Will we have reviews out on the 19th? The whole pre-order thing not sure when the NDA is up so we can see performance numbers.

Will we have reviews out on the 19th? The whole pre-order thing not sure when the NDA is up so we can see performance numbers.

Likely will not have reviews on this site till after launch. Intel went stupid and stopped sending review kits to EU media.

That's not main problem this platform of intel's is going to have. Threadripper will be here in July as confirmed by Alienware's roadmap. And they are placing as top 16C/32T TR on AMD's side. And 10C/20T on intel's. Is that due to intel's high price? Or due to low availability? In either way from Alienware's business perspective, they do not intend to offer more than 10-core intel solution at this moment in time.

That's not only problem, whole intel x299 is inconsistent, rushed plarform. There is almost nothing new on x299 compared to x99 to mandate new socket, maybe with adition to M.2 which can be easily added thry PCI-e adapter. Intel rushed it so fast that they even not managed to implement Lighting. As for CPUs, Kabylake X is a joke, with only 16 PCI-e lanes and Asus already stated that they will not support it on some high-end mobos at least. 6-8 core Skylake X with 28 lanes is still downgrade compared to x99. 10-12 cores are only thing reasonable for next 1-2 quarters though probably still too expensive when compared to x399 and Threadripper. We still have to see prices for Threadripper and x399 mobos, but looks like 12c/24t 3.5GHz+ Thredripper is going to be HEDT king same way as 1600x is in the mainstream. Not that I need more cores, 1800x is just fine, but I could really use more PCI-e slots than x370 offers.

Now is the time if any to support AMD. Threadripper is the best thing to happen to gamers in a long time. INTEL is an overly Greedy Company with pricing. Threadripper is by far the better deal hands down if you are building a new pc. If everyone continues to keep supporting INTEL because of faster clock for clock speeds we might not have an AMD to compete with them in the future. This reminds me of when Athlons came out back in the day ,we need this competition and we need AMD to gain back Market share.

That's not only problem, whole intel x299 is inconsistent, rushed plarform. There is almost nothing new on x299 compared to x99 to mandate new socket, maybe with adition to M.2 which can be easily added thry PCI-e adapter. Intel rushed it so fast that they even not managed to implement Lighting. As for CPUs, Kabylake X is a joke, with only 16 PCI-e lanes and Asus already stated that they will not support it on some high-end mobos at least. 6-8 core Skylake X with 28 lanes is still downgrade compared to x99. 10-12 cores are only thing reasonable for next 1-2 quarters though probably still too expensive when compared to x399 and Threadripper. We still have to see prices for Threadripper and x399 mobos, but looks like 12c/24t 3.5GHz+ Thredripper is going to be HEDT king same way as 1600x is in the mainstream. Not that I need more cores, 1800x is just fine, but I could really use more PCI-e slots than x370 offers.

I agree. The 10+ core Core i9s are the only ones worth considering for HEDT (although the 6 and 8 cores are cheaper than before, 28 lanes is a real turn off). Of course that's what Intel wants people to think as well - they'd prefer that people pay the $400 premium to have the full 44 lanes.

Likely will not have reviews on this site till after launch. Intel went stupid and stopped sending review kits to EU media.

No I got my hands on a 10-core proc, just not obtained through Intel. X299 is buggy though, very buggy.

No I got my hands on a 10-core proc, just not obtained through Intel. X299 is buggy though, very buggy.

Good to hear. Must have been through a motherboard partner. Awaiting the review.

I agree. The 10+ core Core i9s are the only ones worth considering for HEDT (although the 6 and 8 cores are cheaper than before, 28 lanes is a real turn off). Of course that's what Intel wants people to think as well - they'd prefer that people pay the $400 premium to have the full 44 lanes.

Or you pay $xxx less for Threadripper and get more cores and 64 instead of 44 lanes. It would be interesting to see how clock and TDP will be on those 14-18 core i9's, my personal bet would be a lower clock and higher TDP than AMD counterparts when looking at Xeon data.

Or you pay $xxx less for Threadripper and get more cores and 64 instead of 44 lanes. It would be interesting to see how clock and TDP will be on those 14-18 core i9's, my personal bet would be a lower clock and higher TDP than AMD counterparts when looking at Xeon data.

Oh yeah, I was talking for just Intel chips. Threadripper with X399 is a far more attractive option. Depending on the price, I may look to getting a 12 or 16 core for grid computing purposes (and perhaps a couple of GPUs for mining).

Now is the time if any to support AMD. Threadripper is the best thing to happen to gamers in a long time. INTEL is an overly Greedy Company with pricing. Threadripper is by far the better deal hands down if you are building a new pc. If everyone continues to keep supporting INTEL because of faster clock for clock speeds we might not have an AMD to compete with them in the future. This reminds me of when Athlons came out back in the day ,we need this competition and we need AMD to gain back Market share.

Uhm I'm sorry Threadripper for gamers? I would argue we've proven that 8c16t Ryzens didn't bring that much to the table for gamers, seemingly core count doesn't benefit strictly gaming(yet) and while AMD has great IPC they're still lacking compared to Intel...? AMD is till behind on the mhz/oc potential race? Ryzen (and other 6c/12t or 8c/16t) shines a bit more with streaming added to the mix, but do you need 32 threads to stream? That said... Threadripper will be GREAT/AMAZING for content creators and such. what remains to be seen is: -Will Threadripper have the complete identical IPC of Ryzen(it should have right?) -What SKU will AMD offer at the rumored 849$ (Seems it'll be a 3.4ghz baseclock, with no word on boostclocks?, and how will faster SKUS be priced) -Motherboard vendors claim Threadripper boards are EXPENSIVE... What will the platform price eventually be? -With Ryzen's RAM issues, altho' more or less fixed with the AGESA/BIOS updates, lurk again on Threadripper because of QUAD channel now in use? Put up against, how much better will Intel's new series fare? We know the IPC should be up from Broadwell... We know they (so far) clock much better as well... Will it, can it justify Intel higher prices, and will the prices be more even when figuring platform price (keep in mind Threadripper board could be very expensive) Judging from computex x299 seemed ok(A LOT of board and showcases) but from Hilberts last post, maybe not? Seems that a Ryzen 1700 series could remain that best choice for an 'allround' system with Ryzen 1600, Intel i7-7800x or maybe i7-7820x being decent contenders depending on your price point? Anything equal to, or above i7-7900x and Threadripper will be too expensive, and eventually overkill unless you render a lot of stuff? Any input? (I'll be going for an i7-7820X myself, but Hilberts post does worry me a bit... So far I've seen nobody else mention x299 was buggy, or at least 'that' buggy...?!?!??!)

Uhm I'm sorry Threadripper for gamers? I would argue we've proven that 8c16t Ryzens didn't bring that much to the table for gamers, seemingly core count doesn't benefit strictly gaming(yet) and while AMD has great IPC they're still lacking compared to Intel...? AMD is till behind on the mhz/oc potential race? Ryzen (and other 6c/12t or 9c/16t) shines a bit more with streaming added to the mix, but do you need 32 threads to stream? That said... Threadripper will be GREAT/AMAZING for content creators and such. what remains to be seen is: -Will Threadripper have the complete identical IPC of Ryzen(it should have right?) -What SKU will AMD offer at the rumored 849$ (Seems it'll be a 3.4ghz baseclock, with no word on boostclocks?, and how will faster SKUS be priced) -Motherboard vendors claim Threadripper boards are EXPENSIVE... What will the platform price eventually be? -With Ryzen's RAM issues, altho' more or less fixed with the AGESA/BIOS updates, lurk again on Threadripper because of QUAD channel now in use? Put up against, how much better will Intel's new series fare? We know the IPC should be up from Broadwell... We know they (so far) clock much better as well... Will it, can it justify Intel higher prices, and will the prices be more even when figuring platform price (keep in mind Threadripper board could be very expensive) Judging from computex x299 seemed ok(A LOT of board and showcases) but from Hilberts last post, maybe not? Seems that a Ryzen 1700 series could remain that best choice for an 'allround' system with Ryzen 1600, Intel i7-7800x or maybe i7-7820x being decent contenders depending on your price point? Anything equal to, or above i7-7900x and Threadripper will be too expensive, and eventually overkill unless you render a lot of stuff? Any input? (I'll be going for an i7-7820X myself, but Hilberts post does worry me a bit... So far we've nothing nobody else mention x299 was buggy, or at least 'that' buggy...?!?!??!)

Yeah I agree. I think Threadripper is the better HEDT processor but as a gamer I think the Core i9-7820X is in the sweet spot for me. The extra cores give me headroom as games start to utilize them more and it improves the few workstation apps I use. The clockspeed basically makes single threaded apps a sidegrade instead of a slight downgrade like Ryzen/TR does. I don't mind the PCI-E lane issue much because I'll never go SLI/Xfire again and I use a NAS for my storage, so the RAID stuff doesn't bother me either. But yeah, if x299 turns out to be a buggy **** like x99 was when it launched, I'm not touching it.

Der8auer hit 5.0Ghz on a delidded 10 core with a Corsair AIO. He seems to think most chips will be able to do 4.7/4.8.

That i9 7820X 8core would be awesome @ 4.7Ghz 🤓

Likely will not have reviews on this site till after launch. Intel went stupid and stopped sending review kits to EU media.

Has that ever been explained or did Intel decide to leave everyone in the dark on top of an already dumb decision? Edit: Aren't the 7800X and 7820X in the i7 line?

That i9 7820X 8core would be awesome @ 4.7Ghz 🤓

i7, the 28 lane CPU's are all still i7.

Has that ever been explained or did Intel decide to leave everyone in the dark on top of an already dumb decision? Edit: Aren't the 7800X and 7820X in the i7 line?

I haven't heard anything. Hilbert would know but likely will never say anything on the subject which I don't blame him.

Anything equal to, or above i7-7900x and Threadripper will be too expensive, and eventually overkill unless you render a lot of stuff? Any input?

I'll likely aim for a 16-core Threadripper. It will be perfect for grid computing, which makes use of all available threads, and I'm looking forward to a big boost to my World Community Grid numbers. I also plan to do some mining, assuming I can get some decent GPUs for it. With four GPUs across 48 lanes, it should make a killer mining system (might even pay for itself in a few months). I generally don't expect to game on it. My Ryzen 7 system is my current gaming rig (equipped with a pair of 1080s) so I'll continue using that.

No I got my hands on a 10-core proc, just not obtained through Intel. X299 is buggy though, very buggy.

My prediction: There won't be nearly as much complaining on these forums about x299 being buggy, even though its not even a major new architecture change, from people who purposefully forget that Intels platforms have bugs too, compared to how much complaining there was/is about the minor problems AMDs platforms have been having. In fact, if what you say is true, and other reviewers have problems as well, i'm certain those same people will forget about it the moment they stop reading about the bugs, and claim Intels platform to be bug-free, and bash AMD some more for it.

My prediction: There won't be nearly as much complaining on these forums about x299 being buggy, even though its not even a major new architecture change, from people who purposefully forget that Intels platforms have bugs too, compared to how much complaining there was/is about the minor problems AMDs platforms have been having. In fact, if what you say is true, and other reviewers have problems as well, i'm certain those same people will forget about it the moment they stop reading about the bugs, and claim Intels platform to be bug-free, and bash AMD some more for it.

Now you are getting into tinfoil hat stuff bro. You know as well as everyone it depends on the bug. My Sandybridge system still has the post bug that's never been fixed and I'm not sure if it's an Intel, Nvidia or windows bug but sometimes I get a black screen after windows splash. While all of these are annoying they are not performance issues. The "bugs" Ryzen had that are getting ironed out were performance related. When it effects performance of a platform it tends to stick more than just a minor annoyance.

Now you are getting into tinfoil hat stuff bro. You know as well as everyone it depends on the bug. My Sandybridge system still has the post bug that's never been fixed and I'm not sure if it's an Intel, Nvidia or windows bug but sometimes I get a black screen after windows splash. While all of these are annoying they are not performance issues. The "bugs" Ryzen had that are getting ironed out were performance related. When it effects performance of a platform it tends to stick more than just a minor annoyance.

LOL, u are confirming his post. Yeah, a years old bug that prevents u from booting sometimes is unimportant, but, but.... incompatibility with a proprietary and closed memory profile on a 100% new arch that was pretty much fixed in 2 months is a big no... that's not even a bug.

LOL, u are confirming his post. Yeah, a years old bug that prevents u from booting sometimes is unimportant, but, but.... incompatibility with a proprietary and closed memory profile on a 100% new arch that was pretty much fixed in 2 months is a big no... that's not even a bug.

A platform not supporting memory speeds it claims to support resulting in poor performance in some instances, or randomly getting two or three post loops before my PC starts yep that Intel bug is way more of a problem. Like I said the black screen may not be an Intel bug it only started happening recently. Plus the memory compatibility is getting straightened out but at launch even modules on the QVL were not working at advertised speeds. I'm not defending Intel or bashing AMD. After all the teething issues of Ryzen are sorted no one will talk about the memory compatibility ever again ( aside from the raging fanboys).

LOL, u are confirming his post. Yeah, a years old bug that prevents u from booting sometimes is unimportant, but, but.... incompatibility with a proprietary and closed memory profile on a 100% new arch that was pretty much fixed in 2 months is a big no... that's not even a bug.

Well one effects just one person, afaik, and the other effected everyone who bought Ryzen for over two months with 2100+ memory. Honestly, I've seen more people complain about x99 memory issues during the x99 launch then people complain about Ryzen memory issues - mostly because AMD was pretty upfront about it getting fixed while Intel never says anything because they suck at community outreach. Also the AMD community is significantly more vocal than anything out of Intel or even Nvidia. They put a desktop game icon in a driver and the post on /r/amd got 5K+ upvotes, people were literally losing their minds. Every issue AMD has is amplified 400x by it's own fanbase. I'm pretty sure of Vega doesn't release in July they'll ritually sacrifice Raja. I heard Ruby has a spot in an upcoming episode of American Gods.