Thanks Microcenter... $500 8700k on Launch day.

Sure, but Ryzen's lower IPC is rearing its head pretty badly against 8700k.

I was thinking that 8700k's lower clockspeed would put it on par with 7700k at best in gaming, and the number of cores on Ryzen will still edge out 8700k easily, and it looks like neither is true.

Guess it's 8700k or Ryzen 2 this time.
 
chenw said:
Sure, but Ryzen's lower IPC is rearing its head pretty badly against 8700k.

I was thinking that 8700k's lower clockspeed would put it on par with 7700k at best in gaming, and the number of cores on Ryzen will still edge out 8700k easily, and it looks like neither is true.

Guess it's 8700k or Ryzen 2 this time.
Click to expand...

8700K recently recieved many questions as to misleading clocks, ie: 8700K's max turbo is 4.7ghz th e 7700K is only 4.5ghz so not really clock vs clock, also the all core shows spikes to 4.7ghz just to overcome Ryzen's low clocks ie 3.6ghz all core.

If you want to base architecture vs architecture you do it at the same clockspeed, the 1700 at 4.7ghz would clock out 2300pts ~ clearly a massive separation on clock vs clock in SMT, in ST throughput if CB15 is the indicator used at 4ghz (AMD's estimated max 1T turbo) it would be 170 (1800X 162). Clockspeed is used to mask over lack of architectural advancement, that is the only advantage and while intel are not making architectural gains, AMD can very easily improve clockspeed with node maturity while stock clocks for intel are tapped out, 5ghz is only realistic with very high end cooling giving no more wiggle room for clock jumps.
 
So.......
I see Newegg has ibuypower prebuilts with the 8700K with a release date of 11/06/2017. And the "out of stock" price for it has gone up from $379 to $389.
Should I guess that is when the 8700K will be in stock again? It's really looking like I messed up selling my 4790K days before paper release date.
I have all parts for new build waiting for a damn processor.
 
Last edited:
So many CPUs on ebay going for $600+.... I don't get it. Not one little bit.

Solid CPU, but people are stupid.
 
walwalka said:
So many CPUs on ebay going for $600+.... I don't get it. Not one little bit.

Solid CPU, but people are stupid.
Click to expand...

People want the newest, some people are willing to pay some crazy prices for them to be first, never understood it either but it's their money and they value it enough to spend it. Add into that very little supply, and lots of people buying them with intentions to only flip for money, but again, if you are willing to wait outside of a store for them to open and buy what you can....It's your time.

I will be holding off, once supply catches up and demand tapers, prices will level.....Not really sure I should upgrade anyway, I really have no need and I am clock limited with my uses right now.
 
BlueFireIce said:
People want the newest, some people are willing to pay some crazy prices for them to be first, never understood it either but it's their money and they value it enough to spend it. Add into that very little supply, and lots of people buying them with intentions to only flip for money, but again, if you are willing to wait outside of a store for them to open and buy what you can....It's your time.

I will be holding off, once supply catches up and demand tapers, prices will level.....Not really sure I should upgrade anyway, I really have no need and I am clock limited with my uses right now.
Click to expand...

Would you be upgrading the 6700K rig in your sig to the 8700K? Would you really see that much benefit?
 
Burner27 said:
Would you be upgrading the 6700K rig in your sig to the 8700K? Would you really see that much benefit?
Click to expand...

Would totally depend on the clocks these end up getting, if 5+ is a common clock, then yes, I would see a good gain in what I use it for. Might just go for the 8600K if clocks are the same or better, HT will not do much for me.
 
The jury's still out on the 8700k, given all the reports of Intel cherry picking the units for reviews, etc. Things will start to get interesting once it's been released to the masses. Personally I'm not holding out for it though. I just pulled the trigger today on parts for a new 7700k build which will replace my 2500k build from 2011. This was my plan anyway since August, but I wasted some time debating about the 8th gen cpus and waiting for the release, which of course still hasn't really happened except on paper. I picked up the 7700k and MSI z270 gaming pro carbon together for about $420. Since it's mainly going to be a gaming rig along with some casual photo/video editing, office, etc. this seemed pretty tough to beat. I also don't "mega-task" and think the type of scenarios Intel invented for this catch phrase are limited to an extremely narrow segment of users IMHO. I could maybe see going for the better priced 8600k if it were available, but no looking back now. Gonna get this 7700k fired up and oc'd, which looks like it will be happening before any new 8th gen cpu even hits the shelf.
 
whisper said:
The jury's still out on the 8700k, given all the reports of Intel cherry picking the units for reviews, etc. Things will start to get interesting once it's been released to the masses. Personally I'm not holding out for it though. I just pulled the trigger today on parts for a new 7700k build which will replace my 2500k build from 2011. This was my plan anyway since August, but I wasted some time debating about the 8th gen cpus and waiting for the release, which of course still hasn't really happened except on paper. I picked up the 7700k and MSI z270 gaming pro carbon together for about $420. Since it's mainly going to be a gaming rig along with some casual photo/video editing, office, etc. this seemed pretty tough to beat. I also don't "mega-task" and think the type of scenarios Intel invented for this catch phrase are limited to an extremely narrow segment of users IMHO. I could maybe see going for the better priced 8600k if it were available, but no looking back now. Gonna get this 7700k fired up and oc'd, which looks like it will be happening before any new 8th gen cpu even hits the shelf.
Click to expand...

Yeah you will be in good shape. I have been waiting for ryzen/coffee but I don't really play anything that uses the additional cores so I've got no motivation to buy soon.
 
dragonstongue said:
they could sell at $20-$90 per chip and allow upgrade via older motherboards, but it is Intel, so they want to under or overcharge, reduce spec on build quaility, and insist NO previous generation motherboard compatibility..

They legally should NOT be allowed to sell below MSRP or "fair market pricing" cause that enforces monopolistic practices not only for north america, but everywhere..if the raw performance and power consumed is the same as previous generation and same cores/thread count, the pricing should be the same, if more cores, reduce actual power consumed ok a higher price, like Ryzen vs Piledriver/Bulldozer, very justifiable the price is higher they are substantially better all around, sure they dont hit 5Ghz, but, they also not seem to use a ton of power or are space heaters AND they are very capable performers all around.

wish that turbocore/turbo boost would die horrible death TBH, X speed with load or reduced speed no load it works well has for years but now, there is X base speed X turbo on X cores depending on power/temperature/load fancy but seems stupid IMO especially if they are really wanting to be multi-core focused future ^.^.

Intel IMO for 2017 is mehhh, their stock price really has not shown such, whereas AMD for 2017 has been excellent and yet their stock price beyond the first "boom" for Ryzen (2016-2017) has not really jumped much (sitting $10-$13.50 no matter what wins/sales they have recorded, like every investor/backseat stock firms are being paid to enforce keeping it low or something) then there is Nv where stock pricing has skyrocketed, for what reason, they make products, they sell those products, has been this same way for years, AMD Ryzen/RX/Vega are supposedly selling extremely high volume desktop/professional/servers having scored numerous wins, yet their stock price has not went up nearly the same % in 2 years that Nv has who basically only makes 1 product which is graphics?

anyways :D
Click to expand...


Yeah but who wants an AMD CPU when they suck for emulators. I don't want anything from AMD. Their cards suck too.
 
BlueFireIce said:
Would totally depend on the clocks these end up getting, if 5+ is a common clock, then yes, I would see a good gain in what I use it for. Might just go for the 8600K if clocks are the same or better, HT will not do much for me.
Click to expand...
Sort of curious on peoples opinions of the 8600k. Many expected it to be easily faster than the 7700k, but in the benches I have seen, they are neck and neck. The 8600k might be better clock for clock, but it seems very close stock for stock.
 
Nightfire said:
Sort of curious on peoples opinions of the 8600k. Many expected it to be easily faster than the 7700k, but in the benches I have seen, they are neck and neck. The 8600k might be better clock for clock, but it seems very close stock for stock.
Click to expand...

