Intel's 8th Generation Core Family - Coffee Lake (LGA 1151, 6C/12T)

Where do you expect Core i7-8700K's Turbo to land?

  • 3.8/3.9 GHz

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 4.0/4.1 GHz

    Votes: 3 23.1%

  • 4.2/4.3 GHz

    Votes: 6 46.2%

  • 4.4/4.5 GHz

    Votes: 3 23.1%

  • 4.6/4.7 GHz

    Votes: 1 7.7%
  • Total voters
    13
  • Poll closed .
Does a paper launch really do anything for Intel? They'd have probably gotten an ill-conceived impulse buy from me if the thing was actually on sale anywhere. Now I'll hold off and maybe get an Optane SSD if those drop at the end of the month as the rumor mill has been suggesting.
 
OrangeKhrush said:
A few months back pinnacle ridge was slated for Q1 say Q1/Q2 conservative it is a good time to realease early in a year.

PR has some low lying fruits to tweak, the ultimate challenge will be tosqueeze higher turbo policies, most ryzen out the box push like 3.5-3.5 allcores and 4ghz max which is to low
Click to expand...

Wouldn't expect miracles if they stay on the same low-power process, maybe ~200MHz more headroom and a small IPC boost (glad to be wrong, though). Ryzen is essentially a server chip, it's designed for efficiency over maximum performance. The reason most non-X SKUs operate in the 3.0-3.5GHz range is because that's the efficiency sweet spot for the chip. The voltage scaling gets really bad after 3.7GHz or so. My week 28 R5 1600 needs ~1.24Vmin to be fully stable at 3.8GHz, but does the stock 3.4GHz all-core turbo with as little as ~0.98Vmin (a whopping -0.15V offset, these chips seem to be quite overprovisioned at stock). Software measurements, mind you.

I don't think it's realistic for AMD to catch up to Intel in IPC or clocks, but you get some pretty amazing stock perf/watt and workstation/server features that command a huge premium on the Intel side. If you absolutely need maximum performance above all else, there's no reason not to go Intel at this time. Especially now since the i5 8400 is such amazing value even with a Z370 mobo. The AM4 platform has soft advantages such as lower platform cost, unlocked multiplier, ECC RAM, and virtualization support on every SKU, plus a future upgrade path (although things can change). Overclocked 1600 and 1700 are still good perf/$ for gaming and productivity, but you're throwing power efficiency out of the window at that point.
 
spine said:
Intel, and this must be ironic, are now looking to fake short supply it seems, AMD style!?

Lol, you cannot make this shit up:
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/in...ill-be-hard-to-get-availability-dramatic.html

I guess it's a leap to say Intel planned it, but then, if they cared first about supply, I'd thought they would have secured it?
Click to expand...

Oh, it was rushed no doubt - but let's not leap to wild conclusions. They wanted to ice Ryzen sales quickly, and didn't allow time to build a supply of their top parts.

Reading more into it than that is probably stepping past reality.
 
Welp, I gave in an ordered an i3-8350k. That is not what I wanted for my new music production supercomputer/gaming build, but I'd already ordered the Asus z370-i board and so the unlocked i3 is what I'm going to start with. I have been waiting to do this project for 6 months, not gonna let $170 extra for a CPU I didn't plan on buying stand in my way before the 8700k arrives.

My plan is to delid the i3-8350k and punch the gas pedal to the floor clocking it as high as it will go. A lot of my music .vst software mostly benefits from higher clock speeds anyway, not thread count, so it should be a significant upgrade to what I'm using now to say the least! My current CPU is an i7-620M in a Mac laptop from 2010. CPU User Benchmakr dot com says the i3-8350K is somewhere around ~200% faster than my i7-620M. I'll take that as an upgrade.

Then, as soon as the 8700k exits vaporware status, I'll pick one of those up, delid it, and switch it out for the i3 in my build. I wonder, do CPUs retain resale value? What about when you delid? I will probably try to sell the i3-8350k after a few months when 8700k finallys actually launches, thank you Intel, you greedy beast.

The thing that is funny about the i3-8350k vs. the i7-8700k is that the single core speed might end up being pretty similar, at least when comparing some of the luckier unlocked i3's to some of the i7-8700k's that do not fare as well in the silicon lottery. I fully expect to be able to hit near 5ghz on my quad core unlocked regular-threaded i3-8350k, which will be like twice as fast as the single core speed I am dealing with on my 7 year old laptop while trying unsucessfully to get high quality .vst's like Dune 2 and UVI Falcon to run at high resolution and low latency audio sample i/o buffer settings!! I am hoping to hear less abhorent CPU sputtering & crackling like on my i7-620M and more clear & crisp hi-fidelity music coming out of the .vst's when employing the overclocked i3-8350k. I suppose we will find out next week!

PS ~~~ You can technically pre-order an 8700k here, but I have heard horrendous things about this company doing basically exactly what they are seeming to do now; Claim to be able to sell you something by a projected ETA date, and then blowing through that ETA date and subsequent ETA dates and having terrible CS, maybe someone can shed some light on this company? Here's the pre-order link if anyone is feeling adventurous: http://www.shopblt.com/cgi-bin/shop...110030005041_B2DF526P.shtml&order_id=!ORDERID!
 
oleNBR said:
what is the advantage of using a silver IHS? wouldnt copper be better has a higher transfer rate?
Click to expand...

It doesn't. Silver has higher electrical and thermal conductivity.

It just costs a lot more and tarnishes quickly which ruin its applicability for most uses like this. But, sandwiched in a heat spreader with goop on it and sold to people who want to spend $$$ - it's slightly better.

Will the difference actually matter in any meaningful way? No.
 
Brackle said:
Yea 4ghz is kind of low. So hopefully they can refine the processor, and release Ryzen 2k with 4.5+ overclocks.
Click to expand...

They have to change process for that IMO. I get the hope for the underdog, but process trumps all.

Of course I don't understand the off topic in a Intel 8700K thread.
 
DooKey said:
They have to change process for that IMO. I get the hope for the underdog, but process trumps all.

Of course I don't understand the off topic in a Intel 8700K thread.
Click to expand...

Probably a lot of people like me that are super frustrated with Intel, first for rigging the market, then obsoleting their last platform early, releasing a poor X299 lineup, and now a paper launch with Coffee Lake. We all want to give AMD their due but their technology is just so far behind that it's still not workable. If they could just crank it up to higher levels we'd all have a true competitive marketplace again and none of this nonsense from Intel would be happening.

I'm still unsure if I need to "pre-order" an 8700K or if I'm fine waiting until early November, since I'm not ready to build yet anyway. But if Intel goes Apple on us with no stock for months, then I'm going to be even more frustrated and angry at them. At least when nVidia milks the market, they still release some competitive updates to their own products at a "fair" price, like the 1080ti.
 
wildfire99 said:
Probably a lot of people like me that are super frustrated with Intel, first for rigging the market, then obsoleting their last platform early, releasing a poor X299 lineup, and now a paper launch with Coffee Lake. We all want to give AMD their due but their technology is just so far behind that it's still not workable. If they could just crank it up to higher levels we'd all have a true competitive marketplace again and none of this nonsense from Intel would be happening.

I'm still unsure if I need to "pre-order" an 8700K or if I'm fine waiting until early November, since I'm not ready to build yet anyway. But if Intel goes Apple on us with no stock for months, then I'm going to be even more frustrated and angry at them. At least when nVidia milks the market, they still release some competitive updates to their own products at a "fair" price, like the 1080ti.
Click to expand...
Yes, AMD is so far behind that they have Intel scrambling......
 
PhaseNoise said:
It doesn't. Silver has higher electrical and thermal conductivity.

It just costs a lot more and tarnishes quickly which ruin its applicability for most uses like this. But, sandwiched in a heat spreader with goop on it and sold to people who want to spend $$$ - it's slightly better.

