• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Intel Core i9-7900X reviews are going live!

Doobedoo said:
It's great stuff from Intel and for those that an afford it. But on price it will likely be competing with the 16 core Threadripper so we will have to wait and see how the dust settles. Great for progressions sake though more ores for less money :)
Click to expand...


the 8 core seems like a really really good deal, the 6 core is also priced pretty nicely too imo.

some interesting things to note from this review

ipc is exactly as expected, it performs exactly the same as sky/kabylake at the same clocks

clocks speeds are around 4.6/4.7ghz, heat output seems high, but it seems 10 cores at 4.7ghz is fairly hard to cool (as expected)

it needed less than 1.3v for 4.7ghz, meaning there's plenty of voltage room to go, do the 6/8 cores should clock higher with less heat output from less cores (as expected )


the l2 cache seems to be a massive benefit in some tasks like handbrake, not sure what this means for other tasks (hopefully full reviews after nda is lifted will show us this)

since these chips aren't meant to be reviewed yet, the bios' seems to be some form of beta that isn't letting the chip perform correctly, we can see this by some games having a 100% uplift in performance from what hexus said, and that's still not even the review bios, expect performance to be as expected by release.

overall, it's just as expected, take a 6700k, double it's cores and you have a 7820x
 
It's great performance but at £600 plus the cost of the motherboard you are talking quite a lot of money for the investment. Those that want it will spend the money, those that don't need it won't lose much by sticking with a 1700.

Me personally I'm waiting for zen+, hopefully AMD will close down the clock speed advantage and the ipc whilst obviously also being much cheaper too. AMD have made great strides and are closing in.
 
Doobedoo said:
It's great performance but at £600 plus the cost of the motherboard you are talking quite a lot of money for the investment. Those that want it will spend the money, those that don't need it won't lose much by sticking with a 1700.

Me personally I'm waiting for zen+, hopefully AMD will close down the clock speed advantage and the ipc whilst obviously also being much cheaper too. AMD have made great strides and are closing in.
Click to expand...


this is exactly what I've said, ryzen has except performance for the value, and Intel offers the very highest performance for more money.

put it like this, you need a workstation say for video editing and would like 8 cores? you can go budget at r7 1700, the 1800x which offers slightly more performance, or the 7820x which again, offers more performance.
 
I don't think anyone has said otherwise it's the "ryzen is slower than a 2500k" statement and the exaggerated disadvantages that has people scratching their heads.
 
Doobedoo said:
It's great performance but at £600 plus the cost of the motherboard you are talking quite a lot of money for the investment. Those that want it will spend the money, those that don't need it won't lose much by sticking with a 1700.

Me personally I'm waiting for zen+, hopefully AMD will close down the clock speed advantage and the ipc whilst obviously also being much cheaper too. AMD have made great strides and are closing in.
Click to expand...

Eh, £600 ($599) is the i7-7820X (8C/16T) with only 28 PCIe lanes (for apparently no other reason than that Intel love to segment their markets). The processor Hexus and Bit-Tech (both owned by the same owners) reviewed is the £1000 ($999) chip which generously comes with 44 PCIe lanes.

So Ryzen 1700 + B350 mobo comes to around £370, whereas i9-7900X + Z299 board comes to £1200+.
 
KompuKare said:
Eh, £600 ($599) is the i7-7820X (8C/16T) with only 28 PCIe lanes (for apparently no other reason than that Intel love to segment their markets). The processor Hexus and Bit-Tech (both owned by the same owners) reviewed is the £1000 ($999) chip which generously comes with 44 PCIe lanes.

So Ryzen 1700 + B350 mobo comes to around £370, whereas i9-7900X + Z299 board comes to £1200+.
Click to expand...

No I was replying to someone else who is justifying his future purchase of the 7820x. The 7900x will be going against the 16c threadripper whih is also less money.

The 1700 is quite possibly the best all around cpu you an purchase today, Intels mainstream 6 cores may have something to say when they finally appear though.
 
Doobedoo said:
No I was replying to someone else who is justifying his future purchase of the 7820x. The 7900x will be going against the 16c threadripper whih is also less money.

The 1700 is quite possibly the best all around cpu you an purchase today, Intels mainstream 6 cores may have something to say when they finally appear though.
Click to expand...

Apologies. I guess that's what I get for putting that 'someone else' on ignore...
 
Doobedoo said:
No I was replying to someone else who is justifying his future purchase of the 7820x. The 7900x will be going against the 16c threadripper whih is also less money.

The 1700 is quite possibly the best all around cpu you an purchase today, Intels mainstream 6 cores may have something to say when they finally appear though.
Click to expand...
yeah i think the same and thats why ive traded in the 4820k for a 1700
 
something I just noticed, the 7900x is listed as an engineering sample on the cpuz shot by hexus. could be how they got their hands on it.
 
muon said:
Anyone taken a look at the power consumption at load? Don't think there are any 200W air coolers? Definitely needs a water-cooling setup. Considering it is a £1k chip, that probably isn't a problem though.

Would love to have seen the temps.

https://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2017/06/16/intel-core-i9-7900x-and-x299-chipset-revie/7

Threadripper will probably have similar power consumption numbers with 16C/32T.
Click to expand...

the single tower u14s and dual tower noctua are rated at 220w+ so should be more than enough.
 
Doobedoo said:
I don't think anyone has said otherwise it's the "ryzen is slower than a 2500k" statement and the exaggerated disadvantages that has people scratching their heads.
Click to expand...
Ryzen isn't slower than a 2500k but it isn't necessarily faster either. Benchmarks are very software dependant. If a game or benchmark can effectively utilise more than 4 cores then those processors that have more than 4 cores wil always win.

Given most software uses less than 4 cores then we'd have to hand the win to clock speed and ipc in which case Ryzen will always be on the back foot. I can't see the majority of software changing in the immediate future for cpus to being able to utilise more than 4 cores. It will happen eventually in at least a few years but if a piece of software is amazingly quick on 4 cores (and a lot is) there's little point optimising for more.
 
Brazo said:
Ryzen isn't slower than a 2500k but it isn't necessarily faster either. Benchmarks are very software dependant. If a game or benchmark can effectively utilise more than 4 cores then those processors that have more than 4 cores wil always win.

Given most software uses less than 4 cores then we'd have to hand the win to clock speed and ipc in which case Ryzen will always be on the back foot. I can't see the majority of software changing in the immediate future for cpus to being able to utilise more than 4 cores. It will happen eventually in at least a few years but if a piece of software is amazingly quick on 4 cores (and a lot is) there's little point optimising for more.
Click to expand...

I wasn't making the comparison. All I know is you don't see many I3's near the top of many charts, also saw the adored tv video showing how a fx 8350 was close if not beating a 2500k, Ryzen should be quicker today and going forward.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom