Would a dual zeon and quad titan x's be a good gaming machine?

[IceWolfPuppies]

I just wonder if it works

[PlayStation 2]

it's overkill as fuck

but yes

[ZetZet]

No and there is no zeon. It would work though.

[CydiaDash]

Yes, but it's so dumb money-wise

 

Also, *Xeon

[pckid]

I just wonder if it works

Is that a question?

[pckid]

No and there is no zeon. It would work though.

I think he means Xeon

[Hackzzila]

[SPAS-ID]

more than you needed

[BrightCandle]

It would be pretty decent, but it would be a little down on CPU performance due to the lower clock speeds of the Xeons. Games don't really use all the cores well. The Titan's would be nice but you would find that you don't get much extra performance for the third or fourth, and in quite a lot of cases they perform worse than just having one or two cards. So its a lot of expense and its not actually likely to give the best performance in a lot of cases.

[IceWolfPuppies]

I think he means Xeon

sry Im a noob when it comes with spelling 

[pckid]

Why not?

[minibois]

microstutters all over the place (because 4 way SLI) and probably just as much CPU performance as a 5960X (or even 4790K), so useless.

[littlepigboy5]

I just wonder if it works

i only clicked on this because holy fuck its xeon

[IceWolfPuppies]

Is micro stutters because of bottle necking

[don_svetlio]

not really - you see - Xeons have a mirriad of cores but those aren't as strong as say a 4690K's cores - so you will get less performance in almost all games.

[Timmy-P]

Is micro stutters because of bottle necking

No, it's a drawback of multi-GPU setups.

[QueenDemetria]

I just wonder if it works

Yes you could play games on this hypothetical machine, but I would strongly go against it if your primary use is gaming. The Titan X's are just overkill for current day games, and when games theoretically catch up with the Titans power, the Titans will be outdated and there will be better lower cost options at that time. Depending on the Xeon used, it might hold you back since most of them have lower clockspeeds than the i7 counterparts. 

[s3ns3]

no. e5 xeons can do 3.5ghz(and thats a quad core model) . severe bottleneck for the quad titans . an overclocked 5930k would work a lot better.heck an unlocked i5 would be better but mainstream platform doesnt support quad sli

even then quad sli is...bad for gaming. two way sli is ok but even that config has its cons

 

bottom line- core i5+gtx 980ti=very good gaming machine

Edited September 11, 2015 by s3ns3

[kajar9]

Xeons.... until recently. Are usually weaker cores, but a bunch of them. But I don't think you'll put out on those.

 

Games, need few high performance cores and are not improved much by extra cores.

 

Only scenario I would think it's a good idea is when you primarily use it for rendering, server stuff but still want to sometimes play on the same machine, you'd have a decent machine.
When not doing server stuff... You're pretty much pissing away money.

[TheConverter]

 

 

I rather have a 10.000$ rig then 10.000$ car.

 

As for OP, Xeon suck for gaming, the best CPU for gaming is a 6700K with a PLX chip on your motherboard to allow 4 way SLI.

[Megahurt]

It would work and work well, but 1 processor would likely just be sitting there doing nothing, and using only 2 of the 4 Titan X' would probably give a better experience, at least until DX12 games come out.

[owen.fitzpatrick]

It would be pretty decent, but it would be a little down on CPU performance due to the lower clock speeds of the Xeons. Games don't really use all the cores well. The Titan's would be nice but you would find that you don't get much extra performance for the third or fourth, and in quite a lot of cases they perform worse than just having one or two cards. So its a lot of expense and its not actually likely to give the best performance in a lot of cases.

Some of the Xeon e3s are good for gaming, where I live you get locked i7 specs for over $100 less.

[owen.fitzpatrick]

I rather have a 10.000$ rig then 10.000$ car.

As for OP, Xeon suck for gaming, the best CPU for gaming is a 6700K with a PLX chip on your motherboard to allow 4 way SLI.

Depending on the game and its core usage, the 5960x is likely to outperform the 6700k but I can't say I have any experience with either.

You should count xeons out for gaming. I got a Xeon e3 1231 v3 (3.8 Ghz turbo with 8 threads) and it performs great. They don't overclock so you can save on a h97 board and stock cooler, it's closest competitor is the 4790k for $100 more with almost identical specs minus the iGPU and for $420 AUD you get a 4Ghz turbo with 8 threads (I know you can get a 5920k in the USA for around that price but it is cheap for here - 4790 is over $500)

[SkilledRebuilds]

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/449585-god-box-my-attempt/
Asus Z10PE-D8 WS dual mobo (version 1.04, bios 1202)
(2) E5-2699 v3 (36cores/72HT) (O.C. 2.6/4.0 Turbo) (sequential sr numbers)
256GB LR Samsung ram DDR4 ecc reg
(QUAD SLI) 4 Titan X SC
Corsair Aix1500 DIGITAL PSU
1 Samsung M.2 SM951 pcie 3.0 (os drive)
8 Samsung 850 Pro 1TB SSD RAID 0 (apps drive)
9 noctua fans (almost silent)
Corsair Aluminum Red LED Keyboard, red level 10 mouse
LG 31MU97z 4096x2160 true 4K at 60hz dp
CaseLabs Mercury
2 modified Scythe ninja 3 rev b heatsinks
Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut TIM
Windows server 2012 R2, Ubuntu 15, LinuxMint
1lb. of flesh and a pint of blood

[typographie]

In most games, two Xeons would probably perform about as well as a single Core i5 of the same architecture most of the time—maybe worse, depending on the clock speed deficit. Quad Titan X's will run about as well as two Titan X's in too many games to be justifiable.

 

Other than that, yes, it would be a fine gaming system.