The Gold Enthousiast Core 2 Duo mainboard theory?

[puntloos]

Gents,

My first post.. but I'll try to not be too n00b, kay?

The PC world is in an exciting time currently, vista is coming (in itself boring) and it brings directx10, which in turn requires a new videocard. Getting a new videocard usually also requires a new mainboard to take full advantage of that (pci x16), and lo and behold, there are new MBs, that support new CPU's to go with that.. New Ram.. New SATA (2.0) spec.. It really seems that the time to do a full system upgrade is now (maybe more like 'March', but OK)

Now here's the thing. From my point of view, I love to go 'all out' with upgrades, and not skimp on details. On the flipside, buying the very very best money can buy is probably a waste, especially considering the fact that the software industry is currently playing the catch-up game (and losing, for now). Frankly, from what I've read, assuming all things being equal, getting a dualsocket (xenon cloverton) system will get you 0% speed increase in most games, compared to a kentsfield at the same CPU speed. Games don't multi-core that well yet, and it will be a while until this changes.

Additionally, a SLI G8800GTX (or crossfire R600, for that matter) is probably overkill for all current games unless you plan to play at 2000x2000 resolutions.

Getting to my point:
I think the ideal motherboard for me would be a dual-socket xeon clovertown mainboard, with dual pci-x16 (fully wired, of course! not some x16 socket that can only handle x4 speeds or something). Put a single clovertown in there, and a single R600/8800. That way I can both double my graphics and my cpu when the need arises.

The question is:

Does this mainboard exist, or will it exist soon, and/or am I missing something in my whole theory?

[edit]
additional thoughts:
- A clovertown dualsocket mainboard can do single-cpu right? [not answered]
- Can such mainboards support conroes or kentsfields? Perhaps viable to go for that path [not answered]
- Are there dualsocket mainboards out there that support a full pci x16? [not answered]
- Will a MacPro be suitable? (sadly they seem to only ship them with 2 sockets filled) [not answered]
- Is PCI-E x16 with x8 signalling not a bottleneck for current (8800/R600) videocards? [not answered]
- taking something (cpu/gfx) out (and throwing it away) is Bad, 'mkay? [true! ]

[editorial]
Ill let you guys know in this first post when I personally feel the topic/subject has been answered sufficiently. If you see no such message here, add your valuable insights

 

[dguy6789]

Do you have an idea as to how much money you want to spend in total for your new pc? It would probably be best to get a mainboard that supports quad core rather than a dual socket board.

 

[puntloos]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
Do you have an idea as to how much money you want to spend in total for your new pc?

Just assume 'money is no object, insanity is'. If I buy something I need to actually sense (without a FPS counter tweaked to 0.1fps accuracy) that it's better than the cheaper option. Also, of course, providing myself with a viable upgrade path (i.e. empty pci-e and cpu slots) are worth an initial investment of more money (or even slightly lower speed)

It would probably be best to get a mainboard that supports quad core rather than a dual socket board.

Well, the board I would get will always support quadcore, the question is, do I want to be able to plug in an ADDITIONAL quadcore or not. (i.e. the choice between kentsfield (Q6xxx) and Clovertown (X53xx) cpu's)

 

[Roguestar]

If you want value for money, get a decent 680i/650i/P965 motherboard that supports Quad Core, and drop a 4-core in when down the line you've had enough (!!) of your Core 2 Duo.

 

[trOver]

Originally posted by: Roguestar
If you want value for money, get a decent 680i/650i/P965 motherboard that supports Quad Core, and drop a 4-core in when down the line you've had enough (!!) of your Core 2 Duo.

agreed

 

[puntloos]

Originally posted by: Roguestar
If you want value for money, get a decent 680i/650i/P965 motherboard that supports Quad Core, and drop a 4-core in when down the line you've had enough (!!) of your Core 2 Duo.