Dollar for dollar you get two more cores thus two more threads so its a little more future proof. I have a threadripper 1950x and I really want an 8600k as well. I was thinking about adding a second system being an x299 but coffee lake is faster dollar for dollar than skylake x. I have been checking daily everywhere for chips and they are vaporware.
 
tangoseal said:
Dollar for dollar you get two more cores thus two more threads so its a little more future proof. I have a threadripper 1950x and I really want an 8600k as well. I was thinking about adding a second system being an x299 but coffee lake is faster dollar for dollar than skylake x. I have been checking daily everywhere for chips and they are vaporware.
Click to expand...

You actually get 2 less threads compared to the 7700k.
 
kirbyrj said:
You actually get 2 less threads compared to the 7700k.
Click to expand...

Right, the turbos n the 7700k are slightly higher, and in HT-aware applications the 7700k gets a little above the performance of "five" non-HT cores.

So that's why they're fairly close in performance.

The incompatible new socket is just a tip-of-the-hat to motherboard makers. They already enjoy the premiums they can charge on LGA 2066 motherboards, so this gives them a middle-ground between those and the low-end Kaby Lake. It also guarantees them new motherboard sales, instead of everyone reusing older boards.

There's a very long list of Skylake/Kaby users that would be willing to upgrade for jut the cost of the processor, but that would cut the amount of money users would spend in half. And half of the enticement in an upgrade is buying a shiny new color-coordinated motherboard, so each time you reinvent the RGB wheel, it costs money.

Somebody has to guaranteed the OEMs minimum sales numbers, especially since Coffee will be with us for the next year.
 
Last edited:
kirbyrj said:
You actually get 2 less threads compared to the 7700k.
Click to expand...

They are not real cores so performance is far lower. Indeed look at gaming while streaming. The 8600/8700k absolutely devours the 7700k in streaming and gaming at same time. So your argument is Yes it has two more threads but they are SMP based threads and not actual physical cores. So its still a moot point from a performance perspective.
 
whisper said:
The jury's still out on the 8700k, given all the reports of Intel cherry picking the units for reviews, etc. Things will start to get interesting once it's been released to the masses. Personally I'm not holding out for it though. I just pulled the trigger today on parts for a new 7700k build which will replace my 2500k build from 2011. This was my plan anyway since August, but I wasted some time debating about the 8th gen cpus and waiting for the release, which of course still hasn't really happened except on paper. I picked up the 7700k and MSI z270 gaming pro carbon together for about $420. Since it's mainly going to be a gaming rig along with some casual photo/video editing, office, etc. this seemed pretty tough to beat. I also don't "mega-task" and think the type of scenarios Intel invented for this catch phrase are limited to an extremely narrow segment of users IMHO. I could maybe see going for the better priced 8600k if it were available, but no looking back now. Gonna get this 7700k fired up and oc'd, which looks like it will be happening before any new 8th gen cpu even hits the shelf.
Click to expand...

I would reconsider. The extra 2 cores moving forward will help with more and more software tech evolutions.
 
tangoseal said:
I would reconsider. The extra 2 cores moving forward will help with more and more software tech evolutions.
Click to expand...

Not much for me to consider at this point... the 7700k is bought and paid for along with everything else and I'm building the rig tonight with no regrets:D I'm still waiting for my g.skill 3200 cl15 ram though... I think that may hold me up till Friday.

In terms of cores and threads, the 7700k actually offers 8 threads compared to the 8600k having only 6, though I realize 6 physical cores may be better in some instances than 4. But I suspect it will be highly situational which one is actually "better". The 8700k is a different matter but even if it were available today, the price point with the new mobo is higher than I wanted to go. It seems like everything I see praising the benefits of 12+ threads relates to some version of gaming+recording+streaming and all in 4k, etc. I love to game and put a premium on that function, but I'm only going to use 2k and have no interest in streaming at the same time. In fact, when I game that's pretty much all I'm doing except maybe keeping my email up at the same time. As for video editing and rendering, I'm still in 1080p and plan to stay there so the 7700k will eat that for breakfast.

