Two Xeon 5050's or a Pentium E5300? Help please.

Flannery Moore

Honorable
Apr 20, 2013
24
0
10,520
Well, I need some help here. I have a choice between having a computer "Workstation" with two Xeon 5050's, and 16GB of DDR2 Ram, or having a standard desktop with a Pentium E5300 and 4GB of DDR2 Ram.

I play a lot of online games, and I figure having two processors is better than one, even if they are older. But then again.. I'm not sure.

Since I'm not exactly too knowledgeable about this kind of stuff.. and I attempted to do some research, it only made me a bit more confounded.



Here's what I know so far about the Xeon 5050 Processors, thanks to the Ark Intel site:
ARK Intel Source
I10S9vN.png



And now the Pentium E5300:
ARK Intel Source.
kMqXXW2.png





According to the information in those two screenshots, even though the xeon 5050's are at "End of life" they are still considerably more expensive, and have a higher clock speed. Although, they are quite a bit older than the E5300. They both support 64-Bit operating systems, which I need.

The reason I'm hesitating, is because I'm worried about the Xeon 5050's age. I've used an old Dell with a Pentium 4 before, and it wasn't exactly my cup of tea... these Xeon processors are roughly the same age as a Prescott 2M Extreme Edition Pentium 4 processor.


Which is why I'm here, asking the people of Tom's Hardware. What would you guys do, and why?
I really would appreciate any feedback that I can get. Remember, it's a choice of two Xeon Dual-Core processors at 3.0GHz, and 16GB of DDR2 Ram, or one Intel Pentium E5300 Dual-Core processor at 2.6GHz, with 4GB of DDR2 Ram.

I'll be using the setup for gaming.
I have a Nvidia GTX 550 Ti that I'll be using with my setup, when I get this figured out.


Thank you in advance for your help. =)
 
Solution
The Xeons will do you better. Both of them were launched in Quarter 1 of 2008, so both of the options are the same age. The Xeon 5050 at 3.0 GHz is slower than the E5300 at its 2.6, but you get 2 of them. Not to mention the Xeons have Hyper Threading, even if it is an earlier version of it. The Xeons are on the Neburst Architecture (which everyone that knows what it it about, hates it) while the E5300 is Core architecture.

Running Windows 7 on it might make better use of the 2 CPUs than the old OSes did, so it might be just as effective as a low clocked Core 2 Quad. Also with the E5300, you have no idea what motherboard/power supply you get, so it is not certain that a C2Q will be supported, and C2Q are expensive, because its old...

Flannery Moore

Honorable
Apr 20, 2013
24
0
10,520


Um, I looked, and no. The Prescott's used the 90nm process, and had 125 million transistors and a die area of 112mm. The Xeon 5050 uses a 65nm process, with 376 million transistors and has a die area of 162mm.
I quoted that from the Ark Intel thing, and Wikipedia. I honestly have no idea what that stuff means, but obviously they are different. Though I don't know if that means they are worse, or better. =/


And uh... if you know what that information means, and it says that the Xeon is better, I'd like to know please.


As far as a Core 2 Quad core goes, I might look into that, but I'd like to know for sure about the Xeons first, because having two processors kind of intrigues me.
 

Flannery Moore

Honorable
Apr 20, 2013
24
0
10,520



The reason is because I have the budget of a cup of tea. Lol..
I wouldn't be looking at something this out-dated if I had the money for something nice. It might be redundant to you, but to me, it actually means something. I don't have a nice computer. I have a toaster. And I'd love to get something newer, but as I said, I'm not exactly made of money. So this is just a few of my options.


Now I would appreciate it if you could please offer some helpful input, rather than being rude about it. I'm sorry that my low-end choices offend you.
 

Shneiky

Distinguished
The Xeons will do you better. Both of them were launched in Quarter 1 of 2008, so both of the options are the same age. The Xeon 5050 at 3.0 GHz is slower than the E5300 at its 2.6, but you get 2 of them. Not to mention the Xeons have Hyper Threading, even if it is an earlier version of it. The Xeons are on the Neburst Architecture (which everyone that knows what it it about, hates it) while the E5300 is Core architecture.

Running Windows 7 on it might make better use of the 2 CPUs than the old OSes did, so it might be just as effective as a low clocked Core 2 Quad. Also with the E5300, you have no idea what motherboard/power supply you get, so it is not certain that a C2Q will be supported, and C2Q are expensive, because its old hardware for the still used LGA 775. I would go with the Xeons and don't think about it. I hope this was helpful. Cheers and good luck.

Forgot to mention: You should definitely check what kind of PCI / PCIe does the motherboards have. I am almost certain the E5300 will come with PCIe 1.1 or maybe 2.0(but I think 1.1 is a safer bet), but I am not sure the Xeon Workstation motherboard has a PCIe. If that is the case, go with the E5300, because you really need the PCIe for your graphics card.
 
Solution

Flannery Moore

Honorable
Apr 20, 2013
24
0
10,520



Thank you. =)
And yea, the motherboard on the Workstation has two PCIe slots. It's being sold with a Nvidia NVS 290 already in it, so I'll just swap that out for my 550 GTX.


 

Optimus_Toaster

Honorable
Jul 22, 2012
458
0
10,960
Then save your money for something better. I'm not being rude I am telling you the truth, that you will not get a satisfactory experience from a pair of 8 year old CPUs.

Your low end choices don't offend me, wasting money offends me.