Need help deciding between Xeon E5 processors

[Jeff Robertson]

I am working on setting up a 2 node hyperconverged cluster based on c612 supermicro boards and xeon e5 CPUs. For a bit of background I am currently running about a dozen VMs on an overclocked 4790k @ 4.4Ghz with 32GB RAM. The end goal is to have a cluster that can both support about 30 VMs and will also be responsive. I have currently built one of the two nodes using an E5-2630 (10 core, 2.4Ghz all core turbo, 3.1Ghz max turbo) which I consider to be a wide (lots of cores) but shallow (low clocked) CPU. Most of the VMs don't require much HP of course but I do have a couple that I log into frequently and need to be as responsive as possible. The 4790 works great for those VMs. I also run video encoding apps that can take advantage of almost all Mhz, the more cores and higher speed the better.

For the second node I'm considering the following:

E5-2640 v4
10 core
2.6Ghz all core turbo, 3.4Ghz max turbo
26Ghz max throughput
Pros: 200Mhz faster than the 2630
Cons: Not sure how responsive it will be for single VMs, not sure if an extra $200 is worth an extra 200Mhz per core over the 2630

E5-1650 V4
6 core
3.6Ghz all core turbo, 4 Ghz max turbo
21.6Ghz max throughput
Pros: Probably very responsive for the VMs that need it, relatively inexpensive
Cons: Only 6 cores, doesn't seem like much of a step up from the 4790k except for ecc ram

E5-1660 V4
8 core
3.4Ghz all core turbo, 3.8Ghz max turbo
27.2Ghz max throughput
Pros: Best of both worlds
Cons: CANNOT FIND ONE, seriously, the only ones I've found have been priced out of my budget. If anyone knows where to get one let me know!

So there you have it, can't find a 1660 for sale, not sure if a 1650 will have the capacity I want and not sure if the 2650 will have the responsiveness that I want. Any thoughts or alternatives would be appreciated! Also, if anyone knows where to find a 1660 let me know.

 

[Jeff Robertson]

This looks interesting as well:

Intel Xeon OEM E5-2660 V4 SR2N4 2.0GHz 14Core 35M 105W LGA2011-3 Processor CPU | eBay

Not sure how I feel about ordering from china but that is a pretty big savings.

 

[_alex]

Dual e5-2643v4 is probably best option for high core-count and high frequency.

e5-2683v3 often can be found for very reasonable price, bought two for ca. € 380 ea

 

[Jeff Robertson]

Dual e5-2643v4 is probably best option for high core-count and high frequency.

e5-2683v3 often can be found for very reasonable price, bought two for ca. € 380 ea

It looks like the 2643 is similar to the 1650 but can be used in a dual socket system, I will be using two single socket c612 boards. What do you think about this sucker:

Intel Xeon E5-2658 v4 QS 2.3GHz LGA2011-3 14C Compatible with X99 i7-6850K 6900K | eBay

I believe the qs engineering chips are essentially final silicon, it would also save quite a bit of money.

 

[Jeff Robertson]

If you plan on a dual processor motherboard please note the E5-16XX series are 1P meaning you cannot use it in a dual processor (2P) motherboard. You would need a E5-26XX series for 2P.

No need for more than one proc per system, I'm going to be using single proc super micro motherboards. That's why the 1600 series interests me, high clocks with reasonable core counts!

 

[markarr]

If you plan on a dual processor motherboard please note the E5-16XX series are 1P meaning you cannot use it in a dual processor (2P) motherboard. You would need a E5-26XX series for 2P.

There are a good chunk of 2P boards that will accept the E5-1xxx series. You just can't put a second proc in there as it does not have the QPI interconnect. I have a E5-1410v2 in a 2P Intel board currently. It is a workstation so the higher clocked cores were more beneficial than more cores.

 

[_alex]

It looks like the 2643 is similar to the 1650 but can be used in a dual socket system, I will be using two single socket c612 boards. What do you think about this sucker:

Intel Xeon E5-2658 v4 QS 2.3GHz LGA2011-3 14C Compatible with X99 i7-6850K 6900K | eBay

I believe the qs engineering chips are essentially final silicon, it would also save quite a bit of money.

interesting, but not really faster than the 2630.
1650 is maybe the sweet spot if you really want higher clock speeds for a limited number of vm's.
i would then also maximize memory speed in this host.

 

[Jeff Robertson]

interesting, but not really faster than the 2630.
1650 is maybe the sweet spot if you really want higher clock speeds for a limited number of vm's.
i would then also maximize memory speed in this host.

I agree, the ebay chip looks like a 2630 with an extra four cores... The price is so good I might purchase it and send back the 2630, a better chip for less money. I wish I could find an e5-1660, the damn things are just nowhere to be found.

 

[_alex]

I agree, the ebay chip looks like a 2630 with an extra four cores... The price is so good I might purchase it and send back the 2630, a better chip for less money. I wish I could find an e5-1660, the damn things are just nowhere to be found.

Besides the fact that the 2658 is not a production CPU you are right...

Guess the premium intel charges for the 1660 over the 1650 is why they are so rare. Same for 1680.
In the end, it really depends what you need, and 1650 is very often the choice when the focus is on higher clockspeed.
Maybe also 2687W could be interesting if you can find one within your budget and can handle 160W.

I wonder why you don't use the 4790k as part of the cluster if it works for the VM`s in question.

 

[Jeff Robertson]

Besides the fact that the 2658 is not a production CPU you are right...

I wonder why you don't use the 4790k as part of the cluster if it works for the VM`s in question.

I'm kicking it out of production for a few reasons. It doesn't support ECC, not the biggest problem in the world but I've seen too many servers catch ecc errors to trust anything important to it. The biggest reason is the back end of the cluster I'm building. I am using connectx-3 QSFP+ cards with a 40Gb DAC connecting the two nodes. If I want a third I have to then add a power hungry switch to the equation so sticking with two nodes makes things very simple. That and my budget just hit the proverbial wall .