Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Using dual-chip mobos, why not more popular? 2X E6400 OC

Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 26, 2006 7:51:03 PM

I havent seen any discussion about using server mobos for personal home use for gaming etc. The way I see it, cant you put two E6400s on a dual-chip mobo, OC that baby, and basically get Kentsfield+ speeds for half the price?

Whats the catch? Why arent they more popular??
October 26, 2006 8:03:14 PM

1) FB-DIMM's Are expensive
2) Server MB's are expensive big, hard to deal with, etc
3) The MB won't have SLI/Crossfire Support
4) 4cores doesn't help that much unless you have 4threads

That said I have a 2-socket Athlon MP system (oddly its my HTPC, but that another story). And I like it quite a bit. But it is for transcoding/watching compressed content/etc. The board is awful for gaming.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b 4 Gaming
October 26, 2006 8:17:37 PM

5) E6XXX dont support Multi Processor
6) Lga 771 is not the same as LGA775
October 26, 2006 8:32:59 PM

Yeah, you'd have to use the Xeon equivilant which is 100 bucks more expensive (you get 2mB more cache). And:

7) Server boards aren't made for overclocking
October 26, 2006 8:49:08 PM

You guys know your stuff. Isnt there a market for mobo manufacturers to address in the home market. If they have the technology to manufacture it for the server market, why not duplicated it into home use. I'd love to pop on a 2nd E6600 as time goes by and prices go down.

SLI/CF was supposed to bring that, but software didnt evolve fast enough and the latest cards just outstrip in comparasion - bang for your buck. Could be a similar prob with mobos.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b 4 Gaming
October 26, 2006 9:04:13 PM

I dont really know how much extra logic you have to incorporate into the CPU itself to support MutliProcessor. I always thought that with Intel at least, it was just a way to make more money by making you buy Xeon, but there is no way to run anything else then Xeon and Opteron in multiCpu environement.

Thats is about to change with the 4X4 platform from AMD. But these Ahtlon FX will need an extra HT link to connect to the other CPU making them basically Opteron 2XX(Current FX are like opteron 1XX), dont know how accurate of a comparison that is...but it's logical at the very least =)

kmjohnso btw, the Xeon 3000 series dont support multi processor and ended up not having 4M(the 1.86 and 2.13ghz part)

the 51XX are multi proc capable and cost almost 2X the price of similar C2D
October 26, 2006 9:14:02 PM

I put the Xeon 5120 at 280, a hundred bucks more expensive. I thought there were 3040/50 chips w/4mb listed on Newegg. So that was that a listing error?
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b 4 Gaming
October 26, 2006 9:19:12 PM

Oh your right about ths 5120, I check the 5140 price, it's 2X the price...of a E6600...

It was more then a listing error I think, it was adverstised as 4M parts on a few pages on intel web site, and some people at anandtech got confirmation from intel it was a 4M part. In the end it was a big mess that seem to have been sorted out hehe
October 27, 2006 6:43:20 AM

There are server boards that allow over-clocking, just not for Woodcrest at the moment. There is a possibility that Nvidia may release a chipset for 2P systems that will support O/Cing and use standard DDR2 RAM. If they do, then the cheapest quad core Xeons would give much better value than 4x4. The Xeon E5310 at 1.6GHz $455 would over-clock to 2.7GHz at 450 FSB, provided Nvidia get their arse in gear with their chipset.

There are boards supporting over-clocking with Opteron S940 and possibly Socket F by now also. With the Opteron 2P CPUs having their prices drastically slashed recently, if you can find a Socket F board that over-clocks well, the Opteron platform will offer better value than Woodcrest. Take a look at www.2cpu.com for info.
!