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 .
I expect the 7nm Zen to be a nice upgrade
Click to expand...

I expect 7nm to come with reduced frequency (at least from Zen+) however this is 2 generations from now. They will likely make up for that with increased IPC. I don't expect the core count to change with Zen+ and Zen++.
 
bezant said:
Link, or your are full of it.
Click to expand...

20071514581l.jpg
 
drescherjm said:
I expect 7nm to come with reduced frequency (at least from Zen+) however this is 2 generations from now. They will likely make up for that with increased IPC. I don't expect the core count to change with Zen+ and Zen++.
Click to expand...

There is no 14+ Zen planned that I have seen in official sources.
zen-2-620x215.png
 
I remember reading somewhere that AMD was planning yearly Zen releases, is that not the case? That roadmap only shows one more AM4 release.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
I remember reading somewhere that AMD was planning yearly Zen releases, is that not the case? That roadmap only shows one more AM4 release.
Click to expand...

Far as I have seen confirmed by AMD they only plan on making Zen+ at 7nm for AM4 no 14+ process planned. But AMD has been very vague on their future plans.
 
5444308a-97e7-4221-a84a-0c7031a6579f.jpg


This is likely where people got the Zen+ idea. Notice under "Zen" it mentions 14nm and 14nm+
 
Based on that roadmap and AMD's statements, it would appear that all 4 of those releases would be on AM4, which is a lot more appealing.
Although launching 4 CPU series in less than 3 years is a stretch.
 
Meeho said:
Small and cash starved AMD must be a magic company then, relative to Intel.
Click to expand...

TaintedSquirrel said:
Well AMD has been doing it.
If Intel isn't doing it, it's either malice or incompetence.
Click to expand...

Like the early promise of unified socket from Bulldozer up to Excavator?

Like the promised unified Skybridge socket?

Like the unified Carrizo and Carrizo-L socket?

Like the unified Bristol and Summit Ridge socket?

AMD is not doing that because it is the best technological solution neither because AMD mission is to give customers the best upgrade path and product life cycle. AMD does because it is the cheaper solution for them.
 
Armenius said:
Just want to point out that this is from a 2015 presentation (IIRC) since the date isn't indicated in the slide itself.
Click to expand...

Right, a 2015 presentation with the roadmap for the next years. I remember discussing that slide and others in forums one or two years ago. That is why I find fully entertainment the pretensions of some people that 6C Coffee Lake is a last minute change made by Intel in response to RyZen, because RyZen is sooooo good
 
bezant said:
You do realize this is from last year, right? Not from 3 years ago, not even 2 years ago. September 2016....
Click to expand...

bezant said:
Posted September 2016. If the presentation went public in 2016, I am sure that's the date.
Click to expand...

Don't confound the time when the talk was given with the time when the slide was leaked neither with the time when the slide was reported in mainstream sites.
 
juanrga said:
Don't confound the time when the talk was given with the time when the slide was leaked.
Click to expand...

The fact that there is no date is what leads to the confusion. You'll forgive us if we don't blindly accept the words of the Intel elite as gospel.
 
One more thing. The discussion is about desktop, not laptop CPUs so juan, your credibility is taking a hit bud.
 
kirbyrj said:
The fact that there is no date is what leads to the confusion. You'll forgive us if we don't blindly accept the words of the Intel elite as gospel.
Click to expand...

It is about common sense. If you want believe that Intel gave a talk in Septemberg 2016 with the roadmap for 2016, just do it, but then apply the same belief to AMD as well

http://wccftech.com/amd-roadmap-2016-2017-leaked-zen/

According to your belief AMD planned both Excavator and Zen roadmaps in 2016 because Excavator and Zen slides were first leaked in Aug 2016.

bezant said:
One more thing. The discussion is about desktop, not laptop CPUs so juan, your credibility is taking a hit bud.
Click to expand...

If my credibility here depends of guys that believe that Intel planned 6C CFL for mobile, but only 4C for desktops, then I can say it is in safe status. :D
 
juanrga said:
This is all wrong
Click to expand...

Your all wrong, there is no 14nm+ product coming for Zen. Stick to Intel since you actually have info on it. They have 7nm already set, just waiting on the EUV machines to be installed and test runs already have been made. 14nm process may get refined but it wont be marketed as Ryzen 2, just like the 9590 was not marketed as a new chip just a tweak on the process to get everything they could out of it.
 
