Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Xeon 5300 Clovertown Benchmarks!

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Intel Xeon 5300 Clovertown Benchmarks!

    On November 2, 2006 the embargo for Intel's Core 2 Extreme Quad QX6700 was lifted which resulted in a slurry of reviews covering this flagship desktop processor. However, this morning happens to be an important date for Supercomputing 2006 and it serves as yet another milestone for Intel Corporation. This morning Intel will be introducing the Xeon 5300 series, or perhaps better known by its codename of Clovertown. At Phoronix we have had these processors in-house for over a week now and today are able to share our thoughts on these quad-core server/workstation processors as we test them under GNU/Linux...
    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=7860

    Interested in seeing other benchmarks or information? Just ask! There are additional Xeon 5300 focused articles in the works for the near future.
    Michael Larabel
    http://www.michaellarabel.com/

  • #2
    Originally posted by Michael View Post
    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=7860

    Interested in seeing other benchmarks or information? Just ask! There are additional Xeon 5300 focused articles in the works for the near future.
    Hmm, I was kind of expecting a little better showing from the 5330. Two 5330s usually got trounced by a pair of 5150s or even one 5150, so do you think that the lower clock speed or something else was the problem?

    Comment


    • #3
      It is likely due to the difference in clock frequency. I'm working on getting more Xeon 5300 parts so I'll be able to confirm more then. Where have you see the E5330 numbers?
      Michael Larabel
      http://www.michaellarabel.com/

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Michael View Post
        It is likely due to the difference in clock frequency. I'm working on getting more Xeon 5300 parts so I'll be able to confirm more then. Where have you see the E5330 numbers?
        That was a mis-type, I meant 5320

        Comment


        • #5
          Thanks for the in-depth look Michael, the 5300 really seems to have a lot to offer. The price scares me though, if it's anything like the Kentsfield when it finally hits the stores. The QX6700 retails for $1,499 at NewEgg, so I am interested to see if the Xeon will be any better.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Rob Williams View Post
            Thanks for the in-depth look Michael, the 5300 really seems to have a lot to offer. The price scares me though, if it's anything like the Kentsfield when it finally hits the stores. The QX6700 retails for $1,499 at NewEgg, so I am interested to see if the Xeon will be any better.
            Prices range from about $450 to $1200 per processor. The slowest Xeon processor at 1.6GHz will set you back only ~ $450 USD.
            Michael Larabel
            http://www.michaellarabel.com/

            Comment


            • #7
              What is your policy about overclocking of Xeon Server boards?

              If anybody care about Clovertown OC, visit the
              http://forums.2cpu.com/showthread.php?t=77937 thread at 2cpu.com

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Cronos View Post
                What is your policy about overclocking of Xeon Server boards?

                If anybody care about Clovertown OC, visit the
                http://forums.2cpu.com/showthread.php?t=77937 thread at 2cpu.com
                Sounds like fun, may have to try it out
                Michael Larabel
                http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                Comment


                • #9
                  Thanks for the nice review, Michael!

                  I've noticed how the Phoronix reviews use the latest and greatest version of Fedora Core at a given point in time. For this review, FC6 is the latest. This is quite understandable given the time it takes for the Linux kernel to support new hardware.

                  Here's my dilemma - at work, I get to suggest hardware purchases, hardware that is later to be used with Linux. The machines are either servers or workstation and both require the use of more "stable" distributions/releases - in other words RHEL 4 U4 or CentOS 4.4 instead of Fedora Core, or Ubuntu 6.06 LTS instead of the newer 6.10, Debian stable instead of testing and so on.

                  You get the picture - many a time you buy a new piece of hardware and find out that distribution X doesn't support it, since this-or-that particular driver wasn't backported or supported at a particular point in time.

                  I'd love to see the Phoronix reviews have compatibility tests with these "older"/enterprise-oriented/mature distributions. It could be something as simple as sticking the install CD of distribution X into the machine and see if it could start and even complete an installation.

                  Me, I'm not too bothered with lack of support for whatever sound chip is on the motherboards, but I/O, including ethernet support, is crucial.

                  Case in point - I'm trying to figure out if a 5000P or 5000X chipset motherboard, perhaps even the particular Tyan motherboard in this review, would work with any of the "enterprise class" distributions of today.

                  Regards

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    jowa,

                    Thank you for your comments and we will definitely evaluate your suggestion.

                    In regards to the i5000X, if I recall correctly, I have used Dapper Drake without any problems. I don't think I had tried out an i5000P on Dapper Drake or any other enterprise distributions.
                    Michael Larabel
                    http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X