3 x 3930K (or 4930K) vs. dual Xeon E5 2680

[bennyboy]

I got a 4930 and am super happy to see my six cores show up as 12 buckets. Overclocked mine at a comfortable and cool 4GHz (could probably take'em to 4.3, but could hurt their lifespan). However, I've only had my system for a couple weeks...not sure about the longevity or long term stability over Xeon. My old system is a Xeon dual processor...I just left it on for months on end (blew out every fan...actually, by the end, I had the side panel open with a regular 20" room fan blowing on the whole system to keep it cool . But it worked tirelessly for six years...was a good workhorse...actually, I plan on replacing the fans and using as a slave for the next decade or so. Point is, Xeon's are awesome. If you've got the change, make your slaves Xeon's (even a few years old - slower but reliable).

[urbanite]

I am aware of that, just on paper the difference is like baastyan said 3-5% but in working environment it is 10+ for me.

[Morne]

The 4930 is a newer generation i7 than the 3930

[urbanite]

I am not sure if this is about new components but 4930K machine with the same amount of identical RAM and network render is about 10% faster than 3930K.

[Morne]

The 4930 is slightly faster and more power efficient

[baastyan]

As far as I know 3930K and 4930K peform pretty much the same. Have you noticed any difference (more than 3-5%)? I have now 3930K OC to 4,5 GHz,

[urbanite]

Go for 4930 for main and slaves (it should not be difference in prices at the moment). You will have much more rendering power, faster single threads tasks and backup computer.

[baastyan]

Quick question.
What would be best for architectural visualisation workflow (DR only for still images):

1 main workstation with i7-3930K (or 4930K) + small render farm with 2 machines (each of them with 3930K)

or
Dual Xeon E5 2680 (extra cost 500 euro)

What do you think?
Anyone has experience comparing similar solutions?