Fastest Commercial Cpu/Processor

[Shadow565]

NO SIDING!
Realists & Fact Finders Welcome!
I'm wondering what is the fastest(non OC) processor available for any desktop and/or laptop
Currently the highest I've found is the Intel Xeon X5690 & AMD FX-8150

AMD Black Edition FX-8150 (Desktop)
Clock: 3.60 GHz
Cores: 8
Threads: ???
Price: $372.99 USD
Official AMD Details(Barely any):http://shop.amd.com/us/All/Detail/Pr...SearchTerms=fx

Intel Xeon X5690 (Laptop)
Clock Speed: 3.46 GHz
Cores: 6
Threads: 12
Price: $1,600 USD
Official Intel Details:http://ark.intel.com/products/52576/...s-Intel-QPI%29

[hat]

Compare that X5690 against the FX-8150 and it would probably be faster. The IPC of Intel's processors is way ahead of AMD's.

http://ark.intel.com/products/27487/...Hz-800-MHz-FSB)

This P4, as far as I know, still has everything beat in raw clockpeed... but it is quite slow compared to today's cpus.

[n0tiert]

AMD Opteron 6174 vs Intel Xeon X5650 Review

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpu...x5650-review/1

depends on ya needs ..... i would say

[xBruce88x]

the FX-8150 has 8 threads Shadow565. When you say fastest, are you talking clock speed (which isn't the way to go in terms of determining performance) or actual performance of the cpu?

as the above poster said, It kinda depends on your needs.

[Aquinus]

You're comparing apples to oranges, I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish by comparing two CPUs that are designed for two entirely different markets.

[Bunchies]

Originally Posted by Aquinus

You're comparing apples to oranges, I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish by comparing two CPUs that are designed for two entirely different markets.

lol this , it also matters what you use it for .like how Xeon's are not ment for gameing lol

[Shadow565]

Originally Posted by xBruce88x

the FX-8150 has 8 threads Shadow565. When you say fastest, are you talking clock speed (which isn't the way to go in terms of determining performance) or actual performance of the cpu?

as the above poster said, It kinda depends on your needs.

Broadly speaking the clockrate only, im just wondering what is the highest combined clockrate(all cores added up) available for both desktop and laptop.

I understand the clockrate has no solid indication of how powerful a processor actually is performance wise.

Originally Posted by Bunchies

lol this , it also matters what you use it for .like how Xeon's are not ment for gameing lol

I would say Gaming/General Use/Uni Work, i never stated that the Xeon was for gaming just that it was the most powerful processor(that i could find) available in a laptop(which i was planning on getting) Originpc offer several Xeon processors in the EON 17 or EON 17X.

@hat While that is the fastest single(as in Ghz) clockrate processor as you said cant compare to today's quad-core 3Ghz processors

@Aquinus I never compared them only stating that they are the fastest available for each market(the biggest apple and the biggest orange on the market )

[LAN_deRf_HA]

Originally Posted by Bunchies

lol this , it also matters what you use it for .like how Xeon's are not ment for gameing lol

Xeon's are exactly the same as the consumer chips. Gaming performance would be the same.

[OneMoar]

a 2700k easily stomps a FX 8150
a 2700k will
clock higher with less heat
do more per clock cycle
handles threaded loads better and supports more instructions
clock speed does not matter AT ALL now a days a core i3 @ 3.1 will beat a Phenom II @ 3.4Ghz any day of the week

[FordGT90Concept]

Intel® Core™ i7-3960X Processor Extreme Edition (15M Cache, up to 3.90 GHz) is the most powerful single x86 processor available now. Intel® Xeon® Processor E5-2687W (20M Cache, 3.10 GHz, 8.00 GT/s Intel® QPI) is the most powerful two-way x86 processor available now.

Highest clockspeed I know of belongs to IBM POWER6. It has several models clocked at 5.0 GHz but they're not faster than the above Core i7/Xeon as far as performance is concerned.

Non-x86, you'd have to look at the IBM POWER7 795. I have no idea how it stacks up to the Core i7/Xeon above but there is no denying that it is a multithreading monster.


Xeons and Opterons are put through more strict quality controls than the rest. The same processors sold as consumer chips would likely have higher clockspeeds.

[Jetster]

When you said fastest CPU I figured you were taking about getting work done. Like fastest to encode a 10 Gb video, or fastest to run a cycle in prime. Not clock speed

[W1zzard]

tell us more about your workload first. integer or floating point? multi threaded? scales to how many cores? are you really cpu bound?

[1Kurgan1]

Originally Posted by hat

Compare that X5690 against the FX-8150 and it would probably be faster. The IPC of Intel's processors is way ahead of AMD's.

http://ark.intel.com/products/27487/...Hz-800-MHz-FSB)

This P4, as far as I know, still has everything beat in raw clockpeed... but it is quite slow compared to today's cpus.

Pretty sure the PII x6 BE's have beat that in clocks, but I can't remember exactly, I just know both are over 8ghz.

[lyndonguitar]

NASA wants their computer back

[Aquinus]

Originally Posted by LAN_deRf_HA

Xeon's are exactly the same as the consumer chips. Gaming performance would be the same.

Wrong, Xeons are typically clocked lower with more cores because of the nature of server and how all server software threading typically scales really well with connected clients. Additionally Xeons support ECC memory, Trusted Execution Technology, and has a lower thermal limit than SB-E. The 3960x is a gimped E5-2890 with only 6 cores that can be overclocked.

Finally game performance would be lesser due to the lower clock speeds with the exception of games like BF3 where it scales to multiple threads really well.

[n-ster]

Originally Posted by Aquinus

Wrong, Xeons are typically clocked lower with more cores because of the nature of server and how all server software threading typically scales really well with connected clients. Additionally Xeons support ECC memory, Trusted Execution Technology, and has a lower thermal limit than SB-E. The 3960x is a gimped E5-2890 with only 6 cores that can be overclocked.

Finally game performance would be lesser due to the lower clock speeds with the exception of games like BF3 where it scales to multiple threads really well.

He was talking clock for clock... duh.

Between a 3.5ghz i7 2600 and Xeon equivalent a 3.5 ghz, it's the same performance

[repman244]

Xeon E7-8870 2.40 GHz, 30M Cache, 10 cores / 20 threads and it's only $4616

http://ark.intel.com/products/53580/...-GTs-Intel-QPI)

[FordGT90Concept]

The one I linked (E5-2687W) is slightly faster.

2.4 GHz * 10 = 24.0 GHz
3.1 GHz * 8 = 24.8 GHz

Turbo:
2.8 GHz * 10 = 28.0 GHz
3.8 GHz * 8 = 30.4 GHz

It shows in the TDP too (150w vs 130w). Only way the 10 core would beat the 8 core is if the workload specifically required those extra 4 threads.

[repman244]

Originally Posted by FordGT90Concept

The one I linked (E5-2687W) is slightly faster.

2.4 GHz * 10 = 24.0 GHz
3.1 GHz * 8 = 24.8 GHz

Turbo:
2.8 GHz * 10 = 28.0 GHz
3.8 GHz * 8 = 30.4 GHz

It shows in the TDP too (150w vs 130w). Only way the 10 core would beat the 8 core is if the workload specifically required those extra 4 threads.

Correct, the 8 core would perform faster now that I think of it the way you've written it (even in very threaded environments sometimes despite having 2 cores less), the E7 would have the advantage of more cache (when it's needed) and 2 more cores but these 2 advantages would help only in specific cases
The main advantage of the E7 is the scalability (I know this topic is about single CPU's, but just saying it) - you can use 8 CPU's per server (Socket 1567).

[FordGT90Concept]

Oh! I didn't see it was octo-way. That would put it in a separate category from the E5-2687W.

[NinkobEi]

Ah, to have the money lying around to buy one of those processors and OC the heck out of it would be awesome. I'd like to have a 10-core 4.5ghz beast with 4-channel DDR3 in house. Think of the electricity bills!