Intel Xeon E3-1275 Review: Sandy Bridge Goes Professional

Benchmark Results: Rendering

Rendering in Blender is another processor-oriented task, and another benchmark that doesn’t care what sort of graphics card you’re running. That’s good news if you don’t anticipate running other 3D-oriented apps and can get away with HD Graphics P3000 for “free.”

The processor-oriented component of Cinebench is even across the board, just as we’d expect. But the graphics test favors Intel’s Xeon E3-1275. Intel’s Core i7-2600K takes second place. And the Quadro FX 580 falls to last place. Strange? A little. But that’s still an impressive finish for Intel’s Sandy Bridge-based processors in this OpenGL-based benchmark.

Vue is used to create, animate, and render 3D environments, so it’s not surprising that this professional app is well-optimized for multi-core, multi-threaded workstations. Our dual-socket Xeon 5600 system finishes this test in under 10 minutes, and a Core i7-980X can wrap it up in 18. These Sandy Bridge-based configs need around 24 minutes to get the job done. And it doesn’t matter which graphics solution you use, either.

Create a new thread in the US Reviews comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
44 comments
    Your comment
  • Stop teasing and give us a six core Sandy Bridge CPU!
    -1
  • one-shotStop teasing and give us a six core Sandy Bridge CPU!

    Sandy Bridge-E, LGA 2011 X79, Q4 2011.
    3
  • Finally a compilation benchmark! Now please make it standard in your test suite for CPUs and storage so there's a real benefit from it all for actual comparisons.
    -1
  • They still make xeons?
    -4
  • Thanks for this review Chris, very well covered. I'll probably be refering back to this when it comes to spec our next workstations.
    2
  • I think this is a useless review. Why are we comparing Apples to Oranges? Lets compare current generation Xeons to Previous generation Xeons.
    -2
  • one thing I can attest to: companies who cheap out on their workstations and servers never perform well as companies, and eventually fail.

    I've worked with many small businesses, and every one that used a desktop chip for a server or a discount chip (Celeron, Duron, etc) for their desktop computers all performed very poorly. Some seemed to hang on by the sheer will of the owner, and in a couple cases, when the owner got sick for more than a week, the businesses folded like lawn chairs.

    I've also seen an Engineering shop of ~30 engineers invest nicely into a real server and real workstations, and had me set up their entire network with SBS. their business ramped up so fast and well that they had to hire several more engineers and outgrew SBS (limited to 50 users at the time) within the next 2 years, and I had to go back and rebuild their domain with full enterprise level software, and add another server specifically for email. the owner said the investment in that SBS system was the best thing he'd invested in the business since he hired his first engineer.

    Business owners who do not invest in their IT infrastructure fail at business. It's pretty plain and simple. While investing in good IT gear and software doesn't mean you'll ramp up your business to unheard of heights, it does give you a major leg up on the competition.
    1
  • No quick sync on a Zeon??
    0
  • given the option of a cheaper Xenon that does not have the P3000 im pretty sure 90% of companies would choose that option, discreet graphics would almost exclusively be employed for the majority of workstation class desktops
    0
  • Very informative and useful article Mr. Angelini, thank you.
    0
  • GeekApprovedNo quick sync on a Zeon??


    Thats a very bold statement, not all companies require top of the range computer equipment
    0
  • So what happens when AMD brings an Opteron with a more-than-competent GPU onboard? At least in GPU-influenced situations they should see a nice advantage I would think.
    0
  • DiscreetSolutiongiven the option of a cheaper Xenon that does not have the P3000 im pretty sure 90% of companies would choose that option, discreet graphics would almost exclusively be employed for the majority of workstation class desktops

    I think you're wrong. I spend most of my day at work making and compiling code. For me the HD graphics work really well and getting anything more powerful than that, as evidenced from the tests, would be a waste of money. I also don't think I'm in the 10% group.
    0
  • Great article/job!
    0
  • Nice job Chris. You made some excellent points. I too have seen far too many try to run servers on desktop hardware - not as big of a problem for home, but that is not quite as mission-critical, right?

    Are you going to do a follow-up to compare to current Xeons?
    0
  • @zerapio

    how many folks compile codes the size of which require a Xeon? im pretty sure your in the 10% group, IMHO for the majority of cases if your not pairing the Xeon with a discreet GFX card then chances are Xeon would be overkill
    0
  • GeekApprovedNo quick sync on a Zeon??


    Geek,
    Intel says the Xeons support Quick Sync (at least that's the case on the ark.intel.com site). However, I suspect that current apps do not recognize the Xeons, and consequently cannot yet take advantage of the hardware. Perhaps it'll be enabled in upcoming app revisions. Until then, I still recommend the desktop CPUs if Quick Sync is important to you.
    Chris
    0
  • fball922So what happens when AMD brings an Opteron with a more-than-competent GPU onboard? At least in GPU-influenced situations they should see a nice advantage I would think.


    Then the market will get more interesting, to be sure! We still need to see them do this on the desktop, though. I'd be surprised if they didn't end up releasing a FirePro-branded integrated solution at some point!
    0
  • huronNice job Chris. You made some excellent points. I too have seen far too many try to run servers on desktop hardware - not as big of a problem for home, but that is not quite as mission-critical, right?Are you going to do a follow-up to compare to current Xeons?


    You're very welcome Huron, and thanks for the feedback.

    Which Xeons would you like to see compared? And in which workloads? I'm happy to field ideas on this if it's something you can use!
    Best,
    Chris
    0
  • I will say one thing and that is Intel made such a big mess with 3+ types of socket

    LGA1155
    LGA1156
    LGA1366
    LGA2011
    LGA1356
    -1