Maxing out a xw4600 - Advice sought please!

[Rhothgar]

Hi,

I read a reply on a post by DGroves.  I think his reply on a post I have just read is on a thread that is now closed because it is over a year ago.

I have an xw4600 which is currently running 8Gb and a Q9450 CPU with a Quadro 600 Graphics card.

It's been such a faithful machine I cannot bear to get rid of it.

I've read a few articles on the internet about this LGA775 - 771 Xeon Conversion and just read DGroves reply to a user called 'Yoshy' back in January 2020.

He talks of injecting Xeon microcode into the BIOS and then using an E3363 CPU.  Sounds a fab way to keep this very reliable unit alive.  I don't want to PM him without prior approval as it may seem presumptious to do that.

I would dearly love to keep this machine running almost ad infinitum.

I see going 4 x 4Gb on PC-6400 RAM is still very expensive though.  I really need to limit the cost.

Would it simply be cheaper and better to upgrade to a Z230?

The current HP support document still states QX6850 is the highest usable processor but would a QX9770 or QX9775 still work if I didn't want to inject code, would anyone happen to know?

Also wondering what would actually be the best route Graphics card wise too to max that out?

Thanks in advance

[DGroves]

feel free to PM me

for the xeon mod you will need

the x3363 chip

https://www.ebay.com/itm/284354328827?epid=74100378&hash=item4234d6b8fb:g:RwEAAOSwrJpgrulj

the plastic sheet that fits under the chip which swapps the two pin signals

https://www.ebay.com/itm/331590180430?hash=item4d34509e4e:g:BN0AAOSw9N1ViuGs

modding the socket (or the cpu chip for correct orientation

OR, a pre modded chip that has the notches for correct orientation already applied along with the plastic pin swap done

make sure to install xeon chip using correct notches!!!!!!

https://www.ebay.com/itm/303234835769?hash=item469a346539:g:oDIAAOSwVG9dOSrL

a modded HP xw4600 Latest bios that has the proper xeon microcode inserted (see attachment below)

To Install:

with the original cpu chip installed (non xeon)

Download this attachment and extract all files into bootable USB stick with DOS.
Boot from USB stick with DOS and run FlashBin.exe.

the xeon mod is worthwhile because it costs less than a qx97xx chip, consumes less watts (runs cooler)

AND HAS MICRODE INSTRUCTIONS THE CORE CHIPS LACK

you can replace the HP power supply with a higher wattage unit

https://www.ebay.com/itm/500W-Upgrade-HP-XW4600-XW4400-XW6600-Power-Supply-FAST-FREE-S-H-/1432175410...

the fastest AGP card was the Radeon 3850 followed by the 4670/4650 cards

Fastest from Nvidia: Geforce 7950GT agp ,but doesn't come close to the Radeon's

however even with all of the above, i still recommend a z420/440 (440 preferred!!)

[BambiBoomZ]

Rrhothgar,

In terms of benchmark performance, the highest Passmark system rating for an Xw4600 is: 2338 using a Core2 Extreme X9650 / 8GB RAM / GTX 570 / Samsung 850 EVO 500GB SSD boot drive.  A Core2 Extreme X9650 is about $40-50. a GTX 570 is $60-80,a  500GB SSD might be $70, and etc.

Having upgraded quite a number of workstations since 1997- and some systems a number of times, and in consideration of the rapidly increasing performance demands of workstation applications in the last five years or so, my view is that there would be considerably greater efficiency of cost/benefit if the Xw4600 were changed to a z420 / E5-1650 v2 / 16GB / GTX 1060 / 500GB SSD + 2-4TB HD.

Consider this system, purchased for $136:

HP z420_3: (Original) Xeon E5-1607 (4-core / 4 Thread @ 2.8GHz) / 4GB (1X 4GB DDR3-1866 ECC unbuffered / NVIDIA GeForce 7100 GS / WD Blue 500GB / 400W PSU > Windows 7 Professional 64-bit (HP OEM ) > HP 2711x 27" 1980 X 1080
[Passmark System Rating: = 569 / CPU = 5492 / 2D = 538 / 3D = 60 / Mem = 1117 . Disk = 864 ] [Single Thread Mark = 1509] 9.27.17

Upgrades:

E5-1650 v2 = $50

z420 AIO liquid cooler = $55

64GB DDR3-1866 ECC REG = $140  (8X8GB HP/Samsung)

GTX 1060 6GB = $113

HP ZTurbo Drive M.2 256GB AHCI = $135

Other drives= $140

That does add up a bit, but a starter version of this is still possible for a quite reasonable cost:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/154358262983?hash=item23f0782cc7:g:1SMAAOSwG8tgQTtR

And currently z420_3 is the second fastest z420 on Passmark, running on all 6-cores at 4.6GHz:

HP z420_3: (2015) (R12) Xeon E5-1650 v2 (6C@ 4.6GHz) / z420 Liquid cooling / 64GB (HP/Samsung 8X 8GB DDR3-1866 ECC registered) / NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB/ Samsung SM951 M.2 256GB AHCI + Samsung 860 EVO 500GB + HGST 7K6000 4TB / ASUS Essence STX + Logitech z2300 2.1 / 600W PSU > Windows 7 Professional 64-bit (HP OEM ) > Samsung 40" 4K
[Passmark System Rating: = 6186 / CPU = 15845 / 2D = 819 / 3D = 11216 / Mem = 3047 Disk = 13905 /Single Thread Mark = 2525 [7.3.21]

The highest rated z420 is z420_3 when it had an E5-1680 v2 8-core"

HP z420_3 (2014) (R5) > Xeon E5-1680 v2 (8-core@ 4.3GHz) / z420 Liquid cooling / 64GB DDR3-1866 ECC Reg / Quadro P2000 5GB / HP Z Turbo Drive 256GB AHCI + Intel 730 480GB + HGST 7K6000 4TB / 600W PSU / Windows 7 Prof.’l 64-bit > 2X Dell Ultrasharp U2715H (2560 X 1440) / Focusrite Scarlett 2i4 USB interface
[ Passmark Rating = 6227 / CPU rating = 17006 / 2D = 826 / 3D= 8877 / Mem = 3025 / Disk = 14577 / Single Thread Mark = 2373 [5.28.18]

The problem was that the single thread performance was not at the level needed for some very complex 3D modelling.

And as compares to an xw4600, the E5-1650 v2 has 12-threads O/C (using Intel Extreme Tuning Utility "XTU") at 4.6GHz with a CPU mark of 15845 as compared to the 4-core /4-thread Core2 Extreme X9650 running at  3.0 GHz.  The highest CPU mark for a Core2 Extreme X9650 of 685 tested =6553 o/C to 4.15GHz on an ASUS M/B, but the highest in any HP systems is 4267. The Passmark Single Thread Mark "STM" for the Core2 Extreme X9650 = 1,285, while the E5-1650 v2 in z420_3 has an STM = 2,550.  The crux of the matter is that the E5-1650 v2 cost $58 and the last Core2 Extreme X9650 sold on ebahhh was $41.  That's a considerable benefit for +$17,..

The other important aspects of a z420 in comparison is that it has SATAIII, runs up to 64GB of DDR3-1866, has USB3.0, and can run M.2 AHCI drives as boot drive and NVMe for data. For similar upgrade investments, the performance limits are far, far higher and the system will ne useful longer into the future as applications become more demanding, for example video editing, code compiling, database, 3D modeling, VR,& etc. A $ or EUR or GBP on a z420 v2 will return several times the benefit on the more modern platform. Consider too, that an HP Xw4600 in good nick has a value , perhaps $60- $100.

I'm certainly not immune to the charms and challenges of older, high quality systems.  This is a Dell Precision 390 that was going to be thrown away when an architectural office was closed:

As found:

Dell Precision 390 (2007) (Original): Intel Core2 Duo E6300 2-core @ 1.86Ghz / 2GB (2X 1GB) DDR2-667 ECC / Quadro FX550 512MB / 2X WD 320GB ( RAID 1) / 375W
[Passmark Rating = 397 CPU = 586, 2D= 339, 3D=75, Mem = 585, Disk = 552

> and after some "adjustments":

Dell Precision 390 (2007) (R10): Xeon X3230 (4C@ 2.67GHz) / 8 GB DDR2-667 ECC / Quadro K2200 4GB / Samsung 850 EVO 250GB + HGST 7K4000 1TB / M-Audio 192, 24/96 MIDI S/C > Logitech 533 2.1 Speaker system / Windows 7 Ultimate Professional 64-bit / HP 2711 x 27" + Dell 17" LCD / Dell SK-8135 K/B
[ Passmark PT9: Rating = 1964 / CPU = 3402 / 2D= 398 / 3D=3300 / Mem= 845 / Disk= 2691] [STM= 1021] 12.3.20

That 390, with a GTX 660 Ti)  is the highest-rated Precision 390 on Passmark, but has to be considered as a kind of historic preservation project for fun.

In my view, it would be possible to take the Xw4600 only to a certain point, whereas even a lower end, "starter" z420 v2 will outperform the ultimate Xw4600.  With the  upgrades of the two systems not extremely different in cost, the newer system is a better, longer-term investment in effort and costs.

If changing systems is not convenient at the moment, consider middle-ground components for the CPU and memory, enough for the uses, but stretch the budget a bit for the GPU and drives that can go into the next system.

BambiBoomZ

HP z620_2 (2017) (R9) > Xeon E5-1650 v2 (6C@ 4.6GHz) / z420 Liquid Cooling / 64GB (HP/Samsung 8X 8GB DDR3-1866 ECC registered) /GTX 1070 Ti 8GB / Samsung SM951 M.2 512GB AHCI + Samsung 970 EVO M.2 NVMe 500GB + HP/HGST Enterprise 6TB / Focusrite Scarlett 2i4 sound interface + 2X Mackie MR824 / 825W PSU / Windows 7 Prof.’l 64-bit (HP OEM) > 2X Dell Ultrasharp U2715H (2560 X 1440)
[ Passmark Rating = 6412 / CPU rating = 16283 / 2D = 846 / 3D= 13735 / Mem = 3107 / Disk = 14614 / Single Thread Mark = 2550 [7.3.21]

[Rhothgar]

Thank you for your prompt and detailed response.

We have two xw4600 which need looking at and I definitely like tinkering so I may decide to do these mods to the Core2 Duo which is floundering.

I also looked at this Z600 and was wondering if there is more mileage in a Z600 than a Z420/Z440?

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/353548121398

Or item number 353548121398 on Ebay UK if you don't like clicking links.

I currently have a 475W supply in my unit. I think the original died some years ago and I already replaced it.  Is that enough?  I think maybe so.

I also missed bidding on this Lenovo ThinkStation C30 unit.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/124790368271

Or item number 124790368271 on Ebay UK.

I know nothing about the unit but with dual processors maybe it is more of a file server?  Would that have been even quicker than a Z420/440?

I have to say I am incredibly impressed with how the HP's are put together.  Really good quality and well thought out.  Very robust builds in my limited experience.

Also my curious mind wonders if I could just solder the two pins together with sufficient flux and either some very fine solder or some Kynar wire?  I'd need to assess how it sits in the socket.  Presumably this is why these plastic strips exist.

[Rhothgar]

Hi BambiBoomZ

Thanks for your full and detailed reply.

You've certainly given me even more to think about.  Please see my reply to DGroves as I have some questions about the Z600 and ThinkStation C30.

Your comments on their capabilities would be greatly appreciated but I think I have enough to go at with what you have already advised.

I need to print both replies off and decide which PC gets what treatment.  I think one will be sold and changed to either a Z420/440 or Z600 (I am assuming a Z600 would be even more modern that a Z420/440 but at the right price is it a real option?)

Thanks again.

[DGroves]

i personally would not consider any zX00 system unless it's EXTREMELY cheap, and you have a SPECIFIC NEED that matches the specs/capabilities

in other words, save your money, add a bit more and go with a zX20 system (or a zX40 system preferred!!) if you don't want to update the xw4600

your 475 watt supply is fine, no need to update/change it

[BambiBoomZ]

Rhothgar,

RE: The two HP xw4600's:   As mentioned with regard to the 2007 Dell Precision 390, there is a satisfaction in organizing old systems to as high a proportion of their potential as possible.  Of course, there will be an eye on changes that are costly without a commensurate benefit, for example a very expensive GPU. There is also the subject of difficult modifications.  Consider limiting the changes to plug-ins: a faster CPU, more RAM, GPU, and drive(s) and except for drives, use components that are within one or two generations of the system. Going too far in time and costs is wasteful as expensive newer 6GB or 8GB GPU's for example will not reach but a small proportion of their potential. Instead of over-upgrading, consider switching to a later series system.

To that end, here are the highest rated components in the xw4600 according to Passmark Performance Test baselines.  Installing and using Passmark Performance Test 9 is recommended to establish a starting point and subsequent tests can chart progress.  There is a free 30-day trial for each system, but it's not expensive to buy.

