Intel Core i9-7900 Series CPU Core Count and Prices

[capt_cope]

well then we just don't see eye to eye. Clearly - to me - the x299 is a better option now than any motherboard option previously available to consumers. 4 core to 18 core options on one series (at a time when generation CPU changes have yielded less than 10% IPC for the last 6 years - nearly down to 2-3% in the last generation --- meaning we've hit a bit of ceiling on clock speed and IPC improvements until some major overhaul -- so now failing Mhz improvements and IPC improvements we must go wide and 18 cores is very very wide.

so yeah --- looking back through history --- in previous generations you could consider an upgrade from a 4 core to a six core on the same board. (MANY were limited to ONLY 4 core variants) So yeah --- this x299 has future legs!

You've got lots of flexibility with PCI-E lanes when they are needed, you've got the newest tech currently available with no outstandingly obvious bottlenecks for the future (m2 2280 PCI-E variants like the 960 EVO are both stupid fast and stupid cheap (IE $160 for an OS drive that reads at 3,200 MB/s -- that won't seem slow for a LONG time to come) -- you've got USB 3.1 and even when new tech comes out you've got the bandwidth via both CPU cores and PCI-E LANs to handle new tech upgrades into the forseeable future. You've got plenty of memory bandwidth with four channel memory support. It's a very versatile time to upgrade or buy new!

BTW -- While I don't have a problem with a used CPU from the likes of ebay -- I do have a greater fear of a used motherboard from the likes of ebay. Too many things can go wrong or become intermittent problems with a motherboard that you don't know how it was handled or why they are truly selling the part.

So yeah --- I just straight up disagree with you. I'd gladly speed $150-$200 extra on the x299 motherboard and CPU over an older --- (currently) similar performing part. --- in simple anticipation of all these things we've discussed. Personally I would probably buy the 6 core at $389, with the plan to upgrade to a 10+ core when/if the need arises. Put a filter search on ebay and BIN when the opportunity arises.

I think I can agree to disagree, we are talking opinions after all (even though I'm right and you're clearly wrong )

 

[Hagrid]

I think I can agree to disagree, we are talking opinions after all (even though I'm right and you're clearly wrong )

It depends on if all software/games can be made to use as many threads as thrown at it.

 

[Mr. Bluntman]

It's pretty easy to assume IPC are similar or better than current intel line up. So, why would they price their 8 core that hits 4.5Ghz out of box $60 lower than AMD's 8 core that hits 4Ghz out of box when it will outperform it. Still seems 100 dollars high but these are all halo products intel wants to make money, Intel does it in spades while AMD doesn't so gotta assume they've at least thought it though, in terms of projected actual sales of product not good pr.

As far as PCIe lanes, you have to have a very specific build in mind to actually saturate 28 PCIe 3.0 lanes in which you'd need more lanes. Ofc it's easy to want more PCIe lanes but wants are not needs. Will people hit that? Absolutely, especially with the price of this crap the people who lay down that much for a cpu are the same people who buy sas controllers etc.

Agreed. Intel loves their margins. And even with 2 GPUs in SLi or Crossfire and an NVMe SSD - that's enough to run the SSD in a x4 slot, with the GPUs in an x16/x8 config, which is more than sufficient for 2 card systems. Plus you still have 4 PCIe lanes to spare. At most you lose a couple percent in performance by running the second GPU @ x8