Gaming Performance of Xeons

[H0R53]

12 minutes ago, Damascus said:

I'm going to assume you need a Z77 mobo.

Thanks. I'll look them up.

[bimmerman]

13 minutes ago, ImadKnight said:

I have to raise the Qpi/Vtt voltage right?

Yup. Do NOT exceed 1.35 V on the QPI/VTT, but you shouldn't need to. This voltage affects the 'uncore' and BCLK which includes your memory controller. More than 1.35 V can cause failures.

 

I followed these guides to getting a stable overclock on our Gigabyte X58 boards:

http://www.techreaction.net/2010/09/07/3-step-overclocking-guide-bloomfield-and-gulftown/1/

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/overclocking-the-x58-a-practical-guide.108526/

http://www.overclock.net/t/538439/guide-to-overclocking-the-core-i7-920-or-930-to-4-0ghz

 

Basically, incrementally raise your BCLK and QPI/VTT from stock to 200 (if it'll cooperate) keeping a very low memory and CPU multiplier. Then, incrementally work on memory. Lastly, incrementally raise CPU Vcore and multiplier. Isolate each subsystem's max overclock, test it thoroughly, and then work that back into the main system. It's time consuming but it works!

 

I'm running 215x21. I was able to go higher on BCLK but things got unstable without absurd voltage, which I wasn't comfortable with.

 

I have found that the system performs better with a higher BCLK and lower multiplier than the opposite, as the higher BCLK speeds up memory controller and a lot of the behind the scenes aspects of the CPU (I think including Cache? Could be wrong on that). But-- verify this on your own system, and don't assume my settings will work for you.

 

I'll try to take screenshots of my setup tonight, depends when I finish working on the car.

[IKnight]

1 minute ago, bimmerman said:

Yup. Do NOT exceed 1.35 V on the QPI/VTT, but you shouldn't need to. This voltage affects the 'uncore' and BCLK which includes your memory controller. More than 1.35 V can cause failures.

 

I followed these guides to getting a stable overclock on our Gigabyte X58 boards:

http://www.techreaction.net/2010/09/07/3-step-overclocking-guide-bloomfield-and-gulftown/1/

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/overclocking-the-x58-a-practical-guide.108526/

http://www.overclock.net/t/538439/guide-to-overclocking-the-core-i7-920-or-930-to-4-0ghz

 

Basically, incrementally raise your BCLK and QPI/VTT from stock to 200 (if it'll cooperate) keeping a very low memory and CPU multiplier. Then, incrementally work on memory. Lastly, incrementally raise CPU Vcore and multiplier. Isolate each subsystem's max overclock, test it thoroughly, and then work that back into the main system. It's time consuming but it works!

 

I'm running 215x21. I was able to go higher on BCLK but things got unstable without absurd voltage, which I wasn't comfortable with.

 

I have found that the system performs better with a higher BCLK and lower multiplier than the opposite, as the higher BCLK speeds up memory controller and a lot of the behind the scenes aspects of the CPU (I think including Cache? Could be wrong on that). But-- verify this on your own system, and don't assume my settings will work for you.

Thanks a ton! Il experiment tomorrow. 

(and also, to OP, sorry for hijacking the thread )

[He_162]

5 hours ago, ImadKnight said:

Gaming benchmarks aren't going to be a help from me considering my GPU. I will, however, give you my Cinebench to give you an idea of what a 7-year-old overclocked Xeon performs like. 

Thanks for the benchmark, seems like it performs like an i7, despite having lower clocks due to it's higher cores, which is good for lifespan, how much did you pay for it?

 

5 hours ago, bimmerman said:

Bottlenecked or no, I'm content with my OC'd Xeon's (X5675, 4.5gigglehertz) performance in games. I bought my X58 platform in 2010 and haven't felt a need to buy a new CPU/Mobo since then. I'd say the $60 upgrade to the Xeon was well worth it vs a $500-1000 upgrade to a new platform/ram/cpu/m.2/cooler/etc for performance I honestly won't notice with a 60hz 3440x1440 monitor. I am able to play current games at or above 60fps by adjusting the detail settings (R9 290, so not top tier GPU), and that's plenty fine. If anything I'm just going to continue upgrading GPUs until there's truly a compelling CPU and platform to throw down on. I haven't seen one worth its cost, to me, for what I do and how rarely I game.

 

If all you're doing is gaming, all that really matters is whether it plays well enough for the games you want to play at the detail settings you're comfortable with. FPS is far and away less important than whether you're enjoying the game, and really only matters for forum flamewars.

Thanks, this is what I was looking for, someone who shares my opinion on their value.

The original argument was on the value of Xeon's / performance of xeon's vs i7-5820k in games, and other programs.

 

 

5 hours ago, Pasi123 said:

For me 4.2-4.3GHz is stable at 1.3v

You got a frackin gold chip dude. Golden Silicon lottery ticket here!

[He_162]

4 hours ago, ImadKnight said:

Thanks a ton! Il experiment tomorrow. 

(and also, to OP, sorry for hijacking the thread )

That's completely fine dude, I'm happy to see people get the most for their money (hence this thread)

[WkdPaul]

Thread cleaned.

 

Please keep it civil and respectful

[IKnight]

6 hours ago, He_162 said:

Thanks for the benchmark, seems like it performs like an i7, despite having lower clocks due to it's higher cores, which is good for lifespan, how much did you pay for it?

 

Thanks, this is what I was looking for, someone who shares my opinion on their value.

The original argument was on the value of Xeon's / performance of xeon's vs i7-5820k in games, and other programs.
 

You got a frackin gold chip dude. Golden Silicon lottery ticket here!

I managed to get my Xeon for around $25. Remember though, Xeons sometimes suffer from bad single core performance (even though I have never noticed it). 

[asand1]

11 minutes ago, ImadKnight said:

I managed to get my Xeon for around $25. Remember though, Xeons sometimes suffer from bad single core performance (even though I have never noticed it). 

Your typical Xeon has a clock speed less than 3Ghz, this is why people believe Xeons are not good for gaming. Higher clocked Xeons do not suffer from bad single core performance, they are on par within their respective generations.