# [Various] 6-Core Coffee Lake Lineup: i7-8700K & i5-8600K / Official Reviews & Benchmarks (Update 19)



## Robenger

What do you think the chances are of Intel using solder instead of pigeon poop?


----------



## teh-yeti

Odds of solder when the enthusiast line up uses pigeon poop? Slim to none.


----------



## epic1337

so if their i5s are 6C/6T, does that mean their i3s will finally become 4C/8T?
then theres pentium chips that could possibly be 4C/4T chips.


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *epic1337*
> 
> so if their i5s are 6C/6T, does that mean their i3s will finally become 4C/8T?
> then theres pentium chips that could possibly be 4C/4T chips.


That's what I expect as well. Although it's Intel so you never know, what makes sense to us doesn't seem to what makes sense to them sometimes


----------



## Nautilus

Part of me wishes for Z170 compatibility.


----------



## Clocknut

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nautilus*
> 
> Part of me wishes for Z170 compatibility.


it is intel, it will be like socket 775 situation or AMD AM3 vs AM3+ = older CPU are compatible to new chipset, while new cpu are not for old chipset.

btw, unlike X299 that caught pants down by threadripper. These chips is most likely a planned release, Intel probably has this chip ready for Zen. (since Zen has been make known to feature 8 core long long time ago, so I guess Intel has planned this chip to complete against it)


----------



## Cyrious

Well, the locked chips are likely dead on arrival (competition with Ryzen), the 6c 6t unlocked chip I don't see who would want to get that when there are other options, and the 6c12t is going to be fighting against the LGA 2066 hex and Ryzen 5 at the same time.


----------



## svenge

There's a gap in that lineup where the i5-8500 should be. Based on past patterns, it will probably be something like 6c/6t @ 3.2GHz base clock with a 95w TDP.

In my mind, there's only 3 processors worth buying in the mainstream Core series for each generation: The i7-K and i5-K for overclockers, and the i5-x5xx (e.g. 4570, 6500, 7500) for non-overclockers. The 2 OC chips are obvious, and the x5xx non-OC chip is the best balance of clock speed and price for those who aren't overclocking.

An H-series mobo + i5-x5xx really is the best and most cost-effective set-and-forget Intel solution available for those building systems for their less-technical friends. Just slap one together with a pre-overclocked GPU from your preferred vendor (e.g. an EVGA "SSC" model) and off you go. No need to worry if Skippy will know how to adjust the settings or anything then.


----------



## Starbuck5000

Any word on if these will also be found wanting when it comes to PCIe lanes?


----------



## aberrero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Starbuck5000*
> 
> Any word on if these will also be found wanting when it comes to PCIe lanes?


Of course they will. Intel is selling quad cores on X299. You think they'll let you have PCIe lanes on 6-cores?


----------



## amd-dude

Thanks AMD.


----------



## Evangelion

Thanks AMD! I hope I can use the 6 core on my Asus z270i Strix. If I have to buy another mobo then I'll just upgrade to a Ryzen system instead.


----------



## FLCLimax

Coffee Lake is a new platform, Z370. Gotta buy a whole new system. So CL new build, Ryzen and drop in Ryzen+ and Ryzen2 and Ryzen 3 when you feel like it(on the same board thanks AMD) or go SLX with the gimped 78XX witht the same I/O as CL(lol).


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> the 6c 6t unlocked chip I don't see who would want to get that when there are other options


It'd be the 2500k of coffee lake, such cpu's have been extremely popular in the past
Quote:


> and the 6c12t is going to be fighting against the LGA 2066 hex and Ryzen 5 at the same time.


Ryzen 5 isn't much competition when the MT perf is trading blows w/ ryzen 7 8c16t and ST perf is way ahead of everything ryzen


----------



## AlphaC

Need it to be able to hit 4.5GHz + all core for the 6 thread parts unless there's a double digit improvement in IPC over Kaby Lake.

i5-8600K or i7-8700k could be worthwhile purchases if there's overclocking headroom. ~ +11% like Kaby Lake would not be impressive (4.5GHz -- 5GHz is ~ 11%).

The locked i5-8400 is likely dead on arrival since 2.8GHz is a really low locked base clock.

Incredibly happy for x299 users that were planning on getting a i7-7800X though.

I believe as far as pricing goes it'll likely be $350 for the i7s and $250 for the i5s , so it comes down to motherboard cost.

edit: sisoft sandra scores for discussion

http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_run.php?q=c2ffcee889e8d5e3dbecdfe6d4f280bd8dabceab96a680f3cef6&l=en (6C 3.5GHz, 6x 256kB L2, 9MB L3)
http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_system.php?q=cea598ab9aaa9dad9abcdbe6cbfadcae93a385ecd1e0c6ae93a680f8c5f4d2b7d2efdff98ab78f&l=en
http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_run.php?q=c2ffcee889e8d5e3daeddcead8fe8cb181a7c2a79aaa8cffc2fa&l=en (6C 12T 3.59GHz, 3.3GHz IMC, 6x 256kB L2, 12MB L3)

and geekbench from earlier
http://techreport.com/news/32157/rumor-six-core-coffee-lake-cpu-pops-up-in-geekbench , https://hothardware.com/news/intel-coffee-lake-6-core-cpu-multi-core-performance-leaked-geekbench

6 core, 12 thread 3.2GHz "Kaby Lake" = 4619 single core and 20828 multi core


----------



## kd5151

7800x+


----------



## TheWizardMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clocknut*
> 
> it is intel, it will be like socket 775 situation or AMD AM3 vs AM3+ = older CPU are compatible to new chipset, while new cpu are not for old chipset.
> 
> btw, unlike X299 that caught pants down by threadripper. These chips is most likely a planned release, Intel probably has this chip ready for Zen. (since Zen has been make known to feature 8 core long long time ago, so I guess Intel has planned this chip to complete against it)


Actually, most rumours out yesterday suggest it is compatible with Z270 and some Z170 chipsets.


----------



## czin125

4 / 6 * 95W is approximately 64W ( 63.3333 )

A Xeon E3-1280 V5 ( A top binned Skylake ) runs at 3.7ghz using 80W. A lower binned 14nm++ quad core can run at 3.7ghz using only 64W.

A Xeon equivalent of the E3-1280 should clock a little higher with the same voltage at 64 TDP. 3.9ghz 64W 4C/8T Xeon?


----------



## EniGma1987

Wonder if Intel will go "well, we increased the cores by 50% so we also need to increase price", or if they will finally bring the price back down to $320 for the top model due to competition. Tired of this $420 nonesense.


----------



## FLCLimax

You already know the answer.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> Wonder if Intel will go "well, we increased the cores by 50% so we also need to increase price", or if they will finally bring the price back down to $320 for the top model due to competition. Tired of this $420 nonesense.


Price is very important. If this is higher than current 7700K there is no reason to give Intel money.


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Need it to be able to hit 4.5GHz + all core for the 6 thread parts unless there's a double digit improvement in IPC over Kaby Lake.


4.5ghz all core would be extremely low given that kaby averages 5.0 and intel's 14nm is continually being improved in iterations; the last one saw a +300mhz gain from Skylake to Kaby.


----------



## artemis2307

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> 4.5ghz all core would be extremely low given that kaby averages 5.0 and intel's 14nm is continually being improved in iterations; the last one saw a +300mhz gain from Skylake to Kaby.


if they could go higher, they would, but look, 3.7ghz


----------



## Cyro999

3.7ghz guaranteed on all 6c12t while iGPU is maxed


----------



## artemis2307

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> 3.7ghz guaranteed on all 6c12t while iGPU is maxed, single core turbo and OC limits won't be anywhere near that.


it's a K chip, who cares about single core boost?
and seems like 8700K vs R7 won't be much different than 7800X vs R7


----------



## Clocknut

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> Wonder if Intel will go "well, we increased the cores by 50% so we also need to increase price", or if they will finally bring the price back down to $320 for the top model due to competition. Tired of this $420 nonesense.


It is going to price very close to 7800X.

7800X just released, no way they gonna price the i7 K below $300, unless Intel do a price cut on 7800X


----------



## PontiacGTX

Notice how none says 1151v2 but they say 1151.


----------



## artemis2307

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Notice how none says 1151v2 but they say 1151.


AMD came back to the game and suddenly 8th gen is compatible with 6th and 7th gen mobo
shows how much Intel has been playing us for the last decade, and more reason to support the Red team


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artemis2307*
> 
> AMD came back to the game and suddenly 8th gen is compatible with 6th and 7th gen mobo
> shows how much Intel has been playing us for the last decade, and more reason to support the Red team


I dont know, Skylake is Kaby Lake,Coffe lake is Skylake with some enhancement, I dont see why it shouldnt be compatible if the Intel CPUs at least are compatible 3 generations

Since 1150.also having backwards compatibility with your current platform is a reason to go AMD? that doesnt makes sense


----------



## FLCLimax

It's not compatible, there is no credible rumor to suggests it. In fact at the same show where mobo makers said that socket X399 would ship August 10th they said X370 was needed for these and would ship Q4.

Just learn to bring yourselves to say that an intel product isn't worth the box it ships in if you feel that way at heart....it's laughable to suggest that the only thing worth arguing about is if you can use this chip in the old socket when Intel puts out two new sockets every year and you all know it. Just say too little, too late and it's not worth buying trust me, it's theraputic.


----------



## Defoler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artemis2307*
> 
> it's a K chip, who cares about single core boost?
> and seems like 8700K vs R7 won't be much different than 7800X vs R7


I don't know. It looks to be a different layout than the 7800X if those specs are correct. So there might be some bigger changes internally that makes it a more gaming chip compared to the 7800X.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> Iif you can use this chip in the old socket when Intel puts out two new sockets every year and you all know it


That is very interesting.

Intel 2066 came out in 2017.
Intel 2011-3 came out in 2014.
Intel 2011 came out in 2011.

Intel 1151 came out in 2015.
Intel 1150 came out in 2013.
Intel 1155 came out in 2011.

I don't think mathematically 3 years difference or two years difference can support your claim.

This is also interesting because AM4 came out in 2016.
While AM3+ came out in 2010. So that meant 6 years of zero improvements.
AND FP4 came out in 2015, FP3 came out in 2014, FP2 came out in 2013.
Mathematically speaking, I think actually qualifies as one year difference.

Very interesting don't you think?


----------



## FLCLimax

Hey bro, does Cinebench matter today? What's the word?


----------



## Defoler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> Hey bro, does Cinebench matter today? What's the word?


As relevant as blender for gaming.
After all, the 1800x superiority in blender made, it as everyone expected, superior for ga... oh nvm.


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artemis2307*
> 
> it's a K chip, who cares about single core boost?


Few posts back the only thing that you cared about was stock speeds, only reason i mentioned it


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> does Cinebench matter today?


Do you use Cinema 4D?

If yes, then yes.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> It's not compatible, there is no credible rumor to suggests it. In fact at the same show where mobo makers said that socket X399 would ship August 10th they said X370 was needed for these and would ship Q4.
> 
> Just learn to bring yourselves to say that an intel product isn't worth the box it ships in if you feel that way at heart....it's laughable to suggest that the only thing worth arguing about is if you can use this chip in the old socket when Intel puts out two new sockets every year and you all know it. Just say too little, too late and it's not worth buying trust me, it's theraputic.


CanardPC? http://segmentnext.com/2017/07/18/intel-coffee-lake-cpus-compatible/
also x370 isnt AMD chipset?









Intel Since Released Haswell didnt change their TickTock for P-A-O? Intel has been stuck on optimization Since Kaby Lake, one could expect it will have compatibility with LGA1151, and it really makes a difference to have a 6c/12t with higher IPC and clock speed than one with slighly more cores and lower IPC lower frequency, specially in games
Quote:


> On the product side of things, Intel's strategy of keeping the same microarchitecture for two generations allows its business customers to guarantee the lifetime of the halo platform, and maintain consistency with CPU sockets in both consumer and enterprise. Moving to a three stage cycle has thrown some uncertainty on this, depending on how much 'optimization' will go into the PAO stage: whether it will be microarchitectural, better voltage and thermal qualities, or if it will be graphics focused, or even if it will keep the same socket/chipset. This has a knock on effect with Intel's motherboard partners, who have used the updated socket and chipset strategy every two generations as a spike in revenue.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Robenger*
> 
> What do you think the chances are of Intel using solder


Near zero.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Robenger*
> 
> instead of pigeon poop?


I'd bet almost anything that the same bondline thickness of pigeon poop would have considerably more thermal resistance than the Dow Corning stuff Intel uses...well, I guess that depends on what the pigeon has been eating.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Starbuck5000*
> 
> Any word on if these will also be found wanting when it comes to PCIe lanes?


PCI-E lanes are capped by the platform.

It's not physically even possible for these parts (or anything on LGA1151) to support more than 20 CPU attached lanes (16 PCI-E and 4 for the DMI to the PCH)


----------



## FLCLimax

Lot of words to not disprove anything, don't you think? Just buy the Z370 motherboard and enjoy it.


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> Few posts back the only thing that you cared about was stock speeds, only reason i mentioned it


Reading their posts someone is very salty about Intel.


----------



## Lee Patekar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> Reading their posts someone is very salty about Intel.


Lack of competition and monopolies do that to people. The war between AMD and intel is only starting.. hopefully its as good as the Athlon vs Pentium III and/or AthlonXp vs Pentium 4 days.


----------



## Megaman_90

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lee Patekar*
> 
> Lack of competition and monopolies do that to people. The war between AMD and intel is only starting.. hopefully its as good as the Athlon vs Pentium III and/or AthlonXp vs Pentium 4 days.


Agreed. AMD doing well will be good for all parties! Finally some innovation!


----------



## artemis2307

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> Few posts back the only thing that you cared about was stock speeds, only reason i mentioned it


The reason I mention base clock is the OC headroom
7700k have 4.2 base, 4.5 boost with a headroom of 4.9ghz avg
what do you think the 8700k with a 3.7 base can do max? 4.4? if that's the case, it's not gonna be different than the 7800X
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> Reading their posts someone is very salty about Intel.


Who isn't? 10 years a slave doesn't say anything to you?
Ooooh and talking about salt


----------



## Randomdude

If Intel was a person I'd ignore that person for a few years.

(not that I wouldn't either way, I don't buy PC components very often, but in this case, it's a matter of principle)


----------



## epic1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artemis2307*
> 
> Ooooh and talking about salt


curious point though, i don't see Ryzen as anything desktop product, but more like a server product on desktop SKUs.
to point out, AMD's infinity fabric is technically a scalable interconnect, its basically Intel's QPI equivalent.


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> I dont know, Skylake is Kaby Lake,Coffe lake is Skylake with some enhancement, I dont see why it shouldnt be compatible if the Intel CPUs at least are compatible 3 generations
> 
> Since 1150.also having backwards compatibility with your current platform is a reason to go AMD? that doesnt makes sense


The issue isnt really core architecture, but the increase in die size and number of cores. Compatibility will depends on if Intel can lay things out on the package that everything can communicate in the same number of pins and the current pin layout.


----------



## PostalTwinkie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Robenger*
> 
> What do you think the chances are of Intel using solder instead of pigeon poop?


You asked that while looking like your avatar, you troll!


----------



## Artikbot

Soooooo

Pricing? That could sway something I've in the pipeline either Intel's side or AMD's.


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artemis2307*
> 
> Who isn't? 10 years a slave doesn't say anything to you?


Me because I like everyone else had the choice to buy an AMD CPU instead of Intel. It always takes two to milk a market. Buying something and then complain afterwards about being milked and being salty is plain dumb. Its the same idiocy as the people who complain about DLC and microtransactions and such and then go ahead and buy them.


----------



## agello24

and i5 6 core. LMAO! now they want to move to 6 cores? AMD must have scared the crap out of them. for yrs people thought 4 was better than 6 or 8. now they move the idiots to 6 cores. this is why i laugh at their followers.


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Defoler*
> 
> As relevant as blender for gaming.
> After all, the 1800x superiority in blender made, it as everyone expected, superior for ga... oh nvm.


Don't you ever dare commenting on Cinebench scores when Coffee Lake's benches arrive.









Anyways, enthusiast level gaming market is already saturated with many SL and KL CPUs. To be honest, AMD Ryzen have 2x more L2 cache per core over Intel's CL. AMD already provides 6 core CPU at much cheaper rates and is no doubt going to get even better when future games are inevitably going to be optimized for that as well because we have improved L3 in Skylake-X as well.(remember what the latest patch did for Ryzen in AoTS) Either CL needs to show at least 10% IPC improvements over KL to sell it at Intel's usual rates, _Or_ unlocked 6 core CL's price needs to be no more than i7 7700k, _Or_ CL hexa core with KL level IPC would need to go at least 5.3 GHz normal OC to show some improvements against i7 7700k in gaming. Then I see the CL platform worth buying otherwise you're basically wasting money, imo.

Sandy Bridg users can sure go for CL no doubt if they specifically want to go for Intel, but after that, all unlocked quad core Intel CPUs from ivy bridge to kaby lake perform almost equal in games. Intel must unlock anyhow at least 10% IPC improvements with Coffee Lake.

imo.


----------



## Rmerwede

Proof that Intel has been sandbagging the whole time... This has turned into the dark ages of CPUs thanks to Intel's greed and AMD's incompetence.


----------



## philhalo66

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Robenger*
> 
> What do you think the chances are of Intel using solder instead of pigeon poop?


probably the same chances of you winning the lottery then getting hit by lightning.


----------



## Megaman_90

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *agello24*
> 
> and i5 6 core. LMAO! now they want to move to 6 cores? AMD must have scared the crap out of them. for yrs people thought 4 was better than 6 or 8. now they move the idiots to 6 cores. this is why i laugh at their followers.


Nobody ever said 4 cores were better than 6. Its just that historically Intel's single core performance has been better than AMD.

Single core performance is important for gaming.


----------



## kd5151

Take AMD out the picture. Intel was still going to release 6 cores one day. The ECO system is poisoned. We all should have faster products at lower prices even if we don't need them. Without innovation or competition.


----------



## marik123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nautilus*
> 
> Part of me wishes for Z170 compatibility.


+1 for me here and I wonder how well does it overclock?


----------



## agello24

yeah they did. intel, and a ton of other reviews did. why you think intel stuck with 4 cores and ramped the clock up to do better than AMD's 8 core ( somewhat).


----------



## gopackersjt

(THIS IS ALL SPECULATION)

People saying that the Coffee Lake won't support Z170/270 might be wrong. Remember back when Z87 and Haswell debuted? Then we got Z97 and Devil's Canyon? The i7 4770k to i7 4790k was basically the same jump as the i7 6700k to the i7 7700k. But even after the 4790k, we got Broadwell that was used in Z97 boards. Since Kaby Lake was basically another Devil's Canyon, I'm wondering if Coffee Lake will be Z270's Broadwell. But this is Intel, and they haven't made much sense recently. Just some thoughts of mine.


----------



## prznar1

Question is, new socket or not?


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Take AMD out the picture. Intel was still going to release 6 cores one day. The ECO system is poisoned. We all should have faster products at lower prices even if we don't need them. Without innovation or competition.


if this has same price as mainstream an i5 for 220usd or an i7 for 340 might worth compared to Kaby Lake x and skylake x


----------



## PostalTwinkie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *philhalo66*
> 
> probably the same chances of you winning the lottery then getting hit by lightning.


Hmmm....

More like the same chance of him getting struck by lighting, while filling out his lotto ticket, causing him to jerk and circle a different set of numbers than he had originally planned. Those new numbers end up being the winning numbers.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> if this has same price as mainstream an i5 for 220usd or an i7 for 340 might worth compared to Kaby Lake x and skylake x


Of course. Especially when you factor in cheaper motherboards with less lanes and dual channel memory. The 7800x is $390. Why would the new 8700k with 6c/12t be any higher? What I don't get is the quad core i7 is still $350.


----------



## philhalo66

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PostalTwinkie*
> 
> Hmmm....
> 
> More like the same chance of him getting struck by lighting, while filling out his lotto ticket, causing him to jerk and circle a different set of numbers than he had originally planned. Those new numbers end up being the winning numbers.


I like yours better, and your more than likely correct.


----------



## teh-yeti

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *philhalo66*
> 
> I like yours better, and your more than likely correct.


I'm not so sure. His is still technically possible whereas some Intel executive has almost certainly already made it a 0% chance of solder under the ihs.


----------



## AlphaC

People, there's still a use for 6 core CPUs with high IPC and high clocks.

Some software is licensed by logical core (in these cases hyperthreading or SMT is disabled sometimes).

Some software is embarrassingly linear in nature (i.e. serial rather than parallel).

A 6 core that can reach > 5GHz on air with superior IPC to Kaby Lake would have a use , especially since due to Amdahl's law _after 6 cores there's diminished returns for parallelism_.


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PostalTwinkie*
> 
> Hmmm....
> 
> More like the same chance of him getting struck by lighting, while filling out his lotto ticket, causing him to jerk and circle a different set of numbers than he had originally planned. Those new numbers end up being the winning numbers.


The odds of becoming a lightning victim in the U.S. in any one year is 1 in 700,000. The odds of being struck in your lifetime is 1 in 3,000. - National Geographic.

Tonight's Mega Millions jackpot odds ($232 mill): 1 in 258,890,850.

Odds of intel not using pigeon poop in Coffee Lake: 0 in ∞.


----------



## Nutty Pumpkin

I'm excited by the prospect of 6-core consumer chips from Intel. They are feeling the pressure from Ryzen. Hopefully they are priced right and with their single core benefit it's just going to keep the innovation coming from both sides and...

Let's stop caring who it comes from and enjoy the new tasty silicon.


----------



## ThePath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> There's a gap in that lineup where the i5-8500 should be. Based on past patterns, it will probably be something like 6c/6t @ 3.2GHz base clock with a 95w TDP.
> 
> .


guru3d is wrong

The non-k 6 core models have 65w TDP (all other sources are saying that, and guru3d put 95w TDP by mistake
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artemis2307*
> 
> it's a K chip, who cares about single core boost?
> and seems like 8700K vs R7 won't be much different than 7800X vs R7


8700K has 200MHz higher base clock than 7800X and maybe higher IPC


----------



## kingduqc

5ghz 12 thread please.


----------



## Clocknut

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rmerwede*
> 
> Proof that Intel has been sandbagging the whole time... This has turned into the dark ages of CPUs thanks to Intel's greed and AMD's incompetence.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nutty Pumpkin*
> 
> I'm excited by the prospect of 6-core consumer chips from Intel. They are feeling the pressure from Ryzen. Hopefully they are priced right and with their single core benefit it's just going to keep the innovation coming from both sides and...
> 
> Let's stop caring who it comes from and enjoy the new tasty silicon.


Good, lets MAKE sure intel can sandbag again, by buying 8700K instead of Ryzen 5, so AMD do not earn enough bucks and market share. Next time AMD will create bulldozer 2.0

Well thats what happened to Radeon 4870 & Athlon64 back then.


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clocknut*
> 
> Good, lets MAKE sure intel can sandbag again, by buying 8700K instead of Ryzen 5, so AMD do not earn enough bucks and market share. Next time AMD will create bulldozer 2.0
> 
> Well thats what happened to Radeon 4870 & Athlon64 back then.


Or just buy the best product that fits your needs and budget with 0 loyalty to some huge corporation that views you as less than a rounding error.


----------



## Randomdude

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> Or just buy the best product that fits your needs and budget with 0 loyalty to some huge corporation that views you as less than a rounding error.


Can you elaborate with examples please? I find your comment interesting and want to make the most of it in this context, thank you.


----------



## Defoler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Don't you ever dare commenting on Cinebench scores when Coffee Lake's benches arrive.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyways, enthusiast level gaming market is already saturated with many SL and KL CPUs. To be honest, AMD Ryzen have 2x more L2 cache per core over Intel's CL. AMD already provides 6 core CPU at much cheaper rates and is no doubt going to get even better when future games are inevitably going to be optimized for that as well because we have improved L3 in Skylake-X as well.(remember what the latest patch did for Ryzen in AoTS) Either CL needs to show at least 10% IPC improvements over KL to sell it at Intel's usual rates, _Or_ unlocked 6 core CL's price needs to be no more than i7 7700k, _Or_ CL hexa core with KL level IPC would need to go at least 5.3 GHz normal OC to show some improvements against i7 7700k in gaming. Then I see the CL platform worth buying otherwise you're basically wasting money, imo.
> 
> Sandy Bridg users can sure go for CL no doubt if they specifically want to go for Intel, but after that, all unlocked quad core Intel CPUs from ivy bridge to kaby lake perform almost equal in games. Intel must unlock anyhow at least 10% IPC improvements with Coffee Lake.
> 
> imo.


I don't comment on cinebench because for games and that market segment, it is irrelevant. Same as bender.
On the enthusiastic and mid range market, unless all you do is running cinebench 24/7, it doesn't matter.

And as I stated in the past, if you need a creative work CPU, AMD are now finally making sense (if you run programs that actually utilize those amount of threads). If you need a gaming CPU (which is basically the mid range lineup for intel), AMD doesn't make any sense for their lack of performance.

Regarding cache sizes, since AMD and intel work very differently, you can't really compare CL to ryzen in terms of how they work their cache. You can only compare CL vs KL vs SL.
But if you want to compare, intel's creative work chips are the 2066 socket series. Those have 1MB of L2 per core (2x that of AMD), but they have a some weird L3 cache (8.25MB on the 7800X).
For CL, maybe that isn't needed so they can get away with much less L2 cache, but they put 12MB of L3 cache, way more than the 7800X, and even more than the 1800x, which might mean for some work, L3 is more important.
Which is why there is a big difference between the two systems on the intel side. The 2066 socket series is made for creative work, for more memory channels, for more hardware connected slots, and the 1151 is for mid range and enthusiastic gamers. And it makes sense.

And performance increase, you have no idea if it will be 5% in crease in IPC, 10% or 50%. We will just have to wait and see. I'm not going to pass judgment the same as I didn't pass judgment on ryzen until it was out.
There might even be no IPC improvements in some cases, and big difference in other cases. I don't know.


----------



## ILoveHighDPI

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Clocknut*
> 
> Good, lets MAKE sure intel can sandbag again, by buying 8700K instead of Ryzen 5, so AMD do not earn enough bucks and market share. Next time AMD will create bulldozer 2.0
> 
> Well thats what happened to Radeon 4870 & Athlon64 back then.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or just buy the best product that fits your needs and budget with 0 loyalty to some huge corporation that views you as less than a rounding error.
Click to expand...

You're still hurting yourself if you don't support the competition.

You can still buy Intel, but at the same time you have to convince someone else to buy AMD to prevent the cycle from repeating.


----------



## Clocknut

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> Or just buy the best product that fits your needs and budget with 0 loyalty to some huge corporation that views you as less than a rounding error.


which is always Ryzen for anything price above Ryzen 1200.

I couldnt see a reason to buy Intel CPU now base on their pricing. 7700K is not a gaming CPU unless you run a 1080Ti/TitanXp. It is generally better to save over $100+ buying Ryzen & put that money on a better GPU.

Productivity programs usually scale well in multi-core, so it is still Ryzen.


----------



## Nutty Pumpkin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clocknut*
> 
> Good, lets MAKE sure intel can sandbag again, by buying 8700K instead of Ryzen 5, so AMD do not earn enough bucks and market share. Next time AMD will create bulldozer 2.0
> 
> Well thats what happened to Radeon 4870 & Athlon64 back then.


I have Ryzen 5?
Jesus Christ.

Edit: Funnily enough I also had an 4870.
Edit2: All I said was it should bring innovation from both sides. I hate the salt here these days.


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> 7700K is not a gaming CPU unless you run a 1080Ti/TitanXp. It is generally better to save over $100+ buying Ryzen & put that money on a better GPU.


I play a bunch of games where you'd upgrade from an r7 1700 to a 7600k/7700k (say upgrade because they give more FPS in those games) before taking the GPU past a *1050ti* or so in order to improve game performance - usually in the MMO/RTS genres.

Those types of games tend to be quite demanding on the CPU side but easy for graphics and as a result you get CPU limits even with the fastest CPU's paired with low end to midrange graphics. Those CPU-limited FPS ceilings can also be rather low and affect the gameplay in a way that you can't fix in an options menu


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clocknut*
> 
> Good, lets MAKE sure intel can sandbag again, by buying 8700K instead of Ryzen 5, so AMD do not earn enough bucks and market share. Next time AMD will create bulldozer 2.0
> 
> Well thats what happened to Radeon 4870 & Athlon64 back then.


So you're suggesting to buy products not based on performance, quality, your needs and budget but based on who needs to be "supported". No thanks.


----------



## Randomdude

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> So you're suggesting to buy products not based on performance, quality, your needs and budget but based on who needs to be "supported". No thanks.


What's wrong with buying based on who needs to be supported? If someone wants to, all the more power to them. Also in the current market, I feel it's more effective to buy AMD rather than Intel. Throwing thoughts out there, I have no intentions of buying either presently.


----------



## renx

According to Canard, Coffee Lake will work with current Z270 chipsets, and probably even with some Z170 motherboards.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/886913513079353344
That, if true...


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Randomdude*
> 
> What's wrong with buying based on who needs to be supported? If someone wants to, all the more power to them. Also in the current market, I feel it's more effective to buy AMD rather than Intel. Throwing thoughts out there, I have no intentions of buying either presently.


Yeah each to their own. But imo that's plain stupid. I'm no welfare, just like neither Intel nor AMD are. They're profit oriented companies (despite the popular belief AMD is everyones buddy and Intel is the evil incarnate). Why would I buy either ones product when the other is better? I thought about buying a new CPU earlier this year and would have gotten a 1600X because it was just the more appealing offer. If Intel does have the better offer within my budget when I actually need and want a new CPU I will buy theirs. And I'm aware "if one dies the other has a monopoly" but frankly that's how things work, it's not my job as a customer to support a struggeling company by buying their inferior products, it's their job to not produce products that are so inferior they are struggeling.

Besides, with all the "Intel is beaten", "Intel is dead" and what not headlines, shouldn't we buy Intel now by that logic?


----------



## Nutty Pumpkin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Randomdude*
> 
> What's wrong with buying based on who needs to be supported? If someone wants to, all the more power to them. Also in the current market, I feel it's more effective to buy AMD rather than Intel. Throwing thoughts out there, I have no intentions of buying either presently.


I hear ARM is nice.


----------



## bigboy678

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> Yeah each to their own. But imo that's plain stupid. I'm no welfare, just like neither Intel nor AMD are. They're profit oriented companies (despite the popular belief AMD is everyones buddy and Intel is the evil incarnate). Why would I buy either ones product when the other is better? I thought about buying a new CPU earlier this year and would have gotten a 1600X because it was just the more appealing offer. If Intel does have the better offer within my budget when I actually need and want a new CPU I will buy theirs. And I'm aware "if one dies the other has a monopoly" but frankly that's how things work, it's not my job as a customer to support a struggeling company by buying their inferior products, it's their job to not produce products that are so inferior they are struggeling.
> 
> Besides, with all the "Intel is beaten", "Intel is dead" and what not headlines, shouldn't we buy Intel now by that logic?


I do agree that AMD is only playing nice because honestly at the moment they have no choice but to. I could easily see AMD being as "greedy/evil" as Intel if they were the dominant player in the market. Its like the saying goes absolute power absolutely corrupts. Hehe, if Intels stock ever starts to slip just for a second id snatch up as many shares as i could.









I dont think we ever would have to worry about a monopoly though. Someone would buy AMD in a heartbeat if they needed money for the patents alone. I know that the whole x86 licensing wouldnt be transferable according to the deal Intel/AMD met but there is no way on gods green earth that the US government would allow intel to be the only x86 chip producer. As you pointed out they would literally be a monopoly and in the US we do have laws about this stuff. Im sure the EU would have something to say too.

I just like you have no brand loyalty. If you give the performance for the price im looking for I will go with you. If someone comes along and does the same for cheaper or faster i will go with them. Ive never understood brand loyalty especially when it comes to PC/electronics


----------



## Randomdude

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nutty Pumpkin*
> 
> I hear ARM is nice.


Elaborate, please.

The post I quoted, that quoted Clocknut, I was curious as to whether there was a double entendre there, in the sense that the poster agreed with the above statement but also reminded us of the dangers of brand loyalty, as that leads to a palpable lack of objective thought. I also don't believe that it's quite that black and white presently, and I'll present my view on the allegorical gray area I was trying to bring to light:

Anyone can buy Intel and nobody can hold that against them. Least of all nobody on the internet. What I'm getting at is that while Intel still make great processors, when you buy their products and factor in "slight performance difference" in your purchasing decision to go with Intel, that mentality will _eventually_ lead to what we had prior Ryzen's launch, i.e. this discussion wouldn't be possible, ultimately the only choice would be "slight performance difference" generation to generation. While if the opposite is done, the opposite applies and the discussion is possible in the context of this narrative. This figurative "discussion" is obviously only possible when there is competition. Everyone buying what they want is completely fine with me, as people are free to follow their desires and the effects are just something we all have to deal with, equally. *What I'm saying is is that it's not ineffective to buy while factoring in "because they need support" in the current market, and in my opinion that reasoning holds more merit than factoring in slight performance differences between these two camps*. If there are large performance differences, then that's another story, I also didn't buy a Bulldozer CPU when I had the choice - but someone else might have, and his/her reasoning might've been to support the underdog or something else entirely, and that's fine, people can buy whatever they want, that's not what I'm arguing against. Objectivism I imagine has its place in these dynamics, but I don't see how ARM has something to do with my post, nor do I (believe I) have enough information to extrapolate what you're trying to tell me. So, please, elaborate with a more thorough post. I'm likely missing the forest for the trees.


----------



## andre02

I never understood why Intel is stuck for years and years with the same IPC performance or 0-5% improvement and at the same time Nvidia is releasing at least 30% improvement in performance almost every year. I realize they are different architectures and tehnology and such, but still.

Intel must have hit a wall or something. I wonder if it's intentionate and they are playing the waiting game because AMD didn't improve (until now). But i don't think it's that. I mean they have die shrinks and can fit more transistors and also big architectural changes every 2-3 years, just like Nvidia, but they still manage to do almost nothing performance-wise. Kinda odd.

About this generation we are expecting now, Coffee Lake, i'm realistically not expecting much improvement in IPC, if any. It's not even an architecture change, or a process shrink, it's just a "refinement" or "re-refinement". I think they are going for the title of the most refined product with this 14nm process. Just get on with the architectural changes we are all expecting dude !


----------



## Clocknut

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> So you're suggesting to buy products not based on performance, quality, your needs and budget but based on who needs to be "supported". No thanks.


the first statement I said is a sarcasms that half of the people replying me couldnt get it.

my second statement me using the previous example Athlon64; a lot of people are still not buying AMD products despite AMD is superior. Some of them want AMD to be significantly cheaper only to switch sides. Some of them want AMD exist to buy cheaper Intel CPU. Some if Intel is 5%-10% better @ 30-40% more expensive, they will still buy Intel.

When AMD is offering a decent product, buy AMD, even it is a slightly 10% worst performance, but at 30-50% cheaper price, it is still an overall better deal. Stop making that 10% performance a huge deal. It is not, you can take that 10% hit and give money to Nvidia to get far more performance.

The Intel mind share is still very strong after all these years, many still very Intel bias & they nick picking any AMD flaws has. (look at all the 720p,480p Ryzen benchmark, it is like suddenly these resolution become a huge deal)

I am guessing that people still want another wave of 6 years Intel monopoly.









8700K is not going be competitive against Ryzen 5 if Intel is going to price it anywhere near 7800X MSRP. (which I think they are going to; for ex. take a look at 7740k vs 7700k)


----------



## CL3P20

CFL will be a +1 to KBL. Its only enticing due to core count.. though it will be great to have some 6c on a real OC platform.. not this X299 crap.

*still waiting for CNL.. and TGL oh boy.


----------



## PontiacGTX

You mean Skylake? because Kaby lake is the same core architecture.


----------



## rcfc89

8700k is going to be such a Beast. Hurry up and release this Intel


----------



## ILoveHighDPI

Ultimately the lack of performance and innovation over the last five years is still Intel's fault for using illegal tactics to push AMD off the market and create a virtual monopoly.
At one point AMD did have the best products on the market and they were still forced out. Everything about the situation today is messed up. The market is screwed up and the legal system failed everyone and failed to maintain fair competition.
If Ryzen had failed the only way to fix things would have been to split Intel in two.

Right now the only way anything is going to get better is if the market itself starts to self correct, meaning more people need to buy AMD.
Development money for future products doesn't come from no-where.

This isn't blind loyalty, this is aiming for a balanced market.
The important thing is "competition".


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ILoveHighDPI*
> 
> Ultimately the lack of performance and innovation over the last five years is still Intel's fault for using illegal tactics to push AMD off the market and create a virtual monopoly.
> At one point AMD did have the best products on the market and they were still forced out. Everything about the situation today is messed up. The market is screwed up and the legal system failed everyone and failed to maintain fair competition.
> If Ryzen had failed the only way to fix things would have been to split Intel in two.
> 
> Right now the only way anything is going to get better is if the market itself starts to self correct, meaning more people need to buy AMD.
> Development money for future products doesn't come from no-where.
> 
> This isn't blind loyalty, this is aiming for a balanced market.
> The important thing is "competition".


And more people are buying AMD now because they have a product worth buying with Ryzen and threadripper demolishing intel in price/performance for multi threaded tasks, not because of a few vocal fanboys. I have no ill will towards AMD, and hope they continue to put out good products in the future since the consumer wins when there is actual competition in the gpu and cpu market. All my purchases are based on whats best for me, not some big company. If it's AMD next time around I'll have something AMD in my system, if not it will be intel / nvidia again.


----------



## ILoveHighDPI

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ILoveHighDPI*
> 
> I didn't tell you to buy AMD, I told you to tell someone else to buy AMD.
> This hypothetical situation of AMD and Intel swapping places is so far from happening it's like you're worried about flooding every time a cloud rolls by.
> 
> Ultimately the lack of performance and innovation over the last five years is still Intel's fault for using illegal tactics to push AMD off the market and create a virtual monopoly.
> At one point AMD did have the best products on the market and they were still forced out. Everything about the situation today is messed up. The market is screwed up and the legal system failed everyone and failed to maintain fair competition.
> If Ryzen had failed the only way to fix things would have been to split Intel in two.
> 
> Right now the only way anything is going to get better is if the market itself starts to self correct, meaning more people need to buy AMD.
> Development money for future products doesn't come from no-where.
> 
> This isn't blind loyalty, this is aiming for a balanced market.
> The important thing is "competition".
> 
> 
> 
> And more people are buying AMD now because they have a product worth buying with Ryzen and threadripper demolishing intel in price/performance for multi threaded tasks, not because of a few vocal fanboys. I have no ill will towards AMD, and hope they continue to put out good products in the future since the consumer wins when there is actual competition in the gpu and cpu market. All my purchases are based on whats best for me, not some big company. If it's AMD next time around I'll have something AMD in my system, if not it will be intel / nvidia again.
Click to expand...

The performance of Intel chips is limited by competition levels, if AMD isn't competitive you don't get better chips from Intel.
AMD determines the rate of progress for the _entire market_. You _need_ AMD to produce good chips before significant improvements will come out of Intel.

Without a doubt the best product for gamers is still an i7, but if the community that is aware of this problem doesn't find ways to support AMD then the next time we go 5 years with no improvements in CPU performance it's _your_ fault.


----------



## jologskyblues

Yup why don't we all just donate our hard earned money to amd for the good of all mankind.


----------



## Hawkeye360

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rcfc89*
> 
> 8700k is going to be such a Beast. Hurry up and release this Intel


Yeah I want Intel to at least tell us when we can buy it!


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ILoveHighDPI*
> 
> The performance of Intel chips is limited by competition levels, if AMD isn't competitive you don't get better chips from Intel.
> AMD determines the rate of progress for the _entire market_. You _need_ AMD to produce good chips before significant improvements will come out of Intel.
> 
> Without a doubt the best product for gamers is still an i7, but if the community that is aware of this problem doesn't find ways to support AMD then the next time we go 5 years with no improvements in CPU performance it's _your_ fault.


I really can't comprehend the thought process behind this. What exactly has amd done for me to make me want to buy the inferior product for my specific needs?


----------



## Clocknut

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> I really can't comprehend the thought process behind this. What exactly has amd done for me to make me want to buy the inferior product for my specific needs?


At this moment every intel product that is price above Ryzen 1200 is inferior product for the price they charge... so....the choice is obvious.

unless 8700k is priced +10% @ Ryzen 1600x MSRP.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ILoveHighDPI*
> 
> I didn't tell you to buy AMD, I told you to tell someone else to buy AMD.


What if an Intel product is a better choice for their uses? We're supposed to support AMD at someone else's expense? That's not cool at all.

It would be much more sensible to buy AMD for yourself if you want to support the company, because then the choice is affecting you. Personally, if I'm advising someone else, I'm going to try and recommend the very best, most sensible choice. If it's me, I may spend a little more than necessary or buy a different product than might strictly be the best for some personal reason, but I'm not going to make that choice for other people.

Not saying there aren't plenty of situations where an AMD product is the very best, most sensible choice.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clocknut*
> 
> At this moment every intel product that is price above Ryzen 1200 is inferior product for the price they charge... so....the choice is obvious.
> 
> unless 8700k is priced +10% @ Ryzen 1600x MSRP.


It depends. If its $300 its a safe buy. I would get it over 1600 at $220.


----------



## Clocknut

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> It depends. If its $300 its a safe buy. I would get it over 1600 at $220.


you have to divide that money against the performance it offers. Are 8700K 37% better than 1600? does it bundle with cpu cooler like 1600? and also compare AM4 motherboard price against Z370


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clocknut*
> 
> you have to divide that money against the performance it offers. Are 8700K 37% better than 1600? does it bundle with cpu cooler like 1600? and also compare AM4 motherboard price against Z370


Well think of it this way. If I am getting 1080 Ti for $700+ what is extra $80 or even $150 to get 10-20%+ faster CPU?


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clocknut*
> 
> At this moment every intel product that is price above Ryzen 1200 is inferior product for the price they charge... so....the choice is obvious.
> 
> unless 8700k is priced +10% @ Ryzen 1600x MSRP.


That entirely depends on your priorities. If you value price/perf above all else then sure, Intels offerings are inferior, if you just want the best so far Intel was superior. Now Ryzen scrambled that a bit but the 7700K is still the best you can get for gaming.

I for example give myself a set budget for hardware and I'm looking for the very best performing parts I can get for that budget. I'm not gonna make compromises on a CPU I'll be using for 4+ years. And what are 100 bucks more over 4 years - that's 2 bucks per months, that's laughable.


