CPU Speed vs. FSB speed
Bookmark this page:
 Yahoo!
 Google
 Windows Live
 del.icio.us
 digg
 Netscape
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by PeterF on March 8, 2008, 12:31 am
Please log in for more thread options The plan being to build a new server based on the Tyan i5000XT MB, I am stuck on the decision on what Xeon processors to buy. I am not going for leading edge (read expensive) CPU but would be greatly interested in an opinon on what should have priority: BUS speed or CPU speed. My preferences are the Intel Xeon 5060 at 3,2 GHz and a 1066MHz FSB OR the Intel Xeon 5130 at 2.0 GHz and 1333MHz FSB. These CPU cost just about the same. How do I decide between them? The machine will be used as a high end Workstation with a decent graphics card (but not gaming), and I plan two Seagate 73GB 15k SAS in a mirrored RAID; and the same for two Western Digital 36 GB Raptor 10K drives. I am comfortable with my HDD decisions; believing that the two separate controllers will be an advantage over more capactity on only two drives on, eg the SAS controller. But, as I said, how do I decide on the key question of BUS vs. CPU speed? | ||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Paul on March 8, 2008, 2:33 am
Please log in for more thread options 5130 - Dual core, 4MB cache, 65nm, FSB1333, Core 2GHz, LGA771, 65W CPUID=06F6 http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLABP 5060 - Dual core, 4MB cache, 65nm, FSB1066, Core 3.2Ghz, LGA771, 130W CPUID=0F64 http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SL96A Now, if I poke around a bit, the CPUID of a Pentium D 950 is 0F64. http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SL95V So that would make the 5060 the same generation as "Pressler". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Pentium_D_microprocessors A CPUID of 06F6, is the same as a Core2 Duo. That means the 5130 is similar to a Conroe. http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SL9S8 Now, the Xeons probably have their own internal code names, that you can see in a list here. 5060 is "Dempsey". 5130 is Woodcrest. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Xeon_microprocessors The difference between the processor generations, is in the IPC or Instructions Per Clock. For example, compare the benchmark here. The Conroe at 2133MHz core clock, is beating the Pressler at 3.2Ghz. This is an Integer benchmark. Conroe has higher IPC. http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=878&model2=889&chart=410 On floating point, they're getting close together in terms of the benchmark result, but still have that wide difference in core clock speed. So the performance ratio is still around 3.2/2.133 = 1.5x http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=878&model2=889&chart=411 In conclusion - 1) To a first order approximation, performance is proportional to - Core_clock * IPC Using Core_clock alone, is not sufficient to judge them. IPC varies from generation to generation. 2) If you compare two processors, that have identical internal architectures (so their IPCs are the same), you make their cores the same frequency, and one has FSB1066 and the other FSB1333, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference. Maybe if the processor was a quad, and was starving for memory bandwidth, then it would matter. But otherwise, FSB is not that big a deal. 3) Memory speed matters. But the difference again, is not directly proportional. If you could somehow boost the memory bandwidth by 10%, the application performance might increase by 3%. Wasting a lot of money on RAM speed alone, is probably not going to make you a hero. You really shouldn't take my word for it. Look for the SPEC benchmarks, and check the tables of results there. With some luck, maybe you can find results for those two different generations of Xeons, and figure out the conversion factor between core clocks based on those results. I don't consider a Sandra benchmark, to be good enough to use for making purchasing decisions. Also, for specialized applications, sometimes they use things like the SSE instructions. If the thing that "pays the bills" for you, used something like that, then you'd need an even more obscure benchmark, to figure out the best choice. HTH, Paul | ||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by whodunit on March 22, 2008, 2:11 am
Please log in for more thread options > Hi there
> > The plan being to build a new server based on the Tyan i5000XT MB, I > am stuck on the decision on what Xeon processors to buy. I am not > going for leading edge (read expensive) CPU but would be greatly > interested in an opinon on what should have priority: BUS speed or CPU > speed. > > My preferences are the Intel Xeon 5060 at 3,2 GHz and a 1066MHz FSB > OR the Intel Xeon 5130 at 2.0 GHz and 1333MHz FSB. > > These CPU cost just about the same. How do I decide between them? > > The machine will be used as a high end Workstation with a decent > graphics card (but not gaming), and I plan two Seagate 73GB 15k SAS in > a mirrored RAID; and the same for two Western Digital 36 GB Raptor 10K > drives. I am comfortable with my HDD decisions; believing that the > two separate controllers will be an advantage over more capactity on > only two drives on, eg the SAS controller. > > But, as I said, how do I decide on the key question of BUS vs. CPU > speed? The driving force behind your decision may come from which memory speed you choose. The 5060 is a Dempsey processor, based on the Pentium IV design (read flawed), while the 5130 is a Woodcrest processor based on the Core design (an enhanced Pentium III (Coppermine)). With a front side bus of 1067, you would want to get FB-DIMM 533 MHz memory (PC2-4200). With the Woodcrest and a front side bus of 1333, get FB-DIMM 667 MHz memory (PC2-5300). These memory choices will then be matched with your processor to give best performance. Also, get four identical modules at a time, to load all four channels of FB-DIMM to get the benefit of dual-channel/dual-branch mode. The population rules would have the black slots populated first, then the white slots later. The black slots are the first slot in each channel. In the end, I would recommend the Woodcrest processor over the Dempsey, mainly because the Pentium III design supports higher IPC than Pentium IV, and the Core enhancements push the IPC higher. | ||||||||||||||||
| Similar Threads | Posted |
| AMD processor speed compaired to Pentium processor speed | July 4, 2006, 5:51 pm |
| CPU Fan Speed in Red | November 12, 2005, 7:56 am |
| USB speed | December 21, 2005, 3:07 pm |
| AGP speed | January 19, 2006, 10:39 am |
| Rod Speed? | February 22, 2007, 3:54 am |
| USB Speed | October 27, 2007, 6:04 am |
| CPU Speed vs. FSB speed | March 8, 2008, 12:31 am |
| Hi Speed USB2 | July 23, 2005, 11:43 am |
| 'Wrong' CPU speed? | December 27, 2005, 3:07 am |
| ddr2 speed | May 12, 2006, 4:47 am |
| Disk Speed | June 13, 2006, 12:04 pm |
| Improper CPU Speed! Help | June 18, 2006, 4:52 am |
| Ros Speed == Pigmaster | July 21, 2006, 11:36 pm |
| Rod Speed == PigMaster | July 21, 2006, 11:42 pm |
| Ram Speed question | August 5, 2006, 1:47 am |
>
> The plan being to build a new server based on the Tyan i5000XT MB, I
> am stuck on the decision on what Xeon processors to buy. I am not
> going for leading edge (read expensive) CPU but would be greatly
> interested in an opinon on what should have priority: BUS speed or CPU
> speed.
>
> My preferences are the Intel Xeon 5060 at 3,2 GHz and a 1066MHz FSB
> OR the Intel Xeon 5130 at 2.0 GHz and 1333MHz FSB.
>
> These CPU cost just about the same. How do I decide between them?
>
> The machine will be used as a high end Workstation with a decent
> graphics card (but not gaming), and I plan two Seagate 73GB 15k SAS in
> a mirrored RAID; and the same for two Western Digital 36 GB Raptor 10K
> drives. I am comfortable with my HDD decisions; believing that the
> two separate controllers will be an advantage over more capactity on
> only two drives on, eg the SAS controller.
>
> But, as I said, how do I decide on the key question of BUS vs. CPU
> speed?