You mean 'maths'? other than core speed which is all MegaHertz & GigaHertz it doesn't totally because you're not factoring how many cpu cores are running, temperatures in a realistic scenario, turbo-boost (this can significantly increase performance in a single core work load & multiple core workload.), socket revision/micro architecture etc.
Regarding the processors in this comparison, Xeon® Processor E5-2690 v3 | Xeon® Processor E5-2687W v3 here are the links to the official Intel Ark of both E5 family Xeon's
Single threaded workload : Both are more or less definitively even. Both have a maximum core speed of 3.5Ghz with that said not all cores will be running at this speed due to thermal limits, voltage & cooling.
Multi-threaded workload : My opinion between these two xeon processors is hard to put a complete winner since I cannot personally test either in person but I would state that they're within a margin of error since both are similar in-terms of high core count with decently high...(ish) clock speed (also factoring in turbo boost). Having said that I would believe the 2687 v3 would score a little bit lower in a synthetic/realistic benchmark such as Cinebench (widely regarded to show performance fairly accurately using a very large community database)
10 Cores 20 Threads < 2687 v3 | 3.1 Ghz - 3,5 Ghz
12 Cores 24 Threads < 2690 v3 | 2.6 Ghz - 3.5 Ghz
(Both cpu's are supported on the LGA 2011-3 socket up to dual socket configurations in a workstation/server scenario)
Now looking at these two factors one would believe that the 2687 v3 would have the edge due to having a closer in-terms of clock speed threshold a high & more stable speed running 10c 20threads however it would fall slightly short of the 12c 24 thread beast of a cpu which would more or less beat it due to more cores/thread performing on par if not slightly lower.
You should @enanobo ask this question in the CPU category in the forum, not the Blogging section since not many users tend to be given a tonne of answers & user feedback.
I'm not 100% right but I believe in different scenarios each cpu has a place regarding value, performance per dollar & the use-case scenario
Here are a couple great & intuitive videos to watch created by Linus Media Group & other sources like Tom Logan from OC3D TV. If you have time watch them all in your own time. It's all quite knowledgeable & intriguing reviews & first looks. Watch it in whatever order you'd like but I feel if you watch it in the way I've ordered them it's a more understandable.
I would get Z97 motherboard with the newer refresh of (lga 1150) haswell cpu's. Ofcourse it'll be maybe 5-10% better then the original cpu's that launched in 2013 June/July.
Z97 if you're willing to OC will potentially allow you to get most of the benefits of Z87; lots of sata 6Gbps, better power & heat stability, support for the m.2 sata standard/pcie sata express. asus & msi have my vote for great looking & performing motherboard from their gaming/oc + workstation grade boards.
I would say that you should get a hold of 8GB ram vs 16 but it's for you to decide.
For the gpu if it's value bang for you buck gaming, either 770/780 from Nvidia or 7970/280X or higher.
From my understanding the 760 FTW cost more then the GTX 770 with the same style of cooler.
Power supply get something with all the right connectors req; single 24pin power, single/or dual 4+4 cpu breakout cable, dual 6+2 pin for GPU, couple sata power. Maybe your power supply if it's a system for high end gaming sli focuses on a 650-800w.
wng_kingsley7 got a reaction from enanobo in Xeon E5 Family which is Faster?
wng_kingsley7 got a reaction from Alex_A90 in Build Help
wng_kingsley7 got a reaction from seabass9990 in Hello!
