Intel Xeon E-2400 Series First Look

Video Correction - I mistakenly called this system the SYS-511-M. I was actually sent a 511-W, which is a workstation variant. Here are the main differences between those platforms...
SYS-511R-M
Use standard Micro ATX form factor MB
20” shout depth chassis
No NVMe support on front drive bay
Up to two expansion slots + one internal HBA slot
SYS-511R-W
Use SMC proprietary WIO form factor MB
25” depth chassis
Support up to two NVMe on front drive bay
Up to three expansion slots
Able to support double width GPU
Grab yourself a Pint Glass or 20oz Coffee Tumbler at craftcomputing...
Links to items below may be affiliate links for which I may be compensated
Thanks to Supermicro for sending out the SYS-511R-M for this review. Make sure to check out www.supermicro... for your next server!
Last month, among the news of new Emerald Rapid Xeons and Intel's Gaudi AI accelerators, Intel announced the first update to their lineup of Xeon E CPUs in over three years. The Xeon E-2400 mark a return to the entry-level market for server hardware, but does the feature set match the price of entry?
Follow me on Mastodon @[e-mail]
Support me on Patreon and get access to my exclusive Discord server. Chat with myself and the other hosts on Talking Heads all week long.
/ craftcomputing

[@CraftComputing]

- Video Corrections - I mistakenly called this system the SYS-511-M. I was actually sent a 511-W, which is a workstation variant. Here are the main differences between those platforms... SYS-511R-M Use standard Micro ATX form factor MB 20” shout depth chassis No NVMe support on front drive bay Up to two expansion slots + one internal HBA slot SYS-511R-W Use SMC proprietary WIO form factor MB 25” depth chassis Support up to two NVMe on front drive bay Up to three expansion slots Able to support double width GPU Also, Intel did NOT upgrade the onboard storage controller compared to consumer chips. SAS support is available on this system, but only through an add-in card, which would bypass the onboard controller. When taking notes for this video, I wrote down SAS support based on specs of the Supermicro 815 chassis backplane, not the CPU. So, that's one less feature you get compared to other platforms.

[@shanent5793]

SAS is hardly a standard feature on those other platforms. An integrated SAS controller on a premium board will still cost extra. Note that some boards may have MiniSAS connectors, but they are only connected to PCIe lanes or SATA ports

[@mikequinn8780]

I work a company where we’ve deployed a couple dozen of the E-2300 counterparts for this server. We needed dedicated hardware for segmentation reasons (don’t ask it was the least bad option). Our application is highly reliant on single threaded performance so the high boost clock speeds were very important to us and for what we are doing 128GB is way more than we will ever need and the ECC memory is a big plus. The ability to have a pair of servers for redundancy in a very small footprint was important to us. These make a lot of sense for that application.

[@Corei14]

Java Minecraft server?

[@mikequinn8780]

It actually is Java but it's a factory control system for running production machines and talking to databases.@@Corei14

[@Key-z2x]

cool story bro, my Pentium 3 CPU is faster than that.

[@ΘοδωρήςΠαναγιωτόπουλος-δ3ι]

Small office (6 clients), 4 business applications installed on server with local sql DBs, old programs in which only single core speed matters. I totally aggree. There is nothing fitting more than E2488 on a rack shelf. (I am going to Dell R360 with perc H755 and a PM1653)

[@RedXons]

A big reason for not including efficiency cores and performance cores in this platform is the compatibility with hypervisors, foremost VMware ESXi which doesn't support CPU architectures with two different core types. So if this platform had those in order to run ESXi properly you would need to disable the E-Cores (and even then would probably not be certified by VMware). These servers with the Xeon E lineup are often used by companies in the edge running ESXi for cases where you want to have some VMs local in a branch office like SD-WAN edges or even just for witnesses in a 3rd location. BTW: I'm not saying it is a good platform, but we do see some demand for systems like this. And for production you can't run a minisforum box or some i7 counterpart as you need a supported platform, both by the hardware and software vendor. I've personally deployed some of those where the customer specifically wanted the lowest spec and price intel server to run ESXi and maybe 2-3 VMs on it only (for thing like the mentioned witness appliance VMs or similar which you can't really put in the cloud yet).

[@duduoson1306]

Yup, here is the glaringly obvious missed use case. I can also see this low/limited TDP path taken by many datacenters to meet ESG goals as well.

[@andibiront2316]

Also, consistent performance. But to a lesser degree on this kind of products. Intel sells all P-Core Xeons, and will sell all E-Core Xeons soon, but no hybrid architectures as far as I know. It is an schedulling nightmare.

[@Prophes0r]

So...1 out of the MANY options? Linux supports it, including your Linux hypervisor of choice. HyperV supports it. Who cares about ESXi support in 2024 anyway? Every single client I've worked with that was using ESXi is jumping ship. Those clients are small, but who is running ESXi in huge volumes? There is probably a client out there, but there can't be many.

[@andibiront2316]

@@Prophes0r It depends who you ask. But the lowest estimate I found is VMware with 45% market share, 30 points over the runner up. AFAIK, enterprise is still on VMware. Small business probably not, it's expensive.

[@marcogenovesi8570]

@@Prophes0r lol vmware has a huge market share

[@mattartist00]

I personally use the Xeon E series for game server hosting. Having the, essentially, desktop performance in a server platform is really nice for servers such as Minecraft and the like. Running that on Golds or Platinums doesn't really perform as well as you'd think due to the low clock speed.

[@mkrzan01]

Bingo! I've got one on the way to run a couple PalWorld servers. Per core performance is vital.

[@thestrykernet]

These Xeons exist purely for specific system implementations that cannot use E-cores. Since 12th gen Intel's xx500+ (non-F) CPUs support ECC when used on W680 chipset motherboards which is likely why these are the first E series Xeons released since Rocket Lake.

[@mr.sunshine1444]

can't wait to buy this in 8 years!

[@timpeng4418]

By the way, the Core series (non F and higher end i5 or better) now support ECC too as long as you use a W680 motherboard. These Xeons are real head scratchers for me…

[@MiIIiIIion]

Really? Is it a sort of unofficial "we won't support it or help you but it might work" like with ECC on Ryzen, or do they actually support it and verify that support?

[@timpeng4418]

@@MiIIiIIion it’s officially supported and endorsed by Intel

[@weisstdudochnicht1]

Supermicro X13SAZ-F with 13500 and DDR5 ECC 😊

[@proxgs7703]

@@weisstdudochnicht1 does corrected errors are reported back to the OS through the EDAC driver?

[@craigputnam4764]

A big use-case for Xeon E-series CPUs is low-end and mid-range workstations where customers want ECC - I am definitely in that group. Having said that, most of the observations about the E2400's shortcomings for server use hold for workstation use as well: lack of E-cores/limited core count, so-so memory limit, limited PCIe lanes. As others have mentioned, there are enough niche uses for the E-series that it probably won't fall completely flat, but I'm as disappointed as Jeff. I do take issue with Jeff's assertion that unbuffered ECC isn't "real" ECC. The buffer is primarily there to allow lots of modules to coexist. If you're only allowing 4 memory modules anyway, then buffering is an unnecessary expense and performance hit.

[@shanent5793]

ECC is ECC, but there are some features that come with enterprise ECC that are missing from some implementations. For example, I have an AM5 system that supports ECC but errors are not reported at the platform level, they are only detected by the operating system. Registers/buffers only allow for more memory packages to share the command bus. Eg. a registered module can have 40 x4 packages for 64GB vs. unbuffered with 32GB with 20 x8 packages at the same density. Implementations, registered or not, allow for a maximum 2 DIMM per channel.

[@Nalianna]

Sweet, they found their ONE customer.

[@Jaack18]

That's why I got a W680 system, it supports ECC and you can use k skus.

[@tim3172]

@@Nalianna HP sold millions of their Proliant MicroServer series, enough that it got... *checks notes* 10 (well, ten generations and several "v2" so like a dozen) generations of them.

[@JordansTechJunk]

I love Craft Computing so much, I clicked the like and subscribe buttons 9 times!

[@CraftComputing]

*processing* Just making sure it was an odd number.

[@repairman2be250]

Bugger, I only clicked 2 times.

[@user-co9in3kw5i]

Thanks for the review. Pointing out the E-2488's throttling issue is a real concern for our use case; i've got a need for the fastest available single threaded CPU i can get in a rack mounted HA VMWare environment with ECC and the intel E-2488 looks to be the fastest out there on a core by core basis - until it throttles, of course - and when it does, it loses any benefit over our existing highly multithreaded servers, and just adds to the variabilty of hardware we'd need to support. Damn.

[@nichenson7987]

The I5, I7, and I9 all support ECC with a W680 board. I have a 13900 in a Supermicro W680 for one workstation and a 13700K in the Asus W680M in another. Both have ECC support and run very well for a workstation. Given that, I do like the E2300 series for small single function servers and plan on getting a 2468 to use in a pfsense appliance. This is more than enough for something like that.

[@GlassPup]

Yeah, I have a 12600 working with ECC UDIMMs in a ASRock Rack W680D4U just fine.

[@reviewaccount469]

A few use cases I could see: Test/QA environment probably for web services, an intranet web server for an org within a business, an integration services box for sending/receiving records/files, or for remote AI workloads in Diffusion and LLMs. As mentioned it leaves no room for future growth, but I think its meant for small to mid-size businesses that want physical servers for narrow non-taxing use cases. I could see it being a simple choice for non-technical users and finance people wanting to control budgets tightly.

[@Sick5525]

Happy new year Jeff :)

[@mkrzan01]

Gaming dedicated server use for these will shine. DayZ, PalWorld, Minecraft, etc. will excel with the high clock speeds as they don't use many cores.

[@esra_erimez]

Happy and Healthy New Year to Jeff and all the Craft Computing viewers! Who's watching in 2024?

[@DLTX1007]

I think the biggest issue is that 7800X3D and 7900, 7950X (set at 105W or so) exists All 3 would easily run rings around the 8 core model, not so much because there are applications that cannot be used with E core or performance consistency (esxi) Golden cove is just horribly inefficient and falls on its face when power limited, the E cores aren't much better either. In many situations the E cores are clocked up to such a extent that they lose all the efficiency benefits of being well uh, E cores. Also btw, the M.2 slots are 4.0 not 3.0 but minor detail

[@sherrilltechnology]

Great video Jeff, very interesting video!

[@anurbanpenguin8890]

With these being on the LGA1700 socket I can already see this being the next iteration of Aliexpress salvage chipsets and sockets for cheap price to performance in the future. Nothing against that I am all for recycling and reusing as many parts as possible!

[@Key-z2x]

Idk man I cant even find a single benchmark on these things, this cpus probably rare af

[@Elkarlo77]

The biggest contender are the Workstation Processors and there are lot of Servers build with them. A W2465X is an ideal Hypervisor Processor yes it costs 3 times as the E-2400 series but it comes with 16P Cores and up to 2TB of ECC Ram and a meager 64 PCIE 5.0 Channels, which is still 3 times the E-2400 got. Why they are a perfect Hypervisor with only 16 Cores 32 Threads ? When you are running a small AD Domain with an Exchange on Premise. The smallest bundle Microsoft offers are 8 Core licenses with each 2. So the smallest license for a Windows 2022 Server is 16 Cores. You pay for the Cores on the Hypervisor. Exchange 2019 needs 4 Core and 128GB to run... DC needs 2 Cores. Normaly you have a Twin Configuration with two Hypervisors and 4 Microsoft VM's running, so you can swap over. That means you need two Hypervisors with 8 cores for a Failover, most likely 12 cores and 256GB of Ram is plenty.The rest of the Cores can be used up for Linux etc. But the E-2400 is virtually Useless 8 Cores and 128GB of Ram don't cutt it for an On Premise Small Domain with Exchange, while an W-2465X has enough Power for it with minimal licensing fees. AMD has some nice Threadripper Pro in the 16 Core and 1-2TB with lot of PCIE Lanes out there. As Small Server CPU, 8 Cores they are useless you can get literally more Performance when building on a Ryzen 9 7945 pro 12 cores with 24 PCIE Lanes and a Board which supports ECC. That should have been the benchmark for the E-2400 Series.

[@VeritronX]

Would probably make a good game server host, I'd want one for space engineers or minecraft etc

[@spetcnaz83]

I really like this channel, but sometimes it feels like Jeff doesn't really research what the product is for and why certain things were done by the manufacturer. As mentioned before VMWare doesn't support E cores, hence they are disabled/removed. The intent of this CPU is stability, and relatively low power draw in a branch office / small office environment. That very server sitting on the desk is perfect for a restaurant back of office, corporate branch office, or a small business, that needs a solid server, with VMware compatibility, yet it doesn't need to do anything too crazy. Maybe run two or three VMs, DC, file server, and maybe a separate application server of some kind. Demanding Core i9 level performance and features from a chip that is not meant for that is a bit perplexing.

[@CraftComputing]

Price point, it doesn't compare favorably to ANY CPU offering around it. That was my point. Zero expansion potential vs an Epyc 8124P with 3x memory bandwidth, limitless PCIe pipeline and CPU options up to 64 cores. Which platform would you invest in?

