E8400 vs E3110

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
W

woofersus

Golden Member
Jun 5, 2006
1,080
0
76
www.eaststreetaudio.com
Can anybody tell me if there is any reason I would want one over the other? Here are the Intel Spec Sheets:

Core 2 Duo E8400

Xeon E3110


It looks like a re-badge job of the same processor. I'd be able to put the E3110 in a P35 mobo, right? It's LGA-775.

I'm primarily interested because the cheapest I can find an E8400 is $239 on mwave, and Buy.com has the E3110 for $199, and free shipping. With the 5% off coupon that's floating around, it would be $189.40 shipped.
 
W

woofersus

Golden Member
Jun 5, 2006
1,080
0
76
www.eaststreetaudio.com
Is that going to matter? The xeon starts .106 higher, but doesn't go as high. If I'm not really overclocking I won't need it, right? Does average use ever see the upper or lower limits?

I'm not sure what the PCG spec is, but the fact that there isn't one for the E8400 makes me suspect it won't matter. Same for the Thermal Specification. None listed for the E8400, but they have the same TDP rating.

I also noticed in the features list, the xeon lists I/OAT and the core 2 doesn't. What's that?
 
Engineer

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Since the CPU ID string is the same for both, I see no reason that the motherboard would have a problem running the Xeon over the E8400.
 
taltamir

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
good catch egineer...

The CPUID string is the same... that means that they ARE the same CPU with a different name.

They are probably bechmarked and based on their voltage range some get binned as that xeon and some as the E8400.

"identical" hardware is still physically not the same since manufacturing isn't perfect
 
Engineer

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Originally posted by: taltamir
good catch egineer...

The CPUID string is the same... that means that they ARE the same CPU with a different name.

They are probably bechmarked and based on their voltage range some get binned as that xeon and some as the E8400.

"identical" hardware is still physically not the same since manufacturing isn't perfect
Click to expand...

There's a thread at another forum (link in the other E3110 thread here) that states that the boards recognize this as an E8400 so the proof that the ID string is proven there.
 
T

Tempered81

Diamond Member
Jan 29, 2007
6,374
1
81
aren't they like slap-m and slap-k, or slap-l batches codes. I know theres a difference. And also, they list about 10 extra options at the bottom of the OP's links for the e8400. I would be interested to know if the e3110 or x3110 reads temperatures correctly. You can find them for about $190 online right now - great deal. Also, wonder if the overclocking performance is like compared to the e8400
 
P

piotrgurin

Senior member
Apr 4, 2005
343
0
0
Originally posted by: taltamir
190$ online? I paid 209$ for my E8400 a whole month ago!
MURDER! MURDER!
Click to expand...

190??? how do u get it that low? the lowest i can get it to is 198.26
 
W

woofersus

Golden Member
Jun 5, 2006
1,080
0
76
www.eaststreetaudio.com
using that buy.com coupon, I picked one up this morning for 189.40 shipped. (you could get it shipped 3-5 day for like $6 extra)

I'm also curious about the features. Would they have two cpus with different features enabled and still use the same CPUID string? It looks like the features list is the same except for the xeon listing I/OAT. The rest are in the notes below that. Does anybody know what the features listed below are or why they might not be enabled on a xeon? Will I miss them?

PROCHOT
THERMTRIP
PECI
Tdiode
Intel® Trusted Execution Technology (Intel® TXT)
Extended Stop Grant State (C2E)
Extended (C4)
 
T

Tempered81

Diamond Member
Jan 29, 2007
6,374
1
81



Intel® I/O Acceleration Technology (Intel® I/OAT), with Intel® QuickData Technology, moves data more efficiently through Dual-Core and Quad-Core Intel® Xeon® processor-based servers for fast, scalable, and reliable network performance.


Performance

A primary benefit of Intel I/OAT is its ability to significantly reduce CPU overhead, freeing resources for more critical tasks. Intel I/OAT uses the server?s processors more efficiently by leveraging architectural improvements within the CPU, chipset, network controller, and firmware to minimize performance-limiting bottlenecks. Intel I/OAT accelerates TCP/IP processing, delivers data-movement efficiencies across the entire server platform, and minimizes system overhead.


