Should Intel release unlocked E5 Xeons sometime in the next 3 years?

[cbn]

The issue is the same unless there are no SKUs with the same amount of cores.

That doesn't have to be a problem. All Intel would have to do is limit the unlocked mutiplier to the highest bin of any particular core configuration.

 

[Lil'John]

Voted no for several reasons already mentioned above:

• Games don't take advantage of many cores
• Gamers as a whole are cheap so a $5k+ overclocking Xeon won't sell.
• Standard workstation and server loads require stability, OC doesn't provide it.

That said, I've been on the fence with buying dual Xeon E5-2695 v3 just for giggles since I get a good discount on them. I just haven't found a good use yet: "My gaming machine has 28 cores and 56 threads"

 

[cbn]

Forget "should they", why WOULD they? What would be the value to Intel? Who is presently not buying Xeons that would suddenly start buying Xeons if they were multiplier unlocked? Xeons are doing so well in the server space because they offer excellent perf/watt. Instead of overclocking a Xeon and getting worse perf/watt but more absolute performance, why wouldn't you just throw more Xeons at the problem and keep your perf/watt up?

For desktop performance per watt is not as important as in a data center.

And folks use E5s for their desktops.

For example, If you browse for video editing machines you'll run across builds having two 10 core+ E5 Xeons, etc.

 

[Burpo]

http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/xeon/xeon-e5-v3-overview-animation.html

http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/xeon/xeon-e5-v3-performance-animation.html

No way intel will ever "Unlock" their Server CPUs , so John Q Public can muck up what has taken years to design/implement.

 

[ShintaiDK]

That doesn't have to be a problem. All Intel would have to do is limit the unlocked mutiplier to the highest bin of any particular core configuration.

Did you check the prices on those SKUs, and then consider who and how many would buy them? You will find that the 5960X is suddenly dirt cheap.

Again, you are trying to make something with no buyers.

 

[cbn]

Did you check the prices on those SKUs, and then consider who and how many would buy them? You will find that the 5960X is suddenly dirt cheap.

One question I have wondering about is the value of an high core count, high TDP Xeon (maybe Skylake E5 Xeon which will have AVX 512) vs. one or more Nvidia cards (Quadro, Titan X) for various non-gaming tasks (including video editing)

You know those Quadro cards aren't cheap either.

http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/03/n...t-monster-the-quadro-m6000-pro-graphics-card/

Nvidia has lifted the curtains on a new family of cutting-edge Quadro graphics cards at GTC 2015; including the super high-end Quadro M6000. This 12GB $5000 monster almost makes the Titan X look like an integrated graphics card. The specs are legit bananas.

Nvidia’s new Quadro range is aimed squarely at professional designers and video editors working at the enterprise level.

 

[ShintaiDK]

One question I have wondering about is the value of an high core count, high TDP Xeon (maybe Skylake E5 Xeon which will have AVX 512) vs. one or more Nvidia cards (Quadro, Titan X) for various non-gaming tasks (including video editing)

You know those Quadro cards aren't cheap either.

http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/03/n...t-monster-the-quadro-m6000-pro-graphics-card/

Depends on the actual workload. A lot of workloads is useless to try on GPUs.

 

[Idontcare]

What is an unlocked XEON? Not a XEON.

 

[guskline]

No, buy a 5960x like I did.

 

[guskline]

What is an unlocked XEON? Not a XEON.

LOVE THIS QUOTE!:thumbsup:

 

[cbn]

What is an unlocked XEON? Not a XEON.

That is not true.

Xeon W3680 had an unlocked multiplier, but Intel did not advertise it.

http://forums.evga.com/W3680-Xeon-unlocked-multiplier-m1330735.aspx

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117242 (notice newegg reviewers report the unlocked multiplier)

http://www.overclockers.com/forums/...80X-vs-W3680?p=7342781&viewfull=1#post7342781 (some more reports of unlocked multiplier, see post #17)

 

[Burpo]

Those days are long gone.. Performance has increased to the point that Intel has pretty much locked everything down that's used for precision computing.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Those days are long gone.. Performance has increased to the point that Intel has pretty much locked everything down that's used for precision computing.

