Intel Kaby Lake X Core i7-7740K And X299

Simon Belmont · 28 Mar 2017 at 12:00

http://www.fudzilla.com/news/processors/43218-more-core-i7-7740k-kaby-lake-x-details-leaked

Are these in response to AMD Ryzen? They better be cheaper cause Ryzen is a great CPU for the price.

DragonQ · 28 Mar 2017 at 12:13

I don't think anyone is really sure what they are in response to and they certainly won't be cheaper than Ryzen - this is the HEDT platform we're talking about here. I really don't understand why anyone would want an even more expensive version of the i7-7700K.

IceWind · 28 Mar 2017 at 12:22

I dont quite understand the 7740k.... i mean its the same as the 7700k except 100mhz faster at stock ??? but its identical in every other aspect and will probably clock to the same as well so im not sure what intel are aiming at other than removing money from peoples wallets

KompuKare · 28 Mar 2017 at 12:54

Surely being HEDT the big question is whether it's dual or quad channel.
Now, I know that's mostly only relevant for those who archive files all day but still.
I imagine Intel could sell it for the same price as the 7700K (or potentially even lower if they want to move enthusiasts to their HEDT platform), but the motherboard are more expensive. (Well ignoring certain bling Gaming 8lite Super Bling boards of course.)
I guess what might make sense to Intel is to get people to buy into X299 with this cheaper CPU and hope they later upgrade. Potential upgrade is an often sold feature although many (most?) people never actually do upgrade.

Aretak · 28 Mar 2017 at 13:01

IceWind said:
I dont quite understand the 7740k.... i mean its the same as the 7700k except 100mhz faster at stock ??? but its identical in every other aspect and will probably clock to the same as well so im not sure what intel are aiming at other than removing money from peoples wallets

Not quite identical, as they've ripped the iGPU out. TDP is also significantly higher, despite the mere 100MHz bump.

Supernova · 28 Mar 2017 at 13:05

Maybe they hope to dupe people into thinking it's better with the "X" branding. Very strange.

IceWind · 28 Mar 2017 at 13:38

Aretak said:
Not quite identical, as they've ripped the iGPU out. TDP is also significantly higher, despite the mere 100MHz bump.

i could never understand why the igpu was ever present in the highend i7 in the first place.

Its just slightly over 23% TDP increase with only 100mhz base clock increase seem very significant over the 7700k especially since it has no igpu... the only thing I can think of is that they would have a Quad Channel memory controller on the die instead of a dual channel...but then for your average gamer that wont make a massive difference.

This is why I dont see where the 7740k is going to sit... more power draw,, probably more expensive to get into with no real benifit for a gamer and for the professional they would want something more than 4 cores anyway aiming at the 6 core and 8 cores... so unless intel fire out 6 and 8 cores for the same price as Ryzen then I see no place for this.

Jeps · 28 Mar 2017 at 15:45

The 7740k will have to have a quad channel memory controller and it will likely have more PCI-E lanes then the 7700k. I wonder if the lack of iGPU will make it clock better then the 7700k?

The real question is why are intel bothering with skylake-x at all if they have kabylake-x ready to roll? Just make 6, 8 & 10 core kaby-x chips ffs!

DragonQ · 28 Mar 2017 at 15:55

Jeps said:
The real question is why are intel bothering with skylake-x at all if they have kabylake-x ready to roll? Just make 6, 8 & 10 core kaby-x chips ffs!

But Kaby Lake is just an overclocked Skylake and the 6+ core parts won't clock that high...

Jeps · 28 Mar 2017 at 16:09

DragonQ said:
But Kaby Lake is just an overclocked Skylake and the 6+ core parts won't clock that high...

I thought Kabylake was a revised skylake? Are you saying that skylake and kabylake are identical apart from clock speed? If so, why does kaby clock so much better?

DragonQ · 28 Mar 2017 at 16:29

Jeps said:
I thought Kabylake was a revised skylake? Are you saying that skylake and kabylake are identical apart from clock speed? If so, why does kaby clock so much better?

It's on a more mature 14 nm process. There is no IPC difference between the two, although Kaby Lake has a couple of minor improvements like extra decoding capability or something.

=XDC=FluphyBunny · 28 Mar 2017 at 16:40

Kaby-x is an odd ball CPU. Bar some (potential) enthusiastic overclockers I cannot think of anyone who would pay out the sort of money Intel will ask. It will be at least the same price as a 7700k plus the cost of the motherboard. That makes it a very expensive 4 core CPU.

Skylake-x is far more interesting.

Silent_Scone · 28 Mar 2017 at 17:22

Skylake X / X299 is going to knock Ryzen for six, and there's nothing AMD can do about it.

Besides keep updating their microcode till their users have an acceptable experience with DRAM overclocking.

DragonQ · 28 Mar 2017 at 17:27

Silent_Scone said:
Skylake X / X299 is going to knock Ryzen for six, and there's nothing AMD can do about it.

Besides keep updating their microcode till their users have an acceptable experience with DRAM overclocking.

But there is something AMD can do about it, which they've already done: price their products appropriately.

mmj_uk · 28 Mar 2017 at 17:46

IceWind said:
i could never understand why the igpu was ever present in the highend i7 in the first place.

It's because they're just mobile processors sold in a desktop package, the only other alternative is to disable the GPU or give it as a freebie but then they're throwing money away. I expect 7740K to be a lot cheaper but then I also expected Intel to make price cuts by now.

Panos · 28 Mar 2017 at 18:22

Silent_Scone said:
Skylake X / X299 is going to knock Ryzen for six, and there's nothing AMD can do about it.

Besides keep updating their microcode till their users have an acceptable experience with DRAM overclocking.

Their SkylakeX range going to be similarly priced to the Broadwel-E. Sure go buy a £1100 8 core CPU that cannot clock past 4.4Ghz. While someone with £299 and overclock to 4Ghz and fast RAM can do the same job......

Because if anyone believes that the 6-8-10 core Skylakes will clock passed 4.4-4.5Ghz should be dreaming. The chip going to be similar size as the 6800/6900K, which mean serious thermal & power consumption issues. As all this generation of Intel enthusiast CPUs.

And on the latter to put into perspective the 1700X/1800X has 95W, and the SkylakeX 140W which is 50% more, (110% more than the 1700 65W TDP). Exactly the same with the B-E and we saw how good clockers they were with their huge power consumption...

Some of you were arguing here that the 290X consumes more power than the 780Ti (few W making the 780Ti better buy due to it's higher price, only if you run it for 45 years).
But nobody bothers that even the Intel quad cores burn ten time that wattage difference (between 290X - 780Ti) when we compare it to AMD Ryzen 7.

And the price alone cannot be written off by usage, because someone could buy the next 3 generations of Ryzen 8core AM4 processors, for the cost of a single 6900K or SkylakeX 8c one.

nkuk · 28 Mar 2017 at 18:25

Silent_Scone said:
Skylake X / X299 is going to knock Ryzen for six, and there's nothing AMD can do about it.

Besides keep updating their microcode till their users have an acceptable experience with DRAM overclocking.

I would think it would be the other way around, there's almost no reason to pay more for less.

Silent_Scone · 28 Mar 2017 at 18:39

nkuk said:
I would think it would be the other way around, there's almost no reason to pay more for less.

Panos said:
Their SkylakeX range going to be similarly priced to the Broadwel-E. Sure go buy a £1100 8 core CPU that cannot clock past 4.4Ghz. While someone with £299 and overclock to 4Ghz and fast RAM can do the same job......

Because if anyone believes that the 6-8-10 core Skylakes will clock passed 4.4-4.5Ghz should be dreaming. The chip going to be similar size as the 6800/6900K, which mean serious thermal & power consumption issues. As all this generation of Intel enthusiast CPUs.

And on the latter to put into perspective the 1700X/1800X has 95W, and the SkylakeX 140W which is 50% more, (110% more than the 1700 65W TDP). Exactly the same with the B-E and we saw how good clockers they were with their huge power consumption...

Some of you were arguing here that the 290X consumes more power than the 780Ti (few W making the 780Ti better buy due to it's higher price, only if you run it for 45 years).
But nobody bothers that even the Intel quad cores burn ten time that wattage difference (between 290X - 780Ti) when we compare it to AMD Ryzen 7.

And the price alone cannot be written off by usage, because someone could buy the next 3 generations of Ryzen 8core AM4 processors, for the cost of a single 6900K or SkylakeX 8c one.

But the platform will work off the bat, AM4 is of no interest to those who have been on X99. At least those with any nous. Also your assumptions on clocks are baseless and not worth addressing, that's just the fact of it.

"The same job" is a little laughable given how much is locked down on AM4 currently. It is not an enthusiast platform, and won't be for some time.

Panos · 28 Mar 2017 at 18:45

Silent_Scone said:
But the platform will work off the bat, AM4 is of no interest to those who have been on X99. At least those with any nous. Aslo your assumptions on clocks are baseless and not worth addressing, that's just the fact of it.

AM4 it is of interested to those who are stuck with 6 cores because they cannot afford the 5960X/6900K. An off the bat 35% core increase for less money than the Intel 6 core, is pretty good deal.
Also similarly the X299 4-6 cores are of no interest to the same people with the 6-core i7s either. Nor the mainstream 6-core i7s next year.
Especially since Intel is going to keep the same high prices as expected.

SiDeards73 · 28 Mar 2017 at 18:59

Silent_Scone said:
But the platform will work off the bat, AM4 is of no interest to those who have been on X99. At least those with any nous. Also your assumptions on clocks are baseless and not worth addressing, that's just the fact of it.

"The same job" is a little laughable given how much is locked down on AM4 currently. It is not an enthusiast platform, and won't be for some time.

Comer on Scone thats a bit of a tired straw grab mate? even you know X99 was not "Flawless" from the get go? so AMD arent allowed teething issues but Intel are? heh, your probably the same person who thinks their Optane garbage is all that too...

Fact is Skylake-X at the current rumors has no place on the market, infact id go as far to say that Intel are so out of touch with reality and so up themselves, they probably still believe they can even now churn out the usual dross and the sheep will come to graze, they probably arent wrong for the die hards, but AMD has shown you can have a great all rounder at insanely good prices...

Edited to Add, also that AM4 is the mainstream platform, Ryzen is the mainstream for AMD Now, to replace faildozer and the like...

AMD's X99 equivalent is in the works and early reports show a really good performance, and thats not even the stuff aimed at high end server markets.