xeon vs i5

[SPG]

Ok, I already know what you're going to say, but I need to be reassured on something. I made this pc for a friend: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/RMq4f7 and another one of their friends is saying it would be better to get an i5 because a xeon runs bad on 32bit applications. Frankly I think he's speaking out of his ass (and if not the difference is marginal at best) is he correct? or is it still best to use a xeon over the best i5
the pc will be used for cad software and creating video games.
 

Layman terms: yes, the xeon performs better per dollar, IF (and only if) you run 100% 64 bit applications. Also, the motherboard supports the processor, but doesn't support the right kind (or enough) memory slots to make use of a xeon properly.

 

Tech gobbledygook: Intel's Core series processors support both x86 and x64 instruction sets, and have turbo boost (which is surprisingly effective, I thought it was just a marketing gimmick at first when it came out). 64 bit Xeons EMULATE an x86 instruction set, making them dramatically less efficient when faced with 32 bit applications. I can't reliably say that all the productivity software that will be used will be 64 bit (most IDEs are still 32 bit for example. The free ones at least. Except Eclipse, but we're making games not web apps). There's also the issue of memory channels. Xeons use a combination of ECC memory (which the motherboard doesn't support) and one memory channel per core (the xeon that you chose has four cores, the motherboard has two channels with two slots each) to chew through stuff more quickly and reliably. Unfortunately if I were to buy a motherboard that supported all that, it plus the memory would cost as much as the processor itself. So if I get a high end i5 and overclock it, it will render 3d models comparably with a xeon, and perform literally everything else better.

 

[LNW]

The Xeon is a better option for sure. It's like a 4770, without integrated graphics.

[Bob Jim]

Get the Xeon, he doesn't know what he is saying.

[GzeroD]

The thing you quoted there is all of the wrong. 64bit xeons are no less efficient at 32bit workloads than an i5.

[Nena Trinity]

Xeon is more for work but the i5 is able to OC...

 

Most people picks the i5 for gaming and Xeon for work!

 

But most say i7 is for both...

 

Not that Xeon cant do gaming or i5 cant do work its just what they do best ya know?

[TheRetiredSlave]

Uhhhh, I may not be qualified to speak on the subject of detailed CPU specifications, but I'm about 99.9999999999% sure that he's completely speaking out of his ass..

 

The Xeon E3's are (AFAIK) the same chip as the quadcore i5's and i7's, with the only difference being ECC support (which will work with motherboards/RAM that either do or do not support ECC. If the mobo/RAM don't support ECC, the CPU won't run ECC, and everything will work just the same as an i5/i7).

 

Edit: oh, and Xeons don't have integrated graphics. 

 

Other than that, Xeons support more. (Marginally more, and all things that you probably won't use either way. The result for your use is that a Xeon E3 is basically a cheaper and marginally slower i7.)

[amp88]

Ask the person who's asserting that Xeons are "dramatically less efficient when faced with 32 bit applications" compared to an i5 to provide some evidence to support this assertion.

[GzeroD]

Xeon is more for work but the i5 is able to OC...

That depends on the i5. if its a non k both could be base clock overclocked.

[Nena Trinity]

That depends on the i5. if its a non k both could be base clock overclocked.

True it most be K and be used on a Z motherboard!

[WereCat]

Xeon.

Your friend is full of already digested food.

[SPG]

thanks guys, I figured he didnt know what the hell he's talking about

[SteveGrabowski0]

I can't imagine Intel would gimp 32-bit performance on a CPU marketed for workstation use. I'd guess lots of Xeon E3 CPUs are just Core i7s whose integrated graphics didn't meet power targets, and thus they disabled the iGPUs.

[typographie]

Frankly I think he's speaking out of his ass (and if not the difference is marginal at best) is he correct?

 

That's completely false. The Xeon E3 has the same Haswell cores as the i5, and it's basically just a locked Core i7 with a different name. It performs the same in 32-bit and 64-bit applications as any other Haswell-based CPU.

 

Comparing the Xeon E3 to an overclocked Core i5 (I assume that's what you mean because they're about the same price), the i5 will have better per-core performance and will probably be slightly faster in most games. The Xeon has Hyperthreading, and will be faster when the extra logical cores would make a difference.

 

The Xeon is a better choice if the Core i5 would be left at stock speeds.