HP Adds Intel Core i7-6700K To Z240 Workstation, Overclocking Not Supported, But That’s OK

[kewlguy239]

HP announced that its Z240 Workstation can now be equipped with an Intel Core i7-6700K processor. However, the Z240 does not support overclocking, despite the unlocked CPU.

HP Adds Intel Core i7-6700K To Z240 Workstation, Overclocking Not Supported, But That’s OK : Read more

 

[bit_user]

Intel is missing out on a juicy markup by not having a Xeon version of this chip.

 

[Ambular]

I've wondered about this before...why is it that if someone spends a small fortune on an overclocking motherboard and heavy-duty cooler, and it lets them squeeze an extra 600 MHz out of their processor, that's considered reasonable; but if someone wants to buy a k-model processor over its locked equivalent just for the extra 600 MHz out of the box, and doesn't plan to overclock it, that's a waste of money?

 

[TJ Hooker]

@Ambular I agree that over clocking is kinda over rated. However, saying a 6700k is 600 MHz faster than a 6700 is a little misleading. A 6700 turbos to 3.7 GHz on 4 cores and 4 GHz for single core, vs 4 GH and 4.2 GHz for the 6700k. Now, based on what I've read, Intel CPUs can typically be relied to maintain full turbo under load as long as cooling is sufficient, so that means the 6700k is only 200-300 MHz (or 5-8%) faster than the 6700. You may actually be worse off with the 6700k in terms of performance per dollar.

 

[Ambular]

@Ambular I agree that over clocking is kinda over rated. However, saying a 6700k is 600 MHz faster than a 6700 is a little misleading. A 6700 turbos to 3.7 GHz on 4 cores and 4 GHz for single core, vs 4 GH and 4.2 GHz for the 6700k. Now, based on what I've read, Intel CPUs can typically be relied to maintain full turbo under load as long as cooling is sufficient, so that means the 6700k is only 200-300 MHz (or 5-8%) faster than the 6700. You may actually be worse off with the 6700k in terms of performance per dollar.

Okay, that makes sense. Thank you for the explanation! (I didn't mean to imply that overclocking was overrated, though...more was wondering what the problem was with the 6700k vs. 6700 scenario that caused it to be viewed so differently.)

 

[ahnilated]

I guess HP wants people to waste money. Buying a "k" chip and not being able to overclock it is a waste of money but then again, buying an HP computer is a waste of money imho.

 

[egmccann]

I guess HP wants people to waste money. Buying a "k" chip and not being able to overclock it is a waste of money but then again, buying an HP computer is a waste of money imho.

Unless, of course, you're a business and want their support. Which, as a workstation, is the sort of audience this is aimed at. It's all configuration options.

Not every system is out there to play games on.

 

[Samer1970]

Intel is missing out on a juicy markup by not having a Xeon version of this chip.

Actually they should release Max Ghz CPU like AMD did when they released out of the box 5Ghz CPU under warranty. AMD showed us it is possible under warranty and exposed the industry. we want a 4.6- 5Ghz Xeon !

besides i7 are not good for workstations , they lack RDIMM/ECC support.

 

[Samer1970]

I guess HP wants people to waste money. Buying a "k" chip and not being able to overclock it is a waste of money but then again, buying an HP computer is a waste of money imho.

Unless, of course, you're a business and want their support. Which, as a workstation, is the sort of audience this is aimed at. It's all configuration options.

Not every system is out there to play games on.

What is the point of i7 then ? they lack RDIMM support , and workstations need ECC . putting i7 in a workstation is stupid.

 

[serendipiti]

"We can’t attest to HP’s theory that overclocking causes miscalculations with critical application data (that all depends on how stable the overclock is)" ->THATS'S the point.
You define stable overclock by the absence of miscalculations with critical data (not application data). If you plan to overclock on your self, you will have to test and assure that there are no miscalculations on your enterprise invoices (we are talking about serious testing)... enterprises need reliability, spending $$$ for that purpose makes overclocking out of scope.
I can understand enthusiasts using Xeon CPUs, but enthusiasts won't be buying the whole server from HP...
Avoiding OC is what makes more sense, I don't understand the criticism on that.

