If Intel made a skulltrail2 motherboard which let you use regular i5s and overclocj etc they'd make a killing with the crowd who pay thousands for the best over clocked systems.
You're forgetting that the original Skulltrail platform only ever allowed one model of CPU to work. The Core 2 Extreme QX9775, with LGA 771 and a $1500 price tag, was, for all intents and purposes, a Xeon in everything but name. Especially when you consider that Skulltrail required FB-DIMMs.
That's not currently possible, because current CPUs for LGA1150 (regular i5 among them) don't have QPI for dual socket configurations, and, thus, support only single socket operation. To do dual socket with i5's, Intel will have to release special i5 with QPI. Needless to say, this won't happen.
The Skultrail could/can take "cheaper" than QX9775 Xeons of the time. Even now it is a very cheap way to get dual CPUS running .. the coolest thing about it though ..was Coolit's designed for SkullTrail Tec cooler .. that kept my QX9775 running at 17 to 20 degrees C..under load! the Z10PE is the spiritual continuation of skulltrail, even now two 6 core 3.5ghz Xeons don't come too much north of 1 X99 8 core 5960x and you can go lower/cheaper if you need 2 CPUs with the new Xeons.. right now I am looking to finally sell mine and move to the E WS or the D8 .. you don't have to go for the 4K costing 18 core CPU (x2) ..
But the skulltrail did still take Xeon's and not regular off the shelf Core 2 Quad's, and of course the QX9775's.
Seems like going with just a single E5 2687W v3 would be a pretty decent box. I wouldn't go with the 18-core 2699 v3's for a workstation, though, I mean, even if they weren't extremely expensive. The 2687W v3's are like $2k each anyways....
AMD's server road map indicates a 2P APU server, which means two processors with integrated GPUs. This could be interesting in they price it right. Maybe built-in crossfire on what amounts to two 7850K's.
the crowd who pays thousands wouldn't be interested in a dual CPU system using mainstream chips
if we're fantasizing about things that aren't going to happen, it would make a lot more sense to fantasize about an unlocked 10-18 core s2011-3 Xeon that would make any such dual i5 look like a complete joke and would also be far more likely to see considering that 10-18 core Haswell-EP chips actually exist while dual s1150 boards/CPUs do not exist.
Thanks, a nice head's up on some new boards. I take it they support ECC memory with Xeons, but these should also run with i7's right?
And I like the placement of the M.2 slot in the lower-left corner by the PCH and reboot button on the X99-E, it's easily accessible even once installed and loaded with some PCIe. Also notice that there are TWO CPU 8-pin power connectors and a 6-pin PCIe extra power connector tucked around the CPU socket. I can't imagine why a Xeon would need two CPU power connectors if it can't be overclocked other than BLCK.
I suspect that despite the location and nominal intent of being for CPU power that on the single socket board at least, the 2nd 8pin and PCIe 6pin connectors are to provide more 12V for triple/quad GPU configurations. Without that draw, you'd still get a minor boost in voltage stability, but probably not enough to matter.
Does anyone have an explanation for why the Asus X99 motherboards don't support ECC? The similar X79-based Asus P9X79 WS and P9X79-E WS motherboards do.
Oops, that may be wrong. Asus' specifications for the X99-E WS motherboard under the "Product" hierarchy exclude ECC support, but Asus' specifications for the X99-E WS motherboard under the "Commercial" hierarchy include ECC support.
Apologies for the anchor mess. Lacking a preview function, I didn't know what "Submit Comment" would do with HTML, so I tried it.
The discrepancies regarding ECC support exist between the US and global specifications for the X99-E WS, not between the "Product" and "Commercial" hierarchies.
Well, I ordered one when it first came out. The first one I got had problems with the second memory channel. It just wouldn't recognize memory in the B slots. It took two weeks to get the first replacement through their "advanced RMA process."
The second one, a "repaired" board, had a similar problem, but it would intermittently recognize the memory in channel 2. Sometimes it would work and sometimes it would. Asus gave me pushback in getting a replacement, claiming that it must be some other component. I bought a second processor, a second set of memory, and even another power supply to prove the point. It took over two months to get the second replacement.
The third, also a "repaired" board, has issues with memory just like the second, but also has issues with throttling the processor for no good reason. It keeps claiming the CPU is getting up above 105C and throttling it back down below stock clocks. Note that I use the term "has" instead of "had." I still have this board, and Asus is pretty much refusing to communicate with me. It put in the RMA ticket and try to call in, but I get put on hold for hours once I give them the ticket number. Emails are not returned at all.
