F5F Stay Refreshed Hardware Desktop 24 processors running at 1.8 GHz compared to 28 cores at 1.5 GHz

24 processors running at 1.8 GHz compared to 28 cores at 1.5 GHz

24 processors running at 1.8 GHz compared to 28 cores at 1.5 GHz

Y
yalo29
Senior Member
641
09-19-2016, 11:49 PM
#1
I just received a free ASUS WS C621E Sage for my homelab/render setup for Arnold and Maya. I need engineering CPUs because I can't afford QS chips. I also need to purchase it immediately since Linus posted the cheap 3647 Xeon video yesterday, and they’ll be gone soon—just like with the 2066 models before. I could get roughly the same price with two 8160s @ 24c or two 8176s @ 28c. I’m okay with ES CPUs but still unsure which of these two to choose.
Y
yalo29
09-19-2016, 11:49 PM #1

I just received a free ASUS WS C621E Sage for my homelab/render setup for Arnold and Maya. I need engineering CPUs because I can't afford QS chips. I also need to purchase it immediately since Linus posted the cheap 3647 Xeon video yesterday, and they’ll be gone soon—just like with the 2066 models before. I could get roughly the same price with two 8160s @ 24c or two 8176s @ 28c. I’m okay with ES CPUs but still unsure which of these two to choose.

J
JGood456
Member
168
09-20-2016, 12:49 AM
#2
These are indeed the CPUs mentioned. Go for the 8176.
J
JGood456
09-20-2016, 12:49 AM #2

These are indeed the CPUs mentioned. Go for the 8176.

B
Blaster12121
Member
155
09-22-2016, 12:12 AM
#3
Pursue the 8160 series. Unless it's essential for significantly more cores across all tasks (especially heavy multitasking), a system with 24 cores at a higher speed will suffice. For those requiring additional cores and cache, opt for the alternative option.
B
Blaster12121
09-22-2016, 12:12 AM #3

Pursue the 8160 series. Unless it's essential for significantly more cores across all tasks (especially heavy multitasking), a system with 24 cores at a higher speed will suffice. For those requiring additional cores and cache, opt for the alternative option.

R
Rakedge
Member
227
09-27-2016, 01:31 AM
#4
Maintain the same frequency if it exceeds the CPU's capacity; otherwise, opt for the larger option when prices match.
R
Rakedge
09-27-2016, 01:31 AM #4

Maintain the same frequency if it exceeds the CPU's capacity; otherwise, opt for the larger option when prices match.

L
lions8881
Junior Member
17
09-28-2016, 12:36 AM
#5
The issue is that using an ES CPU makes performance drop significantly. The cost comparison depends on the setup; a dual 8160 with full scaling would only be about 30% faster than a 5950x. Most ES models run much slower, so the 5950x is likely much more efficient. ES boards usually cost between $250–300 each, and selling them can offset the expense of a 5950x + Xeon system. Don’t forget the additional cooling and power supply costs. If you must choose, opt for a standard 5950x instead—it offers better performance and value.
L
lions8881
09-28-2016, 12:36 AM #5

The issue is that using an ES CPU makes performance drop significantly. The cost comparison depends on the setup; a dual 8160 with full scaling would only be about 30% faster than a 5950x. Most ES models run much slower, so the 5950x is likely much more efficient. ES boards usually cost between $250–300 each, and selling them can offset the expense of a 5950x + Xeon system. Don’t forget the additional cooling and power supply costs. If you must choose, opt for a standard 5950x instead—it offers better performance and value.

A
Alexandrea1
Member
233
09-28-2016, 09:29 AM
#6
It seemed like something was happening, indicating the alternatives are superior. The main consideration should be the cost relative to what you have. If money isn’t a constraint, the 8176 would be the best choice.
A
Alexandrea1
09-28-2016, 09:29 AM #6

It seemed like something was happening, indicating the alternatives are superior. The main consideration should be the cost relative to what you have. If money isn’t a constraint, the 8176 would be the best choice.

S
sCx_Batman
Member
163
10-02-2016, 02:09 AM
#7
They represent ES numbers, implying reduced clock speeds.
S
sCx_Batman
10-02-2016, 02:09 AM #7

They represent ES numbers, implying reduced clock speeds.

H
husker53
Posting Freak
802
10-06-2016, 07:09 AM
#8
Consider these as low-impact options, which may not significantly improve the situation.
H
husker53
10-06-2016, 07:09 AM #8

Consider these as low-impact options, which may not significantly improve the situation.

D
Djam95
Member
143
10-09-2016, 08:45 AM
#9
These are entirely different clock speeds compared to what was originally intended. The 8160 at 1.8GHz only increases to a maximum of 2GHz all cores, which is quite poor.
D
Djam95
10-09-2016, 08:45 AM #9

These are entirely different clock speeds compared to what was originally intended. The 8160 at 1.8GHz only increases to a maximum of 2GHz all cores, which is quite poor.

W
walee123
Senior Member
737
10-09-2016, 01:06 PM
#10
I checked my surroundings and discovered the 8160 es samples reach around 2ghz (the more affordable ones). These samples can't be sold if you were the one who made the deal with Intel. The board op would cost a lot of money, and spending 4-600 on this setup with slower CPUs would be outmatched by a comparable 5950x configuration.
W
walee123
10-09-2016, 01:06 PM #10

I checked my surroundings and discovered the 8160 es samples reach around 2ghz (the more affordable ones). These samples can't be sold if you were the one who made the deal with Intel. The board op would cost a lot of money, and spending 4-600 on this setup with slower CPUs would be outmatched by a comparable 5950x configuration.