Xeon E5-2637 Build with room to upgrade

[Jsplinter]

Before I drop almost $4k on this build, I would most appreciate some feed back. I am convinced that the CPU selection is correct, so I am building around the Xeon E5-2637 v3 (v4 doesn't seem to have a retail MoBo to support it). This machine will be accessed remotely, so the GPU is secondary for the time being I might eventually want to do CUDA processing at which point in time I will upgrade.


Intel Xeon E5-2637 V3 3.5GHz Quad-Core OEM/Tray Processor
Corsair H110i GTX 104.7 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler
Asus Z10PE-D16 WS SSI EEB Dual-CPU LGA2011-3 Motherboard
Crucial 64GB (4 x 16GB) Registered DDR4-2133 Memory
Samsung 850 Pro Series 1TB 2.5" Solid State Drive
Samsung 850 PRO 2TB 2.5" Solid State Drive
Phanteks Enthoo Pro ATX Full Tower Case
Corsair RM 1000W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply


In the not so distant future the plan is to add an additional E5-2637 and increase RAM from 64-256GB. Might add a couple of GTX 980s as well (at which point I would replace the power supply).

 

[iamacow]

V4 chips aren't out yet (or almost out) which is why nothing supports it. Brands like Asus will add support right away. especially if you have the WS model. In fact Bios 3101 2015/12/01 supports " Broadwell-EP processors." Aka V4 Xeon.

I owned the X79 WS version and I loved that motherboard. It supported every XEON for the original 2011 socket. Even after basically everyone else dropped support. Though the support lists say bios 3204 is when they are officially supported.

http://www.asus.com/us/supportonly/Z10PE-D8%20WS/HelpDesk_CPU/

 

[Jsplinter]

Wow, you are correct! So, even though the Z10PE-D16 WS specification is only for the v3 processors: "Build in Intel® Socket 2011-3: Square type (80x80mm) Processors
Intel® Socket 2011-3 for Intel® Xeon® processor E5-2600 v3 product family"

They are supporting the v4 processors? If it is not likely to cause stability issues, I would rather purchase the newer E5-2637 v4.

V4 chips aren't out yet (or almost out) which is why nothing supports it. Brands like Asus will add support right away. especially if you have the WS model. In fact Bios 3101 2015/12/01 supports " Broadwell-EP processors." Aka V4 Xeon.

I owned the X79 WS version and I loved that motherboard. It supported every XEON for the original 2011 socket. Even after basically everyone else dropped support. Though the support lists say bios 3204 is when they are officially supported.

http://www.asus.com/us/supportonly/Z10PE-D8%20WS/HelpDesk_CPU/

 

[bambiboom]

Before I drop almost $4k on this build, I would most appreciate some feed back. I am convinced that the CPU selection is correct, so I am building around the Xeon E5-2637 v3 (v4 doesn't seem to have a retail MoBo to support it). This machine will be accessed remotely, so the GPU is secondary for the time being I might eventually want to do CUDA processing at which point in time I will upgrade.


Intel Xeon E5-2637 V3 3.5GHz Quad-Core OEM/Tray Processor
Corsair H110i GTX 104.7 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler
Asus Z10PE-D16 WS SSI EEB Dual-CPU LGA2011-3 Motherboard
Crucial 64GB (4 x 16GB) Registered DDR4-2133 Memory
Samsung 850 Pro Series 1TB 2.5" Solid State Drive
Samsung 850 PRO 2TB 2.5" Solid State Drive
Phanteks Enthoo Pro ATX Full Tower Case
Corsair RM 1000W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply


In the not so distant future the plan is to add an additional E5-2637 and increase RAM from 64-256GB. Might add a couple of GTX 980s as well (at which point I would replace the power supply).

b]Jsplinter,[/b]

Without knowing the use and software- CPU, GPU, RAM, and/or disk intensive, number of users any suggestions are going to be generic.

The specification of a dual Xeon motherboard and with a fast 4-core with high single-threading. This compares well to the fastest single CPU 8 core and the total performance from a pair is very good. If single-threaded performance is the priority for example might have better results for less money with a fast 8-core:

CPU_____________________Passmark Average___Single-threaded___Price

E5-2673 v3 : 4-core @ 3.5 /3.7Ghz__ 10306___________ 2155______ $996
E5-2673 v3 2X CPUS:____________ 23466__________ 2155______ $1,994
E5-1680 v3 : 8-core @ 3.2 /3.8GHz __ 16951__________ 2154 ______ $1,850

that provides the same single-threaded performance and same total numberr of threads for a slightly lower cost as the pair of E5-2637 v3 and the extra cost of dual Xeon motehrboards . It appears Adobe multi-threaded applications are not fond of leaping over to dual CPUs so in that use the single E5-1680 v3 is preferable.

Another tactic is to use depreciated CPU's and if for example your system is CPU-intensive:

BambiBoom CalcuCannon Matlabarificsimugraphilicious iWork TurboSignature Extreme ModelBlast 9800 ®©$$™®£™©™_3.26.15

Case /Motherboard / CPU coolers / Power supply : Supermicro SuperWorkstation SYS-7037A-I Dual Socket LGA2011 Xeon 900W Mid-Tower Workstation Barebone System (Black) > $721

http://www.supermicro.com/products/system/tower/7038/SYS-7038A-i.cfm
http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=SY-7038AI

CPU: 2X Intel Xeon E5-2690 Eight-Core Haswell Processor 2.9 /3.8GHz, 20MB LGA 2011 CPU, 130W > used about $800 ($400 each)

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-E5-2690-2-9GHz-20M-SR0L0-8-Core-Socket-2011-CPU-Processor-/131734594636?hash=item1eabfe644c:g:ZP8AAOSwKtVWy7dM

Memory: 64GB (8x 8GB) Crucial 8GB 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM ECC Unbuffered DDR3 1866 (PC3 14900) Memory Model CT102472BA186D > $480 ($60ea.)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=12K-00WZ-00010&cm_re=8GB_DDR3-1866_ECC_unbuffered-_-12K-00WZ-00010-_-Product

GPU 1: PNY Quadro M4000 VCQM4000-PB 8GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 x16 Full Height Workstation Video Card > $859.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA24G3RH4362&cm_re=quadro_M4000-_-14-132-051-_-Product

GPU 2,3: 2X Nvidia Tesla M2090 6GB GDDR5 PCIe 2.0 x16 Computing Processor Module > used sold for $88

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nvidia-Tesla-M2090-6GB-GDDR5-PCIe-2-0-x16-Computing-Processor-Module-/381517005168?hash=item58d42f8170%3Ag%3A-p0AAOSwSHZWhBsc&nma=true&si=XxWQaZh9sa6uDkjKx5D0AglVFe0%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

RAID Controller : LSI MegaRAID SATA/SAS 9260-4i 6Gb/s PCI-Express 2.0 w/ 512MB onboard memory RAID Controller Card, Kit--Avago Technologies > $280

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816118107&cm_re=LSI_megaraid-_-16-118-107-_-Product

Disk 1: SAMSUNG 850 PRO 2.5" 1TB SATA III 3-D Vertical Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) MZ-7KE1T0BW> $430.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147362&cm_re=samsung_850_pro-_-20-147-361-_-Product

Disks 2, 3: 2X Seagate Constellation ES.3 ST3000NM0023 3TB 7200RPM SAS3/SAS 6.0 GB/s 128MB Enterprise Hard Drive (3.5 inch)> $364 ($183 each) (Files, Backup, System Image)

http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=ST3000NM23

Optical Disk: SAMSUNG DVD Burner 24X DVD+R 8X DVD+RW 8X DVD+R DL 24X DVD-R 6X DVD-RW 16X DVD-ROM 48X CD-R 24X CD-RW 48X CD-ROM SATA Model SH-224DB/BEBE - OEM > $18

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827151266

Operating System: Microsoft Windows 7 Professional SP1 64-bit English (1-Pack), OEM > $139.

http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=MSFQC08289
_______________________________________

TOTAL = $4,269

E5-2690: 2X 8-core @ 2.9 /3.8Ghz__ 20826___________ 1874____ $800

The total CPU cost for 2X e5-2690 is less than a single E5-2637 so if all other things are equal, this means that the dual Xeon system could be built within the same budget as the single CPU- the expansion has already happened. Plus, the above example includes 2X used Tesla M2090 6GB co-processors, so given 16 cores at up to 3.5GHz the Quadro M4000 (8GB), and 2X Tesla M2090, for any scientific .analytical, simulation system, it would have a very high calculation density. A system like that new would have cost probably $16,000-18,000. (2X E5-2690= $4,200, 2X Tesla M2090 = $5,100)

The single threaded performance is not as good as the E5-2637 v3, but there are twice as many cores and threads that can be addressed by multi-threaded applications, for example VM's CPU rendering, Matlab / Arc/GIS, and video editing processing.

So, a couple of alternate directions, but really to optimize the system, it's necessary to know the use and programs, number of users, and etc.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

Modeling:

1. HP z420 (2015) > Xeon E5-1660 v2 (6-core @ 3.7 / 4.0GHz) > 32GB DDR3 1866 ECC RAM > Quadro K4200 (4GB) > Intel 730 480GB (9SSDSC2BP480G4R5) > Western Digital Black WD1003FZEX 1TB> M-Audio 192 sound card > 600W PSU> > Windows 7 Professional 64-bit > Logitech z2300 speakers > 2X Dell Ultrasharp U2715H (2560 X 1440)>
[ Passmark Rating = 5064 > CPU= 13989 / 2D= 819 / 3D= 4596 / Mem= 2772 / Disk= 4555]
[Passmark V9.0 Beta Rating = 5019.1 > CPU= 14206 / 2D= 779 / 3D= 5032 / Mem= 2707 / Disk= 4760] 3.31.16
[Cinebench R15 > CPU = 1014 OpenGL= 126.59 FPS] 7.8.15

Rendering:

2. Dell Precision T5500 (2011) (Revised) > 2X Xeon X5680 (6-core @ 3.33 / 3.6GHz), 48GB DDR3 1333 ECC Reg. > Quadro K2200 (4GB ) > PERC H310 / Samsung 840 250GB / WD RE4 Enterprise 1TB > M-Audio 192 sound card > Logitech z313 > 875W PSU > Windows 7 Professional 64> HP 2711x (27", 1920 X 1080)
[ Passmark system rating = 3844 / CPU = 15047 / 2D= 662 / 3D= 3550 / Mem= 1785 / Disk= 2649] (12.30.15)

 

[Jsplinter]

That was good advice showing a comparison between 8 core Xeon vs 2x 4 core Xeon. I am convinced I want to build around the E5-2637. This will be running software that I wrote. It is hard to say whether it will be I/O or CPU bound, so I am hedging my bets a little.

I am mostly looking for feedback related to v3 / v4, and that RAM MoBo and graphics should be stable for a remotely accessed computer.

Without knowing the use and software- CPU, GPU, RAM, and/or disk intensive, number of users any suggestions are going to be generic.

The specification of a dual Xeon motherboard and with a fast 4-core with high single-threading. This compares well to the fastest single CPU 8 core and the total performance from a pair is very good. If single-threaded performance is the priority for example might have better results for less money with a fast 8-core:

CPU_____________________Passmark Average___Single-threaded___Price

E5-2673 v3 : 4-core @ 3.5 /3.7Ghz__ 10306___________ 2155______ $996
E5-2673 v3 2X CPUS:____________ 23466__________ 2155______ $1,994
E5-1680 v3 : 8-core @ 3.2 /3.8GHz __ 16951__________ 2154 ______ $1,850

that provides the same single-threaded performance and same total numberr of threads for a slightly lower cost as the pair of E5-2637 v3 and the extra cost of dual Xeon motehrboards . It appears Adobe multi-threaded applications are not fond of leaping over to dual CPUs so in that use the single E5-1680 v3 is preferable.

Another tactic is to use depreciated CPU's and if for example your system is CPU-intensive:

 

[bambiboom]

"That was good advice showing a comparison between 8 core Xeon vs 2x 4 core Xeon. I am convinced I want to build around the E5-2637. This will be running software that I wrote. It is hard to say whether it will be I/O or CPU bound, so I am hedging my bets a little.

I am mostly looking for feedback related to v3 / v4, and that RAM MoBo and graphics should be stable for a remotely accessed computer."

Jsplinter,

So, do you mean that the system is for software development or your firm is running custom software?

There are quite a number of V4-ready motherboards and this is one of my favorites:

Supermicro X10DAi

Supermicro are server and workstation specialists, so their products are high performance and ultra-reliable. This motherboard supports two Xeon E5 v4 2600 series CPU's and DDR4-2400 ECC Reg- up to 2TB of the right kind. I like this one particularly too as it has 3X PCIe 3.0 x16 slots, so a GPU plus 2X Tesla co-processors is possible, The other two slots are 2X 3,0 X8 and a 2.0 X4 in x8 format, so the system could have GPU, 2X Telsa coprocessor, LSI RAID controller and the boot drive and cache drive can be PCIe SSD.

A great shortcut to a system like that is to build it in a Supermcro SYS-7038A-I or http://www.supermicro.com.tw/products/system/4U/7048/SYS-7048A-T.cfm , both of which incorporate the Supermicro X10DAi motherboard. Both of these have dual LAN. the power supplies are 900w and 1200W so, no future upgrade would be necessary as these are rated to use 2X CPU's.

The Xeon E5-2637 v4 specification.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

 

[Jsplinter]

We are running custom software on the machine.

Thank you very much for pointing out that motherboard and workstation! They look very promising... as long as the price isn't substantially higher than the alternative, I will highly consider using one of those.

The SuperMicro X10DAi Mobo looks comparable to the Asus Z10PE-D16 WS.

In general I prefer online retailers, and the SuperMicro website does not make it easy to find a local distributor (distributors are listed by region).

Jsplinter,

So, do you mean that the system is for software development or your firm is running custom software?

There are quite a number of V4-ready motherboards and this is one of my favorites:

Supermicro X10DAi

Supermicro are server and workstation specialists, so their products are high performance and ultra-reliable. This motherboard supports two Xeon E5 v4 2600 series CPU's and DDR4-2400 ECC Reg- up to 2TB of the right kind. I like this one particularly too as it has 3X PCIe 3.0 x16 slots, so a GPU plus 2X Tesla co-processors is possible, The other two slots are 2X 3,0 X8 and a 2.0 X4 in x8 format, so the system could have GPU, 2X Telsa coprocessor, LSI RAID controller and the boot drive and cache drive can be PCIe SSD.

A great shortcut to a system like that is to build it in a Supermcro SYS-7038A-I or http://www.supermicro.com.tw/products/system/4U/7048/SYS-7048A-T.cfm , both of which incorporate the Supermicro X10DAi motherboard. Both of these have dual LAN. the power supplies are 900w and 1200W so, no future upgrade would be necessary as these are rated to use 2X CPU's.

The Xeon E5-2637 v4 specification.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

 

[bambiboom]

"We are running custom software on the machine.

Thank you very much for pointing out that motherboard and workstation! They look very promising... as long as the price isn't substantially higher than the alternative, I will highly consider using one of those.

The SuperMicro X10DAi Mobo looks comparable to the Asus Z10PE-D16 WS.

In general I prefer online retailers, and the SuperMicro website does not make it easy to find a local distributor (distributors are listed by region)."


Jsplinter,

To compare prices, here is the page at online retailer Superbiiz for the Supermicro X10DAI motherboard as well as the 7038 and 7048 Superworkstations that include a X10DAI. There must be ten or fifteen slightly different versions- slots, LAN and etc.

Superbiiz also sell the Asus Z10PE-D16 WS which is a very good performing motherboard and does include an M.2 port. As you can see, the ASUS is quite a bit more expensive - $496 to $365.

The Xeon E5-2637 v4 pre-order price is apparently $996, but I haven't yet seen a retailer accepting preorders. As Intel has it on their ARK site, it can only be days or a couple of weeks away from availability.

If the system is remotely accessed, instead of a GPU, you might consider a Tesla C2075 CUDA coprocessor. This uses 447 CUDA cores and with 6GB of memory to accelerate calculation intensive tasks. It's unique among Teslas as it has a DVI port to run a monitor (!600 X 1200) and this is useful for setup and maintenance. These are expensive new- $2,500- but as the MTBF is 72,000 hours- 9 years continuous running, a used one is probably a reasonable idea. Amazon sells them for $825 and up and they've sold on Ebahhhh for as little as $300. Another idea along these lines is to buy three Tesla M2090 coprocessors- now selling fro as little as $100-$120 and those could fill the three GPU slots on the X10-DAI and add an extra 1,500 GUDA cores to the project. The Teslas are however dual slot.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

 

[Jsplinter]

BambiBoom,

Thank you so much for that response! I find it extremely helpful. I will update as I make the final decisions.

 

[iamacow]

Dude the Tesla C2075 is 8 years old now and is under $100 used on ebay. Don't waste your money on them. I have like 3 on my floor lol. completely worthless for CUDA these days since it was the early days of it. Nothing modern is supported on it.

 

[bambiboom]

Dude the Tesla C2075 is 8 years old now and is under $100 used on ebay. Don't waste your money on them. I have like 3 on my floor lol. completely worthless for CUDA these days since it was the early days of it. Nothing modern is supported on it.

imacow,

You're misinformed on every point.

1. The Tesla C2075 was released at the beginning of 2012,

2. The least expensive C2075 listed today on Ebay US is $638.

3. Have a look at this benchmark comparing a C2075 to i7-6700.

NVIDIA Tesla C2075

OS Windows
API OpenCL
Discrete
OS OS X
API OpenCL

GPU NVIDIA Tesla C2075 ___Intel Core i7-6700K CPU__AMD FX 9590

Face Detection

25.048 mPixels/s_____________ 6.246 mPixels/s_________ 11.019 mPixels/s

TV-L1 Optical Flow

8.602 mPixels/________________1.72 mPixels/s__________ 0.769 mPixels/s

Ocean Surface Simulation

909.147 Frames/s___+++_______ 102.224 Frames/s_______ 30.315 Frames/s

Particle Simulation - 64k

230.971 mInteraction/s_________ 53.109 mInteraction/s____ 31.623 mInteraction/s

T-Rex

3.146 Frames/s_______________ 0.742 Frames/s_________ 0.468 Frames/s

Video Composition

42.657 Frames/s_____________ 2.929 Frames/s_________ 1.635 Frames/s

Bitcoin Mining

91.754 mHash/s_____________ 7.341 mHash/s__________ 8.811 mHash/s

Now, show me the way in which a C2075 is useless and "Nothing modern is supported on it"- it's 4X to 20X faster than an i7-6700 and 2X to 40X faster than an FX 9590 which is rated to be AMD's fastest CPU. Then, show me photo of the 3- C2075's on your floor and I'll buy them for $300.

Random, uninformed comments are not helping those that ask for advice and information.

Try reality- it's actually more interesting than what you've been using!

Cheers,

BambiBoom

 

[Jsplinter]

In all fairness, I would prefer to compare CUDA to CUDA. Of course comparing something with 448 cores to something with only 4 cores will give very different results depending on which benchmarks are used.

FWIW, I will not be using a Tesla C2075 in this build. The question is still between E5-2637 v3 or v4 and which MoBo to use. When-if-we start doing CUDA processing, we will purchase a couple GTX-980s or better.

Dude the Tesla C2075 is 8 years old now and is under $100 used on ebay. Don't waste your money on them. I have like 3 on my floor lol. completely worthless for CUDA these days since it was the early days of it. Nothing modern is supported on it.

imacow,

You're misinformed on every point.

1. The Tesla C2075 was released at the beginning of 2012,

2. The least expensive C2075 listed today on Ebay US is $638.

3. Have a look at this benchmark comparing a C2075 to i7-6700.

NVIDIA Tesla C2075

OS Windows
API OpenCL
Discrete
OS OS X
API OpenCL

GPU NVIDIA Tesla C2075 ___Intel Core i7-6700K CPU__AMD FX 9590

Face Detection

25.048 mPixels/s_____________ 6.246 mPixels/s_________ 11.019 mPixels/s

TV-L1 Optical Flow

8.602 mPixels/________________1.72 mPixels/s__________ 0.769 mPixels/s

Ocean Surface Simulation

909.147 Frames/s___+++_______ 102.224 Frames/s_______ 30.315 Frames/s

Particle Simulation - 64k

230.971 mInteraction/s_________ 53.109 mInteraction/s____ 31.623 mInteraction/s

T-Rex

3.146 Frames/s_______________ 0.742 Frames/s_________ 0.468 Frames/s

Video Composition

42.657 Frames/s_____________ 2.929 Frames/s_________ 1.635 Frames/s

Bitcoin Mining

91.754 mHash/s_____________ 7.341 mHash/s__________ 8.811 mHash/s

Now, show me the way in which a C2075 is useless and "Nothing modern is supported on it"- it's 4X to 20X faster than an i7-6700 and 2X to 40X faster than an FX 9590 which is rated to be AMD's fastest CPU. Then, show me photo of the 3- C2075's on your floor and I'll buy them for $300.

Random, uninformed comments are not helping those that ask for advice and information.

Try reality- it's actually more interesting than what you've been using!

Cheers,

BambiBoom

 

[iamacow]

I hate to say this bambiboom, but use google. The 2075 is a fermi gpu (GF100) and basically a Geforce 480. It is also only Compute 2.0 (CUDA) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CUDA . Which means "most modern stuff won't run", like I said. Nvidia cut off support long ago on its on CUDA products to sell newer and frankly better stuff. Buying that old card is 100% a waste of money, which is why I have 2 laying on my floor gathering dust.

 

[bambiboom]

I hate to say this bambiboom, but use google. The 2075 is a fermi gpu (GF100) and basically a Geforce 480. It is also only Compute 2.0 (CUDA) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CUDA . Which means "most modern stuff won't run", like I said. Nvidia cut off support long ago on its on CUDA products to sell newer and frankly better stuff. Buying that old card is 100% a waste of money, which is why I have 2 laying on my floor gathering dust.

iamacow,

1. Matlab runs on compute version 1.3 and above. The C2075 is version 2. If you google "2" you will find that it is "above" 1.3.

Did you bother to look at the direct computational comparison of a C2075 with i7-6700K and AMD FX 9590- "modern stuff"?

2. NVIDIA supports all Teslas and Quadros from the Telsa GPU series onwards. I use a Quadro FX 580 to run my server monitor- and that card from 2003 is still on the Autodesk list to run AutoCad 2016- "modern stuff". If you had ever owned a Fermi Tesla such as the C2075- or bothered to use Google, you would know that a C2075 runs the same CUDA 7.5 driver as the current Tesla K80 (Kepler) as well as the older M-series such as an M2090 which are v 1.3- and will run Matlab. I NVIDIA provides drivers as they do for all the Quadro and Telsa Fermi and Tesla GPUs. . I regularly use a Quadro 4000 (Fermi) which is running AutoCad 2015, Solidworks 2014, Adobe CS6, and Sketchup 2015- "modern stuff" in my opinion. and which uses the same driver as my Quadro K2200 and K4200 (Kepler).

3. Certainly the newer Teslas have faster GPU's, more CUDA cores, and memory but every Tesla since the C and M series is completely usable . As the posted comparison of the C2075 with a current i7-6700K shows, the single and double precision computing power is completely useful on parallel applications that benefit from it such as Matlab.

3. If you have two- it was "like 3 of them" last time- Tesla cards gathering dust on your floor, guess who is the person already wasting their money.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

 

[iamacow]

I'll give you credit. I didn't think of mathlab. Anyways my main point is if your spending $600+ on these extremely dated cards, than well..you are wasting money.

I was counting my Quadro FX 4800 on accident....sooo there is that.

 

[bambiboom]

I'll give you credit. I didn't think of mathlab. Anyways my main point is if your spending $600+ on these extremely dated cards, than well..you are wasting money.

I was counting my Quadro FX 4800 on accident....sooo there is that.

iamacow,

I have an FX-4800 in an elderly Precision T5400 and of course, these old Quadros are very reliable, but they are low performance as compared to new ones- a $150 Quadro K620 is faster than than a Quadro 4000- almost 5000 level and that was a $2,000 card new.

The T5400 could use a boost from a Tesla. I lent the T5400 (2X Xeon X5460 / 16GB /FX 4800 to a friend at the local aerospace firm to run some flight dynamics problems (von Karman turbulence) in Matlab and one of the problems ran for two days continuously. The X5460 is non-hyperthreading so it's running only 8 threads total.

A C2075 for $650 does seems too much and I think it's the time of year- I've seen $300-350 ones too. Used Teslas are cheap as the new ones are so much faster, but the cost /performance is very good- in the right application, they can push the numbers. They might sell for more as those have a DVI port and I'm not sure any other Tesla had that. I would rather apply that kind of cost to a K20.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

 

[Jsplinter]

Follow up question: Would it be possible to skip the graphics card altogether? I'm currently not using CUDA and will be accessing this machine remotely.

 

[bambiboom]

Follow up question: Would it be possible to skip the graphics card altogether? I'm currently not using CUDA and will be accessing this machine remotely.

Jsplinter,

If there is space at the system location, I suggest some minimal level of keyboard /mouse, GPU, and monitor for setup, maintenance, and problems. To load and configure everything, to run diagnostics, updates, and if the system has trouble, there needs to be a way to see what's happening. For example, for my office server, which is a separate space- more or less remotely operated- I have a Quadro FX580 (512MB) - less than $20 including shipping, plus a $30 Dell 17" LCD and very generic Dell keyboard and mouse.

Quadro FX1700 and FX1800 are also good. Those Quadros seem to last forever- I have a FX580's from 2004 and 2008,and FX 550's (128MB / dual DVI) and a FX 1800 from 2006-2008 and they all are completely reliable. The FX580 is still on the Autodesk list for AutoCad 2016!

Cheers,

BamibBoom

 

[Jsplinter]

Yes, there is room for all peripherals and the OS needs to be installed.

I am wondering if it is possible to simply use the built in VGA for this purpose (and built in graphics), or if it is necessary to buy a GPU card. This may seem like a dumb question, but I have never built a computer without a GPU card, so I want to make absolutely certain.

Follow up question: Would it be possible to skip the graphics card altogether? I'm currently not using CUDA and will be accessing this machine remotely.

Jsplinter,

If there is space at the system location, I suggest some minimal level of keyboard /mouse, GPU, and monitor for setup, maintenance, and problems. To load and configure everything, to run diagnostics, updates, and if the system has trouble, there needs to be a way to see what's happening. For example, for my office server, which is a separate space- more or less remotely operated- I have a Quadro FX580 (512MB) - less than $20 including shipping, plus a $30 Dell 17" LCD and very generic Dell keyboard and mouse.

Quadro FX1700 and FX1800 are also good. Those Quadros seem to last forever- I have a FX580's from 2004 and 2008,and FX 550's (128MB / dual DVI) and a FX 1800 from 2006-2008 and they all are completely reliable. The FX580 is still on the Autodesk list for AutoCad 2016!

