i7-7820X Reviews

[PCGuy_5960]

Just now, Morgan MLGman said:

I'm pretty sure that they won't RMA it but it's definitely worth a try, it's not like he's gonna get a worse overclocker

Yep @done12many2 RMAed his 5960X and got a 4.9GHz (at 1,35V) one!  I am pretty sure that if someone RMAes his 6700K he will get a 4.7+GHz one

[DXMember]

4 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Because why not? Many people have RMAed their CPUs (for no particular reason) and got golden CPUs as replacements! (Especially with Haswell-E)

Really? I should try that, my Haswell-E is so shit... but I had the TRAY thingy which was $5 cheaper and with just 1 year warranty which is gone like 2 years ago... so.... too bad it's not like RAM with lifetime

[done12many2]

Just now, DXMember said:

Really? I should try that, my Haswell-E is so shit... but I had the TRAY thingy which was $5 cheaper and with just 1 year warranty which is gone like 2 years ago... so.... too bad it's not like RAM with lifetime

 

Unfortunately, they won't let you RMA the tray CPUs.

[Morgan MLGman]

2 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

 

Unfortunately, they won't let you RMA the tray CPUs.

Why would anyone buy them then... The price difference is too low to justify losing warranty.

[PCGuy_5960]

1 minute ago, DXMember said:

Really? I should try that, my Haswell-E is so shit... but I had the TRAY thingy which was $5 cheaper and with just 1 year warranty which is gone like 2 years ago... so.... too bad it's not like RAM with lifetime

Yeah...... If you had purchased a box CPU you would have gotten a golden J batch one for free  (Mine's a J batch, but my cooler is not that good, so no overclocking )

[done12many2]

3 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Why would anyone buy them then... The price difference is too low to justify losing warranty.

 

I don't know.  Apparently @DXMember needed the $5 extra for 2 large Snickers bars.  

[TidaLWaveZ]

3 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Yeah...... If you had purchased a box CPU you would have gotten a golden J batch one for free  (Mine's a J batch, but my cooler is not that good, so no overclocking )

I've had two boxed from microcenter one maxes 4.7 one 4.8*, on good water though. I believe the good one was still hitting 4.2+ asus autotune with Hyper212 though.

[PCGuy_5960]

Just now, TidaLWaveZ said:

I've had two boxed from microcenter one maxes 4.7 one 4.5, on good water though. I believe the good one was still hitting 4.2+ with Hyper212 though.

Yeah, J batch, right?

[NumLock21]

9 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

that video shows how hard it will be to pick the right board, it is just a mess.

It's also the first board ever since the dawn of computers, where users actually have to download the manual first and read it, before purchasing.

[DXMember]

14 minutes ago, DXMember said:

in some cases, when the workload doesn't share data between threads - but if it does then every thread will have to individually fetch from RAM - and if you have 20 of those threads or 36 like with 7980X and you have to fetch RAM on all of them, well... then GG

actually no... scrap that... that kind of thing would still get cached in L3 which all cores would have access to... it'd be something more complicated than that, it would have to be evicted from L3 and then stored in L2 and then same data requested by another core which would be a bizzare scenario but could happen,

anyway, it get complicated really fast... I mean it's Intel... they have like dozens of engineers working on x86 for decades, they know better

but it's still a design choice that doesn't benefit all workloads equally - server centric and consumer centric workloads are very different and it's not feasible to please everyone with a single design

[The Benjamins]

Just now, NumLock21 said:

It's also the first board ever since the dawn of computers, where users actually have to download the manual first and read it, before purchasing.

I can see retailers failing at putting everything needed on the specs page and having people buy boards that release later that it is 8x 4x 4x or that you cant have 2 NVME drives and built in wifi. x299 boards are a joke.

[TidaLWaveZ]

3 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Yeah, J batch, right?

Not sure.

 

I do know that every processor I've gotten from Microcenter seems to have been above average overclocker.

 

The last bad overclocker I had was the i7 920, which I bought from newegg.

 

 

[NumLock21]

Just now, The Benjamins said:

I can see retailers failing at putting everything needed on the specs page and having people buy boards that release later that it is 8x 4x 4x or that you cant have 2 NVME drives and built in wifi. x299 boards are a joke.

IMO out of the 3 board mentioned in Paul's video the Asus Prime X299 Deluxe is the only one so far that tries not to have any disabled PCIe slots when using a KabyLake-X and instead they split the PCIe bandwidth with other devices. That is better than the other 2 boards, where the slot are physically disabled.

 

[Energycore]

Could add tomshardware's review to the OP. Especially this slide

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i9-7900x-skylake-x,5092-10.html

 

That's stock btw, and tomshardware reported pretty strong numbers on the temperature issue.

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i9-7900x-skylake-x,5092-11.html

[PCGuy_5960]

5 minutes ago, Energycore said:

Probably because of AVX-512.....

@Taf the Ghost what's so funny?

[The Benjamins]

5 minutes ago, NumLock21 said:

IMO out of the 3 board mentioned in Paul's video the Asus Prime X299 Deluxe is the only one so far that tries not to have any disabled PCIe slots when using a KabyLake-X and instead they split the PCIe bandwidth with other devices. That is better than the other 2 boards, where the slot are physically disabled.

 

I also do like all of the chipset stuff how if you use a NVME throught the chip set this is disabled and so on. I feel all this mess comes from the low amount of PCIe lanes given by the CPU were they want to have a feature rich board but they have to also make it work on a CPU that has no were near the amount of lanes needed. I am glad it seems like threadripper will not have this stupid problem.

 

despite the CPU silicon being really good everything else about x299 bugs me. The CPU's might be good but man does the platform look bad now.

[Energycore]

Just now, PCGuy_5960 said:

Probably because of AVX-512.....

Perhaps, but to quote Tomshardware

Quote

Pushing all of the Core i9-7900X’s cores with Prime95 or LuxRender propels power consumption to incredible heights. You do get 48 percent more rendering performance in LuxRender, but at the expense of 58 percent-higher power use. This approach has the elegance of a sledgehammer. Then again, if you need speed at any cost, Core i9-7900X is top-notch.

Seems like LuxRender is also showing those high power consumption numbers.

 

Also I just realized this thread is for 7820X reviews (it's an i9 btw)

[Jahramika]

12 hours ago, TahoeDust said:

So...the 7820x is more expensive, takes more power, and runs hotter....but clocks higher and performs better.  Is this not what everyone expected?

Except the double the price of the 1700 which performs on par with the 1800x that everyone wants to hide now. Every reviewer said dont buy the 1800x get the 1700 now 1800x is the standard such hypocrites in the community.

[done12many2]

1 minute ago, Energycore said:

Perhaps, but to quote Tomshardware

Quote

Pushing all of the Core i9-7900X’s cores with Prime95 or LuxRender propels power consumption to incredible heights. You do get 48 percent more rendering performance in LuxRender, but at the expense of 58 percent-higher power use. This approach has the elegance of a sledgehammer. Then again, if you need speed at any cost, Core i9-7900X is top-notch.

 

I personally think that a 48% return on 58% extra power consumed is a pretty good trade off, but I'm crazy like that.  

[Jahramika]

5 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

The results are valid.....kind of. Tthe 7820x was running at 4.8ghz (@1.22v) while I assume the 1800x was at 4ghz~ (I didn't watch the video, I just looked for the OC speeds and didn't see the 1800x). So, you have a 30% increase in power consumption for about 25% more performance (20% clockspeed + 7%~ IPC advantage). So the results are fully valid in the sense that that is how people will be running these chips, but it's not valid in the sense that there is also a large performance gap. 

 

The stock results are the more interesting ones as there is still an 80w gap there, however stock results are almost always less straight forward as you don't know what speeds each core was running at whereas when overclocked it's very straightforward. 

So is my 1700 4 ghz and 180 dollars cheaper stop trying to make Intel's 8C not look expensive.

[Energycore]

Just now, done12many2 said:

 

I personally think that a 48% return on 58% extra power consumed is a pretty good trade off, but I'm crazy like that.  

It's not terrible, but it's not a step forward in efficiency

[NumLock21]

4 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

I also do like all of the chipset stuff how if you use a NVME throught the chip set this is disabled and so on. I feel all this mess comes from the low amount of PCIe lanes given by the CPU were they want to have a feature rich board but they have to also make it work on a CPU that has no were near the amount of lanes needed. I am glad it seems like threadripper will not have this stupid problem.

 

despite the CPU silicon being really good everything else about x299 bugs me. The CPU's might be good but man does the platform look bad now.

Their 28 lane cpus, except for the overprice $600 one, is the only cpu worth getting along with the X299.

[PCGuy_5960]

Just now, Jahramika said:

So is my 1700 4 ghz and 180 dollars cheaper stop trying to make Intel's 8C not look expensive.

No one here is arguing that Ryzen isn't better in terms of price performance, but the 7820X performs quite a bit better than the 1700/1700X/1800X

[done12many2]

1 minute ago, Energycore said:

It's not terrible, but it's not a step forward in efficiency

 

No biggie, that all goes out the window when I start playing with these.

 

 

[79wjd]

4 minutes ago, Jahramika said:

So is my 1700 4 ghz and 180 dollars cheaper stop trying to make Intel's 8C not look expensive.

I'm not commenting on the price of the 7820x. I'm just saying the 7820x consuming 30% more power isn't a bad thing considering it's also 30% faster.