HP xw4600 Performance Test results (260 Tested):

RATING:  1.  2568 (Xeon W3540 on 0AE4h motherboard / 12GB / Radeon HD7850, Samsung 840 PRO)

______   2.  2238 (Core2 Extreme X9550 on 0AA0h motherboard / 8GB / GTX 570, Samsung 850 EVO 500GB)

CPU: 1-5 =  5694. 5252, 5016, 5015, 5002 (Core2 Quad Q9650 on 0AA0h motherboard)

2D:  591(Quadro FX1700)  2-3 = 591, 587 (Quadro FX 1800)

3D:  6681 (GTX 1060), 6363 (GTX 970), 4700 (Radeon HP 7970)  Highest Quadro 3D =1882 (Quadro 4000) (btw, the Q4000 is very hot running) Quadro 2 = 976 (Quadro K2000D), 3,4,5= 911, 902, 897 (Quadro FX 3800) (Recommend using only blower-style GPU's)

MEM: 1563 (16GB / Xeon W3565 on 0B4Ch M/B), 2= 1444 (12GB on Xeon W3540), 3 = 1238 (8GB on Core2 Duo E8400)

DISK: 3237 (SiImage) , 2767 (Samsung 750 EVO 250GB)  <( Samsung 750 EVO, 840 EVO and 850 EVO's =6 of the top 10)

The interesting result of the above exercise is to see that there are (possibly) three motherboards used in the xw4600: 0AA0h, 0B4Ch, 0AE4h and the latter two are apparently LGA1366 running Xeon W35XX CPU's, which is a more modern technology than 771/775. A Xeon W3540 (4C@ 2.93GHz) as in the No. 1 rated system, in the US, costs only from $13-20. Consider changing the motherboard to the LGA1366 version (if it's true!) instead of complex modifications. The original motherboard when sold will offset some of the cost of the replacement.

As for the z600, that is still SATAII and USBII,  but the socket is LGA1366 and can use one or two up to 6-core processors. 

The first two-socket system in this office was LGA 1366:

Dell Precision T5500 (2011) (R2): 2X Xeon X5680 (6-core @ 3.33 / 3.6GHz), 48GB DDR3 ECC 1333 / Quadro 4000 (2GB ) / Dell PERC H310 > Samsung 840 250GB + WD RE4 Enterprise 1TB / 875W PSU > Windows 7 Professional 64> HP 2711x (1920 X 1080)
[Passmark system rating = 3692 / CPU = 14379 / 2D= 651 / 3D= 2285 / Mem= 1792 / Disk= 2934] 8.9.17

The highest rated HP z600 = Passmark system rating = 4110 / CPU = 10835 (Xeon X5670)/ 2D= 549 (Radeon RX480) / 3D= 7300 / Mem= 1822 / Disk= 13396.  There are no z600's listed using the Xeon x5680.

The 2nd two -socket system showing the progress possible going from LGA1366 to LGA2011:

HP z620_1 (2012)(Rev 5) 2X Xeon E5-2690 (8-core @ 2.9 /3.8GHz) / 64GB (4X 8GB +4X 8GB DDR3-1600) / Quadro K2200 (4GB) / Samsung 850 Evo 250GB + Seagate Constellation ES.3 1TB / 800W > Windows 7 Professional 64-bit > HP 2711x (1920 X 1080)
[ Passmark System Rating= 5675 / CPU= 22625 / 2D= 815 / 3D = 3580 / Mem = 2522 / Disk = 12640 ] 9.25.16 Single Thread Mark = 1903

And z620_1 is still using Xeon E5-X6XX first version processors.

The highest rated z620, from our forum friend Brian1965:

Passmark system rating = 7251/ CPU = 17045 (Xeon E5-1680 v2 @ 4.7GHz)/ 2D= 1074 (GTX 1080 Ti) / 3D= 14650 / Mem= 3124 / Disk= 15162. That system  required a custom external liquid cooling system to achieve reliable 4.7GHz performance. 

As compared to the z600, the z620 v2 can use up to 10-core CPU's instead of up to 6, up to DDR3-1866 RAM instead ofDDR3-1333, is PCIe 3.0 instead of 2.0- very important in GPU performance, is SATAIII -twice as fast as SATAII, USB 3.0 instead of , USB 2.0. It can use M.2 AHCI and the Samsung 950 PRO as boot drives and M.2 NVMe as data drives.

