Are there Intel CPUs that perform better than the i9-7900X but not a lower cost?

[modeonoff]

Hello, last year some of you mentioned that one had to use water cooling system due to heat generated by the i9-7900X. I am afraid to use water cooling as water might damage the expensive system. Has the situation been improved? Can I just use a large heatsink and fans instead? Over the past few months, is there any new CPU that has similar or higher performance than the i9-7900X but does not require water cooling system to keep it cool?

 

[rontonomo]

i7 9700k doesn't exist?

 

[Snipergod87]

No since there is no 9700k

 

[WildCard999]

Are you talking about the 8700K? It runs warm but can be cooled & overclocked with high end air solutions.

 

[modeonoff]

Sorry, I meant i9-7900x.

 

[Snipergod87]

The only CPU's that are better cost more, that's how stuff like that works.

 

[modeonoff]

Am I right that those better ones are also hugh heat generators that require water cooling system to cool them down? So if I don' want to deal with water cooling, I better choose Threadripper instead?

 

[Eximo]

I think you are making some assumptions from bad advice.

Threadripper also takes well to water cooling, it even comes with a bracket for the most common type of water cooling pump. Intel sells water cooling solutions for high end server processors. AMD has also sold processors with included water coolers.

You don't have to use water cooling on either, just another option. But if you are after the absolute maximum overclock, yes, watercooling is advised. If you are going to run it at stock settings, then you just need a sufficiently large and supported air cooler.

The better question is do you need that much CPU performance?

 

[modeonoff]

Thanks. I do computer simulations so I want high performance system.

 

[Eximo]

Then you just need a large air cooler.

Here are a few suggestions:

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/xFw323/cryorig-cpu-cooler-crr1a
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/qX6BD3/phanteks-cpu-cooler-phtc14pe (available in several colors)
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/4vzv6h/noctua-cpu-cooler-nhd15

There are also more tall memory friendly variants of these like the Cryorig H5, Noctua NH-D15S and others.

Do you know if high core count is more valuable to you or high clock speed? AMD certainly has the better pricing per core, but Intel will be faster per core.

 

[modeonoff]

Thanks. I do deep learning AI research. GPU is more important than CPU. Too bad there is no motherboard that supports PCIE 3.0 16x16x16x16 on the Threadripper system. Since most libraries are still single threaded, high clock speed with a reasonably number of cores would be good.

 

[rontonomo]

out of all the pcs i have built for people i can honestly say i have never been impressed by an air cooler... and to put one on a 7900x is just crazy... i have a 7820x clocked at 4.5 on all cores with custom water and 3 360 rads and when i bench i still get into the 70s so i personally think air is out of the question.

 

[Snipergod87]

out of all the pcs i have built for people i can honestly say i have never been impressed by an air cooler... and to put one on a 7900x is just crazy... i have a 7820x clocked at 4.5 on all cores with custom water and 3 360 rads and when i bench i still get into the 70s so i personally think air is out of the question.

I take it you haven't delidded? If you did that you would probably be seeing temps around 45-50. Oh the joys of not having solder connecting the CPU to the IHS

 

[rontonomo]

i know 3 people who have delidded and none of them can do a aida 64 fpu only stress test and not go into the 70s some still go into the 80s and they to all have custom water so i don't believe that at all(to be fair though they are all overclocked a decent amount)... if i don't do a fpu bench then yes i stay in the 50s and when i game i rarely break 50 but in aida 64 with a fpu only bench yes i go into the 70s but like i said so do all the delidded cpus i have seen as well. for comparison right now my pc is idle in the low teens and my other pc which is a soldered 5930k with the same cooling system was still hotter and idled in the low 20s. so solder doesn't make that great of a difference.

