Review: Core i9 10980XE processor (Intel 18-core galore)

Take TR review, if you want Mixed Load System, Gaming + Work, intel 18 core is the only solution right now.
TR sadly perfoms way worse in gaming then even cheap Ryzen CPUs, while Intel is always at the top scores.
TR3 has the benefit of more cores and multicore performance but its 100000% pure workstation CPU.

All Mainstream Intel = Best Gaming
Mainstream AMD = Value
High end Mainstream AMD = Gaming + light work [if you dont need PCIe lanes]
HEDT Intel = mixed load systems, Gaming + work
TR3 = Workhorse

 

To the Recommended Offended.
Guru3d can recommend a product for what ever reason the homepage see fit, it is the readers job to at least read the conclusion of the article before making a choice of buying or not buying a very expensive product.
I do not see a problem here, Intel fixed a couple of things wrong with the 7000 and 9000 series 18 core and most importantly fixed the price to be competitive, atleast if you have the platform already.

I am sorry to be rude but it is not Hilberts job to spoon feed the reader with info specific for that person only, i am sure he expects that his readers are able to think and decide if this product fits you or not.
Please stop making wild conclusions about a recommended badge, article release timing or frontpage picture sizes, hopefully most readers have the brain capacity to make a choice and resist buying hardware for 1000$ because the frontpage picture is the largest or highest on the list.

Before I get marked for being a Intel Fanboy, may i list my CPU history:
Intel 133MHz. AMD 1800. 1700. 2400. 2400 mobile. opteron 165. Phenom 955. AM1 Quadcore. A10 8000 mobile. Ryzen 1700 and hopefully a Ryzen 3700 or 3900 next year at 4000 launch.

 

Yes but a custom loop is extremely expensive and cumbersome. My current TR system uses a custom loop but I plan to scrap it with the next overhaul and go completely air-cooled (my gaming system has already been converted to air). This is also a workstation CPU and very few workstation users overclock or use a custom loop.

 

How is it much better? It doesnt beat the 3950x in most benches, they look about equal and where it does beat its basically neck and neck. The gaming, yeah... 1280x720 .
The other point - even aside from price - when all else equal - why the hell would someone choose an extra 100w+ power draw? Sure its not much of a deciding factor for enthusiasts in 2019, but again, when all else essentially equal, makes no sense to opt for the 100w more chip.

 

@MegaFalloutFan
so its better, because it consumes more power to do the same,
requires more and better cooling which is also more expensive,
also costs more without scaling the same amount when it comes to performance.

now even someone that wants to game on a MC rig, can save a lot of money going with amd,
and spend the saved money on a faster gpu, which will then still beat the intel based solution.

Do you drink your blue koolaid daily?

 

Casket Lake-X

 

Intel will come back, they always do. The last time they got their behind handed to them they replied with Core and then sealed it with X58, which I still think is the best platform they ever had. In the mean time however, thank our lucky stars for AMD finally coming out on top. We’re in for some spectacular performance gains after years of stagnation.

 

$979 ?...

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07ZQN3QRR more like £1215.98, or $1568.49

And it's Amazon itself, not some scammer trying to make a quick buck.
But of course, it might drop a bit as they become available everywhere.

Still not worth it, any single bit.
DoA cpu on DeadEnd platform.

I predict that next gen nVidia will be PCI-e 4.0 too, beside whatever AMD will launch in the GPU department, that will seal the coffin on any existing PCI-e 3.0 platforms (which is everything Intel)

 

I really don't see the point of this CPU. The only 2 reasons I can think of to go for this rather than 3950X is memory bandwidth (thanks to quad-channel) and 8 extra PCI-e lanes. Whether that's worth the extra $250, you decide. 3950X has an advantage of PCI-e 4.0 on X570, but if you don't care about it, you can just stick it into a dirt-cheap B450 board and be a happy camper.

There is still quite a big gap in pricing between 3950X ($750) and 3960X($1400). Wonder if AMD will make 16 and/or 18 core Threadripper parts. I mean 18 core TR at $1000 would be the last nail in the coffin for 14nm++++++ Intel procesors. Though I guess AMD doesn't NEED to do that atm.

 

There is a multi new king... the king of Expensive Prices; Power Hungry; Obsolete Technology; 720p Gaming;
Congratulations Intel! Maybe some employees and dumbs will buy this chip...
Pathetic!

 

No you cant, if you want PCIe lanes you need either a TR3 1400USD minimum or any of the Intel HEDT cpus from 550$ to 970$
If you want mixed workstation/gaming setup, 3950x lacks PCIe lanes and 3960x much more expensive and still slower in gaming
At stock both 18 core and 16 AMD consume the same, so which one is more power hungry the 14nm 18 core that consumes the same as 16 core 7nm CPU?

 

@MegaFalloutFan

i9-10980X is not bad CPU but for less you can have 3950X or 3900X which match this CPU in some games

In mixed workloads I still would take ThreadRipper than i9-10980X, still I'm not happy with motherboard offerings for TR or X299(X299 Sage 10g is board which I would choose for myself)

Depending what are yours plans for build but I would go with TR just due more PCI_E lanes and in future you can upgrade to 64 core/128 thread CPU if you want to

ThreadRipper 3970x or 3960x in gaming are not bad or not lot slower than Intel when you are gaming in 1440p or in 4k

Hope this helps

Thanks, Jura

 

@MegaFalloutFan
unless you know everyone will need those lanes, its not a factor for everyone.
and when you have pce 4.0 you dont even need to.
a 1080 that wont saturate a 8x slot (3.0) can run on a 4x slot on pce 4.0
i can put a 570 board in 4x/4x/4x/4x mode an its better than 3.0 doing 8x on each slot, because of less overhead.

 

Gamers: 9900K cheaper
Everything else: AMD is faster and cheaper
Who buys this?!

 

@fry178 @alanm Your words fall on deaf ears, literally futile to continue with that. If you've seen his post history, you'd know what I mean.

Great review as always, gave me something to read on my breaks today.

To think, Zen 3 is right around the corner. Oh to be a fly on the wall at Intel.

 

Buy Intel - cough, cough Bye, Intel.

 

$999 of disappointment. At least beat consumer Ryzen 3950 ($749) in more benchmarks to stay competitive or lower the damn price.

Can't spread marketing "gaming king" bullshit with this type of CPU
Deliver numbers or go home!

 

Maybe someone who already has a X299 MB???

 

its a dead end platform, meanwhile TR3 will go up to 64 cores and has pcie 4 with even more lanes

i had a rig with a 6600 and between forking out $300+ for yet another quad i7 vs 300$ for a decent board + ryzen 5 that was a no brainer at all, now i can go up to a 3900x or even a 3950x which makes anything other than the 9900k in gaming(for now) completely irrelevant

 

You didnt look at the gaming benchmarks then. Its not even close to 9900k. It needs a waterfall (like bender from futurama) to cool this thing which pullls 500w when pushed.

Its a dumb chip for a dumbass users, sorry.