The 2nd highest z620 Passmark performance rating is z620_2 in this office:

HP z620_2 (2017) (R10): Xeon E5-1650 v2 (6C@ 4.6GHz) / z420 Liquid Cooling / 64GB (HP/Samsung 8X 8GB DDR3-1866 ECC registered) /GTX 1070 Ti 8GB / Samsung SM951 M.2 512GB AHCI + Samsung 970 EVO M.2 NVMe 500GB + HP/HGST Enterprise 6TB / Focusrite Scarlett 2i4 sound interface + 2X Mackie MR824 / 825W PSU / Windows 7 Prof’l 64-bit (HP OEM) > 2X Dell Ultrasharp U2715H (2560 X 1440)
[ Passmark Rating = 6412 / CPU rating = 16282 / 2D = 845 / 3D= 13735 / Mem = 3107 / Disk = 14614 / Single Thread Mark = 2550 [7.3.21]

It's a quite clearly demonstrable principle that the later the system, the higher potential for performance, the longer it will remain useful in the context of ever-more demanding software, and in the example of the z620, which is already several generations obsolete - 5?, the parts are not necessarily more expensive.  Z620_2 listed above is now using an E5-1650 v2 purchased for $50. A Xeon X5680 today costs about $35-50- a few Bidenbucks or across the pond- Borisbucks less. When z620_2 was first built, it used a Xeon E5-1680 v2 that cost used $750: they were $1,723 new. The change was made to the E5-1650 v2 as the overclocking potential is higher than the  Xeon E5-1680 v2 and the all-core speed of the E5-1650 v2 is at 4.6GHz whereas the Xeon E5-1680 v2 all-core speed regardless of the overclocking is locked at 3.4GHz, probably to prevent thermal throttling or overheating at continuous 100% loads.

I strongly recommend consideration of a z420 v2 or z620 v2 in place of a z600 and for a single CPU system consider: Xeon E5-1650 v2, E5-1660 v2, and E5-1680 v2 plus the z420 liquid cooler as these are three rare Xeons that may be overclocked using the free Intel Extreme Tuning Utility (XTU).  For a dual CPU z620 consider the Xeon E5-2670 v2, E5-2680 v2, and E5-2690 v2 10-cores.

BambiBoomZ

[SDH]

We used the xw4600 workstations earlier before we shifted to souping up the Z420/Z620 version 2 workstations in a major upgrade of numerous medical imaging workstations.  I can add that if you like tinkering you will like working with the ZX20 generation very much, and make sure to only buy the version 2 workstations.  These have a lot of headroom for improvement when compared to the xw4600.

A big downside to the xw4600 was memory cost.  It uses uncommon memory that is not inexpensive, and was hard to find.  In contrast, the ZX20 can use retired server RAM that runs at the highest speed and is of very high quality for very low cost.  Loading up on identical RAM filling all 8 slots in the ZX20 workstations I mentioned is possible at a low cost, which gets you even more speed in this day and age of 64-bit OS.  We can help you with that memory breakthrough.

[Rhothgar]

I have to say I am little overwhelmed with the wealth of information and I am lacking in an in-depth understanding of the idiosyncrasies of the various generations of processors.

I'm trawling Ebay UK and have been since your post and a lot of the listings are confusing talking of 8 core Z620 workstations but not specifying the actual processor code.  Then some seem to have HP's description as they state up to 24 processor cores (presumably from their latest catalogue of 12 core i7's).  Very misleading and presumably intentionally.  Pretty sure you couldn't buy a 12 core Z620 Workstation in the States for $380 with 480gb SSD (working this on a pound per dollar exchange after duties and import if I was buying my friends across the Pond).

I suppose one big question for me is how can I tell if I am buying a Z620 v2 single processor or dual processor? Is that a simple case of it being an E5-16xx (single) as opposed to an E5-26 (dual)?

You also highlighted the E5-1660 v2 and E5-2680 v2 and I am wondering why specifically?

Also, does the Z620 v2 chassis have space for dual processors regardless of whether it is supplied with one or two processors?

Thanks again.  This information is all very, very interesting and useful.

EDIT:  Just read one of your other posts about a 2013 Bootblock date?  Is that the type of Z420/Z620 I should be looking for.  Just spotted one with a 10 core processor for what appears to be quite cheap.

Been reading about riser boards too but they cost around £200 for brand new if I end up buying a unit with only a single processor assuming I am understanding this E5-16xx and E5-26xx correctly.

[BambiBoomZ]

Rhothgar,

Choosing a new workstation can be overwhelming in that there are seemingly infinite choices.  Before selecting a specific system, consider narrowing the range of choices by a focus on:

1. The uses in priority:  A system having the most demanding use whether : coding, database, 3D CAD, rendering, website deign, or video editing, will have a different hardware emphasis.  Of course, most WS systems have more than one use

2. The necessary performance:  Most WS systems have more than one use and need to be all-rounders to some degree, and whether the work is professional with deadlines, academic, or for private projects make a difference in the level o performance expected.  In this office, the most demanding and highest priority work from a performance standpoint is real-time 3D CAD modeling. 