[@spetcnaz83]

@@CraftComputing The major manufacturers don't have too many low cost Epyc options, some don't have them at all. These E series Xeons have been a mainstay in Dell 1U short chassis for example. That's why Intel does what it does. I am not saying it's the best chip for the segment, but it is made for the segment and it has wide adoption. So comparing it to an i9 isn't really fair. Especially when you mention the lack of E cores as a negative when there is a technical reason for it, which is VMware compatibility.

[@agr-tech]

@@spetcnaz83VMware is just one use case. They could include them and give the option to disable in uefi for VMware customers

[@magneticshrimp7429]

The CPU chipset link is x8 - not x4 - according to the motherboard block diagram in the manual. So the PCIe bandwidth isnt quite that badly constrained (still not great). However In a entry level server platform I would prefer if they split up the x16 CPU lanes into x8 x8 or x8 x4 x4 like they used to do back in the E3 generations.

[@shanent5793]

The Raptor Lake architecture limits it to x8/x8 bifurcation

[@Dean_Smith]

Many vendors still use supermicro chassis as "appliances" with their own custom linux based , application specific build. Feels this is where this aimed at - good efficiency with no complex different cores to accommodate, just using the latest generation underlying platform. Does the motherboard have the on board USB A socket ? Have seen some appliance builds use this for boot and/or recovery rather than full SSD.

[@7MBoosted]

I think intel had an opportunity to shake things up with lga 1700 xeons. Could you imagine a 24 thread e-core only chip in this server pulling only 35 watts at full tilt. Yeah, clock speeds would be low (4.3ghz max turbo), but the thread count and power savings would completely make up for it. It would legitimately be the perfect cpu for the average person's home lab.

[@1armbiker]

They made that years ago. It’s called Snow Ridge. The issue is Intel’s e cores aren’t that efficient, they’re just small and cheap to make. That’s why nobody wanted them in the wider market, and only telcos pushed Intel to give them the chips. You can also find similar products in many older switches.

[@7MBoosted]

@1armbiker respectfully, I disagree. I know they might not be as "efficient" as ARM cores, but when you think of the average home labber, they don't need 225w to run the services they want to run. Heck, skylake chips are a go-to option for home lab right now, to think you can get 6500t performance (N100) at 7w is crazy. That is the same performance at 1/5 the power draw. The down side of e-cores as I see it, is the limited pcie connectivity. Something like a N100 only has 9 pcie lanes.

[@Knirin]

⁠@@7MBoosted The N100 has a very strict power cap though. The performance per watt of the E cores is horrible when you let them off the leash. On leash like the N100 they make great little appliance processors.

[@7MBoosted]

@Knirin why would you not want a high core count power constrained processor in an appliance such as a server? My whole point is that for most typical services you don't need a whole lot, so why not slap 16, 24, 32 e-cores on a chip and be able to target a low power envelope and still be able to run damn near anything in a home lab? People are still going out and running high core count ivy bridge and haswell xeons for their home lab. They run the software fine, but the power use is through the roof. Why not get the same performance per thread at a 5x reduction in power use?

[@chromerims]

@@7MBoosted "e-core only chips" 👍Interesting ideas 32 or more E-cores plus 32MB+ of smart cache, with up to 128GB of DDR5 @ 4000 MTs in quad channel, and with goodly more than only 20x PCIe lanes . . . would be something to consider. *_ Edit: Replying to @denvera1g1 relating to Westmere, Jeff said, "Intel is introducing MASSIVE E-Core based CPUs this year. Both 144 and 288 E-Core models have been confirmed." _*

[@pyroslev]

Well, looks like I'm order a new Coffee tumbler. And this just proves Intel basically yields the meat of the server space to AMD. They were once the kings, proof with the sheer quantities of Xeons. Now, they're something else.

[@Vittra0]

12500/13500/14500 and above supports ECC UDIMM on W680 chipset, so the 13900 does have it. K chips have it as well, but F do not.

[@axescar]

I think all of them have ecc support. It only depends on chipset

[@Effectcake]

As far as i know, there are currently no E-Cores in a Mixed configuration (P + E) on Intel Sever CPUs. Most Sever operating systems, especially Virtualisation systems (vmware, Hyper-V) currently do not support both types of Cores at the same time. They recognise them as different CPUs. Sienna is the better platform here for sure

[@CraftComputing]

It's on Intel to make sure software supports their hardware platforms. I understand that most hypervisors don't support Big/Little yet. All the more reason for Intel to either a) work with software devs to support their hardware stack -or- b) put out a more competitive product in this market segment.

