Wednesday, May 24th 2017

New Details On Intel's Upcoming 10-core Skylake-X i9 7900X Surface

by
Raevenlord
 Discuss (74 Comments)
SiSoft Sandra is one of the best (and more common) sources for details on upcoming, as-of-yet-unreleased hardware details and characteristics. Now, details on one of Intel's upcoming Skylake-X parts have surfaced, which gives us some details on what are likely final specifications, considering how close we are to X299's accelerated release.

The processor in the spotlight is one of Intel's 10-core processors, the Core i9 7900X (which is erroneously reported by the software as the Core i7 7900X), Intel's 10-core CPU. While initial reports pegged this CPU at as running at clock speeds of 3.30 GHz base and with 4.30 GHz Turbo Boost, it would seem Intel's release silicon will leverage much higher stock speeds, with the reported values on this SiSoft report being a staggering 4.0 GHz base, and 4.5 GHz Turbo Boost. These are extremely high clock speeds for a ten-core part, but all the other details about the Core i9 7900X check out: there are 14,080 KB (13.75 MB) of shared L3 cache, 1 MB L2 cache per core (for a total of 10 MB), as well as a 175 W TDP. This difference in clock speeds (especially when you compare it to Ryzen's much lower clock speeds) are probably an indicator of not only architectural differences between both designs, but a statement on Intel's fabrication process capabilities. And as an added bonus, check the motherboard that was used: a juicy, as-of-yet-unknown, X299 Gigabyte AORUS Gaming 7. Two details of this magnitude in a single screenshot? It's clearly a case of having your cake and eating it too.
Source: Overclockers UA

Related News

Add your own comment

74 Comments on New Details On Intel's Upcoming 10-core Skylake-X i9 7900X Surface

#26
GreiverBlade
it's the X299 platform then HEDT from intel ... then price will be sky high ...
they just renamed their HEDT series i9 to clear them from the i7 calling... nothing really new neither

basically this is a i7-6950X refresh
the54thvoidQuite a statement from Intel if true. 10 core at 4GHz stock.....

Ouch for AMD. My 1700X looks a bit poorly now. That being said. How much are these chips going to cost? £1500?
naahhhh it's fine ... it's not in the same segment .... you know : "mainstream enthusiast" and "HEDT-LOL"
if it was a meant for the Z270 chipset and actually sported a correct price, AKA: a little bit higher than a R9 1800X, i would be worried ...

on the other hand ... if you were a "Threadripper" early adopter i would be a little more worried ... oh wait ... 10C/20T vs 16C/32T .... even if they would be priced adequately equal ... i would not worry either :laugh:

still waiting to "upgrade" my own rig for now...
Posted on Reply
#27
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
biffzinkerI don't know if I'd use the word hate so much as being critical of the shenanigans each of these companies like to pull. They are for profit, no? Pretty sure their not running as a non-profit.
Well AMD did for like 8 years
GreiverBladenaahhhh it's fine ... it's not in the same segment .... you know : mainstream enthusiast and "HEDT-LOL"
if it was a meant for the Z270 chipset and actually sported a correct price, AKA: a little bit higher than a R9 1800X i would be worried ...

on the other hand ... if you were a "Threadripper" early adopter i would be a little more worried ... oh wait ... 10C/20T vs 16C/32C .... even if they would be priced adequately equal ... i would not worry either :laugh:

still waiting to "upgrade" my own rig for now...
Intel has had 22 and 24 core CPU's since the launch of Broadwell-e...
Posted on Reply
#28
GreiverBlade
cdawallIntel has had 22 and 24 core CPU's since the launch of Broadwell-e...
exactly what i meant by "nothing new" ... it's the HEDT platform and they just changed the i7 to i9 so the people would go "WOAAAAH Intel developed a new CPU lines" while it's nothing more than what they already did in the past under the i7 HEDT line
oh and for ... 22 and 24 core ... if XEON yes ... in the i7 HEDT did they have it? O.o afaik max was 10C/20T in that category

Threadripper is actually the Intel i7 HEDT (i9) counterpart ~ more or less (while Epyc is the Xeon answer)
Posted on Reply
#29
Scrizz
GreiverBladeexactly what i meant by "nothing new" ... it's the HEDT platform and they just changed the i7 to i9 so the people would go "WOAAAAH Intel developed a new CPU lines" while it's nothing more than what they already did in the past under the i7 HEDT line
oh and for ... 22 and 24 core ... if XEON yes ... in the i7 HEDT did they have it? o_O afaik max was 10C/20T in that category

Threadripper is actually the Intel i7 HEDT (i9) counterpart ~ more or less (while Epyc is the Xeon answer)
2011-3 had some nice chips.
ark.intel.com/products/81061/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-2699-v3-45M-Cache-2_30-GHz
Posted on Reply
#30
GreiverBlade
Scrizz2011-3 had some nice chips.
ark.intel.com/products/81061/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-2699-v3-45M-Cache-2_30-GHz
yeah but still Xeon ...

actually i liked my E3-1275v2 more than a i7-4770K but only for the price difference :p the rest : very Xeon'esque ... (it's either "anemic but nice price over a i7" or "you pay an arm and a leg to get the top dog Xeon" )

and for the E5 : 3400$ :roll: (didn't search in deep ... i took the 1st pricing i saw ;) )
Posted on Reply
#31
trparky
Intel Core i9: It's not whether you need 12 cores, but whether you'll pay for them | ZDNet
The processor market is heating up once again, with AMD and Intel back to having "core and speed" wars. But if the latest leak is accurate, Intel's next-generation silicon is likely to be out of most people's budget.

Edit
But it still leaves the subject of pricing, and the inescapable fact that Intel chips are expensive. Intel's 10-core i7-6590X is an eye-watering $1,650, and no matter how you cut it, that's a lot of money.

That's where the i9 might hit a speed bump. After all, PCs aren't really flying off the shelves, and buyers are more price sensitive than ever. While we'd all love to have 12 cores at our disposal, not many will be willing to spend over a thousand dollars on just the silicon.

And that's the edge that AMD currently has over Intel -- silicon at a price point that people are willing to pay.
If these chips are going to be anywhere close to being $1000 a chip there's no way in hell I'm going to pay that just for the chip. I don't care if Intel chips perform better than Ryzen chips, there's no way in hell I'm going to shovel out that much dough.
Posted on Reply
#32
Camm
Hmm. That TDP is pretty high, and one has to wonder about pricing. But if pricing is good, it'll be exciting to see some competition again.
Posted on Reply
#33
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
GreiverBladeexactly what i meant by "nothing new" ... it's the HEDT platform and they just changed the i7 to i9 so the people would go "WOAAAAH Intel developed a new CPU lines" while it's nothing more than what they already did in the past under the i7 HEDT line
oh and for ... 22 and 24 core ... if XEON yes ... in the i7 HEDT did they have it? o_O afaik max was 10C/20T in that category

Threadripper is actually the Intel i7 HEDT (i9) counterpart ~ more or less (while Epyc is the Xeon answer)
Correct threadripper is targeted at HEDT desktop not server counterparts, my point was simply intel already has inventory of these higher core count setups and if they need additional cores to compete it is as simple as unlocking the multi and slapping a new badge on them.
Posted on Reply
#34
Hossein Almet
I'm very happy with my 6800K at 4.2 GHz with a temperature of 28 C, right now, thank you very much:) It's extremely fast, if the internet connection is cooperating, the webpage is loaded at the click of the mouse.
Posted on Reply
#35
FR@NK
The spice must flow!
Posted on Reply
#36
GorbazTheDragon
Pretty useless for most people, but will be interesting how the larger intel chips match up with the quad-CCX AMD stuff. Theoretically the latency disadvantages of the multi-CCX chips will be less apparent because of the higher latency of intel's interconnect system that (appears to) scale proportionally with core count.
Posted on Reply
#37
*zSnowz*
People have been saying that this is no big deal because this is just pulling xeon chips into the HEDT space. So I looked at current xeon chips and none of them had anywhere near the clocks reported on this piece. Am i missing something? A bunch of core *and* high clocks seems novel to me.
Posted on Reply
#38
GreiverBlade
*zSnowz*People have been saying that this is no big deal because this is just pulling xeon chips into the HEDT space. So I looked at current xeon chips and none of them had anywhere near the clocks reported on this piece. Am i missing something? A bunch of core *and* high clocks seems novel to me.
it's only a i7 line refresh and not a Xeon rebadge imho ... and it's not a novel but rather an evolution of introducing the Skylake-X in the HEDT segment (with the twist of i9 instead of i7 because Intel wanted to make the consumer think it's a whole new line ) i think rather for the X299 platform there will only be, either, enthusiast grade (for who are willing to pay the price of my own rig just for the CPU) i9 or beefed up Xeon like the E5-2699V3 (for who are willing to pay twice the price of my own rig just for the CPU)

i7 HEDT will probably die with the X99 (rather ... be renamed to follow the X299 )

and just in case ... i7-6950X and i9-7900X are pretty similar, both being 10C/20T and in the 4.0ghz portion (actually 1ghz base more and 1ghz turbo more, tho the 6950X max turbo is 4.0 ) it just it seems in the Skylake-X generation there will be one above the 7900X to replace the 6950X as top dog

indeed nothing new... just Skylake-X
Posted on Reply
#39
PinkMachine
Name me just one title that uses 10 cores at 4.5GHz?
Posted on Reply
#40
UnderPantsGnome
DimiThese cpu's have been years in the make and people saying this is all because of Ryzen need to get their heads checked.
Yeah, Ryzen was developed overnight...
Posted on Reply
#41
jigar2speed
PinkMachineName me just one title that uses 10 cores at 4.5GHz?
I can name 2 application titles
Handbrake
Espresso

Plus higher frequency of 4.5GHZ should be great for gaming and future games that might use multi thread for online maps (Stutter free experience)
Posted on Reply
#42
FR@NK
GorbazTheDragonPretty useless for most people, but will be interesting how the larger intel chips match up with the quad-CCX AMD stuff. Theoretically the latency disadvantages of the multi-CCX chips will be less apparent because of the higher latency of intel's interconnect system that (appears to) scale proportionally with core count.
I think you are forgetting that the large AMD chips will be multi die chips...the CCX latency will be exponentially worse compared to the 1800x. Memory channels are also split up on different dies.

Posted on Reply
#44
Gasaraki
cdawallSkylake released in August of 2015, Skylake-E doesn't really change anything. What happened is intel raised their TDP cap to 175W and are selling CPU's at a higher clockspeed out of the box. This isn't something new and crazy it is the same CPU coming pumped from the factory to make sense for pricing.

Basically Intel got some AMD shit on their shoe and went awe hell nah.

But in reality this is likely to make up for the lower multicore performance. 4.0ghz across all 10 cores isn't exactly ground breaking, most of the 6950X's can do 4.4 on decent cooling
What's decent cooling? 4.0 base clock means that it can do that on the normal crappy cooler that Intel provides. Turbo to 4.5 means probably you can do 4.6+ overclocks on a normal AIO water cooler on all cores. Ryzen can't even touch that.
Posted on Reply
#45
Gasaraki
cdawallCorrect threadripper is targeted at HEDT desktop not server counterparts, my point was simply intel already has inventory of these higher core count setups and if they need additional cores to compete it is as simple as unlocking the multi and slapping a new badge on them.
Umm, I'm pretty sure getting a CPU certified to run @ 4.0 GHz base takes more than. That just sounds like the make AMD make cpus, no memory testing, no vendor support, etc.
Posted on Reply
#46
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
GasarakiWhat's decent cooling? 4.0 base clock means that it can do that on the normal crappy cooler that Intel provides. Turbo to 4.5 means probably you can do 4.6+ overclocks on a normal AIO water cooler on all cores. Ryzen can't even touch that.
There is no crappy stock cooler. They are specing the chips at 175W TDP which means the minimum is a massive air cooler. Intel hasn't provided a cooler for HEDT since x79 and even then it was only the lower end chips.
GasarakiUmm, I'm pretty sure getting a CPU certified to run @ 4.0 GHz base takes more than. That just sounds like the make AMD make cpus, no memory testing, no vendor support, etc.
Skylake already does 4.0 and higher out of the box. Intel has been selling 4ghz and higher chips since the p4 days. They know how to bin and produce at their own fab. That means control from start to finish.
Posted on Reply
#48
Gundem
Even though I currently use Intel and almost always have, I find myself more interested in AMD/Ryzen news. We all know what Intel can and most likely will do as they compete with(or dominate) AMD but I feel like AMD's recent development is just far more exciting.
Are many or most current games using 8 or more cores effectively yet? I'm sure some do and some don't but I'm curios if it's now already time to be getting 8 cores for gaming?
Posted on Reply
#49
efikkan
GundemEven though I currently use Intel and almost always have, I find myself more interested in AMD/Ryzen news. We all know what Intel can and most likely will do as they compete with(or dominate) AMD but I feel like AMD's recent development is just far more exciting.
Are many or most current games using 8 or more cores effectively yet? I'm sure some do and some don't but I'm curios if it's now already time to be getting 8 cores for gaming?
Current Kaby-Lake and Broadwell-E cores perform better than Ryzen, especially in gaming. Even though more cores are better, faster cores will remain more important for gaming, even five years from now. There are several games benefiting from more than four cores, still, more cores will not make up for slower cores.
Posted on Reply
#50
thatoneguy1980s
175W TDP?!

Wow.. AMD used to be the dirty power hog to pull out more from their CPUs... lmao.

Definitely caught intel with their pants down with Ryzen
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
May 1st, 2024 03:50 EDT change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts