Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Intel Core i7 - anybody got one? :)
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Kernel & Hardware
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
JanR
n00b
n00b


Joined: 21 Jan 2007
Posts: 67

PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2008 7:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi again,

I forgot to answer the part regarding HT: This is also activated in BIOS as well as in kernel config. I guess thats similar to Pentium 4 and Atom.

Greetings,

Jan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
c0nv1ct
n00b
n00b


Joined: 29 May 2007
Posts: 8

PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nice info, much appreciated. I've been wondering how the new chipset and the i7's TurboBoost would work in gentoo, it's good to hear it doesnt have any issues.

I wont have my parts for my core i7 build until Santa comes :\
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kemoauc
n00b
n00b


Joined: 10 Dec 2008
Posts: 6
Location: Switzerland

PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 9:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
This build was with WANT_MP="true" to force make -j. MAKEOPTS was set to -j12.


Is it safe to set WANT_MP="true" or does it break any packages? Why do you set MAKEOPTS to -j12 and not to -j9 (4 cores + hyperthreading + 1)?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JanR
n00b
n00b


Joined: 21 Jan 2007
Posts: 67

PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 2:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi,

Quote:

Is it safe to set WANT_MP="true" or does it break any packages?


I use it since several month with no problem...

Quote:

Why do you set MAKEOPTS to -j12 and not to -j9 (4 cores + hyperthreading + 1)?


I run parallelism tests with linux kernel on the 8 core Xeon some time ago and figured out that there is a (small) speedup up to 1.5 times the number of cores if there is enough RAM. Therefore, I use 12 but I'm quite sure that the speed using 9 will be rather similar. Maybe I run a comparison on the Nehalem machine soon.

Greetings,

Jan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
squiddie
n00b
n00b


Joined: 26 Jun 2007
Posts: 4
Location: basel switzerland

PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 3:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi

Would be nice if someone could tell me which processor family has to be chosen for an i7 :oops:
I'll have the joy to set one up early in january :P

thx in advance
greetings


Last edited by squiddie on Mon Dec 29, 2008 4:26 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JanR
n00b
n00b


Joined: 21 Jan 2007
Posts: 67

PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 4:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi,

as I use 64 bit version it has to be nocona for gcc 4.1.2 - obviously not the best choice as nocona is the 64 bit capable netburst xeon. For newer GCC I would use core2 which should be better.

Therefore:

Code:

CFLAGS="-march=nocona -O2 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer"
CHOST="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu"
CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}"
MAKEOPTS="-j12"


Greetings,

Jan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
squiddie
n00b
n00b


Joined: 26 Jun 2007
Posts: 4
Location: basel switzerland

PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OK thanks. I'll stick with these settings.

I'm still a bit unshure about the kernel config:
did you choose MPENTIUM4 which would match the nocona/family-15 gcc setting,
or MCORE2 which would be in line with the /proc/cpuinfo family-6?

greetings
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JanR
n00b
n00b


Joined: 21 Jan 2007
Posts: 67

PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 6:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi,

update regarding parallelism: Contrary to what I wrote I ran my openoffice compilation with make -j10, not 12 as written. Therefore, I repeated this with 9 and 12:

make -j10

Code:

        Emerged at: Wed Dec 10 16:57:11 2008
        Build time: 37 minutes, and 23 seconds


make -j12

Code:

        Emerged at: Mon Dec 29 17:26:21 2008
        Build time: 38 minutes, and 16 seconds


make -j9

Code:

        Emerged at: Mon Dec 29 18:06:46 2008
        Build time: 37 minutes, and 11 seconds


At least for OO -j9 seems to be better. For linux kernel 12 was best with very minor advantage.

Greetings,

Jan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JanR
n00b
n00b


Joined: 21 Jan 2007
Posts: 67

PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 6:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi,

Quote:

I'm still a bit unshure about the kernel config:
did you choose MPENTIUM4 which would match the nocona/family-15 gcc setting,
or MCORE2 which would be in line with the /proc/cpuinfo family-6?


Make it Core2. Core i7 has much more in common with P6, Pentium-M and Core2 than with Netburst (P4).

nocona for GCC more or less stands for "64 Bit, SSE, SSE2, SSE3" and some more (see manual).

Greetings,

Jan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
squiddie
n00b
n00b


Joined: 26 Jun 2007
Posts: 4
Location: basel switzerland

PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 11:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OK, I'll do that. Thanks for your help :)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zucca
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Posts: 1800
Location: KUUSANKOSKI, Finland

PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:23 pm    Post subject: i7 Reply with quote

That's just insane speed and power.
I've heard i7 uses less power (watts) than Core (2) Duos. True?
_________________
..: Zucca :..

Code:
ERROR: '--failure' is not an option. Aborting...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rrbrussell
n00b
n00b


Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 64

PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2009 8:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What was the price tag on the processors, mother board, and ram?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zucca
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Posts: 1800
Location: KUUSANKOSKI, Finland

PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2009 12:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JanR wrote:
as I use 64 bit version it has to be nocona for gcc 4.1.2 - obviously not the best choice as nocona is the 64 bit capable netburst xeon. For newer GCC I would use core2 which should be better.

Therefore:

Code:

CFLAGS="-march=nocona -O2 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer"
CHOST="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu"
CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}"
MAKEOPTS="-j12"


Have you tried:
Code:
emerge -j 10 --load-average=9.00
or likewise?
Emerging some meta packages that way could speed up process nicely. :)
_________________
..: Zucca :..

Code:
ERROR: '--failure' is not an option. Aborting...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JanR
n00b
n00b


Joined: 21 Jan 2007
Posts: 67

PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 6:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi,

Quote:

emerge -j 10 --load-average=9.00


I was not aware of this possibility... but I will try that next time.

Quote:

I've heard i7 uses less power (watts) than Core (2) Duos. True?


Not really, but I have no comparison. With an old ATI card (at this time the Geforce 8600GT was still in the old machine) it idles at 102 Watt (no X) and has a maximum consumption of 220 (8 x mprime -t) - measured at AC using a cheap powermeter. The power supply is a Silverstone 500 W with 80plus certificate.

Quote:

What was the price tag on the processors, mother board, and ram?


Not that sure because it was not me who paid it :-) (its my machine at work). Roughly estimated its around 1500 Euro for the components. CPU was 550, board 270 and memory 3x50. This was in December, now it should be cheaper...

Greetings,

Jan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Simba7
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Jan 2007
Posts: 704
Location: Billings, MT, USA

PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 7:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JanR wrote:
as I use 64 bit version it has to be nocona for gcc 4.1.2 - obviously not the best choice as nocona is the 64 bit capable netburst xeon. For newer GCC I would use core2 which should be better.

Why are you using a really old version of gcc? Should be using 4.3.2 to handle the latest processors.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JanR
n00b
n00b


Joined: 21 Jan 2007
Posts: 67

PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 7:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi,

Quote:

Why are you using a really old version of gcc? Should be using 4.3.2 to handle the latest processors.


I'm staying with amd64 stable, not ~amd64. Therefore, everything above 4.1.2 is masked as unstable. As soon as this changes I will recompile everything.

Nevertheless, I will run some benchmarks with the newer compiler...

Greetings,

Jan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Simba7
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Jan 2007
Posts: 704
Location: Billings, MT, USA

PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 7:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I thought 4.3.2 was stable..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JanR
n00b
n00b


Joined: 21 Jan 2007
Posts: 67

PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 8:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi,

not yet...

Code:

[I] sys-devel/gcc
     Available versions: 
        (2.95)  *2.95.3-r9 ~*2.95.3-r10!s
        (3.1)   *3.1.1-r2
        (3.2)   **3.2.2!s *3.2.3-r4
        (3.3)   ~3.3.6-r1!s
        (3.4)   3.4.6-r2!s
        (4.0)   ~*4.0.4!s
        (4.1)   ~4.1.0-r1!s 4.1.2!s
        (4.2)   ~4.2.3!s ~4.2.4!s
        (4.3)   **4.3.0!s ~4.3.1!s ~4.3.1-r1!s ~4.3.2!s ~4.3.2-r2!s


Greetings,

Jan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
c0nv1ct
n00b
n00b


Joined: 29 May 2007
Posts: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jan 16, 2009 12:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You cant make an exception just for gcc? It does make a difference and you can always keep the stable gcc installed incase something bad happens.

I finally got around to building gentoo on my new i7 920. I've got it OC'd to 3.5ghz right now.

Code:
Fri Jan 16 04:33:11 2009 >>> sys-devel/gcc-4.3.2-r2
       merge time: 8 minutes and 42 seconds.


It only took me like 3 hours from stage3 to an xfce desktop. It seemed like most of that was spent rebooting to a livecd because i forgot something in fstab or grub.

I'm quite impressed with this new Intel system, its my first Intel in a very long time. It took me a while to get gentoo on here because i just had to install windows for a while to play some GTA4. But now thats over with and I can get back to doing some real work in gentoo.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
d2_racing
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 25 Apr 2005
Posts: 13047
Location: Ste-Foy,Canada

PostPosted: Fri Jan 16, 2009 6:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

c0nv1ct wrote:
You cant make an exception just for gcc? It does make a difference and you can always keep the stable gcc installed incase something bad happens.

I finally got around to building gentoo on my new i7 920. I've got it OC'd to 3.5ghz right now.


Once you use Gcc 4.2 or 4.3, then you need to have the toolchain in testing arch, because you cannot run GCC 4.3 with only certains packages in ~arch.

You really need to switch to a full ~arch to be sure that everything is compatible with Gcc 4.3.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JanR
n00b
n00b


Joined: 21 Jan 2007
Posts: 67

PostPosted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 7:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi,

Quote:

Once you use Gcc 4.2 or 4.3, then you need to have the toolchain in testing arch, because you cannot run GCC 4.3 with only certains packages in ~arch.

You really need to switch to a full ~arch to be sure that everything is compatible with Gcc 4.3.


And thats why I stay with 4.1.2...

Quote:

I finally got around to building gentoo on my new i7 920. I've got it OC'd to 3.5ghz right now.


Congratulation! I only made a short OC test before returning to stock value... it executed ONE instance of mprime with no error at 4 GHz (base clock 166, so 3.66 + Turbo -> 4 GHz) at mid 80 C temperatures. Have not tried 4 or 8 instances because of poor cooling at this time plus... its a WORK machine! SO now it runs at 2.93+Turbo.

Btw... I actually never saw it at stock speed, even with heavy load on all cores it runs at the +1 turbo mode (3.06 in my case) and with one loaded core it always runs at 3.2. The most useful way to estimate freq is "mhz" from lmbench because the cpufreq framework does not set the correct values in /proc/cpuinfo. They have 2933 in my case for stock speed and 2934 for stock + turbo. Intel has a document online regarding turbo mode and freq monitoring - maybe I code this some day (looks quite simple).

So far, I taskset three load tasks to cores 0-2 or six tasks to 0,1,2,4,5,6 and execute mhz on core 3 or 7. Running it "alone", even in endless loop, always returns something indicating full +2 turbo mode -> 3200 MHz.

Therefore, your 3500 MHz=20 x 175 should be 3850 with turbo enabled for one core or 3675 for all cores if there is enough headroom.

Greetings,

Jan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Simba7
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Jan 2007
Posts: 704
Location: Billings, MT, USA

PostPosted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 3:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

JanR wrote:
And thats why I stay with 4.1.2...

Even though it was released in 2007?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
luispa
Guru
Guru


Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Posts: 357
Location: España

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2009 5:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi,

I just got my new i7 and wonder if some of you know the updated status regarding kernel support for i7 and best CFLAGS, etc.

After reading the thread, would this be the best?

CFLAGS="-march=core2 -O2 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer"
CHOST="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu"
CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}"
MAKEOPTS="-j12"

And sorry for the question, will that options build a full 64 bits system?. I've read that x86_64 is not the i7 architecture...

