xeon vs. pynren

[z_dori]

hi,
if i'll get a xeon quad 2.66G, it will be better for gaming?
or the OC features & MB types won't be the same....

 

[jamesgoddard]

huh...

Intel will release Xeon versions of Pynren, so what are you saying... Are you asking if the quad core 2.66GHz CPU will be better then a 486DX2???

 

[z_dori]

desktop CPU (e6XXX) Vs. Xeon CPU... the 1333fsb ver..(pynren)

 

[InteliotInside]

I doubt you would want a Xeon based rig. The price of the motherboard and the price and performance of FB-DIMMs really hurt.

I desktop Conroe CPU will outperform a Woodcrest because it would have faster RAM. That's probably the simplist explanation I can give.

 

[z_dori]

thanks man.

 

[darious00777]

Don't forget that Socket 775 Xeons can work in Conroe motherboards. None of that ECC memory or motherboard that costs more then a weeks salary. Then again, a lot of high-end desktop boards cost about the same.

 

[z_dori]

ya, i'm planning on the X38 Chipset... foxconn did a huge thing by building a board that is CF & SLI!!! with this chipset.
i guess that asus will come with boards that will cost like the striker extreem...

p.s.
i am really disapoited from the 2900xt. he doesn't kick as* like i thought he would. so for now i'm thinking to wait for the 2nd generation of dx10 cards on PCIe2.0 then, we'll see.
but with this SLI & CF thing for no i'm thinking about GTX or Ultra in SLI.

 

[3Ball]

My CPU was only $8 more than an E6300 and well u can see my motherboard.

Best,

3Ball

 

[z_dori]

the rig i'm planning on, based on money is 3-4Gs
max 400-500$ for CPU i guess... so in that price 2day it's a really good desktop cpu. but if xeon can do better, in that price, & the same board (x38 chipset)- y not?!

i hope...


the real money is on Video cards.

i think that the cooling will cost like the cpu- but only if it would hold cpu + 2 VGA cards.

 

[3Ball]

man u can build just about anything with 3 - 4g's good luck with that puppy!

Best,

3Ball

 

[z_dori]

if i had the guts, i would buy the V8 x5000 system with 2 xeons....
but the only thing that's stoping me is in the pc market. 2day's 3-5G rig, in one year will be half price or less... that's money to the drain... i also have
doubts about this 3-4Gs rig, but for once i want a high end pc

 

[Insane_Maniac]

I hate to say it man, but your best bet is to stick with Conroe. Why in the heck would you want to by a system designed around a server unless you were going to use it as a server. The Conroe is one of the most powerful processors if not THE most powerful processor out there. I seriously urge you to go back and do your homework. And in terms of a dual Xeon board, those are for servers, if your looking for a system with more than one processor, your going to get a dual core with almost every Conroe, and if you want to go even further look into the Kentsfield which is a Quad Core cpu, but its not a true quad core, but the CPU can still kick butt and take names.

The RAM that is designed around the Conroe is going to give you much better performance than say a Xeon. Hence the reason why a Xeon is designed for servers and the Conroe is better for gaming. Not only that you can tighten the timings on your memory and overclock the heck out of a Conroe.

 

[z_dori]

this is y i asked you guys... i can see buy your rigs that u know stuff.
as you can see, the first Q was- is Xeon will do better the conroe for a desktop/gaming rig.

 

[tamalero]

its penryn? XD

 

[z_dori]

ya, penryn... 1333FSB CPUs (xeon & desktop).

 

[cbhm]

they have quad core xeons (clovertown), so a dual socket 771 mobo will essentially be 8 cores.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010340343+1051721706+1302825342&name=Quad-Core

they also have fsb of 1333. question is, what is the difference between active and passive? they have two clovertown quads rated at 2.66, but one is active and the other is passive.

if you are using a dual xeon setup, which northbridge do you want? 5000v, 5000p, or 5000x?

anyway, there are dual xeon mobos with pcie16x.

i just wish we could benchmark one of these in supcom to see how well it performs with 32gb ram (which probably wouldnt be much different from 4gb) and 8 cores :twisted:

 

[nop]

...if you have games that scale well with the number of cores, you might want to get as many cores as you can

Trouble being that most (maybe all?) of today's games really don't scale well with the number of cores that you apply to the problem, so if what you want it for is to play today's games, then getting lots of cores is a bit of a bust. There are suspicions/rumours/predictions that tomorrow's games will scale well over multiple cores, but, hey, that's tomorrow. and, to quote a phrase "prediction is always difficult, especially when its about the future".

On the other hand, if you've got a more general purpose computing problem - maybe folding@home or something- more cores is good.

If you look here 'prices', you'll see that for $400 you could (nearly) get two E5310s, for $500 E5320s, and for just over $600 E5335s. (I've cheated slightly with the prices as those are presumably tray prices and aren't valid until sometime in July.) So, in each case, that will give you 2 by four core parts and as far as execution architecture is concerned those are the same as Conroe parts, but with more cores and more cache.

Now I agree that RAM will cost you more and the cheapest server motherboards tend to be around the price of the top of the range gaming motherboards, and that they go up from there, but, for someone who can really use the cores, I still think that's a better deal than buying the so-called gaming CPUs at $700+.

they also have fsb of 1333. question is, what is the difference between active and passive? they have two clovertown quads rated at 2.66, but one is active and the other is passive.

I believe - correct me if I'm wrong, guys - that the passive and active thing is the heatsink assembly. So active gets you a fan, and given that it is intended to fit in a relatively low profile server housing it could be fast and whiney, and passive gets you a larger lump of metal, which the case probably has to push air past, or it overheats. The second won't be a problem with a good case, although I don't know what situation you are in if you decide you want to fit an 'overclockers' heatsink.

 

[Arctucas]

The 3000 series dual core/3200 series quad core Xeons are basically high-binned Conroes/Kentsfields.

 

[3Ball]

My Xeon 3040 is a conroe based CPU. It a rebranded 6300. Most of the time server chips such as the Xeons are made with higher quality transistors and silicon as well as binned for lower voltages and to many they are considered to be a more reliable/resitant CPU. For an $8 more price tag I could not refuse this theory (especially since I did not plan on keeping the chip for to long anyways). Though many 6300's have clocked better than my 3040 I am perfectly happy with a 3040 @ 2.8ghz. What you said would imply that a 6300 @ 2.8ghz would out perform my 3040 @ 2.8ghz. This is just not true. Maybe you should do your research before accusing other people of not doing theirs.

Furthermore, my motherboard is a socket 775 P965 motherboard, and the memory is the same as what you would call "RAM that is designed around the Conroe" and I was able to lower the timings on them to 4-4-4-10 from 4-4-4-12. Though this isnt much I can go to 4-4-4-8 but there is little to no performance difference and this happens to be what I stress tested at. Its all working great with my Xeon leading the way.

Best,

3Ball

 

[cbhm]

My Xeon 3040 is a conroe based CPU. It a rebranded 6300. Most of the time server chips such as the Xeons are made with higher quality transistors and silicon as well as binned for lower voltages and to many they are considered to be a more reliable/resitant CPU. For an $8 more price tag I could not refuse this theory (especially since I did not plan on keeping the chip for to long anyways). Though many 6300's have clocked better than my 3040 I am perfectly happy with a 3040 @ 2.8ghz. What you said would imply that a 6300 @ 2.8ghz would out perform my 3040 @ 2.8ghz. This is just not true. Maybe you should do your research before accusing other people of not doing theirs.

Furthermore, my motherboard is a socket 775 P965 motherboard, and the memory is the same as what you would call "RAM that is designed around the Conroe" and I was able to lower the timings on them to 4-4-4-10 from 4-4-4-12. Though this isnt much I can go to 4-4-4-8 but there is little to no performance difference and this happens to be what I stress tested at. Its all working great with my Xeon leading the way.

Best,

3Ball

because they are binned for lower voltages, that means they do not have as high of an OC potential, performance aside clock for clock?

 

[3Ball]

Yes, they are clock for clock the exact same. The fact that they are binned for lower voltages would mean that it can most of the time achieve even the same OC level at a lower voltage. The same rules apply from stock to OC on the voltages. Mine was bad luck of the draw and in many cases that is what can happen on any given CPU, but the 939 Opterons are a prime example of lower voltages with better overclocks from a higher quality CPU.

Notice the code name of my processor and package details: http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=212162

Best,

3Ball