The Intel Skylake-X Review: Core i9 7900X, i7 7820X and i7 7800X Tested

264 Comments

View All Comments

• AnandTechReader2017 - Monday, June 19, 2017 - link

  And no load/idle? And clockspeed at full load?
  Also, no mention of Intel drawing more than the rated load?

• AnandTechReader2017 - Monday, June 19, 2017 - link

  Sorry, missed the paragraph under on refresh.

• wolfemane - Monday, June 19, 2017 - link

  Seriously... you don't post gaming results because of bios issues? Seems RYZEN had issues due to premature bios as well but that sure as hell didn't keep you all from posting results anyways.
  
  I was going to give kudos to you guys as I was reading the article for excluding gaming reaults on workstation CPU's. But nope, you had to add that little blurb there at the end.
  
  Pretty god damn shameful if you ask me. Post the results, then do a follow up when venders get their crap together and release reliable bios. The same venders that blamed AMD for their inability to create half way decent bios.

• Ryan Smith - Monday, June 19, 2017 - link

  Unfortunately it's a bit of a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation for us. The Skylake-X platform is still quite immature in some respects, and Intel did not give us a ton of lead-time in testing it. The BIOSes only came in a bit before Ian had to get on a plane. So we've been racing the clock for the past week trying to pull things together.
  
  What we do have are a set of incomplete data that still shows some issues. But we need time to further validate that data, and even more time to write about it. Both of which have been in short supply over the last few days.
  
  Mentioning gaming at all is because we wanted to point out that there are still issues, and that anyone who is primarily interested in gaming is likely best served by waiting, rather than jumping on Intel's pre-orders.

• wolfemane - Monday, June 19, 2017 - link

  I GET where you are coming from. But you (Anandtech) had no issues posting AMD Ryzen results knowing full well that the x370 platform was far *FAR* from mature. Anandtech and other reviewers didn't hesitate to mention all the bugs possibly holding the platform back. But you still posted the results. As you should have.

• Ian Cutress - Monday, June 19, 2017 - link

  Err, what? Our Ryzen 7 review did not have gaming benchmarks.
  http://www.anandtech.com/show/11170/the-amd-zen-an...

• wolfemane - Monday, June 19, 2017 - link

  Well... guess how incredibly stupid I feel? If I could retract my comment I would. I'll go reread the launch review again.

• cheshirster - Monday, June 19, 2017 - link

  No need to apologize
  Here are gaming tests on DDR4-3000 @ 2400 downclocked memory
  With Ryzens BADLY underperforming in RoTR and Rocket League pretty much published
  http://www.anandtech.com/show/11244/the-amd-ryzen-...
  And for Intel they write this
  "Our GTX1080 seems to be hit the hardest out of our four GPUs, as well as Civilization 6, the second Rise of the Tomb Raider test, and Rocket League on all GPUs. As a result, we only posted a minor selection of results, most of which show good parity at 4K"

• DanNeely - Monday, June 19, 2017 - link

  Check the dates; that was published about 5 weeks after the initial Zen review that Ian linked to above. The initial one didn't have any gaming data yet; because in both cases the release day situation was too broken.

• melgross - Monday, June 19, 2017 - link

  Yeah, it's usually considered to be proper to first read about what you're commenting upon.