The question asks for the distinction between the Intel Xeon Platinum 8160 and the 8160T.
The question asks for the distinction between the Intel Xeon Platinum 8160 and the 8160T.
Collected a Lenovo ThinkStation P720 (30BB)...
Connected it to the dual NVMe ports and RAID (HA! not really).
Brought along a single Xeon Silver 4110 (85W) (Lenovo OEM price: 800 bucks!! for the second 4110... well, maybe better to upgrade).
Installed 6@ DDR4 2666 RDIMMs (192GB)
Switched PSU from 690W to 900W
Next step:
Upgraded to 2@ Xeon Gold 6148 (150W)...
Added extra 6@ DDR 2666 RDIMMs (192GB), and a second CPU cooler
(Lenovo OEM price for 6148: over 1000 bucks per unit!!)
Installed MSI RTX 3070... a powerful card, but it takes up space. Moved to T/S P520, along with the 900W PSU.
All components use FCLGA3647 Socket (also known as "P").
Installed RTX A4000 in P720 (single-slot GPU)
Overall, everything seems fine...
Xeon Platinum 8160 is the maximum for P720 (also works with existing 2666 RDIMMs).
Lenovo online parts list shows Platinum 8160T
The 8160T is 3 to 4 times more expensive than a new 8160 on the regular market.
Asked Lenovo about the price difference. Lenovo replied: "ask Intel" (not an unreasonable answer)
Then Intel responded in a way that sounded like a politician: "Intel:" Ask Lenovo
So... the 8160T is built for longer life—Intel says (runs cooler??)
Compare this to the non-"T" 8160?
According to Intel’s published info: 8160 and 8160T are essentially the same, except the T model stays cooler.
Can a 8160T replace an 8160? Both are listed as 150W
Or vice versa? (In my case, I’m considering swapping 8160 for 8160T)
Discussed with Noctua about after-market cooling options.
If the 8160T stays cooler (slower), is that controlled by Lenovo BIOS?
Today’s listings show 8160 and 8160T both at 150W.
Or do they swap? (I’m thinking maybe swapping 8160 for 8160T)
Talking to Noctua about cooling solutions.
If the 8160T performs better, does that depend on Lenovo BIOS settings?
Today’s listings include 8160 and 8160T, both rated at 150W.
Thanks for any helpful info,
John
According to line 28 of the Intel .xls file, the "T" variant shows "Embedded Options = YES" while the non-"T" version is "NO". This behavior seems influenced by Lenovo Mobo settings, such as chipset or BIOS, which may cause throttling (e.g., 8160...). It's still better than the 6148 version. I'll run Passmark just for testing.
Sure thing, here it is rephrased:
I got it completely off track—frontal lobes turning into mush after hitting the wall hard. (Former 486 gearhead... well, I’ve been through that since GWBASIC on stinky yellow punched paper tape, 3.1.1, and buying 256K RAM 'caterpillars' from plastic tubes... tactical USAF computers using ferrite-core memory just to 'zero'...) My bad.
The "T" suffix processors are reduced-power variants of the main processor. They are applied in motherboards that cannot support the more powerful chips or in devices with restricted cooling options. It seems a T model would function adequately, albeit with diminished performance.
The "T" version is already recognized as OEM by Lenovo online parts listing: ("...it should work fine").
Inquiring about compatibility between your P720 and the reverse version: Will the P720 function properly with the "NON-T" variant (Xeon Platinum 8160)? Or will the Non-T 8160 need extra cooling?
Thanks!
I was really focused on getting a good result from this task.
It took a lot of effort to turn a simple idea into something solid.
After numerous discussions with Noctua representatives, they were hesitant about a single answer; they presented various options because of the diverse designs from different makers.
That being said, it seemed the OEM 150W/205W coolers "should" work adequately;
so far, no issues! The CPUs seem to stay within limits (50 - 60C).
Another approach: the rear housing fan was initially set to blow out; it was reinstalled in reverse (meaning blowing in over the CPU units...). Additionally, after removing an odd frame or housing, a front panel was made for a spare fan to exhaust air in the same direction—keeping the airflow consistent (back to front).