Support NeoGAF

[ColdDeckEd]

Streaming, playing and recording a game right now. Multiple tabs on and music, etc.

Hmm you might want to stress test it, even if you aren't doing mission critical stuff on your PC it could end up corrupting your os if it crashes while installing updates for example.

Intel extreme tuning utility (xtu) has a decent test, I like Occt as well.

 

[Kadey]

No I've been upping it every week doing various things and keeping an eye on temps and stuff. Median temps for super heavy use is high 50s. I added three fans to finalize build.

 

[Tommy DJ]

Holy moley, minimum board price is like $500 AUD. Why the fuck would you ever by Kaby Lake-X. That board is at least double the price of the higher end Z270 boards.

 

[ColdDeckEd]

No I've been upping it every week doing various things and keeping an eye on temps and stuff. Median temps for super heavy use is high 50s. I added three fans to finalize build.

Im saying your voltage is low for 5ghz, which may be possible if your chip is golden, but if you haven't done at least a basic amount of stability testing it's a ticking time bomb. I wouldn't do things like flash a bios without stress testing. All it takes is 1 he of running Occt or xtu or aida64 stress test to find out if your stability is really stable.

 

[longdi]

No I've been upping it every week doing various things and keeping an eye on temps and stuff. Median temps for super heavy use is high 50s. I added three fans to finalize build.

Yours is a golden one, 5ghz at 1.325v, and dont seem to have initiated Intel Tim meltdown.

I have a first gen 6600k (without the sgx-feature), am able run 4.5ghz and all cores at 1.2v with all power saving on. Tdp dont got past 70w iirc, and temps stay under 65c on the toughest of stress, in a boiler room (~32c).

Im also lucky im not hit by Intel Tim. There sure is a large variance on how their latest cpu overclocks.

 

[Kadey]

I'm good. If my PC blows up I'll just sue Newegg and Intel.

 

[TatteredHat]

Looking as some of these reviews, Kabylake-X on X299 sounds like a hot pile of garbage, what were they thinking.

 

[comshoplesce]

what are the prices?

 

[JaseC]

Holy moley, minimum board price is like $500 AUD. Why the fuck would you ever by Kaby Lake-X. That board is at least double the price of the higher end Z270 boards.

Yeah, hardware prices here are always awful. Last year, I upgraded from Sandy Bridge to Broadwell-E and from a 980 Ti to a 1080 and saved almost $500 by importing from Amazon and B&H.

 

[spootime]

Anyone familiar with what TTL from Overclock3D is referring to here with Coffee Lake?

damnnn. anyone??

 

[Renekton]

Looking as some of these reviews, Kabylake-X on X299 sounds like a hot pile of garbage, what were they thinking.

ULMB bros may want it 😃

 

[Steel]

what are the prices?

$250-500 for the boards. $400-1000 for the chips.

 

[dr_rus]

Is it just me or is it a *really* bad time to buy a CPU right now? I feel like Threadripper might bring on some price wars that is going to squeeze the market down into new pricing segments but then again Intel just might not care.

Not really. I mean, if you're aiming for >$600 then maybe but this is a very niche market anyway. The only thing which is still a bit of unknown right now is the upcoming 6C CFL S1151 launch which might be a much better option than either 7800X or 7820X for many people. Otherwise we're pretty much set until the next big lineup update from either Intel or AMD.

It is a scary time.

- Ryzen might not be the best for unoptimized games, also memory compatibility fix is ongoing

- Skylake-X is a rushed product with cheap TIM and mesh, plus usual x299 early adopter bugs

- 7700K might be replaced by 6-core coffee lake soon

1. Same can be said about Intel CPUs too.

2. SKX is not as much rushed as created when there were no real competition for it. I'm pretty sure that Intel could've done a lot better if they knew a year ago that the lower end of X299 will compete with higher models of Ryzen. Mesh is good, it solves a lot of issues with HCC dies, bugs will be ironed out. TIM is the only seriously puzzling decision on Intel's part.

3. I don't expect 7700K to be replaced, it's more likely that 6C CFL will sit above it with 7700K possibly getting a small price cut. Consider that 7800X is $389, I don't expect CFL 6C with iGPU to cost less than that.

Anyone familiar with what TTL from Overclock3D is referring to here with Coffee Lake?

