XEON E3110 3GHZ 1333 MHZ FSB - E8400 alternative

bigdogchris said:
I still am waiting to drop mine in. I'm going to do a fresh install of vista 32 on top of this. I've heard that during installation, vista 32 detects cpu memory addressing and in some cases automatically uses BCDEdit /set PAE forceenabl to get that 4gb in 32 bit. NOW, being a server CPU, which uses OSes that use the large memory addressing (4-128gb+), don't you think that vista would see, make the change, and on my first boot see that 4gb? I know it won't with a normal core but since this is a server CPU .... I've heard it only automatically does this on an installation.
Click to expand...

Bullshit. You do not need to re-install over a CPU change. Nothing will be accomplished by that. All Intel CPUs address memory the same. Your so called server CPU isn't a server CPU at all. It is a desktop Wolfdale that has been marked Xeon on the heat spreader and Xeon by some microcode at the factory. It is no different than any retail Core 2 Duo 45nm CPU. It is nothing but an unfounded misconception that there are differences between LGA775 Xeon CPUs and LGA775 Core 2's. There isn't any differences beyond what I've mentioned above.

People keep thinking that specific things about the LGA771 variety applies to the LGA775 chips and that isn't true. In any case the memory issues you mentioned above are totally incorrect and impossible. Shit even LGA771 CPUs are barely different than LGA775 chips. The main difference lies in the pin count and SMP capability. As I said all Intel x86/EM64T CPUs handle memory addressing the same. The memory controller is also in the chipset so there are no issues there.
 
Dan_D said:
I've never seen a BIOS version problem being the cause of poor performance. In fact BIOS versions rarely change the performance of a system. I have however seen BIOS settings cause poor performance. I'd start there and keep going. One way you can test your CPU performance accurately is to run wPrime 1.5 and see if the scores are inline with what you should be getting. If you run it using the same test we do in the motherboard reviews then you can compare your results with ours. Despite some differences in test configurations the numbers should be damned close since that is purely a CPU test. You can follow the link to it in most of the reviews if you don't have the software and can't find it. If your CPU is performing correctly you'll be able to tell with that application. You might also want to check out your memory bandwidth using Sandra and make sure that is where it needs to be.

Beyond that I'd say start by removing your chipset drivers and re-installing them. Then move on to the video card drivers and then run driver cleaner. Get the latest beta drivers for your OS and card, re-install and try again.
Click to expand...

Ok here's what I did.

1/2) Disabled bios settings that were unecessary.
1) Installed windows on a new hard drive.
2) Installed chipset drivers.
3) Installed audio and video drivers.
4) Updated windows with all the latest updates.
5) Installed COD 4.
6) Came here to report my success!!

Oh, I also slapped on my Zalman 9700 onto the CPU while I had the case apart. About 12 degrees cooler with it over stock cooler.

For whatever reason, this install went flawlessly and I'm getting the FPS that I should in games now. COD 4 is running great and UT3 is incredible looking. I'm very happy now.
Thanks for the suggestions and advice.
 
Ub3rn00b said:
Ok here's what I did.

1/2) Disabled bios settings that were unecessary.
1) Installed windows on a new hard drive.
2) Installed chipset drivers.
3) Installed audio and video drivers.
4) Updated windows with all the latest updates.
5) Installed COD 4.
6) Came here to report my success!!

Oh, I also slapped on my Zalman 9700 onto the CPU while I had the case apart. About 12 degrees cooler with it over stock cooler.

For whatever reason, this install went flawlessly and I'm getting the FPS that I should in games now. COD 4 is running great and UT3 is incredible looking. I'm very happy now.
Thanks for the suggestions and advice.
Click to expand...

Maybe it worked this time b/c you didn't install the AMD dual core hot fix! ;)

Now that you have the Zalman on there... overclock it to 3.6Ghz NOW. It should do it at default voltage... though you might need to loosen your ddr2 timings or go back & swap for the ddr2 800.
 
Dan_D said:
Bullshit.
Click to expand...
Whoa calm down killer. I'm sure your mother would roll over in her grave if she heard that kind of language to a complete stranger.

I wasn't saying that you have to reinstall with a CPU change. I have not even installed Vista yet, I just have a pile of parts; I'm waiting for service pack 1. What I read was that during Vista installation, some people have had it automatically use PAE on their systems, but not by just swapping the cpu after Vista is already installed. I'm just trying to figure things out. It may be true or false, I'll find out for myself in a week or two. You should know by now to not listen to anybody except for what you have taught yourself.
 
bigdogchris said:
Whoa calm down killer. I'm sure your mother would roll over in her grave if she heard that kind of language to a complete stranger.
Click to expand...