Will the difference actually matter in any meaningful way? No.
Click to expand...

i see. so i found w/m.k value for nickel is 91 plated over copper is 400, while silver is 430 ish. if the nickel plating is really really thin just to prevent copper from oxidizing then theres probably not much difference over pure silver IHS just like you mentioned.

overall the weakest point in heat transfer is probably IHS to heatsink right? and then die to IHS in that order?
 
Just as expected the 6C Coffeelake i7-8700k has similar performance than top 8C Ryzen, thanks to higher clocks and IPC

getgraphimg.php


it play games so well as 4C Kabylake

getgraphimg.php


and consumes less power. The 95W R7 1800X draws 129W from the socket, whereas the 95W i7 8700k draws 100W.

getgraphimg.php


So CFL is faster, cheaper, consumes less power, and overclocks better.
 
... but is not available.

It's like if a tree falls in the woods...
If an do-it-all cpu is released but can noy be purchased...
 
juanrga said:
Just as expected the 6C Coffeelake i7-8700k has similar performance than top 8C Ryzen, thanks to higher clocks and IPC

getgraphimg.php

it play games so well as 4C Kabylake
getgraphimg.php


and consumes less power. The 95W R7 1800X draws 129W from the socket, whereas the 95W i7 8700k draws 100W.
getgraphimg.php


So CFL is faster, cheaper, consumes less power, and overclocks better.
Click to expand...

Cheaper? Than what exactly? You can get a R7 1700x for $270. It OCs just as well as an 1800x by all accounts. Add a motherboard for $100 and Ryzen is the bargain champion right now.

That and Ryzen is actually available, as opposed to intel's complete Coffee Lake paper launch.
 
Nexus6 said:
Cheaper? Than what exactly? You can get a R7 1700x for $270. It OCs just as well as an 1800x by all accounts. Add a motherboard for $100 and Ryzen is the bargain champion right now.

That and Ryzen is actually available, as opposed to intel's complete Coffee Lake paper launch.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't the 8600K be a more fair comparison to the 1700x? From what I see it is available, and is easily better than the 1700x with a OC.

The paper launch is more of a strategic move than anything. Creates even more demand similar to what Apple does every year (I.E, inc. iPhone X)
 
Champ said:
The paper launch is more of a strategic move than anything.
Click to expand...

Proof? To me it looks like a rush job to get someting competitive in the market. This seems like skylake troubles again. Not that anyone should be surprised when a new chip with lots of hype comes out there are demand/supply issues for a month or so.
 
oleNBR said:
i see. so i found w/m.k value for nickel is 91 plated over copper is 400, while silver is 430 ish. if the nickel plating is really really thin just to prevent copper from oxidizing then theres probably not much difference over pure silver IHS just like you mentioned.

overall the weakest point in heat transfer is probably IHS to heatsink right? and then die to IHS in that order?
Click to expand...

I think so, but have no real data or knowledge there. I will admit surprise at how effective relidding with a tigher gap is on Intel chips. I have to assume they have the gap they do to appease worst-case manufacturing issues of their clients banging out hundreds of systems a day. ROBOT SMASH CPU INTO SOCKET, RAWR. :)

Picking silver over copper is a bit of an eye-roller for me. It smacks of the audiophile equipment guys making things which cost 2x as much and make no real measurable difference, or one so small you really don't care.

But hey, if you want the theoretical tops, there you go. More power to the folks who want to do this.
 
Here is a very thorough review of the lesser 8th gen CPU's:


I know alot on this thread do not like Steve, but he does a very fair assessment nonetheless.

Key takeaways:
1. If intel releases an H370 MB, the i3 8100 and i5 8400 will dominate the R3 1300x and R5 1500x in Gaming AND Productivity.
2. With only Z-370, they are VERY comparable in price/performance. An overclocked R3 1200 and R5 1400 will give the edge to AMD even more.
3. The 8350k is kind of pointless value wise, even when overclocked. Even with 4.9 GHz, it is never really able to match the similar priced i5 8400.
Things will look even worse for the 8350k when cheaper motherboards are released. It also consumes ALOT of power at 4.9 GHZ.
 
Nexus6 said:
Cheaper? Than what exactly? You can get a R7 1700x for $270. It OCs just as well as an 1800x by all accounts. Add a motherboard for $100 and Ryzen is the bargain champion right now.

That and Ryzen is actually available, as opposed to intel's complete Coffee Lake paper launch.
Click to expand...

(i) Some people purchases 1800X and 1700X.

(ii) In general, 1700 doesn't OC as well as 1800X, because worse binning.

(iii) The graphs given were for stock vs stock. If we consider OC, then 1700 will hit a 4GHz wall whereas CFL will achieve 5GHz. The performance gap will increase compared to what show the stock graphs.

(iv) There are plenty cases where those $100 bargain mobos give problems. If you check the thread about the RyXen bug, yu can find lots of people that initially believed the problem was on those cheap mobos.

My comment about cheaper was about who is giving cheaper hardware for top performance, not about who has the cheapest possible hardware at any cost.

(v) RyZen also had stock issues at launch, the common comment was "you can wait, cannot?"
 
juanrga said:
(i) Some people purchases 1800X and 1700X.

(ii) In general, 1700 doesn't OC as well as 1800X, because worse binning.

(iii) The graphs given were for stock vs stock. If we consider OC, then 1700 will hit a 4GHz wall whereas CFL will achieve 5GHz. The performance gap will increase compared to what show the stock graphs.

(iv) There are plenty cases where those $100 bargain mobos give problems. If you check the thread about the RyXen bug, yu can find lots of people that initially believed the problem was on those cheap mobos.

My comment about cheaper was about who is giving cheaper hardware for top performance, not about who has the cheapest possible hardware at any cost.

(v) RyZen also had stock issues at launch, the common comment was "you can wait, cannot?"
Click to expand...

(y):rolleyes:
 
Where are all the 8600k reviews and/or peoples comments on the overclocking?
 
Could hyperthreading be hurting with 6 cores? or is it the cache speed? Or the low base clock? Almost all the reviews show instances of the 8700k falling behind the 7700k in several games (usually not by much but still). Tbh it's all over the place right now, I cancelled my pre-order and will wait it out. And I hate Intel for not giving detailed specs anymore. It's a complete lottery what voltage/frequency/temps you'll get at stock nowadays. Heck ASUS is even unstable at stock settings because of MCE...

Also I see Kyle wasn't able to get his RAM to run at 4000mhz with the motherboard I was purchasing. Not good.
 
If you have money to burn go ahead and buy. Im getting old and this shit doesn't fly with me so F intel.
 
kalston said:
Could hyperthreading be hurting with 6 cores? or is it the cache speed? Or the low base clock? Almost all the reviews show instances of the 8700k falling behind the 7700k in several games (usually not by much but still). Tbh it's all over the place right now, I cancelled my pre-order and will wait it out. And I hate Intel for not giving detailed specs anymore. It's a complete lottery what voltage/frequency/temps you'll get at stock nowadays. Heck ASUS is even unstable at stock settings because of MCE...

Also I see Kyle wasn't able to get his RAM to run at 4000mhz with the motherboard I was purchasing. Not good.
Click to expand...

If an application forces all the cores active but doesn't use them well, I think the 8700k would drop in frequency to areas where it had no real advantage over the 7700k. If the cores aren't fully loaded, the developers are better off using fewer threads. It's a balancing act which is unbelievably annoying.
That should be pretty rare, as overwhelmingly most usages are either strictly single threaded or threaded pretty well (encoders, compressors, etc).

Games will be and always have been really difficult to get perfectly right on all CPUs, due to the pseudo-realtime nature of them. Getting all subtasks to finish at the same time for the frame is tough given core sharing (hyperthreading), timing changing as a function of core loading (turbo), and then of course differing architectures (AMD vs Intel). You miss things even a tiny bit and it is perceivable stutter, especially on fixed rate displays. Its wildly complicated and is why you only see a handful of titles that consistently run buttery smooth.
 
I'd think the die to IHS is the worse of the two. Replacing the Colgate Intel uses with something half decent results in a big boost to reducing temps all other things equal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top