Intel Core i9-7900X, i7-7820X and i7-7800X Review

I did check microcenter and it turns out that it's exactly like I said. there is a huge sale for the 7600k at 200$ (-70$ from it's regular price) and the 1600 is also at 200$ (-20$).
instead of being sarcastic, next time try actually proving me wrong with some real facts.

fact, that price has been going on since 1600 launched so I guess that proved you wrong. That was fairly easy although I believe you are used to being proved wrong in your life,

As for being sarcastic, my handle isn't niceferret or gentleferret. So using the facts of math (something I'm guessing you failed at often) $199 is equal to $199. You now have my permission to continue with your immature hissy fit from being embarrassed in front of everyone on the forum.
 
fact, that price has been going on since 1600 launched so I guess that proved you wrong. That was fairly easy although I believe you are used to being proved wrong in your life,

As for being sarcastic, my handle isn't niceferret or gentleferret. So using the facts of math (something I'm guessing you failed at often) $199 is equal to $199. You now have my permission to continue with your immature hissy fit from being embarrassed in front of everyone on the forum.
"that price has been going on since 1600 launched" complete and utter BS. please don't lie. this kind of deals have been on and off in microcenter stores even before the 1600 launched. unfortunately it's only in-store. if there isn't a microcenter near you, you are out of luck. we are talking about just 25 stores which are sparse nationwide.
unfortunately the majority of people do not have access to this deal or they have to pay/waste time for quite a long trip :D
the prices on amazon and newegg are still much more indicative of what the average Joe will find.
 
Last edited:
"that price has been going on since 1600 launched" complete and utter BS. please don't lie.

You are really smart and know what you are talking about - see now that is a complete and utter BS. I checked the price of the CPUs on microcenter a week after they received the 1600 and the Intel chips dropped in price - that is a fact. I know facts hurt you deeply and make you feel shame but hey I don't care just like I don't care how far people live from a microcenter, I only care how far I live from one.
 
Last edited:
Why are we arguing over a 4 core, 4 thread CPU..... doesn't matter what you do its a bad buy, but the 7700K if you want gaming today
 
The "Price vs Performance" Charts look weird. They dont match the results from the first/second page.

Ryzen 1800X and i7-7800X are placed wrong in "Price vs Performance for Handbrake". The results were swapped?
23fps should be for 7800X and 20fps for 1800X.

Also for "Adobe Premiere Pro CC" and "PC Mark Rendering & Visualization" they dont match all results.
Blender results for 6950X and 7820X seems to have been swapped too?
 
Last edited:
Steven (author), you stated in your article that Ryzen 7 has 16 lanes of PCIE, but that is incorrect. Each Ryzen 7 CPU offers 24 lanes of PCIE. That is significant when comparing them to a new Intel CPU that offers 28 vs Ryzen's 24. The 4 extra PCI lanes aren't that much to brag about. Neither are the 44 that the higher end models will have.

Here's the thing, when it comes down to it, people will most likely opt for the 16c Threadripper over the 16-18 cores Intel i9's, simply because of the PCI lanes. The additional 20 PCI lanes over the incoming Intel CPU's allows one to run an additional GPU at full 16 lanes. Having an additional GPU will offer much greater performance in applications that utilize GPU compute power, much more than what 2 additional CPU cores can offer.

Even though Intel's cores are faster than AMD's it's the additional PCI lanes that make Threadripper the more attractive option, especially since Threadripper is expected to cost $899 vs Intel at $1899. It's a no brainer.
 
Steven (author), you stated in your article that Ryzen 7 has 16 lanes of PCIE, but that is incorrect. Each Ryzen 7 CPU offers 24 lanes of PCIE. That is significant when comparing them to a new Intel CPU that offers 28 vs Ryzen's 24. The 4 extra PCI lanes aren't that much to brag about. Neither are the 44 that the higher end models will have.

Here's the thing, when it comes down to it, people will most likely opt for the 16c Threadripper over the 16-18 cores Intel i9's, simply because of the PCI lanes. The additional 20 PCI lanes over the incoming Intel CPU's allows one to run an additional GPU at full 16 lanes. Having an additional GPU will offer much greater performance in applications that utilize GPU compute power, much more than what 2 additional CPU cores can offer.

Even though Intel's cores are faster than AMD's it's the additional PCI lanes that make Threadripper the more attractive option, especially since Threadripper is expected to cost $899 vs Intel at $1899. It's a no brainer.

Ryzen 7 only has 16 PCIe 3.0 lanes available for GPUs, AMD has a habit of overstating the available lanes.
 
Here's something I'm curious about: in the Cinebench R15 tests, the R5 1500X outperformed the i5-7500 in MT, which I expected due to its SMT capability. What I didn't expect is that it wins in ST, too (by a nose.) This is with an IPC and a clock disadvantage. Both chips should be running at their full turbo speed. That puts the i5-7500 at 3.8 GHz. The R5 1500X has 3.7 GHz. I'm assuming it's using its full XFR capability here, boosting by 200 MHz up to 3.9 GHz to eke out the win. I wonder if the massively larger L3 cache has something to do with it as well. I'm guessing the i5 throttling isn't a possibility either, or the results would probably skew more in AMD's favor there than they do.
 
Back