Might be a bit late on this, but ProxMox doesn’t really handle assigning threads to the e/p cores. That’s handled by the kernel and as long you’re running kernel version 6.1 or greater you should be good on that front.

If you really need to, you can also pin specific VMs to specific cores. So that if you’ve got something that always needs the performance it can always run on the p-cores and things that aren’t as demanding can always run on e-cores.

That said, especially if you’re over provisioning, it’s probably better to let the scheduler in the kernel handle thread assignments.

If I’m reading your example right, I don’t think that would satisfy three either. Three copies of the data on the same filesystem or even the same system doesn’t satisfy the “three backups” rule. Because the only thing you’re really protecting against is maybe user error. I.e. accidental deletion or modification. You’re not protecting against filesystem corruption or system failure.

For a (little bit hyperbolic) example, if you put the system that has your live data on it through a wood chipper, could you use one of the other copies to recover your critical data? If yes, it counts. If no, it doesn’t.

Snapshots have the same issue, because at the root a snapshot is just an additional copy of the data. There’s additional automation, deduplication, and other features baked into the snapshot process but it’s basically just a fancy copy function.

Edit: all of the above is also why the saying “RAID is not a backup” holds true.

I don’t think this meets the definition of 3-2-1. Which isn’t a problem if it meets your requirements. Hell, I do something similar for my stuff. I have my primary NAS backed up to a secondary NAS. Both have BTRFS snapshots enabled, but the secondary has a longer retention period for snapshots. (One month vs one week). Then I have my secondary NAS mirrored to a NAS at my friends house for an offsite backup.

This is more of a 4-1-1 format.

But 3-2-1 is supposed to be:

• Three total copies of the data. Snapshots don’t count here, but the live data does.

• On two different types of media. I.e. one backup on HDD and another on optical media or tape.

• With at least one backup stored off site.

I can’t speak to AI performance, but given you’re stated goal of lower idle power consumption, I’d go with the 14900K, not the KS as you have listed.

Reason being the $250 price difference between the two, when the KS is just a slightly higher binning of the K with an additional 200MHz on the boost clocks. With that higher boost being something you’re unlikely to practically see without a substantial and robust cooling system, I don’t think it’s worth the extra money.

The reason I’d go with the K over the 10940X is the lower limit on it’s power consumption. The E cores are very efficient and can down clock substantially meaning it idles at really low power. The 10940X doesn’t have that benefit.

Beyond that, I’d say look at IPC, per thread, per max sustainable clock of each core, to get a general out look on performance.

Note: all of the above assumes we’re working within your listed options. My actual recommendation would be an AMD 7800x3d or 9800x3d.