KitGuru KitGuru.net – Tech News | Hardware News | Hardware Reviews | IOS | Mobile | Gaming | Graphics Cards
We experienced some problems initially with the 2687W processors which was due to an older bios being installed on the Asus Z9 PE-D8 WS. We updated to the latest 3109 version which cured a frequent ‘micro stutter' issue.
The ‘main' panel shows a brief overview of the system, with 64GB of memory installed and two 2687W processors at 3.1ghz.
The AI Tweaker panel was put in place by ASUS to cover the eventuality that Intel may release unlocked E5 processors. Sadly they haven't so many of these functions are wasted.
The ‘ Advanced' panel shows an overview of all the configurable areas of the motherboard. We were surprised to find DIMM timings in the Chipset configuration, rather than the Ai Tweaker panel.
As this is a server style workstation motherboard, there is a dedicated menu system for viewing Smbios and System event logs. The ‘Boot' panel offers various traditional options for configuring the boot phase, such as adjusting drive positions and boot screen logo on/off.
The ‘Monitor' panel details a list of temperature, fan speeds and voltage readings. Very useful for troubleshooting and checking the cooling performance. The Security panel allows an IT manager or system owner to lock out the bios to unfriendly hands.
The Tool menu is used for flashing the BIOS to as newer revision. It works painlessly as we had to do this to get the system fully operational for the 2687W dual configuration. The EXIT tab can be used for saving and rebooting after making changes to the system. There is also a handy boot override menu for a ‘one time' setting.
As mentioned earlier in the review, the XEON E5 processors are locked by Intel and there is no way to overclock these processors, apart from increasing the BLCK. We only managed a a 104mhz result, so it is pointless to include results at this speed.
With 64GB of the Kingston Predator 2,133mhz memory installed we tried to push past the default 1,333mhz ‘safe' setting. This is handled by using the ‘DDR speed – force' option in the bios. We managed to get stability at 1,600mhz with 9-9-9-24 1T timings, but any higher resulted in a no post.
The system was unable to rescue itself from 1,866mhz or 2,133mhz options, so we manually had to reset the CMOS via the jumper switch every time.
We tried loosening the timings to 11-11-34-2T at 1,866mhz, but it still wouldn't post. 1,600mhz was the limit with 64GB installed.
System validation of our build is available over here.
And there was me thinking my 3570k at 5ghz was awesome 🙂
shame on me !
Go on, give it away, please?
Would be nice to see some opteron reviews too. Cover the amd side of things.
thats a very nice system, but it does show that software is way behind the hardware. exactly the same sorry situation in the world of gaming.
We need a new Crysis and new application support for many cores.
The coders are lazy, although it makes little sense to develop a lot of time to multiple core support when most people have dual/quad core.
Most games ive looked at only use one core however, its a poor showing.
You should have known that on Xeons overclocking is BLOCKED – and this includes not only CPU clocks, but memory as well… 1600 is the highest you’re allowed to go – until Ivy-E next year which is expected to provide 1866. Annoying, isn’t it?
Well I stand (or sit) corrected on that one. I thought they could load the XMP profiles, but clearly not. thanks.
im currently have a similar setup, but on a cosmos 2, and both h80is dont fit on top they touch the top board passive coolers, too bulky ,so i need an advice how to setup this coolers, i saw on your nuild the h80s running wiht only 1 fan? how is the performance of those in that way?
The run great. bear in mind the 2687W’s aren’t producing too much heat when they are running at default clock speeds and voltages. Temperatures were well under 70c under extended load. As long as you have decent air flow, one fan is not a concern. Its only if you were to overclock and push voltages the two fans would be very useful. With Xeon’s being locked, it isn’t a concern.
If you are mounting the coolers at the rear, or top, set the single fan in exhaust configuration.
so ill try to put it on top with the fans outside pushing air inside, that will be ok?
Will the single fan not fit inside the case? I would set them up as exhaust unless you are mounting the radiators at the front of the case.
the problem is that the asus mobo has 2 passive coolers on top of the board and the radiator with the fan inside dont fit couse of them, so, thats why im planning to put them as intake, and only 1 fan each 🙁
I wouldn’t mount them in an intake position at the top of the case, even if they are outside the case. Hot air naturally flows upwards. you would really cause a problem for the airflow of the case if you set them as intake flowing up to down.
Should all still be ok, as long as you have good cool air intake from the front/side of the case.
looks like the cosmos 2 is well ventilated, 2 front, 1 back, 3 to the psu… im going to try the fron cage solution
I’m running this board with Predator 2133MHz using a VCCSA of 1.2V got it stable 11-12-11-30-2T 1.6V so consider that one negative may be solved.