Thread: Intel Core i7 7820X Skylake X Review
https://forum.overclock3d.net/showpost.php?p=950395&postcount=6

My guess would be MB compatibility - CFL will likely need a new S1151 revision.

Additional Reviews:

Here are some others if you'd like to either copy/paste or quote these for the OP.

8-core i7-7820X, 10-core i7-7900X, 4-core i7-7740X and i5-7640X:

• 3DMGame: Its driving is a streamer overflow king! X299 I7-7740 Test! [Chinese]
• 4Gamer: Skylake-X for 10 core 20 threads "Core i9-7900X" Performance Review [Japanese]
• Benchmark.pl: Intel Core i7-7740X - Kaby Lake-X premiere processor test [Polish]
• Cool Enjoy: Cool Enjoy Intel® Core ™ i9 7900X Skylake-X Benchmark [Korean]
• Cowcotland: Test Processor Intel Core i7-7740X [French]
• Hardware.Info: Intel Core i9 7900X Skylake-X & Core i7 7740X Kaby Lake-X review: rushed release raises the bar
• LanOC Reviews: Intel Core X Series i9-7900X and i7-7740X
• OCaholic: Charts CPU Performance Content Creation: 16 CPUs tested - Intel Core i5-7640X
• Overclockers.com: Intel Skylake-X (i9 7900X) and Kaby Lake-X (i7 7740K) CPU Review
• PC Games Hardware (PCGH): Core i9-7900X: First test values - Intel, Skylake-X and the breaking bar against Ryzen threadripper [German]
• Vortez: Intel Kaby Lake-X Core i7-7740X Review: Better Than 7700K?
• XFastest: Intel Core i9-7900X processor test report / extreme performance near demand [XF] [Chinese]
• Zol: Strong Leading Edge 15% Intel Core i7-7820X First Test [+ i7-7820X Benches] [Chinese]

Thanks, added them all plus another one from 3DNews.ru.

 

[neurosisxeno]

My guess would be MB compatibility - CFL will likely need a new S1151 revision.

That or it has even less PCI-e lanes. An i7 with 8 PCIe lanes *vomit*

 

[dr_rus]

That or it has even less PCI-e lanes. An i7 with 8 PCIe lanes *vomit*

Even less than what? It will have the same number as any CPU in S1151 has - i.e. 16. It can't have more because the socket isn't designed for this and it makes no sense for it to have less.

 

[ColdDeckEd]

I'm good. If my PC blows up I'll just sue Newegg and Intel.

It's not about it blowing up lol but the inconvenience of having to reinstall your os, games, etc.

I'd say a 1 hr stress test is worth it but it's up to you.

 

[fermcr]

Those prices Intel.... what the hell?

The best CPU nowadays, cost wise, is probably AMD Ryze 5 1600X/1600. 200-250€ and you good to go. Intel are positioning them self's out of that price range.

 

[Dryk]

Still on a 2500k currently, I feel its really holding my 1070 back as have a 144hz monitor. Itching to upgrade but might wait for Coffee Lake

I'm in the same boat but I don't have the money or will to buy a new Mobo/CPU/RAM set right now. I bought a new fan and overclocked instead.

 

[ezodagrom]

Those prices Intel.... what the hell?

The best CPU nowadays, cost wise, is probably AMD Ryze 5 1600X/1600. 200-250€ and you good to go. Intel are positioning them self's out of that price range.

These are enthusiast CPUs (HEDT platform), not consumer/mainstream CPUs.

Core i5 and i7 Coffee Lake based CPUs are what Intel will be releasing for the 200~400€ market (apparently coming around August~September), not these.

 

[Sir Abacus]

The best CPU nowadays, cost wise, is probably AMD Ryze 5 1600X/1600. 200-250€ and you good to go. Intel are positioning them self's out of that price range.

It's one of those "it depends" things. Ryzen is a great chip for the price but the low turbo speeds, the lack of overclocking, and there's still a pretty big IPC deficiency versus a SKL or KBL? Then the Ryzen 5 still has 2x triple cores with a CCX boundary between them while the 7800X has a ring bus which delivers the multicore performance where the R5 falters. In more than a number of tests a 7800X was keeping up with or outright beating an 1800X. That's clock speed, that's IPC, and that's the ring bus vs the infinity mesh.

It's a complete mess right now with the two philosophies delivering in different areas and there's no clear winners in all segments.

 

[blu]

Quick google tells me nothing. Though given the age of the benchmark I don't see why it would, it does seem like avx throughput (and corresponding power consumption) in general is improved regardless of whether it 512, as demonstrated by prime95 above.

What seems crazy to me is that this isn't demonstrated by other Broadwell or Haswell HEDT architectures. Both blow past their TDP in something like prime, but look relatively normal in Cinebench.

Indeed, chances that cinebench was updated with avx512 support that soon are nil.

 

[Newboi]

Even less than what? It will have the same number as any CPU in S1151 has - i.e. 16. It can't have more because the socket isn't designed for this and it makes no sense for it to have less.

With the progression of technology to 10Gb+ ethernet, nvme storage, thunderbolt 3+, and multiple GPUs, I find it increasingly annoying that Intel refuses to give more PCI-E lanes to their midrange products.

Hopefully AMD will continue to put pressure on Intel by offering more PCI-E lanes across their entire range of chips.

 

[LelouchZero]

I'm good. If my PC blows up I'll just sue Newegg and Intel.

LOL!

I highly recommend checking out Realbench. I don't know how different Skylake responds to this stress test but I've found this program to be exceptional for stress testing my i7 4790K (Haswell/Devil's Canyon).
I'm currently running it at 4.7GHz with 2400MHz DDR3 ram.

A stress test of 15 minutes is the minimum of what you would want to do, ideally 30 minutes to an hour of stress testing with this program will let you know if your CPU is very stable.

If you do run it, as with all stress tests be sure to monitor the temperatures within the first 5 minutes and see how well it's doing after 10 or 15 minutes. Maybe even every 5 - 10 minutes past the 15 minute mark.

Here's a guide and download link if anyone is interested in it: [GUIDE] REALBENCH HWBOT EDITION V2.43

And I can't stress this enough, check those temps!

 

[dr_rus]

Indeed, chances that cinebench was updated with avx512 support that soon are nil.

No need for AVX512 specifically, just AVX would be enough for SKX to heat up to unusual levels. Worth remembering this because right now it's generally really hard to find widespread s/w using AVX (or even SSE4) and when AVX is being used SKX is showing some insane performance which basically justify such consumption - although it's hard to see why Intel felt that such AVX performance level is even needed in a consumer CPU.

With the progression of technology to 10Gb+ ethernet, nvme storage, thunderbolt 3+, and multiple GPUs, I find it increasingly annoying that Intel refuses to give more PCI-E lanes to their midrange products.

Hopefully AMD will continue to put pressure on Intel by offering more PCI-E lanes across their entire range of chips.

Not sure what you mean as while Ryzen itself has more PCIE lanes than SKL/KBL (20 vs 16), SKL/KBL chipsets actually have more PCIE lanes than Ryzen's (+24 3.0 vs +8 2.0) so in the end Intel has more of them in this range right now.

And if you look at the top of Ryzen config vs bottom of X299 platform then you have 20 vs 28 with the same higher number of PCIE lanes provided by the X299 chipset (+24 3.0 in X299 against +8 2.0 for Ryzen).

The only place where AMD may put any pressure on Intel with PCIE lanes count is the Threadripper CPUs with their 64(60?) lanes competing with lower range of X299 with their 28 where even the high count of X299 chipset lanes won't help Intel.

And again, none of this will actually matter much for a regular user, even with NVMe storage and 10GB+ Ethernet. Now, in servers that's another story.

 

[dr_rus]

DP

 

[Durante]

No need for AVX512 specifically, just AVX would be enough for SKX to heat up to unusual levels.

Is that the case when you are not messing with clocks?
Because as far as I am aware, by default, the chips will clock down in AVX loads to keep power consumption at acceptable levels.

 

[Sir Abacus]

Wait. If I'm doing my mental arithmetic right the 7900X is the first piece of consumer kit to break a teraflop (albeit single precision) on the CPU.

Yeah. As long as the AVX-512 clock is above 1.5GHz the 7900X will pull a teraflop single precision. 3GHz and it'll pull a teraflop double precision.

 

[digitalrelic]

The more I read, the more it sounds like the 7820X is the processor to go with. You get the full PCI-E lanes, full ram slot support, high core count AND high IPC, all at a somewhat reasonable price. Sounds like if you delid you can run 4.8ghz+ 24/7.

I think it's the 7820x for me.

