Itanium vs. Xeon

[Cluster]

Does anyone have any experience with both, or either of these processors. I need it to run a CAD program and I need it to be able to perform. I'm not sure on 2-way,4-way,or 8-way.

The Itanium will be a 733MHz 2MB cache, unless the 800MHz 4MB cache version comes down in price. The XEON choice would be a 1.6GHz MP with 1MB L3 cache.

 

[Ebola]

I believe the xeon p4's are identicle to the normal p4's but they allow for multiprocessing. no level 3 cache.

You could buy the quad xeon tyan board and four 2.2 xeons for the price of a single itanium processor. do the math.

 

[Cluster]

But intel also has the new XeonMP. It's designed for greater than 4 way, is only available upto 1.6GHz, and has 1MB L3. I don't think they are on the shelves yet though, can't seem to find a price on one.

 

[Ebola]

wow, learn something new every day.

"A 1.6 xeon mp is only 36% faster than a p3 xeon 900". not extremely impressive if you ask me. I think its just a slower p4 with a larger cache.

heres the details on it.
http://www.intel.com/eBusiness/products/server/processor/xeon_mp/ds021101_sum.htm

an amd dual mp 2000 sounds like a much better choice if you ask me. my vp6 with two p3 1000EB's at 155 fsb crushes a dual p4 xeon 1.6.

 

[Cluster]

I want something more than a 2way though. Price isn't an option. It'll all be on a business loan anyway. I may wait to see how the Hammer's turn out.

 

[TC]

The prestonias have hyper threading enabled in them. Under XP pro two processors are actually viewed by the OS as four. Works well for some programs, while others don't benefit much.

 

[Cluster]

The prestonias have hyper threading enabled in them. Under XP pro two processors are actually viewed by the OS as four. Works well for some programs, while others don't benefit much.

So XP pro does actually use the 64-bit then. Just uses each processor as 2?

I'd probably go with a 64-bit linux if i went with the Itaniums

 

[TC]

So XP pro does actually use the 64-bit then. Just uses each processor as 2?

I'd probably go with a 64-bit linux if i went with the Itaniums

I'm not sure I'm following you. The current xeons are not 64 bit cpu's. Hyper threading is something Intel came up with to allow a single cpu to process more than one thread simultaneously. Normally the only way you can do that is with 2 or more cpu's each running a separate thread. Hyper threading is not truly like having two complete cpu's built into one, but it does have some advantages in certain situations. The hardware "fools" the OS into thinking each physical processor on the motherboard is actually two. My dual xeon workstation only has 2 xeons, but during post the screen says 4 cpu's detected, and so does XP. The OS will dispatch multiple threads to each "cpu" and the hardware takes it from there. Sisoft sandra however is able to detect that there are really only 2 physical processors. Here are some pics:

 

[Chris2]

I'm not sure I'm following you. The current xeons are not 64 bit cpu's. Hyper threading is something Intel came up with to allow a single cpu to process more than one thread simultaneously. Normally the only way you can do that is with 2 or more cpu's each running a separate thread. Hyper threading is not truly like having two complete cpu's built into one, but it does have some advantages in certain situations. The hardware "fools" the OS into thinking each physical processor on the motherboard is actually two. My dual xeon workstation only has 2 xeons, but during post the screen says 4 cpu's detected, and so does XP. The OS will dispatch multiple threads to each "cpu" and the hardware takes it from there. Sisoft sandra however is able to detect that there are really only 2 physical processors. Here are some pics:

I was talking about the Itaniums. They are 64-bit. It would be nice to see a benchmark of these. Just to see how much better they perform for the extra dollars.

 

[TC]

Yes the Itaniums will run XP 64, but they don't use hyper threading like the xeons. Each cpu is treated as a single processor. The fpu performance is in a different ball park from a P4 xeon chip.

 

[donny_paycheck]

The Xeon MPs look pretty sweet. I'm glad Intel is back on the wagon with their monster L2 cached Xeons...the original P4 Xeon's relationship to the P4 is analogous to the AMD XP/MP relationship. Xeon MPs will undoubtedly be very expensive...a 1GHz P3 Xeon with 2mbs of L2 cache is still about $1100 the last time I saw it so you can expect $1800+ for a Xeon MP.

I don't know what you will be doing with your system specifically so I can't say either way what brand you should go with. I also have zero experience with Itaniums but I know they are slow, even in their designed 64-bit environment. I'd wait and see what the sledgehammer brings because it sounds like you're planning on plopping down $8,000+ on this system with a Quadro graphics card and 15krpm U160 drives.

 

[Henry Rollins II]

Hey Donny,

how does that dual Xeon 733 of yours perform compared to your other machines? What mobo do you have for them?

regards,
Henry

 

[donny_paycheck]

Hey Donny,

how does that dual Xeon 733 of yours perform compared to your other machines? What mobo do you have for them?

regards,
Henry

I use an Intel C440GX, a slightly lighter weight version of the Intel SBT2 dual slot 2 server board. The Xeons are very fast, very powerful processors. This is almost entirely due to their monstrous 2mb of full speed L2 cache. Currently I am running a clan server for RTCW on both processors because RTCW uses the Quake 3 engine, which supports SMP. Very cool!

They aren't so great at some things though, such as folding (which is what I originally thought I would use them for) because the Intel FPU performance isn't all that spectacular and FPU performance is mainly what [email protected] uses. Here she is - "Black Sabbath"!:

 

[Chris2]

The Xeon MPs look pretty sweet. I'm glad Intel is back on the wagon with their monster L2 cached Xeons...the original P4 Xeon's relationship to the P4 is analogous to the AMD XP/MP relationship. Xeon MPs will undoubtedly be very expensive...a 1GHz P3 Xeon with 2mbs of L2 cache is still about $1100 the last time I saw it so you can expect $1800+ for a Xeon MP.

I don't know what you will be doing with your system specifically so I can't say either way what brand you should go with. I also have zero experience with Itaniums but I know they are slow, even in their designed 64-bit environment. I'd wait and see what the sledgehammer brings because it sounds like you're planning on plopping down $8,000+ on this system with a Quadro graphics card and 15krpm U160 drives.

The L2 cache on the XeonMP is only 256KB, although they do have the option for 512KB or 1MB of L3 cache.

Where would I got to find a mobo that has 4/8-way processing.

I'm looking to setup a computer for CAD work, and I'm looking at 20K+ for this thing.

 

[donny_paycheck]

The L2 cache on the XeonMP is only 256KB, although they do have the option for 512KB or 1MB of L3 cache.

Where would I got to find a mobo that has 4/8-way processing.

I'm looking to setup a computer for CAD work, and I'm looking at 20K+ for this thing.

My bad, I should've said "on-die cache"! L2, L3...whichever is huge, it will greatly increase performance in some areas.

Check out the forums at 2cpu.com for all your SMP questions. They're the best source that I've found for questions like this.

I haven't seen any 4 or 8-way socket 603 boards being sold anywhere but I believe Supermicro is releasing a 4-way Xeon solution soon for the Xeon MP.

 

[TC]

I believe Anandtech previewed a Supermicro board featuring 4 way xeon support using the server works grand champion chipset. I'll see if I can find it.

 

[Henry Rollins II]

I use an Intel C440GX, a slightly lighter weight version of the Intel SBT2 dual slot 2 server board. The Xeons are very fast, very powerful processors. This is almost entirely due to their monstrous 2mb of full speed L2 cache. Currently I am running a clan server for RTCW on both processors because RTCW uses the Quake 3 engine, which supports SMP. Very cool!

They aren't so great at some things though, such as folding (which is what I originally thought I would use them for) because the Intel FPU performance isn't all that spectacular and FPU performance is mainly what [email protected] uses. Here she is - "Black Sabbath"!:

Wow thats cool. But you are misinformed about the CPU. All 133 Mhz FSB Xeon´s have only 256kB L2 cache.

How do you think it would perform in games? (If it had an AGP port, that is)

regards,
Henry

 

[donny_paycheck]

Wow thats cool. But you are misinformed about the CPU. All 133 Mhz FSB Xeon´s have only 256kB L2 cache.

How do you think it would perform in games? (If it had an AGP port, that is)

regards,
Henry

Oh, I knew that, this board will only do 100mhz FSB anyway so it doesn't mean much to me.

The Xeons I have are fairly fast CPUs but they would play a game only as fast as a normal Pentium III at 733mhz, I would say. Where they excel is in multitasking many threads at once due to their large caches. For example, a Xeon with 2mb of L2 cache will get roughly twice the effeciency in a [email protected] work unit than a 256kb L2 AMD Thunderbird processor because it will utilize the large cache to store the work unit and cruching program right on the processor cartridge with full-speed cache. Right now I run a Return To Castle Wolfenstein server on them and use them for a file server because the motherboard had an integrated U2W-LVD SCSI controller that is very fast at multitasking. Also, RTCW uses the Quake 3 engine so it supports multithreading on SMP systems, so it runs faster on the dual Xeons because it takes advantage of both processors.