Intel Core i7-8700K Benchmarks Leaked

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
VideoCardz has gathered some of the leaks that have appeared over the past few days regarding the 6-core Intel i7-8700K: the most interesting one comes from Karl Morin, a Canadian tech journalist who stumbled upon an HP Omen desktop PC running the upcoming CPU. The multi-threaded test suggests that it’s proportionately faster than the quad-core chips it succeeds and is even faster than older 6-core HEDT chips thanks to higher clock speeds and a newer micro-architecture.
 
Great we have a new champion for cpu limited gaming

I'll still stick to a thread ripper. Still a better all around value and faster in mt task do to sheer number of threads.

Competition is a good thing.
 
Turbo doesn't seem to be working correctly for more than a single core. Another leak for example gave 1410 in CB MT. And its fits quite well with the difference between 3.7 and 4.3Ghz for 6 cores.
 
Shintai said:
Turbo doesn't seem to be working correctly for more than a single core. Another leak for example gave 1410 in CB MT. And its fits quite well with the difference between 3.7 and 4.3Ghz for 6 cores.
Click to expand...

I'm sure we'll see BIOS updates that sort it out.
 
Anyone else see a 6core/12thread 5820 with lower clock beat it?
upload_2017-9-12_12-54-47.png
 
Last edited:
Interesting that there are no ryzen 7 models or low end tr parts on that comparison chart.
 
I'm happy where I'm at, but it's a nice step forward. I'm sure in a few generations I'll have a great upgrade. It may not be a huge upgrade for newer PC's or for gamers (yet), but it's good for those with older CPU's getting upgraded systems. And, my next upgrade will most certainly be more cores and more speed.

I'll wait for retail release plus BIOS updates before taking benchmarks as gospel. I do suspect they are legit, but I'm sure a BIOS update will be released to fix the MT issue.
 
I like the X5650 beating it...lol. I actually picked up another X58 setup to play with.
 
What was the memory setup? That would be the only thing to explain such weak MT performance.
 
Didn't the CPU-Z show a 23MHz front side bus, with a 154 multiplier?

That would suck, lol.
 
I'd be interested, maybe even excited getting a hexa i7 on the desktop

2 more cores than kaby, while being most likely as high clocking as kaby


if it weren't for the fact I would have to buy a new board again
and the first line of boards are just rebranded z270 boards

and the boards one really wants to wait for come out like Q2 next year

hell if it would at least fit into x299 as well (while Intel makes a 7700k for x299 I'm sure they won't bring a hexa i7 on it and cut the legs off the 6 core HEDT chip)

I can just go team red then if I have to replace the board and CPU

bit of a snooze

maybe way later
I buy into it used or so

but then Ryzen refresh would be around that time too I guess

and an R7 at 4.5Ghz would probably not let me even look at Intel again any more
 
The fact that 8700k runs at a lower clock speed than 7700k, and its all cores turbo is barely faster than 7700k's base speed, it runs right into my fear that 8700k might actually have a slight degrade of single core performance over 7700k...
 
chenw said:
The fact that 8700k runs at a lower clock speed than 7700k, and its all cores turbo is barely faster than 7700k's base speed, it runs right into my fear that 8700k might actually have a slight degrade of single core performance over 7700k...
Click to expand...


7700K: 4.5Ghz 1 core, 4.4Ghz 2-4 cores?
8700K: 4.7Ghz 1 core, 4.6Ghz 2 cores, 4.4Ghz 4 cores, 4.3Ghz 6 cores.

Add +4MB cache on top and a likely higher clocked uncore. Up from 4.2Ghz on the 7700K.
 
I'm willing to believe that the turbo clocks aren't 100% ironed out yet. We'll probably see an improvement at launch.
 
FWIW, I'm basically running my i7-980 as if it were an X5650 - hot bclk and low multiplier for better IO and 4.0GHz all-cores.

CFL at stock is trying really hard to maintain Kabby single core performance within a thermal envelope, but also deliver better multi vs Kabby (eg. 6 * 80% clock > 4 * 100%, still within thermal envelope). Tall order, but theoretically feasible for a mature engineering organization.

But since when does [H] care about power/thermal envelope. We expect the mature Intel practice will give us 6 stable cores capable of at least Kabby clocks, and we'll sort how to deliver the amps and keep it cool by choosing a boss VRM MB, re-lid, etc.

I mean, all this discussion of benchmarks at stock power envelope is great, b/c our hobby depends on stuff being a commercial success and therefore available for us to tweak - but we're [H] and we're really waiting to see if it lives up to expectation at 5+ all-cores, amiright?

Edited to add: i7-980 vs. X5650 - http://ark.intel.com/compare/58664,47922
 
Last edited:
yee245 said:
Note that the X5650 benchmark there is a dual configuration, as it indicates 12C/24T.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I did not notice that. I downloaded CB15 and got a 1251 on my OC'd 5930k. Guess I don't need CFL.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top