The Intel Kaby Lake-X i7 7740X and i5 7640X Review: The New Single-Threaded Champion, OC to 5GHz
by Ian Cutress on July 24, 2017 8:30 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
- Intel
- Kaby Lake
- X299
- Basin Falls
- Kaby Lake-X
- i7-7740X
- i5-7640X
Benchmarking Performance: CPU Web Tests
One of the issues when running web-based tests is the nature of modern browsers to automatically install updates. This means any sustained period of benchmarking will invariably fall foul of the 'it's updated beyond the state of comparison' rule, especially when browsers will update if you give them half a second to think about it. Despite this, we were able to find a series of commands to create an un-updatable version of Chrome 56 for our 2017 test suite. While this means we might not be on the bleeding edge of the latest browser, it makes the scores between CPUs comparable.
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
SunSpider 1.0.2: link
The oldest web-based benchmark in this portion of our test is SunSpider. This is a very basic javascript algorithm tool, and ends up being more a measure of IPC and latency than anything else, with most high-performance CPUs scoring around about the same. The basic test is looped 10 times and the average taken. We run the basic test 4 times.
SunSpider has a single threaded focus, and we see the Kaby Lake-X processors take their spots at the top of the graph.
Mozilla Kraken 1.1: link
Kraken is another Javascript based benchmark, using the same test harness as SunSpider, but focusing on more stringent real-world use cases and libraries, such as audio processing and image filters. Again, the basic test is looped ten times, and we run the basic test four times.
Mozilla too relies on single threaded IPC and frequency.
Google Octane 2.0: link
Along with Mozilla, as Google is a major browser developer, having peak JS performance is typically a critical asset when comparing against the other OS developers. In the same way that SunSpider is a very early JS benchmark, and Kraken is a bit newer, Octane aims to be more relevant to real workloads, especially in power constrained devices such as smartphones and tablets.
Octane is an interesting benchmark, requiring cores and ST performance, but mostly the latter. It also seems that either Intel's design is optimized for the benchmark or vice versa, given the substantial difference in performance. There's no way for the benchmark to use all of the threads from AMD, nor the 12 threads in the Core i7-7800X which has a lower single thread performance.
WebXPRT 2015: link
While the previous three benchmarks do calculations in the background and represent a score, WebXPRT is designed to be a better interpretation of visual workloads that a professional user might have, such as browser based applications, graphing, image editing, sort/analysis, scientific analysis and financial tools.
WebXPRT is a mix of ST and MT, but still based in the web and relies on ST performance a lot. Given the variable loading on the benchmark, Intel's newest features such as Speed Shift help keep it at the top.
176 Comments
View All Comments
Chaser - Monday, July 24, 2017 - link
Go 2600K. LMAO!YukaKun - Monday, July 24, 2017 - link
Hey, I'm still using my 4.6Ghz 2700K, so these numbers bring joy to me!Cheers! :P
mapesdhs - Monday, July 24, 2017 - link
4.6? Outrageous! I would be offended if I were a 2700K at a mere 4.6! Get that thing up to 5.0 asap. 8) Mbd-dependent I suppose, but I've built seven 2700K systems so far, 5.0 every time, low noise and good temps. Marvelous chip. And oh yeah, 2GB/sec with a 950 Pro. 8)lowlymarine - Tuesday, July 25, 2017 - link
Either you're water cooling those systems, or you should consider investing in lottery tickets. My 2600k wouldn't push past 4.4 without very worrying amounts of voltage (1.4V+) and even 4.4 ran so hot I on my 212+ I settled for 4.2 to keep the core under 1.3V.soliloquist - Monday, July 24, 2017 - link
Yeah, Sandy Bridge is holding up nicely. Its pretty ridiculous actually.colonelclaw - Monday, July 24, 2017 - link
Wait, am I reading these graphs correctly? Unless I'm going mad, they seem to say that for gaming there's no need to upgrade if you already have a 2600K. Huh?If true, and I have no reason to doubt the data, that would make the 2600K one of the greatest processors ever?
Icehawk - Monday, July 24, 2017 - link
Yup, it's been said many times - if you have an i7 processor you really don't need to upgrade it for gaming, spend the money on a new GPU every few years. I have a 3700k & GF970, other than the video card the system is 6yrs old - I used to build a new one every other year. I've been considering the 7800\7820 though as I do a lot of encoding.Gothmoth - Monday, July 24, 2017 - link
"...Intel’s official line is about giving customers options. ..."yeah like.. if you want more PCI lanes to use all oyu mainboard features just buy the 999$ CPU..... LOL.
mapesdhs - Monday, July 24, 2017 - link
Indeed, just like the "option" of a CPU like the 4820K (4-core but with 40 lanes) suddenly vanished after X79. :D Intel's current lineup is an insult.Kalelovil - Monday, July 24, 2017 - link
Some mistakes for the Ryzen entries in the comparisons on page 1.PCI-E (Ryzen die has 20 lanes non-chipset, not 16), clockspeeds (too high), TDP (1700 is 65W).
Also, I see your point of comparing non-sale prices, but the 1700X seems to be widely and consistently available at near the i7-7740x MSRP. It's all but an official price cut.