Recently, Intel was rumored to be releasing 10 and 12 core "Core i9" CPUs to compete with AMD's 10-16 core "Threadripper" CPUs. Now, Intel has confirmed these as well as 14, 16, and 18 core Skylake-X CPUs. Every CPU with 6 or more cores appears to support quad-channel DDR4:
Intel Core | Cores/Threads | Price | $/core |
---|---|---|---|
i9-7980XE | 18/36 | $1,999 | $111 |
i9-7960X | 16/32 | $1,699 | $106 |
i9-7940X | 14/28 | $1,399 | $100 |
i9-7920X | 12/24 | $1,199 | $100 |
i9-7900X | 10/20 | $999 | $100 |
i7-7820X | 8/16 | $599 | $75 |
i7-7800X | 6/12 | $389 | $65 |
i7-7740X | 4/8 | $339 | $85 |
i7-7640X | 4/4 | $242 | $61 (less threads) |
Last year at Computex, the flagship Broadwell-E enthusiast chip was launched: the 10-core i7-6950X at $1,723. Today at Computex, the 10-core i9-7900X costs $999, and the 16-core i9-7960X costs $1,699. Clearly, AMD's Ryzen CPUs have forced Intel to become competitive.
Although the pricing of AMD's 10-16 core Threadripper CPUs is not known yet, the 8-core Ryzen R7 launched at $500 (available now for about $460). The Intel i7-7820X has 8 cores for $599, and will likely have better single-threaded performance than the AMD equivalent. So while Intel's CPUs are still more expensive than AMD's, they may have similar price/performance.
For what it's worth, Intel also announced quad-core Kaby Lake-X processors.
Welcome to the post-quad-core era. Will you be getting any of these chips?
(Score: 2) by tibman on Tuesday May 30 2017, @06:15PM
Like you pointed out, most people have other programs running at the same time. It's often overlooked in PC gaming benchmarks. VOIP being the big one. I often have a browser open too. So while most games only make good use of 3-4 threads that doesn't make an 8+ thread CPU useless for gaming. Zero random lurches or stutters from other processes is nice. Six core is pretty much the next step for gamers. Eight core is trying to future proof but probably not needed (yet).
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.