These looked good, but there's a huge spread of chi0s and no real addition of pcie lanes. The one thing high end folks are looking for and they still won't push the limits. I mean, they are up to 2066 pads on the chip. why not just go for broke and make it another 160 to 320 more for 10 to 20 more pcie lanes? They are already making you buy new motherboards for this lineup, a new CPU cooler or mounting hardware shouldn't be that much to ask.

I think I will go in this direction Intel Core i9-7900X Overclocked To 5.7GHz Breaking Cinebench World Records next year.

robbysites

bcavnaugh
I think I will go in this direction Intel Core i9-7900X Overclocked To 5.7GHz Breaking Cinebench World Records next year.

Yes that would be a serious weapon!

"Utah! Get me two!"

Yeah did you see the Ryzen 9 announced yesterday?
 
http://www.techspot.com/news/69539-intel-core-x-vs-amd-ryzen-threadripper-what.html
 
When I build my new power rig next year it may be a Ryzen.  My 3960X is getting a little tired.

 
seems like i am not the only one frustrated with intel's latest reactionary offerings.

Intel is doing nothing more now than just embarrass themselves with their craptastic product line-up.  Now, matters are even worse with them announcing that most of the announced i9 line up won't be available until the very end of 2017, and some are delayed until 2018.  Heck, by then Zen2 will have been released...lol.  And to add insult to injury onto themselves, they refuse to budge on price points throughout their CPU line up.  Intel has proven several 'points of epic failure' on multiple counts.  One can only scratch their head at Intel's continue choice to continue down a path of self destruction.

scott@bjorn3d
 
When I build my new power rig next year it may be a Ryzen.  My 3960X is getting a little tired.

I just retired my 3930K after 5 1/2 years and went with a Ryzen 7 1700X build.  Man, I am loving this system.  I have the 1700X paired with an AsRock Fatal1ty Professional Gaming X370 motherboard and have to say I'm very impressed.  AsRock has been amazing with BIOS updates that continue to push memory clocks higher and higher.  I can now run all four DIMMS at 3033Mhz @ 1T Command Rate and CPU @ 3.8Ghz with stock BIOS settings and no tinkering whatsoever.  If I just use two DIMMs, the memory is able to run steady at 3600Mhz!  I have been able to push the 1700X to 4Ghz, but have to use 1.4V to do so.  For everyday gaming and regular light use, 3.8Ghz is just fine.  I also own a second system that has a 7700K at stock settings and I can tell you now that the Ryzen is far better in anything that requires multi-tasking duties.  And as for gaming, I was expecting the 7700K to take a massive lead in all games.  Man, was I wrong!  My 1700X actually scores on par with the 7700K and in more than one occasion actually outscores it!  I play all games at UWQD (3440 x 1440) and 4K, so for me the 7700K just doesn't have any advantages over the 1700X, especially with any of the newer games (one year and less) where they are optimized for multithreading.
 
I've been asked by several of my friends which system to build, and I've told them all to go with Ryzen.  Way cheaper and yet has as good of performance when gaming and hands down destroys anything Intel has within the same price range for multi-tasking applications.  Choose either Ryzen 7 or Ryzen 5 and you won't go wrong.  Folks, Intel is in big trouble and they've finally figures that out.

i think that Intel has simply dug themselves into a deep rut and it'll take them some time to get out of it. some kind of thing happened before with Athlon x64 processors vs Intel Pentium 4.

Iluv2raceit

bcavnaugh
I think I will go in this direction Intel Core i9-7900X Overclocked To 5.7GHz Breaking Cinebench World Records next year.

Pointless.  OC was done with LN2.  For us 'real world' gamers, this is N/A.  Realistic OC on regular custom water or AiO will probably be right around 5Ghz.  Actual boost in performance that really means something in real world game?  Not so much.  Just more hyperbole from the frantic panicking Intel team.

I am happy AMD is doing something good after all this time. I am glad to see some competition But.
You are in a DC forum section right here, we are not "real world gamers here" We do DC distributed computing. ( I am sure some still game)
AMD sucks at BOINC and folding at home SMP unless you are using dual or quad socket Opterons 6172 or better.
The 61xx Opterons were better than their 62xx and 63xx for doing DC work. Newer is not always better.
They can not seem to get the CPU instructions to work properly beyond SSE, SSE2 SSE3, why the heck can they not get it right?
I do not know anyone with the new AMD who does DC work that is real happy with the new CPUs and is rushing out to buy more.
AMD GPUs are fine for playing games, but they too are not all that great at DC work besides a couple primegrid and Milkyway projects.
And they are missing a half million to a million people or more that do DC work.
My 3930K blows away what the new CPUs are doing.

bill1024
 
 
I do not know anyone with the new AMD who does DC work that is real happy with the new CPUs and is rushing out to buy more.
AMD GPUs are fine for playing games, but they too are not all that great at DC work besides a couple primegrid and Milkyway projects.
And they are missing a half million to a million people or more that do DC work.
My 3930K blows away what the new CPUs are doing.

 You missed Moo Wrapper and Yoyo on the AMD GPU projects.
 A low end RX 470 matches the GTX 1070 on Moo Wrapper if both are at stock clocks, and before the recent "shortage-driven crazy prices" on the AMD side the RX 470 could easily be had at half or less the price of a GTX 1070. For that matter, the ancient R9 290 (R9 280x is close but not quite) BEATS the GTX 1070 outright, with the R9 290X being even faster (and I believe beating the GTX 1080) - and even the ancient HD 7970 can match more-or-less the GTX 1070 despite being several generations and some years older tech.
 The Fury beat ANYTHING Nvidia on that project prior to the Titan X Pascal, and I'm not sure if the mighty Titan X Pascal could match a FuryX or Nano (it clocks enough higher it might win, but it's a lot closer than you might think).
 From what I recall of OGR benchmarking on the native DNet client, YoYo should be comparable to Moo Wrapper for basically the same reasons.
 
 Recent Intel offerings have been badly lacking in PCI-E lanes unless you buy their ripoff-priced workstation CPUs, which hurts performance on many DC projects like Folding for multi-GPU rigs.
 In fairness, a lot of CPU performance isn't needed for *most* multi-GPU work, which is why AMD has been quite competative there for a long time despite inferior performance - lower cost for "enough" performance to get the job done.
 
 
 Any DC project that is aimed at using CPUs is very far behind the times anyway - GPUs have progressed to the point that they blow any CPU away except for a very narrow range of instruction types, on anything that can be coded to work on many pieces in parallel - and DC is all about many pieces in parallel by design.
 The days of the PS3 being a dominant DC platform due to it's incredibly powerfull (for the time) multi-core CPU died when GPGPU got going - GPU cores aren't as powerfull as CPU but they're "good enough" for DC work and they have so many MORE cores to work with it's no longer a competition, except for a few "designed specifically to keep CPUs competative" niches like Monero cryptocoin mining.
 

To be fair, the R9 280/280x were the last AMD cards with good DP for a "relatively" low cost - 290/290x had a little lower DP performance despite being higher-end cards, and everything between those and the RX series has had absolute worthlessness on DP outside of SOME of the AMD Workstation-specific cards (the ones that were not specifically based on consumer-level GPU chips).
 
 RX 470/480 and by extension the 570/580 are actually back up some - to ballpark HALF of what the 280x can do.
 
 Intel and AMD CPUs have not been usable in the same socket since the Pentium days, Socket 7 was the LAST time they both used the same socket (486-class chips and the first-gen AMD 5x86 chips, not the later ones that became the K5 series).
 Socket A *MIGHT* have been compatable with the DEC Alpha CPUs, as it was based somewhat on those, but I kinda doubt that.
 Socket A did NOT have the capability of using any Intel CPU - it just had a similar form factor as the early Intel P3 class chips and their Celeron offspring.
 
 AMD licences ability to make x86 from Intel, but they do NOT get the actual technology any more - that stopped with the Pentium, or late in the 486-class CPU days.
 
AMD GPUs tend to win mostly on integer-based projects, and in specific cases on DP-based projects - which is why they are strong in most Crypto as well.
NVidia is strong on SP-based projects, or on "more complex" type stuff like Folding.