TIP: Intel Xeon to gaming PC. (Cheap i7)

[Veristä mössöä]

When you should think of going to Xeon:
- You won't overclock. (Because you can't with this)
- You don't need integrated GPU. (It doesn't have it)

Benefits
- Xeon 1230v2/v3 is almost same processor as i7-3770 (v2) or i7-4770 (v3), but considerably cheaper.
Xeon 1230v2 234$, 1230v3 265$, i7-3770K 320$, i7-4770K 340$

- Because 1230 is almost same as normal/desktop i7, it has 4 cores and 8 threads. This is advantage over i5 processors if you want more parallel processing power.

- Lower TDP and therefore runs cooler.

- It supports all the same motherboards than normal i7/i5s.

- You can go for cheaper motherboards B/H series because you can't overclock.

- v2 is 1155 and v3 for 1150.

So Xeons are really a option for you all if you're building new machines. In nutshell it's cheaper version of desktop i7.

[Rumpelcrutchskin]

Or you could just buy i5-4670K for $240 and overclock it...

[Veristä mössöä]

Yeah but i5 doesn't have hyperthreading (read: 8 threads). i7 (xeon in this case)/i5 are both good, but for different market segments.

Point of this thread was not to compare i5 vs i7. Only to inform that there's cheaper i7 alternative available with minor differences (no GPU / overclocking).

[Dzeeraajs]

That is a really good info tbh

[silver-1]

in games better is high clock speed than more theards

[Veristä mössöä]

Originally posted by stg44:

in games better is high clock speed than more theards

Well of course (for now), but user can have other things that require parallel processing power. These all are choices for end user to make. For ex. some people still buy AMD processors when they have 8 cores, but suck with raw processing power (well they are cheaper). But there are people with different needs.

[Vitdom]

Yep this is really great. I am thinking of buying the 22nm Haswell-based Intel Xeon E3-1240(v3) at 3.4 GHz, equal to the Intel Core i7-4770 w/o IGP.

I keep hearing about people saying the Xeon-branded CPUs are not for gaming although they sure seem better, cheaper and more reliable than the Core iX-branded CPUs. Am I getting something wrong here?

My old PC is a 8 yo nearly dead P4 3 GHz HT CPU and it has made it all these years.

Seeing that the next Intel Tick-Tock generation is the Broadwell-based CPUs which allegedly has -30% power consumption at 14 nm die manufacturing technology, I am concerned buying a current gen CPU because I'd rather like that it remained up to date for the next 5-7 years without any issues or gradual degradation due to thermal issues.

Wondering if I should wait or just go for it right now, I'm not really in such a big hurry.

[groovvy]

With a P4 in hand, you're definitely in no hurry. Do it. Get a nice motherboard, and grab something you can tweak a little instead. I went from a C2Q9400 3.2 to a 4670k and doubled my gains in pure cpu terms. It idles at 700 and then leaps to 4Ghz in the blink of an eye. You'll need some GPU behind it, but it's a thoroughly impressive amount of power. Enough for years. The Xeon will blow your mind too, but if you want to tickle it a bit, go with a k. If you do any video encoding, you'll have a lot more free time.

[Vitdom]

I just want a fast, stable and reliable CPU, I don't do stuff like video encoding, just maybe more heavy CPU tasks such as hobby programming and playing games. My P4 is dead though so I am currently on an average 2 yo laptop. So I don't have any overclocking in mind, but it must definitely be able to endure constant frequency 24/7 without GHz frequency variances and high stability, given I supply it with sufficient air/liquid cooling.

I've settled with the Intel Xeon E3-1240(v3) :)

[_I_]

4670k can hit 4ghz with a 212evo
just disable turbo, and set the base multi at 40

to stop it from underclocking and undervolting while idle, disable c1e

[Vitdom]

Originally posted by _I_:

4670k can hit 4ghz with a 212evo
just disable turbo, and set the base multi at 40

to stop it from underclocking and undervolting while idle, disable c1e

How's the stability for performing durations spanning years? I'm not going to buy 2 CPUs for almost 2x total pricing rather than buying locked products at higher quality for higher pricing.

Regarding the frequency transitions, all the datasheet is saying is "there is a low latency between P-states".
EDIT: Found out it takes ~3000 clocks to transition frequency. "tolerances for dynamic load currents switching frequencies up to 1 MHz"

So I don't really have a need to disable C1E because that would only mean fixing about >0.001% load stutter per work frame in my application. It wouldn't really change the performance quality since I'd put the threshold at 1.000%.

I didn't expect it to be so low. Since I saw people suggesting the power saving features of frequency idleing were bad, I though it was much higher. Why would people need to disable C1E if the clock rate is ½ for only a few microseconds during idle->work transitions? It increases the lifetime by a big margin right?

[_I_]

disabling windows core parking would probably make a bigger diff

if the cooling is good, overclocking wont hurt the lifetime of the cpu
its when they run hot (80c+) is where youll shorten the lifespan of the cpu

[upcoast]

http://en.expreview.com/2012/04/16/intel-xeon-e3-1230-v2-processor-review/22470.html/4

Specs n stuff ^.

[bear]

Originally posted by _I_:

disabling windows core parking would probably make a bigger diff

if the cooling is good, overclocking wont hurt the lifetime of the cpu
its when they run hot (80c+) is where youll shorten the lifespan of the cpu

Only true with no voltage increases. Any increase in voltage will increase electronmigration no matter what temps you keep it at.