----------



## Brutuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clocknut*
> 
> it is intel, it will be like socket 775 situation or AMD AM3 vs AM3+ = older CPU are compatible to new chipset, while new cpu are not for old chipset.
> 
> btw, unlike X299 that caught pants down by threadripper. These chips is most likely a planned release, Intel probably has this chip ready for Zen. (since Zen has been make known to feature 8 core long long time ago, so I guess Intel has planned this chip to complete against it)


However the chip has been set in stone for a while. Intel has had far longer to plan their release but if they expected Zen to be another high core count, low IPC chip like BD they could get caught with their pants down on clock speeds or a tiny/zero IPC gain over Kaby Lake still especially with Zen2 looking like PD was to BD. (All of the really obvious bottlenecks fixed for a much better product)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> I dont know, Skylake is Kaby Lake,Coffe lake is Skylake with some enhancement, I dont see why it shouldnt be compatible if the Intel CPUs at least are compatible 3 generations
> 
> Since 1150.also having backwards compatibility with your current platform is a reason to go AMD? that doesnt makes sense


CPU architecture has zero to do with socket compatibility. It all comes down to how much power the socket can provide, what other pins (eg. display, RAM and PCIe for modern ones) the CPU needs, etc. Look at Socket 7: That had two entirely different CPU architectures from IDT, one from Cyrix, two from AMD and one from Intel on the same socket. You could literally change your CPU architecture every day with everything else remaining the same on that platform. The only change that required a new platform was FIVR and the original 1156 not having enough voltage pins compared to 1155.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> If AMD and intel's market share and brand recognition was reversed you could be damn sure AMD would be milking their customers for all they are worth too.


Actually, there's been various periods of time when the marketshare between AMD and Intel has been much closer than it was today and AMD has always been far less scummy than Intel. Not being a fanboy or anything, just as far as companies go Intel is particularly shady but can make a damn good product.

Cutting out all the other chipset makers, RAMBus, products that blatantly just use a product lines name to sell a shoddy product, constantly making backroom deals, etc. They've just always been like this.


----------



## Kpjoslee

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brutuz*
> 
> Actually, there's been various periods of time when the marketshare between AMD and Intel has been much closer than it was today and AMD has always been far less scummy than Intel. Not being a fanboy or anything, just as far as companies go Intel is particularly shady but can make a damn good product.
> 
> Cutting out all the other chipset makers, RAMBus, products that blatantly just use a product lines name to sell a shoddy product, constantly making backroom deals, etc. They've just always been like this.


well, in terms of market share, there was a time AMD and Intel's market share was pretty close, yet in terms of revenue and profits, it was no contest. AMD is kind of forced into being in "good guy" position because that is what takes to compete against dominant leader. If AMD was in Intel's position, i don't think they would have done anything differently from what Intel has been doing.


----------



## Clocknut

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> That entirely depends on your priorities. If you value price/perf above all else then sure, Intels offerings are inferior, if you just want the best so far Intel was superior. Now Ryzen scrambled that a bit but the 7700K is still the best you can get for gaming.
> 
> I for example give myself a set budget for hardware and I'm looking for the very best performing parts I can get for that budget. I'm not gonna make compromises on a CPU I'll be using for 4+ years. And what are 100 bucks more over 4 years - that's 2 bucks per months, that's laughable.


I probably will agree with you 7700K is the best gaming CPU when one is using the best of the line GPU like 1080Ti/TitanXp, otherwise it is overall better to save some bucks to buy a better GPU.


----------



## ILoveHighDPI

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ILoveHighDPI*
> 
> The performance of Intel chips is limited by competition levels, if AMD isn't competitive you don't get better chips from Intel.
> AMD determines the rate of progress for the _entire market_. You _need_ AMD to produce good chips before significant improvements will come out of Intel.
> 
> Without a doubt the best product for gamers is still an i7, but if the community that is aware of this problem doesn't find ways to support AMD then the next time we go 5 years with no improvements in CPU performance it's _your_ fault.
> 
> 
> 
> I really can't comprehend the thought process behind this. What exactly has amd done for me to make me want to buy the inferior product for my specific needs?
Click to expand...

When did I ever say anything about anyone "deserving" anything. We're talking about the guiding of market forces to benefit everyone.


----------



## Kpjoslee

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ILoveHighDPI*
> 
> When did I ever say anything about anyone "deserving" anything. We're talking about the guiding of market forces to benefit everyone.


It never worked before and it never will, unless you force millions of people at gunpoint sure.







I would have rather see AMD disappear and Intel being split into separate company by being in virtual monopoly lol, but AMD did come back nicely with Ryzen so we will see.


----------



## Deacon

Well any word on pricing? I will be retiring my 3570k early next year, and if the price is good I might go with the 8700k, unless AMD improves gaming performance on the 1800x.


----------



## Robenger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deacon*
> 
> Well any word on pricing? I will be retiring my 3570k early next year, and if the price is good I might go with the 8700k, unless AMD improves gaming performance on the 1800x.


I upgraded from an OC'd 3570k to a R5 1600 and found it to be roughly the same with the exception of older DX9 titles. But Windows and other applications are snappier now plus multi-tasking is a breeze.


----------



## czin125

5200U ( dual core / 14nm ) 15W 2.5ghz 0.9773v
24% increase if the voltage is 1.0 for 14nm++ vs 14nm
26% increase if the voltage is under 1.0 for 14nm++ vs 14nm

There should be a 3.1ghz 15W dual core for coffeelake laptops according to those performance norm graphs.


----------



## JackCY

Yet another new motherboard. For what 6 cores? Just get AM4 and 8 cores for less and you should be able to upgrade if you want to few year later still.
Those frequencies... I bet Intel is pulling another Broadwell unless they somehow magically made a completely new architecture and forgot to tell everyone how they glued it together from the best of what they have.


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> Yet another new motherboard. For what 6 cores? Just get AM4 and 8 cores for less and you should be able to upgrade if you want to few year later still.


On a then 4 year old mobo, sounds like a solid plan to bet on that. Besides how would you know you'd get an R7 + mobo for less when you don't even know what the CFLs will cost.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> Those frequencies... I bet Intel is pulling another Broadwell unless they somehow magically made a completely new architecture and forgot to tell everyone how they glued it together from the best of what they have.


What's wrong with the frequencies? This leaked base frequency is higher than and Ryzen base clock and it's a sample so we don't even know if that's the final base.

You don't make much sense and sound quite butthurt tbh.


----------



## artemis2307

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> On a then 4 year old mobo, sounds like a solid plan to bet on that. Besides how would you know you'd get an R7 + mobo for less when you don't even know what the CFLs will cost.


If you get a solid board in the first place, what's wrong with it? ppl are still using X58 boards nowadays and they runs fine? connectivity? got PCIE x1 slots
if you can upgrade to a 20% faster CPU 4 years from now without spending another 200$ on a new board then what's wrong with it?


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clocknut*
> 
> At this moment every intel product that is price above Ryzen 1200 is inferior product for the price they charge... so....the choice is obvious.
> 
> unless 8700k is priced +10% @ Ryzen 1600x MSRP.


Except for the fact that every ryzen product is inferior to the 7700k for my usage. The gap between 4ghz and 5.1 + better ipc is pretty significant on single thread speed.


----------



## czin125

What's your NB clock at? Are you running 5.1/5.1? What about ram? Since the NB clock isn't linked to ram unlike the former.


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> What's your NB clock at? Are you running 5.1/5.1? What about ram? Since the NB clock isn't linked to ram unlike the former.


4600 cache, 3866 cl17 ram.


----------



## Dragonsyph

So because they had trouble with 10nm they pushed it back (cannon lake,ice lake) and to fill the gap put out kaby lake?

There road map is showing cannon lake version 2(ice lake) to be out in 2018, so we should see cannon lake soon after coffee lake?


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jologskyblues*
> 
> CPU architecture has zero to do with socket compatibility.


It did for intel.
LGA1150 had 3 generations of CPUs.
Quote:


> On the product side of things, Intel's strategy of keeping the same microarchitecture for two generations allows its business customers to guarantee the lifetime of the halo platform, and maintain consistency with CPU sockets in both consumer and enterprise*. Moving to a three stage cycle* has thrown some uncertainty on this, depending on how much 'optimization' will go into the PAO stage: whether it will be microarchitectural, better voltage and thermal qualities, or if it will be graphics focused, or even if it will keep the same socket/chipset. This has a knock on effect with Intel's motherboard partners, who have used the updated socket and chipset strategy every two generations as a spike in revenue.


----------



## artemis2307

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> It did for intel.
> LGA1150 had 3 generations of CPUs.


Haswell and Broadwell which nobody got their hands on and what more?


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artemis2307*
> 
> Haswell and Broadwell which nobody got their hands on and what more?


Haswell Architecture - Skylake Architecture

Haswell Refresh Optimization - Kaby Lake Optimization

Haswell Refresh Optimization - Coffee Lake Optimization??

Broadwell Process - Cannonlake Process

and the "leaked" benchmark shows it runs on LGA1151 Kaby Lake platform


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> Except for the fact that every ryzen product is inferior to the 7700k for my usage. The gap between 4ghz and 5.1 + better ipc is pretty significant on single thread speed.


And now it's 5.*1* GHz.


----------



## IMI4tth3w

this thread is literally unreadable with everyone bickering about how people should buy AMD or intel.

Can we get some actual news and info about the 8700k?

Once things like pricing gets released then sure, we can make comparisons about which is the better buy. But sheesh this stuff is really getting annoying.


----------



## luisxd

thanks amd


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> And now it's 5.*1* GHz.


What's so funny about that? My cpu will do 5.2 24/7. If the 8700k can't break 5ghz and/or sucks in gaming like the 7800k then it will get a hard pass for me. Too many of the games I play are limited by single threaded performance for me to give that up.


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> What's so funny about that? My cpu will do 5.2 24/7. If the 8700k can't break 5ghz and/or sucks in gaming like the 7800k then it will get a hard pass for me. Too many of the games I play are limited by single threaded performance for me to give that up.


Nothing funny about that since it is _your_ CPU doing 5.2 GHz. But that 5.2 is going to be a meme for Intel hardcore fanboys.

Wait a sec.....is it 5.*2* already, so soon ? LOL


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Nothing funny about that since it is _your_ CPU doing 5.2 GHz. But that 5.2 is going to be a meme for Intel hardcore fanboys.
> 
> Wait a sec.....is it 5.*2* already, so soon ? LOL


To be fair most probably don't break 5ghz unless you delid them thanks to the penny pinching on saving a few pennies per CPU over not soldering them.


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Nothing funny about that since it is _your_ CPU doing 5.2 GHz. But that 5.2 is going to be a meme for Intel hardcore fanboys.
> 
> Wait a sec.....is it 5.*2* already, so soon ? LOL


~5g is average and you can handle that voltage (1.38) without delid, it's just more awkward

last iteration of 14nm did 4.7 avg, they got a solid +300mhz so i'm excited to see the next one.


----------



## andre02

The good news is that it will have 12Mb L3 cache (the top one, the 6 core with HT), that means 2 full MB per core, and it's not gimped to 8.25 MB like the 7800X, that seems good news to me if it's confirmed. This and if it does 5GHZ relativley easy like the 7700K then it's a winner, i'm not expecting much of an IPC improvement. The temps at 5 GHZ would worry me though.


----------



## czin125

With 6 standard cores and on an improved process node, it'll produce a lot less heat than the 7800X. You get less pci-e lanes though.

https://news.xfastest.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/SsnPhrm.png

The multiplier is running at 43X in this picture for an ES chip.

So far they have stated that capacitance for all three 14nm processes are the same so the only thing different is the MHz/voltage scaling

It looks 117W ( 6 standard cores ) is possible at 4.3ghz / 1.07v^2 assuming 1.5x cores if that was the voltage requirement for 4.3ghz. A 6700K scaled up would be 136W at only 4.0ghz 1.2v.


----------



## ozlay

I wonder if it has more PCI-e lanes z170 had 20 and z270 has 24 i wonder if z370 will have 28?

If they make an i3 4c/8t its going to be odd having an i3 with more threads then the i5. But guess they have been doing that for years with laptop chips.


----------



## epic1337

chipset lanes aren't really that good, since they're simply multiplexed lanes, or simply put they're like PLX chips.

they could go all the way to 128lanes but they'd still be limited by the interconnect connecting it to the CPU.
in Intel's case its DMI 3.0 which is only worth 4x lanes of PCIe 3.0, imagine cramming 20lanes into such a narrow interconnect.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Update to this thread, CPU-Z leak:
Quote:


> Alleged screenshot of the CPU-Z utility presenting Coffee Lake 6-core processor has been leaked.
> 
> The data reveals LGA1151 socket support and TDP of 80W. The engineering sample has a base clock of 3.5 GHz with a maximum multiplier of 43. It may all just be a wrong reading by CPU-Z utility or early engineering sample which may not necessarily represent the final product. However it's yet another proof that Intel's 8th generation series will feature 6-core processor.
> 
> Earlier rumors from CPC Hardware suggested that Core i7-8700K would feature 3.7 GHz base frequency, while i5-8600 a clock of 3.6 GHz. This sample is likely a different SKU.
> 
> The original source was already taken down.


*Source:* https://videocardz.com/newz/intel-coffee-lake-core-6-core-cpu-z-screenshot-leaks-out

And Frequency leaks:
Quote:


> *So for the details, the first processor is the Core i7-8700K. This chip has 6 cores and 12 threads. The chip is clocked at a base frequency of 3.7 GHz and has a minimum core frequency set at 0.8 GHz which is for idle mode. The chip features a boost clock of 4.3 GHz on a single core, 4.2 GHz in dual core mode while quad and hexa core boost clocks are rated at 4.0 GHz which is impressive.* The CPU has a BCLK frequency of 100 MHz which is expected from Intel CPUs. The chip features an unlocked multiplier as suggested by the "IA (Intel Architecture) Overclock Capable" panel.
> 
> The chip has dual channel memory support with native speeds of 2400 MHz. There's a total of 12 MB of smart cache on the processor, referring to the total L3 cache. The chip will be shipping with Intel's GT2 level graphics core with a minimum clock speed of 350 MHz. The interesting thing is that the chip packs a 95W TDP and is compatible with the LGA 1151 socket which means that Intel may allow Coffee Lake support on 200-series and even 100-series motherboards although there will be a new chipset known as Z390 launching alongside the chips.
> 
> The other two processors are very interesting too. *There's another 95W chip that features clock speeds of 3.2 GHz base, 3.6 GHz (single core / dual core) boost and 3.4 GHz (quad core and hexa core) boost. This chip also supports overclocking but the clock speeds are rather lower for it to be a Core i5 K-Series chip. The other is a 65W part so we can take a guess that this is a T-Series, low TDP chip that comes with clock speeds of 3.1 GHz base but higher boost speeds of 4.2 GHz (single core), 4.1 GHz (dual core) and 3.9 GHz (quad and hexa core) boost clocks*. Remaining specifications of the chips are rather similar.


*Source:* http://wccftech.com/intel-coffee-lake-core-i7-8700k-6-core-cpu-specifications-details-leak/


----------



## jologskyblues

So has there been any indication that the 6-core variant will also share the mesh bus with SKL-X or will it be monolithic just like KL?

Another thing is that I hope, Intel gives in to pressure and go back to using soldered IHS this time around. If not, they should at least improve the TIM and the mounting adhesive of the IHS to minimize any air gaps so that delidding and relidding would be rendered unecessary.


----------



## robertparker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ozlay*
> 
> I wonder if it has more PCI-e lanes z170 had 20 and z270 has 24 i wonder if z370 will have 28?
> 
> If they make an i3 4c/8t its going to be odd having an i3 with more threads then the i5. But guess they have been doing that for years with laptop chips.


From what I have been hearing the i5 is going to be both 6 cores (without HT) and 4 cores with HT. The i3 would then be 4/4 like the previous i5.

If that ends up being true I wonder if they will offer turbo frequencies on i3 or keep it fixed. Since Intel really likes market segmentation, I have a hard time believing they will give in *that* *much* to consumers.


----------



## robertparker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jologskyblues*
> 
> So has there been any indication that the 6-core variant will also share the mesh bus with SKL-X or will it be monolithic just like KL?
> 
> Another thing is that I hope, Intel gives in to pressure and go back to using soldered IHS this time around. If not, they should at least improve the TIM and the mounting adhesive of the IHS to minimize any air gaps so that delidding and relidding would be rendered necessary.


I'm pretty sure it's just like the KL architecture.


----------



## Defoler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ozlay*
> 
> I wonder if it has more PCI-e lanes z170 had 20 and z270 has 24 i wonder if z370 will have 28?
> 
> If they make an i3 4c/8t its going to be odd having an i3 with more threads then the i5. But guess they have been doing that for years with laptop chips.


If the new CPUs are going to be downward compatible, it means that it will most likely use DMI 3.0, which I think is already starting to limit the amount of PCIE without bottlenecking. So I don't expect 24 PCIE lanes out of the chipset.

I was hoping for a different socket so they can put more PCIE lanes on the CPU, but afraid it looks like 16 lanes are going to still be the max on the CPU itself.


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Defoler*
> 
> If the new CPUs are going to be downward compatible, it means that it will most likely use DMI 3.0, which I think is already starting to limit the amount of PCIE without bottlenecking. So I don't expect 24 PCIE lanes out of the chipset.
> 
> I was hoping for a different socket so they can put more PCIE lanes on the CPU, but afraid it looks like 16 lanes are going to still be the max on the CPU itself.


The problem is they'd cannibalise the 7800X. CFL already looks like it'll beat the 7800X by speed, thermals and power consumption so basically the only thing it has going for it are more lanes - which are already limited enough for a HEDT CPU - and quad channel. So if they bump up lanes for mainstream the 7800X makes even less sense.

However there's been a rumor a few weeks back saying there'll be a Z370 chipset released along with the first CFL SKUs which is basically a rebadge of Z270 and later on along with the rest of the lineup and the lower end chipsets there'll be Z390, the "true" Z300 chipset. Who knows, maybe that'll offer a separate socket and more lanes.


----------



## Thiefofspades

I hope its compatibly with z170, I have a full mb water block on mine.


----------



## hahahah

Does someone knows will it have ring or mesh design?


----------



## czin125

8700K can't upgrade to the 7980XE unlike the 7800X.

Z390 might have more pins, larger IHS, no integrated igpu? This could allow it to consistently OC higher ( like the 7740K )
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hahahah*
> 
> Does someone knows will it have ring or mesh design?


6 Standard cores, so nope.


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hahahah*
> 
> Does someone knows will it have ring or mesh design?


Apparently ringbus.


----------



## tw2

I may have missed it, is there a confirmed release date yet? I read rumours of August.


----------



## Bloodcore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> I may have missed it, is there a confirmed release date yet? I read rumours of August.


I don't think there is a confirmed release date.
Though from this picture, I guess we might get CoffeeLake early (Late-Q3) if Intel feels like they need to compete with Ryzen.


----------



## 113802

If this isn't priced at $300 or 10% faster than Kaby Lake. I will be waiting for Zen 2 or a new revision that can hit 4.5Ghz.

My 6700K runs at 4.8Ghz and the 7700k has the same IPC. 200Mhz isn't worth the upgrade. Hopefully I can re-use my z170 board but I doubt it.


----------



## Lass3

This is what I've been waiting for.

Give me that i7-8700K.

Hoping for ring bus, seeing how mesh does on Skylake-X..


----------



## Defoler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> The problem is they'd cannibalise the 7800X. CFL already looks like it'll beat the 7800X by speed, thermals and power consumption so basically the only thing it has going for it are more lanes - which are already limited enough for a HEDT CPU - and quad channel. So if they bump up lanes for mainstream the 7800X makes even less sense.
> 
> However there's been a rumor a few weeks back saying there'll be a Z370 chipset released along with the first CFL SKUs which is basically a rebadge of Z270 and later on along with the rest of the lineup and the lower end chipsets there'll be Z390, the "true" Z300 chipset. Who knows, maybe that'll offer a separate socket and more lanes.


I don't think the 8700K eating at the table 7800X is going to matter to intel.
For the most part, the 8700K is going to be way more than enough for 99% of its market. One GPU, at most one extra addon card, 2 memory channels and enough bandwidth for the drive with all the latest connections.
The 7800X extra memory channels and subsequently higher priced memory, extra PCIE lanes, pricier motherboards, is on a higher price range that I think isn't going to affect the same market.

For gaming I would not consider a 7800X over a 8700K if we are honest. And the 8700K is I expect to be the default CPU to go to for gaming if it isn't a bust and it OC well.
For creative work, I would consider a ryzen over a X299 setup in terms of price, though depends on the features I need.


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WannaBeOCer*
> 
> If this isn't priced at $300 or 10% faster than Kaby Lake. I will be waiting for Zen 2 or a new revision that can hit 4.5Ghz.
> 
> My 6700K runs at 4.8Ghz and the 7700k has the same IPC. 200Mhz isn't worth the upgrade. Hopefully I can re-use my z170 board but I doubt it.


Blasphemy.


----------



## kd5151

8700k vs 1800x


----------



## Nutty Pumpkin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> 8700k vs 1800x


Cinebench score or gaming?
I'd be curious about multi-threaded workstation tasks but gaming I imagine intel?
Better IPC, and most likely higher clocks. Plus there still using ringbus so no extra latency on cache like Skylake-X


----------



## czin125

They should be pretty close at stock settings with both using their all core turbo with 2667mhz.

The interesting thing with Skylake-X might be that it has higher gains for disabling cores than previous core configurations.

http://www.overclock.net/a/intel-core-i3-vs-core-i5-vs-core-i7-gaming-performance-with-geforce-gtx970
"Based on Linus Tech Tips' results, the simulated Core i5 4670K and real Core i5 4670K have almost the same performance. However, when it comes to the Pentium G3258, the simulated one was about 10% faster than the real one. This is probably caused by the huge difference in L3 cache size, 20 MB vs 2 MB."

7900X -> 7800X can gain 17%+ or more in games than a real 7800X. ( According to Nizzen's results in Far Cry Primal )

A 7980XE simulating a 7820X might yield even more % gain over a real 7820X.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> 8700k vs 1800x


Looking forward to this comparison too. With 3200/CL14 or 3600/CL16 used on the Ryzen.

Altho, I'd get 1700 over 1800X. Since Ryzen CPU's pretty much overclocks identical. I have no problem with i7-8700K being compared to 1800X.

I'd like to see both CPU's compared with max OC too tho.


----------



## Nutty Pumpkin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> They should be pretty close at stock settings with both using their all core turbo with 2667mhz.


I honestly found 3200 to be the sweet spot for my 1600. After AEGSA 1.0.6.

I'm also super interested for a fresh round of Ryzen tests to finally see if this optimisation has helped as much as I hoped it has.


----------



## M3T4LM4N222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Evangelion*
> 
> Thanks AMD! I hope I can use the 6 core on my Asus z270i Strix. If I have to buy another mobo then I'll just upgrade to a Ryzen system instead.


YEP. Me exactly. But to be honest, I'll probably end up with Ryzen anyways. I just can't see Intel pricing competitively. Unless the unlocked 6 core/6 thread is able to compete with the Ryzen 1600 @ ~$219 price on multithreaded applications then I won't even consider it. If it's middle-ground pricing between the 1600 and 1700, I will probably go 1700.

Intel has to do a lot for me to even consider sticking with them for this release. I will not get a new motherboard, especially considering LGA 1151 has got to be on it's way out after Coffee Lake.


----------



## mohit9206

Will the i3 be 4C/4T?It better be if they are gonna be asking $120 for it.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nutty Pumpkin*
> 
> Cinebench score or gaming?
> I'd be curious about multi-threaded workstation tasks but gaming I imagine intel?
> Better IPC, and most likely higher clocks. Plus there still using ringbus so no extra latency on cache like Skylake-X


Read my next post.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Looking forward to this comparison too. With 3200/CL14 or 3600/CL16 used on the Ryzen.
> 
> Altho, I'd get 1700 over 1800X. Since Ryzen CPU's pretty much overclocks identical. I have no problem with i7-8700K being compared to 1800X.
> 
> I'd like to see both CPU's compared with max OC too tho.


I know the 1700 is the one to get as long as you can get one close to 4ghz. Even the 1700x dropping down to $300 usd is hard to pass up. But the extra dough for the 1800x just for the clocks doesn't sit well for me. I mean when you factor in MSRP pricing. The 1800x is twice the price of the 1600x. And even Threadripper. The 1950x is just two ryzen cpus glued together right? So wouldn't the 1950x cost be some where in the range of $600-$700 maybe even $800?. Threadripper only looks good compared to what Intel thinks it should price its CPU's at. Anyways. The money saved going with a 1600 or 1700 over a 1800x could easily be put into a better gpu.

The 8700k will put more pressure on AMD. I think it's going to be 8700k vs 1800x at the end of the day. Not 8700k vs 1700. Because if clocks speed is what you are after then go Intel as of right now. In terms of gaming. Intel all the way. But that's only at 1080p. Any CPU is good enough for gaming really. I would stay away from i5's although and wait for coffeelake just like people said wait for ryzen. And it's not like those i5's or i7's are going anywhere. I just expect them to be cheaper. 7740x is still $350.


----------



## PWPersian

Of course its going to have less cache then the previous extreme series processors however will it overclock better?


----------



## obsidian86

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rmerwede*
> 
> Proof that Intel has been sandbagging the whole time... This has turned into the dark ages of CPUs thanks to Intel's greed and AMD's incompetence.


.

Cough Intel rebates cough cough


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Read my next post.
> I know the 1700 is the one to get as long as you can get one close to 4ghz. Even the 1700x dropping down to $300 usd is hard to pass up. But the extra dough for the 1800x just for the clocks doesn't sit well for me. I mean when you factor in MSRP pricing. The 1800x is twice the price of the 1600x. And even Threadripper. The 1950x is just two ryzen cpus glued together right? So wouldn't the 1950x cost be some where in the range of $600-$700 maybe even $800?. Threadripper only looks good compared to what Intel thinks it should price its CPU's at. Anyways. The money saved going with a 1600 or 1700 over a 1800x could easily be put into a better gpu.
> 
> The 8700k will put more pressure on AMD. I think it's going to be 8700k vs 1800x at the end of the day. Not 8700k vs 1700. Because if clocks speed is what you are after then go Intel as of right now. In terms of gaming. Intel all the way. But that's only at 1080p. Any CPU is good enough for gaming really. I would stay away from i5's although and wait for coffeelake just like people said wait for ryzen. And it's not like those i5's or i7's are going anywhere. I just expect them to be cheaper. 7740x is still $350.


Yeah I'm not going quad again. Mine has been fine so far, but it's 6 or 8 this time. Since gaming is what I mostly do on this machine, the i7-8700K interrests me. I can't see it cost more than 7800X, which is cheaper than 1800X. We'll see soon enough. I expect pricing between 1700X and 1800X.

The reason I prefer the 1600 and 1700, is the cheaper price and included cooler. I've put together a 1600 on a dirt cheap AsRock B350 board, hit 4 GHz no problem, even the included stock cooler did 3.9 - changed it later to lower temps and hit 4000. My friend is very happy for the performance/value. It was i5 or this.

Ryzen 5 has impressed me more than Ryzen 7 tbh. The 1600 is very good value.


----------



## ILoveHighDPI

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WannaBeOCer*
> 
> If this isn't priced at $300 or 10% faster than Kaby Lake. I will be waiting for Zen 2 or a new revision that can hit 4.5Ghz.
> 
> My 6700K runs at 4.8Ghz and the 7700k has the same IPC. 200Mhz isn't worth the upgrade. Hopefully I can re-use my z170 board but I doubt it.


As soon as people need to purchase both CPU+Mobo they have no reason to stay on the same platform, requiring a new chipset for Coffee Lake would just be handing AMD a bunch of market share.
We'll see how arrogant Intel actually is.


----------



## Neo_Morpheus

quad core is finally out for the future, gaming dev's can finally start using more cores/threads for the 2020's


----------



## PontiacGTX

if there will be a model with 4c/8t it would be cheaper than a 6c/6t?


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> if there will be a model with 4c/8t it would be cheaper than a 6c/6t?


That's a good question.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> if there will be a model with 4c/8t it would be cheaper than a 6c/6t?


I doubt there will be one but if there were, I'd take the 6C/6T at a higher price.

The 8000 series i3s should be 3C/6T. That way there is no confusion about 4C/8T vs 6C/6T.


----------



## robertparker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> I doubt there will be one but if there were, I'd take the 6C/6T at a higher price.
> 
> The 8000 series i3s should be 3C/6T. That way there is no confusion about 4C/8T vs 6C/6T.


I've heard that the i3s will be 4c/4t. FWIW, I also heard that there will be 4c/8t i5s as well as 6c/6t.


----------



## guttheslayer

For 6C/6T vs 4C/8T, HT doesnt really help in MT performance that much, If I were to pick more physical cores vs more threading from HT, the former is definitely a better choice.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *robertparker*
> 
> I've heard that the i3s will be 4c/4t. FWIW, I also heard that there will be 4c/8t i5s as well as 6c/6t.


Interesting. Well, I'll be looking forward to finding out.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> if there will be a model with 4c/8t it would be cheaper than a 6c/6t?


Why would you buy a 4c/8t over a 6c/6t if they have the same IPC + overclocks?

The only main thing I can think of is power use ; platform (if the 6c/6t is on the same socket this is moot), power delivery required, pcie-lanes (highly doubt 4c/8t would have more), iGPU for some people...

The x299 i7-7800x is likely going to be clobbered by their own i7-8700k in anything not fully utilizing quad channel memory : power wise, IPC , overclocking wise , single threaded app-wise, etc.

It's not much different than i7-3820 & i7-4820K vs i7-3770k , except X299 is also using TIM on the die.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Yeah I'm not going quad again. Mine has been fine so far, but it's 6 or 8 this time. Since gaming is what I mostly do on this machine, the i7-8700K interrests me. I can't see it cost more than 7800X, which is cheaper than 1800X. We'll see soon enough. I expect pricing between 1700X and 1800X.
> 
> The reason I prefer the 1600 and 1700, is the cheaper price and included cooler. I've put together a 1600 on a dirt cheap AsRock B350 board, hit 4 GHz no problem, even the included stock cooler did 3.9 - changed it later to lower temps and hit 4000. My friend is very happy for the performance/value. It was i5 or this.
> 
> Ryzen 5 has impressed me more than Ryzen 7 tbh. The 1600 is very good value.


It's not just for gaming, any workload with < 50% parallel code suffers from Amdahl's law limitations.

For gaming it is clear for anything not on DX12 ; i.e. anyone not using Windows 10 since DX12 is Windows 10 only.

It's apparent even when Windows is removed from the equation: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=vlk-gl-cpuscaling&num=1 , https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NVIDIA-Linux-CPU-Scaling

If the i7-8700k comes attractively priced with affordable motherboards (or reusing LGA1150), it could give Ryzen a run for the money price/perf wise. Intel just needs 30% more performance per core to match a 8 core Ryzen with 6 cores. Some software is licensed by logical core so for those applications a high clocked 6 core would be superior.

Assume average Ryzen hits 3.8GHz. 3.8GHz x 1.3x = 4.94GHz / (1.1x IPC) = 4.49GHz. A decent Ryzen obtains 4GHz : 4GHz x 1.3 = 5.2GHz / (1.1x IPC) = 4.72GHz Easily obtainable on Kaby Lake, but will Coffee Lake turbo as high?


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Why would you buy a 4c/8t over a 6c/6t if they have the same IPC + overclocks?


Cost. Just assuming now but if there is a 4c/8t i5 it'll be positioned below the 6c/6t SKU but there should be an unlocked variant. Getting a CPU that basically was the top dog for gaming for less than the former goto chip for gaming might be very appealing for people on a budget.


----------



## BlockLike

hmmm...

The 8700K has grabbed my attention.

Like anything new, I'm not diving in head first. I'll hang fire for the price and see what OC headroom it has.

If the performance holds up and it isn't stupidly priced, could be quite tempting.


----------



## Lass3

I'd also take 6C/6T over 4C/8T any day at this point.

i5 with 6 cores + massive OC could end up quite good for the price, especially for gamers. Since HT lowers OC, raise temps/power and usually don't give much in gaming - Sometimes performance is slightly worse with HT enabled (just like SMT).
I can hit ~200 MHz more if I disable HT on my old Ivy.

I hope and expect six-core i5-8600K to be around $250, direct competitor 1600X.

That said, I want the 8700K


----------



## Charcharo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> I play a bunch of games where you'd upgrade from an r7 1700 to a 7600k/7700k (say upgrade because they give more FPS in those games) before taking the GPU past a *1050ti* or so in order to improve game performance - usually in the MMO/RTS genres.
> 
> Those types of games tend to be quite demanding on the CPU side but easy for graphics and as a result you get CPU limits even with the fastest CPU's paired with low end to midrange graphics. Those CPU-limited FPS ceilings can also be rather low and affect the gameplay in a way that you can't fix in an options menu


A tip: Many of those games also dont like Hyperthreading. So the 6700K is ... not very useful either.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> Except for the fact that every ryzen product is inferior to the 7700k for my usage. The gap between 4ghz and 5.1 + better ipc is pretty significant on single thread speed.


*For now. Long term Ryzen will outdo 7700K even in pure gaming, unless you mean specific old games (which I respect).
In all else apart pure gaming, the situation is clear.


----------



## TheWizardMan

someone is reporting a 5.0 GHz oc across all cores. Source:

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/6p7lb8/coffee_lake_es_gets_overclocked_to_5_ghz_across/


----------



## czin125

There's a 6C/12T ES Coffeelake running 50x multiplier at 1.415v ( very high for 14nm++ ). That's about 400mhz lower than the max a 7700K could run at while using less volts.

http://cdn.overclock.net/1/19/19a8245c_AXfdaL1.png

A 5300 / 4960 + 4510mhz 18-19-19-32 from a user here.


----------



## artemis2307

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheWizardMan*
> 
> someone is reporting a 5.0 GHz oc across all cores. Source:
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/6p7lb8/coffee_lake_es_gets_overclocked_to_5_ghz_across/


if it can really go that high ON MOST DIES like the 7700k, there's no reason they'd set the stock clock that low, that'd be just bad marketing


----------



## Ding Chavez

The IPC increase on coffee lake will probably be Intel's usual 4-8%, so minimal. Ryzen has finally made Intel go to 6 cores on mainstream, looks like Intel will change the lineup bigtime.
i7 is now 6c12t
i5 is now 6c
i3 is now 4c8t and 4c ???
What I think is most interesting will be the prices, I doubt Intel will not increase prices as the coffee lake i3 4c8t might be close to the current 7700K in performance, just speculating but this is a big shake up.
If the i5 6 core isn't too expensive I might get one would be a good gaming chip.


----------



## TheWizardMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artemis2307*
> 
> if it can really go that high ON MOST DIES like the 7700k, there's no reason they'd set the stock clock that low, that'd be just bad marketing


Keep TDP at 95W?

Anyways, no idea if this is real, but if it is it's impressive.


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ding Chavez*
> 
> Ryzen has finally made Intel go to 6 cores on mainstream, looks like Intel will change the lineup bigtime.


Whenever I read this popular argument I wonder if people realise you don't pull a new CPU out of your ass within 4 months.

The 5GHz is impressive if true. The Voltage is indeed rather high, but we've seen wrong CPU-Z voltage readings in other post launch leaks so it might not be accurate either.


----------



## Charcharo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> Whenever I read this popular argument I wonder if people realise you don't pull a new CPU out of your ass within 4 months.
> 
> The 5GHz is impressive if true. The Voltage is indeed rather high, but we've seen wrong CPU-Z voltage readings in other post launch leaks so it might not be accurate either.


Intel has for sure known the core count and general SKUs for Ryzen, probably over a year before Ryzen was even released. Not final performance or clocks, but a decent bit for sure.

And still no Intel 8 cores







. This means a 14nm+ refresh for Ryzen doesnt need to do much to match CL.


----------



## TheWizardMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> Whenever I read this popular argument I wonder if people realise you don't pull a new CPU out of your ass within 4 months.
> 
> The 5GHz is impressive if true. The Voltage is indeed rather high, but we've seen wrong CPU-Z voltage readings in other post launch leaks so it might not be accurate either.


It's high, but not that high. Remember this is an engineering sample, so the final product could be a bit better. But these voltage numbers are in line with Skylake. A delid and a good cooling solution would make these voltage numbers completely reasonable.


----------



## Ding Chavez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Ding Chavez*
> 
> Ryzen has finally made Intel go to 6 cores on mainstream, looks like Intel will change the lineup bigtime.
> 
> 
> 
> Whenever I read this popular argument I wonder if people realise you don't pull a new CPU out of your ass within 4 months.
> 
> The 5GHz is impressive if true. The Voltage is indeed rather high, but we've seen wrong CPU-Z voltage readings in other post launch leaks so it might not be accurate either.
Click to expand...

A bit simplistic. Intel has had 6 cores for a long time, maybe they had some designs for mainstream in the background, maybe they modified the HEDT chip, they've known ryzen would be 6 cores plus for a long time, so probably had some designs in the background for years.
You think it's jsut a coincidence intel brings out these chips just after ryzen drops, i doubt it. They don't just pull chips out of thier ass they are a progression on previous designs.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Why would you buy a 4c/8t over a 6c/6t if they have the same IPC + overclocks?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> The only main thing I can think of is power use ; platform (if the 6c/6t is on the same socket this is moot), power delivery required, pcie-lanes (highly doubt 4c/8t would have more), iGPU for some people...
> 
> The x299 i7-7800x is likely going to be clobbered by their own i7-8700k in anything not fully utilizing quad channel memory : power wise, IPC , overclocking wise , single threaded app-wise, etc.
> 
> It's not much different than i7-3820 & i7-4820K vs i7-3770k , except X299 is also using TIM on the die.
> It's not just for gaming, any workload with < 50% parallel code suffers from Amdahl's law limitations.
> 
> For gaming it is clear for anything not on DX12 ; i.e. anyone not using Windows 10 since DX12 is Windows 10 only.
> 
> It's apparent even when Windows is removed from the equation: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=vlk-gl-cpuscaling&num=1 , https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NVIDIA-Linux-CPU-Scaling
> 
> If the i7-8700k comes attractively priced with affordable motherboards (or reusing LGA1150), it could give Ryzen a run for the money price/perf wise. Intel just needs 30% more performance per core to match a 8 core Ryzen with 6 cores. Some software is licensed by logical core so for those applications a high clocked 6 core would be superior.
> 
> Assume average Ryzen hits 3.8GHz. 3.8GHz x 1.3x = 4.94GHz / (1.1x IPC) = 4.49GHz. A decent Ryzen obtains 4GHz : 4GHz x 1.3 = 5.2GHz / (1.1x IPC) = 4.72GHz Easily obtainable on Kaby Lake, but will Coffee Lake turbo as high?


Budget?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Nobody knows for sure how faster CL is gonna be IPC wise. It may be 0% or it may be 5%+ or anything else. CL hasn't come yet.
> For now, lets compare the *very entry level AMD R5 1400 to the flagship i7* in mainstream segment.
> (Note: Turbo to turbo performance of KL is 30% higher and stock clock is 31%+ higher than the R5 1400)
> $169 R7 1400 *vs* 339$ i7 7700k.
> 
> Intel wants *2x more money* for this.
> http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1886?vs=1826


you are doing the wrong comparison then because it is aa Ryzen 5 not Ryzen 7, and it is 1500x. which has the higher XFR boost.
and then Intel Probably will update their pricing with coffee lake, the new 6c/6t will be same price as 4c/4t Skylake, and the 6c/12t will be the same price was 4c/8t Skylake. probably a 4c/8t might be cheaper than 6c/6t and match ryzen 5 1500x while having better oc ability,higher IPC

now the question is when AMD will release Ryzen 2


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ding Chavez*
> 
> A bit simplistic. Intel has had 6 cores for a long time, maybe they had some designs for mainstream in the background, maybe they modified the HEDT chip, they've known ryzen would be 6 cores plus for a long time, so probably had some designs in the background for years.
> You think it's jsut a coincidence intel brings out these chips just after ryzen drops, i doubt it. They don't just pull chips out of thier ass they are a progression on previous designs.


Coffee Lake has been rumored to be six cores for over a year now, way before it was known Ryzen would offer 8 and 6 cores. If they knew about it Kaby Lake don't you think they would have released Kaby Lake as 6 core to beat AMD to it and compete directly and without a few months delay?
Also CFL will not be a modified 7800X, that's based on Skylake and is a cut down 10 core chip. And it's not just a simple progression of Kaby as those are native 4 core chips. This has been in planned for a while. I will agree if you say the apparent 2017 release is a reaction to Ryzen but not the CPU itself.


----------



## pez

Quite a lot of posts here. Lots of speculation of Z270 and Coffee Lake compatibility.

Has it been confirmed if the Coffee Lake will or will not work on some Z270 boards? I do understand it is Intel and chances are probably pretty slim, but I figured it's worth asking.


----------



## Killer007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> Quite a lot of posts here. Lots of speculation of Z270 and Coffee Lake compatibility.
> 
> Has it been confirmed if the Coffee Lake will or will not work on some Z270 boards? I do understand it is Intel and chances are probably pretty slim, but I figured it's worth asking.


Sure, don't hesitate to ask here.

It's never been neither confirmed nor refuted. Despite many websites making their own theories most of the leaks so far only show LGA1151 as the socket and nothing more. It may as well be compatible (Intel feels the danger, wants to keep customers) or not (Intel wants to make money/technically impossible to keep the socket). We can hope Coffee Lake isn't playing a Broadwell part here (closed support for Z87 chipset).


----------



## pez

Indeed. I would love for it to be compatible. It would make me feel that much more 'fine' with my system for a few years to come (or until the itch to upgrade again hits).

If not, I'll 'settle' on my 4c/8t system for the next 2-3 years. As someone who uses their PC to game 90% of the time, Ryzen just isn't worth it to me to say I have 6/8c & 12/16t.


----------



## PontiacGTX

leak has shown it works on z270 and like z170 support same cpus, there will be compatibility at least on higher end models


----------



## TheWizardMan

I don't think you can say "it will work" on z270 and z170, but it's definitely looking like it will work, at least on z270. Of course, it will depend on whether your mobo manufacturer provides and updated bios.

Also, did everyone see the leaks yesterday, later in the day, suggesting a 4.3 GHz boost speed? If true, that bodes very well for this chip. Getting excited about this one!


----------



## Hiikeri

If 8700K works on my Z270 -mobo, I say yes, 1 here.

Delidded + at least 5Ghz would be nice. But my SC performance drops then .. so, life is


----------



## CalinTM

Eta release date? And compatible motherboards, socked and chipset names?


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hiikeri*
> 
> so, life is


First world problems...
















Based on reviews of gaming with 7800x and 7820x, I'm waiting to rebuild until I see what CL brings to the table. Also not happy about the intel HEDT CPU pigeon poop debacle and VRM temps with X299.


----------



## 113802

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CalinTM*
> 
> Eta release date? And compatible motherboards, socked and chipset names?


All we know so far is ETA - August/September, Z370 chipset . Everything else regarding motherboard compatibility and socket are rumors until announced.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CalinTM*
> 
> Eta release date? And compatible motherboards, socked and chipset names?





LGA1151.
by default 300 series


----------



## xlink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *epic1337*
> 
> so if their i5s are 6C/6T, does that mean their i3s will finally become 4C/8T?
> then theres pentium chips that could possibly be 4C/4T chips.


You're funny.

Those will be the i5 8500ks. They'll be higher clocked, unlcoked and optimized for gaming.

4 cores with HT and higher clocks is about as powerful as 6 cores without HT.


----------



## czin125

Since it's all the same according to this graph, can't you just derive it from the 6700K and then *1.5x for the capacitance only?


----------



## epic1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xlink*
> 
> You're funny.
> 
> Those will be the i5 8500ks. They'll be higher clocked, unlcoked and optimized for gaming.
> 
> 4 cores with HT and higher clocks is about as powerful as 6 cores without HT.


i3s will obviously be locked, whats wrong with putting a locked 4C/8T beneath an overclockable 6C/6T?


----------



## skafo

Another leak about Turbos

Code:



Code:


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

https://hardforum.com/threads/coffee-lake-lga-1151-6c-12t-launching-in-august-several-k-models-planned.1930226/page-16#post-1043127762

It's from Sweeper/Sweepr, nothing substantial behind it but his leaks turned out to be accurate often before.


----------



## epic1337

good boost, makes even the stock settings worth while.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> Another leak about Turbos
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 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
> 
> https://hardforum.com/threads/coffee-lake-lga-1151-6c-12t-launching-in-august-several-k-models-planned.1930226/page-16#post-1043127762
> 
> It's from Sweeper/Sweepr, nothing substantial behind it but his leaks turned out to be accurate often before.


Updated thread.


----------



## pez

Have to say I'd be excited about a 6-core auto boosting to 4.3GHz. I let my 7700K auto-boost now and I'm perfectly happy with it's performance. Delidding the 6-core and OC'ing it to 4.5 or thereabouts with a slightly lower vcore would be very nice.


----------



## azanimefan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> Another leak about Turbos
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 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
> 
> https://hardforum.com/threads/coffee-lake-lga-1151-6c-12t-launching-in-august-several-k-models-planned.1930226/page-16#post-1043127762
> 
> It's from Sweeper/Sweepr, nothing substantial behind it but his leaks turned out to be accurate often before.


I highly doubt these numbers, I suspect this chip will top out around 4.4-4.6ghz on a non-delided overclock. I doubt the max 6 core turbo will be 4.3ghz. unless they swap to solder, then all bets are off.


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *epic1337*
> 
> good boost, makes even the stock settings worth while.


Yeah thought the same. Might finally be a worthwhile upgrade even at stock for my 3570K.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> Have to say I'd be excited about a 6-core auto boosting to 4.3GHz. I let my 7700K auto-boost now and I'm perfectly happy with it's performance. Delidding the 6-core and OC'ing it to 4.5 or thereabouts with a slightly lower vcore would be very nice.


If these are accurate and given Intel doesn't just push the clocks to it's limits to make it look better on paper, I don't think you'll even have to delid to reach 4.5


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> Yeah thought the same. Might finally be a worthwhile upgrade even at stock for my 3570K.
> If these are accurate and given Intel doesn't just push the clocks to it's limits to make it look better on paper, I don't think you'll even have to delid to reach 4.5


Very true. I probably should have clarified that for my scenario:

My H75 is not going to handle a 6c/12t CPU with any sort of OC without delidding and repasting, so I would most likely need it to retain 'reasonable' temps.


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> Very true. I probably should have clarified that for my scenario:
> 
> My H75 is not going to handle a 6c/12t CPU with any sort of OC without delidding and repasting, so I would most likely need it to retain 'reasonable' temps.


I personally would rather get a different cooler than delid, but that's just me - too lazy to do that and do maintanance once in a while


----------



## evensen007

I hope this ends up with the single threaded perf of the 7700k (plus some) on a 6c cpu. I've wanted to upgrade this 2600k so badly, but it's been hard to justify going 7700k when I'm not assured that the platform will accept the Coffee Lake cpu. HURRY UP INTEL!


----------



## jologskyblues

If I can get all 6 cores to boost to 4.7GHz with bit of an under volt, that would be perfect for me. I might not even have to resort to de-lidding but I'm still hoping the damn IHS will come soldered in the first place. Not likely to happen but I'm hopeful.


----------



## Lass3

With those boost clocks I'm 100% sure I'll get to 4.8 on all cores









But I hope for 5+


----------



## PontiacGTX

5 GHz 8700k vs 4GHz Ryzen 5 1600x vs Ryzen 7 4GHz . we know the result of this


----------



## sumitlian

if 4.3 ghz 6 core turbo is true then 5 ghz is very likely for 8700k.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> if 4.3 ghz 6 core turbo is true then 5 ghz is very likely for 8700k.


For sure.

1 core boost to 4.7 tells me that 4.8 GHz will be piece of cake and 5 GHz very likely too, atleast on decent cooling.


----------



## Hiikeri

If those clocks are true, it seems that Coffee 8700K would be The first x86 Cpu that CBr15 single core performance breaks on stock @ magical 200 points barrier.

I think that not even those clocks isn't needed, IPC increases typically at realistic world 5-8% on next Intel generation.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hiikeri*
> 
> If those clocks are true, it seems that Coffee 8700K would be The first x86 Cpu that CBr15 single core performance breaks on stock @ magical 200 points barrier.
> 
> I think that not even those clocks isn't needed, IPC increases typically at realistic world 5-8% on next Intel generation.


Core i7 7700k/7740x/7800x/7820x at same clock speed?


----------



## Killer007

Damn those Turbos! I'm just wondering whether my Ninja 4 would suffice for 5+ GHz sweet...
*inb4 Intel blocks back-compatibility to 100 chipset*


----------



## Phixit

Let's hope Z170 support this.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Phixit*
> 
> Let's hope Z170 support this.


It might. But I guess it will be up to the motherboard manufacturers to make it work in the end. And they gain nothing from it. They might only do it on the high end motherboards, to satisfy the "best" customers









It would be awesome to see Intel do this tho.


----------



## Dragonsyph

So if its max turbo is 4.7ghz won't most motherboards have the options max turbo all cores by default? So 4.7ghz all core out of the box?


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dragonsyph*
> 
> So if its max turbo is 4.7ghz won't most motherboards have the options max turbo all cores by default? So 4.7ghz all core out of the box?


Probably yes. The turbo speed on former Intel CPU's has pretty much been easy to attain on all cores. This is why I think 4.8-5 GHz will be no problem, if those turbo clocks are true.


----------



## Killer007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> It might. But I guess it will be up to the motherboard manufacturers to make it work in the end. And they gain nothing from it. They might only do it on the high end motherboards, to satisfy the "best" customers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It would be awesome to see Intel do this tho.


I'm not that experienced here, has it ever happenned in the past that mobo manufacturers would block compatibility of newer CPUs only to certain models of one chipset?

After all, Z170 is the highest chipset of 100 series so... if they really split it to compatible and non-compatible ones...


----------



## Dragonsyph

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Killer007*
> 
> I'm not that experienced here, has it ever happenned in the past that mobo manufacturers would block compatibility of newer CPUs only to certain models of one chipset?
> 
> After all, Z170 is the highest chipset of 100 series so... if they really split it to compatible and non-compatible ones...


Im guessing the only thing that might not make it compatible would be the bios. Most of the time they need major bios updates.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Probably yes. The turbo speed on former Intel CPU's has pretty much been easy to attain on all cores. This is why I think 4.8-5 GHz will be no problem, if those turbo clocks are true.


Ya 5ghz at least. This might be my next upgrade, i need the high clocks and high single core for the games i play. And im starting to see 90% cpu usage on a 4 core so a 6 core at 5ghz with higher ipc, single core, and the extra 2 cores for reduced load sounds good.


----------



## Killer007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dragonsyph*
> 
> Im guessing the only thing that might not make it compatible would be the bios. Most of the time they need major bios updates.


I'm sorry if it wasn't clear initially, of course I meant blocking by not releasing new BIOS.


----------



## Dragonsyph

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Killer007*
> 
> I'm sorry if it wasn't clear initially, of course I meant blocking by not releasing new BIOS.


Oh ok my bad, so we were thinking the same thing.


----------



## kingduqc

Will coffee lake compete with Zen+ ?


----------



## Killer007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingduqc*
> 
> Will coffee lake compete with Zen+ ?


¨

I'm pretty sure not even AMD themselves know this yet, let alone us here...


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingduqc*
> 
> Will coffee lake compete with Zen+ ?


Don't nail me on this one but I think I read somewhere Zen+ is expected in early 2018, in that case they would somehow compete. I wouldn't expect too much from Zen+ though, can't imagine they change fron the LPP process for a revision.


----------



## Tojara

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> Don't nail me on this one but I think I read somewhere Zen+ is expected in early 2018, in that case they would somehow compete. I wouldn't expect too much from Zen+ though, can't imagine they change fron the LPP process for a revision.


There's been no official confimation for Zen+ nor any leaks, and when Zen 2 is on 7 nm and should arrive late next year it probably simply doesn't exist. No reason to push a stopgap out for little improvement when they've yet to even launch Raven Ridge. I'd rather see a more polished and/or earlier Zen 2 either way.


----------



## PostalTwinkie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tojara*
> 
> There's been no official confimation for Zen+ nor any leaks, and when Zen 2 is on 7 nm and should arrive late next year it probably simply doesn't exist. No reason to push a stopgap out for little improvement when they've yet to even launch Raven Ridge. I'd rather see a more polished and/or earlier Zen 2 either way.


The 7nm statements from AMD made it feel like Zen2 is our next step and the need for Zen+ isn't there.

Which is a good thing!


----------



## Neo_Morpheus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sheyster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Hiikeri*
> 
> so, life is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First world problems...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Based on reviews of gaming with 7800x and 7820x, I'm waiting to rebuild until I see what CL brings to the table. Also not happy about the intel HEDT CPU pigeon poop debacle and VRM temps with X299.
Click to expand...

I was looking over at Silicon Lottery and they delidded all the cpu's they sell. If its not sold out







you can purchase a delidded cpu that takes 10c+ off (they use thermo grizzley)


----------



## Hiikeri

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Core i7 7700k/7740x/7800x/7820x at same clock speed?


Yes, but like I say, on stock clocks. Those CPUs needs a little bit overclock to get 200.

CPUs also 6th generation (SL-X) and 7th generation (KL).

Coffee Lake will be 8th generation chip. 12 threads on TDP95W on AVX-instructions. Nice.









Its awesome starting point trough delidding and overclock it for 5Ghz and beyond. I see on my crystalball that IT will be the fastest gaming cpu.

Edit. Typos


----------



## Killer007

Guys, could you, please, make your opinions about this guy on Linustechtips? Thank you








Quote:


> I don't know if my word means anything, but let's say I too know of what he speaks of, and I can say this:
> The chipset itself, Z270, supports Coffeelake. The current sockets on the other hand, do not. The internal pin configuration on every known board currently in use, is incompatible with Coffeelake due to how the power delivery of those pins were designed to accommodate the new cores, along with some minor tweaks to the memory subsystem to improve official DDR4 compatibility up to 2666mhz.
> 
> It is far easier to say you need a Z370 board, because it is highly unlikely that we will see current Z270 boards get an updated revision with a proper pin configuration to support CFL. That will only bring more confusion (similar to Z87/Z97 DC support being hit or miss depending on boards). Do I agree with Intel's reasoning behind this? Not at all, and it only further invalidates CFL as a potential platform option for most people. Why would anyone in their right mind, upgrade from Kaby to Coffeelake, requiring an entirely new platform, when they can just spend that money and upgrade to X299 instead, and have a future upgrade path that isn't limited to 6 cores at max? It just makes zero sense to me.
> 
> Had Coffeelake supported the current boards in circulation (even if it came at a clock speed disadvantage), at the very least, people could get more cores at the cost of clocks, without having to buy an entirely new motherboard. Instead, we now have this odd in-between platform that is essentially exactly the same as Kaby as far as IPC and features goes, but offers 2 more cores, stuffed in between yet another architecture that is similar to Kaby in terms of IPC (minus the cache changes) but offers far more cores. This is the most obfuscated product stack that I have ever personally seen.


----------



## muses80

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Killer007*
> 
> Guys, could you, please, make your opinions about this guy on Linustechtips? Thank you


That is very hard to believe that Intel would release a cpu with no chipset support.

If this leak is legit Intel will be launching z370 rebrand+CFL together.The August Launch rumor cannot be true then because Intel would not release CFL with no chipset support z170+z270. CFL is not launching next month if a new mainboard is required.


----------



## besthijacker

I think I saw few pictures back that Z370 will be a rehash of Z270 and true 370 chipsets won't be ready until Q1 next year?


----------



## Killer007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *besthijacker*
> 
> I think I saw few pictures back that Z370 will be a rehash of Z270 and true 370 chipsets won't be ready until Q1 next year?


So far this way seems to be very probable.

Or, the other and maybe more logical option, is that CFL will be released without motherboards, being compatible to previous mobos and 300 chipsets coming in Q1. Doubt it though.


----------



## muses80

Yes Z390 is the real chipset upgrade with more substantial changes supposedly.Z370 just has usb 3.1 and wireless ac built in totally meh upgrades.I have to say it will be a real slap to the face if 8700k requires new z370 mainboard, Z270 is mere 6 months old.


----------



## muses80

I just saw this roadmap leak and it say CFL requires Z370 chipset multipe times.

CFL+Z370 August or september

CFL S +300 Series q1 2018

Here is the roadmap see for yourself.

http://cdn.overclock.net/3/3c/3c38f7d9_Intel-Coffee-Lake-S-roadmap_02.png

Z170+Z270+Z370 is alot of rebrand wallet raping even for Intel I am impressed.


----------



## Xuper

So RIP My Biostar Z270 GT6 and Asus Prime Z270-p........


----------



## muses80

My info on this front is almost 2 months old, but I can say that as of early June 2017 only 300-series motherboards were expected to support CFL. Now, CanardPC hinted Z170/Z270 support is a possibility a few days ago on Twitter, so Intel could have changed their plans. CFL is IMVP8, which means theoretically current MBs could handle it.

https://hardforum.com/threads/coffee-lake-lga-1151-6c-12t-launching-in-august-several-k-models-planned.1930226/page-17

It's not a complete no yet,according to other people with more info.A roadmap is never 100% correct intel could have changed their plans and allow Z270 support,CFL release needs to hurry up,Alot of contrary info being spread around.


----------



## pez

It feels like empty hope at this point, but even if it didn't have the OC'ing capabilities on Z270 that it would have on Z370 and up boards, I'd still be happy to OC it lightly and just have the extra cores and IPC performance.


----------



## czin125

5.5ghz should be possible on 14nm++ if 14nm+ can reach 5400mhz + 5200mhz NB clock at 1.36v
http://i.imgur.com/OrtxOBl.jpg
https://bbs.io-tech.fi/threads/intel-kaby-lake-lga-1151-z270-kellotukset-kokemukset.6251/page-27#post-553168
5.6ghz might even be possible too?


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> 5.5ghz should be possible on 14nm++ if 14nm+ can reach 5400mhz + 5200mhz NB clock at 1.36v
> http://i.imgur.com/OrtxOBl.jpg
> https://bbs.io-tech.fi/threads/intel-kaby-lake-lga-1151-z270-kellotukset-kokemukset.6251/page-27#post-553168
> 5.6ghz might even be possible too?


Maybe the very best 4C silicon would be able to top a 5.4GHz cinebench run, but I think the 6c models will be a couple 100 MHz behind the 4C models.


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Killer007*
> 
> Guys, could you, please, make your opinions about this guy on Linustechtips? Thank you


Idk, sounds weird. Also we have seen LGA1151 in several leaks so how does that match up if CFL is incompatible with 1151?


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PostalTwinkie*
> 
> The 7nm statements from AMD made it feel like Zen2 is our next step and the need for Zen+ isn't there.
> 
> Which is a good thing!


I bet we'll see Zen+ on 14nm+ next year. A few hundred MHz more would do wonders.

I highly doubt 7nm will be doable before late 2018 - early 2019.

*Did AMD confirm that "Zen 3" will be on AM4?*
If DDR5 launches around 2019-2020 this is going to be tight.
Zen -> Zen+ -> Zen 2 -> Zen 3 in less than 3 years?

Unless "Zen 3" will support DDR4 too and use AM4..

According to their roadmap Zen 3 is ~2020.


----------



## czin125

They have LPE ( RX480 ) -> LPP ( RX580?) and Zen is on LPP so there's another revision from Samsung?


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Killer007*
> 
> Guys, could you, please, make your opinions about this guy on Linustechtips? Thank you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Idk, sounds weird. Also we have seen LGA1151 in several leaks so how does that match up if CFL is incompatible with 1151?
Click to expand...

i don't think it is the amount of pins but the power delivery.

i am sure this is not correct but in the ballpark as an example:

say the pins on sky/kaby are spec'd for 0.05amps* whereas CL needs 0.055amps*.

i think @pez alluded to that by willing to compromise OCing . . . no?

*wild guessing!
OT:
to anyone who knows:
so, how much power are those pins rated for?


----------



## sumitlian

Tbh, I don't know about that much at all. But if current requirement is the only thing then I think CPU should be capable to run on that, just some oCing might be limited to some extent I think.

i may be totally different talk but anyways, remember the 990FX AM3+ socket thing ? AM3+ socket has larger holes than AM3, and according to AMD it was allaged that it helped to dissipate some sort of heat more efficiently from the socket as compared to AM3. I don't remember exactly, I might be wrong though. But it still didn't stop mobo manufacturers to provide BIOS support for FX8150/8350 CPUs. Since the new FX CPUs still had about 939 pins and even the old AM3 socket had 941 or 942 I am forgetting. I remember My old nightmare MSI piece of crappy MOSFET 990FXA-GD70 piece of poo engineering by MSI was still somehow provided support for FX CPUs despite it was AM3 only.

I think CL should work fine as long as Intel do not have another holiday plans for themselves this year.


----------



## Hiikeri

If CL is 95W TDP, then it shouldnt be a problem. But If there are example 4-pins for cores, 1-pin/per core, then its maybe impossible for 6-core at same socket.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Well probably not low tier z270/z170 could run coffee lake 6c but probably high end card. high end motherboard on z170/z270 have overkill power regulation.


----------



## 113802

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Well probably not low tier z270/z170 could run coffee lake 6c but probably high end card. high end motherboard on z170/z270 have overkill power regulation.


Only reason I can see them preventing z170 is to push people to buy optane supported motherboards. I hope that's not the case because I paid a decent penny for my Maximus VIII Formula.

The thing that frustrated me about this board is that it doesn't have a TPM header!


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WannaBeOCer*
> 
> Only reason I can see them preventing z170 is to push people to buy optane supported motherboards. I hope that's not the case because I paid a decent penny for my Maximus VIII Formula.
> 
> The thing that frustrated me about this board is that it doesn't have a TPM header!


They would have done the same for Broadwell,to make people upgrade to z97


----------



## TheWizardMan

The only reason for Intel to release coffee lake at this point is because of competition from AMD. If they don't release it with compatibility for z270/170 it won't be nearly as effective.


----------



## BenchZowner

What the hell are you guys discussing ?








Even an ASRock Pro4 can run 5GHz 7700K.
A 8700K Coffee Lake ain't that much different in any kind of power envelope and requirements.

AFAIK Coffee Lake will work just fine on Z270 mobos, the question is if they'll support Z170 out of the box or we'll have to update the microcode ourselves to make them work on Z170 as well.

If they changed their plans and decided last minute to make the CFL only Z3xx compatible, then I can't help but facepalm and tell them to **** with their greediness and hope AMD does wonders in gaming with Ryzen v2 and kick their sorry ashes.


----------



## Sharchaster

hope my msi gaming m7 support this CPU, *6/12 @5 GHz vs 4/8 @5 GHz.*


----------



## BenchZowner

5GHz without some luck and delidding, I don't think so.


----------



## Sharchaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BenchZowner*
> 
> 5GHz without some luck and delidding, I don't think so.


Hope it's soldered....


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sharchaster*
> 
> Hope it's soldered....


the enthusiast CPUs arent soldered


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sharchaster*
> 
> Hope it's soldered....


There's no reason to suspect Intel will ever solder anything again. From their perspective it makes to sense to.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BenchZowner*
> 
> 5GHz without some luck and delidding, I don't think so.


Why not. I've hit 5 GHz on a 7700K, no delid with 240mm AIO.

6700K was 14nm and hit ~200 MHz lower than 7700K, which is 14nm+

Even Skylake-X can reach 4.8 GHz with decent cooling (AIO or high end air), also 14nm+

CFL will be 14nm++


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sharchaster*
> 
> Hope it's soldered....


It is soldered just not the IHS.


----------



## Neo_Morpheus

but AMD threadripper is soldered. Someone in the thermal paste industry should sponser Intel, I sure in return they would get the proper rep and advertisement








I agree with Benchzowner, 5ghz is going to be on the hard side without luck and delidding.


----------



## naz2

so coffee lake is just kaby lake with more cores? meh


----------



## 113802

It would be awesome if Intel sold enthusiast chips with the IHS off. They don't because they make money off of people breaking them and having to buy a new one. :-(

Intel was probably so happy when me and many other were taking hammers to our chips.

Mine was a successful 3770K delid.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WannaBeOCer*
> 
> It would be awesome if Intel sold enthusiast chips with the IHS off. They don't because they make money off of people breaking them and having to buy a new one. :-(
> 
> Intel was probably so happy when me and many other were taking hammers to our chips.
> 
> Mine was a successful 3770K delid.


Intel is becoming a bane to the technology world. one that hindered advancement in CPU progression because they are at the top.

x86 patent need to be licensed to more major company so that Intel will no longer be relevant. Their time in this world is long enough. Time to move on to something better.


----------



## epic1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *naz2*
> 
> so coffee lake is just kaby lake with more cores? meh


no, coffeelake is a programmer's dream come true, a lake of coffee.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *epic1337*
> 
> no, coffeelake is a programmer's dream come true, _a lake of coffee_.


Sounds like a productive day.


----------



## epic1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Sounds like a productive day.


its probably an ironical slap to intel's own staff.
meaning 'time to get off that snooze chair'.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *epic1337*
> 
> its probably an ironical slap to intel's own staff.
> meaning 'time to get off that snooze chair'.


They definitely need something to wake up, heard teenagers are snorting cacao maybe they didn't get the memo.


----------



## epic1337

its actually is quite ironic though, coffeelake is the only time where Intel did something different.
e.g. we had been perpetually stuck with 4cores, now we're getting 6cores on the mainstream platform.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *epic1337*
> 
> its actually is quite ironic though, coffeelake is the only time where Intel did something different.
> e.g. we had been perpetually stuck with 4cores, now we're getting 6cores on the mainstream platform.


Now whether this is something Intel has been planning all along, or if this is a direct response to AMD lighting a fire under their rears is still unclear.


----------



## Hiikeri

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *naz2*
> 
> so coffee lake is just kaby lake with more cores? meh


No. Kaby Lake is 7th generation. Coffee Lake is 8th Generation, Intel says > 15% on Geekbench.

As we know, true performance increase are 5-8% between generations.
Like an Sandy Bridge > Ivy Bridge > Haswell > Skylake > Kaby Lake > Coffee Lake.


----------



## epic1337

you missed devil's canyon and broadwell.


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *epic1337*
> 
> you missed devil's canyon and broadwell.


DC is still a Haswell (4th gen). He did miss BW as you stated.


----------



## Hiikeri

Who cares, you all understand my point with different generations.


----------



## DarkBlade6

The 8700K will be my next CPU, this is the true Skylake 6 cores I've been waiting for. It will have the same IPC (if not a little better) as the 7700K ... without the ''flaw'' (Mesh/cache) of the 7800X. I just hope it will replace the 7700K at the same price point.


----------



## robertparker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarkBlade6*
> 
> The 8700K will be my next CPU, this is the true Skylake 6 cores I've been waiting for. It will have the same IPC (if not a little better) as the 7700K ... without the ''flaw'' (Mesh/cache) of the 7800X. I just hope it will replace the 7700K at the same price point.


So do I. I just have this fear that the 6 core i7K is going to push $400 and the 6 core i5K $300. I hope I'm wrong but Intel being Intel...


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WannaBeOCer*
> 
> It would be awesome if Intel sold enthusiast chips with the IHS off. They don't because they make money off of people breaking them and having to buy a new one. :-(
> 
> Intel was probably so happy when me and many other were taking hammers to our chips.
> 
> Mine was a successful 3770K delid.


Well that's the just what you'll have do when you want high overclocks.
People need to start looking at the TIM thing from a different perspective. What I mean with this is Intel has their reasons not to solder. We probably won't find out what those are and we don't have to agree with it but that doesn't matter. What does matter is Intel decided to use paste to achieve the specifications they want. They meet these specifications so it's mission acomplished from Intels perspective - additionally a modeste overclock is very possible without deliding, in some cases if you're lucky even a high one - bonus points from Intels standpoint. Now if you want to push the CPUs way beyond it's factory specs you'll have to go the extra mile and delid, use AIO or a loop and what not. The general misconcemption here is people think they're entitled to CPUs which easily overclock way beyond it's factory specs without any effort. If you buy a car you won't go around and complain it won't go faster than it does and you have to put some effort in to make it go faster than it was supposed to be.
I know it would be easier to oc higher with solder, but that's not what this is about. The CPUs just aren't soldered, that's just how it is. I too would prefer solder but Intel hasn't soldered mainstream CPUs in years and I doubt they won't again unless they feel the need to.
There's three options, someone can accept the situation and take the CPU as it is, oc it as high as it goes or they want to push it and are willing to delid or they can't accept the paste - which is fine, there's always AMD you can buy instead.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Now whether this is something Intel has been planning all along, or if this is a direct response to AMD lighting a fire under their rears is still unclear.


As you don't just pull a six core die out of your ass I'm assuming it's a planned release, also CFL being six cores has been rumored for over a year now - before it was known how many cores Ryzen will have.


----------



## mushroomboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Well think of it this way. If I am getting 1080 Ti for $700+ what is extra $80 or even $150 to get 10-20%+ faster CPU?


That is the exact reason Intel and nvidia are still big. The EXACT reason. I call it the Murcia effect, why? Because Murcia obviously.

It's blind consumerism just because you can. Instead of spending that extra money on something that could be more useful it's spent on something else. Take that 80 to a local charity if you don't need that money. Heck PayPal it to me, I'll put it to good use.

It's why I typically don't argue the amd vs intel because too many people go "I'm already buying X". And the pollution that mind set costs more than cars, as it's why that new phone has to be bought. Why not? New monitor? Why not? I'll just toss the old one - and it happens. And this mindset feels like it comes from entitlement but it doesn't. It's been a marketing gimic for ages, and NOBODY talks about it unless your in marketing or psych....

Everyone: Take the saved money and buy a good bicycle and leave the house a few times a week. Or any outside hobby. If not for self well being, to set an example for new generations. That you can still enjoy life without fancy tek. Because I'd be willing to bet a lot of people here don't "enjoy" those types of hobbies. Or "can't due to reasons".

As for who to buy? I'd rather buy and based off price alone unless what I need it for is making money. If its income or well being I buy what I think is the best regardless of price. If not, woop woop don't care. I have more important things to buy money with.

And yes this is ocn, but over the years the site is more comparable to car junkies buying fancy expensive cars then going "for max performance" instead if the fun days trying to push oc for the sake of oc. That's what the benchmark crap has done even if we know it's not real world. I has da powa cuz I cans.


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mushroomboy*
> 
> That is the exact reason Intel and nvidia are still big. The EXACT reason. I call it the Murcia effect, why? Because Murcia obviously.
> 
> It's blind consumerism just because you can. Instead of spending that extra money on something that could be more useful it's spent on something else. Take that 80 to a local charity if you don't need that money. Heck PayPal it to me, I'll put it to good use.
> 
> It's why I typically don't argue the amd vs intel because too many people go "I'm already buying X". And the pollution that mind set costs more than cars, as it's why that new phone has to be bought. Why not? New monitor? Why not? I'll just toss the old one - and it happens. And this mindset feels like it comes from entitlement but it doesn't. It's been a marketing gimic for ages, and NOBODY talks about it unless your in marketing or psych....
> 
> Everyone: Take the saved money and buy a good bicycle and leave the house a few times a week. Or any outside hobby. If not for self well being, to set an example for new generations. That you can still enjoy life without fancy tek. Because I'd be willing to bet a lot of people here don't "enjoy" those types of hobbies. Or "can't due to reasons".
> 
> As for who to buy? I'd rather buy and based off price alone unless what I need it for is making money. If its income or well being I buy what I think is the best regardless of price. If not, woop woop don't care. I have more important things to buy money with.
> 
> And yes this is ocn, but over the years the site is more comparable to car junkies buying fancy expensive cars then going "for max performance" instead if the fun days trying to push oc for the sake of oc. That's what the benchmark crap has done even if we know it's not real world. I has da powa cuz I cans.


Pretty narrow minded. Just because it's your point of view doesn't mean everyone has to make purchase decisions like that. You buy hardware based of price - fair enough. Others do not so
what's your problem? If someone can afford paying more for a a little more performance let them - you might spend ****tons of money on a bysicle which other people might find idiotic.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> As you don't just pull a six core die out of your ass I'm assuming it's a planned release, also CFL being six cores has been rumored for over a year now - before it was known how many cores Ryzen will have.


Common sense would have you believe that at least. Although we knew Ryzen was going to be an 8-core for a while, longer than a year too and people speculated about 6-core and 4-core variants.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hiikeri*
> 
> No. Kaby Lake is 7th generation. Coffee Lake is 8th Generation, Intel says > 15% on Geekbench.
> 
> As we know, true performance increase are 5-8% between generations.
> Like an Sandy Bridge > Ivy Bridge > Haswell > Skylake > Kaby Lake > Coffee Lake.


there is no difference performance wise between skylake and kaby
not even the 5% IPC increase we have gotten used to
clock for clock the same
seen reviews were the reviewer took the cooler off to make sure he swapped the CPU (since they performed the same with the same clocks)

the difference in the Intel slides when they show an increase of 15% in performance is because the chips have higher stock clocks and higher boost clocks

that's really all there is to it

coffee lake is a refined kaby lake, which was a refined skylake
but *no* changes in the architecture were made, which is why kaby fits in the same socket as a skylake

from sandy to skylake, how many different sockets are there?

Intel uses the same 15% more performance slide like they did with skylake to kaby
they just bump freqency again as coffee lake is on 14++

which is good enough for me, *if* it fits into my z170


----------



## Lass3

No IPC diff between Skylake and Kaby, but Kaby will OC ~200 MHz higher on avg. 14nm vs 14nm+

Also Z270 have more (additional) PCIe 3.0 lanes than Z170. x24 vs x20


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> there is no difference performance wise between skylake and kaby
> not even the 5% IPC increase we have gotten used to
> clock for clock the same
> seen reviews were the reviewer took the cooler off to make sure he swapped the CPU (since they performed the same with the same clocks)
> 
> the difference in the Intel slides when they show an increase of 15% in performance is because the chips have higher stock clocks and higher boost clocks
> 
> that's really all there is to it


This.


----------



## BenchZowner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> there is no difference performance wise between skylake and kaby
> not even the 5% IPC increase we have gotten used to
> clock for clock the same
> seen reviews were the reviewer took the cooler off to make sure he swapped the CPU (since they performed the same with the same clocks)
> 
> the difference in the Intel slides when they show an increase of 15% in performance is because the chips have higher stock clocks and higher boost clocks
> 
> that's really all there is to it
> 
> coffee lake is a refined kaby lake, which was a refined skylake
> but *no* changes in the architecture were made, which is why kaby fits in the same socket as a skylake
> 
> from sandy to skylake, how many different sockets are there?
> 
> Intel uses the same 15% more performance slide like they did with skylake to kaby
> they just bump freqency again as coffee lake is on 14++
> 
> which is good enough for me, *if* it fits into my z170


For starters, who told you that any architectural change requires a new socket ?
Perhaps you thought so because of Intel's habit of changing sockets every gen.
But that's far from the truth.
There are plenty of things one can change without requiring a socket change.
What's done with Coffee Lake ?
While I have my concrete info about some parts of what's coming, I still cannot confirm that they kept the previous L2 & L3 Cache scheme & function ( associativity & inclusivity ).
If they changed it to the new non-inclusive victim cache design, it will hurt gaming performance ( clock per clock compared to Skylake ).


----------



## peter2k

I think no consumer ever asked to get new sockets every year from Intel

nor does anyone expect that it is required

but likewise it is an Intel thing to change sockets every time when something gets touched up in the architecture (2011 socket, looking at you)

Intel's habit of first designing the chip, then the socket/pins (which is especially bogus since all of a sudden they can make a kaby lake with for HEDT)

so it is prudent to think if Intel would give another IPC bump of 5% and fiddle with the iGPU they would make another socket for it
not because it's really necessary, but Intel loves to do it, just like not soldering chips any more

on the second part

so you have nothing new to add with those insider talk/knowledge?
all rumours (that I'm aware of anyway, which are a dozen or so) point to the same thing
refined kaby cores (including ring bus and not mesh)
which would be good news in a way for anyone having z170/z270 chipsets, maybe

as kaby had no changes over skylake in it's design, and all of a sudden one can just pop in a kaby into a z170

and if Intel would use the new mesh structure we all know gaming performance would go down
and
I would expect a new socket if Intel would actually go with a skylake-x like design (mesh) for the desktop


----------



## 113802

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> Well that's the just what you'll have do when you want high overclocks.
> People need to start looking at the TIM thing from a different perspective. What I mean with this is Intel has their reasons not to solder. We probably won't find out what those are and we don't have to agree with it but that doesn't matter. What does matter is Intel decided to use paste to achieve the specifications they want. They meet these specifications so it's mission acomplished from Intels perspective - additionally a modeste overclock is very possible without deliding, in some cases if you're lucky even a high one - bonus points from Intels standpoint. Now if you want to push the CPUs way beyond it's factory specs you'll have to go the extra mile and delid, use AIO or a loop and what not. The general misconcemption here is people think they're entitled to CPUs which easily overclock way beyond it's factory specs without any effort. If you buy a car you won't go around and complain it won't go faster than it does and you have to put some effort in to make it go faster than it was supposed to be.
> I know it would be easier to oc higher with solder, but that's not what this is about. The CPUs just aren't soldered, that's just how it is. I too would prefer solder but Intel hasn't soldered mainstream CPUs in years and I doubt they won't again unless they feel the need to.
> There's three options, someone can accept the situation and take the CPU as it is, oc it as high as it goes or they want to push it and are willing to delid or they can't accept the paste - which is fine, there's always AMD you can buy instead.


When spending $400 on a custom loop and noticing it had no effect at all on temperatures it's a problem. The 3770K rig was the rig I spent $400 on liquid cooling and temps were still hitting 95C due to an ambient of 88C. After de-lidding temps were at 70C with the 88 ambient temp.



I delidded my 6700k that dropped from 95c full load when using Prime with AVX to 65C at full load after delidding. 76C at full load with all fans at 400RPM with an ambient temp of 81F

Intel's response? "Stop overclocking to avoid high temperatures." If they don't want us to overclock then they should remove overclocking avertisiments from their website.

I will be using my 6700K until Intel releases something that has 15% higher IPC or purchasing Zen 2

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/gaming/how-to-overclock.html

This step cracks me up: *Apply aggressive cooling*


----------



## BenchZowner

The socket changes weren't necessary.
A 6700K would work perfectly on a Z68 motherboard.
Intel just seized the opportunity AMD gave them ( with the lack of competition that is ) to milk the consumers and motherboard makers.
This is no hearsay, it's engineering knowledge based.
They could keep using socket 1150 for example.
They however opted to cash in from chipset sales ( which also pleases the motherboard manufacturers since they will be selling more motherboards, imagine how smaller the mobo makers income would be if you could fit a 8700K on the same mobo you bought the 2600K for ).

Suddenly, now that there's competition from AMD, the CPU's appear to be "socket compatible" hue hue hue.

If AMD manages to catch up absolutely in gaming performance as well, there will be a miraculous price drop for their next gen of CPUs, suddenly Intel will "come to reason".


----------



## JackCY

More like suddenly Intel will raise the rebate program payments again. They won't come to reason, they haven't in the last 40 shady years and the fines they get for breaking laws are tiny compared to how much they are willing to pay for exclusivity. They get fined 1 billion for 6 billion payed to DELL for example. Their advantage from illegal practices is far greater than the fines they get.


----------



## BenchZowner

This time such tactic won't be as effective and interesting for the OEMs.
Ryzen and EPYC are very interesting and great at perf/cost ratios, I'd say impossible to skip on this time.

Given the penalty Alphabet got, Intel wouldn't like to get struck with such a high penalty as well, things are not the way they used to be around anymore.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BenchZowner*
> 
> What's done with Coffee Lake ?


Only more clock speed per given voltage and higher maximum ( 5000->5400-> ???? )

4700->5000->????

4C/8T Coffeelake has the same average capacitance as the 6700K. Only thing different between a Skylake 4C/8T is the voltage scaling and maximum clocks. If you set the clocks and voltage the same, it should draw nearly identical power.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> i don't think it is the amount of pins but the power delivery.
> 
> i am sure this is not correct but in the ballpark as an example:
> 
> say the pins on sky/kaby are spec'd for 0.05amps* whereas CL needs 0.055amps*.
> 
> i think @pez alluded to that by willing to compromise OCing . . . no?
> 
> *wild guessing!
> OT:
> to anyone who knows:
> so, how much power are those pins rated for?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Tbh, I don't know about that much at all. But if current requirement is the only thing then I think CPU should be capable to run on that, just some oCing might be limited to some extent I think.
> 
> i may be totally different talk but anyways, remember the 990FX AM3+ socket thing ? AM3+ socket has larger holes than AM3, and according to AMD it was allaged that it helped to dissipate some sort of heat more efficiently from the socket as compared to AM3. I don't remember exactly, I might be wrong though. But it still didn't stop mobo manufacturers to provide BIOS support for FX8150/8350 CPUs. Since the new FX CPUs still had about 939 pins and even the old AM3 socket had 941 or 942 I am forgetting. I remember My old nightmare MSI piece of crappy MOSFET 990FXA-GD70 piece of poo engineering by MSI was still somehow provided support for FX CPUs despite it was AM3 only.
> 
> I think CL should work fine as long as Intel do not have another holiday plans for themselves this year.


Indeed. This was what I had in mind when I posted that







.

If I can't only OC a 200-300MHz on a z270 vs. 500+ on a z370, I'll be perfectly content with that because I've found a way to extend the life of my current parts. Much like I did going from a dual Kuma to hexa Phenom II years back.


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WannaBeOCer*
> 
> due to an ambient of 88C. After de-lidding temps were at 70C with the 88 ambient temp.


Would you elaborate what you're refering to with "ambient"? Do you live in a sauna?


----------



## 113802

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> Would you elaborate what you're refering to with "ambient"? Do you live in a sauna?


Meant fahrenheit of course.


----------



## BenchZowner

There's no issue with pin current rating.
You guys are totally ignoring the fact that current motherboards are capable of feeding 7GHz 4c8t Kaby Lakes ( trust me, the current up there is much higher than any forthcoming up to 5GHz clock frequency 6-8-10c processor.

The only reason behind silly socket changes like no tomorrow by Intel is their own greediness.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BenchZowner*
> 
> There's no issue with pin current rating.
> You guys are totally *ignoring the fact that current motherboards are capable of feeding 7GHz 4c8t Kaby Lakes* ( trust me, the current up there is much higher than any forthcoming up to 5GHz clock frequency 6-8-10c processor.
> 
> The only reason behind silly socket changes like no tomorrow by Intel is their own greediness.


i understand that and i am sure that would throw some specs out the window.

i would expect intel to adhere to their own specifications.


----------



## skafo

Source: Sweepr again https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/intel-skylake-kaby-lake-coffee-lake-thread-coffee-lake-s-specs-out-page-554.2428363/page-554#post-39005848


----------



## Digitalwolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BenchZowner*
> 
> There's no issue with pin current rating.
> You guys are totally ignoring the fact that current motherboards are capable of feeding 7GHz 4c8t Kaby Lakes ( trust me, the current up there is much higher than any forthcoming up to 5GHz clock frequency 6-8-10c processor.
> 
> The only reason behind silly socket changes like no tomorrow by Intel is their own greediness.


That's true for people that would buy a new cpu and plug it into an old board. For people like me.... the board makers are going to pop out a bunch of new motherboards (even if the same chipset and/or socket) with all these things my old board doesn't have. Then I'm going to buy a "new" board anyway.

I had my 1700 on 5 or 6 different x370 boards before I sold them all to wait for a TR build. Even if I kept my 1700 until "Zen 2" I would most likely buy a new board even if it was fully compatible with which ever one I had by then.

Now I managed to only buy two Z270 boards, but I had a closet full of Z170 boards. I also managed to only buy one X299 board... and I think only two X99 boards, but to be fair one blew up.

but um anyway... Obviously I have a motherboard issue, so I guess that the buying a "new board" thing doesn't bother me as much.


----------



## epic1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BenchZowner*
> 
> The only reason behind silly socket changes like no tomorrow by Intel is their own greediness.


nope, they've been updating DMI lanes and adding DDR4 support, you can't support either without switching sockets since they're not pin-compatible.


----------



## BenchZowner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Digitalwolf*
> 
> That's true for people that would buy a new cpu and plug it into an old board. For people like me.... the board makers are going to pop out a bunch of new motherboards (even if the same chipset and/or socket) with all these things my old board doesn't have. Then I'm going to buy a "new" board anyway.
> 
> I had my 1700 on 5 or 6 different x370 boards before I sold them all to wait for a TR build. Even if I kept my 1700 until "Zen 2" I would most likely buy a new board even if it was fully compatible with which ever one I had by then.
> 
> Now I managed to only buy two Z270 boards, but I had a closet full of Z170 boards. I also managed to only buy one X299 board... and I think only two X99 boards, but to be fair one blew up.
> 
> but um anyway... Obviously I have a motherboard issue, so I guess that the buying a "new board" thing doesn't bother me as much.


Sorry to tell you, but if you had a closet of Z170 boards you paid for all, you're simply a consumerism victim.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *epic1337*
> 
> nope, they've been updating DMI lanes and adding DDR4 support, you can't support either without switching sockets since they're not pin-compatible.


That doesn't apply to each gen, and of course, bar DDR4 support, DMI lane updates could've been 100% pin-compatible in most cases.


----------



## epic1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BenchZowner*
> 
> That doesn't apply to each gen, and of course, bar DDR4 support, DMI lane updates could've been 100% pin-compatible in most cases.


no they don't, DMI being upgraded means old gen CPUs won't run with new chipsets.
simply put, DMI is only backwards compatible, it doesn't run the other way around.

with that in mind, why would you then make the new chipset reuse the same socket and end up having a ton of RMA from having the wrong CPU placed?
change the socket along with the new chipset, not only would it prevent issues from going around, it'll also guarantee that the newer CPUs will be running at their full capability.


----------



## Digitalwolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BenchZowner*
> 
> Sorry to tell you, but if you had a closet of Z170 boards you paid for all, you're simply a consumerism victim.


A closet full of Z170 boards cost a lot less than my car modding hobby and they depreciate far less when "recycled".

I'm not sure how victim enters the picture here... Consumer driven markets where companies exist to make profit. Kind of depend on consumers buying products... You choose whether you want to buy them or not.


