- #Process lasso and threadripper install#
- #Process lasso and threadripper upgrade#
- #Process lasso and threadripper Offline#
- #Process lasso and threadripper windows#
The SM951 is mounted UD to take some write-heavy duty off cache. The Optane being boot + app + scratch is still faster than the 970 Evo being scratch-dedicated. Ideally I would want to have a separate Optane for this purpose but life is not perfect, I guess. Move all the "scratch" stuff off the 970 Evo to the Optane.
#Process lasso and threadripper windows#
Stubbed and passed through the 905p to the workstation VM and decided to reinstall Windows to re-optimise app + boot (boot drive used to the be the SM951 AHCI M.2). Sequential is actually slower than all my Samsung NVMe but that's not a big concern for its intended use. It's a great drive for boot + app + scratch disk due to extremely low latency (and therefore fast random IO). No problem to report.įound a great deal on a brand new Intel Optane 905p 960GB 2.5" U.2 NVMe SSD and made the jump.
#Process lasso and threadripper Offline#
I'm trying to resist the temptation to build another server to house my SATA SSD's as offline backup LOL. The 5TB will be used for infrequently-accessed static data (to keep them off my write-heavy SSD's). The 2 laptop HDDs will be used as online backup for appdata, flash, vdisk etc. I mounted the Seagate BarraCuda 5TB + 2 of my old Toshiba laptop HDD's (320GB and 80GB - yep they are still alive and kicking) as UD. 1 is at 94% reserve and 1 at 98% so still have some way to go. One of the i750 is in cache, the other one mounted as UD. Now all my large capacity SATA SSD's (Samsung 860 Evo 4TB, Samsung 850 Evo 2TB and Crucial MX300 2TB) are in external enclosures serving as offline backup. So I thought since I need to split my offline backup, I may as well solve the speed issue as well. It is filled to 95%, making it very slow (even slower than it has always been!) and creating the need to split my backup among multiple external drives. I have been backing up my data offline to a 2.5" USB external (holding the Seagate BarraCuda 5TB i.e. no need to save data on UD share of SATA SSD).
#Process lasso and threadripper upgrade#
Should i upgrade to 6.8.1 rc1 (kernel 4.19)? Or Threadrippers need the kernel 5.3? I enabled channel mode memory interleaveing on bios, so i could also put the numa nodes tweaks. Thanks everyone for the help! I Tweaked my VM XML and i got near bare metal single core cpu and reasonable multicore (since i only use 6 cores i cant really compare it with another tr2920x) score is a lil bit more than 50% of a real 2920x.Īlso my latency of memory is at ~80ns (geekbench 4) **- Physical Processor 6 (Hyperthreaded) **- Physical Processor 5 (Hyperthreaded) **- Physical Processor 4 (Hyperthreaded) **- Physical Processor 3 (Hyperthreaded) **- Physical Processor 2 (Hyperthreaded) **- Physical Processor 1 (Hyperthreaded) Sysinternals - Logical to Physical Processor Map: My Results with the EPYC hyperthreading workaround (weird numa mapping due to cross-numa node testing)Ĭoreinfo v3.31 - Dump information on system CPU and memory topology
I use this Batch file for a quick report since it's a command line utility and the screen will close after off
#Process lasso and threadripper install#
Happy days!Ĭan you install Microsoft's CoreInfo and see if it detects a hyperthreaded setup?
All cache shows up properly, CPUZ launches and everything, things seem slightly more responsive and latency tests show same as baremetal. This should also translate for Ryzen as well.Īll you need to do is change it to something like below(of course adjusting cores). Cache all comes through right and identifies as threadripper. News! I recently discovered that we no longer need the EPYC fix =0~~.
0 kommentar(er)
