Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
The Soap Box / Re: I just found a good priced Xeon E5 2690v3
« Last post by hutch-- on Today at 11:56:42 AM »
Its never been a problem, I have used the sealed 2 fan sized coolers with the 2 fan sized radiators and silver thermal grease and the Xeons run at about 50c under full load, the i7 a bit hotter at about 60 - 65c on full load. I have seen the coolers with an external tank and a lot of plastic plumbing but they look complicated and messy to set up, even if they are more powerful.
2
The Soap Box / Re: I just found a good priced Xeon E5 2690v3
« Last post by Adamanteus on Today at 10:29:14 AM »
 That's maybe simple Xeon ES 2690v3 is made for immersion cooler system, so multithreading on it with air decent cooler is overheat, as need 5 liters of coolant, that you forgot to stream into  :eusa_naughty:
3
The Soap Box / Re: I just found a good priced Xeon E5 2690v3
« Last post by hutch-- on Today at 10:13:32 AM »
With x99, I have 2 i7 5820k CPUs, one in my old box and one in another and at 140 watt and decent cooling clocked at 4 gig over the original 3.3, it peaks at about 65c when thrashing the guts out of it as the old box has the wrong can (case) for double fan liquid coolers but its a faster box for development and other things where the Xeon's kick ass for multi-threaded tasks.

You can clock the old i7's up to about 4.5 gig but the gain is not worth the temperature increase.
4
The Soap Box / Re: I just found a good priced Xeon E5 2690v3
« Last post by Antariy on Today at 10:07:48 AM »
:biggrin:

Looks great but you are right, you would indeed need many Roubles/shekels or whatever to but the board, 2 Platinums and a mountain of memory.  :tongue:

But, hey, Steve, you then will have a PC near to something what is used somewhere in DreamWorks and/or Pixar studios :D HAHA  :tongue:
(well, with exception of graphics solutions used, but who cares?)

A pile of cores also! :biggrin:

(flooding/spamming mode off)
5
The Soap Box / Re: I just found a good priced Xeon E5 2690v3
« Last post by Antariy on Today at 09:49:56 AM »
There is another factor in using Xeon E5 2690 v3 CPUs. If you have a decent cooling solution, you can thrash the guts out of them for hours and you struggle to get the temperature much over 50c. I have been converting a pile of DVD movies to MP4 recently which means using Handbrake for the conversion then using ffmpeg to clean them up and watching "Coretemp" none of the 12 cores go over about 50 - 52c.

Yes, there are MANY factors which make old Xeons good. The thermal solution under the CPU cover/heat-spreader - it's SOLDER in the 2011 socket. And thermal 'paste'/grease all around above of it (newer of it), requiring to delid CPU to get better cooling but to lose warranty at all. So this means easier cooling/better cooling out of the box.

Now then again about cooling - MORE BIG TECHNOLOGY - 22nm against 14nm - surprisingly it might to appear at first glance - but not in fact - you can cool higher sized chip better than lower sized chip. Also the themperature stability of a chip with higher/bigger size of a single unit/transistor is higher. AMD now with its '7nm' process are having even higher problems with cooling of the chips, while reaching some 'limit' for some particular chip, you can't get more performance out of it (can't overclock, let's say it simpler) just because you cann't anymore to cool it with any SANE/every-day solution lol :D  :greensml:

Also degradation of the chip due to run at max loads in the same 'sample' temperature is LOWER for chip with higher/bigger production process size/technology.

Many 'also's', yeah, even though Haswell/Broadwell even core is not overall good for LOWER-count or even more so SINGLE-core loads requiring high frequency... but who cares when you use CPU only to work and not to game on it with highest possible 'results' lol

And, yeah, as a salt component to the sauce: 4 memory channels in 2011 against 2 memory channels to all current desktop Intel's sockets. So, Cheap memory 2666 MHz at Hutch's BRAND MOTHERBOARD setup will outperform in bandwidth 5000 MHz (5Ghz!) VERY COSTLY MEMORY in 10900 build.

It's products of different markets (server-data-crunching and consumer segments), bad idea to compare 10900 to 2011th CPUs anyway. There are tasks where 10900 will outperform Xeon (games, for example), and there are those tasks where price of Xeon and some other its points of the 'older-age' technology will outperform 'yesterday's level' technology.
6
The Soap Box / Re: I just found a good priced Xeon E5 2690v3
« Last post by hutch-- on Today at 09:45:18 AM »
 :biggrin:

Looks great but you are right, you would indeed need many Roubles/shekels or whatever to but the board, 2 Platinums and a mountain of memory.  :tongue:
7
The Soap Box / Re: I just found a good priced Xeon E5 2690v3
« Last post by Antariy on Today at 09:25:18 AM »
Intel Platinum's are coming onto the market at under $1000 USD and dropping rapidly but I have not seen desktop motherboards for them. You can buy one from Gigabyte but the cost would be prohibitive, > $10,000 USD.