 

[bit_user]

What is the point of i7 then ? they lack RDIM support , and workstations need ECC . putting i7 in a workstation is stupid.

I doubt E3 Xeons support Registered memory, either. But I agree with your point about ECC - most workstation buyers probably want it. The reason they did this is obviously because that chip is clocked higher than Intel's fastest E3 v5 Xeon, yet it's socket-compatible.

 

[Samer1970]

What is the point of i7 then ? they lack RDIM support , and workstations need ECC . putting i7 in a workstation is stupid.

I doubt E3 Xeons support Registered memory, either. But I agree with your point about ECC - most workstation buyers probably want it. The reason they did this is obviously because that chip is clocked higher than Intel's fastest E3 v5 Xeon, yet it's socket-compatible.

Xeons support ECC memory

http://ark.intel.com/products/88171/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E3-1280-v5-8M-Cache-3_70-GHz

i7 6700K does not

http://ark.intel.com/products/88195/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_20-GHz

 

[bit_user]

Xeons support ECC memory

http://ark.intel.com/products/88171/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E3-1280-v5-8M-Cache-3_70-GHz

i7 6700K does not

http://ark.intel.com/products/88195/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_20-GHz

Yes, I know that. I didn't say otherwise.

I think the point you're missing is that Registered != ECC.

Registered memory simply adds a buffer to reduce the electrical load, so that you can increase the number of DIMMs per channel. Support for it is common among servers, in order to support very large memory configurations.

ECC adds data bits to support error correction and detection.

You can buy ECC DIMMs in both registered and unbuffered forms. And registered DIMMs could be ECC or not, but I'm not sure if any are currently sold that aren't ECC.

You're welcome.

 

[Samer1970]

Xeons support ECC memory

http://ark.intel.com/products/88171/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E3-1280-v5-8M-Cache-3_70-GHz

i7 6700K does not

http://ark.intel.com/products/88195/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_20-GHz

Yes, I know that. I didn't say otherwise.

I think the point you're missing is that Registered != ECC.

Registered memory simply adds a buffer to reduce the electrical load, so that you can increase the number of DIMMs per channel. Support for it is common among servers, in order to support very large memory configurations.

ECC adds data bits to support error correction and detection.

You can buy ECC DIMMs in both registered and unbuffered forms. And registered DIMMs could be ECC or not, but I'm not sure if any are currently sold that aren't ECC.

You're welcome.

Thanks for the info , I was talking about ECC for workstations , I said RDIMMs because all the workstations I worked on used RDIMMs and all RDIMMs are ECC today .

 

[bit_user]

Thanks for the info , I was talking about ECC for workstations , I said RDIMMs because all the workstations I worked on used RDIMMs and all RDIMMs are ECC today .

My E5-1620 Xeon can support either unbuffered or registered. I went with unbuffered ECC, because it was cheaper, lower-latency, and I was only going to use 1 DIMM per channel (which is still 4 DIMMs).

My file server is a Phenom II with unbuffered ECC (it doesn't support registered). I have a newer, SSD-based file server that's powered by an i3-4370 with unbuffered ECC. Speaking of which, ECC-support is an under-appreciated feature of i3's. You won't find it in mainstream i5's or i7's.

 

[Samer1970]

Thanks for the info , I was talking about ECC for workstations , I said RDIMMs because all the workstations I worked on used RDIMMs and all RDIMMs are ECC today .

My E5-1620 Xeon can support either unbuffered or registered. I went with unbuffered ECC, because it was cheaper, lower-latency, and I was only going to use 1 DIMM per channel (which is still 4 DIMMs).

My file server is a Phenom II with unbuffered ECC (it doesn't support registered). I have a newer, SSD-based file server that's powered by an i3-4370 with unbuffered ECC. Speaking of which, ECC-support is an under-appreciated feature of i3's. You won't find it in mainstream i5's or i7's.

wow , I did not know that some i3 have ECC support. but there is still a problem , the Chipset must support ECC as well... but still why is intel doing this ? Just make ECC standard option and move on ...

What do you mean by 1 DIMM per channel ?

 

[sine80]

I have an first gen version of the z600 and love it. I was thinking about a z240 but do you think it can support a gtx 1070?

 

[bit_user]

wow , I did not know that some i3 have ECC support. but there is still a problem , the Chipset must support ECC as well...

True. You must buy a workstation/server board, even though the CPU is just an i3. This makes it still rather pricey.

I think the main reason for it is that there aren't really dual-core E3 Xeons. So, for those not needing 4 cores, the low-end is served by the Pentium line, while the high-end is served by the i3 line.

but still why is intel doing this ? Just make ECC standard option and move on ...

I wish they would, but they'd rather play market segmentation games. There's not much else separating desktop CPUs from E3 Xeons.

The situation was simpler when the memory controller was in the chipset, as I was able to use ECC RAM on my old Pentium 4 system by simply getting a montherboard that supported it.

What do you mean by 1 DIMM per channel ?

Exactly that. Mainstream desktop CPUs have 2 memory channels for achieving twice the bandwidth of what a single channel would enable. When you move up to Extreme desktop and E5/E7 Xeon CPUs, they add two more channels, doubling bandwidth again. On a quad-channel CPU, the optimal way to populated memory is with one unbuffered DIMM per channel (i.e. 4 DIMMs, total). Anything more - registered or 2 DIMMs per channel will add latency or reduce clock speed.

Check the links you posted. On of the specs they list is the maximum number of memory channels.

Compare with this Extreme desktop CPU, which shares the same socket as the E5/E7 Xeons: http://ark.intel.com/products/94189/Intel-Core-i7-6800K-Processor-15M-Cache-up-to-3_60-GHz

To feed more cores, you need more memory bandwidth.

 

[Samer1970]

wow , I did not know that some i3 have ECC support. but there is still a problem , the Chipset must support ECC as well...

True. You must buy a workstation/server board, even though the CPU is just an i3. This makes it still rather pricey.

I think the main reason for it is that there aren't really dual-core E3 Xeons. So, for those not needing 4 cores, the low-end is served by the Pentium line, while the high-end is served by the i3 line.

but still why is intel doing this ? Just make ECC standard option and move on ...

I wish they would, but they'd rather play market segmentation games. There's not much else separating desktop CPUs from E3 Xeons.

The situation was simpler when the memory controller was in the chipset, as I was able to use ECC RAM on my old Pentium 4 system by simply getting a montherboard that supported it.

What do you mean by 1 DIMM per channel ?

Exactly that. Mainstream desktop CPUs have 2 memory channels for achieving twice the bandwidth of what a single channel would enable. When you move up to Extreme desktop and E5/E7 Xeon CPUs, they add two more channels, doubling bandwidth again. On a quad-channel CPU, the optimal way to populated memory is with one unbuffered DIMM per channel (i.e. 4 DIMMs, total). Anything more - registered or 2 DIMMs per channel will add latency or reduce clock speed.

Check the links you posted. On of the specs they list is the maximum number of memory channels.

Compare with this Extreme desktop CPU, which shares the same socket as the E5/E7 Xeons: http://ark.intel.com/products/94189/Intel-Core-i7-6800K-Processor-15M-Cache-up-to-3_60-GHz

To feed more cores, you need more memory bandwidth.

yea I know the dual/Triple/Quad Channels modes , it is just the first time I read "1 DIMM per Channel" term.

 

[Samer1970]

I have an first gen version of the z600 and love it. I was thinking about a z240 but do you think it can support a gtx 1070?

Just check the powersupply 12V output and make sure it is above 33 Amps .. it will be ok . Given it has free PCIe 16 3.0 slot.

 

[captaincharisma]

it's HP so no surprises here