Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

"2 Xeon CPUs r Better Than 1 P4 Extreme" article!?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
May 14, 2004 11:10:22 PM

http://www.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20040514/index....

What's happening to THG lately.....??

What was the point of this article anyway???

The "Extreme Edition" is a "rich hardcore gamer's CPU", and in GAMING it still blows the Xeons away....which is quiet natural, since DUAL XEON CPUs WERE NEVER INTENDED FOR GAMING in the first place, so why compare them to an Extreme Edition.........What's their point??

Someone's on crack here...!!
May 14, 2004 11:15:33 PM

Erm....more than just GAMERS buy EEs. Jeeze, it's the highest performing multimedia chip available, FX is the highest performing gaming chip. This just shows that for what the EE is best at there is actually a better, cheaper way to do it. Stop getting on the case of THG for a good article that may not benefit yourself.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
May 14, 2004 11:23:43 PM

Yeah, this is nuts! E7505 is history, it's nearly 2 years old now, why would anyone be reading reviews on it now? Who gives a monkeys, here I am waiting for the E7710 / Nocona reviews and Tom's is producing old outdated E7505 / Prescott reviews - pff - this article was a space filler and they shouldn't bother making the suggested next one comparing E7505 boards, everyone knows how they compare already.

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/myanandtech.html?member=114979" target="_new">My PCs</A> :cool:
Related resources
May 14, 2004 11:25:42 PM

Well..I must disagree with you on that...The "EE" was Intel's answer to the incredible FX51's GAMING performance.

And any professional working in the field of video editing or CAD or Studio Max or graphics intensive applications (or whatever, I'm a doctor so I dont really know a lot about that), will definetely opt for a DUAL or MULTIPLE CPU setup, and NOT the VERY expensive EE.

I still dont see the point of the article.

Hopefully someone can clear this up.
May 14, 2004 11:40:06 PM

Quote:
The "EE" was Intel's answer to the incredible FX51's GAMING performance

I completely agree, but it also happens to be the fastest multimedia chip available.

I also agree that any professional would go for MP (or at least DP), but not everyone is a professional at this stuff....some people surely think that the EE is the be-all-and-end-all solution. EE isn't the best at much of anything now (non-SMP multimedia apps is probably their last chance), and THG indirectly points that out.

I'll give you a few reasons why this article was written--refresh peoples' minds that DP systems cost less and often perform better; denounce the EE (it already loses gaming to a cheaper chip, now multimedia is in the spotlight); and primarily a space-filler (better than a game review, IMO).

@sjonnie: the review was not to shed light on the 7505, but a refresher on the fact that dualies are more cost effective than people think considering their performance advantages over top-of-the-line SP systems.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
May 15, 2004 2:47:48 AM

