The Intel Kaby Lake-X i7 7740X and i5 7640X Review: The New Single-Threaded Champion, OC to 5GHz
by Ian Cutress on July 24, 2017 8:30 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
- Intel
- Kaby Lake
- X299
- Basin Falls
- Kaby Lake-X
- i7-7740X
- i5-7640X
Benchmarking Performance: CPU Legacy Tests
Our legacy tests represent benchmarks that were once at the height of their time. Some of these are industry standard synthetics, and we have data going back over 10 years. All of the data here has been rerun on Windows 10, and we plan to go back several generations of components to see how performance has evolved.
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
3D Particle Movement v1
3DPM is a self-penned benchmark, taking basic 3D movement algorithms used in Brownian Motion simulations and testing them for speed. High floating point performance, MHz and IPC wins in the single thread version, whereas the multithread version has to handle the threads and loves more cores. This is the original version, written in the style of a typical non-computer science student coding up an algorithm for their theoretical problem, and comes without any non-obvious optimizations not already performed by the compiler, such as false sharing.
CineBench 11.5 and 10
Cinebench is a widely known benchmarking tool for measuring performance relative to MAXON's animation software Cinema 4D. Cinebench has been optimized over a decade and focuses on purely CPU horsepower, meaning if there is a discrepancy in pure throughput characteristics, Cinebench is likely to show that discrepancy. Arguably other software doesn't make use of all the tools available, so the real world relevance might purely be academic, but given our large database of data for Cinebench it seems difficult to ignore a small five-minute test. We run the modern version 15 in this test, as well as the older 11.5 and 10 due to our back data.
x264 HD 3.0
Similarly, the x264 HD 3.0 package we use here is also kept for historic regressional data. The latest version is 5.0.1, and encodes a 1080p video clip into a high-quality x264 file. Version 3.0 only performs the same test on a 720p file, and in most circumstances the software performance hits its limit on high-end processors, but still works well for mainstream and low-end. Also, this version only takes a few minutes, whereas the latest can take over 90 minutes to run.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
176 Comments
View All Comments
Gothmoth - Tuesday, July 25, 2017 - link
so why not test at 640x480... shifts the bottleneck even more to the cpu... you are kidding yourself.silverblue - Tuesday, July 25, 2017 - link
Not really. If the GPU becomes the bottleneck at or around 1440p, and as such the CPU is the limiting factor below that, why go so far down when practically nobody games below 1080p anymore?Zaxx420 - Monday, July 24, 2017 - link
"Over the last few generations, Intel has increased IPC by 3-10% each generation, making a 30-45% increase since 2010 and Sandy Bridge..."I have an old Sandy i5 2500K on an Asus Z68 that can do 5GHz all day on water and 4.8 on air. I know it's ancient IP...but I wonder if it could hold it's own vs a stock clocked Skylake i5? hmmmm...
hbsource - Tuesday, July 25, 2017 - link
Great review. Thanks.I think I've picked the best nit yet: On the Civ 6 page, you inferred that Leonard Nimoy did the voiceover on Civ 5 when he actually did it on Civ 4.
gammaray - Tuesday, July 25, 2017 - link
it's kind of ridiculous to see the Sandy bridge chip beating new cpus at 4k gaming...Zaxx420 - Tuesday, July 25, 2017 - link
Kinda makes me grin...I have an old Sandy i5 2500K on an Asus Z68 that can do 5GHz all day on water and 4.8 on air. I know it's ancient IP...but I wonder if it could hold it's own vs a stock clocked Skylake i5? hmmmm...
Mugur - Tuesday, July 25, 2017 - link
Much ado about nothing. So the best case for 7740 is Office applications or opening PDF files? The author seems to have lost the sight of the forest because of the trees.Some benchmarks are odd, some are useless in the context. I watched the YouTube version of this: https://www.techspot.com/review/1442-intel-kaby-la... and it looked like a more realistic approach for a 7740k review.
Gothmoth - Tuesday, July 25, 2017 - link
well i guess intel is putting more advertising money on anandtech.otherwise i cant´t explain how an overpriced product with heat problems and artificial crippled pci lanes on an enthusiast platform(!) can get so much praise without much criticism.
jabber - Tuesday, July 25, 2017 - link
I miss the days when you saw a new bunch of CPUs come out and the reviews showed that there was a really good case for upgrading if you could afford to. You know a CPU upgrade once or twice a year. Now I upgrade (maybe) once every 6-7 years. Sure it's better but not so much fun.Dragonstongue - Tuesday, July 25, 2017 - link
Intel wins for the IO and chipset, offering 24 PCIe 3.0 lanes for USB 3.1/SATA/Ethernet/storage, while AMD is limited on that front, having 8 PCIe 2.0 from the chipset.Funny that is, seeing as AM4 has 16 pci-e lanes available to it unless when go down the totem pole those lanes get segregated differently , even going from the above table Intel is offering 16 for x299not 24 as you put directly into words, so who wins in IO, no one, they both offer 16 lanes. Now if you are comparing via price, x299 is obviously a premium product, at least compare to current AM4 premium end which is x370 chipset, pretty even footing on the motherboards when compared similar "specs" comparing the best AMD will offer in the form of x399, it makes the best "specs" of x299 laughable.
AMD seems to NOT be shortchanging pci-e lanes, DRAM ability (or speed) functional, proper thermal interface used etc etc.
Your $ by all means, but seriously folks need to take blinders off, how much raw power is this "95w TDP" processors using when ramped to 5+Ghz, sure in theory it will be the fastest for per core performance, but how long will the cpu last running at that level, how much extra power will be consumed, what price of an acceptable cooler is needed to maintain it within thermal spec and so forth.
Interesting read, but much seems out of context to me. May not like it, but AMD has given a far better selection of product range this year for cpu/motherboard chipsets, more core, more threads, lots of IO connectivity options, fair pricing overall (the $ value in Canada greed of merchants does not count as a fault against AMD)
Am done.