OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Intel Core i7-7800X review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£390PassMark multi-core score:12994N. of physical cores:6CPU boost clock speed:4.0 GHzCPU socket:LGA2066TDP (Thermal design power):140 W

Intel Core i7-7800X Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 7 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

Intel Core i7-7800X
5.8/10

Overall score

Score
5.8/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 84% of models
Score components

40%

5.2

Technical score

25%

5.2

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

5.2

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 84% of processors
6.6

Value for money

Value for money
6.6/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 86% of models
Score components

70%

5.8

Overall score

30%

8.5

Price

â–¼Worse than 86%
5.2

Technical score

Technical score
5.2/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 57% of models
Score components

60%

4.9

Performance

18%

5.2

Architecture

10%

7.1

Memory & PCIe

7%

4.6

Power & Thermal

4%

7.7

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

â–¼Worse than 57%
5.2

Reviews score

Reviews score
5.2/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 74% of models

5.2

Mark 7.0 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

6.6

Average grade

20%

8.4

Popularity

Grades by review (7)
6 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 74%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • intel-core-i7-7800x
  • intel-core-i7-7800x
  • intel-core-i7-7800x
  • intel-core-i7-7800x
intel-core-i7-7800x
intel-core-i7-7800x
intel-core-i7-7800x
intel-core-i7-7800x
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the Intel Core i7-7800X

Based on 5 · 3

Reviewers appreciate its generous core count and solid overclocking potential, with few clear complaints raised.
Praised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i7-7800X

Technical score
Technical score
5.2/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 57% of models
Score components:

60%

4.9

Performance

18%

5.2

Architecture

10%

7.1

Memory & PCIe

7%

4.6

Power & Thermal

4%

7.7

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

5.2
Reviews score
5.2
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.6/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 86% of models
Score components:

70%

5.8

Overall score

30%

8.5

Price

6.6
Processor type
workstation
This processor belongs to the workstation processor class, which is more advanced than that of 95.4% of processors and equal to that of 4.6% of processors.
CPU socket
LGA2066
This processor uses the LGA2066 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 73.4% of processors and equal to that of 1.4% of processors.
Chipset
X299
This processor supports X299 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 95.5% of processors and equal to that of 1.5% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3
This processor supports SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3 instruction sets, which is narrower support than 81.6% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
6
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 6 CPU cores, which is more than 47.7% of processors and equal to 13.4% of processors.
CPU threads
12
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 12 CPU threads, which is more than 53% of processors and equal to 14.2% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4 GHz which is lower than that of 62.1% of processors and equal to that of 4.8% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
6x 3.5 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 6x3.5 GHz which is higher than that of 66.4% of processors and equal to that of 1% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
12,994
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 12,994 in PassMark, which is higher than 53.2% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Semiconductor size
14 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 14 nm process node, which is older than that of 52% of processors and equal to that of 32.9% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 14 nm
This processor is built on the Intel 14 nm foundry process, which is less advanced than that of 55.9% of processors and equal to that of 29% of processors.
L3 cache
8.25 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 8.25 MB which is smaller than that of 50.7% of processors.
L2 cache
6 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 6 MB which is larger than that of 65.6% of processors and equal to that of 3.9% of processors.
L1 cache
192 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 192 KB which is smaller than that of 79.5% of processors and equal to that of 2.7% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4
This processor supports DDR DDR4, which is newer than that of 25.2% of processors and equal to that of 31.1% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
2,400 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 2,400 MHz, which is lower than that of 64.6% of processors and equal to 11.7% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-2400 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR4-2400 MHz, which is lower than that of 67.7% of processors and equal to 10.9% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
?
Maximum memory capacity
128 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 128 GB of memory, which is more than 59.3% of processors and equal to 22.8% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
no
This processor does not include integrated graphics. 85.4% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
N/A
Integrated GPU execution units
N/A
Integrated GPU base frequency
N/A
Integrated media encoders/decoders
N/A
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
140 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 140 W which is higher than that of 94.9% of processors and equal to that of 0.8% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
140 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 140 W which is higher than that of 95% of processors and equal to that of 0.7% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
?
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more

Intel Core i7-7800X vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 12 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (28 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    28 vs 16
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 2 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (6 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    6 vs 4
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 2x more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 4 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (12 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    12 vs 8
  • 64.2% higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (77 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    77 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • 2x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (128 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    128 GB vs 64 GB
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA2066 vs FP5).
    LGA2066 vs FP5
  • Higher-end processor class
    This processor belongs to a higher-end processor class than the average processor (workstation vs mobile).
    workstation vs mobile
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 2 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (6 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    6 vs 4
  • 4 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (12 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    12 vs 8
  • 33.8% better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (3,752 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    3,752 vs 2,804.5
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (6x3.5 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    6x3.5 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 2x more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 2x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (6 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    6 MB vs 3 MB
  • 12 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (28 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    28 vs 16
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 64.2% higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (77 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    77 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • 2x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (128 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    128 GB vs 64 GB
  • 74.2% lower multi-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (1,344 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    1,344 vs 5,209
  • 22.4% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.2/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models

    5.2

    Mark 7.0 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    6.6

    Average grade

    20%

    8.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (7)
    6 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    5.2 vs 6.7
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 3.11x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (140 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    140 W vs 45 W
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 9.1% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 72.9% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (306 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    306 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 25.7% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.4 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.375 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 22.4% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.2/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models

    5.2

    Mark 7.0 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    6.6

    Average grade

    20%

    8.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (7)
    6 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    5.2 vs 6.7
  • 27.8% lower sentiment score
    5.2 vs 7.2
  • 10.4% worse value for money
    Intel Core i7-7800X has worse value for money than the average processor (6.6 vs 7.3).
    6.6 vs 7.29
  • 56% more expensive
    Intel Core i7-7800X is more expensive than the average processor (£390 vs £250).
    £390 vs £250
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, SGX, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, SGX, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 3 years older release date
    This processor has an older release date than the average processor (2017 vs 2020).
    June 2017
    2017 vs 2020
  • More limited crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more limited crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES vs AES, SHA).
    AES vs AES, SHA
  • 74.2% lower multi-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (1,344 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    1,344 vs 5,209
  • 9.1% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 12.8% lower single-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,338 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,338 vs 1,535
  • 7.1% weaker single-core performance
    This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (2,377 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    2,377 vs 2,558
  • 72.9% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (306 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    306 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 25.7% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.4 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.375 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 16.7% larger process node
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (14 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    14 nm vs 12 nm
  • 50% smaller L1 cache
    This processor has a lower L1 cache than the average processor (192 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    192 KB vs 384 KB
  • Less advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Skylake vs Kaby Lake).
    Skylake vs Kaby Lake
  • 25% lower memory speed
    This processor has a lower maximum memory speed than the average processor (2,400 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    2,400 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • Lower JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a lower JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (DDR4-2400 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    DDR4-2,400 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 2 fewer memory channels
    This processor has fewer memory channels than the average processor (4 vs 2). The average processor supports 2 memory channels.
    4 vs 2
  • No integrated graphics
    This processor does not include integrated graphics, while the average processor does. 85.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 3.11x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (140 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    140 W vs 45 W
  • 3.11x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (140 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    140 W vs 45 W

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

5.0
Hardware Unboxed
≈ estimated
24/05/2018
Benchmark comparison · 37 games vs. Ryzen 5 2600
Verdict
Intel Core i7-7800X performs excellently when overclocked, but its price is hard to justify against a Ryzen chip with similar gaming results.
6.0
Hardware Unboxed
≈ estimated
16/07/2017
Overclocking test · temperatures, power and benchmarks
Verdict
Intel Core i7-7800X gains little from overclocking, and the extra heat and power aren't worth it.
4.0
Hardware Unboxed
≈ estimated
12/07/2017
Comparison · 30-game benchmarks vs. the 7700K
Verdict
Intel Core i7-7800X underwhelms for gaming: the 7700K is faster in many titles, making it the better buy.
Not graded
Shop video
Overview video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

