Percent Faster: Xeon E5s Vs. Xeon 5600s
When we compile the results from all of our tests and compare two Xeon E5-2687Ws to two Xeon X5680s, we see that the E5s are, on average about 21% faster.
Some of those tests aren’t good representations of what a professional would do on a workstation, though. Lame is in there explicitly to show the difference between these CPUs with a single core active, for example. The compression tests are pretty lightweight, and the transcoding tests don’t really necessitate a dual-processor machine. So, let’s take all of that out and see where we end up:
Now we’re closer to a 23% improvement. Euler3D skews the E5’s advantage quite a bit, but so do curiously-low numbers from Blender’s new cycles rendering engine and the SolidWorks 2010 render.
Regardless, more than 20% is significant for money-making applications.
Related Stories :
- Deals April 22: 30% off Dell Xeon E5 Workstation Bundle
- Three Xeon E5 Server Systems From Intel, Tyan, And Supermicro
- Core i7-3970X Extreme Review: Can It Stomp An Eight-Core Xeon?
- Intel Xeon E3-1280 v2 Review: Ivy Bridge Goes Professional
- Intel Xeon E3-1275 Review: Sandy Bridge Goes Professional
- Benchmark: Xeon Quad-cores Faster Than Opterons, But AMD More Power Efficient
- Intel SSD DC S3700 Review: Benchmarking Consistency
- The Nexus 7 Review: Google's First Tablet Gets Benchmarked
- Intel SSD 330 Review: 60, 120, And 180 GB Models Benchmarked
- AMD Radeon HD 7870 And 7850 Review: Pitcairn Gets Benchmarked
My brain cannot comprehend what CS5 would look like with this combined with a 1TB R4 drive, and the GTX680 version of the Quatro would look like... and I am sure my wallet cannot!
Great article! I was not expecting my mind to be blown away today, and it was
No gaming benchmarks? I know this is a high workstation / mid server build, but you know some of the boutiques will make a gaming rig out of any platform. Just out of curiosity, I would have liked to see 2x7970 or 2x580 and a few gaming benchmarks thrown in.
No gaming benchmarks? I know this is a high workstation / mid server build, but you know some of the boutiques will make a gaming rig out of any platform. Just out of curiosity, I would have liked to see 2x7970 or 2x580 and a few gaming benchmarks thrown in.
I'd be really surprised to see these in gaming machines, even in the high end boutiques. That's a $2k processor they reviewed, and basically all it offers over the $1k SB-E chip (for gamers) is an extra pair of cores, which games can't make use of.
I must say DROOL
why aren't AMD cpus tested too? I wouldn't mind seeing how 2x interlagos stacks up.
I wonder how fast TempEncode would chew thru transcoding avi/wmv files to mp3/mp4
why aren't AMD cpus tested too? I wouldn't mind seeing how 2x interlagos stacks up.
Anandtech benched those next to the new Xeons. Went about as well as Bulldozer vs. Sandy Bridge.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5553 [...] -servers/6
why aren't AMD cpus tested too? I wouldn't mind seeing how 2x interlagos stacks up.
Mentioned on the test page--I've invited them to send hardware and they haven't moved on it yet.
Mentioned on the test page--I've invited them to send hardware and they haven't moved on it yet.
I would guess that's because Interlagos is garbage compared to the new Xeons and they know it. I don't think they're terribly eager for the front page of Tom's Hardware to show the low end Xeon's beating the best Interlagos has to offer.
What, or who, was the target? Are there military applications for this weapon?
Sorry, vote me down all you like, but the title was just silly.
I would guess that's because Interlagos is garbage compared to the new Xeons and they know it. I don't think they're terribly eager for the front page of Tom's Hardware to show the low end Xeon's beating the best Interlagos has to offer.
Not really my place to speculate--only to point out that I similarly wanted to see AMD hardware included and explain why it isn't there
What, or who, was the target? Are there military applications for this weapon?Sorry, vote me down all you like, but the title was just silly.
No, the title is a fairly common phrase in American English.
"Now that I've got X, I can really do some damage" would probably be the way I hear it used most often.
Not really my place to speculate--only to point out that I similarly wanted to see AMD hardware included and explain why it isn't there
Yeah, I understand that you're in a sensitive position. But being a lowly commenter, I'm free to speculate all I want!
Muahahahaha!
Yeah, I understand that you're in a sensitive position. But being a lowly commenter, I'm free to speculate all I want!Muahahahaha!
Precisely ;-)
Interesting results.
In my opinion, the SolidWorks test is also one of those not representative of typical SolidWorks tasks. PhotoView only renders realistic images of a SolidWorks model. Personally, I think the Specviewperf SolidWorks test would be significantly more representative of average SolidWorks use.
Although I really hate to draw this comparison, PhotoView is more like using Power Point to organize a display of images created in Photoshop. In this comparison, most of the grunt work is done by Photoshop rather than Power Point, as is most of the grunt work done in SolidWorks then rendered in PhotoView. Performance differences revealed by the Specviewperf test are more informative, IMHO. See these.
great review.. i wonder myself how long we 'll have to wait to see 8 cores and 16 threads on desktop segment as a default pc.. (or less than 400 dolars)
we have to wait to long for that..
I would love one of those with a pair of FireGL cards and a mix of SCSI and SSD drives. I'm sure a dual core version of all of that will run me close to $8K though. Consider though how much Sun SPARC stations and SGI Workstations costed a decade or so ago? Workstations that were not nearly as capable went 20-25k. A dual core E5-2687 with FireGL cards and SSD drives is the fastest workstation you could put together on any platform and you can do it for far less than the 25k from years ago. Absolutely crazy to think about it in those terms.
I think you need to run some folding at home on that. I can't imagine what it would get in PPD, considering how well the old Intel 6 cores (Gulftown) do.
Great article and thanks! 16-cores/32-threads is nice!
Reading this however, all I can do is think how PO'ed I am at Intel not enabling the 7th & 8th cores on the SB-E i7-3960X and i7-3930K.