How so?

 

[Burpo]

He's comparing X58.. Intels break through with QPI back then was huge, but it wasn't long before intel made changes again and X58 with Bclk overclocking was discontinued. Base clock was pretty much locked there after.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Just thinking on how it was connected to precision computing

 

[cbn]

He's comparing X58.. Intels break through with QPI back then was huge, but it wasn't long before intel made changes again and X58 with Bclk overclocking was discontinued. Base clock was pretty much locked there after.

LGA 1366 Xeons were overclockable via bclk, but that particular LGA 1366 Xeon I mentioned also had a unlocked multiplier.

So that sets a precedent for Xeons having unlocked multipliers whether or not bclk overclocking is possible or not.

All that stuff aside though, I think it is important to recognize not all folks using Xeons have the same mission critical reliability needs as a data center. So trying to mandate locked multipliers on those folks makes no sense to me. It isn't as if having an unlocked multiplier Xeon makes the processor incompatible with a non-overclocking SuperMicro motherboard.

If concerns about branding or image are really an issue the unlocked E5 Xeon can be unmarked as the W3680 Xeon was or how the G3258 Pentium is today. No K suffix is needed on the SKU.

 

[Burpo]

Intel doesn't "try to mandate", they just do (for Xeons).. If you want unlocked, buy the less expensive i7.

 

[Essence_of_War]

Xeon W3680 had an unlocked multiplier, but Intel did not advertise it.

I think Idontcare was using the phrase figuratively.

The fact that there exists a multiplier unlocked Xeon in the wild is not really relevant to the point that Idontcare is trying to make.

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

What is an unlocked XEON? Not a XEON.

Or in pictures:

Take this beautiful piece of engineering:

Insist that Ferrari Intel allow User Modifications Overclocking.

Perform Crazy modifications "improvements".

Great, look at my overclocked, "Ferrari" !

 

[pitz]

No, absolutely not. The Xeon brand is synonymous with stability and reliability. The last thing the brand needs is people overclocking it, whether deliberately, or as enthusiasts, and then such processors being resold with subtle overclocking damage.

Perhaps there's room for additional "enthusiast" i7 SKU's which incorporate the higher-spec Xeon features such as additional cores, but please leave the Xeon brand alone!

 

[jpiniero]

Lest you forget about the 'unofficial' 4.4 Ghz Xeon Intel sold (X5698, Quad Core with 2 cores fused off).

 

[cbn]

I think Idontcare was using the phrase figuratively.

The fact that there exists a multiplier unlocked Xeon in the wild is not really relevant to the point that Idontcare is trying to make.

I don't understand how an unlocked multiplier is something that is essential to the operation of a Xeon. Installing an unlocked chip into a locked down non-overclocking board should result in the same operation as a locked chip.

Features that are essential to operation of a Xeon are things like ECC RAM, higher RAM ram capacity, etc.

Here is a better analogy:

What is a Xeon without ECC? Not a Xeon

 

[cbn]

No, absolutely not. The Xeon brand is synonymous with stability and reliability. The last thing the brand needs is people overclocking it, whether deliberately, or as enthusiasts, and then such processors being resold with subtle overclocking damage.

Damage can occur all sorts of ways. Locking down multipliers will not guarantee all used chips in the wild will be in pristine condition.

 

[jihe]

Overclocking on xeons is pretty pointless, you can't even run all 18 cores at max turbo because of heat.

 

[cbn]

Overclocking on xeons is pretty pointless, you can't even run all 18 cores at max turbo because of heat.

The heat could easily be tamed with watercooling.

And looking forward I think overclocking will become increasingly important on the large die Xeons in order to extract their maximum performance. This especially if the top SKUs continue to be designed with performance per watt (for data centers) as the primary target.

Another thing to consider about the large die Xeons is how the reduction in power at each node affects the 1C turbo clock and base clock delta. My guess is that we will see that delta increase if Intel continues to push the maximum amount of cores possible per die.