1366 X58 Xeon 5650

[father-ted]

Not noticed anything myself.
Mine is getting long in the tooth but still flying without any noticeable degredation.

 

[jonathan_phang]

Not really. I have had my 5675 about a month only, so I guess I might not have had it long enough to notice a degredation, but if its there then I havent noticed it. Its been great for games (my rigs primary use) which my old i7 930 at 4ghz was starting to struggle with. Things like Black Ops and AC Odyssey were really taxing, but not since the upgrade. Still does well in synthetic benches, and runs realtively cool. If you can get it cheap (the mobos etc esp) then I'd say its still worth it for non-CPU intensive tasks.

 

[AMDPower]

Any legs in this ref the x58 platforms mysteriously losing performance:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PBZyyU8Xx0

Or is it the spectre microcode patching at work as suggested in a number of comments, what is the experience of current x58 users, noticed anything? I used to have one these beasts at 4.4ghz much earlier in the thread and was about to buy a dell workstation as a workhorse until I saw the above.

There is a few % loss in performance, why is anybodies guess but the loss in performance will not affect you, its minor loss tbh.

 

[humbug]

Any legs in this ref the x58 platforms mysteriously losing performance:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PBZyyU8Xx0

Or is it the spectre microcode patching at work as suggested in a number of comments, what is the experience of current x58 users, noticed anything? I used to have one these beasts at 4.4ghz much earlier in the thread and was about to buy a dell workstation as a workhorse until I saw the above.

He's complaining because by his own admission his channel is known for promoting old hardware like X58.

The screenshots from Hardware Unboxed are with a 980X at 4.4Ghz and the complaint was they were behind mid range Ryzen's and the reason for this was Steve was not using the best memory overclocked.

Steve compared the 980X to stock Ryzen's, the Ryzen 1600 for example stock runs at 3.2Ghz, this vs 4.4Ghz, the Ryzen 1600 has 20%+ overclocking headroom that Steve did not use in his benchmarks, had he overclocked the 1600 to 3.9Ghz it would have matched the 8700K performance, so it would be like me complaining "oh but he didn't show the Ryzen 1600 in the best light compared to a Stock 8700K" get real....

Guys its 10 years old, its not what it once was, move on

Ryzen 1600 @ 3.2Ghz = 144FPS + 20% (3.9Ghz) = 173FPS (stock 8700K)

 

[DragonQ]

Spectre and Meltdown patches have definitely affected performance, I can see it in benchmark results. Hasn't been noticeable in gaming though, so far.

 

[humbug]

I've just priced up an X58 system

i7 980X = £80
ASUS SABERTOOTH X58 = £125
12GB DDR3 = £35
£240, there are more expensive Boards and Ram and cheaper but if you're going to overclock these components to get the performance out of the system i figure you're not going to want the crappiest stuff.

If what you are looking for is good performance for little money yeah its not bad but these components are 10 years old, how trustworthy is the longevity and reliability of these components?

The thing is Intel are no longer competing with themselves in their older platforms, for me the argument that "Intel are gimping their older platforms through planed obsolescence" doesn't make any sense, smart savvy people who look for performance bargains are not going to be looking at Intel's brand new hardware.

Ryzen 1600X = £150
Asus Prime B350-Plus = £80
16GB DDR4 3200Mhz = £130

£360, yes its £120 more but its all brand new with warranty and very high standards of productivity and gaming performance. Intel's current performance equivalent to that is a 9600K and that's £270, £120 more than the 1600X and £30 more than the whole X58 System i priced up.

Yes Tech City need to change their message to stay relevant instead of moaning about it and throwing around conspiracy theories.

 

[yashiro]

There's a tool called InSpectre that lets you toggle the software side of the spectre mitigation patches. You could test these performance differences out yourself if you want.

 

[DragonQ]

I doubt anyone in this thread would advocate buying a used X58 system right now in almost any circumstances. Only useful for those who bought such a system back in the day.

 

[humbug]

I doubt anyone in this thread would advocate buying a used X58 system right now in almost any circumstances. Only useful for those who bought such a system back in the day.

True, i wanted one of these back in the day, but i remember while at the time the CPU's were cheap £65 but because at the time Fleabay was flooded with them good boards, which is what i was looking for were big money, around £150 and in the end i just could justify that in my mind, not for 5 /6 year old stuff....

I'm looking at potentials purchases for this CPU, i don't know much about 32nm Xeon compatibility with 1366 X58 boards so if you don't mind giving me a yae or nay for some boards that i come across. thanks

Biostar T-Power X58 LGA1366

GIGABYTE GA-X58A-OC rev

I was still a noob around here, apparently...

I don't think i have access to their MM and we are not allowed to talk about MM stuff on the main forum, send me an email by clicking on my Trust.

Anyway, Yes Tech City just need to change their message, its what Steve did as soon as Ryzen landed and its value and performance was blindingly obvious, his channel has grown quite a lot since.

Yes Tech City just seem obsessed in almost ignoring Ryzen and trying to continue as if its doesn't exists and its not working for them....

 

[jonathan_phang]

I doubt anyone in this thread would advocate buying a used X58 system right now in almost any circumstances. Only useful for those who bought such a system back in the day.

Completely true. I've been holding onto mine for ages, and to be fair its been doing ok, and fell onto the Xeon bandwagon, and gor £35 I have to say that its performing well enough for me gaming wise at 1440p60. Prior to me getting that I was pricing up a 9700k system, and although the whole system is no doubt bottlnecking other parts like the GPU, its still sufficient for a good level of performance at higher resolutions, even with games that utilise a lot of cores.

Benches at 1080p are of course going to show the difference more, especially at unlocked frames, but I guess it depends if that mirrors the real world usage you want.

It will have to go soon, but it gives me time to ***** the best setup to to replace it (seeing as i need to research RAM, mobo etc).

 

[AMDPower]

I've just priced up an X58 system

i7 980X = £80
ASUS SABERTOOTH X58 = £125
12GB DDR3 = £35
£240, there are more expensive Boards and Ram and cheaper but if you're going to overclock these components to get the performance out of the system i figure you're not going to want the crappiest stuff.

If what you are looking for is good performance for little money yeah its not bad but these components are 10 years old, how trustworthy is the longevity and reliability of these components?

The thing is Intel are no longer competing with themselves in their older platforms, for me the argument that "Intel are gimping their older platforms through planed obsolescence" doesn't make any sense, smart savvy people who look for performance bargains are not going to be looking at Intel's brand new hardware.

Ryzen 1600X = £150
Asus Prime B350-Plus = £80
16GB DDR4 3200Mhz = £130

£360, yes its £120 more but its all brand new with warranty and very high standards of productivity and gaming performance. Intel's current performance equivalent to that is a 9600K and that's £270, £120 more than the 1600X and £30 more than the whole X58 System i priced up.

Yes Tech City need to change their message to stay relevant instead of moaning about it and throwing around conspiracy theories.

why would you buy i7 980x, you could buy a x5650 for £12-£15.

If you can get motherboard, cpu and ram and cooler for under £100 its well worth it. Because unlikely you can get similar performing system for that price. I have seen quite few sell on OCUK forum for that price. Ebay is only good for cheap CPU everything else scour Forums.

I just bought a x5675 for £26 delivered.

 

[humbug]

why would you buy i7 980x, you could buy a x5650 for £12-£15.

If you can get motherboard, cpu and ram and cooler for under £100 its well worth it. Because unlikely you can get similar performing system for that price. I have seen quite few sell on OCUK forum for that price. Ebay is only good for cheap CPU everything else scour Forums.

I didn't know you could, i still would buy an entire platform of that vintage tho, not now

Or i might for a server play thing / Hosting games.... it would have to be cheap tho, for the whole thing.

 

[BongoHunter]

Having run one of these platforms for years I would not recommend them now unless you have an extremely serious budget constraint.

The difference between these and newer stuff is quite pronounced IMO

 

[triss]

My x58 still does me fine atm has lasted years longer than i expected thanks to throwing a xeon in it. However i wouldn't recommend anyone buying into the platform and i will be replacing it with the next zen releases. If anyone was on x58 with a i7 920 I'd still suggest going for a xeon for how little it costs as most will o/c higher n run cooler plus more threads

 

[father-ted]

I am in the same boat.
I was going to upgrade the whole thing but decided to squeeze a little extra time out of it last year when I got a X5675.
Overclocked to 4.3ghz without missing a beat, would go further if I had the time to tinker with the settings.
I have had real value out of this rig, I didn’t expect it to last me 10 years when I built it.

