Smart Car of America Forum banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
He's not mine
Joined
·
9,607 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
I recently purchased two refurbished computers (servers) through Amazon from a 2nd party.

The ad on Amazon claimed dual Xeon quad core E5504 processors at 2.0 Ghz.

One was gifted to my mother. I'll verify tomorrow, but I think that computer has dual Xeon quad core running at 2.6 Ghz. I know that's their clock speed. Since the specs for E5504 state 2.0 GHz, I suspect her's are not as advertized either, better than advertized perhaps, but not E5504.

The one I kept for myself has dual Xeon 2 core running at 3 Ghz.

Neither computer matches the description concerning the processors installed. But, I just can't see me shipping either one off to the seller. That would be a real hassle.

The ad states the processors are E5504. Mine are 5160. I'll check on what my mother got tomorrow evening.

About mine, are dual 2 core Xeon at 3 Ghz comparable to dual 4 core at 2.0 Ghz? Faster? Not so much?

Both have 16GB of RAM, as advertised. But, I only got one Win7Prof installation Disk instead of two. And the video card is an issue too, but one I can live with.

I thought I was getting a good deal with dual quad core Xeons. Now, I'm feeling a bit disappointed. And I'd welcome your thoughts.

Number crunching is the reason I went for dual quad core Xeons.
Here's my main question ...
How does dual core Xeon at 3 GHz compare to quad core Xeon at 2 GHz?
 

·
He's not mine
Joined
·
9,607 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
Well, I went by mom's house to check out her computer. So ...

it turns out neither one of the computers has the processors as advertized. She has dual quad core X5355's running at 2.66 GHz. And, as I state before, mine has dual 2 core 5160's running at 3.0 GHz. The ad states dual quad core E5504 at 2.0 GHz.

I'm not very pleased.


I haven't contacted the seller yet. Not sure it's worth doing so. Perhaps leave feedback to warn other potential customers. I will definitely swap computers with mom ... with what she does she'll never notice the difference, and she has the better computer at the moment.

Anyone else have any thoughts?
---
P.S. I just did a price check online and found a spread in price on the X5355 2.66 GHz ranging from $65 to $440 per unit. That's an insane spread.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
17,345 Posts
Nah, the first time I've seen a Xeon processor was in the Mac G5. Those babies were water cooled!!!

And to answer your question: The quad core would be better for multitasking as it has more cores for different tasks. The dual core would be better for processor heavy, singular tasks thanks to its clock speed.

There are many more factors to consider, so don't take that as a generalization. :wink:
 

·
He's not mine
Joined
·
9,607 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Contact the seller, plus I thought Xeon processors were for server-based applications and not home PC's.
These are servers. My best computers have been Xeon based servers. I have found no problems with these ... just seems kinda cheesy to specify one processor and deliver two different processors.

Xeons are workhorses. My mother doesn't need that kind of horsepower for light game play and Facebook. But, she did need an upgrade and I wanted an upgrade. Two refurbished Xeon based dual processor computers with 16GB RAM, under $900 delivered. Not a bad deal.

I guess I'll do as you suggest and let him know about my concerns.

And swap computers with my mother.
 

·
He's not mine
Joined
·
9,607 Posts
Discussion Starter #8 (Edited)
Thanks hihosilver. Good information there. Although the advertized CPU is the only one not listed as "end of life", I think the units delivered look preferable to it. So, I'm a little squeamish about complaining to the seller. On the other hand, his inaccuracy still bothers me.

Of course they're all old. That was understood at the time of purchase. You don't buy a new server with this capability for anywhere near what I paid. The refurbishing included new 1TB HDDs.

And the fact that he never delivered on the second Win7Prof disk bothers me too.

Overall, other than the discrepancies I'm satisfied with the purchase. Inaccurate advertizement. He should hear about that.
But at least he didn't promote them beyond their capacity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,013 Posts
neon is right about the # of cores and the work they do; unless you have eg. multi-threaded applications or server apps with lots of background processes, the 4 cores might be mostly unused, and the faster clocked dual core would do fine.

On the other hand...
The water cooled Power Macintosh G5 "Quad Core" (2.5) was one of the first and last Power Macintosh G5 models to use dual core PowerPC 970MP (G5) processors, which have two independent processor "cores" on a single silicon chip.

The Power Macintosh G5 "Quad Core" (2.5) is powered by two "dual core" 2.5 GHz PowerPC 970MP (G5) processors with four optimized AltiVec "Velocity Engine" vector processing units (one per core), eight double-precision FPUs (two per core), 1 MB of on-chip level 2 cache on each core, and dual bidirectional 1.25 GHz frontside system buses (one for each processor).

This was in 2005. Macs didn't use Xeon (which was intel, G5 was PPC) until 2006 (dual 5100 series) and xeon quad core in 2009 (iThink).
 

·
He's not mine
Joined
·
9,607 Posts
Discussion Starter #12 (Edited)
dennyrex: No rest for my computers, no matter what they are. All eight cores are entertained 24/7.
Aside from BOINC processing (utilizes all available, including GPU if permitted by user). Other tasks which can take nearly 24 hours (no lie) are finished in less than an hour on a workhorse. My last Xeon based computer (dual 2 core at 3.4 GHz) makes my current entry level HP seem like an irritation for some of the most common tasks.

Not to worry. I've had fast, and I've had ordinary. I prefer fast, and put all available cores to work.

These servers have 1.333 GHz bus speed. I admit, I'm probably not enough of a geek to truly appreciate bus speed, LOL. But, apparently that's pretty zippy. I gather it is a measure of how fast the CPU communicates with the rest of the system, RAM & etc. Is that correct?
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top