Intel Claims i7-8700K to Be 11% Faster Than 7700K

11% ST, 51% MT.

For ST:
Clock +200Mhz.
Cache +4MB.
Memory +266Mhz.

For MT:
Clock +100Mhz.
Cache +4MB.
Cores +2.
Memory +266Mhz.
 
So using the Intel math to real math conversion formula, it will be more like 3-5%?

That would certainly fit in with the lazy kind of IPC gains that intel has provided with each very minor architecture revision they put out with each "new" generation.

Interesting that intel can only give you 1% more performance under multithread

If there are gains here, then it will mostly be more cores + higher frequencies, and a couple of percent from cache size increases.
 
Last edited:
There is no IPC change from the cores themselves. Its the same SKL/KBL cores now called CFL on 14nm++. The first new core on the desktop is ICL next year.

All benefit is clocks, cache, cores and memory speed.
 
Yeah, I would say that these cores were finished long before Ryzen. Intels next gen should actually be interesting.
 
I don't think anybody expected CFL to bring anything groundbreaking to The table regarding IPC.

Add for core count, this makes the i7-7800X suddenly irrelevant (although Ryzen already did that IMHO).

All in all, it's a good thing Intel is finally doing something different than just a few MHz more on their new iteration of CPUs.
 
A leaked slide from a retailer training event in China claims that the flagship Coffee Lake CPU, the six-core, twelve-thread i7-8700K, offers 11% higher performance than the Kaby Lake i7-7700K. The image also confirms quad-core i3 and six-core i5 chips.

Intel has been claiming 20% performance jumps every generation. They were full of horse manure because it was purely in video processing. In real world high end applications you have a dedicated GPU. The reality is their CPU IPC and top clock had minimal if any improvement. So I'll wait till the actual benchmarks come out.
 
Looks like ST performance is dead and developers are not moving things to MT, so basically welcome to the golden age of high speed computing. It's all downhill from here.
 
Looks like ST performance is dead and developers are not moving things to MT, so basically welcome to the golden age of high speed computing. It's all downhill from here.
So in your cheery future we are all back to using an abacus? :meh:
 
Well, I'll finally get off my x5660 a 4Ghz.

I can finally get a relatively affordable 6 core/12 thread with much higher IPC.
 
Ah ok now it makes sense, ipc gain is zero then. How long will intel milk this architecture?

Yet you still gain what an uarch would bring and then some. Next change in uarch is ICL next year.

14nm++ is really impressive!
 
sooo a 6 core 12 thread 8700 is 11% faster than a 4 core 8 thread 7700? but its 50% more cpu lol
 
sooo a 6 core 12 thread 8700 is 11% faster than a 4 core 8 thread 7700? but its 50% more cpu lol

11% ST, 51% MT.

Intel 7th Gen Single/Multi-Thread Boost Intel 8th Gen
i7-7700K (4C/8T)
+11% / 51% i7-8700K (6C/12T)
i7-7700 (4C/8T)
+18% / 58% i7-8700 (6C/12T)
i5-7600K (4C/4T)
+19% / 55% i5-8600K (6C/6T)
i5-7400 (4C/4T)
+29% / 61% i5-8400 (6C/6T)
i3-7350K (2C/4T)
+17% / 65% i3-8350K (4C/4T)
i3-7100 (2C/4T)
+16% / 61% i3-8100 (4C/4T)
 
I'm pretty happy with my 7700k and I have not even tried any OC beyond the motherboard auto clocker.

Still, I'll probably upgrade next year - I like to multitask and I sometimes have multiple MMO instances running...
 
that makes more sense, although it looks like the ST is just based on a higher clock so makes sense it would be marginally faster

Clock, cache and memory speed. And perhaps uncore clock. Specially if you equalize memory speed the number will drop a bit.
 
Because of all the criticism of only 10% gains per gen for so long.... We have 11% now!! ;)

Interested in seeing how the power/temps pan out. And pricing of course but I expect it to be more than the 7700k.
 
Because of all the criticism of only 10% gains per gen for so long.... We have 11% now!! ;)

Interested in seeing how the power/temps pan out. And pricing of course but I expect it to be more than the 7700k.

10% isn't great but at 10% per generation, we have double the performance in 7 generations...
 
Yeah, I would say that these cores were finished long before Ryzen. Intels next gen should actually be interesting.

The architecture for these cores has more or less been finished since Sandy Bridge. Despite multiple die shrinks, switching to 3-D transistors, and whatever else Intel says its done, IPC is up about 20-ish percent after all this time? Moreover, considering the size of the Sandy Bridge and those multiple die shrinks there's been room for 2 extra cores for a long, long time.
 
10% isn't great but at 10% per generation, we have double the performance in 7 generations...

Doesn't work that way. Intel gain claims were mostly on the iGPU side. The acutally IPC improvement was pathetic. From Sandy Bridge->Now we have roughly a 20% IPC improvement TOTAL on general CPU throughput.

I seriously doubt the 14nm++ is going to be that much better because the TDP max gives you an absolute cap. And if the efficiency hasn't improved, then your max clock per core will have to be lower to reach the same TDP max given there are more cores. That's why your max clock comes down the more cores that are busy. I can easily run 4.8GHz on my Ivy Bridge if I only use 1 core at that. But because I use 4 cores, I can max out at 4.4GHz only during burn in test. With six cores it would be even worse.

Hardly an improvement for enthusiast.
 
Im on an ancient i7930!

Should i go this expedited 8700k or just be a baller and get the 10core on the x299 chipset?

4core is king, I doubt going 6 more would do anything for me. I just need fast cpu, 1080ti, 960pro, ssd, 4tb storage in a small case cuz im bored of atx since i dont used all the available connections. 1440p dual monitor setup for gaming is what I'm aiming for.
 
Im on an ancient i7930!

Should i go this expedited 8700k or just be a baller and get the 10core on the x299 chipset?

4core is king, I doubt going 6 more would do anything for me. I just need fast cpu, 1080ti, 960pro, ssd, 4tb storage in a small case cuz im bored of atx since i dont used all the available connections. 1440p dual monitor setup for gaming is what I'm aiming for.

Depends on your workload. If you are a gamer, 4c/8t will remain the champ unless game developers use those extra cores in the future. (Ryzen optimizations?)

If you encode movies or do heavy workloads (SQL, compiling, math, scientific simulation) then more cores would work out in your favor.
 
hold on, i7-7700x does 4200 on all cores and 4500 on one ?
So if Intel is right on 11% if no change to IPC then 4500 x 1.11 (11%) would be clock rate of 4.995 and there doing it at 4.7.

So it would end up the 11% increase is a 5% IPC gain.
 
Back
Top