Intel Xeon E3-1280 v2 Review: Ivy Bridge Goes Professional
-
Page 1:Ivy Bridge Finds Its Way Into Servers And Workstations
-
Page 2:Intel’s Second-Gen Xeon E3 Processor Family
-
Page 3:Platform Support: Three Old Chipsets, C216, And Memory Compatibility
-
Page 4:Test Setup And Benchmarks
-
Page 5:Benchmark Results: Adobe CS 5.5
-
Page 6:Benchmark Results: Rendering
-
Page 7:Benchmark Results: Transcoding
-
Page 8:Benchmark Results: Productivity
-
Page 9:Power Consumption
-
Page 10:Xeon E3-1200 v2 Is A Power Story, Not A Performance One
Platform Support: Three Old Chipsets, C216, And Memory Compatibility
Picking A Platform
As with Intel’s Ivy Bridge-based Core processors, the newest Xeon E3s are compatible with previous-generation motherboards, so long as vendors update their firmware to support them. Granted, upgrades are far less common in the server and workstation space. Technically, though, the C202, C204, and C206 chipsets work fine.
There is new core logic to complement Ivy Bridge-based Xeon E3s, though—C216.
You might recognize its Panther Point code name from Intel’s 7-series desktop chipsets, and its features largely from Z77. But C216 adds vPro and AMT 8.0 support, which are necessary for the remote management capabilities not available from Intel’s enthusiast-oriented offerings.
| C216 (Workstation) | C206 (Workstation / Server) | C204 (Server) | C202 (Server) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| vPro / AMT 8.0 | X | X | ||
| Rapid Storage Technology | X | X | X | X |
| Smart Response Technology | X | |||
| Integrated Graphics | X | X | ||
| Supported Displays | Three | Two | ||
| HD Audio Support | X | X | ||
| Node Manager Support | X | |||
| USB 3.0 Ports | Four | |||
| USB 2.0 Ports | 10 | 14 | 12 | 12 |
| PCI Express 2.0 Lanes | Eight | Eight | Eight | Eight |
| SATA 6Gb/s | Two | Two | Two | |
| SATA 3Gb/s | Four | Four | Four | Six |
Otherwise, C216 facilitates DisplayPort 1.1 support, four USB 3.0 ports, HD Audio, a pair of SATA 6Gb/s ports (complementing four 3 Gb/s connectors), eight second-gen PCIe 2.0 lanes, and an integrated gigabit Ethernet MAC, just like Z77.
Like C206 before it, C216 is intended as a workstation-oriented chipset. It supports the Ivy Bridge architecture’s three display outputs on boards equipped with the right connectors. It has the audio and I/O functionality you’d expect to use on a desktop, but not a server. And it even adds Smart Response Technology to the company’s business portfolio, facilitating SSD-based caching for faster boot-up and application launching.
Memory Compatibility
The trickiest part of setting up our Xeon E3-1280 v2 and Intel S1200BTL motherboard was finding a memory kit that’d work. Like the desktop Core processors, these E3s support unbuffered modules-only. So, the 100 GB+ of registered modules we have on-hand don’t work.
Constrained to desktop-oriented kits, it quickly became clear that you want to pay close attention to Intel’s supported memory list prior to picking the pieces for a new server or workstation. We eventually tracked down four 2 GB modules based on Micron ICs, but not before exhausting four or five other kits from Kingston, G.Skill, and Crucial.
| Platform | DIMM Configuration | Xeon E3-1200 v2 Family |
|---|---|---|
| Intel C202 and C204 Chipsets | Unbuffered, Non-ECC | Not Supported |
| Unbuffered, ECC | Supported | |
| Unbuffered, Non-ECC/ECC Mix | Not Supported | |
| Intel C216 and C206 Chipsets | Unbuffered, Non-ECC | Supported (Client OS) Not Supported (Server OS) |
| Unbuffered, ECC | Supported | |
| Unbuffered, Non-ECC/ECC Mix | Not Supported | |
| Intel 7-Series Desktop Chipsets | Unbuffered, Non-ECC | Not Supported |
| Unbuffered, ECC | Not Supported | |
| Unbuffered, Non-ECC/ECC Mix | Not Supported |
The good news is that the E3’s memory controller is fairly flexible. It’s able to accommodate up to 32 GB in four slots, operating as fast as 1600 MT/s even with two DIMMS per channel. And although the C206 and C216 chipsets do support non-ECC mode, Intel’s configuration matrix clearly encourages you to stick with ECC-capable RAM.
- Ivy Bridge Finds Its Way Into Servers And Workstations
- Intel’s Second-Gen Xeon E3 Processor Family
- Platform Support: Three Old Chipsets, C216, And Memory Compatibility
- Test Setup And Benchmarks
- Benchmark Results: Adobe CS 5.5
- Benchmark Results: Rendering
- Benchmark Results: Transcoding
- Benchmark Results: Productivity
- Power Consumption
- Xeon E3-1200 v2 Is A Power Story, Not A Performance One
Need Ivy Bridge Goes budget.
Still Waiting this.... i3, Pentium G
Need Ivy Bridge Goes budget.
Still Waiting this.... i3, Pentium G
I went with a Sandybridge E5-1620 + discrete graphics. Twice the memory bandwidth. Twice the PCIe lanes. Comparable price. And the raw performance of the cores is only a couple % slower. A good tradeoff for GPU compute.
You don't buy Xeons for performance, you buy them for reliability. The performance for clock speed is exactly the same.
If you need the single-threaded performance, you need it. You can't get that performance by combining multiple systems. In servers or render farms, you can just add a few more machines to make up for the lesser performance, because they are dealing with tasks that are extremely well threaded – so you don't buy the fastest option, you buy the best value option. But in some cases, the single threaded performance is more important (certain workstation tasks) or you are limited to one system (many workstation tasks), so the performance matters more than value until the performance stops making a significant difference.
And I wouldn't say that it is better value, rather I'd say that it is necessary for the extra reliability.
Thanks.
Thanks.
It does whatever it wants.
AMD or ARM-BASED are not serious competitors at least for about next 2 years I guess.
I'm liking the v2 moniker; instead of inventing new codes, is it so hard to just attach a suffix like a version number of an a/b/c etc.? That's enough to convince people that it's comparable to an older model in speed, socket type etc. but the version number will denote improved performance.
Intel: Compatibility? Standards? Screw that.
Translation to Real World - One thing that has often disturbed me is the duration of many of these benches, my experience is that they often either aren't relevant or worst aren't a good measure to real world jobs which often last for HOURS not 1~2 minutes. For comparison sake and perhaps scaling it would be nice to have a 'Part 2' with E5's and UP/DP/MP.
It took me a half cup of coffee to figure out why you choose the E3-1290, I got it once I realized the clocks.
Using Stock clocks the Ivy Bridge is a good step in the right direction, but other than it's Litho it's hard for me still to consider it a 'Tock'. I'm hoping the Haswell will correct some of the IB shortcomings.
Okay, so basically it is that thing I said (the need for performance being that great). And yeah, I worded the whole 'value' bit pretty poorly, but you seem to have caught on to what I was getting at. Thanks!
Being a consumer with no knowledge of the enterprise/server sector of hardware, it's a bit difficult to see how something so seemingly small can be worth so much, but I often forget that businesses have a lot more money to spend than individuals like myself.
It depends, supposedly Q2 2013 but if the Haswell makes the Ivy Bridge-EP superfluous then it's doubtful it will ever be produced.
If you can stomach guesses and utter conjecture then here's an interesting post with external links in an effort to prove or disprove - http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2259752
E5 is the full server version of Sandy Bridge. The equivalent won't be released for Ivy Bridge until next year, so the comparison isn't valid. This is just some re-badged client Ivy Bridge parts with minor enhancements.
FYI you wasted money if you bought E5 for home use. Overclockability, which Xeons don't have, is more important that memory bandwidth or pci-e lanes.