Dual 2800XP Barton possable?

[ElectroSoldier]

Forgive my asking this but i know little about AMD CPUs at all.

I saw the prices of the 2800XP Barton CPUs (about £150 each) and as they are so little i was thinking about setting up a dualie usin them, so my questions are.

Is it possable to SMP them at all.

what would be a good board to set them in (around the £150-£200 mark)

[cmcquistion]

Yes, you can use those chips. For a motherboard, I suggest the MSI K7D Master.

The CPU's will need some modification, though.

You will have to do the L5 mod and you will have to mod the multi (since they are 166 FSB chips.)

You can find all the info you need in the thread called "MSI K7D & 2 Barton 2500 XPs, What do I do now?"

[cmcquistion]

For thorough instructions and recommendations on parts and such, please read my sticky, at the top of this forum, called "Step-by-Step: How to build a cheap and quiet AMD dually."

*EDIT* The link is in my sig.

[ElectroSoldier]

The board looks good and only £120 too.
Is the PCB red or green, i saw both or does it depend on the supplier!

not to keen on playin with all the mod stuff...
whats the fastest MP that you can buy for around £150

[cmcquistion]

It is red.

The only green ones, were the VERY early production ones. Any that you buy, new should be red.

How much is 150 pounds, in USD?

You can always just buy XP's and mod them for SMP. It is fairly easy and will save you a lot of money, or allow you to buy faster CPU's.

[ElectroSoldier]

think £150 is about $240

about speed, thats what i thought but im a little wary of spendin 300quid and killing the guarentee

[cmcquistion]

Originally posted by ElectroSoldier
think £150 is about $240

about speed, thats what i thought but im a little wary of spendin 300quid and killing the guarentee

On www.pricewatch.com, the cheapest MP2800 (the Palomino model) is $238 each. That is right at your price.

If you are going to spend that much money, though, you should consider a Barton MP. Monarchcomputer.com has the Barton MP2800 for $245 each.

[aftermath]

it cant be a pally the palys would not work @ that spead and were only 256 k cache the mp and xp 2800 are all 512 cache.

[cmcquistion]

It is either a Pally or a T-bred. The reseller listed it as a Pally, running 2083 MHz. They may have been wrong. It may be a T-bred.

Not all MP's have 512k cache. ONLY the Barton MP's do. To my knowledge, the only Barton MP is the Barton MP2800.

[aftermath]

yeah we both have crosed wires hear as a mp 2800 it must have 512k cache and yes only mp 2800 has 512k out of the offiacl mps. id say the reseller has it wrong think there may have been some 2100 or perhaps even some 2400 palys about so maby that spead would work but pally was @0.18 micron and the die would be huge at that fabrication size and with 512 cache. it has to be a barton to get a rating of 2800 no other chip revison of the k7 could achive that.

[cmcquistion]

Thanks for clarifying that.

[ElectroSoldier]

ok start again using the BIG word writing with lots of pictures.

Im VERY new to even looking at AMDs I am Intel (thought I would be untill I die but im intrigued)

im looking to build a dualie, built around a CPU with a speed of no less than 2800MHz basically twice the speed of my baby which is a dual P3 1.4 Tualatin, i cant find a 3.06GHz Xeon for less than £300 eachand the AMD 2800 looks like its in the £150 each range so its half price :) ) so

Will that MSI board run the 2800MP Barton? if not what will for about the same £££

Do I need a matched pair (as I do for Intel) and how do I tell if it is matched?

[OC-NightHawk]

There are no AMD processors with a clockspeed that fast unless you overclock, which also voids your warenty.

[cmcquistion]

Originally posted by ElectroSoldier
ok start again using the BIG word writing with lots of pictures.

