Intel Core i9 7980 XE Available Starting September 25th

lol, very interesting times

 

2.6 Ghz....

Anno 2007 wants it's core frequency back.

 

well to be fair( lol ) a more direct comparison( for us consumers i.e. price ) would really be the 10 core 7900X which is a more respectable 3.3Ghz.
So it will be really interesting how the 7900X compares with the TR 1950X across the board.

 

What?

All high core count CPUs have always had inherently lower clock speeds.

 

Jeez people... it's a joke. I wasn't comparing them.

We had 2.6ghz back in 2007.
And now also 2.6ghz.

Who knew ?

 

2000 bucks for a CPU!! :nerd: That´s, like, the value of my car or something.

Pretty cool we´re finally adding more cores though.

 

We had 3.8ghz Pentiums back in 2004 too so...

 

Apart from the Threadrippers, good clocks on all 8, 12 or 16 cores

 

True, but the 16 core TR is 3.4GHz for a base clock. So in comparison, something seems a little off - 2 cores doesn't warrant an 800MHz difference when both models [probably] have such similar IPC.


I understand why Intel chose 2.6Ghz, though. They're trying to keep the TDP to a point where if you were to use a 4-pin CPU power connector, your PC will still function. Considering some AMD boards come with 2x 8-pin connectors, it seems they don't care about the minority of people with some crappy outdated PSU.

 

I would kinda have to wonder why someone would be getting such a high end platform and decide to use an outdated PSU. But, i have seen it before, so... lol

 

Agent is right, chips with a lot of cores tend to run at a lower clock speed. An 18-core Xeon like the E5-2699 v3 runs at 2.3 GHz. Thus, the 7980XE can be thought of as a slightly overclocked Xeon with a higher TDP, less cache, and paste for TIM.

Well, TR has a higher TDP (180W vs 165W), which makes up some of the difference.

I'm not sure about that. Intel raised the TDP on the 14+ core models from 140W to 165W, so I wouldn't say that they're trying to accommodate weak PSUs (far from it).

 

Oh whoops I didn't realize the top i9 models were 165W, I thought they were 140W like the others. I wasn't reading close enough I guess. Well then, I guess that throws my theory out the window.

Don't underestimate the frugality and/or ignorance of the average buyer. PSUs are something many people don't take seriously on PCs they care about. It isn't something to ever go cheap on yet it isn't uncommon to see people powering a 275W GPU on a 20 gauge Y-cable using a PSU that doesn't even have the 80+ certification.

 

I can't believe in these "165w" TDP since 10c warms and draws as hell, 180w TR will draw less Power, AMD Ark is actually more efficent, because of that they can put +3.40GHz on all models, 2x R7 1700X (16c 32t) draws less (~220w) than 10c 20t i9 (250~350w Max load), maybe TR has New Stepping over Desktop RYZEN

 

Everyone losing their **** over a base clock of 2.6ghz - which is what the processor sits on when doing absolutely nothing. The boost clocks are what matters most as that's when the processor is being used. With a boost 2.0 clock4.2ghz (and boost 3.0 clock of 4.4Ghz for only two cores) are pretty decent clocks really.

 

not if you use more than 2 cores ... 2 cores at full speed is decent for a UE4 games who use 4 threads ... not for professional applications .. It is a good placebo for counter AMD on IPC ( on 2 cores )... but nothing more .

 

isn't it only the Boost 3.0 (4.4Ghz) that only boosts 2 cores? I literally just cut and paste that info from another tech site. Not sure how many cores boost with boost 2.0 4.2Ghz.

 

That would be two cores. All core boost of 3.4ghz.