AT have updated with power numbers. They exceed the tdp. And notice difference to bwe.
You still dont know that TDP is not power consumption?
AT have updated with power numbers. They exceed the tdp. And notice difference to bwe.
So, I wonder what prices will be for the previous gen 6950x and 6900k....
PCGamesHardware.de said:Shortly before the NDA case, the mainboard manufacturers send us new BIOS versions, which improve the performance significantly. Previously, the results are far from consistent, which is reflected, among other things, in a poorer game performance of the Core i9-7900X compared to the previous Core i7-6950X.
TweakTown said:Since many of you asked, I have upgraded my GPU from the GTX 980 to a GTX 1080 Ti. I have three motherboards on hand and one new memory kit. The motherboards were all used; one for overclocking, one for out of the box performance, and one for Intel optimized performance (correct specified with Turbo 3 and 2666MHz memory).
...Intel Optimized is according to Intel spec and not considered overclocking; it's what you will score near out of the box, the other results are from earlier BIOS versions
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8225/intel-core-i9-7900x-series-skylake-cpu-review/index3.html
HotHardware said:''With the very same Corsair AIO cooler, and a bump in voltage to 1.33V, we took our Core i7-7740X all the way up to 5.3GHz, with complete stability and no throttling.''
https://hothardware.com/reviews/int...7-7740x-cpu-review?page=8#jmRs72MfJ1adGymT.99
HardwareCanucks said:I’m going to keep this section a lot shorter than I normally would since with the rushed nature of this launch I haven’t had much time to play around with the lone Kaby Lake-X processor I have in hand. With that being said, if there is one thing Intel did well on this Core-X lineup it’s overclocking. The i7-7740X has a good amount of additional TDP headroom and according to our contacts at various motherboard vendors, these chips should easily hit between 5.0 and 5.5GHz with proper cooling.
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...590-intel-kaby-lake-x-i7-7740x-review-18.html
You might want to share some of your technical knowledge with Ian:You still dont know that TDP is not power consumption?
Already discussed in the previous page.
They didn't release the big guns yet...Intel rushed the release of Skylake-X given that optimized BIOS was not available for press reviews well in advance. Intel could have launched Skylake-X in July and got more positive reviews.
Hopefully BIOS optimizations will tame the power a bit. It really doesn't bother me much as long as it's using the power effectively.I must say I'm disappointed with this lineup. First of all, there is no IPC improvement, there are some outliers like AT review pointed out, but they go both ways. In the end you end up with +-1.5% difference vs SKL-S. Also the AVX512 "segmentation" means that 6C and 8C models get half the AVX512 capability, in other words effectively no better than BDW-E except they can run the AVX512 code. Throughput wise they will be the same. Not that AVX512 matters much anyway since we have only a handful of AVX2 supported commercial workloads now.
Now on to the ugly. Power consumption is just crazy high. 7820X is drawing 41% more power (81W!) at the platform level vs 1800X both at stock. That is crazy. Even when both OCed to the max the delta is 28% or in total watts 86W of difference. PCIe lanes totaling 28 Vs 24 on Ryzen 7 are also not that much of a difference given the price difference between the two ( much worse when you compare it to say a much cheaper 1700 model which is basically the 1800X only with lower multiplier and 100Mhz lower OC ceiling).
Not all is bad though, the chip can OC nicely and 4.6-4.7Ghz is doable with good air or WC which is great. Still for that price of the whole platform it doesn't make much sense. Stock Turbo is helping this chip differentiate itself from BDW-E and Ryzen 7 in benchmarks but at the expense of power draw/heat which is not that good. If it was priced at 450-500 max it would have made much more sense. But they would never price it that low no matter what competition has, they have to keep their margins high.
Given the power draws of the 8C and 10C parts, what frequency do you expect to see 18C part running at ?They didn't release the big guns yet...
And from all the reviews I have seen, they all agree the new chips are power hogs, and run hot..
Given the power draws of the 8C and 10C parts, what frequency do you expect to see 18C part running at ?
@ 165W? We have already seen that released parts exceed 140W (total package power).Before you start with the sub 3.0 GHz speculation again, let me point out 18C Xeon Gold 6150 has a 3.4 GHz all-core Turbo @ 165W TDP. A highly binned Core i9-7980XE will either match or beat this mark.
So they got pissed, what 3 days back, hence decided to not send samples 5~10 days back?According to the OC3D guy, Intel got pissed about Hexus and BitTech breaking NDA and therefore did not send out chips to most reviewers.
