10980XE Benchmarked

thesmokingman

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
6,617
Wow, it is not any faster than what's on the market already. This is gonna be stillborn perhaps... not much reason to get one over a 9900k or 3900x, especially given the price. And the 3950x is around the corner!
 

demondrops

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 7, 2016
Messages
422
no suprise there. they are just fucked on tdp from start... feels like the deadweight rushed start of x299 platform already. they just cant compete with amd on more cores cause it will make too much heat and clocks will get neutered.
 

demondrops

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 7, 2016
Messages
422
and when they do go 10nm.. they will drop x299 so not very upgrade friendly xD really hard to justify going intel on x299..
 

x3sphere

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
2,755
TR3 is going to destroy this. Not sure if AMD is going to price that aggressively though when the 3950X will beat the 10980XE in a lot of workloads.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this

BrotherMichigan

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 8, 2016
Messages
375
Wccftech is claiming the performance seems low because it lags the 9980XE a bit in Cinebench, so (as always), we should wait for the real reviews.
 

demondrops

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 7, 2016
Messages
422
y amd goin to smoke intel now lol. only reason 9900k is better is cause it have less cores so it can reach higher clocks. once they increase cores they will loose that advantage not by alot but they will. or it will be more like even, and then why not pick a motherboard that might get more support that cost less, and get 2 more cores. seems like a nobrainer.
 

defaultluser

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 14, 2006
Messages
14,399
Wow, it is not any faster than what's on the market already. This is gonna be stillborn perhaps... not much reason to get one over a 9900k or 3900x, especially given the price. And the 3950x is around the corner!


Especially since they're doing price cuts on Skylake-X parts to make room for this shit. If you already own the things, then upgrade on the cheap.

It's still twice the price for maybe 15% more performance.

And that's before 3590X arrives on the scene. That will be at least 25% faster on average than the 3900X, for 3/4 the price of the 18-core monster.

When Threadripper 3000 series gets here, t will absolutely decimate this garbage heap :D
 
Last edited:

BrotherMichigan

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 8, 2016
Messages
375
These benchmarks are BS. The 1080XE is at 3Ghz stock. OC all cores to 4.6Ghz and it will wipe the flooor with any Ryzen offering and beat it. It will even beat a 24 core threadRipper 3 but not a 32. But hey they have their own high count chips and that is their server line. It even shows 3Ghz and I also heard and read it as well. 3Ghz stock 18 cores.. try 4.6Ghz all cores then you will see 18 core 1080XE pass by every CPU ever made for consumers and HEDT as well except we dont know how it will do against TR3 32 core CPU. I think it will keep up. But if you need that much juice just get a Xeon and call it a day or a dual socket Xeon 56 cores hehe.

Do you know of any sites that compared the 3900X to the 9980XE? I'd be interested to see the comparison.
 

FlawleZ

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
1,586
These benchmarks are BS. The 1080XE is at 3Ghz stock. OC all cores to 4.6Ghz and it will wipe the flooor with any Ryzen offering and beat it. It will even beat a 24 core threadRipper 3 but not a 32. But hey they have their own high count chips and that is their server line. It even shows 3Ghz and I also heard and read it as well. 3Ghz stock 18 cores.. try 4.6Ghz all cores then you will see 18 core 1080XE pass by every CPU ever made for consumers and HEDT as well except we dont know how it will do against TR3 32 core CPU. I think it will keep up. But if you need that much juice just get a Xeon and call it a day or a dual socket Xeon 56 cores hehe.

Run what ya brung. Show me 4.6 all core stable WITHOUT exotic cooling on this chip. Hate to burst your bubble but it's not gonna happen dude. Intel has it at these clock speeds for a reason.
 

thesmokingman

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
6,617
Run what ya brung. Show me 4.6 all core stable WITHOUT exotic cooling on this chip. Hate to burst your bubble but it's not gonna happen dude. Intel has it at these clock speeds for a reason.