Scalability

Intel I/OAT provides network acceleration that scales seamlessly across multiple Gigabit Ethernet (GbE) ports. It cost-effectively scales up to eight GbE ports and up to 10GbE, with power and thermal characteristics similar to those of a standard gigabit network adapter. TCP Offload Engine (TOE) solutions, in contrast, require a separate TOE card for each port, resulting in significant cost and thermal challenges for server platforms.


Reliability

Intel I/OAT is a safe and flexible choice because it is tightly integrated into popular operating systems such as Microsoft Windows Server* 2003 and Linux*, avoiding support risks associated with relying on third-party hardware vendors for network stack updates. Intel I/OAT also preserves critical network configurations such as teaming and failover, by maintaining control of the network stack processing within the CPU?where it belongs. This results in reduced support risks for IT departments.
 
VirtualLarry

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,587
10,227
126
That I/O AT stuff sounds like something some marketing drone came up with. It doesn't look like it's a specific real technology at all.
 
taltamir

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
QFT virtual... there is no description of what it actually is, its just some random marketing gibbrish...

I Oat? that process is definitely eating plenty of oatmeal to get all its fiber needs taken care of... talk about well formed stool (the marketing that is)
 
B

BigMoosey74

Member
Dec 18, 2007
92
0
0
Ok so I am wondering the same thing. I was looking up the X3350 vs the Q9xxx series. I found a few things by looking at the data sheets side by side.

Desktop -----Supports Intel® Trusted Execution Technology (Intel® Core?2 Quad processor Q9000 series only) - The Intel® Core?2 Quad processor Q9000 series supports Intel® Trusted Execution Technology (Intel® TXT). Intel® TXT is a key element in Intel's safer computing initiative that defines a set of hardware enhancements that interoperate with an Intel TXT enabled opeating system to help protect against software-based attacks. It creates hardware foundation that builds on Intel's Virtualization Technology to help protect the confidentiality and integrity of data stored/created on the client PC.

Xeon ------does not have this listed.



Xeon ICC_VCCPLL ICC for PLL land 130 mA Ron Buffer On Resistance 7.49(min) 9.16 (max) O
Desk ICC_VCCPLL ICC for PLL land 260 mA Ron Buffer On Resistance 7.5( min) 11( max) O



Also...looking at the Land Assignments, there are a few assignment differences between the two but I have no clue what they mean performance wise, but indeed they are NOT the same cores.



Here is an interesting tid-bit from the data sheets. They say that the Yorkies can support half multipliers up to 13.5 and then in the table that I cannot paste, 14 and then 15 multipliers are supported (that is 333*15 = 5GHz). So the future may hold some higher clocking quad cores. Below is the text from the data sheet on the Xeon cores.



2.9.1 Front Side Bus Clock (BCLK[1:0]) and Processor Clocking

BCLK[1:0] directly controls the FSB interface speed as well as the core frequency of the
processor. As in previous generation processors, the Yorkfield processor core frequency
is a multiple of the BCLK[1:0] frequency. The processor bus ratio multiplier will be set
at its default ratio during manufacturing. It will be possible for engineering samples to
override this feature through the use of Model Specific Registers (MSRs) that are set
through the BIOS. Refer to the Wolfdale Processor Family BIOS Writers Guide (BWG)
for the details about these MSRs and the setting scheme of the core frequency to FSB
multiplier ratios. The Yorkfield processor supports Half Ratios between 7.5 and 13.5,
refer to Table 2-14 for the processor supported ratios.

Some processor engineering samples allow the core frequency to be configured by
writing the desired core clock frequency to system bus ratio into bits [12:8] of the
CLOCK_FLEX_MAX MSR. The BIOS must then initiate a CPU-only reset. After the CPUonly
reset, the processor will begin operating at the new core clock frequency to
system bus ratio. Refer to the Wolfdale Processor Family BIOS Writers Guide (BWG)
regarding details about this feature. Production processors will not support modification
of this register since the required ratio is set during manufacturing. No user
intervention is necessary, and the processor will automatically run at the speed
indicated on the package.