Im VERY new to even looking at AMDs I am Intel (thought I would be untill I die but im intrigued)

im looking to build a dualie, built around a CPU with a speed of no less than 2800MHz basically twice the speed of my baby which is a dual P3 1.4 Tualatin, i cant find a 3.06GHz Xeon for less than £300 eachand the AMD 2800 looks like its in the £150 each range so its half price :) ) so

Will that MSI board run the 2800MP Barton? if not what will for about the same £££

Do I need a matched pair (as I do for Intel) and how do I tell if it is matched?

Yes, it will run dual MP2800's. You don't need matched pairs. MP2800's don't run 2800 actual MHz. This is their PR rating, as I assume you are aware.

[ElectroSoldier]

PR rating?

I know AMDs that are 2800 dont run @280MHz sorry wrong choise of words but they are equal to a 2.8GHz Intel Xeon right?

[dagamore]

Originally posted by ElectroSoldier
PR rating?

I know AMDs that are 2800 dont run @280MHz sorry wrong choise of words but they are equal to a 2.8GHz Intel Xeon right?

right and Mustang JR are real mustangs too :D


all kidding aside, if you can get them to run on your MB they will be monsters, not dual HT 2.8 Xeons (400 maybys but not 533 or the new 800 (next year some time)) they are great cpus, but i dount thing you can get them to runn at the stock FSB for the chips. but good luck

[aftermath]

the stock fsb on a barton mp 2800+ is 133 (ddr266)
if he gets 166 xp chips then he will hard code the multi to get the corect clock speed. losing some fsb isnot a huge deal.
the pr rating is in refrence to how fast a t_bread would need to be.
Many magaziens noticed that the pr rating was a good comparison with the 400 fsb p4 and ever the 533 ones, althought often the 3000 and 3200+ ratings were optermistic.

[cmcquistion]

aftermath is right. The MP2800, like at MP chips, has a 133 FSB. It does not have 166, like Bartons XP's.

[ElectroSoldier]

So will a 2800MP barton core FULLY work on that MSI board or is there a board of about the same price that will do a better job of it, I like the look and features of the MSI but im dont realy care if i do end up with that board

also is the 2800MP Barton comparable to the Intel Xeon Prestonia 2.8GHz @400MHz or is the Xeon "better" although much more expensive.

I will NOT be buying or using the Athlon XP chips only the MPs as XPs cant SMP stock (i like to setup a system stock then play so I know it was playing that killed it not just building it) and I dont like playing with my chips like that (The L5 mod looks a little much for me as it is bound to go wrong :rolleyes: )

[cmcquistion]

Originally posted by ElectroSoldier
So will a 2800MP barton core FULLY work on that MSI board or is there a board of about the same price that will do a better job of it, I like the look and features of the MSI but im dont realy care if i do end up with that board

also is the 2800MP Barton comparable to the Intel Xeon Prestonia 2.8GHz @400MHz or is the Xeon "better" although much more expensive.

I will NOT be buying or using the Athlon XP chips only the MPs as XPs cant SMP stock (i like to setup a system stock then play so I know it was playing that killed it not just building it) and I dont like playing with my chips like that (The L5 mod looks a little much for me as it is bound to go wrong :rolleyes: )

Yes the MP2800's will work. I believe the MSI is the best board to use. I believe that the MP2800 is comparable to the Xeon 2.8. I've read several reviews that show that the PR rating for MP's is pretty fair in relation to Xeons. Xeons are a little faster at some things and MP's are a little faster at others. In the end, they are pretty close to each other.

The L5 mod is extremely easy, just so you know. I don't know ONE person that has done it and has somehow damaged their chip or motherboard. The worst thing that happens, usually, is someone does it wrong and has to redo it. Personally, I've modded at least a dozen XP's for MP use.

My two cents...

[ElectroSoldier]

Ok right i just got two 2800MP for £84.00 (about $135) each retail boxed so its going to be based on those.

As to the board Looks like I might go with the Master L version (If my supplier can get the L model) but is onboard LAN the ONLY difference?

CMC in ya sticky it says I NEED ECC reg'd if Im going to use more then 1 stick. Is it need or just best to use ECC reg'd (but ill probably get ECC reg'd anyway)

also are there any known isses with this board as far as PCI addin cards go (like with Adaptec cards, or creative drivers etc etc)

:)

[cmcquistion]

Originally posted by ElectroSoldier
Ok right i just got two 2800MP for £84.00 (about $135) each retail boxed so its going to be based on those.

As to the board Looks like I might go with the Master L version (If my supplier can get the L model) but is onboard LAN the ONLY difference?

CMC in ya sticky it says I NEED ECC reg'd if Im going to use more then 1 stick. Is it need or just best to use ECC reg'd (but ill probably get ECC reg'd anyway)

also are there any known isses with this board as far as PCI addin cards go (like with Adaptec cards, or creative drivers etc etc)

:)

You need to use Registered (but not necessarily ECC) if you want to use more than TWO sticks of memory. You CAN use up to two sticks of unbuffered RAM.

There is one issue with the MPX chipset you should know about. If you are going to use any kind of disk controller (SCSI, RAID, etc), then you need to use one of the 66 MHz, 64 bit PCI slots. Make sure to get a controller that is compatible with 66 MHz slots, it doesn't actually have to be 66 MHz, though. I have a SCSI controller, for example, that is compatible with 66 MHz PCI slots, though it actually runs at 33 MHz.

The chipset has a latency issue, which affects the 33 MHz PCI slots. It doesn't hurt most peripherals, because their used bandwidth isn't high enough. Hard disks, however, use enough bandwidth, that the issue affects them and lower the controller's performance, if it is in one of those 33 MHz, 32 bit PCI slots.

[Icekimo]

Originally posted by cmcquistion

There is one issue with the MPX chipset you should know about. If you are going to use any kind of disk controller (SCSI, RAID, etc), then you need to use one of the 66 MHz, 64 bit PCI slots. Make sure to get a controller that is compatible with 66 MHz slots, it doesn't actually have to be 66 MHz, though. I have a SCSI controller, for example, that is compatible with 66 MHz PCI slots, though it actually runs at 33 MHz.

The chipset has a latency issue, which affects the 33 MHz PCI slots. It doesn't hurt most peripherals, because their used bandwidth isn't high enough. Hard disks, however, use enough bandwidth, that the issue affects them and lower the controller's performance, if it is in one of those 33 MHz, 32 bit PCI slots.

Is it why the PCI bridge latency can't run high ?

[cmcquistion]

Originally posted by Icekimo


Is it why the PCI bridge latency can't run high ?

I'm not sure what you are referring to. Are you referring to the PCI Latency setting in the BIOS? I believe it lets you pick from 32, 64, 128, etc. The best setting, of course, is 32.

[Icekimo]

What I tried was, set latency in BIOS to a high value, to get faster disc transfers. The problem was I could'nt get my disc running with a greater value than 32. I didn't need a quick responding disc, but a disc with a high transfer rate. So, I ended with the value 32, as you also have.

[cmcquistion]

Originally posted by Icekimo
What I tried was, set latency in BIOS to a high value, to get faster disc transfers. The problem was I could'nt get my disc running with a greater value than 32. I didn't need a quick responding disc, but a disc with a high transfer rate. So, I ended with the value 32, as you also have.

32 is the best setting. Running higher values is only necessary if you have some old PCI card that requires 64 or something. Lower is better.

[ElectroSoldier]

thanks for that.
I do plan to put a couple of SCSI disk controllers in it but they are both 64bit 66MHz cards and will go in to the 64bit slots anyway.

It will be next month before I can buy the board now anyway as I just go the CPUs so lots of time to read up on it but this is starting to look good.

Thanks for all your help in this.

but 1 last Q.
will the board runn ECC registered RAM (think ill be putting 3x 512 sticks in it)

[Icekimo]

With PC2100 ECC registered, I could reach FSB 144.
I didn't have PC2700 as I "only" will be able to reach FSB 150 with this board. It would to me be too expensive to reach it.

[cmcquistion]

Originally posted by ElectroSoldier
thanks for that.
I do plan to put a couple of SCSI disk controllers in it but they are both 64bit 66MHz cards and will go in to the 64bit slots anyway.

It will be next month before I can buy the board now anyway as I just go the CPUs so lots of time to read up on it but this is starting to look good.

Thanks for all your help in this.

but 1 last Q.
will the board runn ECC registered RAM (think ill be putting 3x 512 sticks in it)

Yes, it will run up to four sticks of Registered RAM. Whether they are ECC or not, is inconsequential. In fact, you will get better performance by disabling ECC in the BIOS.

[ElectroSoldier]

Ok

Will the board run PC2700 DDR RAM, it says only PC2100

[cmcquistion]

Originally posted by Icekimo
With PC2100 ECC registered, I could reach FSB 144.
I didn't have PC2700 as I "only" will be able to reach FSB 150 with this board. It would to me be too expensive to reach it.

The good thing about running PC2700 is that you can run high FSB (up to 150) with agressive memory settings. CAS Latency, in particular, makes a big difference. Running CAS 2.0 yields higher overall performance than running 25% faster FSB, with CAS 2.5. If you can run high FSB, and at CAS 2.0, then that is the best of both worlds.

[cmcquistion]

Originally posted by ElectroSoldier
Ok

Will the board run PC2700 DDR RAM, it says only PC2100

Yes, it will.

My highest recommendation for memory on this board is Samsung Registered ECC PC2700. With this memory, you can run high FSB, with fast memory settings. Since it is Registered, you can use up to four sticks. All of the dual Opteron boards I have seen REQUIRE Registered PC2700. If you upgrade to one of those, someday, then you will already have compatible memory.

[Spl Engineering]

That makes the Reg ECC pc 2700 a wise choice

[OC-NightHawk]

Originally posted by cmcquistion


Yes the MP2800's will work. I believe the MSI is the best board to use. I believe that the MP2800 is comparable to the Xeon 2.8. I've read several reviews that show that the PR rating for MP's is pretty fair in relation to Xeons. Xeons are a little faster at some things and MP's are a little faster at others. In the end, they are pretty close to each other.

The L5 mod is extremely easy, just so you know. I don't know ONE person that has done it and has somehow damaged their chip or motherboard. The worst thing that happens, usually, is someone does it wrong and has to redo it. Personally, I've modded at least a dozen XP's for MP use.

My two cents...

Ok, since the guy said better disregarding bang for buck for a second. I'd like to clear something up. The MP2800 is not directly comparable to a Dual 2.8GHz 533MHz FSB Xeon rig. In everything short of a few scientfic benchmarks they have either came close or got their ass handed to them. When it comes to rendering and video encoding Xeons win hands down unless you go and use some obscure encoding program. If price were not an issue for you I'd say go with the xeon rig over the MP any day. Also I should point out that in the scientific benchmarks the xeons calculates floating point internally at a much higher precision.

You might want to check this thread out. http://forums.2cpu.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=40393

[cmcquistion]

Originally posted by OC-NightHawk


Ok, since the guy said better disregarding bang for buck for a second. I'd like to clear something up. The MP2800 is not directly comparable to a Dual 2.8GHz 533MHz FSB Xeon rig. In everything short of a few scientfic benchmarks they have either came close or got their ass handed to them. When it comes to rendering and video encoding Xeons win hands down unless you go and use some obscure encoding program. If price were not an issue for you I'd say go with the xeon rig over the MP any day. Also I should point out that in the scientific benchmarks the xeons calculates floating point internally at a much higher precision.

You might want to check this thread out. http://forums.2cpu.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=40393

Most of the posts in that thread seem to support that the MP is greater or equal to the Xeon??? At least for all of the real applications that people mentioned. As far as benchmarks, you can find just as many benchmarks showing AMD ahead as you can find benchmarks showing Intel ahead. Realistically, they are ~about~ even. Intel is better at some things. AMD is better at others.

As you mentioned in that thread, what you want to do with the workstation can help you decide what platform to go with. For you, rendering and such (Maya, Max, SoftImage), the Xeon platform was higher performance. For others, the AMD system may be higher performance.

[OC-NightHawk]

Originally posted by cmcquistion


Most of the posts in that thread seem to support that the MP is greater or equal to the Xeon??? At least for all of the real applications that people mentioned. As far as benchmarks, you can find just as many benchmarks showing AMD ahead as you can find benchmarks showing Intel ahead. Realistically, they are ~about~ even. Intel is better at some things. AMD is better at others.

As you mentioned in that thread, what you want to do with the workstation can help you decide what platform to go with. For you, rendering and such (Maya, Max, SoftImage), the Xeon platform was higher performance. For others, the AMD system may be higher performance.

I know what posts you refer to. The mpeg encoder. I don't know about you, but at my job we don't use mpeg files. What he failed to mention was the speeds of the other codecs, like DivX or Xvid. Xeons do a very good job of encoding video with premiere. Which of course is a industry standard, with only final cut being more desirable (but thats mac not pc so irelevent here) Then the fact that xeons are extremly fast with virtual dub if you can't afford premere and just need to encode a file. Also the majority of the posts backing was made by the same person, who I might add only used that one bench to back up his whole claim of MPs being better. I'll agree to the statement of MPs being better if and only if its preceded or followed by the four words "bang for your buck".

In the scheme of things the only thing I've seen with proper documention that the MPs do better is scientific computation. Of course by better I mean faster. However the Xeon and P4 line of processors use a higher precission internaly.

Also in regards to things like, "the athlon can do a dvd in about real time at highest quality. the xeon takes a bit longer ( ~10% ). The xeon starts off screaming but really slows down the amd keeps chugging along at the same speed. I tried CCE 2.65 on the amd and it seemed a lot slower. Tmpegenc always seemed to work well and fast for me so I really never tried to get CCE working."

He doen't mention the configuration of the systems, he doesn't mention whats going on in the background. For all we know the xeon rig could be improperly set up or a fictional machine he never had to test. Also note the word seemed, he's back peddleing and covering his butt. Covering it from what? Also note he gave no time length figures for the two machines. Now you can take him at face value but I take it with a grain of salt, especially when I can encode a DVD sized file with my system using premiere in real time. Aseras also disputes the fact that encoding video doesn't use up bandwidth of the PCI drive. I admit I've never used that program, but when premiere encodes its writing to the drive the whole time. A slow 33MHz PCI bus will be used up way before you start rendering a DVD quality video in real time. Not to mention why put a "xeon is on a u320 15K RPM" on a board with regular PCI bus bandwidth. That drive array alone would saturate the PCI bus. Hell like you said before two or three IDE drives in an IDE raid array would saturate the PCI bus. His "facts" just don't add up.

[cmcquistion]

Originally posted by OC-NightHawk


I know what posts you refer to. The mpeg encoder. I don't know about you, but at my job we don't use mpeg files. What he failed to mention was the speeds of the other codecs, like DivX or Xvid. Xeons do a very good job of encoding video with premiere. Which of course is a industry standard, with only final cut being more desirable (but thats mac not pc so irelevent here) Then the fact that xeons are extremly fast with virtual dub if you can't afford premere and just need to encode a file. Also the majority of the posts backing was made by the same person, who I might add only used that one bench to back up his whole claim of MPs being better. I'll agree to the statement of MPs being better if and only if its preceded or followed by the four words "bang for your buck".

In the scheme of things the only thing I've seen with proper documention that the MPs do better is scientific computation. Of course by better I mean faster. However the Xeon and P4 line of processors use a higher precission internaly.

Also in regards to things like, "the athlon can do a dvd in about real time at highest quality. the xeon takes a bit longer ( ~10% ). The xeon starts off screaming but really slows down the amd keeps chugging along at the same speed. I tried CCE 2.65 on the amd and it seemed a lot slower. Tmpegenc always seemed to work well and fast for me so I really never tried to get CCE working."

