Xeon or i7

[hhamama66]

I'm thinking of building a pc both for gaming and for running CAD. I can spend at most $700 on a CPU which would give me a 5930k. I was looking around at the Xeon line And found that the Xeon e5 2630 v3 within my budget and has two more cores than the 5930k however, it runs at 2.4 ghz stock with no way to over clock it. What I want to know is, would the Xeon be better for CAD but worse for gaming and would the 5930k be better at gaming but slightly worse for CAD? Also, is clock speed really that big of a deal?

Link: http://m.newegg.com/Product/index?itemnumber=N82E16819117479&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-PCPartPicker,%20LLC-_-na-_-na-_-na&AID=10446076&PID=3938566

[Aniallation]

I'm thinking of building a pc both for gaming and for running CAD. I can spend at most $700 on a CPU which would give me a 5930k. I was looking around at the Xeon line And found that the Xeon e5 2630 v3 within my budget and has two more cores than the 5930k however, it runs at 2.4 ghz stock with no way to over clock it. What I want to know is, would the Xeon be better for CAD but worse for gaming and would the 5930k be better at gaming but slightly worse for CAD? Also, is clock speed really that big of a deal?

Link: http://m.newegg.com/Product/index?itemnumber=N82E16819117479&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-PCPartPicker,%20LLC-_-na-_-na-_-na&AID=10446076&PID=3938566

Unless you're running 4 GPUs, get a 5820K instead, spend more money towards better mobo and cooler, and just overclock that.

[Guest]

I would just go with a 5820k and save money, there isn't much a difference between 5930k/5820k that OCing wouldn't fix

[hhamama66]

Unless you're running 4 GPUs, get a 5820K instead, spend more money towards better mobo and cooler, and just overclock that.

Yes, I'm planning on running 3 GPUs with a bunch of PCIe SSDs

[Aniallation]

Yes, I'm planning on running 3 GPUs with a bunch of PCIe SSDs

Is that even going to fit? 3 good GPUs would take up at least 6 slots, you'd only have 1 slot left for PCIe card

[Guest]

Yes, I'm planning on running 3 GPUs with a bunch of PCIe SSDs

Why PCIE? they're more expensive, and deliver just a bit more proformance, for the price oft that you could buy 2 500GB 850 Evo SSD's and stick them in RAID 0, and 3 GPU's aren't really necessary... a single Fury X can do 4k

[Amazingasian]

[hhamama66]

Why PCIE? they're more expensive, and deliver just a bit more proformance, for the price oft that you could buy 2 500GB 850 Evo SSD's and stick them in RAID 0, and 3 GPU's aren't really necessary... a single Fury X can do 4k

I'm thinking of doing a triple monitor set up with 3 980ti's

[hhamama66]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQ59vHSFfZA

I've watched the video before and I know Linus basically said that a Xeon and a core series processor would perform pretty much the same if they're found on the same micro architecture and have the same core count and clock speed. But the Xeon is 2.4 Ghz while the 5930k is 3.6 ghz with an unlocked multiplier. So, will clock speed affect my gaming performance?

[dalekphalm]

I'm thinking of building a pc both for gaming and for running CAD. I can spend at most $700 on a CPU which would give me a 5930k. I was looking around at the Xeon line And found that the Xeon e5 2630 v3 within my budget and has two more cores than the 5930k however, it runs at 2.4 ghz stock with no way to over clock it. What I want to know is, would the Xeon be better for CAD but worse for gaming and would the 5930k be better at gaming but slightly worse for CAD? Also, is clock speed really that big of a deal?

Link: http://m.newegg.com/Product/index?itemnumber=N82E16819117479&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-PCPartPicker,%20LLC-_-na-_-na-_-na&AID=10446076&PID=3938566

CAD loves multithreads. Games, not so much.

 

Basically, CAD will do better with the Xeon, but worse in Gaming.

 

You basically have to pick whichever is more important for you: Gaming or CAD, then pick the appropriate CPU.

 

Note: The 5930k will still do quite well in CAD, just not as good.

[hhamama66]

CAD loves multithreads. Games, not so much.

Basically, CAD will do better with the Xeon, but worse in Gaming.

You basically have to pick whichever is more important for you: Gaming or CAD, then pick the appropriate CPU.

Note: The 5930k will still do quite well in CAD, just not as good.

I know gaming doesn't really need more than 4 threads (maybe three I don't know, I just know that a quad core is plenty for gaming) but Linus mentioned in a previous video that under similar specifications, a core processor and a Xeon should perform about the same and look at the specs of the 5930k vs the e5 2630 v3, the only difference is the Xeon's lower clock speed and the 5930K's two fewer cores

[BillytheSkids]

Hhamama66,

I posted a similar response to this in a discussion about video rendering earlier today but have trimmed my simplified explanation for relevance. Also saying you want to do CAD is a generalization like you're good with computers so can you fix my Fibre Channel SAN? Could you be more specific what your plans are?

"While ideally everyone should have workstation equipment for heavy lifting applications such as CAD or video rendering real world budgets do come into play. Rendering is a complex multifaceted beast which is the reason to ask what software you plan on using. Primarily rendering is a CPU intense application my easiest way to explain how it works is to use simple CAD as an example. When rendering a single object such as a part for a CNC machine it uses purely 1 core to render that object. So the most important aspect of the computer is pure Ghz speed on 1 core. The higher the Ghz the faster the render. When you do CAD 3D animation it is the same principal but the split up on a core per frame basis an 8 core CPU will be able to render 8 frames at a time. Let's say we are rendering 1 second of animation at 24 FPS. Then let's say it takes 20 seconds per frame of the 4.0 Ghz of the AMD 8370 not overclocked. You will be able to render that 1 second (24 frames) of video in 1 minute (24/8=3*20=60). The frames are split per core and pure speed reduces the time per frame."

The main factor speed affects is time per frame for rendering, so theoretically an 8 core 2 Ghz CPU is equivalent to a 4 Ghz 4 Core CPU. Obviously this is just for simplicity sake that I make that statement and things like OS overhead, amount of frames to render, etc are huge factors but you get the relationship. Let me know what your plans are and I will do my best to direct you if I can but I am also in agree that the 5820k is excellent performance per dollar. Also keep in mind that in majority of CAD applications 3 GPU's is of no benefit at all.

Hope this helps.

[Aniallation]

I know gaming doesn't really need more than 4 threads (maybe three I don't know, I just know that a quad core is plenty for gaming) but Linus mentioned in a previous video that under similar specifications, a core processor and a Xeon should perform about the same and look at the specs of the 5930k vs the e5 2630 v3, the only difference is the Xeon's lower clock speed and the 5930K's two fewer cores

At stock speeds yes the Xeon will be better for CAD and i7 will be better for gaming. However with overclock those 6 cores of the i7 become quite a bit faster then the stock 8 cores of the Xeon, so even though it has less cores it'll run just as well in CAD, with additional performance in gaming compared to the Xeon.

 

I'd say go for the i7 if you're willing to OC.

[dalekphalm]

I know gaming doesn't really need more than 4 threads (maybe three I don't know, I just know that a quad core is plenty for gaming) but Linus mentioned in a previous video that under similar specifications, a core processor and a Xeon should perform about the same and look at the specs of the 5930k vs the e5 2630 v3, the only difference is the Xeon's lower clock speed and the 5930K's two fewer cores

Well that's kind of the point. The Xeon only performs the same as the i7 when you downclock the i7 to match the Clock Speed of the Xeon.

 

The i7 WILL PERFORM BETTER in games, compared to that Xeon. There's no question about it. The i7's faster clock speed will be vastly more important in games compared to the two extra cores that most games won't even utilize.

 

So as I said, you have to make a choice. More CAD performance, or more Gaming performance?

[hhamama66]

Hhamama66,

I posted a similar response to this in a discussion about video rendering earlier today but have trimmed my simplified explanation for relevance. Also saying you want to do CAD is a generalization like you're good with computers so can you fix my Fibre Channel SAN? Could you be more specific what your plans are?

