15
Homeserver advice: i9-14900KS vs. i9-10940X
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Feb 2025
15 points (85.7% liked)
Selfhosted
62951 readers
600 users here now
A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.
Rules:
-
Be civil.
-
No spam.
-
Posts are to be related to self-hosting.
-
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.
-
Submission headline should match the article title.
-
No trolling.
-
Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.
-
AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.
Resources:
- selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
- awesome-selfhosted software
- awesome-sysadmin resources
- Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting
Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.
Questions? DM the mods!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
I can't speak to AI performance, but given you're stated goal of lower idle power consumption, I'd go with the 14900K, not the KS as you have listed.
Reason being the $250 price difference between the two, when the KS is just a slightly higher binning of the K with an additional 200MHz on the boost clocks. With that higher boost being something you're unlikely to practically see without a substantial and robust cooling system, I don't think it's worth the extra money.
The reason I'd go with the K over the 10940X is the lower limit on it's power consumption. The E cores are very efficient and can down clock substantially meaning it idles at really low power. The 10940X doesn't have that benefit.
Beyond that, I'd say look at IPC, per thread, per max sustainable clock of each core, to get a general out look on performance.
Note: all of the above assumes we're working within your listed options. My actual recommendation would be an AMD 7800x3d or 9800x3d.
Thank you! The AMD-Route sounds also promising, but I'm not sure about there idle power consumption. they say that intle is bettle in idle mode. But i'm not sure if proxmox can handle the E-cores properly.
"They say", but they're right. Ryzen chips do have worse idle power usage, but you're talking about 10w or so, at most.
And uh, if you were looking at an X-series CPU, I can't see how that 10w is a dealbreaker, because you were already looking at a shockingly inefficient chip.
Might be a bit late on this, but ProxMox doesn't really handle assigning threads to the e/p cores. That's handled by the kernel and as long you're running kernel version 6.1 or greater you should be good on that front.
If you really need to, you can also pin specific VMs to specific cores. So that if you've got something that always needs the performance it can always run on the p-cores and things that aren't as demanding can always run on e-cores.
That said, especially if you're over provisioning, it's probably better to let the scheduler in the kernel handle thread assignments.