Then there's the question of how many apps can even fully leverage 8 threads much less 12 or more. None that I use or can foresee using in the next 3-4 years. HT has been around since 2002 and it's still not always used or fully implemented to give maximum benefit. Adding more cores and threads to that equation only gives good value once we're at the point where everything we run can leverage it (aside from just benchmarks designed to showcase the multiple threads). Well, yes we are moving in that direction but not that quickly IMHO. In 4 more years it might make more sense, at which point I'm sure Intel/AMD will be trying to sell us on 36-core cpus for those who want to game/record/stream 6 games at the same time (in 4K or higher) while also rendering in photoshop and simultaneously running two separate 128-track recording studios. Lol.

But yes, point taken a couple extra cores wouldn't be a bad thing. Just not what I consider necessary at this time.
 
Last edited:
tangoseal said:
They are not real cores so performance is far lower. Indeed look at gaming while streaming. The 8600/8700k absolutely devours the 7700k in streaming and gaming at same time. So your argument is Yes it has two more threads but they are SMP based threads and not actual physical cores. So its still a moot point from a performance perspective.
Click to expand...

If you're really serious about streaming you have a dedicated computer with a capture card.
 
So... Why is the 8700K still out of stock but all these stores (newegg, amazon, and microcenter) have prebuilt with the 8700K in stock?
 
manny1222 said:
So... Why is the 8700K still out of stock but all these stores (newegg, amazon, and microcenter) have prebuilt with the 8700K in stock?
Click to expand...

Because OEMs buy in quantity, and get preference on launches.

Retail gives Intel a higher margin, but for each chip they still have to package and ship it and warranty it. That takes time to build-up stock.

OEMs are much simpler to move volumes, since you just ship them a tray packed with CPUs. The OEM handles the rest.

So it's not hard to understand why an in-demand CPU would be hard to get anywhere but in an OEM system. Once the initial demand spike cools AND production ramps-up, the retail chips will become more widely available.

This is how it's always been.
 
Last edited:
defaultluser said:
Because OEMs buy in quantity, and get preference on launches.

Retail gives Intel a higher margin, but for each chip they still have to package and ship it and warranty it. That takes time to build-up stock.

OEMs are much simpler to move volumes, since you just ship them a tray packed with CPUs. The OEM handles the rest.

So it's not hard to understand why an in-demand CPU would be hard to get anywhere but in an OEM system. Once the initial demand spike cools AND production ramps-up, the retail chips will become more widely available.

This is how it's always been.
Click to expand...

Well a week ago I paid the premium at Microshitter and looking at current stock and demand it wasnt such a bad deal. I am sitting on a chip that absolutely crushes my old six core 3930K for roughly the same price. It also games esports titles like a rabid cocaine bath salt sniffing rabbit. Now on games that demand higher resolution, IPC and core speed isn't the bottle neck anymore. GPUs are. at 99% GPU usage I get the same FPS in Destiny 2 @ 3440x1440 as I do on my 8700K overclocked to 4.8ghz all core.

So be careful in buying the retarded insanity constantly regurgitated by Intel cock jocks that IPC is everything because as an owner of both platforms, AMD and Intel's latest, there is not a fucking difference on Earth between the two chips at high resolution gaming. Not an ounce unless your being very specific in games that once you beat no one gives a shit about like Tomb Raider blah blah...
 
defaultluser said:
Because OEMs buy in quantity, and get preference on launches.

Retail gives Intel a higher margin, but for each chip they still have to package and ship it and warranty it. That takes time to build-up stock.

OEMs are much simpler to move volumes, since you just ship them a tray packed with CPUs. The OEM handles the rest.

So it's not hard to understand why an in-demand CPU would be hard to get anywhere but in an OEM system. Once the initial demand spike cools AND production ramps-up, the retail chips will become more widely available.

This is how it's always been.
Click to expand...

