Core2 Extreme vs. Xeon

[mystikmedia]

(Sorry for the length of this post. I hope some of you will have the time to read through and reply on my questions. )

I am looking for some input on a dilemma I have been pondering. For the purpose of this post, let's say that price does not matter and take it out as a factor. The goal is to build the fastest system possible to be delivered between now and early January. The system will be used for software development, audio and video editing, audio and video conversion, compression and decompression (WinRAR), and normal Windows usage. Of course, fast bootups, program execution, and all the common things everyone wants to be fast are of interest.

So, considering that, here are the issues that come to mind:

Core2 Extreme can be overclocked and does not require FB RAM (I understand standard RAM to be quite a bit faster than FB). With the overclocking, I believe faster RAM can also be utilized (and maybe without...not 100% sure on that).

With a Xeon configuration, 8 cores is possible (vs 4 with Core2 Extreme). The video editing/conversion software used most is TMPGEnc and TMPG MPEG Editor, and as I mentioned, WinRAR is the most common software used for file compression/decompression. I "believe" that I won't benefit from 8 cores over 4 for normal Windows usage. Am I correct on this? However, I may be able to benefit for the audio/video operations?

So, which route do you believe would give me the very best performance for what I am looking to do?

On a side-note, I am considering going with a flash-based disk drive solution for increased bootup time and better performance. What do you think on this? I have a 16 drive SCSI RAID solution. So, space is not really a concern for the boot drive. I currently have a 4-disk RAID with 10,000 RPM drives, but the performance I am seeing is not consistent at all for some reason (RAID 0)...less than 30 MB/s with a file copy sometimes and other times it will reach 100+ MB/s with seemingly the same system load, whereas my 16-disk RAID averages about 93 MB/s. Anyway, what do you think would be the best solution? It seems that for the boot drive, RAID slows down boot time a lot.

Thanks very much in advance for advice, comments, etc.

 

[Acanthus]

16 disk raid doing 93MB/s seems awfully low...

I get 105MB/sec out of 2 of the new SATA perpendicular drives using onboard raid on the motherboard...

As for applications that will use 8 cores, video encoding is about it.

In general usage you will not notice the difference between 4 and 8 cores with the exception of a few games.

Most audio encoding applications are not SMP aware, out of the few that are, most of those will only utilize dual core. (i say most because there may be one out there thatll use 4 cores that i do not know of)

Nothing is saying you cant overclock with a xeon see sig.

With cost completely out of the equation, an 8 core solution would be best for the extensive video encoding it sounds like you do.

 

[mystikmedia]

Wow. I thought Xeon could not be overclocked. In that case, seems like that may be the way to go. Since I should then have the best of both worlds.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
16 disk raid doing 93MB/s seems awfully low...

I get 105MB/sec out of 2 of the new SATA perpendicular drives using onboard raid on the motherboard...

He has SCSI, which maxes at 100 MB/sec.

Nothing is saying you cant overclock with a xeon see sig.

You can't overclock with a 2P LGA 771 motherboard & FB-DIMMS.[/quote]

 

[mystikmedia]

I edited the original post after I noticed which motherboard you are using since it does not require FB. Very interesting.

 

[mystikmedia]

Thanks much for the replies, especially Acanthus. I definitely know something I didn't before now. To follow-up... Do Xeons generally overclock just as well as Extreme Edition processors?

 

[myocardia]

Mystik, welcome to anandtech. Want to know what I would do, if I had unlimited resources? I'd built two identical QX9650-based systems (the 3 Ghz Penryn quad-core), if I were in your situation, along with a KVM. Well, that's what I would do, if I planned on using an optical drive much.

See, a 3+ Ghz quad-core will max out an optical drive, so you'd get zero benefit from the other 4 cores, if you happened to be ripping DVD's. With two quads, you'd be able to max out both optical drives, and also work on two different projects at the same time.

 

[mystikmedia]

Thanks for the welcome. I have read the reviews and news here for a long time, but never joined the forum until today.

The two-system solution would not work well for me...plus, my AC couldn't keep up back when I could fit two PCs. I don't use an optical drive much anyway, though.

 

[myocardia]

Your A/C wouldn't be able to keep up with a dual quad server, then. Well, assuming you were using two fast Xeons, that is.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: mystikmedia
Do Xeons generally overclock just as well as Extreme Edition processors?

All of Intel's quads are overclocking like crazy, even the $275 Q6600. Most people are limited by the ungodly heat they produce, not by the processor itself. You have to have at least a good watercooling setup, to be able to max them out, it seems.

 

[mystikmedia]

I figure it would be about the same as the one I have now. That is, I have an 8 core system now, but it's 2.66ghz, with the FB slower RAM, and the Tyan Tempest i5000XT Intel 5000X motherboard does not support overclocking. I believe the new processors are better on energy too. Plus, I want to get better cooling (well, will need that anyway because of the overclocking, but you know what I mean...to cool in such a way that so much heat is not released into the room also, hopefully).

 

[mystikmedia]

In Acanthus' signature, what do these bits mean?

"SLACT (G0)" and "@ 333 strap"

I am just trying to figure out what all exactly I will need to be able to overclock the Xeons and use the faster RAM. That is, is there more than just a certain motherboard needed? I am wanting to get this when the 45nm systems are released. So, the motherboard will need to work with that. I will most likely be going DDR3. Do you all have specific suggestions or should I wait to look when it gets closer?

 

[myocardia]

Okay, there's only one way to have a hot computer, and not heat up your room-- venting the heat outside, or using watercooling, and having the radiator in another room. Even a watercooled system will heat up your room the same amount as any of the air coolers will. And SLACT (G0) is just the stepping of his processor. SLACT is the code that's printed on the processor, that means you have a G0 stepping quad, instead of a B3 quad.

And his motherboard allows him to set the northbridge strap independently of the FSB speed, most motherboards do it automatically, dependent on the FSB. That's why he's having to use so much northbridge voltage. And like I said earlier, you can't overclock LGA 771 Xeons, especially with FB-DIMMS. He has an LGA 775 Xeon, which is really nothing more than a slightly more expensive G0 stepping LGA 775 Q6600.

 

[mystikmedia]

Ah, gotcha. I did not understand the reference fully when read initially, but I have looked it up now, and see what you're saying. So, hmmm. That throws my plan out of loop. What are your best recommendations considering all the above, myocardia? Thanks again for taking the time to reply. It is much appreciated.

 

[myocardia]

Well, as far as the heat produced, what I said in my previous post are the only two ways I know of to remove the heat from the room the computer is in. And since you've already got 8 Kentsfield 2.66 Ghz cores, I'd say you're already maxed performance-wise.

Most likely, Intel will introduce some slightly faster Penryn-based server chips, if that interests you. They'll definitely run a bit cooler, since they'll be 45 nm, instead of 65 nm. Besides that, I don't know what to tell you.

 

[mystikmedia]

Originally posted by: myocardia
Well, as far as the heat produced, what I said in my previous post are the only two ways I know of to remove the heat from the room the computer is in. And since you've already got 8 Kentsfield 2.66 Ghz cores, I'd say you're already maxed performance-wise.

Most likely, Intel will introduce some slightly faster Penryn-based server chips, if that interests you. They'll definitely run a bit cooler, since they'll be 45 nm, instead of 65 nm. Besides that, I don't know what to tell you.

What I mean is.... Considering that I can't overclock the 45nm Xeons, would you suggest I go with the Extreme Edition Core2 instead (4 cores vs. 8)? The Xeon will result in me using the slower RAM, I believe. Which way do you believe will give me the best performance for my purposes?

 

[myocardia]

I'd also suggest Sun. Anything else has got me stumped, man. Have you talked to Dell or Sun?

 

[myocardia]

PM me again, and I'll give you my cell phone #, if you want it. That's about the best I can do, especally at 4 AM, Texas time.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: mystikmedia
In Acanthus' signature, what do these bits mean?

"SLACT (G0)" and "@ 333 strap"

I am just trying to figure out what all exactly I will need to be able to overclock the Xeons and use the faster RAM. That is, is there more than just a certain motherboard needed? I am wanting to get this when the 45nm systems are released. So, the motherboard will need to work with that. I will most likely be going DDR3. Do you all have specific suggestions or should I wait to look when it gets closer?

Id wait for some of the early adopters to get results with 45nm chips on X38 chipsets.

SLACT is the retail code for the stepping of the chip.

For the Q6600 the G0 code is SLACR
For the Xeon X3220 the G0 code is SLACT

Note that for LGA775 based systems, there is no real difference between a Core 2 Quad and a Xeon. Xeons tend to have slightly better bins so you can get an extra 100-200mhz out of them, but its a crapshoot on their advantages really.

 

[mystikmedia]

Right. The only advantage to them, I think, is that you can run two of them.

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Originally posted by: myocardia
And like I said earlier, you can't overclock LGA 771 Xeons, especially with FB-DIMMS.

Hate to disagree with you but you can overclock the lower LGA 771s, and who knows what the 45nm xeons will bring (what with skulltrail being a S771 board you may even see some BIOS overclocking options on some boards).

That being said you can't overclock the current batch anywhere near as much as you can with the core2s. If you go with a 266 FSB xeon you can get about 40% OC less with the 333 xeons.

All in all a core2 quad will clock higher and be a better bet IMHO.

 

[mystikmedia]

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb

Originally posted by: myocardia
And like I said earlier, you can't overclock LGA 771 Xeons, especially with FB-DIMMS.

Hate to disagree with you but you can overclock the lower LGA 771s, and who knows what the 45nm xeons will bring (what with skulltrail being a S771 board you may even see some BIOS overclocking options on some boards).

That being said you can't overclock the current batch anywhere near as much as you can with the core2s. If you go with a 266 FSB xeon you can get about 40% OC less with the 333 xeons.

All in all a core2 quad will clock higher and be a better bet IMHO.

Thanks much for your feedback. It is indeed appreciated.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: mystikmedia
Right. The only advantage to them, I think, is that you can run two of them.

To my knowledge, there are no dual socket 775 motherboards.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: mystikmedia
Right. The only advantage to them, I think, is that you can run two of them.

To my knowledge, there are no dual socket 775 motherboards.

there isnt..

But welcome skulltrail.

Dual LGA771 /w FB-DDR2800 /w Overclocking abilities.


That is your solution op. Wait for skulltrail. then its GG.

 

[bryanW1995]

I agree. I was just reading this thinking "skulltrail, skulltrail, this is one of the 50 people on this earth who would actually see a large benefit from SKULLTRAIL!!!!". anyway, aigo beat me to it, but that is your perfect solution.