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 .
ge6p9Bk.png
 
"From circles of mainboard manufacturers now come more details, which is behind the "improved power supply". Actually, the information should not get public due to Intel's guidelines, a Youtuber has nevertheless released it (embedded below from 2:40) - thanks to the PCGHX member Wolfgang75 for the reference .

Intel had allocated some pins, which had previously supplied the integrated graphics unit with power, to the CPU cores. In addition, there have been unused pins, which are already used by the motherboard manufacturers for voltage supply. On the Z270 boards, Intel had assigned this a fixed function. The result: Coffee-Lake S-CPUs could literally burn on high-end Z270 models, because they got too high tensions over these pins.

To the question why Intel has not introduced a new socket to avoid confusion: the changes should have been made relatively short term, so that no time remained. The Core i7-8700K would probably have survived without the changes to the pin layout, but Intel is already preparing for Coffee-Lake-S-Eights, which are rumored to appear next year ."

Source: https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Coffee-Lake-Codename-266775/News/Z270-Inkompatibilitaet-Grund-1240154/&edit-text=&act=url
Click to expand...
 
I'm glad someone had the balls to leak good info on what was really changed. I'm guessing the pushed up launch is what caused them to just reconfigure 1151 to work due to time constraints vs changing the socket completely.
 
Shintai said:
So 18 more pins used on CFL for power delivery.

What's the new excuse now? :D
Click to expand...
AM4 works on 4, 6, and 8 core CPUs. X299 for 4 all the way to 18.
Yet somehow Intel can't fit 4 and 6 on the same socket layout? Can't even imagine the hoop-jumping required to justify that.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
AM4 works on 4, 6, and 8 core CPUs. X299 for 4 all the way to 18.
Yet somehow Intel can't fit 4 and 6 on the same socket layout? Can't even imagine the hoop-jumping required to justify that.
Click to expand...

Not to mention, "Intel had allocated some pins, which had previously supplied the integrated graphics unit with power, to the CPU cores. In addition, there have been unused pins, which are already used by the motherboard manufacturers for voltage supply ... Necessary adjustments are due mainly to the eight-core CPUs." Whether all these points are valid or not it doesn't clear up a variety of questions about the matter.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
AM4 works on 4, 6, and 8 core CPUs. X299 for 4 all the way to 18.
Yet somehow Intel can't fit 4 and 6 on the same socket layout? Can't even imagine the hoop-jumping required to justify that.
Click to expand...

Former platform was designed for up to 4-core. A new platform is designed for more cores. What is so difficult to understand?

Pretending that KBL platform would support 6-cores because AM4 supports up to 8-core, is so silly like pretending that AM4 would supports up-to 16-core Zen, because X299 supports up to 18-core...
 
juanrga said:
Former platform was designed for up to 4-core. A new platform is designed for more cores. What is so difficult to understand?

Pretending that KBL platform would support 6-cores because AM4 supports up to 8-core, is so silly like pretending that AM4 would supports up-to 16-core Zen, because X299 supports up to 18-core...
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's not like AMD's AM3+ motherboards could support 4,6, or 8 core cpu's back a few years ago.....
 
juanrga said:
Former platform was designed for up to 4-core. A new platform is designed for more cores. What is so difficult to understand?

Pretending that KBL platform would support 6-cores because AM4 supports up to 8-core, is so silly like pretending that AM4 would supports up-to 16-core Zen, because X299 supports up to 18-core...
Click to expand...
So it's poor planning? Incompetence? Laziness? Intel has done it before, so they're clearly capable.

Justify it however you want, but none of the reasons are good for Intel. They deserve to be criticized.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
So it's poor planning? Incompetence? Laziness? Intel has done it before, so they're clearly capable.

Justify it however you want, but none of the reasons are good for Intel. They deserve to be criticized.
Click to expand...
This is why I like AMD. They squeeze what they can out of a platform. Like Dan had said that sometimes that brings problems, but I think it helps with the CPU upgrades that a lot of people want.
Intel is a business as well, so them sticking it to people and milking them is what they do?
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
So it's poor planning? Incompetence? Laziness? Intel has done it before, so they're clearly capable.

Justify it however you want, but none of the reasons are good for Intel. They deserve to be criticized.
Click to expand...

My biggest bet would be poor planning due to unexpected 10nm delays, Kaby lake and Coffee lake were "plopped" in. After these delays and Intel would be ridiculed if they had 2 more gens of 14nm without one having a big fundamental change(moar coars), especially when there is a competitive market.
 
They're teasing us with the non-functional "Learn More" buttons.
MSI's boards look (aesthetically) a lot better than ASUS this time around.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
They're teasing us with the non-functional "Learn More" buttons.
MSI's boards look (aesthetically) a lot better than ASUS this time around.
Click to expand...

I didn't notice since I was just going on the links in the Reddit thread about it. The product pages work fine, but those "Learn More" buttons don't for whatever reason.

 
bpizzle1 said:
https://www.msi.com/Landing/intel-coffee-lake-z370-gaming-motherboard

MSI revealed the rest of their z370 lineup. I have to admit, the Gaming M5 looks like it may be up with the Maximus Hero for me.
Click to expand...

meh. not a fan of any of them, they are all the same exact basic board except the godlike and M5 and its blatantly obvious.

Asus and Asrock will have the best boards as usual IMHO and perhaps Gigabyte might come out with a SOC again but their X299 SOC has been MIA outside of a few testers hands, styling and variety wise asus and asrock for the aesthetics and range of actually different boards if you ask me
 
MSI, please drop the Killer LAN.

Oh god. It's worse. The page for the Gamer M5 shows a guy ROARING WITH EXTREME GAMER VR power, then later a guy maximizing his potential, with a stuffed animal on his computer.

They aren't even targeting adults anymore, are they?
 
Shintai said:
Prices are already official by Intel. 359 for a 8700K. A 1800X needs to be much lower than that.

More slower cores that loses big time when scaling isn't close to linear can in no way expect a price premium. Its FX all over.
Click to expand...
One other consideration some will make is with AMD you know you will be able to upgrade your CPU without having to change out your whole system. AM4 will be around awhile, while a new chipset is coming the current one will be supported as well (unless AMD pulls an Intel Z270 to Z370 BS move). Intel sting with ever changing sockets and even same socket but not able to use it will hurt them.

Now I can't wait for the 8700K reviews, hopefully it kicks ass and moves AMD to get Ryzen + out as soon as possible. A real $359 8700K and decently priced quality motherboards should turn the tidal wave AMD was turning up. You can put 1800x on a <$100 motherboard, I have a $80 board with a 1700x, so pricing is more then just the CPU here. 1800x is a strong cpu, at Broadwell 8 core performance level, at $349 that is pretty awesome.

A core is two threads with AMD, saying AMD has slow cores when their SMT is better than Intel is not the case, it is very competitive.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
So it's poor planning? Incompetence? Laziness? Intel has done it before, so they're clearly capable.

Justify it however you want, but none of the reasons are good for Intel. They deserve to be criticized.
Click to expand...

So lets assume they didn't do it. And 8700K only hit 4.5Ghz instead of 5Ghz+. Then we would hear some waaah waaaah poor OC, terrible design and what not.
 
drescherjm said:
I expect Zen2 will be on the same platform however Zen3 will need new motherboards to support DDR5 and / or PCIe 4.0.
Click to expand...

I dont think even AMD knows what Zen2 will require on an electrical level to function as expected. The APUs went through a series of sockets fast due to changes in voltage planes.
 
AbRASiON said:
Yeah the RAM is impacting the purchase to be honest. It's $410 AUD for 32GB of only 2666, ugh! What the hell.

That being said I mean I'd love to get an 8700k with DDR4, 4000 or something but the problem is, we're going PCI-e 5, we're going DDR5 kinda in the next 12 to 18 months, we're finally going 8 core and 10nm in the next 12 to 18 months.

Seems to me, I can buy this stuff, save $300 now and put that towards a beast in 2.5 years.

I don't blame you though I guess, be nice to have the stuff at the top of the pack.
Click to expand...

i agree with you on that. of course theres always those fanbois will claim "always waiting". the jump from intel this time finally is worth the wait, 4 cores milk for nearly 10 yrs, 22nm/14nm milk for nearly 6 yrs, theres little improvement honestly, with exception of chipset since z170.

however suddenly due to AMD, intel had no choice but to give 6 and 8 cores mainstream all within 1.5 yrs, it is now worth the wait and skip 6 cores and wait for 8 cores 10nm+.

i've been waiting since ivybridge though so im gonna have to buy both 6/8 cores cause intel, dont make compatibility work.
 
Shintai said:
So lets assume they didn't do it. And 8700K only hit 4.5Ghz instead of 5Ghz+. Then we would hear some waaah waaaah poor OC, terrible design and what not.
Click to expand...
it would be a poor overclocker and a complete bust. I would go 7700K over 8700K if that became true. :eek:
 
noko said:
If Intel Coffee Lake matches or is close to AMD multi-threading per price range, it will also be faster on less threaded type applications making Intel the better buy if costs are similar. Also the over clocking ability maybe looked at as well. Coffee Lake so far looks to be very good and I hope Intel keeps the price reasonable. I think AMD will need to lower prices, like getting the 1700 around $250 which would compete well with the 8600K price point. 1700x $299, 1800x $349.
Click to expand...

The 1600 needs to be $140 US or cheaper to be a bargain now.
The 8400 will likely beat it in most things and comes with a "free" video card - which is relatively competent.
If you're a non gamer (me) than being forced to buy a GPU for the 1600 isn't cool
 
AbRASiON said:
The 1600 needs to be $140 US or cheaper to be a bargain now.
The 8400 will likely beat it in most things and comes with a "free" video card - which is relatively competent.
If you're a non gamer (me) than being forced to buy a GPU for the 1600 isn't cool
Click to expand...

Motherboard is cheaper for the 1600, cheap little video card is like 20 bucks. I seriously doubt AMD will change the prices from their current levels.
 
I just want a cheap ITX on launch day, AsRock is my best bet right? ECS aren't going to take care of me for several months yeah?
 
Gideon said:
Motherboard is cheaper for the 1600, cheap little video card is like 20 bucks. I seriously doubt AMD will change the prices from their current levels.
Click to expand...

Intel onboard GPU is capable of 3 video outs, 4k for at least 2 (if not all 3?) of them, it does h264 / h265 decode and encode if I recall. It's even capable of very, very basic games.
It's ENTIRELY "free"
The Intel CPU has a better IPC to boot.

So,....... the AMD 1600 needs a REAL price drop. I'd gladly support them to keep them around, but without a guaranteed way to get a segfault free edition CPU and without a super cheap, decent quality, but quiet, small, low power, modern, CHEAP GPU - why should I pay any more than $140?
 
AbRASiON said:
I just want a cheap ITX on launch day, AsRock is my best bet right? ECS aren't going to take care of me for several months yeah?
Click to expand...

ara9tkopk0pz.png


Supposedly the Strix ITX (Strix-I on the chart) should be available on launch. Someone posted a preview of the board a bit up the thread. Granted, I have no idea what "cheap" is for you. An educated guess at the price of the Strix would be like ~$170. No idea though.
 
Last edited:
bpizzle1 said:
ara9tkopk0pz.png


Supposedly the Strix ITX (Strix-I on the chart) should be available on launch. Someone posted a preview of the board a bit up the thread. Granted, I have no idea what "cheap" is for you. An educated guess at the price of the Strix would be like ~$170. No idea though.
Click to expand...


They are $259 for the identical z270 model here (AUD) which kinda sucks, because they should be $220 / $230.
The Strix z370 will no doubt, be $269 or even as high as $289 for opening month :/
 
AbRASiON said:
They are $259 for the identical z270 model here (AUD) which kinda sucks, because they should be $220 / $230.
The Strix z370 will no doubt, be $269 or even as high as $289 for opening month :/
Click to expand...

Any idea if Strix ITX will be avail launch day/week?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top