Xeon vs i7

Jokester · 12 Jul 2012 at 12:37

SB-E works different to SB/IB when overclocking.

bemaniac · 12 Jul 2012 at 13:47

Yeah the straps on my 3820 go 1.00 and 1.25 and are safe. More than this is a tad weird but it's just like a multi.

Dirtyganker · 12 Jul 2012 at 14:26

Lazder said:
you guys with 2500K and 3770K really use integrated graphics?? Most of you dont even have that option on motherboards..

Of course they have it, just about all socket 1155 boards do. And if you do any encoding/re-coding of video (ie, to your iPhone or Tablet is quite common) then you're most likely using QuickSync, which means you are using the integrated graphics although you may not be aware of it.

PiKe · 12 Jul 2012 at 14:30

Dirtyganker said:
Of course they have it, just about all socket 1155 boards do. And if you do any encoding/re-coding of video (ie, to your iPhone or Tablet is quite common) then you're most likely using QuickSync, which means you are using the integrated graphics although you may not be aware of it.

Thought you needed something plugged into the on-board graphics to utilise quick sync?

Dirtyganker · 12 Jul 2012 at 14:38

I'm using some of these Xeon E3-1230 in 1U rack mounted servers at work and they fullfil a very specific requirement - decent compute performance, low power, and they will work 24/7 almost indefinately. There is no requirement to overclock in the types of environment that Xeon's tend to occupy and practically no requirement for on board graphics in the majority of cases.

If I'm buying 50 server units a year then why would I want to pay a premium for onboard graphics and unlocked multipliers that I'm never going to use? They are designed to do a specific job, reliably and indefinately.

Additionally, much of the Xeon range are also designed to be used in mutli-socket/cpu solutions and your mainstream processors just don't have the capability to talk to one and other. Xeon's generally do.

It's not fair to compare the E3-1230 to an i5 or and i7 ... different animal designed to meet a different requirement.

Would I use a Xeon at home? If I decided I needed more execution cores on my rendering workstation than what I now have on my 3930k then I might, but even then I'd be missing quicksync which I use all the time, so really I don't think I would.

That said I have a VMware cluster at home and the Xeon would be a much more appropriate option than the Core i7 machines I'm currently using in that scenario.

Dirtyganker · 12 Jul 2012 at 14:40

PiKe said:
Thought you needed something plugged into the on-board graphics to utilise quick sync?

No, the Lucid software takes care of all of that.

Orcvader · 12 Jul 2012 at 15:15

PiKe said:
Thought you needed something plugged into the on-board graphics to utilise quick sync?

Lucid Virtu takes care of that. Although honestly I stopped using the onboard since I didn't like QuickSync qaulity wise. Went back to Handbrake, but now I find encoding times more sluggish... They better release the OpenCL accelerated version soon :mad:

.

PiKe · 12 Jul 2012 at 15:20

Your board has to support Lucid Virtu?

Orcvader · 12 Jul 2012 at 15:34

Yes, it will need to support Virtu if you want to use QuickSync while the monitor is connected to the discrete GPU (D-mode). Virtu can also work the other way round (I-mode), where the monitor is to the onboard but gives the discrete the workload when needed, although this causes more latency and reduces frame rates by a bit. But both modes will allow you to use QuickSync without sacrificing the discrete.

Combat squirrel · 12 Jul 2012 at 16:13

ONE QUESTION

Can a xeon 1155 chip be under clocked ? ( I know it cannot be overclocked )

Combat squirrel · 12 Jul 2012 at 18:16

Decided to find out for myself, the Intel Xeon E3-1230 is on its way

Orcvader · 12 Jul 2012 at 18:42

Combat squirrel said:
ONE QUESTION

Can a xeon 1155 chip be under clocked ? ( I know it cannot be overclocked )

I have... no idea. Should be able to. Guess you'll find out when it arrives

.

mmj_uk · 12 Jul 2012 at 18:55

Be interesting to see the results, it makes the standard 2500/2600 (non-K) processors obsolete unless you want the onboard GPU.

As others have mentioned though, I reckon you're going to struggle to get much over 4ghz at best so it's no 2600K killer, obscene value for stock clock/light overclockers though.

Combat squirrel · 12 Jul 2012 at 20:49

mmj_uk said:
Be interesting to see the results, it makes the standard 2500/2600 (non-K) processors obsolete unless you want the onboard GPU.

As others have mentioned though, I reckon you're going to struggle to get much over 4ghz at best so it's no 2600K killer, obscene value for stock clock/light overclockers though.

I dont want to overclock it, im underclocking it, LOW as possible power at around 2.5-2.8ghz, hoping for 0.8-0.9v

Orcvader · 12 Jul 2012 at 21:00

Can't overclock it anyway

. It's max speed will be the stock speed. But underclocking is a different matter...

ubersonic · 13 Jul 2012 at 09:28

Just thought I would mention this as nobody has pointed it out yet, the are actually TWO different versions of this CPU on sale today (usually at the same price).

The E3-1230 which is a 3.2GHz Sandy Bridge CPU and the E3-1230V2 which is a 3.3GHz Ivy Bridge CPU, both have 8MB cache, 4 cores and HT however the V2 has 100mhz higher clocks, IB architecture and a 69w TDP compared to the 80w TDP of the Sandy chip.

Combat squirrel · 13 Jul 2012 at 09:47

Orcvader said:
Can't overclock it anyway . It's max speed will be the stock speed. But underclocking is a different matter...

Yup for sure, is why I bought it, I dont even slightly want to overclock it as its a server machine, so was happy to buy a non 'k' chip.

ubersonic said:
Just thought I would mention this as nobody has pointed it out yet, the are actually TWO different versions of this CPU on sale today (usually at the same price).

The E3-1230 which is a 3.2GHz Sandy Bridge CPU and the E3-1230V2 which is a 3.3GHz Ivy Bridge CPU, both have 8MB cache, 4 cores and HT however the V2 has 100mhz higher clocks, IB architecture and a 69w TDP compared to the 80w TDP of the Sandy chip.

Yup very true, the one I bought is the sandy, again more than powerful enough for my server.

The reason I got it is im currently running an i3 2100T which is very very fast, and the server is running just fine, however, I ALSO use it as a CCTV surveillance machine with 8 cameras, so monitoring 8 live video feeds is fairly processor intensive, and defo is once it starts recording/encoding. Im using Ispy which is very threaded software, so this chip will be ideal

areksnumbr1sxylady · 13 Jul 2012 at 17:36

I submitted a thread for product suggestions with this CPU, they said that it is very interesting chip and will look into it.

Combat squirrel · 13 Jul 2012 at 18:59

Lazder said:
I submitted a thread for product suggestions with this CPU, they said that it is very interesting chip and will look into it.

Why, so interesting ?

ubersonic · 14 Jul 2012 at 15:12

Well the thing about it that interests me is its performance (assuming the V2 IB version) compared to other processors in the same price/performance range, if your not interested in overclocking it looks like a bargain:

i5 2550K: slower at stock clocks and ~ same price
i7 2600: slower and more expensive
i7 2700K: ~ same performance at stock clocks and more expensive
i5 3550: slower but slightly cheaper
i5 3570K: slightly slower at stock clocks and ~ same price
i7 3770: 100mhz faster and more expensive*
i7 3770K: 200mhz faster at stock clocks and a lot more expensive**

*Would cover the cost of the ram or maybe the motherboard
**would cover the cost of the motherboard and maybe also the ram

Now im going to be replacing a lot of our workstations soon and don't plan on overclocking any hence why this chip interests me as in addition to great price/performance it also runs cooler than any i5/i7 according to the specs.