Intel Xeon 5600-Series: Can Your PC Use 24 Processors?

Status
Not open for further replies.

enzo matrix

Splendid
[citation][nom]one-shot[/nom]Or 24 Logical CPUs, not really Processors.[/citation]
Misleading title. I was excited because I assumed intel had finally come out with 12-core server CPUs.
 

shin0bi272

Distinguished
Nov 20, 2007
1,103
0
19,310
12
[citation][nom]Enzo Matrix[/nom]Misleading title. I was excited because I assumed intel had finally come out with 12-core server CPUs.[/citation]
they could have gone 4x 6 core cpus without HT too.
 

cangelini

Contributing Editor
Editor
Jul 4, 2008
1,878
9
19,795
4
[citation][nom]Enzo Matrix[/nom]Misleading title. I was excited because I assumed intel had finally come out with 12-core server CPUs.[/citation]

The Xeon 5600-series tops out with 6 cores and 12 threads, yielding 24 logical processors between two sockets. =)
 

wh3resmycar

Distinguished
Sep 12, 2007
2,502
1
20,965
57


i have a feeling you dont understand what the word "workstation" means.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Hyper threading was kind of cool back in the P4 days, but now I don't see the point. Virtually nothing that >people actually use< has any benefit to see from it.. It just makes for cool screenshots imo..

I guess what this review says is that, if you want performance for stuff you do at home you should pretty much just get a Nehalem i7 6c with some fast ram. The xeons seems to be behind on everything multimedia, much as expected.
 

Otus

Distinguished
Nov 23, 2009
29
0
18,530
0
[citation][nom]cangelini[/nom]The Xeon 5600-series tops out with 6 cores and 12 threads, yielding 24 logical processors between two sockets. =)[/citation]
You should have written "logical processors" or "logical cores" and no one would have argued.
[citation][nom]mheager[/nom]Not true. Hyper threading makes it so if one app gets stuck in an endless loop it doesn't suck up all the cpu and freeze the computer.[/citation]
The OS can do that even on a single core with no HT. Not to mention the case with many physical cores which non-HT CPUs have nowadays.
 

kokin

Distinguished
May 28, 2009
445
0
18,810
7
[citation][nom]mheager[/nom]Not true. Hyper threading makes it so if one app gets stuck in an endless loop it doesn't suck up all the cpu and freeze the computer.[/citation]
But why should it get stuck in an endless loop with all that computing power?
 

mindbreaker

Distinguished
Jul 26, 2010
32
0
18,530
0
Since when do the chip makers get to choose not to have their chips tested? Is this a news magazine or isn't it? Test those G34 socket AMD Opterons!

And guys; chess is still one of the best applications to see the potential of a chip with all threads pegged. Crafty has a benchmark if the Fritz one is not using all the threads. Or you can do things more hands on; just see how much time it requires to get StockFish 1.8 to reach depth 30 in the start position. It is free and the #2 engine in the world.
 

jeffunit

Distinguished
May 19, 2008
115
0
18,680
0
Nice picture of a memory module. Unfortunately, it isn't a picture of the kingston KVR1333D3E9SK3/3G which has ECC, and hence 9 memory chips per side.
 

cangelini

Contributing Editor
Editor
Jul 4, 2008
1,878
9
19,795
4
[citation][nom]jeffunit[/nom]Nice picture of a memory module. Unfortunately, it isn't a picture of the kingston KVR1333D3E9SK3/3G which has ECC, and hence 9 memory chips per side.[/citation]

Blargh. That's what I get for relying on Kingston's stock photography. Photo of one of my actual modules is in there now.
 

cangelini

Contributing Editor
Editor
Jul 4, 2008
1,878
9
19,795
4
[citation][nom]mindbreaker[/nom]Since when do the chip makers get to choose not to have their chips tested? Is this a news magazine or isn't it? Test those G34 socket AMD Opterons! And guys; chess is still one of the best applications to see the potential of a chip with all threads pegged. Crafty has a benchmark if the Fritz one is not using all the threads. Or you can do things more hands on; just see how much time it requires to get StockFish 1.8 to reach depth 30 in the start position. It is free and the #2 engine in the world.[/citation]

Hoping to get AMD in on the next round, for sure!
 

wotan31

Distinguished
Jun 30, 2009
345
0
18,780
1
I'll bet Windows won't work with this many processors. The crap OS will probably BSOD. Even it boots, Windows is a virtual retard when it comes to thread management - it scales VERY poorly once you go above 4 cpu's. Linux or OSX on the other hand, would definitely benefit from such technology, since both of those have advanced thread management.
 

wotan31

Distinguished
Jun 30, 2009
345
0
18,780
1
[citation][nom]Tamz_msc[/nom]I was expecting an even better performance from these CPUs.The performance is still limited by the software you use.[/citation]
Correct... if the software you use is Windows. Use a real OS that's based on UNIX and can actually scale properly when you give it serious hardware. Windows is a tinker toy in comparison.
 

geok1ng

Distinguished
Jun 25, 2008
108
0
18,690
2
AT already compared 12 tread Xeons agains 12 cores Opterons:

"The bottom line is: is this twelve-core Opteron a good deal? For users waiting to use it in a workstation we have our doubts. You’ll benefit from the extra cores when rendering complex scenes, but in all other scenarios (quick simple rendering, modeling) the higher clocked and higher IPC Xeon X5600 series is simply the better choice.

Applications based on transactional databases (OLTP and ERP) are also better off with new Xeon. The SAP and our own Oracle Calling Circle benchmark all point in the same direction. Intel has a tangible performance advantage in both benchmarks.

Data mining applications clearly benefit from having “real” instead of “logical” cores. For datamining, we believe the 12-core Opteron is the clear winner. It offers 20% better performance at 20% lower prices, a good deal if you ask us. Intel’s relatively high prices for its six-core are challenged. The increased competition turns this into a buyers market again.

And then there is the most important segment: the virtualization market. We estimate that the new Opteron 6174 is about 20% slower than the Xeon 5670 in virtualized servers with very high VM counts. The difference is a lot smaller in the opposite scenario: a virtualized server with a few very heavy VMs. Here the choice is less clear. At this point, we believe both server CPUs consume about the same power, so that does not help either to make up our minds. It will depend on how the OEMs price their servers. The Opteron 6100 series offers up to 24 DIMMs slots, the Xeon is “limited” to 18. In many cases this allows the server buyer to achieve higher amount of memory with lower costs. You can go for 96 GB of memory with affordable 4 GB DIMMs, while the Intel server is limited to 72 GB there. That is a small bonus for the AMD server."

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2978/amd-s-12-core-magny-cours-opteron-6174-vs-intel-s-6-core-xeon/15

The funny part is that on the PC market the choice is clearly the 6 cores Phenon for $325, on the server segment the 12 core Opteron is very competite, but on the workstation market things are not so clear, and cost, power envelop and performance must be taken into fine consideration before purchasing.

This article is not biased towards Intel: it only points convenintly towards one the few market segment that Intel has a product worth mentioning ( the other being extrem low power no compromise taken PC with the i3...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY