Buying a pair of Xeon x5660s

Notice: Page may contain affiliate links for which we may earn a small commission through services like Amazon Affiliates or Skimlinks.

Patrick

Administrator
Staff member
Dec 21, 2010
12,511
5,792
113
I might just go with X5650's at that price TBH. I think those would sell for $150/pair and you are losing very little in terms of performance. If you cannot find 2 X5650's for $150 I bet I can find a pair in the lab.
 

T_Minus

Build. Break. Fix. Repeat
Feb 15, 2015
7,625
2,043
113
x5650, x5660 so close I'd say that's a fair price for a pair of them. I've seen the x5650 as low as $50/each too if you can wait and watch. I think I sold all my x5650 already, but I'll check.
 

The Gecko

Active Member
Jan 4, 2015
116
81
28
45
Thank you all for your input. I just scored a pair of x5675 CPUs for $200 shipped. Combine that with the fact that I already have someone lined up to buy my outgoing two x5560 CPUs and I'm doing pretty good.
 

T_Minus

Build. Break. Fix. Repeat
Feb 15, 2015
7,625
2,043
113
I just agonized over whether to go the X5570 or X5670. I decided to go with the X5570 because performance wise, there's not enough difference to justify the price difference.

Intel Xeon X5670 vs X5570

2 X5570s were less that 50 bucks delivered.
Sorry, but just to be clear for others who read this thread. Performance wise there is a rather large difference between the two.

This is INCORRECT information you've shared and doesn't paint an accurate picture/comparison.

The x5600 is updated architecture, it has 2 more cores, and is def. a much better processor than the x55## CPU. More cache too.

PassMark:
X5570 @ 2.93GHz 5,545
X5650 @ 2.67GHz 7,591
X5670 @ 2.93GHz 8,183
 

Patriot

Moderator
Apr 18, 2011
1,450
789
113
@T_Minus I just took it to mean that it didn't justify the gap from $50/pair to $200/pair. But yes... big performance delta... and power delta.
@Fritz you are fine. We all start somewhere.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T_Minus

T_Minus

Build. Break. Fix. Repeat
Feb 15, 2015
7,625
2,043
113
Pardon my ignorance.
I still think what you shared is valid in terms of $/performance but comparing them as equal or near equal is a bit of a stretch and I wanted to outline the performance reasons I found :) No harm my friend.
 

T_Minus

Build. Break. Fix. Repeat
Feb 15, 2015
7,625
2,043
113
@T_Minus I just took it to mean that it didn't justify the gap from $50/pair to $200/pair. But yes... big performance delta... and power delta.
@Fritz you are fine. We all start somewhere.
Looks like I posted as you were typing too :) That's exactly how I feel too. $/performance no problem, but they're not equal CPUs to compare, even with the generation gap.
 

Patriot

Moderator
Apr 18, 2011
1,450
789
113
Looks like I posted as you were typing too :) That's exactly how I feel too. $/performance no problem, but they're not equal CPUs to compare too even generation gap.
The crazy part is the jump to SB-E is an even bigger gap.
 

T_Minus

Build. Break. Fix. Repeat
Feb 15, 2015
7,625
2,043
113
The crazy part is the jump to SB-E is an even bigger gap.
FOR SURE.

When I went from 2P x56__ to 1 E3 it was rather impressive the difference, when I replaced the SATA 7200 with 15k SAS once again impressive, no more IO waiting... even with that the server runs <20% CPU most of the day and maintains 1MB/s writes consistently. (I need to find out what logging is doing that though.)