Xeon E3110 or C2D E8400?

W

WiLLiSTER

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Messages
2,702
I was about 3 minutes away from placing an order on an E8400 when I saw that the E3110 is the same speed, but quad and about $10 cheaper. Would it have any real advantage over the 8400 or should I just spend that extra $10. I'm going to overclock a little bit, but I'm not going to try to push past 4ghz.
 
if you're just going to be gaming go with the dual core.

if you're going to be folding a lot go with the quad core.
 
The E3110 is dual core, not quad core. The E3110 is the Xeon counterpart of the E8400, and they are essentially the same chip. Both are dual core. I'd grab whichever one was cheaper.
 
I hear the E3110 retail from tankguys for $214 is a hot item right now as the batch code (Q807A091) they have OCs really well.
 
Are they interchangable and will the E3110 work in all motherboards?
 
Met-AL said:
Are they interchangable and will the E3110 work in all motherboards?
Click to expand...

The E3110 will work in any Socket 775 motherboard that supports the 45nm Core 2 duo chips. Simply put: if your motherboard works with an E8400, then the E3110 will work--they are essentially the same chip.
 
Ah, sorry about that. I could have sworn I read quad when I was looking at it.

Well then, I suppose my question now is will it oc like the 8400 then if its essentially the same thing? If so I may as well save a little bit of money and get that.

sofarfrome said:
I hear the E3110 retail from tankguys for $214 is a hot item right now as the batch code (Q807A091) they have OCs really well.
Click to expand...

$187.99 for oem with a code for an additional $7.99 with google checkout, bringing it to a meer $180 compared to the $200 E8400 at td.
 
But the retail version seems to be the better OCing chip. For me it is worth the extra $34 to get a potentially better OCing CPU. On XS someone has the same batch at 4.27GHz with 1.296vcore. That is excellent.
 
sofarfrome said:
But the retail version seems to be the better OCing chip. For me it is worth the extra $34 to get a potentially better OCing CPU. On XS someone has the same batch at 4.27GHz with 1.296vcore. That is excellent.
Click to expand...

The overclockability of these chips is going to vary from batch-to-batch. Luckily with a boxed retail version of either the E3110 or the E8400 you'll have the batch number on the box. So if there's a hot batch, then you can try to get a chip from said batch--like the tankguys deal you mentioned earlier.

Generally speaking, the Xeon chips are higher-binned versions of their mainstream counterparts, so it would stand to reason the Xeon chips might conceivably have an OC advantage, though I doubt the Xeon E3110 chips will consistently out-OC the E8400, and vice versa. There are always going to be better OCing chips in some batches whether they are Xeon or Core 2 Duo.
 
I have a Xeon E3110 that I purchased from excaliberpc.com and I have it running at 4.0ghz with 1.3 vcore. My ram is holding me back but it can go higher :D batch code (q746a545)
 
bicycle_wreck said:
The E3110 will work in any Socket 775 motherboard that supports the 45nm Core 2 duo chips. Simply put: if your motherboard works with an E8400, then the E3110 will work--they are essentially the same chip.
Click to expand...

While they are the same chips, some boards that support the E8400 don't support the Xeon E3110. Most higherend boards do, but not often officially. While basically identical, it has a different microcode than the E8400 (although boards falling into this category should be rectified come next BIOS update). Check around forums/google if your board will work with it.
 
bicycle_wreck said:
The overclockability of these chips is going to vary from batch-to-batch. Luckily with a boxed retail version of either the E3110 or the E8400 you'll have the batch number on the box. So if there's a hot batch, then you can try to get a chip from said batch--like the tankguys deal you mentioned earlier.

Generally speaking, the Xeon chips are higher-binned versions of their mainstream counterparts, so it would stand to reason the Xeon chips might conceivably have an OC advantage, though I doubt the Xeon E3110 chips will consistently out-OC the E8400, and vice versa. There are always going to be better OCing chips in some batches whether they are Xeon or Core 2 Duo.
Click to expand...

What I meant was the retail version at Tankguys is the better OCing chip than the OEM version at Tankguys because of its batch code, not because it is a retail version. And there is NO proof anywhere that indicates the Xeons are higher binned than the desktop version. The only apparent difference is the microcode that identifies it as a Xeon. I have used no less than 10 xeons in recent years with the same batch codes as their desktop counterparts and none OC'd any better than the desktop versions.
 
astyler said:
While they are the same chips, some boards that support the E8400 don't support the Xeon E3110. Most higherend boards do, but not often officially. While basically identical, it has a different microcode than the E8400 (although boards falling into this category should be rectified come next BIOS update). Check around forums/google if your board will work with it.
Click to expand...

So far I have heard of no board supporting the E8400 and not the E3110. The only issue I am aware of (I had this happen to me) is the Asus boards will not recognize the X3350 (same as the Q9450) but it has nothing to do with the microcode difference, it is the C1 vs C0 revision as the boards don't recognize the Q9450 either. And interestingly enough the boards still boot and perform fine.
 
astyler said:
While they are the same chips, some boards that support the E8400 don't support the Xeon E3110. Most higherend boards do, but not often officially. While basically identical, it has a different microcode than the E8400 (although boards falling into this category should be rectified come next BIOS update). Check around forums/google if your board will work with it.
Click to expand...

This is the first I've heard of this problem. :( Do you have a link?

sofarfrome said:
What I meant was the retail version at Tankguys is the better OCing chip than the OEM version at Tankguys because of its batch code, not because it is a retail version.
Click to expand...

I know what you meant, and I thought I pretty much backed you up in my post. :confused:

sofarfrome said:
And there is NO proof anywhere that indicates the Xeons are higher binned than the desktop version.
Click to expand...

These newer Xeons supposedly have higher T-junction deltas. They can withstand more heat?

sofarfrome said:
I have used no less than 10 xeons in recent years with the same batch codes as their desktop counterparts and none OC'd any better than the desktop versions.
Click to expand...

I agree, and that's exactly what I said in my post. :confused:
 
"there is no proof the xeons are higher binned" and I do agree.

Just let me tell you they clock very well although :D



max fsb @540 x 8.5

http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=331019

max overclock at 532 x 9




this with an asus P5K-C on AIR cooling ( TRUE 120 )

1.59v real for 4.78 ghz to vista desktop .

actually running at 3.6 ghz 24/7 with 1.16v load orthos stable

can bench 3Dmark 06 @4.5 gh AIR .



no difference to me in games .

run smoothly under COD4, crysis .

Works too with P5E and asus maximus formula but I prefer P35 , X38 very messy with my G-skill PC6400 ( no boot / vdimm undervolted )

still confident with X48 , seems very good too for high fsb .

regards
 
Like you, I haven't noticed that much difference between 3.6GHz and 4GHz, the only difference being a higher required vcore to run stable at 4GHz and maybe a couple more frames in games. 3.6 is fast enough it seems.. although thats not the [H] way! :p
 
skizzled said:
Like you, I haven't noticed that much difference between 3.6GHz and 4GHz, the only difference being a higher required vcore to run stable at 4GHz and maybe a couple more frames in games. 3.6 is fast enough it seems.. although thats not the [H] way! :p
Click to expand...

yes , most people are enthousiast getting easier 4 ghz on air with those wolfies than with allendale/conroe .

as targeting the higher fsb is most part of fun than really much better . You 'll get better results in memory bandwith benches like everest or sandra sisoft but for daily apps or games , I bet you don't see any difference .

What I'm looking for is the lower vcore.

I recommend too not to brutalize those chips with long prime sessions .

I now just run some OCCT for 1 or 2 hours , and some 3d benches ( 3dmark 06 / aquamark 03) then test in games for daily use .Not same as I did for my former conroe with hours and hours of dual prime ...
 
There is a thread on XS about possible degradation - several people needed to increase vcore to get same stability under orthos or occt

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=179965&highlight=degradation

Don't forget those chips are new and we don't know so much about them like 65 nanos .

so you can think differently but IMO it is no more my way to stress with a hammer this cpu . Running fine with games and apps you daily use should be enough without BSOD or others issues .

I talk to several people who claimed stability under hours of prime and finally aren't stable actually .. and I too found stability with one and not other

my conroe was stable after + 24 h dual prime half and one year ago .

a week ago I run occt for just 2 hours and my rig failed .. ( it was prime stable )

so IMO , there is no reason to push it because no stress sessions would tell me it is stable for 100 %. and you can spend hours days or months doing it with orthos , occt , cpu stress MT , you can fail once . if not one day the other .and you see some people run small fft when others choose large fft or blend protocol , so if you were in such quest for stability it would be logical to run the 3 tests hmm ? and I 'm almost sure most of people who are stable at one aren't under the other one unless they ran all of them without a pb.

you can see very fast too if you are not stable with small fft or occt ( in 5/10 minutes you fail, those tests are more stressing than any daily appz or heavy games you could run . )

so if your rig is stable everyday for your daily use ( games , encoding, etc ) , is the best proof to me .

But I too respect people who think the other way , not the pb . ;)

and I got this xeon for 2 months now and no bsod at that volt for 3.6 ghz , yes it is surely safe at that voltage .

don't forget about electro migration too , it is not because people have water or else for lowering temps that they are safe with higher voltage or stress , it doesn't change the fact your cpu takes thoses volts .

Regards
 
But by making that whole argument, aren't you essentially arguing against overclocking and/or things like folding, which constantly stress the CPU?
 
of course not !

I'm talking for my personal use of overclocked cpu .

do you think I 'd be member of such forums( ocforum/ xtremsystems and others ) lol

I just think we should be careful with those new cpu's

don't forget I validate my 4 ghz E6600 here too with +8hours priming . :p
 
Obviously if you're here, it's not because you underclock. ;)

I was just trying to get clarification. Your point then is that, until the 45nm cores go through a couple of series, we should not push on them too hard? It's a difficult position given that so far the 8400s and 3110s are going like gangbusters, often on very little voltage. Going then to say that 8 hours of prime would be unnecessarily pushing it doesn't bode well for the folder, video encoder, or hardcore gamer who is planning on a 10 hour Crysis binge.
 
