Gadgetory

welcome back to harbor unboxed today we're revisiting the battle between the horizon 7 1800 x and the core i7 6900 k and this this is a bit of a special battle so let me explain why prior to the risin 7 Series launching in March of 2017 if you wanted a modern 8 core desktop processor you had one choice and that was the core i7 69 hundred K today's video is sponsored by Corsair and their void Pro RGB and HS 70 wireless gaming headsets both offer an exceptional audio experience using specially tuned 50 millimeter neodymium speaker drivers and the premium build quality means they're not just highly durable but also very comfortable both offer a 16 hour runtime with a slew of other features so for more information please check them out via the link in the video description the 6900 K was a Broadwell ebay cpu supporting 8 cores 16 threads and was clocked at a frequency of 3.2 ki go to the base but Atwood clock as high as 3.7 gigahertz for the boost it packed what was at the time a very fat 20 megabyte l3 cache it also supported quad channel ddr4 2500 memory 40 pcie 3.0 lanes and it was rated at 140 watts for the TDP so essentially it was a beast the only problem with this beast was that cost one thousand and ninety dollars us and that was a pretty big jump up from the already overpriced 340 WS quad core Core i7 7700 K but with no alternatives to speak of Intel were free to set pricing as they saw fit so charge an arm and a leg they did however roughly a year later people were finally liberated by Amy's risin 7 series 8 cores for half the price or even better if you look at the 1700 X and 1700 well I suppose that's close enough to the truth yes the 1800 X offered 8 cores and half the price of the 1600 K but it wasn't exactly a direct competitor the 6100 K is a member of Intel's high-end desktop Foreman as such offers significantly more PCI Express Lanes when compared to mainstream offerings so if you want to hang multiple workstation class GPUs off your CPU some high-speed storage and any other bandwidth hungry devices you might need a high-end desktop CPU will be required and the horizon 7 series really wasn't an option for such users as it packs just 16 PCIe lanes and they're required by the discreet graphics card nevertheless the Rison 7 Series what's still hugely exciting as not everyone requires a workstation class CPU 8 core processors are still extremely beneficial for mainstream users gamers and even content creators back in 2017 it was mostly just streamers that found the 8 core desktop CPU useful for gaming but today modern games are starting to put them to use and this is pushing streamers towards 12 and even 16 core parts the point is though before Rison those of you who could benefit from 8 cores had to make do with 4 unless you took out a small loan to grab something like the core i7 1600 k processors like the 1800 x really have helped bridge the gap between mainstream and high-end desktop Intel CPUs moreover it's those who didn't require the extra PCIe lanes who saw the 1800 X as a direct competitor to the 6900 K and it's easy to see why once we get benchmarking I should note that AMD did later blow Intel's high-end desktop processor range out of the water well that's subjective but I believe they did and I did so in late 2017 with thread Ripper and perhaps that's a battle that we can revisit at a later date for now let's focus on the Rison 7 1800 X and the core i7 6 900k though I have also thrown in the 7700 K results from last week all CPUs were tested with G skills flair X ddr4 3200 cell 14 memory the 7700 K and 1800 X used to a gigabyte modules while the 1600 K gets 4 as this is required to take advantage of its quad channel memory controller then as usual the GPU of choice is the GeForce r-tx 2080 Ti ok let's get into the benchmarks kick starting the benchmarks we have Cinebench our 20s multi-core test and here the core i7 600 K is 6% slower than the 1800 X out of the box once both CPUs are overclocked the 1600 K did jump into the lead and now it's 5% faster than the 1800 X with a score of 4039 points then as we have a look at the single core performance it's interesting at the 1800 x wins out of the box but it does have a higher clock speed the 1600 K is limited to 3.7 gigahertz for its turbo single core clock speed as a result it was 9% slower in this test that said once overclocked it was able to beat the 1800 X this time by a 6% margin next that we have WinRAR now for the upcoming is n2 content I would like to just make it clear that I will be including both winrar and 7-zip in the benchmarks I know these days 7-zip is widely regarded as the superior application but for this video we only have WinRAR so it is what it is and this application does favour memory bout a latency over well pretty much everything else for that reason the 6000 okay and it's quad channel memory configuration just cleans up but this is still interesting to look at because as you can see for memory sensitive workloads the 6000k really does enjoy a massive advantage over the 1,800 X however for video editing tasks the 1800s and 600 K are much more evenly matched in fact out of the box the 1800 X was 8 percent faster taking just 508 seconds to complete the workload that said once both CPUs r overclocked the 1800 X became 5 percent slower not a big difference either way and it's fair to say for encoding performance they are very similar moving on to v-ray and here we see out of the box performance is virtually identical between the 618 hundred X that said the higher overclocking ceiling of the 600 K allowed it to pull ahead by a 13 percent margin so a strong result here for the Intel CPU but overall the much cheaper 1800 X was very impressive we find a similar story of Corona here the 1800 X was 5 percent faster out of the box but once overclocked the 600 K was 11% faster and it's the same story with blender out of the box the 800 X was 9% faster but once overclocked the 69 okay hit the lead by 5 percent margin overall though these results do bode well for AMD's much more affordable 1800 X when it comes to total system power can see the six-hour okay is more efficient out of the box as AMD had to be a bit too aggressive with the 1800 ex pushing it well out of its efficiency window or at least the efficiency window of the manufacturing process however once overclocked the 1600 K did gobble up slightly more power there overall both CPUs did consume roughly the same amount of power here okay time for some gaming benchmarks and first that we have Assassin's Creed Odyssey and here the 60 hour ok shows the 1800 X who is boss stock the 600 K just about maxes out the RT X xx atti delivering almost 20% more frames than the 1800 X though I should note that the frame time performance was just 10% higher overclocked the 1800s does fare a bit better it's fight against the 69 hundred K but even so the high end desktop processor was still 12% faster on average as you'd expect the margins close up even more the GPU limited 1440p resolution and once the cpus are overclocked there's really very little in it moving on to battlefield 5 and here we see a little to no difference between the 1% low performance of the 1600 K and 1800 X yet despite that the 1600 K was around 12% fast when looking at the average frame rate moving to 1440p basically neutralizes the results in here the 1800 X and 600 K push the RT X 20 atti 2 very similar frame rates ok so I know these results look a bit too favorable for the 1600 K but I can assure you they're accurate in fact the 1600 K is very similar to the 99 or okay in this title even out of the box the 600 K was almost 20% fast in the 1800 X but once you have a clock both CPUs that margin is extended to almost 40% in fact the 69 RK was 51 percent faster when comparing the one percent low performance and that's pretty insane those margins are significantly reduced dark 1440p as we become more GPU bound but even so once I overclocked the 1% low performance of the 69 UK was still 27% higher moving on to the division 2 here the 1800 x + 69 ok much more evenly matched though again it's the overclocked performance that gets to the 69 RK ahead in these closer battles and we say that once again increasing the resolution the margins previously seen are basically eliminated and now the 69 arcane 1800 X deliver the same performance as we found in the past fire cries not a good title for Rison processors and despite the 6 and I are ok losing to the 77 ok it's still well ahead of the 1800 X especially at once overclocked even at 1440p the 1600 K remains well ahead of the 1800 X and we see that the overclocked results are well they're quite brutal really World War Z isn't a very CPU demanding game but even so the 600 K was clearly faster than the 1800 X here but because we're talking about well over 130 FPS at all times the margins here really aren't a big deal as you'd expect there's also very little difference in 1440p but again the 1800 X does trail the 69 ok by a small margin rage 2 also isn't a particularly CPU demanding title therefore even at 1080p with an RT X 2082 a we see very little difference between the tested CPUs and that being the case of 1080p we see a very similar thing at 1440p the hitman 2 results are quite interesting stock the 69er okay managed to match the 77 ok making it 18 percent faster than the 1800 X however once overclocked that margins blown out to almost 30 percent as the 1600 K lays waste to the 1,800 X and also beats the 77 ok by a handy margin even at 1440p Intel's high-end desktop 8-core processor remained well ahead of the 1800 X particularly once both processes were overclocked the horizon 7 processor performance very well in total war Three Kingdoms matching the 69 henrique out of the box and it was only slightly slower for the one percent low performance once both CPUs were overclocked that being the case there was simply no separating the two at the more GPU limited 1440p resolution so a good result here for the rising 7 processor and I think that'll just about do it for the benchmarks right so there you have it unsurprisingly the core i7 6000k is still a beast in 2019 basically if AK o'clock a bit higher it would essentially be a beefy core I $9.99 hundred K and they both use Intel's low latency ring bus architecture and this is why I much prefer the 69 arcade to the newer core i7 9800 X I mean yeah the 9800 X is much cheaper but obviously times changed the 9800 ex was released in late 2018 whereas the 69 hundred K was released in mid 2016 whenever we revisit older processes like this I'm constantly reminded of how much of a shame it is that Intel has to continually acts platform support though I suppose having said that as good as the 6800 case still is at the current second hand asking price which is typically about $400 u.s. they're not particularly great value when you can snap up a thread gripper a 1950 X second hand for about the same amount then of course if you don't require all those extra PCIe lanes something like the 1800 X for under $200 is really hard to pass up especially when it can be thrown on a modern and still well supported platform so grabbing an 1800 extra around $150 u.s. it's not really a challenge and with the 3800 acts about to hit shelves and say it's going to be even easier to find cheap 1800 X processors still looking back at the situation in 2016 you can easily see why AMD priced the 1800 X at $500 they really well they realistically couldn't have charged any more and I think they knew that which is why there was a $400 version of the same product called the 1700 X don't get me wrong I'm not trying to take anything away from the first gen rising 7 Series it was phenomenally good but it was good because it was priced appropriately back in 2016 the first gen Rising series found itself in a bit of an awkward spot it wasn't FIRREA to the 77 RK at the time when it came to gaming performance but could hang in there and even beat the 6 na hurich a for a lot of productivity workloads but then it lacked the features to compete as a high-end desktop part moreover most games and applications were flat-out utilizing a quad core processor at the time let alone an 8 core 16 thread processor today though with software and game requirements what they are I feel as though AMD probably could have gotten away with a $500 rise in seven part with no cheaper alternatives to speak of but in 2016 that simply wasn't going to fly anyway I think it's fair to say in 2019 the 1,800 X is still largely inferior to the 600 K in terms of performance but it is still less than half the price in fact it's a little better than half the price so again for those who don't need the extra PCIe lanes the 1800 X is clearly the better buy and then I'd argue if you do need the PCIe lanes then the 1950 X would be the better by wrapping this video up there is one more thing I should talk about and that is broad belly overclocking it has been quite some time since I broke out my Broadwell II test rig so yeah I have done plenty of overclocking with it in the past but I haven't done anything recently so for this video I just referred to my previous notes on how I overclocked my 1600 K chip and how I got it happily to 4.3 gigahertz with 1.3 volts so I jumped into the BIOS I tuned the necessary settings and then I booted it into Windows and initially it seemed like good news the system booted straight in the windows it was completely stable and I got testing however right away I knew there was something a bit off because the cinnamon are 2000 results while they were improved they weren't improved by to the to the degree that I would have expected them to be improved by let's say that after a little snooping around I noticed the CPU was only boosting to 3.7 gigahertz so it was kind of like an MC overclock I thought that was a bit odd so I reset and I jumped back into the BIOS all the settings were correct as far as I could tell I did a little bit of tinkering booted back into Windows and I was faced with the same issue a 3.7 gigahertz cap I messed around for a lot longer than I care to admit trying to solve this issue before giving up and referring to Google for some help it wasn't long before I found thread after thread of Broadway Leona's complaining about the same issue and it turns out in late 2018 Microsoft released a Windows 10 update that broke Broadwell Lea overclocking however you can't just blame Microsoft or Windows on this one rather it was a joint effort between Microsoft to Intel when I'm dressing the spectra variant to vulnerability this window is update along with an Intel micro code update disables bars overclocking and there's really no way around it unless you remove the update and roll back to an earlier biased revision what I was forced to do for this video was applied the overclock in the BIOS and then once that was done loading two windows open up the Intel XTU software and then apply the overclock that would then see the overclock stick in Windows and I could test the CPU at four point three gigahertz the problem with this method is you have to open the XTU software and then manually reapply the overclock every single time so it's hardly a practical solution I took to Twitter to check if anyone and come up with a better solution and no one had the best solution came from Twitter user just plain L who suggested base clock overclocking and that does work so he uses a 125 megahertz clock and this gets he's 68 52 4.2 gigahertz which is one hundred fifty megahertz down from the previous 4.4 gigahertz he was hitting using the multiplier method so he wasn't happy about this but he noted it's better than nothing I can certainly understand why he's mad imagine spending six hundred and twenty ish dollars us on an unlocked six core 12 for a high-end desktop processor only to have the unlocked functionality basically disabled a few years later and a few years later when you really need it the most you'd think the down greater performance seen when addressing these various vulnerabilities was enough but it seems broad well the owners have to contend with the overclocking Headroom taking a hit as well and I suppose all that miserable note I'm gonna end that video here if you did enjoy the video be sure to hit the like button you can subscribe for more content and if you appreciate the work we do at our box then can see that supporting us on patreon thanks for watching I'm your host Steve I'll see you again next time