The Intel Xeon W-3175X Review: 28 Unlocked Cores, $2999
by Ian Cutress on January 30, 2019 9:00 AM ESTTest Bed and Setup
As per our processor testing policy, we take a premium category motherboard suitable for the socket, and equip the system with a suitable amount of memory running at the manufacturer's maximum supported frequency. This is also typically run at JEDEC subtimings where possible. It is noted that some users are not keen on this policy, stating that sometimes the maximum supported frequency is quite low, or faster memory is available at a similar price, or that the JEDEC speeds can be prohibitive for performance. While these comments make sense, ultimately very few users apply memory profiles (either XMP or other) as they require interaction with the BIOS, and most users will fall back on JEDEC supported speeds - this includes home users as well as industry who might want to shave off a cent or two from the cost or stay within the margins set by the manufacturer. Where possible, we will extend out testing to include faster memory modules either at the same time as the review or a later date.
We changed Intel's reference system slightly from what they sent us, for parity. We swapped out the storage for our standard SATA drive (mostly due to issues with the Optane drive supplied), and put in our selection of GPUs for testing.
| Xeon W-3175X System As Tested | |
| Item | |
| CPU | Intel Xeon W-3175X |
| CPU Cooler | Asetek 690LX-PN |
| Motherboard | ASUS Dominus Extreme |
| Memory | 6 x 8GB Samsung DDR4-2666 RDIMM |
| Storage | Crucial MX200 1TB |
| Video Card | Sapphire RX 460 2GB for CPU MSI GTX 1080 Gaming 8GB for Gaming |
| Chassis | Anidees AI Crystal XL AR |
| Power Supply | EVGA 1600W T2 Titanium |
Other systems tested followed our usual testing procedure.
| Test Setups | |||||
| Intel HEDT | i9-9980XE i9-7980XE |
ASRock X299 OC Formula |
P1.40 | TRUE Copper |
Crucial Ballistix 4x4GB DDR4-2666 |
| AMD TR4 | TR2 2970WX TR2 2920X |
ASUS ROG X399 Zenith |
1501 | Enermax Liqtech TR4 |
Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 4x8GB DDR4-2933 |
| TR2 2990WX TR2 2950X |
ASUS ROG X399 Zenith |
0508 | Enermax Liqtech TR4 |
G.Skill FlareX 4x8GB DDR4-2933 |
|
| EPYC SP3 | EPYC 7601 | GIGABYTE MW51-HP0 |
F1 | Enermax Liqtech TR4 |
Micron LRDIMMs 8x128GB DDR4-2666 |
| GPU | Sapphire RX 460 2GB (CPU Tests) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming 8G (Gaming Tests) |
||||
| PSU | Corsair AX860i Corsair AX1200i |
||||
| SSD | Crucial MX200 1TB | ||||
| OS | Windows 10 x64 RS3 1709 Spectre and Meltdown Patched |
||||
| VRM Supplimented with SST-FHP141-VF 173 CFM fans | |||||
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
136 Comments
View All Comments
Yorgos - Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - link
it's not only program dependent, it's also scheduler dependent.It is found that the windows scheduler doesn't treat TR very well and throttles it down.(ref. L1T)
MattZN - Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - link
Yup, in a nutshell. When Microsoft finally fixes that scheduler issue all of these sites will have to rerun their benchmarks. While it won't run away on performance, the results will start to look more like they should given the HW capabilities. Not a problem for me with Linux but its kinda amusing that Windows users are so beholden to bugs like these and even the professional reviewers get lost when there isn't a convenient UI button that explains what is going on.-Matt
mapesdhs - Saturday, February 2, 2019 - link
Is that the same issue as the one referring to running on core zero? I watched a video about it recently but I can't recall if it was L1T or elsewhere.jospoortvliet - Sunday, February 3, 2019 - link
it is that issue yes. blocking use of core is a work-around that kind'a works.jospoortvliet - Sunday, February 3, 2019 - link
(in some workloads, not all)Coolmike980 - Monday, February 4, 2019 - link
So here's my thing: Why can't we have good benchmarks? Nothing here on Linux, and nothing in a VM. I'd be willing to be good money I could take a 2990, run Linux, run 5 VM's of 6 cores each, run these benchmarks (the non-gpu dependent ones), and collectively beat the pants off of this CPU under any condition you want to run it. Also, this Civ 6 thing - the only benchmark that would be of any value would be the CPU one, and they've been claiming to want to make this work for 2 years now. Either get it working, or drop it altogether. Rant over. Thanks.FlanK3r - Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - link
where is CinebenchR15 results? In testing methology is it, but in results I can not find it :)MattsMechanicalSSI - Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - link
der8auer did a delid video, and a number of CB runs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aD9B-uu8At8 Also, Steve at GN has had a good look at it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N29jTOjBZrwMattZN - Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - link
@MattsMechanicalSSI Yup... both are very telling.I give the 3175X a pass on DDR connectivity (from the DerBauer video) since he's constantly having to socket and unsocket the chip, but I agree with him that there should be a carrier for a chip that large. Depending on the user to guess the proper pressure is a bad idea.
But, particularly the GN review around 16:00 or so where we see the 3175X pulling 672W at the wall (OC) for a tiny improvement in time over the 2990WX. Both AMD and Intel goose these CPUs, even at stock, but the Intel numbers are horrendous. They aren't even trying to keep wattages under control.
The game tests are more likely an issue with the windows scheduler (ala Wendel's work). And the fact that nobody in their right mind runs games on these CPUs.
The Xeon is certainly a faster CPU, but the price and the wattage cost kinda make it a non-starter. There's really no point to it, not even for professional work. Steve (GN) kinda thinks that there might be a use-case with Premier but... I don't really. At least not for the ~5 months or so before we get the next node on AMD (and ~11 months for Intel).
-Matt
mapesdhs - Saturday, February 2, 2019 - link
Cinebench is badly broken at this level of cores, it's not scaling properly anymore. See:https://www.servethehome.com/cinebench-r15-is-now-...