7700k now or wait for 8700k/8600k?

K

kidstechno3

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 29, 2016
Messages
201
With current stocks of 8600k/8700k in short supply and high prices, would it better to just go ahead and upgrade off a mature platform and get the 7700k/z270 from a meagerly OC'd 3570k?

Or would the benefits of the 8600k/8700k/z370 outweigh that of the 7700k/z270?
 
You have waited this long, why not wait a little longer and get the newest tech? You're going to see nice improvements with your minimum FPS numbers on that monitor, regardless. Unless budget is a concern, I would hold out for the 8700k.
 
Why wait this long to upgrade from one quad core to another? Backorder like Shintai said and get yourself a real upgrade on all fronts.
 
I can tell you that the two extra cores are awesome. Trust me. I even have an 7820x and the four extra cores are even awesomer and I have a 1950x and the 12 extra cores are awesomeerererer

But my overall favorite chip out of the bunch is the 7820x. It feels faster than the 8700K and the Threadripper hands down even though my 16 core behemoth crushes it in multi threaded workloads.

So essentially it is worth it to wait a few more weeks until things are in stock and then make the jump the 8600 or 8700k series.
 
Definitely agree with what everyone has said. I would suggest using the auto-notify on newegg. I bought mine last Thursday when i got a notification email. I checked again in 15 mins and it was sold out. Their stock is selling out as soon as they restock.
 
I would choose 8600k, slightly better all around than 7700k and priced similar

That's what I'm doing with my 3570k upgrade
 
It seems like a better temp upgrade would be a 3770k then get an 8700k later. Or get an Z370 motherboard, DDR4, and an i3 if you can find one of those cheap. Drop the 8700k in later.

Otherwise just wait for more stock.
 
8700K availability is starting to catch up. It has been in stock the better part of the last 24hrs and is in stock at most of the Micro Centers.
 
Yeah, and “opportunity pricing” should subside soon.

While I am possibly biased, I always encourage people to get chips with SMT. It makes a huge difference in some loads, and is almost never a detriment anymore now that people know how to code for it.
 
currently using a i5 6600k and will be upgrading to i7 7700k. 7700k currently has a promo right now that includes assassin creed origin and warhammer 2 which made me upgrade. I was going to upgrade to i7 8700k but the availability of these processor is hard to get. i7 7700k upgrade will also save me money since i don't have to buy motherboard and ram.

In your case ill just wait a little more to get the 8700k
 
Last edited:
Err... why would you need to buy RAM, unless you're using a DDR3 Z170 mobo?
(Not knocking you, my work rig also has a 7700 and DDR3L - Dell OptiPlex 5040)
 
I'm wondering if the $120-$130 premium on the 8700k is worth it over the 8600k. Not sure if the 8600k/8700k will go down (seems like 8600k right now is going about $289 while the 8700k is about $420). Could spend that extra $100 on maybe new CPU AIO or other parts.

Is Hyperthreading that big of an increase on games/productivity apps?
 
WhoBeDaPlaya said:
Err... why would you need to buy RAM, unless you're using a DDR3 Z170 mobo?
(Not knocking you, my work rig also has a 7700 and DDR3L - Dell OptiPlex 5040)
Click to expand...
What i meant was if i have to upgrade to 8700k i would need to buy new ram and motherboard. If i upgrade to 7700k i can still use my z170 board and ram. Reason i chose the 7700k route vs 8700k route.
 
kidstechno3 said:
I'm wondering if the $120-$130 premium on the 8700k is worth it over the 8600k. Not sure if the 8600k/8700k will go down (seems like 8600k right now is going about $289 while the 8700k is about $420). Could spend that extra $100 on maybe new CPU AIO or other parts.

Is Hyperthreading that big of an increase on games/productivity apps?
Click to expand...

Games generally not so much, although there are those who swear by an increase in smoothness and minimum rates more threads provides. I have not personally experienced this, at least not to any degree which I could perceive.

In productivity, there is almost always a significant improvement, and it of course varies by the workload. If you're really not doing CPU bound stuff very often (like most people - there's a reason ultrabooks sell very well) - then it doesn't matter.
Just as one example, here's the 7zip benchmark on my not-really-yet-overclocked 8700k.
12 Threads - 43473
6 Threads - 28321

Now of course again this does vary completely based upon what the app's instruction mix is. But it is very rare there is no improvement if something is well threaded and it is actually CPU bound.
 
Last edited:
kidstechno3 said:
I'm wondering if the $120-$130 premium on the 8700k is worth it over the 8600k. Not sure if the 8600k/8700k will go down (seems like 8600k right now is going about $289 while the 8700k is about $420). Could spend that extra $100 on maybe new CPU AIO or other parts.

Is Hyperthreading that big of an increase on games/productivity apps?
Click to expand...
You will benefit from additional threads with encoding audio/video, compression, encryption, photoshop, video editing, spreadsheet and rendering scenes on CPU in 3d graphics software (Blender for example). It is entirely dependent on the app and what you are doing. Games that do support the extra threads may not be properly using them and a smoother experience might result with HT disabled, but every game is different. 8700K is more of a future proofing and peace of mind thing. You are getting faster stock speeds (3.7-4.7 GHz vs 3.6-4.3), more L3 cache (12 mB vs 9) and should be getting a better binned cpu (I would hope).
 
Seems like a 7700K is something youd buy knowing youll replace it, but maybe waiting on something after 8700K is better than getting over eager yeah? Could get a 7700k, drop it in, then wait til icy, or even later to upgrade, since you wont be in any hurry.
 
kidstechno3 said:
I'm wondering if the $120-$130 premium on the 8700k is worth it over the 8600k. Not sure if the 8600k/8700k will go down (seems like 8600k right now is going about $289 while the 8700k is about $420). Could spend that extra $100 on maybe new CPU AIO or other parts.

Is Hyperthreading that big of an increase on games/productivity apps?
Click to expand...

In the long term, yes get the 8700k. If you think you'll want to upgrade again in two years, get the 8600k.
 
PhaseNoise said:
Games generally not so much, although there are those who swear by an increase in smoothness and minimum rates more threads provides. I have not personally experienced this, at least not to any degree which I could perceive.

In productivity, there is almost always a significant improvement, and it of course varies by the workload. If you're really not doing CPU bound stuff very often (like most people - there's a reason ultrabooks sell very well) - then it doesn't matter.
Just as one example, here's the 7zip benchmark on my not-really-yet-overclocked 8700k.
12 Threads - 43473
6 Threads - 28321

Now of course again this does vary completely based upon what the app's instruction mix is. But it is very rare there is no improvement if something is well threaded and it is actually CPU bound.
Click to expand...

The less well optimized a workload is, the more benefit hyper-threading gives.

Since almost all AAA games are optimized to the crappy jaguar core with gimped AVX, games that scale linearly with cores give very high hyperthreading scaling on 8700k.
 
I'm currently reading up on CPU's as I'm about to rebuild my aging rig and the 8600K is looking awful hard to beat. Mine will be strictly a gaming rig and I wanted to stick with AMD another go round and really wanted to go with an overclocked 1600X but I spent $500 on this 144 Hz, 1080 monitor a couple years ago and I'm wanting to get a little more life out of it and all the benches show Intel getting up to 20% better framerates at 1080. Plus I'm wanting to get as close to 144 fps as possible so it looks like Intel is what I need to go with.

The 8700K is just ridiculously overpriced right now assuming you can find it in stock at all. In terms of gaming, the 8700K really isn't any better than the $300 7700K.

Motherboard prices don't seem to be much different either. In previous years you could save up to $100 on a comparably priced AMD board over an Intel one but the boards I'm looking at are about the same price regardless if it's AMD or Intel.

So I guess bottom line for the OP would be it's worth the wait to go ahead and get a 8600K at least. At $300, that's looking to be the best chip on the market right now dollar for dollar.
 
Is a 7700k worth it at $250? That's what MC is selling them for right now (w/ $30 mobo bundle savings as well)
 
I would honestly wait until next year when the Z390 chipsets comes out with the new 8c CPU. I felt Intel rushed the Z370 and 8600/8700k to fight AMD, and the Z390 is going to be the proper Chipset IMO.
 
Brackle said:
I would honestly wait until next year when the Z390 chipsets comes out with the new 8c CPU. I felt Intel rushed the Z370 and 8600/8700k to fight AMD, and the Z390 is going to be the proper Chipset IMO.
Click to expand...
Well, really just comes down to what he wants to do with it and if he will be overclocking.

But I will say this, I am ALMOST to my full jump off point on 4C processors. Not just yet, but close. Very much depends on usage profile.
 
00Dan said:
Primarily gaming. I rarely do encodes and such, I'm not thinking of too many use cases where I felt like I needed more cores. (I'm sure if they existed I would know it).

I would overclock whatever I end up getting.
Click to expand...
Tell me what games you play, what video card you have, and what resolution you are playing at.
 
00Dan said:
BF1, modded Skyrim, Witcher 3 (I’m a bit behind on AAA games). I have a 1080 and currently playing at 4K.

The place I feel my 2500k is falling short is minimum frame rates. I have it in my head that upgrading will allow me to up those and smooth things out some. I’m aware I’m GPU bound at my resolution.

The alternative to this all is perhaps purchasing a 1440 gsync monitor where I probably won’t feel any dips and just drag out my SB system a bit longer.
Click to expand...

Of course I look this morning and see the local MC just got a shipment of 8700ks, so this conversation about a 7700k may be moot if the extra cost is justifiable.
 
00Dan said:
Of course I look this morning and see the local MC just got a shipment of 8700ks, so this conversation about a 7700k may be moot if the extra cost is justifiable.
Click to expand...

Wait long enough and they will be out of stock before the end of the day. :D May want to just do it if you cannot wait.
 
I think a straight 8 core(no HT) will be my next and last for many yrs. I stumbled on the an outrageous 7700k deal. Otherwise I was intending on 8600k, at this point there's only 5 itx boards for z370
 
You can pretty much compare an 8/8 cpu to a 6/12 cpu right now. For MT, double the score are half the time of an 8350k
 
Nightfire said:
You can pretty much compare an 8/8 cpu to a 6/12 cpu right now. For MT, double the score are half the time of an 8350k
Click to expand...
Yes thats what I want, hopefully 8/8 is ok to OC on air a bit better than 8700k temp wise. Since 86600k temps are better than 7700k and similar performance. But I do believe that they took a step forward on coffee lake with TIM as temps seem better than kabby.

Since 6/12 should ~=9cores I may just pickup 8700k on the way out but dont think it wil be discounted like 7700k was/is
 
You can't really compare a 7700k to an 8600k as the latter was given a 14++ node. Using the same node, a "dual 8350k" or theoretical 8/8 has about the same performance as an 8700k and uses about the same amount of power at the same frequency, meaning that temps will most likely be the same.
 
Nightfire said:
You can't really compare a 7700k to an 8600k as the latter was given a 14++ node. Using the same node, a "dual 8350k" or theoretical 8/8 has about the same performance as an 8700k and uses about the same amount of power at the same frequency, meaning that temps will most likely be the same.
Click to expand...
you dont make any sense, I cant compare 7700k 14+ to an 8600 14++ but at 1st you said I CAN compare an 8700k 14++ to a future 8c/8t 10+(doesnt exist yet)

and the real problem with what you say is that YES I can compare 7700k to 8600k because they are both out and available
 
You cant compare across nodes, even retaining same clocks. You can somewhat compare SKUs like 8350K vs 8600K. Else take a 8700K and simply test difference core count and HT on/off.
 
Your getting too technical, you basically saying I can't compare a 3770k vs an 8700k.

I surely can compare them, I can compare performance/efficientcy/power consumption/temps all of this info is out there

Im talking about general comparisons, like performance per watt or temp.

You guys are too stuck on arguing AMD vs Intel. You should have lots of complaints about Kyle doing the ipc comparisons instead of what I'm talking about

Like I said I'm anticipating 8c/8t to be similar performance to 8700k and expecting better temps, we will wait and see
 
So you just base it off of hopes and nothing else. A 8/8 may never exist, so what was the point of this thread? To convince people that hyper threading is evil?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top