lionceau

Anybody planning a Ryzen build?

1064 posts in this topic Last Reply

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I just built my Ryzen server yesterday.  It crashed sometime when I was unable to get to it.  I have been watching the log and its spitting out this error a lot:

 

Jul 17 08:39:17 FatTony kernel: pcieport 0000:00:01.2: AER: Corrected error received: id=0008
Jul 17 08:39:17 FatTony kernel: pcieport 0000:00:01.2: PCIe Bus Error: severity=Corrected, type=Data Link Layer, id=000a(Transmitter ID)
Jul 17 08:39:17 FatTony kernel: pcieport 0000:00:01.2: device [1022:15d3] error status/mask=00001000/00006000

Which correpsonds to this:

IOMMU group 1: [1022:15d3] 00:01.2 PCI bridge: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD] Device 15d3

 

Anyone else had this problem?  On a B350 mobo.

 

Edit:  After some googling and trying various things, I added pcie_aspm=off to my syslinux.cfg and the errors are not getting thrown around anymore.  I will let it run and see if my system is stable now.

Edited by choppyesq

Share this post


Link to post

How should CPU pinning be handled on a ryzen chip? I assume the CCX makes it slightly more complicated. I guess the real question is, what is the layout of the CPU/Threads for 1-16?

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

So I ordered a 2700x, Gigabyte x470 Ultra Gaming and a whole bunch of other stuff. Excited to see how unRAID will run 😃

I still have a 1080 Ti, will this work for pass through? I wonder what the power draw will be when not running the Windows VM and basically not using the GPU.

Edited by pushnoi

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, pushnoi said:

So I ordered a 2700x, Gigabyte x470 Ultra Gaming and a whole bunch of other stuff. Excited to see how unRAID will run 😃

I still have a 1080 Ti, will this work for pass through? I wonder what the power draw will be when not running the Windows VM and basically not using the GPU.

 

You won't be disappointed.

 

I have been running mine now for a couple of months with much the same hardware (exact spec in my signature) and it has been both pain and lockup-free.

 

There's no reason to expect any problem with the 1080Ti. I'm using a GTX 970 without hassle, but there plenty of reports of success with your model too. If unsure of the process then Gridrunner's guide is a handy reference.

 

The power draw will just be a trickle until it is in use. If you are curious then you can always invest a few <insert local currency> in a wall socket power-meter. It's always fun to actually see hard data as opposed to supposition. In my own case I'm idling at 95W with just a couple of minor container/VM running 24x7, and that spikes to 270W when gaming on a Windows VM.

 

 

 

Edited by Dev Null
Fleshing out power usage details.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/24/2018 at 4:22 AM, pushnoi said:

So I ordered a 2700x, Gigabyte x470 Ultra Gaming and a whole bunch of other stuff. Excited to see how unRAID will run 😃

I still have a 1080 Ti, will this work for pass through? I wonder what the power draw will be when not running the Windows VM and basically not using the GPU.

 

Before you use Unraid extract the GPU BIOS using TechPowerUp GPU-Z and best to do it on a clean Win10 and then use the Hex editor to remove the headers from the BIOS file. Had to do that on my GTX 1060 because none of the online BIOS worked. 

 

On a side note, I finally got my RX Vega 64 to GPU passthrough but the Reset bug for AMD cards persists. I have to reboot the whole system to make it work again. 

 

 

I used this post and works with some success. Does anyone else have this struggle with the AMD reset bug? 

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/22/2018 at 3:37 PM, smashingtool said:

How should CPU pinning be handled on a ryzen chip? I assume the CCX makes it slightly more complicated. I guess the real question is, what is the layout of the CPU/Threads for 1-16?

 

They are actually numbered from 0 to 15 and they are paired even-odd. So threads 0 and 1 are physical core 0, threads 2 and 3 are physical core 1, etc. all the way to threads 14 and 15 being physical core 7. You'll see the arrangement if you switch to the Dashboard page of the webGUI. This is different from how an Intel processor is arranged, where in an i7, for example, threads 0 and 4 represent physical core 0, threads 1 and 5 are physical core 1, threads 2 and 6 are physical core 2 and threads 3 and 7 are physical core 3. I'm no sure why they are different but the AMD arrangement makes more sense to my simple mind.

