Re: W11 support?

On 9/7/25 10:30 AM, Paul wrote:
> On Sun, 9/7/2025 7:09 AM, T wrote:
>> On 9/6/25 11:27 PM, T wrote:
>>> On 9/6/25 11:01 PM, T wrote:
>>>> On 9/6/25 10:37 AM, Paul wrote:
>>>>>      https://www.xda-developers.com/intel-core-i7-14700k-review/
>>>>
>>>> Hi Paul,
>>>>
>>>> I picked this processor out from this chart at ASUS:
>>>>
>>>> https://www.asus.com/us/motherboards-components/motherboards/ workstation/pro-ws-w680m-ace-se/helpdesk_qvl_cpu?model2Name=Pro-WS- W680M-ACE-SE
>>>>
>>>> because it was 35 watts and supported ECC.
>>>>
>>>> But the review you sent me said it ran "hot".
>>>>
>>>> Something is fishy here.  You  take?
>>>>
>>>> -T
>>>
>>>
>>> Hmmm.
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/236783/intel-core- i7-processor-14700k-33m-cache-up-to-5-60-ghz/specifications.html? wapkw=i7-14700K
>>>
>>> says:
>>>
>>> Processor Base Power 125 W
>>> Maximum Turbo Power  253 W
>>>
>>> Maybe ASUS chart made a mistake?
>>
>>
>> Ooops, that was the "K" version.
>>
>> This is for the "T" version:
>>
>> Processor Base Power  35 W
>> Maximum Turbo Power   106 W
>>
>> So no heat buildup problem here
> 
> Obviously, a T is not in the same class as a K !!!
> 
> At one time, we had just the concept of TDP to worry about.
> Today, some of the processors no longer have the concept
> of a "base clock". The datasheet leads you to believe
> they "run from 0..MaxTurbo". And then, there is a continuum on
> power, just as your 14700K is 125W base, and 253W on turbo.
> 
> The T version, if you can find the datasheet for it, it
> is not going to have the same "top-clock". If it DID
> have the same "top-clock", then all that would mean
> is the power limit on turbo is 250W or so. You can't
> have a top clock, without some increased VCore voltage
> and a hefty thermal output.
> 
> The difference between 3.5GHz and 5GHz, is Windows Update
> finishes a bit more snappy. That's on an email/web browser
> machine. If you're gaming, the battle scene frames
> on the screen "turn blurry" when there isn't enough CPU
> to paint the frames. Once the 5GHz is available, the
> scene should be crystal clear.
> 
> It all depends on what you want to do with the machine,
> as to whether a T serves a purpose or not. A lot of
> the time, you can't even find a T on Newegg to buy. That
> used to be the problem with those, is they were in
> pre-built machines, but not a lot of them leaked to retail.
> They share some characteristics with laptop processors, in
> terms of the voltage and frequency selection used.
> 
> If your plan is to use a 35W CPU, then you could cool that
> with a wet rag. It wouldn't take much of a cooler. My blow-down
> cooler could handle that (and if you let it, it could even handle
> the idle CPU with the fan off). Whereas a 253W processor, if
> you're doing a 7ZIP run and compressing a 3TB backup image,
> then your cooler choice has to sustain good operating
> temperatures, during the extended compute run. 7ZIP is the
> equivalent of a "burn-in software".
> 
> Since AMD has been on a price-dropping spree recently,
> some of their lower power processors have lost the in-box
> cooler, and so buying a cooler is now an extra step for them.
> You could get good performance from a 65W CPU, plus with
> the right motherboard choice, the AMD also have ECC support
> across more of the product line.

Boxed vs tray processors.  Boxed gets you the fan and
the pretty sticker for the front of your box.  I do
not mind the tray units as I typically get a better
cooler anyway.  I am allergic to AMD processors.
> DDR5 has two kinds of ECC capability, and the traditional
> extra-chip kind is what you want when doing an ECC box. A
> USENET poster went through a living hell, getting that to work,
> and he never did deliver his "Linux numbers" that prove the
> memory controller is in the correct operating mode. That's how
> you figure out (partially) that it is working.
> 
> With the DDR5, there is also an error-injection capability, so
> you can actually shoot in an error, and see an error appear in
> the log as a proof of ECC-purchase. It takes a software to run the
> error injector.
> 
> I would not blame you for selecting your current mobo choice,
> if it meant less work getting ECC to work.
> 
> Always double-check, that the handful of components you are using,
> really are "ECC ReadY" and it is not s sham. I got screwed out of
> ECC on my X48, via various press releases (will-she-or-wont-she).
> I had ECC DIMMs but the BIOS gives the bad news "it won't work".
> Design-error in chipset (X48).
> 
> These are purchase patterns for the RAM.
> 
>      4x32GB DDR5 ECC  (suited to a highly reduced clock rate of operation)
>                       (slower speed, caused by bus loading of two DIMMs per channel)
>      or
> 
>      2x48GB DDR5 ECC  (the "odd" sized DIMMs can be used and ECC ones are available)
>                       (One DIMM-Per-Channel allows the highest operating clock)
> 
>      plus
> 
>      1x8GB non-ECC DDR5  (this is the single DIMM you put in the motherboard while
>                           flashing up the BIOS. You also use this stick, when the
>                           motherboard won't start any more, despite resetting the CMOS,
>                           and the last ditch effort, is to put the non-ECC single stick
>                           back in by itself).
> 
> Always have that teaser-DIMM ready, on these high tech builds. I didn't need that
> on my builds - I spent the first evening working in the dark, nothing would
> run, the BIOS flasher LED was flashing (but it wasn't doing anything). But
> I eventually got it running after "trying all permutations and combinations"
> as a technique :-/ On one combination, suddenly the LED frequency was different...
> 
>     Paul

Hi Paul,

Thank you!

This board has a W680 chipset:
https://www.asus.com/us/motherboards-components/motherboards/workstation/pro-ws-w680m-ace-se/helpdesk_qvl_cpu?model2Name=Pro-WS-W680M-ACE-SE


i5-14600K
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/236799/intel-core-i5-processor-14600k-24m-cache-up-to-5-30-ghz/specifications.html

Max Turbo Frequency                  5.3 GHz
Performance-core Max Turbo Frequency 5.3 GHz
Efficient-core Max Turbo Frequency   4 GHz
Performance-core Base Frequency      3.5 GHz
Efficient-core Base Frequency        2.6 GHz


i5-14600T  (Yes, I did notice they are hard to find: found
one on FleeBay)
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/236782/intel-core-i5-processor-14600t-24m-cache-up-to-5-10-ghz/specifications.html

Max Turbo Frequency                  5.1 GHz
Performance-core Max Turbo Frequency 5.1 GHz
Efficient-core Max Turbo Frequency   3.6 GHz
Performance-core Base Frequency      1.8 GHz
Efficient-core Base Frequency        1.3 GHz

I can live with the difference.  I am after long life
and low heat means longer life.  And I always over cool
the processor.  And this is not a high performance
gaming design anyway.  Just a work horse multitasking
workstations -- virtual machines and all.


I will let Kingston figure out the memory for me:
2 x 16GB for 32 GB dual interleaved

https://www.kingston.com/datasheets/KSM48E40BS8KI-16HA.pdf
KSM48E40BS8KI-16HA, 16GB 1Rx8 2G x 72-Bit, PC5-4800 CL40 288-Pin DIMM

Is dual interleave still a thing?


I intend to run Fedora 42+ on it with Windows in qemu-kvm
Virtual machines.  I may retire when W12 comes out.
This new design is meant last me till I get my
heavenly reward.

-T