Intel Core i9 7980XE Linux Benchmarks: 18 Core / 36 Threads For $1999 USD

[indepe]

Very interesting. Please also add tests that compare single-threaded performance.

I was wondering about the performance of the 7940X, since it has a relatively high base clock (and is less expensive). Seems it isn't available yet.

[ddriver]

I think that makes it 45 % meh.

45% would be the product value deficiency. Double that to get the meh factor. It can exceed 100%

[bridgman]

Interesting... these are getting into EPYC 7551P price range...

...200 MHz slower than the 7601 Michael tested (so 6-10%) but limited to 1 CPU only like these and around $2K ($2100 IIRC).

That would be one of those interesting "AMD is a bit more expensive but generally faster" articles.

[Spooktra]

Regarding the Blender benchmark, it's not that Blender "is hitting a wall", it's the default configuration is limiting the scaling with cores, try increasing the number of tiles for the cpu benchmark from the default 32, I think you will find performance and scaling skyrocket.

[qsmcomp]

My prediction months ago is correct: The MSI X299 SLI PLUS cannot hold i9-7980XE.

[chithanh]

Interesting... these are getting into EPYC 7551P price range...

...200 MHz slower than the 7601 Michael tested (so 6-10%) but limited to 1 CPU only like these and around $2K ($2100 IIRC).

That would be one of those interesting "AMD is a bit more expensive but generally faster" articles.

It is good that finally, someone at AMD woke up to this fact.

If AMD marketing had been smart and had provided Epyc 7551P to reviewers, the conclusions you see all over the web saying how Intel has the fastest and priciest CPU might have been different. Something like: "If you have $2k to spend on a CPU, buy an Epyc 7551P."

But no, and one has to wonder what AMD marketing is doing all day. Are they sleeping or what?

[Zola]

AMD EPYC 7401P eats it alive for 700$ less & you get 8x DDR4 controller along with the 128 PCI-E lines. All do server bord and 4x more DDR dims will eat price difference still that is 2x RAM working faster and 2.6x more PCI-E lines only thing missing is OC suport but I don't think that's crucial with so much cores performance per W is more important.

[Michael]

It is good that finally, someone at AMD woke up to this fact.

If AMD marketing had been smart and had provided Epyc 7551P to reviewers, the conclusions you see all over the web saying how Intel has the fastest and priciest CPU might have been different. Something like: "If you have $2k to spend on a CPU, buy an Epyc 7551P."

But no, and one has to wonder what AMD marketing is doing all day. Are they sleeping or what?

I might be getting a 7551P in the days ahead... Last week I was told I am getting a handful of other models, though I have yet to receive them.

[birdie]

So many cheap AMD fanboys in the thread it's amusing. None of them will buy a CPU which costs more than $400, yet they cannot stop blaming Intel for selling a relatively expensive CPU with outstanding specs and performance which AMD cannot even touch with a barge pole neither in single threaded, nor in multi threaded scenarios.

Tell me, honestly, if you're not this CPU target audience, why the hell do you even comment on it? Just because bashing everyone who's not AMD is trendy and cool? That's just disgusting and pathetic.

Go buy Threadripper and enjoy it. Oh, wait, you won't and you can't.

[chithanh]

Oh, a wild Intel/NVidia/Microsoft troll appears! Shoo back into the burrow where you came from.