Intel Xeon L5639 Hexa(6) Core LGA1366 Price:US $79.80 Used Ebay Seller

Discussion in '[H]ot Deals Discussions' started by primetime, Sep 29, 2013.

  1. Brackle

    Brackle Old Timer

    Messages:
    7,228
    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Well 23 is the turbo multi. So that is why you cant select that multi for all 6 cores.. Now I was able to select 22 multi with no issues. I even used c-state etc while running it.

    This was on an Asus Rampage III Gene with the latest bios.
     
  2. Zoson

    Zoson [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,115
    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2001
    As I mentioned earlier if you have C1E enabled(C states) you cannot use your turbo multiplier. You must disable C1E and speedstep to use the turbo multiplier like a regular one. This trick is from the original i7 920 days where they were using it to get the 21x multiplier so they could do 4.2GHz with 200BCLK on the cheapest CPU available.
     
  3. MN Scout

    MN Scout [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,557
    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2003
    I wish my setup looked even 10% as good as yours. The fan on the NB doesn't distract me at all. Very nice job. I can also understand your unemployment concerns, I'm currently in the same situation.
     
  4. primetime

    primetime [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,012
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2005
    its funny you mention that...on the p6tdeluxv1 was just the opposite ...it had to have all c states enabled for turbo to kick in....i don't use turbo anymore so it doesn't change anything for me now......but thats the way it is/was on the p6tdeluxv1 with the latest bios
     
  5. SkOrPn

    SkOrPn [H]Lite

    Messages:
    64
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    Yeah SpeedStep was his problem, he said he is not willing to run without it, so that means 22 is his max multi (?) and he was not aware of that. If 22 is not one of the standard x5650's Turbo multis why does Intel list 20 as the max multiplier? You have normal multis from 12-20 and then Turbo multis from 21-23, right or wrong? If I can easily change my multi to 22 and still run all 6 cores with HT on, then I think Intel should be advertising that as the max multi.

    Oh wait, Zoson I just re-read your statement above in bold. So, with C1E and SpeedStep disabled, 21, 22 and 23 all become normal multipliers? In other words I should be able to run all 6 cores with HT on, so long I enable Turbo mode? I see many people who can't get 23 to run on all 6 cores, they seem to drop down to 2 cores only or the chip spontaneously drops to the lowest possible multi. lol

    I guess when I find time I am going to play around with it so I can see what happens. I already have a profile saved for this setup anyway.
     
  6. Zoson

    Zoson [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,115
    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2001
    SpeedStep and C1E in conjunction control both power saving and turbo clocking by increasing or lowering CPU voltage and multiplier based on system load.

    C1E enables dynamic C-States - Transitioning between various voltage states on the fly.
    Speedstep enables the ability for the processor to select different clock multipliers on the fly.

    Disabling C1E will prevent the random crashes due to a change in voltage state in response to CPU loading conditions.

    Disabling Speedstep *should* give you the ability to treat the Turbo multiplier like a regular multiplier. It should also make any 'turbo' mode options in your bios disappear or grey out as they will no longer do anything.

    Also lets be real clear here. There's no such thing as limited core clockspeeds on first gen i7's. It's all cores or no cores. Anyone telling you they could reach 23x multiplier on 2 cores and it would drop down on more cores is telling you lies. That's not how first gen turbo works. All your cores always go up and down in multiplier TOGETHER.
     
  7. primetime

    primetime [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,012
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2005
    not calling anyone a lier...but my last 5639 would turbo on 2 cores only IF c states was on....i could see this happening with the osd from afterburner...just saying...now games like bf4 it would not turbo...but older games like stalker it would...i could also force it to happen to set inel burn test to use 2 cores only...and sure enough it would turbo to next multiplier (your board would already be using that multiplier though)

    edit: now if you were referring to the old 920 series....you could be correct....cause i don't remember checking much in those days
     
    Last edited: Jun 16, 2014
  8. Zoson

    Zoson [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,115
    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2001
    You were only *USING* two cores. ALL your cores are turboing. The difference is 2nd gen and up can run different multipliers on different cores. So two cores can be running boosted while the others arn't. This is fact and not up for debate.
     