 

[MyCuleUsrName]

I am running a new i9-7900X at 4.9ghz on H100i closed loop at about 80-85C. The earlier released chips seem to have a major TIM/Heat issue, that appears to have been rectified. I think whether you can cool on Air or not is going to depend on the silicon lottery, if you get an older chip with cheap TIM, you will need a minimum of 240 AIO cooler. If you get a chip like mine, I'd think you could run on Air, especially if you do not overclock. I can run speeds at about 51C-55C, If I keep all 10-cores at 100% between 4ghz to 4.3ghz. Honestly though, I haven't used an air cooler in 6+ Years. We need someone running a i9-7900X on Air to chime in.....

 

[modeonoff]

Besides the i9-7900X, what other high-end CPUs are available that run well on air and perhaps around $1K or below?

Are these i9 much faster than the 8700/8700K?

 

[mdd1963]

'better, but less expensive'

absolutely not.

 

[modeonoff]

I haven't built workstation for 10 years. I guess a lot have changed over the years. From the specs and price range, I am considering the following CPUs (also open to suggestion): 7920X, 7900X, 7820X, 8700 and 8700K. Among these, how are they ranked in practice? Don't know if they can run well in air. I try to stay away from water cooling due concern of water leakage damaging the expensive components. If possible, I also hope to be able to use as many PCIe 3.0 running at x16 as possible. Now 32GB RAM is OK. May need 64GB or 128GB RAM later. Not sure yet. What suggestion do you have? Too bad I have to forget about using the Threadripper.

 

[Lord Letto]

Checking http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/ the Best CPU for Single Core Performance it's the i7-7740X followed very negligibly (1%) by the i7-8700K with the 8700K having the best Quad core Performance, if you want Multi Core Performance than the i9-7980XE is the best although over the $1k CPU Budget, with that Budget the Threadripper 1920X is the best or maybe the 1950X depending on the price.
i9-7900X Vs i7-7740X: http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i9-7900X-vs-Intel-Core-i7-7740X/3936vsm304932
i9-7900X Vs i7-8700K: http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i9-7900X-vs-Intel-Core-i7-8700K/3936vs3937
i9-7900X Vs i9-7980XE: http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i9-7900X-vs-Intel-Core-i9-7980XE/3936vsm352013
i9-7900X Vs Ryzen TR 1920X: http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i9-7900X-vs-AMD-Ryzen-TR-1920X/3936vs3934
i9-7900X Vs Ryzen TR 1950X: http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i9-7900X-vs-AMD-Ryzen-TR-1950X/3936vs3932

 

[modeonoff]

Thanks. Can i7-7740X, i7-8700, i7-8700K, i7-7820X i9-7900X all run well without water cooler?

From the intel's comparison table, it looks like 8700K runs at (3.7-4.7 GHz) while 7820X (3.6-4.3 GHz) and 7900X (3.3-4.3 GHz). However, 8700K supports only dual channel while the others support quad channels. Is quad channels much better?

About the PCIE lans, 7820X supports 28 lans and 7900X supports 44 lans. So, how many GPU running at x16 can they support?

 

[theonerm2]

Here is how they rank with the top being the best.
7920X
7900X
7820X
8700K
8700

The 8700K runs cooler, uses less power, and can on average hit much higher clock speeds when overclocking than the series of Skylake-X. It would be about like a lower clocked 8 Core intel CPU but it's better than that because it has very good single core performance whereas a lower clocked CPU wouldn't have that. If you need the power that those extra cores can give you I'd go with a Threadripper 1920x. It's a little better than the 7900x but not as good as the 7920x. If you want the most cores for the least money while still buying a new CPU you need the ThreadRipper 1950X. If you want really good single core performance as well then the Intel CPU's are better and in that case the best one you can afford is the 7920x. Although I think a good compromise would be the 7900x if you want to save a little money. But if you're going to get a many core CPU then get it because it is something you need now rather than trying to future proof. Most people these days don't need more than a dual core CPU. Gamers don't really need more than a 4 core 8 thread CPU. But people working on things such as video editing for example need as many cores as they can get. If you fall into that last category then Threadripper 1950x is a good choice and probably the best choice for the money. That's 16 cores for only $879.49. Intel's 12 core option costs around $1100. Now 16 cores from AMD beats 12 from Intel on tasks that require the extra CPU cores. But on tasks that don't use as many cores Intel will win every time. AMD has came a long way for me to even be able to say that AMD is an option here. I think for the price and performance that you get that the Threadripper 1950x is the best option.

Ultimately the choice is yours though.

The i9 7900x need high end cooling. Such as a water cooler or a Noctua NH D15 for example. The 8700K can run pretty well on a midrange air cooler as long as you do not overclock that much. Same for the 7740X although I do not recommend the 7740x.

 

[modeonoff]

Thanks. Why 7740X is not recommended? It has the highest base speed of 4.3GHz.

I am not a gamer but a researcher in deep learning. I originally planned to use Threadripper due to its large number of PCIE lans and lower cost. However, due to compatibility issues with some software, I have to choose Intel CPU. For the number of cores, 6-8 would be sufficient. The important thing is to be able to run multiple GPU at high speed. Anybody knows how many GPU can run at x16 in 7820x, 7900x and 7740x systems? The 8700K seems to be able to run one GPU at x16.

 

[BFG-9000]

I'm not sure why you fear custom water cooling, as unless you drive an old VW or Porsche any car you have is likely to be watercooled, and its engine costs more to replace than a 7900x system too. If you really wanted to you could even use all AN fittings instead of barbs and clamps.

Porsche had to move to watercooling in order to avoid detonation at high boost pressures, as air cooling was unable to remove the extra heat quickly enough. As stated before, big air works as well as AIO if you have the space. Water cooling allows you to remotely mount the radiator to avoid introducing waste heat into the case, but the hoses that come with AIO are usually too short to move it far. I run an old truck A/C condenser underneath my house as the radiator. There's no fan noise or heating of the room because, well it's all outdoors. And as the lowest point of the loop I never need to crawl out there to bleed air from the system.

BTW the GPUs probably benefit more from water cooling as there's so much less room for a big air heatsink on those that they can get quite noisy under full load, plus the TDP of each can dwarf the 7900x's puny 140w. As for the 112w 7740x, it's fine if you only want 4 cores, and to be only able to use half of the RAM slots of your motherboard. Yep, it only has a dual-channel memory controller because it's just consumer Skylake, only on LGA2066. And you can answer how many x16 cards for that 7740x easily because just like 8700k, the chip only has 16 PCIe 3.0 lanes. 7820x has 28 and 7900x 44. Intel loves their levers and switches for product segmentation, so if you want more, you must pay a lot more.

 

[Snipergod87]

I have found personally Big Air coolers to be much more reliable (don't have to worry about a pump dieing). I don't need to be concerned about maintaince/cleaning the system and possible corrosion, and I dont need to worry about leaks.
Air coolers are much simpler, and much more reliable, even to the point where if the air coolers fan's die there is typically enough airflow through the case to keep the processor cool enough. Also I find the pump noise to be quite annoying.

 

[modeonoff]

I am considering 7900X, 7820X and 8700K. I plan to use a 43" 4K monitor. It seems that the motherboards for 8700K include an on-board graphics chip that could drive a 4K monitor. So, I can devote 1 or 2 1080Ti all running at x16 to just do CUDA computations. If I get the 7820X or 7900X, I will need to buy an extra GPU to drive the 4K monitor. Am I correct?

In my system, I plan to use 3 SSD (Windows, Linux and Hackintosh) and perhaps also 1HD. At least one (two if possible but not that important) SSD must be PCIe NVMe M.2. The 3rd one can be just normal SSD. Initially 32GB but may add 32GB more later.

Why there is no motherboard with PLX chip to support x16x16x16x16 for the 8700K?

Has anybody used ASUS WS X299 SAGE workstation motherboard?