AnandTech Home IT Portal Home Increase Font Size Decrease Font Size Change Page Size
Quad Core Intel Xeon 53xx Clovertown
Quad Core Intel Xeon 53xx Clovertown
Date: December 27th, 2006
Topic: IT Computing
Manufacturer: Intel
Author: Johan De Gelas
Buy the Intel Xeon 5345 E5345 2.33GHz QuadCore
Blank
 
 

Introduction

The Xeon 5160 (a.k.a. Woodcrest) is probably the best server chip Intel has made in the past decade. It delivers high IPC, high (3GHz) clock speed and a surprising low 80W TDP for a dual core design. But Intel's engineers saw that the fastest Woodcrest could score twice for Intel, in a slightly different form... or should we say package. Lower the voltage of a 3GHz from about 1.21 V to slightly less than 1.1V and you can only achieve 2.33GHz. However by running at 2.33GHz and 1.1V, Intel was able to cut the TDP in half. Now place two of these low voltage Xeons in one package and you get a 2.33GHz quad core Xeon and an 80W TDP. This is the essence of the CPU that bears the codename "Clovertown".



The quad core Xeon runs at less than 1.1V

The really weird thing about all this is that Intel sells those two Xeon 5160 chips with lower voltage for the same price as one of the higher clocked chips. A 2.33GHz quad core Xeon DP costs the same as a 3GHz dual core Xeon DP ($851), and a 1.86GHz quad core will cost as much as a 2.66GHz dual core. In other words, Intel is willing to give one chip "for free" just to "ignite the quad core era".

Intel is also trading in (theoretically almost 30%) single threaded performance for more multi-threaded processing power while keeping the power envelope the same. It is not as radical as Sun's T1, but the philosophy behind it is more or less the same. Is it a good bet? Well, being first to market with a quad core x86 product will probably make a big impact. It should be especially interesting for HPC and rendering applications. If you need the power of four cores in a blade server, the 65nm Clovertown or Xeon 53xx is the ideal CPU for the very crammed, "hard-to-cool" housing.

The Xeon 53xx - with the appropriate BIOS update - should have drop-in capability in 5000(x) based chipset boards. The availability of Xeon 53xx generates some very interesting choices for the server buyer. With 8 cores on a dual socket system, can it replace the more expensive quad socket systems such as those based on the Opteron 8 series or the recently launched Xeon 71xx CPUs? Should you go for a high clocked dual core Xeon or a lower clocked quad core Xeon? The "standard" answer is that it depends on the application, but that answer is boring and hardly informative. In this article we will try to give an answer to these questions as they apply to Rendering, OpenSSL, Java, SAP and MySQL applications. Jason and Ross are busy with the SQL Server benchmarks, so you can expect even more benchmarks soon.

Quad Core Choices   Next Page

 
  Index

Tools Share
Find lowest prices Find the lowest prices
Digg   del.icio.us   E-mail  
Print This Article Print this article  

15 Comments - Last by Antinomy, 990 days ago
Username:
Password:
Excellent Review by Viditor, 1059 days ago
Probably one of your most thorough and well-rounded articles Johan...many thanks!
It was nice to see you working with large (16GB) memory.
If you do get a Socket F system, will you be updating the article?

Reply
Excellent Article! by rowcroft, 1059 days ago
Loved the article, great job.

I'm in the process of purchasing two dual quad core servers for VMWare use. Looking at the cost to performance analysis, it would be worth mentioning that many of the high end applications are licensed on a per socket basis. This alone is saving us $20,000 on our VMWare license and making it a compelling solution.

I would love to see more of this type of article as well- very interesting and not something you can easily find elsewhere on the net. (Tom's hardware reviewed the chip running XP Pro!)

Reply
RE: Excellent Article! by duploxxx, 1057 days ago
If you think that reading this review will help you to decide what to buy as VMWARE base you are going the wrong way! Yes these small tests are in favor for the new MCW architecture as we saw before and since haevy workload seems hard to test for some sites like anand! keep in mind that VMWARE is heavy workload, you combine the cpu and ram to whatever you want, guess what the fsb can't be combined like you wish!

thinking that a 2x quad will outperform the 4p opteron is a big laugh! the fsb will kill youre whole ESX instantly from 4+ os on your system with normal load.

the money you save is indeed for sure, the power you loose is an other thing!

friendly info from a certified esx 3.0 beta tester :)


Reply
Good Review by ltcommanderdata, 1059 days ago
Well it's nice to finally see a review of the 5145, although I was hoping for more detailed power consumption numbers. The performance benchmarks were very detailed though which was great.

