Does Ryzen potentially "kill" the unofficial consumer Xeon DIY PC builds?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Does Ryzen "kill" the albeit small market for Xeon-based gaming/multiuse PCs?

  • Yes, Ryzen fulfills this niche role pretty well

    Votes: 45 66.2%
  • No, Xeons will still be the preferred CPU

    Votes: 4 5.9%
  • This is a small specific market, and does not really change things much overall

    Votes: 19 27.9%

  • Total voters
    68
  • Poll closed .

mattiasnyc

Senior member
Mar 30, 2017
356
337
136
Yes, I misunderstood your objection, sorry for that. I personally would try an ES but I understand it's not proper to compare with. That's why I moved to the Ryzen 5 1600 vs. Xeon E5 1650.

Your 80$ Ryzen is an auction :p (The last auction on january 5th closed at 160$.)
Ok, fine. I'm in the US. Let me get a few sources then (R 1600 / E5 1650):

Newegg: 200 / 593 (v4)
Amazon: 200 / 500 (v2)
Microcenter: 190 / n/a

So the normal outlets - since we're excluding ebay - show the Xeon at over the double price. On top of that the Ryzen 1600 comes with a cooler and at Microcenter also comes with an additional $30 off when paired with a motherboard.

Found another great video, only 6k views. It feels nice and comfy sitting on that old z400, sipping a beer, and watching the stream :)
The Chinese X79 Benchmarks... Mission Accomplished?
Sounds like you're looking for validation of your purchase. Just be happy about it. No need to lobby others to accept its value.
 

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
9,460
1,566
96
Hi. I was told I might be able to contribute here... When I first started looking into slightly older xeon cpu's I couldn't find any relevant info from pc users/gamers. Most just put their opinion. My best advice it to find out yourself.

I built a pc using one of those knock off boards. I love it. Tried a $70 e5-1620 v2 with a 1080 ti and also a $170 e5-1660 v2.

Works just as good or better than my 7700k cpu I paid over $300 for.

I have game play videos and videos of my watercooled Project: XEON
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbktM-Pfv2_CfImN9NxU4cg

Project:XEON
https://pcpartpicker.com/b/yTzYcf

Sent from my VS835 using Tapatalk
What did you do, use leftover parts for this build?
 

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
9,460
1,566
96
No It's not. I have 2 ssd drives and a 1tb sshd on a side project build that doesn't get used that much. And one small ssd drive for os is all you really need
Yeah but why are you using a 5400 rpm drive? And yes I do consider 300GB for two SSDs to be too small for Windows and applications, plus games.

Maybe I'm just biased since I have two 1TB SSDs in my desktop.
 

customgtp

Junior Member
Jan 8, 2018
6
0
1
Yeah but why are you using a 5400 rpm drive? And yes I do consider 300GB for two SSDs to be too small for Windows and applications, plus games.

Maybe I'm just biased since I have two 1TB SSDs in my desktop.
 
Last edited:

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
9,460
1,566
96
Look I came on here to give my experience on my x79 board and xeon cpu. I don't know why my hard drives on a project build are being questioned. I have no issues with my hard drives on this build.
Because it is a 5400 rpm HDD? I have one in my refurbished ThinkPad T430, and the slowness just drives me nuts.
 

PG

Diamond Member
Oct 25, 1999
3,426
44
91
Haha !!!!
Nope.

--snip---

Intel eats AMD.

:D
I'm not impressed. A quick google search shows that the cheapest one of those cpus available is just under $3k.
http://www.nextwarehouse.com/item/?2733618_g10e
Your Cinebench score shows that the result comes from a dual cpu system. (16cores / 32 threads) 3466 / 2 = 1733 per cpu

Ryzen 8 core cpus can be had for under $300, so that Xeon is 10X more expensive.
All Ryzen cpus can be overclocked. The r15 score for a stock 1800x = 1626
https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/1603
That Xeon at 10 times more expensive is just a bit more powerful in the benchmark you are bragging about, per cpu that is.
If you need more threads for a direct overall system comparison you can get a Threadripper 1950X to arrive a the same cores and threads while still being cheaper than the Xeon. 1950X r15 score is 3004 so it loses to the Xeon, but it's in the general ballpark.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
107,554
23,451
146
I'm not impressed. A quick google search shows that the cheapest one of those cpus available is just under $3k.
http://www.nextwarehouse.com/item/?2733618_g10e
Your Cinebench score shows that the result comes from a dual cpu system. (16cores / 32 threads) 3466 / 2 = 1733 per cpu

Ryzen 8 core cpus can be had for under $300, so that Xeon is 10X more expensive.
All Ryzen cpus can be overclocked. The r15 score for a stock 1800x = 1626
https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/1603
That Xeon at 10 times more expensive is just a bit more powerful in the benchmark you are bragging about, per cpu that is.
If you need more threads for a direct overall system comparison you can get a Threadripper 1950X to arrive a the same cores and threads while still being cheaper than the Xeon. 1950X r15 score is 3004 so it loses to the Xeon, but it's in the general ballpark.
Not to worry--I'm sure once the microcode fix for meltdown is ready, that Xeon will look extremely sad compared to TR.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

Topweasel

Diamond Member
Oct 19, 2000
5,414
1,606
136
I'm not impressed. A quick google search shows that the cheapest one of those cpus available is just under $3k.
http://www.nextwarehouse.com/item/?2733618_g10e
Your Cinebench score shows that the result comes from a dual cpu system. (16cores / 32 threads) 3466 / 2 = 1733 per cpu

Ryzen 8 core cpus can be had for under $300, so that Xeon is 10X more expensive.
All Ryzen cpus can be overclocked. The r15 score for a stock 1800x = 1626
https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/1603
That Xeon at 10 times more expensive is just a bit more powerful in the benchmark you are bragging about, per cpu that is.
If you need more threads for a direct overall system comparison you can get a Threadripper 1950X to arrive a the same cores and threads while still being cheaper than the Xeon. 1950X r15 score is 3004 so it loses to the Xeon, but it's in the general ballpark.
Considering the choice of a dual socket server we should compare the Epyc performance in the same price range. That will get you something like 48 cores and 96 threads. I'd like to see the Cinebench numbers on that.

A 32c Epyc (7601) Gets a hair under 7000k in Cinebench. Extra 50% minus some overhead should put a dual 7451 system at ~10k in Cinebench range. For the same price as someone is spending on that server, they could get something 3x faster.

Or as one would put it AMD eats Intel.

Oops miss read the place I got the numbers so 48 versus 64 cores. So minus 25% which would put in at roughly 5000. Still 60% faster.
 

Topweasel

Diamond Member
Oct 19, 2000
5,414
1,606
136
You know what I just noticed I was just checking recent posts in threads I have posted in before. Didn't notice the title. Nothing about that Xeon Gold system meets the requirements of this thread.
 

BrainEater

Senior member
Apr 20, 2016
209
40
46
The title was : Does Ryzen potentially "kill" the unofficial consumer Xeon DIY PC builds?

My answer was no.
-----

Thanks for the post PG ! you are right.
I wasn't trying to impress.I'd have shown the dual 8168 Xeons if I was.....7000+ cinebench.
-----
Zinfamous , you should probably read up on the microcode fixes.They are no where near what you had hoped for ...
I benchmarked my rig six ways from sunday after the win 10 patch.
over 10 runs , my cinebench went up 3 points to the score I posted....I WILL lose some on I/O but I don't mind.

------
I don't care about cost , and I don't OC anymore.
the 1950x I have access to does 3040 cinebench at stock, this rig (out of the box,stock,untweaked) does 3445.
----
My comment stands.
 

USER8000

Golden Member
Jun 23, 2012
1,522
753
136
The title was : Does Ryzen potentially "kill" the unofficial consumer Xeon DIY PC builds?

My answer was no.
-----

Thanks for the post PG ! you are right.
I wasn't trying to impress.I'd have shown the dual 8168 Xeons if I was.....7000+ cinebench.
-----
The answer is yes,since only hardware enthusiasts on tech forums who live in a bubble would think cost wouldn't be an issue for DIY PC builds.

People do DIY builds do so to save money or get better value for money by farting around with hardware,if not they would just buy an off the shelf system like most people,so since cost is a factor,yes it does kill Xeons for DIY builds since the price differential is massive.

The newly adjusted pricing for the HEDT platform probably kills off Xeons for many DIY builds anyway.

Intel also killed off the compatibility of consumer socket Xeon CPUs with normal motherboards by restricting the chipsets they could be used in,so even made those CPUs worse value for money.




------
I don't care about cost , and I don't OC anymore.
the 1950x I have access to does 3040 cinebench at stock, this rig (out of the box,stock,untweaked) does 3445.
----
My comment stands.
Your comment does not stand,as in the realworld cost is a factor,ie,computing has over the last 40 years shown that lower cost technologies always win out over time. Or maybe you need to ask Cray,IBM,etc who found their expensive niche CPUs being massively outsold by mass produced cheaper ones in servers and supercomputers by companies like Intel who undercut them.

ARM did the same thing in phones and tablets when compared to more expensive CPUs from Intel and AMD.

So in the end for bragging points you spent massively more just to get just over 10% to 15% show-off points when if you had spent still less on an AMD system,you would have got a faster one in that benchmark.

Also if you didn't care about money you would just buy an off the shelf system and be done with it instead of fiddling around building PCs. There are plenty of bespoke well built system with great support available in many countries.
 
Last edited:

USER8000

Golden Member
Jun 23, 2012
1,522
753
136
Actually I looked at the price of the Xeon Gold 6144 in the UK:

https://www.scan.co.uk/products/intel-xeon-gold-6148-s3647-skylake-sp-20-cores-40-threads-24ghz-31ghz-turbo-275mb-cache-150w-retail

£2900 for the CPU only. The cheapest motherboard is £550:

https://www.scan.co.uk/shop/computer-hardware/motherboards-intel/intel-xeon-socket-3647-motherboards

So £3450 just for the CPU and motherboard. LMAO.

1950X is £900:

https://www.scan.co.uk/products/amd-ryzen-threadripper-1950x-s-tr4-16-core-32-thread-34ghz-40ghz-turbo-40mb-64-lane-180w-cpu-retail

The cheapest motherboard starts at under £300:

https://www.scan.co.uk/shop/computer-hardware/motherboards-amd/amd-x399-socket-tr4-atx-motherboards

A WX9100(which is hardly good value for money) costs £1600:

https://www.scan.co.uk/products/amd-radeon-pro-wx-9100

The Nvidia P500 costs £1900:

https://www.scan.co.uk/products/16gb-pny-nvidia-quadro-p5000-pascal-2560-cores-gddr5x-256-bit-288-gb-s-89-tflops-4x-dp-14-dual-slot-

So 1950X CPU, a X399 motherboard and a WX9100 16GB or Quadro P500 16GB costs less than a Xeon Gold 6144 and a motherboard.

No,no people are right the Xeon Gold is going to be bought in droves by people building DIY computers,when you could get a 1950X,X399 motherboard and an expensive workstation card for less than the cost of the CPU and motherboard only.

Forget AMD,I would say the HEDT X299 CPUs make the Xeon Gold look a non-starter for most DIY builds.
 

BrainEater

Senior member
Apr 20, 2016
209
40
46
The answer is yes,since only hardware enthusiasts on tech forums who live in a bubble would think cost wouldn't be an issue for DIY PC builds.

People do DIY builds do so to save money or get better value for money by farting around with hardware,if not they would just buy an off the shelf system like most people,so since cost is a factor,yes it does kill Xeons for DIY builds since the price differential is massive.

The newly adjusted pricing for the HEDT platform probably kills off Xeons for many DIY builds anyway.

Intel also killed off the compatibility of consumer socket Xeon CPUs with normal motherboards by restricting the chipsets they could be used in,so even made those CPUs worse value for money.






Your comment does not stand,as in the realworld cost is a factor,ie,computing has over the last 40 years shown that lower cost technologies always win out over time. Or maybe you need to ask Cray,IBM,etc who found their expensive niche CPUs being massively outsold by mass produced cheaper ones in servers and supercomputers by companies like Intel who undercut them.

ARM did the same thing in phones and tablets when compared to more expensive CPUs from Intel and AMD.

So in the end for bragging points you spent massively more just to get just over 10% to 15% show-off points when if you had spent still less on an AMD system,you would have got a faster one in that benchmark.

Also if you didn't care about money you would just buy an off the shelf system and be done with it instead of fiddling around building PCs. There are plenty of bespoke well built system with great support available in many countries.
whoa there big boy !
I've spent 20,000$ on casemods that failed.It's one of my hobbies.

so now , when I spend that on a nice Xeon system, I'm the effing enemy.
My numbers speak for themselves.

Relax guys.

Number 1, and #2 on the Cinebench are AMD systems .
Don't hang onto that for long tho.

:p

edit.
It's really hard to find legit gold/platinum processors on ebay etc.
I looked.
 
Last edited:

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
107,554
23,451
146
-----
Zinfamous , you should probably read up on the microcode fixes.They are no where near what you had hoped for ...
I benchmarked my rig six ways from sunday after the win 10 patch.
over 10 runs , my cinebench went up 3 points to the score I posted....I WILL lose some on I/O but I don't mind.
.
From what I recall, the actual microcode patches haven't even been released. Only OS patches from Microsoft. And obviously, it does depend on your use case.
 

Topweasel

Diamond Member
Oct 19, 2000
5,414
1,606
136
BE, The point always was about consumer level boards and tower systems with cost effect and sometimes used Xeons. Since the core count was low in the past (just barely over 10 cores) and Intel stopping Xeons from running on the X platforms. With Ryzen being so close in performance and cores would it kill the these types of systems. I don't have an answer to that, though the Ryzen 7 1700 did stop me from retiring my 3930K with a 6900 last year.

But a New 2SP server with Gold CPU's while amazingly fast and you deserve Kudo's for your system. It's not the type of system that this thread was asking about. Personally I would get a ThreadRipper or Epyc for less, but that isn't why your system isn't a great example of the question of the thread.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY