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 .
Armenius said:
It's locked and lower power compared to the -K part. At stock Turbo speeds there should be very little difference between the two. Anyone know if the -K parts still lack support for VT-d?
Click to expand...

As far as I know, 8XXX-K has VT-d support if you looked at the data from Intel.
 
Armenius said:
It's locked and lower power compared to the -K part. At stock Turbo speeds there should be very little difference between the two. Anyone know if the -K parts still lack support for VT-d?
Click to expand...

I'll add in support, just for specificity: the 8600k is 3.6GHz base, 4.3GHz turbo and the 8600 is 3.1GHz base, 4.3GHz turbo.

At stock speeds as noted they should both boost to the max that thermals allow, so if not intending to overclock they should both be comparable in performance allowing for sample variation.


[I looked these up for my own education, as the relationship between the 8700 parts is different, where the -k product has higher boost speeds too, making it the better choice for non-overclocked builds with thermal headroom]
 
IdiotInCharge said:
I'll add in support, just for specificity: the 8600k is 3.6GHz base, 4.3GHz turbo and the 8600 is 3.1GHz base, 4.3GHz turbo.

At stock speeds as noted they should both boost to the max that thermals allow, so if not intending to overclock they should both be comparable in performance allowing for sample variation.


[I looked these up for my own education, as the relationship between the 8700 parts is different, where the -k product has higher boost speeds too, making it the better choice for non-overclocked builds with thermal headroom]
Click to expand...

i only look at k part heh. and only at the maximum frequency it can reach under what voltage for temperature. can't wait for 9700k 16MB of L3 cache.. hope its still RING BUS design. if it's Mesh, then they'll need for mesh to be able to hit 4000mhz.
 
IdiotInCharge
Oh I see. Will the 8600 last like 3-4 yrs? Or will you recommend the 8500? I'm more into mmo games which uses older game engines. I'm using a thermal limited Dan case a4. Thanks :)
 
jenosmaverick said:
Oh I see. Will the 8600 last like 3-4 yrs? Or will you recommend the 8500? I'm more into mmo games which uses older game engines. I'm using a thermal limited Dan case a4. Thanks :)
Click to expand...

That's a rarer problem- reality is, once you drop your average clockspeed closer to 4GHz, the extra two cores in the Ryzen R7 CPUs start to make sense- and the R7 has SMT, so you're going from six threads to sixteen.

An 8600k, overclocked, would be faster for gaming and about nothing else, and you're not overclocking, so... R7 1700, if you can?

If not, it's not like the 8600 won't get the job done :).
 
Well Ryzen was really an option and I really liked it since it is soldered but can't find any mitx board in my country (Philippines) and have to risk buying abroad and I can kiss my warranty goodbye. Worth the risk to have no warranty? Thanks :)
 
That's a tough one. I assume returning a defective part would be an issue too?

I'd honestly just stick with Intel, though I'd try to stretch for an 8700 (non-k) if I could. Hyperthreading would give you a little more longevity.
 
Yeah returning would be a pain in the ass. I'll prolly shoulder the return shipment and will take months to get a new one if they ever respond to me. 8700 does run hot aswell with stress test in low 90's from users. Well either way both risky choices delid intel or buy a ryzen board from abroad.
 
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/unannounced-intel-core-i7-8086k-surfaces.html

index.png
 

Where to find the source of the Photos:

H E R E

CTRL+F "8+2" and you'll find what yah need.

I am convinced this is part of 8th Gen as it is filed under Coffee Lake S with no mention of a Coffee Lake R(efresh) in sight, the top of the page literally says 8th Gen also.
fMyDfjF.png
 
Last edited:
quote:

"we I can only assume that 5.1 GHz is a single thread and core boost and 4.4 for the all-core boost."

Big deal, Im doing that base on a six core 12 thread sb-e 3930k
 
Mega6 said:
quote:

"we I can only assume that 5.1 GHz is a single thread and core boost and 4.4 for the all-core boost."

Big deal, Im doing that base on a six core 12 thread sb-e 3930k
Click to expand...

Sure, and I'm doing more on my 8700k, but the question is: will this thing overclock better?

Just being guaranteed to hit 5.1GHz boost on a single core is a pretty good starting point versus the 8700k, for example.
 
It's just a starting point. again, no big deal. Let me work on my LN cooling. Intel has nothing new right now, Going back to sleep instead.
 
Mega6 said:
It's just a starting point. again, no big deal. Let me work on my LN cooling. Intel has nothing new right now, Going back to sleep instead.
Click to expand...

They don't have anything for me either, but if this is just a better overclocking 8700k- I'm sure that will be worth it for plenty ;).
 
To tell ya the truth if was in the market now, it would be more threads, less money. Don't worry - I won't go there. unsubscribing for next-gen.
 
Dayman said:

Where to find the source of the Photos:

H E R E

CTRL+F "8+2" and you'll find what yah need.

I am convinced this is part of 8th Gen as it is filed under Coffee Lake S with no mention of a Coffee Lake R(efresh) in sight, the top of the page literally says 8th Gen also.
View attachment 67017
Click to expand...

if i try to search it now, its not there. intel removed them?
 
  • Like
Reactions: akiba
like this
Wait... Why does the 8950hk and the new xeons have more cache than 8700k (edit: I mean the 8850H and 8750H 6-core chips from the slides)? And higher clock speed?! With thermal paste... in a laptop chip??

