WoW! are dual cpu systems THAT uncommon?

Patriot

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - March 2011/June 2013/De
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
2,496
I think dual cpu has been on the decline since the invention of the multicore procs.

Not really... that market for dual quad and octo procs has increased dramatically since the Pentium D came out...
 

Patriot

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - March 2011/June 2013/De
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
2,496
Do you have numbers, or are you just speculating?

I work in the industry that is driven by their demand. For the number 1 workstation manufacture.
Desktop market is nothing. It is transitioning to a mobile market.

If you want numbers they are everywhere. I will not do your Google work for you.
 
Last edited:

Asonitez

Weaksauce
Joined
Aug 21, 2010
Messages
66
I still remember my Dual CPU ABIT mother board with Dual P4's on it. Man.. I was king of the world back then lol. Loved that system... but I ran into a lot of issues with that mobo. RMA'ed it twice. I've never looked into dual cpu systems since then. I thought they were only used in production houses or very large rendering farms and stuff like that.
 

mikeblas

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - May 2006
Joined
Jun 26, 2004
Messages
12,776
I work in the industry that is driven by their demand. For the number 1 workstation manufacture.
Desktop market is nothing. It is transitioning to a mobile market.

If you want numbers they are everywhere. I will not do your Google work for you.
LOL
 

MrGuvernment

Fully [H]
Joined
Aug 3, 2004
Messages
20,056
Desktop compared to Buisness world is nothing when you have companies that buy up 10/20 , 100 new design work stations every now and then which are usually dual socket rigs and high end CAD cards ya.. desktop market is nothing compared to them.
 

W.Feather

Hard DC'er for Aug 2012 / Feb 2019 / Mar 2020
Joined
Nov 10, 2009
Messages
11,487
I find it a little funny that everyone here (for the most part) who are saying dual CPU setups are worthless are those who dont have one. Obviously there is a use case for every one. I personally use my SR2 for rendering, large MATLAB assignments, FEA via Solidworks or NX, all at home. Why? Because it is infinitely quicker than using the school computer, and it more than cuts the rendering / sim time in half (in comparison to my 2600k when I had it at 4.5 Ghz, and this was with the SR2 only at 3.1 Ghz).

For gaming, no there is no reason for 2p, but there are alot of valid reasons to need, or want a 2p system, however on this forum the good majority of 2p/4p/8p computer talk happens in the DC sub forum.
 

W.Feather

Hard DC'er for Aug 2012 / Feb 2019 / Mar 2020
Joined
Nov 10, 2009
Messages
11,487
Quite alot faster, assuming your software is well coded. you have 4 more physical cores, 8 threads more total, assuming same speed you should be quicker.

Note* When I ran L5639's a while back (prior to upgrading to the x5680's in my sig), I ran them at 3.33 Ghz all day long stable, 195 blck IIRC, however it will be OC dependent, some SR2's will hit 190+ without issues, and break 200, some wont break 180....same with chips.
 

DogsofJune

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
3,967
I still remember my Dual CPU ABIT mother board with Dual P4's on it. Man.. I was king of the world back then lol. Loved that system... but I ran into a lot of issues with that mobo. RMA'ed it twice. I've never looked into dual cpu systems since then. I thought they were only used in production houses or very large rendering farms and stuff like that.

I loved my Abit BP6 and the VP6. Great boards in their day.


Today I broke my old Tyan Tiger system out of storage. It was a beast back in the day. 604 socket and AGP. Still has an Evga 7900 video card in it.

It's about to get popped out of the case and retired for good. I am jonsing for some case modding.


 

Ramses

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 30, 2000
Messages
5,396
Man, SMP. I miss it.

I remember I coughed up for my first dual P2 Supermicro board way back, 440GX, onboard SCSI.
King of the world then too, with 512meg of ECC SDRAM. It cost a fortune. NT4 rocked.

I did Slot 2 Xeons, Pentium Pro's, S370 VP6 era stuff, all the usuals. Kinda got out of it before Opterons got popular(affordable). Then hyperthreading came along and I played with that, which was a poor substitute I found out. Dual cores were better, but life changed and I was a laptop user with a dual core AMD chip, which was amazing at the time. I still use the damn thing which says something for it's staying power.

Now, my desktop has 8 4ghz cores and 16gig of ram and it all cost less than the first dual slot 1 board alone did. I wish there was that sort of progress in everythign. My phone has 4 cores. It's a crazy world.

I really miss SMP. I wish there was a cheap enough and fast enough way these days to make it worth it. The single desktop chips are all so fast now it's really not worth the bother for what I do, and if I was going for nostalgia I'd buy some old junk.
 

