For comparaison:
 

http://forum.coolaler.com/showthread.php?t=270808
 
My score:) :

If you whant calculate the dual octo SB E score at 4.9 ....
 
Real need DIRECT CPU PCIE lignes, not NF300.
And 16 dimm, hhmmm Like it :)
 
 

shadow001
As for the 8 core Xeon versions coming out in a few months, keep in mind that they're going to be expensive(DUH), and that going from 12 cores/24 threads(maximum on the SR2) to 16 cores/32 threads is not a 50% increase in CPU power...It's a bit just over 30% more.

Don't forget that since the architecture is changing, the clock-for-clock performance goes up.  Even for a test comparing 980X with 3930K (both at 3.2GHz 6c-12t), it averages between 10-30% in fully multi-threaded apps.  So with additonal cores, the scale could be as much as 70% for the 8c-16t CPU.  40% seems like a good average, clock-for-clock, between a 6c-12t Westmere-EP and 8c-12t Sandy Bridge-EP.  Is it worth the dollars to upgrade?  That's not up to me.

massdestructor
But I'm a bit skeptical with this screen shots, how it is possible that the Xeon version of the i7-3960X (that is exactly the same die with 2 cores disabled and some L3 cache also disabled) gets better IPC per core, may be because the more available L3 cache?

Do you have a link of a Xeon E5-1660 doing so?
 
In general, that's like despite the similar CUDA core count from certain Quadro to GeForce models, the Quadro card can do better in professional apps than a consumer card; so a "Xeon" isn't just a different brand same of the same die, spec or features. Some aspect of the program or driver must use the Xeon differently, something has to set at least the single-socket variants apart to keep customers from settling on [often cheaper] "Core" branded systems.

Hello, EVGA Classified SR2 (and next version)  is working to one processor ?

thanks

shadow001

Impressive score at 3 Ghz even, but my main question is what will it take to cool down a pair of 8 core Xeon's to 4.5 Ghz + before we start dreaming about how high it can go in cinebench 11.5.....I mean are we talking a cooling setup simply to break a record or something that has to be stable and usable day in and day out, all year round?

I thought you cant overclock the Xeons?

emach

shadow001

Impressive score at 3 Ghz even, but my main question is what will it take to cool down a pair of 8 core Xeon's to 4.5 Ghz + before we start dreaming about how high it can go in cinebench 11.5.....I mean are we talking a cooling setup simply to break a record or something that has to be stable and usable day in and day out, all year round?

I thought you cant overclock the Xeons?

How do you think K|ngP|n and TiN gets the world records in 3D Mark benches?

I don't know much about the LGA2011 Xeons, but if they're anything like the LGA2011 Sandy Bridge E, then baseclock OC'ing might be limited. I think, from what I've read so far, that BCLK with SB-E isn't quite as rigid as with regular Sandy Bridge but it seems logical that, being based off the same architecture, the BCLK still wouldn't be as flexible as LGA1366. Thus overclocks might be somewhat limited.
 
And I don't think Intel will release an unlocked "K" or "X" Xeon as the market for them would be too small. I'm sure the development team for the SR-X would have taken this into consideration if this was an issue though.

sorry if sound nob why only 2 processor why not use 4 processor ?
 

Why not 4 processors? It's simple really. Only high-end servers need that much power for one. Also can you imagine finding a case for a motherboard *that* big? :P

anony-moose

Why not 4 processors? It's simple really. Only high-end servers need that much power for one. Also can you imagine finding a case for a motherboard *that* big? :P

 
 
Not just that, but the cost of 4 Xeons at a 1000$+ a pop and the amount of power it would need once fully assembled with high end video cards onboard, as many households use 15 amp breakers at 120 volts for their wall outlets, and that's shared between many outlets not just 1.
 
In any case, that totals 1800 watts of power, hence why in practical real world terms, we'll never see single power supplies beyond 1500 watts, since they're not 100% efficient converting A/C to D/C power, but usually around 85%, meaning it's pulling practically all that power from the wall socket to get those 1500 watts D/C continous produced to the PC (1725 watts A/C).
 