Am I imagining things, or are those new 6 cores a new chopped down 8 core with higher clocks at lower volts than the previous design used in 8700k?

5.2ghz overclock 8-core for everybody? 5.3?!
 
Last edited:
bAMtan2 said:
Wait... Why does the 8950hk and the new xeons have more cache than 8700k? And higher clock speed?! With thermal paste... in a laptop chip??

Am I imagining things, or are those new 6 cores a new chopped down 8 core with higher clocks at lower volts than the previous design used in 8700k?

5.2ghz overclock 8-core for everybody? 5.3?!
Click to expand...
The 8950hk does not have more cache than the 8700k. And then only has a 100 megahertz higher single core turbo. I'm really not sure why you would think that would be any indication that it would be an 8-core CPU as that really doesn't seem to make sense to me.
 
Dayman said:
This is the 6/12 Mobile Chip - Intel held it up at the launch event.
Click to expand...


I don't think it's possible for me to accurately measure something with nothing for scale reference, but I can say that the new chip looks taller than the old chip, and the block diagram for the old chip shows that the cores are added length-wise. So assuming the width is the same, then it could reasonably be a longer chip with 8 cores, 2 of which are disabled.

But I'm referring to the facts of its speed and voltage (TDP), which would not appear to be possible with the old chip, and the weird unexplained cache differences...
 
Last edited:
So the 8700k remains the fastest mid range desktop processor for gaming? Or is the 8700K being remanned with solder for cooler temps? How to tell the difference between old 8700k and new then if name remains the same?
 
bpizzle1 said:
They better rename the X399 before they release it. AMD already uses that name, and it would be extremely confusing for people if Intel calls their new platform the same thing.
Click to expand...

I believed those names are registered or something.
 
Dayman said:
Intel RST Driver Update confirms the existence of Z390, reveals a new HEDT Platform named x399 and shows us that 300 series chipset is named Cannon Point
Click to expand...

What the hell is this? So x399 will be CNL and CFL? I am guessing that is CNLx and CFLx (I thought these were named Cascade Lake??) I will be floored if Intel replaces KBLx with CNLx as these chips did not sell. Why the hell is CNL coming to desktop at all? I thought this was mobile only. They must be having alot of issues with 10nm+ (ICL) and maybe spectre/meltdown. It would be really crappy if x299 users couldn't upgrade as well.

Where the hell is Shintai?? Straighten this crap out please.
 
Nightfire said:
What the hell is this? So x399 will be CNL and CFL? I am guessing that is CNLx and CFLx (I thought these were named Cascade Lake??) I will be floored if Intel replaces KBLx with CNLx as these chips did not sell. Why the hell is CNL coming to desktop at all? I thought this was mobile only. They must be having alot of issues with 10nm+ (ICL) and maybe spectre/meltdown. It would be really crappy if x299 users couldn't upgrade as well.

Where the hell is Shintai?? Straighten this crap out please.
Click to expand...

It isn't referring to the CPUs, it is referring to the platform(Cannon Point PCH/CNL Platform). X399 supports cascade lake, not coffee or cannonlake.
 
iirc there is an skl-x update comming to x299 with soldered chips not sure about any other differences.
 
Denpepe said:
iirc there is an skl-x update comming to x299 with soldered chips not sure about any other differences.
Click to expand...

The rumor is that there is a Skylake X refresh that are soldered. I don't really buy it. Cascade Lake X should be launching with X399 (that also supports Skylake X), whether it is soldered or not I do not know
 
juanrga said:
I believed those names are registered or something.
Click to expand...

Dayman said:
View attachment 70920
Look what we got here! ;) 8 Core Coffee Lake ES Sampling Targets June'18 launch later in the year in Q4.

Source
Click to expand...

its great and all but now got worries. with the patch and new microcode, intel's chip jumped down in quite abit of performance in terms of ipc. though intel can still clock very high, its just isnt as good as what it was prior to the patch. i have yet to patch my 8700k prob wont patch it, i dont want 9700k to lose in terms of ipc to ryzen, seems like going backward.

another concern would be 9700k with mesh design, mesh at 3200mhz is very slow.. as mesh design is more dependent on the mesh frequency and benefits a lot from it, alot more than overclocking ring bus frequency.
 
oleNBR said:
its great and all but now got worries. with the patch and new microcode, intel's chip jumped down in quite abit of performance in terms of ipc. though intel can still clock very high, its just isnt as good as what it was prior to the patch. i have yet to patch my 8700k prob wont patch it, i dont want 9700k to lose in terms of ipc to ryzen, seems like going backward.

another concern would be 9700k with mesh design, mesh at 3200mhz is very slow.. as mesh design is more dependent on the mesh frequency and benefits a lot from it, alot more than overclocking ring bus frequency.
Click to expand...

Why would use mesh? Rings scale well to eight cores.
 
juanrga said:
Why would use mesh? Rings scale well to eight cores.
Click to expand...

Maybe it is a business decision, with IF scaling well with cores and memory perhaps Intel want to sacrifice latency for scaling that is really the only decision as to mesh vs ring and maybe cost, Ring is likely the higher cost on diminishing yields.

with AMD doing well with their IF development, you would assume Intel could iron out theirs a little better or at worst case not see that much of a drop off in the gamers world but net gains in scaling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top