Ramses

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 30, 2000
Messages
5,396
Lots Mike, lots and lots. And not a bit of it has to do with any sort of performance.

You either get it or you don't. Simple as that.
 

Ramses

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 30, 2000
Messages
5,396
Well, that was a productive response.

Sorry, I suck at arguing ambiguous emotional BS online, so I don't.
I have no facts, there are no facts to have, therefore, not much of a response.
One either understands or they do not. It isn't a contest so don't be upset.

It still just isn't the same though, to me, and to others.
I also drive a 30 year old car that is inferior, technically, to
anything current. Which I could afford if I really wanted.
Because they just aren't the same
either. :)
 

uOpt

Gawd
Joined
Mar 29, 2006
Messages
755
Over at 2cpu there is the same thread going on.

Problems include:
- high price for SMP CPUs that have high clockspeed, and you need two of them => $$$
- more heat and noise, some HSF placement problems
- no overclocking unless you go all out

So you get many cores but slow per-core speed unless you spend big money.

Tradition benefits include:
- much more memory capacity because you have 2-4x the number of memory slots and they can take 2x as big modules
- always working ECC support (regardless of whether registered or unbuffered)
- you can often use the higher number of RAM slots to get good amounts of RAM cheaper because you can use smaller modules

Recent changes:
- quality of non-SMP boards gets spottier and spottier. You can even buy bad Gigabyte boards these days
- some removal of features from consumer CPUs, e.g. some virtualization functionality
- ECC functionality killed in non-Xeon (but not from non-SMP) and spotty availability with AMD


Myself I actually run more SMP boards now, the main reason that AMD doesn't perform well for my tasks anymore, so I cannot have ECC in consumer boards at all. Once I need a server board and a Xeon overclocking is gone. And more of my workload uses multiple CPUs. And I need a lot more RAM. So a SMP systems works out right now, although I curse the slow CPU every time that rawthrerapee writes some colorspace that GIMP has to convert.
 

mikeblas

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - May 2006
Joined
Jun 26, 2004
Messages
12,776
If there's a romantic or emotional attraction to having multiple sockets, that's fine. I totally get it -- we all do things that serve entertainment or emotion rather than more tangible needs. Point is, SMP doesn't mean you have multiple sockets; that's one implementation, but multicore systems can be SMP, too. (OTOH, funny thing is that modern multi-socket systems are NUMA and not SMP.)
 

Patriot

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - March 2011/June 2013/De
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
2,496
If there's a romantic or emotional attraction to having multiple sockets, that's fine. I totally get it -- we all do things that serve entertainment or emotion rather than more tangible needs. Point is, SMP doesn't mean you have multiple sockets; that's one implementation, but multicore systems can be SMP, too. (OTOH, funny thing is that modern multi-socket systems are NUMA and not SMP.)

By modern... starting in 2003 with AMD and 2007 with Intel.
SMP is dead long live NUMA...

So long as you don't cross numa nodes to get access to memory... numa is far better than smp.

I render for fun and I fold for family and friends...
Lots o compute is needed ;)

3dsmax.JPG


I agree not everyone needs multi-proc... and the irony of most of the people in here arguing being from the DC forum is not lost on me.
However the fact remains... uP is limiting... in memory, in PCIe lanes, and in cores.
Most do not need it, but for those of us that do... multiproc is wonderful.
 

MattyC

Gawd
Joined
Mar 13, 2007
Messages
797
Personally I have only ever owned one dual CPU rig. That was a dual 1 GHz Powermac that I got just for the giggles of owning a dual CPU box when my university was updating its CGT labs and selling the old boxes for almost nothing. If they had not had such a firesale I probably would never have owned one.
 

lutjens

Gawd
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
792
Over at 2cpu there is the same thread going on.

Problems include:
- high price for SMP CPUs that have high clockspeed, and you need two of them => $$$
- more heat and noise, some HSF placement problems
- no overclocking unless you go all out

So you get many cores but slow per-core speed unless you spend big money.

Tradition benefits include:
- much more memory capacity because you have 2-4x the number of memory slots and they can take 2x as big modules
- always working ECC support (regardless of whether registered or unbuffered)
- you can often use the higher number of RAM slots to get good amounts of RAM cheaper because you can use smaller modules

Recent changes:
- quality of non-SMP boards gets spottier and spottier. You can even buy bad Gigabyte boards these days
- some removal of features from consumer CPUs, e.g. some virtualization functionality
- ECC functionality killed in non-Xeon (but not from non-SMP) and spotty availability with AMD


Myself I actually run more SMP boards now, the main reason that AMD doesn't perform well for my tasks anymore, so I cannot have ECC in consumer boards at all. Once I need a server board and a Xeon overclocking is gone. And more of my workload uses multiple CPUs. And I need a lot more RAM. So a SMP systems works out right now, although I curse the slow CPU every time that rawthrerapee writes some colorspace that GIMP has to convert.

