MSI Clutch GM51 Wireless mouse review
ASUS ROG STRIX B760-F Gaming WIFI review
Asus ROG Harpe Ace Aim Lab Edition mouse review
SteelSeries Arctis Nova Pro Headset review
Ryzen 7800X3D preview - 7950X3D One CCD Disabled
MSI VIGOR GK71 SONIC Blue keyboard review
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D processor review
FSP Hydro G Pro 1000W (ATX 3.0, 1000W PSU) review
Addlink S90 Lite 2TB NVMe SSD review
ASUS ROG Rapture GT-AXE16000 WIFI6E router review
Core i9-7980XE 18-core Benchmarks
It's has been quiet with X299 and the Skylake-X platform processors. We've seen the 10-core review, the 12-core parts in stores but other then that it remains silent. However in Asia a website leaked performance benchmarks on the 18-core part, the 2000 USD Core i9-7980XE.
It was website Coolenjoy who got their hands on a sample, which is rare as Intel will not be sending them to reviewers. But there has been some pro-oc activities with that part. The benchmarks originate from Coolenjoy and have been performed on an ASUS APEX motherboard. It looks like the proc indeed boosts up to 4.2 GHz on the cores during Cinebench.
| Processor | Cores/Threads | PCIe lanes | Base Clock | Turbo 2.0 | Turbo 3.0 | TDP | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Core i9 7980XE | 18 / 36 | 44 | 2.6 GHz | 4.2 GHz | 4.4 GHz | 165 W | $1999 |
| Core i9 7960X | 16 / 32 | 44 | 2.8 GHz | 4.2 GHz | 4.4 GHz | 165 W | $1699 |
| Core i9 7940X | 14 / 28 | 44 | 3.1 GHz | 4.3 GHz | 4.4 GHz | 165 W | $1399 |
| Core i9 7920X | 12 / 24 | 44 | 2.9 GHz | 4.3 GHz | 4.4 GHz | 140 W | $1199 |
| Core i9 7900X | 10 / 20 | 44 | 3.3 GHz | 4.3 GHz | 4.5 GHz | 140 W | $999 |
| Core i7 7820X | 8 / 16 | 28 | 3.6 GHz | 4.3 GHz | 4.5 GHz | 140 W | $599 |
| Core i7 7800X | 6 / 12 | 28 | 3.5 GHz | 4.0 GHz | na | 140 W | $389 |
| Core i7 7740X | 4 / 8 | 16 | 4.3 GHz | 4.5 GHz | na | 112 W | $369 |
| Core i5 7640X | 4 / 4 | 16 | 4.0 GHz | 4.2 GHz | na | 112 W | $242 |
The i9-7980X should boost up to 4.4 GHz on two cores in Turbo Boost Max 3.0 and up to 4.2 GHz in Turbo Max 2.0. The 2000 USD 165 Watt part should be available soon. Below the tests, courtesy of Coolenjoy.
Please read: The 7980XE scores are listed above the chart only with the scores and no bar plot (totally weird when you look at it but yeah, it is what it is).
Review: ASUS TUF X299 Mark I Motherboard with Core i9 7900X - 09/15/2017 09:41 AM
We grab a Core i9 7900X processor and review the €289,- ASUS TUF X299 Mark 1 motherboard with it, yes the Sabertooth series is back. A nice looking motherboard in dark theme offering nice fea...
Acer Predator Orion 9000 To Get Core i9 18C/36T processor - 09/01/2017 06:58 PM
Acer has been a busy bee showing off gaming mice, headsets, that delayed G-Sync HDR screen, and also an 18-core processor PC. The Orion 9000 holds four GPUs, two carry-grips, and carbon fibre pattern...
Overclockers Get Core i9 7960X for a bit of viral hype - 08/18/2017 09:19 AM
Intel at the moment is trying to create a bit of a viral, they do not talk to media about their Skylake-X series mega-core processors, they did however seed pro-overclockers with 16-core samples. ...
Intel Core i9 7980 XE Available Starting September 25th - 08/09/2017 04:08 PM
Yesterday Intel released the last specs for their Core X-series Processor Family Specs 14- to 18-Core. Earlier indication for the Core i9-7980XE would be a release in October. It now seems that the ...
Intel X-series processors Specs leaked incl Core i9 7980 XE - 07/29/2017 02:41 AM
Yesterday a new slide surfaced on the web, detailing the entire Core X lineup from Intel, the interesting thing here is that the specs shown include the full line-up, up-to the 14, 16 and 18-core part...
Agent-A01
Senior Member
Posts: 11619
Joined: 2010-12-27
Senior Member
Posts: 11619
Joined: 2010-12-27
#5474889 Posted on: 09/23/2017 07:15 PM
As said before, intel CPUs don't run at base frequency unless thermally throttled or heavy avx 512
Nice Cinebench scores. 
That said, to state the obvious, those 7980 Cinebench scores are NOT at the base clock of 2.6 Ghz, not a chance.
That said, to state the obvious, those 7980 Cinebench scores are NOT at the base clock of 2.6 Ghz, not a chance.As said before, intel CPUs don't run at base frequency unless thermally throttled or heavy avx 512
D3M1G0D
Senior Member
Posts: 2068
Joined: 2017-03-10
Senior Member
Posts: 2068
Joined: 2017-03-10
#5474898 Posted on: 09/23/2017 07:40 PM
Nope. The article mentioned that they were clocked at 4.2 GHz - so massively overclocked.
Nice Cinebench scores. That said, to state the obvious, those 7980 Cinebench scores are NOT at the base clock of 2.6 Ghz, not a chance.
That said, to state the obvious, those 7980 Cinebench scores are NOT at the base clock of 2.6 Ghz, not a chance.Nope. The article mentioned that they were clocked at 4.2 GHz - so massively overclocked.
Aura89
Senior Member
Posts: 8393
Joined: 2008-07-31
Senior Member
Posts: 8393
Joined: 2008-07-31
#5474902 Posted on: 09/23/2017 07:44 PM
That 'basic' math is only applicable to similar CPUs.
1950x architecture is not at all similar to intel
The IPC differences between the CPUs is not that much different, so that "basic math" works just fine as a general idea, but not an absolute. There is, in general, a 1-5% IPC difference depending on which test you are doing. Which is close enough to get a "general" idea of what performance difference there would be at different frequencies and cores between current intel and current AMD, they just won't be "absolute"
like many others are saying that others are just trying to dust off, these scores do not look like the 7980XE at base, or at all-core 3.4Ghz boost, but rather look like it's being overclocked. Why people can't see that is beyond me. Ultimately, we'll see if these scores hold true when guru3d makes a review about it, but i'd bet it does not, because these scores simply do not make sense with the information that intel, themselves, have given us. If it is correct, then intel literally pulled extra performance out of thin air.
And, as others have stated before as well, their own pictures prove this:
If the CPU is at 100% utilization, the max frequency for all-core boost is 3.4Ghz, so if anyone is trying to say "well maybe it's not overclocked and it really does perform this good" my question is:
How do you explain the picture they provided, which clearly shows, 100% utilization @ 4.17Ghz, far beyond the max all-core boost of 3.4Ghz? Refuting this fact shown by the people who did the tests is quite frankly madness.
That 'basic' math is only applicable to similar CPUs.
1950x architecture is not at all similar to intel
The IPC differences between the CPUs is not that much different, so that "basic math" works just fine as a general idea, but not an absolute. There is, in general, a 1-5% IPC difference depending on which test you are doing. Which is close enough to get a "general" idea of what performance difference there would be at different frequencies and cores between current intel and current AMD, they just won't be "absolute"
like many others are saying that others are just trying to dust off, these scores do not look like the 7980XE at base, or at all-core 3.4Ghz boost, but rather look like it's being overclocked. Why people can't see that is beyond me. Ultimately, we'll see if these scores hold true when guru3d makes a review about it, but i'd bet it does not, because these scores simply do not make sense with the information that intel, themselves, have given us. If it is correct, then intel literally pulled extra performance out of thin air.
And, as others have stated before as well, their own pictures prove this:
If the CPU is at 100% utilization, the max frequency for all-core boost is 3.4Ghz, so if anyone is trying to say "well maybe it's not overclocked and it really does perform this good" my question is:
How do you explain the picture they provided, which clearly shows, 100% utilization @ 4.17Ghz, far beyond the max all-core boost of 3.4Ghz? Refuting this fact shown by the people who did the tests is quite frankly madness.
Agent-A01
Senior Member
Posts: 11619
Joined: 2010-12-27
Senior Member
Posts: 11619
Joined: 2010-12-27
#5474921 Posted on: 09/23/2017 09:21 PM
The IPC differences between the CPUs is not that much different, so that "basic math" works just fine as a general idea, but not an absolute. There is, in general, a 1-5% IPC difference depending on which test you are doing. Which is close enough to get a "general" idea of what performance difference there would be at different frequencies and cores between current intel and current AMD, they just won't be "absolute"
like many others are saying that others are just trying to dust off, these scores do not look like the 7980XE at base, or at all-core 3.4Ghz boost, but rather look like it's being overclocked. Why people can't see that is beyond me. Ultimately, we'll see if these scores hold true when guru3d makes a review about it, but i'd bet it does not, because these scores simply do not make sense with the information that intel, themselves, have given us. If it is correct, then intel literally pulled extra performance out of thin air.
And, as others have stated before as well, their own pictures prove this:
If the CPU is at 100% utilization, the max frequency for all-core boost is 3.4Ghz, so if anyone is trying to say "well maybe it's not overclocked and it really does perform this good" my question is:
How do you explain the picture they provided, which clearly shows, 100% utilization @ 4.17Ghz, far beyond the max all-core boost of 3.4Ghz? Refuting this fact shown by the people who did the tests is quite frankly madness.
clock for clock, intel has a 10% advantage in single core performance. Comparing 7700k to 1800x in cinebench with both set to 3.5ghz
Coffeelake will further that maybe another 5% give or take.
As for the rest, don't know why you're directing that at me.
It's clearly known that most highend motherboards have All core turbo boost enabled by default.
That means under load it will put all cores to the max single core turbo boost.
Nothing to do with Intel.
Since 7980xe has a single turbo of 4.2ghz, it's safe to say that this setup is utilizing all core turbo setup.
The IPC differences between the CPUs is not that much different, so that "basic math" works just fine as a general idea, but not an absolute. There is, in general, a 1-5% IPC difference depending on which test you are doing. Which is close enough to get a "general" idea of what performance difference there would be at different frequencies and cores between current intel and current AMD, they just won't be "absolute"
like many others are saying that others are just trying to dust off, these scores do not look like the 7980XE at base, or at all-core 3.4Ghz boost, but rather look like it's being overclocked. Why people can't see that is beyond me. Ultimately, we'll see if these scores hold true when guru3d makes a review about it, but i'd bet it does not, because these scores simply do not make sense with the information that intel, themselves, have given us. If it is correct, then intel literally pulled extra performance out of thin air.
And, as others have stated before as well, their own pictures prove this:
If the CPU is at 100% utilization, the max frequency for all-core boost is 3.4Ghz, so if anyone is trying to say "well maybe it's not overclocked and it really does perform this good" my question is:
How do you explain the picture they provided, which clearly shows, 100% utilization @ 4.17Ghz, far beyond the max all-core boost of 3.4Ghz? Refuting this fact shown by the people who did the tests is quite frankly madness.
clock for clock, intel has a 10% advantage in single core performance. Comparing 7700k to 1800x in cinebench with both set to 3.5ghz
Coffeelake will further that maybe another 5% give or take.
As for the rest, don't know why you're directing that at me.
It's clearly known that most highend motherboards have All core turbo boost enabled by default.
That means under load it will put all cores to the max single core turbo boost.
Nothing to do with Intel.
Since 7980xe has a single turbo of 4.2ghz, it's safe to say that this setup is utilizing all core turbo setup.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 1580
Joined: 2004-12-10
Nice Cinebench scores.