In other words, to get even more power requires even higher rated breakers and maybe even larger caliber electrical wiring depending on how old the home is, or operating your PC in the garage since the breakers there are usually 20 amps(2400 watts), since contractors figure that if you're going to use power tools for renovations( power hungry since they have large electrical motors), you'll be working in the garage anyhow...
 
Another option, and if you don't cook at home and have no use for your oven, is to use that circuit since it has it's own dedicated 40 amp circuit(4800 watts A/C)....Ovens produce heat to cook food, so they'll use a lot of power in the process...
 
My setup is right at the limit of the breaker, since i once had it running a benchmark at full load that takes some time to complete, and used a small compact vacuum cleaner in the living room just to clean up, and within seconds of turning it on the breaker popped, shutting down the PC as well...That's when i found out that the breaker is shared between the socket the vacuum is connected, and the socket used to power the PC up...The hard way 
 
So 4 processor motherboards, heck no as i'd need to rewire the house for higher electrical currrent first...  

fayzacantik
sorry if sound nob why only 2 processor why not use 4 processor ?

To a business, they generally get hundreds or thousands of processors when they want to upgrade, so for them motherboards with more sockets is a more effective use of space.  Also the cost is drop in the bucket and more or less made up for in a matter of weeks or months through revenue.
 
Enthusiasts however, most aren't using their systems to pay the bills, so cash is a big issue when you start looking into multi-socket configurations because the CPU's don't generally mix and match.  Intel charges a massive premium for each additional socket: Compare the Recommended Customer Price (bulk MSRP) of the highest end of the 32nm Westmere 1P, 2P and 4P markets.  For just one quad-socket CPU, someone could build an entire SR-2/X rig.  Even the AMD 16-core makes their quad-socket much more appealing despite the performance drop, but there are no overclockable quad-AMD boards anyway.

anony-moose
And I don't think Intel will release an unlocked "K" or "X" Xeon as the market for them would be too small.

Yesterday I would have agreed, but new theories pop up every day:

Well, the rumours say that, encouraged by the unexpected success of the Westmere Xeon 5600 in the OC space, Intel is quite ready to go ahead with unlocked versions of the high end Xeon E5 too. After all, the users of the upcoming EVGA SR-X dual Socket 2011 mainboard, or its likely competitors from Gigabyte or Asus, wouldn’t mind even 250W TDP per socket to get to well above 4 GHz with dual 8-core Xeon E5, backed by 8 memory channels.

 
If a market niche can be cornered, then there is no reason a company wouldn't.  The idea behind demand is that the number of them and what they are willing to pay has to balance.  Intel could be betting unlocked Xeon E5 users are willing to pay for it.

fayzacantik

sorry if sound nob why only 2 processor why not use 4 processor ?

 
As much as I would like to see a quad socket 2011 board from EVGA, I think EVGA will be hard pressed to sell enough boards of this type to justify R&D expenses. If you look at the price tag for an existing 8-core socket 1567 processor, the pricing comes out to ~$2200 for the E7-4830 (up to 4-socket) and $2600 for the E7-8830 (up to 8-socket). You are looking at least $10K just for the board, processors, and some memory which I don't think very many enthusiasts would buy into. However, I'm sure we'll see quad socket boards from server board manufacturers like Supermicro. There will be options out there but without overclocking support in BIOS.

linuxrouter

fayzacantik

sorry if sound nob why only 2 processor why not use 4 processor ?

As much as I would like to see a quad socket 2011 board from EVGA, I think EVGA will be hard pressed to sell enough boards of this type to justify R&D expenses. If you look at the price tag for an existing 8-core socket 1567 processor, the pricing comes out to ~$2200 for the E7-4830 (up to 4-socket) and $2600 for the E7-8830 (up to 8-socket). You are looking at least $10K just for the board, processors, and some memory which I don't think very many enthusiasts would buy into. However, I'm sure we'll see quad socket boards from server board manufacturers like Supermicro. There will be options out there but without overclocking support in BIOS.

 
ECC 1333 memory at that, wich costs a fortune compared to regular unbuffered DDR 3 ram that's available at higher rated speeds for much less money, but when you need to fill up a lot of memory slots to their full capacity, there's no alternative really.