Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Core i9 7900X Linux Benchmarks

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Intel Core i9 7900X Linux Benchmarks

    Phoronix: Intel Core i9 7900X Linux Benchmarks

    Since the Intel Core-X Series were announced last month at Computex, I've been excited to see how well this high-end processor will perform under Linux... Linux enthusiasts have plenty of highly-threaded workloads such as compiling the Linux kernel, among other packages, and thus have been very excited by the potential of the Core i9 7900X with its ten cores plus Hyper Threading and sporting a 13.75MB cache. With finally having an X299 motherboard ready, here are my initial Ubuntu Linux benchmarks for the i9-7900X.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=24854

  • #2
    Good to see the Linux tests. For gaming I'm still happy with my Ivy Bridge 3770. Looking forward to see Threadripper's results.

    Comment


    • #3
      Good to see very strong Linux support right out of the gate for these chips. If you get the time you could try those Open Porous Media benches that you tested out here https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...en-7-1800X-OPM

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by chuckula View Post
        Good to see very strong Linux support right out of the gate for these chips. If you get the time you could try those Open Porous Media benches that you tested out here https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...en-7-1800X-OPM
        Yeah I'll be doing OPM benchmarks on it soon.
        Michael Larabel
        http://www.michaellarabel.com/

        Comment


        • #5
          Any particular reason for the +50% perf on some tests? Is because of AVX 512? Optimized binary? Cache?

          Nice results, but for US$ 1K, 140W, I prefer Ryzen 1800X

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by andrei_me View Post
            Any particular reason for the +50% perf on some tests? Is because of AVX 512? Optimized binary? Cache?

            Nice results, but for US$ 1K, 140W, I prefer Ryzen 1800X
            I'll have a better idea when having more tests completed, currently looking at skylake vs. skylake-avx512 GCC7 comparison.
            Michael Larabel
            http://www.michaellarabel.com/

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by andrei_me View Post
              Any particular reason for the +50% perf on some tests? Is because of AVX 512? Optimized binary? Cache?

              Nice results, but for US$ 1K, 140W, I prefer Ryzen 1800X
              Ryzen 1700 is about as fast as 1800X if you just overclock it up to 3.9-4.0 GHz.. I've got good results especially after the latest AGESA. So you could easily build two entire systems for $1000 or wait for Threadrippers (which probably will beat Intel in perf/price comparison anyways).
              Last edited by caligula; 06-27-2017, 09:22 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Certainly a powerful part. With mobo + CPU prices likely 3x higher than a Ryzen combo I would seriously hope performance would match. It's not fast enough to justify its price on a price/performance basis, but if you need absolute desktop performance supremacy this is clearly the answer for now.

                We'll have to see if the HEDT performance crown is retained when Threadripper arrives. Seems absolutely certain AMD will maintain it's value dominance. It's possible they may capture the performance crown for a while too. If their 16 core parts arrive before the higher end HCC-based i9 parts ship, which seems likely, they have a shot.

                I kind of wish the absolute desktop performance leader wasn't relevant to all but the intended audience for these parts, but having that crown earns mindshare even among people who will never buy HEDT platforms. I would love to see AMD wear the crown, even if only for a couple months.

                Competition is great. Competition at the high end will help bring down prices across the board. I kind of smell a new price war coming on.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by caligula View Post
                  wait for Threadrippers (which probably will beat Intel in perf/price comparison anyways).
                  I doubt that, either an OEM chooses to market towards lower-paying consumers or towards higher. Nothing will be free for the consumer in this battle.
                  This CPU performs exactly like it ought for its price, it won almost all tests.
                  Taken into acount that the AMD chips where cheaper, they still seemed to perform uneven.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by AdamOne View Post
                    I doubt that, either an OEM chooses to market towards lower-paying consumers or towards higher. Nothing will be free for the consumer in this battle.
                    This CPU performs exactly like it ought for its price, it won almost all tests.
                    Taken into acount that the AMD chips where cheaper, they still seemed to perform uneven.
                    Well, the 32 threads TR its supposed to be 800-950$ and given how close to Ryzen is in most benchmarks, I can fairly say it will trounce it and trounce it even harder at perf per $ and to be totally honest the 7900x is not worth 1000$ + 400$ board at all, 599$+250$ board sure but not 1000$+

                    Also please notice some of those benchmarks are heavily skewed towards intel(I mean the software is, not Michael's test) that make the difference look huge but in more fair tests that scale well regardless the brand I don't see anywhere a trouncing 2x difference that justify the extra 500-700$ and the weird phrase "This CPU performs exactly like it ought for its price"

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X