Thanks a lot in advance,

Luis
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
squiddie
n00b
n00b


Joined: 26 Jun 2007
Posts: 4
Location: basel switzerland

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2009 6:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

'lo

To build a 64bit system you have to choose amd64 for both the minimal CD and installing instructions.
The reason is that AMD brought it first so you have to choose that also for your i7.

Also remember to take ~amd64 when keywording packages.

The entries in my make.conf are:
Code:

CFLAGS="-march=nocona -O2 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer"
CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}"

MAKEOPTS="-j12"
WANT_MP="true"

CHOST="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu"

FEATURES="ccache"
CCACHE_SIZE="8G"

'cause GCC 4.1 does not support -march=core2 as JanR explained. We have to wait for Gentoo switching GCC to a higher version :)
Also forget the last two lines if you don't use CCACHE anyhow I recommend using it. Search the web for "gentoo ccache" for more info.

When configuring your kernel choose "core2/newer Xeon" as Processor family and enable SMT. Set Maximum number of CPUs to 8. Afaik you have to count virtual cores.

Have fun. It's a beast :P
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
luispa
Guru
Guru


Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Posts: 357
Location: España

PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks a lot squiddie, yes it's a beast; I'm really surprised with the performance, I put 6GB of DDR3 so I'm really surprised. Let's see if I'm able to take teh most of its 8 CPU's, that's why I want to go to the best 64bits+MP configuration...

Regarding the installation...

I didn't know where to get a Intel 64 compatible Install ISO, so I found System Rescue CD. Also found that "-march=native" is the recommended option but only supported starting with gcc 4.3.2, so I wanted to install 64 and upgrade to gcc >=4.3.2 asap...

This is what I did:

1- Used the System Rescue CD to boot the box in 64 bits mode. At the boot prompt: rescue64, even if the screen mentions AMD64 it will work in Intel64.
I'm thinking today that maybe I could have downloaded the AMD64 Install disk and try it. I don't know if it's prepared to run on x86_64 architectures as the System Rescue CD... anyway.

2- Follow the standard handbook instructions regarding network, disks, etc.

3- When I get int the make.conf, I used this INITIAL config:
CFLAGS="-O2 -pipe -march=nocona"
CHOST="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu"
CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}"
MAKEOPTS="-j9"

4- Continued with normal install (following handbook):
chroot, emerge --sync, emerge portage, locale.gen, timezone

5- At this point I upgraded to GCC 4.3.3. This is what I did, hope It's correct:
# mkdir /etc/portage
# echo "sys-devel/gcc ~amd64" >> /etc/portage/package.keywords
# echo "sys-libs/glibc ~amd64" >> /etc/portage/package.keywords
# emerge -av gcc
:
# gcc-config -l
# gcc-config x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-4.3.3
# env-update
# source /etc/profile

6- Then adapt "make.conf" as now gcc supports a new "-march". This is my current FINAL config:
CFLAGS="-O2 -pipe -march=native" <=== -march=native
CHOST="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu"
CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}"
MAKEOPTS="-j9"

7- Now, recompile everything (this is not documented, hope I did it well.. :-/)
# fix_libtool_files.sh 4.1.2
# emerge -v binutils gcc glibc libtool
# emerge -v genlop gentoolkit

I had a blocking situation so I fixed it like this:
# emerge -C sys-libs/com_err sys-libs/ss
# emerge -C sys-fs/e2fsprogs
# emerge -pv e2fsprogs

Finally, recompile everything
# emerge -e system

... and Update everything
# emerge -DuvnN world

That was last night, the upgrade to 4.3.3 and full recompilation only took 2 hours...

8- Today I continue with the handbook:
timezone, download gentoo-sources, modify kernel, compile it, etc....

I'll update once I'm finished
I plan to use "core2/newer Xean" as processor family / SMT,etc... as you recommend. Thanks again.
Regarding CCACHE, I didn't know about it. Once I have the system fully built I'll take a look at it.

Thanks again,

Luis
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Kernel & Hardware All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 2 of 9

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum