Xeon 3500 series = Desktop Core i7 + ECC Support?

[Inconsequential]

Im wondering if its worth getting the 2.66Ghz one and then putting in a faster Core i7 but with non ECC memory?

Anyone have any specs on the chipset?

As its a single processor setup the desktop counterpart should be able to fit in there no problems, and then the non ECC memory is cheaper!

Any input anyone?

 

[m1stake]

Actually the 3500 series is a desktop i7 + ECC support. The 3500 series and desktop are interchangeable.

 

[belvdr]

Actually the 3500 series is a desktop i7 + ECC support. The 3500 series and desktop are interchangeable.

Why would you want ECC support in a desktop? It just adds overhead for no good reason.

 

[Inconsequential]

Why would you want ECC support in a desktop? It just adds overhead for no good reason.

Stability.

Changed the title btw, thanks.

And looking at the X58 chipset, which the Mac Pros chipset is undoubtably based on, my plan may just work.

Although with the HE discount, the cost going to 6gb with apple is £100 where the kit from Crucial is £121.99

The processor upgrade is £335 where the desktop one is > £450!!

So I guess apple gets my monies this week

 

[belvdr]

Stabililty in what? The only systems at work that have ECC memory are the servers. All desktops/laptops use non-ECC and are as stable as ever.

I know what ECC memory does, just not sure why anyone would demand it in a desktop system. Seems odd.

 

[Inconsequential]

Stabililty in what? The only systems at work that have ECC memory are the servers. All desktops/laptops use non-ECC and are as stable as ever.

I know what ECC memory does, just not sure why anyone would demand it in a desktop system. Seems odd.

Ah im with you now!

I dont know why, apple thinks its needed!

Personally dont care

 

[m1stake]

Why would you want ECC support in a desktop? It just adds overhead for no good reason.

Yes, it does add pointless overhead to playing wmv files.

However, humor me for a minute and imagine someone doing some heavy lifting that was error sensitive on a "desktop." They exist! Hello nanofrog!

 

[belvdr]

Yes, it does add pointless overhead to playing wmv files.

However, humor me for a minute and imagine someone doing some heavy lifting that was error sensitive on a "desktop." They exist! Hello nanofrog!

Consider yourself humored. I just rarely see any heavy lifting on a desktop. Yes, it is a desktop.

 

[m1stake]

Consider yourself humored. I just rarely see any heavy lifting on a desktop. Yes, it is a desktop.

Neither do I (I don't do IT ), but it's the "because it's there" philosophy.

 

[belvdr]

Neither do I (I don't do IT ), but it's the "because it's there" philosophy.

Gotcha.

 

[Umbongo]

You should be able to use non-ecc unbuffered memory anyway. And the Xeons and i7s will probably have the same price at somewhere like scan.co.uk so if you want to keep ECC and install a better processor yourself you can.

 

[Outsider]

Anyone doing simulations, scientific, or financial computer, ECC is the rule, not the exception. For things like Photoshop, FCP, and many other applications, it's not essential.

 

[Eidorian]

Anyone doing simulations, scientific, or financial computer, ECC is the rule, not the exception. For things like Photoshop, FCP, and many other applications, it's not essential.

You don't want that week long job screwing up in memory.

 

[Outsider]

Hehe, true dat!

Also, I think the 2.66 and 2.93 Xeon 3500 has full memory bandwidth of of 6.4GBps while the Core i7 920 and 940 have 4.8GBps bandwidth.

 

[belvdr]

Anyone doing simulations, scientific, or financial computer, ECC is the rule, not the exception.

All of those types of jobs are run on a server clusters, such as SGI or Unix, for us. It's in a data center, so you get all the other backups as well, such as power. ECC all you want, but if the power drops, oops!

The audio/video work was what I thought most professionals did on a Mac, hence my question/confusion.

 

[Eidorian]

All of those types of jobs are run on a server clusters, such as SGI or Unix, for us. It's in a data center, so you get all the other backups as well, such as power. ECC all you want, but if the power drops, oops!

The audio/video work was what I thought most professionals did on a Mac, hence my question/confusion.

It still doesn't keep someone from wanting that level of reliability on the small scale.

What's wrong with a professor wanting ECC to run some things on their Mac Pro and not tie up the backend with a job? Some people have to share that CPU time.

 

[Outsider]

All of those types of jobs are run on a server clusters, such as SGI or Unix, for us. It's in a data center, so you get all the other backups as well, such as power. ECC all you want, but if the power drops, oops!

The audio/video work was what I thought most professionals did on a Mac, hence my question/confusion.

Macs are still popular in the scientific community.

 

[belvdr]

It still doesn't keep someone from wanting that level of reliability on the small scale.

What's wrong with a professor wanting ECC to run some things on their Mac Pro and not tie up the backend with a job? Some people have to share that CPU time.

Oh nothing at all... Like I said, my confusion stemmed from not realizing that.

 

[Outsider]

I think I read somewhere that Intel improved ECC performance with the Nehalem memory controller. I'll try and find the article.

 

[SACD02]

Hehe, true dat!

Also, I think the 2.66 and 2.93 Xeon 3500 has full memory bandwidth of of 6.4GBps while the Core i7 920 and 940 have 4.8GBps bandwidth.

Benchmakrs (which have compared i7 965 Extreme w/ 6.4 to i7 920 w/ 4.8) show no improvements. At 4.8, the memory is basically saturated so it's not the bottleneck anymore

 

[belvdr]

I think I read somewhere that Intel improved ECC performance with the Nehalem memory controller. I'll try and find the article.

That would be cool.

 

[Tesselator]

I do work in three different universities. Aichi University, Kyoto University, and a very large technical college called Kanazawa Institute of Science and Technology.

Not considering the heavy metal:
The 3D CG and CAD type training labs are 80% PC and 20% mac,
Med labs (LOL DeskTop DNA Sequencers!!) are all Macs,
Chem labs are all Mac,
Business is a mixed bunch - they usually get the hand-me-downs from other depts.
Computer Science is 80% PC and the rest is a mix of Unix of some type or another.
Media training (like for TV commercials, promotional video, POS kiosks, etc) it's all PCs

I dunno if any of that means anything or not. I mean another school could profile completely different. But those are the departments I spend enough time in to know what they have across 3 schools here in Japan anyway.

 

[Inconsequential]

I think I read somewhere that Intel improved ECC performance with the Nehalem memory controller. I'll try and find the article.

That would be great to see!

Wonder if Barefeats could test with and without ECC memory!

 

[nanofrog]

Yes, it does add pointless overhead to playing wmv files.

However, humor me for a minute and imagine someone doing some heavy lifting that was error sensitive on a "desktop." They exist! Hello nanofrog!

It's needed in some cases.

You should be able to use non-ecc unbuffered memory anyway. And the Xeons and i7s will probably have the same price at somewhere like scan.co.uk so if you want to keep ECC and install a better processor yourself you can.

In fact it can. Apple just decided to stick with ECC. It can be quite useful for FPU intensive calculations in particular, and that means anything from scientific applications to graphic/video professionals using rendering software.

Anyone doing simulations, scientific, or financial computer, ECC is the rule, not the exception. For things like Photoshop, FCP, and many other applications, it's not essential.

From what I understand, the math intensive portions of it can benefit from ECC. Web browsing and email, NO.

You don't want that week long job screwing up in memory.

I presume you mean rendering, so it would make sense to me.

Hehe, true dat!

Also, I think the 2.66 and 2.93 Xeon 3500 has full memory bandwidth of of 6.4GBps while the Core i7 920 and 940 have 4.8GBps bandwidth.

I've OC'd mine and it exceeds 6.4GB/s on an i7 920.

I'll either drop in a W3570, or swap the board to a DP, and go from there. Just to use ECC!

It still doesn't keep someone from wanting that level of reliability on the small scale.

What's wrong with a professor wanting ECC to run some things on their Mac Pro and not tie up the backend with a job? Some people have to share that CPU time.

I don't share the CPU time, as it's a stand alone system. But I still need ECC.

Years ago, I'd get too many BSODs without it. Not to mention erroneous output that was useless. It caused too much wasted time, and I had no choice. I've stuck with it ever since.