• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

SB-E [C2] Stepping

Dan2kx said:
Hope so, I've been waiting 2weeks with the rest of the pc built and just staring at me in the corner!
Click to expand...

Yea! I'm in the same boat except I have not bought anything! Afraid of DOA components and return periods :(

Will get my WC orders in this week (partially) will probably need to wait a little longer for 2 x 7970 Blocks and back plates.
 
The old stepping supports VT-x, which is "hardware VT acceleration" as you put it. What it lacks, and is added in the new stepping, is VT-d. VT-d is only useful if you have hardware that supports this functionality and want to be able to use it in a virtual machine (i.e. not likely for most people on OcUK).

That isn't to say that it's not important, but it's not the deal breaker most people make it out to be.
 
I agree its not a deal breaker, but this close to a new revision, might as well wait huh?

I also use Microsofts virtual XP to run some 32 bit apps, VPN to connect to work etc, i doubt this would take any real benefit from this (VT-d) though as i run it on my laptop which only has a centrino2 processor with no hardware support, so my oriinal point is why i am waiting specifically.
 
Saundie said:
The old stepping supports VT-x, which is "hardware VT acceleration" as you put it. What it lacks, and is added in the new stepping, is VT-d. VT-d is only useful if you have hardware that supports this functionality and want to be able to use it in a virtual machine (i.e. not likely for most people on OcUK).

That isn't to say that it's not important, but it's not the deal breaker most people make it out to be.
Click to expand...

While this roughly true there have been reports that these clock better (ASUS forums). It is an enthusiast chip and Yes I can have 3 or 4 virtual machines going sometimes.

If you don't use Virtual machines or you have no plans to enable VT-d then this will never bother you!

To address the other point you make about "..hardware that supports the functionality..."

Well this is not true.
from Wikipedia
"... guest virtual machines to directly use peripheral devices, such as Ethernet, accelerated graphics cards, and hard-drive controllers, through DMA and interrupt remapping."

Which is probably handled by X79 chipset

So in essence your virtual machine will behave very much like your computer when talking to hardware, i.e. rather than emulation it would use the Ethernet controller or GPU directly.

TBH for 500£ I'm not willing to buy a chip which clearly does not perform as originally intended. Intel's SKU specifically stated VT-D which was hastily changed in response to RMA's. Some people on Overclock.net have been promised RMA's directly from Intel (apparently).

EDIT:
Theoretically
Not that I will - but since I only use Linux I will no longer need to use WINE to play games. The VT-D will enable me to play any game inside a Windows Guest Virtual Machine with pretty decent frame rates :D
 
Last edited:
Like I said, I don't dispute the fact that it's an important feature to certain people. I'm merely stating that people have been confusing VT-d for VT-x, and mistakenly claiming that hardware assisted virtualisation doesn't work. Clearly, this isn't the case!

Now, the lack of VT-d isn't going to cause a problem to the majority of the target market i.e. the enthusiast who is big into gaming (yet somewhat ironically, it does cause me issues, but that's my reward for being an early adopter). I can totally understand why you would be unwilling to pay £500+ for a CPU that does not support this feature, especially given that you (inSilica) have mentioned one of the few potential uses where VT-d is essential.

I'd also like to point out that I'm not trying to be contrary or otherwise cause annoyance; I'm just keen on making sure that people understand that it isn't a crippling issue, that makes the CPU worthless and unusable, and causes misery and shame to all concerned.

Edit: I should have been more precise when I said "hardware that supports the functionality". What I meant was, it's up to the motherboard manufacturer to enable VT-d functionality in the chipset - if they don't, it doesn't matter which stepping of the processor you have, you'll be without VT-d. HP have a history of removing access to features like this from their BIOS/EUFI, for example having a system with a Core 2 Duo that supports VT-x, on a chipset that can support VT-x, and preventing the end user from enabling the feature.
 
Last edited:
Saundie said:
Like I said, I don't dispute the fact that it's an important feature to certain people. I'm merely stating that people have been confusing VT-d for VT-x, and mistakenly claiming that hardware assisted virtualisation doesn't work. Clearly, this isn't the case!

Now, the lack of VT-d isn't going to cause a problem to the majority of the target market i.e. the enthusiast who is big into gaming (yet somewhat ironically, it does cause me issues, but that's my reward for being an early adopter). I can totally understand why you would be unwilling to pay £500+ for a CPU that does not support this feature, especially given that you (inSilica) have mentioned one of the few potential uses where VT-d is essential.

I'd also like to point out that I'm not trying to be contrary or otherwise cause annoyance; I'm just keen on making sure that people understand that it isn't a crippling issue, that makes the CPU worthless and unusable, and causes misery and shame to all concerned.

Edit: I should have been more precise when I said "hardware that supports the functionality". What I meant was, it's up to the motherboard manufacturer to enable VT-d functionality in the chipset - if they don't, it doesn't matter which stepping of the processor you have, you'll be without VT-d. HP have a history of removing access to features like this from their BIOS/EUFI, for example having a system with a Core 2 Duo that supports VT-x, on a chipset that can support VT-x, and preventing the end user from enabling the feature.
Click to expand...

Sounds like there was some confusion :D . You are quite right some people have confused VT-d and VT-x.

I think we are saying the same thing :)

inSilica said:
...

If you don't use Virtual machines or you have no plans to enable VT-d then this will never bother you!
....
Click to expand...
 
Dan2kx said:
Hope so, I've been waiting 2weeks with the rest of the pc built and just staring at me in the corner!
Click to expand...


And me - driving me up the wall..
I opened a thread in the customer service section, and OCUK will be letting me know on the 20th when they will have the C2 stepping in stock, so I will post back here the minute I have any info...
 
I will update..
Plan on contacting them Fri morning and 5ub has promised by then they should have a decent idea on whether they are in stock, or if not, when they might arrive. As soon as I know, I will post back here as I know how frustrating it is having a pile of boxes waiting to be converted into a build

And yes, if they are in, i will be paying the extra for Sat delivery ;):p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom