• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

emt64 intel xeons

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

mbentley

Gloriously Lead, Overclockix Chief Architect
Joined
Sep 26, 2002
Location
Indianapolis, IN
anybody own a pair of emt64 intel xeons? i am curious because i am not having much luck with my 1.6's or my 2.4's and i am just thinking about going for a more stable system at stock speeds even if it does mean spending a lot of money on it. i already have my ncch-dl which will run those processors so that shouldn't be a problem... i was just curious what other people thought about them. right now i am looking at the 3.2ea's from newegg:
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=19-117-027&depa=1
 
I'm using the 2.8s. Eventually PMSfishy and want to bench them at the same speeds to see what the SSE3 and Emt64 does for the processor. All I have to say is if you do get them, do not use the stock coolers they are incredibly loud.
 
dicecca112 said:
I'm using the 2.8s. Eventually PMSfishy and want to bench them at the same speeds to see what the SSE3 and Emt64 does for the processor. All I have to say is if you do get them, do not use the stock coolers they are incredibly loud.

lol are they the IWT's? those things are horribly loud. i have some mcx603-v's and i imagine they should work...
 
Don't forget I believe the EMT64 nocona chips are based on the prescott core, while your current ones are not, so the newer ones will have to have a couple hundred mhz over your current ones to perform similarly.

Although if you are buying the 3.2's already, then they are probably pretty close to your current ones at 2.8 (or maybe a little faster). But then you could probably overclock the 3.2 a bit... all depends if the increase in performance is worth it to you.

If you have time I know some over at 2cpu have the nocona chips, but I haven't really waded through all the info to get specific comparisons, but I know there are some who reported benchmarks over there.
 
Prescotts would preform worse? I thought they were just space heaters...oh well. 3.2 Nocanas SHOULD out-preform dual LV's @ 3ghz when EMT64 is enabled. Good luck.
 
AFIsoldier said:
Prescotts would preform worse? I thought they were just space heaters...oh well. 3.2 Nocanas SHOULD out-preform dual LV's @ 3ghz when EMT64 is enabled. Good luck.

i am hoping that we can see some 64 bit applications as well as more 64 bit operating systems for the windows platform.

i really don't think prescotts are that bad of performers... my lappy is a prescott and it runs quite well at 2.8.
 
AFIsoldier said:
Prescotts would preform worse? I thought they were just space heaters...oh well. 3.2 Nocanas SHOULD out-preform dual LV's @ 3ghz when EMT64 is enabled. Good luck.
On the contrary. If you see my 640 review they are quite stellar overclockers. If you have the chance stop by and take a look:

http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=368536

Btw bently the TDP on these is 84W
 
I didn't mean to imply they were bad performers. And once good software comes out they will get even better.

I just remember somewhere @ 2cpu they were doing cinebench and maybe pcmark or something and a 3.4ghz nocona was about comparable to a 3.1 ghz prestonia. I can see how this is because if I'm not wrong (I might very well be) they had to lengthen the pipeline even more for the prescott core (and hence added more cache to help alleviate this)?

Anyway, those are just synthetic benchmarks and you probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference in real-world stuff. And of course you'd have the advantage of being able to run 64 bit apps when they start rolling out.
 
Albigger said:
I didn't mean to imply they were bad performers. And once good software comes out they will get even better.

I just remember somewhere @ 2cpu they were doing cinebench and maybe pcmark or something and a 3.4ghz nocona was about comparable to a 3.1 ghz prestonia. I can see how this is because if I'm not wrong (I might very well be) they had to lengthen the pipeline even more for the prescott core (and hence added more cache to help alleviate this)?

Anyway, those are just synthetic benchmarks and you probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference in real-world stuff. And of course you'd have the advantage of being able to run 64 bit apps when they start rolling out.
You are correct on all accounts. However the 2MB of L2 direct cache has helped the prescott core *alot*. Instead of it being about 10-15% behind A64s its about 5% now.
 
Sentential said:
You are correct on all accounts. However the 2MB of L2 direct cache has helped the prescott core *alot*. Instead of it being about 10-15% behind A64s its about 5% now.

That's true, but the one linked to in the first post claims only 1mb L2 cache.

Also I'm sure they won't overclock as high in a dual setup as they did for you (well, maybe with extreme cooling).


However, mbentley, assuming its not the RAM / board holding you back, I would think the 3.2's would hit about 3.6 with decent air cooling (again, may want to check 2cpu as I know more people there have the noconas), give or take 100mhz. So that should put you well above your 2.8 now. Its just whether or not its worth it investment wise (those 3.2 xeons are $380 each - ouch!)

EDIT: By the way Sentential - nice OC on that! I still have to read (or at least skim) the last few pages of that thread tho.
 
Albigger said:
That's true, but the one linked to in the first post claims only 1mb L2 cache.

Also I'm sure they won't overclock as high in a dual setup as they did for you (well, maybe with extreme cooling).
:confused: How so? Its only a little worse than my winchester and no worse than an Opteron. With just regular ole air cooling he has a solid shot at hitting 4ghz in a dually config if they use the same core.
 
Sentential said:
:confused: How so? Its only a little worse than my winchester and no worse than an Opteron. With just regular ole air cooling he has a solid shot at hitting 4ghz in a dually config if they use the same core.

well, the only problem with dualies is the fact that there is 2 times the heat, and the weakest processor will be the max speed...
 
Sentential said:
:confused: How so? Its only a little worse than my winchester and no worse than an Opteron. With just regular ole air cooling he has a solid shot at hitting 4ghz in a dually config if they use the same core.


well for one, doesn't your board use a totally different chipset (925 something)?

EDIT: looks like its and AS8 which is the 865 chipset. My bad - thought it was a different board. /EDIT


And I'm just saying don't hope for it. I mean, unless I'm blind, show me someone hitting 4ghz plus in a stable way on a dually xeon? I haven' seen any, certainly not that start with 3.2 chips. I may have seen one that started with 3.6 chips, can't remember....
 
mbentley said:
well, the only problem with dualies is the fact that there is 2 times the heat, and the weakest processor will be the max speed...
Ah thats a good point. Those cores you listed look like a varation of the 3.2F / 3.0Fs

Basically an E0 with EMT64. I'd go for it, overall E0s clock much like an N0 but slightly better. You should have good luck with them
 
Albigger said:
well for one, doesn't your board use a totally different chipset (925 something)?


And I'm just saying don't hope for it. I mean, unless I'm blind, show me someone hitting 4ghz plus in a stable way on a dually xeon? I haven' seen any, certainly not that start with 3.2 chips. I may have seen one that started with 3.6 chips, can't remember....
I understand, but with the older prescott cores it was unheard of as well. With the rise of E0s and N0s they are clocking MUCH better.

Plus the steep price tag prevents most people from ocing em
 
dicecca112 said:
from what I can tell, my 2.8s hit 3.1 on stock voltages. If I had better ram, I could probably have it higher.

Can't you run the RAM asynch to test whether that's what's holding you back?
 
yeah, well my rig has other issues besides that. Failing SCSI drives, needs better cooling, probably better PSU. It works for now. But slowly its gonna get fixed.
 
Back