Wednesday, May 31st 2017

Intel Core i9-7900X Overclocked To 5.7GHz Breaking Cinebench World Records

Now that Intel has officially rolled out its "Core-X" family based on the Skylake-X and Kaby Lake-X CPUs, overclocking of them has begun in earnest for those lucky few who have one in hand. As per usual, benchmarkers at the extreme end of the spectrum tend to shoot for the moon no holds barred, driven by the fumes of LN2 cooling. For one lucky i9-7900X owner calling himself "Elmor," he took his rightful place among the benchmarking stars, shattering the previous Cinebench world record for a 10-core chip with a very respectable 5.7GHz final clock. His score in Cinebench R15 was 3181, while Cinebench R11.5 scored 34.79.
Elmor is of course not new at this. He has a previous record attained with a Ryzen 7 1800X early during early launch, so it seems professional overclocking is alive and well. This of course is by no means what an average OC'er should expect out of any chip, but it is still impressive and an achievement in its own right to see these chips pushed so far.Source: HWBOT, HotHardware
Add your own comment

73 Comments on Intel Core i9-7900X Overclocked To 5.7GHz Breaking Cinebench World Records

#1
FR@NK
Game over AMD!
Posted on Reply
#2
R-T-B
FR@NK said:
Game over AMD!
Not so fast. His previous Ryzen 7 1800X overclock nearly matched this one in raw clockspeed. Sure, I'll admit at the moment, Intel still has the crown given it's appearing more OC'able and it's a 10 core, but Ryzen can be very competitive for those of us who don't want to sell both Kidneys and thus, die.
Posted on Reply
#3
Hedgemon
With a decent Silicon lottery Chip, Im sure you can achieve a decent clock of 4.6-4.8 on these chips using some watercooling. I mean of course he's running 5.7GHz without a lid, so we'll see how much the thermal paste really plays into this for those of us who dont want to de-lid our chips.
Posted on Reply
#4
erocker
Senior Moderator
FR@NK said:
Game over AMD!
Not sure if serious lol.

If this was done with more conventional cooling, maybe.
Posted on Reply
#5
phanbuey
Intels will definitely be faster at the high end - but for the money you won't really get much better than a good OC on a 1700 with a B350 mobo....

Spend the rest of your cash on life.
Posted on Reply
#6
RejZoR
FR@NK said:
Game over AMD!
Yeah, because 90% of users run their CPU's on LN2, right? Also, that 999$ price tag which is most likely tray price. Which means it'll never be just that much in retail...

I don't value CPU's buy how far they go under LN2. It's cool for 5 seconds, but doesn't really excite me. At all. What you can get out of CPU using water cooling that is a common thing for daily use, well, that does interests me.
Posted on Reply
#7
Toothless
Now drop those prices a good 25-35% and Intel might get their crown back.
Posted on Reply
#8
Camm
RejZoR said:
I don't value CPU's buy how far they go under LN2. It's cool for 5 seconds, but doesn't really excite me. At all. What you can get out of CPU using water cooling that is a common thing for daily use, well, that does interests me.
Or even more importantly IMO, what performance is before sending power usage skyrocketing. Its a great OC sure, but I want to see what sort of volts I need to do 4Ghz 24/7 stable over halo shit.
Posted on Reply
#9
NdMk2o1o
FR@NK said:
Game over AMD!
Hello threadripper 16c/32t
Posted on Reply
#10
Dj-ElectriC
Toothless said:
Intel might get their crown back.
They... kinda never lost it. Not since 2006 in my books.
Posted on Reply
#11
Toothless
Dj-ElectriC said:
They... kinda never lost it. Not since 2006 in my books.
AMD had a huge stride in catching up with Ryzen and it was enough to put things in par with the 7700K. Per price/performance AMD is winning pretty hard right now.
Posted on Reply
#12
Caring1
R-T-B said:
... Ryzen can be very competitive for those of us who don't want to sell both Kidneys and thus, die.
Do frogs even have two kidneys? :p
On a serious note, wasn't turbo boost 4.5 on those chips, making his achievement of 5.7 seem a bit lame. o_O
Posted on Reply
#13
Toothless
Caring1 said:
Do frogs even have two kidneys? :p
On a serious note, wasn't turbo boost 4.5 on those chips, making his achievement of 5.7 seem a bit lame. o_O
R-T-B's species of frog has four kidneys that rotate between on and off positions.
Posted on Reply
#14
NdMk2o1o
Dj-ElectriC said:
They... kinda never lost it. Not since 2006 in my books.
I like my 6c/12t $200 AMD can beat your Intel $500 processor :D it makes me smile inside
Posted on Reply
#15
Dj-ElectriC
NdMk2o1o said:
I like my 6c/12t $200 AMD can beat your Intel $500 processor :D it makes me smile inside
As long as you so firmly believe that, who am i to judge. I'm not gonna retire my 30 month old CPU any time soon.

