Discussion in 'Hardware' started by inv4der, 2 May 2010.
Give it a MAJOR break - hes made his valid inclusion of the xeon and just leave it alone.
So are you saying the I7 860 is the same performance as the 930 but cheaper? That sounds like a no brainer to me.
(I thought the processors were similar prices)
People who dissuade others from buying a Xeon processor for the simple reason that Xeons are used in workstations(!) and servers really need to read up on their hardware info.
At least since the "Core2" days Xeons are practically identical to their "normal" desktop counterparts. The difference mainly was in the chipsets used for the motherboards.
With the advent of the "Core i" series of CPUs there's actually a tangible benefit to getting a Xeon processor, provided you don't mind paying a bit more for the Xeon counterpart to a desktop Core iX processor. That added benefit is the ability to use ECC memory. However, for socket 1156 processors this also "requires" a motherboard with the workstation equivalent of the P5x/H5x/Q5x chipset, the Intel 34x0 chipset. This is purely an Intel-made distinction as all IbexPeak chipsets are pretty much identical and the memory controller is integrated with the CPU anyway.
The X58 chipset actually supports Xeon CPUs right out of the box, but not all motherboard manufacturers implement this.
However, if you never want to use ECC memory, there's really no incentive to get a Xeon. The regular Core iX processor will perform just as good (but not better).
As the above poster mentioned, ECC will only work with a Intel 34xx chipset board.
Having said that, I still think a Xeon would be a great chip, no matter what you use it for.
I don't get all this "It's for servers" stuff.. so what? Doesn't stop Apple sticking them in Mac Pros does it?
He has a choice of no HT with a i7 or i5, or HT with a X-3440. If he can get an answer to "does it work with my motherboard" and that answer is yes, I think he SHOULD get the Xeon. Why not?
I've no idea who called Photoshop a "consumer" application earlier, but just LOL!
There some interesting talk here regarding this. Most people are running them at 3.8GHz or so.
I don't get it... it's just as clockable as the i7, has HT and is cheaper. What's not to like? If his motherboard can accept it he'd be stupid NOT to get it wouldn't he? So what if he has a server chip in a gaming rig? If he also does a little rendering etc, he'll have a big advantage, and there's nothing about the X3400 that makes it WORSE as a gaming chip... so what's all the fuss about?
If it works in your board.... go for it.
Thanks for the help...
Not really planning to use ECC memory and the errors themselves are just soft errors and I think these errors really don't matter unless you are running say nuclear simulation
Advantages of getting x3440 as of now:
-Almost the same price
The only disadvantage I can think of is that it MAY not be compatible with the board....but I have now read enough threads to convince me that they can run on normal P55 boards...people are running them on Gigabyte-s, EVGAs and so on...
Thanks for the help...
Yeah; people are getting 3.8GHz on air on X3440....benches and gaming seem good too....plus they run cooler and provide you with bragging rights...
$1500 canadian = £975
What is? The X3440 chip? It's around CD$240 or £178 from Scan.
No, he's referring to the overall budget for the build.
Ahh... that makes sense.
With regard to the whole "Will it work with my board" thing... the OP hasn't built yet, so why not choose a board that WILL work with the X3440? I know the EVGA P55 board will.
See what the people here are using, and go with that.
Seriously.. if you want a gaming rig, but also do rendering or video editing, or anything else that benefits from HT... I think this chip is a great idea.
....or you could build a X58 rig and just have done with it
Hello there....you are the guy with tri-sli'ed GTX480s right? according to your sig....
I wanted to ask you if I should go with two lesser cards with SLI or a single more juicy card? I have heard that there are more driver problems with SLI and compatibility problems with games and that you have to wait for the next driver after the release of a game to be able to play it properly...is it true?
Thanks of the opinion....
I kind of ''dont like' EVGA boards (not trying to be offensive in any way, its just my opinion)...I like ASUS and Gigabyte boards better....that being said some are using ASUS's maximus III formula for X3440 too...
And here's another great thread related to the topic:
Sorry maybe I should have worded it better to avoid confusion, As pete say's that was his total build budget and that is todays currency exchange rate's.
Slightly off-topic, but if I were to build a system right now I'd get a Xeon X34xx and an ASUS P7F7-E WS SuperComputer motherboard (although they could remove the NF200 for all I care).
My reason: I never ever again will build a system which doesn't support ECC. I did it once, and lo and behold, memory errors. I just can't tolerate memory errors.
Is there are serious saving in going the 1156/Xeon x3440 route though? Would it be MUCH more expensive to build a X58/i7 930 rig?
As the only reason I can see for going the X3440/1156 route is cost. There's no advantage to using the Xeon (there's no harm either despite what most in here say), but unless you spend a fortune on the motherboard, you'll lose ECC memory ability. Without that, there's only HT left that may be an advantage over the i7 860.
Surely it would be better to build a X58 rig. HT and Triple channel and all that jazz... unless the uniqueness of having a Xeon rig appeals to you of course, and there's nothing wrong with that either. I'm just curious.
Cost for a complete ga-p55-ud4p/x3440/gtx 470 build: CAD $1380
Cost for a complete ga-x58-ud5/i7 930/gtx 470 build: CAD $1600
Cost for a complete crosshair iv/Phenom 1090T/GTX 470 build: CAD $1480
If I use a Ga-890fxa-ud5 for phenom, then the rig costs 1440---only $60 more than p55 build...
So they are all ~$100 apart....phenom is good too....all are good
And also should I go with two lesser cards in SLI/crossfire or a single more juicy card? I have heard that there are more driver problems with SLI/crossfire and compatibility problems with games and that you have to wait for the next driver after the release of a game to be able to play it properly...is it true?
P.S. I still have some time until I build the rig (about 2-4 months so prices will most probably come down a bit by then)
that's a load of crap
Us older members specifically turned to server based CPU's because they tend to be the better pick of the crop off the waffer which means they require a little less voltage to get them going.
Of course that means you can overclock them very well, and achieve great results.
Need i remind forum goers of the legendary Opteron 144, £70 cpu that clocked faster and easier than any sandy core athlon.
followed by the opteron 165 dual core, another success in terms of overclocking. Actually got one in the corner rendering at the moment.
What made me laugh was you can get a Tyan motherboard supporting dual xeons and mild overclocking for £240, then a pair of Xeon E5520 for £600 a pair, and it comes in all for the same price as a single 6 core gulftown! Umm eight cores of love please!
Before I say anything, remember this is only my opinion!
I think you should go with two lesser cards in SLI. My previous GTX 260s were bought for considerably less than the cost of a GTX 295 and yet had the same performance (hell, they cost less together than most 285s at the time and pissed all over them).
As for driver performance, there are almost no issues. My 260s did have some issues with Crysis but only with the 19x.xx drivers. The 480s have had ABSOLUTELY no problems at all.
So, perhaps one option for you is to buy a 470 now for as cheap as you can, then buy another a few months later to get the performance of the 495 (whenever that is released).
workstations these days are alot diffrent to normal pcs
and dont all xeon chips require registered memory?
Nope...atleast X3440 doesn't...it does support registered, ECC memory but doesn't require it....
I tried this out a little while ago for another post here on Bit. I borrowed the Lynnfield based Xeon (and I confirmed it is a Xeon) from the uniprocessor 'foxhollow' server platform and tied it on a H55 'kings creek' based desktop board. The DIMM slots run right to the CPU socket so the CPU really doesn't care about the PCH hanging off it's DMI link. They are all pretty much different skews of Ibex Peak anyway and the stuff I work with generally does not care unless you are trying to use the CPU-PCH video link.
As for the prefetchers, I know I can say that the adjacent cache line prefetchers can be tweaked using BIOS options. I think all I can safely say is that I know more is possible on some chips. I'll have to look and see what else I can say on the subject.
Separate names with a comma.