Dell T7600 CPU Upgrade

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
P

pelampe

Reputable
Jan 15, 2015
13
0
4,510
Hello,

I am working with a Dell Precision T7600 purchased in Jan 2014. It has dual Xeon CPU (E5-2603) processors running at 1.8GHz.

OS is Windows 7 Pro, 64-bit installed on an SSD. RAM is 32GB.

The new mapping software application we are using on this machine requires a minimum of 2.2 GHz CPU and the machine is noticeably slower now.

So I would like to see what options we have to changing out to faster CPUs for this system.

TIA for your replies!

Phil
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Here's the list of what is compatible:
E5-2603 Processor(Four Core HT, 1.8GHz Turbo, 10 MB Cache, 80 watt)
E5-2609 Processor (Four Core HT, 2.4GHz Turbo, 10 MB Cache, 80 watt)
E5-2620 Processor (Six Core HT, 2.0GHz Turbo, 15 MB Cache, 95 watt)
E5-2630 Processor(Six Core HT, 2.3GHz Turbo, 15 MB Cache, 95 watt)
E5-2650 Processor(Eight Core HT, 2.0GHz Turbo, 20 MB Cache, 95 watt)
E5-2665 Processor(Eight Core HT, 2.4GHz Turbo, 20 MB Cache, 115 watt)
E5-2667 Processor(Six Core HT, 2.9GHz Turbo, 15 MB Cache, 115 watt)
E5-2680 Processor(Eight Core HT, 2.7GHz Turbo,20 MB Cache, 130 watt)
E5-2643 Processor(Four Core HT, 3.3GHz Turbo, 10 MB Cache, 130 watt)
E5-2687W Processor(Eight Core HT, 3.1GHz Turbo, 20 MB Cache, 130 watt)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Well, given the T7600 was available with the E5-2687W, a 150W part, and the high likelihood that Dell used the same cooling mechanism for all T7600s, you can probably use anything in the E5-26xx line.

That E5-2687W is a beast at 3.1GHz, and 20MB of cache, though also very expensive. There's a E5-2643 at 3.3GHz and 10M of cache is sheer clockspeed is more helpful (lower TDP also, and lower cost).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I think you're best checking the motherboard and finding the supported CPU list. Dell uses tons of different motherboards, and many times, they can be picky about what CPU they accept.

I've had a C2D motherboard LGA775 socket that could only accept up to a 2.6GHz dual core 2 and no higher, even though the socket had CPUs up to 3.4GHz and quad.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Ancient: Thanks for the extensive list of supported CPUs. Now I'll be able to research each one for pricing and availability.
Regards - Phil
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


bliq: good to know about the wattage and cooling system. I will keep that in mind when looking at the other CPUs. Also good to know about the 10 vs 20 mb cache differences between the two CPUs as well.

Regards - Phil
 
Upvote 0 Downvote



Phil,

If you're using Arc/GIS or similar mult-threaded applications, the choice of CPU's will depend on performance expectation and budget. In my view, the world of Xeon E5-2600 series had a special peak in the E5-2687w, but there are a number of other good candidates. You are probably aware that the Precision T7600 series varies by the chipset and therefore the CPU version and Memory supported. The T7600 uses DDR3-1600 with E5 v1 CPU's, T7610 uses E5 v2 with 1866 speed and the revision to the T7910 uses E5-v3 with DDR4-2133. It does appear that that there are T7600's using E5-2600 v3 series, but that would be with DDR3-1600. RAM.

In Passmark, these are the top ten CPU ratings:

1 > 6 = 2X E5-2687w (8-core 3.1 / 3.8GHz) (CPU = 22196 to 22859)
7 = 2X E5-2689 (8-core 2.6 / ) (CPU = 22196)
8 > 10 = 2X E5-2687 (21385)

> And therein is the story with of the E5-2687w- excellent performance and while $1,900 new, only about $550-650 each now.

http://ark.intel.com/products/64582/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-2687W-20M-Cache-3_10-GHz-8_00-GTs-Intel-QPI

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odkw=E5-2680&_sop=15&LH_Complete=1&_osacat=164&_from=R40&_trksid=p2045573.m570.l1313.TR5.TRC2.A0.H0.XE5-2687.TRS0&_nkw=E5-2687&_sacat=164

The v2 is faster: 3.4 / 4.0GHz but those can also cost $2,000 used- almost the price new.

You might also consider:

E5-2680 (8-core @ 2.7 / 3.5GHz) Passmark = 19181 > About $350 each

http://ark.intel.com/products/64583/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-2680-20M-Cache-2_70-GHz-8_00-GTs-Intel-QPI >

E5-2667 (6-core @ 2.9 / 3.5GHz) Passmark CPU = 18082 > About $450 each

http://ark.intel.com/products/64589/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-2667-15M-Cache-2_90-GHz-8_00-GTs-Intel-QPI

The E5-2680 has a very good cost/ performance value in E5-2600 series CPU's. And it has in my view an excellent balance of clock speed and core count- running the first two cores at 3.5GHz- which is perfectly good for 3D modeling and then for rendering, MATLAB, or Arc/ GIS fire on all cylinders at 2.7GHz. Still a good clip. However, if the budget allows, I think a pair of E5-2687w would be the thing.

I'm assuming the use of used CPU's and this in respect of my experience of perfect reliability with used Xeons. Since 2008, I've purchased used X3230, X5460, and X5680. The oldest at the time of purchase was the X3230 from 2006 purchased in 2015 for a Precision 390 ($28) and so far, very good performance and flawless reliability. The heaviest use has been the pair of 2008 Xeon X5460 (4-core @ 3.16GHZ) over the last 5 years in a Precision T5400 and that system used heavily for rendering and sometimes on for several days continuously, without one serious failure.

RAM: You might consider increasing RAM to 64GB and if you don;t have one, consider the Dell PERC H710P RAID controller that was sold with the T7600 new. The top 10 disk scores on Passmark:

1 > 3 PERC H710P (21832 > 19503)
4 LSI MR9361-8i (16953)
5 > 7 PERC H710P (15828 > 15257)
8 > LSI MR9271-8i (13896)
9 > 10 PERC H710P (13215 > 13100)

There's a pattern there. It's not possible to know the disk attached to these controllers, but I suspect they are RAID 10's of fast SSD's like Samsung 840 or 850 EVO or Pro. To put these scores in perspective, the top disk score for a single disk is going to be about 5000 on a T7600.

Getting the best performance for your needs is a complicated equation, but the T7600 has a very high potential and excellent reliability.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

1. HP z420 (2015) > Xeon E5-1660 v2 six-core @ 3.7 / 4.0GHz > 32GB DDR3 ECC 1866 RAM > Quadro K4200 (4GB) > Intel 730 480GB (9SSDSC2BP480G4R5) > Western Digital Black WD1003FZEX 1TB> M-Audio 192 sound card > 600W PSU> Logitech z2300 > Linksys AE3000 USB WiFi > 2X Dell Ultrasharp U2715H (2560 X 1440) > Windows 7 Professional 64 >
[ Passmark Rating = 5064 > CPU= 13989 / 2D= 819 / 3D= 4596 / Mem= 2772 / Disk= 4555] [Cinebench R15 > CPU = 1014 OpenGL= 126.59 FPS] 7.8.15

Pending upgrade: HP /LSI 9212-4i PCIe SAS /SATA HBA RAID controller, 2X Seagate Constellation ES.3 1TB (RAID 1)

2. Dell Precision T5500 (2011) > Xeon X5680 six -core @ 3.33 / 3.6GHz, 24GB DDR3 ECC 1333 > Quadro K2200 (4GB ) > Samsung 840 250GB / WD RE4 Enterprise 1TB > M-Audio 192 sound card > Linksys WMP600N PCI WiFi > 875W PSU > Windows 7 Professional 64> HP 2711x (1920 X 1080)
[ Passmark system rating = 3490 / CPU = 9178 / 2D= 685 / 3D= 3566 / Mem= 1865 / Disk= 2122] [Cinebench 15 > CPU = 772 OpenGL= 99.72 FPS] 7.8.15

Pending upgrade: PERC H310 PCIe SAS /SATA RAID controller, 2X WD Black 1TB (RAID 1)(Converts disk system from 3GB/s to 6GB/s)

 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Anarkie13: that is a good point. I will make sure to open the case first, to confirm MOBO specs. I will also contact our Dell rep to see what they can confirm.
Regards - Phil
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Ancient: where did you see the E5-2643 (3.3GHz) listed for the $775 price, if I may ask?

Regards - Phil
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


BambiBoom: Yes, I am running ArcGIS v10.2.2 (most recent version is 10.3). And Yes, I believe that this workstation is using some type of PERC RAID although which I'm not exactly sure at the moment. I will find out and get back to you.

As for the other info you have provided, that is very much appreciated. It will take me a day or night to digest it all, but once I'm done with reading through it I'm sure I will have some additional questions and/or comments.

Regards - Phil
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
pelampe wrote:

BambiBoom: Yes, I am running ArcGIS v10.2.2 (most recent version is 10.3). And Yes, I believe that this workstation is using some type of PERC RAID although which I'm not exactly sure at the moment. I will find out and get back to you.

As for the other info you have provided, that is very much appreciated. It will take me a day or night to digest it all, but once I'm done with reading through it I'm sure I will have some additional questions and/or comments.

Regards - Phil"

Phil,

ArcGIS is a very interesting application and along with it's capabilities seems to require a interest in complex hardware considerations. Here's the best guide I've seen to working out an appropriate system:

http://www.wiki.gis.com/wiki/index.php/Platform_Performance

Many aspects to attain good performance are well-known such as OpenGL workstation GPU's- Quadros and Firepros, but the optimization of CPU performance is more complex and varies with use. The situation is made quite a bit more complex by the application running on a server and there is also a delicate balance between process cycle throughput and the speed of request input. My interpretation of this paper is that clock speed is -or is sometimes and /or often- more important than core /thread count when ArcGIS is implemented on a server with multiple user access. The key statement:

"There is an indirect relationship between server processing time and peak system throughput. Faster per core processor performance reduces service processing time. Shorter processing time means each processor core can service more requests. More service requests per core means more peak throughput."

See the chart showing the superior per core performance on a single E5-2637 v3 4-core than a pair of E5-2637 v3.

This is logical but the relationship in the statement must be related to the data sets and memory and disk bandwidth, GPU coprocessing and other factors.At a certain point, this and other statements mean a really fast four-core is better than a medium speed 8-core as it can compress the calculations into more continuous threads, especially in a multi-user situation.This has come up in other conditions with dual CPU systems as dividing the signal into multiple threads and in effect having to keep them in sync and then reassembling at the output has a latency because the instruction sets are different lengths. I was considering a MATLAB system for a friend doing some flight dynamics problems (vonKarman filters) and considered whether the better approach was not to use the conventional solution of as many cores of a reasonable speed, but to use as fast as possible single-CPU system (such as E5-1660 v2 6-core @ 3.7 /4.0GHz) supplemented by a Tesla CUDA coprocessor (K10). Fewer, but faster threads accelerated with very high double precision density Tesla co-processor. I made a similar shift with my current system, going from dual 4-cores (3.2GHz) to a single, faster 6-core (3.7) with a wider memory bandwidth and faster RAM.

While you're looking into the current hardware, I'm going to look into this aspect a bit more.. If you could give me an idea on the type of projects and typical file sizes, that would could help towards an optimized solution especially if the projects are for example in resources exploration analytics and you're using the 3D Map which are far more calculation intensive than demographic distributions in 2D.

In this context this is also useful to consult:

http://wiki.gis.com/wiki/index.php/Platform_Performance_%28CPT_Demos%29#Platform_pricing_analysis

> of which the key statement is: "Xeon E5-2643 v3 [6-core @ 3.4 / 3.7GHz] 12-core platform has the lowest cost [=best cost /performance]". In this paper, after careful cost /performance analysis of up to dual 14-core systems, the fast dual 6-core is the best choice. This is apparent in the breakdown of core utilization. The efficiency is made higher by the higher overall CPU utilization, which in my view may relate to the idea of inefficiencies and latency in dividing the signal into more threads.

Sorry to ramble on.

Cheers,

BambiBoom
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


BambiBoom: I was out of town this past weekend (to see the lunar eclipse) and didn't get a chance to closely read your informative post. I will take a look at it in the next day or two and get back with comments to the forum. It seems like the true answer is not so easy to define, after all!

And THANKS so much for your detailed analysis and comments! Don't worry, you are not "rambling".

Regards,
Phil
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


ServerSupply.com
I upgraded my Dell Precision T7400 with their chips, they arrived quickly and work perfectly.

Unkk
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


hi,

I'm thinking of buying a T7610 w E5-2640 v1. I've seen them sold so i quess they're backwards compatible. in this case should i use a DDR3 1600 or 1866?
Tnks
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
hi,

I'm thinking of buying a T7610 w E5-2640 v1. I've seen them sold so i quess they're backwards compatible. in this case should i use a DDR3 1600 or 1866?
Tnks

yonafshi,

The Preciision T7600 used DDR3-1600, and the T7610 was made to use Xeon E5-v2's with DDR3-1866. The T7610 you buy may have 1866 already. If the system has a v1 processor it will run the RAM at 1600. However, the E5 v2's are one of the best series Xeons and if te system doesn't have much RAM currently and it's not very much extra expense, using 1866 would be a way to ease a change in a couple of years to a faster v2.

I have system s with 1333, 1600, and 1866 and I don't sense a lot of difference in RAM speed, but my suggestion is to stay with 1866.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote



First thank you for your reply. Very interesting. But there's something I'd like to make clear if possible. You elaborated earlier about models T7600/7610/7910 and corresponding cpu's v1/2/3. But i see from your comments and elsewhere that basically all these different versions work on 7600/7610. I should point out I haven't bought it yet, so this is very useful to me. I was inclined to go with the 7610 because i thought there's greater cpu upgrade ability, now I'm wondering.

This is confusing because 1. it makes the difference btw these models seem even less significant (usb 3.0 port, RAM speed). Are there other significant points I'm missing? 2. is it just a marketing issue, that each have different cpu version, or are there significant performance differences when using a higher ver. Than specified for the model? like in the MoBo (bottleneck for example).

Much appreciated,
Yoni
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Yoni,

I don't believe that it's possible to use a v2 in every Precision T7600 - but perhaps some can. The CPU series that can be used in a system from v2 onwards is reflected by the change in model numbers- the T7610 were v2 and the 7910 v3 which is a different socket- LGA2011-3. With HP's, a z620 or z820 ( equivalent to Precision T7600) if the bootblock date is after 6.23.13, can use v2's. My z620 was made in late 2012 but has the 2011 bootblock date, so the chipset and BIOS can not see the v2 nor is the controller configured to use DDR3-1866.

While I am not certain, it's more than probable that both HP and Dell were using the identical chipsets C602 or whichever, and then switched over to the new chipset when the v2's were announced. The new series were backwards compatible but the old series could not see forward. I've seen reference to "updating the BIOS" as a way to use the v2 but, that doesn't seem to be the case for HP's- unless they were made after the magic date. I've heard of people altering the motherboard - which includes some delicate soldering- to change the bootblock date, but it seems extreme.

In any event, the cost of E5-2600 v2's is still very high and for example, the v1's are so inexpensive now, one can buy a very high level v1 for the cost of a low end v2. I bought a Xeon E5-2690 8-core 2.9/ 3.8 for $152- the price new was $2050. But, the closest equivalent v2 is the E5-2650 v2 2.6 /3.4 which cost new $1,170- much less, but on Ebay US they still cost s minimum of $350. So, the slightly lower specification v2 costs a bit over half, but used, still costs more than double. Of course, the situation is the same comparing v2's to v'3,

As for performance, the v2's added cores and had higher clock speeds and 1866 RAM. I think one of the great CPU's of all time was the E5-2687w v2 as it was 8C @ 3.4 /4.0 GHz. - good for highly threaded computation and has a high single-thread performance. I have an HP z420 with more or less the 6-core version, the E4-1660 v2 which is 3.7 /4.0GHz. However, the v3's added even more cores. If you want the best cost/performance buy v1, if you need the higher clock speed- v2, and if you need 14-22 cores it will have to be v3 or v4.

Yes, a lot of confusing details to work these things through.

Cheers,

BambiBoom
 
Upvote 1 Downvote


bambiboom,

This is a very interesting discussion. There are a few things my mind doesn't quite get around. From what I understand 2011 and 2011-3 are different sockets (physically), so I don't see how it is possible that in some cases of T7600 (above mentioned) someone can use the xeon v1 and then v3. Could you explain?

What you said about cpu prices is very true. My intention is to buy v1 at the moment, but I want good upgrade ability and in 2-3 yrs time the prices may be more forthcoming for v2. With 7610 I know i am there, the question is regarding 7600. As to RAM, 1600 on T7600 should probably be enough. What i understand from you is that by finding out the production date (of Mobo/workstation), one can assume the upgrade ability to v2, and that this will require updating the bios.

1. I'm not a tech, so can anyone do this update? What does it entail? A link would be great!
2. From you comments i understand the question of ver. Is I/O, work/not, rather than performance level. Thus i assume that MoBo performance isn't the issue.

Regards, Yoni
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom