7900X reviewed!

[AnonymousGuy]

4 minutes ago, Terodius said:

Bitwit Kyle had a delidded engineering sample 7740K and still he could barely push it to 5.3GHz. 5 years ago I was getting 5.4GHz on water on a 2600K and still all these years later we can't get a CPU that will overclock as well as that one did. Intel has been sitting on their ass all these years, I'm so glad AMD is back to bring some competition back into the market. 

OC proof: http://www.3dmark.com/3dmv/3802606 

> 5Ghz was never commonplace on a 2600K or 2500K from what I recall.  4.8-4.9-ish was the average.

[VagabondWraith]

11 minutes ago, TahoeDust said:

That ASRock package was super tempting.  Definitely a lot of board for the money.  I'm glad to hear you liked your Gigabyte Gaming 7 board.  I have read mostly positive things about them.  There is still a week for some atrocious review to make me cancel my order.

That's why I'm waiting on the mobo reviews.  I'll get the CPU first since those really never have issues. I reckon next week for in-depth mobo reviews.

[leadeater]

1 minute ago, AnonymousGuy said:

> 5Ghz was never commonplace on a 2600K or 2500K from what I recall.  4.8-4.9-ish was the average.

And I think this shows it's more a fundamental technology limitation rather than lacking the ability or willingness to create CPUs that can clock faster.

[done12many2]

6 minutes ago, Terodius said:

Bitwit Kyle had a delidded engineering sample 7740K and still he could barely push it to 5.3GHz. 5 years ago I was getting 5.4GHz on water on a 2600K and still all these years later we can't get a CPU that will overclock as well as that one did. Intel has been sitting on their ass all these years, I'm so glad AMD is back to bring some competition back into the market. 

OC proof: http://www.3dmark.com/3dmv/3802606 

 

Why are you running 4.6 GHz today?

[done12many2]

3 minutes ago, VagabondWraith said:

That's why I'm waiting on the mobo reviews.  I'll get the CPU first since those really never have issues. I reckon next week for in-depth mobo reviews.

 

Looks like I'll go with the Asus x299 Deluxe at launch since it doesn't appear that the Apex or Extreme will be available.  That's a lot of hassle.  

[TahoeDust]

1 minute ago, done12many2 said:

 

Looks like I'll go with the Asus x299 Deluxe at launch since it doesn't appear that the Apex or Extreme will be available.  That's a lot of hassle.  

I have loved my p8z68 Deluxe.  It has been rock solid.  If you decide to sell it and move to the Apex or Extreme hit me up.  If I am not completely satisfied with my Gigabyte board I may be interested.

 

 

I really kind of fell for the Aorus after watching this video... 

 

 

 

[paps511]

214 watts at full load?! is that correct?

[VagabondWraith]

10 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

 

Looks like I'll go with the Asus x299 Deluxe at launch since it doesn't appear that the Apex or Extreme will be available.  That's a lot of hassle.  

I looked on Asus' page and didn't even see any extra info on it (nor a price). Such a bummer that don't have it available at launch.

[tom_w141]

7 hours ago, leadeater said:

Isn't a 1700 rather close to a 7700k for that? And slightly cheaper?

Yep comparing apples to bricks again  that margin when there is a $100 price difference is fine. Use money to compare systems and you get 3 R7 1700: 1 X299 system. So yeah you might be slightly faster but I've got 3 PCs and you won't be faster than all of them doing a task each ?

[tom_w141]

6 hours ago, VagabondWraith said:

I freaked out a bit, but I think I'll stick to my plan and get the 7820X. My room temps are 16-18c year round, so temps should be fine.  

 

@done12many2 talked some sense into me. ?

What was the sense? That you can buy this or an R7 1700 and a 1080Ti?  I hope you aren't a gamer because the gains were meh. I mean look at all the reviews so weak...

[TahoeDust]

Damn...Ryzen fanboys are insecure and salty AF

 

They love their "Best Value" award...about as meaningful to me as a participation trophy.

[tom_w141]

45 minutes ago, paps511 said:

214 watts at full load?! is that correct?

No double it and more if you talking 10+ core variants. For toms hardware the motherboard shut down due to excess power draw.

[tom_w141]

5 minutes ago, TahoeDust said:

Damn...Ryzen fanboys are insecure and salty AF

 

They love their "Best Value" award...about as meaningful to me as a participation trophy.

Look at X299 against Ryzen performance is anywhere from 2-20% better at 300% of the price. That's why people are salty X299 is overpriced and rushed. Yeah the 10 core is decent but TR will shit on it for $850 16 cores... Intel need to get off their high horse and cut down the Intel tax as they don't dominate any more

[TahoeDust]

1 minute ago, tom_w141 said:

Look at X299 against Ryzen performance is anywhere from 2-20% better at 300% of the price. That's why people are salty X299 is overpriced and rushed. Yeah the core is decent but TR will shit on it for $850 16 cores... Intel need to get off their high horse and cut down the Intel tax as they don't dominate any more

Like I said...congrats on the "Best Value" award.  If I ever decide I want almost the best CPU I can comfortably afford, I will be sure to check them out.

[done12many2]

7 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

Look at X299 against Ryzen performance is anywhere from 2-20% better at 300% of the price. That's why people are salty X299 is overpriced and rushed. Yeah the 10 core is decent but TR will shit on it for $850 16 cores... Intel need to get off their high horse and cut down the Intel tax as they don't dominate any more

 

Here you go again.  It's sad that you spend your time doing this.  Some of us don't care about value like you do.  You need to accept that.

 

When value is not a factor and performance is all that matter, your Ryzen CPU is inferior.  It's nothing to be upset about man.  

 

If anyone needs to get off the high horse, maybe it's you?

[leadeater]

1 minute ago, done12many2 said:

Here you go again.  It's sad that you spend your time doing this.  Some of us don't care about value like you do.  You need to accept that.

 

When value is not a factor and performance is all that matter, your Ryzen CPU is inferior.  It's nothing to be upset about man.  

And some of us will go spend $15k on a server and then also buy an X series workstation just fuck with people that care deeply about value .

 

I mean I care about it in the sense I know it is a thing and use it when giving advice but you don't always have to practice what you preach.

[done12many2]

Just now, leadeater said:

And some of us will go spend $15k on a server and then also buy an X series workstation just fuck with people that care deeply about value .

 

I mean I care about it in the sense I know it is a thing and use it when giving advice but you don't always have to practice what you preach.

 

Exactly.  If PCs are a passion of ours and we chose to splurge a bit, there's no need for the value orientated people to get worked up into a frenzy about the shit.  

 

I have yet to buy a house based purely on value alone.  Sure it's a factor, but sometimes the wife just tells me, "that's the one" and I shut up and buy as I'm told.  

 

With that said, it's exhausting watching so many people exhausting the value policing.  I get it, AMD provides a competitive cheaper option.  But the fact remains, it's a competitive cheaper option.  Getting 70 or 80% of anything is not usually where the bulk of expense is.  Usually it's that last 10 to 20% that costs us the most in many things.  

[Drak3]

8 minutes ago, TahoeDust said:

They love their "Best Value" award...about as meaningful to me as a participation trophy.

Except, for a select few of us on the forums, most people won't touch the capability of Intel's more expensive CPUs until Intel has units that cost half as much and support far more usable features. It's wasted cost on what could have gone to a meaningful upgrade, or spent on something else entirely.

So having the best, other than a nigh worthless brag, is only really important for a few people. Some with rather deep pockets, and either a use case or a void in their head.

For all of the people on this forum that claim that they benefit from anything above X299's 10 core (only for it's PCIe lane count, otherwise it'd be the hexacore), I expect that 90% of them are doing things that the 7700K at stock settings can easily do for a good few years.

 

Beyond that, only people I see getting higher core count X299 chips and actually are:

@done12many2

and me.

Done12 for AVX512 performance, benching, and because he can.

Me, to experiment with some KVMs and AVX512.

 

To me, value is dictated by need and want. Something like the 7980XE is a horrible value to standard consumers, and thus, they should avoid it. To Done12, it's not actually a bad value if he can leverage it, and if anyone can leverage it, it's him, or @leadeater. To me, it's not a great value right now, but if I develop a use case that benefits from it, value of it shoots up.

9 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

your Ryzen CPU is inferior.  It's nothing to be upset about man.  

When you phrase it like that, it kinda is. So long as you use that word, 'inferior.'

[TahoeDust]

Well...I look at it this way.  When I bought my 2700k setup I bought the best that I could comfortably afford.  Almost 6 years later that has worked out pretty well for me.  Maybe 6 years from now I will be saying the same thing about my 7820x.

[leadeater]

8 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

or a void in their head.

You called? 

 

Self confessed money waster right here.

 

I wouldn't actually go for something like a 7980XE in my desktop, I too have a limit of pointlessness and that is it. I keep all my large workload stuff on my servers where they should be but I have legitimate workload to utilize more than one dual socket server and that is solely due to personal professional development in my career. Having a lab where I can do anything and try any technology in a like for like configuration to a real world deployment (smaller scale) is extremely helpful.

[Drak3]

Just now, leadeater said:

You called? 

 

Self confessed money waster right here.

