New pocket server CAPS v4 Pipeline

[Robert]

I'm looking at building this for my new server:

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/612-computer-audiophile-pocket-server-c-p-s-v4-pipeline/ 

What do you guys think about this latest effort from Chris C?



Robert

[PeterSt]

Hey Robert - What about : crazy expensive for "no power".

[christoffe]

Hi,

From my experience with” battery powered” frontend units/components this concept with the external PS (from CA and http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=3045.msg32944#msg32944 ) will enhance the SQ compared to our present “high powered”  PC configuration.

The SQ with my “under performing”  laptop (with an external switching  PS)  is the best  I ever had.  For a test I will order the” HDPlex Linear Power Supply” (< € 300,00 ex Hamburg).

Joachim

[CoenP]

Hi Joachim,

No strange performance related experiences with the laptop?
I guess a lot of system optimizations are not possible. Ok these might be less relevant SQ wise in a LPSU/battery situation but stops, hiccups etc are an annoyance too.

The HDplex is for the laptop I assume...

regards, Coen

[christoffe]

Hi Joachim,

No strange performance related experiences with the laptop?
I guess a lot of system optimizations are not possible. Ok these might be less relevant SQ wise in a LPSU/battery situation but stops, hiccups etc are an annoyance too.

The HDplex is for the laptop I assume...**correct**

regards, Coen

Hi Coen,

The XXH settings I'm using are "weird", 8x AP only, no XTweaks and replay in "Attended" mode only. This settings do not favour the SQ from the angle of the hardware, but there is nothing strange during the replay, no ticks, nothing, a clean sound only.

The laptop is not as fast as ............. , but the loading speed of the tracks it is quite accepable for me, even with 192KHz/24 bit files.
I just tried to play tracks in "Unattended" but this mode doesn't work, so for this situation the CPU needs more power (and RAM).

What I expect is, that the external PS favours the SQ, and therefore  "low demanding power" components are essential. Such a PC should work when reading Peters comment here: http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=2937.msg31238#msg31238

The Intel Core i7-4790K processor (or Xeon E3-1241 v3 or Michaels Xeon type) should meet the requirement, and 16Gb RAM is a must.

We have to wait for Michaels report about his PC assembly. (hopefully before Christmas)

Joachim

[Robert]

Yes price has been mentioned as an issue. The power supply alone is an extra box although linear.

Peter when you say "no power" do you mean it should be an i7?
 
I would like to build a server for about $2000 NZ dollars which is about 1200 Euros. Or is this not worth the effort?

I like the idea of fanless.

Robert

[PeterSt]

Hi there Robert,

Yes, I would always use a modern i7. Doesn't need to be a million cores per se (also not 6), but this is about so many other things related to speed. So I can't emphasize enough how my i7 does *everything* in a whimp when running at 430MHz only. That is ~10 times slower than normal ! So for example, the fastest laptop already will lose from that no matter it's clockspeed is 10 times higher. And this is thus because there's so much more ...

Anyway what I meant to say is that the price is ridiculously high and you get about "nothing" for it. "Flexible" it says. Oh ? well, I wonder where. Compare with our "XXHighEnd PC". That is power and that is ultimately flexible. And totally silent. And cheaper.
So of course I compare it to that - Can't help that !
(and not trying to sell you one because it is way over your budget - also taking into account the shipping costs).

But is it worth the effort ? yes. Not only because I claim so, but because everybody without exception "admits" it when done (going from underpowered to say overpowered).

And for that $2000 you will be able to do it. It is only that it takes you a month to get everything together, especially about the being silent and the case where it is to fit in. So when in a small case it is NOT easy.
Start with the idea that the processor will be 135W (not the 80W from that CAPS) and work your way up from there.

Regards,
Peter

[music33]

I've been researching out different computer builds.  After looking at many parts / configurations and comparing them it becomes pretty obvious that Peter's PC is very well thought out.  michaeljeger PC although different is also very well thought out.  I also really like acg's computer that he has listed in his signature.

The v4 Pipeline seems to have every bell and whistle - separate USB card, linear PS, passive cooling case all of which makes the computer expensive.  It isn't clear from the article how the different components impact the sound.  With the NOS1a these things may not matter as much.  From reading Peter, a more powerful chip would be better.  michaeljeger PC is closer to the v4 pipeline, but much cheaper to build.  it is more like a minimalistic build of the v4 pipeline with a better CPU and picoPSU.  looking forward to hearing about it.

In doing my research a question has come up for Peter - Why use the I7 over a Xeon?  The Xeon has a lower TDP, doesn't have on board graphics, more cores and supports ECC RAM.  All these things seem like pluses for a Xeon over an i7.  Certainly a response from anyone else is welcomed as well.

thanks,
dave


   

[acg]

In doing my research a question has come up for Peter - Why use the I7 over a Xeon?  The Xeon has a lower TDP, doesn't have on board graphics, more cores and supports ECC RAM.  All these things seem like pluses for a Xeon over an i7.  Certainly a response from anyone else is welcomed as well.

thanks,
dave


   

Price I believe.  The Xeons are very expensive.  I purchased mine second hand for less than the cost of the i7 otherwise it would have cost twice the i7 new.

[PeterSt]

Hi Dave,

In addition to what Anthony (acg) said, Xeon's are not better that I can see. They are slower on the (max) frequency and btw both the i7 and the Xeon don't have on board graphics. OK, it depends a bit on the type (of i7) but now this is also related to something you may have overlooked : the CPU socket.

So if you go for the LGA2011 ... in there both go i7 and Xeon. This can be very convenient. Btw, where our PC could only focus on the X79 chipset for this, today this is X99 and don't ask me how the choices are for that at this moment (I just didn't investigate it - I think Michael did).
In the end this is all about the existence of MoBo's and for LGA2011/X79 there's one reliable MiniATX only (that I know) : ASRock. Small downside : The X79 version was taken out of production a year ago, and I assume it will be replaced by a X99 version. Or not at all ... and then it stops for small MoBos.

The only positive that I can think of with the Xeons is the number of cores. Like 20 (hyperthreaded) if you want (or even 24 - I forgot).
Thinking Xeon is a bit dangerous at this moment, because new I7's will be there with more cores than the 12 from today. Or are already there - again I didn't look. But the 12 cores (or native 6) will be 16 ( 8 ) at least because the i7 actually already was that. But it couldn't be utilized because of not enough pins on the chip possible. I do this by heart : I suppose that LGA2011-3 has the sufficient amount of pins so the already existing 16 core i7 (design) can go in against a fair price.

Now I should start digging myself I suppose ...
Peter