He doen't mention the configuration of the systems, he doesn't mention whats going on in the background. For all we know the xeon rig could be improperly set up or a fictional machine he never had to test. Also note the word seemed, he's back peddleing and covering his butt. Covering it from what? Also note he gave no time length figures for the two machines. Now you can take him at face value but I take it with a grain of salt, especially when I can encode a DVD sized file with my system using premiere in real time. Aseras also disputes the fact that encoding video doesn't use up bandwidth of the PCI drive. I admit I've never used that program, but when premiere encodes its writing to the drive the whole time. A slow 33MHz PCI bus will be used up way before you start rendering a DVD quality video in real time. Not to mention why put a "xeon is on a u320 15K RPM" on a board with regular PCI bus bandwidth. That drive array alone would saturate the PCI bus. Hell like you said before two or three IDE drives in an IDE raid array would saturate the PCI bus. His "facts" just don't add up.

I'm not going to argue Intel-vs-AMD.

It serves no purpose, but to divide us.

I'm here to learn and to help others.

[OC-NightHawk]

I'm not saying AMD VS Intel I go platform by platform. I call them like I see them as they are today. In the future when Opterons come down in costs and are available for workstations they are going to be a major contender. With intel's only 64-bit chip being super expensive it would never be a workstation chip any of us would want to own at home.

In what way was I not helping? All I did was point out a view that was either biased or mislead. PCI bandwidth is universal between the platforms you know that, so when the Desktop xeon with only 33MHz PCI is compared to a MP chipset with 64Bit PCI, I just have to comment on the unfair compairson. Especially when I feel he blew off the PCI-X based boards as not mattering in the equation of his particular compairson. I'm just trying to keep people honest. Again if I was considering bang for my buck I'd agree with the MP choice.

If you want to help others don't just stay silent when facts are distorting the view of the platform that isn't your first choice. You want to help be consitant and point out these things for any "benchmark test".

[cmcquistion]

Originally posted by OC-NightHawk
In what way was I not helping?

I never said that you weren't helping others.

I felt that the thread was turning into an Intel-vs-AMD argument. I simply don't want it to end up there, that is all.

I am accusing you of nothing, nor am I disregarding your opinion or the facts that you presented.

[OC-NightHawk]

oh, ok. Well anyways my point was just that he expected the world from the Xeons when he stuck them in a non PCI-X board. He said it himself, they start off screaming fast and then slow down. My hypothesis is that when the file starts to get written to the drive his machine bottle necks and slows down.

But in all fairness MP systems are capable and won't disapoint for the price, just keep an eye on the heat as they won't reboot the system like intel when they overheat.

[ElectroSoldier]

SOB

I do 1hell of a lot of video editing using Premiere 6.5 and a Pinnacle DV-500 on my dual 1.4, i was told that anything a Xeon can do an MP can do for less £££ :mad:

oh well as i got th CPUs ill have to give it a go, and it might even turn out to be good, and at least its cheaper than a Xeon and about as good

[cmcquistion]

For what its worth, I have seen several dual AMD benchmarks that show the MP nose-to-nose with a Xeon platform on Premiere 6.5.

Here's one. A dual CPU showdown, performed by Maximum PC, comparing dual Mac G4's @ 1.25 GHz, dual MP2400's at 2. GHz, and dual 2.8 GHz Xeon's.

http://www.themach5archive.com/misc/showdown.pdf

In their tests, they used the Tiger MPX board, which is a solid AMD board, but by far not the fastest. Still, the dual AMD's (with 256k cache) were beat by the Xeon Prestonia @ 2.8 GHz, by only 2.1% at Premiere 6.5 and 2.8% at Photoshop 7.0.

