Intel Core i7-7820X Skylake-X Review

[rhysiam]

Motherboard: MSI - X299 RAIDER ATX LGA2066 Motherboard ($221.98 @ Newegg)

...

Why is the first one the cheapest OCable option? There are cheaper motherboards. Are they not capable to overclock the 7820x?

According to PCPartPicker $222 is the cheapest X299 mobo on the market right now.

 

[filippi]

If i was buying a new computer i would get i7 7820X over Ryzen x1800 any time because it is better CPU in term of performance and overclocking and extra money justifies it. Compared to 6/12 and 8/16 variants of i7 7800x and 7820x Ryzen has nothing to offer in my opinion.

Classic comment here, but I'll bite

Cheapest OC-cabable(ish) 7820X option right now
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
CPU: Intel - Core i7-7820X 3.6GHz 8-Core Processor ($678.75 @ Amazon)
CPU Cooler: Corsair - H110i 113.0 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler ($104.99 @ Newegg)
Motherboard: MSI - X299 RAIDER ATX LGA2066 Motherboard ($221.98 @ Newegg)
Total: $1005.72
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-07-28 00:40 EDT-0400


Alternative OCable(ish) Ryzen 7 build
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
CPU: AMD - Ryzen 7 1700 3.0GHz 8-Core Processor ($286.76 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: MSI - B350M PRO-VDH Micro ATX AM4 Motherboard ($74.98 @ SuperBiiz)
Total: $361.74
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-07-28 00:43 EDT-0400

What AMD is offering is performance that's approaching that of the 7820X on a decent platform for only slightly more than a third of the cost (including CPU + Mobo + cooling). No question that the Intel options are faster and that X299 is a higher-end platform. Money aside, it's all great. But to be able to get a reasonably fast 8 core CPU with a respectable bundled cooler and a decent motherboard for just a little over $360 is incredible IMHO. It's not the fastest and certainly isn't the right choice for everyone, but I'd rate it as an hugely compelling offering for wide range of users who have better things they can do with extra $600+ they'd have to fork out to go with Intel.

Right there the biggest "no way" i have seen in years for anyone who cares about price/performance in the enthusiast gaming scene: Go AMD path + 50 bucks more and you get a 1080ti in the deal. nice.

 

[the nerd 389]

If i was buying a new computer i would get i7 7820X over Ryzen x1800 any time because it is better CPU in term of performance and overclocking and extra money justifies it. Compared to 6/12 and 8/16 variants of i7 7800x and 7820x Ryzen has nothing to offer in my opinion.

Classic comment here, but I'll bite

Cheapest OC-cabable(ish) 7820X option right now
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
CPU: Intel - Core i7-7820X 3.6GHz 8-Core Processor ($678.75 @ Amazon)
CPU Cooler: Corsair - H110i 113.0 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler ($104.99 @ Newegg)
Motherboard: MSI - X299 RAIDER ATX LGA2066 Motherboard ($221.98 @ Newegg)
Total: $1005.72
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-07-28 00:40 EDT-0400


Alternative OCable(ish) Ryzen 7 build
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
CPU: AMD - Ryzen 7 1700 3.0GHz 8-Core Processor ($286.76 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: MSI - B350M PRO-VDH Micro ATX AM4 Motherboard ($74.98 @ SuperBiiz)
Total: $361.74
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-07-28 00:43 EDT-0400

What AMD is offering is performance that's approaching that of the 7820X on a decent platform for only slightly more than a third of the cost (including CPU + Mobo + cooling). No question that the Intel options are faster and that X299 is a higher-end platform. Money aside, it's all great. But to be able to get a reasonably fast 8 core CPU with a respectable bundled cooler and a decent motherboard for just a little over $360 is incredible IMHO. It's not the fastest and certainly isn't the right choice for everyone, but I'd rate it as an hugely compelling offering for wide range of users who have better things they can do with extra $600+ they'd have to fork out to go with Intel.

Why is the first one the cheapest OCable option? There are cheaper motherboards. Are they not capable to overclock the 7820x?

Skylake-X has fundamental cooling problems that result in extremely limited overclocking headroom. Combined with a linear VRM (look up linear voltage regulation if you don't know what it is) on the CPU package, there are serious problems with overclocking at all. If you want to OC, you have to get higher quality cooling and a better motherboard, and hope that between the two, it can keep the overheating CPU reasonably stable. The CPU will overheat if you overclock. Intel designed them that way.

Some of the cheaper motherboards have serious problems running these CPUs at stock settings, as they are capable of drawing more than 300 watts at stock settings in some situations. The 7820X is better than some other models, but these aren't 140 watt CPUs, regardless of what the datasheet may indicate.

 

[paullyh]

Guys, I am interested to know which of benchmarks are useful to evaluate this CPU review with VMware virtual machines. Any insights, please? Thnk you.

 

[G4nd4lf]

Can you compare the 6900k @ 4GHZ to the above cpus?

 

[rhysiam]

Guys, I am interested to know which of benchmarks are useful to evaluate this CPU review with VMware virtual machines. Any insights, please? Thnk you.

Well, a virtual machine doesn't really add much overhead on top of whatever you're doing with the virtual machines. So the better question is: what are you doing on the virtual machines? If you're running something CPU intensive on them, then whatever that load is on the client will be the best guide to the sort of CPU you need. In my experience, the most useful application for virtual machines has been test networks, like a mini domain, with router, AD DC, Mail server and some clients. Those sorts of uses are actually not particularly CPU demanding. It's RAM you want lots of, and sufficient IO (as in a decent SSD) to boot a few machines at a time. I'm not saying the CPU doesn't matter, it just matters less than enough RAM and decently fast storage. Other VM uses will have totally different CPU requirements.

 

[John Wittenberg]

"Core i7-7820X joins Core i9-7900X at the bottom of this chart, while the 10-core Broadwell-E-based -6900K takes pole position. The Ryzen models are very competitive; they outperform both Skylake-X processors."

I like that Tom's thinks that the 6900K is a 10 core, but it's really an 8 core. The 10 core 6950X is actually what should have been compared to the 10 core 7900X.

Yet that would likely make the 7900X look even worse for how Skylake-X regressed in game performance vs Broadwell-E.

Bad Tom's. Bad.

 

[PaulAlcorn]

"Core i7-7820X joins Core i9-7900X at the bottom of this chart, while the 10-core Broadwell-E-based -6900K takes pole position. The Ryzen models are very competitive; they outperform both Skylake-X processors."

I like that Tom's thinks that the 6900K is a 10 core, but it's really an 8 core. The 10 core 6950X is actually what should have been compared to the 10 core 7900X.

Yet that would likely make the 7900X look even worse for how Skylake-X regressed in game performance vs Broadwell-E.

Bad Tom's. Bad.

Thanks for pointing out the obvious typo. Of course, that doesn't imply that we don't understand it's an eight core model -- that's why we are making the comparison with the -7820X. We also point out that it is an eight-core model several other times in the article.
We've been one of very few outlets that even point out that Intel's mesh cause performance regression relative to prior-gen comparables, and we point it out constantly. See the -7900X review for the full breakdown.