Dell T20 - energy consumption too high with 25 Watt idle - around 10ish W is the goal

[flashdrive]

Is there a way / option to lower the power consumption in TrueNAS?

I have not yet compared to a Windows install on this system.

• SCALE in idle draws 25 Watt
• Dell UEFI / BIOS is set up for CPU etc
• SCALE 2022-11 RC1 is installed on usb thumb drive
• no HDD attached
• 12 GB RAM
• Intel Xeon E3-1225 v3, 4x 3.20GHz max. Turbo 3.60GHz , 8MB L3, 84W TDP
• no PCIe card, internal grapics of Xeon is used
• no optical drive

compare

[Sammelthread] - Dell PowerEdge T20

Dell PowerEdge T20 Der Dell PowerEdge T20 ist wahrscheinlich am besten als Workstation zu nutzen mit seinen 2x Displayports und dem ECC Support bietet er alles was man braucht. Der T20 kommt aber auch für den Einsatz als Server in Betracht. In der Xeon Variante bietet der T20 auch vPro und...

www.hardwareluxx.de

 

[garm]

seams a bit high, my T20 idles around 20W with four HDDs and 4 SSDs, but I'm running Core

 

[rvassar]

Since you linked to a German language forum, I'm guessing you're trying to minimize your energy footprint for the coming Winter. Can you give us some more info on what you're trying to achieve? Let's see if we can brainstorm some ideas...

Disconnect the optical drive entirely. If you need one periodically, use a USB attached external unit.

Modify for passive cooling? Your average 80mm fan is going to max out around 7 watts by itself. The T20 has three fans. Can you rig up a passive CPU heatsink that leverages the case exhaust fan? You might need to handle boot events for missing fans.

Core i3 CPU's can make use of ECC RAM, something like the Core i3-4130T will have a maximum TDP of 35w, less than half the 84w Xeon. It should be a socket 1150 drop in, but much slower.

 

[flashdrive]

I will try with TN Core again

My idea is to have a replacement of my current Airport Extreme with USB HDD attached as a permanently available Apple Time Machine storage location.

This is a fanless setup with next to no idle consumption, but running Samba v1 only - no Software updates available from Apple any longer.

Goal:

to minimize the idle power consumption of the 24/7 replacement.

Research indicated that said T20 Xeon powered system would be good at that, hence my surprise of the 25 Watts idle draw.

 

[flashdrive]

Also I shall check the T20 UEFI update - latest version etc...

edit: latest Dell UEFI A20 was already installed.

 

[jgreco]

Research indicated that said T20 Xeon powered system would be good at that, hence my surprise of the 25 Watts idle draw.

And you were hoping for 10? What is your research there based on?

In general, the only thing I've seen in the Intel architecture arena with draws as low as 10 are laptop CPU based systems. This includes gear such as Apple Mac Mini. Even if we look at a Mac Mini M1, that idles at 7W. Plus it has no HDD's. The Intel Mac Mini's are, I believe, just a shade higher, slipping in just under 10W.

Core i3 CPU's can make use of ECC RAM, something like the Core i3-4130T will have a maximum TDP of 35w, less than half the 84w Xeon. It should be a socket 1150 drop in, but much slower.

This isn't likely to be helpful though. The idle power consumption of similarly rated CPU's within a product generation are normally fairly similar. The TDP only acts to limit watt burn, usually for purposes that involve cooling solutions such as passive cooling. It is even likely to end up burning a little more energy; a TDP-limited part that is running full tilt tends to be a bit less efficient in terms of Gflops/W (or whatever your preferred measure is) than a standard part that is allowed to spike its power usage (turbo, etc) in order to get the same workload done faster. That's the thing that tends to throw people.

 

[joeschmuck]

25 Watts is not bad at all in my opinion, you may be able to shave a few watts off depending on the power savings mode you have the CPU setup for in the BIOS.

So many people want to build a NAS that just sips power and they come to the realization it can't really be done, not the what they desire, otherwise we would have a very popular thread for low power NAS builds. If you are going to replace components in order to lower your electric bill, consider the amount of money you will be paying for those new components and how many years it would take to recoup the costs.

