Why not buy a Xeon instead of i5 or i7?

[know of fence]

Browsing search a bit: the almost Pavlov'ian response to this question is immediately barked as "Xeon for server, Core i7 for gaming". There is an obvious problem with this, because paying for Intel's on-die HD 4000 graphics doesn't make a whole lot of sense for a gaming rig. But review sites don't really do Xeon, you can't find them in the AT Bench tool for instance.

Most motherboards support the socket 1155 Xeon just as well as other Ivy Bridge CPUs(?) and as it turns out you have to not just consult the MB RAM compatibility list, but also check the CPU RAM compatibility list to find suitable memory. With Xeon you have the option to use error correcting memory as well, but you don't have to.

Comparing the i7-3770K to the E3-1270V2, they appear to be exactly the same chip and score exactly alike in benchmarks, the Xeon comes sans integrated Graphics offering a whole bunch of virtualization features instead. Though they may be just as useless to me and you as integrated graphics.
Intel's own comparison: http://ark.intel.com/compare/65727,65523

The "V2" at the end indicates that it's build using 22 nm process. While Xeons with a 5 at the end (E3-1275 V2) also offer integrated graphics.

Here a few more benchmarks I've found: http://www.servethehome.com/intel-xeon-e31270-v2-ivy-bridge-xeon-review-4c8t-35ghz/

Moving down to about a 200$ prices, the differences are more pronounced. Xeon offers 4/8 core Hyperthreading where an i5 doesn't! Hyperthreading being the main differentiator between i5/i7. This definitely should give you more bang for the buck!
A link to a comparison of E3-1230V2 to an i5 at the same clocks.http://ark.intel.com/compare/65516,65732

Unfortunately the Xeon also comes with a so called "heat spreader", which literally puts a lid on overclocking. Would it be too much to hope that server CPUs actually use slightly lower voltages. I guess I'll have to dig for those in the spec-sheets.
Xeons are traditionally multiplier locked, but isn't getting 4/8 HT for 200 bucks preferable to the frustration of Ivy-Bridge overclocking?

 

[Smartazz]

Ivy Bridge overclocking isn't that bad. The general consensus is that they can run at higher temperatures just fine.

 

[Arkaign]

I certainly agree that Xeon > Locked i5/i7 imho, at least when you get the equivalent/better models. Good air cooling and a decent mobo + Ivy i5K/i7K is usually pretty decent, though I had a 3770K that wasn't even stable at stock speeds lol. I'm personally never going to recommend Ivy after that debacle, but happy for those that have had decent luck.

 

[Chiropteran]

They make much sense, these words you write.

If I needed a new computer right now I'd probably get a http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819117286 for my CPU.

 

[IntelEnthusiast]

It really comes down to what you are going to be doing with the system. If you are going to be gaming in which the hyper-threading won't make a differance then it makes more sense to go with the Intel® Core™ i5. Also since Intel Xeon® don't support overclocking if you are trying to go with higher end performance I would say that the Intel Xeon are most likely not going to be the processor to best fit your needs. http://ark.intel.com/compare/65516,65732

 

[aigomorla]

Xeons and the regular cpu's are in short almost identical.

It comes down to small features in the cpu which xeon's have that makes the cpu more suitable in the enterprise environment.

You can find the simular Ivy as the xeon, it will be the exact same, minus the special features which xeons have.

These features will most likely NOT impact any performance, or give u any advantages in performance. As i said, its mostly a enterprise field aspect which the xeon's have.

There were cases back in the C2Q, and Bloomfield / Gulftown days where the Xeons were better, and i7's Xeon's did have a better IMC then typical i7's, which translated to slightly better overclocking with less voltage due to the better IMC.

I dont know if this still applies to the new Xeons tho, as i havent touched Sandy-B outside the 2600K, and i skipped Ivy all together.

 

[know of fence]

The Main difference is, while all Xeons (and core i7's) have a shared L3 cache of 8MB, the core i5 only has 6MB L3 cache. The sole exception to this is a low power 17 W Xeon-L that has a smaller cache. A product brief supplies a good overview of the various SKUs (Product Briefs, page 5). http://www.intel.com/content/www/us...essor-e3-family/XeonE3TechnicalResources.html
Only five of which are of interest (E3-12-20,30,40,70,80), and just 3 models have very comparable prices to the Core counterparts.

In case hyperthreading isn't your thing, the cheapest E3-1220v2, is the only Xeon that comes without it.
Comparison to i5: http://ark.intel.com/compare/65511,65734

Intel has a rather informative website. The Datasheets for voltage and such read pretty much like carbon copies of each other.
Core:http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/CoreTechnicalResources.html
Xeon:http://www.intel.com/content/www/us...essor-e3-family/XeonE3TechnicalResources.html

In case of Sandy Bridge it took a while for chips with disabled graphics to be released (end of January this year), until that day comes for Ivy Bridge the Xeons appear to be a better price proposition (if you have a discrete video card) and a cooler choice, especially if you are looking at the highest Core i7 or the lower Xeons (E3-1220v2, E3-1230v2). Frankly, it's nice to narrow the selection down to just 3 choices (all linked comparisons).