That makes the system single-core performance oriented, and the navigation /rasterization of the models requires a high performance GPU.  The rendering, done in CPU-centric ray tracing is also very important, and that is optimized by the number of processor cores, but that is not a real-time work; renderings can be run in a queue overnight. Bur rendering also requires a lot of RAM- a 5K rendering requires 38GB of RAM during setup and there is a high density of disk swaps. To keep up with ever-more demanding applications , the two main systems here have required nearly constant upgrading in every subsystem. 

Understanding the performance of specific hardware is a daunting prospect. For some time, I've used Passmark Performance test to identify high performing systems and which components and combinations were responsible.  This is done by making informed searches; one knows whether to look for  many cores or fewer, faster ones, high memory capacity, server functions- many fast drives and RAID configurations, and so on.

3. The expected period of use:   This considers, for what period of time is the subject system expected to be used and does it have sufficient residual upgrade capabilities to be useful in that period.  Going too many generations back as the starting point may limit the system such that it has to be replaced two years sooner; it may have been cheap to start, but changing sooner makes it more costly and adds to the effort.

4. The effort to obtain and configure for use:  the best tactic in my experience is to find a system in the middle of the maker's range that is no more than two or three generation behind the current one.  That means that there will be systems that have been rotated out of use that are high performance but at three or four years old are quite significantly depreciated.  Here's an example of an obsolete system with a strong potential at a reasonable cost:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/255038366099?hash=item3b6178a193:g:QSYAAOSwNLNg3xr1

_An HP z440 with a Xeon E5-1650 v3 / 32GB of RAM / 240GB SSD + 1TB HDD / Quadro FX 580 512MB /Windows 10 for £350.  The Xeon E5-1650 v3 is among the three last Xeons that may be overclocked, the system is functional as is, has a  healthy, useful amount of 2133 speed RAM, and can can boot from M.2 NVMe drives. The supplied drives and Quadro FX580 GPU would be adequate to  run the system while setting up the system and shopping for the proper GPU and faster, higher capacity drives. That is to say, such a system could be used on some level the same day as receiving it, and the potential performance with refinements over time- and without having to begin from point zero is very good.  Importantly, the closer a system is to being adequate for use upon purchase, the less time and cost will be spent later.

From Passmark Performance Test baselines:

HP z440 / Xeon E5-1650 v3 / 32GB RAM /Quadro P4000 8GB / Toshiba XG1Tb NVMe M.2

Rating = 6086 / CPU = 13896 / 2D = 896 / 3D = 10846 / MEM =2747 / DISK= 13286

Note that the highest rated z440 system on Passmark is only a GPU,an M.2 drive, and probably somewhat fewer scratches away from the £350 Ebahhh system.

The office z420:

HP z420_3: (2015) (R12) Xeon E5-1650 v2 (6C@ 4.6GHz) / z420 Liquid cooling / 64GB (HP/Samsung 8X 8GB DDR3-1866 ECC registered) / NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB/ Samsung SM951 M.2 256GB AHCI + Samsung 860 EVO 500GB + HGST 7K6000 4TB / 600W PSU > Windows 7 Professional 64-bit (HP OEM ) > Samsung 40" 4K
[Passmark System Rating: = 6186 CPU = 15844 / 2D = 819 / 3D = 11216 / Mem = 3047 Disk = 13905 /Single Thread Mark = 2525 [7.3.21]

Yes, z420_3 has a somewhat higher overall rating- z420_3 ,is the highest rated z420 on Passmark, but the considerable time expended and total cost of z420_3 to try for the limit of the z420  running a Xeon E5-1650 v2 @ 4.6GHz on all cores means the expenditure was more than double that of the example z440  plus many hours, and with no considerable further improvement (only the GPU really) in the future.

There is by the way, a z440 / Xeon E5-1650 v3 running at 4.7GHz on Passmark with  a CPU mark of 16833. What is the CPU cooling I wonder?

5. The cost:    As mentioned, the closer a system is to being adequate for use upon purchase, the faster it is useful, and the less time and cost will be spent later.  In my view, it is worth stretching the budget a bit to have the desired system with the desired final processor, enough RAM and a GPU and drive sufficient to get back to work. 

This is not an advocation for the eBahhh system mentioned, but only to suggest an efficient approach to choose a system.

BambiBoomZ