Looks like the 3820 has slightly better specs. Is it worth paying $400 more for a computer with the same configuration? i.e. will I see a difference in performance in photoshop?

The 3770 overclocks better and outperforms the 3820 for many things. The only potential advantage is if 2011 socket lets you replace the cpu in a few years for something with more cores.

thanks.

you will never win on the sockets. right now the concentration is in using the 1155 socket. the having Quad memory channels isn't really going to help you and the X79 chipset is older and delivers less then the 77 series overall. in a few years you will replace the whole board not just the cpu.

I think the only real advantage to the 3820 is the ability to upgrade the base system to a 6-core chip in the future.

15Bit wrote:
I think the only real advantage to the 3820 is the ability to upgrade the base system to a 6-core chip in the future.

True-- like I mentioned above-- but the false promise in all this is that going from 4 to 6 core isn't thaaaat huge when you consider all the other performance upgrades you'll get in future gen chips (which may be 6- or 8-core anyway for the normal enthusiast models) and future mobos.

Also, top end chips, like current 6-core, tend to start at a premium, drop in 6-12 months to their lowest, current, retail price, and then don't get a ton cheaper for a long time... unless you get a great used deal (perhaps already overclocked to hell for a long time). Case in point: i7-970.

So after one or two generations max, it's almost always better cost AND performance wise to go to a new mobo/CPU vs. upgrading to the previously stratospherically priced higher-core enthusiast model.

If you're going to go X79, I think there's basically zero reason to get the 3820-- instead of spending the difference to get the 6-core chip now: 3930K. The quad-channel memory just isn't a big deal.

thanks for the info. Is there a great commercially made 3770 "box" you'd recommend? Considering a Dell XPS 8500. Most of the premade configs are around $900-$1000. Video cards are typically crap but I could just move over my nvidia quadro 2000 from the other box or buy a new one.

Thoughts?

You can get a more robust Xeon system from Dell for only a little extra. Lifespan is usually 2 or 3 times that of consumer/prosumer grade systems too.

Just to confuse things...

Thanks, which model?

jzucker wrote:
Thanks, which model?

http://www.dell.com/us/enterprise/p/desktops-n-workstations.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=biz&~ck=mn
Scroll down and have a look.


I think the T3600 model makes a great little workstation box for photo and video editing!
http://www.dell.com/us/enterprise/p/precision-t3600/fs

from what I've read, an overclocked 3770 will outperform a 4 core 3.2ghz zeon machine and those dells only have a 400w power supply and can't be upgraded to the 600w. To get the 6 core and 16gb memory and 2tb HD which would be a big performance boost is more than 2x the price. You think it's worth it and will the 400w power supply be enough?

It has the 635W or something for $35 more. Keep in mind that Dell's workstation class boxes use 90% efficient PSUs so 400W is like a 550 or 600W in their (or another brand's) consumer boxes.

IMO the caches and busses on a system are more critical for video and image editing. If the 2012/13 models are true to even the year prior's then their workstation class MB architecture will MORE than make up for the teensy differences in clocks. Additionally overclocking means over-cooling. Unless you're running water-cooling that means over-noise and this also means all the grills, vents, fins, ports and so on get plugged up with lint is rather short order. Overclocking IMHO is for kiddy gamers.

If it were me on a budget I'd get the cheapest 6-core with the least amount of non-ecc RAM and the smallest HDD. 3TB HDDs are available for about $125 to $150 now and 3rd party RAM is dirt cheap last I looked. Let's see if I can post a configuration:

Four Core XEON (E5-1620, 3.6GHz) w/635W PSU: $1,068
Six Core XEON (E5-1650, 3.2GHz) w/635W PSU: $1,523
http://ecomm.dell.com/dellstore/basket.aspx?c=us&cs=555&l=en&s=biz&itemtype=CFG&oid=5190df25-b278-4eb8-afd4-7cb4d115707c

Anyway, I was just thinking that they're more future-proofed besides being more robust architecturally. It's always worked that way for me anyway.

With a high spec consumer-class brand-box I usually need to replace it in about 2 years.
With a home made high-spec gammer box I usually need to replace it in about 3 years.
With a mid-range Workstation class machine I usually want to replace it in about 5 years (but end up waiting 6).

I'm currently running (4 Dell workstations and a MacPro) as my core system.

no, it won't let you add the 635W PS because the case is not compatible. Not sure why it lists it as an option but if you click on the 635w PS you get a compatibility error message.

I think you just have to click both boxes for the 635W option. And then it allows it without error. No? It does for me.

Bifurcator wrote:

With a high spec consumer-class brand-box I usually need to replace it in about 2 years.
With a home made high-spec gammer box I usually need to replace it in about 3 years.
With a mid-range Workstation class machine I usually want to replace it in about 5 years (but end up waiting 6).

.

Why do you need to replace the homemade system in 3 years? I'm considering builiding a system for photo editing (no gaming), so your statement caught my attention.

in addition to the xps 8500, i'm also considering this

Component Price
3770K CPU 319.99
16gb memory 77.99
cpu cooler 33.75
Asus p8z777 MOBO 189.99
2tb drive 89.99
corsair carbide case 90.98
seasonic 520w PS 82
DVDR 22.99
GEForce 650 135.99

jzucker wrote:
in addition to the xps 8500, i'm also considering this

Component Price
3770K CPU 319.99
16gb memory 77.99
cpu cooler 33.75
Asus p8z777 MOBO 189.99
2tb drive 89.99
corsair carbide case 90.98
seasonic 520w PS 82
DVDR 22.99
GEForce 650 135.99


Given that, with the bare-bones Xeon Precision WS your additional (non-Dell) buy list would look like:

16gb memory 77.99
2tb drive 89.99

Although I sure like my ST3000DM001 3TB Baracudas a lot. I recently added two to each system in a RAID0 configuration. Very fast! And can be found for $120 after rebate with a little looking around. I think I paid $100 a pop for mine. I just happened on to a pile of them at a department store believe it or not and gobbled them all up. Mmmm, Yummy HDDs! http://www.anandtech.com/show/5042/seagates-new-barracuda-3tb-st3000dm001-review





Bifurcator wrote:
With a high spec consumer-class brand-box I usually need to replace it in about 2 years.
With a home made high-spec gammer box I usually need to replace it in about 3 years.
With a mid-range Workstation class machine I usually want to replace it in about 5 years (but end up waiting 6).

CorwinGraves wrote:
Why do you need to replace the homemade system in 3 years? I'm considering builiding a system for photo editing (no gaming), so your statement caught my attention.


Assuming a non-Xeon/Opteron build the MB is usually at the end of its life span by then. To upgrade with any significant impact on system performance I usually find the buss speed is too slow, the caches too small to take up any slack, the chipset unsupportive, power requirements impossible (without changing the MB), and so on. My criteria for "replacement" is double the speed at the same relative class and price-point.

I haven't been paying very close attention for the past two or three years so things may have changed a little on me but from keeping system current since 1980 with the CBM/CPM Pet until now that's how it's played out. In 1998 or so the Pentium Pro based machines began defining the "Workstation" class computer for Intel based machines in answer to high performance machines like the Sun SPARCstation ('89) and their very popular "Ultra Workstations" ('95). Since then there has always been a split in system performance, longevity, and stability of course with the Workstation class in the far lead. Xeon became the moniker after the Pentium Pro and the performance division between consumer and workstation/server classes continued to grow for awhile until the two were fairly well defined.

The biggest split in the past couple of years has been in multi-core computing where Xeon and Opteron offer up to 8 and 16 cores per chip (respectively) but the supporting board-level and system components typically remain a cut above their consumer grade counterparts. I guess you can look up all the meaningful specs and see the differences and/or look at real-world benchmarks like the PhotoShop script benchmarks. I used to know enough to lay it out but I've not visited much to do with computer hardware in the past two years and forgotten most of it. I do know that Intel's Core branded processors starting with the 32nm fabrications in early 2011 were up to the task of taking on and even defeating the Xeon line in terms of speed per core (measuring with some non-real-world benchmark utilities). But the smooth steady and dependable operation of Xeon/Opteron systems I believe still remain a significant difference between them and their desktop brethren as far as I know. I've read some people saying that it's currently down to only ECC as the most distinguishing difference but I think they're talking only about chip performance and not the features and specs found in the rest of the system. ECC is a fairly big deal tho - as of course is 6 cores per chip vs. only 4 that Mr. Zucker is considering.

you will discover that by the time you think you are going to upgrade your system cpu the next "state of the art" chipsets/MoBo/CPU's/capabilities/gee whizzes/ and wows will be well upon you (and probably by at least 2 generations) and that it will not be cost effective route to travel. I have been there and tried that.

sjms wrote:
you will discover that by the time you think you are going to upgrade your system cpu the next "state of the art" chipsets/MoBo/CPU's/capabilities/gee whizzes/ and wows will be well upon you (and probably by at least 2 generations) and that it will not be cost effective route to travel. I have been there and tried that.


^--This--^

Unless you need to pay tremendous amounts for top of the line (Xeon/Opteron, 6/8 cores)-- go with something middle of the road in enthusiast terms. The 3770 is perfect. Even the 2600K-- which overclocks like magic-- is a great choice.

Get a good mobo, and a very good power supply (this you can reuse). Do a basic, simple overclock to 4.0 Ghz (which is basically turnkey) or fiddle and aim for better. Cheap 3rd party cooler will do it fine, such as the 212+, which sells for $15 to $30.

Don't go all out hoping to hit a fortuitous upgrade cycle. Hit a bang-for-the-buck higher end system, nurture it, and do a full upgrade a few generations later.

so the question is, for a 2 year cycle is it worth even putting together my own machine? The $200 for the case and power supply that I can reuse doesn't seem worth it.

justruss wrote:
sjms wrote:
you will discover that by the time you think you are going to upgrade your system cpu the next "state of the art" chipsets/MoBo/CPU's/capabilities/gee whizzes/ and wows will be well upon you (and probably by at least 2 generations) and that it will not be cost effective route to travel. I have been there and tried that.


^--This--^

Unless you need to pay tremendous amounts for top of the line (Xeon/Opteron, 6/8 cores)-- go with something middle of the road in enthusiast terms. The 3770 is perfect. Even the 2600K-- which overclocks like magic-- is a great choice.

Get a good mobo, and a very good power supply (this you can reuse). Do a basic, simple overclock to 4.0 Ghz (which is basically turnkey) or fiddle and aim for better. Cheap 3rd party cooler will do it fine, such as the 212+, which sells for $15 to $30.

Don't go all out hoping to hit a fortuitous upgrade cycle. Hit a bang-for-the-buck higher end system, nurture it, and do a full upgrade a few generations later.