EDIT: In the Land Assignments, I only found 3 that differed from each other...that is out of 775 land assignments so they are quite similar in that aspect.
 
B

BigMoosey74

Member
Dec 18, 2007
92
0
0
Oops, to be clear, I was comparing the X3350 to the Q9000s. It is sort of off topic but parallel that these Xeon cores will probably do just the same as the desktop counter parts. Good call though. The E3110 does have the TXT, it is listed here as well on page 8:
http://download.intel.com/desi.../datashts/31491502.pdf

I just didn't compare the E3110 to the E8400s yet.

There are a few differences in the land assignments. I found 3 assignments on the "right side" grid that varied between the Xeon X3350 and Q9000.

That means that these need a slightly different manufacturing process so they aren't just the same chip that they slap into a Xeon box. I am not sure how that would affect performance but that means they are 99.6% physically identical according to the land assignments (If I caught all of the differences).


Edit:
http://download.intel.com/desi...on/datashts/319005.pdf
page 43, L2, P2, T1 positions are different
 
T

TheJian

Senior member
Oct 2, 2007
220
0
0
quick note
E3110 in stock at ewiz.com for $207 shipped! DAMN. Just bought dads for $229 the other day.
 
T

TheJian

Senior member
Oct 2, 2007
220
0
0
Originally posted by: BigMoosey74
Oops, to be clear, I was comparing the X3350 to the Q9000s. It is sort of off topic but parallel that these Xeon cores will probably do just the same as the desktop counter parts. Good call though. The E3110 does have the TXT, it is listed here as well on page 8:
http://download.intel.com/desi.../datashts/31491502.pdf

I just didn't compare the E3110 to the E8400s yet.

There are a few differences in the land assignments. I found 3 assignments on the "right side" grid that varied between the Xeon X3350 and Q9000.

That means that these need a slightly different manufacturing process so they aren't just the same chip that they slap into a Xeon box. I am not sure how that would affect performance but that means they are 99.6% physically identical according to the land assignments (If I caught all of the differences).


Edit:
http://download.intel.com/desi...on/datashts/319005.pdf
page 43, L2, P2, T1 positions are different
Click to expand...

The question is are they really different or just a bios update will pick up these changes. Are they just changed for recognition in a server board and really functionally no different if supported by a bios (just mapped differently but function the same)? I've seen no performance related differences. In fact some boards even pick up the E3110 as a E8400. I wonder if those docs are out of date too. Intel has to keep track of a huge amout of docs you know. Mistakes have been made before by all tech companies in their spec sheets. Usually quickly fixed but who knows. That doc I pointed to was from 3/20. Clearly they're catching up, I bought 2 of them before that doc date...ROFL. Not saying your wrong just wondering (I mean it is in that doc after all...Just skeptic on my part).
 
child of wonder

child of wonder

Diamond Member
Aug 31, 2006
8,307
176
106
I'm running an E3110 in my Abit IP35-E at 3.6GHz 400x9 at 1.225V (real).

Great performance. My RAM doesn't OC much past 400MHz so I haven't tried going higher.
 
eva2000

eva2000

Member
Jun 21, 2003
126
0
76
1.25v is max E3110 rated vcore not stock..

i.e my E3110 stock vcore on AUTO = 1.056v idle/1.048v load on Asus Blitz Formula. I can get to 3200Mhz at 1.048v prime95 load stable so 3.6ghz at such voltages is doable. my E3110 Q750A158 does 4005mhz at 1.256v and 4203mhz at 1.36v prime95 stable.
 
rockfella79

rockfella79

Member
Nov 16, 2007
147
7
81
U think i can touch 4.5 with 1.4 Vcore on my IP35-E?
Did you try 1.4Vcore? Whats the Vdroop in the BLITZ? I've heard it is one of the least....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom