Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Building A Very High End System

Last response: in CPUs
Share
November 1, 2011 9:41:26 PM

Can anyone tell me if I should buy the highest spec Xeons, MOBO and DDR3 now in order to build a very high spec system OR should I wait until Intel release their new LGA-2011 line up?

I'm planning to build a machine with up to 64GB of memory, two Xeon W3690s (or X5675s or X5690s) and a top of the range MOBO.

But I don't want to invest many thousands of dollars and then find a higher spec CPU line up is announced that has an even higher spec.

Do any experts here have a view on this now or later question?


Thx
November 1, 2011 9:48:52 PM

itzdanielp said:
The new Xeons should be coming out in about 3 weeks, wait until then.

Look at the EVGA SR-3 Board, and use that as a model if you are going for ultra high end dual processor.

http://www.techpowerup.com/153916/EVGA-SR3-Super-Record...


Hi

Thanks for that info, do you know what the names/model numbers might be for the new Xeons? Is there any new or advance chit chat?


Thx
Related resources
November 1, 2011 10:06:31 PM




Thanks again, I'm liking the 8 core devices. two of those and I have 32 hyper-threaded processors available truly stunning.

A big concern I have is ensuring the CPU/MOBO and DDR3 sticks are all rock solid - I know some of these higher spec systems are a little picky and the MOBO makers have their lists of "tested" memory brands etc.

Incidentally the Wikipedia article refers to Xeon E5 16XX device numbering but the other list refers to Xeon E5 26XX any significance to this?


Thx
November 2, 2011 12:40:02 AM

If it was me I would wait for the new motherboards as they will support quad channel ram.

Can I ask why do you want to install 64 gb ram? What do you use your pc for? I was amazed when I saw that and curious.
a c 141 à CPUs
November 2, 2011 1:42:51 AM

I was thinking the same thing. What could you possibly be doing that you would need that much memory. Anyway I agree with itzdanielp. Its only a couple weeks until te Xeon's come out just wait then decide.
a c 184 à CPUs
November 2, 2011 4:15:16 AM

rds1220 said:
I was thinking the same thing. What could you possibly be doing that you would need that much memory. Anyway I agree with itzdanielp. Its only a couple weeks until te Xeon's come out just wait then decide.

Maybe 3d programs? or "hardcore" programming?
November 2, 2011 1:21:09 PM

damian86 said:
If it was me I would wait for the new motherboards as they will support quad channel ram.

Can I ask why do you want to install 64 gb ram? What do you use your pc for? I was amazed when I saw that and curious.



Memory speed is important so yes quad channel has caught my attention, is this a feature of the new LGA 2011 platform?

The memory size is relevant because I run a small business that has developed a very high performance in-memory database technology for Windows.

Some datasets may contain millions of items (e.g. real-time stock or option price data) and with indices for the data etc can easily consume 20 GB or more.

Testing with these volumes of data is impossible if physical memory is too small, such a system would be subject to intense thrashing which pretty much prevents testing.

The high core count is likewise important as apps and tools for this system are inherently parallel (one test program here runs 100,000 database writes per thread concurrently into a test in-memory data set using 8 threads on an 8 core machine).

Because data is in-memory (well ideally it has not been paged out) we can update data at rates exceeding 500,000 updates per second or even higher.

64GB is plenty and I like to have more resources than I currently need to I won't hit hardware limits on massive tests.


Seymour

a b à CPUs
November 2, 2011 1:37:07 PM

SeymourCray said:

Incidentally the Wikipedia article refers to Xeon E5 16XX device numbering but the other list refers to Xeon E5 26XX any significance to this?


Thx



1XXX = 1 processor per board
2XXX = 2 Processor per board
4XXX = 4 processor per board.

EDIT: er, just to clarify I mean Motherboard.

These are server chips, so they are designed to work in parallel on a single system, but some are limited as to how many can be used.
November 2, 2011 2:11:44 PM

itzdanielp said:
1XXX = 1 processor per board
2XXX = 2 Processor per board
4XXX = 4 processor per board.

EDIT: er, just to clarify I mean Motherboard.

These are server chips, so they are designed to work in parallel on a single system, but some are limited as to how many can be used.


Ahh - had no idea about numbering ! now how much is a four processor board ..... (may be overkiil!)


Seymour.

a b à CPUs
November 2, 2011 3:57:08 PM

All LGA-2011 boards come with at least 4 DIMMS, support 1 stick per channel. Most mid to upper range boards come with 8 dimms, 2 sticks per channel quad channel. There are currently none on the market due to NDA's from Intel.

The socket is supposed be released Nov 14th. You will start seeing a lot of boards then.

November 9, 2011 9:40:36 AM

damian86 said:
Yes LGA2011 is supposed to support quad channel ram, it is hard to find quad channel boards, so we will have to wait a bit in that case.

Here, a little review

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i7-3960x-x79-p...

I would also suggest to make sure that your MB can support Sata3 (6.gb/s)

What you said sounds interesting, so you will definitely use all the ram.

Another killer:

http://www.supermicro.com/products/system/4U/8046/SYS-8...


Yes that latter system is nice but even at entry level is priced at over 9,000 bucks. I've noticed that as the spec goes up the margins on assembled systems (as a % of parts cost) also rises.

I looked at one well known high-end vendor recently and calculated that they were (in effect) charging over 500 bucks extra - per Xeon - not to mention other overheads.

I'd love to just hand overthe cash and order one of these big beasts - but it's such a waste when one can save several thousand just by assembling it one's self.


I'm just waiting now to see what these LGA2011 parts are really like when they arrive...


Seymour.


November 9, 2011 9:41:27 AM

itzdanielp said:
All LGA-2011 boards come with at least 4 DIMMS, support 1 stick per channel. Most mid to upper range boards come with 8 dimms, 2 sticks per channel quad channel. There are currently none on the market due to NDA's from Intel.

The socket is supposed be released Nov 14th. You will start seeing a lot of boards then.


I see, so next week news should begin to trickle....


Seymour.

a b à CPUs
November 9, 2011 1:19:00 PM

I'll build one for you without the massive overhead ;) 

heck, I'll do it for the fun of it
November 9, 2011 2:25:43 PM

hahaha, im not sure what you intend to use this PC for, but if its for gaming you're going to have some serious problems... When using 4 CPU's no matter the cores or threads your going to have BIG scaling problems on anything that doesnt utilize or was designed for that use, for example when quad cores were released a few years back games ran like s***, because they couldn't utilize anything from it. Id reccomend DUAL 990X i7's if i was to blow all my money.! :D 
November 9, 2011 2:43:42 PM

SeymourCray said:
Can anyone tell me if I should buy the highest spec Xeons, MOBO and DDR3 now in order to build a very high spec system OR should I wait until Intel release their new LGA-2011 line up?

I'm planning to build a machine with up to 64GB of memory, two Xeon W3690s (or X5675s or X5690s) and a top of the range MOBO.

But I don't want to invest many thousands of dollars and then find a higher spec CPU line up is announced that has an even higher spec.

Do any experts here have a view on this now or later question?


Thx


Get this, noob.

http://www.apple.com/mac/

a b à CPUs
November 9, 2011 3:03:27 PM

icedfire690 said:
Get this, noob.

http://www.apple.com/mac/


Dude... It is completely unnecessary to complete every comment you make on this forum with "noob"

Especially if you look at the tag under your name.

And at least try to stay relevant to the topic of the thread.
November 9, 2011 3:05:13 PM

But seriously, why fuss over all these when you can get something powerful with the click of a mouse?
a b à CPUs
November 9, 2011 3:08:37 PM

because any of the custom builds we are discussing would be around half the price, and would run circles around whatever is "pre-made" from apple.

Apple just a couple years ago started even beginning to compete with windows, when the switched to Intel processors.

However apples business model consists of happily hanging back from cutting edge, going with what is tried and true, using their name instead of their performance to make sales.

If you want true cutting edge power, which is what the OP asked for, you can't go with a click and buy method, especially from apple.
November 9, 2011 3:28:09 PM

itzdanielp said:
because any of the custom builds we are discussing would be around half the price, and would run circles around whatever is "pre-made" from apple.

Apple just a couple years ago started even beginning to compete with windows, when the switched to Intel processors.

However apples business model consists of happily hanging back from cutting edge, going with what is tried and true, using their name instead of their performance to make sales.

If you want true cutting edge power, which is what the OP asked for, you can't go with a click and buy method, especially from apple.


Preach it brother! It's refreshing to see someone not deluded by the monster that is apple.

I have to admit OP, you have one impressive set up in mind. I couldn't even begin to fathom the programs you could run with such a system. Granted i'm just a gamer, but seeing someone build something like that is still quite the site. As far as advice goes I recommend waiting for the LGA. From what I've read they will be packing several next-gen features, including PCI-E 3.0, SAS 6Gbps and quad-channel DDR3 memory; If only my wallet was big enough to even think about getting one... Oh the woes of being a struggling college kid.
a b à CPUs
November 9, 2011 3:35:28 PM

Mybumurface said:
Preach it brother! It's refreshing to see someone not deluded by the monster that is apple.

I have to admit OP, you have one impressive set up in mind. I couldn't even begin to fathom the programs you could run with such a system. Granted i'm just a gamer, but seeing someone build something like that is still quite the site. As far as advice goes I recommend waiting for the LGA. From what I've read they will be packing several next-gen features, including PCI-E 3.0, SAS 6Gbps and quad-channel DDR3 memory; If only my wallet was big enough to even think about getting one... Oh the woes of being a struggling college kid.



I'm not going to lie, I use apple on a daily basis. But I do not fall under the category of a die hard apple fan that will use apple no matter what. For what I use them for they are the best (Audio Editing / Pro Tools) and they do have a solid OS. But that does not make them best over all. There are functions that I use windows for, functions that I use apple for, and still others that I use Linux for. All on a daily basis. :) 
November 10, 2011 11:00:19 PM

Fanbars said:
hahaha, im not sure what you intend to use this PC for, but if its for gaming you're going to have some serious problems... When using 4 CPU's no matter the cores or threads your going to have BIG scaling problems on anything that doesnt utilize or was designed for that use, for example when quad cores were released a few years back games ran like s***, because they couldn't utilize anything from it. Id reccomend DUAL 990X i7's if i was to blow all my money.! :D 



Well gaming isnt my goal - I may play them from time to time though.

But the i7's cant be run as SMP devices so far as I know, they lack the hardware interface that is needed for the two (or four) processors to interconnect.


Seymour.

November 10, 2011 11:09:34 PM

icedfire690 said:
Get this, noob.

http://www.apple.com/mac/



Why? the day I buy an Apple is the day to put me in a padded cell!

I have no time for them, they are pretentious and little more than fashion gadgets in my opinion. Apple never invested in an OS the way Micorosft did with NT, they preferred to do what every other klutz does - using Unix or one of the umpteen variations of it.

You wont see an Apple running mission critical systems like those on banks or trading firms etc for a reason, they are not good enough.

They support only Objective-C an antiquated and feeble OO language, the development tools are a joke when compared to Visual Studio 2010 and there is nothing even close to Microsoft's .Net which blows Java away.

If you write serious software for a living that must support demanding 24/7 systems then you will have no interest in such toys.

Soryy - but I know of what I speak.


Seymour.


November 10, 2011 11:15:31 PM

Mybumurface said:
Preach it brother! It's refreshing to see someone not deluded by the monster that is apple.

I have to admit OP, you have one impressive set up in mind. I couldn't even begin to fathom the programs you could run with such a system. Granted i'm just a gamer, but seeing someone build something like that is still quite the site. As far as advice goes I recommend waiting for the LGA. From what I've read they will be packing several next-gen features, including PCI-E 3.0, SAS 6Gbps and quad-channel DDR3 memory; If only my wallet was big enough to even think about getting one... Oh the woes of being a struggling college kid.



Well I'm looking fwd to this really, some of the stuff I will be able to do will be staunning, the database technology is already replacing SQL Server at a few key firms because it is just so fast and I need to be able to hammer the system hard.

Just recently I ran a test that runs 8 threads on a two core Athlon machine each doing semi-random concurrent writes and updates to a large 2GB shared memory database, this test ran fine over and over, but when I tested it on an 8 core i5 notebook I saw failures (buggy locking code), so even code that is tested on say 2 or 4 core boxes can still fail on 8 or 16 core machines, not many developrs are aware of this.

Hence the need for this beast!


Seymour.
a c 141 à CPUs
November 11, 2011 12:11:24 AM

SeymourCray said:
Why? the day I buy an Apple is the day to put me in a padded cell!

I have no time for them, they are pretentious and little more than fashion gadgets in my opinion. Apple never invested in an OS the way Micorosft did with NT, they preferred to do what every other klutz does - using Unix or one of the umpteen variations of it.

You wont see an Apple running mission critical systems like those on banks or trading firms etc for a reason, they are not good enough.

They support only Objective-C an antiquated and feeble OO language, the development tools are a joke when compared to Visual Studio 2010 and there is nothing even close to Microsoft's .Net which blows Java away.

If you write serious software for a living that must support demanding 24/7 systems then you will have no interest in such toys.

Soryy - but I know of what I speak.


Seymour.


I agree 100%. Never owned an Apple computer and never will. I see no point in the I pad, I phone and I everything else its all just overpriced fashion gadgets as you put it. My sisters have Apple laptops and I Pad and when using both all I can think is this OS is garbage compared to Windows 7. Using their Apple stuff only made me more convinced that I'll never buy anything made by Apple and I can see why most of the World uses Windows isntead of Mac or Linux.
December 3, 2011 1:17:13 PM

itzdanielp said:
1XXX = 1 processor per board
2XXX = 2 Processor per board
4XXX = 4 processor per board.

EDIT: er, just to clarify I mean Motherboard.

These are server chips, so they are designed to work in parallel on a single system, but some are limited as to how many can be used.


Well I just saw that the i7-3960X offers stunning performance, like a 50% more than the i7-990X.

I'm also once again utterly bewildered by the Intel plans and numbers, read this - it has dozens of Xeons with an "E5" in their name as well as E6 and E7 which has just baffled me no end.

How the hell do Intel expect anyone to understand or follow this crazy array of products?

So far as I can tell, until a processor appears on that passmark website - I can't consider it.


Seymour.


a b à CPUs
December 5, 2011 1:49:38 PM

SeymourCray said:
Well I just saw that the i7-3960X offers stunning performance, like a 50% more than the i7-990X.

I'm also once again utterly bewildered by the Intel plans and numbers, read this - it has dozens of Xeons with an "E5" in their name as well as E6 and E7 which has just baffled me no end.

How the hell do Intel expect anyone to understand or follow this crazy array of products?

So far as I can tell, until a processor appears on that passmark website - I can't consider it.


Seymour.



I will agree with you on their Xeon line being hard to follow....


However all of the ones you pointed out are E5xxx or E7xxx

The new processors are E5-xxxx
December 27, 2011 1:14:00 PM

OK

Im seeing the new i7-3960X @ 3.3 GHz with passmark = 15,331 = very fast indeed.

The ASUS rampage IV Extreme BF3 X79 mobo - with sup't for up to 64GB Mem.

I'd like to use these as the basis for new box now, need it v soon indeed.

The Tiger Direct website for that mobo says I can use DDR3 2400MHz memory but has 'OC' next to that, does this mean I must run the processsor at some non-std clock rate? would that CPU/MOBO work OK at those settings?

What memory would I get? does brand matter at these high specs ?

How does this sound?

Also need a good graphic adapter(s) not a big gamer, but be silly to build such a serious box and not fork out a few extra hundred so that I can do some good gaming from time to tim...

Seymour.
December 27, 2011 1:17:16 PM

Also I want to use 8G memory sticks because mobo has 8 slots and supports 64GB.
a b à CPUs
December 27, 2011 1:45:23 PM

Check out the review that was posted today about quad channel memory kits on the 3960x here on the site.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/quad-channel-ddr3-m...

Running at 2400MHz is pretty much pointless, a kit running at 1866MHz is more stable and will give you the same performance.

For GPU I would go with an nVidia GTX 580. Very powerful single card that can always be added to later with up to 3 more.

Memory brand doesn't really matter. I personally like G-Skill, Corsair and Kingston.
December 28, 2011 11:46:58 AM

itzdanielp said:
Check out the review that was posted today about quad channel memory kits on the 3960x here on the site.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/quad-channel-ddr3-m...

Running at 2400MHz is pretty much pointless, a kit running at 1866MHz is more stable and will give you the same performance.

For GPU I would go with an nVidia GTX 580. Very powerful single card that can always be added to later with up to 3 more.

Memory brand doesn't really matter. I personally like G-Skill, Corsair and Kingston.


Thanks again Daniel, v informative testing...I'm seeing hardly anything though that ships as 8GB sticks, since MOBO support 8 slots and a total of 64G I wanted to only get 8G sticks, perhaps starting off with 4 of these for 32GB.

Does anyone know where to go for this size memory?

Thx
!