Obviously, given that three boards have memory issues, there is a design problem that makes it vulnerable to memory issues. To have them claim they've repaired these boards to only still have memory issues shows that they don't know what is causing the vulnerability to memory issues. There's also the poor design issue with the PCIe x4 slot in the middle of the board. In order to use it, two USB 3.0 ports and one SATAe port set have to be disabled. The M.2 slot also shares PCIe lanes with the second SATAe port set. So, if you use both the PCIe x4 slot and the M.2 slot, you only get 4 SATA ports. Granted, this is mostly due to the restrictions Intel designed into the Z97 chipset and the Haswell CPU, but there are other options in how to work with all this. The BS of "disable this to use that" has got to stop.
I have the processors, memory, and power supplies that wouldn't work with said board now working fine in an H97m and a Maximus VII Hero, but neither have the capabilities I was looking for. I'm still fairly loyal to Asus, considering I've had the least amount of issues with Asus hardware over the 28 years I've been building systems, but my loyalty is now waning due to this ongoing problem. Their support systems need major reworking.
With my experiences, I'm never buying Gigabyte, ECS, or Biostar again, and I'm too wary of MSI to put a board of theirs in my main system, so that leaves me with few options. Asus is still the best I've dealt with.
I have to agree that there are not may motherboards vendors you want to trust after Intel left the MB game. Asus "deluxe" and ROG models seem to do very well imo. To my understanding the Deluxe has everything. I have their vid cards, i'm on the fence about them. Gigabyte UDxH line where x is 5 or greater do well for me too. I dislike their gamer brand. I also have their vid cards too, and they all do superb imo. Asrock has won me over and I have used their MB for the first time after a family member had success with their z68 board MSI recently has been lacking quality, thus I put them in the same league as ECS, and Biostar. I will no longer purchase MSI or XFX graphics cards while we are talking about banned products.
I would probably prefer the Asus X99 Deluxe over the X99 WS. It looks like you get extra x16 slots (7 instead of 5) and support for Xeon/ECC memory, and you lose wifi, all for an additional $150.
The differences go way beyond mere slot quantity, etc. For some, compatibility with RAID cards, etc. will be critical. What I like about the WS boards is they have the same oc features & abilities as the ROG series. Excellent results with the P9X79 WS (though the E followon didn't seem to be quite as good).
Is there anyone able to explain or provide graph how CPU PCI-E lanes are connected to slots in ASUS X99-E WS? I'm especially interested in diagram for 28-lane CPUs.
You can download manuals and read up on this in details; in short, you get x16 with 4 slots populated and x8 with 7 slots populated (except top one is still x16).
I ask myself whether that might be interesting to those that might want to get the i7 5820K processor with 28 PCI Express 3.0 lanes - does the WS motherboard get around this limitation by offering x16 for 4 slots regardless of processor....
I think there is a slight error in the article acording to asus specs page it is Expansion Slots 7 x PCIe 3.0/2.0 x16 (single x16 or dual x16/x16 or triple x16/x16/x16 or quad x16/x16/x16/x16 or seven x16/x8/x8/x8/x16/x8/x8)
I was also curious this is from the manual...BTW thank you google docs so i could copy from PDF..... umm so the manual says one but the specs pages says another. so I am not sure how this all works out if you also install and M2 and TB2 Expansion slots 40-LANE CPU 7 x PCI Express 3.0/2.0 x16 slots* (single at x16, dual at x16/x16, triple at x16/x16/x16, quad at x16/x16/x16/x16, seven at x16/x8/x8/x8/x8/x8/X8) 28-LANE CPU 7 x PCI Express 3.0/2.0 x16 slots* (single at x16, dual at x16/x16, triple at x16/x16/x16, quad atx16/x16/x16/x16, seven at x16/x8/x8/x8/x8/x8/X8) * The PCIe x16_2's default setting is in Auto mode that automatically optimizes the system bandwidth. The PCIe x16_2 automatically runs at x2 mode with ASUS Thunderbolt EX card installed on PCIe x16_2 slot.
...AND ... M.2 Support* This motherboard features the M.2 slot, which shares bandwidth with PCI Express 3.0 x4 slot to speed up data transfer up to 32 Gb/s. This helps enhance the performance of your SSD (Solid State Drive) that is dedicated only to the operating system. * Supports PCIe mode only.
I didn't see this mentioned, and ASUS' website offers conflicting information ... does the X99-E WS offer the OC Socket? Has ASUS confirmed either way yet? Same question, I suppose for the Z10-PE-D8 WS. Would be interesting to see if their OC Socket applies to Xeon systems as well.
Yes, it does - one can even clearly see this from the socket pins itself on the two uppermost pictures in this post - X99-E WS has OC socket with additional pins present, in contrast to sockets on Z10PE-D8 WS (the latter one is for barely overclockable Xeons, so there is no sense in using OC sockets for dual socket board).
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
33 Comments
Back to Article
Pissedoffyouth - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
If Intel made a skulltrail2 motherboard which let you use regular i5s and overclocj etc they'd make a killing with the crowd who pay thousands for the best over clocked systems.haikuginger - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
You're forgetting that the original Skulltrail platform only ever allowed one model of CPU to work. The Core 2 Extreme QX9775, with LGA 771 and a $1500 price tag, was, for all intents and purposes, a Xeon in everything but name. Especially when you consider that Skulltrail required FB-DIMMs.TiGr1982 - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
That's not currently possible, because current CPUs for LGA1150 (regular i5 among them) don't have QPI for dual socket configurations, and, thus, support only single socket operation.To do dual socket with i5's, Intel will have to release special i5 with QPI.
Needless to say, this won't happen.
3ch3l0n - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
The Skultrail could/can take "cheaper" than QX9775 Xeons of the time. Even now it is a very cheap way to get dual CPUS running .. the coolest thing about it though ..was Coolit's designed for SkullTrail Tec cooler .. that kept my QX9775 running at 17 to 20 degrees C..under load! the Z10PE is the spiritual continuation of skulltrail, even now two 6 core 3.5ghz Xeons don't come too much north of 1 X99 8 core 5960x and you can go lower/cheaper if you need 2 CPUs with the new Xeons.. right now I am looking to finally sell mine and move to the E WS or the D8 .. you don't have to go for the 4K costing 18 core CPU (x2) ..extide - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
But the skulltrail did still take Xeon's and not regular off the shelf Core 2 Quad's, and of course the QX9775's.Seems like going with just a single E5 2687W v3 would be a pretty decent box. I wouldn't go with the 18-core 2699 v3's for a workstation, though, I mean, even if they weren't extremely expensive. The 2687W v3's are like $2k each anyways....
eanazag - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
AMD's server road map indicates a 2P APU server, which means two processors with integrated GPUs. This could be interesting in they price it right. Maybe built-in crossfire on what amounts to two 7850K's.bunnyfubbles - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
the crowd who pays thousands wouldn't be interested in a dual CPU system using mainstream chipsif we're fantasizing about things that aren't going to happen, it would make a lot more sense to fantasize about an unlocked 10-18 core s2011-3 Xeon that would make any such dual i5 look like a complete joke and would also be far more likely to see considering that 10-18 core Haswell-EP chips actually exist while dual s1150 boards/CPUs do not exist.
kwrzesien - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
Ian,Thanks, a nice head's up on some new boards. I take it they support ECC memory with Xeons, but these should also run with i7's right?
And I like the placement of the M.2 slot in the lower-left corner by the PCH and reboot button on the X99-E, it's easily accessible even once installed and loaded with some PCIe. Also notice that there are TWO CPU 8-pin power connectors and a 6-pin PCIe extra power connector tucked around the CPU socket. I can't imagine why a Xeon would need two CPU power connectors if it can't be overclocked other than BLCK.
colinstu - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
no i7sIan Cutress - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
The X99-E WS will support i7s, but the Z10PE-D8 W8 will not. Only the Xeon E5-26xx v3 series is aimed at 2P motherboards and have the valid QPI links.The best way to check with ASUS motherboards is go to the product page, click support, then click CPU Support:
http://www.asus.com/Commercial_Servers_Workstation...
http://www.asus.com/Commercial_Servers_Workstation...
