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 .

Raendor

Gawd
Joined
Sep 21, 2015
Messages
845
i was hoping they will confirm supported chipsets and socket by that time. I know it should be 1151, but who knows what it will end up with knowing intel. I'll be not happy if at least z270 is not supported.
 

SomeGuy133

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
3,447
Yep. And 24 or so from the chipset via the shared DMI interface.
still wondering the latency differences between the two.

I guess time will tell when we get real optane m.2 cards and someone tests the two ports....why is this not common knowledge :/

I do miss PCIe PCH slots :/ I would put my 10Gb E card in that so my GPU gets 16x lanes :/
 

Shintai

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
5,678
still wondering the latency differences between the two.

I guess time will tell when we get real optane m.2 cards and someone tests the two ports....why is this not common knowledge :/

I do miss PCIe PCH slots :/ I would put my 10Gb E card in that so my GPU gets 16x lanes :/

You can just look at PLX chips to get an idea. They tend to be 130-150ns latency added.
https://www.broadcom.com/products/pcie-switches-bridges/pcie-switches/

But I agree, we are nearing a point where we need more in mainstream terms.
 

SomeGuy133

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
3,447
You can just look at PLX chips to get an idea. They tend to be 130-150ns latency added.
https://www.broadcom.com/products/pcie-switches-bridges/pcie-switches/

But I agree, we are nearing a point where we need more in mainstream terms.
https://www.techpowerup.com/233487/intel-to-introduce-3d-xpoint-dimm-tech-to-the-market-on-2018

this is why i would not make that statement. The different in latency and IOP from PCIe to Memory is microseconds to nanoseconds. I doubt there is only a 100ns delay in the PCH and added distance from CPU. It would be a better guess to say micro seconds differences vs nano seconds. But i still wouldnt claim shit without a real source. I find nano second difference to be BS given what little we know.
 

Shintai

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
5,678
I would not assume that is even remotely comparable.

Why isn't it comparable? It's the exact same concept.

https://www.techpowerup.com/233487/intel-to-introduce-3d-xpoint-dimm-tech-to-the-market-on-2018

this is why i would not make that statement. The different in latency and IOP from PCIe to Memory is microseconds to nanoseconds. I doubt there is only a 100ns delay in the PCH and added distance from CPU. It would be a better guess to say micro seconds differences vs nano seconds. But i still wouldnt claim shit without a real source. I find nano second difference to be BS given what little we know.

What are you trying to compare with what exactly?

Some 100us NAND? 10us 3DXpoint NVME or some 250ns 3DXpoint DIMMs?

For 3DXpoint NVME drives a PCIe switch adds something like 1-1.5% latency.
 

SomeGuy133

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
3,447
Why isn't it comparable? It's the exact same concept.



What are you trying to compare with what exactly?

Some 100us NAND? 10us 3DXpoint NVME or some 250ns 3DXpoint DIMMs?

For 3DXpoint NVME drives a PCIe switch adds something like 1-1.5% latency.
your assuming the PCH is the exact same. I would not assume such a thing. I have no clue how much farther the copper is, its cycles, assume there is no other types of overhead and so on. I have no idea how much father the path from the PCH is to the CPU and whatever else is going on conversions or whatever.

You seriously talk out of your ass way too much and make ridiculous assumptions on things you have no knowledge of.

SATA goes through the PCH and its latency is horrific comparably. Is that because of SATA or PCH or both. I am not going to pretend i know. You can be my guest but until someone with real knowledge does a flow chart break down with latencies I am not making guesses.

Which brings me to a tangent...why is the average latency between all aspects of a computer not mapped? I am surprises there is no common knowledge flow chart of the latencies of everything on a computer.

I remember talks in the 90s or 2000s about BTX being better and worse for latecies between different parts and talks going on about making a better layout that is better for cooling and latency for computer parts. I remember the talks going on but never heard more than that. It was an interesting debate though.

http://www.myce.com/review/native-z170-hyper-m-2-vs-pcie3-m-2-77791/final-thoughts-4/

only place that has tested it but all the photos are broken. Also 950 PRO is not even remotely comparable to Optane so if their are latency issues it might not be noticeable until you throw Optane into the picture since optane is magnitudes faster....time will tell I guess.
 
Last edited:

Shintai

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
5,678
your assuming the PCH is the exact same. I would not assume such a thing. I have no clue how much farther the copper is, its cycles, assume there is no other types of overhead and so on. I have no idea how much father the path from the PCH is to the CPU and whatever else is going on conversions or whatever.

You seriously talk out of your ass way too much and make ridiculous assumptions on things you have no knowledge of.

SATA goes through the PCH and its latency is horrific comparably. Is that because of SATA or PCH or both. I am not going to pretend i know. You can be my guest but until someone with real knowledge does a flow chart break down with latencies I am not making guesses.

Which brings me to a tangent...why is the average latency between all aspects of a computer not mapped? I am surprises there is no common knowledge flow chart of the latencies of everything on a computer.

I remember talks in the 90s or 2000s about BTX being better and worse for latecies between different parts and talks going on about making a better layout that is better for cooling and latency for computer parts. I remember the talks going on but never heard more than that. It was an interesting debate though.

If you think it somehow works differently, prove it. I supplied numbers on PCIe switching latencies.
 

SomeGuy133

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
3,447
If you think it somehow works differently, prove it. I supplied numbers on PCIe switching latencies.
i just edited. Check it again.

You provided something that is irrelevant and not comparable and pretend that it is comparable with no factual basis. That is how bad misconceptions are created. I forget what it was but about 5-10 years ago there was this horrible misconception that would simple not die. It was when i used to post on a laptop forum. There have beena few over the years. Wish I recalled what they were :/

Oh one of them was application of TIMs...hell I still see it on this forum today about how air bubbles are formed.

The other had to do with CPUs or something. There were quite a few but whatever.

A classic is the flicker threshold lol.
 

Shintai

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
5,678
i just edited. Check it again.

You provided something that is irrelevant and not comparable and pretend that it is comparable with no factual basis. That is how bad misconceptions are created. I forget what it was but about 5-10 years ago there was this horrible misconception that would simple not die. It was when i used to post on a laptop forum. There have beena few over the years. Wish I recalled what they were :/

Oh one of them was application of TIMs...hell I still see it on this forum today about how air bubbles are formed.

The other had to do with CPUs or something. There were quite a few but whatever.

A classic is the flicker threshold lol.

The images on the site you linked doesn't load at all. Got something else?

And seems you have conflicting benchmarks.
According to PC Mark 8 storage suite, connecting via the native Z170 hyper M.2 socket provides a marginally faster connection when compared to connecting the Samsung 950 Pro NVMe SSD to the main PCI3 x16 sockets. However, just like in the synthetic benchmarks, the difference in performance is so slight between the two connection methods to be unnoticeable in the real world.

Also how the M.2 slot on the actual board is connected, not to mention how much it was shared with over the DMI 3.0.

So I dont see you have proven anything.
 
Last edited:

CSI_PC

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 3, 2016
Messages
2,193
your assuming the PCH is the exact same. I would not assume such a thing. I have no clue how much farther the copper is, its cycles, assume there is no other types of overhead and so on. I have no idea how much father the path from the PCH is to the CPU and whatever else is going on conversions or whatever.

You seriously talk out of your ass way too much and make ridiculous assumptions on things you have no knowledge of.

SATA goes through the PCH and its latency is horrific comparably. Is that because of SATA or PCH or both. I am not going to pretend i know. You can be my guest but until someone with real knowledge does a flow chart break down with latencies I am not making guesses.

Which brings me to a tangent...why is the average latency between all aspects of a computer not mapped? I am surprises there is no common knowledge flow chart of the latencies of everything on a computer.

I remember talks in the 90s or 2000s about BTX being better and worse for latecies between different parts and talks going on about making a better layout that is better for cooling and latency for computer parts. I remember the talks going on but never heard more than that. It was an interesting debate though.

http://www.myce.com/review/native-z170-hyper-m-2-vs-pcie3-m-2-77791/final-thoughts-4/

only place that has tested it but all the photos are broken. Also 950 PRO is not even remotely comparable to Optane so if their are latency issues it might not be noticeable until you throw Optane into the picture since optane is magnitudes faster....time will tell I guess.

