My 7820x Geekbench Scores - Worth Upgrading?

N

Nirad9er

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 18, 2004
Messages
2,956
So I ran Geekbench 4/5 on my 7820x (@ 4.7Ghz, 4000Mhz ram) to see how it compares to Intel's and AMD's latest and greatest.

I've had the 7820x since release and I'm getting the upgrade itch. For sure I'll get a 3080Ti or Big Navi later this year whenever they release.
I was contemplating upgrading my CPU to a 10900x, mobo / cpu change to 10900k, or waiting to see what Zen3 is like (Q4 this year?)
What do you think? I game on my system 90% of the time (4K 120hz monitor) with the 10% being general browsing and DVD/Blu-ray encoding / burning.

Geekbench 4:
geekbench 4 result.PNG


Geekbench 5:
geekbench 5 result.PNG


Comparing them to 10900K, 9900KS, and 3900X Geekbench 5 results I found on some reviews.
geekbench 5 compare.PNG
 
I've been contemplating upgrading my 7820X also but I just don't think the current options are not enough to justify the $$. With that I have been looking at a 3950X. I think I will try to wait it out.

Btw what voltage are you using. I was able to run mine at 4.6 GHz @ 1.175, all core.
 
Not worth it - you get 20% higher singlle-thread, 15% higher multi-core.

If you're running a game at 100 fps, that would mean your performance goes up to 120. fps. Not worth the massive cost of changing platforms.

If you're craving more cores, why not look around for 12 cores Skylake X refresh (used, as new is overpriced)?

https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i9-9920X-Processor-Processors-999AC6/dp/B07JGCV5KN

What are you uusing your system for anyway? it's hard to recommend when all you supply is Geekbench scoeres.
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
I upgraded from a 7820x to an 3950x. Did it make much of a difference? Nope. I just wanted it. For gaming I wouldn't do it but if it's for shits and giggle and you have the cash to burn. Go for it.
 
I don't see any good reason to upgrade, but I understand the upgrade itch and playing around with new stuff.
 
techie81 said:
I've been contemplating upgrading my 7820X also but I just don't think the current options are not enough to justify the $$. With that I have been looking at a 3950X. I think I will try to wait it out.

Btw what voltage are you using. I was able to run mine at 4.6 GHz @ 1.175, all core.
Click to expand...

I'm running 4.7 Ghz @ 1.25V. I could probably tweak a little more but my temps are fine with my custom water cooling loop.
 
defaultluser said:
Not worth it - you get 20% higher singlle-thread, 15% higher multi-core.

If you're running a game at 100 fps, that would mean your performance goes up to 120. fps. Not worth the massive cost of changing platforms.

If you're craving more cores, why not look around for 12 cores Skylake X refresh (used, as new is overpriced)?

https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i9-9920X-Processor-Processors-999AC6/dp/B07JGCV5KN

What are you using your system for anyway? it's hard to recommend when all you supply is Geekbench scoeres.
Click to expand...

I primarily game. I decided to go HEDT with Skylake X coming from a 4790K to get 8 cores then later intel came out with the 9900k 8 core on the standard desktop line.
After trying out HEDT and realizing the advantages weren't really there for my use, I'd kinda rather go back to a standard desktop platform now considering they've caught up to 8/10 cores and >5ghz.

If I could get a 20fps increase I would definitely take that considering I'm gaming at 4k / 120hz but in reality at that resolution the graphics card will probably make a bigger impact.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
The problem with this new socket is it's a guaranteed dead-end:

In the typical one refresh per-platform the 10-core Skylake will be replaced by an 8-core Icelake. Icelake is currently clocking at around 4GHz max boost!

Even if they resolve some of the issues in getting clocks higher, the best you can expect in Icelake refresh is 4.5 GHz.

AMD is expected to do better with Zen 3 later on this year (15% higher IPC, should be faster per-core than the massively-overclocked 10900K) , but you might want to wait for Socket AM5 (next year) .

Intel mainstream platforms are not the way to go if you want better per-core performance. Unless 20% is good enough for you (that's as high as the platform will go)? They're so heavily-overclocked, they're expected to use the same power as your current E-series processor.
 
Last edited:
defaultluser said:
The problem with this new socket is it's a guaranteed dead-end:

In the typical one refresh per-platform the 10-core Skylake will be replaced by an 8-core Icelake. Icelake is currently clocking at around 4GHz max boost!

Even if they resolve some of the issues in getting clocks higher, the best you can expect in Icelake refresh is 4.5 GHz.

AMD is expected to do better with Zen 3 later on this year (15% higher IPC, should be faster per-core than the massively-overclocked 10900K) , but you might want to wait for Socket AM5 (next year) .

Intel mainstream platforms are not the way to go if you want better per-core performance. Unless 20% is good enough for you (that's as high as the platform will go)? They're so heavily-overclocked, they're expected to use the same power as your current E-series processor.
Click to expand...
Why do you say it's a guaranteed dead socket? Don't you think you'd get a couple CPU upgrades out of it or do you think Intel will jump to DDR5 shortly after? The problem with Zen 3 this year is it's the last AM4 cpu before going to AM5 so if I skip 10900x I might as well skip Zen3 since I won't have any upgrade path without getting a new Mobo and RAM for AM5.
 
Nirad9er said:
Why do you say it's a guaranteed dead socket? Don't you think you'd get a couple CPU upgrades out of it or do you think Intel will jump to DDR5 shortly after? The problem with Zen 3 this year is it's the last AM4 cpu before going to AM5 so if I skip 10900x I might as well skip Zen3 since I won't have any upgrade path without getting a new Mobo and RAM for AM5.
Click to expand...


Intel mainstream is staying on 14nm until 2022. It's going to peak at 10 cores, then walk backwards with Rocket Lake (8 cores, Willow Cove back-port).


https://www.techpowerup.com/review/future-hardware-releases/#rocketlake

What makes this thrown-together architecture even messier is that we have no idea how many of the efficiency improvements from 10nm will get erased with this rushed back-port to 14nm (obviously this was supposed to be a 10nm part). We will have to wait and see how high they can clock this potential power-hog!

AMD Zen 3 is expected to give you enough performance to surpass 10-pcore Skylake,! If that's not enough, then you can wait a year AM5. But either way, AMD has a lot more interesting-looking consumer platform over the next two years.

Intel is looking to charge a premium of nearly $600 for the 10-core i9-10900K , while AMD is unlikely to do any price increases with Zen 3 (and you can pick-up the 3900X right now for a little over $400, so it's a complete ripoff for 7% higher turbo clocks than the 9900K).
 
Last edited:
So basically, if you're going to wait for DDR5 anyway, just keep what you have. Maybe drop in a higher core processor if you want (probably unnecessary and expensive). Anything you buy now is going to be "obsolete" with the advent of DDR5. I would think that both Intel's LGA1200 and AMD's AM4 will both get one more updated CPU (Rocket Lake and Zen 3) before they EOL the sockets.
 
defaultluser said:
Intel mainstream is staying on 14nm until 2022. It's going to peak at 10 cores, then walk backwards with Rocket Lake (8 cores, Willow Cove back-port).


https://www.techpowerup.com/review/future-hardware-releases/#rocketlake

What makes this thrown-together architecture even messier is that we have no idea how many of the efficiency improvements from 10nm will get erased with this rushed back-port to 14nm (obviously this was supposed to be a 10nm part). We will have to wait and see how high they can clock this potential power-hog!

AMD Zen 3 is expected to give you enough performance to surpass 10-pcore Skylake,! If that's not enough, then you can wait a year AM5. But either way, AMD has a lot more interesting-looking consumer platform over the next two years.

Intel is looking to charge a premium of nearly $600 for the 10-core i9-10900K , while AMD is unlikely to do any price increases with Zen 3 (and you can pick-up the 3900X right now for a little over $400, so it's a complete ripoff for 7% higher turbo clocks than the 9900K).
Click to expand...

If Intel charges $600 for a CPU that supposed to compete with a 3900x ($500 retail, can be bought for closer to $400), then they are dead on arrival.

Also, it makes so sense why Intel would drop back down to 8 cores for Rocket Lake on a mainstream platform when AMD already has 16 cores on 3950x. Intel is clearly screwed and I'm tired of their non-sense.
I'll likely wait out until next year and go AMD on AM5 since they clearly have a solid product strategy and values what consumers want at a reasonable price point. Intel can screw themselves. They are turning out to be as bad as Nvidia at this point.
 
https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/20800558/fs/14585564#

The AM4 has been a much better platform for me, especially considering how hot the 7820x is even while delidded. I linked a comparo between my 7820x and 3900x. The gap in FSU is 10% which is a best case scenario given the 7820x is at 5ghz and the 3900x is ratio overclocked 4.5ghz on CCX0 to 4.3ghz on CCX3. In a heavily threaded bench like Cinebench the 3900x leaves the 7820x in the dust.
 
It seems a lot of us 7820X users are kind of stuck in limbo. The 3950X is an attractive option, but I just don't see the benefit of upgrading to AM4 when DDR5 is only a year away. :smuggrin:

When you go HEDT you expect your rig to last 4-5 years. I want my next system to be on a platform that will last just as long.
 
Darkswordz said:
It seems a lot of us 7820X users are kind of stuck in limbo. The 3950X is an attractive option, but I just don't see the benefit of upgrading to AM4 when DDR5 is only a year away. :smuggrin:

When you go HEDT you expect your rig to last 4-5 years. I want my next system to be on a platform that will last just as long.
Click to expand...
Depends on what you use it for. For my video editing software will no longer run properly on anything that's more than two to three years old no matter how powerful it is. And this is because newer versions of the software that I use will require hardware processing functions and capabilities that did not exist at all in such older hardware.
 
Im running 7820x 5ghz @1.29v with Derbauer Direct Die Frame, Heat Killer VRM and CPU Heatsink, chip can do 5.2ghz with my 280 + 360 loop. I just installed the custom loop on this past Saturday. Parts were sitting in a box from performance-pcs since September lol. Finally got around to it, was using a AIO with the chip @ 4.7ghz 1.17v and 3.3ghz mem cache.

I'm just going to wait till the next HEDT, or maybe upgrade the 3570k in the living room with LGA 1200 if it supports rocketlake on z490.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top