New NOS1 dedicated PC. Less terrifying thanks to you. All help still welcome!

[rakeshpoorun]

Hi,

I do not know if such a thread is appropriate for this site as I have not seen anyone start one like this where they ask for help as and when they need it. If it is not appropriate, please remove it.

I have bought a NOS1 recently (not here yet) and need some help and advice with the PC side of things. I have done a lot of reading here but I still have one zillion and one questions.

I am really a newbie in the worse sense of the word and am literally terrified at the prospect of embarking on a PC build, especially one dedicated to get the most out of Peter's XXHighend's software.

This is hopefully the thread where I can ask some idiotic questions and some kind souls with more expertise and experience than myself can offer some advice.

I hope there is no problem with creating such a thread in the first place?

Best regards
Rakesh

[juanpmar]

Hi Rakesh, you have two ways, buy Peter´s PC and forget about the hassle to build it or ask whatever you want to know and anyone will try to help you to build it yourself.

Kind regards,
Juan

[rakeshpoorun]

Hi Rakesh, you have two ways, buy Peter´s PC and forget about the hassle to build it or ask whatever you want to know and anyone will try to help you to build it yourself.

Kind regards,
Juan

Many thanks. The cpu I have here is a LGA2011 socket R. E5-2680. I have two of these CPUs.

QUESTION: Is there anything to be gained to use these two CPUs in a dual server board. That would be 16 cores! Can XXHighend take advantage of this?

I have got a a blu-ray drive and some hard disks that I would like to use. This means I cannot really get Peter's PC as I would like to use some of the parts that I already have.

Best regards
Rakesh

[juanpmar]

Hi Rakesh, if I were you and wanted to build a computer what I´d do is to take a look to the signature of others and especially to Peter´s signature.

If you already have some components that you intend to use go to the window search in the upper right part of this forum to put the keyword and see what others think.

For example if you are looking for LGA2011 you'll find this (just an example): http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=3063.msg33225#msg33225

On the other hand if someone knows something specific about your questions for sure will tell you. If not, ask again 

Regards,
Juan

[Gerard]

I have bought a NOS1 recently (not here yet)

Rakesh

Huh you did not buy a NOS1 here from Peter?

 

[rakeshpoorun]

I have bought a NOS1 recently (not here yet)

Rakesh

Huh you did not buy a NOS1 here from Peter?

 

I am afraid you misunderstand me, Gerard. I meant the NOS1 has not reached me yet as I decided to go for this only a few days ago on Peter's advice.

I know next to nothing about servers and dual cpu motherboards and applications. But  this is what I think...

Clearly XXhighend is CPU intensive and is actually capable of making use of as many cores/threads as are made available to it.

However, presumably, some applications would I think need to be coded specifically so that they can take advantage not only of multiple cores and hyperthreading but also of multiple CPUs.

Now let me guess. At the time Peter wrote the software, he would not have envisaged the situation where anyone would be foolish and absurd enough to use a dual CPU motherboard. So the answer is probably no.

Best regards
Rakesh

[PeterSt]

Now let me guess. At the time Peter wrote the software, he would not have envisaged the situation where anyone would be foolish and absurd enough to use a dual CPU motherboard. So the answer is probably no.

Hey Rakesh - then you guessed wrong.

Support for 16 cores has been there since day one. Sadly (for you ) no 8 core processors existed at that time (max was 6 from some AMD). So 2 was common and a little later that became 4 hyperthreaded.
But motherboards with 4 sockets existed for ages already ...

Maybe 5 years or so ago Asus was working on some dual socket reasonable sized board and there is some topic about that in here somewhere.
In the end one board became available (but IIRC some less common brand) and I forgot why I didn't get it, but I (explicitly) didn't.

The only "PC" which today is used with some common sense and dual CPU's is some Mac Pro; I forgot who, but there is a cusomer hanging out there somewhere using that (with Windows).

FYI, software doesn't see 2 CPU's explicitly (but can if must); it sees the CPU cores. So if you put in 2 Xeon's with 20 cores each, it sees 40 cores (numbered 0 u/i 39).

Current version of XXHighEnd supports 24 cores for explicit tasking (see the yellow leds in the top of the screen). But this is just because to date nothing really exists in real (us audio !) life with more cores. If it comes around, the support for more cores comes around.
Btw, the most noticeable this is with track loading. So have 24 cores and 24 tracks load in parallel in the time of the longest track (but say in the time of 1).

Clearly XXhighend is CPU intensive

It is the opposite of that !

Regards,
Peter

[BertD]

Since about 2 months now I am using a rather simple PC and could not be more than happy with it.

http://www.atlastsolutions.com/ultimate-fanless-mini-itx-pc-core-i7-haswell-8gb-120gb-ssd-asus-q87t/

Used only for XX

I should compare it with a so called optimal PC one day but compared to my previous PC there has not much changed to the sound.

At first a bit less alive and dullish but after a week on continuous power it has even improved the previous situation. Still on Switching Power but that will be changed soon so no complaints...

Using Remote Desktop (other PC, tablet or phone), Galleries on the local SSD and the music on an external server connected with wired LAN and all is very responsive.

Decoupled with bearings and a heavy weight on top to eliminate vibrations. Ultra silent, reboots (when needed) within 10 seconds (!) and small size...

Bert

[rakeshpoorun]

...For example if you are looking for LGA2011 you'll find this (just an example): http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=3063.msg33225#msg33225

On the other hand if someone knows something specific about your questions for sure will tell you. If not, ask again 

Regards,
Juan

Hi Juan,

Thanks for the help and advice.

As you suggested, and as I was planning to anyway, I have done a little more reading about the LGA2011 Motherboards (why Intel would want to have three versions of this socket God in all his wisdom must find hard to fathom), and found out what I needed to know.

My processor is "socket R", so that the very latest V3 processors would not fit in the motherboard that I need to buy for my current processor. Well, that's good to know. For now I need to get the motherboard, memory, and graphic card if required...to start with.

Best regards
Rakesh

[rakeshpoorun]

Now let me guess. At the time Peter wrote the software, he would not have envisaged the situation where anyone would be foolish and absurd enough to use a dual CPU motherboard. So the answer is probably no.

Hey Rakesh - then you guessed wrong.

Support for 16 cores has been there since day one. Sadly (for you ) no 8 core processors existed at that time (max was 6 from some AMD). So 2 was common and a little later that became 4 hyperthreaded.
But motherboards with 4 sockets existed for ages already ...

Maybe 5 years or so ago Asus was working on some dual socket reasonable sized board and there is some topic about that in here somewhere.
In the end one board became available (but IIRC some less common brand) and I forgot why I didn't get it, but I (explicitly) didn't.

The only "PC" which today is used with some common sense and dual CPU's is some Mac Pro; I forgot who, but there is a cusomer hanging out there somewhere using that (with Windows).

FYI, software doesn't see 2 CPU's explicitly (but can if must); it sees the CPU cores. So if you put in 2 Xeon's with 20 cores each, it sees 40 cores (numbered 0 u/i 39).

Current version of XXHighEnd supports 24 cores for explicit tasking (see the yellow leds in the top of the screen). But this is just because to date nothing really exists in real (us audio !) life with more cores. If it comes around, the support for more cores comes around.
Btw, the most noticeable this is with track loading. So have 24 cores and 24 tracks load in parallel in the time of the longest track (but say in the time of 1).

Clearly XXhighend is CPU intensive

It is the opposite of that !

Regards,
Peter

Hi Peter,

Many thanks for your response. This was indeed very educational. And it of course has practical implications in that if anyone was to find a dual CPU motherboard, then this does not seem a bad choice although the case might be an issue.

The case that I have just dragged down from the loft to take a look inside will take an ATX-sized motherboard.

There are also some really quiet fans in there that I could use.

So existing components are:
1.a 500GB hard disk Samsung HD5021J
2. a blu-ray rewriter (I think LG or Pioneer)
3. a dvd-rewriter
4. a Lynx Studio 2 AES16 PCI card
5. a  Thermaltake TR2-470 PP PSU
6. 2 x 250GB SSDs (somewhere)
7. The Audiolab 8000DT media HTPC case (must have been a prototype as Audiolab never brought out this product)
8. I also recently bought an ESI Juli@ PCIe soundcard as I realised some motherboards did not have legacy PCI slots anymore
9. Some quiet fans

I also have the recently purchased Xeon E5 socket R processors. I should receive them from Germany over the next few days. I hope that they are not "chinese fakes"...The seller seems to be a legitimate seller. If they are genuine, I may end up buying 2 more; if not my credit card company should be able to refund me. We shall see...

All in all, there must be in the region of a thousand pounds worth of components lying around. I would have loved to have ordered your XXHighend PC but it would have meant wasting and paying twice over for components (especially given that some of the stuff here is not half bad) that I already have.

So I will deal with my PCPhobia, swallow my pride, ask stupid questions as and when required and supplemented with some research, come up with a plan of action over the next couple of weeks. Given the time I have, this will take me two months...

Many thanks
Rakesh

[rakeshpoorun]

Since about 2 months now I am using a rather simple PC and could not be more than happy with it.

http://www.atlastsolutions.com/ultimate-fanless-mini-itx-pc-core-i7-haswell-8gb-120gb-ssd-asus-q87t/

Used only for XX

I should compare it with a so called optimal PC one day but compared to my previous PC there has not much changed to the sound.

At first a bit less alive and dullish but after a week on continuous power it has even improved the previous situation. Still on Switching Power but that will be changed soon so no complaints...

Using Remote Desktop (other PC, tablet or phone), Galleries on the local SSD and the music on an external server connected with wired LAN and all is very responsive.

Decoupled with bearings and a heavy weight on top to eliminate vibrations. Ultra silent, reboots (when needed) within 10 seconds (!) and small size...

Bert

Hi Bert,

I went on Atlas Solutions' website and I must say that by the time you have upgraded some components, you are paying in the region of £1000-1200 for a PC with little in the way of upgrade path.

As you say, it is esthetically very pleasing indeed and it looks like it is an excellent XXHighend source. I imagine you have the NOS1a and I have read that this newer version of Peter's dac is more forgiving of the source computer. I will have the NOS1, at least for a year or so. So I need to be more mindful of following the advice given by Peter when designing a PC source for the NOS1. At the moment, I do not think I have departed too much from his recommended specifications.

I like the fact that you are using a tablet to control everything...I would certainly like to do that as well. But one step at a time...

Many thanks
Rakesh

[rakeshpoorun]

It has been quiet here recently so I thought I might as well chip in, if anyone is interested, with where I got to with my project. Not very far at all but I have made some "progress", although I hesitate to use the word.

It has been nearly two weeks ago since I last posted on my self-proposed plan to build my own music pc. In that time, I had to learn a lot not only about building a music server but also understand what my own objectives were. Without clearly defined objectives, no sensible decision can be made.

I realised quite soon just how little I truly knew but from talking to friends, people in IT and companies that actually build servers and workstations to spec, knowledge did not necessarily lead to wisdom and true understanding...The reverse of the coin was that with this greater understanding, essential as it is, I did not really get any closer to knowing why a choice should be made as opposed to another. Like with nearly anything, there are so many opinions and so often conflicting that it is not clear that there is any sort of agreement about anything. It felt a bit like walking down the aisle in Sainbury's looking for a bottle of wine for the evening meal. How does one come to a rational decision when placed in front of such a large number of equally plausible alternatives?

I came very close to just giving up and simply try and order Peter's tested and proven solution. There were however a couple of issues. Quite apart from the cost involved, I really did not want to be tied up to the Asrock X79 motherboard...I wanted to buy some relatively inexpensive processors and upgrade to something more decent eventually from the current V3 Haswell generation (generally more cores for less power consumption). Ideally, I would have liked to move away from Sata III drives, use up and coming tech like USB3.1, maybe Thunderbolt II to connect to a NAS, use really fast PCIe based "NVME" hard drives to boot from, reduce power consumption and increase core count by using CPUs like the Xeon E5-2650LV3. Ideally I wanted a bigger case since clearly that would enable better and more efficient cooling and open up the possibility of a dual cpu LGA2011-3 motherboard.

You may ask: what has any of this got to do with sound? In fact, my understanding is that all the considerations enumerated above have implications both in terms of sound and ease of use and keeping open the possibility of future upgrades.

I however know my limitations and whilst I have a better idea of what I want to achieve and how to get there, I know that I need and will seek help. Some invaluable assistance, Peter, Juan and others who posted in this thread have already given. I hope you will not hold back and help with both advice or blunt criticism.

I have however very culpably digressed from the opening and teasing first line of the post which suggested I had made progress. Part of that progress is understanding what I am doing and where I am going and hopefully that came through above. Maybe my situation will correspond to people joining the Phasure club. The other part of that progress is that I have actually decided on some essential aspects of my build and ordered the parts, but it is the Athletico v Real Madrid Champions League derby in a moment so that will have to wait.

Best rgds
Rakesh

[PeterSt]

Rakesh,

From my own experience :

More than 12 cores won't benefit SQ for explicit technical reasons (read : I didn't do anything in the program that leads to "more cores will sound better").

More than 12 cores *will* benefit track loading of playlists comprising of more than 12 tracks. So the more cores the more tracks load in parallel.
This is not 100% linear (for speed)  because there's also disk (or LAN) I/O involved.

I do not claim that a slower (processor) PC will sound as good and (indeed) I most certainly to not claim that for the normal NOS1.

The more headroom in, say, bandwidth the PC has for everything, the better it will be - always.

Peter

[juanpmar]

I came very close to just giving up and simply try and order Peter's tested and proven solution. There were however a couple of issues. Quite apart from the cost involved, I really did not want to be tied up to the Asrock X79 motherboard...I wanted to buy some relatively inexpensive processors and upgrade to something more decent eventually from the current V3 Haswell generation (generally more cores for less power consumption). Ideally, I would have liked to move away from Sata III drives, use up and coming tech like USB3.1, maybe Thunderbolt II to connect to a NAS, use really fast PCIe based "NVME" hard drives to boot from, reduce power consumption and increase core count by using CPUs like the Xeon E5-2650LV3. Ideally I wanted a bigger case since clearly that would enable better and more efficient cooling and open up the possibility of a dual cpu LGA2011-3 motherboard....
...I however know my limitations and whilst I have a better idea of what I want to achieve and how to get there, I know that I need and will seek help....

Best rgds
Rakesh

Rakesh,

In my opinion the use of a computer as an audiophile source is still in its childhood. If you are planning to use components so different than the ones used by the majority of the people here, then you are a pioneer and in some sense that means that are us the ones who will learn from your experience. As an example, if you are planning to use USB3.1 or Thunderbolt must be you who tell us about your experience with it.
Perhaps with the intention of having the latest you are going too far with the use of so very different parts and as a result will be hard for us to help you. It does not mean of course that you can´t try different configurations or components but I always would use other´s experience as reference. The more optimized computers to use with XXHighEnd and NOS1, that I know, are Peter´s, and with some differences and modifications those of Nick, Mani, Scroobius ...

Kind regards,
Juan

[PeterSt]

A very senseful response, Juan. And don't forget your own very well layed out "configuration". Maybe some will say that by now it is outdated (but then our own PC is that just the same) but about proven concepts ...

Something else (for us "helpers") - and not sure whether this has been made clear in this topic, is that Rakesh actually sort of "wants" to have a base in a by now somewhat older concept : the X79 chipset. This is because the processor he likes to use (a Xenon), which won't fit the LGA2011-3 cpu socket (and which latter would be around the new X99 chipset).
So what follows from this is while you (Rakesh) may want to be in some leading leage, this can not be the case because of your chosen processor.

I should also emphasize that nobody should make this the biggest deal of the world, with the knowledge that most certainly the majority of XXHighEnd users, and also NOS1 users, do not use any really sophisticated PC. It only shouldn't be a from all angles under powered laptop ...

Peter