Intel Xeon W2400 : Comparative Performance : Part 3
History of Intel HEDT : Rise, Stall , Return or Fall ?!
HEDT - High End Desktop, as opposed to a High End Enthusiast or a traditional Workstation platform, has always been a bit of a grey area for many. There have been numerous debates over the years of what actually constitutes a HEDT platform , does a higher end enthusiast level platform qualify as HEDT, as they certainly can qualify as a Workstation, for example.
Personally HEDT meant a higher level platform that had extended PCIe and memory features, both in bandwidth and capacity. Traditionally the HEDT would have one step higher core count and higher than dual channel memory, and would be systems end users who had higher requirements for PCIe and memory would gravitate to.
History of Intel HEDT.
This may get long, so for those who prefer to TL;DR , skip to the end :-)
Rise !
Intel always maintained parallel products for both Mainstream ( Core / i Series) and Workstation ( Xeon ) that shared a common socket, each platform however had accompanying chipsets that had similar feature sets, but were clearly defined and targeted respective markets. The most significant feature difference with the CPU's was that the Xeons had ECC memory support, and were ( supposedly ) top bin chips in the silicon lottery. The difference at the Xeon chipset level was less access to clocking features, which reflected more of a focus to the enterprise target market.
I'll maintain the focus on single socket system, tho most of the socket platforms listed also ran in dual Xeon configurations with different respective chipsets and CPU's that had an extended QPI channel for inter socket communication. The Xeons could however be used in both HEDT / Workstation chipset motherboards , and the first true Intel HEDT platform IMO was the X58.
X58 / 3400 : Socket 1366 ( November 2008 )
X58 was the first platform with QPI, Tri Channel DDR3, expanded PCIe lanes , and the CPU's also had core counts one step above the HEE platform of the day. CPU families that could be run were 2 generations of the i7 900 Series and the Xeon W3500/W3600.
I developed systems around X58/W3500/W3600, simply to have the combination of the top bin chips, and the access to the wider feature set of the X58 HEDT chipset instead of using the dedicated 3400 chipset. One little known fact was that the Xeon W3600's were actually unlocked , so could be overclocked on the X58 if the end user desired.
Top Line Chips : i7 990X - 6 Core / Xeon W3690 - 6 Core
Price variable between the i7 900's and the mirrored Xeon W3500 / 3600's was only around $50.00-$100.00 , so to me it was worth the additional minimal expense to get the top bin.
X79 / C602 : Socket 2011 ( November 2011)
Unlike the HEE platforms that were shifting every 12 months or less, the HEDT platforms would get around 3 years. X79 brought a new socket ( of course ) , DMI, more PCIe lanes, Quad Channel DDR3, and giving away its Xeon heritage even more, had an Enterprise level storage controller. It was a bit of an odd bird, but was an incremental improvement both chipset feature wise, and CPU , which got higher IPC, larger Caches, etc.
CPU families that could be run were 2 generations of i7 ( 3000/4000) and 2 generations of E5 1600/2600 Xeons. E5 1600 were single socket chips that mirrored the i7 desktop chips , E5 2600 were dual socket enabled chips. Why I have listed that series is that we could use the workstation variant of that chip, the E5 2687W, to lift the max core count of the platform from the official 6 Core to 8 Core.
Top Line Chips : i7 4960X - 6 Core / Xeon E5 1660 - 6 Core / Xeon E5 2687W - 8 Core
X99/C610 : Socket 2011-3 ( August 2014 )
Just short of 3 years on from the X79 came the X99, and of course another ( slight ) socket change, and the now usual incremental improvement in PCIe lanes, IPC, Cache and a move to Quad Channel DDR4. It was however getting harder to access the Xeon E5's , and support for the E5 2600 was now limited. However the i7's had received 2 core bumps across the 2 generations , one to 8 Core with the 5960X, and another to 10 Core with the 6950X , so it negated the reason to shoehorn the E5 2600's, and the mirrored E5 1600's were essentially getting locked out for the larger OEM's, i.e, Dell/Apple.
Top Line Chips : i7 6950X - 10 Core / Xeon E5 1680V4 - 10 Core
X299/C422 : Socket 2066 ( November 2017 )
Fast forward just over 3 years and we get to arguably the last of the line, the X299 , which again brought a new socket , increased PCIe lanes, and a whole new series of CPU's , the i9 7X Series, which ranged from 8 to 18 Core , which was a significant uptick in available core counts for the HEDT platform, levels only available previously in dual socket systems.
Also released on the same socket 2066 was a Xeon W2200 series on the C422 chipset platform , but clocking this time did not mirror the X-Series, being more conservative and inline with what I consider to be enterprise level clocking profiles. A popular system using that series of Xeons was the iMAC Pro
The X299 platform received another 2 CPU generational upgrades , i9 9X in November 2018 and again to the i9 10X in November 2019, both jumps were minor Clock/IPC improvements only. The platform was the first to receive 3 CPU generational upgrades and was extended another 3+ years to end of 2022 , which is unprecedented , as in that time the HEE platform had progressed to 13th Gen.
Top Line Chips : i9 10980XE - 18 Core / Xeon W2295 - 18 Core
The Stall !
I don't believe Intel intended to stretch the X299 this long , as there were numerous leaks of an X399 refresh ( later renamed Z399 due to AMD stealing the X399 chipset nomenclature, LOL ) still on socket 2066 , with a CPU core count upgrade to 22 Cores, partnered with a X599 Platform on socket 3647 up to 28Cores , which was an X-Series version of the C621 / Xeon W3200 series that is still used in the current Mac Pro.
The above leaks were floating around in 2019, but both failed to eventuate, and then the rumours of ending the X-Series branding, which was to be merged in to the next Xeon W series under a unified W790 chipset. My concern on hearing that was that HEDT as we knew it could be "Xeon'ed" in its development, profiling, marketing and platform approach.
And that brings us to where we are now.
The Return or Fall ? !
After some unexpected and lengthy delays , the leaks proved accurate in that Intel had literally thrown the baby out with the bath water regards their previous marketing and profiling of the HEDT sector , and in doing so, there would be a more unified approach with Xeon W2400 being what they call a "Mainstream" Workstation platform ( don't say HEDT ) , based on a Monolithic Die design , up to 24 Cores, and a W3400 "Professional" Workstation platform, based on a Multi Chiplet Die design , up to 56 Core, both being driven by the same W790 chipset? !
This was officially released February 2023.
How they decided to run 2 completely different die designs , under a unified chipset was already throwing up alarm bells for me, so I wasn't overly surprised there were some gremlins in early R&D. I had a gut feeling that locking the 2 platforms under a unified chipset could/would bring the more conservative profiling needed on the W3400 down on the W2400, and I was right. This isn't overly complicated , IMO, the clocking curves being navigated by the W2400's is due to the chips being forced to operate under clocking profiles that are obviously designed to cater for the W3400.
For those not clear on what I am referring to , have a read of Pete from Scan's reports, or previous posts about the requirement to unofficially unlock the true ACT.
The frustration is that neither Intel reps or the engineers from the respective motherboard manufacturers, in this instance ASUS, will give any clear indication of why the official ACT clocking profiles are so ridiculously low on the W2400 , when thermal and clocking overhead for the chips are barely scratching the surface @ its official/stock configuration ? !
To me this could have easily been avoided, the motherboards focused on the W2400 platform should not be compatible with the W3400, they should not be cross pollinating, or at minimum, they should at least provide clearly separate clocking profiles at an official level, instead of hiding them under some undocumented 'Watercooled Overclocking Profile".
Lets be clear, this is not an overclock, it doesn't touch or alter the base clock multiplier, it simply adjusts the turbo profile to allow the true ACT ( All Core Turbo ).
This needs to be the official profile setting !
To add further , lets address the elephant in the room. The W2400 series , which is supposed to be the direct replacement for the X-Series HEDT platform, has been priced significantly higher than most if not all in the DAW/Tech industry were expecting. I could accept a 10-20% uptick for comparable core counts against the outgoing X299 , which is normal for a new platform release, but CPU pricing in my local market of Australia is coming in at least 2x what I was hoping/expecting , motherboards are 3x. Its a massive increase which is very difficult to justify for many when the performance, as mentioned in previous posts against the 13900K and 7950X , core for core, is very similar, with the later being 1/3 the cost.
So in closing , this is how we have arrived at this junction point , the W2400's have the potential to deliver some significant and long overdue performance improvements over the outgoing X299, but at a price point that will be a long reach for many except the upper tiers who can justify the additional PCIe requirement and the expenditure.
The return could well become a fall with all the above weighed up, and I have not even covered some ongoing R&D minefields currently being navigated that I am not in a position to share, as yet, as they are still under investigation with the appropriate engineering teams.
And with that, on to the next :-)