Worth remembering SATA needs to use the more traditional-historical protocol, one reason it is much slower than NVMe that has much lower latencies without conversion.

Problem with calculating latency generally over the whole PC environment; different protocols, different HW (such as 3D XPoint to SSD Nand), maximum lanes via PCH (and also applies to Ryzen in a different way due to how it contends specific funcions), contention and activity from multiple devices so how decide the impact, possibly controller used with storage device, etc.

For Skylake here is how the PCH can be setup in terms of those HSIO and PCIe; not all are usable hence why Z170 here has up to 20 PCIe lanes separate to the GPU.


PCH%20Allocation_575px.png




BTW in that test you link, I notice she also had a GPU connected to the x16 lanes (minor quibble but still ideally should be just the storage device for such testing as we do not know if that influences and importantly which motherboard slots the devices went into).
They say "and then connected to the main PCIe3 x16 socket", but then you would not have the Nvidia 950 GPU listed as part of the HW test machine setup *shrug*.
And unfortunately one really really needs to know just how well the Hyper M.2 card converter-controller works in the PCIe slot, comes back to also component and also BIOS.
That said, another site Puget systems showed that M.2 will throttle after 60 seconds, so not sure why the performance was not there when converted to use the PCI gen 3 x4 motherboard slot that has better air/cooling potential.
https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Samsung-950-Pro-M-2-Throttling-Analysis-776/

Cheers
 
Last edited:

Shintai

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
5,678
Even something like AHCI vs NVME on PCIe makes a massive difference.

Screen%20Shot%202014-06-02%20at%2010.29.34%20PM.png
 

CSI_PC

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 3, 2016
Messages
2,193
your assuming the PCH is the exact same. I would not assume such a thing. I have no clue how much farther the copper is, its cycles, assume there is no other types of overhead and so on. I have no idea how much father the path from the PCH is to the CPU and whatever else is going on conversions or whatever.

You seriously talk out of your ass way too much and make ridiculous assumptions on things you have no knowledge of.

SATA goes through the PCH and its latency is horrific comparably. Is that because of SATA or PCH or both. I am not going to pretend i know. You can be my guest but until someone with real knowledge does a flow chart break down with latencies I am not making guesses.

Which brings me to a tangent...why is the average latency between all aspects of a computer not mapped? I am surprises there is no common knowledge flow chart of the latencies of everything on a computer.

I remember talks in the 90s or 2000s about BTX being better and worse for latecies between different parts and talks going on about making a better layout that is better for cooling and latency for computer parts. I remember the talks going on but never heard more than that. It was an interesting debate though.

http://www.myce.com/review/native-z170-hyper-m-2-vs-pcie3-m-2-77791/final-thoughts-4/

only place that has tested it but all the photos are broken. Also 950 PRO is not even remotely comparable to Optane so if their are latency issues it might not be noticeable until you throw Optane into the picture since optane is magnitudes faster....time will tell I guess.

Sorry for 2nd post follow-up.
A big consideration is importantly using multiple drives/devices just like we do in real life and especially enthusiasts or more so prosumer.
This further compounds the contention sharing, which is not necessarily captured in a lot of these tests due to focus on a a single product storage device without other variables being introduced.
Cheers
 

SomeGuy133

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
3,447
Sorry for 2nd post follow-up.
A big consideration is importantly using multiple drives/devices just like we do in real life and especially enthusiasts or more so prosumer.
This further compounds the contention sharing, which is not necessarily captured in a lot of these tests due to focus on a a single product storage device without other variables being introduced.
Cheers
The throttling is heat...its been known. I have never had throttling on my 950 PRO because my case isn't shit and has airflow.

My point is latency exists due to drivers, distance, hub, timings, and different direct routes to the CPU. PCIe vs Memory channel is magnitudes different. PCH adds a whole another layer of delays and i wouldnt just claim a plx chip is equivalent.

PCIe ACHI NAND is faster than SATA too by miles in latency even without NVMe. My point is there is too many unknowns to claim what shintai was trying to spew.