The point is that we don't know how well these chips hold up at 4GHz+ and over 1.4V. They could all catastrophically fail after 8 months of heavy use for all we know. 3.6GHz is an easier clock to hit, you don't need to up the voltage, and you can run RAM at 1:1 with the FSB @ 400MHz. If you want 3.8GHz at the same FSB, get an e8500.

That said, running at 4GHz+ for everyday use probably won't degrade the life of the chip significantly as long as it's kept within specification for max voltage and temperature.
 
I grabbed an OEM E3110 from tankguys over the E8400. As long as it hits ~3.5-4G, I'll be happy.
 
Gillbot said:
I grabbed an OEM E3110 from tankguys over the E8400. As long as it hits ~3.5-4G, I'll be happy.
Click to expand...
I don't think you could be unhappy ;)

-=Antimatter=- said:
The point is that we don't know how well these chips hold up at 4GHz+ and over 1.4V. They could all catastrophically fail after 8 months of heavy use for all we know. 3.6GHz is an easier clock to hit, you don't need to up the voltage, and you can run RAM at 1:1 with the FSB @ 400MHz. If you want 3.8GHz at the same FSB, get an e8500.

That said, running at 4GHz+ for everyday use probably won't degrade the life of the chip significantly as long as it's kept within specification for max voltage and temperature.
Click to expand...

I'm on the same way .

You could uncheck BTW auto vcore since most often mobo will overvolt it.

Set to auto mine is around 1.25 v and as you can see my 3.6 ghz is stable with only 1.16v load - everyone shoud test it before let autovcore.

running 4ghz is not risky IMO with 1.35v max with xeon I mean and good cooling.

what differs from E8400 is vidrange and maybe they get hotter at same clocks but they are great overclockers .

Looking for gem which may be able to run 4 ghz with less than 1.22 v load 24/7 :)

Hope I can post some good results when my new xeon arrive .

edit: IMO E8500 is not worth the price for such little difference between E8400.

I fI were to choose a penryn , I ' go for E8300 to come ( 2.8 ghz and estimated price 130/140 USD )
 
Aelfgeft said:
Obviously if you're here, it's not because you underclock. ;)

I was just trying to get clarification. Your point then is that, until the 45nm cores go through a couple of series, we should not push on them too hard? It's a difficult position given that so far the 8400s and 3110s are going like gangbusters, often on very little voltage. Going then to say that 8 hours of prime would be unnecessarily pushing it doesn't bode well for the folder, video encoder, or hardcore gamer who is planning on a 10 hour Crysis binge.
Click to expand...

Finally you got me huuh ;)

but the last prime for hours , needed to valid here eh eh



new baby 4ghz @1.20 vcore

cheers
 
I have a E3110 watercooled running 4.1GHz everyday use 1.33v.

Nice and speedy.
 
Dragon Heart said:
I don't think you could be unhappy ;)
Click to expand...

Well, you'd be incorrect. :(

I must have gotten the dud...

Tried 500x7, 8 and 9 at up to 1.35v and get nothing. Backed it down to 475 and tried the same, nothing, 450 nope, 425 nope, 400 nope, 350 NOPE!?! I booted in at 333 or a measly 3.0GHz. Yep, stock. FAIL!
 
Gillbot said:
Well, you'd be incorrect. :(

I must have gotten the dud...

Tried 500x7, 8 and 9 at up to 1.35v and get nothing. Backed it down to 475 and tried the same, nothing, 450 nope, 425 nope, 400 nope, 350 NOPE!?! I booted in at 333 or a measly 3.0GHz. Yep, stock. FAIL!
Click to expand...

there is something weird

what mobo do you have ?

I think you can't go wrong with Xeon /penryn running with intel P35.

tried X38 ( asus P5E and maximus formula and got lot of issues booting or ram related. no luck for me as other owners success with such combos , but I don't like complicated bios settings so ..
 
MSI Neo2-FR

I finally got it up at 4GHz, it just took a bit more vcore than i was comfortable with. 1.3875v but it's about an hour into orthos and running ok so far at 9x445 though core temp is reporting both cores at 69-72°C.
 
Gillbot said:
about 12°c lower.
Click to expand...

as expected .

you got same load temps than my Q807 , that is weird even if reported 10° lower in real temp for 4 ghz

My Q746 reaches 55° full under prime and it is with the same cooling TRUE120

26° idle vs 55° on the same board tssss ( asus P5K premium black pearl ed)

I can't even boot at higer clocks since I get warning mess " cpu survoltage " and stucked at post . report temps are 86° idle on cpu tssssssssss crap .

I'm suspecting it is not only bad temps report but IHS concave .

I was seriously thinking to lap this one but bye for warranty .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top