dual 2.8 Ghz 1 Mb xeon gamer [RESOLVED]

Reaper13 · Post by **Reaper13** » Mon Aug 29, 2005 1:16 am

I have been having a LOT of trouble with my a64 machine, mostly to do with my MSI CRAP

mobo, ill never buy one again. So, I am getting out the big guns and setting up a dual xeon 2.8 Ghz 1 Mb cache machine

for my main machine (gamer).

ChickenSalad · Post by **ChickenSalad** » Mon Aug 29, 2005 1:51 am

Xeon cpu's are about as fit for gaming like monstertrucks are fit for formula 1 racing.

Post by **Cheesy** » Mon Aug 29, 2005 2:13 am

Where've you been Chicken

Reaper13 · Post by **Reaper13** » Mon Aug 29, 2005 2:13 am

Yaaaaaaaaa overkill... love it. Like having two p4EE's on one board

ChickenSalad · Post by **ChickenSalad** » Mon Aug 29, 2005 3:26 am

Dude, it's more under-kill than over. While a Xeon looks all hot'n spicy for the uninformed geeks eye, it turns out to be close to worthless in serious gaming souroundings. It's simply not what it's made for. It's strengths are server tasks and workstation functions as with production software. Like buying a 4000$ rendering graphicscard will make you look all l33t on the specs page, it'll still not allow you to play any game at an fps rate comparable to high end consumer products. Seriously mate, don't let me stop you from pushing Canada's economy by shelling out big bucks for a system that won't even deliver close to what you imagine it would, but for your own happiness, do some reading on the hardware you admire before you buy it.

Cheesy wrote:Where've you been Chicken

Just around the corner. Never realy been gone mate, just keeping a low profile, after all, I aint even playing BF2.

Reaper13 · Post by **Reaper13** » Mon Aug 29, 2005 4:11 am

sorry, you must have me confused with a computer noob

I know that the game would be better with a new pci ex board and card.
This one is agp 8x.
Its not about making me a better player either, im not stupid.

I am NOT an uninformed geek, thank you.
I just wanted a replacement for my current system, and figure id play around with this, AND if i want to set upa BF2 server in the future it would be great.
This machine will also be a number cruncher (d2ol) among with a lot of other things.
I know exactly what i am getting and what it will be used for, I already have a xeon linux server.
END

Post by **ph1l0r** » Mon Aug 29, 2005 6:21 am

So to sum it all up. You posted here to show off with your super-duper hardware without the need or even the intent to get at least some sort of technical support from the community.

ChickenSalad · Post by **ChickenSalad** » Mon Aug 29, 2005 6:36 am

Well, beg your pardon Reaper13, but wasn't it you who posted that...

Reaper13 wrote:I am [...] setting up a dual xeon 2.8 Ghz 1 Mb cache machine [...] for my main machine (gamer).

...

But hey, as I said, just keep on pushing that economy. Good luck.

Post by **sushi** » Mon Aug 29, 2005 7:44 am

'nough said

resolved added

Reaper13 · Post by **Reaper13** » Mon Aug 29, 2005 11:29 am

Ok im sorry i even posted. Youre a crabby bunch eh?

Post by **Ash2Dust** » Mon Aug 29, 2005 2:12 pm

Some days people are crabby. I've posted my share of crabbiness. Good job on not crabbin back with a flame.
You posted what you intended to do and people gave their feedback. It would be interesting to see what difference it does make for BF2. If people can justify a dual $600+ video cards, I dont see anything wrong with pushing the same or less money on a motherboard dual CPU combo. Hell, if all it did was speed up the load and verify before each map, that would make some people happy. But I would start with a faster hard drive and memory for that.

As for using it as a future server/cruncher, then it makes sense to examine that route.

deathbot9000 · Post by **deathbot9000** » Mon Aug 29, 2005 3:30 pm

Xeons for gaming is both right and wrong.

There is no noticeable performance increase in gaming w/ a Xeon (or dual Xeons) but with the newer chipsets for Xeons being geared more towards workstation applications there is less of a performance hit than in the past.

Really there are 2 reasons why a gamer shouldn't/wouldn't use a Xeon in their gaming box.

1. price, nuff said
2. compatibility. While Xeon chipseted mobo's are being made more and more w/ workstation applications in mind they still are skimpy on the extras that most gamers like w/ their boxes (pci-x, bluetooth, etc)

here's some benchmarks

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content ... ing&page=1

ChickenSalad · Post by **ChickenSalad** » Mon Aug 29, 2005 7:13 pm

Ash2Dust wrote:I dont see anything wrong with pushing the same or less money on a motherboard dual CPU combo.

Oh that aint wrong, it's just pretty useless as 99.99% of all games in existance simply don't support dual (or multiple) cpu's. BF2 doesn't so the load and verify would take just as long as with 1 (Xeon) cpu.

If you look at the GamePC charts you'll notice that the Xeon 3.06/1MB dual AND single setups tend to score very close to the Athlon XP 3200+. Fine, but what happens when you compare the prices of the two setups? You'll find out that the Xeons cost roughly 3 to 10 times as much as the comparable Athlons. Same GAMING performance, for 3+ times the money? Pardon me if I don't recommend such an adventure.

Post by **Ash2Dust** » Mon Aug 29, 2005 11:55 pm

deathbot9000 wrote:here's some benchmarks

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content ... ing&page=1

Its a couple year old article. They point out how at 533 bus the dual matches the single with 800 bus. Be interesting to see the same test with both at 800 bus. I think you would see an increase with the memory bandwidth increase.

Everyones budget seems to be bigger than mine so I wont be doing it.

Reaper13 · Post by **Reaper13** » Sun Sep 04, 2005 7:46 pm

Right now I have two 1.6 lv xeons clocked at 3.0 Ghz (15 x 200Mhz fsb) each on an Asus pc-dl board, runs awesome.
chips cost $150 pair
board cost $150
added some ddr400 ram and voila!

Free-to-play based on teamplay and tactics.

dual 2.8 Ghz 1 Mb xeon gamer [RESOLVED]

dual 2.8 Ghz 1 Mb xeon gamer [RESOLVED]

Re: dual 2.8 Ghz 1 Mb xeon gamer