Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Does anyone know...

Last response: in CPUs
Share
May 31, 2007 3:29:40 PM

Does anyone know what would give better results/performance, a dual processor, dual core XEON system in the 3.0GHz range or a Core 2 Duo Quad core?

If anyone can shed any light on this or point me in the right direction I would be extremely grateful

More about : question

May 31, 2007 3:53:44 PM

I think you may be confused with the technologies?

Dual-core processors are a general name for all, well, dual core processors made by Intel and AMD, both. The Intel lines are the Core 2 Duo, the Xeon [These are primarily used for workstations], and the Pentium D. For AMD they are the X2 series, and the FX series [for now].

If you mean, dual processors, are you talking about, something like the Socket F processors from AMD where you have to buy two of them? [Their quad-cores].

From Intel, the line in order of least powerful, to most powerful is like this:

Pentium D
Xeon [Workstations, mainly.]
Core 2 Duo.

Those are the dual-cores. If you're talking about Quad cores also, the quads would be at the end of the list. The Core 2 duo's and the Core 2 quad's are for home use. They are relatively cheap, and excellent for gaming/video/sound editing, and should fit the use for most people's needs today, unless you definately need top of the line. In that case, you should find yourself looking at the Core 2 Quad's [Q6600, Q6800], from Intel, or, if you're stuck with getting AMD, their Socket F processors, however, these aren't the best in town.
May 31, 2007 4:05:40 PM

Quote:
Does anyone know what would give better results/performance, a dual processor, dual core XEON system in the 3.0GHz range or a Core 2 Duo Quad core?

If anyone can shed any light on this or point me in the right direction I would be extremely grateful


It depends on the application and how much you are willing to spend.
A dual quad set up is more expencive since the dual socket mobos (F) require special memory (FBDIMM) and are geared towards server / workstation work.

If the application supports more then one processor, and more then 1 core, then the Xeon dual core dual processor would perform better.
Related resources
May 31, 2007 6:58:35 PM

1) Netburst based Xeons are outdated technology. Core 2 "Woodcrest" or "Clovertown" based ones are good. (Clovertown is quad core.)

2) Unless you are operating a bandwidth constrained server workload, Core 2 Quadro is much better price/performance than 2P Xeon 51xx. FB-DIMMs and 2P boards simply cost a premium.

3) Core 2 Quadro can be overclocked on several mainstream boards and frequently exceeds 3GHz, but not by much unless you have excellent cooling. I have not heard of anyone overclocking a 2P Xeon board.

4) If overclocking is out of the question, then 2P 3.0GHz Woodcrest Xeons will usually outpace Core 2 Quadro at 2.4 or 2.67GHz. There is a version of Core 2 Quadro at 2.93 Ghz, but I think availability is very limited.
May 31, 2007 7:36:03 PM

what exactly are you looking to do with that kind of a setup. programs, file server?

also give the rest of your specs for this setup. :D 
!