Gideon said:
Your all wrong, there is no 14nm+ product coming for Zen. Stick to Intel since you actually have info on it. They have 7nm already set, just waiting on the EUV machines to be installed and test runs already have been made. 14nm process may get refined but it wont be marketed as Ryzen 2, just like the 9590 was not marketed as a new chip just a tweak on the process to get everything they could out of it.
Click to expand...

And you have the nerve of repeat the same false information "no 14nm+ product coming for Zen" after I have given you the roadmap from AMD showing Zen next year, after I explained you that Pinnacle Ridge is a Richland-like refresh of Summit Ridge, and after Dayman just posted an official AMD slide showing the Zen port to 14nm+. But what to expect from someone that continues negating the RyZen bug after AMD officially acknowledged it...
 
juanrga said:
It is about common sense. If you want believe that Intel gave a talk in Septemberg 2016 with the roadmap for 2016, just do it, but then apply the same belief to AMD as well

http://wccftech.com/amd-roadmap-2016-2017-leaked-zen/

According to your belief AMD planned both Excavator and Zen roadmaps in 2016 because Excavator and Zen slides were first leaked in Aug 2016.
Click to expand...

I don't know when AMD planned that roadmap. And I don't know when Intel planned their roadmap. That's the point. I'm not pro-AMD/Anti-Intel. I've owned both in the past 6 months and am currently on a soon to be obsolete for no good reason Z270 board :D. I'm just pointing out that without a date on that roadmap or a link to the article where it came from, it's hard to say when it was planned. And as a well-established Intel apologist, I assume that you're going to give the benefit of the doubt to Intel at all times. That's not a name calling. Don't hit the report button like your other Intel associate ;).
 
Gideon said:
Your all wrong, there is no 14nm+ product coming for Zen.
Click to expand...

AMD slides says you are wrong.

Gideon said:
I think you missed the point, people that have Ryzen motherboards will have the option if they want to, not unlikely some updated motherboards will release with the next version of Ryzen as well.
Click to expand...

They get the option to use the 14nm+ Zen refresh.
 
juanrga said:
And you have the nerve of repeat the same false information "no 14nm+ product coming for Zen" after I have given you the roadmap from AMD showing Zen next year, after I explained you that Pinnacle Ridge is a Richland-like refresh of Summit Ridge, and after Dayman just posted an official AMD slide showing the Zen port to 14nm+. But what to expect from someone that continues negating the RyZen bug after AMD officially acknowledged it...
Click to expand...


AMD-Enterprise-CPU-2015-2019-Roadmap_1-1.jpg



http://wccftech.com/amd-cpu-roadmap-leak-7-nm-starship-14nm-naples-snowy-owl-zen-core/


There is no 14nm+ for ZEN or Epyc they might refer to that for ZEN/Vega apu. 7nm is Zen 2 and EPYC 2 not this 14nm+
 
Gideon said:
AMD-Enterprise-CPU-2015-2019-Roadmap_1-1.jpg



http://wccftech.com/amd-cpu-roadmap-leak-7-nm-starship-14nm-naples-snowy-owl-zen-core/


There is no 14nm+ for ZEN or Epyc they might refer to that for ZEN/Vega apu. 7nm is Zen 2 and EPYC 2 not this 14nm+
Click to expand...

Do you even know what you post, not to mention from what date? Obviously no.

Lets try again, so everyone with sight issues can follow too. Watch this. Now do your research and figure out where its from before you embarrass yourself further.
AMD-Zen_3.png


Here is the link:
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/Externa...WxkSUQ9LTF8VHlwZT0z&t=1&cb=636305869590230797

And another:
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/Externa...WxkSUQ9LTF8VHlwZT0z&t=1&cb=636305760276980114

Both from here:
http://ir.amd.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=74093&p=irol-analystday
 
Last edited:
That is marketing material and it shows ZEN 2 as 7nm just like I said. Continuing process improvements should ring a bell to you, a term they like to say. When ZEN 2 comes will see who is right, I am not worried.
 
juanrga said:
The 7800X is also cheaper than the 1800X and consumes similar power.

Anandtech gets a huge power consumption disparity between both, because measures power consumption with AVX512 workloads that stress the 512bit SIMD units on SKL-X, whereas RyZen only has 128bit FMAC units.

I think we can safely conclude that the CFL 8700k will beat the 1800X on any metric: MT performance, ST performance, efficiency, overclocking headroom, and price.
Click to expand...

i'd agree on almost everything except power efficiency. we aim for high overclocking so efficiency is out of the window already. MT performance is on edge i'd say.


juanrga said:
Larger cache and faster RAM increase the IPC.

i7-8700k: 218cb / 4.7GHz = 46.38

i7-7700k: 200cb / 4.5GHz = 44.44
Click to expand...

maybe more than just cache increase and memory speed, not sure about the memory part could play a huge factor in CB not sure never tested it.

7700k.png


7700k 45x @197 so per 100mhz = 4.378
7600k 42x @182 so per 100mhz = 4.333
7700k has 2MB more cache than 7600k and since this is ST, HT dont matter. difference in score for only 2MB cache difference between cpu is just ~0.044.

considering 8700k has 4MB more than 7700k then we double that 0.044 * 2 = 0.088, thats the extra score due to 4MB cache per 100mhz. 0.088 * 45 = 3.96 extra score from having more cache at 4.5ghz (assuming 8700k clocked at 4.5ghz).

intel slides shows 200 vs tomshardware at 197 thats a disparity of 1.53%. so taking 8700k score 218 from intel's slide, with 1.53% less we get about 214.

if 8700k has no IPC improvement at 4.5ghz with just 4MB more cache, it should be 3.96 + 197 around 201. but shown above 214 theres some noticeable difference there i'd say too much for ram speed to be a factor, theres gotta be something else. the extra 200mhz would only score a tiny bit more like say 4 points so comparing 201 to 210.. at 4.5ghz mmmmmm


Shintai said:
Turbo 3.0 is software application based. Not exactly a loss.
https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...y/turbo-boost/turbo-boost-max-technology.html
https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/26103/Intel-Turbo-Boost-Max-Technology-3-0
Click to expand...

imho its a great thing to have but since 6c can likely overclock to 5ghz then its not that bad. originally i really wanted like 8 or 10 cores at 4.6ghz and overclock 2 cores to like 5.2 ghz.
 
Last edited:
Gideon said:
That is marketing material and it shows ZEN 2 as 7nm just like I said. Continuing process improvements should ring a bell to you, a term they like to say. When ZEN 2 comes will see who is right, I am not worried.
Click to expand...

Silly attempt to evade. We know that Zen2 is a 7nm product planned for 2019. We gave this information to you FOUR PAGES AGO. What we don't accept is your repetitive "There is no 14nm+ for ZEN", because you are WRONG, as has been demonstrated to you by at least three different posters.

I had enough of your derail of this thread.
 
Last edited:
kirbyrj said:
I don't know when AMD planned that roadmap. And I don't know when Intel planned their roadmap. That's the point. I'm not pro-AMD/Anti-Intel. I've owned both in the past 6 months and am currently on a soon to be obsolete for no good reason Z270 board :D. I'm just pointing out that without a date on that roadmap or a link to the article where it came from, it's hard to say when it was planned. And as a well-established Intel apologist, I assume that you're going to give the benefit of the doubt to Intel at all times. That's not a name calling. Don't hit the report button like your other Intel associate ;).
Click to expand...

Don't worry, I don't think your posts are high enough to hit the report button. Mods sure have better things to moderate.

What I find amazing is how you accuse others, when we simply gave a pair of links to a pair of slides. If you want to believe that Intel and AMD planned the roadmaps on the CFL slide and the EXV-Zen slide, respectively, in 2016, just fool yourself. Some of us know the roadmaps were planned before. That is all.
 
oleNBR said:
i'd agree on almost everything except power efficiency. we aim for high overclocking so efficiency is out of the window already. MT performance is on edge i'd say.

maybe more than just cache increase and memory speed, not sure about the memory part could play a huge factor in CB not sure never tested it.

View attachment 34234

7700k 45x @197 so per 100mhz = 4.378
7600k 42x @182 so per 100mhz = 4.333
7700k has 2MB more cache than 7600k and since this is ST, HT dont matter. difference in score for only 2MB cache difference between cpu is just ~0.044.

considering 8700k has 4MB more than 7700k then we double that 0.044 * 2 = 0.088, thats the extra score due to 4MB cache per 100mhz. 0.088 * 45 = 3.96 extra score from having more cache at 4.5ghz (assuming 8700k clocked at 4.5ghz).

intel slides shows 200 vs tomshardware at 197 thats a disparity of 1.53%. so taking 8700k score 218 from intel's slide, with 1.53% less we get about 214.

if 8700k has no IPC improvement at 4.5ghz with just 4MB more cache, it should be 3.96 + 197 around 201. but shown above 214 theres some noticeable difference there i'd say too much for ram speed to be a factor, theres gotta be something else. the extra 200mhz would only score a tiny bit more like say 4 points so comparing 201 to 210.. at 4.5ghz mmmmmm


imho its a great thing to have but since 6c can likely overclock to 5ghz then its not that bad. originally i really wanted like 8 or 10 cores at 4.6ghz and overclock 2 cores to like 5.2 ghz.
Click to expand...

My claim about efficiency is for stock settings. The 7740k is more efficient than the 1800X. I see no reason why the 8700k will not maintain this efficiency gap with the 1800X.

So far as I know CoffeLake is the same microarchitecture than Kabylake; therefore the only possibility to explain the higher IPC has to come from the larger L3 cache and the faster RAM. The faster RAM reduces access latency, which increases IPC because reduces the cycles that the cores aren't doing useful work, and a similar explanation comes from the larger L3. How much the IPC is increased depends on each workload: the IPC can vary from zero for compute-bound workloads to probably a nice quantity for memory-bound workloads.

The 7700k has 33% more L3 than the 7600k. The 8700k has 50% more than the 7700k.

IPC 7700k: 43.78
IPC 7600k: 43.33

Assuming linear relationship between L3 and CB scores

43.78 + ( 43.78 - 43.33 ) * [ 12 - 8 ] / [ 8 - 6 ] = 44.68

which implies a 2% higher IPC. The data leaked shows a 4.4% higher IPC. I don't know if the remaining 2% can be explained by the fast memory/controller. I don't have any data.
 
I need a cliffnotes version, this stuff is so confusing. One of the reasons I like techtubers, makes this stuff a lot easier to comprehend.

I hope we can use z270
 
Gideon said:
That is marketing material and it shows ZEN 2 as 7nm just like I said. Continuing process improvements should ring a bell to you, a term they like to say. When ZEN 2 comes will see who is right, I am not worried.
Click to expand...

Holy crap you still in denial despite even AMD tells you are so wrong its laughable. There is no nasty bug in Zen either right? Oh wait :D
 
DigiTimes: Desktop Coffee Lake in October, Mobile Cannon Lake by the end of 2017

DigiTimes said:
On August 21, Intel released its latest, eighth-generation processors, dubbed Kaby Lake Refresh*, with the first U series designed for 2-in-1 and ultra-thin notebooks, and the company is slated to debut its newest CPUs for desktops in October. Many notebook vendors, such as Dell, HP, Lenovo, Huawei, Samsung, Haier and Tsinghua Tongfang are gearing up for presenting their new notebook models adopting the new processors in September.

...While its seventh-generation Kaby Lake series and eighth-generation Coffee Lake series processors are manufactured on a 14nm process, Intel is expected to release the first Cannon Lake-based processors fabricated on a 10nm process by the end of 2017. Walker said that Intel is really at a transition stage in terms of the process architecture adopted for its CPU products, adding that while the 14nm process has already matured, Intel will come out with more products using 10nm process in 2018 to allow more choices for customers.
Click to expand...

http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20170823PD200.html
 
Shintai said:
Holy crap you still in denial despite even AMD tells you are so wrong its laughable. There is no nasty bug in Zen either right? Oh wait :D
Click to expand...

Your a pot calling a kettle black :) You were in denial about coffee lake being ready to go on the 21st...look how that turned out Mr.

https://hardforum.com/threads/bad-time-to-buy-a-cpu.1941679/#post-1043157868

https://hardforum.com/threads/bad-time-to-buy-a-cpu.1941679/#post-1043159863

https://hardforum.com/threads/bad-time-to-buy-a-cpu.1941679/#post-1043161123

Oh yeah Shintai, 8700k's are showing up by the truck loads in retail oh wait, they arent. lol ;)
 
Dan_D said:
It's easy to armchair engineer CPUs to do that. Its probably a bit harder to do that in the real world.
Click to expand...

I can confirm this. Trying to get something new done with NO pinout or electrical changes is close to impossible if you want to do anything correctly or efficiently.

The fact that not every single CPU released has a socket and supporting glue designed expressly for it is actually amazing.

You really should consider your MB/CPU purchase a matched pair and not expect either to survive a generation. Another way of looking at it is that if you CAN reuse a MB, they either made compromises or didn't change very much.
 
PhaseNoise said:
I can confirm this. Trying to get something new done with NO pinout or electrical changes is close to impossible if you want to do anything correctly or efficiently.

The fact that not every single CPU released has a socket and supporting glue designed expressly for it is actually amazing.

You really should consider your MB/CPU purchase a matched pair and not expect either to survive a generation. Another way of looking at it is that if you CAN reuse a MB, they either made compromises or didn't change very much.
Click to expand...
This discussion will be fun to revisit in a few years once AM4 is retired.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top