3 ms·

Niiice! I wonder how it behaves in games. Did anyone try it yet? Also, the Xeon E5-2670 is still priced at 1900+ euros in Europe at the moment...

by joss82 11y ago

vvanders 11y ago
Games benchmark is on page 7, does pretty okay.
wyldfire 11y ago
Then you should probably import one -- start with the link in the article. No way the duties will be anywhere near that much.
striking 11y ago
IIRC Linus Tech Tips does take a look at a similar system for video rendering. It's probably not going to do super well in games because the bottleneck is usually at the GPU anyway.
paulmd 11y ago
There are benchmarks on page 7. To summarize, it's slower than a 4690K in all cases, and running it in 2-CPU mode is slower than 1-CPU mode in all cases. Still beats AMD's high-end FX-8350 processor in all cases, amusingly enough. That's pretty much what you'd expect. Gaming performance is strongly correlated with single-threaded performance. Many games are essentially single-threaded and even when they're multi-threaded they are still subject to Amdahl's Law. Certain parts of games cannot be multithreaded (eg all draw-calls must be made from a single thread in all APIs prior to DX12 and Vulkan) and they tend to limit overall performance. So with narrow exceptions, single-thread performance is king. The best example of this is the G3258 - it's not really that powerful a processor, but it can be overclocked to really extreme levels and keep up in many games just through sheer single-threaded performance. Going across multiple processors is also particularly brutal because of greatly increased thread and cache synchronization costs. So again, not really a surprise that it's actually slower. If you need more than a 4790K or 6700K can deliver, your next stop is the 5820K or other -E series processors. But not many games really need or can make good advantage of more than 4 threads, and even fewer need more than 8.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- bubuga 11y ago
  > Still beats AMD's high-end FX-8350 processor in all cases, amusingly enough. A brand-new AMD FX-8350 costs around $160, while a Intel Xeon e5 2670 is sold for $1560 (newegg prices) The Xeon isn't 10x the processor that the AMD FX is. Not by a long shot.
  - paulmd 11y ago
    Yes, while workstation chips are insanely expensive (from a consumer perspective) they do often underperform enthusiast chips like the Core i5 series. The point here is that the FX-8350 does not. An older workstation-class chip outperforms it pretty handily. And once we move into consumer-class chips, its Ivy Bridge class equivalents totally outclass it, as do even its Sandy Bridge class predecessors. The Bulldozer architecture is absurdly bad for gaming usage, and should never be recommended, full stop. Single-threaded performance pushes frames, not multi-core performance. The AMD equivalent is likely several times as much as the FX processor as well. Not quite as much as the Intel, certainly, but not $160.
e12e 11y ago
Or you could buy an entire system for 700 euros? http://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-Z420-Workstation-E5-2670-Xeon-RAM-32GB-SSD-128GB-HDD-250GB-Quadro-295-/262335968438?hash=item3d147134b6:g:6N0AAOSwZQxW6Rjq http://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-Z420-Workstation-E5-2670-Xeon-RAM...

Niiice! I wonder how it behaves in games. Did anyone try it yet? Also, the Xeon E5-2670 is still priced at 1900+ euros in Europe at the moment...

by joss82 11y ago

Niiice! I wonder how it behaves in games. Did anyone try it yet? Also, the Xeon E5-2670 is still priced at 1900+ euros in Europe at the moment...

vvanders 11y ago

Games benchmark is on page 7, does pretty okay.

wyldfire 11y ago

Then you should probably import one -- start with the link in the article. No way the duties will be anywhere near that much.

striking 11y ago

IIRC Linus Tech Tips does take a look at a similar system for video rendering. It's probably not going to do super well in games because the bottleneck is usually at the GPU anyway.

paulmd 11y ago

There are benchmarks on page 7. To summarize, it's slower than a 4690K in all cases, and running it in 2-CPU mode is slower than 1-CPU mode in all cases. Still beats AMD's high-end FX-8350 processor in all cases, amusingly enough. That's pretty much what you'd expect. Gaming performance is strongly correlated with single-threaded performance. Many games are essentially single-threaded and even when they're multi-threaded they are still subject to Amdahl's Law. Certain parts of games cannot be multithreaded (eg all draw-calls must be made from a single thread in all APIs prior to DX12 and Vulkan) and they tend to limit overall performance. So with narrow exceptions, single-thread performance is king. The best example of this is the G3258 - it's not really that powerful a processor, but it can be overclocked to really extreme levels and keep up in many games just through sheer single-threaded performance. Going across multiple processors is also particularly brutal because of greatly increased thread and cache synchronization costs. So again, not really a surprise that it's actually slower. If you need more than a 4790K or 6700K can deliver, your next stop is the 5820K or other -E series processors. But not many games really need or can make good advantage of more than 4 threads, and even fewer need more than 8.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
bubuga 11y ago
> Still beats AMD's high-end FX-8350 processor in all cases, amusingly enough. A brand-new AMD FX-8350 costs around $160, while a Intel Xeon e5 2670 is sold for $1560 (newegg prices) The Xeon isn't 10x the processor that the AMD FX is. Not by a long shot.
- paulmd 11y ago
  Yes, while workstation chips are insanely expensive (from a consumer perspective) they do often underperform enthusiast chips like the Core i5 series. The point here is that the FX-8350 does not. An older workstation-class chip outperforms it pretty handily. And once we move into consumer-class chips, its Ivy Bridge class equivalents totally outclass it, as do even its Sandy Bridge class predecessors. The Bulldozer architecture is absurdly bad for gaming usage, and should never be recommended, full stop. Single-threaded performance pushes frames, not multi-core performance. The AMD equivalent is likely several times as much as the FX processor as well. Not quite as much as the Intel, certainly, but not $160.

e12e 11y ago

Or you could buy an entire system for 700 euros? http://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-Z420-Workstation-E5-2670-Xeon-RAM-32GB-SSD-128GB-HDD-250GB-Quadro-295-/262335968438?hash=item3d147134b6:g:6N0AAOSwZQxW6Rjq http://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-Z420-Workstation-E5-2670-Xeon-RAM...