The place where you can save power would be if you could purchase SSD's vice spinning rust drives, but the cost per TB is very high. You could use the smaller 2.5" hard drives but those are not really recommended for NAS use and you would need to ensure they are CMR.

 

[rvassar]

This isn't likely to be helpful though. The idle power consumption of similarly rated CPU's within a product generation are normally fairly similar. The TDP only acts to limit watt burn, usually for purposes that involve cooling solutions such as passive cooling.

Yes, it was meant in context of the passive cooling suggestion in the paragraph above. Provided idleness is actually achieved, the higher power CPU getting the work done faster, will spend more time in a low power sleep state.

Honestly, this use case is covered by several other low power solutions. I don't think spinning up a NAS 24x7 is the correct one in a location where we're counting individual watts. Every WiFi router I've owned for the last 10 years has offered a USB port and the ability to share storage. I've only used it with the AFP share, but I believe Time machine can utilize a simple SMB share these days. If ZFS & RAIDz is desired, a Raspberry Pi 4 with a pair of USB drives is an easy DIY that runs around 5 watts plus drive draw.

 

[rvassar]

You could use the smaller 2.5" hard drives but those are not really recommended for NAS use and you would need to ensure they are CMR.

One way to ensure CMR in the 2.5" format is to only use enterprise qualified server drives. The shingled write stall is not a ZFS specific "feature" of SMR drives. It grossly impacts regular RAID controllers as well. If it's qualified for use on a server with a RAID controller it's almost certainly CMR. The 2.5" drives do just fine in NAS roles, and are far more common in the current generation of servers than 3.5" drives. Which isn't to say the 3.5" format is on it's way out, but it is getting relegated to a bulk storage role where the higher capacity 3.5" drives come in to play.

The $100 question is what happens in a couple years... I have 15Tb 2.5" SSD's in engineering test now.

 

[jgreco]

One way to ensure CMR in the 2.5" format is to only use enterprise qualified server drives.

Are these still limited to about 2.4TB? Or am I not looking hard enough?

It's been depressing that the drive sizes in 2.5 have been stuck in the 1-2TB range for almost a decade (WD Red 1TB).

The $100 question is what happens in a couple years... I have 15Tb 2.5" SSD's in engineering test now.

Send them to me for engineering test.

 

[rvassar]

Are these still limited to about 2.4TB? Or am I not looking hard enough?

It's been depressing that the drive sizes in 2.5 have been stuck in the 1-2TB range for almost a decade (WD Red 1TB).

Amusingly, I'm going to have to go look. But that is the "break point" I'm familiar with. The thing you have to consider is where does the HDD/SSD line cross in terms of price vs. performance? More importantly, where is that line when you consider the impact of 24gig SAS SSD's in external JBOD units? It gets weird from there...

 

[jgreco]

The thing you have to consider is where does the HDD/SSD line cross in terms of price vs. performance?

I don't know if performance even matters. HDD is never going to be a stellar performer. As I've pointed out many times over the years, my ST32550N hard drives in 1993 were seeking at about 9ms. It's almost 30 years later now and we're, what, half that? Hard drives have cost per TB going for them, but it seems inevitable that SSD will eventually get there too.

I already stopped buying the WD10JFCX 2.5" 1TB HDD's (been available since 2013, prices stable around $70) because SSD prices such as the Samsung 870 EVO are only about $90-$150. The main thing they lack is endurance. But you can get SSD's with endurance, just costs a bit more.

SSD pricing has been flat-ish lately, which is depressing. There's supposed to be a glut of flash on the market, but the price drops seem to be offset by increased prices earlier in the year. It's hard to find a great up-to-date graph that includes 2021-2022 though.

 

[joeschmuck]

I was looking at some of the NVMe SSD's on sale this past week and I could almost see an upgrade path for myself in the near future. My current hard drives are over 2 years beyond the warranty and I hope they last another year, but if not, a NVMe Mirror might be a great option. I don't have huge storage requirements thankfully.

As for the OP @flashdrive, you never listed your storage capacity requirement right now and what you expect in the future. I know you may not think it impacts your question but it does. If you are looking to expand the system up to about 8 years later (I figure a system is good for 10 to 12 years, then it will likely be replaced) then you need a motherboard that support the near term future expansion needs, for example in 5 years you need to double your storage capacity.

 

[flashdrive]

Yes, it was meant in context of the passive cooling suggestion in the paragraph above. Provided idleness is actually achieved, the higher power CPU getting the work done faster, will spend more time in a low power sleep state.

Honestly, this use case is covered by several other low power solutions. I don't think spinning up a NAS 24x7 is the correct one in a location where we're counting individual watts. Every WiFi router I've owned for the last 10 years has offered a USB port and the ability to share storage. I've only used it with the AFP share, but I believe Time machine can utilize a simple SMB share these days. If ZFS & RAIDz is desired, a Raspberry Pi 4 with a pair of USB drives is an easy DIY that runs around 5 watts plus drive draw.

Yes, I have asked in the Apple forum about the requierements for sn SMB network share - this is possible to be used for Apple Time Machine. It was also my thinking in the beginning utilizing a router USB attached single drive solution.

But then I like TrueNAS to use

Main thing here: Spinning down / idling the data HDDs in TN versus drive tear for that scenario.

 

[ChrisRJ]

If the possible solution is also using a "router" with a single USB HDD attached, as an alternative to TrueNAS, I think the requirements are not clear yet. There is a huge difference between those two approaches in terms of data safety.

I also have USB drives as part of my backup strategy (not limited to Time Machine, though). However, without some additional "thinking" I would consider a USB drive as somewhat unsafe, at least relative to ZFS.

 

[flashdrive]

My main backup storage is a TrueNAS home build - which is not running 24/7.

I am using 2 backup locations: the one I want to replace is the 24/7 single USB hard drive.

Hence the "router would also be ok"-approach.

In fact the Airport Extreme is just this set up - I am not using it as a router at all, just as USB adaptor to the LAN.

 

[joeschmuck]

If the possible solution is also using a "router" with a single USB HDD attached, as an alternative to TrueNAS, I think the requirements are not clear yet. There is a huge difference between those two approaches in terms of data safety.

I also have USB drives as part of my backup strategy (not limited to Time Machine, though). However, without some additional "thinking" I would consider a USB drive as somewhat unsafe, at least relative to ZFS.

Thinking outside the box, I love it.

 

[emk2203]

If you just need a USB --> LAN adapter, you could use something like a reflashed WD MyBook Live or an Odroid HC2, both of which are excellent for power savings. The HC2 (based on the XU4) won't draw more than 2W if idle. The MyBook Live (PowerPC architecture) has similar low energy consumption. Together with a nice WD Red, the system should run cool enough. The old MyBooks can be had on eBay, the HC2s are a little rarer.

For anyone wondering why we try to bring the consumption down so much: Every watt translates to 5 € on your yearly energy bill in Germany now. A server with 120W is equivalent to 600€ energy costs per year.

I am also treating my systems now as 'cold storage' which I want to wake up only occasionally, like three days a month.

 

[rvassar]

For anyone wondering why we try to bring the consumption down so much: Every watt translates to 5 € on your yearly energy bill in Germany now. A server with 120W is equivalent to 600€ energy costs per year.

I suspected this was the case, hence my comment about suitability of a NAS vs. a simpler embedded solution. I don't know what kind of regulations you have, or even what sort of skills, but if I was in your shoes, I'd be looking at ways to generate & store my own power. Solar panels, DIY windmill, permanent magnet alternator connected to an exercise bike. A human can output about 100 watts continuously. Storage is the expensive bit. There's been a whole cottage industry in this stuff where I grew up out in California.

 

[flashdrive]

power results:

15 Watts
Win 10 on HDD in idle

around 20 Watts idle
TrueNAS (Core, SCALE)

I need to check how these results are achieveable, if at all: https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/threads/dell-poweredge-t20.1031138/#strom

Also check the USB - router scenario with SMB sharing as another option.