WTF makes you think my mother is dead and what makes you think she gives a shit?

bigdogchris said:
I wasn't saying that you have to reinstall with a CPU change. I have not even installed Vista yet, I just have a pile of parts; I'm waiting for service pack 1. What I read was that during Vista installation, some people have had it automatically use PAE on their systems, but not by just swapping the cpu after Vista is already installed. I'm just trying to figure things out. It may be true or false, I'll find out for myself in a week or two. You should know by now to not listen to anybody except for what you have taught yourself.
Click to expand...

I haven't tried this myself, but Vista 32bit might very well enable the PAE workaround on machine that has 4GB or more of RAM during installation. I don't know if that's the case or not, I don't run Vista 32 on anything with more than 2GB of RAM.

In any case what I told you is absolutely accurate. If you do not believe me simply research it yourself. All Intel EM64T capable processors using the same architecture address memory in the same way.
 
Woot @ Dan I too occasionally have those kinds of posts after seeing the same questions and mistakes made over and over and over and over and over and over.... And here I thought I was the only occasionally grumpy guss.

@ bigdogchris
Heh go down in the video sub-forums if you really want to see some action we are pretty tame up here.
 
Perhaps I can help out here. I have the e3110, 4gb's RAM (2 x 2) and Vista Home 32 bit. I was fully aware of the memory addressing issue beforehand, and knew that I would be getting 3.5 gigs of RAM with my 8800GT 512, but my friend gave me Vista 32 bit for free, so seeing that extra 512 mb of RAM would have cost an additional $130 (to buy Vista 64) when the first 3.5 only cost me $80. To get to the point—I can still only see 3.5, as I expected, so no, the e3110 doesn't magically cure this issue. On the other hand, 3.5 gigs of RAM is fantastic, and so is this processor. No slowdowns here.
 
nothing in the world can cure this issue other then more then 32bits used for memory addressing

32bit software can ONLY produce 4096mb of memory, even if your windows shows 4gb, if there is any other hardware in your system that uses up any sort of memory addresses(which it does) then the 32bit software will only have so much of that 4096mb left over for useable memory, Vista SP1 will show all the ram regardless, it doesn't mean it will use it all.
 
Guys:) Please keep this thread clean from all the shouting.

I posted for information only and to make it clear that E3110 actually compatible with any motherboard/bios that can run E8400.
 
If you guys want to stress these puppies, fire up some 24 or 32 man CS:S at a low resolution. No game kills the CPU like CS:S, matter of fact I think a low resolution run of a CS:S demo with lots of action should be standard for all CPU testing and reviews, minimum framerate is the most important thing in game performance, it affects your connection and hit detection but it gets ignored all the damn time. It would fit in very well with HardOCP's real-world style as CS:S is probably the second most popular game in the whole world right behind 1.6. I'm thinking about getting one of these duals and shooting for 4.5 just to see what it can do in CounterStrike, on my [email protected] it still drops below 100fps often :( (anyone who plays CS:S seriously and runs 100 rates knows this is very bad).

If anyone here who's hitting 4+ ghz with these penryns could play some Office with lots of players, low resolution and no AA to eliminate gpu bottleneck, and let me know the lowerst framerates you see that would be sweeeeet.
 
Received my first ever E3110 Xeon 45nm Wolfdale (E8400 equivalent) :D

E3110 SLAPM 2V7***** / ***414
FPO/Batch: Q750A158
Version: E27970-001
Pack Date: 02/06/08

E3110_Q750A158_1.jpg


Nice low AUTO vcore at 1.152v in bios with Coretemp VID = 1.0875v. So I set bios vcore to lowest available option = 1.1v for 1.056v idle/1.048v load with Loadline Calibration disabled.

Realtemps shows Coretemp is over reporting temps by 7-10C :)

prime95_load.png


Very promising cpu as the low vcore end

3207Mhz at 1.048v load

prime95_load.png


3300Mhz at 1.048v load

prime95_load.png


4005Mhz at 1.256v load

With loadline calibration disabled (vdroop enabled). Notice what CPU VTT is set ;)

prime95_idle.png


prime95_load.png
 
Nice chip eva2000 ! :D

Curious , where'd ya purchase it from , seems your batch is way differant then the ones from Buy.com (Q746A534) and Ewiz (Q746A535).

