Some dummy X99 questions

[Adam.]

Hello guys!

 

First of all, I want to apologise about my not perfect English

 

I am planing to replace my old rig(i7-4790k and bla bla bla. Mostly programming) with new X99 build.
I am planing to use:

MSI X99A SLI PLUS motherboard(https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/X99A-SLI-PLUS.html#hero-overview)
As a CPU used Xeon: Intel E5 2683 V3(Not an ES) from ebay: Link
 

My question is about RAM's. CPU supports max. 2133MHz speed. Can I use higher speed ram's? Or should I but slower ones?

[Windows7ge]

The Xeon CPU might not let you push the RAM very high but you won't see huge performance shifts going with faster memory unless you're swamping large files in and out of RAM. So I'd go with 2133MHz and if it'll allow it overclock it manually.

[NumLock21]

5 minutes ago, Adam. said:

Hello guys!

 

First of all, I want to apologise about my not perfect English

 

I am planing to replace my old rig(i7-4790k and bla bla bla. Mostly programming) with new X99 build.
I am planing to use:

MSI X99A SLI PLUS motherboard(https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/X99A-SLI-PLUS.html#hero-overview)
As a CPU used Xeon: Intel E5 2683 V3(Not an ES) from ebay: Link
 

My question is about RAM's. CPU supports max. 2133MHz speed. Can I use higher speed ram's? Or should I but slower ones?

The Xeon you've picked out cannot be overclocked and does not support XMP. 2133MHz is the maximum that cpu will support, so getter higher ram is a waste, where it will just down clock 2133MHz.

[Adam.]

1 minute ago, Windows7ge said:

The Xeon CPU might not let you push the RAM very high but you won't see huge performance shifts going with faster memory unless you're swamping large files in and out of RAM. So I'd go with 2133MHz and if it'll allow it overclock it manually.

I would go with i7. But X99 i7 CPU's is kinda expensive. And buying used Xeon is not that risky.

[Adam.]

2 minutes ago, NumLock21 said:

The Xeon you've picked out cannot be overclocked and does not support XMP. 2133MHz is the maximum that cpu will support, so getter higher ram is a waste, where it will just down clock 2133MHz.

But 2400Mhz and 2133Mhz price is almost exactly the same!

[NumLock21]

1 minute ago, Adam. said:

But 2400Mhz and 2133Mhz price is almost exactly the same!

Then get the 2400, even though it will just run at 2133.

[Adam.]

2 minutes ago, NumLock21 said:

Then get the 2400, even though it will just run at 2133.

Thanks! I think I will do that.

By the way, Your E5 1650 v3 is able to handle 16GB (4x4GB) DDR4 3000 Trident-Z?

[DXMember]

get any RAM that is DDR4, it will run at JEDEC specification

 

also damn that Xeon is a beast... but why do you think you need a 14 core for programming though?

unless you're programming some very specific extremely heavily multithreaded solutions the low clock speed will hurt the compile times and stuff...

[Adam.]

2 minutes ago, DXMember said:

get any RAM that is DDR4, it will run at JEDEC specification

 

also damn that Xeon is a beast... but why do you think you need a 14 core for programming though?

unless you're programming some very specific extremely heavily multithreaded solutions the low clock speed will hurt the compile times and stuff...

Not only programming, sometimes rendering, it's a bit overkill I know..

You think that 2.0GHz and turbo at 3.0Ghz will hurt compiling times and day-to-day task? I have same feels.
This CPU is not that expensive(Used ofc) - that is one of the reasons why.

[NumLock21]

10 minutes ago, Adam. said:

Thanks! I think I will do that.

By the way, Your E5 1650 v3 is able to handle 16GB (4x4GB) DDR4 3000 Trident-Z?

Yes 

[Adam.]

2 minutes ago, NumLock21 said:

Yes 

But it can't run it on 4000? Or I am wrong.

[DXMember]

5 minutes ago, Adam. said:

Not only programming, sometimes rendering, it's a bit overkill I know..

You think that 2.0GHz and turbo at 3.0Ghz will hurt compiling times and day-to-day task? I have same feels.
This CPU is not that expensive(Used ofc) - that is one of the reasons why.

depends on what you consider the day to day tasks - if it's facebook and youtube, then lol

if it's like gameing and running stuff like really heavy single threaded solutions then yes it will hurt it - not by much but still if you can't completely and absolutely justify the use for 28 threads then there is absolutely no reason to change from 4790k

[NumLock21]

1 minute ago, Adam. said:

But it can't run it on 4000? Or I am wrong.

Ram or cpu clock speed?

[Adam.]

1 minute ago, DXMember said:

depends on what you consider the day to day tasks - if it's facebook and youtube, then lol

if it's like gameing and running stuff like really heavy single threaded solutions then yes it will hurt it - not by much but still if you can't completely and absolutely justify the use for 28 threads then there is absolutely no reason to change from 4790k

Ram

[Adam.]

2 minutes ago, DXMember said:

depends on what you consider the day to day tasks - if it's facebook and youtube, then lol

if it's like gameing and running stuff like really heavy single threaded solutions then yes it will hurt it - not by much but still if you can't completely and absolutely justify the use for 28 threads then there is absolutely no reason to change from 4790k

My Day-to-day is:

A lot of VM's for projects, developing platforms and so on(Linux).
Browsing throw web and other stuff.
Couple IDE's in background.

Sometimes I do gaming.

 

The reason why I am building new system. My old parts are sold. Only CPU is left. It will be silly to rebuild that system with DDR3 memory. It's getting old. Now I am stuck with my MacBook

[Dash Lambda]

8 minutes ago, Adam. said:

My Day-to-day is:

A lot of VM's for projects, developing platforms and so on(Linux).
Browsing throw web and other stuff.
Couple IDE's in background.

Sometimes I do gaming.

 

The reason why I am building new system. My old parts are sold. Only CPU is left. It will be silly to rebuild that system with DDR3 memory. It's getting old. Now I am stuck with my MacBook

Well, that sounds like a multicore environment...

VM's, by my understanding, eat up resources.

[Adam.]

1 minute ago, Dash Lambda said:

Well, that sounds like a multicore environment...

VM's, by my understanding, eat up resources.

Yes, my old i7 was sometimes struggling with some tasks.

And one of reason was not enough resources.

I would go with X99 i7, but they are really really expensive.

[Dash Lambda]

1 minute ago, Adam. said:

Yes, my old i7 was sometimes struggling with some tasks.

And one of reason was not enough resources.

I would go with X99 i7, but they are really really expensive.

Indeed. They are so expensive they make me angry.

It wouldn't really make that much sense in your situation anyway. More money for fewer cores and slightly higher per-core performance, just silly.

 

A Xeon also means you can relax a little on cooling, which is nice.

[Adam.]

4 minutes ago, Dash Lambda said:

Indeed. They are so expensive they make me angry.

It wouldn't really make that much sense in your situation anyway. More money for fewer cores and slightly higher per-core performance, just silly.

 

A Xeon also means you can relax a little on cooling, which is nice.

But there is one drawback. If I go with Xeon. I need to buy additional GPU, because Xeon does't have that.

[Dash Lambda]

1 minute ago, Adam. said:

But there is one drawback. If I go with Xeon. I need to buy additional GPU, because Xeon does't have that.

Nor do Core series chips. X99 doesn't typically have iGPUs.

[Adam.]

1 minute ago, Dash Lambda said:

Nor do Core series chips. X99 doesn't typically have iGPUs.

Oh yeah, my mistake  Everything costs money. In this case, huge amount of money...