X99 vs Z170 - which one is better for use @office/work?

[dr_lucas]

I am going to upgrade our X58 motherboards with newer ones (15 computers) and was wondering what your opinions on the current available options X58 vs Z170 (or maybe other suggestions).
Graphics/Gaming/OC performance is not an issue as they are going to be used in a corporate environment.


Thanks

 

[kenkickr]

What is their use in a corporate environment? Primarily MS Office work, Photo editing, Cad, etc?

 

[newtekie1]

Either is way overkill for a corporate environment unless they are doing video editing or something like that.

 

[dr_lucas]

What is their use in a corporate environment? Primarily MS Office work, Photo editing, Cad, etc?

Yes, office, heavy photoshop psd works, Web design etc.
Wanna keep the hardware as future proof as possible so not need to upgrade too often.

 

[RejZoR]

Z170, because the platform is cheaper and processors as well. For X99, motherboards start at around 350€ lol.

 

[hat]

As others said, depends on the work. If it's a lot of heavy lifting (like video editing, or CAD, that sort of thing as mentioned earlier) go for x99. The additional cores will help you there, as will the RAM bandwidth should you decide to go for quad channel. If that sort of thing isn't what you're doing, then go for Z170. It will be less expensive, and you can just use the integrated graphics (x99 does not have integrated graphics, so you would also have to supply basic video cards).

Actually, I wouldn't recommend Z170 at all. Z170 is more for gamers, enthusiasts, overclockers and the like. I would be quicker to recommend H170, or even H110 depending on your needs (amount of USB, SATA ports varies, RAID functionality, etc).

 

[cadaveca]

Actually, I wouldn't recommend Z170 at all. Z170 is more for gamers, enthusiasts, overclockers and the like. I would be quicker to recommend H170, or even H110 depending on your needs (amount of USB, SATA ports varies, RAID functionality, etc).

Q170/Q150/B150 are the business-class chipsets. Only Q170 supports Stable Image Platform Program and vPro.


So really, neither Z170 or X99 should make into a business environment. The only true choice for both administration and security on a business-class level is the Q170.

 

[n-ster]

I agree that most likely, it's either x99 or Q170.

Another option I've had great success with in corporate environments are Xeon + ECC RAM, but that's situational and dependant on how much they are willing to pay and how they use their computers. I've never had to deal with corruption and way less often did I have to deal with crashes on computers with Xeon and ECC. There are two things I don't cheap out on in corporate environments that have a decent budget, and that's PSU and storage (25% over provisioned SSD usually). Consider investing in upgrading those two parts if they aren't the greatest right now.

 

[peche]

Q170/Q150/B150 are the business-class chipsets. Only Q170 supports Stable Image Platform Program and vPro.


So really, neither Z170 or X99 should make into a business environment. The only true choice for both administration and security on a business-class level is the Q170.

this.....

also this...

 

[RejZoR]

Depends on "business". If you need a cheap workstation that you plan to overclock in order to save money and have loads of compute power, Z170 still makes sense. Cheap Z170 + 6600K. With some overclocking you can turn this 3.3GHz chip into a 4.6-4.7 GHz quad core monster. If you slam any kind of water cooling on it you'll be able to get super stable operation even at long term loads.

 

[n-ster]

They have the money for x99 though, so might as well go x99 over z170 in most cases no?

 

[silentbogo]

Both are a super-overkill for an office. Even for a typical gaming environment it's too much.

If all you do is office work - go for Pentuim G3250 and an H81 motherboard (those go for $40-50 right now). Can probably build a whole machine with 23" fullHD monitor for $300-$350 if you are a conservative like me.

If you want the latest hardware, but no OC is planned - get the cheapest Skylake CPU and look for an adequate motherboard with H170 or B150 chipset. But in this case if I were you, I'd wait for low-end LGA1151 CPUs to appear on the market (i3, Pentium etc.). And don't even bother with GPU: pretty sure that the new Intel HD is enough to play solitaire and farmville.

 

[cadaveca]

LoL. All this "save money" idea doesn't work in the real business world. Expenses such as equipment upgrades are write-offs that offset taxes, and the most recent equipment has the lowest cost of ownership. The idea that something is "overpowered" isn't a real thing in the office... good performance = useful longevity. Also, overclocking should not a be a word mentioned, as most office PCs are really only managing data, and OC puts this at jeopardy. There won't be "K" SKUs used in such builds, so OC isn't an option anyway.

 

[RejZoR]

You're mixing up corporations and small offices. Someone who knows a thing or two about computers, has a small office but requires some grunt, OC is certainly an option. Hell, I've seen custom builds in corporate environments as well. AVAST Software for example utilizes Quad-SLi GeForce GTX custom systems with water cooling for parallel data processing using GPU's. Sure they aren't overclocked, but still. Most corporations would just buy a server rack(s) and call it a day. With most likely costs 10 times higher than this one.

I mean, we aren't talking extreme overclocks on the limit here, we are talking differences that can make up a huge difference, but aren't extreme OC's in any aspect.

 

[peche]

Both are a super-overkill for an office. Even for a typical gaming environment it's too much.

If all you do is office work - go for Pentuim G3250 and an H81 motherboard (those go for $40-50 right now). Can probably build a whole machine with 23" fullHD monitor for $300-$350 if you are a conservative like me.

If you want the latest hardware, but no OC is planned - get the cheapest Skylake CPU and look for an adequate motherboard with H170 or B150 chipset. But in this case if I were you, I'd wait for low-end LGA1151 CPUs to appear on the market (i3, Pentium etc.). And don't even bother with GPU: pretty sure that the new Intel HD is enough to play solitaire and farmville.

you dont have an idea of how wrong you are sir...

i work in IT dept on a money and finacial shits company, i have pretty much people here heavily tasking on their computers and we have noticed that i3 computers can do plenty of work ... but speed means more time saved, more things acomplished in due time, so better workstations always means quiet times to IT departments, so in this point recomending cheap pentium G processors and lower is not sane,

@dr_lucas tell me moaaar about what are the computers used for and let me know how can i help you, i know that feeling bro...

 

[dr_lucas]

Only issue that I see with the Q170 chipsets is they don't come with USB 3.1...

 

[dr_lucas]

you dont have an idea of how wrong you are sir...

i work in IT dept on a money and finacial shits company, i have pretty much people here heavily tasking on their computers and we have noticed that i3 computers can do plenty of work ... but speed means more time saved, more things acomplished in due time, so better workstations always means quiet times to IT departments, so in this point recomending cheap pentium G processors and lower is not sane,

@dr_lucas tell me moaaar about what are the computers used for and let me know how can i help you, i know that feeling bro...

What are they being used for? If security is important, you'll want a Q-series or Cxxx chipset machine.

Either way, you should be a little more specific what they'll be used for.

As I wrote above: MS office, heavy photoshop psd works, Web design, programming etc
No CAD/CAM and obviously no gaming

 

[dr_lucas]

By the way, money is not really an issue, to a certain extent. I don't think XEON justifies the extreme cost increase, although ECC RAM is helpful, but anyways these are used mainly in servers rather than work stations. (I did see some workstations in Chevron recently upgraded to XEON with ECC RAM for some odd reasons)

 

[dr_lucas]

Both are a super-overkill for an office. Even for a typical gaming environment it's too much.

If all you do is office work - go for Pentuim G3250 and an H81 motherboard (those go for $40-50 right now). Can probably build a whole machine with 23" fullHD monitor for $300-$350 if you are a conservative like me.

Overclocking in a business environment running 15 computers is absolutely not a good idea for multiple reasons.

LoL. All this "save money" idea doesn't work in the real business world. Expenses such as equipment upgrades are write-offs that offset taxes, and the most recent equipment has the lowest cost of ownership. The idea that something is "overpowered" isn't a real thing in the office... good performance = useful longevity. Also, overclocking should not a be a word mentioned, as most office PCs are really only managing data, and OC puts this at jeopardy. There won't be "K" SKUs used in such builds, so OC isn't an option anyway.

Completely agree with you, dave. The longevity and future proof are key factors here, as I wrote above. I tend to go with your Q170 recommendation, although it's such a new chipset that I couldn't find any reviews for any of the motherboards based on it (for example ASUS Q170M-C that seems interesting)...

 

[Aquinus]

What are they being used for? If security is important, you'll want a Q-series or Cxxx chipset machine.

Either way, you should be a little more specific what they'll be used for.

Edit: X99 is overkill for that list. Don't consider it.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Only issue that I see with the Q170 chipsets is they don't come with USB 3.1...

The thing about USB 3.1 is that no one has agreed on a front panel header for it yet so the 3.1 ports are always on the I/O plate. Quite impractical for a standard that is supposed to be used for plug & play devices. 3.1 adaption is just beginning so my advice would be to plan for a USB 3.1 card in the future with the finalized front panel header and a 3.5" or 5.25" bay drive with ports.

I would stick to Q150/Q170 unless you know you need 6+ cores.

 

[cadaveca]

Completely agree with you, dave. The longevity and future proof are key factors here, as I wrote above. I tend to go with your Q170 recommendation, although it's such a new chipset that I couldn't find any reviews for any of the motherboards based on it (for example ASUS Q170M-C that seems interesting)...

As a business owner myself, I tend to understand these needs a bit more than the average enthusiast.

Business-class motherboards aren't commonly reviewed because they do not need to be. The fact that they will be used in an office environment means their design and feature set are tailored to those uses, and stability and a long running life are part of that. I'd be looking at the 6600 CPUs (65W) paired with 500 GB - 1 TB mechanical drives, 16 GB 2133 MHz memory, and 500W PSUs tossed into whatever case you like. That would lead to an initial system cost of just under $1k, OS included. If you approach a larger local retailer, I'm sure they could cut you a deal on the large number of machines.

With power use included, you're talking a <$250/year, per system, cost of ownership over 5 years. $7500/ year for 15 machines is pretty affordable to me, but you may be able to find more value-added options by approaching Dell or Acer. I'm sure you could find a Dell All-in-One with keyboard/mouse/monitor for that same $1k price tag, and they could have the machines at your door within a day or two. As mentioned the actual use of these machines should dictate what direction you go. If this is for very basic office needs, you can get away with a slightly older system with less grunt for sure, since most offices will not change the way they do business within a 3-5 year span.

 

[dr_lucas]

The thing about USB 3.1 is that no one has agreed on a front panel header for it yet so the 3.1 ports are always on the I/O plate. Quite impractical for a standard that is supposed to be used for plug & play devices. 3.1 adaption is just beginning so my advice would be to planfor a USB 3.1 card in the future with the finalized front panel header and a 3.5" or 5.25" bay drive with ports.

I would stick to Q150/Q170 unless you know you need 6+ cores.

Yeah, sounds like a good advice, I will probably go with the Q170.
I am not sure what you mean about the front panel header. There are 2 main types, type A and type C and there are already front panel headers, like this one:
http://www.asrock.com/mb/spec/card.asp?Model=Front USB 3.1 Panel

 

[silentbogo]

OK, now that I know what it is going to be used for specifically - scratch Pentium G.

As Aquinus and many others said, Q170 would be the best option, but those are kinda not on the market yet. I only found one EU store that had a Q170M-C. Newegg has none.
Alternatively you should still look at B150. Those are cheap, presumably reliable and unless you need a built-in TPM module and x2.5 higher surge protection, then it could offer everything you'll use from Q170 board, which includes up to 32GB of DDR4 suppoty, all current CPU support (until 130W monsters arrive), SATA III + RAID, PCI-e 3.0 etc. etc. etc.

About Photoshop: it still scales badly beyond and even under 4 cores. There is a nice bench here: https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Adobe-Photoshop-CC-Multi-Core-Performance-625/
Haven't found any info on GPU utilization in Photoshop CC, but this article reviews GPU performance impact in CS6:
https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Adobe-Photoshop-CS6-GPU-Acceleration-161/

Which means unless your programming work requires some extensive and frequent compiling - don't bother to go anywhere higher than i5-6600.

 

[n-ster]

Well if you want to compare 2011-3 vs Xeon 2011 v3, the price difference really isn't that big. quad-core E5-1620 v3, hex-core E5-2620 v3 or E5-1650 v3 are very reasonably priced. Motherboard-wise most if not all AsRock X99 boards support ECC RAM, and often have most consumer features like USB 3.1 you'd want. Do you intend to have discreet GPU either way?

Also, Photoshop DOES scale well with Hyper-Threading, at least according to reviews comparing the 6600k to the 6700K

An E5-1620 v3 is ~300$, AsRock X99 motherboards 180~220$ depending on want you want. ECC RAM is more expensive but the benefits are worth the cost IMO. Compare this to an i7-6700 which is actually a few bucks more, and MB is about 40-50$ cheaper only. Do note that the i7 6700 will likely be more powerful than both the e5-1620 v3 or the 2620 v3. The e5-1650 v3 likely beats out the i7-6700, but is 270$ more or something along those lines. Either way though, Xeon could still be a very viable option IMO