So does that mean it will be coming back in stock soon? I'm this close to just saying screw it and Ryze - ing
 
It will probably be out-of-stock through the holidays. I'd jump on AMD's boat if having it now is important.

Curious: you have an 8700k already in your signature. Why do you need to build a system you already own?
 
No i dont have it yet. I have everything else and i actually have it all built. Just need to drop in the cpu.
I updated my signature after i sold my previous core components with the assumption that I'd get one on the release day, but it waa all sold out by the time i went to buy.
 
Oh, you're one of those people so impatient they'll buy a system immediately, even when you can't test it.

You're also one of the people who CAUSES this runaway pricing and unavailability.

Be prepared to stalk sites like Ebay/Newegg/Craigslist for the next month or two for something resembling MSRP, cause that's the only way you'll get it.
 
defaultluser said:
Oh, you're one of those people so impatient they'll buy a system immediately, even when you can't test it.

You're also one of the people who CAUSES this runaway pricing and unavailability.

Be prepared to stalk sites like Ebay/Newegg/Craigslist for the next month or two for something resembling MSRP, cause that's the only way you'll get it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, he made a major goof there imo. Also triple monitors targeting 144 fps+ may be difficult to accomplish with one 1080ti.
 
defaultluser said:
Oh, you're one of those people so impatient they'll buy a system immediately, even when you can't test it.

You're also one of the people who CAUSES this runaway pricing and unavailability.

Be prepared to stalk sites like Ebay/Newegg/Craigslist for the next month or two for something resembling MSRP, cause that's the only way you'll get it.
Click to expand...

Okay. Before you make silly assumptions, ask questions or read my post fully. I didnt buy a full system. I already had these components. The only things i changed were core components - cpu, motherboard, and ram. I bought the ram on sale 2 weeks before the coffee lake release date, when i decided to upgrade.
I dont claim to know everything or to have purchased every cpu, but i don't remember there being intel cpu shortage at launch. It wasn't something i was expecting when i bought ram and mobo. I built the system anyways expecting that there would be stock in a couple of days, or a week, so I'd just drop it in and test like you're talking. Please excuse my inability to see the future.
I also dont see how my plan to purchase causes runaway pricing and unavailability. I was over here thinking it was just because of Intel's rushed launch, but i guess it was me.
 
Furious_Styles said:
Yeah, he made a major goof there imo. Also triple monitors targeting 144 fps+ may be difficult to accomplish with one 1080ti.
Click to expand...

Yes it was a major goof, but like i said i'd never seen intel cpu shortage at launch, so it wasn't what i was expecting.
Also I'm not playing or benchmarking a bunch of games. I mostly do racing simulation and i was able to average 144 fps when i play with my 1080ti (with a 4790K). I'm upgrading to the 8700K to help with streaming.
I've had bad experiences with SLI in the past and decided on single card solutions going foward.
 
The last time Intel had a launch without shortages was Sandy Bridge.

It's pretty common for retail processors being sold out.
 
Well then excuse my ignorance........!



Incidentally the last time i bought a cpu at launch was my 2500K.
 
defaultluser said:
The last time Intel had a launch without shortages was Sandy Bridge.

It's pretty common for retail processors being sold out.
Click to expand...

Yeah it was ridiculous with skylake. I think I sold some dope one on ebay for well over 500 bucks. It's like these people don't fucking read.
 
Looks like the coffee lake cpus are starting to trickle in again. My local microcenter seems to have the 8700k in stock (in-store only, and still for $500 if you're a sucker), and newegg is showing the 8700 available. I'm still betting they won't be widely available until after the New Year, at least not for MSRP.
 
defaultluser said:
The last time Intel had a launch without shortages was Sandy Bridge.

It's pretty common for retail processors being sold out.
Click to expand...

Cruel irony though was all the early LGA 1155 motherboards had some kinda bug or defect and had to be recalled. This pretty much made a shortage on 1155 motherboards especially the P67 boards. I had a couple sandy bridge chips sitting around with no motherboard for a few weeks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top