Yeah but there you're already implying that I basically throw away a CPU (and maybe a mainboard). MAYBE this will turn out to be more economically viable than the alternative, but as said, just plugging in another identical CPU to almost double my capacity makes more sense from a 'pragmatic' point of view. Wether or not in the end it will simply be cheaper to throw stuff away is.. well part of the question I pose here. What will be better:

1/ Buy a quadcore dualsocket now and plug in new cpu/gfx (that will be cheap by then) to double my systemspeed when I start to lag behind
2/ Buy a conroe/kentsfield and replace my mainboard for a faster DDR3/SATA3/PCI-E x32 system when they arrive. (ditto for the GFX solutions)

..

 

[Roguestar]

If you're too averse to throwing out a CPU, buy an E6300 now and overclock it, then down the line drop in a Q6600 or whatever is the latest and greatest quad core. You're not spending much on the processor that you'll be "wasting", then, and don't forget you can always eBay it when you're done.

 

[puntloos]

Originally posted by: Roguestar
If you're too averse to throwing out a CPU, buy an E6300 now and overclock it, then down the line drop in a Q6600 or whatever is the latest and greatest quad core. You're not spending much on the processor that you'll be "wasting", then, and don't forget you can always eBay it when you're done.

Well:

1/ That solution would still be throwing out something.
2/ In my opinion any secondhand hardware yields only a marginal profit, often not really worth the effort
3/ I (and my family) own quite a few systems, and we have a tradition of 'passing down' hardware. This hypothetical E6300 would be useless to my family or my linux server etc.
4/ An E6300 would be a lot slower than a clovertown, this would definately be noticable currently. Buying a more expensive CPU now would only add to my points #1, #2 #3

Anyway - I realise that maybe the 'throw away' procedure in the end gives me more performance for my buck, but I would love to see some figures to back that claim up.

 

[Roguestar]

So buy the E6300 and overclock it? Mine does 3.2Ghz without problems and that's faster than a stock X6800.

 

[puntloos]

Originally posted by: Roguestar
So buy the E6300 and overclock it? Mine does 3.2Ghz without problems and that's faster than a stock X6800.

Yeah, but not than a stock Q6800 (or similar, not sure if its called that), thereby dropping that option outside my 'money is no object' clause.

Seriously though, I'm not against overclocking, and maybe I will actually go that path, so you have a very valid point, however purely for the discussion's sake, it would be easier to stick the overclocking option into a 'sidebar' and primarily discuss 'stock speed everything' while comparing stuff

 

[StopSign]

"Getting good value" and "not overclocking" contradict each other.

 

[puntloos]

Originally posted by: StopSign
"Getting good value" and "not overclocking" contradict each other.

True, but my original primary goal was 'max performance', secondary is 'value' which can be gained by things like stability, silence (very relevant in overclocking), upgradability, future-proofness etc.

 

[StopSign]

Max performance = getting a low/mid range processor and overclocking the hell out of it. This gets you excellent performance while retaining good value.

Stability = Stock is stable, but good overclocks are just as stable

Silence = A good quiet HSF/cooling setup

Upgradability = Ability to dispose of your current components, which is directly related to how much you're selling the parts for, which is directly related to how much you originally bought the parts for

Future-proofness = How far are you thinking ahead? How often do you plan on upgrading? i.e. Don't get the QX6700 later this year when a bunch of new quad-cores are about to be released. Etc.

Upgradability and future-proofness are very closely related. The less you think ahead, the easier it is to upgrade.

 

[JAG87]

www.falcon-nw.com

Thats all I can say to people with too much money that make these retarded threads.

 

[puntloos]

Originally posted by: JAG87
www.falcon-nw.com

That site doesn't even have the xeons, and only one - the slowest - quad cpu. Nice suggestion.

Thats all I can say to people with too much money that make these retarded threads.

Translation: you are jealous of people with more disposable income than you, but since you can't say that out loud you come up with.. drumroll.. retarded! w00t. Now mommy told you to clean your room, so upstairs young man, let the grownups talk, ok?

Next!

 

[Conky]

Originally posted by: puntloos

Originally posted by: JAG87
www.falcon-nw.com

That site doesn't even have the xeons, and only one - the slowest - quad cpu. Nice suggestion.

Thats all I can say to people with too much money that make these retarded threads.

Translation: you are jealous of people with more disposable income than you, but since you can't say that out loud you come up with.. drumroll.. retarded! w00t. Now mommy told you to clean your room, so upstairs young man, let the grownups talk, ok?

Next!

WWYBYWB? :roll:

 

[JAG87]

want me to take pics of the rig thats beside me?

its everything you ever dreamed of and will never have. why? because you make threads like these.

people who make threads like these will never have top notch computers. and even if they do at one point (because of incredibly stupid amounts they are willing to spend) it wont stay top notch for very long.

if you want to learn something, try and listen. my suggestion is sarcastic, in the sense that if you have enough money to blow (like you claim you do) you might as well get the best. and the best is falcon northwest.

call them up and they will gladly make the best possible computer with all the specs you give them. get a nice airbrush paint job too, dont forget. they will reach down into your pockets, but thats not important to you it seems.



So instead of making retarded threads and I quote:

"Frankly, from what I've read, assuming all things being equal, getting a dualsocket (xenon cloverton) system will get you 0% speed increase in most games, compared to a kentsfield at the same CPU speed."

"I think the ideal motherboard for me would be a dual-socket xeon clovertown mainboard, with dual pci-x16 (fully wired, of course! not some x16 socket that can only handle x4 speeds or something). Put a single clovertown in there, and a single R600/8800. That way I can both double my graphics and my cpu when the need arises."



for the last time, if you have cash to blow, falcon is the way. if you have any brains at all, do it yourself and do it smart. not with server parts and server motherboards.

 

[DavidoFoo]

Originally posted by: puntloos

Originally posted by: JAG87
www.falcon-nw.com

That site doesn't even have the xeons, and only one - the slowest - quad cpu. Nice suggestion.

Thats all I can say to people with too much money that make these retarded threads.

Translation: you are jealous of people with more disposable income than you, but since you can't say that out loud you come up with.. drumroll.. retarded! w00t. Now mommy told you to clean your room, so upstairs young man, let the grownups talk, ok?

Next!

You come off as extremely conceited and whiny. Get off your high horse and actually listen to what these guys are saying.

 

[CurseTheSky]

If you want to spend a ton of money, go for it. Buy the best computer possible. It's your loss in a year when DDR3 / Bearlake / faster quad cores / better GPUS come out. Nothing stays "the best" for long. The computer in my signature cost me a good $3,000, and even I know it'll be a hunk of junk in a year or two.

If you want a good performing computer that won't make you regret the purchase twelve months down the road, listen to what these guys are saying. I'd hard to find a game that will use more power than an overclocked E6600 (even E6300), two 8800GTX's (or even one), and 2GB of DDR2. The super-high-level-premium components are basically for A) benchmarks (NOT games), B) rich people, and C) bragging rights. They're NOT ment for your every day desktop computer.

If you want to spend $5-10k on a computer and are too worried to overclock it, don't even bother building it. Buy an Alienware and Falcon and get it completely custom. I'll sit back and enjoy the same performance at half the price.

 

[secretanchitman]

Originally posted by: CurseTheSky
If you want to spend a ton of money, go for it. Buy the best computer possible. It's your loss in a year when DDR3 / Bearlake / faster quad cores / better GPUS come out. Nothing stays "the best" for long. The computer in my signature cost me a good $3,000, and even I know it'll be a hunk of junk in a year or two.

If you want a good performing computer that won't make you regret the purchase twelve months down the road, listen to what these guys are saying. I'd hard to find a game that will use more power than an overclocked E6600 (even E6300), two 8800GTX's (or even one), and 2GB of DDR2. The super-high-level-premium components are basically for A) benchmarks (NOT games), B) rich people, and C) bragging rights. They're NOT ment for your every day desktop computer.

If you want to spend $5-10k on a computer and are too worried to overclock it, don't even bother building it. Buy an Alienware and Falcon and get it completely custom. I'll sit back and enjoy the same performance at half the price.

you stole the words right out of my mouth. this man knows what hes talking about, along with the rest of the replies in this thread.

besides, why would you want xeons instead of core 2 duos? not much difference...

get an E6600 and overclock it. in a couple of years (or months in your case), buy an E6650/E6750/E6850 or even a quad-core and overclock that. get an evga video card so you have the ability to "step-up" whenever a new gpu comes out (although it has to be within 3 months from date of purchase).

and so on and so forth.

