We all know Xeon processors can be Dual-CPU but what about Intel Core series?

[Kamjam21xx]

10 minutes ago, Biggerboot said:

Dual Socket motherboards don't really really provide synergy between the two processors.  It's more like having two motherboards glued together (that may not be technically correct but it's a better analogy than fusion).  I think this exists to save real-estate in server environments.

For workstations you can also do your work on them without the need for an application to support or even hassle of using a render farm. 

 

Atleast on the smaller scale. 

[Biggerboot]

15 minutes ago, Kamjam21xx said:

For workstations you can also do your work on them without the need for an application to support or even hassle of using a render farm. 

 

Atleast on the smaller scale. 

Right, I definitely understand the use cases.  I'm thinking of it from a practical/cost standpoint on a large scale, when you compare a server environment to consumer or pro-sumer.  There's probably a desire to fit as many xeons in a rack as they can, keeping the physical space and power supplies fully utilized.

[Guest]

54 minutes ago, Kamjam21xx said:

Most any amount of rendering a 1950x isnt exactly "enough" id build a render farm with 512 cores if i could, but i dont have enough money.

There is tiers for rendering.

1st tier is hobby scale, so you just do it as a hobby, and don't get any money, it doesn't make sense to get a uber pc on this tier, the ryzen 7 with 16 threads is the max.

2nd tier is small scale rendering, so you get a little money for it. Here the Threadripper makes sense. 

3rd tier is already a bigger operation, here the deal xeons and dual EPIC's make sense, as they make tons of money for the animations etc.

4th tier is big operations, so movies etc, here giant render farms make sense.

 

So there is no need to get 512 cores if you only do hobbist stuff, as you won't get the "investment" back, but with work comes deadlines, and so you need faster equipment.

But as you can see, dual consumer cpu's don't make sense on any tier, as for the same money as 2 i7's and a dual cpu mobo you could get a Threadripper, that outbeats it in both features and speed.

[Kamjam21xx]

7 minutes ago, Some Random Member said:

There is tiers for rendering.

1st tier is hobby scale, so you just do it as a hobby, and don't get any money, it doesn't make sense to get a uber pc on this tier, the ryzen 7 with 16 threads is the max.

2nd tier is small scale rendering, so you get a little money for it. Here the Threadripper makes sense. 

3rd tier is already a bigger operation, here the deal xeons and dual EPIC's make sense, as they make tons of money for the animations etc.

4th tier is big operations, so movies etc, here giant render farms make sense.

 

So there is no need to get 512 cores if you only do hobbist stuff, as you won't get the "investment" back, but with work comes deadlines, and so you need faster equipment.

But as you can see, dual consumer cpu's don't make sense on any tier, as for the same money as 2 i7's and a dual cpu mobo you could get a Threadripper, that outbeats it in both features and speed.

Well i had a project span a month, and render farms worked out to about 2-3% of what i got paid. So those arent a bad option either. 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Kamjam21xx said:

Well i had a project span a month, and render farms worked out to about 2-3% of what i got paid. So those arent a bad option either. 

The best thing is renting render farms, that is even cheaper than buying them.

But excuse my curiosity, what kind of rendering were you doing?

Did you do a movie render, or an animated film or?

Im just curious, because im just now entering the rendering scene, so i want to know what do i need to focus on to get the big checks.

[Kamjam21xx]

26 minutes ago, Some Random Member said:

The best thing is renting render farms, that is even cheaper than buying them.

But excuse my curiosity, what kind of rendering were you doing?

Did you do a movie render, or an animated film or?

Im just curious, because im just now entering the rendering scene, so i want to know what do i need to focus on to get the big checks.

Oh gee idk. It was for a company that supplies (rents out) temporary wall sollutions that are foam with a skin and track that can assemble vice versa pretty quick. They send them out from coast ti coast.

 

I used Ambient occlusion, reflection, global illumination, etc. 

 

I can tackle anything, so i just kindof go where the wind takes me. 

I used rebus farms because they have a plugin that integrates right into C4D (i even have on subdivided displacement, you cant really see it though)

 

Edit: so probably renders of products for companies? This specific company had me do lots of them for each job they were bidding, until it became irrelivant to pay me to keep making them when they could reuse old ones.

[erdemalsirt]

3 hours ago, BarackOBatman said:

 

If dual socket idea isn't work well, then what about Dual 8700K CPU Chips in same CPU? Only 1 CPU but developed as Single... AMD + Intel does for mobile systems.. Integrated AMD GPU + Intel CPU ... But what about both CPU in same CPU inside?

 

[BarackOBatman]

32 minutes ago, erdemalsirt said:

If dual socket idea isn't work well, then what about Dual 8700K CPU Chips in same CPU? Only 1 CPU but developed as Single... AMD + Intel does for mobile systems.. Integrated AMD GPU + Intel CPU ... But what about both CPU in same CPU inside?

 

Thats basically what a threadripper is. 2 CPU dies on one PCB connected using "infinity fabric" or AMD EPYC which is 4 dies. Or am i misunderstanding?