"While ideally everyone should have workstation equipment for heavy lifting applications such as CAD or video rendering real world budgets do come into play. Rendering is a complex multifaceted beast which is the reason to ask what software you plan on using. Primarily rendering is a CPU intense application my easiest way to explain how it works is to use simple CAD as an example. When rendering a single object such as a part for a CNC machine it uses purely 1 core to render that object. So the most important aspect of the computer is pure Ghz speed on 1 core. The higher the Ghz the faster the render. When you do CAD 3D animation it is the same principal but the split up on a core per frame basis an 8 core CPU will be able to render 8 frames at a time. Let's say we are rendering 1 second of animation at 24 FPS. Then let's say it takes 20 seconds per frame of the 4.0 Ghz of the AMD 8370 not overclocked. You will be able to render that 1 second (24 frames) of video in 1 minute (24/8=3*20=60). The frames are split per core and pure speed reduces the time per frame."

The main factor speed affects is time per frame for rendering, so theoretically an 8 core 2 Ghz CPU is equivalent to a 4 Ghz 4 Core CPU. Obviously this is just for simplicity sake that I make that statement and things like OS overhead, amount of frames to render, etc are huge factors but you get the relationship. Let me know what your plans are and I will do my best to direct you if I can but I am also in agree that the 5820k is excellent performance per dollar. Also keep in mind that in majority of CAD applications 3 GPU's is of no benefit at all.

Hope this helps.

I've wanted to do a triple monitor set up and noticed that with two way SLI setups using a 5930k, the reviewer wasn't getting much extra out of the second card at 1440p, especially in games like the Witcher 3 that eat up a lot of resources Especially with anti aliasing turned even just a little. And I don't plan on doing that heavy of rendering mainly DIY projects and school work in the future (I'm becoming an engineer). I've used auto desk inventor before and have enough experience with it to know that my i7 4790k can handle it, but what'll happen when I start doing more intense work?

[infamous_last]

CAD applications (in terms of CPUs) only care about cores and raw processing speed.

The massive speed advantage compensates for the loss of 2 cores.

6 cores is more than enough and certainly more than many people have in their CAD rigs, so don't get hung up on "losing 2 cores".

 

Even at stock speeds the i7 will absolutely destroy the Xeon.

Unless you need ECC memory or planning on running workstation cards (which are often needed for simulation work), there's little value in the Xeon.

[BillytheSkids]

Hhamama66,

Autodesk Inventor is a 3D parts modeler meaning it models 1 single object at a time and relies on the graphics card to display the object. This means that in no way are you making use of having multiple cores and a lower core higher OC would net you better results for this type of CAD. Tricks that can improve parts modeling. First, store files on the SSD. The CPU requires fast access of the points in 3D space, benchmarks have shown that for CAD storing the file on an SSD and installing the software on a HDD will have better performance then the reverse (though having both on an SSD is the best option). I have a linked folder labeled CAD to my SSD from My Documents specifically for this reason. Second, more RAM there is a point of diminishing return past 16 GB in my experience however. Third, graphics card, while graphics doesn't do the heavy lifting a good graphics card will help speed up rotation and manipulation of the object in 3D space. I have actually done parts modeling on integrated Intel graphics on a laptop due to Nvidia Optimus not switching properly and did not notice very much between the two (considering it was a $600 Lenovo). If parts engineering is your primary goal I would say stay with your current 4790K and possibly invest into better equipment for an unbalanced overclock (1 core higher then the rest) and better graphics card.

Hope this helps.

[richcali21]

I just built a Xeon system with the E5-2660 2.6GHz 10 core and I am shocked how well it is doing in the benchmarks and I think if you are serious at all about the CAD then you know

what you need to do. I went with a dual processor board and I am only running one processor and it does great then down the road if or when I need more I can then add the second processor. The other thing you need is room for lots of ram and ECC ram is nice when doing critical renders. I just did some research for a upcoming rig for Revit and it called for as 

high of processor as you can afford and as many cores as possible. I think if you check the benchmarks out there and not the specs you will see these E52600v3 series Zeon's are getting some great scores and with the right GPU games wont be an issue. I have the Asus GeForce GTX 980 OC and for me with Premiere Pro CC it has 2,056 Cuda Cores and just screams through my workload and for under $500 it was quite a deal. I would suggest not to go below 2.6GHz if you can afford it and if you cant you might consider waiting as I see 2.6GHz as a minimum for many of the more professional programs out there.

[Guest]

I'm thinking of doing a triple monitor set up with 3 980ti's

you know you can run 3 monitors on 1 card... up to 4 on one... anything 4+ is un-necessary a 980 is for 30fps 4k gaming a 980Ti is for 60fps 4k and Titan X is for guarentee 4k 60 FPS max settings, you don't need 3 980Ti's...  anyone will tell you that you wasted money on at least 1 980Ti, others will beg to differ but 3 is stupid, your wasting so much money when you could put that money in a 5960x or others 

[hhamama66]

Hhamama66,

Autodesk Inventor is a 3D parts modeler meaning it models 1 single object at a time and relies on the graphics card to display the object. This means that in no way are you making use of having multiple cores and a lower core higher OC would net you better results for this type of CAD. Tricks that can improve parts modeling. First, store files on the SSD. The CPU requires fast access of the points in 3D space, benchmarks have shown that for CAD storing the file on an SSD and installing the software on a HDD will have better performance then the reverse (though having both on an SSD is the best option). I have a linked folder labeled CAD to my SSD from My Documents specifically for this reason. Second, more RAM there is a point of diminishing return past 16 GB in my experience however. Third, graphics card, while graphics doesn't do the heavy lifting a good graphics card will help speed up rotation and manipulation of the object in 3D space. I have actually done parts modeling on integrated Intel graphics on a laptop due to Nvidia Optimus not switching properly and did not notice very much between the two (considering it was a $600 Lenovo). If parts engineering is your primary goal I would say stay with your current 4790K and possibly invest into better equipment for an unbalanced overclock (1 core higher then the rest) and better graphics card.

Hope this helps.

I know my 4790k is a beast. Even older sandybridge i7's in school with the integrated graphics would do fine in running auto desk with 4 and even 8 different projects open at the same time. I now know that a xeon is completely unnecessary for auto desk, but what about running two and even three 980 ti's in SLI? As I've mentioned earlier, many reviewers were noticing bottlenecks on the 5930k and weren't gaining much performance out of the second card. I figured maybe having a processor with a higher core count would solve the problem, but the only option I have on LGA 2011-3 is the 5960X, and at over $1000, it's definitely out of my budget.

[BillytheSkids]

I know my 4790k is a beast. Even older sandybridge i7's in school with the integrated graphics would do fine in running auto desk with 4 and even 8 different projects open at the same time. I now know that a xeon is completely unnecessary for auto desk, but what about running two and even three 980 ti's in SLI? As I've mentioned earlier, many reviewers were noticing bottlenecks on the 5930k and weren't gaining much performance out of the second card. I figured maybe having a processor with a higher core count would solve the problem, but the only option I have on LGA 2011-3 is the 5960X, and at over $1000, it's definitely out of my budget.

Hhamama66,

More cores and higher clock speeds would help with running multiple GPU's but as someone stated earlier the question comes down to why would you want to run that many GPU's? While getting more performance for gaming on games that are specifically programmed to take advantage of it is great that is only those specific games. Even with those games, you run into an issue of micro stuttering due to dropped frames from communication issues of the multiple GPU's. So your experience while may have a higher frame rate at times could be more jarring when encountering the issues purely because you have multiple graphics cards. A single top of the line card (GTX 980Ti IMO, Titan X does not make fiscal sense to me) should be more then adequate and leaving room for investing in quality displays to take advantage of it. It is your choice and only you know your full situation, but if rule of thumb tends to be games don't benefit from having more then 4 cores, I'm unsure how more cores would benefit 980 Ti's in SLI. The answer to your question however might be to wait for Intel Skylake's latest 4790k replacement. That I'm sure would be the best chance at removing any potential bottlenecks. You could even get one 980Ti now on your current system and wait for Skylake giving you time to test and upgrade later if it does not meet your expectations.

Hope this helps.