[@shanent5793]

​@@CraftComputing it's up to the software company to decide what platform to support. I set the requirements for my application and if it's proprietary there's nothing Intel can do about it

[@CraftComputing]

If VMWare/MS/etc don't want to allow you to customize their software for supporting your hardware, see option B. Make a better product that's supported.

[@shanent5793]

@@CraftComputing why is it only Intel that has to do that? What is IBM doing to make Windows run better on Power?

[@powerpower-rg7bk]

As mentioned already in the comments, the lack of virtualization support with the heterogenous CPU architecture would prevent many server use-cases. However, there are a few more reasons why efficiency cores were disabled, often centering around workloads that need consistent timing. Various application bugs have cropped up when switching between performance and efficiency cores that best avoided in a server environment. Thus offering a chip like his without efficiency cores makes sense for the target market. It would be nice to see a bit higher single core turbo and multicore turbo even if power consumption was bumped up to a 130W value. Ditto for supporting faster ECC memory. It would give this platform a bit more single threaded performance which could be this platforms selling point. On the flip side, is AVX-512 enabled? The performance cores do have AVX-512 units on the consumer side but Intel has fused them off on all Raptor Lake chips. It would make sense to enable given the lack of performance cores. As for the motherboard, we really need to see more affordable PCIe switches for platforms like this. The 16 lanes of PCIe 5.0 off of the CPU can easily fan out to 32 lanes of PCIe 4.0 for storage or 64 lanes of PCIe 3.0 for legacy devices/expansion.

[@CraftComputing]

Big/Little works in both KVM and HyperV. It's VMware that won't support it.

[@shanent5793]

There's no competing with the integrated PCIe lanes. An x48 lane PCIe 4.0 store/forward switch chip costs over $200, PCIe 5.0 will be even more. By the time it's in a board it's gonna be $1000+ so it doesn't add much value compared to EPYC or bigger Xeons

[@zackerymcpherson9409]

I've used this CPU for my clients with older softwares that are not optimized for the newer chip designs.

[@collinmcguire65]

ECC is supported on my 13500 running on a w680 board why are you reporting that 13th gen isn’t ECC compatible? Simple search on the intel Ark further proves that they do support ECC

[@casperghst42]

Which is why I'm still quite happy with my E3 1245v6.

[@nadtz]

The E2400 have some 'but why' aspects to them but they do have their place. Relatively low power in 1u form factor but decent/good clock speed considering it's low power and price. They also make good ESXI hosts as others have mentioned. I'd personally have looked pretty hard at this for a home server if it had more PCIE lanes but they don't so yeah. Kind of a 'best worst' scenario but we've installed some 2400 and 2400g servers and they do the job. There is a 10gb version of this setup also, that one has 1 gen4 M.2 as well.

[@stefannilsson2406]

An entry level sapphire rappids server looks a lot more worthwhile. Even the lowest end chips get 8 memory channels with support for 4TB of memory and 80 gen 5 pcie lanes.

[@lamar9525]

I agree! Very informative YT!

[@richardrestall8592]

You nailed it. The Intel market segmentation strategy has worked fo decades, to the profit of Intel and the detriment of Intel customers

[@repairman2be250]

Thanks Jeff, though I clicked twice the like button. How about a video where you compare the 13th gen and the 13 and a half something gen, I mean the 14th gen Intel CPU.

[@shadowdeath9687]

These would make nice current gen replacements for Precision 3930 Rack, which is still only a 9th gen PC. Deployed a number of these as control PCs for industrial equipment.

[@romayojr]

no craft review at the end?

[@johncnorris]

The E-2400 series does fit the description of a red-headed step-child.

[@MitchellWilsonII]

I was super bummed when I found out they weren’t going to release any G variants. I need QuickSync!

[@Tamazin]

Same! Been waiting for ages for that! Quicksync + ddr5 ecc + relative low tdp xeon! The only option for that currently is "old" ddr4 versions released in 2021Q3 (2388G).

[@agr-tech]

You would need a w680 chipset to get quick sync, ecc, and ddr5. I have one such board.

[@MenkarX]

What? Coffee? I was hoping to see beer review!

[@t8z5h3]

Reminds me of a modern version of the dell percussion 3930R fixed workstation.

[@FlaxTheSeedOne]

I mean this kind of system is not the type getting used for Virtualization (like performance comupte) this is more the type getting used as dedicated hosts for Monitoring Nodes, or Firewall/Jump/Log hosts. So something you want on dedicated hardware asit shoudl be the last one to fail where virtualization is not desirable. 10G is also a non issue as you will not exceed the 2Gbit the chassis offers. And even if you want to use it as a GW, or Firewall you slapp in a 100G nic or something. This kind of machine also makes sense at the edge where you ingest some data and inference it with a GPU where the samll footprint makes sense. This does not feel like the type of machine you woudl deploy at a small buisses. And even if you would, you would probably deploy them as a small entry level storage cluster. Even smaller buissneses will pick a higher end server for its expandibility. For Compute desity this is also not it. as thers 1U systems which can handle it better.

[@gwjones82009]

depending on the price of the box itself, this strikes me as almost a PFsense business firewall box alternative, BYOHW of course.

[@paulbrooks4395]

I suspect these target a market segment specifically requested by companies that need specs that aren't too high with prices low. I've heard these mentioned for telecoms and edge servers in the past. It's important to remember that Intel has competent people who know their markets. They will cut products that don't yield profits, and the server markets include millions of units sold per year.

[@ahmetrefikeryilmaz4432]

The only truly valid use case I see for this over the 8124P is cloud gaming and maybe banking. Intel is trying to no cannbalise the real xeon platform which honestly is being absolutely brutalised by AMD. There are some companies that has neem using intel for decades and the moment they decide change is good Intel is going to lose a lot of market share really fast. It has been happening in the laptop market especially after news of intel paying OEM's not to use AMD have surfaced and that's in turn presumably no longer the case. On desktop AMD does much better at half as much Watts of power. This is all because Intel made one crucial error in investing so much in the 10nm process...

[@SanjayRavindran]

Hey Jeff, please note that 13900k and 14900k so as few other cpu's in 12th gen and 13 does support ecc udimm with R680E and W680 chipsets. As you said, it seems like a pointless platform.

[@martinpalenik]

I need this, our application is single core only.. Thanks for the review! I just dont know how to order this in Canada, always a big problem.

[@thelinuxlearningcurve5394]

You have probably prevented a lot of headaches and saved some people a bunch of money...Hats off to you for telling the whole truth.... Hope Intel actually listens...That chip sounds like it could have been impressive except for the serous handicapping done by Intel.

[@shanent5793]

There are only 16 PCIe 5.0 lanes, not 20. That's all that Raptor Lake supports. Nor do they support SAS on their own or through the chipset, you will still have to add an HBA. The Supermicro datasheets only mentions SAS support in the backplane, and not in the motherboard. Did you personally verify either of these capabilities? Registration and buffering are orthogonal to ECC; the registers on the address bus allow the signal to fan out to more chips per DIMM, which enables double the command rate, but unbuffered ECC is still ECC.

[@gigabit9823]

You're the best Jeff. Happy New Year.

[@sonny8085]

You say that the i9-13900 doesn't support ECC, but Lenovo sell their P3 Ultra Workstation with the options of that processor and ECC ram on the configuration page

[@gabest4]

Future candidate $20 ebay cpu.

[@mikequinn8780]

The big question I’ve had for a long time is why don’t more server builders use Ryzen? It’s got the best core count for the socket size and ECC support. Seems like a great low end server processor but aside from Asrock-Rack I don’t know of another server board that supports Ryzen.

[@shanent5793]

I have that Asrock AM5 board and it's mediocre, I wish there were an alternative. ECC errors can only be detected by the OS, so the system can crash without the platform logging the error. The BIOS is clunky, not because of the text interface, but because of the slowness along with the plethora of confusing and contradictory options presented that do absolutely nothing. It also tends to fill the logs with false fan errors if they're not revved up, it seems it just can't reliably measure below 900 RPM

[@mikequinn8780]

@@shanent5793 Good to know I have their AM4 board at my house and its been fine. Guess I can take that upgrade off the table. Still seems like something that could be good if done right.

[@shanent5793]

@@mikequinn8780 might still be worthwhile for the built-in in dual Broadcom 10GBase-T, it was slightly cheaper than the ASUS ProArt which only has a single Marvell 10 Gig. There are used, discrete NICs which are cheaper but they consume scarce slots on client boards

[@Bobstone2131]

Wow, feels like you just read an eBay ad for a 5-6 year old system. For $200-300, might be ok.

[@magneticshrimp7429]

Server folk do not really like mixed cores, but I wish they would support it as an option.

[@dhgodzilla1]

Hey Jeff in your Opinion what would be the Best X99 Xeon for a Gaming System? I recently got a good deal on some Hunanzhi X99 Motherboards so am shopping around for some good options & I trust your judgement in this area since you have built so many of them.

[@mrlithium69]

its 8 chipset lanes now. DMI x8 it says on your slide @ 3:18

[@AidenPryde3025]

I have a feeling that Intel limits the number of W680 chipset they sell, so the consumer CPUs aren't going into servers as much, as they support basically the same ECC as this platform.

[@woodmanvictory]

Uhh afaik all 13th gen CPUs support ECC on even the desktop SKUs but only on the C-series chipsets.

[@richardw5761]

Cool video. I know this request is stupid but please Frankenstein a gpu u in and grab a few benchmarks, Doom 1 if nothing else. Thanks.

[@chubbysumo2230]

I have a dell t340 with an e2176g. Im guessing its just market segmentation reasons that they exist.

[@milescarter7803]

I can't be the only one who wants to see the E cores hit the road in favor of a 10-12 P core setup? Or alternatively give us 24/32/40/64/80 of them on a die and forget the P cores. I like these, still wish they were supported on mainstream boards. Judging from the performance of the P cores, the E cores need to be invisible to software that doesn't support them because of bottlenecks etc. Still waiting to see what the chiplets bring, maybe the all singing all dancing all P core processors I would like, and maybe a mix for people doing productivity, and all E cores for renders/compute.

[@ewasteredux]

Thanks Jeff! Off the wall question... Did they ask you to review this or did it show up as part of a computer safe-haven law?

[@CraftComputing]

🎵 in the aaaaaarrrrrmmms ooooffff an aaangellllll 🎵

[@ewasteredux]

@@CraftComputing , LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!🤣

[@johnpaulsen1849]

Seems like the ASRock rack 1u with either Intel 1700 or AM5 for AMD would be just as effective.

[@rudypieplenbosch6752]

More power usage, higher pricing even less performance , bigger numbers on the type spec, bigger = better ?

[@computerenthusiast402]

What’s your favorite server build to recommend for quick mass storage ?

[@likeapro9329]

Bench this vs a x99 E5-2690 v4 !! would LOVE to see how much it edges out the old cpu for cost??

[@edwarddesposito4476]

I do not see the comparison. i9 workstation and low-powered Xeon configured as a small business network appliance because the CPUs are priced the same?

[@CraftComputing]

Because it's literally the same chip.

[@OftenAsked]

I'd been eyeing an E-2374G for my HL15 build - no Graphics in the 2400 platform means... I really don't know what platform I'll use for the new Low-Power NAS.

[@thewoode1050]

Don't you think the core count might have been with small businesses in mind who don't want to pay for higher core count windows server licenses?

[@Yuriel1981]

Why did "compilation of comprises" sound like "Comedy of Errors" when you said it? Also, how did they not make it a 10 core/20 thread at least? It just seems like a lack luster generational offering.

[@crissnickers_frog6689]

soryy ,but u have servers on the internet!!........and option to use youtube @4k or 8k rezolution.......istaling a extention protocol on the browser.........so this is optional ,and u can have connections from provider@10gb or more.......so is a difference with/@ 1gb lan or 10gb fibre users??in every use case?

[@greenprotag]

That rough. I guess it's sort of a solution looking for a problem? You would have to require this CPU for intense & bursty single core workloads AND ECC. I am imagining maybe cloud gaming or some kind of stand alone remote access workstation... But it feels still lacking even then. It lives out on the edge and can't be upgraded... And is that edge worth it at all?

[@greenprotag]

On the cloud gaming front it's also not worth it considering it's not super lucrative and not very scalable aside from just buying a bunch of individual boxes... Then just... Why?

[@interceptor001]

The problem are not the chips. It's getting a cheap enough board to justify it. Also everything up from i5-12500 can run ECC und that board so why buy a xeon? (Honest question)

[@leoworrall9449]

The lack of E cores might make this ideal for something like Wendell’s forbidden router

[@equintar]

Therefore... Conclussion: Worth it or not?

[@Franseven]

intel is cutting their losses on this refresh gen and is preparing a big return with the arrow lake 15th gen

[@haxwithaxe]

Until you mentioned market cannibalization I was thinking about per core licensing as the reason to ditch the e cores.

[@sjargo11]

I know its not really relevant to the video but does anyone know what the two wall mounted shelves in the background are called or where to find them? I think they look awesome :)

[@aazjo]

I see your flipper keep moving and lighting up. Are you using it as a remote or something?

[@CraftComputing]

Best teleprompter remote I've ever used.

[@Raintiger88]

Gen 3. . .but I still want it.

[@porklaser]

Yeah this server has a use case and it "makes sense" to deploy it in those places. Sure, fine. Still cant get past that this is just a desktop cpu where they twiddle the fuses to make it worse, then upcharge and sell it as a "server" platform.

[@pyramidsinegypt]

So it's the business version of a Celeron 😅

[@zdravkotomasevic2763]

Not really. Atom more likely 😂

[@SoraIroNaKISEKI]

Any plan for a W2400/3400?

[@FrenziedManbeast]

Wow eight cores in a server - 2010 called they want their core counts back.

[@Draknem]

You can run 128 gigs of unbuffered ECC ram on a lot of AM4 and AM5 boards with any Ryzen CPU. Weird how Intel still locks down this feature to only work on Xeons. PCIe configuration is also not much better than normal desktop platforms. The whole thing feels kind of pointless.

[@PsychoStreak]

Given that the server only has 1GB Ethernet on board, the PCIe lanes aren't that big a bottleneck, as it's already going to saturate the NICs with just a basic NVME setup. Plus the CPU usage probably isn't going to be great either. It really seems like Intel just wanted something to fill a price point here, rather than give a real entry level product. This doesn't seem like a huge or significant evolution of the old E2-12xx series, which were what let me get into server level gear at home without running cast off enterprise gear or bankrupting myself with newer higher tier Xeons. Adding in Raptor Lake's worst attributes doesn't do it any favors. Hard pass on these.

[@halitimes2]

The entry level Xeon line has been more or less stagnant for about a decade. The lack of e-cores isn't a surprise, this is more or less a respun E5-1620v1, over and over and over. Any performance gain and TDP decrease is simply due to an improved node.

[@fxgamer-11yt]

i wounder how it pairs in gaming

[@denvera1g1]

what i would have personally liked to see from this generation of Xeon is something like a return to the E, L, and X series from the Westmere days. but this time L being normaL, X being all P cores(12 total) and E being all E cores(48 total) I know the architecture isnt really meant for this but each one of those E core complexes is almost EXACTLY the same size as a single P core.

[@CraftComputing]

Intel is introducing MASSIVE E-Core based CPUs this year. Both 144 and 288 E-Core models have been confirmed.

[@denvera1g1]

@@CraftComputing I would love to see them, wonder if the E-2400 series will see an all E-core update, its what this platform needs to save it from the landfill

[@chromerims]

@@CraftComputing "144 and 288 E-Core" . . . That sounds interesting. Thank you 👍

[@ccleorina]

Well they remove E core just because some hypervisor don't support big little architecture and VMware one of them... that's why AMD have EPYC Zen 4c & Intel have Sapphire Rapids-SP aim more cloud market.

[@rafaelestevam]

Looks like a cpu for vendors who already lock-in all the hardware and don't care about upgrade

[@AidenPryde3025]

This is clearly a workstation SKU.

[@kenzieduckmoo]

wow. so not only does it not compete against the new threadrippers, it also fails against 13th gen desktop chips.

[@carlolalattacosterbosa5821]

Before hitting the play button, i thought you were about to talk about old 1356's Xeons (I mean, xeon E5-24xx is a thing...) . It is an UNFORTUNATE name for intel this time, it's a matter of a "5"...

[@KellicTiger]

I'm building a TrueNAS Scale system this fall. I'm 90% certain I'm going to go with AMD. Intel's offerings for Xeon are a joke at this point. Even a low end Threadripper looks to be a better option than anything Intel is offering right now. For power I can possibly underclock it in the BIOS. I'm less interested in speed and cores and more interested in the lanes. Something that Intel is way behind in unless you drop serious bank on one of their higher end chips.

[@zdravkotomasevic2763]

Spot on! This platform makes no sense...

[@nhansgoofyvideos7581]

So these are the old Xeon E3 bastardized eh?

[@Adam130694]

3:33 - just wait sometime when some russian/chinese/whomever guy unlocks it...

[@marcogenovesi8570]

Imho this is for stuff with per-core EXPENSIVE licensing so no you don't want ecores and you don't want a lot of cores either. Also it's probably just clustered with another similar machine. Seen so many of similar small 1U servers things running Oracle db stuff. They don't need that much

[@Knirin]

I was thinking a great little front end server for a database or web application. The kinds of stuff that absolutely hates apparently random, to the software, shifts in CPU performance.