 

[bimmerman]

Why cannibalize Xeons unnecessarily? This is one of the key differentiators between the desktop Core and Xeon lines, the ability to run dual sockets when needed.

 

Further, dual socket gaming was done back in X58 and X79 days. EVGA released two dual-socket (Xeon) boards that could be overclocked heavily, the SR-2 and the SR-X. Response was enthusiastic from review sites who didn't have to pay for CPUs, and these are available used now that CPUs are cheap. These boards were ludicrously expensive when new, only fit in a handful of expensive cases, required expensive power supplies, double the ram, etc etc. Do you sense a theme?

 

To say there is zero benefit is putting it mildly, however, and now that you can get 16+ cores on a single CPU socket, there is little reason to even go dual socket for non-server parts. In fact, I'm not aware of Intel releasing dual socket desktop parts for the LGA2011 socket-- there's just no demand when cloud and server computing exist for the few times you really need a billion cores.

[Biggerboot]

1 hour ago, bimmerman said:

Why cannibalize Xeons unnecessarily? This is one of the key differentiators between the desktop Core and Xeon lines, the ability to run dual sockets when needed.

Agreed, but also not to mention there's probably a break-even analysis board makers have to do when evaluating if it's worth it to make consumer grade dual/multi socket boards (sort of related to the EVGA board you mentioned).  That probably further justifies intel for not bothering to do it. 

It's similar to other features like ECC memory.  I think it would be reasonable for them if there was a demand for it, but it's fair to admit people in this space aren't overclocking CPUs.  It's more things that can burden tech support, so omitting features has other financial benefits besides just cannibalizing a line.

Even consumer grade dual xeon boards like the Asus WS lineup have a pretty limited production, and you don't see a lot of others doing the same sort of thing.

[Kamjam21xx]

Yeah but theyre definitely just doing it so you have to buy their xeon line. Ill continue thinking that until i see the engineering costs with adding a consumer cpu to the dual socket lineup.

[Biggerboot]

15 minutes ago, Kamjam21xx said:

Yeah but theyre definitely just doing it so you have to buy their xeon line. Ill continue thinking that until i see the engineering costs with adding a consumer cpu to the dual socket lineup.

I wouldn't be surprised either way.  I don't think it's the engineering cost that would be an issue.  It's just a matter of people buying it to justify making it, or producing a dual socket board that otherwise would've had a guaranteed buyer in the server space.  Maybe there'd be a market out there, idk, we'll see how far the core wars go.

[erdemalsirt]

Well still i think Dual-Socket is not bad idea for gamers but, of course Intel needs to made more different Dual-Socket technology for Gamers and General users... Imagine if someone have Intel Pentium G4560 and he want to make more better performance for cheap price and he buy the second Intel Pentium G4560 and he put in to Second CPU Socket and now he doubling performance better... I know the Dual-Sockets have very high lattency problem but, i am sure Intel can made special Dual-Socket for gamers. If Graphics Cards SLI/Crossfire can be optimized for gamers better everytime, then CPU's can do that too... There is nothing that prevents this. Because i think nowadays Intel doesn't focused made CPU more fast... There is not a extremely jump performance improvements (about every core power) when i compare between 4790K and 7700K in same cores... And Intel really have some problems made 10nm CPU's... And i can't imagine what happens after 7nm and 5nm and more.... I think in the future, Intel needs to develop special Dual-Socket technology with very fast connection between two CPU's for gamers.

[Kamjam21xx]

16 minutes ago, erdemalsirt said:

Well still i think Dual-Socket is not bad idea for gamers but, of course Intel needs to made more different Dual-Socket technology for Gamers and General users... Imagine if someone have Intel Pentium G4560 and he want to make more better performance for cheap price and he buy the second Intel Pentium G4560 and he put in to Second CPU Socket and now he doubling performance better... I know the Dual-Sockets have very high lattency problem but, i am sure Intel can made special Dual-Socket for gamers. If Graphics Cards SLI/Crossfire can be optimized for gamers better everytime, then CPU's can do that too... There is nothing that prevents this. Because i think nowadays Intel doesn't focused made CPU more fast... There is not a extremely jump performance improvements (about every core power) when i compare between 4790K and 7700K in same cores... And Intel really have some problems made 10nm CPU's... And i can't imagine what happens after 7nm and 5nm and more.... I think in the future, Intel needs to develop special Dual-Socket technology with very fast connection between two CPU's for gamers.

Yeah when the technology gets to the point it can utilize 16 cores in your game.

[Razor Blade]

More CPUs aren't as good as a single better CPU. Unless games get to the point of using more than available cores than available in the current consumer class CPU there is no point going with a dual CPU setup.

[erdemalsirt]

38 minutes ago, Razor Blade said:

More CPUs aren't as good as a single better CPU. Unless games get to the point of using more than available cores than available in the current consumer class CPU there is no point going with a dual CPU setup.

But Intel have to try that... Because maybe we can see abnormal performance improvement when they run 9th Intel Core series CPU with Dual-Socket technology (Not old Dual-Socket technology) I can give an example about HBM2 Memory developed by AMD... They make it connection very fast between Graphics card's GPU Processor because of technology etc... So, i think possible to make it fast connection between two CPU's but, for example if Intel core i7 9700K have 850 Single Core performance, when the second 9700K connected, it needs shows like 1600 Single Core score if Single 9700K Multi-Core score is 7800, then when the second 9700K added on second socket, i expect 15.000 Multi-Core score or more... But, Intel needs to develop CPU's for that and it needs support for it and also ASUS, MSI and other companies needs to work hard about socket building and motherboard design. Also with that, i am waiting for PCI-E 4.0 when Dual-Socket gaming motherboards released...

 

If Intel and Motherboard companies really listen my idea, then it would be awesome... GTX 2080Ti in HB SLI on PCI-E 4.0, Intel Core i7 9700K with new generation of Dual-Socket technology (World record of Single core performance because of Dual-Socket I HOPE...) It would be awesome i can't imagine more...

[Razor Blade]

2 minutes ago, erdemalsirt said:

Intel needs to develop CPU's for that and it needs support for it

So my question is this. Why would Intel do that when Xeon already exists which will do everything you want and more?

[erdemalsirt]

Just now, Razor Blade said:

So my question is this. Why would Intel do that when Xeon already exists which will do everything you want and more?

Intel Xeon processors have much more different algorithms so that's why they have slow frequency not 4 Ghz or more and much cores but they are not good for gaming... But i think Dual-Socket for gamers isn't bad idea, don't you? ;-;

[8uhbbhu8]

No the clock speed difference is not because of different algorithms. If you look at Xeons, they offer almost all of the same things as consumer cpus do with a few differences, mostly additions that are not needed in consumer workspaces. Also it's because its stupidly harder to get all the cores working together right at higher clockspeeds the more cores you add. Last of all, Power Draw. You want a gaming system that the cpus alone draw 800w? Good luck running that plus whatever other components you want on a standard 210v wall outlet. (not everyone has 240v available and most homes are not wired for anything more then 15A. Cooling that with normal gear in a way that's not a turbine or a full custom LC loop is a dream as well.

 

I think your missing the point here. Intel is NEVER going to have more then single socket boards as we know it for consumer systems. The whole point of dual, quad, etc socket boards is enterprise. Bringing it to consumers where systems are vastly cheaper is nothing but a bad idea for Intel as a company. They will lose all of those customers that pay the big bucks for this sort of gear and instead move to the cheaper similar performing platform. Therefore Intel would be shooting themselves in the foot by making less profit. Less profit for businesses especially ones that are publicly traded is never a good thing for them. It's not about helping us. It's about making as much money as they can. 

 

Consumer systems is actually quite a small segment as not everyone upgrades every year or even every few years and there is very very little they can offer in terms of paid services to them. Enterprise and business solutions on the other hand are a MASSIVE market. No they don't upgrade all the time either BUT since it is a market where so many massive amounts of hardware go through every month they focus a lot of their time on it. Hardware costs thousands of dollars more not just because it is more difficult to make but because it's marketed to groups that can afford it and need the specific stuff offered. Basically the motto is if you can't afford it or justify the price to yourself you don't need it.

 

Dual socket is a terrible idea for gamers. Latency, lower clocks due to so many cores, heating and power draw issues, system SIZE issues... I could go on.

 

Games? HAH. Most games nowadays don't even take advantage of even your quad core cpus. Never mind anything in the enterprise segment. THE ONLY WAY dual socket could affect gamers is if they're running low core count i3s. Even then most can run games perfectly well with no reason to upgrade other then clock speed. And that's the thing that matters most in games. Clock speed, NOT cores. To make games where you spread things out over many cores, NEVER MIND the stupid difficulty of spreading out over multiple cpus and the BUS that goes between and coordinates them, you need to basically rewrite every game from the ground up. I guarantee most games will not see any improvement with more cores for AT LEAST 5 years as most games 5 years from now are in development NOW with and for the hardware available NOW. Even then, Core i9 and Ryzen exist. They have enough core count and clockspeed to make any dual cpu system you try to throw at a game redundant immediately. 

 

Spoiler

There is a hell of a lot more to it then what i've said and i guarantee i've got a few things wrong but i'm generalizing over 2 platforms that are meant to be completely different. BUT I do know most of what i'm talking about as i am a consumer and im going into/delved into the professional world quite a bit.

 

[erdemalsirt]

So, is that impossible?

[erdemalsirt]

I still wanna Dual-Socket motherboards for gamers... ASUS or MSI can...

[Thomass55]

Erdem please get off the LTT forum.

 

Sorry people. I know this guy from somewhere else and he has some severe problems. 

Also erdem, stop trying to add me on Steam, you're a nuisance.

[asand1]

On 5/10/2018 at 1:51 AM, erdemalsirt said:

 

 

Two Intel Core i7 9700K = Showing on Windows 10 Task manager (10 Ghz with 16 Cores and, 32 Threads)

It doesn't work that way. You would still have 5Ghz.

[O9B0666]

On 5/23/2018 at 9:35 AM, erdemalsirt said:

I still wanna Dual-Socket motherboards for gamers... ASUS or MSI can...

Just get some Xeon x5660's and call it a day