Reminds me of that one time they hid that oh... massive phase unit under the table! Do you count the 1kw draw of a phase unit into the cpu draw lmao?
 

thesmokingman

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
6,617
These benchmarks are BS. The 1080XE is at 3Ghz stock. OC all cores to 4.6Ghz and it will wipe the flooor with any Ryzen offering and beat it. It will even beat a 24 core threadRipper 3 but not a 32. But hey they have their own high count chips and that is their server line. It even shows 3Ghz and I also heard and read it as well. 3Ghz stock 18 cores.. try 4.6Ghz all cores then you will see 18 core 1080XE pass by every CPU ever made for consumers and HEDT as well except we dont know how it will do against TR3 32 core CPU. I think it will keep up. But if you need that much juice just get a Xeon and call it a day or a dual socket Xeon 56 cores hehe.

You really need to read. And if ya can't read Italian translate it. Hell if you went thru the review you'd kow it ran at 3200mhz ram speed same as the other tested setups, all the other factors listed. The base clock is 3ghz. It boosts to 4.6ghz on only so many cores. I swear posts like yours only serves to troll ppl.

And really to assume they rigged it to make other Intel product and AMD look better... seriously wtf? And add to that ya clearly don't know how AMD boosts works either smfh.
 

Dayaks

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
8,945
This is the first chart that makes me question the entire review:

F44B1BA5-2905-40CD-BAD1-4B79A1BBFAC9.png
 
Joined
Apr 1, 2008
Messages
2,728
The results published on that review isn't too impressive and in some cases it even loses against the 3900x is rather off putting and embarassing for Intel. Being stuck on 14nm isn't doing Intel any favours so it seems. At least Intel is going to release these processors at half the price, thanks to tough competition from AMD.
 

Dayaks

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
8,945
The results published on that review isn't too impressive and in some cases it even loses against the 3900x is rather off putting and embarassing for Intel. Being stuck on 14nm isn't doing Intel any favours so it seems. At least Intel is going to release these processors at half the price, thanks to tough competition from AMD.

It’s because the review is bullshit.
 

N4CR

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
4,944
It’s because the review is bullshit.
How? Same thing happens to ring bus Xeon vs zen2 epyc. It gets assfucked in every common metric bar an ssl bench and uses more power. Latency is poor also.
Yes this one seems bit too conservative but I'd not expect miracles from other reviews. AMD has ring bus Intel turds out maneuvered at every turn. Even IPC and clocks..
 

Dayaks

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
8,945
How? Same thing happens to ring bus Xeon vs zen2 epyc. It gets assfucked in every common metric bar an ssl bench and uses more power. Latency is poor also.
Yes this one seems bit too conservative but I'd not expect miracles from other reviews. AMD has ring bus Intel turds out maneuvered at every turn. Even IPC and clocks..

Because it’s significantly below the processor it’s replacing.... I am not saying Intel isn’t screwed but an 18 core Intel will not have issues vs a 12 core AMD processor.
 
Last edited:

evilmedic

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 17, 2005
Messages
197
How? Same thing happens to ring bus Xeon vs zen2 epyc. It gets assfucked in every common metric bar an ssl bench and uses more power. Latency is poor also.
Yes this one seems bit too conservative but I'd not expect miracles from other reviews. AMD has ring bus Intel turds out maneuvered at every turn. Even IPC and clocks..

AMD definitely didn't go Ring bus. There are pro''s & con's of every approach.
 

BrotherMichigan

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 8, 2016
Messages
375
I'm pretty sure Skylake-X and on have a mesh interconnect anyhow. Latency is higher than the ring bus LCC parts, but lower than it would be if a ring bus were used on the HCC parts. Also, the power comparison between Intel's mesh and AMD's Infinity Fabric is pretty nuanced.
 
D

Deleted member 82943

Guest
How? Same thing happens to ring bus Xeon vs zen2 epyc. It gets assfucked in every common metric bar an ssl bench and uses more power. Latency is poor also.
Yes this one seems bit too conservative but I'd not expect miracles from other reviews. AMD has ring bus Intel turds out maneuvered at every turn. Even IPC and clocks..

Calm down. Take a breath. Sheesh. You sound like you’re about to go Alex Jones on this thread.
 

DKS

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
481
Asus has already brought out new bios's for their X299 motherboards for the 10th generation processors.
 
Top