Skylake-X reviews

[Kairos]

...

There seems to be much more headroom with Skylake-X than its predecessor, and the main limiting factor is temperature if our CPU is anything to go by. We plumbed in 1.3V as a starting point and crept up from 4GHz all the way to an astounding 4.7GHz, which is 300MHz higher than we managed with the Core i7-6950X. Even more impressive was the fact that it was still completely stable with just 1.28V - far lower than the 1.44V we needed with the older CPU.

However, temperatures were definitely a concern with Cinebench and Terragen pushing 100°C with our 240mm AIO liquid cooler. As a result, while stable and potentially tameable under custom water-cooling, we decided to go for 4.6GHz for benchmarking, which required a super-low 1.22V. Interestingly our Core i7-6950X ran much cooler despite using a significantly higher voltage, albeit at 4.4GHz. This could well be due to thermal paste having been used between the heatspreader and CPU core with the new Skylake-X CPUs, in which case delidding could potentially yield significant benefits given the high heat density.

...

Intel Core i9-7900X (Skylake-X) Review
Source: bit-tech

 

[Kairos]

...

Wouldn't it be nice if the world's leading chip giants launched new processor series that worked perfectly and made implicit sense?

That's the hope, but having witnessed AMD's Ryzen arrive with teething issues ranging from memory support to hesitant in-game performance, it is frustrating to find that Intel's Core X-Series isn't immune to certain missteps, either.

X299 motherboards don't appear to be quite ready, there are question marks surrounding the Skylake-X processors due later this year, and at the lower end of the Core X spectrum, Kaby Lake-X is nothing short of puzzling.

Plenty of reason for discord among enthusiast users, yet look past the confusion and you may see cause for optimism. The world's first Core i9 processor, the 7900X, is ultimately a 10-core powerhouse offering excellent IPC performance and outstanding multi-core prowess in a single $999 chip armed with plenty of overclocking headroom. Said ingredients make it an automatic choice for power users seeking the ultimate PC experience, and the chip's benchmarking potential makes for a fitting debut of the Core i9 brand.

...

Review: Intel Core i9-7900X (14nm Skylake-X)
Source: hexus

 

[Kairos]

...

Today, we're reviewing the Intel Core i9-7900X Skylake X CPU, benchmarking it in game streaming (Twitch, YouTube) vs. Ryzen, in Blender & Premiere rendering, VR gaming, and standard gaming.
...

Source: gamersnexus

 

[Kairos]

...

Core i9-7900X performs well in our productivity, workstation, and HPC tests. The mesh-imposed disparities aren't as pronounced in those benchmarks. But we also have re-run Ryzen 7 1800X benchmarks to think about. Pressure to size up has pushed AMD's flagship down to $460, less than half of what a Core i9-7900X would cost. While Intel may capture the top 1% of high-end enthusiasts with Skylake-X, everyone else has to consider whether Ryzen may be the smarter buy.

Moreover, AMD's upcoming Threadripper CPU has to have Intel worried. How do we know? The X299 motherboards we used needed firmware updates to address very serious performance issues right up until launch. Intel didn't seem nearly as ready for Skylake-X's introduction as we'd expect. A number of Core i9s with even more cores won't be ready until later this year.
However, it looks like Intel couldn't get the four-, six-, eight-, and 10-core models out fast enough. They'll ship later this month.

Unfortunately, this story won't be ready to wrap up until we have Threadripper to compare against. Given Core i9-7900X’s high price and performance caveats, enthusiasts should probably hold off on a purchase until we know more about the competition, even if Skylake-X looks like a bigger step forward than Intel's past HEDT designs.

Intel Core i9-7900X Review: Meet Skylake-X
Source: tomshardware

 

[Kairos]

Source: pcper

 

[Kairos]

...

Should I wait for the 12-core? For ThreadRipper? Or Just Go Ryzen?

Both the 12-core Core i9-7920X and AMD’s ThreadRipper parts are set to launch this summer, with the Intel part confirmed in the August timeframe. By this time the X299 ecosystem should be settling down, while AMD will have to navigate a new X399 ecosystem, which I’m getting mixed messages about (some motherboard vendors say they are almost ready, others say they’re not even close). Both of these CPUs will be exchanging more cores for frequency, and the cost is a big factor – we don’t know for how much ThreadRipper or the X399 motherboards will retail for.

Ultimately a user can decide the following:

To play it safe, invest in the Core i9-7900X today.
To play it safe and get a big GPU, save $400 and invest in the Core i7-7820X today.
To play it cheaper but competitive, invest in Ryzen 7 today.
To invest in PCIe connectivity, wait for ThreadRipper. 60 PCIe lanes are hard to ignore.
To invest in AVX512, wait for the next Intel CPUs.

...

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

 

[86technie]

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

See no point in getting this, rather just get Xeon E5.
However Xeon E5-2690 10 core chip will be about twice
the price of the i9.

 

[haylui]

Hm...Good buy or goodbye?

Sent from Sony D6503 using GAGT

 

[m0n0n0ke]

Hm...Good buy or goodbye?

Sent from Sony D6503 using GAGT

Milking platform. You decide

 

[haylui]

20-30% faster
105% costlier
35% more power hungry
Comparing 7900x to 1800x
Looks like we have a winner here

Sent from Sony D6503 using GAGT