what cpu is best for...

[anton muzic]

Hi all,
Yes i know, a very cloudy heading but wait till you hear why?
I've often searched around for explanations of which x86 cpu will do a better job with graphics or server or games oriented pc's.

I have a pent II mmx 350Mgz which does the job with internet and word processing. I have a pent 4 1.7Ghz rambus memory which i use for video editing and music making.
But both of these were bought without the knowledge of what i really needed to fulfill my goals.
Now, i know that the Xeon (i'll stick mainly with Intel stuff) was directed towards the server market (and i'm gullible enough to believe that even though i have no idea what is needed for the server to be efficient).
Now, my question is...is there a site (or can someone explain..) that elaborates what areas of use were paired with which cpu? (or is it all a case of careful marketing?)

cheers
anton :rolleyes:

[ski]

Simply wait until Intel comes out with a new CPU, and then buy the previous 'fastest' model.
You will then get the most 'bang for the buck'.

[saphalline]

A server CPU needs two things: tons of cache, and multi-processor capable. Because servers spend the majority of their time shuffling data around, they need lots of CPU power to keep track of where that data goes and still be able to run advanced server OS'es (like Windows Server 2005).

One good way to keep server CPU's expensive and powerful is to add on the cache! Sometimes quite a bit more than their home-bred counterparts! The P4 Prescott has no L3 cache, but the P4 Xeon Potomac has up to 4MB of L3 cache! Previous Xeons had similar extra cache, like the PIII version. Normal Coppermine PIII's had 256KB of L2 cache, whereas the PIII Xeon Cascades could have up to 2MB of L2 cache. The other thing to note about server CPU caches is that they have a little something extra in them. This leads into the multi-proc aspect, but the caches on a server CPU have extra ECC and coherency to them, because they have to keep track of which data goes to which CPU.

OK, on to the good stuff, SMP! The other good way to keep servers speedy is to simply add more processing power. The problem is, server CPU's themselves are a bit more complex, so they always lag behind their home-bred counterparts in speed and new features (like faster FSB's). Adding more processing power then becomes an exercise in frustration. But there is another way... ;) Just add another CPU! Yep, server CPU's like the Xeon are almost identical to the Pentiums they model, except they have multi-processor support embedded in the core. The simplest way to describe this is that Xeons can work with other Xeons on the same mobo, while P4's cannot. The chipset, CPU, and OS all work together to split up the jobs between all Xeons, be it 2, 4, or 8 of them.

You can actually have just one Xeon in a server (it will work fine), but with the extra cost of everything else, what's the point?? By the time you get a server system put together, the cost of another CPU is rather insignificant, so while I have seen single-Xeon servers, I don't know why anyone would bother.