Technical > PC Hardware Discussion/Reviews > Socket 604

Socket 604

Current CPU (1 of 2)

Motherboard/System

No one has any idea if it will work?

reply to sk1939
I'm not 100% positive but it might work though it has some things going for it that could stop it. The CPU is a 4-socket model but it could still work in single/dual socket configurations. The chipset states it supports an 800 FSB but the CPU is listed as being a 1066 FSB. If the CPU can scale back then yes it should work assuming it isn't limited to being used in quad socket configs. Let me see what else I can dig up.

Edit: I think I see why you want this. It's the only way to get a quad core CPU in a socket 604. I'm going to venture a guess that it won't work but I'm really not sure to be honest with you. It will almost certainly use more power which means the VRM might not be up to the task even if you can get it to boot.

I guess I'll just look at faster dual core solutions. Right now it's relatively slow, but it's not as important since most of the work is done on a DL165 and DL360 G5. I was hoping to try to squeeze some life out of this box, but it looks like it's approaching it's limits.

reply to sk1939
If you get it and it works let me know

I have a DL380 G4 and a dual quad setup would be nice

although for the price of 2 of those you could get a DL580 G4 on ebay

»www.ebay.com/itm/HP-Proliant-DL5···fe11a468

Looks like a decent deal, but I would be hesitant to get it because of the hefty power draw (note the 20A plugs) and the requirement for laptop hard drives (plus sleds).

It doesn't use laptop harddrives
Find a Laptop that uses SAS drives

just because they're 2.5 instead of 3.5 doesn't make them laptop drives

infact you wouldn't be able to put in a laptop drive because the connector is slightly different

btw DL580's are capable of quad socket

actually heres one that comes with harddrives and 4 cpus
»www.ebay.com/itm/HP-Proliant-DL5···c125b5e7

reply to sk1939
Yeah I thought "let me just go find him a quad core that isn't a 4 socket model, that should work". Looked around and hmmm OOOHHHH I see why now LOL.

Another thing hampering that CPU in the system is it's a Core based Xeon, all the other 603/604 models are NetBurst. Your current CPU is a 110W TDP model so I'm trying to find something that fits within that power envelope. The best you can get in the same Irwindale type is a 3.8 single core. That's a decent bump over what you have now but I doubt it's worth the hassle there.

The spec sheet says the SAS model supports dual core CPUs but the SCSI and SATA model don't. I don't see what the difference would be with the drive choice but I guess I can see HP putting higher end components in the higher end SAS model. The SAS model does have a bigger PSU though.

OK here's what I found. The dual core in the SAS model (apparently there's only one choice) is a Praxville DP model at 2.8 with a 135W TDP and it is on a 604 socket. From what I can gather you should be able to run a 7000 sequence CPU in 1-2 socket configs but you'll almost certainly need to upgrade the VRM (might be able to snag the one for the SAS model if yours isn't the SAS model.

This looks like your choices:
Praxville DP Xeon 2.8 dual core, 2x 2 MB L2, 135W TDP

Praxville MP Xeon 7030 2.8 dual core, 2x 1 MB L2, 165W TDP
Praxville MP Xeon 7041 3.0 dual core, 2x 2 MB L2, 165W TDP

Tulsa Xeon 7110M 2.6 dual core, 2x 1 MB L2, 4 MB L3, 95W TDP
Tulsa Xeon 7120M 3.0 dual core, 2x 1 MB L2, 4 MB L3, 95W TDP

Tulsa Xeon 7130M 3.2 dual core, 2x 1 MB L2, 8 MB L3, 150W TDP
Tulsa Xeon 7140M 3.4 dual core, 2x 1 MB L2, 16 MB L3, 150W TDP

Out of that list you actually have two dual core options that are lower than the TDP of your current CPU but that doesn't mean it won't pull more power because it most likely will. It has a little less L2 cache but adds L3 cache. The two at the top end of the chart add significantly more L3 cache as well.

For the 7130M/7140M there's some decent prices on ebay as well. Also make sure you don't mistype an N instead of an M. The N version has a 667 FSB, the M is the 800 FSB. The sad part is I don't see a VRM on ebay and looking through the search results I haven't seen the "upgrade kit" for the 2.8 dual core. Not sure what to tell you at this point. You may be stuck with it as is or be limited to upgrading to the fastest single core you can.

from an HP site I was looking at yesterday there is no upgrade kit to go to the dual core model

I would bet its a newer motherboard kinda a transition as the G5's dropped SCSI and are just sas

so I doubt that you can upgrade a G4 that has the non-dual core CPU to a dual core CPU unless you replace the motherboard

which is why it's likely cheaper to get a DL580 G4 which could have 4x dual core xeons for only a little more than buying the one he linked

reply to sk1939
Almost any 4+ socket system will have 20A plugs but you can get them with a 15A plug on the other end (doesn't mean it isn't a power hog still lol). I have a Dell 6650 that was that way. Bought off ebay, didn't come with power cables and I saw those plugs and thought WTF is this lol.

