add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube

Comments

Comments

Comment reply on codetricity's Completed Build: Rainbow Unicorn

  • 41 months ago
  • 1 point

Hi. All of these look great. I think that like me, you viewing this as a hobby and want to experiment with what is out there. It's fun to build an unusual system and see how it performs under different workloads. If it were me and my money, I would go for the cheapest first, the E5-2650 2.1Ghz, 10 core. looking at CPU-Z, it seems like you can achieve a multiplier of 25, giving you 2.5Ghz. If it works as you expect, you'll have a system with 10 cores, which is unusual and good for bragging rights. If you can't get it to work, you're out less money. If you can get it to work and you want to experiment more, you'll have the confidence to spend a bit more for more cores and then try and sell your cheaper CPU.

I had no problem booting my Xeon. It works exactly the same as other CPUs. All the cores just start working. The CPU runs cool, so you don't need a high-end cooling system. You can't overclock the multiplier. You'll be stuck at the max speed of the CPU when you bought it.

Unless you do a lot of video rendering or 3D modelling or scientific computing, you probably don't need the cores beyond 10. However, if you do those things, then maybe the extra money is worth it to you. Or, maybe you simply just want 12 or 14 cores because you can. That's a fine reason too.

In my case, the system feels smooth, like a big luxury car with a smooth ride. It's not the fastest and it's not a sports car. However, there's consistent performance regardless of what else spins or on my system. Anyway good luck. Seems like your primary goal is to have fun, which is awesome.

This guy has a 18 core Xeon on the same motherboard. https://pcpartpicker.com/b/pQTH99

he seems happy.

Also, I got a bracket online to put other watercoolers on the motherboard, in case you're using the same motherboard. It's somewhat limiting due to the small size. If you don't mind a larger case, I would go for an ATX board.

Comment reply on codetricity's Completed Build: Rainbow Unicorn

  • 41 months ago
  • 1 point

yes, but I think you can find cheaper ones. I paid $40 less. In the pictures of the build, I have a CPU-Z screenshot. my per core speed is 2.3Ghz, which is lower than the real CPUs (not ES), but still looks higher than the link you provided. I think you can find a better deal if you search. I wasn't in a rush, so I searched for a while. IMO, I would wait until you find one capable of at least 2.2Ghz per core. good luck. It's a lot of fun. It's a bit of a gamble, but it worked out for me.

Here's the link to my CPU-Z. https://cdn.pcpartpicker.com/static/forever/images/userbuild/177507.0bdc6746e952840b545dc70b745e57e9.1600.jpg

UPDATE: I just looked at the link you provided again and it seems you have Max Turbo Frequency of 2.9 GHz. So you have a better CPU than I have. Also, the table on the link you provided lists the base frequency as 2.2GHz. You might want to confirm the 2.9GHz with the seller. if it actually goes to that speed, looks like a deal. Also, the seller's CPU-Z screenshot shows a multiplier of 12-25, so it seem like it going at at least 2.5GHz. Not sure where he's getting the 2.9Ghz number from. but, it looks like it's probably a better CPU than what I have.

Comment reply on codetricity's Completed Build: Rainbow Unicorn

  • 41 months ago
  • 1 point

The ES CPUS are slower and possibly less reliable since they're made for prototyping equipment. If you go for a 12 core build, make sure you're expectations are in line with the limitations. It is much slower than even a Pentium 3258 for single core things. For example, if I just start a browser or normal program, the startup time is faster on the Pentium 3258 and the Pentium generally feels snappier. I have the Pentium overclocked quite a bit.

It's only when you have a lot of stuff going on at the same time that the 12 core power kicks in. For example, video rendering while streaming, while browsing the web is possible.

Unless you have an edge use case like I do, then the i5-6600K overclocked is going to be the best bang for the buck. The i5 is $239. The Pentium 3258 is $75. The Xeon E5-2658 12 core was $160 used.

Comment reply on codetricity's Completed Build: Rainbow Unicorn

  • 41 months ago
  • 1 point

Intel Xeon E5-2658 v3 ES QEYP LGA2011-3 12-Core

It's an engineering sample, I got from eBay used. No problems with stability, heat, or reliabiity. I used it for 4 months as a daily-use workstation. I only changed because there was a sale on the 6800K on Thanksgiving Day. If I were to do it again, I wouldn't have spent the money on the 6800K as the performance difference is negligible in real-world use. I suspect that a better use of my money would have been for a 1TB or 512GB M.2 NVME PCI SSD. Intel has one for $365 on Newegg. If you do go for the Xeon 12-core, I'd be curious to learn what your experience is like. I primarily wanted the power for video rendering and 3D modelling. It kicks butt for those uses.

Comment reply on codetricity's Completed Build: Rainbow Unicorn

  • 41 months ago
  • 1 point

How do I find this information? I actually took the CPU out of my computer and am running a 6800K right now to experiment with overclocking.

For the Xeon 2658, CPU-Z says it is E5-V3

The chip has this on it C324A195 e4

It's a good CPU. I recommend it. The only reason I swapped out the 12 core for the 6 core 6800K is that single core performance is a little slow and certain applications only use one core. I may build another system with the 2658 12 core. No problems after months of use.

Comment reply on codetricity's Completed Build: Rainbow Unicorn

  • 43 months ago
  • 1 point

On the Asrock site, max memory is listed as 128GB. See this:

http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/X99E-ITXac/?cat=Specifications

From their site: - Max. capacity of system memory: 64GB (with Core™ i7 CPU) or 128GB (With Xeon® CPU)*

I am not sure if 128GB is actually possible though.

I used this supported memory list

http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/X99E-ITXac/?cat=Memory

Near the bottom of the list is this:

DDR4 2133 32GB Crucial CT32G4RFD4213.36FA1 DS 2pcs

I do not know if 128GB is actually possible as they do not list supported 64GB sticks.

I am using that exact memory, 32GB per stick

Comment reply on codetricity's Completed Build: Rainbow Unicorn

  • 43 months ago
  • 1 point

I just checked out your kick-*** build. Awesome. Do you use the 18 core Xeon for graphics? I've been doing more Unity programming and manipulating 3D graphic textures. The 12 core Xeon is working out great. I am using it as my daily driver now.

BTW, saw that you had a problem with using the HDD and SSD together with Windows 10. Try disconnecting the HDD and boot only from the SSD (or install if it's a clean install). Once Windows 10 is fully installed and updated, reconnect the HDD SATA cable and it may work.

Comment reply on codetricity's Completed Build: Rainbow Unicorn

  • 44 months ago
  • 1 point

yes, it's an ES. No problems with dead cores or temperatures. It runs cool. The main issue is that the CPU can't be overclocked and the single core performance is maxed at around 2.4Ghz. If you have the cash, I would go for the 6800K, which can be purchased on sale for a bit over $410, depending on shipping and tax. If you want to save $250 and don't mind slower performance for applications that only use a single core, then the 2658 is working out great. Certain applications use only a single core and those run slower.

I think it really matters how much time you spend with video rendering or multi-threaded applications. If you into scientific visualizing, the 12 cores are great. If you're a gamer, the 6700K is going to be better and you can use cheaper motherboards if cost is a factor. If you're got extra cash, then the 6800K is probably better overall with much higher single core speeds and a solid 6 cores. Also, unless you really want something small, I think I would go with a microATX.

Your main question about the CPU - it's stable and solid. I use it every day as my main workstation now. I use temp sensor and monitoring software several times a week to test the system. I haven't transferred it downstairs to my daughter yet. She's still using a 4790K.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Overclocking xeons (and high core count cpus in general)"

  • 45 months ago
  • 1 point

I have a 12 core Xeon budget build based on a used E5-2658. I can only overclock the base clock. Currently, I have it at 103 MHz bus speed, which is a 3% improvement over stock speeds. Overclocked speed is now 2.36 GHz. The system is noticeably cooler than my i5 2500K or my i7 4790k, both overclocked. I am surprised at how cool the Xeon runs. Maybe it is because the clock speed is so much slower per core? I suspect that if you're running dual 6 core CPUs, then heat will not be a problem. I am running a stock air cooler that came with my motherboard in a mini ITX case that has only one 120mm fan on the case. Temps are much cooler than my 4790K with watercooling. Even at stock speeds with no overclock, the 4790K was too hot under load with the stock Intel cooler.

Oh wait, I just looked at the E5645, that's a LGA1366 socket. My information may not be relevant. I'm using an X99 chipset mini-itx. The older Xeons may be different.

Comment reply on codetricity's Completed Build: Rainbow Unicorn

  • 45 months ago
  • 2 points

Search on eBay for a used CPU. There's tons of CPUs out there used. I didn't want to put the full retail price on it as I thought it was misleading since I actually bought an used CPU. If you take this route, you might also consider the E5 2690 v4 14 core at 2.1 GHz.

The E5 2658 was the cheapest used processor I could find that I suspected would yield performance above my current 4790K overclocked. Also, this was my first experience buying a used CPU. It's a hobby. I can easily swap it out for 6900K if I suddenly win the lottery. The 6900K is a better CPU, so if you want to buy new for warranty reasons, go for the 6900K or the 6950K and not the 2658. The clock rate of the 2658 is slow, but it's cheap used and good-enough.

Also, the Xeon 2658 is going to be slower than a 4790K (or 6700K) for gaming. So, it's not a great CPU for gaming unless you're already committed to the X99 motherboards for a future upgrade path.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Is a i5 6600k CPU enough to edit videos?"

  • 45 months ago
  • 2 points

I agree that it's minutes, not hours. The difference is minor unless you're dealing with large videos and effects often. Though, that might be the case. Also, there's an issue of whether you can "feel" the difference and how much that feeling is worth to you in terms of money. Some people want as pleasant as experience as possible, though there is definitely a cost consideration.

For gaming, the upgrade is barely noticeable. For video rendering, the difference is very noticeable, but it is not so bad that it makes it unusable. The other issue is whether the delay upsets the creative flow and desire to keep working on the video or graphic. Sometimes a minor delay will make you want to stop editing a graphic or video. In that case, your entire project suffers because of the frustration.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Is a i5 6600k CPU enough to edit videos?"

  • 45 months ago
  • 1 point

I just ran a cinebench on my old laptop with an i7-5500U CPU (dual-core). The Cinebench score is 274. I have a 840M discrete GPU in the laptop.

Huge difference here:

  • i7 dual core (laptop): 274 cb
  • Xeon 12 core: 1350 cb

The laptop is not pleasant to use for video editing. I just got a quad core i7 laptop for my son with a 960 GPU, fast SSD, and the editing experience is fine. His quad core i5 was painful to use.

If you overclock the 6600K, it looks like it's around 20% (or more) slower than an i7. The 6700K is $319 right now and it's a tempting buy! That's $70 off the retail price. Pair that with a cheap Evo 212 cooler and you're good to go. In fact, the price is so attractive, I've been thinking of buying an i7 6700K myself.

The situation is entirely different if you use your computer for gaming, which I don't. If it's primarily for video editing, go for more cores and faster SSD.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Is a i5 6600k CPU enough to edit videos?"

  • 45 months ago
  • 1 point

I put some benchmark information here: https://pcpartpicker.com/b/fhRG3C

Look in the pictures and the CPU section

  • Xeon 2658 12 core takes 108 seconds for a render benchmark.
  • 4790K @ 4 Ghz (overclocked) takes 147 seconds
  • i5 6600 is 215 seconds

Basically, at some point the experience gets to be kind of a pain.

Cinebench scores

  • Xeon 2658: 1350 (graphic on site)

For comparison, these Cinebench scores from Eurogamer

  • i5 6600K overclocked @ 4.5 GHz: 702
  • i7 4790KL 840
  • i5 2500K: 492

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Overclocking a Xeon for a minecraft server"

  • 45 months ago
  • 1 point

I have a Xeon E5 in my system and have so far overclocked the base clock from 100 to 102. It is stable. https://pcpartpicker.com/b/fhRG3C

You won't be able to overclock the multiplier on Xeon chips, so you're not going to get a boost like you would with a k series. Also, the base clock is tied to the memory, so you will only get a max of around 105 bclk before your system goes wonky. If you need more power with your 2011 socket, then buy a used 8 core or 12 core CPU.

I don't have a minecraft server, but I do have a 3258 overclocked in addition to the Xeon.

If you already have the 2011 socket motherboard, you can buy 8 core CPUs for under $100 used. Look at this video with 151,000 views https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWAyT8yD1oc

Spend $54 and get an 8 core CPU for your rig. Do it!!

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Is a i5 6600k CPU enough to edit videos?"

  • 45 months ago
  • 2 points

I have benchmarked Cinebench on my build here. https://pcpartpicker.com/b/fhRG3C

I do not think that the core i5 will be enough. I have limitations with a i7 4790K with 16 GB of memory running Adobe Premiere Pro. In order to overcome the limitations, I built another system with a 12 core Xeon, 32 GB of memory, and 1 TB of SSD.

I have another system with a core i5 and 32 GB of memory that is heavily overclocked.

Basically, everything in life is fine until you use a faster system, then you never want to go slower. You don't realize the difference until you use a faster system. There is a noticeable difference between the core i5 with no hyper threading and the i7 4790K with threading. It is a big difference. You can feel it.

I think you will have a similar experience going from the 6700K to a 6800K. I would not consider the 6600K.

I am hoping to run addition benchmark tests this weekend. I will post some additional benchmarks if I do. Do not just take my opinion, go to a rendering benchmark site and look at the quantifiable numbers yourself.

Look at the CPU Score Multi at this site.

https://us.rebusfarm.net/en/tempbench?view=benchmark

I was actually going to this forum to ask whether I should look into upgrading to a dual-CPU (24 physical core, 48 thread) system. I've been watching video rendering benchmark videos on YouTube and this seems to be common configuration. I've been looking at this motherboard. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813182967

I will start a different topic for that discussion. For now, I am happy with my current system.

Bottom line, the i5 may work, but if you use your friend's i7, then you will not want to go back to the i5. it's kind of like saying that you can play a PC game on a laptop and it does run, but then you use your friend's rig with a GTX 1080 and i7 6700K (or even i5) and then you're like, "wow, I didn't know the game was supposed to be like this." Once you use a faster computer for video rendering, you will say, "wow, it's a lot different experience." However, If you're just editing home videos infrequently, then anything, even the i5 will work. If this is for your job, spend the little bit extra money and you will be more productive.

The GPU doesn't matter, though you do need some type of discrete GPU. the low-end GTX 950 is not a bottleneck in my workflow.

I don't play PC games. If you do, your system may look different.

Comment reply on codetricity's Completed Build: Rainbow Unicorn

  • 45 months ago
  • 1 point

So far, so good. In general, it runs cooler than an i7 and is smooth. The over all experience is quite good.

Single core performance is considerably slower than my 4790K. The Xeon also can't be overclocked. The 12 cores are great for rendering.

I plan to use the Xeon myself for a few weeks and assess if I should upgrade to 64GB of RAM and M.2 PCI before I move it downstairs to my kids' table. That will be the acid test of whether they want to use the Xeon or the 4790K for their video editing. I think they'll want to make the switch. One of the main goals of the build is to improve on the limitations of the overclocked 4790K on an ITX board and make the user experience more fun. Honestly, I'm not sure if it will achieve that goal as I have not moved it to their desk yet.

Overall, I think that the Xeon is probably slightly better than a quad core 6700K (the newer version of the 4790K), but probably not as good as a i7-6800K 6 core for video editing. For gaming, I would recommend the 6700K.

I am actually surprised at how good the 4790K is for video editing. I'll have a better opinion on the Xeon after a month or two of use. So far, I'm happy with my strategy of using the 2011-v3 socket, X99 chipset. The 12 core Xeon is $250 cheaper than a new 6800K, but the 2011-v3 X99 ITX motherboard was pretty expensive at $250. I usually buy boards in the $150 range.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "small atx case"

  • 59 months ago
  • 2 points

Wow, that looks like an awesome case, thanks for the tip.

Prior to considering on keeping my ATX motherboard, I was actually looking at the Coolermaster Elite 130 in the mini-itx form factor. This one looks like it's bigger and nicer. Still, it does look a little big and a little industrial for my livingroom.

I'm thinking of something like this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811204044 Or this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811163257

Though, they both look a little big.

I'm really torn about going to a mini-itx form factor. I'm a little hesitant to buy a new motherboard for my 2500K 1155 socket CPU since my current motherboard is working fine and has overclocked nicely. Thanks for the tips

Comment reply on manirelli's Completed Build: My Travel PC

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

that's a good idea to bring your own rig to your parent's place. i've been using a gaming laptop but there are limitations to that. nice build. i'm envious. thanks for sharing.

Comment reply on manirelli's Completed Build: My Travel PC

  • 60 months ago
  • 1 point

This is a great build. I'm envious that you get to travel with such a fine computer. What do you do about the monitor when you travel? Do you also bring a monitor in your suitcase or do you borrow a monitor when you reach your destination?

Also, I am debating between this case and the Cooler Master Elite 130, primarily because I have an unused Corsair ATX that I found my in office closet and that would save me some money if I could reuse it. Still, the look and size of the Silverstone RVZ 01B is very nice.

Sort

add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube