# Dual E5645 mini-build log



## twilyth (Mar 1, 2012)

I didn't want to clutter up the team page and this isn't going to be a big deal with any mods or such.  It's just mainly going to be a pix gallery.  BTW, it seems that I bought some engineering samples rather than honest to god E5645's.  Anyone want to very what I have?  I'll look at the imprints tomorrow but couldn't really make it out tonight.













*And now, a few posed like one of my French girls - with fans - Ooo La La.*


----------



## KieX (Mar 1, 2012)

Very nice. See that you went for server cpu coolers in the end. Subscribed to see some more.


----------



## de.das.dude (Mar 1, 2012)

sub


----------



## F150_Raptor (Mar 1, 2012)

twilyth said:


> BTW, it seems that I bought some engineering samples rather than honest to god E5645's. Anyone want to very what I have?



If I remember right, the ES chips don't have a locked multiplier.  They are what every one with Sr-2's want for overclocking.


----------



## Completely Bonkers (Mar 1, 2012)

Nice _play_station  Xeon 56xx and accompanying chipset is so much better than 5400 and those silly hot FBDIMMs that I have!


----------



## bogmali (Mar 1, 2012)

How is that board working for you so far? I've read so many reviews and comments about it (mostly bad) that it swayed me to go the SR-2 route. I could've gotten one for cheap last year.


----------



## twilyth (Mar 1, 2012)

F150_Raptor said:


> If I remember right, the ES chips don't have a locked multiplier.  They are what every one with Sr-2's want for overclocking.


Thanks man.  Since I have no real use for the unlocked multi, should I off these as an even trade to people with dual 5645?  I don't want to go lower on the clock speed.  I will of course be happy to go up.  Or should just I just get my ass in gear and build the damned thing?

Serious question btw.  Thanks. 


bogmali said:


> How is that board working for you so far? I've read so many reviews and comments about it (mostly bad) that it swayed me to go the SR-2 route. I could've gotten one for cheap last year.



Yeah,I cheaped out on the board.  Was going to get the SR2 but was penny wise and pound foolish.  After the reg'd dram and other stuff, would have worked out the same or cheaper.  D'oh. 

But will keep everyone informed.  Thanks.


----------



## bogmali (Mar 1, 2012)

twilyth said:


> Thanks man.  *Since I have no real use for the unlocked multi, should I off these as an even trade to people with dual 5645?*  I don't want to go lower on the clock speed.  I will of course be happy to go up.  Or should just I just get my ass in gear and build the damned thing?



Are you going to trade them? If so what are you looking to get?


----------



## twilyth (Mar 1, 2012)

bogmali said:


> Are you going to trade them? If so what are you looking to get?


For someone who has a pair of E5645's or better and is a TPU cruncher, it would be an even trade.  Each pays their own shipping.


----------



## bogmali (Mar 1, 2012)

twilyth said:


> For someone who has a pair of E5645's or better and is a TPU cruncher, it would be an even trade.  Each pays their own shipping.



I see. I can't help there, all I have a legit X5570's (quad cores). My other SR-2 has X5670's


----------



## KieX (Mar 1, 2012)

F150_Raptor said:


> If I remember right, the ES chips don't have a locked multiplier.  They are what every one with Sr-2's want for overclocking.



My L5639's are ES too but not unlocked multi  Must be something for X series.



twilyth said:


> Thanks man.  Since I have no real use for the unlocked multi, should I off these as an even trade to people with dual 5645?  I don't want to go lower on the clock speed.  I will of course be happy to go up.  Or should just I just get my ass in gear and build the damned thing?
> 
> Serious question btw.  Thanks.



Build it now, decide later?



bogmali said:


> I see. I can't help there, all I have a legit X5570's (quad cores). My other SR-2 has X5670's



If you get bored of them 5670's...


----------



## bogmali (Mar 1, 2012)

KieX said:


> If you get bored of them 5670's...




They are boringly......GOOD!