It'll also eat into the sales of the higher priced Xeons like 6150, I doubt the i9 7980 will be highly binned as you're speculatingBefore you start with the sub 3.0 GHz speculation again, let me point out 18C Xeon Gold 6150 has a 3.4 GHz all-core Turbo @ 165W TDP. A highly binned Core i9-7980XE will either match or beat this mark.
Is there any chance that the higher core count chips are 14nm++?
This launch is hilarious. How can you guys seriously think that BIOS revisions will really help that much here? This is Intel we are talking about. They have released similar CPUs for quite some time now. Cmon guys wake the heck up. I honestly don't see that much improvement over Broadwell-E.
I must say I'm disappointed with this lineup. First of all, there is no IPC improvement, there are some outliers like AT review pointed out, but they go both ways. In the end you end up with +-1.5% difference vs SKL-S. Also the AVX512 "segmentation" means that 6C and 8C models get half the AVX512 capability, in other words effectively no better than BDW-E except they can run the AVX512 code. Throughput wise they will be the same. Not that AVX512 matters much anyway since we have only a handful of AVX2 supported commercial workloads now.
Now on to the ugly. Power consumption is just crazy high. 7820X is drawing 41% more power (81W!) at the platform level vs 1800X both at stock. That is crazy. Even when both OCed to the max the delta is 28% or in total watts 86W of difference. PCIe lanes totaling 28 Vs 24 on Ryzen 7 are also not that much of a difference given the price difference between the two ( much worse when you compare it to say a much cheaper 1700 model which is basically the 1800X only with lower multiplier and 100Mhz lower OC ceiling).
Not all is bad though, the chip can OC nicely and 4.6-4.7Ghz is doable with good air or WC which is great. Still for that price of the whole platform it doesn't make much sense. Stock Turbo is helping this chip differentiate itself from BDW-E and Ryzen 7 in benchmarks but at the expense of power draw/heat which is not that good. If it was priced at 450-500 max it would have made much more sense. But they would never price it that low no matter what competition has, they have to keep their margins high.
We now know that the Core i9-7900X’s performance to power consumption ratio turns negative as you utilize more of its on-die resources. Of course, this has to be factored into your overclocking plans, since many coolers can't cope with the heat dissipated by a >200W processor.
Stable overclocking, defined as reliable operation under Prime95 for prolonged periods of time without hitting a temperature limit, wasn’t possible beyond 4.4 GHz. Reports of >5 GHz with all cores active should be taken with a grain of salt. We did boot into Windows at 5.1 GHz, but running actual applications resulted in either a BSOD or a motherboard emergency shutdown.
We did manage to achieve a stable 4.8 GHz overclock under the single- and multi-core Cinebench R15 benchmarks. However, our cooling solution was probably the decisive factor there. Realistically, 4.5 GHz should be achievable with an all-in-one liquid cooler.
Intel rushed the release of Skylake-X given that optimized BIOS was not available for press reviews well in advance. Intel could have launched Skylake-X in July and got more positive reviews.
They didn't release the big guns yet...
There are several more waves of SKX coming, so don't worry
Considering that while consuming 40% more power at the platform level, it does twice the job, it is reasonably efficient, ya know.Now on to the ugly. Power consumption is just crazy high. 7820X is drawing 41% more power (81W!) at the platform level vs 1800X both at stock. That is crazy. Even when both OCed to the max the delta is 28% or in total watts 86W of difference. PCIe lanes totaling 28 Vs 24 on Ryzen 7 are also not that much of a difference given the price difference between the two ( much worse when you compare it to say a much cheaper 1700 model which is basically the 1800X only with lower multiplier and 100Mhz lower OC ceiling).
Considering 7900x only draws 150W at 4Ghz, 7980X will draw only about 250W at 4Ghz. Tolerable, actually. The worst thing, of course is that AVX512 will make it completely unusable to stress test with P95 and LinX.The rest of the Skylake-X SKUs are going to be less appealing to enthusiasts who want the best single thread performance and multithread performance. MCC die based 16C and 18C SKUs are likely to have serious difficulty with overclocking to 4 Ghz given 7900x is already drawing 150w at stock.
We talk about BIOS revisions helping with situations when it actually loses to Sandy Bridge or something silly like that.This launch is hilarious. How can you guys seriously think that BIOS revisions will really help that much here? This is Intel we are talking about. They have released similar CPUs for quite some time now. Cmon guys wake the heck up. I honestly don't see that much improvement over Broadwell-E.
Looks like Core i7-7740K is the go-to CPU for absolute best ST performance, at least until 14nm++ Coffee Lake arrives.