 

[xiaxdragon]

Oh man, I'm debating between the i7-7800X or the Ryzen 1600X

I'm leaning towards the Ryzen at this point. Anyone in this thread have one, that can give me a first-hand experience with it?

love my 1700x


I lost about 5fps overall in FFXIV (went from 93fps on MAX settings at 1080p to 87fps on MAX) compared to my i5-7600k

HOWEVER

I definitely can do a lot more shit like stream without problems due to core count and what not. Overall it allows me to do a lot more and overall seems to be really smooth going. BIOS updates further down the line will also only improve it more. I did notice random stuttering in rocket league the other night.....but I couldn't tell if it was my internet lol.

I'm very, very happy for Ryzen and once games go over the 4 core cap.....its going to be the best gaming bang bar none.

The Ryzen 5 series though might be want you want to wait for though. It's supposed to have lower Core count of like 6.....however base clocks will be more in the 4GHz range being an overall better gaming CPU.

6, 7 and 8 Zen series are more workstation CPU's.....that just happen to do gaming well overall.

 

[Abraxas]

I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I have a couple of questions with regards to CPU purchases.

1) if i was buying a CPU for gaming and general use today, or in tye near future, the 7600k and 7700k would still be the best value to performance in the $200-$300ish market compared to the new releases, right?

2)is that still the cade when compared to rysen? The performance at the pricepoints seems excellent from AMD, but not for games, if I am correct

3) should i just be waiting for coffee lake anyway? And would that be using the X299 boards or the z270 ones?

Thanks if you can answer any questions. This would be for a mini-itx build if that helps.

 

[blu]

No need for AVX512 specifically, just AVX would be enough for SKX to heat up to unusual levels. Worth remembering this because right now it's generally really hard to find widespread s/w using AVX (or even SSE4) and when AVX is being used SKX is showing some insane performance which basically justify such consumption - although it's hard to see why Intel felt that such AVX performance level is even needed in a consumer CPU.

I guess for those occasions where a workstation SIMD workload is sufficiently de-corentized so that a GPU would not run circles around the SKX ; ]

Is that the case when you are not messing with clocks?
Because as far as I am aware, by default, the chips will clock down in AVX loads to keep power consumption at acceptable levels.

They do. It's ultra annoying in low-density avx code where the sparse avx instructions would be sufficient to trigger the avx throttling logic, while at the same time not giving much of a throughput boost : /

 

[Diablohead]

love my 1700x


I lost about 5fps overall in FFXIV (went from 93fps on MAX settings at 1080p to 87fps on MAX) compared to my i5-7600k

HOWEVER

I definitely can do a lot more shit like stream without problems due to core count and what not. Overall it allows me to do a lot more and overall seems to be really smooth going. BIOS updates further down the line will also only improve it more. I did notice random stuttering in rocket league the other night.....but I couldn't tell if it was my internet lol.

I'm very, very happy for Ryzen and once games go over the 4 core cap.....its going to be the best gaming bang bar none.

The Ryzen 5 series though might be want you want to wait for though. It's supposed to have lower Core count of like 6.....however base clocks will be more in the 4GHz range being an overall better gaming CPU.

6, 7 and 8 Zen series are more workstation CPU's.....that just happen to do gaming well overall.

This is important information people need to remember, gaming stress tests and benchmarks are one thing but when you can multitask easier using a better core setup, it's worthwhile.

 

[LQX]

Yeah, went from X99 to 6700K as I mostly game but man I regret it. Sure I have few more frames but multitasking and transcoding was something else.

 

[dr_rus]

Is that the case when you are not messing with clocks?
Because as far as I am aware, by default, the chips will clock down in AVX loads to keep power consumption at acceptable levels.

They lower the clocks because otherwise they'd run out of thermal envelope so they still do heat up more than usual running AVX even despite them lowering the clocks while doing so.

Tbh I don't know why Intel is so intent on pushing AVX into consumer CPUs as FP32 workloads would be much better covered by a GPU in this niche. I think this is one of these areas where SKX specifically wasn't intended to compete with anything and they just went bananas on specs instead of thinking how it may look when compared to a much less advanced in AVX support but otherwise similarly performing CPU (i.e. Zen).

I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I have a couple of questions with regards to CPU purchases.

1) if i was buying a CPU for gaming and general use today, or in tye near future, the 7600k and 7700k would still be the best value to performance in the $200-$300ish market compared to the new releases, right?

2)is that still the cade when compared to rysen? The performance at the pricepoints seems excellent from AMD, but not for games, if I am correct

3) should i just be waiting for coffee lake anyway? And would that be using the X299 boards or the z270 ones?

Thanks if you can answer any questions. This would be for a mini-itx build if that helps.

1) Best value to performance right now, not necessarily so in a year or two from now. This choice wholly depend on how often you plan to upgrade your platform (CPU+MB). Going with a slightly slower in modern games 6C or 8C CPU can be more beneficial in the long run. I would also rather doubt the assertion that 7700K is still the fastest gaming CPU on average now, after 7820X launch.

2) See the first part of 1)

3) You should probably wait for CFL and Threadripper - both should be coming in the next couple of months. CFL will likely use a new revision of 200 series chipsets meaning that current MBs won't be compatible.

 

[Datschge]

Tbh I don't know why Intel is so intent on pushing AVX into consumer CPUs as FP32 workloads would be much better covered by a GPU in this niche. I think this is one of these areas where SKX specifically wasn't intended to compete with anything and they just went bananas on specs

The huge die size increase with SKX certainly makes the push for AVX look misplaced in a product that may be needed in mass market later.

 

[Sir Abacus]

Tbh I don't know why Intel is so intent on pushing AVX into consumer CPUs as FP32 workloads would be much better covered by a GPU in this niche. I think this is one of these areas where SKX specifically wasn't intended to compete with anything and they just went bananas on specs instead of thinking how it may look when compared to a much less advanced in AVX support but otherwise similarly performing CPU (i.e. Zen).

Because GPGPU is slow for low latency tasks. You need to dump the data in VRAM, the GPU does whatever it does, then dumps the data back over to system RAM. Takes an eternity in computing time.

 

[dr_rus]

The huge die size increase with SKX certainly makes the push for AVX look misplaced in a product that may be needed in mass market later.

I dunno, the die size increase can be due to a number of factors, with Skylake improvements being the obvious one (there are more than just better AVX support) but then there's the new mesh network and bigger caches. It's hard to discern if that's AVX/AVX512's fault that the die is big - and then again it's not so big to be an issue really for a mass produced product, with 10C SKX being less than 400mm^2.

Because GPGPU is slow for low latency tasks. You need to dump the data in VRAM, the GPU does whatever it does, then dumps the data back over to system RAM. Takes an eternity in computing time.

GPGPU and vector math specifically is about throughput, not latency. Also, latencies are pretty good on modern GPUs.

 

[blu]

The huge die size increase with SKX certainly makes the push for AVX look misplaced in a product that may be needed in mass market later.

Because GPGPU is slow for low latency tasks. You need to dump the data in VRAM, the GPU does whatever it does, then dumps the data back over to system RAM. Takes an eternity in computing time.

You're between a rock and a coconut if you're in the high-throughput, low-latency domain these days. Apropos, avx512 will not give as good latencies as one might expect at first glance, thanks to the need for "firing up" of all ALU engines for the full vector width - i.e. there's an implied latency of IIRC 100s of microseconds just to enable those 512-bit engines from idle. Combine that with the throttling of avx-active cores, and your latency goals might just as well be out of reach. That still might win you some over the average trip to GPU land, but the entire premise of CPU being the latency champion becomes murkier and murkier for vector tasks.

 

[Steel]

I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I have a couple of questions with regards to CPU purchases.

1) if i was buying a CPU for gaming and general use today, or in tye near future, the 7600k and 7700k would still be the best value to performance in the $200-$300ish market compared to the new releases, right?

2)is that still the cade when compared to rysen? The performance at the pricepoints seems excellent from AMD, but not for games, if I am correct

3) should i just be waiting for coffee lake anyway? And would that be using the X299 boards or the z270 ones?

Thanks if you can answer any questions. This would be for a mini-itx build if that helps.

1. For intel, yeah. 7600k is interchangable with a R5 1600 for gaming overall(Some games are better for the 7600k, some better for 1600), though right at this minute.

2. Not for the 7600k. It's not worth than an r5 in gaming, but it's not really better either, and the r5 is better in everything else. 7700k is definitely the best gaming cpu though(Not including the X299 7700k that overclocks further, but... Not worth it). That being said, games may use more cores in the future, in which case both the 1600 and 1700 are better in the long run.

3. Depends on your current cpu. Coffee lake may use different boards than available now but it won't use X299. Coffee lake may not even be that much better than a 7700k in current games.

 

[ezodagrom]

3. Depends on your current cpu. Coffee lake may use different boards than available now but it won't use X299. Coffee lake may not even be that much better than a 7700k in current games.

It depends on what clocks and price it'll have, but the 6-core Coffee Lake could potentially become the best overall option for gaming, with both high single-threading performance and good multi-threading.

 

[Kvik]

So. I was a little curious about pricing in my side of the planet, so I decided to look it up.

https://www.pccasegear.com/products/39400/intel-core-i9-7900x

$1449 Dingo Dollars.

Get stuffed, Intel.

 

[Paragon]

So. I was a little curious about pricing in my side of the planet, so I decided to look it up.
https://www.pccasegear.com/products/39400/intel-core-i9-7900x
$1449 Dingo Dollars.
Get stuffed, Intel.

Is that not just a straight conversion?
$1100 USD is $1455 AUD right now, according to Google.

 

[Neo_Geo]

love my 1700x


I lost about 5fps overall in FFXIV (went from 93fps on MAX settings at 1080p to 87fps on MAX) compared to my i5-7600k

HOWEVER

I definitely can do a lot more shit like stream without problems due to core count and what not. Overall it allows me to do a lot more and overall seems to be really smooth going. BIOS updates further down the line will also only improve it more. I did notice random stuttering in rocket league the other night.....but I couldn't tell if it was my internet lol.

Unless you have multiple other tasks constantly needing CPU cycles while gaming, you probably would have been fine if you had just gotten a 7700k.

A non-HT i5 is basically only good for gaming without large scale multiplayer and gaming without multitasking. A 7700k allows gaming below ~90fps and allows moderate multitasking ala combining gaming/chrome/GPU streaming & broadcasting. Doing all of these while gaming in something like large multiplayer Battlefield servers or another very CPU intensive game IE you may need a decent overclock to stay in a comfortable zone away from the CPU ceiling when needing those same tasks in the background.

6+ core counts come into play when you want to game at higher framerates and be able to have enough headroom for multiple CPU intensive tasks while gaming. Chrome tabs actively consuming CPU cycles, CPU encoded streaming and broadcasting, server duties such as local/remote file hosting, Plex/Kodi/OTA streaming/transcoding for your household.

We are getting closer to a reality where more than 4c8t is needed for gaming itself, but unless the consoles make a shift away from 8 weak cores, then 4 much stronger cores will beat them every time, and with 8 threads to utilize, they trounce them even at stock speeds.

 

[Kadey]

It's not about it blowing up lol but the inconvenience of having to reinstall your os, games, etc.

I'd say a 1 hr stress test is worth it but it's up to you.

It is funny and I am saying it mostly in jest but I did blow up a PC before. Now I know to be more careful. I don't do anything unless I am sure of it.

 

[Renekton]

I wonder if a humble Noctua U14S can cool the 7820X at stock.

If not I need to change case to accommodate an AIO or D15

 

[outsidah]

Aren't they sponsored by Intel? lol

You haven't kept up with the drama huh?

 

[Mrbob]

So can the 7820X hit 4.8ghz overclocked as rumored? That would be great for an 8 core chip.

 

[Kvik]

Is that not just a straight conversion?
$1100 USD is $1455 AUD right now, according to Google.

Heh. Yeah, I know. I'm just still a little miffed by their rubbish pricing schedule. I mentioned this in the previous thread, but taking away PCIE lanes from their 6/8C SKU for no good reason other than because they can (and because they will be able to get some poor cunt to still pay for it) is utterly regrettable.

 

[Timedog]

And suddenly the same people arguing to wits end about the importance of thermals are changing their tune!

 

[Unknown Soldier]

A good 550w PSU is perfect for nearly any single GPU setup, really. Even something like a GTX 1080 should be fine with it.

People putting 1000w PSU's in their budget PC builds has always been kind of wasteful.

I have a single 1080 Ti and 5820K and I can pull 550W from the wall easy NBD. Any 550W PSU would be running at 100% trying to power my machine and you don't really want PSUs running continuously at max capacity. Actually since PSUs are not 100% efficient I think it's very likely a 550W PSU would probably trigger it's overvoltage protection and shut down trying to power my machine.