Also the small drives are better IMO. They are laptop sized and you could put a laptop oriented SATA drive in there but they make SAS and enterprise grade SATA drives in 2.5" form factor now. The reason I think they are better is the smaller platter. Ever hear of short stroking a drive? A 2.5" drive has smaller platters so in a way it has "native" short stroking over a similar 3.5" drive without the capacity loss. Not sure where the break even point is in speed vs capacity though as 2.5" drives in SAS format top out around 600GB I think (still maintaining 10K+ speeds). If you don't mind dropping down to 7200 you can get 1 an 2 TB models in SAS I think. Plus 2.5" drives should use less power.

Honestly I would look at upgrading the system altogether. In some cases it's just not worth it anymore to continue dumping money into a server and I think you've hit it with this one. I had a Dell 2600, the first server we got at the office. It needed a new PSU and the RAM was starting to throw errors. For about the same money as it would have taken to repair the 2600 I got a 2850 of ebay. Two dual cores now instead of two singles and more RAM than I had in the 2600. Was a win-win for me. Not to mention I bought it locally so I was able to go pick it up and not have to ship it (we've had issues with servers arriving damaged and this was a critical server we didn't want to roll the dice on arriving damaged).

Do you prefer HP or are you open to other brands as well?

reply to DarkLogix
I know that, but SATA drives are backwards compatible with SAS drives. SAS drives are too expensive for home use.

Actually you would.

btw I just checked and although the thought of getting a DL580 G4 was sounding nice I just found a DL380G5 for less

»www.ebay.com/itm/HP-DL360-G5-8GB···c178b82d

so it might make more sense to jsut get a G5

I wouldn't use a Sata drive in a server, SAS do better with being in mid-large raid arrays where as sata are best as plain drives (this info comes from seagate who makes both sas and sata drives)

though I think I might wait to see what'll happen when we upgrade to a full vmware setup at work (most of the servers are starting to push 3years so warrentys are out...)

reply to DarkLogix
Hmmm that might make sense actually. You don't normally see SCSI and SAS available in the same model type, it's either one or the other. Sounds like he is stuck with the single core then

reply to JoelC707
That I knew; the "quad" Powermac G5 I have is that way.

I don't know about being better since the throughput and cache levels are lower (for SATA) than their 3.5" cousins.

I prefer HP only because I make extensive use of iLO for management. I'm open to Dell as well, but I would like to keep the price under $200.

I don't have spare SAS or 2.5" drives as well, which is why I'm trying to find servers that can take SATA drives for capacity. The current G4p I have takes SCSI drives, but that's not the way I want to go due to capacity limits.

reply to sk1939
What are you doing with the server if you don't mind me asking? Under most circumstances, SATA drives are just fine for home use though I do have some U160/U320 SCSI's in some of my home servers. Though that's largely because that's what the server came with. Any home build server would get SATA.

reply to sk1939
Throughput should be the same in SATA for SATA because neither can fully saturate the bus anyway. Cache levels on the other hand you are probably right about unless you get an enterprise level SATA but at that point it's probably just as expensive as the SAS drive. Though for capacity and ease of replacement I can fully understand wanting to stick with 3.5" SATA.

Edit: Dell does have DRAC cards for offline and OOB management and OMSA for online web based management but if you are used to HP's iLO there's no reason to switch. You should be able to find a comparable HP or Dell at your price range.

reply to sk1939
with Sata drives they are normally for consumer use and sata 2.5's tend to be ment for laptops so it makes sense for a sata 2.5 to have less cache

but then sas drives normally have a raid controler with a ton of cache so on drive cache is less important, so sas drives over all tend to have less cache

you might be able to get an MSA type device on ebay that would take lots of sata drives and then use that inplace of the built in drive bays

reply to JoelC707
The DL360 G4p is hosting Folding@Home, DNS, DHCP, and webserve.
The DL165 G2 is hosting Server 2008 with Hyper-V for Cisco Unified Communications, Microsoft Link, and Cisco Presence.
The DL360G5 is hosting Server 2008 with Hyper-V for Forefront Threat Management, Exchange 2010, Cisco Secure Access Control, SQL, Sharepoint, and a file server.

reply to JoelC707
I was looking at getting another DL360 G5, or a Poweredge 2950 if I can find one for a reasonable price. The reason I went with HP in the first place was that they had less drive capacity, but were cheaper than the Dell's.

reply to sk1939
Dark has a good point. For max capacity for say your DL360 G5 File server, an external drive array connected via Infiniband or something similar would be a good way to add LOTS of storage space and not worry about what type of drives are in the main server. Let them be for the host OS for example. You will likely end up spending a little more than you want though as those can be expensive.

So the G4p in question here is basically your DC? You didn't mention a DC otherwise but you're running Server 2008 and have all the other requisite services including Exchange, that would require a DC. Folding is the only thing I can see this thing even needing an upgrade for honestly. The other services running on it are just fine on that caliber of a system. Why not move folding over to another system entirely and leave the G4p as is?