TiGr1982 - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
No i'7s for dual socket, because i7's have QPI disabled and thus don't support dual sockets in principle.DanNeely - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
I suspect that despite the location and nominal intent of being for CPU power that on the single socket board at least, the 2nd 8pin and PCIe 6pin connectors are to provide more 12V for triple/quad GPU configurations. Without that draw, you'd still get a minor boost in voltage stability, but probably not enough to matter.Wiring - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
Unfortunately, it doesn't sound like ECC DRAM is supported on any of Asus' X99 motherboards. Each Asus X99 motherboard's specifications exclude ECC DRAM support (<A HREF="http://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/X99A/specifica... <A HREF="http://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/X99E_WS/specif... WS</A>, <A HREF="http://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/X99DELUXE/spec... <A HREF="http://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/RAMPAGE_V_EXTR... V EXTREME</A>). Beginning at 2:24 in the <A HREF="http://video.newegg.com/v/1440100272/asus-x99-e-ws... X99-E WS Motherboard Interview"</A> on Newegg, an Asus representative states the X99-E WS motherboard does not support ECC DRAM.Does anyone have an explanation for why the Asus X99 motherboards don't support ECC? The similar X79-based Asus P9X79 WS and P9X79-E WS motherboards do.
Wiring - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
Oops, that may be wrong. Asus' specifications for the X99-E WS motherboard under the "Product" hierarchy exclude ECC support, but Asus' specifications for the X99-E WS motherboard under the "Commercial" hierarchy include ECC support.Apologies for the anchor mess. Lacking a preview function, I didn't know what "Submit Comment" would do with HTML, so I tried it.
The URLs referenced were:
http://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/X99A/specifica...
http://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/X99E_WS/specif...
http://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/X99DELUXE/spec...
http://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/RAMPAGE_V_EXTR...
http://video.newegg.com/v/1440100272/asus-x99-e-ws...
Contrast:
http://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/X99E_WS/specif...
with:
http://www.asus.com/Commercial_Servers_Workstation...
Wiring - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
The discrepancies regarding ECC support exist between the US and global specifications for the X99-E WS, not between the "Product" and "Commercial" hierarchies.dgingeri - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
I hope they had different engineers design these from the Z97-WS board. That board was HORRIBLE.DIYEyal - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
I'm curious, what was horrible about it?dgingeri - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
Well, I ordered one when it first came out. The first one I got had problems with the second memory channel. It just wouldn't recognize memory in the B slots. It took two weeks to get the first replacement through their "advanced RMA process."The second one, a "repaired" board, had a similar problem, but it would intermittently recognize the memory in channel 2. Sometimes it would work and sometimes it would. Asus gave me pushback in getting a replacement, claiming that it must be some other component. I bought a second processor, a second set of memory, and even another power supply to prove the point. It took over two months to get the second replacement.
The third, also a "repaired" board, has issues with memory just like the second, but also has issues with throttling the processor for no good reason. It keeps claiming the CPU is getting up above 105C and throttling it back down below stock clocks. Note that I use the term "has" instead of "had." I still have this board, and Asus is pretty much refusing to communicate with me. It put in the RMA ticket and try to call in, but I get put on hold for hours once I give them the ticket number. Emails are not returned at all.
Obviously, given that three boards have memory issues, there is a design problem that makes it vulnerable to memory issues. To have them claim they've repaired these boards to only still have memory issues shows that they don't know what is causing the vulnerability to memory issues. There's also the poor design issue with the PCIe x4 slot in the middle of the board. In order to use it, two USB 3.0 ports and one SATAe port set have to be disabled. The M.2 slot also shares PCIe lanes with the second SATAe port set. So, if you use both the PCIe x4 slot and the M.2 slot, you only get 4 SATA ports. Granted, this is mostly due to the restrictions Intel designed into the Z97 chipset and the Haswell CPU, but there are other options in how to work with all this. The BS of "disable this to use that" has got to stop.
I have the processors, memory, and power supplies that wouldn't work with said board now working fine in an H97m and a Maximus VII Hero, but neither have the capabilities I was looking for. I'm still fairly loyal to Asus, considering I've had the least amount of issues with Asus hardware over the 28 years I've been building systems, but my loyalty is now waning due to this ongoing problem. Their support systems need major reworking.
With my experiences, I'm never buying Gigabyte, ECS, or Biostar again, and I'm too wary of MSI to put a board of theirs in my main system, so that leaves me with few options. Asus is still the best I've dealt with.
bebimbap - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
I have to agree that there are not may motherboards vendors you want to trust after Intel left the MB game.Asus "deluxe" and ROG models seem to do very well imo. To my understanding the Deluxe has everything. I have their vid cards, i'm on the fence about them.
Gigabyte UDxH line where x is 5 or greater do well for me too. I dislike their gamer brand. I also have their vid cards too, and they all do superb imo.
Asrock has won me over and I have used their MB for the first time after a family member had success with their z68 board
MSI recently has been lacking quality, thus I put them in the same league as ECS, and Biostar.
I will no longer purchase MSI or XFX graphics cards while we are talking about banned products.
ludikraut - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
I didn't see anything horrible about the Z97-WS. I run a Z87-WS and would have taken a Z97-WS in a heartbeat if I could justify the cost.icrf - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
I would probably prefer the Asus X99 Deluxe over the X99 WS. It looks like you get extra x16 slots (7 instead of 5) and support for Xeon/ECC memory, and you lose wifi, all for an additional $150.mapesdhs - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
The differences go way beyond mere slot quantity, etc. For some, compatibility with RAIDcards, etc. will be critical. What I like about the WS boards is they have the same oc features
& abilities as the ROG series. Excellent results with the P9X79 WS (though the E followon
didn't seem to be quite as good).
Ian.
MrSpadge - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
Regarding Xeon OC: can you adjust the divider / strap / whatever they call it for higher BCLK base frequencies? E.g. 166 MHz instead of 100 MHzextide - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
In the past (with E5 v1/v2) you have not been able to do this. I would assume the v3's would be the same.Senti - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
Is there anyone able to explain or provide graph how CPU PCI-E lanes are connected to slots in ASUS X99-E WS? I'm especially interested in diagram for 28-lane CPUs.vred - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
You can download manuals and read up on this in details; in short, you get x16 with 4 slots populated and x8 with 7 slots populated (except top one is still x16).athanor - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
I ask myself whether that might be interesting to those that might want to get the i7 5820K processor with 28 PCI Express 3.0 lanes - does the WS motherboard get around this limitation by offering x16 for 4 slots regardless of processor....vred - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
Yeah, talking about some massive PLX-ing here. :) 64 PCIe lanes total for the 7 slots!themeinme75 - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
I think there is a slight error in the article acording to asus specs page it is Expansion Slots7 x PCIe 3.0/2.0 x16 (single x16 or dual x16/x16 or triple x16/x16/x16 or quad x16/x16/x16/x16 or seven x16/x8/x8/x8/x16/x8/x8)
themeinme75 - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
I was also curious this is from the manual...BTW thank you google docs so i could copy from PDF..... umm so the manual says one but the specs pages says another. so I am not sure how this all works out if you also install and M2 and TB2Expansion slots 40-LANE CPU
7 x PCI Express 3.0/2.0 x16 slots* (single at x16, dual at x16/x16,
triple at x16/x16/x16, quad at x16/x16/x16/x16, seven at x16/x8/x8/x8/x8/x8/X8)
28-LANE CPU
7 x PCI Express 3.0/2.0 x16 slots* (single at x16, dual at x16/x16, triple at x16/x16/x16, quad atx16/x16/x16/x16, seven at x16/x8/x8/x8/x8/x8/X8)
* The PCIe x16_2's default setting is in Auto mode that automatically optimizes the system bandwidth. The PCIe x16_2 automatically runs at x2 mode with ASUS Thunderbolt EX card installed on PCIe x16_2 slot.
...AND ...
M.2 Support*
This motherboard features the M.2 slot, which shares bandwidth with PCI Express 3.0 x4 slot
to speed up data transfer up to 32 Gb/s. This helps enhance the performance of your SSD
(Solid State Drive) that is dedicated only to the operating system.
* Supports PCIe mode only.
ludikraut - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
I didn't see this mentioned, and ASUS' website offers conflicting information ... does the X99-E WS offer the OC Socket? Has ASUS confirmed either way yet? Same question, I suppose for the Z10-PE-D8 WS. Would be interesting to see if their OC Socket applies to Xeon systems as well.TiGr1982 - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
Yes, it does - one can even clearly see this from the socket pins itself on the two uppermost pictures in this post - X99-E WS has OC socket with additional pins present, in contrast to sockets on Z10PE-D8 WS (the latter one is for barely overclockable Xeons, so there is no sense in using OC sockets for dual socket board).vred - Tuesday, September 16, 2014 - link
By the way, if you look really closely - the X99-E WS has some bent pins in the socket. :D