Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Difference between Quad Core Intel® Xeon® and Intel® Core™ 2 Quad proc

Last response: in CPUs
Share
August 27, 2009 5:29:51 AM

Hello friends,
What is the difference between Quad Core Intel® Xeon® and Intel® Core™ 2 Quad processors? Which one is the best and why 9especially if the OS is windows 2003 Small Business Server) ?

Also what is the equivalent processor for Quad Core Intel® Xeon® in terms of regular processors for desktop?

My final concern ... which one is good for video editing and converting for one format to other (like real media to MPG formats) applications?

Thanks in advance and sorry if I am asking dumb questions.
August 27, 2009 5:39:49 AM

Xeon is business class, made for servers and such. On these reliability and multitasking is the key. Lots of motherboards for these will even support 2 processors on the same board. C2Q was intels consumer grade quad cores. These are more concerned with performance for the price. These are being phased out in favor of the i5. The best consumer processor you can currently buy for your uses is the i7. Like the Xeon it is a great multitasker and is the fastest overall architecture on the market right now. This means clock for clock, the i7 is faster than any other processor you can buy.
August 27, 2009 5:51:15 AM

Thanks for your reply. I have licensed Windows 2003 SBS. Another thing is i7 cost more money where Quad Core Intel Xeon system I am getting like $400 bucks. Is it suggestable?
Also just wondering why we cannot use C2Q ( intel's consumer grade quad cores) in place of business class processors Xeons? Can't the consumer C2Q processors tolerate the load? Can any one put some more light for me please? At least some urls so that I can go thru to gain knowledge. Thanks in advance.
Related resources
August 27, 2009 6:03:39 AM

I would need to see the specs on the xeon system to make a recommendation. If that is a new system, I really wouldn't recommend it. For that price you will probably not be happy with the speed of the system. The cheapest i7 system I know of prebuilt is $700. It has a 920 processor that runs @ 2.67 per core. That is roughly equivalent to a C2Q @ 3.2 or so.
August 27, 2009 6:15:59 AM

Quad Core Intel® Xeon® X3220, 2.40GHz, 2x4M Cache, 1066MHz FSB
4GB, DDR2, 800MHz, 2x2GB,Dual Ranked DIMMs [add $32]
160GB 7.2K RPM SATA 3Gbps 3.5-in Cabled Hard Drive
Those are the main things and remain is the same as just regular PC. Is it suggestable to buy for $400 bucks?
August 27, 2009 6:24:02 AM

There are some differences but they are very low level something to do with the way the trace, queue, and cache all interact, unfortunately I lost the link. Also I believe the xeons have a lower heat output.

Any will work for both desktops or servers, but the xeons were specifically optimized for the server environment.
August 27, 2009 6:39:34 AM

I can't really say if its worth it to you or not, but that is not a bad deal. From what I've seen the i7 on vista 64 will perform about 30- 50% faster than what you have there with video editing...your cost would be about 75% more for the i7 system. I'll let you make the call on whether or not price increase is worth the performance increase.
August 27, 2009 4:52:40 PM

Xeons are silicon that has been tested to be more stable than the core two quads. if you have a xeon and core 2 quad at the same clock rate they are going to be near identical performance wise, but since xeons are the cream of the crop they'll have better reliability (and generally more overclocking headroom). one thing to watch out for is, if you get a lower end core 2 quad, one which has no xeon counterpart they generally have certain things turned off like sse4.1 and vitalization technologies. if you're re-encoding lots of video sse4.1 is a crucial feature for you to have.
a b à CPUs
August 27, 2009 5:27:25 PM

The term "Xeon" is a moving target, much like the term "Celeron".

"Xeon" has been re-branded several times e.g. search for "Xeon"
at Newegg and get a very long list:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=E...


Xeons are also available for the LGA-1366 socket e.g. X5000 series.



MRFS
August 27, 2009 5:28:13 PM

belial2k and endorphines are on the money. Also, some lower end C2Qs will less cache.
August 27, 2009 5:45:48 PM

ps. If you're debating between c2d and xeon you'd probably be looking at a socket 775 xeon. The problem with that is that from what i can tell they've all been discontinued, which leaves you looking from a socket 771 board, the pickings of which are significantly thinner.
August 27, 2009 5:59:37 PM

To the OP.

Forget the Opteron/Xeon models entirely.

The diferences are:

1- Sticker ( i mean name ) and warranty
2- Microcode
3- Price

All bad for us desktop users. We don't want to pay more, the microcode is basicaly useless to us and we don't need the extra warranty. We upgrade too often. And the motherboard are ussually more expensive and have features that are useless to us desktop users. Server Chips (Xeon/Opteron) are sometimes picky on witch memory you put on them. While ussually working, this is not always the case.

Get a nice Core 2 Quad, i7/i5 or Phenom II.
August 27, 2009 6:11:02 PM

505090 said:
There are some differences but they are very low level something to do with the way the trace, queue, and cache all interact, unfortunately I lost the link. Also I believe the xeons have a lower heat output.

Any will work for both desktops or servers, but the xeons were specifically optimized for the server environment.

Please find the links to this information. AFAIK the two are the same, operationally speaking.
August 27, 2009 6:29:41 PM

joefriday said:
Please find the links to this information. AFAIK the two are the same, operationally speaking.


Yes i'm curious about those links also. AFAIK the two are the same but while the desktop CPU can only be used as single CPU, the Xeon/opteron can be used as multiple CPUs. On the same board of course. So they should have the appropriate modifications to be optimized that way.

I guess in terms of Prefetchers, Dispatchers Busses and other components, the diferences will be related to MP configurations.

Anyway, just pointing out, im waiting for the links also :bounce: 
August 27, 2009 7:14:47 PM

To all those waiting for the link, not gonna happen. last time I looked it up it took 3 weeks of reading about processor architecture.

Two things though
1. several of you point out differences cache, hyper-threading, multi processor, heat. And then say they are the same
2. do you really think major corporate IT teams the same people who won't upgrade your workstation, or install vista on anything, spend more money to put xeons in the their servers without good reason
August 27, 2009 8:29:25 PM

505090 said:
To all those waiting for the link, not gonna happen. last time I looked it up it took 3 weeks of reading about processor architecture.


I hunger for articles like that. Honestly.
a b à CPUs
August 28, 2009 4:04:33 AM

how would the xeon compare in gaming with a C2Q, i7, and PII
August 28, 2009 5:34:43 AM

depends on which one...but its going to cost you more for the same performance. Business hardware is always going to have a price premium for the same performance as consumer grade products.
August 28, 2009 7:47:35 AM

Simple explanation:
Xeon: Designed to run @ full load for 3 years 24/7 (3 years being the average life span of a server)
Xeons were never intended for desktop use, so they aren't optimized for feeble tasks like gaming.
Now tasks that actually use processor power like video editing, compiling, simulations, DB handling, ect... you might see some benefits, but then
again you might see more benefits from a nVidia Quadro like you get in most Workstations.

C2D/Q: Designed to last 1 year @ full load 12 hours and idle for the other 12 hours (1 Year being the average lifespan of a desktop)
Desktops do desktop things like: gaming, word processing, minor video editing, the average user requirements, ect...

i7: Easy way to describe it is best of both, not entirely as potent as a Xeon but much better at handling the load than a C2D/Q. You do get Xeons that
are based on the i7 technology.

my 2 cents...
a b à CPUs
August 28, 2009 11:13:46 AM

I don't agree with you at all... The desktop versions are designed to run 100 percent load for three years as well. If they weren't, they wouldn't come with a 3 year warranty.
August 28, 2009 11:38:01 AM

sportsfanboy said:
I don't agree with you at all... The desktop versions are designed to run 100 percent load for three years as well. If they weren't, they wouldn't come with a 3 year warranty.


I don't agree.

The purpose of a desktop computer and the purpose of a server are very different. In many situation servers will constantly run and run and run 24\7, never idling.

The purpose of the desktop computer is to serve a single user that will use for only part of the day, and even during that use the load on the CPU may only be minimal. Even if you game, you can only do that for so long, then you stop, and the computer idles.
August 28, 2009 2:46:09 PM

I'm not sure where the "1 year is the average lifespan of a desktop" came from, lol. Ever see how old the desktops are at people's houses? I have a college instructor how has a Pentium II Dell rig at his house. My and my wife's parents are getting by just fine on Dell P4 computers, purchased back in 2004.
August 28, 2009 3:31:30 PM

joefriday said:
I'm not sure where the "1 year is the average lifespan of a desktop" came from, lol. Ever see how old the desktops are at people's houses? I have a college instructor how has a Pentium II Dell rig at his house. My and my wife's parents are getting by just fine on Dell P4 computers, purchased back in 2004.