----------



## F150_Raptor (Mar 2, 2012)

KieX said:


> My L5639's are ES too but not unlocked multi  Must be something for X series.



They should be unlocked too!  Is the board they are in allow overclocking?



twilyth said:


> Thanks man.  Since I have no real use for the unlocked multi, should I off these as an even trade to people with dual 5645?  I don't want to go lower on the clock speed.  I will of course be happy to go up.  Or should just I just get my ass in gear and build the damned thing?



I'd keep them.  You can put the in any lga1366 mobo too, they don't have to be in a server board.  Then you'll see what they can really do!


----------



## KieX (Mar 3, 2012)

Any updates twilyth?



F150_Raptor said:


> They should be unlocked too!  Is the board they are in allow overclocking?



SR-2. Though I appear to have an old BIOS, that needs flashing (can't see any option for Turbo for example). Will play around this weekend see how it goes.


----------



## twilyth (Mar 3, 2012)

Thanks Kiex.  I almost got the m/b in yesterday but misplaced a stand-off.  I normally wouldn't have bothered with the last row but I'm trying to do everything right.  I even put in the back panel cover - which I NEVER do.  I haven't done anything on it today so I'll try to at least get the board in and wired up tonight - hopefully.


----------



## twilyth (Mar 3, 2012)

got the board in last night with the existing PSU, so I have a NIB backup - or I guess I could return it.

It powered up immediately and went looking for the boot rom on the network.

Now I just have to install Home Server 2011.  Found a NIB 4 port switch since the room I'm building it in only has one ethernet line.  Also had just gotten a slim, portable DVD writer, so I can use that for the install.

Not sure if I'll leave it in the spare room or not.  Heat is turned off in there so might be the best choice.  Looking forward to seeing how much of a bump this is going to give me.  My RAC is about 18k but I had to set one of the 2600k to suspend when in use since I'm getting a lot of cursor lag on SN2S.  I should probably be closer to 20k.  According to the points calculator it will only do 5k, which seems odd but I think it's broken since that is also the score for 1 hex-core.  Therefore I figure it should be a 10k boost which will put me into the low 30's hopefully. 

Will have to look into getting an SR2 I guess and running them at 3.5-4ghz.


----------



## twilyth (Mar 3, 2012)

It seems that I had to turn off the network boot options in bios.  Also installed an internal dvd drive.  Finally got it to boot off the install disk and it should be done installing by now.  It's probably too late to get any wu's in tonight, but will hopefully have nearly a full day for tomorrow - barring any more issues.


----------



## KieX (Mar 4, 2012)

Almost there!


----------



## twilyth (Mar 4, 2012)

I have a problem.  The machine seems to be running fine, but I only have 12 threads rather than 24.  Do I have to turn on hyperthreading?  because if so, I can't find it in the bios.  Is i tpossible that only one chip is working?  how do I tell.  Very upset at the moment.


----------



## KieX (Mar 4, 2012)

twilyth said:


> I have a problem.  The machine seems to be running fine, but I only have 12 threads rather than 24.  Do I have to turn on hyperthreading?  because if so, I can't find it in the bios.  Is i tpossible that only one chip is working?  how do I tell.  Very upset at the moment.



Taking a look at the Manual, HyperThreading should be under:

Advanced> CPU Configuration

Setting called: Intel(r) HT Technology, leave [Enabled]

If it's not coming up with those settings, the problem probably lies elsewhere


----------



## repman244 (Mar 4, 2012)

twilyth said:


> Is i tpossible that only one chip is working?  how do I tell.



Did you try running CPU-Z and see if you have option for CPU 1 and 2?


----------



## twilyth (Mar 4, 2012)

KieX said:


> Taking a look at the Manual, HyperThreading should be under:
> 
> Advanced> CPU Configuration
> 
> ...


Thanks Kiex.  Once I calmed down a bit I went through bios and saw that it was in fact enabled.  That means one of the chips is bad.

How can I tell which socket?  Should I flip the chips around?  I'm absolutely certain that I assembled the board properly.  Double checked that both coolers are working.


repman244 said:


> Did you try running CPU-Z and see if you have option for CPU 1 and 2?



Yes and there is only one cpu listed.  Same in bios under advanced.  As I asked Kiex, how can I tell which socket is the problem.

thanks guys.  I really appreciate the blindingly fast responses.  You da man/men.


----------



## stinger608 (Mar 4, 2012)

twilyth said:


> As I asked Kiex, how can I tell which socket is the problem.



In the manual for the motherboard does it show which socket is "socket 0" and "socket 1?"

Run CPU-Z and look to see which socket is reporting. It should either be 0 or 1. That should explain which socket is the issue. 

Also, what operating system are you running? *Disregard that question, as I see you were installing Home Server 2011. Dude, Microsoft Home Server 2011 will ONLY support 1 physical processor!!! Windows 7 Home Premium will only support 1 as well. Windows 7 pro, ultimate, and enterprise will however support up to 2 physical processors. That is most likely your problem Twilyth.*



> Posted by Microsoft on 9/3/2010 at 11:02 AM
> 
> A business decision was made and Vail will only support 1 processor, with up to 4 cores, and only up to 8GB of RAM. This is expected.
> 
> ...


----------



## KieX (Mar 4, 2012)

twilyth said:


> Thanks Kiex.  Once I calmed down a bit I went through bios and saw that it was in fact enabled.  That means one of the chips is bad.
> 
> How can I tell which socket?  Should I flip the chips around?  I'm absolutely certain that I assembled the board properly.  Double checked that both coolers are working.
> 
> ...



If it's not coming up in BIOS, that' gonna be some type of Hardware prob, as opposed to software. Start with checking all the power connectors are properly flush, then from BIOS load optimized defaults and reset CMOS (page 2-24 of manual)

Hope it ain't a bad CPU. Certainly 2P boards are a whole lot more hassle than we're used to.


----------



## twilyth (Mar 4, 2012)

stinger608 said:


> In the manual for the motherboard does it show which socket is "socket 0" and "socket 1?"
> 
> Run CPU-Z and look to see which socket is reporting. It should either be 0 or 1. That should explain which socket is the issue.
> 
> Also, what operating system are you running? *Disregard that question, as I see you were installing Home Server 2011. Dude, Microsoft Home Server 2011 will ONLY support 1 physical processor!!! Windows 7 Home Premium will only support 1 as well. Windows 7 pro, ultimate, and enterprise will however support up to 2 physical processors. That is most likely your problem Twilyth.*


How the fuck do they call it a server?  Aw, nevermind.  I get it.  HOME server, not server server.

OK.  I'll load w7 pro then.  Hope I can do an upgrade install.

Here is the CPUZ display.  If the the manual lists the sockets as 1 and 2, I assume that CPUZ means socket 0 when it says #1?




Thanks very much man.


----------



## twilyth (Mar 4, 2012)

KieX said:


> If it's not coming up in BIOS, that' gonna be some type of Hardware prob, as opposed to software. Start with checking all the power connectors are properly flush, then from BIOS load optimized defaults and reset CMOS (page 2-24 of manual)
> 
> Hope it ain't a bad CPU. Certainly 2P boards are a whole lot more hassle than we're used to.



Ah.  OK.  Good point.  I'll take a photograph of the bios screens


----------



## KieX (Mar 4, 2012)

twilyth said:


> How the fuck do they call it a server?  Aw, nevermind.  I get it.  HOME server, not server server.
> 
> OK.  I'll load w7 pro then.  Hope I can do an upgrade install.
> 
> ...



Just saw his post after mine lol.

Perhaps Server2008 is in order? 
http://www.microsoft.com/download/e...b00000c932fd0rjc7_5p3t&displaylang=en&id=5023


----------



## stinger608 (Mar 4, 2012)

KieX could be correct. Not sure why it would not be showing in the bios to be honest. that really shouldn't be affected from the operating system. Hmmm, very odd indeed.


----------



## twilyth (Mar 4, 2012)

KieX said:


> Just saw his post after mine lol.
> 
> Perhaps Server2008 is in order?
> http://www.microsoft.com/download/e...b00000c932fd0rjc7_5p3t&displaylang=en&id=5023



OK, but if you all could take a look at my screen shots first and let me know what you think.


----------



## stinger608 (Mar 4, 2012)

I don't know, its really not showing either a single chip or 2 chips. I think it is because both chips are identical. I think I would load up Windows 7 Professional and see if the second physical chip is seen in Windows.


----------



## KieX (Mar 4, 2012)

Think you may need to go back a couple of steps. Advanced> Hardware Monitor

It should show you temps and such for both CPU's. If it's not.. then yeah HW problem.


----------



## bogmali (Mar 4, 2012)

CPU-Z somehow is showing your E5645's as E5620's? Last time I checked E5620's are quad Westmeres and not hexes. So did you get CPU0 and CPU1 to show up?


----------



## twilyth (Mar 4, 2012)

KieX said:


> Think you may need to go back a couple of steps. Advanced> Hardware Monitor
> 
> It should show you temps and such for both CPU's. If it's not.. then yeah HW problem.



It looks like it is seeing both, but one is very hot and has no rpm on fan speed.  Will double check connections, but both fans are running.











EDIT:  dling server 2008 R2 SP1


----------



## stinger608 (Mar 4, 2012)

Looks like you have one of the cpu fans plugged into a chassis fan header man. But yea, both physical processors are showing up just fine in the bios. 

Server 2008 R2 will cure the issue in windows


----------



## twilyth (Mar 4, 2012)

stinger608 said:


> Looks like you have one of the cpu fans plugged into a chassis fan header man. But yea, both physical processors are showing up just fine in the bios.
> 
> Server 2008 R2 will cure the issue in windows



Thanks again.  Burning the disk now.  Will power down, double check headers, and install.  I did check the headers the first time but I will double check with the manual now.


----------



## twilyth (Mar 4, 2012)

UPDATE:  pulled off the cooler on cpu 2, de-spooged and reapplied paste - this time with Noctua (couldn't find it the first time around).  Fired it up and the temps were identical.

The first cpu is right next to a case fan so I think I'm getting better temps with the Noctua paste but the extra airflow is helping cpu 1.

Anyway, halfway through the install.  Have to run an errand and will re-install boinc when I get back in about an hour.

Oh, and it turns out I was hallucinating.  I did indeed have it on the wrong header.  I could have sworn I checked it though.  You see, this is why I have OCD.  I really can't trust myself. 

edit:  have to take a shower, so I guess I'll go out later.


----------



## repman244 (Mar 4, 2012)

twilyth said:


> Fired it up and the temps were identical.



Don't worry much about having different temperatures since the chips don't necessarily have the same V core. As I can see from the picture your CPU 1 is running at 1.212V and CPU 2 at 1.218V.
My 2 old Xeons also have very different V core and run at about 10C different.


----------



## twilyth (Mar 4, 2012)

@Repman - thanks buddy!

With Win server 2008 installed I now have 24 glorious threads.  I can almost hear the angels singing!!!






That one angel looks a little gay, but as long as he can crunch . . . 

Thanks everyone for your help.  I never would have figured this out on my own.  My team rocks!!!


----------



## gplnpsb (Mar 4, 2012)

twilyth said:


> I didn't want to clutter up the team page and this isn't going to be a big deal with any mods or such.  It's just mainly going to be a pix gallery.  BTW, it seems that I bought some engineering samples rather than honest to god E5645's.  Anyone want to very what I have?  I'll look at the imprints tomorrow but couldn't really make it out tonight.



Q2WV's are A-0 stepping engineering samples that are basically equivalent to the B-1 stepping mass production E5645s. I should note that they have locked multipliers, as they have a dual-qpi link. Only the single qpi link gulftown engineering samples (ie Q3FE) had unlocked multipliers. If it interests you, your chip's batch number C9300170 indicates that it was manufactured in the 30th week of 2009, basically the last week of July. 



bogmali said:


> CPU-Z somehow is showing your E5645's as E5620's? Last time I checked E5620's are quad Westmeres and not hexes. So did you get CPU0 and CPU1 to show up?



CPU-Z sometimes has issues generating the name string for engineering samples that are from before the qualification sample stage. The name string is basically an estimate of what the cpu should be based on the cpuid values it reports. The specification string is the one to trust, its an ASCII string reported directly by the cpu. Here it just reads "Genuine Intel(R) CPU", indicating that this is a pre qualification sample ES that was manufactured before the Gulftown chip specifications and branding were finalized.


----------



## twilyth (Mar 4, 2012)

@gplnpsb:  Thanks man.  Interesting stuff.  Not to be argumentative, but the ASUS board did let me kick the multi from 18 to 19 and get a final clock of >2.5ghz.  But either way, it's cool.  I'm just happy to have the damned thing working.  I feel like such an ass too because I'd already contacted the seller, but I just sent him an email, so that's settled now too.  Miller time.

btw, if you think you might want to contribute some cpu cycles to the cause, we'd be happy to have you, but either way, welcome to TPU!


----------



## mstenholm (Mar 4, 2012)

KieX said:


> Just saw his post after mine lol.
> 
> Perhaps *Server2008* is in order?
> http://www.microsoft.com/download/e...b00000c932fd0rjc7_5p3t&displaylang=en&id=5023



I used that version when I had a 4P box. It works.


----------



## Completely Bonkers (Mar 4, 2012)

24 thread! What The Funk! Nice rig man. Makes me want to upgrade my SLOW dual E5420s.

How about a doing some benchies for us to drool over
Like Geekbench 
Or cinebench R10 or R11.5 / CPU parts
Or gflops bench
Or Fritz


----------



## twilyth (Mar 4, 2012)

Completely Bonkers said:


> 24 thread! What The Funk! Nice rig man. Makes me want to upgrade my SLOW dual E5420s.
> 
> How about a doing some benchies for us to drool over
> Like Geekbench
> ...


Ahem.  So . . . let me see if I understand.  You want me to use some of my precious CPU cycles to do benchies.  

Hmmm.  Why don't you ask my buddy Smeagol how we feel about the precious.






  j/k.  I AM a points whore but not THAT bad - yet. 

I have to go out (never made it before), but I'll dl those guys now.


----------



## Completely Bonkers (Mar 4, 2012)

I find running benchmarks very boring too! And a few % here and there isnt important. But seeing how much your new rig ZOMGS my E5420 workstation might encourage me to do something about it...! I'm either going to upgrade the CPUs for an extra 15-20%. Or I'll junk it and get a whole new rig.


----------



## twilyth (Mar 4, 2012)

Completely Bonkers said:


> I find running benchmarks very boring too! And a few % here and there isnt important. But seeing how much your new rig ZOMGS my E5420 workstation might encourage me to do something about it...! I'm either going to upgrade the CPUs for an extra 15-20%. Or I'll junk it and get a whole new rig.


I understand, I was just busting your chops.

It seems that I should probably keep my sense of humor to myself.  I had posted something to the team thread that didn't go over very well either.  I had trouble pronouncing Shistosoma so I wanted to change it to Snoo Snoo.  It probably didn't help that it made no sense whatsoever, but that was sorta the point.  Oh well . . .

I'll definitely run everything I can get for free in terms of benchies.  Cinebench doesn't seem to have a free version.  Intel burn test is a definite.  Not familiar with the other 2 but I have them on a thumb drive ready to go.


----------



## twilyth (Mar 4, 2012)

Completely Bonkers said:


> I find running benchmarks very boring too! And a few % here and there isnt important. But seeing how much your new rig ZOMGS my E5420 workstation might encourage me to do something about it...! I'm either going to upgrade the CPUs for an extra 15-20%. Or I'll junk it and get a whole new rig.



