Intel Core-X Series: Full Specs Revealed

[PCGuy_5960]

@leadeater Can you please clean the thread?  

 

The G4560 has nothing to do with X299 

[tom_w141]

1 minute ago, Fonzie92 said:

Lol, now you guys are calling the mods when I proved you wrong with my screenshot. Absolutely hilarious 

No they are saying it's nothing to do with the clock speeds of the 14, 16 and 18 core X299 models or anything to do with X299 at all. They are right. Start a separate thread about the topic and I'm sure people will batter you with evidence there too (not that you'll listen)

[Fonzie92]

1 minute ago, tom_w141 said:

No they are saying it's nothing to do with the clock speeds of the 14, 16 and 18 core X299 models or anything to do with X299 at all. They are right. Start a separate thread about the topic and I'm sure people will batter you with evidence there too (not that you'll listen)

Says the one who is replying and arguing with me....  lol you go make your thread. I'll debate you to the ends of the earth 

[leadeater]

When I have to remove more than half the thread for being off topic there is a problem, keep it on topic please.

[goodtofufriday]

16 minutes ago, leadeater said:

When I have to remove more than half the thread for being off topic there is a problem, keep it on topic please.

 

(sry/notsry i had to) 

[Fonzie92]

20 minutes ago, leadeater said:

When I have to remove more than half the thread for being off topic there is a problem, keep it on topic please.

Remind me not to post on this forum again, if all you're going to do is delete our posts. Pathetic.

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, Fonzie92 said:

Remind me not to post on this forum again, if all you're going to do, is delete our posts. Pathetic.

You're welcome to have the discussion you were having in a different thread for that purpose, as the title of this thread says it's about X299 not something else. Mentions of competing products or other ones is fine in context but it is totally not acceptable when 80% of the topic has nothing to do with the topic.

[Fonzie92]

5 minutes ago, leadeater said:

You're welcome to have the discussion you were having in a different thread for that purpose, as the title of this thread says it's about X299 not something else. Mentions of competing products or other ones is fine in context but it is totally not acceptable when 80% of the topic has nothing to do with the topic.

I agree. But I just find it in bad taste to permanently delete the posts, why can't our off-topic posts just be merged to a newly dynamically created xx thread for debate. I'll happily code that feature in for IBP as an addon for moderators to do. I will have to invoice Linus for that feature, however

[leadeater]

3 minutes ago, Fonzie92 said:

I agree. But I just find it in bad taste to permanently delete the posts, why can't our off-topic posts just be merged to a newly dynamically created xx thread for debate. I'll happily code that feature in for IBP as an addon for moderators to do. I will have to invoice Linus for that feature, however

They aren't deleted they are hidden, nothing is deleted for many reasons. Once something is gone it's gone you can't, easily, get it back so hiding is better.

[SomeCallMeJo]

4 hours ago, tom_w141 said:

I didn't see you sneak that in. Is it now? Well would you like to bet on that?  

They are coming to mobile laptops in late august. Now for desktop cpus, it's going to be a while before we get those.

[SSL]

1 hour ago, Fonzie92 said:

Remind me not to post on this forum again, if all you're going to do is delete our posts. Pathetic.

 

Welcome to LTT!

[tom_w141]

24 minutes ago, SomeCallMeJo said:

They are coming to mobile laptops in late august. Now for desktop cpus, it's going to be a while before we get those.

IK hence my statement (no one cares about mobile)

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

i think the 16 core TR vs the 18 core I9 is going to be super interesting to see in benchmarks, if Intel cant go much beyond that base then AMD might be preformance king tbh

Well, I suppose that the 16 core threadripper is only 2 cores shorter than the core i9-7980XE. But since the core i9 has an extra 2 cores than the 16 core threadripper, it could do well in terms of multi core applications, and it has an additional 4 more threads which could also make it do well in multi threaded applications. I also depends on the clockspeed, because the core i9-7980XE could have stronger cores clocked at higher clockspeeds and threadripper could have multiple different cores clocked at slower clockspeeds. But, it would certainly be an interesting concept to test.

[Drak3]

4 hours ago, MageTank said:

This is the hard part. I can't name the source, as I do not want to get the person in trouble. I hate to be the "anonymous source" guy, as I absolutely hate when other people do it, but i genuinely can't name them. If anything, I recommend just waiting until they come out (or for Der8auer to inevitably review it). 

Bet I know who it is.

4 hours ago, huilun02 said:

Someone explain what is an 112W i5 doing on X299?

It's X299's Pentium. The stopgap for the people that don't save before dropping money onto the enthusiast platform.

 

5 hours ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

from what i have seen benchmark wise the 6c I7 was preforming around an R5 1600x while running a higher frequency, which would indicate that it has a step back in instructions per clock lol. i dont think Coffee lake is smokeing anyone

It's also possible that some of the benches scale with L3 cache, where the 7800X has 8.25MB and the 1600 has 16.

 

[MageTank]

Just now, Drak3 said:

Bet I know who it is.

Would be interesting if you do, because I technically don't, lol. 

[Drak3]

4 minutes ago, MageTank said:

Would be interesting if you do, because I technically don't

Yeah no we're actually room mates

\s

4 minutes ago, MageTank said:

lol. 

2 minutes ago, huilun02 said:

Oh you mean people who didn't save and yet spend $240 on a stopgap measure? Oh ok

We should stop saying people. Realistically, it's probably one guy. One, very stupid guy.

[Bananasplit_00]

Just now, TheBeastPC said:

Well, I suppose that the 16 core threadripper is only 2 cores shorter than the core i9-7980XE. But since the core i9 has an extra 2 cores than the 16 core threadripper, it could do well in terms of multi core applications, and it has an additional 4 more threads which could also make it do well in multi threaded applications. I also depends on the clockspeed, because the core i9-7980XE could have stronger cores clocked at higher clockspeeds and threadripper could have multiple different cores clocked at slower clockspeeds. But, it would certainly be an interesting concept to test.

its definatly going to be a fun battle to see IMO. to me it looks like the multi die TR has the clock advantage at the moment, it atleast wins in base clock speed by quite a bit, but Intels all core turbo could be good aswell. i think its going to be a close battle in some scenarios and some there is going to be a clear winner. Would be really funny if AMD pulls ahead and takes the preformance crown though  

[Curufinwe_wins]

Remember everyone that turbo boost 3.0 is a two core turbo, and the 2.0 is then the 4C. We will see what the all core turbo is, but for games at least that isn't too bad compared to generations before this one.

[Dylanc1500]

14 minutes ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

its definatly going to be a fun battle to see IMO. to me it looks like the multi die TR has the clock advantage at the moment, it atleast wins in base clock speed by quite a bit, but Intels all core turbo could be good aswell. i think its going to be a close battle in some scenarios and some there is going to be a clear winner. Would be really funny if AMD pulls ahead and takes the preformance crown though  

 

8 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Remember everyone that turbo boost 3.0 is a two core turbo, and the 2.0 is then the 4C. We will see what the all core turbo is, but for games at least that isn't too bad compared to generations before this one.

Well if the Xeon 6154 is anything to go by, the 7980xe will have an all core boost of 3.7.

[Bananasplit_00]

Just now, Dylanc1500 said:

 

Well if the Xeon 6154 is anything to go by, the 7980xe will have an all core boost of 3.7.

is that the all core boost? if it is id say its quite high and should smash TR

[Dylanc1500]

22 minutes ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

is that the all core boost? if it is id say its quite high and should smash TR

Yes all core. However that chip has a 200w TDP.

 

Also these chips should have two FMA units per core, unless they disable something.

[TheKDub]

6 hours ago, Fonzie92 said:

How is your CPU pin getting destroyed at a measly 1.25v not a design flaw?

It's possible it was a defect with the motherboard, not just the chip.

[Princess Luna]

What I can see is that for the first time in a long time people do seem to be more excited about AMD's HEDT than Intel's HEDT and that does please me.

[3DOSH]

Some are forgetting that most motherboards take the 1 core boost and apply it to all cores by default, the problem is the heat and power consumption, going by the 10 core its gonna be a big problem.

And for the people putting TR against the highest end ship from Intel, your insane. TR is 1K $ so its competition should be the nearest prices chip from Intel, SO the X7900 or X7920. 

[PCGuy_5960]

6 hours ago, Fonzie92 said:

How is your CPU pin getting destroyed at a measly 1.25v not a design flaw?

 

4 minutes ago, TheKDub said:

It's possible it was a defect with the motherboard, not just the chip.

Guys, Steve damaged ground pins. This is NOT a design flaw. The back of the CPU probably wasn't clean.