 

I wouldn't actually go for something like a 7980XE in my desktop, I too have a limit of pointlessness and that is it. I keep all my large workload stuff on my servers where they should be but I have legitimate workload to utilize more than one dual socket server and that is solely due to personal professional development in my career, having a lab where I can do anything and try any technology in a like for like configuration to a real world deployment (smaller scale) is extremely helpful.

You absolutely would if the need arised. And here's why: KVMs. You'd run your dual core NAS, hexacore Windows gaming rig, quad core HTPC, and a Linux workstation when you couldn't have multiple, smaller PCs. That's really putting y'er noggin to saving space.

[done12many2]

16 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Except, for a select few of us on the forums, most people won't touch the capability of Intel's more expensive CPUs until Intel has units that cost half as much and support far more usable features. It's wasted cost on what could have gone to a meaningful upgrade, or spent on something else entirely.

So having the best, other than a nigh worthless brag, is only really important for a few people. Some with rather deep pockets, and either a use case or a void in their head.

For all of the people on this forum that claim that they benefit from anything above X299's 10 core (only for it's PCIe lane count, otherwise it'd be the hexacore), I expect that 90% of them are doing things that the 7700K at stock settings can easily do for a good few years.

 

Beyond that, only people I see getting higher core count X299 chips and actually are:

@done12many2

and me.

Done12 for AVX512 performance, benching, and because he can.

Me, to experiment with some KVMs and AVX512.

 

To me, value is dictated by need and want. Something like the 7980XE is a horrible value to standard consumers, and thus, they should avoid it. To Done12, it's not actually a bad value if he can leverage it, and if anyone can leverage it, it's him, or @leadeater. To me, it's not a great value right now, but if I develop a use case that benefits from it, value of it shoots up.

When you phrase it like that, it kinda is. So long as you use that word, 'inferior.'

 

Silicon Lottery has their own section on OCN.  http://www.overclock.net/f/18068/silicon-lottery

 

He asked for some preliminary feedback on what people were wanting with regards to Skylake-X CPUs, delidding, warranties and so on.  There are a great deal of enthusiasts who could care less about value.  They just want the best of the best they can buy regardless of practicality or cost.  This is absolutely nothing new within the x99 community.  

 

You, I, and people outside of LTT already know this.  We are not alone.  

 

 

 

 

 

[scottyseng]

2 minutes ago, TahoeDust said:

Well...I look at it this way.  When I bought my 2700k setup I bought the best that I could comfortably afford.  Almost 6 years later that has worked out pretty well for me.  Maybe 6 years from now I will be saying the same thing about my 7820x.

Yeah, I really regret not spending that extra $100 back in 2011 when I bought my 2500K system. I just bought a cheap $130 2700K from ebay last summer and overclocked, it works great as a daily CPU for browsing / gaming / content creation (to an extent)

 

I think if people can afford the best and can use it, they should get it if they want to (Assuming the rest of the system also is good). Chances are the work the user is doing will pay the system off anyway. I expect a fair chunk of these high end Intel CPUs just to be written off as office equipment in companies.

 

I'm still trying to get over the fact at how high core CPUs are getting lower in price now in general.

 

As for value, it's "worth" depends on the user. If I sold my copic markers and art supplies, I could probably easily buy a 6900K system. But I use them a lot so it's worth it for me. Meanwhile a lot of my friends can't stand that I paid that much for my art hobby.

[leadeater]

Just now, Drak3 said:

You absolutely would if the need arised. And here's why: KVMs. You'd run your dual core NAS, hexacore Windows gaming rig, quad core HTPC, and a Linux workstation when you couldn't have multiple, smaller PCs. That's really putting y'er noggin to saving space.

Save space, I'll let you know when I run out of room in this . 

 

 

Mind you have have a whole room for my server stuff and I could fit 3-4 more racks in it.

[VagabondWraith]

20 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

 

Exactly.  If PCs are a passion of ours and we chose to splurge a bit, there's no need for the value orientated people to get worked up into a frenzy about the shit.  

 

I have yet to buy a house based purely on value alone.  Sure it's a factor, but sometimes the wife just tells me, "that's the one" and I shut up and buy as I'm told.  

 

With that said, it's exhausting watching so many people exhausting the value policing.  I get it, AMD provides a competitive cheaper option.  But the fact remains, it's a competitive cheaper option.  Getting 70 or 80% of anything is not usually where the bulk of expense is.  Usually it's that last 10 to 20% that costs us the most in many things.  

Just like the TITAN Xp vs 1080 Ti. If you have the money for the best, there's no need tgaf about what others deem as "value." At a certain point, it becomes less about value and more about having the best.