4.0
techspot.com
≈ estimated
12/07/2017
Gaming benchmark · 7800X vs 7700K
Verdict
The Intel Core i7-7800X adds two cores and more cache to the 7700K, but in several games it trails the four-core 7700K.
5.0
bit-tech.net
≈ estimated
20/09/2017
Lab test · Skylake-X comparison
Verdict
The Intel Core i7-7800X is a six-core X299 chip for multi-threaded work, but it lacks Turbo Boost Max 3.0 and several features of its Skylake-X siblings.
8.0
techspot.com
✓ explicit
23/06/2017
Benchmark review · Skylake-X debut
Verdict
The Intel Core i7-7800X is a six-core Skylake-X chip reaching about 60GB/s of memory throughput, though its 28 PCIe lanes limit expansion.
6.0
chip.de
≈ estimated
13/02/2018
Lab test · Six-core Skylake-X
Verdict
The Intel Core i7-7800X is a six-core chip with an unlocked multiplier, but lab results are average across the board.
6.0
tweakers.net
≈ estimated
19/06/2017
Architecture overview · Skylake-X lineup
Verdict
The Intel Core i7-7800X is a six-core Skylake-X chip with quad-channel memory and a mesh interconnect, but its 28 PCIe lanes limit multi-GPU and RAID builds.
6.0
hardware.info
≈ estimated
03/07/2017
Benchmark test · Ryzen 7 1800X comparison
Verdict
The Intel Core i7-7800X is a six-core chip that trails the Ryzen 7 1800X in multi-threaded work but wins in games and lightly threaded tasks.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i7-7800X

  • Excellent overclocking potential, with some users reaching stable 4.5GHz to 5.0GHz frequencies with proper cooling
  • Support for quad-channel DDR4 memory provides significantly higher bandwidth compared to mainstream platforms
  • Strong performance in multi-threaded tasks like video editing, rendering, and running multiple virtual machines
  • Good entry point for the high-end desktop (HEDT) X299 platform, offering more PCIe lanes (28) than standard Kaby Lake chips
  • Support for advanced instruction sets like AVX-512, which can benefit specific professional workloads
  • Relatively easy to delid for enthusiasts looking to improve thermal performance and achieve higher overclocks

What customers don't like about Intel Core i7-7800X

  • High power consumption with a 140W TDP, leading to significant heat output that requires high-end cooling solutions
  • Underwhelming gaming performance compared to cheaper mainstream alternatives like the i7-7700K due to lower stock clock speeds and the mesh bus architecture
  • Expensive total platform cost because of the high price of X299 motherboards and the need for four RAM modules for quad-channel support
  • Lacks certain high-end features found in its more expensive siblings, such as Intel Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0
  • Uses a thermal interface material (TIM) instead of solder under the heat spreader, which can limit thermal efficiency unless delidded
  • Does not support Intel SGX, preventing the playback of 4K Blu-ray discs on certain software platforms

Verdict

The Intel Core i7-7800X is an entry-level High-End Desktop (HEDT) processor from the Skylake-X architecture, featuring 6 physical cores and 12 threads with a 3.5 GHz base clock and a 4.0 GHz Turbo Boost 2.0 frequency. Built on a 14nm process for the LGA 2066 socket, it offers 28 PCI Express 3.0 lanes, a quad-channel DDR4-2400 memory controller supporting up to 128GB, and 8.25MB of L3 cache. Its main advantages include strong multi-threaded performance for content creation, support for high-bandwidth quad-channel memory, and an unlocked multiplier that provides significant overclocking potential. However, its high 140W TDP results in substantial heat output that requires robust cooling solutions, and it lacks integrated graphics, necessitating a dedicated GPU for any display output.

Compare Intel Core i7-7800X with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel Core i7-7800X and other processors

No results found