Difference between Core and Xeon CPUs

[Mars999]

What are the benefits of using Xeon vs. Core? I don't care about overclocking, but would like to know if the FPU is faster on Xeon? What about precision of the CPU? Rounding errors?


I have to believe there has to be something better about them? More reliable?

Thanks

 

[Gillbot]

ECC Memory on Xeon

 

[soccerballtux]

What are the benefits of using Xeon vs. Core? I don't care about overclocking, but would like to know if the FPU is faster on Xeon? What about precision of the CPU? Rounding errors?


I have to believe there has to be something better about them? More reliable?

Thanks

more reliable, creme de la creme chips go to the server line. You would be able to overclock it better on a lower voltage. Comes from exactly the same die, just a more favorable position.

 

[Gillbot]

more reliable, creme de la creme chips go to the server line. You would be able to overclock it better on a lower voltage. Comes from exactly the same die, just a more favorable position.

imho, not really. I've went through both ant often they oc nearly identically.

 

[Jimbo]

In the Xeon 3000 series there is no difference.
I have had them both and they function identically.

 

[soccerballtux]

imho, not really. I've went through both ant often they oc nearly identically.

oh.
I'm thinking back in the Athlon64 and X2 days when everybody bought an Opteron.

 

[n7]

more reliable, creme de la creme chips go to the server line. You would be able to overclock it better on a lower voltage. Comes from exactly the same die, just a more favorable position.

I'm sorry, but to the best of my knowledge, there's zero factual proof in that statement.

I have no doubt that sometimes Xeons might be better for OCing due to luck, etc, as were some of the Opteron vs. the Athlon 64s.

I am not aware of any higher quality control involved w/ the Xeons vs. Core i7s though.

 

[Mars999]

So why do people pay extra for them vs. Core CPUs?

 

[Shmee]

well, when there were still a lot of C0's around for the 920's, the xeon equivalent W3520 I believe, was a guaranteed D0.

That is one reason I guess.

 

[Gillbot]

So why do people pay extra for them vs. Core CPUs?

Sometimes the Xeon line has a lower VID and people commonly misinterpret this as a better OC ability. Otherwise, I honestly have no idea other than the common misconception that they OC better.

 

[zuffy]

So why do people pay extra for them vs. Core CPUs?

Dual socket capability with the 5500 series and quad socket capability with the 7400 series from my understanding.

 

[iluvdeal]

I've ran across one defective CPU in my life and it was a Xeon. It happened last year. It took our system manufacturer months to find out what the problem as they assumed the kernel panics were being caused by something else: the OS, the hard drives, etc. It was only until they swapped out one of the CPUs did the problem disappear.

 

[soccerballtux]

So why do people pay extra for them vs. Core CPUs?

Sometimes the Xeon line has a lower VID and people commonly misinterpret this as a better OC ability. Otherwise, I honestly have no idea other than the common misconception that they OC better.

if you're thermally limited, that _is_ better overclockability.

 

[Gillbot]

if you're thermally limited, that _is_ better overclockability.

speculation

 

[Zstream]

A while ago when I met with Intel they stated the Xeon chip comes from a certain part of the wafer known to have less defects. I forgot if that is the middle or side *shrug*. It can also take a wide variety of voltages.

 

[jonsu]

I've been wondering the same with these xeon pcs recently because I need to build one web server...
I haven't found benchmark comparing these pricey CPU with cheaper one to justify the price.

 

[mozartrules]

The price difference between the 35xx Xeon and the i7 isn't really that bad if you ignore the Microcenter deals (i7 $290, W3520 $310) and the ability to use ECC memory can be important for server work. The price of the 55xx Xeons is a a different matter, but they have both lower TDP for the same speed and the second QPI link.

 

[soccerballtux]

speculation

Phonons and quantum tunneling increase with heat. How this affects overclocking is intuitively obvious for anyone that has taken any advanced semiconductor fundamentals class.

 

[Gillbot]

Phonons and quantum tunneling increase with heat. How this affects overclocking is intuitively obvious for anyone that has taken any advanced semiconductor fundamentals class.

class and theory != real world results

 

[jonsu]

The price difference between the 35xx Xeon and the i7 isn't really that bad if you ignore the Microcenter deals (i7 $290, W3520 $310) and the ability to use ECC memory can be important for server work. The price of the 55xx Xeons is a a different matter, but they have both lower TDP for the same speed and the second QPI link.

Last time I have ECC on my Dell it causing me BSD, but that is era Pentium pro I think. But maybe it should get better ?

I don't know much about some stuff you mention: lower TDP and QPI Link What makes them so valuable that intell charge premium to that ?

Thanks,

Jon

 

[Beautiful_Life]

So why do people pay extra for them vs. Core CPUs?

Big business have no time to sit around doing their own benchmarking and stress test to see if there is any real difference between Core and Xeon chips. One day late in making a decision or one day of downtime cost them hundreds of thousands to millions, far more than the difference between a Core and Xeon chip. Plus, they don't have to to waste like sending the chip for RAM or replacing one blade due to a defective chip. It's not just real gains, but peace of mind.

The tech guys in those companies have probably been convinced by Intel that Xeon processors are more reliable theoretically and more imprtantly statistically.

After all Intel does divide all the chips they produce to different lines from China blackmarket to Celerons to Cores to ULVs to Core Extreme, to Xeons.
It's a combination of real quality difference and extremely good marketing.

People pay 40 dollars for bottled water, half a million for wine, why not for Xeon?

 

[Lonbjerg]

There is also the QPI link.
Core i7 and Xeon X3500 have 1 QPI link.
Xeon X5500 has 2 QPI links
Future XEON's chips will have 4 QPI links.

All i7's only have 1 QPI link, but XEON is able to run in dual-CPU config (and quad-CPU config in the future.)

 

[PCTC2]

There is also the QPI link.
Core i7 and Xeon X3500 have 1 QPI link.
Xeon X5500 has 2 QPI links
Future XEON's chips will have 4 QPI links.

All i7's only have 1 QPI link, but XEON is able to run in dual-CPU config (and quad-CPU config in the future.)

The Xeon 3500 sequence runs off the same X58 chipset as the Core i7's and does NOT support dual socket configuration on paper, but does support ECC.

The Xeon 5500 sequence (not just the X5500's) has 2 QPI links, supports dual socket configurations and ECC. Also, certain Xeon classes have lower TDP, aiming at 1U operation in datacenters, where power and heat factor more than in your living room.

The processing density of having four lower TDP quad cores in a 1U form factor is what you pay for in the Xeon name. Can anyone say private cloud computing in minimal colo space?

 

[Ben90]

Big business have no time to sit around doing their own benchmarking and stress test to see if there is any real difference between Core and Xeon chips. One day late in making a decision or one day of downtime cost them hundreds of thousands to millions, far more than the difference between a Core and Xeon chip. Plus, they don't have to to waste like sending the chip for RAM or replacing one blade due to a defective chip. It's not just real gains, but peace of mind.

The tech guys in those companies have probably been convinced by Intel that Xeon processors are more reliable theoretically and more imprtantly statistically.

After all Intel does divide all the chips they produce to different lines from China blackmarket to Celerons to Cores to ULVs to Core Extreme, to Xeons.
It's a combination of real quality difference and extremely good marketing.

People pay 40 dollars for bottled water, half a million for wine, why not for Xeon?

Or those tech guys paid by those big companies probably know when a processor needs to support ECC memory and multiple sockets.

 

[soccerballtux]

Big business have no time to sit around doing their own benchmarking and stress test to see if there is any real difference between Core and Xeon chips. One day late in making a decision or one day of downtime cost them hundreds of thousands to millions, far more than the difference between a Core and Xeon chip. Plus, they don't have to to waste like sending the chip for RAM or replacing one blade due to a defective chip. It's not just real gains, but peace of mind.

The tech guys in those companies have probably been convinced by Intel that Xeon processors are more reliable theoretically and more imprtantly statistically.

After all Intel does divide all the chips they produce to different lines from China blackmarket to Celerons to Cores to ULVs to Core Extreme, to Xeons.
It's a combination of real quality difference and extremely good marketing.

People pay 40 dollars for bottled water, half a million for wine, why not for Xeon?

Or those tech guys paid by those big companies probably know when a processor needs to support ECC memory and multiple sockets.

it's not really a "processor needs to support" it's a "we have a 200GB database that we need to function reliably-- it breaks itself enough as it is-- we can't afford to pay our guys to be tracking down bugs occurring because one bit flipped from a 1 to a 0 and cascaded down the line crashing the entire database". So it's economic for them to pay buku money to make sure their failures are 100% not the fault of hardware.