I just repaired an Athlon 1600 based HP Pavillion. It would keep randomly turning off. The issue was the power supply fan, it was so old it didn't work anymore. Those Pavillions are small and don't use a standard power supply, so I had to improvise. I opened up the PSU, ripped the fan out (which was smaller than standard 120mm fan). A normal small fan wouldn't fit inside, so I externally mounted a 120mm case fan just outside the power supply.

Believe it or not, it worked. The computer no longer shuts off after about 5 minutes of use.

Generally computers fail because of moving components, such as fans and hard drives. I rarely see a failure that wasn't related to the failure of a moving part (exception: Dell GX270\280 mother capacitor manufacturer defect).
a b à CPUs
August 28, 2009 6:21:08 PM

i am getting by ok on a tualatin celeron, also known as rebranded OCed Pentium3 ( i feel kind of ripped off actually) bought back in '01, then again i couldn't help it my parents bought it, Of course i do enjoy my laptop alot more
a b à CPUs
August 28, 2009 9:30:51 PM

I do know the purpose of a desktop computer and the purpose of a server LOL.

So your telling me because I bought a desktop chip instead of a server chip, I'm not supposed to leave my machine on or do a ton of video rendering?

Sorry that's rubbish

The two chips are virtually identical, tdp is the same as well as heat tolerances.

August 31, 2009 4:06:31 AM

@ Sportsfanboy

Your completely missing the point... And they are not the same, they might be based on the same tech, but thats were it ends usualy.

Simple example again:

1st Server: a prodution server, runs 100% load 24/7, after 3 years you HAVE to replace it, if you run it longer you start to experience stabilty issues, strange stuff like on a few HP ML130 G5 servers we had, started to complain that it was overheating, then shuts off, checked the ambient temps ect ect, termal sensor packed up, other started to damage Memory, ect ect

2nd Server: a Test platform for POC for example, was never used 24/7 or 100% load over extended periods(more than a week at a time), server is 6 years old, still not one problem.

The lifetime of a CPU is dependant on useage mostly. Thats why most desktops are able to get so old, most people dont push them to their full potential 100% of the time.

If you still dont understand i might have to start describing it in terms of car engins or something...

again just my 2cents...
a b à CPUs
August 31, 2009 10:42:25 AM

your funny the way you talk down to me,lol

you think your smarter than me so you can feel better about yourself,lol

Your pathetic

I never make any of my post personal until someone rubs me the wrong way and you have.

And you don't know what your talking about... Do you think people have crunched with their cpus before they could do it with their video cards? In case you don't know that's 100 percent load or close to it. I know a couple of people that have overclocked e6600's that have left them on for almost the entire time while crunching when their not using their computer. When did the e6600 come out, hmmm, And I would like to add that is overclocked as well, which puts additional ware on the chip. still no problems after 3 years + of use.

Being the same manufacturing tech and architecture does in fact make them almost the same, you dumbass. The main difference is that server chips are optimized for fully buffered ram and to be run in a team environment (muti socket).

That being said, the desktop chips and the server chips should be able to handle to same punishment. The reason being are 1) They are in fact built on the same Tech. 2) Voltage- both max and min. are the same for both chips. 3) heat tolerances (like I said) are exactly the same.

Get a clue about what your talking about before starting sh-t with people you ignorant f--k
a b à CPUs
August 31, 2009 10:56:49 AM

I also love that you said "C2D/Q: Designed to last 1 year @ full load 12 hours and idle for the other 12 hours (1 Year being the average lifespan of a desktop)"

Where the hell did you pull that data from, lol

My q6600 would last longer than a year overclocked to 4.0ghz, lol
August 31, 2009 12:44:34 PM

good for you troll....
a b à CPUs
August 31, 2009 12:49:19 PM

I'm not a troll I actually spend time trying to help people.

You as shown in your post, proved that that you enjoy going after people and not the facts
July 20, 2010 3:24:30 PM

mmm, I know this thread is almost 1 year old, but after I read it ... I do see that we will never get this point anywhere.

Nano was right about 100% all the time on server since it is hundreds or maybe thousands of people access it simultaneously so if you open the task manager you will see a 100% bar load any time you see it. So for desktop users, it almost like you run prime95 for the whole year without stopping it (and you all know how hot your processor will be).

and Sportsfanboy also has his point too. I can't deny him too. I have a laptop which runs 24/7 for bittorrent download and sometimes I am doing some video rendering for 3 straight days (but the processor's load never exceed 80% during the rendering process). I only restart my laptop if it hangs (approximately once a month). Now it's already 5 years old and I have no problem with my laptop at all.

so both of you really got your points :-).

cheers :-)
!