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 .

-Sweeper_

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 2, 2016
Messages
184
So guys, where do you expect Core i7-8700K to land in terms of clock speed? Might give you a surprise later today.

Edit: I want stock base clocks + Turbo modes.
 
Last edited:

Cali3350

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 22, 2002
Messages
4,700
So guys, where do you expect Core i7-8700K to land in terms of clock speed? Might give you a surprise later today.

Stock or Overclock?

Im expecting 3.7/4.2/4.4 stock with 80% of chips capable of 4.8ghz.

And I consider that an aggressive expectation, so if Intel beats that props to them.
 

RPGWiZaRD

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 24, 2009
Messages
1,177
Stock or Overclock?

Im expecting 3.7/4.2/4.4 stock with 80% of chips capable of 4.8ghz.

And I consider that an aggressive expectation, so if Intel beats that props to them.

+1 That's roughly mine guess as well, ofc 4.8GHz would be "damn good" for a 6 core IMO and to even reach that the process has been to have gone rather smoothly. If it can surpass that at reasonable voltage & temperature, then that would be something... based on that one ES though, 4.8GHz sounds very doable.

Before this month I had more like 4.6~4.7GHz max clocks in 80~90% of the cases on air/water expecation, but as closer we get the more faith I've gotten. :p
 
Last edited:

Raghar

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 23, 2012
Messages
209
That's not hard considering how CPU-Z works. Try it yourself too.

Example from my own I just took.
cpuz4.png

yZi4MaJ.png


When you want to show a screenshot from CPU-Z, it's smart idea is to prevent CPU downclocking before making a screenshot.

I'm so hardcore overclocker, looking at a CPU running at defaults is giving me weird feeling. Are really people who are doing that? Then I remember, majority of them, I just never see them to show a picture of theirs PC or internals.

If I am not misguided those are clocks of current engineering samples.
These should be real world clocks, these CPU should be really close to launch this leaked.
 

AbRASiON

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 28, 2004
Messages
352
4.8ghz is going to cook your board and cooler - maybe those of you with mATX and ATX rigs, very pricey coolers and at least 3 system fans will be fine - but considering the known 7700k heat spikes, I'll actually be very happy with even just 4.3ghz. It'll still decimate a Ryzen system considering it has a higher frequency, higher IPC and contains the 'free' video card I'd like (as a non gamer)

Win win.
 

Nihilus1

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 7, 2015
Messages
441
First to vote!
4.1 ghz would be a good stock turbo clock.

That would make it about 10% lower at single thread and 30% higher at multi thread over a 7700k assuming 3.7/4.1 ghz. Anything over that is a bonus.
 

Nihilus1

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 7, 2015
Messages
441
4.7Ghz ST, more than 4Ghz all core.

Isn't the max for the 7700k 4.5 ghz sc? I can't see even the sc clocks being higher due to the greater complexity. Also, it would be strange for Intel to have the 8800k that much faster than the 7800x.
 

CSI_PC

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 3, 2016
Messages
2,193
Isn't the max for the 7700k 4.5 ghz sc? I can't see even the sc clocks being higher due to the greater complexity. Also, it would be strange for Intel to have the 8800k that much faster than the 7800x.
This is on the latest node though so will have certain improvements, just comes down to whether Intel decides to create some artificial barriers or not and the difference between official clocks and good sustainable overclocks on the K model (could be important for this product range this time round).

Cheers
 

Cali3350

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 22, 2002
Messages
4,700
This is on the latest node though so will have certain improvements, just comes down to whether Intel decides to create some artificial barriers or not and the difference between official clocks and good sustainable overclocks on the K model (could be important for this product range this time round).

Cheers
Besides Intel PR, do we actually know what the "new node" can do?
 

-Sweeper_

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 2, 2016
Messages
184
Exclusive: Intel® Core™ i7-8700K Specifications (Coffee Lake)

6C/12T
12MB L3
3.7 GHz Base
4.3 GHz 6-core Turbo
4.4 GHz 4-core Turbo
4.6 GHz 2-core Turbo
4.7 GHz 1-core Turbo
95W TDP

Disclaimer: The source this info comes from has provided accurate Intel leaks in the past. For now, treat it like a rumor, but rest assured I will let you know about any changes. No pricing (MSRP) information yet. Next in line, Core i5-8600K specifications.
 
Last edited:

Shintai

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
5,678
Exclusive: Core i7-8700K Specifications (Coffee Lake)

6C/12T
12MB L3
3.7 GHz Base
4.3 GHz 6-core Turbo
4.4 GHz 4-core Turbo
4.6 GHz 2-core Turbo
4.7 GHz 1-core Turbo
95W TDP

Disclaimer: The source this info comes from has provided accurate Intel leaks in the past. For now, treat it like a rumor, but rest assured I will let you know about any changes. No pricing (MSRP) information yet. Next in line, Core i5-8600K specifications.
Yum yum :D
 

SomeGuy133

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
3,447
12% performance boost over 14nm+.


Relevant chart for 14nm++ benefits:
http://techreport.com/r.x/2017_03_30_Intel_manufacturing_day/14nmcharacteristic.png

SHows 14nm, 14nm+, and 14nm++

14nm+ (Kabylake) did improve clocks about 20% at the same power in ULV form factor (i.e. ~ 3 GHz). but only about ~ 8% at desktop clocks. 14nm++ looks pretty health on this. "It's only 14nm" isn't true.

I heard 15% 14nm++ was a total of 30% better than regular 14nm. Kaby had a 400mhz better max OC over SKL. 5.2ghz vs 4.8GHz and lower voltage IIRC for that so 8% but also better voltages IIRC.

The overall average chip on Kaby was much better than 8% though.
 

FrozenSun

Weaksauce
Joined
Nov 25, 2016
Messages
110
Exclusive: Intel® Core™ i7-8700K Specifications (Coffee Lake)

6C/12T
12MB L3
3.7 GHz Base
4.3 GHz 6-core Turbo
4.4 GHz 4-core Turbo
4.6 GHz 2-core Turbo
4.7 GHz 1-core Turbo
95W TDP

Disclaimer: The source this info comes from has provided accurate Intel leaks in the past. For now, treat it like a rumor, but rest assured I will let you know about any changes. No pricing (MSRP) information yet. Next in line, Core i5-8600K specifications.

Seems believable enough.
 

TaintedSquirrel

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Aug 5, 2013
Messages
10,451
I heard 15% 14nm++ was a total of 30% better than regular 14nm. Kaby had a 400mhz better max OC over SKL. 5.2ghz vs 4.8GHz and lower voltage IIRC for that so 8% but also better voltages IIRC.

The overall average chip on Kaby was much better than 8% though.
Kaby Lake was already having heat problems I wonder how they will add on two more cores without telling consumers to buy water.
Maybe we are approaching a time when overclocking an Intel chip comes with a pre-requisite of delidding.
 

Nihilus1

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 7, 2015
Messages
441
Damn, 4.4 ghz with 4-cores - even higher than the 7740x. The cpu will probably be a little pricier but the mb will no doubt be cheaper.

This should be able to do close to 4.8 ghz all core o/c as others have suggested.
 
Last edited:

SomeGuy133

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
3,447
Kaby Lake was already having heat problems I wonder how they will add on two more cores without telling consumers to buy water.
Maybe we are approaching a time when overclocking an Intel chip comes with a pre-requisite of delidding.
the heat per square mm is the same so no issues.
 

IdiotInCharge

NVIDIA SHILL
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,710
Yeah, more total heat generated, but more surface in contact with the heatspreader- so not much harder to cool so long as the capacity is there (and if it isn't, it'll just throttle).
 

AbRASiON

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 28, 2004
Messages
352
I actually found a die shot of the 7700k and noticed that the actual cores themselves really consisted of significantly less die area than you'd think - considering shared cache, other logic, GPU etc

I would hazard a guess, adding 2 more cores could be as little as 20% more surface area.
I still think they'd want a lower voltage and frequency to ensure we don't hit those random 100c spikes, like we're seeing on the 7700k
 

chenw

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 26, 2014
Messages
3,977
Here is me hoping that Ryzen will keep up the pressure and maybe see an 8C/16T i7-9700k?
 

AbRASiON

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 28, 2004
Messages
352
Here is me hoping that Ryzen will keep up the pressure and maybe see an 8C/16T i7-9700k?
Might have trouble fitting the iGPU on that one - if you want 8 core, x299 for you.
(You might not like the iGPU, some of us do and it is part of the 1151 platform)
 

chenw

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 26, 2014
Messages
3,977
Might have trouble fitting the iGPU on that one - if you want 8 core, x299 for you.
(You might not like the iGPU, some of us do and it is part of the 1151 platform)
Don't particuarly care too much about the lack of iGPU, chances are I'll probably have a few spare GPUs lying around the house if the current GPU dies.

My problem with X platforms in general is the PCI-E lanes. 16 lane CPU on X platform just really compounds the cost of the system for no real good reason, and I probably will never settle for a 28 lane CPU (whoever thought 28 lanes was a good idea should be tarred and feathered, preferably a few times), so yeah...
 

RPGWiZaRD

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 24, 2009
Messages
1,177
So due to all the leaks happening now, it's starting to look like a launch in roughly 1 month after all? To me that would be a good indication that there will be backwards compatibility added on Z270 (and maybe Z170).
 

AbRASiON

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 28, 2004
Messages
352
It's a self fullfilling prophecy though, all the leaks said august, so the fake leakers will ramp up, just before august, won't they?

We really won't know until some more concrete evidence comes up.
 

IdiotInCharge

NVIDIA SHILL
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,710
For the higher core count parts, Intel can strip the iGPU down to next to nothing- it doesn't have to play games, just spit out a display for the spec. I even use them on my gaming system, and that's as much as I need. Free outputs for extra monitors either way.
 

AbRASiON

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 28, 2004
Messages
352
For the higher core count parts, Intel can strip the iGPU down to next to nothing- it doesn't have to play games, just spit out a display for the spec. I even use them on my gaming system, and that's as much as I need. Free outputs for extra monitors either way.


I agree, as long as it can do 3 monitors 4k 60Hz, 2d Windows, I'm happy
 

juanrga

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
2,801
Isn't the max for the 7700k 4.5 ghz sc? I can't see even the sc clocks being higher due to the greater complexity. Also, it would be strange for Intel to have the 8800k that much faster than the 7800x.

Coffee Lake uses 14nm++. SKL-X and Kabylake use 14nm+.

Also Coffee Lake is a simpler core than the one used in 7800X (no 512bit units, 1/4th of L2) and that affects f_max as well.
 

Cali3350

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 22, 2002
Messages
4,700
Relevant chart for 14nm++ benefits:
http://techreport.com/r.x/2017_03_30_Intel_manufacturing_day/14nmcharacteristic.png

SHows 14nm, 14nm+, and 14nm++

14nm+ (Kabylake) did improve clocks about 20% at the same power in ULV form factor (i.e. ~ 3 GHz). but only about ~ 8% at desktop clocks. 14nm++ looks pretty health on this. "It's only 14nm" isn't true.
That is Intel PR though. Im not saying there wont be improvements, but I need to see it before I outright believe it.
 

-Sweeper_

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 2, 2016
Messages
184
With 4.6-4.7 GHz Turbo for 1-2 core operations and 50% extra L3 cache I believe i7-8700K will be the new king for CPU-intensive games and other apps that require stellar performance-per-core.

The entire lineup is aggressively clocked and competitive, people will be positively surprised. :coffee:
 

RPGWiZaRD

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 24, 2009
Messages
1,177
The entire lineup is aggressively clocked and competitive, people will be positively surprised. :coffee:

Except for the AMD fanbois that will already insist 6 core and clock frequencies & IPC is a thing of the past and despite real world tests showing a different result. Emulators that I'm interesting in, is particularly funny scenario where you can get linear performance boost with clock frequency scaling.
 
Last edited:

Cali3350

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 22, 2002
Messages
4,700
Except for the AMD fanbois that will already insist 6 core and clock frequencies & IPC is a thing of the past and despite real world tests showing a different result. Emulators that I'm interesting in, is particularly funny scenario where you can get linear performance boost with clock frequency scaling.
Extreme AMD Fanboys are annoying, yes. But Ryzen is a great option for a lot of builders. A 6 core / 12 thread processor for $219 with a cooler that will allow you to take it to 4GHZ is pretty absurd.

For absolute peak performance, Intel is clearly still the better option though. Which is why im holding off on CoffeeLake. I want 6 cores at 5GHZ.
 

Brahmzy

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Messages
4,958
CFL supposed to have any new instructions or DRM enhancements over KBL as it relates to UHD/4K playback n compatibility?

Any OTHER reasons to go CFL besides core/thread count? Same lanes, same MoBos etc.
 

Raendor

Gawd
Joined
Sep 21, 2015
Messages
845
Exclusive: Intel® Core™ i7-8700K Specifications (Coffee Lake)

6C/12T
12MB L3
3.7 GHz Base
4.3 GHz 6-core Turbo
4.4 GHz 4-core Turbo
4.6 GHz 2-core Turbo
4.7 GHz 1-core Turbo
95W TDP

Disclaimer: The source this info comes from has provided accurate Intel leaks in the past. For now, treat it like a rumor, but rest assured I will let you know about any changes. No pricing (MSRP) information yet. Next in line, Core i5-8600K specifications.

z170/270 support updates? Any info on that?
 
Top