Thought I would point out a few errors I noticed as I was flipping through. First on page 2, in the Cache2Cache Latency chart the 201 for the Xeon DP 5060 that is placed in the "Same die, same package" row should be in the "Different die, same package" row. Dempsey uses a dual die approach like Presler and Cloverton as opposed to a single die approach like Smithfield and Paxville DP. And in the last page in the conclusion, you mentioned Clarksboro having "four DIBs", which implies 8 FSBs. I believe that should read two DIBs or really a Quad Independent Bus (QIB) since I'm pretty sure it only has 4 FSBs. (On a side note, Intel slides showed those 4 FSBs clocked at 1066MHz which is really disappointing. Hopefully, now that Cloverton turns out to come in 1333MHz versions instead of only 1066MHz versions that was first announced, Tigerton (and therefore Clarksboro) which is based on Cloverton will also have 1333MHz versions.)

Reply
RE: Good Review by Khato, 1059 days ago
Agreed on it being quite the good review, save for the lack of power consumption numbers/analysis. Form factor and power consumption can be just as important as the performance when the application can be spread across multiple machines, now can't it? At the very least, it would be nice to link to the power consumption numbers for the opteron platform in the first review it showed up in (which puts the dual clovertown at 365W load, while the quad 880 is supposedly 657W load.)

Reply
RE: Good Review by zsdersw, 1057 days ago
quote:

as opposed to a single die approach like Smithfield and Paxville DP


Smithfield/Paxville is a MCM chip (two pieces of silicon in one package), as well.

Reply
i would like to see a comparison against a single quadcore x6800 using ecc by hans007, 1059 days ago
i think an alternative to say a dual dual core AMD though even as a server or workstation is say a quad core socket 775 cpu. I know the lower 3xxx series xeons are made for this (and are exactly the same as core 2 duo) so

you could do a comparison of 2 amd dual cores vs a single 775 quad with ECC ddr2 etc.

Reply
RE: i would like to see a comparison against a single quadcore x6800 using ecc by mino, 1058 days ago
Check QuadFX vs. Kentsfield reviews.

With ECC both results will be a bit lower but the conparison remains.

A small hint: NO ONE tested QuadFX as DB server against Kenstfield....

Gues what: Quad FX is cheaper and would rules the roost on server-like tasks.

Reply
Amen by Justin Case, 1059 days ago
Finally a good article at AT, written by someone who knows what he's talking about. Meaningful benchmarks, meaningful comments, and conclusions that make sense. If only some Johanness could rub off on other AT writers...

Reply
socket vs memory count by dropadrop, 1059 days ago
Considering how much we just payed for some DL585's compared to DL380's I think the performance is pretty impressive. There is still something the DL380's (and most other two socket servers) can't do, and that is hosting 64GB or more ram.

I mainly take care of vmware servers, and there the amount of memory becomes a bottleneck long before the processors, atleast in most setups. I don't think I'd have alot of use for octal processors unless I got a minimum of 32GB of ram, probably 64.

Reply
Comments Page 1 of 2

Free Forrester Risk Management Report
Demystifying Enterprise Risk Management. Download Free With Registration.
DOWNLOAD vWire Today - FREE TRIAL
Take Control of Your Virtual Infrastructure. Manage VI Data & Prevent Problems.
Report Unlicensed Business Software Use
Earn Up to $1 Million by Reporting Unlicensed Software Use. Fill Out Our Form!
Download Microsoft Visual Studio ® Team System
Streamline Dev processes, Reduce time to market. Try Microsoft Visual Studio Team System, FREE!
Supermicro Barebone Servers
We Carry Everything Supermicro. Low Price, Top Service, FREE Shipping, and more.




Latest news by
DailyTech

 November 20, 2009

Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank

 November 19, 2009

Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank




pipeboost
Copyright © 1997-2009 AnandTech, Inc. All rights reserved. Terms, Conditions and Privacy Information.
Click Here for Advertising Information