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, John_M said:

 

They are actually numbered from 0 to 15 and they are paired even-odd. So threads 0 and 1 are physical core 0, threads 2 and 3 are physical core 1, etc. all the way to threads 14 and 15 being physical core 7. You'll see the arrangement if you switch to the Dashboard page of the webGUI. This is different from how an Intel processor is arranged, where in an i7, for example, threads 0 and 4 represent physical core 0, threads 1 and 5 are physical core 1, threads 2 and 6 are physical core 2 and threads 3 and 7 are physical core 3. I'm no sure why they are different but the AMD arrangement makes more sense to my simple mind.


The Intel numbering made sense when you had system code that didn't understand hyperthreading and you didn't used one processor with multiple cores but the servers (and also often the workstations) had multiple CPU slots where the motherboard often wasn't fully symmetric but required some hardware to be handled by a specific CPU.

 

It would have been very bad if code intended for the second CPU ended up running on the second thread of the first CPU.

Share this post


Link to post
26 minutes ago, pwm said:


The Intel numbering made sense when you had system code that didn't understand hyperthreading and you didn't used one processor with multiple cores but the servers (and also often the workstations) had multiple CPU slots where the motherboard often wasn't fully symmetric but required some hardware to be handled by a specific CPU.

 

It would have been very bad if code intended for the second CPU ended up running on the second thread of the first CPU.

 

From a historical viewpoint I can see that made sense. Thanks for the explanation.

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/25/2018 at 7:14 PM, unraidrocks said:

 

Before you use Unraid extract the GPU BIOS using TechPowerUp GPU-Z and best to do it on a clean Win10 and then use the Hex editor to remove the headers from the BIOS file. Had to do that on my GTX 1060 because none of the online BIOS worked. 

 

What's wrong with reading the bios in unRAID as explained in that shared video tutorial? Does that not work all the time?

Also - is it possible to use that same GPU for both say OSX and Windows? Obviously not at the same time, but say - shutting one VM down and loading another?

Share this post


Link to post

Most ATX-size X370 and X470 motherboards have three PCIe x16 sockets, the top two being wired via a switch that allows either single PCIe v 3.0 x16 or dual PCIe v 3.0 x8 operation, while the bottom one is wired with four PCIe v 2.0 lanes from the chipset. There are usually two or three PCIe v 2.0 x1 slots (and often a second M.2 socket) that take lanes from the bottom x16 slot if they are used. With that in mind, here's what I'd like to do:

 

Put a decent graphics card in the top slot and a SAS HBA in the second long slot so they would get x8 each. Put a cheaper, single slot graphics card in the bottom slot. Now, is there a way of making the primary graphics card be the one on the bottom slot, so that it is used for the unRAID console, leaving the more powerful card free to be passed through to a VM? I'm thinking there would need to be a BIOS option to select which slot has the primary GPU. Does anyone know of an X470 or X370 board that fits the bill? The two that interest me are the Asus PRIME X470-PRO and the Gigabyte AX370 Gaming K5. They both have the slots but I don't know if they have the BIOS option.

Share this post


Link to post

My Gigabyte Gaming 5 allow the choice of witch slot to use for primary display. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, david279 said:

My Gigabyte Gaming 5 allow the choice of witch slot to use for primary display. 

 

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/29/2018 at 4:31 AM, John_M said:

 

They are actually numbered from 0 to 15 and they are paired even-odd. So threads 0 and 1 are physical core 0, threads 2 and 3 are physical core 1, etc. all the way to threads 14 and 15 being physical core 7. You'll see the arrangement if you switch to the Dashboard page of the webGUI. This is different from how an Intel processor is arranged, where in an i7, for example, threads 0 and 4 represent physical core 0, threads 1 and 5 are physical core 1, threads 2 and 6 are physical core 2 and threads 3 and 7 are physical core 3. I'm no sure why they are different but the AMD arrangement makes more sense to my simple mind.

 

So that would mean 0-7 are the first CCX, and 8-15 are the second, right? 

I assume that mixing and matching between the 2 CCXs would be bad. I'll likely give my VM sole access to a whole CCX, so 8-15, unless thats a bad idea for some reason.

Share this post


Link to post

Hi I read little in this post if you need a motherboard for 24 HDD   got this one now link  it are whit 2 sas controllers in the pci-e  and if I also like to get my GTX 970 in it.
there are we only talk abut a X470 right ?  I find only this of the B450 but the price and all are there any benefit then B450
also to be sure I like to use  it for my VR also so the VM must also have the USB of the host that will not be a problem or ? 

sorry for any misspelling 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


Copyright © 2005-2018 Lime Technology, Inc.
unRAID® is a registered trademark of Lime Technology, Inc.