Difference Between Intel Server and Desktop CPUs

On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 14:59:18 -0500, Yousuf Khan <bbbl67.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:

>misc1@nazooka.com wrote:
>> Can someone point me to an article or explain the difference between
>> server and desktop cpu solutions.
>
>> For example,
>
>> How do 2x Dual-Core Intel® Xeon® Processor 5100 (server model) compare
>> to 1x Intel Core™2 Quad processor (desktop model) in terms of
>> performance?
>
>> Thanks,
>
>Well, first of all, the Core 2 Quad would be a quad-core, but the Xeon
>5100-series would be a dual-core. I think you really should be asking
>about Xeon 5300-series, which are the Xeon quad-cores.
>
> Yousuf Khan

But that changes his question, eh?

He wants to know if he can spend a lot less to buy a desktop core 2 quad
instead of paying much much more for two dual-core Xeons and attendant server
board kit.

ie: wrt performance, are four desktop cores equivalent to four server cores?

hth

/daytripper
 >> Stay informed about: Difference Between Intel Server and Desktop CPUs 

On 16 Feb 2007 11:13:37 -0800, misc1.RemoveThis@nazooka.com wrote:

>Can someone point me to an article or explain the difference between
>server and desktop cpu solutions.
>
>For example,
>
>How do 2x Dual-Core Intel® Xeon® Processor 5100 (server model) compare
>to 1x Intel Core™2 Quad processor (desktop model) in terms of
>performance?

The basic design of the Xeon 5100 series chips is almost exactly the
same as that of Intel Core 2 Duo chips. Similarly the Xeon 5300 quad
core chips are basically identical to Core 2 Quad chips.

The only differences are as follows:

- Bus speed of the Xeon 5100 and Xeon 5300 chips is mostly 1333MT/s
vs. only 1066MT/s for the desktop Core 2 Duo

- Clock speeds of the various chips vary slightly. The Xeon 5160 is
available at up to 3.0GHz while the fastest desktop Core 2 chip is the
Core 2 Extreme at 2.93GHz.

- All Xeon 5100 and 5300 series chips support Intel's Virtualization
technology (VT) while some Core 2 Duo chips do not

- Some Xeon 5100 and 5300 series chips support Intel's Demand Based
Switching, which allows them some power savings beyond the SpeedStep
technology implemented in the desktop chips, however this does require
some software support.

- Power consumption might be slightly different for one chip vs.
another.


So, getting back to your original question though, if you were to
compare a single Core 2 Quad vs. a similarly clocked quad core Xeon
5300 on a very similar platform, the Xeon would probably be a small
amount faster due to the higher bus speed.

If you were to compare two dual-core Xeon 5100 chips to a single
quad-core Core 2 Quad, then the Xeon would require a very different
platform. It would almost certainly use a server-class motherboard
using a server-class chipset, and these days that would probably mean
FB-DDR memory. This would probably result in a slight loss in
performance when compared to the desktop performance. At a guess I
would say that the single Core 2 Quad would be about 3-5% faster on
average, though it will vary from one application to the next. On the
other hand, your server Xeon 5100 system could probably handle 4 times
as much memory, support much higher bandwidth add-in cards and, most
importantly, have all the reliability and support features typical of
servers but not of desktops.
--
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca
 >> Stay informed about: Difference Between Intel Server and Desktop CPUs 

Thanks for the explanation ! Much appreciated !
 >> Stay informed about: Difference Between Intel Server and Desktop CPUs 

daytripper wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 14:59:18 -0500, Yousuf Khan <bbbl67.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> misc1.TakeThisOut@nazooka.com wrote:
>>> Can someone point me to an article or explain the difference between
>>> server and desktop cpu solutions.
>>> For example,
>>> How do 2x Dual-Core Intel® Xeon® Processor 5100 (server model) compare
>>> to 1x Intel Core™2 Quad processor (desktop model) in terms of
>>> performance?
>>> Thanks,
>> Well, first of all, the Core 2 Quad would be a quad-core, but the Xeon
>> 5100-series would be a dual-core. I think you really should be asking
>> about Xeon 5300-series, which are the Xeon quad-cores.
>>
>> Yousuf Khan
>
> But that changes his question, eh?
>
> He wants to know if he can spend a lot less to buy a desktop core 2 quad
> instead of paying much much more for two dual-core Xeons and attendant server
> board kit.
>
> ie: wrt performance, are four desktop cores equivalent to four server cores?

Well, for one thing, 5100-series CPUs are available up to 3 GHz; Core 2
Quads are not.

--
Mike Smith
 >> Stay informed about: Difference Between Intel Server and Desktop CPUs 

Tony Hill wrote:
> On 16 Feb 2007 11:13:37 -0800, misc1 RemoveThis @nazooka.com wrote:
>
>> Can someone point me to an article or explain the difference between
>> server and desktop cpu solutions.
>>
>> For example,
>>
>> How do 2x Dual-Core Intel® Xeon® Processor 5100 (server model) compare
>> to 1x Intel Core™2 Quad processor (desktop model) in terms of
>> performance?
>
> The basic design of the Xeon 5100 series chips is almost exactly the
> same as that of Intel Core 2 Duo chips. Similarly the Xeon 5300 quad
> core chips are basically identical to Core 2 Quad chips.
>
> The only differences are as follows:
>
> - Bus speed of the Xeon 5100 and Xeon 5300 chips is mostly 1333MT/s
> vs. only 1066MT/s for the desktop Core 2 Duo
>
> - Clock speeds of the various chips vary slightly. The Xeon 5160 is
> available at up to 3.0GHz while the fastest desktop Core 2 chip is the
> Core 2 Extreme at 2.93GHz.
>
> - All Xeon 5100 and 5300 series chips support Intel's Virtualization
> technology (VT) while some Core 2 Duo chips do not

The original question was sever vs. desktop, and AFAIK the desktops all
support 64bit, PAE, and virtualization. Some (all?) mobile chips lack
virtualization (vmx), which is a problem if you want to run virtual
machines. I have a note which says that some don't have nx (execute
protect) but I have never seen such a device so I report it only as a
reminder to check if you need the feature.
>
> - Some Xeon 5100 and 5300 series chips support Intel's Demand Based
> Switching, which allows them some power savings beyond the SpeedStep
> technology implemented in the desktop chips, however this does require
> some software support.
>
> - Power consumption might be slightly different for one chip vs.
> another.
>
>
> So, getting back to your original question though, if you were to
> compare a single Core 2 Quad vs. a similarly clocked quad core Xeon
> 5300 on a very similar platform, the Xeon would probably be a small
> amount faster due to the higher bus speed.
>
> If you were to compare two dual-core Xeon 5100 chips to a single
> quad-core Core 2 Quad, then the Xeon would require a very different
> platform. It would almost certainly use a server-class motherboard
> using a server-class chipset, and these days that would probably mean
> FB-DDR memory. This would probably result in a slight loss in
> performance when compared to the desktop performance. At a guess I
> would say that the single Core 2 Quad would be about 3-5% faster on
> average, though it will vary from one application to the next. On the
> other hand, your server Xeon 5100 system could probably handle 4 times
> as much memory, support much higher bandwidth add-in cards and, most
> importantly, have all the reliability and support features typical of
> servers but not of desktops.

One final note, server boards usually support EDAC (or ECC if you like)
error correcting memory. That might be a big benefit in some
applications, to warn on memory issues rather than silently fail.

Good explanation, Tony.

--
Bill Davidsen
He was a full-time professional cat, not some moonlighting
ferret or weasel. He knew about these things.
 >> Stay informed about: Difference Between Intel Server and Desktop CPUs