Xeon Owners Club

[Zyll Goliat]

NVIDIA drivers are in the 700MB range, and has Experience includes in case people want to use it. Optional to have it installed.

Ad blockers help with net traffic..

Higher clocks = more power. My 1680v2 will eat 200w easily and it's an Ivy Bridge 8-core.

You see the new Xeons? 350w TDP. You're going to pay for the cores and clocks and that's what pushing for performance does.

You can't exclude older techs when I had a x5675 pull over 300w alone.

Also, Ivy Bridge will not support PCI boot media. Haswell was first official and it wasn't til Skylake that NVME properly worked. (I totally don't have boards and drives and tested this multiple times)

Sure Ivy didn't support PCI boot media but NVME working just fine and it's bootable on some X79 motherboards with the modded bios .....

 

[Toothless]

Sure Ivy didn't support PCI boot media but NVME working just fine and it's bootable on some X79 motherboards with the modded bios .....

NVME via PCI is fine. I've even used it on x58, just not for booting.

 

[Socket2011]

Oh yeah , "Ry ...ZEN" he he ...
Most pages will not allow you to engage with a ad-blocker running. Or , entrap you to divulge even more info (or $$) to engage in a semi ad free environ.
STILL , a scam. But we are in "Scamerica".
Interesting when I go VPN (from europe) to scamerica sites , they let up on some of this BS.

"Skylake" is the first to support NVME ??? cheap Huanazhi X79's natively support m.2 booting , and my X99 gigabyte has full speed (attachment),trim,smart. worked with both
V3 and V4. They just used the X99 chipset to derive the NVME lanes (slow).
Search "X79 Sabertooth Bios MOD" on youtube , the man gets full use of NVME with a modded BIOS.
I never noticed my V1 8-core Xeon using 200W .. is that total system draw ?? It's IRF VRM reports a spot -on 105W TDP as advertised. I'm pleased that the V4 seems mis-rated
on the TDP , at stock 2.4ghz(attachment 2) .... uses 70W. And , 92W @ 2.9 ... All I gain is a couple thousand on passmark. Seems I found my perfect HTPC processor. Ice cold.
I have a I5 kaby lake and my son's Comet lake 10700kf to compare this to. It seems Intel's innovation and Moore's law broke down from 2016-2020.

 

[80-watt Hamster]

Oh yeah , "Ry ...ZEN" he he ...
Most pages will not allow you to engage with a ad-blocker running. Or , entrap you to divulge even more info (or $$) to engage in a semi ad free environ.
STILL , a scam. But we are in "Scamerica".
Interesting when I go VPN (from europe) to scamerica sites , they let up on some of this BS.

"Skylake" is the first to support NVME ??? cheap Huanazhi X79's natively support m.2 booting , and my X99 gigabyte has full speed (attachment),trim,smart. worked with both
V3 and V4. They just used the X99 chipset to derive the NVME lanes (slow).
Search "X79 Sabertooth Bios MOD" on youtube , the man gets full use of NVME with a modded BIOS.
I never noticed my V1 8-core Xeon using 200W .. is that total system draw ?? It's IRF VRM reports a spot -on 105W TDP as advertised. I'm pleased that the V4 seems mis-rated
on the TDP , at stock 2.4ghz(attachment 2) .... uses 70W. And , 92W @ 2.9 ... All I gain is a couple thousand on passmark. Seems I found my perfect HTPC processor. Ice cold.
I have a I5 kaby lake and my son's Comet lake 10700kf to compare this to. It seems Intel's innovation and Moore's law broke down from 2016-2020.

Can't speak to NVME support, but TDPs are very fuzzy numbers. The historical purpose AFAIK was as guidance for system manufacturers to design/specify a thermal solution. I had a "55W" i3 once that wouldn't pull more than mid-40s no matter what load I threw at it.

 

[Toothless]

I don't consider bios modding as true support. Always a chance for something to go wrong.

Those cheap, Chinese boards that claim to be X79? Those aren't actual X79. The chipsets are from donor boards and they're glued together to support different techs.

Haswell can do 700MB/s to 900MB/s for NVME. Skylake actually has PCI lanes for it. Kaby and newer did much better with support.

No, not total system draw. I've had my 1680v2 stock pull 160w on the core itself. Intel has a program to measure out power draw on their chips. Overclocked those chips have pulled 240-260w.

 

[Socket2011]

I don't think NVME is processor dependent. I just had my Haswell 2680v3 do 3.5gb/s bootable same as with this new v4.
Same board , same Samsung M.2. The BIOS GUI see's the MVMe's controller as a bootable device same as any SATA device.
Speed is dependent on how many PCI-e lanes are available. Gigabyte (with this 2016 MB) .... MVMe was not as fast , or as used. So, they
just used the 2 lanes running through the X99. My Samsung was "throttled" @ 1500mb/s. A Google search for other owners of my board suggested
to buy the add-on card and plug it in one of the full length slots. viola , 2500mb/s. I looked up the Samsung driver for my NVME , installed it.
Then I got the advertised 3500mb/s.
I never tried one of the no-name Chinese boards. I did research them , they do have a true Wellsburg X99 chipset . "Leftovers" from the Taiwan
MB stocks. Cheaper VRM, caps , 1oz copper .... no extra's at all.
It seems all it takes to see a M.2 NVMe in bios is a string to engage the controller , just like a PCI-E video card at bootup.

 

[Toothless]

You can't compare consumer (Z97) to server (V3/V4 chips)

X99 can use NVME just fine for the most part, but that's HEDT/server. V3 is Haswell, so no, not CPU dependant. It's chipset. That's why those Chinese boards can use NVME; recycled chipsets with improper naming.

My Gigabyte X99 runs my 6900k, and before, the 2698v4. Ran NVME drives just fine on both chips. It's the chipset that matters.

 

[Socket2011]

But how does that explain an add-on card ? Electrically , the add-on is directly connected to the CPU 3.0 pci-e lanes ... totally bypassing the X99.
According to the block diagram for the X99 , it connects to the DMI 2.0 of the Xeon and derives just V2.0 pci-e lanes. 40 3.0 lanes come right from the CPU
never touching the X99.
The X99 lanes do the 1X slots (and the slow stupid onboard NVME) on my boards.
Nope , the CPU does the 1X slots ..., as well. X99 just does the onboard NVME and sata/LPC. According to device manager.

 

[Toothless]

NVME only needs four lanes. Most of not all PCI NVME cards will do minimum 3.0 x4. I used one on my Z97 board to get the 3GB/s from my 970 EVO as a boot.

 

[Socket2011]

NVME only needs four lanes. Most of not all PCI NVME cards will do minimum 3.0 x4. I used one on my Z97 board to get the 3GB/s from my 970 EVO as a boot.

And the card is directly connected to 4 lanes , as is a video card connected to 8/16 direct lanes right to the CPU. The BIOS initializes the CPU and allows
it's lanes to directly boot the NVME . that's why those V1/2 bios mods can also boot direct from those 3.0 lanes. Chipset is out of the picture.

 

[Toothless]

And the card is directly connected to 4 lanes , as is a video card connected to 8/16 direct lanes right to the CPU. The BIOS initializes the CPU and allows
it's lanes to directly boot the NVME . that's why those V1/2 bios mods can also boot direct from those 3.0 lanes. Chipset is out of the picture.

Again, I just don't count bios mods as legit. Risk and reward, and not much can saturate the drive speed of a SATA SSD when the biggest V2 is a 12 core.

 

[Sora]

100meg of the actual drivers and a gig of spyware that benefits "them".

If only you had a clue about what the "driver" constitutes and how big it actually is even when the gfe shit is stripped out.

 

[Wdoox]

My processor finally arrived, and it is a beauty of a cpu

Intel Xeon E5 2690 v2 @ 3728.02 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR

[7ljqky] Validated Dump by DESKTOP-P9T0LVP (2022-09-16 15:27:34) - MB: Asus SABERTOOTH X79 - RAM: 12288 MB

valid.x86.fr

After my faithful 2660v2 died I was using 4930k (oc to 4.4 ghz) for some time but 2690v2 oc is in another league. I just run cinebench 15 for fun and yea..

 

[Socket2011]

If only you had a clue about what the "driver" constitutes and how big it actually is even when the gfe shit is stripped out.

Instead of making smartass remarks , feel free to be a good web citizen and explain.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Instead of making smartass remarks , feel free to be a good web citizen and explain.

Took the words right out of my mouth! Except you were nicer about it..

 

[Socket2011]

Took the word right out of my mouth! Except you were nicer about it..

Things like this push me to learn more. Nvidia scatters a lot of code throughout windows. Services , drivers , "helpers" ....

 

[N/A]

516 Nvidia driver is in the 1,81 GB range unpacked, 1395 files and that is what counts. the display driver alone is 0.99 GB. it's getting out of hand.
for the NVMe pcie I'm using the second 16x slot in 1x mode ~~ 800MBs in atto. but it maxes at 250MBs verifying torrent, cpu limit.

 

[Socket2011]

To clarify what I "assumed" to be the issue with older MB's booting to NVMe's.
What it's NOT -
The processor , pci-e (V2.0/3.0/4.0)
Even if we had an old core duo Intel with a UEFI bios and pci-e , it could work.
The code in the UEFI is contained in the Platform Initialization Specification for the ability to see a NVMe controller as a bootable device.
The UEFI X79 boards could easily implement this (like the sabertooth or my P9X79) , but they were pre NVMe units.

I actually found a USB (clover EFI) bootloader that can add the NVMe spec to even a legacy bios.
Kind of a waste , since to make use of such a fast boot device needs a newer faster bus (and CPU).
I also found out my new Gigabyte MB DOES use the X99 for all the 1X PCI-e slots and the integrated NVMe connector.
Since it's the UEFI specification string that determines use , NVMe will work on any PCI-E bus connection.
Built - in NVMe on 2017 MB's don't bother with the chipset at all - direct NVMe to the CPU(4 V3.0 lanes)
Swap your card around , I have -
Video card - PCI express root port 3
NVMe - port 2 ( all alone , by itself)
My fast ASUS soundcard (4 lanes) - port 1.

All the lower bandwidth stuff (wi-fi , etc.) - Let the X99 DMI derived lanes (V2.0) take the job.
I was a dummy !! I had my wi-fi plugged in to a full length pci-e slot and the MB has a switch that halved
my 16X pci-e into 2 -8X's. Duh. Everything DID work .... but now it works better !

BTW - best V1-V4 intel package to date is the V10.1.2.19 inf. Added more system device entries and is more descriptive of this XEON.

516 Nvidia driver is in the 1,81 GB range unpacked, 1395 files and that is what counts. the display driver alone is 0.99 GB. it's getting out of hand.
for the NVMe pcie I'm using the second 16x slot in 1x mode ~~ 800MBs in atto. but it maxes at 250MBs verifying torrent, cpu limit.

I have an older GTX 550ti , just watch movies. It's package (391.35) is 500meg. After NVslimmer , I install a 150meg package.

Nvcuda.dll 12.3meg , for example , NVopencl 18.2meg ... all sorts of assorted hard linked entries pointing to winsxs.
I don't think many are actually used , a lot of 32 bit stuff and redundancy. For other programs , I hard link "app data" to a second NVMe partition.
keeps my OS partition "clean". Even with this older package , a whole lot of bloat !!

 

[Dr. Dro]

"obsolete" huh ??? What is the purpose of Rysen 9 or threadripper power ? To create and run more useless "features" forced on the masses.
If " enthusiasts" want 225W TDP processors and 1200W PS's in a coming age of scarcity , let them burn up with the rest of the earth !
I'm not quite a "luddite" , but in the past few years ... both web content and software has not only become bloated but outright irritating.
One example - the Nvidia driver package. 100meg of the actual drivers and a gig of spyware that benefits "them".
Another example of a "solution in search of a problem". IOT , anyone ... what a scam !

Most web pages are just a collection of 3rd party crap and redirects . A website in the early 21'st century did not need to connect to 50 IP's to show us
100kb actual content. So ... we have been scammed into paying the bills (with 1200w PS's) to facilitate a bunch of BS , which does not serve us.
Get the 1Gig fast internet connection , only to have 95% of that bandwidth consumed by content that benefits "them' , and we pay for it. BS !!

PS - I did research the full V3 and 4 die configs , I even know the errata of both families. I did not want a 24 core die that had 8 disabled cores ! (2697a)

Sorry, no. These CPUs are obsolete, that's why you can buy them for next to nothing, they're essentially e-waste at their intended market segment.

That word doesn't mean that they've become completely useless. My personal server runs on a Core 2 Quad Q9505, but it hosts files for one client - my PC.

Obviously, you're using these relatively high performance parts for very simple tasks, so they seem like they're very high performance parts. Which they 100% were, in their day. It doesn't mean newer chips are scams, just that your needs are low and met by those parts.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Sorry, no. These CPUs are obsolete

No, they are not. These days are NOT like times three decades ago where a CPU and it's platform were massively eclipsed by the very next generation CPU. In the last 10 years, each generation of CPU is holding it's own against not just the next gen but indeed the next several generations of CPU. For example, the W3680 I have in my Dell T3500 is still doing well as a 1080p gaming system and it works perfectly doing anything else required of it. Even Core2Quad CPU's can still be used as a daily driver as long as they're not pushed to any serious workload.

that's why you can buy them for next to nothing,

No. The reason they're inexpensive is because they're surplus.

they're essentially e-waste at their intended market segment.

Sort of. Companies only replace technology when it is no longer cost effective to operate or the needs of the needed operations can no long be met by existing platforms. Business technology management is VERY complex and varies from company to company and government to government. The way you describe it makes it seem far to simple, which it isn't.

Obviously, you're using these relatively high performance parts for very simple tasks, so they seem like they're very high performance parts.

That's not true either. Gaming might be simple in context, but it is far from simple in computational practice.

Which they 100% were, in their day.

They 100% still are.

It doesn't mean newer chips are scams, just that your needs are low and met by those parts.

That depends on your perspective. To many people, they can not justify the expense of a current gen system at an $1100 starting point, when you can by older hardware that give 85% of the performance at less than half the cost. To some, that seems like a scam.

There are many perspectives about an industry as complex as the technology industry. See the bigger picture and you might better understand the perspectives of others.

 

[Dr. Dro]

No, they are not. These days are NOT like times three decades ago where a CPU and it's platform were massively eclipsed by the very next generation CPU. In the last 10 years, each generation of CPU is holding it's own against not just the next gen but indeed the next several generations of CPU. For example, the W3680 I have in my Dell T3500 is still doing well as a 1080p gaming system and it works perfectly doing anything else required of it. Even Core2Quad CPU's can still be used as a daily driver as long as they're not pushed to any serious workload.

No. The reason they're inexpensive is because they're surplus.

Sort of. Companies only replace technology when it is no longer cost effective to operate or the needs of the needed operations can no long be met by existing platforms. Business technology management is VERY complex and varies from company to company and government to government. The way you describe it makes it seem far to simple, which it isn't.

That's not true either. Gaming might be simple in context, but it is far from simple in computational practice.

They 100% still are.

That depends on your perspective. To many people, they can not justify the expense of a current gen system at an $1100 starting point, when you can by older hardware that give 85% of the performance at less than half the cost. To some, that seems like a scam.

There are many perspectives about an industry as complex as the technology industry. See the bigger picture and you might better understand the perspectives of others.

I'm not sure where you're coming from with this initial argument, but the X99/C612 platform is not just one or two, but it is several generations old. Even though they remain useful to some people in a small scale, and cherished, perhaps coveted by people like us, they are very much obsolete in their intended markets, that is, as scalable datacenter processors.

We know where most of these Xeons are coming from, and that's from cloud hosting and render farms and/or their suppliers. These companies have green goals to meet, which require high server density which these platforms cannot offer as they have limited scalability. So yes, they're "surplus" because they're e-waste otherwise. Using outdated technology such as this flies in front of energy policy and real estate management, which is why practically all big companies invest heavily in renewing their platforms every generation or two. At least three such cycles have been completed since this platform.

Sapphire Rapids is launching this quarter, and Emerald Rapids (the "next-gen" in this 2019 roadmap) will follow soon in H2 2023. So you shouldn't be surprised to see any stocks of Broadwell-EP chips being offloaded on eBay, they've long since been replaced.

On the subject of performance, I must disagree, they are no longer high performance parts if a 18-core flagship processor such as my 4669 v3 is not capable of outpacing a common desktop processor like the Ryzen 5 5600 (non-X) even on multithreaded workloads such as Cinebench that heavily favor multicore processors. Not to mention that support for these has been dropped altogether in modern operating systems. Which isn't a deal breaker to us, but it very much is for someone who needs support for business reasons.

On gaming, I must also disagree. Your W3680 is miserably obsolete, it cannot boot many newer engines due to the lack of AVX support and the performance is... bro, dude, you're on TPU, i'm sure you read a review on a lousy i3 and compared to your own experience. It's a rebranded Core i7-980X, and while I enjoyed having my -990X 11 years ago, its time has very long since come and gone. Their performance borders on the irrelevant when bringing up gaming PCs in a modern context, you're going to get a LOT more out of even a lousy i3-10100F.

Intel Core i3-10100 Review - Affordable 4c/8t

Intel's Core i3-10100 is the most affordable Comet Lake "Core" processor. Unlike its predecessor, it finally has HyperThreading, which brings the core configuration to 4c/8t. Our Core i3-10100 review takes a close look at how Intel's new budget offering performs against AMD Ryzen 3 3100 and 3300X.

www.techpowerup.com

I think this last one applies to you, not me. These processors are old technology, and the one thing we will agree on, is that i'm glad that they have found a way to us instead of simply being destroyed. Newer server chips will not be so fortunate, as both the latest Xeon and EPYC CPUs now have security locks through eFuse that only let them work in conjunction with their intended platforms, locked by brand and possibly even motherboard type. For example:

Lenovo Vendor Locking Ryzen-based Systems with AMD PSB

Lenovo is vendor-locking its AMD Ryzen based platforms with AMD PSB including its Ryzen Pro ThinkCentre Tiny platforms

www.servethehome.com

 

[lexluthermiester]

I'm not sure where you're coming from with this initial argument, but the X99/C612 platform is not just one or two, but it is several generations old. Even though they remain useful to some people in a small scale, and cherished, perhaps coveted by people like us, they are very much obsolete in their intended markets, that is, as scalable datacenter processors.

We know where most of these Xeons are coming from, and that's from cloud hosting and render farms and/or their suppliers. These companies have green goals to meet, which require high server density which these platforms cannot offer as they have limited scalability. So yes, they're "surplus" because they're e-waste otherwise. Using outdated technology such as this flies in front of energy policy and real estate management, which is why practically all big companies invest heavily in renewing their platforms every generation or two. At least three such cycles have been completed since this platform.

View attachment 262278

Sapphire Rapids is launching this quarter, and Emerald Rapids (the "next-gen" in this 2019 roadmap) will follow soon in H2 2023. So you shouldn't be surprised to see any stocks of Broadwell-EP chips being offloaded on eBay, they've long since been replaced.

On the subject of performance, I must disagree, they are no longer high performance parts if a 18-core flagship processor such as my 4669 v3 is not capable of outpacing a common desktop processor like the Ryzen 5 5600 (non-X) even on multithreaded workloads such as Cinebench that heavily favor multicore processors. Not to mention that support for these has been dropped altogether in modern operating systems. Which isn't a deal breaker to us, but it very much is for someone who needs support for business reasons.

On gaming, I must also disagree. Your W3680 is miserably obsolete, it cannot boot many newer engines due to the lack of AVX support and the performance is... bro, dude, you're on TPU, i'm sure you read a review on a lousy i3 and compared to your own experience. It's a rebranded Core i7-980X, and while I enjoyed having my -990X 11 years ago, its time has very long since come and gone. Their performance borders on the irrelevant when bringing up gaming PCs in a modern context, you're going to get a LOT more out of even a lousy i3-10100F.

I think this last one applies to you, not me. These processors are old technology, and the one thing we will agree on, is that i'm glad that they have found a way to us instead of simply being destroyed. Newer server chips will not be so fortunate, as both the latest Xeon and EPYC CPUs now have security locks through eFuse that only let them work in conjunction with their intended platforms, locked by brand and possibly even motherboard type. For example:

Lenovo Vendor Locking Ryzen-based Systems with AMD PSB

Lenovo is vendor-locking its AMD Ryzen based platforms with AMD PSB including its Ryzen Pro ThinkCentre Tiny platforms

www.servethehome.com

You are missing some context and certainly the point. I'm not continuing this further. If you don't agree, that's fine but don't tell the rest of us what and how to think. We don't care and don't need to be told what is or is not useful to us. Put simply, hush up about it.

 

[Dr. Dro]

You are missing some context and certainly the point. I'm not continuing this further. If you don't agree, that's fine but don't tell the rest of us what and how to think. We don't care and don't need to be told what is or is not useful to us. Put simply, hush up about it.

Am I really the one missing context when just a few posts above I actually defended these old parts' usefulness to us? It really just sounds like you got really upset that I called these processors enterprise refuse.

End of the day, we only get to play with these because their intended target market (aka huge companies that buy these chips on contracts with thousands of units of these chips) no longer wants them. It's as simple as that, you're only now beginning to find some Naples processors on the cheap, and those were the original EPYC's that have been replaced by Rome, Milan and Genoa since.

Newer chips are not scams, even if you can achieve a great performance/price ratio if you buy smart instead of buying the latest and greatest. From an user perspective, that is.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Am I really the one missing context when just a few posts above I actually defended these old parts' usefulness to us? It really just sounds like you got really upset that I called these processors enterprise refuse.

End of the day, we only get to play with these because their intended target market (aka huge companies that buy these chips on contracts with thousands of units of these chips) no longer wants them. It's as simple as that, you're only now beginning to find some Naples processors on the cheap, and those were the original EPYC's that have been replaced by Rome, Milan and Genoa since.

Newer chips are not scams, even if you can achieve a great performance/price ratio if you buy smart instead of buying the latest and greatest. From an user perspective, that is.

Let it go or the mods will be asked to show you the way out.

 

[Dr. Dro]

Let it go or the mods will be asked to show you the way out.

For what? I've been respectful throughout and have brought counterpoints in fair discourse. It seems clear that we're not going to change each other's minds, so as you wish, consider this conversation ended.