  9. primetime

    primetime [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,012
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2005
    I was really only trying to commit on this statement....and it more than possible i misunderstood on what you meant by this....on this motherboard with c-states and the power saving stuff on (not speed step) that if i ran an application that only pushed 2 cores that they would reach 4ghz with my 5639 and the other 4 cores would stay at 3200mhz only as to how and why who knows....i always assumed it was the way turbo was designed to work mainly cause the bios was written to work that way do to power limits? idk....
    only beneficial for older applications and or games that only used 2 cores....its possible i was confusing turbo with something else.....but on my board with this bios....i can run 2 of the 6 cores on a faster multiplier If i have all the c states turned on to default and just stress 2 of the cores....if it stress all of them it of course they all stay at the same lower multiplier
    i have zero use for it now since i can barley use the non turbo multis lol but if i was back with the 5639 then i found the turbo to be useful in games like stalker....otherwise i would never hit 4ghz....except like you said setting IBT to use only 2 cores....and those 2 cores would jump to 4ghz

    just sharing my experience...not trying to argue by any means....i could show you the same thing on this chip if you wanted
     
  10. Zoson

    Zoson [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,115
    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2001
    Enough, you seem to have all sorts of totally wrong ideas. You need to actually read up on your cpu and its behavior before posting stuff like this because you're giving bad information to people.

    http://www.intel.com/support/processors/corei7/sb/CS-032279.htm
    "Previous Generation IntelĀ® Core™ i7 Desktop Processors"

    You'll note it says "active cores" and then gives the turbo speed. It has NOTHING to do with individual cores running at different speeds. If you use 1 or 2 cores active, you can go up two bin multipliers. if you're using more than 2, you only get one multiplier bin up. The thing is ALL your cores speed up on first gen core architecture. So even though you're only using 2 cores, all six go up to the higher clockspeed. I feel like a broken record since this is basically exactly what I said before.

    Unlike you, I won't say things unless I can prove it. You might want to take that road instead of just making wild guesses.
     
  11. primetime

    primetime [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,012
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2005
    I only made statements on how it behaves on mine...where you get wild guess from? believe what you want i don't care...really i don't:)

    This is the way it behaves on mine....is this not turbo working?
    [​IMG][/URL][/IMG]
    Using all threads turbo turns off?
    [​IMG][/URL][/IMG]

    fuck if i know?.....i only see what its doing
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2014
  12. Zoson

    Zoson [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,115
    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2001
    Whatever software that is, it's detecting incorrectly. Probably was made for 2nd gen+ and doesn't actually detect individual core multipliers, but rather uses an algorithm to guess which cores are clocking up. It's actually pretty obvious that this software is guessing as your first and last cores are on the same multiplier and bus speed but are supposedly running at two different clockspeeds.

    Simple fact of the matter is there are only two clock domains inside 1st gen Core architecture cpus, core and uncore - which we already went over. This is changed in 2nd gen and up, and if you look at the bios controls of the high end overclocker boards, you can change the multiplier per core.

    Edit: here's an example, just scroll to the bottom and look at the Turbo section:
    http://rog.asus.com/129672012/maximus-motherboards/asus-z77-motherboard-uefi-bios-tuning-guide/
     
  13. primetime

    primetime [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,012
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2005
    oh ok i got ya....never occurred to me the software was reporting it incorrectly...well we learn something every day;)
     
  14. nekrosoft13

    nekrosoft13 [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,456
    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    are those CPUs still available?
     
  15. primetime

    primetime [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,012
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2005
    well yes they are? which one grabbed your interest the most? the 5640 at 90 each was the best value last time i looked.......for max overclock the 5670 is a good choice but at least twice the cost(was more for me) but some got them pretty cheap....some people are just ebay marksman at getting good deals.....so what is your budget?:)
     
  16. r00k

    r00k 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,655
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2004
    Found 4 L5639's for ~100 shipped...

    L5640 for $79.99 shipped
     
  17. msbbc833

    msbbc833 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    320
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2008
    What is the difference between the L series and the X series? Example: L5640 vs X5650? They are roughly the same price and clock speed, same cache, etc.

    Also, what is the best x58 motherboard to use with these processors? Trying to hit 4ghz+
     
  18. primetime

    primetime [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,012
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2005
    X5650 has a higher multiplier, but not by much really...as far as the best motherboard, if money were no issue my vote would be ASUS Rampage III Formula Republic of Gamers, LGA 1366
    I don't think there's any better for 1366 boards.....My p6tdelux v1 works fine but the rampage can and will overclock a bit higher, but with that being said all the asus boards seems to do quite well. This thread has been going for quite some time, and i can't recall any asus users having issues, unlike some of the others including but not limited to evga boards in particular....the only catch is youl need the latest bios for the boards...and this could be an issue if you don't have an older cpu, so you can make sure it has the updated bios. In worse case scenario an [h] member can hook you up with a loaner 920 if needed

    If you can catch a good deal go for the x5650 then 4ghz or above should be easy to achieve......Not to mention there are some real experts here with that same board in case you need assistance:) best of luck! i figure in a couple years time the time could be right to rebuild an 8 core xeon system on the cheap, and at the same time double our cpu power vs. doing a newer side grade for much more money. this is a real fact....even the newest amd 8 core heavily overclocked cpu still cant compete with what were using...this system is and shall be the longest best system i have ever have the pleasure of owning. Not one single regret, not one
     
    Last edited: Jul 2, 2014
  19. SkOrPn

    SkOrPn [H]Lite

    Messages:
    64
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    Anyone know why the R3E will not let me select 21 or 23 multi on my x5650? Gosh I hope this was not answered already. When I type in 21 it automatically puts in 22, and when I type in 23 it does the same. When I type in say 20 or 19 etc it just puts that multi in there as it should do, but not 21 or 23. I have a friend with a R3F and it does the exact same thing with the same x5650 chip. C1E and Speedstep are disabled, full LLC is enabled, and all spread spectrums are disabled as well.

    What does this mean?

    EDIT: Never mind me, it seems the 5650 does not allow odd number multipliers above it advertised specs, and the 5660 does not allow even numbered multis above its advertised specs. If anyone has a 23 multi on their x5650 please let me know what you did to get it to work. I've tried every setting I can think of but 23 multi is not available on my R3E and I already verified this with several other users of Rampage mobos. Why is this happening?
     
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2014
  20. SkOrPn

    SkOrPn [H]Lite

    Messages:
    64
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    I agree completely. However, if I was wealthy I still would not be on this system, it would probably be my media server, lol. But without the wealth, this is by far the longest running system I think I have ever owned. What I think is happening is that for the past 20 years or more systems just did not do things as fast as the human needed them to perform at, and thus we were not satisfied until x58 and 1366 came along. C2D started to give me that feeling like I was getting somewhere finally but it still did not satisfy the need for speed. This however, is snappy, maybe not instant as of yet but still VERY close, close enough to hold onto longer than usual. But, again I think it won't be until Skylake that I may be satisfied. This is actually bad news for the computer industry because I think many people upgrade just for faster equipment, not because they need it. And if that is the case with the way the economy is turning out, as these computers get faster sales will go down. Case in point, between 1995 and about 2010 I built and rebuilt my system anywhere from 2 to 5 times in a single year. NEVER have I had a single system as long as this R3E, NEVER. It is the sheer speed, my ability to tinker and tweak my OS's, and overclock the system and FINALLY throw some solid state at it that is finally getting me to a satisfied level, not to mention that money has become much more valuable to hold onto these days for more important needs.

    If I can never afford to upgrade again I could easily be happy with this R3E until it dies on me. Now the GPU and Monitor is another story all together, lol...
     
  21. primetime

    primetime [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,012
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2005
    it only goes so high and yours is doing as it should......a 5670 only does 22 or 23 for turbo only.....but mine is not 100% stable above 21 anyway...could be luck of the draw...more likely just reaching the limit of the westmere in general in my opinion....but yea 23 multi for a 5650 is never going to happen
     
  22. SkOrPn

    SkOrPn [H]Lite

    Messages:
    64
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    OK, thanks primetime, I was wondering what the heck was going on. I was told, at least I thought that was what I read, that above 20 (21-23) was turbo multis only and that the only way to enable them (or get them to stick) was to disable EIST and C1E.