I will do the full upgrade later this year though....not looking forward to the cost tbh, I will have to keep the bank statement away from the wife lol

 

[jonathan_phang]

Having run one of these platforms for years I would not recommend them now unless you have an extremely serious budget constraint.

The difference between these and newer stuff is quite pronounced IMO

I totally agree with you, the numbers dont lie, but just wondering what situations you saw the bottleneck? Was it in gaming (with unlocked framerates) as well as productivity? I'm still planning my upgrade but surprised how well I can still run every modern game, albeit at 1440p60 only. Wouldn't recommend anyone trying to search it out for a gaming rig from scratch, but there's def legs in just going the Xeon route.

And when I do upgrade I'm sure I'll unlock even more from the GPU for an added bonus

 

[BongoHunter]

I totally agree with you, the numbers dont lie, but just wondering what situations you saw the bottleneck? Was it in gaming (with unlocked framerates) as well as productivity? I'm still planning my upgrade but surprised how well I can still run every modern game, albeit at 1440p60 only. Wouldn't recommend anyone trying to search it out for a gaming rig from scratch, but there's def legs in just going the Xeon route.

And when I do upgrade I'm sure I'll unlock even more from the GPU for an added bonus

Didn't have an issue with gaming, I'm always GPU constrained in that regards as I only buy mid-range graphics cards.

Main issues for me were with virtualization and anything that was super heavy on disk IO. Newer SATA/NVME, and more PCIE lanes + extra memory bandwidth and access to higher core count CPUs are all good reasons to pick newer kit if your doing a lot of work

 

[jonathan_phang]

Didn't have an issue with gaming, I'm always GPU constrained in that regards as I only buy mid-range graphics cards.

Main issues for me were with virtualization and anything that was super heavy on disk IO. Newer SATA/NVME, and more PCIE lanes + extra memory bandwidth and access to higher core count CPUs are all good reasons to pick newer kit if your doing a lot of work

Thanks for the reply. Definitely 10000% for those use cases. I'm just a gamer, and I really cant wait to get onto the new storage tech when I eventually upgrade. I *AM* totally surprised how well it stands up for gaming still though, even with bottlenecks.

 

[Draeger]

Not noticed anything myself.
Mine is getting long in the tooth but still flying without any noticeable degredation.

Likewise. My wee 5650 is sat running at 4.4Ghz with a basic Asus GTX760 is believe it or not still running the latest games (albeit at only 1920x1080 due to my monitor) with ease at very high settings.

I also us this system to run Adobe CS4 with Dreamweaver, Fireworks, PS and Illustrator as well as using it for video processing under Sony Vegas or Davinci Resolve for my DJI drone footage edits and it copes easily.

These may be old chips but my goodness, they are still able to kick ass.

 

[Strife212]

I've just priced up an X58 system

i7 980X = £80
ASUS SABERTOOTH X58 = £125
12GB DDR3 = £35
£240, there are more expensive Boards and Ram and cheaper but if you're going to overclock these components to get the performance out of the system i figure you're not going to want the crappiest stuff.

If what you are looking for is good performance for little money yeah its not bad but these components are 10 years old, how trustworthy is the longevity and reliability of these components?

The thing is Intel are no longer competing with themselves in their older platforms, for me the argument that "Intel are gimping their older platforms through planed obsolescence" doesn't make any sense, smart savvy people who look for performance bargains are not going to be looking at Intel's brand new hardware.

Ryzen 1600X = £150
Asus Prime B350-Plus = £80
16GB DDR4 3200Mhz = £130

£360, yes its £120 more but its all brand new with warranty and very high standards of productivity and gaming performance. Intel's current performance equivalent to that is a 9600K and that's £270, £120 more than the 1600X and £30 more than the whole X58 System i priced up.

Yes Tech City need to change their message to stay relevant instead of moaning about it and throwing around conspiracy theories.

But for those who've had one for the past 10 years, it's amazing