 

[tweakboy]

The only reason you should even be talking about getting a Xeon is if your gonna install 64GB of RAM. End of story. This is why they are expensive. Get a dual socket Xeon but once again 64GB or 128GB of RAM.

All this RAM is a over kill but people with xeon servers that the advantage you can go higher in RAM then todays best conusmer mb. also why do you need all the cores ?

What program you use ?

I know Sonar would love it,,

 

[blastingcap]

It's all about ECC memory for me. Intel has ridiculously bad ECC policies that artificially restrict ECC memory to server motherboards, and very few consumer Intel CPUs can handle ECC. It's just a way for Intel to get businesses to pay a lot more for the same hardware, and as a consumer I hate it.

ECC was less important back when node sizes were huge and total quantity of RAM was a lot less, and thus errors were less frequent, but node sizes have fallen even as capacity has risen, and I don't know if I'll build another computer without ECC ever again. If that means going AMD or Intel Xeon, I'll go for whatever is cheaper with an acceptable power and performance profile. Historically AMD has had much more consumer-friendly ECC memory policies, and I hope they will continue that beyond AM3+. I will not buy FM1 or FM2 or FM-anything so long as they do not support ECC memory.

http://techcrunch.com/2009/11/02/new-study-proves-that-ecc-memory-may-well-be-worth-the-extra-cost/

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Why not? Because overclocking is effectively locked down on s1155 without an unlocked multiplier, and while s2011 does allow BCLK overclocking via straps, the s2011 Xeons do not, so you have to go i7 and not Xeon in order to overclock regardless of whether or not the CPU has unlocked multi.

Basically, Xeons are no longer overclockable and thus don't look very good next to a 4.5+GHz i5/i7 unless your usage is actually niche enough to where you don't need max processing power however still need 3+GHz worth of it but also want as little TDP as possible.

So say a really small form factor gaming HTPC, although I'd wager an overclocked i5 3570K could effectively do the job just as well

 

[tweakboy]

A Xeon will do nothing for games. Games barely use 4 cores.

A Xeon means your doing something very intensive.

What exactly do you do. DAW , or Video Editing or StudioMax warrants more cores.

 

[Smartazz]

A Xeon will do nothing for games. Games barely use 4 cores.

A Xeon means your doing something very intensive.

What exactly do you do. DAW , or Video Editing or StudioMax warrants more cores.

I think he was talking about the 1155 quad core Xeons.

 

[aigomorla]

my gulftown is faster then my xeons.. :O

And my Xeons are in tandum...

The Gulftown is like paris hilton... bling bling hello~
The Xeon is like martha Stewart... efficiency efficiency oh wait.. got busted for tax evasion..

 

[WhoBeDaPlaya]

The Gulftown is like paris hilton... bling bling hello~
The Xeon is like martha Stewart... efficiency efficiency oh wait.. got busted for tax evasion..

 

[know of fence]

To address some of the points that were brought up. If OC'ed, the i5-K is potentially a better machine for games, but it's a lesser CPU overall, due to the lack of Hyper-threading and smaller L3 Cache. It is hard to compare the CPUs with HT to the i5, with the exception of the two K-processors, which are just 0.1 Ghz (3%) apart.

In most benchmarks the i7-3770K(Xeon's evil twin) and the i5-3570K, just show this 3% frequency related performance disparity.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-3770k-i5-3570k_6.html
And only by cherry picking a video related task the Hyper-threading and/or larger cache seem to make a difference (<20%):

For tweaking I just intend to plug in my Watt-meter and screw around with voltage a bit, if possible. Performance per W per $ and idle consumption, those are the things people would care about if they knew better IMHO. More predictable power consumption allows an exactly matching PSU, a 40$ heatsink, an inexpensive MoBo, resulting savings are better spent on SSD or graphics. A much more sensible approach given the CPU product cycles, and suiting to the anti-climactic nature of IB i.e. the focus on TDP reduction of a die shrink.

 

[smangular]

Agreed, I'm also a great fan of ECC and therefore Xeons.
I was just looking at this Xeon and Asus WS Motherboard options.

Currently running a Xeon with 8GB ECC in my ZFS NAS.

 

[harobikes333]

Isn't the Xeon most expensive at the moment? ....:?

 

[know of fence]

It's all about ECC memory for me. [...]
ECC was less important back when node sizes were huge and total quantity of RAM was a lot less, and thus errors were less frequent.
http://techcrunch.com/2009/11/02/new-study-proves-that-ecc-memory-may-well-be-worth-the-extra-cost/

Thank you very much for the link, the article is too eager to jump to conclusions, possibly getting it all wrong, but the study itself is completely to the point. It says nothing about DDR3 but states that between DDR1 and DDR2 things didn't get worse. Also the study doesn't actually use data from non-ECC ram, or says anything in that regard.

From that study I learned that Error Correcting Codes have limits to how many bits they can correct, single bit errors can be two things; either an indication of a hard error, basically a hardware defect, or soft errors which stem from rather random causes. The last paragraph begins with this:

Conclusion 7: Error rates are unlikely to be dominated by soft errors.