*EDIT*

OOP's , nm seems you live down under (saw your post at ocf), means you most likely purchased far from the states .
 
eva2000 said:
Nice low AUTO vcore at 1.152v in bios with Coretemp VID = 1.0875v. So I set bios vcore to lowest available option = 1.1v for 1.056v idle/1.048v load with Loadline Calibration disabled.
Click to expand...

Mobos today figure out voltage for you? Man, it doesn't feel like THAT long ago I bought my last system parts...

My e3110 comes today... In fact I am taking a half day off work to wait at home for delivery.

My sweet, sweet $3/gig HP DDR2-667 RAM is going to be the limiting factor in my OC, I can see.
 
horseflesh said:
Mobos today figure out voltage for you? Man, it doesn't feel like THAT long ago I bought my last system parts...

My e3110 comes today... In fact I am taking a half day off work to wait at home for delivery.

My sweet, sweet $3/gig HP DDR2-667 RAM is going to be the limiting factor in my OC, I can see.
Click to expand...

Motherboards have been setting up voltages automatically since the late 1990's.
 
Well sure, they read the CPU and know what voltage to use--his post made it sound like the board was changing voltage automagically based on the CPU clock, which I have not seen. Did I misread, or did I just miss that feature somehow over the years?
 
horseflesh said:
Well sure, they read the CPU and know what voltage to use--his post made it sound like the board was changing voltage automagically based on the CPU clock, which I have not seen. Did I misread, or did I just miss that feature somehow over the years?
Click to expand...

That's been around for a year and a half or so. The 680i SLI boards have always done that and some newer Intel boards do it now too. The feature is actually quite effective on all the boards I've used that can do it.
 
Those who still have a question what is the difference between these CPUs, here is the answer from Intel per my request:
The E3110 and E8400 are nearly identical. However the E3110 has Intel VT, whereas the E8400 does not. Also, the E8400 has Intel TXT, whereas the E3110 does not. Also, the E3110 only supports DDR2 memory, whereas the E8400 supports both DDR2 and DDR3 memory technologies. Finally, the E8400 has been designed and tested and “supported” for eight or so Intel “DESKTOP” chipsets, whereas the E3100 has only been designed, tested and has support for two “SERVER” chipsets (3200 & 3210).​
 
Directron said:
Those who still have a question what is the difference between these CPUs, here is the answer from Intel per my request:
The E3110 and E8400 are nearly identical. However the E3110 has Intel VT, whereas the E8400 does not. Also, the E8400 has Intel TXT, whereas the E3110 does not. Also, the E3110 only supports DDR2 memory, whereas the E8400 supports both DDR2 and DDR3 memory technologies. Finally, the E8400 has been designed and tested and “supported” for eight or so Intel “DESKTOP” chipsets, whereas the E3100 has only been designed, tested and has support for two “SERVER” chipsets (3200 & 3210).​
Click to expand...

Good lord. Well I can already poke holes in this statement. First off, I'm not 100% sure ont he VT and Intel TXT features and which is supported on which version, so I can't dispute that part of the statement but the Xeon E3110 doesn't support either memory technology. Support for memory is up to the chipset and not the processor. So that's a load of crap right there.
 
Dan_D said:
Good lord. Well I can already poke holes in this statement. First off, I'm not 100% sure ont he VT and Intel TXT features and which is supported on which version, so I can't dispute that part of the statement but the Xeon E3110 doesn't support either memory technology. Support for memory is up to the chipset and not the processor. So that's a load of crap right there.
Click to expand...
For the memory, I think they meant that DDR3 isn't "officially" supported by Intel on the Xeon because they don't make any DDR3 xeon motherboards. Of couse we know, it has nothing to do with the CPU but the northbridge. I don't see why a e8400 wouldnt support VT, it's pretty certain that all 6mb cache penrynns are identical and come from the same line and then get binned. but maybe Intel artificially disables VT on the e series to create a difference. Oh well virtual machines are slow anyway. More fud.
 
shiznit said:
For the memory, I think they meant that DDR3 isn't "officially" supported by Intel on the Xeon because they don't make any DDR3 xeon motherboards. Of couse we know, it has nothing to do with the CPU but the northbridge. I don't see why a e8400 wouldnt support VT, it's pretty certain that all 6mb cache penrynns are identical and come from the same line and then get binned. but maybe Intel artificially disables VT on the e series to create a difference. Oh well virtual machines are slow anyway. More fud.
Click to expand...

Hopefully that is what they meant.
 
I found another possible source for the E3110 Xeon;
URL Removed

EDIT:// Nevermind. Out of stock. Argh!

- Joey
 
stereo55 said:
Nice chip eva2000 ! :D

Curious , where'd ya purchase it from , seems your batch is way differant then the ones from Buy.com (Q746A534) and Ewiz (Q746A535).

*EDIT*

OOP's , nm seems you live down under (saw your post at ocf), means you most likely purchased far from the states .
Click to expand...

came from pcmaniacs.com.au in Australia :)

4203Mhz at 1.360v load​
loadline calibration enabled (1.368v idle/1.360v load)

Prime95 v25.6 ~6+ hrs min mark

prime95_load.png




Max FSB tests​

Seems my Asus Blitz Formula might be limiting my FSB, as my best FSB clocking E6600, E6700, E6850, 8500 and now E3110 all seem to hit a ceiling at around 530-535FSB for Super Pi 32M. This E3110 max bootable FSB into memtest86+ is around same as the lower of my 2x E8500 Q740A493T max FSB of 540FSB and 555FSB so around 540FSB.

Click images below for full screenshots





Unoptimised Super Pi 32M run just to test FSB.

 
This might be a stupid question. Are there any games that might not load because they would look at the cpu-id and they say they dont work with a "server chip"?

In otherwords, every app and game I run with my Core2 can run without compatibility issues, correct?
 
LanPirate1 said:
This might be a stupid question. Are there any games that might not load because they would look at the cpu-id and they say they dont work with a "server chip"?

In otherwords, every app and game I run with my Core2 can run without compatibility issues, correct?
Click to expand...

No. All Core 2 architecture based processors are capable of running the same instruction sets. (Except for the newer Yorkfield/XE and Wolfdale chips which support SSE4 while older chips do not.)
 
eva2000 said:
Seems my Asus Blitz Formula might be limiting my FSB, as my best FSB clocking E6600, E6700, E6850, 8500 and now E3110 all seem to hit a ceiling at around 530-535FSB for Super Pi 32M. This E3110 max bootable FSB into memtest86+ is around same as the lower of my 2x E8500 Q740A493T max FSB of 540FSB and 555FSB so around 540FSB.
Click to expand...

All CPUs hit a ceiling eventually. To have it as high as 530+ is amazing, there really anything you can complain about man. I've had some dud chips hit a wall at 375, another at 420. Sounds like you have a great mobo and nothing to really complain about. ;)
 
Well I mean....I can get the processor to overclock to 3.6ghz at 1.34nb and 1.30vc and I haven't tried higher yet. But I can't get the ram to overclock worth a darn. It's ddr2 800mhz 4gb (2x 2gb) Supertalent ram. Couple friends of mine had 4gb (4x 1gb) kids and 2gb 2x 1gb kits. Nobody I know has the 4gb 2x2gb kit. Maybe that's the issue, I dunno. I tried upping the volts on the ram but no good. Got the ram to like 850mhz and any higher the board won't post. Do I need to up the volts on the SB or somethin'? Thoughts on this anyone?
 
Borrow your friends 2x1gb, see what it does before you buy more/other ram. If you see improvements then do your research and invest in some quality DDR2 1000-1100. Also I would think your results will be better with only 2 slots filled.
 
toddw said:
Borrow your friends 2x1gb, see what it does before you buy more/other ram. If you see improvements then do your research and invest in some quality DDR2 1000-1100. Also I would think your results will be better with only 2 slots filled.
Click to expand...

i agree with todd,.and yeah, up your southbridge by .1 to .2 as well..your temps appear nice and low on north and southbridge.
 
Just Curious...

Which mobo are you guys pairing your E3110's with?

I have one coming in later this week and I need to purchased one today so i can build it by next weekend.
 
Mine is an Asus P5N-D. Not the most user friendly board to use with the processor as any overclocking requires manual adjustments to the voltages and you have to know what you're doing to get it done. If you're not overclocking, then it's fine. Excuse me I have to go now because I just pooped a little. This is not a drill.
 
Is there a XEON based E8500 alternative? The E8500 is the chip I've been waiting on....
 
I switched chips from a e6750 to the e3110 Xeon. I did run into a problem though posting into windows though. I tracked down to the Asus AI Booster. I'm not sure if it had "configured" itself to the previous specs and was jamming up, even though I was oc'ing through the bios.
Hoping this may help someone else,
Rob

btw - forgot to mention my batch was q746a4545 from moogr.com out of PA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top