Xeon X5650 or Core i5 4570?

[Hi-Fi Man]

Which CPU would you use in a build used for general use/gaming/medium productivity/emulation/etc.?

The Xeon would go in an Asus P6T SE and the i5 would go in an Asrock h97 Pro4. The Xeon would also have 12GB of RAM vs 8GB for the i5.

The additional PCIe lanes look on the P6T look useful for PCIe SSDs in the future but the i5 has some additional instructions. Choices.

Comments, opinions, concerns, etc. let me know!

 

[Arachnotronic]

I'd go with the i5, but if you plan to overclock that X5650, it may be the better deal.

 

[Hi-Fi Man]

I have/do, 4GHz is very easy on it.

 

[Arachnotronic]

I have/do, 4GHz is very easy on it.

Sounds like you already own the Xeon. Probably worth saving the money and using it until it's too slow...then upgrade when needed

 

[Hi-Fi Man]

I own both lol that's why I ask!

 

[ClockHound]

You own both, but can only build one? Why not build one now and one later and do your own comparo, write a stunning review and get a full time gig at the recently flush-with-cash Anandtech?

If you do much render/video work, the overclocked Xeon will be much faster than the square core Haswell. Probably better for VM with the extra RAM and cores. For gaming, who cares?

Oh...I get it. You've already made your choice and you want to see if we agree with it...They're both horrible. Sell them both and get a tablet with 8 cores. :biggrin:

 

[Arachnotronic]

I own both lol that's why I ask!

Well then...I'd go with the i5

 

[Arachnotronic]

Oh...I get it. You've already made your choice and you want to see if we agree with it...They're both horrible. Sell them both and get a tablet with 8 cores. :biggrin:

LITTLE.LITTLE is the new trend, I hear. #octacoremagic

 

[Hi-Fi Man]

You own both, but can only build one? Why not build one now and one later and do your own comparo, write a stunning review and get a full time gig at the recently flush-with-cash Anandtech?

I'm an awful writer unfortunately.

My mind isn't decided and I only need one machine. The i5 has better single-thread performance whist the Xeon has better multi-thread performance but I don't know what's going to be more important for future programs...

P.S. an 8-core tablet sounds dirty

 

[ClockHound]

I'm an awful writer unfortunately.

My mind isn't decided and I only need one machine. The i5 has better single-thread performance whist the Xeon has better multi-thread performance but I don't know what's going to be more important for future programs...

P.S. an 8-core tablet sounds dirty

Screw the writing then. Just make awesome graphs with lots of flames and stuff.

FYI - you posted this in the CPU AND Overclocking Forum. Can't have one without the other. :biggrin:

Sure, the single thread performance Haswell is higher, but actually using a non-overclockable stock system would make me feel old, a borderline Apple prospect and a betrayer of the tweaker ethos.

Haven't used a non-overclocked system in over 10 years and it's something I'll look forward to only in my dotage. Stock clocks and porridge.

If this was a 4790K vs the Xeon, it would be something worth pondering. However, in this case, it's no contest - the X58 has great legs - overclocking the 5650 will keep you young, dirty and tweaky.

At best the 4570 would let you feel hip for a 6-9 months, then the shine will fade and the ugly wrinkles of stock clock remorse will annoy until you can only use it to browse online for 8 core tablets.

 

[Burpo]

"the shine will fade and the ugly wrinkles of stock clock remorse will annoy until you can only use it to browse online for 8 core tablets"
You should be the writer ClockHound.. I love your posts! So descriptive! lol

 

[sonitravel09]

I can say that Xeon beats the i5. But for gaming, the i5 would be your pick.

 

[Makaveli]

I can say that Xeon beats the i5. But for gaming, the i5 would be your pick.

But once you crank the res up the bottleneck will now be on the gpu.

With GPU limitations you may find gaming to be fairly close between the two even with the huge lead in single threaded performance.

 

[Hi-Fi Man]

Well spoken ClockHound!

I ended up going with the i5 just due to SATA III and the super fast boot times this UEFI board gives me. 7 second boot times are awesome! If I could have that Xeon on a UEFI board with SATA III I would be golden.

Good news though, one of my graphics design buddies needed a cheap system so I offered him the Xeon, motherboard, GTX 650, 3x2GB CL8 1GHz DIMMS, corsair 750 watt PSU, and possibly an HDD for $500, so I think I made out well.

RIP westemere though!

 

[escrow4]

Screw the writing then. Just make awesome graphs with lots of flames and stuff.

FYI - you posted this in the CPU AND Overclocking Forum. Can't have one without the other. :biggrin:

Sure, the single thread performance Haswell is higher, but actually using a non-overclockable stock system would make me feel old, a borderline Apple prospect and a betrayer of the tweaker ethos.

Haven't used a non-overclocked system in over 10 years and it's something I'll look forward to only in my dotage. Stock clocks and porridge.

If this was a 4790K vs the Xeon, it would be something worth pondering. However, in this case, it's no contest - the X58 has great legs - overclocking the 5650 will keep you young, dirty and tweaky.

At best the 4570 would let you feel hip for a 6-9 months, then the shine will fade and the ugly wrinkles of stock clock remorse will annoy until you can only use it to browse online for 8 core tablets.

On the contrary a 4690 all cores turbo would run at 3.9GHz. Overclocking is even more niche than it used to be. Intel's focus is mobile and iGPU. And all you'd really gain is a few more minimum FPS. X58 is obsolete, I'd take the modern platform anyday over a creaky old has been.

 

[Blue_Max]

...sorry, double post.

 

[Blue_Max]

On the contrary a 4690 all cores turbo would run at 3.9GHz. Overclocking is even more niche than it used to be. Intel's focus is mobile and iGPU. And all you'd really gain is a few more minimum FPS. X58 is obsolete, I'd take the modern platform anyday over a creaky old has been.

I've been endlessly debating the same thing... and coming to the same conclusion. For example, I was just on the Dolphin Emulator page, where it explained its software is all about the IPC and how the newer the Intel processor, the better. My old i7-920 is only about 1/2 the speed of a spanky new i5-4690k!

Admittedly, lots of games are going to be more video card limited, but when single-core performance matters the new stuff just kicks arse. Getting USB3, SATA6, SRT, and all the other new technologies... well... the computing experience becomes much nicer.

...of course, there's something just plain jelly about seeing 12 threads on the task manager window.

 

[ClockHound]

On the contrary a 4690 all cores turbo would run at 3.9GHz. Overclocking is even more niche than it used to be. Intel's focus is mobile and iGPU. And all you'd really gain is a few more minimum FPS. X58 is obsolete, I'd take the modern platform anyday over a creaky old has been.

Read the OP. He has a 4570, not a 4690 - and either will get spanked hard by an overclocked 5650 for render/video work.

And you have no idea what creaky old is, you little whippersnapper - Don't make me bring the LN2 300A over there to pee on your carpet. :biggrin:

 

[MongGrel]

Screw the writing then. Just make awesome graphs with lots of flames and stuff.

FYI - you posted this in the CPU AND Overclocking Forum. Can't have one without the other. :biggrin:

Sure, the single thread performance Haswell is higher, but actually using a non-overclockable stock system would make me feel old, a borderline Apple prospect and a betrayer of the tweaker ethos.

Haven't used a non-overclocked system in over 10 years and it's something I'll look forward to only in my dotage. Stock clocks and porridge.

If this was a 4790K vs the Xeon, it would be something worth pondering. However, in this case, it's no contest - the X58 has great legs - overclocking the 5650 will keep you young, dirty and tweaky.

At best the 4570 would let you feel hip for a 6-9 months, then the shine will fade and the ugly wrinkles of stock clock remorse will annoy until you can only use it to browse online for 8 core tablets.

"the shine will fade and the ugly wrinkles of stock clock remorse will annoy until you can only use it to browse online for 8 core tablets"
You should be the writer ClockHound.. I love your posts! So descriptive! lol

Nom nom nom.

X5650.

 

[MongGrel]

NM.

Well spoken ClockHound!

I ended up going with the i5 just due to SATA III and the super fast boot times this UEFI board gives me. 7 second boot times are awesome! If I could have that Xeon on a UEFI board with SATA III I would be golden.

Good news though, one of my graphics design buddies needed a cheap system so I offered him the Xeon, motherboard, GTX 650, 3x2GB CL8 1GHz DIMMS, corsair 750 watt PSU, and possibly an HDD for $500, so I think I made out well.

RIP westemere though!

Yep he'll probably be good to go with that for $500 awhile, works for both of ya a bit, if you're helping him do it I suppose.

 

[SPBHM]

I was considering buying the Xeon and x58 board a few months back and what I dislike about the X5650 option is that some X58 boards have horrible power usage (others not so much but still nothing like 1150), the chipset does not support current Sata/USB (you either use addon cards for that, or find one of the rare boards with it), most boards are big and complex, and by now pretty old, making reliability a concern, for me at least, also you basically have to OC these CPUs, because ST performance for sub 3 GHz nehalem is not that amazing compared to Haswell, and it requires a decent cooler...

now looking at the 4570, you can run it with very basic MBs (even sub $50) with current sata/usb, power usage is nice, you can run it with the intel cooler, small case and never worry about it again, no OC or anything.

the 4570 is a great performer for general usage and gaming, the X5650 is much nicer for video and rendering work, but with some OC should also be quite good for gaming.

if I owned a x58 board and had some old 920, I would definitely buy the X5650, but I decided against start building a x58 in 2014, for the reasons I mentioned... others might see it differently.

 

[ClockHound]

Well spoken ClockHound!

I ended up going with the i5 just due to SATA III and the super fast boot times this UEFI board gives me. 7 second boot times are awesome! If I could have that Xeon on a UEFI board with SATA III I would be golden.

Good news though, one of my graphics design buddies needed a cheap system so I offered him the Xeon, motherboard, GTX 650, 3x2GB CL8 1GHz DIMMS, corsair 750 watt PSU, and possibly an HDD for $500, so I think I made out well.

RIP westemere though!

Understand the boot time thing, waiting 9 seconds for my 5660 rig to hit the desktop every two weeks when I cold boot is time I could better spend here in the forums getting insights into the geek condition.

Send your buddy over here: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2335636 for some old skool overclocking fun.

Actually, you can have a Xeon (HW-E) on a UEFI board with SATA III. X99 and 5960X - 8 Haswell cores AND overclocking too. It's what I'll be getting next. When they're old, creaky and cheap.

Congrats on your choice, Hi-Fi Man! Enjoy the shiny square core UEFI. While it lasts.

 

[tweakboy]

Wait for. Also Xeon dont overclock I saw somewhere .. Is that true.

gb

 

[Blue_Max]

Well... $120 for the Xeon X5650 and on its way... hope it doesn't get stuck at the border.

 

[dragantoe]

Well... $120 for the Xeon X5650 and on its way... hope it doesn't get stuck at the border.

definitely the right choice. in the applications where the i5 is better, it's by a small degree, but in applications where the xeon is better, it's by a very large degree.