I couldn't get burntest to run.

fritz chess would only use 8 cores

I was able to run geek bench, but the free version only allows 32-bit mode.  Results are attached.


```
Benchmark Summary
  Integer Score             17482 |||||||||
  Floating Point Score      20675 |||||||||||
  Memory Score               4186 ||
  Stream Score               5062 ||

  Geekbench Score           14698 |||||||

System Information
  Operating System      Microsoft Windows Server 2008 R2 Standard (64-bit)
  Model                 System manufacturer System Product Name
  Motherboard           ASUSTeK Computer INC. Z8NA-D6(C)
  Processor             Genuine Intel(R) CPU             000  @ 2.40GHz @ 2.41 GHz
                        2 Processors, 12 Cores, 24 Threads
  Processor ID          GenuineIntel Family 6 Model 44 Stepping 0
  Processor Package     Socket 1366 LGA
  Processor Codename    Westmere-EP
  L1 Instruction Cache  32.0 KB x 6
  L1 Data Cache         32.0 KB x 6
  L2 Cache              256 KB x 6
  L3 Cache              12.0 MB
  Memory                24.0 GB DDR3 SDRAM 667MHz
  Northbridge           Intel 5500 22
  Southbridge           Intel 82801JR (ICH10R) 00
  BIOS                  American Megatrends Inc. 1209   

Integer Performance
  Blowfish
    single-threaded scalar   1451 
    multi-threaded scalar   29785 ||||||||||||||||
  Text Compress
    single-threaded scalar   1897 |
    multi-threaded scalar   30001 ||||||||||||||||
  Text Decompress
    single-threaded scalar   2043 |
    multi-threaded scalar   28783 |||||||||||||||
  Image Compress
    single-threaded scalar   1922 |
    multi-threaded scalar   31426 |||||||||||||||||
  Image Decompress
    single-threaded scalar   2047 |
    multi-threaded scalar   26300 ||||||||||||||
  Lua
    single-threaded scalar   3400 |
    multi-threaded scalar   50732 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||

Floating Point Performance
  Mandelbrot
    single-threaded scalar   1904 |
    multi-threaded scalar   36286 |||||||||||||||||||
  Dot Product
    single-threaded scalar   1048 
    multi-threaded scalar   22933 ||||||||||||
    single-threaded vector   4707 ||
    multi-threaded vector   73506 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
  LU Decomposition
    single-threaded scalar   2360 |
    multi-threaded scalar    7672 ||||
  Primality Test
    single-threaded scalar   3903 ||
    multi-threaded scalar   43000 |||||||||||||||||||||||
  Sharpen Image
    single-threaded scalar   1447 
    multi-threaded scalar   28433 |||||||||||||||
  Blur Image
    single-threaded scalar   2935 |
    multi-threaded scalar   59317 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

Memory Performance
  Read Sequential
    single-threaded scalar   4673 ||
  Write Sequential
    single-threaded scalar   6511 |||
  Stdlib Allocate
    single-threaded scalar   2954 |
  Stdlib Write
    single-threaded scalar   3030 |
  Stdlib Copy
    single-threaded scalar   3764 ||

Stream Performance
  Stream Copy
    single-threaded scalar   4752 ||
    single-threaded vector   6015 |||
  Stream Scale
    single-threaded scalar   4330 ||
    single-threaded vector   5652 |||
  Stream Add
    single-threaded scalar   4677 ||
    single-threaded vector   5800 |||
  Stream Triad
    single-threaded scalar   4910 ||
    single-threaded vector   4360 ||
```


----------



## stinger608 (Mar 4, 2012)

That is frigging awesome Twilyth!!!!!!!!!! 

Finally up and crunching 24 glorious threads. 


Oh and I just sent you a PM bro. Regarding something of interest for this system.


----------



## mstenholm (Mar 5, 2012)

stinger608 said:


> Finally up and crunching 24 glorious threads



I just saw the first real numbers from your new build at Free-DC and I noticed that yours "bench" higher then Kiexs ditto 24 threads in Floating Point Speed: 2,286.91 vs 2,062.86 million ops/sec. Only time will show...

Talking about time then I'm 3-3½ day away from my blue SNtS goal and that coincides with a trip to Africa (not a holiday destination sadly) so I will be down to around half my current production.

Edit: sorry Kiex, more like 2 days from now


----------



## twilyth (Mar 5, 2012)

mstenholm said:


> I just saw the first real numbers from your new build at Free-DC and I noticed that yours "bench" higher then Kiexs ditto 24 threads in Floating Point Speed: 2,286.91 vs 2,062.86 million ops/sec. Only time will show...
> 
> Talking about time then I'm 3-3½ day away from my blue SNtS goal and that coincides with a trip to Africa (not a holiday destination sadly) so I will be down to around half my current production.
> 
> Edit: sorry Kiex, more like 2 days from now


Wow.  I didn't even know we could still find our bench stats anywhere.  Thanks.  That 's a very cool feature of Free-DC.

But I just checked and I think you may have been looking at a different rig.

for 1921802 it says Floating Point Speed: 	 2,315.49 million ops/sec

He also has 1696780 which says Floating Point Speed: 	 2,062.86 million ops/sec

mine is still what you quoted for rig 1921792

but it's also listed as 1921320 which says Floating Point Speed: 	 2,254.05 million ops/sec

I think we both did multiple installs so in my case, those 2 rigs are the same.  Not sure about Kiex but I know he did a lot of tweaking over the weekend.

But regardless - thanks again man.


----------



## KieX (Mar 5, 2012)

mstenholm said:


> I just saw the first real numbers from your new build at Free-DC and I noticed that yours "bench" higher then Kiexs ditto 24 threads in Floating Point Speed: 2,286.91 vs 2,062.86 million ops/sec. Only time will show...
> 
> Talking about time then I'm 3-3½ day away from my blue SNtS goal and that coincides with a trip to Africa (not a holiday destination sadly) so I will be down to around half my current production.
> 
> Edit: sorry Kiex, more like 2 days from now





twilyth said:


> Wow.  I didn't even know we could still find our bench stats anywhere.  Thanks.  That 's a very cool feature of Free-DC.
> 
> But I just checked and I think you may have been looking at a different rig.
> 
> ...



Yeah, sorry about that. The current 2.57GHz is the 2315 million ops/s

I didn't have a spare PSU over weekend, so I took it from another cruncher for the SR-2 and copied the BOINC data folder to finish off those WU. Got the PSU through post today, so the previous entry will go back to being a 2600K, and the newly finished SR-2 will take a few days to ramp up from the bottom of my list.

Try to enjoy your trip MStenholm, should come visit here in London sometime


----------



## bogmali (Mar 5, 2012)

Kiex-any pics of the SR-2 build?


----------



## KieX (Mar 5, 2012)

bogmali said:


> Kiex-any pics of the SR-2 build?



Afraid it's nothing special. Just an open-air, silent cruncher 

http://i.imgur.com/2HR12.jpg


----------



## twilyth (Mar 5, 2012)

KieX said:


> Afraid it's nothing special. Just an open-air, silent cruncher
> 
> http://i.imgur.com/2HR12.jpg



I definitely believe in having free-range crunchers.


----------



## KieX (Mar 5, 2012)

twilyth said:


> I definitely believe in having free-range crunchers.



Are you going to be running yours free-range too? Or is it going to go inside a cage for mass production?


----------



## twilyth (Mar 5, 2012)

KieX said:


> Are you going to be running yours free-range too? Or is it going to go inside a cage for mass production?



Well, having a cat around . . . you know . . . it's for their own protection.


----------



## twilyth (Apr 22, 2012)

I finally put together the new rig with 2 E5650 running with a 21 multi so about 2.8ghz.

Here's a dump of the shots I took.  Not too exciting, but mildly pornographic.


----------