And i picked mine for 310$ off microcenter back then.

but hey, hey. Again, as long as we are happy with what we got eh
Posted on Reply
#16
NdMk2o1o
Dj-ElectriC said:
As long as you so firmly believe that, who am i to judge. I'm not gonna retire my 30 month old CPU any time soon.

And i picked mine for 310$ off microcenter back then.

but hey, hey. Again, as long as we are happy with what we got eh
I don't, I have numbers that back it up :toast: and $310 is a damn fine price ;) but you have to admit AMD have opened up the whole HEDT market wide open, now we can have $200 procs that can compete with Intel chips that used to cost $500+ it's not a bad thing really is it? ;)

I remember buying i5 2500k for £180 brand new and i7 for £250... awesome!!!

Now i7 is £320 and i5 is £250.... not sure the performance increased that much did it? considering it was just a tweak on Nehalem.....

Intel can go suck a fat one for all I care, we have performance/price where it used to be 8 years ago, the force has been restored and all is good in the world!
Posted on Reply
#17
R-T-B
Toothless said:
R-T-B's species of frog has four kidneys that rotate between on and off positions.
No, that's my brother. I shit you not, the kid actually has 4 kidneys.

Me? I get by without them, which means I have to spend something called money. :(
Posted on Reply
#18
theoneandonlymrk
FR@NK said:
Game over AMD!
Be nice to see there answer since it looked like asus had one(Tr )clocked to 5ghz on water.
Good times indeed except,,, im soddin skint.
Posted on Reply
#19
HTC
I wonder how this chip would fair if "Elmor" disabled 2 cores and 2 threads, ran cinebench again and compared it VS the 1800x performance (IIRC, the 1800x has the WR for an 8 c / 16 t chip): would this chip beat the 1800x?
Posted on Reply
#20
theoneandonlymrk
HTC said:
I wonder how this chip would fair if "Elmor" disabled 2 cores and 2 threads, ran cinebench again and compared it VS the 1800x performance (IIRC, the 1800x has the WR for an 8 c / 16 t chip): would this chip beat the 1800x?
Also really odd that they didn't run it on the 18 core for the full balls on table ,and what moment:Do_O:D:)
Posted on Reply
#21
FR@NK
HTC said:
I wonder how this chip would fair if "Elmor" disabled 2 cores and 2 threads, ran cinebench again and compared it VS the 1800x performance (IIRC, the 1800x has the WR for an 8 c / 16 t chip): would this chip beat the 1800x?
There doesnt seem to be any 8 core skylakes out in the wild right now but using math to calculate points per core then times 8 you would get a number slightly higher then the 1800x record. But then it would be likely to get abit more MHz out of his chip if it has 2 fewer active cores. The cheaper($389) 6 core 7800x also holds the record for its core class.
Posted on Reply
#22
EarthDog
HTC said:
I wonder how this chip would fair if "Elmor" disabled 2 cores and 2 threads, ran cinebench again and compared it VS the 1800x performance (IIRC, the 1800x has the WR for an 8 c / 16 t chip): would this chip beat the 1800x?
Yes.

Its faster clock for clock...ryzen ipc is a few % slower and they are clocking higher on ln2 it seems.
Posted on Reply
#23
kinjx11
this is so un-important to me and won't affect my future decision about buying a workstation CPU


i can't do that OC without LN2
Posted on Reply
#24
EarthDog
kinjx11 said:
this is so un-important to me and won't affect my future decision about buying a workstation CPU


i can't do that OC without LN2
its news for the thousands that like to push their chips to the limit.

...now, let me get out of your orbit. :p
Posted on Reply
#25
HTC
EarthDog said:
Yes.

Its faster clock for clock...ryzen ipc is a few % slower and they are clocking higher on ln2 it seems.
Do you happen to recall the speed of the 1800x when it broke the 8c / 16 t record? Was it slower then this chip? Unfortunately, i don't recall :(

If @ a lower speed, obviously it will lose VS this chip but if @ higher speed, then perhaps that would overcome it's slightly smaller IPC? Dunno, really: just wondering!
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment