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

Due to chipset limitations, I've never been able to hit the max limits, so I can't say. Still, I hate network throughput and everything else constantly being throttled when transferring data between two nvme drives. Companies shouldn't try to live off the insurance model: make you buy it in the hopes that you don't actually use it.
 
But will you notice the difference?

Throughput you measure; do you have some form of work that some amount of time saved with increased bandwidth would actually be noticed enough for it worth the cost?
 
Yes, I notice the difference. Do I do any work that relies on the extra horsepower? Not at the moment, which is why I would sell my 1800x and get the 1900x instead of the 1950x.
 
Shintai said:
You do know AMD uses the exact same design not to mention others as well? And its done for a reason. Not because of "evil greedy companies".
Click to expand...

I’m not going to debate AMD with you. I am fully aware that AMD does not have the same level of competence and execution as Intel, therefore they have an excuse when it comes to design limitations and shortcomings in their products.

Intel is evil, and greedy.
 
Stimpy88 said:
I’m not going to debate AMD with you. I am fully aware that AMD does not have the same level of competence and execution as Intel, therefore they have an excuse when it comes to design limitations and shortcomings in their products.

Intel is evil, and greedy.
Click to expand...

Evil might be pushing it, but greedy isn't.
 
Dan_D said:
X399 definitely seems to have a leg up on the M.2 / PCIe storage front. It's lagging behind on SATA and while it does have more PCIe lanes, several of the slots are Gen 2.0 PCIe, not 3.0 which is bullshit. Also, keep in mind that AMD's SATA implementation has far more limited stripe sizes available and they don't do RAID 5 at all. USB performance is something I'm going to test, but AMD typically lags slightly behind Intel on that front.
Click to expand...

seriously, I was going to sell my X370 and move up to TR but this is some serious BS.
 
I wouldn't even go with evil; Intel is morally obligated to produce the best return possible for their investors.
 
Trimlock said:
seriously, I was going to sell my X370 and move up to TR but this is some serious BS.
Click to expand...

X370 is the same way. It's less flexible than Z270 or X299 and has the same limitations as X399. It's PCIe x1 slots are PCI gen 2.0 and it's SATA ports are just as limited in flexibility as X399's are. Futhermore, the dedicated x4 link for storage on Ryzen 7 series CPUs only allow for two possible M.2 configurations. 2x M.2 slots with 2x PCIe lanes or a single dedicated x4 link for one M.2 slot. While Z270 and X299 have to deal with DMI 3.0, they are capable of using dual x4 M.2 slots in RAID or however you wish to configure it. You see pretty significant write improvements although some drives can saturate the link on reads. Again, this is regarding benchmark tests which are designed to push the drives. In daily use, it works fine as you aren't saturating DMI 3.0's link with network, storage and PCIe all at once.

But I agree, its bullshit that AMD used PCIe 2.0 slots for any of it's slots on X370 or X399. AMD has always lagged behind on platform features, even when its CPUs were dominant.

IdiotInCharge said:
I wouldn't even go with evil; Intel is morally obligated to produce the best return possible for their investors.
Click to expand...

Yes it is. Companies aren't inherently evil.

Stimpy88 said:
I was just having some fun.

My belief is that all corporations are as good or bad as each other, given the right climate.
Click to expand...

I agree. AMD used to charge $1,000 for it's top end CPUs. You better believe they'd offer one at $2,000 for the HEDT market just like Intel if AMD thought they could actually sell a CPU at that price.
 
infinity-gauntlet1.jpg


You are not evil until you get to Thanos's level even then it's just a cosmic clash with a silver surfer intervention.
 
kirbyrj said:
I'd be a lot more excited for CFL if Intel would stop the bullshit and allow it on Z270 boards. Sure seems like a greedy move on Intel's part.
Click to expand...
We don't know that, yet. Everyone is still going by the statement of one customer representative from one company on Twitter. Others were putting words into the mouth of an Intel sales representative from the X299 launch event.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
Got to wonder who is worried about M.2 RAID speeds outside of benchmarking, given the lack of discernable improvement over even a SATA SSD for desktop usage, and spending to go to an HEDT platform just for that seems pretty absurd...
Click to expand...

There are far better reasons for buying into X399 or X299 over Z270 or X370 than M.2 RAID. More PCIe lanes, quad-channel RAM and the ability to use CPUs with more than 4 cores (Intel) or 8 cores (AMD). The extra SATA storage on the Intel side or the vastly improved M.2 performance on the AMD side are additional benefits of moving to the HEDT platform.
 
Shintai said:
How are these 2 linked? What if CFL uses IMVP9 VRM spec and SKL/KBL uses IMVP8?
Click to expand...
How does that relate to fact that Coffelake on desktop is just more Kabylake(which were mostly just Skylake to begin with) cores and hertz that even Skylake had in reserve. Per Sillicon Lottery's 80% achievement rate on lowest tier.
 
Until games start better supporting multi-threading, I'm not sure how much of an improvement the 8700k will bring other that the 9-11% single core increase. One main problem is that consoles are still using really outdated CPUs. The new XBox One X for example is still on JAGUAR cores (8 threads)... which offer 1/3 to 1/2 the performance of Ryzen for example. Developers have to make games work with these ancient CPUs if they want to sell across all platforms. If you want content creation, not sure that 6 cores/12 threads is the best investment of money--there are better chips for that from both AMD and Intel.

On the other hand, the Core i3 and i5 offerings are actually very interesting. Four cores on an i3 means that an i3 is basically the new i5 (time to sell Kaby Lake i5's before they drop in value?). I would guess that 6 cores plus the ~10% boost for the new i5's means that it should perform similarly to the current i7's in gaming. Current i5 performance at i3 prices sounds pretty good. Would have been better if you could use the same motherboard but for new system builders this might be quite interesting.
 
New chips equals more sales if they kept selling Sandy Bridge until today they would be stale and buzz wouldn't be generated.

I don't think I'll even upgrade unless I'm still in the Retail Edge Program and they offer the chips which probably won't be for a entire year. I kinda regret upgrading from the 4790K Haswell to a 6700K basically they are the same chip gaming wise except one uses DDR4. At least I have a backup if my TUF motherboard hits a thunderstorm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top