Another interesting note, I got from another site:
Premiere 6.5 isn't optimized to even use SSE, much less SSE2 or HT, for anything except for when it uses DirectShow filters. Got that from Adobe during the 6.5 beta.

I am not bashing the Intel chips. They are good chips and are faster at many things. Even in this, they are faster, but only by a minute amount, in my opinion.

[ElectroSoldier]

Yeah I guess your right.

There is a difference (in that Prestonia's beat MPs) but the difference is small really and whats a few mins to an hour when creating a masterpiece.

I feel good about this new project though, but I think when im done ill have to look at building a dual or quad Xeon Prestonia.

The costs will be lower on 2nd user stuff in a couple of months when I have finnished this babe and I have always wanted a quad (hehehe 4 physical + 4 logical = 8 @ 2.4GHz each = :eek: )

[OC-NightHawk]

Originally posted by cmcquistion
For what its worth, I have seen several dual AMD benchmarks that show the MP nose-to-nose with a Xeon platform on Premiere 6.5.

Here's one. A dual CPU showdown, performed by Maximum PC, comparing dual Mac G4's @ 1.25 GHz, dual MP2400's at 2. GHz, and dual 2.8 GHz Xeon's.

http://www.themach5archive.com/misc/showdown.pdf

In their tests, they used the Tiger MPX board, which is a solid AMD board, but by far not the fastest. Still, the dual AMD's (with 256k cache) were beat by the Xeon Prestonia @ 2.8 GHz, by only 2.1% at Premiere 6.5 and 2.8% at Photoshop 7.0.

Another interesting note, I got from another site:


I am not bashing the Intel chips. They are good chips and are faster at many things. Even in this, they are faster, but only by a minute amount, in my opinion.

I never said in all things they were far ahead of the pack in everything, just mostly ahead. Rendering they rock, thats mostly what I meant about beating AMD by a large margin. My point with premeire was that the xeons were not nearly as bad in a professional grade setup (ie not a DPI533 or the new asus board). There is no doubt that even when AMD is beaten it still can't be called slow by any sense. Anyways my main point was I just thought that guy sold the xeons way short. The price argument floats no doubt, but no one can deny the performance in the majority of things is better if only by a little in some areas. Not to mention the guy was dead paning the xeon by slamming the archatecture of the processor and then points to a sandra bench which still shows it in the lead. *phiff* he just annoyed me, scary he made me feel like I was back at gamefaqs again.

However I was under the impression that the xeons were only mentioned in this topic as a hypothetical thing anyways so price isn't a issue. Just a passing day dream. The MP system isn't going to be a bad system, just not the absolute best. But then again the Xeons are only great if you overclock them or pay out the ass for a high end stock one. So pricewise a xeon system that cost the same as yours would more than likely pale.

Edit:

Also I should note that the CINEBENCH 2003 tool used a real world commercial renderer. It comes from the modeling package called Cinema4D. Although I have never used it I do know of it.

[couchpotato]

ElectroSoldier - sorry for being a little off topic,
you say
" Ok right i just got two 2800MP for £84.00 (about $135) each retail boxed so its going to be based on those"

That is some great price (in pounds) - Dabs.com is quoting
£185 each at the moment - any chance of letting me at
your supplier?

[ElectroSoldier]

The cost of £85 is - VAT and is supplied by Jadestone Traders Ltd, I work for them and I get payed by either wages or a discount and on this I took a discount instead.

We will have a web site up and running soon, and our stock will be listed (no prices though as it is "trade only" but we will see as to who we will supply. Im not 100% on the prices as Im just one of the guys who part builds systems/packs boxes, and sort out the web site and computers.

£85 is a price to ME as an employee but I think we might be able to do better then Dabs ;) but drop me a mail and ill find out what we can do for what (PS DONT pay retail prices, retail is +50% of what UK suppliers can get it for, you only need to find a supplier that will supply YOU as an end user and your away)

[couchpotato]

Lovely - If I get the Job I'm interviewing for
tomorrow- I'll be beating at your door.

:D