Friday, June 16th 2017
Core i9-7900X Skylake-X Review Shows Up
An Intel Core i9-7900X has appeared for a full review at the site Hexus.net. Spoiler alert, it clocks to 4.7 GHz on all ten cores with relative ease (only taking 1.25 V, apparently, though it racked up nearly 100°C in Cinebench at that voltage).
The review praised Intel's overclocking headroom and general muscle in a mostly positive review. Still, not all is rosy in Intel land. They found performance per watt to not have improved much if at all, criticized the high price tag, and Hexus.net had the following to say about the overall experience:
"X299 motherboards don't appear to be quite ready, there are question marks surrounding the Skylake-X processors due later this year, and at the lower end of the Core X spectrum, Kaby Lake-X is nothing short of puzzling."
It would seem AMD is not the only major chip-maker who can have motherboards ill prepared at launch time, even the mighty Intel may have teething issues yet.
You can read the full review (which is mostly positive, by the way) in the source link below.
Oh, and a special shoutout to our own @the54thvoid for discovering this article.
Source:
hexus.net
The review praised Intel's overclocking headroom and general muscle in a mostly positive review. Still, not all is rosy in Intel land. They found performance per watt to not have improved much if at all, criticized the high price tag, and Hexus.net had the following to say about the overall experience:
"X299 motherboards don't appear to be quite ready, there are question marks surrounding the Skylake-X processors due later this year, and at the lower end of the Core X spectrum, Kaby Lake-X is nothing short of puzzling."
It would seem AMD is not the only major chip-maker who can have motherboards ill prepared at launch time, even the mighty Intel may have teething issues yet.
You can read the full review (which is mostly positive, by the way) in the source link below.
Oh, and a special shoutout to our own @the54thvoid for discovering this article.
247 Comments on Core i9-7900X Skylake-X Review Shows Up
Keep it to 90C while stress testing and throttling will never happen. That leaves you 10c of headroom on these chips for warming ambient or other factors.You typically wont see the same temps a stress test gets either. Certainly not hotter. Thats the point is to make it a 'worst case' scenario.
That said, with my custom loop, i was able to reach 4.5ghz using aida64 stress test and keep it at 90c (7900k). During gaming temps were way less. Rendering 1080p/4k, encoding, compiling, was all several to 20c less than stress test temps.
The tim will only cause throttling if you raise the voltage and clocks past a certain point with your cooling. To put it the same way for the umteenth time, its certainly fine at stock and wont cause throttling. There is headroom for some overclocking as well. As much as many want/what indium solder would give??? Probably not, but the tim isnt really a problem (shit) like you two were incessantly going on about and blowing it out of proportion. :)
Also remember, this CPU has FIVR, so it seems hotter than it should be because of internal voltage regulation like Haswell CPUs. TIM has nothing to do with it.
"someone said this thing sucks, so I'mma gonna go with that since my wallet likes me that way".
4ghz 1.2v p95 v28.1 small fft showed 465w, lol! (System - at the wall)
Stock 265w... 1.15v
Tell your boss to spend the $100 for you to get a clamp-based amp meter! You can get a really good fluke one for less than $100, even, and the tool is invaluable.
I think it is HILARIOUS that you and I, guys who actually have access to these chips, are the ones that don't seem to be so adamant that there is something wrong with these chips. You'd think
we'd actually used them! :p
Also worth noting is the orientation of the DIMM slots and cache performance in AIDA64 memory benchmark (also the memory performance, wow!).
Haven't run into any weirdness as was reported by some reviewer...
Ill message you when not sitting at a stop light.. ;)
Yeah, its funny...and a bit sad all at the same time. What happened to listening?? What happened to being open to being corrected? What happened to supporting your talking points in a discussion. Im always happy to learn new things, but, i need support, not some random new people just spewing things out without it... :(
...sad forums...forums are sad.
BTW: when you look at "delidding" results carefully, most of the temp drop comes from significant shortening of the TIM/solder thickness, not from a different material.I'm pretty sure it's not that. It's most likely just the number. Almost 100*C. Almost boiling water. We're programmed to be worried. :-)
Don't think i'll be upgrading for at least another few more years.
However, I expect more from individuals. Most people here at least seem to be adults, so they must have had some exposure to high-school physics by now. They should know that electronics are not afraid of 100*C.
They should have at least a slight intuition that modern industrial installations are also operated by some sort of electronics, so it's clearly possible to make chips that sustain way over 100*C (AFAIK the current efforts are to reach 300*C).
Yes, Intel's cpus do clock a bit higher, get slightly more single thread performance, have a better implementation of avx and the infinity fabric frequency being fixed to the memory frequency isn't ideal which makes Intel's cpus better for some use cases.... but overall ryzens are better, the single thread performance is very close to Intel's, you get a lot more cores, pcie lanes, ecc support, better power efficiency and all that for less money.....
Bulldozer was a bust and the Phenom II while being not as good as what Intel had at the time was okish.
Sandy bridge was (and still is) an awesome cpu but after it Intel just didn't do much (ok, the igpu did get better) since they really had no competition.... and if you want to go further back the Core2quads, Celerons 300A, and probably a few others were also very good cpus for their time. But they also had some pretty crappy things like the P4 too... the Baytrail/Cherrytrail atoms while not very fast are also very under rated if they weren't artificially gimped by having 2 gb of ram at the most in the vast majority of cases (I think some of the tablets with them did have more but they aren't common) and very slow emmc storage they would be great cpus for cheap x86 tablets.....
And on the AMD side the Athlon and Athlon64 were great as well so both manufacturers had their good and not good moments...
They have an advantage by price and cores. Nothing wrong with free cores, but if you arent using them, like most cant, and wont for years (where 4c/8t starts holding things back)...