To claim DMI is the same as PCI and the PCH is the same as a plex chip is a ridiculous assumption.

Shintai has a horrible habit of talking out of his ass on the forum and claiming knowledge he has none of.

I have seen no information on the latency differences between PCH and PCIe and i have tried googling too and see many posts people asking for an answer and never getting a reliable one.

I wouldnt claim what shintai was baselessly claiming.
 

Caedo

n00b
Joined
May 22, 2013
Messages
49
Well this is it. I want to run SLI, a soundcard and M.2 drives.

What motherboard do you have? In my Maximus V Gene, the onboard sound is shockingly good even when I don't use SPDIF out (which I do exclusively). I would venture to say most full featured motherboards should preclude the need for sound cards. If audio quality is that important, optical out is probably a better solution anyway, no?
 
Last edited:

Vittra

Gawd
Joined
Jul 9, 2005
Messages
908
There are still motherboards that have PCI-E slots that are traced to the chipset. My Asus Maximus VIII Gene (Z170) has a physical 16x slot which is actually electrically PCI-E 3.0 x4 and routed the chipset. It's one of the main reasons I got it, and one of the reasons I believe the Z270 mATX boards are inferior - despite having 4x additional lanes. I find the shift away from this to 2x M.2 slots provides less flexibility overall.

I did note however when I was doing some quick research for ATX Z270 boards, that the IX Hero (Z270) has one of these as well. I'm sure there are others, I just didn't delve into the ATX boards too deeply.
 

elvn

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 5, 2006
Messages
4,279
http://www.overclock.net/t/1564342/onboard-audio-vs-video-card-hdmi-out/10

-------------------------
"Originally Posted by mistersprinkles

Yes the sound is being fed to whatever output you have selected. Remember that your integrated audio's primary job is to be a DAC. If there is no digital/analog conversion ocurring inside the PC, the audio has no reason to go through integrated.

If the audio were going out an SPDIF integrated onto the motherboard, it would, again, not really be going through the audio section of the motherboard (the ALC1150/892/etc chip and the capacitors/opamps, etc) so much as it would just be piped directly to the SPDIF port.

The information with digital out is just that- DIGITAL. Nothing needs to be done with it. It's just data. It remains a series of 0's and 1's until a digital to analog converstion occurs in your outboard DAC/stereo/receiver/TV/soundbar/etc.

The QUALITY of the digital to analog conversion is perhaps the single most important factor in deciding how good your audio will sound. There are DACs out there costing $14000. And there are DACs costing $50. Not only will the actual audio quality out of an expensive DAC be better, but it will support a wider range of formats and sample rates as well.

An entry level DAC may only support 44.1/48/96Khz and that's it. A high end DAC will support everything up to 5+Mhz (DSD). The best DAC's out there right now, as far as most people are concerned, not counting the "ridiculously expensive" stuff are the "Chord Hugo" and "Schiit Yggrsil""

---------------------------------
Posted by Tacoboy

"Ahhhh....makes more sense to me now. So since I'm using the hdmi out of my video card, the audio data goes through the motherboard and out the hdmi, and the onboard audio not helping in this case. The hdmi is going through my home theater receiver which is a Yamaha V377 500W 5.1 surround setup.

Thanks alot for your help, I have one more question for ya
smile.gif
The best my receiver can put out from the pc is a simulated surround mode. I figured from owning gaming consoles which have supported dolby digital and dts 5.1 for some time now, certainly pc gaming would offer those formats as well. But I never see them in the audio options of the games I've tried so far, GTA V for example. Only the option to select the type of speaker setup. This might be a silly question, but , am i missing something? Or do the games not support those formats?"

--------------------------------------
Posted by mistersprinkles
"The audio is going thru the HDMI cable and out the speakers, there is no additional "audio processing" needed, by the receiver, as all the receiver is doing is taking in 6-channels of digital audio, sending it thru it's DAC feature, then amplifying it and sending it out to 6 speakers.

The game itself has already done the "audio processing"."

===================================================================================================


http://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answ...dia-based-graphics-card-to-work-with-my-hdtv?

3) Finally, newer NVIDIA GPUs such as the GeForce G210, GeForce GT220 or GeForce GTX 480 have added an internal HD audio codec. This is like having an internal sound controller built right into the graphics card. The NVIDIA internal HD audio codec can only be used to output to an HDMI (or DisplayPort) display. It does not support analog audio. If you require analog audio (i.e. for headphones or PC speakers), you must continue to use your PC's sound controller. The NVIDIA internal HD audio codec is superior to analog audio or S/PDIF signal. While S/PDIF is limited to compressed 5.1 multi-channel, the NVIDIA HD audio codec can support additional audio channels and also support more advanced audio formats used with Blu-ray movies. If you have a graphics card with internal NVIDIA HD audio codec, simply plug the HDMI audio cable from your graphics card to your HDTV and it will carry both video and audio. No other internal or external cables are needed from your sound card for audio.

For more information on the audio codecs supports, please view the Knowledge Base Article Which HDMI audio formats do NVIDIA GPUs support?

==============================

https://forums.geforce.com/default/...anding-desktop-from-my-dvi-dp-144hz-monitor-/

masterotaku said:
Most modern games I play work in 5.1, by the way.

D-Man11
So do most older games. The problem lies in what was used and what you have in your chain. In most cases, the format is going to converted and emulated and not true to the engineered recordings of the game developer.

Like older games used Miles Sound System, EAX, OpenAL, A3D....if your soundcard does not support these formats, it will play it in 5.1 still, but it will be virtual/simulated by the decoder used. The same thing with new games and the myriad of encoding that they use.

https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/932657/3d-vision/dolby-atmos/post/4873463/#4873463 you can see some of the different old audio formats here


Since you will watch a lot of video, you'll probably be happy with an AVR. But if your serious about gaming, you should approach it like GibsonRed and his setup.

https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/932657/3d-vision/dolby-atmos/post/4871195/#4871195



Sora

Miles is not a hardware library, it is purely software, same as A3D and will work across HDMI just fine.

OpenAL is also a software library which has a hardware implementation only available on Creative sound cards - it can output multichannel across hdmi with no trouble.

EAX has software and hardware implementations, but developers at the time mostly just went with the hardware surround method, so to get surround from this you need both DSound to OpenAL wrapper.

You will not get multichannel audio from any game using a hardware dsound output over hdmi, unless using the xfi titanium HD which has a hdmi port for this very purpose as it can route the wrapped dsound>openal output over its own hardware.
 

Syphon Filter

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 19, 2003
Messages
2,597
What motherboard do you have?

Maximus VI Formula - You're right I could use on-board.

Still, for my next upgrade I'd like to be able to run 16/16 for SLI and still have spare for M.2 (4), maybe even RAID M.2 (so 8).

But I think it;s already been noted above that 16/16 for SLI won't make any real difference.
 

AbRASiON

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 28, 2004
Messages
352
Sigh, want more news :/
I even have a google alert configured for "coffee lake" to email me.
 

RPGWiZaRD

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 24, 2009
Messages
1,203
Sigh, want more news :/
I even have a google alert configured for "coffee lake" to email me.

Same here! Extra spicy news would be some leaked overclock @ 5GHz (I'm sure it'll have a decent chance reaching it if u just bring voltage fairly high also on non-subzero temps just for the sake of doing it), then I'll be like:

ron-paul-its-happening-its-happening-45ghz-plus-6c12t-overclocks.jpg


But I doubt that happens before mid-June ~ early July possibly. Intel has been pretty strict with NDA regulation these last years. I'm guessing 4.6~4.8GHz on highend air/water might become the norm.
 
Last edited:

Caedo

n00b
Joined
May 22, 2013
Messages
49
How often do current i7's hit > 4.5GHz? Anecdotally, it seems the Sandy chips could do it much more frequently than Haswell and subsequent processors. If Coffee Lake does give us a 4.5 giggle 6c/12t i7, I will be absolutely tickled.
 

SomeGuy133

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
3,447
How often do current i7's hit > 4.5GHz? Anecdotally, it seems the Sandy chips could do it much more frequently than Haswell and subsequent processors. If Coffee Lake does give us a 4.5 giggle 6c/12t i7, I will be absolutely tickled.
most 4790K and 6700Ks his 4.5 and all 7700Ks hit 4.5 and most 7700Ks hit 5GHz and some hit 5.2GHz.

Kaby has amazing clocks. Which is why people are hopeful cream of crop of the cannonlakes will hit 5GHz
 

Shintai

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
5,678
most 4790K and 6700Ks his 4.5 and all 7700Ks hit 4.5 and most 7700Ks hit 5GHz and some hit 5.2GHz.

Kaby has amazing clocks. Which is why people are hopeful cream of crop of the cannonlakes will hit 5GHz

Cannonlake is mobile only ;)

Desktop goes Kaby Lake(14nm+)->Coffee Lake(14nm++)->Icelake(10nm+).
 

AbRASiON

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 28, 2004
Messages
352
Higher clocks for me please. I like old software
Then you're waiting for the wrong CPU, it's 14nm++ which is mostly meaningless marketing speak.
The cream of the crop 14nm period is kaby, because only 4 cores. Adding 2 more isn't going to give us more frequency, it's going to take it away.

I suspect 5ghz coffee lake will be far far rarer than 5ghz kaby lake. I'm ok with that as long as it does 4.5 -> 4.6 kind of area. It'll still thrash Ryzen at a heap more benchmarks than it already does.
 

SomeGuy133

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
3,447
Then you're waiting for the wrong CPU, it's 14nm++ which is mostly meaningless marketing speak.
The cream of the crop 14nm period is kaby, because only 4 cores. Adding 2 more isn't going to give us more frequency, it's going to take it away.

I suspect 5ghz coffee lake will be far far rarer than 5ghz kaby lake. I'm ok with that as long as it does 4.5 -> 4.6 kind of area. It'll still thrash Ryzen at a heap more benchmarks than it already does.
i was saying 14nm+ was marketing gimmick but than intel pushed an extra 400mhz max out of highest binned CPUs (4.8GHz-5.2GHz) which surprised me! Most Kabys hit 5GHz which is much better than the average for SKL (4.5/4.6?) so I wouldnt call 14nm+ a gimmick so if history repeats we might luck out again and find some more mhz improvements.

400-500 more mhz is no marketing gimmick.
 

blkt

Gawd
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
666
Then you're waiting for the wrong CPU, it's 14nm++ which is mostly meaningless marketing speak.
The cream of the crop 14nm period is kaby, because only 4 cores. Adding 2 more isn't going to give us more frequency, it's going to take it away.

I suspect 5ghz coffee lake will be far far rarer than 5ghz kaby lake. I'm ok with that as long as it does 4.5 -> 4.6 kind of area. It'll still thrash Ryzen at a heap more benchmarks than it already does.
Wait, what makes you think there will be no 4C variant of coffee lake for desktop use?
 

CSI_PC

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 3, 2016
Messages
2,193
You keep saying this, but I really don't think it's true. Unless you delid, our make liberal use of the AVX offset, it seems most 7600/7700 will top out around 4.8GHz.

Hehe with you saying that reminds me of:



I cannot stop thinking of Mandy Patinkin in Homeland though still as the Spaniard lol.
That character will follow him around forever, classic cult film and book though.

Cheers
 

Immolation1991

Weaksauce
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
127
How likely is a 6C/12T i7 for less than 400$? Damn, I cant wait anymore, there were so many cpu deals in the past days where i live. I already bought a Ryzen 1600x because is was 30% off. Yesterday I saw 7700k + Z270 mobo for under 300 bucks after all kinds of rebates and cashback.
 

Veritas187

Weaksauce
Joined
Feb 9, 2017
Messages
84
How likely is a 6C/12T i7 for less than 400$? Damn, I cant wait anymore, there were so many cpu deals in the past days where i live. I already bought a Ryzen 1600x because is was 30% off. Yesterday I saw 7700k + Z270 mobo for under 300 bucks after all kinds of rebates and cashback.
Where the hell did you see 7700k+ z270 for 300??!
 
Top