Re: [OpenSCAD] Choosing new notebook to work with OpenSCAD
thank you very much for your opinion! I will have a look if I can find 16GB
RAM for comparable money...
Also thank you for your comment on the number of cores vs clock speed. From
what I read the base clock speed of Asus TUF should be 2.2 GHz with boost
frequency up to 4.1 GHz. I think it sounds fine, provided you can really get
that boost frequency they state when you need it.
Regards
Anet
---------- Původní zpráva ----------
Od: MichaelAtOz
Datum: 22. 10. 2020 v 15:45:20
Předmět: Re: [OpenSCAD] Choosing new notebook to work with OpenSCAD
Anet wrote
Hello,
I am a total beginner and I want to do some simple 3D modeling with
OpenSCAD
(example: a small box with a lid, or a toy for animal)
That's fine for 'simple 3D modeling'.
I didn't look it up, I presume nowadays they are all SSD's.
When you progress to complex, you may want 16GB memory.
ATM you want max clock speed ahead of multiple cores.
GPU's not too important.
Other power users may want to comment.
OpenSCAD Admin - email* me if you need anything, or if I've done something
stupid...
- on the Forum, click on my MichaelAtOz label, there is a link to email me.
Unless specifically shown otherwise above, my contribution is in the Public
Domain; to the extent possible under law, I have waived all copyright and
related or neighbouring rights to this work. Obviously inclusion of works of
previous authors is not included in the above.
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 04:09:17PM +0200, AnetaBrunova@seznam.cz wrote:
Also thank you for your comment on the number of cores vs clock speed. From
what I read the base clock speed of Asus TUF should be 2.2 GHz with boost
frequency up to 4.1 GHz. I think it sounds fine, provided you can really get
that boost frequency they state when you need it.
The boost is able to run for a few seconds, I think. That's not going
to help you when you have a 60 second rendering job.
With the big difference in "normal" and "boost" speed, in this
instance it may also be that this boost speed is achievable for single
thread performance when your other cores are not active.
Roger.
--
** R.E.Wolff@BitWizard.nl ** https://www.BitWizard.nl/ ** +31-15-2049110 **
** Delftechpark 11 2628 XJ Delft, The Netherlands. KVK: 27239233 **
f equals m times a. When your f is steady, and your m is going down
your a is going up. -- Chris Hadfield about flying up the space shuttle.
On Sat, 24 Oct 2020 19:32:04 +0200
Rogier Wolff R.E.Wolff@BitWizard.nl wrote:
On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 04:09:17PM +0200, AnetaBrunova@seznam.cz wrote:
Also thank you for your comment on the number of cores vs clock speed. From
what I read the base clock speed of Asus TUF should be 2.2 GHz with boost
frequency up to 4.1 GHz. I think it sounds fine, provided you can really get
that boost frequency they state when you need it.
The boost is able to run for a few seconds, I think. That's not going
The boost (and degree of boost) depends upon power consumption and
temperature not time. For a 15W part then a few seconds would be typical
but not so much for a 45W part.
to help you when you have a 60 second rendering job.
It's a laptop, so the 45W part is pretty much the best you can do and
you'll get plenty of benefits from the turbo because you are mostly
running single core and that laptop has external graphics.
If you want to get a higher sustained clock on multiple cores you'll need
to go to a desktop/server part which means either a non-laptop system or
a really expensive, big and heavy one with short battery life.
Everything comes down to power input and heat dissipation. The less bits
of the CPU running the more of the power budget is available to run the
things it is doing faster. Anything on the CPU shares the power budget so
on chip graphics also has an effect. Discrete graphics on the other hand
is a separate component with its own power and cooling so only eats into
the total power/cooling for the system.
Physics generally says that if you can split your sustained workload
efficiently then doing it more parallel and slowly is (to a point) more
efficient, but there is a point at which the fixed power overheads wipe
it out. Thus running 4 cores at 2.2GHz with a threaded app at base
frequency is way more efficient than trying to burst one core.
15W TDP parts are usually considered the right option for things like
business use where the machine is mostly idle but short bursts of fast
performance make it responsive, 35-45W parts are better for gaming and
other more sustained loads. Generally speaking though any vaguely modern
sustained loads like games are architected for four threads of execution.
Alan