Ever consider a single processor board with a Xeon E5-1650 or E5-1660? They both support ECC, large amounts of memory and are fully unlocked. The E5-1680 V2 8 core CPU has been announced, although the jury is still out on whether or not it'll end up being unlocked.

Also, Francois Piednoel at Intel is surveying the enthusiast audience to see if there's demand for an unlocked 12 core Extreme CPU. Check it out at the link below and be sure to express your interest if such a processor does interest you.:)

http://www.hardware-360.com/intel-p...w-if-you-would-buy-12-core-extreme-processor/
 

uOpt

Gawd
Joined
Mar 29, 2006
Messages
755
Ever consider a single processor board with a Xeon E5-1650 or E5-1660? They both support ECC, large amounts of memory and are fully unlocked. The E5-1680 V2 8 core CPU has been announced, although the jury is still out on whether or not it'll end up being unlocked.

Also, Francois Piednoel at Intel is surveying the enthusiast audience to see if there's demand for an unlocked 12 core Extreme CPU. Check it out at the link below and be sure to express your interest if such a processor does interest you.:)

http://www.hardware-360.com/intel-p...w-if-you-would-buy-12-core-extreme-processor/

The E5-1660 has an unlocked multiplier?

And I don't think the non-SMP xeons support registered memory, so the maximum RAM capacity is the same as the desktops, no?

4 cores + hyperthreading are enough for me. Memory capacity, I don't even know. I suppose 48 GB is fine-ish for now but I just ran out of 48 in a particular project.
 

lutjens

Gawd
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
792
The E5-1660 has an unlocked multiplier?

And I don't think the non-SMP xeons support registered memory, so the maximum RAM capacity is the same as the desktops, no?

4 cores + hyperthreading are enough for me. Memory capacity, I don't even know. I suppose 48 GB is fine-ish for now but I just ran out of 48 in a particular project.

Indeed, the E5-1660s multiplier (and BCLK straps) are fully unlocked. It also supports registered ECC memory, as well as regular unbuffered ECC and unbuffered non-ECC memory, up to 256GB total supported. The IMC of these processors is Romley-EP based. The only downside is the fact that they're limited to single processor operation.
 

uOpt

Gawd
Joined
Mar 29, 2006
Messages
755
Indeed, the E5-1660s multiplier (and BCLK straps) are fully unlocked. It also supports registered ECC memory, as well as regular unbuffered ECC and unbuffered non-ECC memory, up to 256GB total supported. The IMC of these processors is Romley-EP based. The only downside is the fact that they're limited to single processor operation.

Right, I forgot about the single socket Sandy Bridge E and the quad-channel memory. Last time I looked at it it did indeed look attractive. Are you positive that a random supermicro single-socket 2011 board will do registered memory?
 

lutjens

Gawd
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
792
Right, I forgot about the single socket Sandy Bridge E and the quad-channel memory. Last time I looked at it it did indeed look attractive. Are you positive that a random supermicro single-socket 2011 board will do registered memory?

I know this one does...

http://www.supermicro.com/products/motherboard/xeon/c600/x9sre.cfm

As does this one...

http://www.supermicro.com/products/motherboard/xeon/c600/x9sra.cfm

Just looked at the other 1P SM boards and they all seem to support RDIMMs...:)
 

Antizax

n00b
Joined
Nov 9, 2013
Messages
14
As someone who's owned an SR-2 since release, speed is not the advantage you get from a 2 socket system. Highly parallel and high RAM bandwidth applications are where you see the benefit over single socket systems of the same generation. Think of it as adding more bandwidth instead of more speed.
 

Jayllo

Weaksauce
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
65
I think enthusiast SMP has gone away since chips started showing up as multicore.

If you're asking if you need SMP, you probably don't...

The expensive premium coupled with the fact most consumer software doesn't scale to 12+ cores make it really a niche market these days.

I mean, I thought SMP was great back in early 2000, you can have something run Symantec and do something else in the meanwhile.
 

agrikk

Gawd
Joined
Apr 16, 2002
Messages
933
This thread has me reminiscing over my Tyan Tiger dual Slot 2 motherboard with dual 750MHz processors. That thing was do damn awesome it was awesome. Then my horrible experience with Athlon MP processors. Now I have a pair of Dell T5400 with dual quad-core Xeons - one I use for audio production work and both I use for second and third PCs when my friends come over to death match.

I too have a romantic fondness for 2P/4P/nP systems, but happily plug away on my 4-core low-watt daily driver until I need some compute power at which point out come the Xeons.
 

brutalizer

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 23, 2010
Messages
1,599
Actually, modern dual socket systems are NUMA, not SMP. Modern desktop operating systems handle either situation just fine.
I beg to differ. In this thread, we discuss the new coming IBM POWER8 cpu. I mention in a post server cpus vs desktop cpus, cache, threading, performance, etc. In this post I discuss the bad scalability of Linux and talk about SMP, NUMA and HPC.
http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1040393845&postcount=41
 

Patriot

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - March 2011/June 2013/De
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
2,496

Red Falcon

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
11,140
Pfff, noobs!
Here's a real man's 2P system!

SegaSaturn.jpg


With two Hitachi SH-2 RISC CPUs @ 28.6 MHz each, who could go wrong? :D :p
 

JedixJarf

Weaksauce
Joined
Jul 20, 2011
Messages
97
Dual CPU --> SMP. I think most desktop operating systems were not designed around this / not optimal.

Still would be cool to have dual, triple, or quad 3930K's :D

Yeah, it's too bad you cant OC Xeons anymore like the 1366 days.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
32,040
I hopped in this forum to satiate my curiosity and learn something. Ive considered several times going forward with a dual cpu build. Being in a forum as active as this, and seeing the activity level (or lacktherof) in this section is certainly cause for concern.

Cost aside, why so little interest or activity? Or is this section of the forums just super new? Wouldn't running a dual cpu rig potentially eliminate the cpu bottleneck a lot of our newer gpu's are seeing for example?

Ive heard of these all the way back since the tyan mobo days - so its certainly not a new tech. As enthusiasts we have latched on to extremes and we have successfully mainstreamed, dual channel memory, dual gpu's, dual hard disks, what is the hurdle with dual cpu's? Seems like a fairly logical "next" step for enthusiast level performance.

Just curious ^^

It's really quite simple.

99.999999999999999% of users - even power users like us - do not need (or really ever do anything that takes advantage of) more than 4 cores. Truth is, even 2 cores with HT performs admirably in what 95% of users do.

While some games have popped up that do have decent multithreaded code, the benefits tend to taper off after 4 cores.

Having many cores is really only mostly useful to hardcore renderers/encoders or people running servers, specifically virtualized servers, and for these users it's usually more cost effective to get a single 6 core (12 logical with HT) extreme edition CPU or an many core AMD or 8 core Xeon than it is to try to string together multiple CPU's. The multi-socket motherboards tend to cost a lot more, and most destop CPU's do not support being used in multi-CPU rigs, often forcing you to buy expensive Xeon/Opteron models.

Truth is, for home enthusiasts mult-CPU systems have mostly been a non-issue in the last 10 years or so. They were brilliant back when single core CPU's were the norm, and two CPU's could really have some impact. The Dually Celeron 300A rigs on ABT BP6 boards were amazing back then, but things have changed a lot.

These days, people who build multi-CPU rigs either have very specific workloads that benefit greatly from them, or are just wasting their money for the bragging rights...
 

mikeblas

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - May 2006
Joined
Jun 26, 2004
Messages
12,776
Maybe you intend to be hyperbolic, but that's far too many nines.
 
D

Deleted member 82943

Guest
Maybe when threading becomes easier and more software can take advantage of it... But even now I can do a seemingly infinite amount of things on my "lowly" 6 core desktop
 

Zarathustra[H]

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
32,040
Maybe when threading becomes easier and more software can take advantage of it... But even now I can do a seemingly infinite amount of things on my "lowly" 6 core desktop

I feel the same way. I am a power user. I do things most people never do with their computers.

My man rigs 6 core 3930K (12 logical with HT) is mostly wasted on me. I often wonder why I didn't just save some money, electricity, heat output and fan noise by going with an Ivy Bridge Quad core i7 instead.

There are some cases where I use all cores (like when I transcode stuff) but 99.9% of the time, I have no benefit from this CPU at all...

Going with more cores and dual sockets would be a complete waste for me, and for most people. Some specialized workloads thrive on them though. A friend of mine in LA does computer rendering for the film industry, and for her, the more cores, the better. Her workload is relatively rare though.

My VMWare server in my basement uses an 8 core bulldozer though, and those cores DO get utilized well, to the point where I'd consider at least a multi-CPU motherboard, with the option of upgrading in the future, next time I upgrade it. But again, that is something that most people don't do with their rigs.
 
Top