The Intel i7 7900X processor appears by surprise in SiSoftware Sandra, with its ten cores and twenty processing threads, destroying brands and marking the line of Intel Basins Falls, which will make it very difficult for AMD Threadripper.
Last minute surprise at SiSoftware Sandra, who lately has us quite used to leaks and has shown new data on Intel Basins Falls processors. Specifically we are talking about the Intel i7 7900X processor, which has ten cores and twenty processing threads, which will work at a base frequency of 4.0GHz and a Boost mode of 4.5GHz, in addition, to confirm that this processor will have nothing less than 13.75MB L3 cache.
We see that the utility shows this processor as the second most powerful currently, something that is really impressive. It should be noted that this processor is based on the Skylake-X architecture, which requires a motherboard with an X299 socket (remember that the ASRock models have been filtered) and that it will not have integrated graphics. In addition, the filtration does not end at this point, because if we go down, it indicates the consumption of the processor, which is 175W.
To give us an idea, it has marked 1386.94Mpix / S in SiSoftware, well, the first is the Intel Xeon Platinium 8176 with 28 cores and 56 processing threads and a base working frequency of 2.8GHz and a Boost mode of 3.8GHz, almost nothing. The third position is occupied by the Intel Xeon Gold 6130 with 16 cores and 32 processing threads with a result of 1356.7Mpix / s. The next commercial processor outside of Xeon is in seventeenth position with a score of 949.96Mpix / s, obtained by the i7 6950X with ten cores and twenty processing threads.
We must bear in mind that this data is rough work, but it already shows us the brutal potential of these processors, which AMD Threadripper will have to face with its solution of sixteen cores and thirty-two processing threads and everything indicates that It will be black enough to catch up with you, as this processor is above processors with a lot more cores.
Source: SiSoftware
And the price? The AMD solution surely does not leave a liver like Intel's. Which has been rehashing us for years. They just move with some competition, that marks the kind of company they are. Like Apple, always trying to scam the buyer as much as possible, the fault is ours alone.
Sorry, but what you're saying is pure demagoguery. Intel offers a certain quality and performance and sets the price it considers, you pay it or not, that depends on the user. You all talk about the price, but I do not see anyone talking about the reason why AMD has developed processors which are based on two individual internally interconnected quad-core modules that depend on the frequency of the RAM. The price is very nice, but the AMDs have given many problems and currently, although they do not have full compatibility with all the RAM memory modules on the market and it is a problem, especially for users with limited knowledge, who do not know how to update the BIOS or do not dare due to inexperience. We are going to put all the cards on the table, not scratch the surface in a banal way.
PS: Intel has not had competition from AMD in more than a year, faced with this situation and as market dominant and without competition, Intel has set the price it wanted, it is that simple.
Let's talk without knowing, what compatibility problems are there with ALL the memories, the OC is something else, meta desiformar.Intel lives thrown away refried, the success of Ryzen is nothing new from there.Many problems? What other problem? an 1800X yields almost the same as the Intel solution that costs twice, the one I see in more problems is Intel
AMD has problems with RAM memories and from day one, you just have to read our reviews where we explain the problems with four RAM memory kits from three different manufacturers. AMD is releasing AGESA code updates to address these issues, which still persist, but are being mitigated. Another of the initial problems was the performance under Windows 10, which was quite low, because this operating system detected the processing threads as physical cores, causing performance to drop (recognized by Microsoft).
You talk about synthetic benchmarks, I talk about games, since our audience is mostly interested in games. In this field they perform on par with Intel's Kaby Lake and Skylake processors with half the cores. You should know that in a synthetic benchmark, what counts are the cores, not the frequencies, therefore, the more cores, the better the result. This is not the case in games, as there are hardly any games that can run more than four cores, so it is absurd to have that much core for games.
PS: The Ryzen 7 1700 and Ryzen 7 1700X with the Kingston HyperX Savage memories did not work when they came out, we spent several hours trying to configure it and there was no way, it was completely impossible, it did not start and with the Corsair Predator and the KFA2 Hall of Fame, no you could go from 2133MHz, if you raised them with AMP to 2400MHz, it wouldn't start anymore. This is because the manufacturers did not have the BIOS ready, because AMD had a very short notice of the launch and they were immersed in the manufacture of the Kaby Lake motherboards. If AMD botches, these things happen.
The only clear thing is that this page has opinions of a 12-year-old boy, above 2133 it is OC, no manufacturer guarantees it, it goes except Intel that says that you buy a microphone to do OC but then it tells you that you cannot do OC .
A processor is measured by how much it can do, not everyone wastes time in front of the computer, many work AND play.
Most of them already run the memories at maximum speed, I don't even talk about the problems of Intel hardware, the last 2 quite nice, a security flaw that takes years and a micro that you have to open like a can of sardines to less hot.
On this same page there is an article about the Vega «AMD Vega cards do not really exist, they are graphics cards still in an early stage of development»
How to take this page seriously.
Because a pic says more than a thousand words
If you are going to talk about a topic, at least inform yourself a little.
https://static.gamespot.com/uploads/original/929/9291711/3202306-9688938649-RYZEN.jpg
Very easy, the Ryzen 1800x tops out at 4.1 and the i7 6900k at 3.7Ghz 😀 If you put both with OC, the most normal thing is that the i7 6900k performs better. Before talking, you have to inform yourself, since Intel can do OC. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/154d1d1d0b2c2e155ffb4a6b3d0ed445d63ddea5c8e45c8f65548e65e71f40ac.jpg
You need to compare prices and the benchs that I put are without OC, the ryzen makes around 1600 factory, and with Oc something of 1800, returned if we compare prices Ryzen wins far, for troll you lack soup.
Let's go step by step, the 1800x can't do OC since the limit is 4.1 which is what it achieves with AMD's XFR, and the 6900k comes at 3.3 and turbo at 3.7Ghz, we already compared different speeds, when that 6900k can go to 4.3Ghz easily, we're not talking about price, since if you want to buy something better you have to care about the price, by rule of three my car is better than a Ferrari since it costs 6 times less and you can't go more than 120 😀 good luck mate, you have a long way to go to be a multi-account troll.
The 1800 comes 3.6 from the factory, the xfr is for a single core and if you can make Oc up to 4.1 in all cores.
It is good that you get what you want from a comparison such as the price that is the main variable because otherwise I do not know what we are talking about.
And change your nickname is a bit obvious.
Returned is 6900 how much is it worth? How much is a 1700 worth? Because a 1700 ocean misery reaches those levels. Not for nothing did the prices drop and they will continue to drop.
I invite you to take off your mask and tell me what a multi-account person you are 😀
1st time I comment on this page, I find the amount of misinformation funny, if Intel throws money at them they should give it back because they are very bad.
Nor do I start talking about the 1700 ocean, there directly Intel has nothing to do but shoot himself.
The limit for any Ryzen is 4.1Ghz 😀 the 1700 is a 1800 with less speed, same as the 1700x 😀 all 3 are the same with different speeds, don't get motivated, buddy.
Good account Pepe 😀
the proof that intel, without competition, does what it wants …… ..is the big M THAT HAS PUTTED INTO THE I7 7700. and above instead of recognizing it and fixing it ……. it tells you not to overclock with a processor that they sell you exactly for it… ..they laugh in our face …… .we mean eninma and they have the lame …… .to tell us that Rains