looks like quad channel is not worth it,I wish intel would put out a 6 core on 1155.
I can beat that bandwidth and latency with my 2600k
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?278569-3930K-new-stepping/page4&
C2 3930K here. Source of this guy's chip is a little cherry though imo, his chip is an ES
That said those are the best settings I have seen for a SB-E running 5ghz. Before this on C1 chips, the best I have seen is a 3960X doing 5 @ 1.45. Intel gave me an RMA for C2 as well, a pity, I voided my standard warranty already. I have a PTPP though, maybe a few high voltage runs at some point will nuke this puppy and I will RMA...
I can beat that bandwidth and latency with my 2600k
Is it me or does that quad channel bandwidth look rather low.
Is it me or does that quad channel bandwidth look rather low.
"However, do not forget about the peculiarities of the LGA 2011 platform, which we have already mentioned many times in this and previous articles. The cache-memory in Sandy Bridge-E processors works slower than in regular Sandy Bridge CPUs, and quad-channel memory controller performs fast only during multi-threaded requests, while during regular type of activity it falls behind the dual-channel memory in LGA 1155 systems. As a result, the performance of a quad-core LGA 2011 CPU is closer to that of a quad-core LGA 1155 processors working at 200 MHz lower clock frequency."
I sold my SB-E for $500 even today, so I lost $50+13% sales tax on it. C2 inc to me from ncix.
Really need that VT-d, huh?
Got my new C2 installed. It is doing 5ghz with 1.41, my C1 needed 1.48 for 5ghz. No time to verify full stability yet, but 10 runs in linx 4096mb stable.
Grain of salt disclaimer that it is very well not the stepping but just a better chip.
Thats very encouraging.
Would like to see some temp comparisons at the same speed and voltage of a 3930/3960 to 3820.
.................
Even under water the chip still gets hot under a prime load - 53 to 63 depending on the core, at stable 5ghz it gets up to 57 to 68. These chips get pretty hot compared to SB. Would like to see some temp comparisons at the same speed and voltage of a 3930/3960 to 3820.
VT-d is for letting the VM use the part (graphics card, network card) directly, which at the same time means it can be only used on that VM. So it wouldn't provide any real benefit in that situation as far as I know.
Its for use more in a esx setup where you would only be accessing directly one VM at a time. For people wanting to run a gaming system within an VM, it would be a must. Like for example, I might decide that rather then use My Win 7 Ultimate as the host OS, I can still get pretty good results from having it be one of the VM's loaded into vsphere. This would work great for a scenario where you are trying to run active servers, and don't want a Windows crash to take down everything else.
Right, I would think a TV-Tuner might be a better example (but now they can be on the network...)
How would you tap the graphics capability, really? I mean, sure you could run aero and get HW acceleration for video and stuff, but I would think the console would be way to laggy for gaming. Plus, with ESX you are going to need another computer to even access the console...
So, yeah. Not worth much unless you have a case for it going in...
Apparently a lot of people have been giving it a try. Better to make 1 $3k box and a $400 box, then 2 2k boxes.
Really? Where? And I am still curious how they get all the sounds and such piped out, I wouldn't think RDP would handle it fast/well enough (for gaming), could be wrong though
Again, if you've got a link to where people are doing this I'd love to review what they are doing. I have multiple ESXi boxes already