You mean Socket 3647 CPUs, Steve? if yes, then on ASUS - https://www.asus.com/Motherboards-Components/Motherboards/Workstation/WS-C621E-SAGE/ and/or https://www.asus.com/Motherboards-Components/Motherboards/Workstation/Pro-WS-C621-64L-SAGE-10G/ and/or https://www.asus.com/Motherboards-Components/Motherboards/Workstation/Pro-WS-C621-64L-SAGE-10G/ don't know how much will it cost in AU, but guessing not more than $2000 (what, of course, is way too much anyway).
8
The Soap Box / Re: I just found a good priced Xeon E5 2690v3
« Last post by hutch-- on Today at 09:06:57 AM »
There is another factor in using Xeon E5 2690 v3 CPUs. If you have a decent cooling solution, you can thrash the guts out of them for hours and you struggle to get the temperature much over 50c. I have been converting a pile of DVD movies to MP4 recently which means using Handbrake for the conversion then using ffmpeg to clean them up and watching "Coretemp" none of the 12 cores go over about 50 - 52c.

Intel Platinum's are coming onto the market at under $1000 USD and dropping rapidly but I have not seen desktop motherboards for them. You can buy one from Gigabyte but the cost would be prohibitive, > $10,000 USD.
9
The Soap Box / Re: I just found a good priced Xeon E5 2690v3
« Last post by Antariy on Today at 08:33:57 AM »
I have i9-10900, let us compare our performance  :badgrin: :biggrin: :thup:

Just as simple reference lol:
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-i9-10900-vs-Intel-Xeon-E5-2690-v3/3745vs2364

Code: [Select]
Intel Core i9-10900 @ 2.80GHz Intel Xeon E5-2690 v3 @ 2.60GHz + ADD
Max TDP 65W 135W
First Seen on Chart Q2 2020 Q2 2014
Single Thread Rating 3072 1902
CPU Mark 20831 16434

Considering it's "age" and the price you could now get it with, even with twice "higher" (read below a note on this) power consumption, the Xeon drives well. Considering numerous other facts about those, don't assume 10900 to be A LOT more performant in therms of instructions processed per WATT consumed.

Note single thread rating. In single thread load 10900 will have turbo frequency 5.2 GHz, while Xeon (this particular) will have 3,5 MAX.
So, considering the same Xeon to be run at 5,2 Ghz (just assumption, as it could have been IF Xeon could have been run on 5,2 GHz lol :D ): 5,2 / 3,5 * 1902 = 2826 scores.
While 10900 on the same frequence has 3072 scores, which is less than 9% improvement of performance per cycle over a lot older architecture.
Of course all those numbers are taken considering those results of benchmarks got above off the site. And are not really scientifical reference. But some food for thought, huh? :D  :biggrin:
Well, anyway, we all know Intel after Sandy Bridge did not improve the performance with big leaps, like it was in times of pre-Sandy Bridge, and Sandy Bridge leap times.

Now, look at the following: 10900 single thread score / Xeron single thread score = 1,615 (times 10900 'better')
now the same but for multiple threads / 'overall cpu mark' - 1,2675550687598880369964707314105. Just 27% better overall. But at the same time, to reach that/those 27% at full load, 10900 EATS / CONSUMES a lot more than its marketologists-stated '65W'. Easily the same or even more than Xeon. Why - read below.

NOTE on TDP: intel is not really honest in the specifications for its new processors, 65W is the 'real power' of the CPU being run in its base core frequency, presumably not even using newest AVX extensions, while being run with load on all cores and/or with max. out turbo frequency, its power will easily exceed Xeon's. So, these numbers '65W' for 10900 are just 'marketing reference', if you turn off power limits for your 10900 CPU and use very good cooling and will do the stress-test or heavy computing task, it could presumably exceed 200W haha.

While Xeons 'datasheet' are stating real power: it's SERVER CPU, it can't lie and can't mislead the 'consumer' with wrong info. This TDP is hardly 'wired' to CPU itself and it NEVER can reach anything above stated TDP. Nearing to TDP limits CPU begins to drop frequencies (throttling).

And being put to the same power limit as Xeon, 10900 will drastically outperform it only in lower-thread-count tasks. With full load - there would not be drastical YEAH FAT BIG DRASTICAL difference. Maybe 30% yeah. But is that something worth mentioning 7 years later and 5 generations of CPU made since this model of Xeon (Haswell - as 4th Generation - then 5th Broadwell, 6th Skylale, 7th Kaby Lake, 8th and 9th Coffee Lake, and 10th - Comet Lake) ? :D  :greensml:

Marketing, marketing is all around. Don't trust anyone. This post - too, haha  :greenclp: :greensml: :rofl: :biggrin:
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10