 

[StopSign]

Originally posted by: puntloos

Originally posted by: JAG87
www.falcon-nw.com

That site doesn't even have the xeons, and only one - the slowest - quad cpu. Nice suggestion.

Thats all I can say to people with too much money that make these retarded threads.

Translation: you are jealous of people with more disposable income than you, but since you can't say that out loud you come up with.. drumroll.. retarded! w00t. Now mommy told you to clean your room, so upstairs young man, let the grownups talk, ok?

Next!

Xeon? Are you building a server?

 

[puntloos]

-sigh-

Originally posted by: JAG87
Blablabla - brag - blablabla - you suck - blablabla - retarded - blabla - any brains at all then do it right yada yada

I hope you don't mind the above recap, but I don't think I missed much, you still haven't actually said anything constructive like - oh - what 'doing it right' actually means, in your opinion.

But to re-iterate, I did NOT post this topic to present to you all with my omniscient godly wisdom, I have tried to present my current line of thinking regarding high-end gaming PCs that are a worthwhile semi-long-term investment and asked for comments, suggestions. If I'm wrong, tell me so and TELL ME WHY, just hurling some insults without backing anything up is.. a waste of your and my time and indeed I will treat you with an attitude that reflects that. Yes, I have money I am willing to spend on a high-end machine, no I don't care to be the very best for 3 seconds only to see my system be overtaken by cheaper rigs unless I keep spending like an idiot. I am well aware of the pitfalls trying to get on top of the world in computing.

As for the fact that 'xeons' are 'server hardware', that is true up until a certain point. Specifically, what makes a board a server board? 20 SATA ports and 12 buffered DIMM slots? Built-in scsi raid controllers? A specific chipset? Price? Brand? I have seen plenty of 'server boards' that do not require special memory, special hardware, have no extra scsi controllers etc.

What makes a CPU a server CPU? Are the xeons I am talking about tuned towards server performance which hurts the gaming performance? Are gaming and serving mutually incompatible goals? Or is the xeon just a kentsfield that is capable of dual-socketing?

So let's do some math.

Assume we both buy a Geforce 8800 and some side-compontents for $2000. Assume your CPU + MB will be kentsfield (quadcore) and mine will be clovertown. The price premium of a clovertown over a kentsfield CPU is about $300. The price premium of a dualsocket board over a singlesocket one is $200. The rest of the components are identical.

So assume, today I pay $500 more for my system than you.

- In 1 year, an enthousiast needs to replace his mainboard to remain 'top of the bill', and assuming he only changes CPU and Mainboard, he will indeed pay $1000 again for the then-top CPU with its paired mainboard, effectively doubling (if he's lucky) his speed.
- 'My' rig allows me to drop in a second clovertown, in theory nearly doubling CPU speed. This second clovertown will probably be $350 by then. FSB or other Bottlenecks? Perhaps. Do tell.

After 1 year, after upgrading, we will then again be at the 'same speed', the difference though, is $150 in my advantage. Then you sell your old gear.. and we come out.. about equal?

As for overclocking, in my experience, the absolute clock speed you can reach with a certain CPU type ('conroe' for example) is always the same. Assuming a bit of luck, and of course generalizing a bit, both the E6600 and the E6300 will in the end be able to run at the same speed. Percentage-wise the E6300 is a better overclocker, and better value for money, but assuming we both overclock sensibly, the end speed is the same. Is overclocking a good idea then? Well, maybe. It is first of all a bit of a gamble what your particular E6300 can reach. Also, raising FSB, PCI speed etc might cause instability elsewhere. You might even need memory with bigger tolerances for whacky speed settings. Worth it? Perhaps, but this 'added worth' vs 'added risks' is something that can be expressed in raw $$$. Does it -really- add up or are people staring blind at the 'my 2Ghz can run 50% faster and your 2.6Ghz can only run 33% faster'.

In the end I just like to have OPTIONS. If it is so amazingly obvious that xeon is server only, then just point me to some resource proving that, and I'll shut up. Until that time I just enjoy weighing pros and cons, doing some funny math, seeing different perspectives, playing a bit of the ol' "what if" game, and in the end making my mind up based on facts, some prognosis, some guesses, but not based on someone calling me retarded and that's that.

 

[StopSign]

Originally posted by: puntloos
If it is so amazingly obvious that xeon is server only, then just point me to some resource proving that, and I'll shut up.

The fact that Xeons don't use socket 775 make them a non-mainstream route to take.

Taken straight from Intel's site:
Quad-Core Intel® Xeon® Processor 5300 Sequence

The industry's first quad-core processor for mainstream servers provides breakthrough performance and capabilities for the ultimate in powerful, dense and energy efficient servers. With the Quad-Core Intel® Xeon® processor 5300 series you get breakthrough performance ? up to 50% greater than the industry-leading Dual-Core Intel Xeon processor in the same power envelope¹ and up to 150% better than the competition².

Intel® processor-based entry-level servers build in proven performance, manageability, and reliability, allowing you to spend more time on moving your business forward.

Also, dropping in a second CPU does not double performance, just like how the move from single core to dual core didn't double performance. And just like how SLI/Crossfire does not double performance. Just like how PC3200 -> PC2-6400 does not double memory performance. The reason is that although the specifications double on paper, your applications must be designed to take advantage of these increased specifications. Server applications are optimized to utilize all the processing power available, while games are not. Games are NOT optimized for an 8-core dual-CPU system and will not be in the near future. When you drop in your second Clovertown, your performance will not increase one bit because it's not even using your first Clovertown to its full potential.

Have you read reviews for server CPUs? They don't benchmark with games. They benchmark with server and workstation applications that require a massive amount of raw CPU power (i.e. render farming).

 

[puntloos]

Originally posted by: StopSign

Originally posted by: puntloos
If it is so amazingly obvious that xeon is server only, then just point me to some resource proving that, and I'll shut up.

The fact that Xeons don't use socket 775 make them a non-mainstream route to take.

And this fact will indeed mean a 'price premium'. It is at least conceivable that there will be fewer server boards/cpus than consumer boards so thats part of economics. I did account for that.

Also, dropping in a second CPU does not double performance, just like how the move from single core to dual core didn't double performance. And just like how SLI/Crossfire does not double performance. Just like how PC3200 -> PC2-6400 does not double memory performance. The reason is that although the specifications double on paper, your applications must be designed to take advantage of these increased specifications. Server applications are optimized to utilize all the processing power available, while games are not. Games are NOT optimized for an 8-core dual-CPU system and will not be in the near future. When you drop in your second Clovertown, your performance will not increase one bit because it's not even using your first Clovertown to its full potential.

That WAS true. It is becoming decidedly untrue.

Source Engine goes multi-core
Unreal 3 engine will see significant gains on multicore systems

Also, I've been speaking to multiple top gaming developers (okay, 3, but one of them is high up in the chain of Gears of War) and they all confirm that multicore is where it's at, and it will be Soon(tm)

As one example, it would be very efficient to build one AI thread per 'enemy' Once you have more than 3 active enemies onscreen/near you will start to notice more cores.

Plus, let us not forget that we are comparing a 'enthousiast' rig with a 'server' rig (for the lack of better terms) and it is quite doubtful that in one year the CPU/FSB speeds of the 'current best' system have jumped 100%.

Have you read reviews for server CPUs? They don't benchmark with games. They benchmark with server and workstation applications that require a massive amount of raw CPU power (i.e. render farming).

I have read those reviews. Yet the question noone seems to be asking is WHY NOT. One reason seems to be that many server boards have lacking graphics card 'connectors' but I have seen plenty of server mainboards that in fact do have at least one pci-E x16 slot.

Additionally, for me it is true that currently I would not mind actually being able to encode mp3's/movies/whatever while playing games, and when my 'main machine' finally gets to retire, i usually 'degrade' it to be my 'home server' which it would still be eminently suitable for.

 

[Minitank]

Tired of all the flames, envy, and sarcasm? Sign up at overclockers? forum. They do not tolerate all this nonsense. Check out my thread under ?ceoman? at the General Hardware section. http://www.ocforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=8