Jruel2

The only overclocking programs that come to mind are Throttlestop, CPU-Tweaker, SetFSB and Ai Overclock Tuner(Asus). I'm sure more exist but a little searching would be needed, if I think of anymore I'll post them. 

They probably won't do anything at all  but it could be worth a shot. Not even sure if SetFSB would work with any current architecture. 

moviemanxs

All the quoted programs you mentioned could be usefull for boards with bios that "don't" have OC'ing options but the SR-X and the Asus board do have these options.
The issue is that by raising the BCLK you raise the entire PCI Buss and once you cross app 105 things go bad fast.
What is needed is a way to isolate the BCLK from the rest of the PCI Buss but everyone I've talked to says they've tried all the tricks and got butkus( nothing)
EXCEPT one guy and I think he not I should be the one to show what he'd done..

cateno 

in RE4 and X79 classi  blck 135 and higher no trouble the I7 intel  no have impleted the  blck restriction lga1155 , the xeons have this maximum 107 108 blck and multi blocked , end of 2012 possible serie K and X , for xeons and nice SRX at this time 

cateno

SRX next week   in my home and hope bios reconized my Xeons 8C

shadow001

It's mostly because with the SR-X, aside from the price of the motherboard and that of the higher end 8 core Xeon's wich aren't exactly cheap even if they are the best performing ones, don't get the advantage of "free" performance by overclocking the processors, so the SR-X is just like any other dual socket motherboard made by tyan or supermicro or asus.

Without that bonus what's the point of it, though i was surprised by the relatively low price of the 16 core AMD interlagos(dual 8 core bulldozers), wich top out at 1200$ each for the fastest version, so if the idea is to use software that can scale to 64 threads, and one can't overclock either the interlagos or the intel E2690 Xeon 8 cores, i wouldn't proclaim a victor in advance given there's 32 extra cores with the AMD option.

8 core sandy bridge E Xeon's are good but twice as fast as a bulldozer they are not in order to overcome that much of a disadvantage, and either option is close to the same price, but you get 2 processors from intel(16 cores/32 threads) and almost 4 processors from AMD(64 cores/64 threads) 

CyberstormXIII ...  you would probably be much better of creating 2 or more computers with dual xeon e5's instead - if you needed that much processing power - at least hardware wise, you would get much more processing power that way (if you properly factor in the cost of the windows server operating systems).