The Intel Skylake-X Review: Core i9 7900X, i7 7820X and i7 7800X Tested
by Ian Cutress on June 19, 2017 9:01 AM ESTBenchmarking 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.
Benchmarking Performance: CPU Office Tests
Comparing Skylake-S and Skylake-X/SP Performance Clock-for-Clock
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
264 Comments
View All Comments
FreckledTrout - Tuesday, June 20, 2017 - link
If the 16 core Threadripper ends up being higher perfomant, cheaper, and using less power then it this argument wont matter. Im not sure it will win all three but it could.Lolimaster - Tuesday, June 20, 2017 - link
<$1000 for 16 core Zen, spent your money there, worth the extra over the 8 core Ryzen.Flunk - Tuesday, June 20, 2017 - link
No, it isn't. In a professional setting it's better to have more, less expensive systems rendering/serving/anything that just needs more processor time. For an additional $1000, I can double my performance rather than getting 20-30% more.FMinus - Thursday, June 22, 2017 - link
Frankly I was looking at an upcoming 12 core CPU from either AMD or Intel for my render machine, with the EPYC prices announced, I could see myself going with two AMD Threadrippers 12 cores if they keep them under $800. I got most parts, just need motherboards and the chips, and if they really do keep the price under $800 for 12 core TR, I will get two systems for a bit more as just the 12 core CPU from Intel will cost. Granted since I got most other parts I spent that ahead, but still, two systems easily. And of course the power consumption will be higher, but still.someonesomewherelse - Saturday, October 14, 2017 - link
What about a single processor 24 core (or even 32 core) epyc? Slightly lower clocks but the 32 core's extra cores should make up for it and it's cheaper than 2 12 core threadrippers especially once you factor in the motherboards/ram/... and ease of use.someonesomewherelse - Saturday, October 14, 2017 - link
With TR being so cheaper you can have two computers rendering which will be almost twice as fast.barleyguy - Saturday, June 24, 2017 - link
The 1600x has a 4.1 GHz XFR frequency, which requires good cooling but seems to kick in more than other Ryzen processors, likely because of two less cores. So on lightly threaded tasks without manual overclocking, the 1600x is a great choice.Manual overclocking changes the picture a bit though. In that case the 1600 and 1700 move up in bang for the buck, as does the i7 7700k.
chrysrobyn - Monday, June 19, 2017 - link
Zen isn't winning anything here, but they're showing up to the party. It's hard to ignore their prices, which are always lower than the Intel chips in the neighborhood (summed up in the conclusion with "Play it cheaper but competitive"), and their power -- 1/3rd less power than the Intel chips nearby -- which I didn't even see addressed?Ian Cutress - Monday, June 19, 2017 - link
I made the graph, forgot to write about it. Doing so now...(I always end up writing through the launch time :D)
Ian Cutress - Monday, June 19, 2017 - link
OK sorry, done. I'm currently in another briefing for something else...