Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 21

Thread: Intel's 3.4GHz 'Nocona' Xeon

  1. #1
    DR
    DR is offline
    on ye old ship HEXUS DR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    HEXUS HQ, Elstree
    Posts
    13,385
    Thanks
    1,035
    Thanked
    789 times in 358 posts

    Intel's 3.4GHz 'Nocona' Xeon

    To sum up, small-cache Xeon just got usefully faster, but Opteron still easily holds the lead.
    http://www.hexus.net/content/reviews...lld19JRD04MjI=

  2. #2
    OMG!! PWND!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    In front of computer
    Posts
    964
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    :S is it possible to see what it OC's like?? just for giggles of course

    *imagines a 2.8 Ghz Opteron....*

  3. #3
    Rys
    Rys is offline
    Tiled
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Abbots Langley
    Posts
    1,479
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    2 times in 1 post
    While I can't benchmark 2.8GHz dual Opterons, I do run 2.8GHz+ Athlon FX (Opteron by everything else but name), and I do have an article in the works that compares performance from FX-51 (2.2GHz), right up to a mythical FX-59/Opteron 256 (3.0GHz).

    Hope that'll be of interest Sorry I can't do it with a pair of processors though.

    Rys
    MOLLY AND POPPY!

  4. #4
    OMG!! PWND!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    In front of computer
    Posts
    964
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Why cant you?? Your ment to be the uber guy who does magical things...

    /me realises the world is crumbling around him!

    If Rys cant do it... who can??

    Or is it a case of the mobos dont allow it?

  5. #5
    HEXUS consultant editor James Morris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    157
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    None of the Opteron motherboards I know of allow overclocking, and with Registered ECC memory required you're not exactly spoilt for choice with high performance memory anyway. The same is true of Tumwater chipset motherboards so far. However, Asus and Iwill both managed to shoehorn 875 chipsets onto dual Xeon motherboards, so maybe we'll see the same with 925X. Supermicro 7525 boards are definitely not intended to be overclocked, though. This is a shame, because Xeons are just as good as P4s, if not better, for overclocking - the current PCMark04 world leader is an overclocked dual Xeon, incidentally built by the UK's very own Armari.

  6. #6
    Rys
    Rys is offline
    Tiled
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Abbots Langley
    Posts
    1,479
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    2 times in 1 post
    Even if I could increase FID on the Opterons using the BIOS, I'd need a second VapoChill and I've only got one

    For our next dual-CPU box review, I'll endeavour to slap some watercooling on there at the very least, should it be me doing the article. If anything, overclocking someone else's £3000 workstation is a giggle.

    Rys
    MOLLY AND POPPY!

  7. #7
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    29
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Interesting article, would be nice to see an overclocked prestonia platform (800 fsb DDR400 etc, put them on equal stepping) vs the new narconia too.

    And I think you mean 3DMark 2001, not 2003 as the article suggests.

    Last edited by TheDarkRealm; 18-08-2004 at 04:10 PM.
    2x 2400@3262 (D1 stepping) Xeons (233*14) (VID pin modded to 1.6v)
    ASUS PC-DL Deluxe (v1.04)
    Nvidia 6800 ultra
    1gb Corsair XMS3200

  8. #8
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts

    Opteron Short End Of The BandWidth??

    Any reason why you could not or would not allow the memory to run at 200/800HT 3200GB/sec??

    I know them benchmarks would have looked very different....In Opterons favor of course.

    And another thing....You could have done one up on AnandTech and run some Linux 64 (FedoraCore3, Suse 9.1, Knoppix64,....), in SMP, and NUMA(Linux)

    This Review seemed biased.

    I wish Reviewers could put there Bias Aside for the sake of a Real Platform Investigation....I'm getting really sick of seeing the mentality of "Oh Intel is so Great, I don't mind paying another $500 more for 40 more watts of heat, and less performance...blah, blah, blah)

    I know I can rely on Tech Report, and Ace's Hardware to put up a real review.

    Here's Hoping

    Freebrew

  9. #9
    Rys
    Rys is offline
    Tiled
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Abbots Langley
    Posts
    1,479
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    2 times in 1 post
    The mainboard didn't allow DDR400, simple as that. There's no memory adjust functions in the BIOS.

    I could have run 64-bit, if 64-bit was the article focus. It explains that on the first page, did you read it? We don't exist to go "one up" on other sites.

    And did you even read the conclusion, or any of the article? The Xeon does NOT come out on top.

    Thanks for your pre-determined, biased input.

    Rys
    MOLLY AND POPPY!

  10. #10
    HEXUS consultant editor James Morris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    157
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by freebrew
    And another thing....You could have done one up on AnandTech and run some Linux 64 (FedoraCore3, Suse 9.1, Knoppix64,....), in SMP, and NUMA(Linux)


    Suggest a few real graphics workstation apps that people who spend £4-5K on a system actually use running any of these Operating Systems. Lightwave? Nope. 3dsmax? Nope. Industrial CAD? Nope. After Effects? Nope. Photoshop? Nope. Video encoding software? Nope. Maybe some scientific simulation, although even here Microsoft's stranglehold on the PC platform is pretty great.

    64-bit Linux is almost exclusively for servers, which is not what was being tested in this review.

    But, suggest a few real-world Linux 64 applications used by professionals and I'm sure the suggestions will be taken on board for future testing.

  11. #11
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Rys
    The mainboard didn't allow DDR400, simple as that. There's no memory adjust functions in the BIOS.

    I could have run 64-bit, if 64-bit was the article focus. It explains that on the first page, did you read it? We don't exist to go "one up" on other sites.

    And did you even read the conclusion, or any of the article? The Xeon does NOT come out on top.

    Thanks for your pre-determined, biased input.

    Rys
    It does allow DDR400, you were running Opteron 250 without the proper BIOS.

    The BIOS you had in the board is dated 8th March 2004, before the release of the 248/250 and CG stepping cores. There is 2 sets of newer BIOS which addresses the issues.

    Also the AMD-8151 is known to have a slightly weaker AGP implementation.

    Curious as to why AMD didn't provide you the Iwill DK8N instead of the DK8X.

  12. #12
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Dadmag


    Suggest a few real graphics workstation apps that people who spend £4-5K on a system actually use running any of these Operating Systems. Lightwave? Nope. 3dsmax? Nope. Industrial CAD? Nope. After Effects? Nope. Photoshop? Nope. Video encoding software? Nope. Maybe some scientific simulation, although even here Microsoft's stranglehold on the PC platform is pretty great.

    64-bit Linux is almost exclusively for servers, which is not what was being tested in this review.

    But, suggest a few real-world Linux 64 applications used by professionals and I'm sure the suggestions will be taken on board for future testing.
    Maya, Softimage XSI, Shake, Satori Paint
    + Big productions houses have proprietary graphic applications that run on linux.

    Or are those not good enough for you?

  13. #13
    OMG!! PWND!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    In front of computer
    Posts
    964
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by satanskji
    Maya, Softimage XSI, Shake, Satori Paint
    + Big productions houses have proprietary graphic applications that run on linux.

    Or are those not good enough for you?
    Hey, no need to be mean about it...
    Unlike you, noone has the ability to forefill everybodys needs, and the VAST majority of readers of these articles WONT have Linux, well at least I believe this to be so...

    Just try to be a bit nicer in your first post on the forums.. ohh Welcome

  14. #14
    HEXUS consultant editor James Morris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    157
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by satanskji
    Maya, Softimage XSI, Shake, Satori Paint
    + Big productions houses have proprietary graphic applications that run on linux.

    Or are those not good enough for you?
    We were talking about 64-bit benchmarking. I'm pretty sure these are all 32-bit Linux implementations, so not Linux 64. I wasn't saying that Linux isn't used in real production houses - just that Linux 64 isn't yet. I don't think any of the apps you mention have 64-bit versions.

    I refer you to these two system requirement pages:
    Maya
    Softimage XSI
    Last edited by James Morris; 19-08-2004 at 09:02 AM.

  15. #15
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by freebrew
    This Review seemed biased.

    I wish Reviewers could put there Bias Aside for the sake of a Real Platform Investigation....I'm getting really sick of seeing the mentality of "Oh Intel is so Great, I don't mind paying another $500 more for 40 more watts of heat, and less performance...blah, blah, blah)

    I know I can rely on Tech Report, and Ace's Hardware to put up a real review.

    Here's Hoping

    Freebrew
    Err, try rereading the article. He said that the Nocona is better than previous Xeon's, so yes, it is a worthwhile improvement, but it still doesn't beat the Opteron. Where's the bias?

    In either case, is it me, or are the first couple of graphs mixed up? It shows the Xeons being faster, but the text below says Opteron wins.

  16. #16
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Dadmag
    We were talking about 64-bit benchmarking. I'm pretty sure these are all 32-bit Linux implementations, so not Linux 64. I wasn't saying that Linux isn't used in real production houses - just that Linux 64 isn't yet. I don't think any of the apps you mention have 64-bit versions.

    I refer you to these two system requirement pages:
    Maya
    Softimage XSI
    No you weren't, none of the applications you mentioned has a 64 bit version. And none of them will have before Microsoft decides to ship a 64 bit OS.

    Both Maya and XSI comes from 64 bit platforms, so it's not unreasonable to think that they will be available for 64 bit Linux before XP 64 ships.

    I'm not trying to be mean, just making sure that noone misses any facts.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. HELP what to do w/ Xeon 2.8ghz ES
    By kryptkeeper in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 25-06-2004, 02:46 PM
  2. Intel's Revamped Roadmap
    By chrisf6969 in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-05-2004, 07:31 PM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-02-2004, 11:57 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •