Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > CPUs and Overclocking

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Home and Garden
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-17-2013, 10:45 AM   #1
NTMBK
Diamond Member
 
NTMBK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,903
Default Socket 603 Xeon MP [Now with benchmarks]

UPDATE: I bought this upgrade and installed it, and it works nicely. If you want to see some benchmarks to see how old skool hardware handles modern loads, see my later posts!


Original post

As you can see from my signature, I have a very old dual-socket Xeon workstation (picked up free when they were throwing them out at work, score). I'm thinking of upgrading the processors, since you can get old Xeons mighty cheap on eBay- apparently this motherboard is good up to 3GHz, and a 50% performance boost would help make it a bit more useful.

I have a question however- will the Gallatin Xeon MPs work in a motherboard designed for Prestonia Xeons? They're both Socket 603 with a 400MHz FSB, but I'm not sure whether the board would fail to recognise them- and their 4MB L3 cache. Anyone got any advice?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximilian View Post
I like my VRMs how I like my hookers, hot and Taiwanese.

Last edited by NTMBK; 01-28-2013 at 08:12 AM.
NTMBK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 11:16 AM   #2
Arkaign
Lifer
 
Arkaign's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 19,258
Default

It's going to depend on your exact mobo and bios revision.
__________________
Death is the answer.
Arkaign is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 11:25 AM   #3
Charles Kozierok
Elite Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,762
Default

In general I'd say yes, but as Arkaign mentioned, the devil will be in the details.
__________________
"Of those who say nothing, few are silent." -- Thomas Neill
Charles Kozierok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 11:31 AM   #4
NTMBK
Diamond Member
 
NTMBK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,903
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arkaign View Post
It's going to depend on your exact mobo and bios revision.
It's a Dell Precision 530, if that's any help to anyone out there. Dell have released updated BIOS for it, including one which apparently includes "Added support for newer Processors". Sadly they don't seem to specify anywhere what these newer processors are. (Helpful, Dell! )#

EDIT: Hmm, the release date for the BIOS revision with updated CPU support is December 2004 (or possibly May, I'm never sure with US sites). The Gallatin I'm looking at came out in March 2004 according to Wikipedia, so I'm kinda hopeful?

EDIT 2: I could just try going for the Prestonia 3GHz, but that seems to actually be a lot rarer and more expensive on eBay. Plus it hasn't got a nice fat L3.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximilian View Post
I like my VRMs how I like my hookers, hot and Taiwanese.

Last edited by NTMBK; 01-17-2013 at 11:37 AM.
NTMBK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 12:31 PM   #5
Arkaign
Lifer
 
Arkaign's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 19,258
Default

This thread seems to have confirmation for you :

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/29...xeon-processor

"Hi all,

I currently run my dell precision 530 with two gallatin sl79v's (3.0ghz with 4mb cache each) and 4GB of pc800 rambus rimms on riser cards, this combined with an hd3850 agp card makes it run all new games like crysis2, bioschock 2, battlefield bad company , etc.. etc..

People are amazed on how fast it is and all panic if I show them the motherboard from 2001
Am now going to buy an pci-x sas card to hook it up to an ssd boot disk with dual 15k sas disks for fast data, I have even ordered an pci-x to pci-e 4x epansion card (pex8114) so that I can connect the latest pci express videocard to it.... can't wait to get the results in.

Friendly greets

Kevin

p.s: not every ws 530 motherboard can handle the sl79v's for that you need at least bios a11"

Given that you're already running 130nm CPUs (Prestonia), I think the 130nm Gallatin should work, as long as your bios is updated.
__________________
Death is the answer.
Arkaign is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 12:43 PM   #6
NTMBK
Diamond Member
 
NTMBK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,903
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arkaign View Post
This thread seems to have confirmation for you :

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/29...xeon-processor

"Hi all,

I currently run my dell precision 530 with two gallatin sl79v's (3.0ghz with 4mb cache each) and 4GB of pc800 rambus rimms on riser cards, this combined with an hd3850 agp card makes it run all new games like crysis2, bioschock 2, battlefield bad company , etc.. etc..

People are amazed on how fast it is and all panic if I show them the motherboard from 2001
Am now going to buy an pci-x sas card to hook it up to an ssd boot disk with dual 15k sas disks for fast data, I have even ordered an pci-x to pci-e 4x epansion card (pex8114) so that I can connect the latest pci express videocard to it.... can't wait to get the results in.

Friendly greets

Kevin

p.s: not every ws 530 motherboard can handle the sl79v's for that you need at least bios a11"

Given that you're already running 130nm CPUs (Prestonia), I think the 130nm Gallatin should work, as long as your bios is updated.
Aha, awesome! That's it, I've hit buy Thanks for the help.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximilian View Post
I like my VRMs how I like my hookers, hot and Taiwanese.
NTMBK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 01:21 PM   #7
Arkaign
Lifer
 
Arkaign's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 19,258
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NTMBK View Post
Aha, awesome! That's it, I've hit buy Thanks for the help.
Cool! I hope it works out well for you, I'm a fan of cheap upgrades that keep things going better.
__________________
Death is the answer.
Arkaign is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2013, 04:59 AM   #8
NTMBK
Diamond Member
 
NTMBK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,903
Default

Apparently these processors were $3600 each at launch... and now they're 20 for a pair. Scary how fast things change.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximilian View Post
I like my VRMs how I like my hookers, hot and Taiwanese.
NTMBK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2013, 05:35 PM   #9
NTMBK
Diamond Member
 
NTMBK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,903
Default

As my sig now indicates, I managed to upgrade the processors! The trickiest part was that the TIM had set solid- when I lifted the heatsinks, it yanked the old processors out without despite the socket being "shut". I managed to get the processors off the heatsinks and remount them, and there seems to be no harm done.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximilian View Post
I like my VRMs how I like my hookers, hot and Taiwanese.
NTMBK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2013, 05:39 PM   #10
OlafSicky
Platinum Member
 
OlafSicky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,377
Default

So how does it run?
OlafSicky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2013, 05:44 PM   #11
NTMBK
Diamond Member
 
NTMBK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,903
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OlafSicky View Post
So how does it run?
I've not thrown any intensive games at it yet to test it, but it feels a little bit smoother, certainly. Less of the random stalls it used to get.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximilian View Post
I like my VRMs how I like my hookers, hot and Taiwanese.
NTMBK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 01:14 AM   #12
crashtech
Diamond Member
 
crashtech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Southern Idaho
Posts: 3,375
Default

Any Netburst CPU seems painfully slow to me these days. I would expect that rig to perform similarly to a low end Core2 Duo.
crashtech is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 03:30 AM   #13
NTMBK
Diamond Member
 
NTMBK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,903
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crashtech View Post
Any Netburst CPU seems painfully slow to me these days. I would expect that rig to perform similarly to a low end Core2 Duo.
Oh, there's no denying it's slow. But getting this old thing running, and then upgrading, has been more like a bit of fun on the side for me It's nice to learn a bit of history. Not to mention, it's certainly usable for internet browsing, music, and older/indie games, which is plenty for me. When I eventually get bored I'm sure I'll sell it.

Anyone got any benchmarks they'd like me to run? They have to run under Windows XP, I've not tried putting 7 on this yet.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximilian View Post
I like my VRMs how I like my hookers, hot and Taiwanese.
NTMBK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 08:05 AM   #14
SPBHM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,617
Default

some "free" and easy to run things like cinebench 11.5, winrar (4.20 or higher)
and I'm curious to see how the system performs on AIDA64 cache and memory benchmark...

also have you tried any 3Dmark? what about 1080p youtube playback (forcing hardware acceleration off)?
SPBHM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2013, 12:06 PM   #15
NTMBK
Diamond Member
 
NTMBK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,903
Default

Right, here's some AIDA64 benchmarks!

Memory latency: 176.6 ns (528.22 cycles)
Memory copy: 2115 MB/s
Memory write: 2036 MB/s
Memory read: 2579 MB/s

So yeah, pretty terrible! 4 threads over a 400MHz FSB is seriously choked. Maybe I should rerun without HT on...

EDIT: Results without HT:

Latency: 175.7 ns
Copy: 2080 MB/s
Write: 2036 MB/s
Read: 2582 MB/s
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximilian View Post
I like my VRMs how I like my hookers, hot and Taiwanese.

Last edited by NTMBK; 01-26-2013 at 12:19 PM.
NTMBK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2013, 12:19 PM   #16
Ferzerp
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 5,492
Default

That's a decade old junk.....

I'd not wish it on my worst enemy.
Ferzerp is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2013, 12:27 PM   #17
NTMBK
Diamond Member
 
NTMBK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,903
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferzerp View Post
That's a decade old junk.....

I'd not wish it on my worst enemy.
Meh, with nice keyboard and a modern monitor it's perfectly usable for internet browsing. Plus indie games are fine, FTL runs well. No substitute for demanding games of course
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximilian View Post
I like my VRMs how I like my hookers, hot and Taiwanese.
NTMBK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2013, 04:29 PM   #18
Absolution75
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 973
Default

I'm going to guess that the lowest end $45 pentium processor would beat it in most benchmarks.

Someone can do the calculations, but I would imagine a low end pentium lynfield would more than make up for its cost in power savings.


It is a cool machine, but mmmmm
__________________
Intel Core i7 860 (Thermalright 120 Ultra) | MSI P55-GD65 | 4x4GB DDR3-1600 | XFX Radeon 7950 | WD 640GB Black & 4x Samsung EcoGreen F2 1.5TB (RAID-5) & Samsung F4 1TB | Antec Neo Eco 620c | Logitech Z-5500 | Antec 300 | Dell Ultrasharp 2312HM & Dell Ultrasharp 2007WFP | Logitech MX518 | Windows 7 Professional x64


Absolution75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2013, 12:30 AM   #19
crashtech
Diamond Member
 
crashtech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Southern Idaho
Posts: 3,375
Default

Yeah, a G530 has close to 3 times the CPU performance as this dual 3Ghz Gallatin rig according to the only source where I could find results for both, Passmark.
crashtech is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2013, 06:38 AM   #20
NTMBK
Diamond Member
 
NTMBK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,903
Default

Don't worry, I know that it's in no way a sensible thing to be doing, and that even a modern Celery would beat it in almost every way. This is just me indulging my hobby.

What can I say? I enjoy screwing around with computers, seeing how fast they can go, tweaking and prodding them. I get as much enjoyment out of doing it to an older computer as to a newer one, and it's a hell of a lot cheaper. And seriously, who among us hasn't done daft, pointless things with our computers, just for the hell of it?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximilian View Post
I like my VRMs how I like my hookers, hot and Taiwanese.
NTMBK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2013, 09:11 AM   #21
SPBHM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,617
Default

pretty high latency, but I think this was always a characteristic of RDRAM, and with FSB at a 100MHz QDR for this platform is also not going to help, the other results are quite good considering how old it is, I think.

what about the cache test from aida?
I'm also curious about winrar and cb.


this PC is probably significantly slower than a G530 (I'm not sure about the single core sandy bridges, like the g440), but yes, it's something more interesting and "cooler", for me at least.
SPBHM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2013, 09:35 AM   #22
NTMBK
Diamond Member
 
NTMBK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,903
Default

Annoyingly, the test won't test my L3. The programme recognises that the cache is present, but won't run tests on it. Weird. Probably some bug in the software, I doubt that this is a very common configuration to test! Well, here's the results anyway:



Next up, 3DMark!
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximilian View Post
I like my VRMs how I like my hookers, hot and Taiwanese.
NTMBK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2013, 11:25 AM   #23
NTMBK
Diamond Member
 
NTMBK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,903
Default

Right, here's some 3DMark results!

Without Hyperthreading: 5891

With Hyperthreading: 5585

Interestingly, the "CPU test" actually performed far worse with hyperthreading enabled!
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximilian View Post
I like my VRMs how I like my hookers, hot and Taiwanese.
NTMBK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2013, 11:28 AM   #24
Ferzerp
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 5,492
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NTMBK View Post
Interestingly, the "CPU test" actually performed far worse with hyperthreading enabled!
You can't compare the HT of today with the HT of netburst. It true netburst fasion, it needed to be a failure in every way possible. (Netburst was *really* awful. We didn't see anything else so abysmal for its time until late 2011)

Right now, you have to have some *extremely* optimized code to keep a core active enough where HT is no benefit (and in a few extremely rare edge cases a penalty. Even with Linpack it is only a 5-10% penalty, and I think that's the absolute worse possible scenario for it). Back then, it was pretty bad. Anything that was pretty high processor utilization could make HT fall flat on its face and get results like yours due to contention for the same resources.

Last edited by Ferzerp; 01-27-2013 at 11:37 AM.
Ferzerp is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2013, 03:02 PM   #25
SPBHM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,617
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NTMBK View Post
Right, here's some 3DMark results!

Without Hyperthreading: 5891

With Hyperthreading: 5585

Interestingly, the "CPU test" actually performed far worse with hyperthreading enabled!
l2 looks HIGH on this test, a lot higher than what I remember my K7 would achieve.

as for the 3dmark... that's unexpected.. I never really tested HT on 3dmark06, but on Vantage it brings good gains, well at least for nehalem and higher.

this 4600 is a DDR2 or DDR3 card?


anyway, HT seems to work well with some netburst CPUs
http://en.inpai.com.cn/doc/enshowcon...23&pageid=6627
SPBHM is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.