Not at all what is you 4 way or higher setup you can have for a workstation.Often P4EE will offer best possible performance even compare to a 64 way opteron.

````NOT the VERY expensive EE`````` no actualie very cheap.

i need to change useur name.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by juin on 05/15/04 00:44 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
a b à CPUs
May 15, 2004 3:06:51 AM

Wow, you must be lost. Tom's isn't just a gaming/modders hardware site. People come in looking for the fastest PC for their professional apps as well. A lot of them have a lot of money to blow in order to get themselves the best performance available for that app. The 875 is clearly the fastest available Intel chipset, I doubt an EE on a 7505 would hold water to an EE on the 875 for example. But the 7505 IS the late Xeon chipset, even if it is a bit old. Tom's is trying to compare Intel's best dually platform to their best single platform. And the dually wins a lot of rounds.

Even though the EE is often considered a "gamers" chip, it's really Intel's fastest single CPU. You see a lot of guys wander through these forums asking "Should I go dually" and they often say "I run all these professional apps but still want adequate performance for the occasional game". And that article tries to provide the information those guys seek, not you or me.

After all, my pro apps run fine on my slower hardware.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
May 15, 2004 5:06:23 AM

Quote:
You see a lot of guys wander through these forums asking "Should I go dually" and they often say "I run all these professional apps but still want adequate performance for the occasional game". And that article tries to provide the information those guys seek, not you or me.

Too true. I would love to get my hands on a dually Iwill DH800. I game a lot but I also do a lot of video encoding, multitasking, etc. and really need the best of both worlds. I was considering getting two Xeon 2.8s but I've been reading that they don't run stable with the FSB much over 533. When the hell are those 800MHz FSB Noconas coming out and why doesn't anybody review the DH800?

You've tried and failed. The lesson here is, never try again. -- Homer Simpson.
May 15, 2004 5:08:05 AM

if you mean overclocking it no really a good idea.

i need to change useur name.
a b à CPUs
May 15, 2004 6:03:11 AM

If you want the board reviewed, why don't you ask Iwill to send out samples to their favorite review sites?

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
May 15, 2004 9:21:45 AM

Here's an article from anandtech comparing the Prescott vs Northwood vs EE.
For gaming: EE, Athlon 64
For media encoding and worstation performance: Prescott beats EE real bad.


http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1965&p=5

"Workstation Performance was a bit of a surprise because processors with the largest on-chip cache are usually the best performers in this benchmark. However, in all the individual tests with SPECviewperf 7.1.1 except UGS, Prescott was the best performer. Apparently, there are aspects of the Prescott design that make it more efficient in SPECviewperf. This same pattern was also seen in Intel CPU comparisons on other chipsets and other motherboards. It is a big surprise that Prescott beats the EE in Workstation Performance benchmarks, even though the EE has 2.5MB of cache compared to the 1MB of the 3.2E."


The way that I see it...the "EE" shows its strength and any REAL advantage only in GAMING.
May 15, 2004 9:29:21 AM

Here's a part of the CONCLUSION of that article...


"The areas that most surprised us were Media Encoding and Workstation Performance. We expected P4EE to lead in these benchmarks, but instead, Prescott was the top performer. Intel tells us that Divx 5.1.1 provides support for new SSE3 instructions, and at least in our configuration with an XMpeg 5 front end, Prescott leads in Media Encoding. Other Media Encoding benchmarks that use older codecs have been showing Prescott about the same as Northwood in encoding tests. Workstation Performance was generally dominated by Prescott, so those applications that depend on the types of operations tested in SPECviewperf will perform best with the Prescott 3.2E. The SPECviewperf 7.1.1 benchmarks were repeated on a VIA PT880 motherboard with all three 3.2 processors, and Prescott again dominated these benches, providing the top performance in all the 7.1.1 suite including UGS.

Prescott and EE compatibility will be a part of all future testing of Pentium 4 motherboards. With the testing that went into this comparison, you should have a better idea of how the 3 flavors of Pentium 4 compare at the same speed on the same reference motherboard. Prescott is not a very good gaming chip at 3.2 GHz, but it is closer to Northwood than many expected. If you can afford the price tag, P4EE is still the best choice for gaming among Intel processors. Northwood and Prescott are virtually interchangeable as measured in Content Creation and General Usage performance. For Media Encoding and Workstation Performance, Prescott at 3.2GHz appears to have an edge over both Northwood and the much more expensive 3.2EE."


So...if Media Encoding and Workstation Performance is what u NEED..get a Prescott for a 1/3 of the price...but for GAMING...as I said...its the "EE" all the way....

However, with a dually setup or a MP...your rig will kick ass in "Media Encoding and Workstation Performance " and beat an "EE" hands down...!!

I hope I have made my point.....
May 15, 2004 12:08:59 PM

Quote:
If you want the board reviewed, why don't you ask Iwill to send out samples to their favorite review sites?

Me? Take an active roll? I'd rather just sit here and complain. :smile: Actually I'll shoot them out an e-mail today. You would think the makers of such a unique board would want to show the world what it can do! That's why I'm a bit worried and hesitant about getting that board. Maybe they just need a kick in the pants from consumers like me or maybe Iwill wants the DH800 to be tested with Noconas. Any word on when they might be available? If I could get my hands on a couple of Noconas I'll test it myself!

You've tried and failed. The lesson here is, never try again. -- Homer Simpson.
May 15, 2004 2:18:10 PM

What's so special about the DH800 other than the usage of unbuffered RAM?? IMO, Tyan's K8Ws (Tiger and even-more-so Thunder) are far more impressive, but that 's just me probably.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
May 15, 2004 9:15:31 PM

Believe me I've thought about that. It would be much cheaper for me to get a couple of 2.8GHz Xeons than get two 246 Opterons <i>and</i> ECC RAM. Furthermore, those Tyan boards with an AGP slot are over $500! The DH800 is $350. So, I could save $150 on the board itself and not have to buy new ECC RAM. It makes sense. However, if the Noconas come out with an outrageous price tag I may just take a look at the Tyan.

You've tried and failed. The lesson here is, never try again. -- Homer Simpson.
May 15, 2004 9:45:44 PM

No one expect nocona to be a fast core but the increase in bandwith should make a lot for the platform.1MB L2 may be more usefull there.

i need to change useur name.
May 15, 2004 10:56:14 PM

> It would be much cheaper for me to get a couple of 2.8GHz
>Xeons than get two 246 Opterons and ECC RAM.

Obviously, as it would be cheaper to get a pair of opteron 240's than a pair of 3.2 GHz Xeon 1MB's. Point being, that the opteron 246 is considerably faster overall as a 2.8 Xeon.Gaming obviously, but even if you use Xvid for your video encoding, and not DivX (and frankly why would anyone use DivX ?). If you do MPG2 encoding, a lot depends on what codec you use. here is a good link for single cpu performance on video encoding:
<A HREF="http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/intelamdcpuroundupv..." target="_new">http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/intelamdcpuroundupv...;/A>

HT performance might also give a glimpse of how the codec will perform on a dual setup, so if for instance your main tool is Mainconcept, investing in a dual cpu machine is most likely not very smart.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
May 15, 2004 10:57:17 PM

I don't know, I was considering that the boost from 533Mhz to a full 800Mhz would be roughly a 5-10% performance increase; even more so if you consider the state of current Xeon chips (E7505 is old). Therefore, if they can get a canterwood-like chipset with great stability and good performance out the door, you'd have dual 3.6Ghz Noconas with 800Mhz FSB and dual DDR/DDR2 or whatever with 64-bit enabled... It's not revolutionary, but it's getting better...

In any case, I thought that the article in THG was an indication of the potential of going dual-core. I mean, compare a lower-clocked dual-core setup (dual chips, heck) to a higher-clocked single-core setup... So this article indicates that there is performance to be gained, and very much, in some few certain tasks which are relatively common...

It's just that usual dual CPU talk. It's valid for dual core as well...

<i><font color=red>You never change the existing reality by fighting it. Instead, create a new model that makes the old one obsolete</font color=red> - Buckminster Fuller </i>
May 15, 2004 10:59:47 PM

My original plan was to get two 2.8GHz Xeons, lower the multiplier and increase the FSB. However, from what I'm reading with the DH800 the Xeons aren't running too stable like that. The DH800 supports 800MHz FSB so I would like to couple it with processors that will take advantage of that. To get a board that supports 800MHz FSB and two CPUs that don't go much higher than 533 doesn't make too much sense.

You've tried and failed. The lesson here is, never try again. -- Homer Simpson.
May 16, 2004 12:18:05 AM

Ummm, let me show you three systems:

IWill DH800: $349
2x Xeon 3.06GHz (generally slightly slower than 246s, and usually equal to 244s): $936 OR 2x Xeon 2.8GHz (generally slower than 244s): $661
2GB Mushkin Level-II PC2700: $510
________________________
TOTAL: $1795 w/ 3.06s OR $1520 w/ 2.8s

Tyan Tiger K8W: $232
2x Opteron 246: $882 OR 2x Opteron 244: $614
2GB OCZ PC3200EL ECC: $590
________________________
TOTAL: $1698 w/246s OR $1426 w/244s

Tyan Thunder K8W: $436
2x Opteron 246: $882 OR 2x Opteron 244: $614
2GB OCZ PC3200EL ECC: $590
________________________
TOTAL: $1902 w/246s OR $1640 w/244s

Not only are the 246s faster than 3.06s (in most apps), but the Opteron scales better in MP systems, is more upgradable in the future (dual-core Opterons are promised to be 100% compatible with current mobos), has twice the bandwidth on the Thunder than on the already faster-than-Xeon Tiger, and has registered RAM which is better than than unbuffered for systems with 4 DIMMS (especially on the 875P chipset).

IMO, until Nocona, Xeon is useless outside of app-specific usages because overall the Opteron systems are cheaper, more reliable (because of registered and ECC RAM), more scalable, more upgradable, and faster at most price points. In addition, I trust TYAN borads a lot more than IWill boards (I have an IWill right now, would have been much better off with the Asus or even Intel board). Also, the TYANs have more features.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
May 16, 2004 12:23:25 AM

That's an interesting theory, you think this article was to shed light on the upcoming dual-cores? Hmmmm, makes sense now. Also has me really interested in a dual-core system.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
May 16, 2004 1:21:11 AM

Personnaly i dont believe much in dual core or higher setup or 64 bit.


..........In any case, I thought that the article in THG was an indication of the potential of going dual-core. I mean, compare a lower-clocked dual-core setup (dual chips, heck) to a higher-clocked single-core setup... So this article indicates that there is performance to be gained, and very much, in some few certain tasks which are relatively common...

Common how many you 3D rendering here that use version that are less that 2 year old.My guess is it 50% 50% so if you compare let say a 2.4C with a AXP 2500+ how many application will run faster does P4 not much.In actuale benchmark P4 is faster overall.Toms have use apps that are by tradition freshly compile and made for Xeon and by Xeon and mean P3 cascade and P2.The overall ISV will move is software to the lowest common dominateur.I will guess that more that 80% of application starting with game will never be port to multi treads or will never see the need for multitreads.Simcity 4000 dont even use SSE that something very old in computer time.Maxis is neither a small game developper.Minium requirement for the game is a 1GHZ.So be definition 80% of those CPU support SSE and 100% support MMX.(% base for CPU around 1GHZ P3 katmai Coppermine thunderbird duron...).

Many dont even use vector instruction in game.There is not a excuse for those.SSE can be done with every compiler for ICC that even easier -QXA flag and you have SSE3 automatic parallization.How many conference and tool those corp directeur goes that intel show them the use of even plain optimization.Ubisoft gameloft EA and few others have gaming studio in montreal and i know kind a bunch who work there.50% dont even know what is a vector instruction or SSE or SIMD.90% will tell you that is really to do but have never try.100% will tell you that time to market is more important that those geeki stuff.In overall basis from tech support 3D animateur background creator java programeur C++ AI programeur.Will tell you that multi treads is for mainframe and i mean Z series from IBM.To think the market will move to 64 bit multitreads and vector instruction for what improving the respond time from 1MS to 0.67 MS.Most CPU can do every task almost virtual in a instance that you dont even see.For the rest server and workstation is allready multitread 64 bit and well made and they allready use CPU with 64 bit multi treads.

i need to change useur name.
May 17, 2004 3:43:27 AM

3.6 ghz is not before the end of 2004.In desktop is likely to be in Q3 normaly XEON is 1 quarter late.

It seen to me that 3.4 and 3.6 xeon will have 2MB of cache the a major rework of the core.

i need to change useur name.
!