F5F Stay Refreshed Hardware Desktop E5-2630 V2 versus FX 8230 in a Minecraft server setup

E5-2630 V2 versus FX 8230 in a Minecraft server setup

E5-2630 V2 versus FX 8230 in a Minecraft server setup

A
andrewliu12
Member
170
01-16-2016, 10:43 AM
#1
Hey everyone, I've been running modded Minecraft servers on a Dell machine with two E5-2630 v2 processors and 1033MHz RAM. I recently got some free hardware, including an FX 8320 with 1866MHz RAM. I was thinking about switching some servers to the FX because Minecraft tends to perform better with single-core speeds. I understand the FX has quicker clock speeds, but I've also heard it doesn't always deliver. Which option is better for me?
A
andrewliu12
01-16-2016, 10:43 AM #1

Hey everyone, I've been running modded Minecraft servers on a Dell machine with two E5-2630 v2 processors and 1033MHz RAM. I recently got some free hardware, including an FX 8320 with 1866MHz RAM. I was thinking about switching some servers to the FX because Minecraft tends to perform better with single-core speeds. I understand the FX has quicker clock speeds, but I've also heard it doesn't always deliver. Which option is better for me?

T
the5harkman
Senior Member
542
01-18-2016, 06:27 AM
#2
AMD and Intel clock speeds can't be directly compared. It seems the dual E5 models are the best choice.
T
the5harkman
01-18-2016, 06:27 AM #2

AMD and Intel clock speeds can't be directly compared. It seems the dual E5 models are the best choice.

J
Jangusty
Junior Member
43
01-31-2016, 03:42 PM
#3
If you decide to go ahead, consider testing the server on both platforms, though I think the Xeons will likely perform better.
J
Jangusty
01-31-2016, 03:42 PM #3

If you decide to go ahead, consider testing the server on both platforms, though I think the Xeons will likely perform better.

H
Hols8888
Member
140
02-14-2016, 01:42 PM
#4
The Xeons run on Ivy Bridge architecture (Intel 3rd gen), unless you significantly modify the system (FX) which would make that single CPU consume more power than both Xeons together). In that case, they should perform better in terms of single-core speed.
H
Hols8888
02-14-2016, 01:42 PM #4

The Xeons run on Ivy Bridge architecture (Intel 3rd gen), unless you significantly modify the system (FX) which would make that single CPU consume more power than both Xeons together). In that case, they should perform better in terms of single-core speed.

E
Elliepls
Member
222
02-15-2016, 06:06 PM
#5
Ivy Bridge ran significantly quicker than Bulldozer in a straight comparison. For best performance, stick with Xeons or consider faster Ivy Bridge chips available on eBay. Using affordable registered ECC RAM works well with them, and Minecraft servers particularly benefit from ample RAM.
E
Elliepls
02-15-2016, 06:06 PM #5

Ivy Bridge ran significantly quicker than Bulldozer in a straight comparison. For best performance, stick with Xeons or consider faster Ivy Bridge chips available on eBay. Using affordable registered ECC RAM works well with them, and Minecraft servers particularly benefit from ample RAM.

R
Roccoboy8
Member
162
02-19-2016, 08:07 AM
#6
The Xeons are expected to outperform the 8320.
R
Roccoboy8
02-19-2016, 08:07 AM #6

The Xeons are expected to outperform the 8320.

R
ReveloT_T
Member
167
02-20-2016, 05:07 PM
#7
A quicker clock speed doesn't matter if the instructions per clock are poor quality. At that time, AMD processors weren't even competitive. The Xeon would still beat the Bulldozer CPU despite its lower speed.
R
ReveloT_T
02-20-2016, 05:07 PM #7

A quicker clock speed doesn't matter if the instructions per clock are poor quality. At that time, AMD processors weren't even competitive. The Xeon would still beat the Bulldozer CPU despite its lower speed.