beaker7

ZachA



For the amount of money, why not make it a DIY project??? I could easily send 11,000.00+ through them and still not get a quad SLI SR-X

Of course.  Just pointing out that there must be at least a little to be gained via BCLK if they are offering it.

 
Great find.  From the post here, it looks like a max of 105 on the BCLK.  Now, Origin does not say how much the OC will be;)
Will be interested to see how high they can go......high enough to make people want to purchase for OCing?  Who knows.

thegreatga


will the sas ports support raid 5 each so i could create two logical drives out of eight physical drives in raid 5? I know its only sata ii but its my understandig that non ssd's dont saturate sata ii anways?

Yes, the SAS support RAID 0, 1, 5, 10 and JBOD.

Where did you see the prices?I see the 2687 as being more expensive than the 2690. The 2687 being higher frequency.
Some places buy servers in bulk, which gives them a discount on the components. Then they take the cpus out to customise the servers to their customers needs.
It is a reason to be careful if buying tray parts

Aggressor Prime


Jacob, does having all the PCIe slots from one CPU have anything to do with how nVidia restricts SLI certification on Sandy Bridge-EP motherboards?

 
No, the SLI certification thing was just a licensing issue, it isn't free.

rottenmutt

Aggressor Prime


Jacob, does having all the PCIe slots from one CPU have anything to do with how nVidia restricts SLI certification on Sandy Bridge-EP motherboards?

No, the SLI certification thing was just a licensing issue, it isn't free.

 
People whant power, not restrictions.
If you put down money for a complete SR-X setup, there should be NO restriction what so ever

chillernr1

rottenmutt

Aggressor Prime

Jacob, does having all the PCIe slots from one CPU have anything to do with how nVidia restricts SLI certification on Sandy Bridge-EP motherboards?

No, the SLI certification thing was just a licensing issue, it isn't free.

People whant power, not restrictions. If you put down money for a complete SR-X setup, there should be NO restriction what so ever.

With respect, if the number of people and how much they are willing to spend don't add up to the cost of implimentation, then a business isn't going to bother with it.  That any of us are willing to pay whatever it takes means absolutely nothing unless 1) there are enough of us to break-even from or 2) we pay for the whole development ourselves.  The reason everything we can buy exists for purchase is because there was more demand than the cost to get it out there.  Top-dollar items just refer to the maximum allowed features that the company could afford to sell; SR-X is the best it can be for who it was intended for, if you're unsatisfied then you weren't the target market.
 
Chances are EVGA already knew with zero unlocked Xeon E5-2600's to wire the board to take single i7's and thus route most of the PCIe lanes through one CPU; and not being able to wire it for a second CPU worth of lanes.  You got to give EVGA credit for doing their homework and producing their product for their intended target customer.

lehpron

chillernr1

rottenmutt

Aggressor Prime

Jacob, does having all the PCIe slots from one CPU have anything to do with how nVidia restricts SLI certification on Sandy Bridge-EP motherboards?

No, the SLI certification thing was just a licensing issue, it isn't free.

People whant power, not restrictions. If you put down money for a complete SR-X setup, there should be NO restriction what so ever.

With respect, if the number of people and how much they are willing to spend don't add up to the cost of implimentation, then a business isn't going to bother with it.  That any of us are willing to pay whatever it takes means absolutely nothing unless 1) there are enough of us to break-even from or 2) we pay for the whole development ourselves.  The reason everything we can buy exists for purchase is because there was more demand than the cost to get it out there.  Top-dollar items just refer to the maximum allowed features that the company could afford to sell; SR-X is the best it can be for who it was intended for, if you're unsatisfied then you weren't the target market.

Chances are EVGA already knew with zero unlocked Xeon E5-2600's to wire the board to take single i7's and thus route most of the PCIe lanes through one CPU; and not being able to wire it for a second CPU worth of lanes.  You got to give EVGA credit for doing their homework and producing their product for their intended target customer.

 
Indeed, the fact that they did this means they did do their homework.  I have a question though, who IS their target customer?  Before it was quite obvious, but with no unlocked chips on a board that's main selling point is overclocking...who are they selling this to?  I can't figure it out:)

Johnny_Utah

Indeed, the fact that they did this means they did do their homework.  I have a question though, who IS their target customer?  Before it was quite obvious, but with no unlocked chips on a board that's main selling point is overclocking...who are they selling this to?  I can't figure it out:)

Assuming you weren't being sarcastic, the biggest clues are in EVGA's news articles comparing X79 to SR-X: X79 brags overclocking, SR-X does not.  In otherwords, EVGA wasn't expecting to gain overclockers with SR-X; that they can survive on the other uses of the board from extreme power users, server admin, to folders and crunchers -- the latter could be the strongest market for EVGA.   It may be possible that the majority of SR-2 customers didn't put Xeon overclocking in priority, remember the majority of frequent posters on the forums don't represent all customers.
 
The addition of the PCIe 3.0 PLX chip in SR-X and not in their X79 certain pushes those customers interested in multiple PCIe 3.0 cards.  I was schoolded by X79 members that while games may not saturate PCIe 2.0 yet, computational ues of graphics cards can, so those users see a more significant difference from x8 to x16 2.0, thus feel similar about 3.0.  It is EVGA's gamble whether those customers choose to put their demands in priority and choose another brand with more PCIe lanes, as opposed to being loyal to EVGA's new Global Warranty.  I don't think it was made for simplifying the process.  They are a business, everything they do is suspect, even their poll on the front page is another form of market analysis.
 
All is not lost with SR-X, they added single i7 use just to net those who may want more than an X79 with the option of a pair of 8-cores whenever they choose to, since none of EVGA's X79's allow Xeon E5's [yet].
 
Before with SR-2, EVGA allowed Xeon 5000's in X58 as a temporary, but it becomes a sale for Intel and not EVGA, so to speak.  Allowing one i7 in SR-X allows EVGA to make a sale while users don't get an X79, the difference is negligible to Intel but significant to EVGA.

its called the tick-tock method, intel releases two generations staggered of each architecture and socket. so you get a low architecture chip released first that works on the new socket and gives a chance to experiment and improve for the tock cycle release of the high end new architecture chips. look at the release dates of the 1366 socket Xeons. they started off with a small batch (comparable to the current 2011 offerings) which were not very powerful and overall mediocre, then the next year they came out with the high end 1366 socket chips. the ones most of the SR-2 users have now. if anything EVGA should be praised for releasing this at the beginning of the cycle, letting us get our hands on it and play with it, work out the kinks and bugs before the cycle with the (im guessing) unlocked chips comes out. who wants to work out normal bugs while having overclockers shove complaints down your throat because they expect it to already be refined?
all in all, great board, ill be getting one, along with a waterblock from nateman_doo. haters will hate.