Conclusion

It has been more than three years since the previous generation Xeon E7 hit the market. IBM and Oracle have overtaken the old Xeon E7 since then and an update was long overdue. Since then, Intel has launched two new architectures in the dual socket server CPU market: the Intel E5-2600, based on the "Sandy Bridge" architecture, and the Intel E5-2600 v2 ("Ivy Bridge").

The new Xeon core has already shown its worth in the dual socket Xeon E5-2600 v2 based servers. It is interesting to note that both architecture updates, Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge, although relatively subtle on their own, have increased the integer performance of each individual core by 30%. The many subtle changes also increase the performance/watt, and the excellent 22nm process technology enables a 50% higher core count. The end result is that the general computing performance has doubled in scalable integer applications (SAP) and tripled in floating point applications. There is more.

We are entering the big data era, and the result is a strong and renewed interest in (almost) real-time data mining. One of the prime examples is SAP with the in memory and compressed database platform SAP HANA. Both Microsoft with SQL Server 2014 and IBM with DB2 10.5—with the so called BLU acceleration—are following suit. Therefore, it is likely that there will be a strong demand for a server platform with massive RAM capacity. The new quad socket Xeon servers can offer up to 3TB of RAM with relatively affordable 32GB DIMM technology and no less than 6TB with the ultra-expensive 64GB LR-DIMMs. That is another reason why the Intel Xeon E7 v2 platform will be more attractive than much more expensive RISC servers that are typically limited to 1-2TB.

Overall, Intel's launch of the tried and proven Ivy Bridge cores looks ready to set a new level of performance expectations. Ivy Bridge EX may seem awfully late compared to the IVB and IVB EP releases, but that's typical of this server segment. The Xeon E7 v2 chips are slated to remain in data centers for the next several years as the most robust—and most expensive—offerings from Intel. If you can use more smaller servers instead of a few large servers, that will certainly be more cost effective, but the types of applications typically run on these servers and the demands of the software can frequently make the hardware costs a secondary consideration.

HPC: OpenFoam
Comments Locked

125 Comments

View All Comments

  • Kevin G - Saturday, February 22, 2014 - link

    Not 100% sure since I'm not an IEEE member to view it, but this paper maybe the source for the POWER7+ figures:
    http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?...
  • Phil_Oracle - Monday, February 24, 2014 - link

    TDP is great for comparing chip to chip, but what really matters is system performance/watt. And although Intel's latest Xeon E7 v2 may have better TDP specs than either Power7+ or SPARC T5, when you look at the total system performance/watt, SPARC T5 actually leads today due to its higher throughput, core count, 4 x more threads, built-in encryption engines and higher optimization with the Oracle SW stack.
  • Flunk - Friday, February 21, 2014 - link

    8 core consumer chips now please. If you have to take the GPU off go for it.
  • DanNeely - Friday, February 21, 2014 - link

    Assuming you mean 8 identical cores, until mainstream consumer apps appear that can use more CPU resources than the 4HT cores in Intel's high end consumer chips but which can't benefit from GPU acceleration become common it's not going to happen.

    I suppose Intel could do a big.little type implementation with either core and atom or atom and the super low power 486ish architecture they announced a few months ago in the future. But in addition to thinking it was worthwhile for the power savings, they'd also need to license/work around arm's patents. I suppose a mobile version might happen someday; but don't really see a plausible benefit for laptop/desktop systems that don't need continuous connected standby like phones do.
  • Kevin G - Friday, February 21, 2014 - link

    Intel hasn't announced any distinct plans to go this route, they're at least exploring the idea at some level. The SkyLake and Knights Landing are to support the same ISA extensions and in principle a program could migrate between the two types of cores.
  • StevoLincolnite - Saturday, February 22, 2014 - link

    Er. You don't need apps to use more than 4 threads to make use of an 8 core processor.
    Whatever happened to running several demanding applications at once? Surely I am not the only one who does this...
    My Sandy-Bridge-E processor being a few years old is starting to show it's age in such instances, I would cry tears of blood for an 8-Core Haswell based processor to replace my current 6-core chip.
  • psyq321 - Monday, March 10, 2014 - link

    Well, you can buy bigger Ivy Bridge EP Xeon CPU and fit it in your LGA2011 system.

    This way you can go up to 12 cores and not have to wait for 8-core Haswell E.
  • SirKnobsworth - Friday, February 21, 2014 - link

    8 core Haswell-E chips are due out later this year. You can already buy 6 core Ivy Bridge-E chips with no integrated graphics.
  • TiGr1982 - Friday, February 21, 2014 - link

    Did you know:
    Haswell-E is supposed to be released in Q3 this year, to have up to 8 Haswell cores with HT, fit in the new revision of Socket LGA2011 (incompatible with the current desktop LGA2011), and work with DDR4 and X99 chipset. No GPU there, since it's a byproduct of server Haswell-EP.
  • Harry Lloyd - Friday, February 21, 2014 - link

    That will not help much, unless they release a 6-core chip for around 300 $, replacing the lowest LGA2011 4-core chips. It is about time.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now