Cheers,

BamibBoom

 

[bambiboom]

Jsplinter,

I don't know what the source of the display would be- Xeon E5 CPU's do not have integrated graphics. See E5-2637 v3 specifications below. When there is integrated graphics, the CPU has a sub-system that generates a signal input to an motherboard chip that generates the video output. Anyway, CPU's with IG are subtracting system computational and memory resources- the system RAM becomes (variably) dedicated to video output.

If there a reason why a graphics output is objectionable? - e.g., security?

Cheers,

BambiBoom



Intel Xeon Processor E5-2637 v3
(15M Cache, 3.50 GHz)

Specifications
-
Launch Date Q3'14
Processor Number E5-2637V3
Intel® Smart Cache 15 MB
Intel® QPI Speed 9.6 GT/s
# of QPI Links 2
Instruction Set 64-bit
Instruction Set Extensions AVX 2.0
Embedded Options Available
No
Lithography 22 nm
Scalability 2S
VID Voltage Range 0.65V–1.30V
Recommended Customer Price TRAY: $996.00
Datasheet Link
Product Brief Link
Additional Information URL Link
-
Performance
# of Cores 4
# of Threads 8
Processor Base Frequency 3.5 GHz
Max Turbo Frequency 3.7 GHz
TDP 135 W
-
Memory Specifications
Max Memory Size (dependent on memory type) 768 GB
Memory Types DDR4 1600/1866/2133
Max # of Memory Channels 4
Max Memory Bandwidth 68 GB/s
Physical Address Extensions 46-bit
ECC Memory Supported ‡
Yes
-
Graphics Specifications
Processor Graphics ‡ None
-
Expansion Options
PCI Express Revision 3.0
PCI Express Configurations ‡ x4, x8, x16
Max # of PCI Express Lanes 40
-
Package Specifications
Max CPU Configuration 2
TCASE 76.6°C
Package Size 52.5mm x 45mm
Sockets Supported FCLGA2011-3
Low Halogen Options Available See MDDS
-
Advanced Technologies
Intel® Turbo Boost Technology ‡ 2.0
Intel® vPro Technology ‡
Yes
Intel® Hyper-Threading Technology ‡
Yes
Intel® Virtualization Technology (VT-x) ‡ Yes
Intel® Virtualization Technology for Directed I/O (VT-d) ‡
Yes
Intel® VT-x with Extended Page Tables (EPT) ‡
Yes
Intel® TSX-NI No
Intel® 64 ‡
Yes
Idle States Yes
Enhanced Intel SpeedStep® Technology
Yes
Intel® Demand Based Switching
Yes
Thermal Monitoring Technologies Yes
Intel® Flex Memory Access No
Intel® Identity Protection Technology ‡ No
-
Intel® Data Protection Technology
Intel® AES New Instructions
Yes
Secure Key Yes
-
Intel® Platform Protection Technology
OS Guard Yes
Trusted Execution Technology ‡
Yes
Execute Disable Bit ‡ Yes

 

[Jsplinter]

Correct, the Xeon E5 CPU does not have integrated graphics. I think there might be a GPU on the Asus Z10PE-D16 WS motherboard itself. In the specifications it lists:

Graphic
ASpeed AST2400 32MB
VGA port*2
- Supports VGA with max. resolution 1920 x 1200 @ 60 Hz

I am confused why it would have a VGA port without a GPU.

Maybe I will just go ahead an get a separate GPU. I was trying to hold off purchasing a GPU until I knew for sure I was going to be using CUDA on the machine.

Jsplinter,

I don't know what the source of the display would be- Xeon E5 CPU's do not have integrated graphics. See E5-2637 v3 specifications below. When there is integrated graphics, the CPU has a sub-system that generates a signal input to an motherboard chip that generates the video output. Anyway, CPU's with IG are subtracting system computational and memory resources- the system RAM becomes (variably) dedicated to video output.

If there a reason why a graphics output is objectionable? - e.g., security?

Cheers,

BambiBoom