    I will see what I can do with the 22. Thanks
     
  23. primetime

    primetime [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,012
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2005
    So how is your current setup working out for you? clock speed, memory speed, temps performance that kind of thing....only recent change i have made was putting memory in 1t instead of default 2t.....still passes any and all stability test and gave me a slight boost in benchmarks. I actually have all power saving enabled....c states, speed step, core parking...basically any and all i could find

    Not sure were you live but in North America its peak of summer so any and all measure of reducing temps from the pc the better.....course in the winter it will actually help heat a small room lol

    Truth be told the performance loss of all the power savings is so minimal in my testing it was silly not to use them.....course every board is a little different in that regard

    Bottom line is so many people cant get it thru there head that this cpu/x58 platform still 6 years latter outperforms any and all new cpus except the intel i7 hexacore or above ones....this system has been and still is a tank:D
     
  24. SkOrPn

    SkOrPn [H]Lite

    Messages:
    64
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    Sorry for the lack of updates, but I simply forgot. I did manage to boot into Windows at 22x205, but about three minutes into IBT it crapped out on me. Since I was at 1.35v on both qpi and cpu vcore, I was not will to raise voltage. Dropped down to 200x22 and it completed three 10 run passes of IBT on very high and 24 hours of Prime95. However, as I tried to lower voltage it immediately became unstable, so I dropped bclk some more because I prefer less heat coming from my chip. I noticed that dropping BCLK all the way down to 185 did not lose any Gflops performance, in fact it gained a tiny amount. Now I am at 185x22, 4080 mhz using only 1.30v. Not sure but I think it might go lower on the voltage. Running very nicely and snappier using the higher multi for sure.

    I think I found my 24/7 for now.
     
  25. primetime

    primetime [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,012
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2005
    Thats good to hear...heck 200 mhz wont help really in day to day stuff anyway, and depending on where you live its peak of summer...so the extra heat is not wanted or needed.

    Heres a real world test to determine exactly where were at:
    http://lucca.hardforum.com/rewrite/...881&id=1&match=1&source=none&destination=none


    My results on my 24/7 use settings with all power savings, c states, core parking, speed step enabled for a real honest result....not just a benchmark at above higher than usual settings for trying to score a higher score but a real honest score.

    HandBrake 0.9.9.5530 - 64bit Version
    OS: Microsoft Windows NT 6.2.9200.0
    CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5670 @ 2.93GHz
    Ram: 12279 MB, Screen: 1920x1080

    x264 [info]: using cpu capabilities: MMX2 SSE2Fast SSSE3 SSE4.2
    x264 [info]: profile Main, level 3.0
    [20:10:00] reader: done. 1 scr changes
    [20:10:00] work: average encoding speed for job is 291.156342 fps
     
  26. GonzoP

    GonzoP 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,660
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2006
    Between this thread and the x58 club thread over in Intel you guys have me ready to pull the trigger. I'll stop by there later but these xeon's are certainly tempting and priced right for us original i7 owners to extend our systems another year or two.
     
  27. ssnyder28

    ssnyder28 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,551
    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Exactly, there is more good info on these cpus on teh interwebs too. I generally suggest people buying x58 hex core setups and then spending their perceived savings on the gpu.
     
  28. SkOrPn

    SkOrPn [H]Lite

    Messages:
    64
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    Where is this Intel x58 club you speak of? I went to Intels website and see no such club. Link please?
     
  29. King Icewind

    King Icewind [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,441
    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
  30. vsboxerboy

    vsboxerboy 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,662
    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    I haven't posted it officially, but I'm going to be selling my dual L5639 server w/ 48GB of ram in the Los Angles area if anyone is interested, I'd like to get $600 for it including the supermicro 2U case and a 1TB RE4. PM me if interested, local pickup only.
     
  31. SkOrPn

    SkOrPn [H]Lite

    Messages:
    64
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    Thanks, but he said a club over at Intel site. That is the x58 club here at [H], lol. But I see now what he meant. Thanks
     
  32. ssnyder28

    ssnyder28 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,551
    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Lol as if Intel would allow a club on their site that highlights why EOL cpus are completely viable today and that there is no need to buy new cpus to conflict with their revenue stream.
     
  33. SkOrPn

    SkOrPn [H]Lite

    Messages:
    64
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    My point exactly, I just wanted to see it so I could laugh at such a club, lol...
     
  34. GonzoP

    GonzoP 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,660
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2006
    Yeah $70 for a 5650 and I'm trying to ebay a pair of 7950's for $200. Value at its finest.
    Yeah like below I meant the Intel sub forum linked below
    ^^
    :cool:
    :D

    I'll say it again until this week I never even thought about upgrades. Then I say primetime's thread read up on the xeon's and while cruising ebay saw the fire sale on AMD video cards. If the seller will accept my offer I'll be back in the game 4Ghz+ Hexa and Crossfire 7950's not bad for less than $300. I'm 90% sure my HX 850 will be up to the task especially since the xeon will draw less juice than my i7
     
  35. SkOrPn

    SkOrPn [H]Lite

    Messages:
    64
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    The low voltage and temps were the very first thing I noticed. But I'm on top tier water cooling and fantastic tim. My 930 never hardly went below 40c, unless it was dead of winter and my window was open. Although my 930 ran just fine at 1.26v @ 4ghz, it did not do so at these temps. My x5650 runs at LEAST 10C cooler at the same clock and voltages. Love it...
     
  36. GonzoP

    GonzoP 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,660
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2006
    Agreed. My Xeon 5650 runs cooler at 4.4Ghz than my i7 920 D0 ran 4GHz
     
  37. Zoson

    Zoson [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,115
    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2001
    The 6 core cpus are 32nm and the 4 core cpus are 45nm. Thus the reduction in voltage, reduction in temps, and reduction in ability to tolerate higher voltages.
     
  38. Nate7311

    Nate7311 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,312
    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2001
    Well, I fried my L5639 the other night... 20 years in the industry and that's the 1st CPU I've seen die! Windows 8 just bluescreened on me and the box wouldn't post anymore. Swapped everything but the CPU in testing. finally decided to try that, and using the old 920 I got from someone in this thread she popped up. But, of course that was after I bought a 2600k + board from the F/S forum. I did get 10 months of almost double the stock vCore and at 4Ghz on it though!
     
  39. primetime

    primetime [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,012
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2005
    wow.......thanks for posting....what was the voltages you used so the rest of us know not to venture that far out of the safe area

    1. was these any signs of instability before she died? there's a hole bunch of us that would really like to hear it was going unstable for quite a while forcing you to keep upping the voltage before she died......or was it the opposite with all going fine until that dreaded bad cpu bios sound?

    please be as thorough as possible with temps, voltages, how it was used and what else comes to mind......might help save another cpu with this information;) and as always very sorry for your loss:(
     
  40. Nate7311

    Nate7311 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,312
    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2001
    I did have a few random BSOD reboots during gaming. Honestly, as fast as it rebooted, I never checked into it and always assumed my video card, guess I know different now. The 2600k (stock speed for now) Asus P8P67Pro that I replaced it with from the F/S forum feels just as snappy but is definitely smoother. The old proc would ocassionally have random pauses for a sec or 2 and then fly though all the stacked up commands. I was able to transfer the windows install right over and boot right up, so I don't believe that the pauses were anything but O/C related.

    My final settings were as follows:
    Mult: auto
    BCLK: 200
    Speedstep On
    All CStates on
    Ended up @ 3.6Ghz base clock and 4Ghz Turbo.

    CPU voltage: 1.37
    PLL voltage: 2.15
    QPI voltage: 1.4
    I was using a CM Hyper212 and my idle temps were 98F and in-game stressed were high 145F-149F. Being a network consultant, My main usage was typical office program stuff with frequent gaming. Having it to do over again, I think I'd have backed it down to 190 BCLK and tune to voltage down as well.