ECC is a solution for soft errors, random errors that are in no correlation to anything.
The study shows that most errors are caused from hardware failure, and typically show strong correlations, they happen inside the same DIMM repeatedly and also tend to get worse.
ECC can only handle these hard errors for so long, they can only be fixed by replacing the DIMM.

ECC RAM is a little more expensive, it's a bit slower due to higher latencies and it's not a catch-all solution. Adoption rates are probably adequate to its usefulness (risk vs. reward).

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Isn't the Xeon most expensive at the moment? ....:?

in most cases, yes

however there are a few models that can give you something you can't get out of an i5/i7 and cost less

for instance, the Xeon E5 2620 gives the option of 6c/12t for only ~$400, albeit at a pretty low clockrate

then there are the quadcore Xeons for 1155 like the Xeon E3-1240 V2 and lower that are cheaper yet effectively just as fast as CPUs like the i7 3770 and lower

otherwise, yes, they are more expensive

 

[BurnItDwn]

There are cases where a xeon makes more sense vs an i7. Just like how in the dual core days, a dual core Opteron sometimes made more sense than an Athlon X2.

 

[blastingcap]

Thank you very much for the link, the article is too eager to jump to conclusions, possibly getting it all wrong, but the study itself is completely to the point. It says nothing about DDR3 but states that between DDR1 and DDR2 things didn't get worse. Also the study doesn't actually use data from non-ECC ram, or says anything in that regard.

From that study I learned that Error Correcting Codes have limits to how many bits they can correct, single bit errors can be two things; either an indication of a hard error, basically a hardware defect, or soft errors which stem from rather random causes. The last paragraph begins with this:


ECC is a solution for soft errors, random errors that are in no correlation to anything.
The study shows that most errors are caused from hardware failure, and typically show strong correlations, they happen inside the same DIMM repeatedly and also tend to get worse.
ECC can only handle these hard errors for so long, they can only be fixed by replacing the DIMM.

ECC RAM is a little more expensive, it's a bit slower due to higher latencies and it's not a catch-all solution. Adoption rates are probably adequate to its usefulness (risk vs. reward).

I find that an odd position. Every little bit helps, and there are limits to what you can do to limit hardware failure. It's like changing the lightbulbs to something more efficient. Will it do as much as changing the fridge to a more efficient model? No, but every little bit helps, and ECC doesn't cost much more in terms of performance--or in cost. And the cost delta would be even lower if ECC were standard.

Let me know what you think after a few more node shrinks. What worked before will not work so well in the future. Similar to RAID-5 being sufficient back when arrays were smaller, but it's outdated due to stagnant URE and rising array sizes. Cosmic rays and alpha particles, among other things, aren't getting any smaller even though node sizes are.

 

[Idontcare]

ECC is like driving a car which has an airbag. You won't need it, nor appreciate it, until you have an accident.

Can you drive your car without an air-bag? Yes, millions of people do everyday.

Are you safer with an air-bag installed in your car? No...unless you happen to be in an accident, in that case the answer is yes (except under very rare flukey situations).

Are there even safer ways to travel? Yes. If safety truly is your number one priority then traveling by vehicle with an airbag is still going to be unacceptable.

But if you should happen to find yourself traveling by car and you do happen to find yourself involved in a head-on collision then you are probably going to wish your car has an air-bag.

ECC ram in a consumer box is like that. It is completely unnecessary until it is needed, then you'll probably really wish you had some all along.

 

[aigomorla]

ECC is like driving a car which has an airbag. You won't need it, nor appreciate it, until you have an accident.

Can you drive your car without an air-bag? Yes, millions of people do everyday.

Are you safer with an air-bag installed in your car? No...unless you happen to be in an accident, in that case the answer is yes (except under very rare flukey situations).

Are there even safer ways to travel? Yes. If safety truly is your number one priority then traveling by vehicle with an airbag is still going to be unacceptable.

But if you should happen to find yourself traveling by car and you do happen to find yourself involved in a head-on collision then you are probably going to wish your car has an air-bag.

ECC ram in a consumer box is like that. It is completely unnecessary until it is needed, then you'll probably really wish you had some all along.

actually i wouldnt call it an airbag...
And air bag is post accident recovery... not pre accident.

Id say ECC is more like along the lines of a Accident mitigation system... the kind which steps on your breaks for you, to try to avoid the accident at the start, more so then a protection of an Air Bag.

 

[blastingcap]

anti-lock brakes? better tires?

 

[bunnyfubbles]

There are cases where a xeon makes more sense vs an i7. Just like how in the dual core days, a dual core Opteron sometimes made more sense than an Athlon X2.

Opterons were far more clear cut though

I remember buying an Opteron 165 before the X2s were even on the market, and all for a miniscule entry price because it was only a 1.8GHz part that could then be overclocked to make up for that otherwise low base clockspeed

in this instance the Xeons only make sense if you're simply not going to overclock and really don't want the iGPU