----------



## epic1337

when i upgrade rigs, i keep the old CPU+mobo pair in another system,swapping just the CPU alone means the old one is sitting there collecting dust.
with this approach i have two running rigs that can readily be accessed, furthermore in my area its easier to sell the entire rig than selling it part by part.
better yet, i have my old rig ready to substitute whenever i encounter issues with my new rig.

on the other hand, at the rate i upgrade my rigs i always end up with an ancient rig, with the new stuff having lots of new features it simply makes keeping the old board pointless.
take my previous rig for example, it only had SATAII, 100mbps NIC and USB 2.0, this current rig in comparison has all of the better goods plus more.


----------



## AlphaC

I'll likely be getting a i7-8700k or i5-8600K as long as the pricing isn't ridiculous.

4.7GHz single core boost with 4.3GHz 6 core turbo is leading to believe that they will have little headroom for overclocking the i7.

The i7 premium likely isn't worth it for most people that OC, seeing how use of over 6 threads requires massive amounts of parallel code. HT only gives +30-40% performance.


----------



## epic1337

the base and turbo clock is high enough for the lock chips to be attractive for most.
imho overclocking a 6core is a serious matter, heat alone wouldn't be cooled by some cheapo aircooler.


----------



## BenchZowner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *epic1337*
> 
> no they don't, DMI being upgraded means old gen CPUs won't run with new chipsets.
> simply put, DMI is only backwards compatible, it doesn't run the other way around.
> 
> with that in mind, why would you then make the new chipset reuse the same socket and end up having a ton of RMA from having the wrong CPU placed?
> change the socket along with the new chipset, not only would it prevent issues from going around, it'll also guarantee that the newer CPUs will be running at their full capability.


Actually, no.
The DMI changes rarely have to do with CPU socket pins ( have you ever counted how many pins are NC ? ).
Sometimes the DMI changes were between the chipset and sata controllers and other host controllers, not directly to the CPU.

Most of the times those changes could've been easily made pin compatible, way more complex things are pin compatible in high tech than simple interconnects and master clock BUS controllers.

And like I said, not between all generations DMI changes occurred.

You may not want to face it, but Intel has been juicing us for a whole lot of time.
You seem to be "used to it", I've been on the ride willingly, but I do not condone such tactics.

Anyway, from an engineering point of view ( that's what I studied and do for a living ) most of them could've been done single socket compliant.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *epic1337*
> 
> the base and turbo clock is high enough for the lock chips to be attractive for most.
> imho overclocking a 6core is a serious matter, heat alone wouldn't be cooled by some cheapo aircooler.


i7-6800k , i7-5820k, i7-4930k, i7-3930K all were 6 core 12 thread CPUs.

If you mean by a 150W TDP 120mm fan cooler I could understand, but if a 200-250W TDP rated dual tower or 140mm single tower , on par with a 240 or 280 AIO +/- 5°C?


https://us.hardware.info/reviews/6415/5/scythe-fuma--grand-kama-cross-3-review-new-scythe-cpu-coolers-test-results-maximumncooling

https://us.hardware.info/reviews/6976/9/20-water-coolers-review-for-better-cooling-cooling-efficiencyn240280mm


----------



## kfxsti

http://wccftech.com/intel-coffee-lake-core-i7-8700k-core-i5-8600k-6-core-cpu-leak

According to this coffee lake will be compatible with z170-z270 mobos


----------



## grss1982

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> There's a gap in that lineup where the i5-8500 should be. Based on past patterns, it will probably be something like 6c/6t @ 3.2GHz base clock with a 95w TDP.
> 
> In my mind, there's only 3 processors worth buying in the mainstream Core series for each generation: The i7-K and i5-K for overclockers, and the i5-x5xx (e.g. 4570, 6500, 7500) for non-overclockers. The 2 OC chips are obvious, and the x5xx non-OC chip is the best balance of clock speed and price for those who aren't overclocking.
> 
> *An H-series mobo + i5-x5xx really is the best and most cost-effective set-and-forget Intel solution available for those building systems for their less-technical friends. Just slap one together with a pre-overclocked GPU from your preferred vendor (e.g. an EVGA "SSC" model) and off you go. No need to worry if Skippy will know how to adjust the settings or anything then.*


Could not agree more on this concept. Did something similar to this for a friend recently but with the older 1155 platform. It did help that his cherished games are mostly from Steam including DOTA 2.

As for these new Intel chips, is this really it? The competition is actually heating up? God I hope we have a price war between the two giants. It's a win-win for all of us!


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kfxsti*
> 
> http://wccftech.com/intel-coffee-lake-core-i7-8700k-core-i5-8600k-6-core-cpu-leak
> 
> According to this coffee lake will be compatible with z170-z270 mobos


They were the ones saying it'll require a 1151V2 socket a few weeks ago. WCCFTech is questionable to say the least, constantly repeating rumours from reddit and tech forums and making them look like facts.


----------



## muses80

Yeah you cannot trust wt.ftech ever just posting articles on both side of the fence.My personal opinion is that intel will not support Z170/Z270 with CFL just my opinion.No need for Z370 launch with CFL if backwards compatability is supported.But Intel may decide mindshare is more important than margains and make a good decision for their customers.


----------



## BenchZowner

To my knowledge & info, Z270 support is set in stone, Z170 remains a mystery.


----------



## Lass3

I'm wondering about what Z370, or Z390?







Will bring to the table compared to Z270.

What if CFL CPU's just fit in current Z170 and Z270 boards. Has Intel spoken of a new chipset?


----------



## BenchZowner

Z370 is coming.
What is brought to the table ?

Kind of pointless updates ( maybe meaningful for those who think that RAIDing for example 3 m.2 SSDs will bring higher real-life SOHO performance uplifts







)


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BenchZowner*
> 
> Z370 is coming.
> What is brought to the table ?
> 
> Kind of pointless updates ( maybe meaningful for those who think that RAIDing for example 3 m.2 SSDs will bring higher real-life SOHO performance uplifts
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Haha. Yeah probably.

I just don't see what Z270 is lacking, that Z370 will improve on.

Z270 gave us 4 more PCIe 3.0 lanes compared to Z170 and Optane support. Optane is pretty much pointless for consumers with SSD AFAIK.


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> I'm wondering about what Z370, or Z390?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will bring to the table compared to Z270.
> 
> What if CFL CPU's just fit in current Z170 and Z270 boards. Has Intel spoken of a new chipset?


What defo is coming with the 300 series chipset is native WiFi and BlueTooth, along with native USB3.1 support. What else idk.
The whole Z370/390 think is just a rumor so far and if I remember correctly it comes from financial analysts and not tech people. It states that Intel won't get the 300 features ready in time so release Z370 along with the first chips and the fully featured Z390 later with the rest of CFL.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> They were the ones saying it'll require a 1151V2 socket a.


and how legit is that source compared tot he proof it was running on Z270


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> and how legit is that source compared tot he proof it was running on Z270


Not at all, that's what I'm saying. WCCFTech is not a reliable source at all.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> Not at all, that's what I'm saying. WCCFTech is not a reliable source at all.


that Wccftech post the validation doesnt make it less reliable.


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> that Wccftech post the validation doesnt make it less reliable.


I'm really not sure what you're trying to tell me? They claim this one they and the complete opposite the other day, use reddit posts as sources wihtout even trying to validate or cite the source and then go on and edit arcticles in hindsight when that "leak" busted. Obviously they say something credible now and then yeah, but I personally don't even bother reading their stuff.


----------



## kfxsti

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> Not at all, that's what I'm saying. WCCFTech is not a reliable source at all.


I didn't post the link I posted for an argument lol.
I posted it because this isn't the only place I have seen it not showing a 1151 v2 but with a z270 being used.


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> Not at all, that's what I'm saying. WCCFTech is not a reliable source at all.


How dare you say something like that ! Intel have included WCCFTech as a source into one of their presentation slides.


----------



## Scotty99

So im in middle of upgrading my HTPC and i found a cheap z270 board at microcenter open box, do we have anything but rumors about whether or not coffee is going to socket into a z270 board? I was just going to buy a 30 dollar celeron in the meantime, but if we know for sure it isnt going to fit i would grab a g4560 or above.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BenchZowner*
> 
> To my knowledge & info, Z270 support is set in stone, Z170 remains a mystery.


What knowledge and info is this? Not asking with the intention to doubt you -- just eagerly waiting like the others that we might be lucky enough to get a 6c/12t CPU for our current boards.


----------



## Scotty99

I ended up just getting an H110 board, but what is stopping a coffee lake to slot into that board if it is indeed 1151?


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I ended up just getting an H110 board, but what is stopping a coffee lake to slot into that board if it is indeed 1151?


Unless they change the pin layout, nothing. However, BIOS will stop you.


----------



## Scotty99

Well i bought a pretty popular itx board, surely a bios update isnt something that would prevent people from upgrading, board manufacturers would never hear the end of it.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well i bought a pretty popular itx board, surely a bios update isnt something that would prevent people from upgrading, board manufacturers would never hear the end of it.


Unfortunately, this is Intel and not AMD. AMD seems to do a little bit more in the sense of supporting new chips on older platforms. But even when they did so, only certain boards carried the support.

Unfortunately, I could see Z170 being the bare minimum they allow with the exclusion of many B and H chipsets. There will be complaints, but there would be more if they decided to shaft Zx70 users rather than Bx50 and Hx10 users.


----------



## Scotty99

I mean, 4790k's could be slotted into every 1150 board that i know of, dont see this being any different. Unless they change the pin layout of course, but man would that be some sketchy stuff lol.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I mean, 4790k's could be slotted into every 1150 board that i know of, dont see this being any different. Unless they change the pin layout of course, but man would that be some sketchy stuff lol.


True, but this covered Z87 and Z97 (i.e. two generations of chipsets). The argument here is that Intel has never done a 3rd generation of a chipset or even a 3rd reiteration of the same socket in a 'pro-sumer' board. That's why there's speculation that it may or may not work. Trust me. I'm hoping for the same thing you are.


----------



## Scotty99

Im surprised there havent been more leaks, we knew everything about ryzen/vega/skylake x before they hit lol.


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Im surprised there havent been more leaks, we knew everything about ryzen/vega/skylake x before they hit lol.


We're still likely a couple months out, considering we just recently saw actual labeled engineering samples.


----------



## Lass3

Wccftech is pretty much as reliable as AMD slides.

https://www.techpowerup.com/235698/intel-readies-four-6-core-coffee-lake-skus-including-two-core-i5


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Wccftech is pretty much as reliable as AMD slides.
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/235698/intel-readies-four-6-core-coffee-lake-skus-including-two-core-i5


Ya that looks more like it









My 60 dollar itx h110 board supports 7700k, wonder if 8700k will slot in. With a 4.7ghz turbo, who needs to overclock stuff....not like these are going to clock higher than a 7700k anyways. CPU's are getting pretty close to GPU boost 2.0 where things are nearly maxxed from factory it seems.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya that looks more like it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My 60 dollar itx h110 board supports 7700k, wonder if 8700k will slot in. With a 4.7ghz turbo, who needs to overclock stuff....not like these are going to clock higher than a 7700k anyways. CPU's are getting pretty close to GPU boost 2.0 where things are nearly maxxed from factory it seems.


H110 doesnt have enough power to handle 6 cores on high clock speed, on the other hand z170 can


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> H110 doesnt have enough power to handle 6 cores on high clock speed, on the other hand z170 can


Maybe, maybe not. I was surprised to see 7700k compatibility on this board, depending on how fast the all core boost is on the 8700k you really never know.


----------



## azanimefan

so they're going to sell a 6C cpu for the same amount that AMD sells a 6c12t?

still not seeing what intel is doing here.


----------



## Gauanqh6764

..


----------



## naz2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nobelharvards*
> 
> Ryzen's success is mostly off of enthusiasts who meticulously research specifications, and avoid brand loyalty. They buy whatever is best for their use cases. The best product wins their wallet.
> 
> There are a lot of mainstream customers out there who still think "Intel = quality, AMD = cheap and hot".
> 
> That mindshare is still extremely powerful, and means they won't completely give up their price difference with AMD. Not yet, at least.


that's not entirely wrong considering developers have been targeting intel as their lead platform for years now


----------



## Scotty99

I have not owned an AMD cpu since athlon xp in college, which was the first PC I built myself. Enter ryzen and it was an absolute no brainer, but sadly for the most part you are correct that people think AMD is bad.....because they have been for so long.

The ryzen is bad in gaming argument is dead and gone, the only thing holding people back from buying ryzen is that is says AMD on the package.


----------



## jologskyblues

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nobelharvards*
> 
> Ryzen's success is mostly off of enthusiasts who meticulously research specifications, and avoid brand loyalty. They buy whatever is best for their use cases. The best product wins their wallet.


Ryzen has also finally created a worthy upgrade path to those people who only exclusively buy AMD based on brand loyalty and/or on "moral" grounds.


----------



## Charcharo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jologskyblues*
> 
> Ryzen has also finally created a worthy upgrade path to those people who only exclusively buy AMD based on brand loyalty and/or on "moral" grounds.


Yet those that only buy Intel dont suffer from brand royalty?
Also Moral arguments, whilst usually very difficult to levy and defend, are absolutely valid.


----------



## Gauanqh6764

..


----------



## Charcharo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nobelharvards*
> 
> If AMD was the big guy, and Intel was the little guy, there's a very good chance AMD would be the one locking everything down and Intel trying to open things up.
> 
> You could argue the same thing for nVIDIA vs AMD.
> 
> They're all big businesses, who want to turn a profit. They want your wallet. Thinking AMD is an angelic company is very naive thinking.
> 
> Now, I will admit, I do tend to incline towards AMD because of "moral" reasons (I like AMD better), but as a consumer (as in, what I'll actually spend money on), I will buy the best product for my use cases. Period.
> 
> As a consumer, you should always vote with your wallet on what the best product is, that's how innovation happens. Always buy the best product for the best price for your use case.
> 
> If you have a disposable income and don't care about price to performance and have the luxury of being able to buy a different brand purely on "morals", then just buy the most expensive Threadripper or i9, whichever you prefer, the end.


Did I ever state otherwise? I know very well that its possible (not certain though!) for AMD to act just as bad as Intel if they were in the position. And then, I will oppose them.

Seriously man, its a good post and I give a +1 but its obvious stuff







. I already operate under those rules so no worries!

Admittedly some hate is directed at Intel as they are worse than Apple and Microsoft (and those 2 are powerhouses too) which means it is inferior in the types of people it employees in general. But still, if they were the underdog, the good of gaming and technology would mean I gotta be on their side.


----------



## skafo

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/891872117972545537
Will make a lot of you unhappy.

I personally don't care as I'm on Z77 and would actually prefer a new socket if it's shared with Ice Lake.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/891872117972545537
> Will make a lot of you unhappy.
> 
> I personally don't care as I'm on Z77 and would actually prefer a new socket if it's shared with Ice Lake.


Z370 and Z390?


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Z370 and Z390?


I don't know, just ASRock saying CFL not compatible with Z270. Very confusing, but if they use the same socket on a new chipset (which would probably mean that next gen will have a new socket) and block older chipsets intentionally that'd be rather idiotic.

Things don't quite add up to be honest.


----------



## Killer007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> I don't know, just ASRock saying CFL not compatible with Z270. Very confusing, but if they use the same socket on a new chipset (which would probably mean that next gen will have a new socket) and block older chipsets intentionally that'd be rather idiotic.
> 
> Things don't quite add up to be honest.


To be fair, even more surprising than the _fact_ of incompatibility with Z270 is that ASRock came up with it out of nothing, on the internet, and on Twitter. That's why I'd take it sceptically; moreover, Asus and MSI, when asked about this, responded "not having an official stance". Either they don't know or they're keeping it a secret. Either way this adds a lot of suprise to ASRock's revelation.


----------



## robertparker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Killer007*
> 
> To be fair, even more surprising than the fact of incompatibility with Z270 is that ASRock came up with it out of nothing, on the internet, and on Twitter. That's why I'd take it sceptically; moreover, Asus and MSI, when asked about this, responded "not having an official stance". Either they don't know or they're keeping it a secret. Either way this adds a lot of suprise to ASRock's revelation.


If CL is truly a couple of months away, I can't see how they wouldn't know.


----------



## Asterox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *azanimefan*
> 
> *so they're going to sell a 6C cpu for the same amount that AMD sells a 6c12t?
> *
> still not seeing what intel is doing here.


Well it is very simple,







Intel CPU die is significantly expensive=Intel simply can not track AMD Ryzen/Threadripper prices.

*People do not understand or do not want to accept it, the slowest i5 8400 6/6 2.8ghz will cost minimum 250dolars vs R5 1600 6/12 200dolars*.


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Killer007*
> 
> Asus and MSI, when asked about this, responded "not having an official stance". Either they don't know or they're keeping it a secret.


They might as well know and not say a word because they want to sell a few more Z270 boards before Intel kills those off after a couple of months. That's what I'd do at least.


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asterox*
> 
> Well it is very simple,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intel CPU die is significantly expensive=Intel simply can not track AMD Ryzen/Threadripper prices.
> 
> *People do not understand or do not want to accept it, the slowest i5 8400 6/6 2.8ghz will cost minimum 250dolars vs R5 1600 6/12 200dolars*.


Can we keep such clownish fanboy stuff out please?


----------



## Killer007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> They might as well know and not say a word because they want to sell a few more Z270 boards before Intel kills those off after a couple of months. That's what I'd do at least.


Although it actually makes sense and may pretty well be true, I desperately hope it isn't.


----------



## czin125

They could just put a Z370 PCH onto a mocf board with nothing else changed and it'd be good to go? That board appears to be sold out everywhere.


----------



## Ding Chavez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *azanimefan*
> 
> so they're going to sell a 6C cpu for the same amount that AMD sells a 6c12t?
> 
> still not seeing what intel is doing here.


The Intel CPUs will probably have better IPC, better stock clocks, better OCing, probably better ram speeds plus Intel usually costs a bit more than AMD. Whether that's worth paying more and having no HT is a good question, for the i5 atleast.
I just hope Intel have the same prices as current i5s and i7s but knowing Intel they will probably jack prices up a bit cos it's got 2 more cores, and I wouldn't be surprised if they are Z370 only. Same prices and Z170 and Z270 compatible would be good but I bet they milk current 4 core and new 6 core for max profit.


----------



## pez

Why are we back to talking about Ryzen again after mods came and cleaned up the thread?

Honestly, Ryzen is a great choice potentially for those that aren't worried about just gaming and want to take advantage of the extra cores and HT. It's an even better choice for those on a 3770K or lower. Currently Ryzen competes with the IPC of Haswell and sometimes Skylake.

The CFL stuff will probably be more appealing to those that really want to upgrade and get the features they were missing from Haswell and it's relevant chipsets (and older), but couldn't find the reason to spend the money it takes to go from Haswell to KL. Not to mention if gaming is the focus, then CFL will definitely be the clear winner for the time being.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *epic1337*
> 
> the base and turbo clock is high enough for the lock chips to be attractive for most.
> imho overclocking a 6core is a serious matter, heat alone wouldn't be cooled by some cheapo aircooler.


Wait, so the 8700 non overclock version could boost to 4.3GHz for all 6 cores, that is pretty big boost!!


----------



## ilmazzo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Wait, so the 8700 non overclock version could boost to 4.3GHz for all 6 cores, that is pretty big boost!!


highest boost is never for all cores, never......


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ilmazzo*
> 
> highest boost is never for all cores, never......


This.


----------



## looniam

aahhh iirc i used asus's MultiCoreEnhanement to force all the cores to max boost on my old i5-2400.

and iirc again, people were claiming asus was cheating in benchmarks because of MCE.


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> aahhh iirc i used asus's MultiCoreEnhanement to force all the cores to max boost on my old i5-2400.
> 
> and iirc again, people were claiming asus was cheating in benchmarks because of MCE.


Yes, you are right. It may have been like that with sandy bridge, but afaik haswell did not go full turbo speed on all cores. Same with skylake and kaby lake.
All core turbo clock is still above normal clock but not exactly the advertized turbo clock.

But yeah all this doesn't matter much since any Intel CPU to date with advertized single core turbo almost reaches to that turbo clocks on all cores with manual overclocking. It is safe to say that CL i7-8700*k* overclock should reach at least 4.3GHz on all cores(if single core turbo is 4.3GHz). i7-8700 might not reach 4.3 GHz on all cores on its own.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ilmazzo*
> 
> highest boost is never for all cores, never......


The 8700 has 4.6ghz Single core. Why would 4.3ghz be an issue for All Core Turbo?


----------



## Dragonsyph

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ilmazzo*
> 
> highest boost is never for all cores, never......


Pretty much up to the motherboard brand and if they have all core turbo on by default. My cpu did 4.4ghz all core default settings. A lot of motherboards do this. But I guess amd owners need something to argue over in an intel thread. Should we talk about ryzen for another 50 pages?


----------



## Kana Chan

Looks like they removed that twitter reply.


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana Chan*
> 
> Looks like they removed that twitter reply.


So people might have lost their minds over nothing


----------



## Clocknut

Even if it is compatible with Z170/Z270.Those budget cut down VRM will likely to cause issue if someone OC a 6 core intel.

There is not way 8700K will consume the same power as 7700k when OC


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> So people might have lost their minds over nothing


or it was against the NDA, which most likely it was

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clocknut*
> 
> Even if it is compatible with Z170/Z270.Those budget cut down VRM will likely to cause issue if someone OC a 6 core intel.
> 
> There is not way 8700K will consume the same power as 7700k when OC


if ya spent like 80 bucks on a board its no real big deal to buy a new one

but I'm sure my Watercooled VRM's on my 350$ board can cope just fine with an overclocked 6 core chip


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> aahhh iirc i used asus's MultiCoreEnhanement to force all the cores to max boost on my old i5-2400.
> 
> and iirc again, people were claiming asus was cheating in benchmarks because of MCE.


My bad, I checked out again. Many boards allow for full turbo yeah, it is very much possible all cores will go full Turbo with many boards.
Imo, Asus wasn't cheating, they just went a little above Intel's rules.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana Chan*
> 
> Looks like they removed that twitter reply.


either they were breaking NDA or it was false
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clocknut*
> 
> Even if it is compatible with Z170/Z270.Those budget cut down VRM will likely to cause issue if someone OC a 6 core intel.
> 
> There is not way 8700K will consume the same power as 7700k when OC


They are being used with high end motherboards... and really the only which could run high clock speed CPUs can be those

and TDP isnt about Power consumption


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> aahhh iirc i used asus's MultiCoreEnhanement to force all the cores to max boost on my old i5-2400.
> 
> and iirc again, people were claiming asus was cheating in benchmarks because of MCE.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My bad, I checked out again. Many boards allow for full turbo yeah, it is very much possible all cores will go full Turbo with many boards.
> Imo, Asus wasn't cheating, they just went a little above Intel's rules.
Click to expand...

gotta +rep a guy who checks their work.


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> or it was against the NDA, which most likely it was


Yeah my thoughts as well, just saying people should wait with getting their pitchforks and torches out until theres something official.


----------



## gigafloppy

Which is faster for gaming? 4C8T, or 6C6T? If 6C6T is faster, the i5-8600K might just be an excellent upgrade for owners of older core i7s.

I didn't upgrade to Sky- & Kabylake because I didn't like to pay for a sidegrade from a quad to a quad. And single core performance of Ryzen is about the same as my overclocked Ivy Bridge. The i7-3770 is fast enough for most games these days, but lately more and more games just can't maintain 60fps anymore because of its... "aging" single core and memory performance. Upgrading to i5 coffee lake? Worth it, or a waste of money? (especially with current memory prices)


----------



## unityole

what was the twitters post about?


----------



## cooljaguar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gigafloppy*
> 
> Which is faster for gaming? 4C8T, or 6C6T? If 6C6T is faster, the i5-8600K might just be an excellent upgrade for owners of older core i7s.
> 
> I didn't upgrade to Sky- & Kabylake because I didn't like to pay for a sidegrade from a quad to a quad. And single core performance of Ryzen is about the same as my overclocked Ivy Bridge. The i7-3770 is fast enough for most games these days, but lately more and more games just can't maintain 60fps anymore because of its... "aging" single core and memory performance. Upgrading to i5 coffee lake? Worth it, or a waste of money? (especially with current memory prices)


For gaming usually the safe bet is a high clock speed, then core count. Hyper-threading's value is real hit or miss. So if the leaks are legit the 8600k should beat the 3770 pretty easily, compared to the 3770 it has the advantage in both clock speed and core count.

If the 8600k's bigger brother, the 8700k, can hit 5GHz it'll be even better, maybe even "perfection" as far as gaming CPUs go. High clock speeds? Check. High core count? Check. HT? Check.

Of course that'll change if games start making real use of octocores. But that's a long way off, we're only just now reaching the point where a good number of games can take advantage of hexacores.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gigafloppy*
> 
> Which is faster for gaming? 4C8T, or 6C6T? If 6C6T is faster, the i5-8600K might just be an excellent upgrade for owners of older core i7s.
> 
> I didn't upgrade to Sky- & Kabylake because I didn't like to pay for a sidegrade from a quad to a quad. And single core performance of Ryzen is about the same as my overclocked Ivy Bridge. The i7-3770 is fast enough for most games these days, but lately more and more games just can't maintain 60fps anymore because of its... "aging" single core and memory performance. Upgrading to i5 coffee lake? Worth it, or a waste of money? (especially with current memory prices)


Base clock is lower on 8600k and 8700k, really would depend on the game and if it can take advantage of the extra cores. 8600k would be an upgrade only for a few games that dont like hyperthreading as much as real cores.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *unityole*
> 
> what was the twitters post about?


ASRock saying Coffee Lake won't be compatible with 200 series motherboards.


----------



## czin125

The only way to find out is August 21-26, 2017.


----------



## unityole

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> The only way to find out is August 21-26, 2017.


why? is that the release date for CFL 8700K?


----------



## BenchZowner

Yeap.


----------



## unityole

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BenchZowner*
> 
> Yeap.


wow so quick only few weeks away. i thought i'd have to wait till end of sept or oct like last yr


----------



## mav451

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *unityole*
> 
> wow so quick only few weeks away. i thought i'd have to wait till end of sept or oct like last yr


I thought the slides indicated ww34'17 to ww41'17 as production dates, not necessarily launch dates, covering Aug 21st through Oct 15.
October would already be start of Q4 - and that seems far more likely to me.


----------



## naz2

there's been no info regarding a specific release date, just Q3


----------



## skafo

Gamescom is end of Augst, wouldn't that be a likely event to release/reveal CFL?


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ilmazzo*
> 
> highest boost is never for all cores, never......


Yeah you are right, except the 4.3GHz I mentioned wasnt even the highest boost for 8700. The highest boost, aka single core boost was 4.6GHz.

You need to read the detailed specs again.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Yeah you are right, except the 4.3GHz I mentioned wasnt even the highest boost for 8700. The highest boost, aka single core boost was 4.6GHz.
> 
> You need to read the detailed specs again.


Uhm, which specs?

Coz the only one I can found is 3.7GHz for base clock. 4.6GHz turbo boost seem a bit off given a base clock that low.

Nvm, found it. Still, nothing is confirmed at this moment.


----------



## unityole

i want 5ghz 6 cores in laptop. time to wait..


----------



## Gauanqh6764

..


----------



## czin125

Well, the P870DM is apparently capable of taking a 7700K to 5.2 Core/ 4.9 NB clock.
http://i.imgur.com/2yPL4nN.jpg
Probably have to wait till 10nm for a 5ghz 6 core in a laptop.


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> Well, the P870DM is apparently capable of taking a 7700K to 5.2 Core/ 4.9 NB clock.
> http://i.imgur.com/2yPL4nN.jpg
> Probably have to wait till 10nm for a 5ghz 6 core in a laptop.


Browsing on the desktop doesn't prove anything. If his vcore is close to his VID there's no way that thing wont thermal throttle the instant he puts any load on it.


----------



## svenz

https://newsroom.intel.com/press-kits/8th-gen-intel-core/


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenz*
> 
> https://newsroom.intel.com/press-kits/8th-gen-intel-core/


Cool, this whole expectation was a killer. Intel most important showing in ages (they are on the backfoot). I hope they deliver and they do it for a reasonable price, not X series price.


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Cool, this whole expectation was a killer. Intel most important showing in ages (they are on the backfoot). I hope they deliver and they do it for a reasonable price, not X series price.


I hope they'll announce the whole lineup and not just the 2017 lineup.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Update to this thread 4.7GHz confirmed:
Quote:


> Intel will be clocking the Core i7-8700K at up to 4.7GHz on maximum single-core CPU clocks, while it'll hit 4.6GHz on dual-core, 4.4GHz on quad-core, and 4.3GHz on hexa-core. It'll support dual-channel DDR4, feature a 95W TDP, and integrated graphics.
> 
> The new 8700K will be joined by the 8700, with slightly lowered CPU clocks of 4.6/4.5/4.3/4.3GHz for single/dual/quad/hexa-core CPU clocks, respectively


*Source:* http://www.tweaktown.com/news/58697/intel-core-i7-8700k-detailed-6c-12t-up-4-3ghz/index.html


----------



## Dragonsyph

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Update to this thread 4.7GHz confirmed:
> *Source:* http://www.tweaktown.com/news/58697/intel-core-i7-8700k-detailed-6c-12t-up-4-3ghz/index.html


That is looking pretty good. 4.3ghz all core turbo for 6 cores?

Anyone know what Igpu it has? Or does it say and im missing it?


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dragonsyph*
> 
> That is looking pretty good. 4.3ghz all core turbo for 6 cores?
> 
> Anyone know what Igpu it has? Or does it say and im missing it?


Yup 4.3GHz. Don't think what iGPU it has yet has been detailed at all.

Update again:
Quote:


> Intel Core i7-8700K smiles for camera
> 
> The first pictures allegedly showing upcoming 6-core 8700K processor have also emerged today at Baidu. We are looking at 2 different processors (the one on the right is different than the first two).
> 
> Along with the photo, CPU-Z benchmark result was also published showing 2323 single-thread performance and 13980 multi-thread performance. This is better than i7-7700K by 4443 points, but no confirmation was posted that we are in fact looking at 8700K benchmark (could be anything really).


*Source:* https://videocardz.com/71740/intel-core-i7-8700k-pictured-i3-8350-and-i3-8100-specs-leaked


----------



## Scotty99

Why are they using an outdated version of cpu-z? Its been months since that program has has the new scoring system, how does that single core compare to a 7700k?


----------



## unityole

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nobelharvards*
> 
> Can't imagine that. Lower clocked SKUs, maybe, but the full fat desktop chips will be primarily in those chunky laptops with enormous cooling capacity.
> 
> 5GHz on all 6 cores? Forget it.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> Browsing on the desktop doesn't prove anything. If his vcore is close to his VID there's no way that thing wont thermal throttle the instant he puts any load on it.


we just need a golden chip from silicon lottery and a new laptop design with bigger heatsink with 2 fans on the CPU.


----------



## naz2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Why are they using an outdated version of cpu-z? Its been months since that program has has the new scoring system, how does that single core compare to a 7700k?


https://web.archive.org/web/20170226080109/https://valid.x86.fr/bench/1

7700k scored 2301, so as expected coffee lake is literally just kaby lake with 2 extra cores. no IPC improvement


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Why are they using an outdated version of cpu-z? Its been months since that program has has the new scoring system, how does that single core compare to a 7700k?


7700K scored 2235 in the test below where it was boosting to it's native 4.5Ghz during benchmark

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/core_i7_7700k_processor_review_desktop_kaby_lake,10.html

so the question is: what frequency was the 8700K really at when taking the screenshot of the singlethread performance. If it was boosting it's 1 core to 4.7 then 2300 is a very weak score, less than the 7700K. If the tested core was also at 4.5 (most likely) however it is a marginal to absolutely no IPC improvement on a single core level.

In addition if we extrapolate from that same link the IPC results from the graph in the guru3D benchmark test (all clocked down to 4.2Ghz on purpose during their test) we can safely assume no ipc improvement this round, so we can really expect the exact same single core performance at equal frequencies but with 50% more core capacity.

So the million dollar question really is: What max frequency can we reach with al 6 cores overclocked ?

I'm personally still excited at this point because a hyperthreaded non-HEDT cpu with 6 cores that effectively boosts to 5ghz on a good bin is nothing short of revolutionary right ? That might really turn out to be the new standard for high-end gaming pc's with just enough multitasking horsepower as well as roughly the same current singlethread performance of the 7700K


----------



## Blaze0303

If I can get 6c/12t without needing a new motherboard...I would be so happy!


----------



## BenchZowner

IMHO the most futureproof ( as much as one can claim as such ) chip would've been a 8core/16thread Kaby-Lake/Coffee-Lake ( should be awesome for streaming + gaming even the latest games for the forthcoming years )


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BenchZowner*
> 
> IMHO the most futureproof ( as much as one can claim as such ) chip would've been a 8core/16thread Kaby-Lake/Coffee-Lake ( should be awesome for streaming + gaming even the latest games for the forthcoming years )


8/16 is too much of a compromise in temps and OC capability in comparison to the i7-7700K in games. IMHO, no need for now in the desktop segment. If people need extra cores, there is always the 2011 or Ryzen, both underscoring against the i7-7700K in games. I think 6/12 with the high clocks they are will be enough to game and stream. And I imagine the i7-8700K will reach 4.8Ghz (or more) in all cores with delid. That would be a beast.

In the future, perhaps a couple years from now, when games do really benefit from 8/16, they can move up again.


----------



## BenchZowner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> 8/16 is too much of a compromise in temps and OC capability in comparison to the i7-7700K in games. IMHO, no need for now in the desktop segment. If people need extra cores, there is always the 2011 or Ryzen, both underscoring against the i7-7700K in games. I think 6/12 with the high clocks they are will be enough to game and stream. And I imagine the i7-8700K will reach 4.8Ghz (or more) in all cores with delid. That would be a beast.
> 
> In the future, perhaps a couple years from now, when games do really benefit from 8/16, they can move up again.


If based on SkyLake/Kaby-Lake ( Coffee Lake is an unknown when it comes to L2 & L3 Cache hierarchy and functionality ) an 8C/16T would clock for 24/7 at 4.6GHz with a decent cooler, and that would be more than fine for any game ( how many games do you really think see any fps increase when going over 4.5GHz at 1080p or higher ? )


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BenchZowner*
> 
> If based on SkyLake/Kaby-Lake ( Coffee Lake is an unknown when it comes to L2 & L3 Cache hierarchy and functionality ) an 8C/16T would clock for 24/7 at 4.6GHz with a decent cooler, and that would be more than fine for any game ( how many games do you really think see any fps increase when going over 4.5GHz at 1080p or higher ? )


errr....skylake based and overclockable to 4.6Ghz you say ? Wait, we have that already !

https://ark.intel.com/products/123767/Intel-Core-i7-7820X-X-series-Processor-11M-Cache-up-to-4_30-GHz

https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/i7-7820x


----------



## Scotty99

Going to 6 cores really changes nothing if single core performance is the same, that assumes these can overclock as high as a 7700k can which i doubt. AMD still offers the more future proof solution for less money, but glad to see intel is FINALLY moving away from quad core CPU's for the mainstream.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Going to 6 cores really changes nothing if single core performance is the same, that assumes these can overclock as high as a 7700k can which i doubt. AMD still offers the more future proof solution for less money, but glad to see intel is FINALLY moving away from quad core CPU's for the mainstream.


Actually it does Scotty. And for the following reasons:

-Some games really saturate the full 4 hyperthreaded cores of my 5Ghz 7700K currently to their fullest. I litteraly see 8 green lines reaching the top in process explorer so that begs for more cores. And this is on a fresh clean installed Windows 10 with no other programs (not even an antivirus) installed !

-Reality is more than the scenario I just described here above. In a real world scenario, as soon as you boot into windows you see your system tray load up with icons right ? Those are all programs and processes running in the background that are eating away from your cpu cores. You don't want that to limit your options and performance as it currently does on a 4-core. So 50% more cores can really make all that difference, provided you can keep that high singlethread performance that we currently have with the 7700K/7740X.

Note: This is all in response to only your statement of: "Going to 6 cores really changes nothing if single core performance is the same". As for your second statement that AMD has a more future proof solution for less money I can only agree with you but then again that is all in a scenario where singlethread performance doesn't matter, but we already know that it actually does...


----------



## BenchZowner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> errr....skylake based and overclockable to 4.6Ghz you say ? Wait, we have that already !
> 
> https://ark.intel.com/products/123767/Intel-Core-i7-7820X-X-series-Processor-11M-Cache-up-to-4_30-GHz
> 
> https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/i7-7820x


That's not what I described, this one ( and all the current X299 7xxx chips ) carry the new L3 cache design ( non-inclusive - victim cache ) which has a performance hit for most games.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> 
> 
> Intel Core i7-8700K smiles for camera
> 
> The first pictures allegedly showing upcoming 6-core 8700K processor have also emerged today at Baidu. We are looking at 2 different processors (the one on the right is different than the first two).
> 
> Along with the photo, CPU-Z benchmark result was also published showing 2323 single-thread performance and 13980 multi-thread performance. This is better than i7-7700K by 4443 points, but no confirmation was posted that we are in fact looking at 8700K benchmark (could be anything really).
> *Source:* https://videocardz.com/71740/intel-core-i7-8700k-pictured-i3-8350-and-i3-8100-specs-leaked


Socket Wise they look really similar, maybe they are comparing 7700K to 8700k?


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Socket Wise they look really similar, maybe they are comparing 7700K to 8700k?


You might be right, this is a 7700Ks backside



And the 6700K looks the same.


----------



## artemis2307

if the i3 8350k turns out to be 4c8t, that would be a giant middle finger to the 6700k/7700k buyers


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> You might be right, this is a 7700Ks backside
> 
> 
> 
> And the 6700K looks the same.


6700k,77700k and 8700k in the same picture, the one in the right is 8700k
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artemis2307*
> 
> if the i3 8350k turns out to be 4c8t, that would be a giant middle finger to the 6700k/7700k buyers


it seesm the specs would be 4c/4t maybe the i5 8400 will be 4c/8t


----------



## TheWizardMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> 6700k,77700k and 8700k in the same pricture, the one in the right is 8700k
> it seesm the specs would be 4c/4t maybe the i5 8400 will be 4c/8t


If that's the case, looks confirmed that the z170 and z270 will not be compatible.


----------



## Nick the Slick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheWizardMan*
> 
> If that's the case, looks confirmed that the z170 and z270 will not be compatible.


How so? Not that I think it will be compatible (I am trying to keep my hopes alive though lol), this is Intel we're talking about. Just curious what you see in the picture that confirms it's not compatible?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BenchZowner*
> 
> That's not what I described, this one ( and all the current X299 7xxx chips ) carry the new L3 cache design ( non-inclusive - victim cache ) which has a performance hit for most games.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> Actually it does Scotty. And for the following reasons:
> 
> -Some games really saturate the full 4 hyperthreaded cores of my 5Ghz 7700K currently to their fullest. I litteraly see 8 green lines reaching the top in process explorer so that begs for more cores. And this is on a fresh clean installed Windows 10 with no other programs (not even an antivirus) installed !
> 
> -Reality is more than the scenario I just described here above. In a real world scenario, as soon as you boot into windows you see your system tray load up with icons right ? Those are all programs and processes running in the background that are eating away from your cpu cores. You don't want that to limit your options and performance as it currently does on a 4-core. So 50% more cores can really make all that difference, provided you can keep that high singlethread performance that we currently have with the 7700K/7740X.
> 
> Note: This is all in response to only your statement of: "Going to 6 cores really changes nothing if single core performance is the same". As for your second statement that AMD has a more future proof solution for less money I can only agree with you but then again that is all in a scenario where singlethread performance doesn't matter, but we already know that it actually does...


The 1600 will match the 8700k in cores/threads for half the price (assuming they raise the price on i7's, which they will). That is what i meant by nothing changes, not that some games cant take advantage of >4 cores, that is the reason i bought a ryzen in the first place...


----------



## TheWizardMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nick the Slick*
> 
> How so? Not that I think it will be compatible (I am trying to keep my hopes alive though lol), this is Intel we're talking about. Just curious what you see in the picture that confirms it's not compatible?


The pin placement on the 8700 chip isn't in the same place as the 7700 and 6700. The 8700 chip is clearly larger than the other two as well, with the pins more spread out.

I don't think there is any way this chip will be backwards compatible based on this picture.


----------



## Frosted racquet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheWizardMan*
> 
> The pin placement on the 8700 chip isn't in the same place as the 7700 and 6700. The 8700 chip is clearly larger than the other two as well, with the pins more spread out.
> 
> I don't think there is any way this chip will be backwards compatible based on this picture.


They look identical to me.


----------



## Nick the Slick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheWizardMan*
> 
> The pin placement on the 8700 chip isn't in the same place as the 7700 and 6700. The 8700 chip is clearly larger than the other two as well, with the pins more spread out.
> 
> I don't think there is any way this chip will be backwards compatible based on this picture.


If you look closely at the alleged 8700k, it is not perfectly aligned with the other two, it is pushed slightly up, so maybe that's throwing you off? If it were pushed down in alignment they look exactly the same to me, except for the stuff in the center.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Frosted racquet*
> 
> They look identical to me.


Same here.


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheWizardMan*
> 
> The pin placement on the 8700 chip isn't in the same place as the 7700 and 6700. The 8700 chip is clearly larger than the other two as well, with the pins more spread out.
> 
> I don't think there is any way this chip will be backwards compatible based on this picture.


As Nick the Slick said, the 8700K is just pushed up a little imo. It's hard to tell though because the perspective distorts the proportions as well, I tried to measure the three against each other and even the two on the left differ from each other.


----------



## TheWizardMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nick the Slick*
> 
> If you look closely at the alleged 8700k, it is not perfectly aligned with the other two, it is pushed slightly up, so maybe that's throwing you off? If it were pushed down in alignment they look exactly the same to me, except for the stuff in the center.
> Same here.


I see what you're saying. The lighting is very bad in that picture, especially toward the bottom of the supposed 8700K.


----------



## Phixit

That single thread performance ..


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BenchZowner*
> 
> If based on SkyLake/Kaby-Lake ( Coffee Lake is an unknown when it comes to L2 & L3 Cache hierarchy and functionality ) an 8C/16T would clock for 24/7 at 4.6GHz with a decent cooler, and that would be more than fine for any game ( how many games do you really think see any fps increase when going over 4.5GHz at 1080p or higher ? )


I still think it is too much of a compromise. The king now is the i7-7700K at +5Ghz. If the i7-8700K reaches 5Ghz, and I believe it can, there is no need for 2 extra cores and a compromise in temps and OC. But this is me. They can bring the octacore with Ice Lake, but I still think an octacore will spoil the nature of a native hexacore for the time being (2017).

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> errr....skylake based and overclockable to 4.6Ghz you say ? Wait, we have that already !
> 
> https://ark.intel.com/products/123767/Intel-Core-i7-7820X-X-series-Processor-11M-Cache-up-to-4_30-GHz
> 
> https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/i7-7820x


The 2011 chipset has some differences and a lag in performance for games the same way the Ryzen has. They are server / workstation chips, not a destop chip for games, Photoshop (i7700K is still king IIRC) and Office stuff.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> The 1600 will match the 8700k in cores/threads for half the price (assuming they raise the price on i7's, which they will). That is what i meant by nothing changes, not that some games cant take advantage of >4 cores, that is the reason i bought a ryzen in the first place...


It was mentioned the U$ 349 price for the i7-8700K, so it won't be pricier. You have to remember that the 115X socket has some limitations in comparison to 2011, they cannot sell for the price of an X series chip.

http://wccftech.com/intel-coffee-lake-8th-gen-official-announcement-21-august-launch/

And you cannot seriously compare a native thoroughbred hexacore with 4.3Ghz turbo in all cores with an octacore server chip with two disable cores that cannot go above 3.9Ghz in most chips. This is almost the stock speed of the i7-8700K. The Ryzen price is appealing, but now that they are updating the i7 for the same price, the i7 has a good chance to remain the king in games. And with a good cost benefit.


----------



## BenchZowner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*


What's the question ?

You don't understand what I said ?

In layman's terms.

Between Skylake/KabyLake & Skylake-X, there has been a change in the way the caches work ( as well on the size and associativity & hierarchy ).
The way Skylake-X's L3 Cache operates, it harms its gaming performance a bit.
If you take an equal clocked & core count KabyLake & Skylake-X and test them in various games, you'll see that the KabyLake will be faster ( between 5-10 fps in benchmarks where the range is near 80-120 fps ) at 1080p.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BenchZowner*
> 
> What's the question ?
> 
> You don't understand what I said ?
> 
> In layman's terms.
> 
> Between Skylake/KabyLake & Skylake-X, there has been a change in the way the caches work ( as well on the size and associativity & hierarchy ).
> The way Skylake-X's L3 Cache operates, it harms its gaming performance a bit.
> If you take an equal clocked & core count KabyLake & Skylake-X and test them in various games, you'll see that the KabyLake will be faster ( between 5-10 fps in benchmarks where the range is near 80-120 fps ) at 1080p.


I think that's a bit of an exaggeration. The biggest difference is still clockspeed. Also the platform is still new.

Regardless I am still pegged at 300 fps most of the time in Overwatch







(and that's at only 4.3ghz)


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheWizardMan*
> 
> The pin placement on the 8700 chip isn't in the same place as the 7700 and 6700. The 8700 chip is clearly larger than the other two as well, with the pins more spread out.
> 
> I don't think there is any way this chip will be backwards compatible based on this picture.


they arent placed at the same length to be seen like if they were the same size


----------



## BenchZowner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I think that's a bit of an exaggeration. The biggest difference is still clockspeed. Also the platform is still new.
> 
> Regardless I am still pegged at 300 fps most of the time in Overwatch
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (and that's at only 4.3ghz)


It isn't about the clock speed.

Clock per Clock, test them and you'll see exactly what I'm saying.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BenchZowner*
> 
> It isn't about the clock speed.
> 
> Clock per Clock, test them and you'll see exactly what I'm saying.


I don't have a 7700k handy.

I will say my 7820x at 4.3 is a noticeable upgrade in Overwatch and GTA compared to my 4790k @ 4.6.

If you are just gaming you shouldn't be buying an 8 core cpu yet anyway, IMO at least.
Maybe the cache issue is something that can be resolved through the scheduler? In CPU-Z and cine bench I am able to match or beat a stock 7700k in single core.
I don't really see how the mesh would effect games negatively and nothing else.


----------



## BenchZowner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I don't have a 7700k handy.
> 
> I will say my 7820x at 4.3 is a noticeable upgrade in Overwatch and GTA compared to my 4790k @ 4.6.
> 
> If you are just gaming you shouldn't be buying an 8 core cpu yet anyway, IMO at least.
> Maybe the cache issue is something that can be resolved through the scheduler? In CPU-Z and cine bench I am able to match or beat a stock 7700k in single core.
> I don't really see how the mesh would effect games negatively and nothing else.


I might do it in the near future on a livestream.

But until then, mark my words.
Disabling 6 cores out of the 10 in a 7900X and clocking it at 4.5GHz ( all cores ) and comparing it with a 7700K @4.5GHz, you'll get higher framerates in most games in 1080p with the 7700K.
Just mark my words.
I bet anything I have that you'd like to grab off me in case I lose the bet ( trust me, I don't do losing bets, whenever I'm willing to bet on something, I sure know 100% what I'm talking about )

8c is my gaming recommendation for a long time futureproof gaming PC, it will most certainly be able to drive any graphics card to its max performance at any resolution in any game, even 4 years from now.
Plus, whenever a game isn't very multithreaded ( like most







), you will have no problem whatsoever to stream your game live at 1080p in very high quality without any performance loss or hickups.
6c should be fine, but it may not be sufficient for some games if you want to stream your gaming at high details & resolution.


----------



## thebski

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nobelharvards*
> 
> 5GHz on all 6 cores? Forget it.


Really? That would definitely be disappointing. We are seeing 4.9 as an available bin from Silicon Lottery on an 8 core Skylake-X chip. I would hope the better 6 core CL CPUs can do better.


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I think that's a bit of an exaggeration. The biggest difference is still clockspeed. Also the platform is still new.


It's really not, more than a few games are seeing IPC losses that extend into the double digit %'s (matched core counts and clocks) between skylake and skylake x because of the new cache


----------



## zGunBLADEz

So this is a 7820x with -2 cores and here is intel once again lol

7800x anyone?


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thebski*
> 
> Really? (...) We are seeing 4.9 as an available bin from Silicon Lottery on an 8 core Skylake-X chip.


Exactly. Perhaps he is saying without delid. I imagine the i7-8700K will reach 5Ghz with a certain ease in a delidded chip with custom loop. But I might be wrong. We'll see.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> The 1600 will match the 8700k in cores/threads for half the price (assuming they raise the price on i7's, which they will). That is what i meant by nothing changes, not that some games cant take advantage of >4 cores, that is the reason i bought a ryzen in the first place...


Matching cores/threads won't mean it will match the performance. At all.


----------



## Hu5ky

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BenchZowner*
> 
> I might do it in the near future on a livestream.
> 
> But until then, mark my words.
> Disabling 6 cores out of the 10 in a 7900X and clocking it at 4.5GHz ( all cores ) and comparing it with a 7700K @4.5GHz, you'll get higher framerates in most games in 1080p with the 7700K.
> Just mark my words.
> I bet anything I have that you'd like to grab off me in case I lose the bet ( trust me, I don't do losing bets, whenever I'm willing to bet on something, I sure know 100% what I'm talking about )
> 
> 8c is my gaming recommendation for a long time futureproof gaming PC, it will most certainly be able to drive any graphics card to its max performance at any resolution in any game, even 4 years from now.
> Plus, whenever a game isn't very multithreaded ( like most
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ), you will have no problem whatsoever to stream your game live at 1080p in very high quality without any performance loss or hickups.
> 6c should be fine, but it may not be sufficient for some games if you want to stream your gaming at high details & resolution.


I'm gonna quickly hi-jack the thread and ask what's an ideal "future proof" gaming/streaming processor atm. I'm planning to make an open loop system for CPU and GPU.


----------



## BenchZowner

It depends.
Gaming only or Gaming + Streaming.

First would call for a 6 core ( 5820K for example ), second would be an 8core ( Intel or AMD, both are excellent for the task )


----------



## 113802

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Matching cores/threads won't mean it will match the performance. At all.


Ivy Bridge currently handles everything just fine. Ryzen has more cores and threads and is faster than Ivy Bridge. AMD's lineup matches Broadwell-E IPC in every task except for gaming. The Toxic blue giant hasn't increased IPC with the 2 generations they released. Kaby Lake/SkyLake-X. They have no idea what they are doing with x299 so they released a 7700k with more pins to fit into the x299 with a higher TDP.

AMD announced Zen will be on a tock tock tock cycle. We will be expecting a 10-15% IPC improvement every release along with higher frequencies.

Next generation consoles will be Zen based so game developers will be able to utilize AMD's SMT properly.

The blue toxic giant is currently being hit by all sides this year. Qualcomm along with Microsoft found a way to legally emulate x86 and will be releasing low end Windows notebooks using the Snapdragon 835.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hu5ky*
> 
> I'm gonna quickly hi-jack the thread and ask what's an ideal "future proof" gaming/streaming processor atm. I'm planning to make an open loop system for CPU and GPU.


Ryzen since they actually support their sockets.


----------



## Lexi is Dumb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Matching cores/threads won't mean it will match the performance. At all.


It doesn't have to if the price disparity is large enough(likely), and some will be willing to make the quite reasonable sacrifice in single threaded perf to get the same core/thread count at a cheaper price.

That said, I don't agree with him. A choice between 8 cores and lower single thread perf or 6 cores with Kabylake single thread perf does change a lot.
For many 8/16 was a huge enough difference in multi-thread vs the 4/8 7700k that the IPC/Clock deficit was worth it, with 8/16 vs 6/12 the IPC/Clock deficit suddenly doesn't seem as appealing.

Think the same could essentially be said for 6/12 vs 6/6 if the 6/6 has better single thread.

*All assuming prices are reasonably similar though. Cause i mean if it was a $300 R7 against a $500 i7 then it's still pretty clear cut for most.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lexi is Dumb*
> 
> *All assuming prices are reasonably similar though. Cause i mean if it was a $300 R7 against a $500 i7 then it's still pretty clear cut for most.


I doubt it. They cannot charge the same for a mainstream plataform, dual channel, less PCI lanes and without all the bling of the 2011 motherboards.

The price has been stated at $349 (basically the same as the i7-7700K).
http://wccftech.com/intel-coffee-lake-8th-gen-official-announcement-21-august-launch/

Due to the proximity of the release, it might be right.


----------



## Lexi is Dumb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> I doubt it. They cannot charge the same for a mainstream plataform, dual channel, less PCI lanes and without all the bling of the 2011 motherboards.
> 
> The price has been stated at $349 (basically the same as the i7-7700K).
> http://wccftech.com/intel-coffee-lake-8th-gen-official-announcement-21-august-launch/
> 
> Due to the proximity of the release, it might be right.


I mean I didn't think it was a likely scenario anyway, and my example was exaggerated. If it's $349 then im standing by the rest of what I said.


----------



## ViTosS

True or myth? With more cores the GPU usage will be higher in situations where would be below 99% with a 7700k for example?


----------



## bigjdubb

It depends on why the gpu usage is below 99%. If it's because it is being bottlenecked by the cpu and the game will utilize more threads then it is possible that this new 6 core would solve that.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> It depends on why the gpu usage is below 99%. If it's because it is being bottlenecked by the cpu and the game will utilize more threads then it is possible that this new 6 core would solve that.


Observe this video in 4:30 minutes, the 5960X can pull the GPU usage more consistent and higher than the 6700k, this would be because of more core number the 5960X has compared to 6700k?


----------



## bigjdubb

Correct, but that doesn't mean it would be a universal result. GTAV is an example of a game that will take advantage of more cores. If the game is limited to using 4 cores or less, adding more cores wouldn't help.


----------



## QuackPot

Tempted to get this to replace my 2500k.


----------



## Scotty99

Anyone have a guess when these will be available for purchase?


----------



## Brutuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WannaBeOCer*
> 
> Ivy Bridge currently handles everything just fine. Ryzen has more cores and threads and is faster than Ivy Bridge. AMD's lineup matches Broadwell-E IPC in every task except for gaming. The Toxic blue giant hasn't increased IPC with the 2 generations they released. Kaby Lake/SkyLake-X. They have no idea what they are doing with x299 so they released a 7700k with more pins to fit into the x299 with a higher TDP.
> 
> AMD announced Zen will be on a tock tock tock cycle. We will be expecting a 10-15% IPC improvement every release along with higher frequencies.
> 
> Next generation consoles will be Zen based so game developers will be able to utilize AMD's SMT properly.
> 
> The blue toxic giant is currently being hit by all sides this year. Qualcomm along with Microsoft found a way to legally emulate x86 and will be releasing low end Windows notebooks using the Snapdragon 835.


To add to this: 5 years, 4 generations of CPUs and when I run the CPUz bench of my tweaked i5 3570k system against a stock 7700k I end up with a massive 4% single-threaded performance difference with my RAM at DDR3-2000 CL9 and CPU at 4.6Ghz in the BIOS. (Realistically because my board has picked up a habit of going for 97-99Mhz bclk instead of 100, I end up at ~4.45-4.52Ghz as my final clock speed)

Ryzen does get lower single-threaded performance here than my CPU does, but my CPU is only the limitation in games that simply will never be GPU limited short of running an 7700k on its IGP or GTX 1050Ti or something. And honestly, even that difference absolutely pales in comparison to the multi-threaded performance difference: an i7 7700k isn't even 2x the MT performance of my 5 year old i5, whereas the Ryzen 7 1700X's are just over 2.5x the speed.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brutuz*
> 
> To add to this: 5 years, 4 generations of CPUs and when I run the CPUz bench of my tweaked i5 3570k system against a stock 7700k I end up with a massive 4% single-threaded performance difference with my RAM at DDR3-2000 CL9 and CPU at 4.6Ghz in the BIOS. (Realistically because my board has picked up a habit of going for 97-99Mhz bclk instead of 100, I end up at ~4.45-4.52Ghz as my final clock speed)
> 
> Ryzen does get lower single-threaded performance here than my CPU does, but my CPU is only the limitation in games that simply will never be GPU limited short of running an 7700k on its IGP or GTX 1050Ti or something. And honestly, even that difference absolutely pales in comparison to the multi-threaded performance difference: an i7 7700k isn't even 2x the MT performance of my 5 year old i5, whereas the Ryzen 7 1700X's are just over 2.5x the speed.


What is your cpu-z score out of curiosity?


----------



## Brutuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> What is your cpu-z score out of curiosity?


I included a link in that post and again here to screenshots showing it.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brutuz*
> 
> I included a link in that post and again here to screenshots showing it.


That's about what my 4790k gets in single thread. My 7820x @ 4.3 gets around 510

and sorry, I'm blind


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WannaBeOCer*
> 
> Ivy Bridge currently handles everything just fine. Ryzen has more cores and threads and is faster than Ivy Bridge. AMD's lineup matches Broadwell-E IPC in every task except for gaming. The Toxic blue giant hasn't increased IPC with the 2 generations they released. Kaby Lake/SkyLake-X. They have no idea what they are doing with x299 so they released a 7700k with more pins to fit into the x299 with a higher TDP.
> 
> AMD announced Zen will be on a tock tock tock cycle. We will be expecting a 10-15% IPC improvement every release along with higher frequencies.
> 
> Next generation consoles will be Zen based so game developers will be able to utilize AMD's SMT properly.
> 
> The blue toxic giant is currently being hit by all sides this year. Qualcomm along with Microsoft found a way to legally emulate x86 and will be releasing low end Windows notebooks using the Snapdragon 835.
> Ryzen since they actually support their sockets.


Well problem here is that I'm upgradering this year, in a month or two. Winter means gaming for me, and i7-8700K will be the obvious choice. Ryzen is not an option. I've already tried/built several Ryzen rigs and it's a downgrade or side-grade in games coming from i7-3770K @ 5 GHz. I'm a high fps / Hz gamer. Ryzen will hold me back. My 1080p is 240 Hz. My 1440p will soon be 165 Hz again.

You see, we all have different needs. Ryzen won't do it for me. Zen 2 might be better, but I can't wait till 2019. The 2018 refresh won't do magic.

Now, can we stop talking about Ryzen in a Coffee Lake thread?


----------



## xioros

Do we know if Coffee lake utilizes a classic ring bus design (like Kaby Lake) or a mesh-design (like Skylake-X)?


----------



## Gauanqh6764

..


----------



## steelbom

That 6-core w/o HT appeals to me... could be my next CPU.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nobelharvards*
> 
> The original poster wanted to see 5GHz 6 core in a laptop.
> 
> That is unfeasible. Even for those thick chunky laptops, it is a bit of a stretch.
> 
> Bear in mind that my ambient temperatures during the height of summer commonly go over 40°C. Last summer (2016/17) I think my room saw around 47°C. Some people's PCs idle on lower temperatures than that. That's my *ambient* temperature. No air conditioning.


Well, 14nm++ only decreases power through decreased voltage vs 14nm+ / 14nm as the dynamic capacitance is the same. 50% more cores = 50% more power though. It'd still be at least 30% increased power for any given clock speed vs a 4 core 14nm+ cpu. But if it's only 5.0ghz/4.7ghz rather than 5.2ghz/4.9ghz, it might be possible in a newer P870 laptop.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> True or myth? With more cores the GPU usage will be higher in situations where would be below 99% with a 7700k for example?


if the games is doing a 100% CPU usage due to being highly multithreaded proabbly the CPU usage will drop
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brutuz*
> 
> To add to this: 5 years, 4 generations of CPUs and when I run the CPUz bench of my tweaked i5 3570k system against a stock 7700k I end up with a massive 4% single-threaded performance difference with my RAM at DDR3-2000 CL9 and CPU at 4.6Ghz in the BIOS. (Realistically because my board has picked up a habit of going for 97-99Mhz bclk instead of 100, I end up at ~4.45-4.52Ghz as my final clock speed)
> 
> Ryzen does get lower single-threaded performance here than my CPU does, but my CPU is only the limitation in games that simply will never be GPU limited short of running an 7700k on its IGP or GTX 1050Ti or something. And honestly, even that difference absolutely pales in comparison to the multi-threaded performance difference: an i7 7700k isn't even 2x the MT performance of my 5 year old i5, whereas the Ryzen 7 1700X's are just over 2.5x the speed.


Clearly if Skylake is using 2133 MHz DDR4, then Ivy Bridge might have an advantage but CPU Z benchmark seems out of place to measure CPU performance I think CB is more accurate


----------



## thebski

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nobelharvards*
> 
> The original poster wanted to see 5GHz 6 core in a laptop.
> 
> That is unfeasible. Even for those thick chunky laptops, it is a bit of a stretch.
> 
> Bear in mind that my ambient temperatures during the height of summer commonly go over 40°C. Last summer (2016/17) I think my room saw around 47°C. Some people's PCs idle on lower temperatures than that. That's my *ambient* temperature. No air conditioning.


Gotcha. Yes, that's pretty unlikely.


----------



## unityole

wheres @siliconlottery for binned 8700k chips?


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *unityole*
> 
> wheres @siliconlottery for binned 8700k chips?


They wont start binning processors until they can buy them. How can they bin a processor they don't have?


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Well problem here is that I'm upgradering this year, in a month or two. Winter means gaming for me, and i7-8700K will be the obvious choice. Ryzen is not an option. I've already tried/built several Ryzen rigs and it's a downgrade or side-grade in games coming from i7-3770K @ 5 GHz. I'm a high fps / Hz gamer. Ryzen will hold me back. My 1080p is 240 Hz. My 1440p will soon be 165 Hz again.
> 
> You see, we all have different needs. Ryzen won't do it for me. Zen 2 might be better, but I can't wait till 2019. The 2018 refresh won't do magic.
> 
> Now, can we stop talking about Ryzen in a Coffee Lake thread?


Bam! Everything you just said should quiet a lot of people hyping Ryzen up in this thread for he last few pages.

You hit the nail on the head perfectly.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> Bam! Everything you just said should quiet a lot of people hyping Ryzen up in this thread for he last few pages.
> 
> You hit the nail on the head perfectly.


I bet any amount of money that 99/100 people cannot differentiate the difference between 120fps and 240.

That said high clocked CPU's do serve a purpose, generally for MMO's. Its kinda crazy, the oldest games require the fastest hardware.


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> Do we know if Coffee lake utilizes a classic ring bus design (like Kaby Lake) or a mesh-design (like Skylake-X)?


I bet it's ring as always. Nothing wrong with ring for lower core count CPUs.

Can't wait for the horrendous power consumption and thermals compared to Ryzen 7 8 cores.


----------



## xioros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> Do we know if Coffee lake utilizes a classic ring bus design (like Kaby Lake) or a mesh-design (like Skylake-X)?
> 
> 
> 
> I bet it's ring as always. Nothing wrong with ring for lower core count CPUs.
> 
> Can't wait for the horrendous power consumption and thermals compared to Ryzen 7 8 cores.
Click to expand...

I hope so. The victim cache and mesh layout are terrible for gaming performance.

As for Ryzen, all this fanboyism needs to stop. It's a great platform, but it also has its flaws (motherboard choice and general VRM quality, motherboard feature set, ITX availability, segmentation faults _although this should be solved soon?_, gaming performance for high-refresh setups etc).


----------



## unityole

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nobelharvards*
> 
> The original poster wanted to see 5GHz 6 core in a laptop.
> 
> That is unfeasible. Even for those thick chunky laptops, it is a bit of a stretch.
> 
> Bear in mind that my ambient temperatures during the height of summer commonly go over 40°C. Last summer (2016/17) I think my room saw around 47°C. Some people's PCs idle on lower temperatures than that. That's my *ambient* temperature. No air conditioning.


once again dependent on the design of the laptop, heatsink and quality of cpu. though people get cihps and run benchmark all day i dont do that. 5ghz 6c should be more than possible if those condition meet.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> I hope so. The victim cache and mesh layout are terrible for gaming performance.
> 
> As for Ryzen, all this fanboyism needs to stop. It's a great platform, but it also has its flaws (motherboard choice and general VRM quality, motherboard feature set, ITX availability, segmentation faults _although this should be solved soon?_, gaming performance for high-refresh setups etc).


1. Motherboard choice: really? If you're buying a Ryzen 5 just about any X370 motherboard will be fine ; Ryzen 5 1600X needs little to no overclocking.
2. Motherboard featureset: other than Optane , there's not really much that mainstream Intel boards have over a decent X370 board
3. ITX: GIgabyte. Asrock, Biostar all have ITX boards and those are $110
4. segfaults: if it were such a problem in Windows then more people would have complained about it MONTHS ago
5. high refresh is a niche pretty much only for gamers; 60FPS at any resolution is fine

That said, Coffee Lake will be a worthwhile upgrade for gaming if it clocks well. Ring bus is just superior to the X299 and X370 platform's mesh.


----------



## xioros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> I hope so. The victim cache and mesh layout are terrible for gaming performance.
> 
> As for Ryzen, all this fanboyism needs to stop. It's a great platform, but it also has its flaws (motherboard choice and general VRM quality, motherboard feature set, ITX availability, segmentation faults _although this should be solved soon?_, gaming performance for high-refresh setups etc).
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Motherboard choice: really? If you're buying a Ryzen 5 just about any X370 motherboard will be fine ; Ryzen 5 1600X needs little to no overclocking.
> 2. Motherboard featureset: other than Optane , there's not really much that mainstream Intel boards have over a decent X370 board
> 3. ITX: GIgabyte. Asrock, Biostar all have ITX boards and those are $110
> 4. segfaults: if it were such a problem in Windows then more people would have complained about it MONTHS ago
> 5. high refresh is a niche ; 60FPS at any resolution is fine
Click to expand...

I see you missed what I wrote:
Quote:


> *It's a great platform*, but it also has its flaws


1, 2 & 3: I/O, audio spec is generally lower on an AMD board than on an Intel board. As for mini-ITX, there aren't any true high-end (Maximus Impact for example) solutions. Only mid-range. Not a single ITX board has dual Intel NICs. I was looking into it because I want to build myself an ITX NAS. I need the PCIe slot for something else and I _need_ 2 Intel NICs. That rules AMD out completely, while Z270 gives me multiple board options. A Ryzen CPU would do a way better job for a NAS, but there's simply no ITX motherboard that actually has the proper functionality (Dual Intel NIC, preferably also PCIe bifurcation).

4. Agreed. It's a small issue.

5. That was my original opinion too. But who games on 60 FPS today and calls him/herself an enthusiast? Most people that run real gaming setups run over 60 FPS. And that's completely overlooking the games that rely on single threaded performance (MMO RPG, badly optimized titles, some RTS)

I'm not saying Ryzen is bad. I'm saying you're making a compromises _for a way better value proposition_. I would recommend Ryzen/Threadripper over Skylake-X any day. But that doesn't make it the perfect platform many people want it to be. It's _still_ behind on gaming versus Intel.

And it doesn't overclock very well - which, on _overclock_.net, should be an aspect to consider


----------



## Scotty99

I get 130+ fps in overwatch at 1440p with a measly 1060, saying ryzen cant game at high FPS is hogwash. MMO's do require that IPC but in all honesty most are coded so poorly that the spots in the game where IPC matters its going to feel the same no matter what platform you are on.

If you really think about it, the only spot i could recommend a current intel CPU over ryzen is for competitive gamers on 240hz panel who make a living on their rig. This isnt to say these people would be able to tell the difference between 200 and 240 fps, if only for the placebo.

Right now ryzen in my eyes is the default recommendation, coffee at least allows me to recommend intel to people again depending on their use case. Think about it this way guys, if somehow multi core CPU's were much harder to produce and AMD were the ones with the clock speed lead, you would have the same people recommending intel because of the future proof aspect that more cores gives you lol. You can argue either side honestly.

Back to the coffee discussion, i wonder if intel has learned their lesson yet and switched back to solder.


----------



## Lexi is Dumb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> But who games on 60 FPS today and calls him/herself an enthusiast?


Being any kind of gamer is not a requirement for being a PC enthusiast.


----------



## AlphaC

@ xioros , Maximus Impact is EOL. There will be none for Intel either , per elmor.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *
> 
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/6atydw/open_but_personal_letter_to_the_pc_components/dhhqtye/
> *I'm not saying you have to buy our boards, I'm saying we and a few other people in other companies are putting in a lot off effort for you guys and I hope it will show in sales. If it doesn't there's a risk we won't be allowed to keep doing boards like Apex, it's exactly why Impact is no more.


I'm not going to debate about 60 FPS, this is overclock.net not 144FPS.net , esports.net, or Highrefreshgaming.net

The Ryzen 7 1700 provides a decent overclocking base, it's 3.9 or 4GHz from 3GHz base and 3.7GHz 2 core turbo. That's more overclocking than the i7-7700k (~5GHz from 4.5GHz turbo or 4.2GHz base).


----------



## Phixit

I have a 144Hz monitor and if I was on the market for a new upgrade, I honestly wouldn't mind to lose a few FPS and get a 1700/1700x. They just offer much more bang for the bucks vs the current Intel offering.


----------



## Lexi is Dumb

I've always wanted to know, what difference does it really make if you're getting 120 or 140 fps on say a 144hz adaptive sync monitor? Like isn't the whole point that you no longer need to worry about refresh rates as much? I can't imagine a world of difference in smoothness between even like 100 and 144.
Surely what matters is that game to game and between buying the gpu and a year later, you're still good to go, 144 fps on an older game or 80fps in a new game with IQ all the way up?


----------



## Scotty99

Ya you got that exactly right, this is why i decided to save money on a GPU and settled with a 1060. No matter what FPS i am getting between 80 (where i start to notice smoothness of high hertz monitors) to 165 its all gucci. Yet another reason to throw the ryzen fps defecit argument out the window.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lexi is Dumb*
> 
> I've always wanted to know, what difference does it really make if you're getting 120 or 140 fps on say a 144hz adaptive sync monitor? Like isn't the whole point that you no longer need to worry about refresh rates as much? I can't imagine a world of difference in smoothness between even like 100 and 144.
> Surely what matters is that game to game and between buying the gpu and a year later, you're still good to go, 144 fps on an older game or 80fps in a new game with IQ all the way up?


Perceptibly? I personally can't tell the difference. I prefer to push myself towards being GPU-bound as often as possible. At 144Hz, the games which most benefit from that refresh-rate can be played well above 100FPS with my 1080. On more intensive AAA games, I can still push 90-100FPS with minimal compromise in settings. Personally, I find no empirical difference in 20-30 FPS ranges at or above 100FPS. If I were a super twitch gamer pushing 144FPS or better, pinned, maybe it would be different, but that's not me.


----------



## Phixit

I can understand the FPS argument for games like CS:GO on a competitive level where FPS is more important than your newborn baby.


----------



## Scotty99

I watch top 500 overwatch players on twitch, they all have 240hz panels. That is who intel is for atm, no one else really.....just get a gsync panel.


----------



## aDyerSituation

As an Ex Top 200 Overwatch player I can definitely tell the difference between 100/120/144.


----------



## Scotty99

No one who posts on this forum is a top 500 overwatch player lol.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> What? Dyer#11491
> 
> That's a pretty ignorant claim to make.


Let me guess, you are one of those looney bins who uses that website to filter data so it appears you are good at the game?

Show me your actual ranks from blizzard.

Like i said above intel is for those ACTUAL competitive gamers, most people the intel vs ryzen FPS defecit isnt a thing.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> You are getting way off topic and sound insanely jealous. I gave you my battle tag look it up yourself.


No, i just know you are full of it lol. I know what it takes to be top 500 in overwatch, and you sir dont have it.


----------



## Scotty99

Just for people reading this thread.

If he was an actual top 200 overwatch player he would not be posting here as much as he does, he would be seeking a team for the upcoming overwatch league and living in a gaming house looking to make millions.

You are a sad little panda, lying on a forum like that.


----------



## Scotty99

That is not top 200 for even season 2, but i will say that is higher than i expected to see. Ill eat my words on that one.

As for your 120/144fps comments. I have some good eyes and can notice the slightest variations in frame times/stutter, and i still cannot decipher 120 vs 144 fps.


----------



## unityole

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lexi is Dumb*
> 
> Being any kind of gamer is not a requirement for being a PC enthusiast.


agreed. i game on 60fps and i call my self an enthuaist. in cpu and storage i must have the best and fastest. in graphics side i couldn't care less though i want the best GPU, its not a must have.


----------



## StreekG

Are CPU-Z benches reliable at all? I'm getting a very low score on my 6 core 6850K compared to what is posted here, while other benches are all giving me an accurate score.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *StreekG*
> 
> Are CPU-Z benches reliable at all? I'm getting a very low score on my 6 core 6850K compared to what is posted here, while other benches are all giving me an accurate score.


Be sure it's the same CPU-Z version


----------



## Dragonsyph

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *StreekG*
> 
> Are CPU-Z benches reliable at all? I'm getting a very low score on my 6 core 6850K compared to what is posted here, while other benches are all giving me an accurate score.


I don't trust it, I get wild differences in scores.

Topic:

Hoping this is a 6 core that can OC to 5ghz with decent temps.


----------



## Nightbird

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dragonsyph*
> 
> Hoping this is a 6 core that can OC to 5ghz with decent temps.


Only if you delid, the pennies that Intel is saving is going to cost them some sales


----------



## Neo_Morpheus

I think the 7700k was showing a lower FPS in the lowest average frames in games against the Intell 79xx cpu's. Another thing in using a chip with more than 4cores/8threads is the percentage of cpu usage is lower and spread across the chip, less heat. Also the maximum number of PCI Express Lanes at 16 could be a problem if you want to add some things.

This is my CPU-Z bench if it helps StreekG



111%-100%
793%-538%


----------



## naz2

cpuz completely reworked their scoring system some time ago, gotta make sure you're comparing the same versions


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Why are you here exactly? Shoo off to the peasant forum.


\

Overwatch was an entirely different game in season 2, i wasnt wrong in calling that guy out and he knows he was speaking a half truth claiming to be "top 200".

I am still interested in coffee as i am one of the people who do play MMO's, while ryzen plays it fine my only experience prior was with a 2500k. I do doubt the game will play any better on a 8700k, but ill probably give it a go as i live near a microcenter and can buy boards/cpu's dirt cheap.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I bet any amount of money that 99/100 people cannot differentiate the difference between 120fps and 240.
> 
> That said high clocked CPU's do serve a purpose, generally for MMO's. Its kinda crazy, the oldest games require the fastest hardware.


That may be the case, but I'm making this argument for those that can and at that, I'm making this argument on an _enthusiast-based_ forum. I can tell a huge difference between 100hz and 144hz (though I've not purposely tried 120hz).

I'm sure most of my comments come off as a hatred for Ryzen, and that's fine, but they're not. I adore Ryzen. I wish I had a use-case for it, but I don't. At this moment in time, with my setup the way it is, I'm going to outperform any Ryzen chip in 90% of games. And that's perfect for me as I game on my PC about 99% of the time I'm using it. I don't encode video, audio, etc. I absolutely get the appeal of Ryzen and the improvements in stability and performance over the past few months has been great to see.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> 1. Motherboard choice: really? If you're buying a Ryzen 5 just about any X370 motherboard will be fine ; Ryzen 5 1600X needs little to no overclocking.
> 2. Motherboard featureset: other than Optane , there's not really much that mainstream Intel boards have over a decent X370 board
> 3. ITX: GIgabyte. Asrock, Biostar all have ITX boards and those are $110
> 4. segfaults: if it were such a problem in Windows then more people would have complained about it MONTHS ago
> 5. high refresh is a niche pretty much only for gamers; 60FPS at any resolution is fine
> 
> That said, Coffee Lake will be a worthwhile upgrade for gaming if it clocks well. Ring bus is just superior to the X299 and X370 platform's mesh.


There isn't a huge variety in ITX boards like there is for the Intel platform, though it should improve. Not to mention the extremely garbage layout that Gigabyte decided to go with on their Ryzen board. The lack of dual M.2 and any type of enthusiast board is a downside for me. I'm happy to redact my statement once they do release a board like this, though.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I get 130+ fps in overwatch at 1440p with a measly 1060, saying ryzen cant game at high FPS is hogwash. MMO's do require that IPC but in all honesty most are coded so poorly that the spots in the game where IPC matters its going to feel the same no matter what platform you are on.
> 
> If you really think about it, the only spot i could recommend a current intel CPU over ryzen is for competitive gamers on 240hz panel who make a living on their rig. This isnt to say these people would be able to tell the difference between 200 and 240 fps, if only for the placebo.
> 
> Right now ryzen in my eyes is the default recommendation, coffee at least allows me to recommend intel to people again depending on their use case. Think about it this way guys, if somehow multi core CPU's were much harder to produce and AMD were the ones with the clock speed lead, you would have the same people recommending intel because of the future proof aspect that more cores gives you lol. You can argue either side honestly.
> 
> Back to the coffee discussion, i wonder if intel has learned their lesson yet and switched back to solder.


It's not that people are saying it doesn't do high refresh rate/high FPS, but it's not as consistent for those wanting 144hz. You have to remember how many screen and FPS-junkies we have here. G-sync and adaptive sync solve a lot of problems for those times when we can't constantly hit 100+/120+/144+/etc FPS, but some people do not have a tolerance for FPS less than their refresh rate.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> As an Ex Top 200 Overwatch player I can definitely tell the difference between 100/120/144.


Same....(minus the top 200 part)







.


----------



## Contiusa

Does anyone know when the Coffee Lake NDA lifts? Will it be the actual 21rst or will they only present the lineup, prices, etc?


----------



## BlockLike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Does anyone know when the Coffee Lake NDA lifts? Will it be the actual 21rst or will they only present the lineup, prices, etc?


AFAIK it's the official reveal/launch on 21st

Product specs, skus, possibly pricing etc... nothing more


----------



## Scotty99

Whats the guess on launch date? Mid October?


----------



## czin125

It looks like there's a new slide out there where 8700K is +11% / +51% and the clocks are 3.8 /4.3/4.5 ( the new one seems to be 1:1 vs the perf norm graphs at ~ just under 1.00v anyways ).

No regressions apparently vs the 7700K.


----------



## kd5151




----------



## Scotty99

They are claiming 11% IPC improvement? I assume that first number is single core?


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> They are claiming 11% IPC improvement? I assume that first number is single core?


I guess. But the real question is on what benchmark?


----------



## BlockLike

knowing intel... probably 11% more expensive


----------



## xioros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> They are claiming 11% IPC improvement? I assume that first number is single core?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> They are claiming 11% IPC improvement? I assume that first number is single core?
> 
> 
> 
> I guess. But the real question is on what benchmark?
Click to expand...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlockLike*
> 
> knowing intel... probably 11% more expensive


From the picture (11%/51%) I'd assume it stands for single-threaded/multi-threaded gains

The single core turbo is way higher, explaining the 11%.
Core count goes up by 50% (but they can't keep clocks high on 6 cores), so that explains the 51%

11% IPC is bs - and everything after Sandy proves that.

Anyone with a better explanation?

And in terms of pricing, unless they don't release a quad core i7 (which I expect they still will), we can probably expect a higher pricing. Probably on par with the 7800K.

And: memetime by CSI


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> and the clocks are 3.8 /4.3/4.5


Well it's hard to tell from that blurry slide, but there's this http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_run.php?q=c2ffcee889e8d5e2d2e2d6e2d6f082bf8fa9cca994a482f1ccf4&l=en claiming a 4.7 boost so I'm inclined to think it's just looks like 4.5.


----------



## Scotty99

Well i mentioned IPC improvement assuming both turbo to 4.5ghz max on one core, is that not the case?


----------



## skafo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> From the picture (11%/51%) I'd assume it stands for single-threaded/multi-threaded gains
> 
> The single core turbo is way higher, explaining the 11%.
> Core count goes up by 50% (but they can't keep clocks high on 6 cores), so that explains the 51%
> 
> 11% IPC is bs - and everything after Sandy proves that.
> 
> Anyone with a better explanation?
> 
> And in terms of pricing, unless they don't release a quad core i7 (which I expect they still will), we can probably expect a higher pricing. Probably on par with the 7800K.


My thoughts as well (except for your pricing point). It would mean an IPC increase though because otherwise it'd be exactly 50% or even less considering 6 core boost is slower than 4 core boost on 7700K and it wouldn't be 11%. Assuming the 4.7GHz are true that's like what, a 4-5% increase over the 7700k? So 6-7% missing.


----------



## Frosted racquet

It's Intel we're talking about here. They claimed 15% Single-core improvement from 6700k to 7700k for a 7% clock improvement and we all saw how that turned out. Now they're claiming 11% for presumably 4% clock improvement for single core.


----------



## e-gate

It will be a Kaby with 2 extra cores glued on them.
The days of significant IPC increase are dead long time ago.
Now it's refreshes and tweaks.
It's still important they go hexa on mainstream and quads are finally dead but anyone who is expecting any significant IPC increases is deluded.
The important jump in CPUs the last years is going hexa and octa on the mainstream.
This is very important and I'm happy I have a reason to upgrade my good ol' Sandy.
As for games. They will follow the multi-thread trend once people start buying multi core CPUs.
Anyone who bought Ryzen and plans to stay with it for many years he will see what a good investment he made.
Same for those who will buy the hexa CFLs.


----------



## Scotty99

Well its possible they got some IPC from somewhere, what needs to be sorted is the max boost clocks on the 8700k. I have heard 4.7ghz and 4.5, but ya that does not account for 11% even if its the higher number.


----------



## Scotty99

Sooo does anyone have a guess on release date?


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Sooo does anyone have a guess on release date?


I'd guess about a month after they paper launch it.


----------



## d3v0

Been saving up for a rebuild of the sig rig and I itll be approximately 4 months before I hit the numbers necessary for the desired overhaul. At the time, 7700K was what I was looking at. Now I am still a ways out and 8700K is the focus. Is it possible/worthwhile to consider waiting til Coffee Lake for the process shrink? Do process shrinks even matter much anymore for overclocking?


----------



## Scotty99

8700k is the perfect upgrade for a 2500k, id jump on it. 6c 12t is going to have a lot more legs than 4c8t in terms of not only gaming but whatever you do on your PC.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *d3v0*
> 
> . Is it possible/worthwhile to consider waiting til Coffee Lake for the process shrink? Do process shrinks even matter much anymore for overclocking?


Coffee Lake is the only option. The i7-7700K will become an i3 in a couple weeks. From the slides, they should start selling the Coffee Lake chips in September. It would be the worse investment of the decade to buy an i7-7700K right now. But Coffee Lake will not have a die shrink. It will continue to be a 14nm chip. The shrink for desktop will come with Ice Lake IIRC, at the end of 2018, beginning of 2019.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*


I was expecting at least one SKU with 4c/8t and OC ability









also the 11% is on sysmark



One curious note from the wccftech
Quote:


> The Intel Core i7-8700K will be the flagship processor of the lineup. It will feature 6 cores and 12 threads. The chip will be compatible with the LGA 1151 socket and *rumors are that board makers will extend support of Coffee Lake onto 200-series and even 100-series platforms*. The chip will be Intel's first hexa core product and will be based on the 14nm process node.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*


Updated thread:
Quote:


> Intel claims i7-8700K to be 11% faster than 7700K
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intel is hosting a training for retailers in China for upcoming Coffeelake 8th Gen Core series. According to the leaked slide, the upcoming i7-8700K CPU will be 11% faster than 7700K in single threaded operations.
> 
> The slide also confirms that for the first time Intel will introduce quad-core i3 series and six-core i5 series.
> 
> Both Core i5 and i7 series are to use 6-core configuration, although the i5 will not support Hyperthreading.
> 
> The leaked specs seem to align with previous rumors. The i7-8700K is the flagship Coffeelake CPU with six cores and twelve threads.


*Source 12:* https://videocardz.com/72112/intel-claims-i7-8700k-to-be-11-faster-than-7700k


----------



## Scotty99

I cant read the slide too blurry, is it still 4.5 max boost? If so they are claiming IPC increases.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I cant read the slide too blurry, is it still 4.5 max boost? If so they are claiming IPC increases.


looks like 4.5ghz to me.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> looks like 4.5ghz to me.


Cool. Well if these things can clock to 5.0ghz with a good cooler i may actually have to switch back to the blue team. There was no way i was going to go with a 4c cpu in 2017 so i picked up this ryzen chip, i had no idea coffee was going to hit this year (given that 7700k was a 2017 release) otherwise i would have waited.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Cool. Well if these things can clock to 5.0ghz with a good cooler i may actually have to switch back to the blue team. There was no way i was going to go with a 4c cpu in 2017 so i picked up this ryzen chip, i had no idea coffee was going to hit this year (given that 7700k was a 2017 release) otherwise i would have waited.


Can't go wrong with either. Its the moar cores war after all.


----------



## PontiacGTX

For reference
Increased performance on intel claims based on sysmark doesnt mean IPC increase


----------



## Scotty99

Well....the charts show single core performance gains of 11%. If these chips are indeed 4.5ghz max turbo, what other than IPC could account for the 11%? Again remember that 11% number is apparently single core gains.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well....the charts show single core performance gains of 11%. If these chips are indeed 4.5ghz max turbo, what other than IPC could account for the 11%? Again remember that 11% number is apparently single core gains.


they claim Kaby lake has 15% increase. it has 0% IPC increase.if they keep using sysmark as reference they are just getting higher performance due to higher clocked RAM/IMC+higher cpu clock speed+bigger and faster cache


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> they claim Kaby lake has 15% increase. it has 0% IPC increase.


Eh no, it has a clockspeed advantage over 6700k....the 8700k apparently has the same max turbo speed.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Eh no, it has a clockspeed advantage over 6700k....the 8700k apparently has the same max turbo speed.


Clock-speed advantage != IPC advantage. Clock-speed can contribute to an IPS advantage, which would be a part of the Sysmark scores just like the components @PontiacGTX mentioned. In what I understand to be your primary use-case, you're not going to see a 15% performance increase.


----------



## Scotty99

No, you guys still dont get what im saying lol. If the 8700k actually has an 11% lead in "single thread" performance as intel claims, that has to be from IPC. 6700k was at a clockspeed deficiency compared to kaby, any gains you see in benchmarks is attributed to that. Where is intel getting 11% if the 8700k has the same boost clocks as 7700k?

And im on ryzen, if i knew coffee lake was going to be 6c12t and releasing in 2017.....ya i wouldnt have bought it. It will be quite a large gain for me as long as they hit similar clocks to 7700k, which i see no reason they shouldnt. One caveat being i hope they dont use toothpaste this time around....


----------



## SuperZan

The same place they got 15% from if they're still using Sysmark as per usual. If we see a broad range of benchmarks and games which put the equivalent-clock core strength at an 11% improvement over SL/KL, that's one thing. All we have is a leaked slide and from what we have seen in the past, which is all we really have to go on right now, that's from something like Sysmark which will display the maximum possible delta. Until we have real benchmarks at equivalent clocks which demonstrate performance in many common tasks, it's impossible to assume a literal 11% across-the-board increase in IPC based on what we know right now. Certain benchmarks can vary greatly with RAM/cache size, latency, etc.

As to clock speeds, I'm not too skeptical of Intel's ability to produce a high-clocking 6c/12t part given what they have with Skylake-X. To this point, I think 5GHz will likely be an upper-range result under water, but we'll know soon enough. Either way, for your MMO/MOBA/FPS-type gaming, sure, Intel will probably be a superior option if you're trying to push beyond 144Hz. Your display is 1440p though, so I wouldn't expect to realise the lion's share of CL's serial-performance advantage over Ryzen unless you knock in-game res down to 1080p. At 1440p 144Hz I have very little difference between my 4790k, even tuned up to 4.8GHz, and my 4GHz 1700X in games like CSGO, ESO, and Smite, despite the 4790k's single-core benchmarking advantage.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Coffee Lake is the only option. The i7-7700K will become an i3 in a couple weeks. From the slides, they should start selling the Coffee Lake chips in September. It would be the worse investment of the decade to buy an i7-7700K right now. But Coffee Lake will not have a die shrink. It will continue to be a 14nm chip. The shrink for desktop will come with Ice Lake IIRC, at the end of 2018, beginning of 2019.


While I agree buying a 4c/8t CPU for >$300 at this moment is silly, saying that the top chip for gaming alone is going to be 'an i3 in a couple weeks' is one of the silliest things I've ever read.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Coffee Lake is the only option. The i7-7700K will become an i3 in a couple weeks. From the slides, they should start selling the Coffee Lake chips in September. It would be the worse investment of the decade to buy an i7-7700K right now. But Coffee Lake will not have a die shrink. It will continue to be a 14nm chip. The shrink for desktop will come with Ice Lake IIRC, at the end of 2018, beginning of 2019.


The CFL i3's are 4C/4T in current leaks...?

A shrink does not always pay off, remember Sandy -> Ivy ? 32nm to 22nm did close to nothing.

And Cannon Lake should be the 10nm shrink af CFL - I won't wait for sure. Getting i7-8700K ASAP.

Ice Lake will be 2nd 10nm release.


----------



## czin125

Could the IPC increase come from die stacking the uncore/cache onto the core? It'd be shorter distance, right?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Kinda sad I got my 7800X.. But running 4800 on water. Can push for 4900 also.. Not delidded.. But I got the ram cheap second hand, CPU 20% off and mobo 6% off.. So can't be that bad..

Still, I really want to try that 8700K!


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Kinda sad I got my 7800X.. But running 4800 on water. Can push for 4900 also.. Not delidded.. But I got the ram cheap second hand, CPU 20% off and mobo 6% off.. So can't be that bad..
> 
> Still, I really want to try that 8700K!


That's great, whats ur mesh at?

I hope I'll be able to hit 5 GHz on i7-8700K, delid or not don't care


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> That's great, whats ur mesh at?
> 
> I hope I'll be able to hit 5 GHz on i7-8700K, delid or not don't care


Mesh is on a calm 3200 at 1.150V ATM. I do not want to fry this CPU as it seems to be a decent overclocker. I could probably hit 5000 if I delid, and the 15 to 20'C drop os true if you delid.

I can fold 24/7 with both CPU and GPU, and easily passed Realbench 2.5x which got AVX included. So happy about 4800 at 1.260V with around 75'C when the fans ramp up under realbench. That is pretty good for a AVX benchmark.

Mem is on 4x4gb 3800mhz 16-18-18-38-1T.

When I think about it, I do not regret it really. Quadchannel, lanes etc. I nice.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Mesh is on a calm 3200 at 1.150V ATM. I do not want to fry this CPU as it seems to be a decent overclocker. I could probably hit 5000 if I delid, and the 15 to 20'C drop os true if you delid.
> 
> I can fold 24/7 with both CPU and GPU, and easily passed Realbench 2.5x which got AVX included. So happy about 4800 at 1.260V with around 75'C when the fans ramp up under realbench. That is pretty good for a AVX benchmark.
> 
> Mem is on 4x4gb 3800mhz 16-18-18-38-1T.
> 
> When I think about it, I do not regret it really. Quadchannel, lanes etc. I nice.


Yeah, it's good. Personally I don't need QC or the extra lanes. I'll be slightly disappointed if I don't hit 5 GHz on all cores tho. My OCD won't be able to handle 4.9, so I'll settle with 4.8 if I can't hit 5 stable.


----------



## d3v0

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 8700k is the perfect upgrade for a 2500k, id jump on it. 6c 12t is going to have a lot more legs than 4c8t in terms of not only gaming but whatever you do on your PC.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Coffee Lake is the only option. The i7-7700K will become an i3 in a couple weeks. From the slides, they should start selling the Coffee Lake chips in September. It would be the worse investment of the decade to buy an i7-7700K right now. But Coffee Lake will not have a die shrink. It will continue to be a 14nm chip. The shrink for desktop will come with Ice Lake IIRC, at the end of 2018, beginning of 2019.


Going from 4c/4t to 6c/12t may indeed feel like the biggest upgrade ive done in my days







Thanks guys


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> While I agree buying a 4c/8t CPU for >$300 at this moment is silly, saying that the top chip for gaming alone is going to be 'an i3 in a couple weeks' is one of the silliest things I've ever read.


Depending on the rumor, yes. Makes no sense to have HT only in the top two CPUs of the lineup, then you can assume the current i7 will become an i3 version somewhere. Even if it comes late in 2018 (Intel loves to throw some crumbs for the crowd on the i3 line) you are throwing money away on the current i7.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *d3v0*
> 
> Going from 4c/4t to 6c/12t may indeed feel like the biggest upgrade ive done in my days
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks guys


Sure


----------



## madwolfa

Welp, just bought a 7700K. 279.99 at Microcenter (plus 30$ off the matching mobo). Didn't open it yet, though... Should I wait till Monday? I've sold my 3770K rig yesterday and need a new build ASAP...


----------



## xioros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madwolfa*
> 
> Welp, just bought a 7700K. 279.99 at Microcenter (plus 30$ off the matching mobo). Didn't open it yet, though... Should I wait till Monday? I've sold my 3770K rig yesterday and need a new build ASAP...


Can you survive the weekend without? I'd wait - but I'd have an other system to use in the meanwhile


----------



## madwolfa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> Can you survive the weekend without? I'd wait - but I'd have an other system to use in the meanwhile


I can definitely wait... my case doesn't arrive till Monday anyway. But whatever Intel announces on 8/21, it's still going to be months till we start seeing the CFL and Z370 motherboards hitting the wide retail, likely at the inflated prices? Or is it going to be much sooner than that?

I wish I still had my trusty 3770K to wait it out, but I've got a really good offer that I couldn't refuse.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madwolfa*
> 
> I can definitely wait... my case doesn't arrive till Monday anyway. But whatever Intel announces on 8/21, it's still going to be months till we start seeing the CFL and Z370 motherboards hitting the wide retail, likely at the inflated prices? Or is it going to be much sooner than that?
> 
> I wish I still had my trusty 3770K to wait it out, but I've got a really good offer that I couldn't refuse.


I don't recall processors ever really having inflated prices at launch.
You could probably use that rig and just resell the parts later when coffee lake comes out? If you have the budget for it of course.

If you sell it quickly you should get most of your money back I would think


----------



## Scotty99

Selling stuff on craigslist or ebay is a pita, id return it and just wait for a real upgrade in the 8700k.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Return the 7700k and keep a cheap placeholder


----------



## ThePath

How 11% single thread and 51% in mutli-core improvement is bad thing ?! This biggest improvement in multi-core we have seen in year. Also, the i5 and i3 multi-core improvement look even bigger over previous generation
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Frosted racquet*
> 
> It's Intel we're talking about here. They claimed 15% Single-core improvement from 6700k to 7700k for a 7% clock improvement and we all saw how that turned out. Now they're claiming 11% for presumably 4% clock improvement for single core.


They never claimed that 7700K is 15% faster than 6700K. I challenge you to prove that

They did not mention the CPU that they compared (they might be comparing low power mobile core m kaby lake to mobile skylake, and 15% is possible because of the big increase in clock speed of the mobile part compared to skylake)


----------



## xioros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Return the 7700k and keep a cheap placeholder


He'd need a different mobo too. Consider a Ryzen 3 as a temporary setup? Those won't lose a lot of value by the time CL lands.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> He'd need a different mobo too. Consider a Ryzen 3 as a temporary setup? Those won't lose a lot of value by the time CL lands.


could be an option a ryzen 3 1200 on b350 or a ryzen 5 1400

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/x3TNjc


----------



## Lass3

I bet we will see CL + Z370 boards ealier than people think. Guess we'll find out on monday.


----------



## PontiacGTX

RoadMap didnt show release in H1 2018? but of course Kaby Lake and Skylake X were released earlier

https://tech4gamers.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Intel-cpu-roadmap-may-2017-1.jpg

even official slides form months aog says 2017 maybe they will release it earlier


----------



## Frosted racquet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThePath*
> 
> They never claimed that 7700K is 15% faster than 6700K. I challenge you to prove that


From TPU
https://www.techpowerup.com/img/17-02-10/26da1b08bc2d.jpg

15% improvement in a single cherrypicked benchmark.


----------



## ThePath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Frosted racquet*
> 
> From TPU
> https://www.techpowerup.com/img/17-02-10/26da1b08bc2d.jpg
> 
> 15% improvement in a single cherrypicked benchmark.


I have seen that long time ago man

And I'm right. They did not mention 7700K and 6700K in that graph. Try again.

You do not know what model they were comparing


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThePath*
> 
> I have seen that long time ago man
> 
> And I'm right. They did not mention 7700K and 6700K in that graph. Try again.
> 
> You do not know what model they were comparing


6700k= 6th Gen
7700k= 7th Gen
8700k= 8th Gen


----------



## ThePath

[/quote]
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> 6700k= 6th Gen
> 7700k= 7th Gen
> 8700k= 8th Gen


Seriously ? You did not understand my point ?

Core i5-7300U, Core i7-7Y75 and Core i7-7600U etc are also 7th gen

How do you know which model they were comparing when the graph does not mention which model. There is no mention it was 7700K vs 6700K ?!


----------



## tw2

So the 8700K should be a pretty worthwhile upgrade for gaming coming from a 4690K?


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> So the 8700K should be a pretty worthwhile upgrade for gaming coming from a 4690K?


Indeed, it should be, 2 moar cores and at least 10% more IPC than 4690k.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> So the 8700K should be a pretty worthwhile upgrade for gaming coming from a 4690K?


With that 1080 Ti you have, yes. Higher IPC, probably will have higher clock speeds, 2 more cores and hyper-threading.

Quite an upgrade.


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Indeed, it should be, 2 moar cores and at least 10% more IPC than 4690k.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> With that 1080 Ti you have, yes. Higher IPC, probably will have higher clock speeds, 2 more cores and hyper-threading.
> 
> Quite an upgrade.


Thanks for the advice, I am at 4.2GHz overclock on all cores (I did't win the silicon lottery) with the 4690K so I will wait for the 8700K reviews and see what it looks like. Should be able to clock a lot higher than 4.2GHz and with the IPC gain I would be expecting some decent improvement. As for games taking advantage of more than 4 cores, I guess we will see (and hope).


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Frosted racquet*
> 
> From TPU
> https://www.techpowerup.com/img/17-02-10/26da1b08bc2d.jpg
> 
> 15% improvement in a single cherrypicked benchmark.


We don't need to think that much. Intel are indeed talking about higher clock turbo/speed. They are claiming 6th to 7th gen improvement to be 15% as we already know this is not the truth at all for 99% of applications as far as IPC is considered, also cinebench r15's single thread score is same for both i7-6700 and i7-7700 in IPC section and that is with Intel compiler.

But regardless, IPS is in the end what we need and if Intel manage to provide 15% more performance at same wattage per core then it is a win.
But then again, Intel has been called by FTC to provide disclaimer that Sysmark may be optimized for Intel CPUs, and this is why that 15% not at all representation of the performance improvements in 99% of real world applications for both older Intel and all AMD CPUs.


----------



## czin125

The picture shows
7700K -> 8700K 11%/51%

7700 -> 8700 18%/58%

7100 -> 8100 16%/61%


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> So the 8700K should be a pretty worthwhile upgrade for gaming coming from a 4690K?


Yes. Especially using a high end GPU. It's been shown many times that i5 4C/4T is holding back high end GPU's in demanding games.

Here is i7-7700K and i5-7600K both running 4.8 GHz and the i5 performs noticeably worse in many of the tested games when using the 1080 Ti.









The difference between 4C/8T and 4C/4T might not matter much to 60 Hz gamers, but for 120-240 Hz gamers it will be very noticable (even tho for 60 Hz gamers the input lag will still be much lower with higher fps).

I've done testing on my own machine, disabling HT, and performance go down in demanding AAA games. I guess HT saves the day, because 4 cores is barely enough anymore. This is only true in demanding games tho.


----------



## xioros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> So the 8700K should be a pretty worthwhile upgrade for gaming coming from a 4690K?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. Especially using a high end GPU. It's been shown many times that i5 4C/4T is holding back high end GPU's in demanding games.
> 
> Here is i7-7700K and i5-7600K both running 4.8 GHz and the i5 performs noticeably worse in many of the tested games when using the 1080 Ti.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The difference between 4C/8T and 4C/4T might not matter much to 60 Hz gamers, but for 120-240 Hz gamers it will be very noticable (even tho for 60 Hz gamers the input lag will still be much lower with higher fps).
> 
> I've done testing on my own machine, disabling HT, and performance go down in demanding AAA games. I guess HT saves the day, because 4 cores is barely enough anymore. This is only true in demanding games tho.
Click to expand...

While this may be true for your example, it's only true when you're already maxed out on the GPU aspect. I'll take an i5 + 1080 Ti over an i7 with a 1080 any day.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> While this may be true for your example, it's only true when you're already maxed out on the GPU aspect. I'll take an i5 + 1080 Ti over an i7 with a 1080 any day.


Difference between i7-7700K and i5-7600K is like $75-100 where the difference between 1080 Ti and 1080 is 250-300$

I don't cheap out on CPU with $700-750 GPU. Do you really want to save $75-100 and experience much worse performance in some games?

I expect the i5-8600K to do much bettter than current i5's tho. The 2 extra cores will do wonders and the gap between 8700K and 8600K probably won't be as big as 7700K vs 7600K.


----------



## czin125

NB clock is running at 4400mhz for the 8700K which is probably where the 11% comes from or part of it and paired up with 2667mhz ram.

http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_run.php?q=c2ffcee889e8d5e2d2e2d6e5dcfa88b585a3c6a39eae88fbc6fe&l=en


----------



## xioros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> While this may be true for your example, it's only true when you're already maxed out on the GPU aspect. I'll take an i5 + 1080 Ti over an i7 with a 1080 any day.
> 
> 
> 
> Difference between i7-7700K and i5-7600K is like $75-100 where the difference between 1080 Ti and 1080 is 250-300$
> 
> I don't cheap out on CPU with $700-750 GPU. Do you really want to save $75-100 and experience much worse performance in some games?
> 
> I expect the i5-8600K to do much bettter than current i5's tho. The 2 extra cores will do wonders and the gap between 8700K and 8600K probably won't be as big as 7700K vs 7600K.
Click to expand...

I was honestly comparing an entry (i5-7500?) i5 to the 7700K - which is far more than the 75$ you're suggesting. The price difference between the 1080 and 1080 Ti is also quite a bit smaller than the 300$ you're suggesting: 200$ (Newegg, both the GigaByte Gaming OC variants) - if you compare the cheapest 1080 to the cheapest 1080 Ti it's even less. The difference between these CPU's is 140$, and even more if you compare MSRPs
Sure, the price difference in CPU's is still smaller than it is for the GPU's, but it's by far not as large as you're trying to suggest. On top of that, a 7500 + 1080 Ti will _wreck_ a 7700K + 1080.

But that wasn't my point. My point was: max the GPU front before you start pumping money in a CPU for those last bit of frames. It offers far more value. The only exception to this is if you _absolutely_ intend to keep your CPU & mobo for a few generations - although future proofing tends to be far more expensive than selling outdated hardware and buying new parts for a similar performance (and that's assuming old, expensive hardware can keep up).


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> I was honestly comparing an entry (i5-7500?) i5 to the 7700K - which is far more than the 75$ you're suggesting. The price difference between the 1080 and 1080 Ti is also quite a bit smaller than the 300$ you're suggesting: 200$ (Newegg, both the GigaByte Gaming OC variants) - if you compare the cheapest 1080 to the cheapest 1080 Ti it's even less. The difference between these CPU's is 140$, and even more if you compare MSRPs
> Sure, the price difference in CPU's is still smaller than it is for the GPU's, but it's by far not as large as you're trying to suggest. On top of that, a 7500 + 1080 Ti will _wreck_ a 7700K + 1080.
> 
> But that wasn't my point. My point was: max the GPU front before you start pumping money in a CPU for those last bit of frames. It offers far more value. The only exception to this is if you _absolutely_ intend to keep your CPU & mobo for a few generations - although future proofing tends to be far more expensive than selling outdated hardware and buying new parts for a similar performance (and that's assuming old, expensive hardware can keep up).


I would never pair a non-K i5 4C/4T together with the best gaming GPU available. Makes no sense to me. The CPU will bottleneck in so many games and I'm sure the *minimum fps* will be ALOT lower than with 7700K + OC.

I do balanced systems. Low/mid end CPU with an ultra high end GPU, nah.. Who will pay $750 for a GPU but cheap out on CPU like that?

What you say might be true for 60 Hz gaming, but for 120-240 Hz gamers, a CPU like that will result in massive performance decrease.
Problem with i5 quads is the minimum fps.

The i5-8600K should make i5 relevant again tho. 6 cores with high clocks and IPC won't hold back performance like 4 core i5's do now (again, in demanding games, paired with a high end GPU).


----------



## xioros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> I was honestly comparing an entry (i5-7500?) i5 to the 7700K - which is far more than the 75$ you're suggesting. The price difference between the 1080 and 1080 Ti is also quite a bit smaller than the 300$ you're suggesting: 200$ (Newegg, both the GigaByte Gaming OC variants) - if you compare the cheapest 1080 to the cheapest 1080 Ti it's even less. The difference between these CPU's is 140$, and even more if you compare MSRPs
> Sure, the price difference in CPU's is still smaller than it is for the GPU's, but it's by far not as large as you're trying to suggest. On top of that, a 7500 + 1080 Ti will _wreck_ a 7700K + 1080.
> 
> But that wasn't my point. My point was: max the GPU front before you start pumping money in a CPU for those last bit of frames. It offers far more value. The only exception to this is if you _absolutely_ intend to keep your CPU & mobo for a few generations - although future proofing tends to be far more expensive than selling outdated hardware and buying new parts for a similar performance (and that's assuming old, expensive hardware can keep up).
> 
> 
> 
> I would never pair a non-K i5 4C/4T together with the best gaming GPU available. Makes no sense to me. The CPU will bottleneck in so many games and I'm sure the *minimum fps* will be ALOT lower than with 7700K + OC.
> 
> I do balanced systems. Low/mid end CPU with an ultra high end GPU, nah.. Who will pay $750 for a GPU but cheap out on CPU like that?
> 
> What you say might be true for 60 Hz gaming, but for 120-240 Hz gamers, a CPU like that will result in massive performance decrease.
> Problem with i5 quads is the minimum fps.
> 
> The i5-8600K should make i5 relevant again tho. 6 cores with high clocks and IPC won't hold back performance like 4 core i5's do now (again, in demanding games, paired with a high end GPU).
Click to expand...

Are you even reading my posts? I'll highlight the important bits:

I *agree that it's foolish to pair a 1080 Ti with a 7500* - but if you can't afford a 1080 Ti *and* a 7700K, *if* you have to choose between a stronger CPU + weaker GPU versus a stronger GPU + weaker CPU, the best *gaming experience* will be achieved with a strong GPU and a slightly slower CPU. The example of the 7500 + 1080 Ti vs 7700K + 1080 was to *explain the principle*. It wasn't a recommendation.

If you really want to discuss this specific scenario/example, compare the 7700K + 1080 with a 1600 (+OC, stock cooler) + 1080 Ti with stock cooler - which is more or less the same price - but significantly faster. We're talking value here: *performance within a specific budget*, not bearing in mind upgrade-path*. And I'm really curious of how your minimum FPS holds up then. Beware that you can't overclock (or even keep up turbo) under the stock cooling solution of the 7700K (does it even include a cooler?).

*And there's a good chance the 1600 + OC will shrink the cap with the 7700K over time, but I'll leave that out of the comparison because it's based on an _unreliable_ extrapolation of optimization.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> Are you even reading my posts? I'll highlight the important bits:
> 
> I *agree that it's foolish to pair a 1080 Ti with a 7500* - but if you can't afford a 1080 Ti *and* a 7700K, *if* you have to choose between a stronger CPU + weaker GPU versus a stronger GPU + weaker CPU, the best *gaming experience* will be achieved with a strong GPU and a slightly slower CPU. The example of the 7500 + 1080 Ti vs 7700K + 1080 was to *explain the principle*. It wasn't a recommendation.
> 
> If you really want to discuss this specific scenario/example, compare the 7700K + 1080 with a 1600 (+OC, stock cooler) + 1080 Ti with stock cooler - which is more or less the same price - but significantly faster. We're talking value here: *performance within a specific budget*, not bearing in mind upgrade-path*. And I'm really curious of how your minimum FPS holds up then. Beware that you can't overclock (or even keep up turbo) under the stock cooling solution of the 7700K (does it even include a cooler?).
> 
> *And there's a good chance the 1600 + OC will shrink the cap with the 7700K over time, but I'll leave that out of the comparison because it's based on an _unreliable_ extrapolation of optimization.


I am. But it depends on your goals. I see you're a 60 Hz gamer, so what you are saying is partly true. But for a 1080p-1440p/120-240 Hz gamer, the fps dips would be insane on a i5-7500 compared to i7-7700K, when using a 1080-1080 Ti.

When I disable HT on my i7-3770K @ 5 GHz the minimum fps drops ~75% in BF1 MP 48-64p for example. Minimum fps goes from ~115 to ~65.
On a 60 Hz monitor this probably won't be noticeable for most people (input lag would suffer tho). With a 120-240 Hz monitor this would be highly noticable and I would take 7700K @ ~5 GHz + Custom 1080 over i5-7500 + 1080 Ti any day. The minimums would be higher. GPU is not that important when chasing the high fps. Games become CPU bound and i5 non-K quad will bottleneck for sure.


----------



## xioros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> Are you even reading my posts? I'll highlight the important bits:
> 
> I *agree that it's foolish to pair a 1080 Ti with a 7500* - but if you can't afford a 1080 Ti *and* a 7700K, *if* you have to choose between a stronger CPU + weaker GPU versus a stronger GPU + weaker CPU, the best *gaming experience* will be achieved with a strong GPU and a slightly slower CPU. The example of the 7500 + 1080 Ti vs 7700K + 1080 was to *explain the principle*. It wasn't a recommendation.
> 
> If you really want to discuss this specific scenario/example, compare the 7700K + 1080 with a 1600 (+OC, stock cooler) + 1080 Ti with stock cooler - which is more or less the same price - but significantly faster. We're talking value here: *performance within a specific budget*, not bearing in mind upgrade-path*. And I'm really curious of how your minimum FPS holds up then. Beware that you can't overclock (or even keep up turbo) under the stock cooling solution of the 7700K (does it even include a cooler?).
> 
> *And there's a good chance the 1600 + OC will shrink the cap with the 7700K over time, but I'll leave that out of the comparison because it's based on an _unreliable_ extrapolation of optimization.
> 
> 
> 
> I am. But it depends on your goals. I see you're a 60 Hz gamer, so what you are saying is partly true. But for a 1080p-1440p/120-240 Hz gamer, the fps dips would be insane on a i5-7500 compared to i7-7700K, when using a 1080-1080 Ti.
> 
> When I disable HT on my i7-3770K @ 5 GHz the minimum fps drops ~75% in BF1 MP 48-64p for example. Minimum fps goes from ~115 to ~65.
> On a 60 Hz monitor this probably won't be noticeable for most people (input lag would suffer tho). With a 120-240 Hz monitor this would be highly noticable and *I would take 7700K @ ~5 GHz + Custom 1080 over i5-7500 + 1080 Ti any day.* The minimums would be higher. GPU is not that important when chasing the high fps. Games become CPU bound and i5 non-K quad will bottleneck for sure.
Click to expand...

Sure, except, you can't do that *with the same budget* (consider: decent board, cooling, delid). *For that budget*, you could nearly get a 7700K @ stock + a 1080 Ti.
So my point still stands, for a limited budget (providing you can afford maxed CPU + maxed GPU), max out GPU first (with the exception of the Titan ofc), and then max your CPU. And that's again, not saying you should pair a 1080 Ti with a Pentium. It does however mean, that once you hit a certain level of CPU power (in the current gen, a R5 1600/basic i5?), the rest of your budget should go towards GPU until you've maxed it out.

Here is a metaphor of what your answer means in this context:
I argue that the table is blue and you tell me you disagree because the chair is red.

And, unless you're going to list me *actual setups, that's capable of a 5GHz overclock (mind cooling, motherboard)* that costs as much as a basic Ryzen 5 1600 kit that's OC capable with a 1080 Ti _and_ outperforms it, you should refrain from replying. I'm not interested in the color of the chair (_I agree that it's red_) - I'm only interested in the color of the table. Sure, a higher budget will perform better. For a 7700K @ 5GHz + custom GTX 1080, I can still propose a setup that still outperforms it for the same price.

Beat this in terms of performance for the same price (the original argument):
AMD R5 1600 + OC (does 4 GHz on stock cooler)
ASRock Fatal1ty AB350 Gaming K4 (upgrade to ASRock Fatal1ty X370 Gaming K4 if Intel NIC, ALC1220 and SLI/CF are required, add $50)
GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 1080 Ti

For a total of: $1035 as of writing. Your setup has to achieve better minimums, while maintaining at least the refresh rate of the display on average. Good luck. If you don't present me a setup that outperforms this, I would suggest you refrain from further comments on this matter.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Indeed, it should be, 2 moar cores and at least 10% more IPC than 4690k.


AMD ryzen doesnt perform good with Pascal?


----------



## Redwoodz

So in other words it performs like a 4.7GHz 7700K.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Redwoodz*
> 
> So in other words it performs like a 4.7GHz 7700K.


There are a lot of games coming out that can take advantage of more than 4c 8t. 8700k is the first real upgrade intel has done in 7 years on the mainstream side of things.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> AMD ryzen doesnt perform good with Pascal?


No issues thus far on my end.


----------



## Scotty99

Playing OW right now, getting 150+ fps at 1440p with a 1060. Had a 2500k before clocked to 4.8, averages are far higher on this ryzen chip.


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> AMD ryzen doesnt perform good with Pascal?


I didn't say anything about Ryzen, he asked if this(CL i5/i7) would be an upgrade or not over his HW i5. And yeah it is.
Personally, if I am to buy any new CPU in future, there is 0% chance for me to even consider any Intel CPU after knwoing Intel's decades of illegal/immoral/evil/deceptive practice and how they have been preventing AMD to thrive.


----------



## caenlen

if all 6 cores OC to 4.9ghz like every 7700k does on its 4... i will be very intrigued. cause AMD can get what 4.1ghz max. 800mhz doesnt sound like much but a 6 core 4.9ghz is the sweet spot for me, oh sweet mama yes it is.


----------



## Contiusa

From what I have found, Skylake-X was announced on May 30th (released June 19th if I saw it correctly) and Anandtech has a review on June 19, less than a month later. Is this what we can expect from Coffee Lake? Some reviews and stores selling it a couple weeks later in September? I saw a slide somewhere with 300 series motherboards available in September.


----------



## Scotty99

There is still no concrete info on if these will slot into z170 or 270 boards. There are just as many "credible" sources for each side lol.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> No issues thus far on my end.


Only a small amount of games have issues. I think they are Total War: WARHAMMER in DX12 and Deus Ex: Mankind Divided in DX12, but DX11 performs better for NVIDIA in both of those anyway. I believe Unreal Engine 4 in DX12 also has issues with Ryzen + Pascal. I'll test all of this myself soon.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> Only a small amount of games have issues. I think they are Total War: WARHAMMER in DX12 and Deus Ex: Mankind Divided in DX12, but DX11 performs better for NVIDIA in both of those anyway. I believe Unreal Engine 4 in DX12 also has issues with Ryzen + Pascal. I'll test all of this myself soon.


Cheers, that may be why I haven't had any issues thus far. I play TW:W and Deus Ex under DX11 as Nvidia generally does better under DX11 anyway. I'll have to see how the Unreal engine numbers go when I get my FE cards in for my lab workstation.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Cheers, that may be why I haven't had any issues thus far. I play TW:W and Deus Ex under DX11 as Nvidia generally does better under DX11 anyway. I'll have to see how the Unreal engine numbers go when I get my FE cards in for my lab workstation.


The only DX12 UE4 game I know of is Gears of War 4 which I don't play (this game is actually DX12 only), so I will test DX12 UE4 in the engine's SDK. I wonder if it's an issue that NVIDIA can fix?


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> if all 6 cores OC to 4.9ghz like every 7700k does on its 4... i will be very intrigued. cause AMD can get what 4.1ghz max. 800mhz doesnt sound like much but a 6 core 4.9ghz is the sweet spot for me, oh sweet mama yes it is.


Max being the keyword here. Look in the Ryzen owners thread. Most struggle to hit 4 GHz stable. I've tried 1600 and 1700, none of them hit 4 GHz with 100% stability. Settled with 3.9 and 3.95. In most reviews they hit 4 GHz but they use Ryzen Master software and don't even test for 100% stability.

I expect the 8700K to hit 4.8-5 GHz easy, which means more for the serious OC'ers. A few people is running 7700K at 5.4 GHz 24/7 on this forum. Even Skylake-X can hit 4.7-4.9 on 240 aio or high end air and these are much hotter than Coffe Lake will be, plus CL is 14nm++

I think i7-8700K and i5-8600K is going to be very popular, especially for 120-240 Hz gamers. I have no doubt in my mind that these will deliver better min and avg than Ryzen when chasing very high fps. Aiming for 100 fps minimum, maybe combined with lowered/tweaked IQ and pretty much all games will become way more CPU bound.


----------



## PriestOfSin

This is gonna be super popular with the e-sports crowd, if it can reliably hit 5GHz. It's good that the i5 ended up having six cores, it seems silly to by a quad-core in 2017.


----------



## Scotty99

I forget where are they livestreaming this? Please dont be facebook lol.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Mr lasse3 at it again lol

I love when they do the 240hz talk...

Csgo dont count XD

Funny mentioning stability when lots of the Intel topics retain on using prime95 and using the new avx underclocked feature on intel dont even count lol


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I forget where are they livestreaming this? Please dont be facebook lol.


facebook and on intels newsroom. For me its 11:00am est time.


----------



## xioros

Have we been jested








Quote:


> We will start rolling out our 8th Gen family today, beginning with a range of mobile processors designed specifically for sleek thin and light notebooks and 2 in 1s.


----------



## jprovido

Coffee Lake i5 is really interesting. wouldn't a Cofeelake [email protected] 6c/6t destroy a Kabylake i7 at 4c/*8*t?


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> Have we been jested


They better be kidding. The market is not giving any leeway for Intel lately. They gonna get stoned if they are not releasing the i7-8700K.


----------



## Contiusa

Well, they say The first processors available are the mobile processors for thin and light laptops and 2 in 1s; consumer desktop will follow in the fall, and that starts at September 21, so it could fall in the same trend of Skylake-X, that was released a couple weeks after the announcement. Unless they are saying that the i7-8700K will be announced during the Fall and released near Christmas (although they say "available"). Then they got us pretty good.


----------



## bl4ckdot

300-series chipset required : https://www.techpowerup.com/236313/intel-8th-gen-core-i5-and-core-i7-retail-boxes-pictured


----------



## SONICDK

8700k launch tomorrow? Oo


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> 300-series chipset required : https://www.techpowerup.com/236313/intel-8th-gen-core-i5-and-core-i7-retail-boxes-pictured


yay /s
especially since the first line of 300 chipsets are rebranded z270 ones (which are ohh so different from z170 already /s )

I'm not even seeing a pretend to rename the socket 1151 *v2*
a Ryzen it is for a next build then


----------



## TheWizardMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> 300-series chipset required : https://www.techpowerup.com/236313/intel-8th-gen-core-i5-and-core-i7-retail-boxes-pictured


Good job Intel. I will not be upgrading this gen now.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheWizardMan*
> 
> Good job Intel. I will not be upgrading this gen now.


I'm craving to update .. Coming from a 4790K I can not wait to build a PC with high speed DDR4, NVMe SSD, and a fast 12 threads CPU.
Ryzen let me down games wise, X299 is a **** show, so I really hope the 8700k delivers.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> Coffee Lake i5 is really interesting. wouldn't a Cofeelake [email protected] 6c/6t destroy a Kabylake i7 at 4c/*8*t?


i say yes.


----------



## xioros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TheWizardMan*
> 
> Good job Intel. I will not be upgrading this gen now.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm craving to update .. Coming from a 4790K I can not wait to build a PC with high speed DDR4, NVMe SSD, and a fast 12 threads CPU.
> Ryzen let me down games wise, X299 is a **** show, so I really hope the 8700k delivers.
Click to expand...

I'm in the same boat. I want to get rid of my DS214se and make my current build into a home-server/NAS - but I'll need to buy a new platform first. And I'm really hoping the Z3*9*0 platform doesn't leave me waiting too long. It seems like bad value to buy a Z370 considering the Z390 chipset is supposed to come with a wider feature set (Native _real_ USB 3.1 _gen 2_ - not the gen 1 bullcrap; Thunderbolt 3, etc)


----------



## VegetarianEater

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> Coffee Lake i5 is really interesting. wouldn't a Cofeelake [email protected] 6c/6t destroy a Kabylake i7 at 4c/*8*t?


with 8 thread loads they'd be even, but anything less than that the 6C/6T would win because real cores are worth a lot more than threads


----------



## Scotty99

Wait a second, desktop SKU's werent announced?


----------



## xioros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Wait a second, desktop SKU's werent announced?


Nope, just mobile.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> I'm in the same boat. I want to get rid of my DS214se and make my current build into a home-server/NAS - but I'll need to buy a new platform first. And I'm really hoping the Z3*9*0 platform doesn't leave me waiting too long. It seems like bad value to buy a Z370 considering the Z390 chipset is supposed to come with a wider feature set (Native _real_ USB 3.1 _gen 2_ - not the gen 1 bullcrap; Thunderbolt 3, etc)


Z390 is supposed to be 10 nm AKA 9th gen, right ? Not sure if I can wait this long


----------



## GreedyMuffin

May I ask how you find SK-X/X299 at **** show?


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> May I ask how you find SK-X/X299 at **** show?


VRM design, new cache design that isn't good for gaming (as the time being), power consumption / temps, and CPU are not soldered (well the 8700K probably won't be either, but you get my point).
I may have used strong words and been spoiled by x99, but x299 really doesn't fit my needs and I feel it could have been way better.


----------



## Scotty99

Its not that x299 is terrible on its own, it just makes no sense with ryzen/threadripper pricing.

But ya, im a bit miffed we didnt get any info on desktop models......grrrr.


----------



## kd5151

less than 1 hr to go.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Its not that x299 is terrible on its own, it just makes no sense with ryzen/threadripper pricing.
> 
> But ya, im a bit miffed we didnt get any info on desktop models......grrrr.


Isn't the live streaming starting in 45 min ? Desktop models might be announce there... I hope


----------



## Scotty99

Oh, thought someone said no desktop models were being introduced today.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Isn't the live streaming starting in 45 min ? Desktop models might be announce there... I hope


Also saw this when i woke up:
https://www.yahoo.com/tech/8th-gen-intel-core-news-155558370.html


----------



## kd5151

The first wave of 8th Gen Intel Core processor-powered devices featuring i5/i7 processors will come to market beginning in September, and we expect more than 145 designs to choose from. But that's just the beginning. 8th Gen Intel Core processors will continue to roll out through the coming months, with the first desktop processors coming in the fall, followed by processors for enterprise customers and a broad range of other options purpose-built for different segments. The 8th Gen family will even include some of our first 10 nm products.

source:https://newsroom.intel.com/editorials/new-8th-gen-intel-core-processors-simplifying-today-opening-door-whats-next/


----------



## kd5151

https://www.techpowerup.com/236313/intel-8th-gen-core-i5-and-core-i7-retail-boxes-pictured boxes

https://www.techpowerup.com/236319/intel-6-core-coffee-lake-die-pictured die shot


----------



## Scotty99

Does someone have a link for where they are streaming this? Or did it already happen....../confused.


----------



## Phixit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Does someone have a link for where they are streaming this? Or did it already happen....../confused.


It think it begins at 8AM PST. I don't have any stream link tho.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Does someone have a link for where they are streaming this? Or did it already happen....../confused.


https://newsroom.intel.com/news/8th-generation-intel-core-processor-family-debuts-live-video/

the countdown has begun!


----------



## Scotty99

How do we have info that the desktop models are pushed back to oct/nov/dec if the livesteam hasnt happened yet lol?


----------



## JackCY

Can't wait for the temperature results







Boiling toothpaste.


----------



## kd5151

GO!


----------



## Scotty99

God this is cringe lol. Oh man a quad core processor, impressive intel.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> God this is cringe lol. Oh man a quad core processor, impressive intel.


It really is


----------



## 404Error

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> God this is cringe lol. Oh man a quad core processor, impressive intel.


That green screen guy is on point tho. I wonder how much they're paying him to cluelessly look around in circles


----------



## kd5151

streaming in 480p and the audio is low.


----------



## Scotty99

lol right, and the chick who has been watching netflix in there for 10 hours *** lol.


----------



## TheWizardMan

*** was that


----------



## mouacyk

what the was that? absolutely useless video


----------



## Scotty99

That is officially the dumbest thing ive ever watched.


----------



## TheWizardMan

When are they telling us about the desktop line?


----------



## bl4ckdot

Guys, I lost 20min of my life.


----------



## thyfartismurder

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheWizardMan*
> 
> When are they telling us about the desktop line?


"soon"


----------



## Scotty99

That video made me feel better about my ryzen purchase, at least there is that lol.


----------



## kd5151

Desktops will be here in the fall. Read post 590 and click on the source. That article was the same thing as the video.


----------



## mouacyk

Shouldn't have watched that useless stream. TPU already has this chart up way prior and gives more info:


----------



## Scotty99

Well from what ive read notebooks with 15w 8th gen parts release in september, and desktops are simply after that. So oct/nov/dec sometime.


----------



## sepiashimmer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Shouldn't have watched that useless stream. TPU already has this chart up way prior and gives more info:


The event video never loaded for me.


----------



## Ph42oN

That live stream was totally disappointing.


----------



## BoredErica

I can't believe I stayed up to watch the livestream.


----------



## jprovido

sigh if they only made it compatible with z270 I buy this on day 1. what am I gonna do with this 7700k now lol


----------



## xioros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> I'm in the same boat. I want to get rid of my DS214se and make my current build into a home-server/NAS - but I'll need to buy a new platform first. And I'm really hoping the Z3*9*0 platform doesn't leave me waiting too long. It seems like bad value to buy a Z370 considering the Z390 chipset is supposed to come with a wider feature set (Native _real_ USB 3.1 _gen 2_ - not the gen 1 bullcrap; Thunderbolt 3, etc)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390 is supposed to be 10 nm AKA 9th gen, right ? Not sure if I can wait this long
Click to expand...

Is it? I thought Z390 was planned for December 2017?








Oh well, GA-Z370X Gaming 9 it is then... (if it has the same feature-set as the Z270 Gaming 9 - need PLX and love the WB)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> sigh if they only made it compatible with z270 I buy this on day 1. what am I gonna do with this 7700k now lol


Free give-away


----------



## bazh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> Is it? I thought Z390 was planned for December 2017?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh well, GA-Z370X Gaming 9 it is then... (if it has the same feature-set as the Z270 Gaming 9 - need PLX and love the WB)
> Free give-away


On the roadmaps it's Q1 2018 (CNL PCH)


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> How do we have info that the desktop models are pushed back to oct/nov/dec if the livesteam hasnt happened yet lol?


Yeah, I think people are just fretting. From the slides and Intel's info, desktop line will be announced tomorrow and available in September (next month) if we take into consideration the motherboard slides, when Coffee Lake starts at the third quarter of Q3 (September).

Anyone has a different "official" info? So far this is what I gathered (September). I assume third week, around 19-21st.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Updated with the following new information:
Quote:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here are the first pictures of the retail boxes of 8th generation Intel Core i5 and Core i7 processor which will be launched on 22 August; with Core i3 following on much later in the year, or even early-2018. The boxes confirm several things about these chips, beginning with the fact that their integrated graphics cores will be branded "Intel UHD Graphics 6xx," and that they will require motherboards based on Intel 300-series chipset, even though their socket is "LGA1151."
> 
> There doesn't appear to be a socket key difference between these processors and "Kaby Lake," so it's possible that while 300-series chipset motherboards support older "Kaby Lake" and "Skylake" processors, "Coffee Lake" will only work on 300-series chipset, and not older 200-series or 100-series.
> 
> 
> 
> *Source 13:* https://www.techpowerup.com/236313/intel-8th-gen-core-i5-and-core-i7-retail-boxes-pictured
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intel today announced its 8th generation Core processor family, with new mainstream desktop (MSDT) processor SKUs. The company is stressing on these chips featuring "40% more performance over the previous-generation," even though the "Coffee Lake" micro-architecture is essentially based on the "Skylake" and "Kaby Lake" architectures. The company is arriving at 40% by across the board increases in core-counts. Quad-core Core i5 and Core i7 SKUs now have 6 cores as opposed to 4 (a 33% multi-threaded performance increase straight off the bat), and the remaining 7% from higher clocks or micro-architecture level incremental updates; while Core i3 now includes quad-core SKUs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Source 14:* https://www.techpowerup.com/236324/intel-stresses-on-40-more-performance-for-8th-generation-core-family
Click to expand...


----------



## BoredErica

So the Excel chart is not confirmed data, right?

You guys notice the 10 2017 on the mug as pointed out on Reddit?


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> So the Excel chart is not confirmed data, right?
> 
> You guys notice the 10 2017 on the mug as pointed out on Reddit?


i didnt notice but now i do!


----------



## Niobium

If 8700 non-K means saving at least $50 over the K I would gladly go for the former since I'm not going to bother OCing at all with a min 4.3+GHz turbo and I like cheap boards. I'll be sticking with Intel again, at least I know they play well with all Hynix DDR4 at rated speeds unlike AMD.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Niobium*
> 
> If 8700 non-K means saving at least $50 over the K I would gladly go for the former since I'm not going to bother OCing at all with a min 4.3+GHz turbo and I like cheap boards. I'll be sticking with Intel again, at least I know they play well with all Hynix DDR4 at rated speeds unlike AMD.


16gb GSkill flare x 3200mhz on newegg cost almost as much as a ryzen 1600.


----------



## Scotty99

Glad i built on ryzen 7 release, got 3200 kit for 98 bucks. Also got a 1060 6gb for 220, those are like 300+ now cause of miners apparently.


----------



## Menta

Not feeling this LINE UP. 6 core is lame


----------



## pez

Well the non-270 compatibility all but confirms that AMD will be my next CPU unless they just mess something up. By that time, I should be running an even bigger resolution that will make CPU overhead even more irrelevant.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> Well the non-270 compatibility all but confirms that AMD will be my next CPU unless they just mess something up. By that time, I should be running an even bigger resolution that will make CPU overhead even more irrelevant.


I think the Z370 is especially appealing for those that are still on Z97 or older. If you only do games, your 7700k should last you some years


----------



## evensen007

This 'live-stream' was pathetically bad. I don't understand in this day and age how they could be so badly orchestrated. AMD's Vega teasers were also terrible.

I'm itching so badly to upgrade this Sandy Platform, but I hate being on the cusp of a new chipset/architecture. Technically, the 7700k platform will probably last me as long as Sandy has, but I'm holding out just a little longer to see what Coffee brings.


----------



## czin125

Do motherboards with 2x2 ram slots have shorter traces than 1x4 ram slots? Would they happen to make those configurations for Z370?


----------



## mouacyk

Shameless charting of IPC gains based on SiSoft rankings between 2nd, 4th, 6th, and 8th generations. I had to fudge the Long-Int and Single-float values for the 2nd gen a bit, due to probably differences in the benchmark version when last ran.

First, IPC gains from lower generations to higher ones:


Here, re-ordered to show the IPC gains in ascending order:


Upgrading from 4790K, 150% cores + 15% IPC sounds about right and should land around 165%. Look at that upgrade from 2700K though. Dang!


----------



## kevindd992002

I was reading the articles online about the launch and correct me if I'm wrong but the 8700K won't be available anytime soon, right? The only details they gave were for the laptop CPU's. That means my recent 7700K purchase was a wise decision


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> I was reading the articles online about the launch and correct me if I'm wrong but the 8700K won't be available anytime soon, right? The only details they gave were for the laptop CPU's. That means my recent 7700K purchase was a wise decision


In the fall. Desktop cpus will be here in the fall. And will need new mobos.


----------



## naz2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> I was reading the articles online about the launch and correct me if I'm wrong but the 8700K won't be available anytime soon, right? The only details they gave were for the laptop CPU's. That means my recent 7700K purchase was a wise decision


if you bought a 7700k after ryzen came out then you dun goofed


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> In the fall. Desktop cpus will be here in the fall. And will need new mobos.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *naz2*
> 
> if you bought a 7700k after ryzen came out then you dun goofed


I'm building a new rig so the parts are not here yet. They're coming from the US and I'm in the Philippines so it could still take a while. I'm contemplating if I want to sell the parts so that I can go with a Coffee Lake. Would that be worth it?

I'm not considering Ryzen so no worries on that. I'm only comparing the 7700K with the 8700K and if it's worth the wait.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Ryzen for gaming is not very good.. Tested 7700K, 1700 and 7800X this year. Before that, many others..


----------



## azanimefan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Ryzen for gaming is not very good..


you know it's blanket statements like this that make my brain go numb.

Ryzen for gaming is about as good as broadwell or haswell, or do you mean to say those aren't good for gaming too? About the only actual difference between skylake and ryzen is the slight performance increase skylake gets from faster ram, and the faster clock speeds it can get.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> *Ryzen for gaming is not very good*.. Tested 7700K, 1700 and 7800X this year. Before that, many others..


Let's be fair and clarify this statement a bit, since I've seen it thrown around a lot. RyZen is fine for GPU-bound gaming, where image quality (and resolution) are prioritized. Where it doesn't do as well as the Intel counterparts is where high FPS (144+) is prioritized. Pick your poison, if you're cash-strapped. For me, I like the versatility that the Intel counterparts can handle both priorities well.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Let's be fair and clarify this statement a bit, since I've seen it thrown around a lot. RyZen is fine for GPU-bound gaming, where image quality (and resolution) are prioritized. Where it doesn't do as well as the Intel counterparts is where high FPS (144+) is prioritized. Pick your poison, if you're cash-strapped. For me, I like the versatility that the Intel counterparts can handle both priorities well.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

True. I was on the bus, going to make a follow up post. But for 1440P/144hz gaming it does not cut it, other than that, it is pretty nice when overclocked and with fast ram.

Still, the 7800X is a whole new world compared to both 7700K and 1700 for my usage. It is higher clocked and got faster ram.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> True. I was on the bus, going to make a follow up post. But for 1440P/144hz gaming it does not cut it, other than that, it is pretty nice when overclocked and with fast ram.
> 
> Still, the 7800X is a whole new world compared to both 7700K and 1700 for my usage. It is higher clocked and got faster ram.


Eh, stop ****posting dude. I would bet you my bank account if you had three systems next to each other with those CPU's you mentioned with identical components otherwise, you would not be able to tell the difference between them without having a FPS meter open on a 1440p 144hz panel.

AMD essentially gave consumers broadwell E for a fraction of the price, yet no one ever bashed on that platform for its gaming prowess. The only reason people think its ok to compare ryzen to a much higher clocked 7700k is because ryzen is priced so well lol.


----------



## mouacyk

I guess it's not so strange that Ryzen showed better minimums due to having more cores ready instead of stalling. So for some games that use more than 4 cores, Ryzen is actually more fluid. Hoping that 8700K will do the same for Intel mainstream.


----------



## kingduqc

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Eh, stop ****posting dude. I would bet you my bank account if you had three systems next to each other with those CPU's you mentioned with identical components otherwise, you would not be able to tell the difference between them without having a FPS meter open on a 1440p 144hz panel.
> 
> AMD essentially gave consumers broadwell E for a fraction of the price, yet no one ever bashed on that platform for its gaming prowess. The only reason people think its ok to compare ryzen to a much higher clocked 7700k is because ryzen is priced so well lol.


it`s such a pointless argument since it`s game dependent.

If the rigs are running arma 3. I'm telling you, it`s night and day difference. On the other hand, a more modern game like bf1 I would also bet the experience it similar.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingduqc*
> 
> it`s such a pointless argument since it`s game dependent.
> 
> If the rigs are running arma 3. I'm telling you, it`s night and day difference. On the other hand, a more modern game like bf1 I would also bet the experience it similar.


Night and day eh lol. Mmk. You just cant go around saying stuff like he is, that ryzen does "not cut it" for 1440p 144fps gaming....thats a ridiculous statement.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> True. I was on the bus, going to make a follow up post. But for 1440P/144hz gaming it does not cut it, other than that, it is pretty nice when overclocked and with fast ram.
> 
> Still, the 7800X is a whole new world compared to both 7700K and 1700 for my usage. It is higher clocked and got faster ram.


Ryzen isn't an issue for 1440p/144Hz unless you're driving it with a Titan or 1080 Ti in games where you can expect at least a pinned 144 FPS. When I got my 1700x I put considerable game time in on it, my 4790k, and the 6700k I had been using for gaming prior, all on 1440p 144Hz with a 1080. Most games where a 1080 could truly drive 144 FPS (CSGO, Smite, 2015 and older games) there was no issue on any of the CPU's. 6700k could push those games hardest, but it was irrelevant to the experience as they all met the 144 FPS mark. Newer 'AAA' games at 1440p with eye candy displayed no perceptible difference on any of the processors.

1080p 144Hz+, I would take your point, but 1440p is still largely GPU-bound, and then the majority of time that you're CPU-bound the game can be run on any Haswell-level part beyond 144Hz. For the true outliers, like ARMA, there's no replacement for a 7700k that makes sense (at least until we see what the 8700k can do).


----------



## Scotty99

I play the MOST cpu bound game of all time in world of warcraft. While i have no doubt the FPS would be higher on a 7700/8700k that does not begin to touch on "night and day" differences. These old ass games are gonna play like trash no matter what hardware you have. Only thing that will fix these old games is getting a dx12 patch.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I play the MOST cpu bound game of all time in world of warcraft. While i have no doubt the FPS would be higher on a 7700/8700k that does not begin to touch on "night and day" differences. These old ass games are gonna play like trash no matter what hardware you have. Only thing that will fix these old games is getting a dx12 patch.


That's what I mean. Some games, ARMA being a great example, are true outliers. They're CPU-bound not just by necessity or age, but by dint of their entire development history and for very particular reasons.

WoW is an interesting one; it scales well with IPS, but there are elements to its design that will run poorly on any known CPU. I haven't really played since Catacylsm, but I do remember that comparing my desktop to my laptop, the numbers were always obviously higher on the former in scenarios like raids and AV BG, but the drops were extremely predictable and happened proportionally no matter which system I was on at the time. One might have had me at 70 FPS and would drop to 30, whilst the other was at 40 and would drop to 15, but it was that same sort of predictable drop. In any event, I agree that night and day is a mischaracterisation for a game like WoW.


----------



## Scotty99

Exactly its just old as balls. FFXIV is a newer mmo and that plays eons better. 30 fps in that game feels like 60+, i have no idea how they do it but comparing similar scenarios in those two games is actual night and day differences (world boss in WoW vs large fate in ffxiv).


----------



## Scotty99

I am really curious to see how destiny 2 plays. I pre-ordered it and beta hits later this month. Will be neat to see how a newly developed mmo can play on high end hardware. The places where these games traditionally make rigs fall on their face (spots where tons of people are in one spot) might be something that can be alleviated with proper modern day coding, or maybe that is something that is unavoidable.


----------



## Phixit

WoW is a mess even on my 6700k, the official forum is full of threads about it. And I'm talking about a few zones in the newest expansion.

The engine is old and unoptimized.


----------



## Ding Chavez

According to this techpowerup review the Ryzen is good for gaming. Overall it is close to 7600K and 7700K in the performance summary. If you look at each game individually it does drop a bit on some games but on others it is actually ahead so it does well overall.
As a PC gamer and builder I'd say the Ryzen 1600X is good for gaming, and good value, I'd buy one, my 2c.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_5_1600X/19.html

But at this point I'd wait for the coffee lake because it will probably be better and have more caffeine just depends how they price it. If the i5 6c isn't too pricey I will probably get one. Looking forward to it.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Hate me if you want, that is completely fine for me as I don't really care.









I've tested on the games I've played, and posted benchmarks for BF1. Yes, I am using a top tier GPU like the 1080TI which is overclocked.

When 7800X get 22% better avg FPS, and 25% min FPS compared to the 1700, you do really notice it. I really notice the difference between 115 fps, and 140 fps. Yes, I mostly play Battlefield.

Ryzen does not suck. It is a massive sucsess! But for me, and my usage. (also compared to the 7800X and 7700K) it does "suck" when it lacks far behind. Which is 90% just because it is slower clock-wise. This is only for MY usage after MY testing. This is what I experienced.

I am sorry if someone got butthurt or upset. Not my intention.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Hate me if you want, that is completely fine for me as I don't really care.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've tested on the games I've played, and posted benchmarks for BF1. Yes, I am using a top tier GPU like the 1080TI which is overclocked.
> 
> When 7800X get 22% better avg FPS, and 25% min FPS compared to the 1700, you do really notice it. I really notice the difference between 115 fps, and 140 fps. Yes, I mostly play Battlefield.
> 
> Ryzen does not suck. It is a massive sucsess! But for me, and my usage. (also compared to the 7800X and 7700K) it does "suck" when it lacks far behind. Which is 90% just because it is slower clock-wise. This is only for MY usage after MY testing. This is what I experienced.
> 
> I am sorry if someone got butthurt or upset. Not my intention.


Bro no one is upset, merely correcting your statement "ryzen can not cut it for 1440p 144hz gaming" because that is absurdity.

What i find funny about people like you is this, you knew before you bought ryzen that you trade a small amount of FPS for a CPU that is going to last a lot longer than the competition, then turn around and preach your "findings" as if you had an epiphany on the matter lol. I could have saved you money and told you to get a 7700k if you really need those extra 15 fps. People who bought ryzen consciously made the decision to trade a few fps for a CPU that is going to be relevant in 2022, something that cannot be said for a 7700k.

The really ironic thing is this, in just a year or two the people who bought 7700k's because they got higher FPS in the games of today will be wishing they stuck with their ryzen 1700, as games are going to inevitably play better on higher core CPU's as time goes on.


----------



## reqq

ye ryzen super bad for battlefieldn lol


----------



## Scotty99

Ya i found his results odd as well considering the game, BF1 most reviewers have it neck and neck with intel....especially at 1440p.


----------



## mouacyk

The "games are going to use more cores" argument isn't new. Bf1 is one of the most demanding modern games and it still runs great on my 4790k at 1440p 120hz. There are optimization issues in the engine but those affect even hexacores. I found that by stripping my os down to the bare runtime essentials, nearly all the micro stutter so often reported is eliminated.

I take a different view that games will not scale linearly beyond 6 cores, much less 4 even going forward. It's not worth the insurmountable effort to parallelize game logic for that many threads with marginal returns. Interactive games have a serial nature. The extra threads we gained the last few years are for parallelizable tasks like audio, network, physics, and a VERY sophisticated rendering pipeline.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> The "games are going to use more cores" argument isn't new. Bf1 is one of the most demanding modern games and it still runs great on my 4790k at 1440p 120hz. There are optimization issues in the engine but those affect even hexacores.
> 
> I take a different view that games will not scale linearly beyond 6 cores, much less 4 even going forward. It's not worth the insurmountable effort to parallelize game logic for that many threads with marginal returns. Interactive games have a serial nature. The extra threads we gained the last few years are for parallelizable tasks like audio, network, physics, and a VERY sophisticated rendering pipeline.


Well its not only about how games use those cores of course, having those idle cpu resources at hand can give a better overall experience. I agree on the 6 core comment btw and id be willing to trade my 1700 for a 8700k thats why im keeping up with this thread. There was no way i was going to buy a quad core cpu in 2017, if you told me intel was going to release a 6c12t mainstream cpu the same year i would have laughed at you. 4c8t will have limitations soon, i feel even worse for people who bought a i5 this year.....ouch.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> The "games are going to use more cores" argument isn't new. Bf1 is one of the most demanding modern games and it still runs great on my 4790k at 1440p 120hz. There are optimization issues in the engine but those affect even hexacores.
> 
> I take a different view that games will not scale linearly beyond 6 cores, much less 4 even going forward. It's not worth the insurmountable effort to parallelize game logic for that many threads with marginal returns. Interactive games have a serial nature. The extra threads we gained the last few years are for parallelizable tasks like audio, network, physics, and a VERY sophisticated rendering pipeline.


True, but with Coffee Lake and Ryzen becoming the 'mainstream', we can expect 6-8 core parts as the standard going forward. This is more realistically going to accelerate the process of optimising with at least four cores in mind, and potentially six, rather than one or two to four as is the usual case today. I'm not certain that gaming will fully utilise eight cores plus any time soon, but I do expect multi-core paths to exhibit improved performance as development becomes centred around the new mainstream.


----------



## e-gate

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *reqq*
> 
> 
> 
> ye ryzen super bad for battlefieldn lol


Literally unplayable.


----------



## aDyerSituation

That is the only review I've seen with Ryzen beating a 7700k in Battlefield.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!









Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!









Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## VegetarianEater

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> That is the only review I've seen with Ryzen beating a 7700k in Battlefield.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


I mean, you just showed a 1080p graph vs a 1440p one, and then the second one was overclocked intel vs stock ryzen... with the 7700k getting 4fps over the ryzen. I have no doubt that at 1440p overclocked ryzen will get better mins than a 7700k on a heavily multithreaded game like that


----------



## Fediuld

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> That is the only review I've seen with Ryzen beating a 7700k in Battlefield.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


However what's the ram used on those reviews, and when the reviews were made?
Zen is very sensitive with Ram speeds. 2133 to 3466 is 40% on pure FPS performance. 3000 to 3466C14 is around 15-20% alone. Because of how Infinity Fabric works and communicates with the other system. The review with the BF1 where 1700 beats 7700K, 3600Mhz ram is used.

Kabylake, KabylakeX & Skylake (not the SkylakeX) run the ring at their processor speed.
Broadwel-E thats the speed of "uncore", was topping 3.4Ghz on 99% of the systems. For ryzen that depends on the ram speed.

Also reviews before AGESA 1006 (aka May 2017) are pointless these days, because they do not represent the reality today, nor Windows or NV driver optimisations over the last 5 months.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fediuld*
> 
> However what's the ram used on those reviews, and when the reviews were made?
> Zen is very sensitive with Ram speeds. 2133 to 3466 is 40% on pure FPS performance. 3000 to 3466C14 is around 15-20% alone. Because of how Infinity Fabric works and communicates with the other system. The review with the BF1 where 1700 beats 7700K, 3600Mhz ram is used.
> 
> Kabylake, KabylakeX & Skylake (not the SkylakeX) run the ring at their processor speed.
> Broadwel-E thats the speed of "uncore", was topping 3.4Ghz on 99% of the systems. For ryzen that depends on the ram speed.
> 
> Also reviews before AGESA 1006 (aka May 2017) are pointless these days, because they do not represent the reality today, nor Windows or NV driver optimisations over the last 5 months.


these are all recent reviews. Tech spot, tom's hardware, wcctech you can look it up. It's from Skylake-x reviews.

It's also not a simple task getting Ryzen to 3200 on any thing but B Die ram. I am still reading about people being stuck at 2933. I'm sure 3600 is even a further stretch.


----------



## QSS-5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by Fediuld View Post
> 
> However what's the ram used on those reviews, and when the reviews were made?
> Zen is very sensitive with Ram speeds. 2133 to 3466 is 40% on pure FPS performance. 3000 to 3466C14 is around 15-20% alone. Because of how Infinity Fabric works and communicates with the other system. The review with the BF1 where 1700 beats 7700K, 3600Mhz ram is used.
> 
> Kabylake, KabylakeX & Skylake (not the SkylakeX) run the ring at their processor speed.
> Broadwel-E thats the speed of "uncore", was topping 3.4Ghz on 99% of the systems. For ryzen that depends on the ram speed.
> 
> Also reviews before AGESA 1006 (aka May 2017) are pointless these days, because they do not represent the reality today, nor Windows or NV driver optimisations over the last 5 months.


Ryzen does not have a RAM speed advantage over Intel, both gain equal (+/-) performance boost from same higher speeds. The gain Rysen gets form a 3600mhz is the same gain Intel gets, and in some cases Intel gets more and vise versa depending on game. This argument is old and needs to be understood, AMD just used the argument, well because it is true that performance increases but it would anyways regardless of infinity fabric or not because just like Intel, faster RAM helps with faster core to core communication because of latency decrease!

It is called confirmation bias to think faster RAM speeds directly and only benefits AMD


----------



## Scotty99

^

Also the discussion is for 1440p, if you are still gaming on a 1080p monitor and have a gtx 1070 and above graphics card....you got your priorities all out of whack. I have tested 2400 vs 3066 and at 1440p it ram does not make a lick of difference. Even in a synthetic like cinebench the gains are so small it shouldnt even be a consideration with current 3200 prices starting at 150.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> ^
> 
> Also the discussion is for 1440p, if you are still gaming on a 1080p monitor and have a gtx 1070 and above graphics card....you got your priorities all out of whack. I have tested 2400 vs 3066 and at 1440p it ram does not make a lick of difference. Even in a synthetic like cinebench the gains are so small it shouldnt even be a consideration with current 3200 prices starting at 150.


Thank you for dictating my use-case. I will be sure to come to you next time I want to upgrade my computer. Make sure it's okay with you


----------



## Phixit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> ^
> 
> Also the discussion is for 1440p, if you are still gaming on a 1080p monitor and have a gtx 1070 and above graphics card....you got your priorities all out of whack. I have tested 2400 vs 3066 and at 1440p it ram does not make a lick of difference. Even in a synthetic like cinebench the gains are so small it shouldnt even be a consideration with current 3200 prices starting at 150.


I couldn't afford to upgrade my monitor AND graphic card at the same time. It will likely be my next upgrade.

And I don't think a GTX 1070 for 1080p/144Hz is overkill. I'm getting like ~120fps in BF1 in average all maxed out.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Thank you for dictating my use-case. I will be sure to come to you next time I want to upgrade my computer. Make sure it's okay with you


Sure you can PM me anytime. My 1440p 165hz gsync monitor was 250 bucks after rebates, there simply is no excuse to be running at 1080p today.

The discussion was about 1440p 144hz and you linked 1080p benches.....kinda why you are getting pushback here as well.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Phixit*
> 
> I couldn't afford to upgrade my monitor AND graphic card at the same time. It will likely be my next upgrade.
> 
> And I don't think a GTX 1070 for 1080p/144Hz is overkill. I'm getting like ~120fps in BF1 in average all maxed out.


A monitor would have been a far better purchase for you, gsync support goes all way down to a gtx 650ti. You could have used your old card and lowered details until you could have afforded the GPU.

Not trying to pick on you two, everyone seems to do this and i simply do not understand it. A monitor is hands down the best upgrade you can do for your gaming PC, not even a SSD compares.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Sure you can PM me anytime. My 1440p 165hz gsync monitor was 250 bucks after rebates, there simply is no excuse to be running at 1080p today.
> 
> The discussion was about 1440p 144hz and you linked 1080p benches.....kinda why you are getting pushback here as well.


Congrats. You have the only 1440p monitor I would ever consider buying.

Not everyone wants a monitor bigger than 24". Also I dipped below 144fps quite frequently in Gears of War 4, DOOM, and Killing Floor 2 at 1080p max settings.
So why would I upgrade my resolution again?

Pretty sure the WCCFTech benchmark is at 4k also.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Congrats. You have the only 1440p monitor I would ever consider buying.
> 
> Not everyone wants a monitor bigger than 24". *Also I dipped below 144fps quite frequently in Gears of War 4, DOOM, and Killing Floor 2 at 1080p max settings.
> So why would I upgrade my resolution again?
> *
> Pretty sure the WCCFTech benchmark is at 4k also.


Common thing i hear from people who have never used gsync. It makes it so you dont have to worry about capping at 144 fps all the time, gsync range on my monitor is 30-165hz.


----------



## Scotty99

I also must add. Most games are terrribly optimized on max settings. High or even medium depending on the game is usually the best mix of fidelity and frame rate. I have never used max settings on any game i own.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I also must add. Most games are terrribly optimized on max settings. High or even medium depending on the game is usually the best mix of fidelity and frame rate. I have never used max settings on any game i own.


Yeah for me usually a mixture of high and low fits the bill. But in single player games I like to crank it up a little more.

I've never really had tearing problems. I can just notice frame dips very easily.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ding Chavez*
> 
> According to this techpowerup review the Ryzen is good for gaming. Overall it is close to 7600K and 7700K in the performance summary. If you look at each game individually it does drop a bit on some games but on others it is actually ahead so it does well overall.
> As a PC gamer and builder I'd say the Ryzen 1600X is good for gaming, and good value, I'd buy one, my 2c.
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_5_1600X/19.html
> 
> But at this point I'd wait for the coffee lake because it will probably be better and have more caffeine just depends how they price it. If the i5 6c isn't too pricey I will probably get one. Looking forward to it.


I think it's pretty clear to wait for coffeelake if you care about high frame rate or have a single threaded application (i.e. legacy proprietary software) that uses up to 4 threads. Ryzen is plenty capable for 60FPS and even 120 FPS (depending on the use case).

Ryzen has the same drawback as Intel X299 in that that it uses a mesh.

I'm probably getting a Coffeelake CPU once microcenter puts out some good combo deals , plus the cheapest Z370 board that won't blow up pushing 100amps or whatever it takes for the average safe overclock on about 150-160W power envelope under stress (so maybe something like 20A @ 100°C PowerPAK mosfets x 6 to leave about 20% margin with doubled low side , 6 phases NexFETs). See i7-7800x and Ryzen 5 1600 CPUs.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Shameless charting of IPC gains based on SiSoft rankings between 2nd, 4th, 6th, and 8th generations. I had to fudge the Long-Int and Single-float values for the 2nd gen a bit, due to probably differences in the benchmark version when last ran.
> 
> First, IPC gains from lower generations to higher ones:
> 
> 
> Here, re-ordered to show the IPC gains in ascending order:
> 
> 
> Upgrading from 4790K, 150% cores + 15% IPC sounds about right and should land around 165%. Look at that upgrade from 2700K though. Dang!


good info

Amdahl's law still holds for over 6 threads if parallelization is low.


----------



## Scotty99

Gsync is not for tearing under refresh rate, its for stutter. Once you go gsync you notice it instantly when playing on one that doesnt have it.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Gsync is not for tearing under refresh rate, its for stutter. Once you go gsync you notice it instantly when playing on one that doesnt have it.


I used freesync before. Didn't notice the difference tbh


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I used freesync before. Didn't notice the difference tbh


Cant speak for freesync, but i couldnt play overwatch on a non gsync monitor anymore.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Cant speak for freesync, but i couldnt play overwatch on a non gsync monitor anymore.


I can't play anything over 90fps without ULMB anymore. Anything less than that, G-Sync shines.


----------



## Scotty99

You know i tried ULMB recently just to test, and honestly i dont see the hype behind it. I came from CRT's and i didnt think it was anything like that (thats what ULMB tries to achieve).


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> Have we been jested


Yeah, you were right. I think we have been jested indeed... Very little information on the i7-8700K. People say October, but at this point they could be talking announcement, which would delay the release to November / December (Christmas).

What a joke Intel. Every site seems to have been jested as well. I'm not seeing any article regarding why the desktop Coffee Lake was simply ignored in the last couple days. Perhaps they were caught off guard and don't want to admit the mistake? Perhaps tomorrow we'll hear something. What is strange is that by the pace of things and leaks, the release seemed to be right around the corner. They might be holding the line so that the unwary buy more Skylake-X CPUs.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Gsync is not for tearing under refresh rate, its for stutter. Once you go gsync you notice it instantly when playing on one that doesnt have it.


Tearing can happen when fps is above or below the refresh rate. It is just more pronounced when it is above. Gsync eliminates this.

@All

Will current lga1151 waterblocks be compatible with the new lga1151v2?


----------



## Ding Chavez

Spotted some price info, it's in CAD but prices are close to current i5 and i7 only about $20 more. If this is accurate prices look good IMO.
Quote:


> Rumor: Prices Leak for Intel's Coffee Lake




https://www.extremetech.com/computing/254521-rumor-prices-leak-intels-coffee-lake

Edit: Looking at the i5 8400 for $237CAD or $187USD looks like a great bargain gaming chip if you can lock all 6 cores to 4.0GHz with the motherboard.


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Sure you can PM me anytime. My 1440p 165hz gsync monitor was 250 bucks after rebates, there simply is no excuse to be running at 1080p today.
> 
> The discussion was about 1440p 144hz and you linked 1080p benches.....kinda why you are getting pushback here as well.


Let's not pretend that's normal pricing. And since nvidia doesn't let you mix resolutions in surround I would need 3 monitors so that would cost me around $1200. I only play 1 game in surround, so it's definitely not worth $1200 to upgrade my monitors. That's ignoring the fact that even my 1080 wouldn't be a 1440p 144 hz card today, 1080p 144hz is about its limit.


----------



## azanimefan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ding Chavez*
> 
> Spotted some price info, it's in CAD but prices are close to current i5 and i7 only about $20 more. If this is accurate prices look good IMO.
> 
> 
> https://www.extremetech.com/computing/254521-rumor-prices-leak-intels-coffee-lake
> 
> Edit: Looking at the i5 8400 for $237CAD or $187USD looks like a great bargain gaming chip if you can lock all 6 cores to 4.0GHz with the motherboard.


so intel ups the price of all it's cpus by 20 per, and it's now a "great bargain"?

sure a few more cores but it's far more expensive than competing AMD offerings.


----------



## Defoler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *azanimefan*
> 
> so intel ups the price of all it's cpus by 20 per, and it's now a "great bargain"?
> 
> sure a few more cores but it's far more expensive than competing AMD offerings.


Where did you learn math?
Seriously, we all need to know to never send any kids there ever again.

462.41->484.44 = 4.7%
406.35->407.73 = 0.3%
313.95->338.00 = 7.6%
149.08->152.51 = 2.3%

Those are basically could just be small adjustments considering maybe a big higher manufacturing price and inflation adjustment or difference in money exchange.


----------



## sumitlian

okay, by looking at the price of i3-x350k and i3-x100, is it confirmed the former is a 4c/8t CPU ?


----------



## Contiusa

It is also important to notice that the price of the i7-7700 (non K) is the same of the i7-8700. The difference for the K series might be just an agio for being a flagship release, the same for the i5-K. And this is not from Newegg or similar. It is a Canadian store. The prices will be lower and most likely on par with 7th generation.. And the i3-K 8th generation is actually cheaper.


----------



## Tojara

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Defoler*
> 
> Where did you learn math?
> Seriously, we all need to know to never send any kids there ever again.
> 
> 462.41->484.44 = 4.7%
> 406.35->407.73 = 0.3%
> 313.95->338.00 = 7.6%
> 149.08->152.51 = 2.3%
> 
> Those are basically could just be small adjustments considering maybe a big higher manufacturing price and inflation adjustment or difference in money exchange.


Just pointing it out, 20 per [CPU] =/= 20 percent.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> okay, by looking at the price of i3-x350k and i3-x100, is it confirmed the former is a 4c/8t CPU ?


Both seem to be 4c/4t from the chart on page 25. The numbers there seem way off, as I don't expect 20% more IPC over Kaby Lake (or even 5% for that matter), and i3s don't have turbo.


----------



## Ding Chavez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *azanimefan*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Ding Chavez*
> 
> Spotted some price info, it's in CAD but prices are close to current i5 and i7 only about $20 more. If this is accurate prices look good IMO.
> 
> 
> https://www.extremetech.com/computing/254521-rumor-prices-leak-intels-coffee-lake
> 
> Edit: Looking at the i5 8400 for $237CAD or $187USD looks like a great bargain gaming chip if you can lock all 6 cores to 4.0GHz with the motherboard.
> 
> 
> 
> so intel ups the price of all it's cpus by 20 per, and it's now a "great bargain"?
> 
> sure a few more cores but it's far more expensive than competing AMD offerings.
Click to expand...

AMD 6 core 1600 $214

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113435

i5 8400 6 core $187

Tis cheaper not far more expensive. If you reread the comment it refers to the i5 8400.


----------



## azanimefan

the i5-8400, you mean the non-overclockable chip that will come with a locked clock speed at 2.8ghz with a max all core turbo of 3.8ghz?

you mean that one is a "great" bargain? sure, if I want a cpu with 40% lower base clock speed than a ryzen 6c12t cpu rolling a 4ghz overclock. Reminder, in pretty much every bench where a skylake intel was clocked at the same clock speed as a ryzen the ryzen generally matches the intel. but you're going to try to sell me on the idea that a lower clocked intel with 1/2 the threads of a ryzen cpu is a "great deal" sure, have at it.

now the K series i5 might be interesting, but I'm not seeing the value in this offering. Especially since my buddy at intel is telling me that their biggest problem with coffee lake is temps, and that they really don't expect these chips to make their turbo speeds as a full time overclock. Not without something seriously hefty cooling them.

sidenote: he's pretty reliable, he's the guy who was telling me years before Broadwell that they couldn't clock broadwell up no matter what they did.


----------



## Ding Chavez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *azanimefan*
> 
> the i5-8400, you mean the non-overclockable chip that will come with a locked clock speed at 2.8ghz with a max all core turbo of 3.8ghz?
> 
> you mean that one is a "great" bargain? sure, if I want a cpu with 40% lower base clock speed than a ryzen 6c12t cpu rolling a 4ghz overclock. Reminder, in pretty much every bench where a skylake intel was clocked at the same clock speed as a ryzen the ryzen generally matches the intel. but you're going to try to sell me on the idea that a lower clocked intel with 1/2 the threads of a ryzen cpu is a "great deal" sure, have at it.
> 
> now the K series i5 might be interesting, but I'm not seeing the value in this offering. Especially since my buddy at intel is telling me that their biggest problem with coffee lake is temps, and that they really don't expect these chips to make their turbo speeds as a full time overclock. Not without something seriously hefty cooling them.


Again try reading. If you can lock all 6 cores to 4.0GHz, which some motherboards may be able to do. Only 6 threads true but we'll see how it does for gaming. I bet it's a very good gaming chip for $187.

Heat again we'll see. I bet it's fine at 4.0.

OK you think a 6 core Intel coffee lake for $187 sux fair enough lol. I think it might be great for gaming at $187. We shall see...


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ding Chavez*
> 
> Again try reading. If you can lock all 6 cores to 4.0GHz, which some motherboards may be able to do. Only 6 threads true but we'll see how it does for gaming. I bet it's a very good gaming chip for $187.
> 
> Heat again we'll see. I bet it's fine at 4.0.
> 
> OK you think a 6 core Intel coffee lake for $187 sux fair enough lol. I think it might be great for gaming at $187. We shall see...


But is it wise to sell my brand new 7700K and ASUS Z270 board and wait for the 8700K and ASUS Z370 board that'll come out?


----------



## Ding Chavez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Ding Chavez*
> 
> Again try reading. If you can lock all 6 cores to 4.0GHz, which some motherboards may be able to do. Only 6 threads true but we'll see how it does for gaming. I bet it's a very good gaming chip for $187.
> 
> Heat again we'll see. I bet it's fine at 4.0.
> 
> OK you think a 6 core Intel coffee lake for $187 sux fair enough lol. I think it might be great for gaming at $187. We shall see...
> 
> 
> 
> But is it wise to sell my brand new 7700K and ASUS Z270 board and wait for the 8700K and ASUS Z370 board that'll come out?
Click to expand...

If you can get a decent price for it and really need/want more threads yes. If it will do for a few more years then not really IMO.


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> But is it wise to sell my brand new 7700K and ASUS Z270 board and wait for the 8700K and ASUS Z370 board that'll come out?


Think about how long our Sandy Bridge platform has lasted us. I've had mine since 2011. Coffee lake is not that big of a leap over the 7700k. Your quandary is basically whether or not you think games are going to drastically start taking advantage of more cores or not. My bet is not much. I bet a 7700k will last as long as Sandy Bridge has and that you won't see any benefit of the additional Coffee cores/threads for another 4-5 years. It's all GPU bound at this point at 1440x res and above.

Now having said that, if you can walk into the store and return the equipment for a full refund and wait 2 more months I would do that. The pricing should be so similar with Kaby that it just makes more sense to have the insurance. Your 2700k should be just fine for 2 more months, right?


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ding Chavez*
> 
> If you can get a decent price for it and really need/want more threads yes. If it will do for a few more years then not really IMO.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Think about how long our Sandy Bridge platform has lasted us. I've had mine since 2011. Coffee lake is not that big of a leap over the 7700k. Your quandary is basically whether or not you think games are going to drastically start taking advantage of more cores or not. My bet is not much. I bet a 7700k will last as long as Sandy Bridge has and that you won't see any benefit of the additional Coffee cores/threads for another 4-5 years. It's all GPU bound at this point at 1440x res and above.
> 
> Now having said that, if you can walk into the store and return the equipment for a full refund and wait 2 more months I would do that. The pricing should be so similar with Kaby that it just makes more sense to have the insurance. Your 2700k should be just fine for 2 more months, right?


Right. I guess what I want to know is: will there be any disadvantage of going with the 8700K compared to keeping with the 7700K? The core and boost frequencies of the 8700K is higher than the 7700K and with more cores. I don't think I don't need 6C/12T now but it is nice to have as long as I'm not sacrificing any single thread or overclocking performance. So is there even any disadvantage if I go with the 8700K?

Yes, I can wait if it's just 2 months. My 2700K will work just fine. It's just so hard to wait for all the components to arrive before starting my watercooling build.


----------



## Scotty99

The only "disadvantage" would be if 8700k uses the new mesh architecture style that ryzen and skylake x use. Disadvantage in quotes because it seems only older games run better on the ring stye mesh of kaby lake, new games should be able to be coded in a way to take advantage of the newer mesh. I went with ryzen because i kept my last PC for 5+ years and didnt feel comfortable buying a 4 core cpu in 2017.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> The only "disadvantage" would be if 8700k uses the new mesh architecture style that ryzen and skylake x use. Disadvantage in quotes because it seems only older games run better on the ring stye mesh of kaby lake, new games should be able to be coded in a way to take advantage of the newer mesh. I went with ryzen because i kept my last PC for 5+ years and didnt feel comfortable buying a 4 core cpu in 2017.


Ok, makes sense. Is it generally safe to assume that the 7700K would potentially overclock higher than the 8700K because it has less cores (setting aside silicon lottery, of course)?


----------



## SuperZan

My sneaking suspicion is that the 7700k will retain the overall IPS lead with the highest potential clocks. The 8700k will be a more balanced processor, but I'll be surprised if the 8700k can match the 7700k in clockspeed potential under ambient cooling, particularly air and mainstream AIO.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Ok, makes sense. Is it generally safe to assume that the 7700K would potentially overclock higher than the 8700K because it has less cores (setting aside silicon lottery, of course)?


Usually that would be a fair assumption, but given that the 8700k has a higher boost from the factory would indicate these should overclock similarly to 7700k.


----------



## Scotty99

You will see less 5.2ghz+ on 8700k im sure, but i think a 5ghz all core overclock should be fairly common.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> My sneaking suspicion is that the 7700k will retain the overall IPS lead with the highest potential clocks. The 8700k will be a more balanced processor, but I'll be surprised if the 8700k can match the 7700k in clockspeed potential under ambient cooling, particularly air and mainstream AIO.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Usually that would be a fair assumption, but given that the 8700k has a higher boost from the factory would indicate these should overclock similarly to 7700k.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You will see less 5.2ghz+ on 8700k im sure, but i think a 5ghz all core overclock should be fairly common.


Ok, then that makes it more hard to make a decision between the two  I hope Intel announces the desktop Coffee Lake CPUs earlier than fall and have them available by fall.


----------



## Nightbird

Wouldn't it be wonderful if the next i7 after Coffee Lake was 8 cores though







I'm sure AMD will work on clock speeds for the next round, so it would be insane for Intel to try to counter say... 8 4.8ghz Zen cores with 6 5.2ghz cores.


----------



## dieanotherday

If they go $400 8 core amd will be dead


----------



## Scotty99

We are a long time away from mainstream 8 cores. A 5ghz 8700k will nearly match a ryzen 7 at 4ghz in multi threaded apps. AMD is the one that needs to offer the value proposition, people should be glad intel are even doing 6 cores lol.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dieanotherday*
> 
> If they go $400 8 core amd will be dead


Intel lowers price. AMD lowers price. We all win. The 1500x is trying to compete against the i5 7500 right now. If Intel rebrands the i5 7500 into a i3 8100 what do you think is going to happen to the 1500x? Call me crazy but I think the 1500x will be priced on par with i3 8100 which could be $120. And even crazier me says the 1500x should of been priced like that in the first place.


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> We are a long time away from mainstream 8 cores. A 5ghz 8700k will nearly match a ryzen 7 at 4ghz in multi threaded apps. AMD is the one that needs to offer the value proposition, people should be glad intel are even doing 6 cores lol.


Lets take 0 synchronization panalty in multithreading.
Ryzen 7 -> 4 GHz * 8 cores = 32 GHz total.
i7-8700k -> 5 GHz * 6 cores = 30 GHz total.
8% SL/KB IPC + (hoping at least) 5% more IPC with CL = 13% more IPC with i7 = 33.9 GHz i7 (taking IPC = 1.0 for both AMD and Intel)

Intel should be about 33.9 / 32 = 1.059; ~6% faster in multithreadng.

But we know that AMD Ryzen's HT/SMT scales better than Intel (at least as compared to up to KL), then yeah I agree it it does look like, i7-8700k 5 GHz at best will be equal to Ryzen 7 4 GHz(except in AVX where Intel may have advantage in real world).
And if the new IPC turns out to be faster than 5% then i7 might be faster than that.

Now all we need is, to confirm if i7-8700k could do 5 GHz on all cores or not with air or AIO cooler.








Also this is all with default memory clocks.
I bet i7's memory will do 4000MHz+ and Ryzen 7 should be 3466+ MHz. Now we can't predict which will scale relatively more with faster RAM.

End result is AMD did change the style of market and gave a equivalent or faster(multithreading and multitasking) solution in advance. And Intel will still be ahead in giving ultimate frame rates in gaming due to higher core clock.

In the end, nothing will have changed other than Intel is going to provide Ryzen 7 competitor in multithreading. End of story for this year, now we can go home till the CoffeeLake launch.


----------



## Scotty99

True i wasnt figuring in IPC claims intel is throwing out, should be pretty darn close between a 8700k at 5 and 1700 at 4ghz.


----------



## SuperZan

I remain skeptical that a 5Ghz OC will be common on anything but custom loops. We'll see when we see, but I'm not so confident in these parts pushing all-core OC's much past their max turbo.


----------



## Scotty99

I just see no good reason they wont. Is 7800x the six core skylake x? That ive seen many people hit 5ghz on. Either way if 5ghz is the limit id probably do 4.8-4.9 anyways, i dont like pushing the absolute limits on hardware when most times the volts for 100 or 200mhz is way higher.


----------



## Zboe

I just want to take a moment to thank AMD for these new mainstream Intel hexa-core chips.









I wish they'd hurry up and release these so I can decide between Ryzen and CFL.


----------



## oxidized

http://wccftech.com/intel-coffee-lake-core-i3-8350k-cpu-benchmarks-leak/

What if this turns to be true?


----------



## Scotty99

Nvm reread it, that would be a CPU-z bug folks. At ryzen launch that software was putting my 1700 way above a 7700k single threaded, which is of course nonsense and they had to rewrite the benchmark. Same thing is happening there with that coffee lake chip.


----------



## oxidized

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Nvm reread it, that would be a CPU-z bug folks. At ryzen launch that software was putting my 1700 way above a 7700k single threaded, which is of course nonsense and they had to rewrite the benchmark. Same thing is happening there with that coffee lake chip.


Good point, well we'll have to wait not that much longer i guess


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> http://wccftech.com/intel-coffee-lake-core-i3-8350k-cpu-benchmarks-leak/
> 
> What if this turns to be true?


The 8T processor beating the 4T one by 33%? Seems pretty likely; about the same as 7600K vs 7700K. Wouldn't call that "almost on par", though. The IPC increase looks nice, but we'll have to see.


----------



## oxidized

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> The 8T processor beating the 4T one by 33%? Seems pretty likely; about the same as 7600K vs 7700K. Wouldn't call that "almost on par", though. The IPC increase looks nice, but we'll have to see.


Clock is lower, and it's a 4/4 vs a 4/8


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> http://wccftech.com/intel-coffee-lake-core-i3-8350k-cpu-benchmarks-leak/
> 
> What if this turns to be true?


no way. Based on the leaks it's going to be a 7600k without the turbo. 7600k is the new 8350k.


----------



## kmac20

Anyone else ever find it a bit ironic that the K skus are always clocked higher than the non skus, despite them clearly being for overclocking enthusiasts who are going to bump it up themselves anyway?

I mean I understand the why ($), but I don't find it slightly humorous.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kmac20*
> 
> Anyone else ever find it a bit ironic that the K skus are always clocked higher than the non skus, despite them clearly being for overclocking enthusiasts who are going to bump it up themselves anyway?
> 
> I mean I understand the why ($), but I don't find it slightly humorous.


http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-intel-moves-to-shut-down-locked-skylake-cpu-overclocking


----------



## kmac20

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-intel-moves-to-shut-down-locked-skylake-cpu-overclocking


WHy am I not surprised at all. Oh yeah, because $

Again I still find it interesting that they don't market the non SKUs at higher speeds than the Ks, because anyone who gets a K will just overclock it past what the non K could be at anyway. Because if you don't overclock, right? That means you wanna get the best bang for your buck. So you'd be more likely to buy any of the Intel SKUs at whatever price point you could afford because of the higher clocks, perhaps even spending more money.

If you DO overclock, youre gonna pay for that K sku anyway. Sooooo....to me it almost seems like a marketing mistake, but again the answer is $

God anyone miss the days when all you had to do to overclock a processor was have a board that let you bump up the FSB and it was not dependent on which specific SKU of a chip you got? At least AMD lets anyone do whatever they want with their processors. And no, I"m not an AMD fanboy. Yes I did just do a Ryzen build to replace my one below, but I have always used Intel CPUs up until this point in time because they were simply the better bang for the buck. I go where my wallet takes me, not where the companies take my wallet.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kmac20*
> 
> WHy am I not surprised at all. Oh yeah, because $
> 
> Again I still find it interesting that they don't market the non SKUs at higher speeds than the Ks, because anyone who gets a K will just overclock it past what the non K could be at anyway. Because if you don't overclock, right? That means you wanna get the best bang for your buck. So you'd be more likely to buy any of the Intel SKUs at whatever price point you could afford because of the higher clocks, perhaps even spending more money.
> 
> If you DO overclock, youre gonna pay for that K sku anyway. Sooooo....to me it almost seems like a marketing mistake, but again the answer is $
> 
> God anyone miss the days when all you had to do to overclock a processor was have a board that let you bump up the FSB and it was not dependent on which specific SKU of a chip you got? At least AMD lets anyone do whatever they want with their processors. And no, I"m not an AMD fanboy. Yes I did just do a Ryzen build to replace my one below, but I have always used Intel CPUs up until this point in time because they were simply the better bang for the buck. I go where my wallet takes me, not where the companies take my wallet.


Ryzen is just as bad. The 1800x is $160 more than the Ryzen 1700 right now on newegg. Even if the Ryzen 1700 was locked I still take it and put that $160 into a higher end gpu.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Ryzen is just as bad. The 1800x is $160 more than the Ryzen 1700 right now on newegg. Even if the Ryzen 1700 was locked I still take it and put that $160 into a higher end gpu.


The 1700 _isn't_ locked, though. It's hard to say Ryzen is 'bad' in that sense when they give non-overclockers several tiers of speed at different prices whilst giving overclockers the opportunity to pay less for equal or better speeds. It's the opposite of Intel's model. Whatever else one thinks of Ryzen, it's a laudable approach for the customer.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> The 1700 _isn't_ locked, though. It's hard to say Ryzen is 'bad' in that sense when they give non-overclockers several tiers of speed at different prices whilst giving overclockers the opportunity to pay less for equal or better speeds. It's the opposite of Intel's model. Whatever else one thinks of Ryzen, it's a laudable approach for the customer.


What I mean by bad is that AMD didn't get the price right with the 1800x. AND neither does Intel. When the Phenom II X4 965 came out it looked pretty good compared to the i7. But 1 month later Intel dropped the first i5 and the phenom looked bad being $50 more. http://www.anandtech.com/show/2832/20

So Intel is going to drop coffeelake. Hopefully the prices with be $390 or less. What happens to the 1800x? I think I know. Even the 1700x which is suppose to be $399 is selling $100 cheaper at times. Some of the Intel guys are already shouting ryzendozer and that ryzen will be $199.99. But most of those comments are coming from wccftech. so yeah.


----------



## kmac20

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> The 1700 _isn't_ locked, though. It's hard to say Ryzen is 'bad' in that sense when they give non-overclockers several tiers of speed at different prices whilst giving overclockers the opportunity to pay less for equal or better speeds. It's the opposite of Intel's model. Whatever else one thinks of Ryzen, it's a laudable approach for the customer.


This. Thats my point. Thank you.

And @kd5151 Fanboys will be fanboys. Of course something newer and better always comes along eventually. Its about buying the best thing possible for you when you go out to make the purchase. People can always scream that something better is around the corner, but that doesn't matter if I need to make the purchase now. If everyone always waited for the next thing around the corner, none of us would be building PCs









Fanboys are stupid. Company loyalty for the most part is stupid. Go with the best bang for the buck. And I doubt its going to be "ryzendozer", like, ever. I in fact think it will be 2 releases down from Intel that truly compete with Ryzen. And I'm no fanboy. Before this build I have exclusively used Intel CPUs. Why? Because they were the best bang for the buck. Bulldozer and the likes were a mess. The i5 2500K was a game changer. now the Ryzen 5/7 is the game changer this time. Pendulum swings back and fourth and back and fourth.

Same with Nvidia and AMD(or ATI if you wanna go there). They have both had game changers. The biggest IMO was the G92 and 8800GT from Nvidia. That changed things not just for builders (because when the 8800GT came out it blew EVERY SINGLE CARD AWAY, even nvidias own highly priced 300-400$ cards which was what the 7900GTX at the time?) for 200$ or less, plus thats when they realized you could take GPUs and seriously adopt them for things other than rendering things on a screen. That one actually rewrote the rule book for a lot of reasons. But then for us users the pendulum swung back to AMD for better bang/buck/performance, and back again, and on and on it goes.

WHEN THERE IS HEALTHY COMPETITION THAT IS. When there isn't you get what Intel has been putting out for the past couple years: almost complete stagnation.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kmac20*
> 
> This. Thats my point. Thank you.
> 
> And @kd5151 Fanboys will be fanboys. Of course something newer and better always comes along eventually. Its about buying the best thing possible for you when you go out to make the purchase. People can always scream that something better is around the corner, but that doesn't matter if I need to make the purchase now. If everyone always waited for the next thing around the corner, none of us would be building PCs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fanboys are stupid. Company loyalty for the most part is stupid. Go with the best bang for the buck. And I doubt its going to be "ryzendozer", like, ever. I in fact think it will be 2 releases down from Intel that truly compete with Ryzen. And I'm no fanboy. Before this build I have exclusively used Intel CPUs. Why? Because they were the best bang for the buck. Bulldozer and the likes were a mess. The i5 2500K was a game changer. now the Ryzen 5/7 is the game changer this time. Pendulum swings back and fourth and back and fourth.
> 
> Same with Nvidia and AMD(or ATI if you wanna go there). They have both had game changers. The biggest IMO was the G92 and 8800GT from Nvidia. That changed things not just for builders (because when the 8800GT came out it blew EVERY SINGLE CARD AWAY, even nvidias own highly priced 300-400$ cards which was what the 7900GTX at the time?) for 200$ or less, plus thats when they realized you could take GPUs and seriously adopt them for things other than rendering things on a screen. That one actually rewrote the rule book for a lot of reasons. But then for us users the pendulum swung back to AMD for better bang/buck/performance, and back again, and on and on it goes.
> 
> WHEN THERE IS HEALTHY COMPETITION THAT IS. When there isn't you get what Intel has been putting out for the past couple years: almost complete stagnation.


I couldn't agree more.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> But is it wise to sell my brand new 7700K and ASUS Z270 board and wait for the 8700K and ASUS Z370 board that'll come out?


If you already have the goods in use and have to sell them second hand, I wouldn't bother. If it's an incoming order that you can still cancel and you have time to wait, I would. When the 8700K arrives and you look back at now You'll say it was a no brainer to wait 2 more months. It looks like the cpu and mothersboards will be available somewhere by the end of october:

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/intel-z370-express-chipset-motherboard-list-surfaces.html


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> But is it wise to sell my brand new 7700K and ASUS Z270 board and wait for the 8700K and ASUS Z370 board that'll come out?


it would be wiser to invest into a better graphics card
or spent it on more SSD space really

and upgrade when you feel the need to

hell maybe delid the 7700k, slap 400-500Mhz on top and be fine for the next few years

I've come to the same problem really

I've waited for Vega, bought a 1060 to hold me over
now prices are inflated (and am kinda disappointed in Vega)
and until I really feel the need to upgrade my card Nvidia will come out with a new line

with the restrictions of a 1060 in my rig and not feeling the need to throw in a better card quite yet
a new CPU wouldn't make a lick of a difference
even a skylake-x 10 cores at 5Ghz


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> If you already have the goods in use and have to sell them second hand, I wouldn't bother. If it's an incoming order that you can still cancel and you have time to wait, I would. When the 8700K arrives and you look back at now You'll say it was a no brainer to wait 2 more months. It looks like the cpu and mothersboards will be available somewhere by the end of october:
> 
> http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/intel-z370-express-chipset-motherboard-list-surfaces.html


That's the thing. The CPU, board, and RAM kit are already on their way here (shipped) and I don't have any way to cancel. They're still brand new. Thanks for the link.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> it would be wiser to invest into a better graphics card
> or spent it on more SSD space really
> 
> and upgrade when you feel the need to
> 
> hell maybe delid the 7700k, slap 400-500Mhz on top and be fine for the next few years
> 
> I've come to the same problem really
> 
> I've waited for Vega, bought a 1060 to hold me over
> now prices are inflated (and am kinda disappointed in Vega)
> and until I really feel the need to upgrade my card Nvidia will come out with a new line
> 
> with the restrictions of a 1060 in my rig and not feeling the need to throw in a better card quite yet
> a new CPU wouldn't make a lick of a difference
> even a skylake-x 10 cores at 5Ghz


I already have a EVGA GTX 1080Ti FTW3 and a 500GB Samsung SSD. My Dell S2716DG is already on its way also so there's nothing more really to invest 

My Dr. Delid kit is also on its way. So picture it like this, all components that I have and will have are up-to-date already except for the 7700K which will be ousted by the 8700K when it becomes available. Hence my dilemma.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Can't you return them if they are unused/not opened.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> That's the thing. The CPU, board, and RAM kit are already on their way here (shipped) and I don't have any way to cancel. They're still brand new. Thanks for the link.
> 
> I already have a EVGA GTX 1080Ti FTW3 and a 500GB Samsung SSD. My Dell S2716DG is already on its way also so there's nothing more really to invest
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My Dr. Delid kit is also on its way. So picture it like this, all components that I have and will have are up-to-date already except for the 7700K which will be ousted by the 8700K when it becomes available. Hence my dilemma.


To put things in perspective, the singlethread performance of the 8700K is expected to be the same of the 7700K. So the thing you will be missing out on at best is the 2 extra cores. It's not a dealbreaker considering your setup and plans (gaming obviously considering your choice of graphics card) but it's up to you to consider how much that is worth to you.

Until now the 7700K with it's 4 cores has only rarely performance loss in games and by that I mean only during some peak moments in some specific games) but it's starting slowly and will grow over the next years to come. On top of that, if you're the kind of person that does not run with a clean installed Windows OS but rather many programs on it that eat off your cpu cores...

Up to you to decide how much your current choice will weigh on your consience. Fact is that for pure gaming the 7700K will remain the top dog along with 8700K for the next few years, especially with the delid. I delidded my 7700K recently and I'm very happy with it's performance @ 5Ghz. In addition It might take a while for delidding kits for 8700K to arrive..


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Can't you return them if they are unused/not opened.


The CPU is from an eBay seller that does not accept returns so that's a no there. The motherboard in turn can be returned to Amazon but I won't ship them back as it will be very costly for me. That's the problem when you don't live in the US but buy stuff from there.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> To put things in perspective, the singlethread performance of the 8700K is expected to be the same of the 7700K. So the thing you will be missing out on at best is the 2 extra cores. It's not a dealbreaker considering your setup and plans (gaming obviously considering your choice of graphics card) but it's up to you to consider how much that is worth to you.
> 
> Until now the 7700K with it's 4 cores has only rarely performance loss in games and by that I mean only during some peak moments in some specific games) but it's starting slowly and will grow over the next years to come. On top of that, if you're the kind of person that does not run with a clean installed Windows OS but rather many programs on it that eat off your cpu cores...
> 
> Up to you to decide how much your current choice will weigh on your consience. Fact is that for pure gaming the 7700K will remain the top dog along with 8700K for the next few years, especially with the delid. I delidded my 7700K recently and I'm very happy with it's performance @ 5Ghz. In addition It might take a while for delidding kits for 8700K to arrive..


Yeah, I understand. It's just that if you have the chance now why not go for it before even starting the build, right. But you're correct that it's really up to me to decide.

Oh, I thought the delid kits now are also compatible with the 8th gen cpu's as they practically use the same socket form (just 1151v2)?


----------



## profundido

not sure about the compatibility with existing delid kits. they might actually be compatible. The only thing confirmed so far is that existing motherboards are not compatible but that might be due to the pin ordering on the die rather than it's exact size


----------



## PontiacGTX

Well it seems only only cared about making everyone upgrade so if you were expecting more than 2 year cycle is better choice to get AMD









even if AMD refresh of Ryzen can do around 4.6GHz or so seems a better choice than any of the intel offering


----------



## TheWizardMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Well it seems only only cared about making everyone upgrade so if you were expecting more than 2 year cycle is better choice to get AMD


I have to admit I'm pretty disappointed. Money really isn't an issue for me, so if I want to upgrade I can without thinking about it. That being said, the principle of it really bothers me.

Also, I don't want to have to re-bend all my hardline tubes for a new mobo.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Well it seems only only cared about making everyone upgrade so if you were expecting more than 2 year cycle is better choice to get AMD
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *even if AMD refresh of Ryzen cna do around 4.6GHz or so seems a better choice than any of the intel offering*


Man, if only that had happened on launch of Ryzen... I would never look at Intel mainstream again, and perhaps not even Intel HEDT either. Here's to hoping for RyZen+.


----------



## Recipe7

I've been contemplating going from my 5820k to 8700k (I use this pc for daily use and gaming). I'm seeing that there is negligible gains comparing clock to clock (i'm running 4.5ghz at 1.28v), but what kind of gains should I be seeing if I run 8700k at 5ghz compared to 5820k at 4.5ghz? I'm running fairly cool on my noctua d-14 but I'm planning to put the 8700k under water to hit 5ghz+

I may also just put my 5820k under water and maybe hit 4.7ghz at some higher voltage since I seem to have a great clocker.

Can't decide


----------



## GreedyMuffin

No offence, but 4500 at 1.28V is not a great
clocker. 

My old 5820K did 4700 at the same voltage fully OCCT stable.

If you got the extra money, and want to upgrade, go for it!


----------



## Scotty99

Wonder how the people who bought a 7800x are going to feel when this 8700k releases, they spent 400 for a 6 core and probably 300 on a board and at least 200 on ram.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Recipe7*
> 
> I've been contemplating going from my 5820k to 8700k (I use this pc for daily use and gaming). I'm seeing that there is negligible gains comparing clock to clock (i'm running 4.5ghz at 1.28v), but *what kind of gains should I be seeing if I run 8700k at 5ghz compared to 5820k at 4.5ghz?* I'm running fairly cool on my noctua d-14 but I'm planning to put the 8700k under water to hit 5ghz+
> 
> I may also just put my 5820k under water and maybe hit 4.7ghz at some higher voltage since I seem to have a great clocker.
> 
> Can't decide


Likely higher minimums, averages, and max frames in games just like how 7700K leads all the HEDT CPUs in gaming benchmarks. This is what I like about the mainstream platform -- it's lean and with that you have potential to reduce latency much further than HEDT.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Wonder how the people who bought a 7800x are going to feel when this 8700k releases, they spent 400 for a 6 core and probably 300 on a board and at least 200 on ram.


I think those guys know what they're doing. They're just using the cheapest CPU to "get by" for now, until they save up enough money/work for the high core count CPUs, or when the high-core CPUs become more affordable near EOL.

Frugal devs, server admins, and enthusiasts still scoop up Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge xeons with high core counts for the very same reason.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Wonder how the people who bought a 7800x are going to feel when this 8700k releases, they spent 400 for a 6 core and probably 300 on a board and at least 200 on ram.


They can upgrade to an 18C at a later date if they wanted to.


----------



## Scotty99

Well im just thinking from my perspective. I am kind of itching to go to a 6c12t cpu that clocks high and intel has that on the market right now in the 7800x, but the 8700k is going to be cheaper, boards are going to be cheaper, memory is going to be cheaper and the 8700k is going to be faster. There are some people for sure that are going to be upset about this lol.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I am not. But probably because I can run mine at 4800++.
I like the HEDT platform. Longer lifespan, easy to upgrade to a higher core count CPU, quad-channel, plenty of lanes. Plus I got 20% off CPU, 6% off ram and bought the memory for half the price used. So the price difference is minimal, if any in my case.

Running the "cheap" ram at 3800-16-18-18-38-1T. (G.Skill Ripjaws V 3600).


----------



## agello24

not impressed. this seems like a panic move by intel.


----------



## ozlay

Hopefully it will lower the price of the 1900x so I can get one.


----------



## kd5151

https://videocardz.com/72230/intel-core-i7-8700k-spotted-alongside-asrock-z370-pro4


----------



## Scotty99

When did intel say release was early october? I dont recall ever reading that.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> When did intel say release was early october? I dont recall ever reading that.


in the lame video there was two coffee mugs that had the oct 2017 on them.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> in the lame video there was two coffee mugs that had the oct 2017 on them.


that is video cardz source? 2 coffee mugs







these are like the bottle of water from AMD which said Fiji lol


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> that is video cardz source? 2 coffee mugs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> these are like the bottle of water from AMD which said Fiji lol




Taken from the video Intel put out a couple of days ago. See the mug on the table and and the mug in the girls hand in the Background? Could be a easter egg. I dunno. Intel said in the fall. Edit: forgot a word.


----------



## Recipe7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> No offence, but 4500 at 1.28V is not a great
> clocker.
> 
> My old 5820K did 4700 at the same voltage fully OCCT stable.
> 
> If you got the extra money, and want to upgrade, go for it!


Im so offended you have no idea,









Was your 4.7 with a loop?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Likely higher minimums, averages, and max frames in games just like how 7700K leads all the HEDT CPUs in gaming benchmarks. This is what I like about the mainstream platform -- it's lean and with that you have potential to reduce latency much further than HEDT.
> I think those guys know what they're doing. They're just using the cheapest CPU to "get by" for now, until they save up enough money/work for the high core count CPUs, or when the high-core CPUs become more affordable near EOL.
> 
> Frugal devs, server admins, and enthusiasts still scoop up Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge xeons with high core counts for the very same reason.


I'll just have to wait for November to decide. I want to do my first loop, but I want to make sure I make it with the right build. I can't say no to 5-5.2ghz OC on 8700k, but I can say no to having to pay for that setup on top of the loop which will already cost me roughly 700usd.

Decisions decisions.


----------



## KenjiS

My 2 cents.. for whatever its worth

Really nice that Intel is finally offering a 6 core consumer product. But my heart just... I would still likely dump my money into a 1700X or 1900X instead because I'm kind of just salty with Intel

Yes I love my 6700k, but some things i do with my rig (Photo editing namely) really do use more threads and cores. Plus with more and more stuff like nVME storage using PCIe.. well... 16 lanes is a bit thin..

I however am usually ahead of the curve.. I put money into an Athlon X2 for a pure gaming machine because i knew dual core was going to be a thing and I bought a Core2Quad over a Duo to replace that. I wobbled a bunch back and forth between the 6700k and the 5820k when I built this last year.. looking back on it I have my days of regretting I didn't spring for the 5820 instead..

Feels a lot more like Intel has had to panic to counter AMD's moves..

Now Ryzen isnt perfect. But my money right now would still be on a Ryzen rig for myself.. even with Coffee Lake coming up


----------



## SuperZan

The plus with Ryzen is that if you buy a decent board, you can turn around and sell Ryzen v.1.0 for most of what you'd need for Ryzen+, all the while enjoying Ryzen's solid performance now. Coffee Lake will be nice, no doubt, and you'll still probably get another revision on Z370, but I think Ryzen has more low-hanging fruit to pick for Ryzen+ than is usual for Intel revisions.


----------



## Scotty99

Ya im still on the fence about coffee. My use case denotes fast cores but honestly id have to see some benchmarks first.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya im still on the fence about coffee. My use case denotes fast cores but honestly id have to see some benchmarks first.


In your case it's worth keeping in mind that you already have an AM4 platform, so if Ryzen+ can appreciably raise clock speeds and tune the arch a bit, you'll be looking at a SKL/KL/CFL-tier part anyway. If Ryzen works for you now, that's the path of least resistance, though I can understand the temptation. Benches will be illuminating.


----------



## CrazyHeaven

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well im just thinking from my perspective. I am kind of itching to go to a 6c12t cpu that clocks high and intel has that on the market right now in the 7800x, but the 8700k is going to be cheaper, boards are going to be cheaper, memory is going to be cheaper and the 8700k is going to be faster. There are some people for sure that are going to be upset about this lol.


I wouldn't be. I'm planning on building around the 8700k. I'd be happy if AMD manages to release something that does over 200% of the work of Coffee Lake. I wouldn't make any changes to the build I made. Just because it would be better than my cpu wouldn't change what my cpu could do. Ideally if I built it right it still meet or exceed my current needs. All that means is we get a nice war going so my next upgrade would be a huge one.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://videocardz.com/72230/intel-core-i7-8700k-spotted-alongside-asrock-z370-pro4


Thanks. So with this latest result on a consumer board, here's how the scaling looks now vs 2nd, 4th, and 6th generations:


From 6th to 8th, nearly 50% so no IPC gains just the two extra cores and HT.
From 4th to 8th, there's nearly a 30% IPC gain alone.


----------



## wutang61

Bottom line of coffee: Thanks AMD. If Ryzen wasn't here, this thread wouldn't be. I wish IBM or ARM would reenter/enter the desktop/HEDT marketplace. The intel one and only is getting as old as Nvidia as the "sole" gpu maker. Patiently waiting for the ipc wars to begin again. Just as the GHZ wars of yesteryear. Amd is back in the game and frankly it's about time. Although all that was accomplished was catch up. It's pretty disgusting im sitting on a 6 year/3 generations+ old platform and everything on the market to be still qualifies as a sidegrade without spending 2 thousand dollars.

Here's hoping for a brighter future. For all of us. Red,Green,or Blue.


----------



## Scotty99

I mean its a nice thought that AMD forced intels hand, but i dont think thats how it went down. This was probably planned well before intel knew about ryzen given the ultrabook SKU's.


----------



## BoredErica

I think Ryzen did have an effect. It's too much of a coincidence. It takes time to bring a product to market, but if need be I think Intel can move things up. Plus, Zen was announced a long time ago.


----------



## Scotty99

Skylake x was a reaction to ryzen 100%, but i personally think 8th gen was going to be this either way.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Skylake x was a reaction to ryzen 100%, but i personally think 8th gen was going to be this either way.


yes but I think it would've been a q3/q4 2018 release not fall 2017. this is obviously because of Ryzen.


----------



## Scotty99

Well release date sure, i am talking (and i think everyone here as well) about core counts rising.

When ryzen launched it embarassed broadwell e and intel had to fix that pronto. Just because ryzen matches up more pricewise to the mainstream does not mean that is its closest competitor.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well release date sure, i am talking (and i think everyone here as well) about core counts rising.
> 
> When ryzen launched it embarassed broadwell e and intel had to fix that pronto. Just because ryzen matches up more pricewise to the mainstream does not mean that is its closest competitor.


This feels really refreshing. it's been a long time since there was any competition. the last time AMD had a competetive cpu was with the 1090T/1055T Thuban CPU. sure it had an IPC disadvantage but was actually faster with multithreadded apps and the 1055t was really well priced


----------



## Scotty99

Yea its great for everyone really, now the software needs to catch up : )

I will say tho, intel holding onto 4 cores for so long does say a lot about how important clock speed is. I dont know a ton about software but my guess is a lot of it (including some games) are still going to work best on one fast thread. This is why a 6c12t 5ghz cpu makes more sense to me than a 4ghz 8c16t.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well im just thinking from my perspective. I am kind of itching to go to a 6c12t cpu that clocks high and intel has that on the market right now in the 7800x, but the 8700k is going to be cheaper, boards are going to be cheaper, memory is going to be cheaper and the 8700k is going to be faster. There are some people for sure that are going to be upset about this lol.


I bought a g skill 3200MHz C14 2x8gb RAM kit supposedly for my 7700K. If I decide to go with 8800K, is the RAM kit still one of the optimal ones to use for the Z370 platform? The IMC of the 8700K would probably be stronger, I know.


----------



## Scotty99

Im curious about that as well. I know z170 memory works at xmp fine in 270 boards, but really not sure about how ram compatibility will go down with coffee.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> I bought a g skill 3200MHz C14 2x8gb RAM kit supposedly for my 7700K. If I decide to go with 8800K, is the RAM kit still one of the optimal ones to use for the Z370 platform? The IMC of the 8700K would probably be stronger, I know.


my cheap RAM rated 2133 works easily at 3200 with my kaby (though admittedly with more loose timings, but then testing RAM stability takes a long time to be sure)

I truly believe "compatible" RAM kits are one of marketings biggest wins these days

please, 3200 is nothing

if you want to push past 4000, especially a good amount past 4000, maybe it matters, but then a more stable UEFI (Bios) would matter a whole lot more (there are threads and people here who have shown that even binning boards is important for really good memory OC)


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> my cheap RAM rated 2133 works easily at 3200 with my kaby (though admittedly with more loose timings, but then testing RAM stability takes a long time to be sure)
> 
> I truly believe "compatible" RAM kits are one of marketings biggest wins these days
> 
> please, 3200 is nothing
> 
> if you want to push past 4000, especially a good amount past 4000, maybe it matters, but then a more stable UEFI (Bios) would matter a whole lot more (there are threads and people here who have shown that even binning boards is important for really good memory OC)


Ok. So are you saying that I keep my 320p kit and just OC the hell out of it with the 8700K/Z370 platform if ever I go with it?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

So this Covfefe Lake is not a new architecture or is it? When is the next new architecture coming? I want IPC + new node + more cores from Intel.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> So this Covfefe Lake is not a new architecture or is it? When is the next new architecture coming? I want IPC + new node + more cores from Intel.


Skylake architecture probably same as Skylake S and the numbers are exaggerated


----------



## Bloodcore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> So this Covfefe Lake is not a new architecture or is it? When is the next new architecture coming? I want IPC + new node + more cores from Intel.


Unless it happens to be a backported cannonlake, you'll have to wait a couple more years.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> This feels really refreshing. it's been a long time since there was any competition. the last time AMD had a competetive cpu was with the 1090T/1055T Thuban CPU. sure it had an IPC disadvantage but was actually faster with multithreadded apps and the 1055t was really well priced


The 1055T was a $199 dollar cpu selling at $150 ish at the time. Bulldozer sent AMD backwards. And the piledriver FX-6300 was a improved version of the 1055T which was $140. The 6 ccores gave the i3 a run for its money. But AMD had a hard time competing against the i5 and a even harder time with the i7. This time around I Think has a product that can stand up to i5's and i7's and then some. Thank cpu gods for threadripper.


----------



## kd5151

http://wccftech.com/intel-core-i7-8700k-cpu-benchmarks-leak-faster-than-8-core-ryzen/

Enter at your own risk.


----------



## Scotty99

Ya when both are overclocked to the max the 8700k should be on par with a 1700. Gotta remember tho, ive seen 1700 as low as 270 dollars, thats going to be close to 100 dollars less than 8700k. Single core of course is going to be same story as 7700k vs ryzen.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya when both are overclocked to the max the 8700k should be on par with a 1700. Gotta remember tho, ive seen 1700 as low as 270 dollars, thats going to be close to 100 dollars less than 8700k. Single core of course is going to be same story as 7700k vs ryzen.


+ z370mobo + aftermarket cooling.







- cheaper memory.


----------



## Scotty99

Ya honestly the only reason i bought an aftermarket cooler was to try to see how high i could go, i should probably just sell it and go back to 3.8 with stock cooler lol.


----------



## Scotty99

Sooo i know unrelated, but i just picked up a PNY 240gb ssd on ebay for 64.99 after promo code posteclipse15. 15 bucks off basically anything on ebay. SSD i got was from refurbforless seller, going into my HTPC.


----------



## Nick the Slick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Sooo i know unrelated, but i just picked up a PNY 240gb ssd on ebay for 64.99 after promo code posteclipse15. 15 bucks off basically anything on ebay. SSD i got was from refurbforless seller, going into my HTPC.


I don't know whether to be sad or pissed at how stupid I am. I never look at the eBay home page so I had no idea about this code. Literally just ordered a Galaxy s8 this morning and now I can't cancel the order and reorder or anything.


----------



## Scotty99

Ouch lol. If it makes you feel better i never look either, i just sign up for slick deals notifications, crazy good deals on there sometimes.


----------



## IMI4tth3w

I can see why people are happy about the competition between AMD and Intel, which i agree is good. But I really hope Intel has their ducks in a row for when coffee lake releases. Need i remind you the crazyness that was the Ryzen launch with the TONS of bugs with motherboards. Then we had Intel rush out their Broadwell-E line and the VRM issues there.

I don't want coffee lake to be rushed. I want to get it when it is released, and i want to have none of these issues. If Ryzen causes Intel to rush this release, and it ends up full of issues and bugs, i'll be a sad panda.

Is it worth the earlier launch when the first adapters get faulty motherboards that later revisions and people who wait don't have to deal with? I just hope Intel will be more prepared this time. I don't seem to recall many issues at all over the last couple years with the last mainstream chip releases from Intel having many day 1 issues as they have been working on their own time.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Coffee Lake is looking sweet for sure. Nice to see Intel finally being pushed to ditch the "quad core as mainstream" policy of the past decade. A hexa with even better IPC than KL and the same headroom will make for a monster all-around setup. Too bad about the incompatibility however.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Coffee Lake is looking sweet for sure. Nice to see Intel finally being pushed to ditch the "quad core as mainstream" policy of the past decade. A hexa with even better IPC than KL and the same headroom will make for a monster all-around setup. Too bad about the incompatibility however.


I am really curious if there is any IPC lead. The lead from wccftech shows that there is no improvement in R15 Cinebench and others for single threaded benchmark.

And those who bought or are gunning for the 7740K (such as stroonz ). Good luck to them. 8700K already crush the 7800X. I feel those who spent $300+ getting their ripped off 7740K, which is only as fast as a i3-8350K, will definitely regret big time.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> I am really curious if there is any IPC lead. The lead from wccftech shows that there is no improvement in R15 Cinebench and others for single threaded benchmark.


no intel just glued a 4.3 ghz 7350k to the 7700k and called it 8700k.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> no intel just glued a 4.3 ghz 7350k to the 7700k and called it 8700k.


I will still buy this over the ripped off 7740K which cost way more expensive than any mainstream offering.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> I will still buy this over the ripped off 7740K which cost way more expensive than any mainstream offering.


K or X or FX-7740X.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> http://wccftech.com/intel-core-i7-8700k-cpu-benchmarks-leak-faster-than-8-core-ryzen/
> 
> Enter at your own risk.


Updated OP:


----------



## Zyther

Going by that, the 8700k is just behind the 7700k in single threads, OCing the 8700k to match the 7700k would then show better single thread, so IPC improvement confirmed?


----------



## delboy67

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zyther*
> 
> Going by that, the 8700k is just behind the 7700k in single threads, OCing the 8700k to match the 7700k would then show better single thread, so IPC improvement confirmed?


7700k is 4.5ghz single core turbo and 8700k is 4.7ghz so it looks like a small regression in single thread.


----------



## Zyther

True, I was looking at base.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I'm happy about the results. My 7800X at 4800 get 1610/215 in CB R15.


----------



## BoredErica

Uhh... what version of the Fritz benchmark are we talking about here?


----------



## adversary

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *delboy67*
> 
> 7700k is 4.5ghz single core turbo and 8700k is 4.7ghz so it looks like a small regression in single thread.


is turbo frequency time limited? so after a maybe little time period, it downclocks at base frequency (which is lower in 8700K compared to 7700K).


----------



## Gauanqh6764

..


----------



## adversary

that this is strange. it is same arhitecture and same cache sistem, it should't perform worse even at same clock, moreover not with 200Mhz more, which sound little disappointing.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *delboy67*
> 
> 7700k is 4.5ghz single core turbo and 8700k is 4.7ghz so it looks like a small regression in single thread.


So far I see its single core 4.5GHz boost from the same site, so I am thinking it is the same IPC.

I was wondering the definition of IPC and Intel marketing for 11% improvement in IPC. I know it means Instruction Per-Clock, but could it be applied to context outside single core, it could be comparing multicore threading performance at the same clock?

If the communication and latency between the cores are improved, does that considered as an IPC improvement.


----------



## TMatzelle60

When is the desktops releasing i want to build a new PC 7700K and gtx 1070 but i wonder how close this is to being out


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> When is the desktops releasing i want to build a new PC 7700K and gtx 1070 but i wonder how close this is to being out


Probably in 3 months or 1 quarter period.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Probably in 3 months or 1 quarter period.


would i be stupid on buying a 7700K for gaming and streaming right now? I mean i dont need the 6 core i7


----------



## SuperZan

If you're doing low-intensity streaming or maybe using your GPU and don't mind the lower quality, it should be sufficient. If you're serious about streaming, Coffee Lake or Ryzen 5 would be more able at that particular task.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> If you're doing low-intensity streaming or maybe using your GPU and don't mind the lower quality, it should be sufficient. If you're serious about streaming, Coffee Lake or Ryzen 5 would be more able at that particular task.


Thanks. Streaming will be mostly gaming i mean would the 7700K be fine for gaming for a couple of years with a 1080 @ 1080P


----------



## Paxi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> The plus with Ryzen is that if you buy a decent board, you can turn around and sell Ryzen v.1.0 for most of what you'd need for Ryzen+, all the while enjoying Ryzen's solid performance now. Coffee Lake will be nice, no doubt, and you'll still probably get another revision on Z370, but I think Ryzen has more low-hanging fruit to pick for Ryzen+ than is usual for Intel revisions.


Is there any information yet about "Ryzen+" running on AM4 boards?


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Thanks. Streaming will be mostly gaming i mean would the 7700K be fine for gaming for a couple of years with a 1080 @ 1080P


Yeah, a 7700k and a 1080 will last for a good while at 1080p. 720p/30FPS streaming shouldn't be an issue, and you can probably manage 60FPS in some scenarios.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paxi*
> 
> Is there any information yet about "Ryzen+" running on AM4 boards?


http://wccftech.com/amd-zen-ryzen-naples-processors-four-years-roadmap/

In short, Zen is going to be iterated on several times on 14nm (until 2020) and with what we know of AMD's segmentation scheme (Ryzen, TR, Epyc) there is no pending platform change on the mainstream AM4 which would require changes to the socket nor is AMD likely to merge the mainstream and HEDT/server platforms given that Ryzen mainstream is PGA while the others are LGA. Add to that AMD's history of socket consistency and, unless specifically stated otherwise, the most efficient technological and financial decision is to iterate on Zen within the context of the AM4 platform.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Yeah, a 7700k and a 1080 will last for a good while at 1080p. 720p/30FPS streaming shouldn't be an issue, and you can probably manage 60FPS in some scenarios.
> 
> http://wccftech.com/amd-zen-ryzen-naples-processors-four-years-roadmap/
> 
> In short, Zen is going to be iterated on several times on 14nm (until 2020) and with what we know of AMD's segmentation scheme (Ryzen, TR, Epyc) there is no pending platform change on the mainstream AM4 which would require changes to the socket nor is AMD likely to merge the mainstream and HEDT/server platforms given that Ryzen mainstream is PGA while the others are LGA. Add to that AMD's history of socket consistency and, unless specifically stated otherwise, the most efficient technological and financial decision is to iterate on Zen within the context of the AM4 platform.


Thanks if it wasnt for the 3 month wait of not having a gaming pc i would. Honestly in some games that i would be running 60FPS if there is a 10 percent increase ill only gain about 6 fps not a game changer and higher boost but like i said kind of to far off ill probably keep my order coming.

My build (Currently in transit)

Fractal Design Core 500
Intel Core i7 7700K
Asus Z270i Strix
Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB DDR4 Red
Asus GTX1080 Turbo
Corsair SF450
Fractal Design Celsius S24

When can we expect AMD to make the AMD Ryzen+ or next gen?


----------



## Scotty99

Its still not 100% confirmed these wont slot into a z270 board. You could build your PC and put in a pentium g4400 for ~35 bucks for now, if 8700k isnt compatible you could just sell it off on ebay later and get the 7700k.


----------



## Tojara

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *adversary*
> 
> that this is strange. it is same arhitecture and same cache sistem, it should't perform worse even at same clock, moreover not with 200Mhz more, which sound little disappointing.


L3 latency has likely gone up, or the need to two hops in L3 brings the core down a bit. I suspect there are a fair amount of small changes like that to maintain the power use at given clocks reasonable compared to last gen.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> So far I see its single core 4.5GHz boost from the same site, so I am thinking it is the same IPC.
> 
> I was wondering the definition of IPC and Intel marketing for 11% improvement in IPC. I know it means Instruction Per-Clock, but could it be applied to context outside single core, it could be comparing multicore threading performance at the same clock?
> 
> If the communication and latency between the cores are improved, does that considered as an IPC improvement.


They are likely not improved, if anything changes to reduce power are more likely with slight regressions to latency and bandwidth. Coffee Lake seems little more than Kaby with more cores, so the IPC claim seems like hot air (wasn't it an performance per thread claim in the first place?), or only applies to very specific applications. Larger L3 helped older HEDT CPUs with similar cache hierarchy a lot in specific applications, so I wouldn't be surprised to see that a few cases.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> If the communication and latency between the cores are improved, does that considered as an IPC improvement.


There is no strict definition, but anything that gets you to execute code faster at the same clock speed could be considered an IPC improvement. If you really wanted to you could well pick a multithreaded bench as a comparison point and advertise multithread scaling improvement as single-thread improvement, especially as we haven't seen the full slides.

By picking benchmarks you can make 6700k 50% faster per clock than a 4770k, but that doesn't mean it actually is. Without specific reliable benchmarks I wouldn't say for sure, but the ones on the last page indicate little (low single-digit) to no single-core IPC improvement in general.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Thanks if it wasnt for the 3 month wait of not having a gaming pc i would. Honestly in some games that i would be running 60FPS if there is a 10 percent increase ill only gain about 6 fps not a game changer and higher boost but like i said kind of to far off ill probably keep my order coming.
> 
> My build (Currently in transit)
> 
> Fractal Design Core 500
> Intel Core i7 7700K
> Asus Z270i Strix
> Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB DDR4 Red
> Asus GTX1080 Turbo
> Corsair SF450
> Fractal Design Celsius S24
> 
> When can we expect AMD to make the AMD Ryzen+ or next gen?


Next year. What we get depends on whether there is a refresh of Zen, and if there are no significant delays it's not unreasonable to expect first Zen 2 CPUs by the end of the year. I'd hardly just immediately on anything brand new AMD nor Intel, launches without availability/price/feature issues are pretty few and far between.


----------



## rudyae86

Hmm time to upgrade my 4790k?

RAM prices though are high right now....

I'm itcing to start a new build and give this PC to my little brother...


----------



## nanotm

the leaked versions of the coffee lake lineup look like they just took the current chips altered them slightly and downgraded them all 1 tier and then gave them a new number, not that this is a new tactic from intel but it is funny seeing all the fans lining up to pay even more money for the same chips...


----------



## Gauanqh6764

..


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nanotm*
> 
> the leaked versions of the coffee lake lineup look like they just took the current chips altered them slightly and downgraded them all 1 tier and then gave them a new number, not that this is a new tactic from intel but it is funny seeing all the fans lining up to pay even more money for the same chips...


I think we all agree that the Intel hexacore for the mainstream socket should have arrived way sooner, perhaps with Haswell, but what I see here is the half full / empty glass mentality. I rather say they upgraded the chips one tier, especially because the i7 got 2 extra cores. How's that a downgrade? We are not talking the HEDT line.

The other point is: according to leaked benchs, the i7-8700K will compete if not surpass the R7 1700 in many cases, especially in games and Adobe / Office tasks, when it will perform way better. And it is supposedly tied with the R7 1700 on Cinebench multithread.

So it seems that the i7-8700K will be a much stronger choice than a R7 in many cases. Not to mention the lack of bugs, which still persists with Ryzen, and they are simply dreaded by studios and designers.

All in all, the market will have strong options by the end of the year. My only thing though is that the hexacore took so long that it can leave the market with a bitter taste and people already ask for an octacore the following year. They took too long to release it.


----------



## CriticalOne

In retrospect a 8700k would have probably been a better fit for me, but it wasn't around when I needed to upgrade and it looking to be a bit more expensive anyway.

Oh well. I game a whole lot less nowadays and my workflow runs great on the 1700. I'll look into increasing my DRAM speeds and getting the 1700 to around 3.8Ghz and just use it until I feel the need for a replacement.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> would i be stupid on buying a 7700K for gaming and streaming right now? I mean i dont need the 6 core i7


Of course not. Just because something new comes out does not mean that the current hardware its replacing gets slower. The 7700K will be a fantastic CPU for years to come (I still consider my ancient 2600K to be a decently powerful CPU even today).


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rudyae86*
> 
> Hmm time to upgrade my 4790k?
> 
> RAM prices though are high right now....
> 
> I'm itcing to start a new build and give this PC to my little brother...


What's wrong with your 4790K exactly, besides you just wanting to build something new? That is still a very high end CPU when you consider the average PC setup people are using today.


----------



## nanotm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> I think we all agree that the Intel hexacore for the mainstream socket should have arrived way sooner, perhaps with Haswell, but what I see here is the half full / empty glass mentality. I rather say they upgraded the chips one tier, especially because the i7 got 2 extra cores. How's that a downgrade? We are not talking the HEDT line.
> 
> The other point is: according to leaked benchs, the i7-8700K will compete if not surpass the R7 1700 in many cases, especially in games and Adobe / Office tasks, when it will perform way better. And it is supposedly tied with the R7 1700 on Cinebench multithread.
> 
> So it seems that the i7-8700K will be a much stronger choice than a R7 in many cases. Not to mention the lack of bugs, which still persists with Ryzen, and they are simply dreaded by studios and designers.
> 
> All in all, the market will have strong options by the end of the year. My only thing though is that the hexacore took so long that it can leave the market with a bitter taste and people already ask for an octacore the following year. They took too long to release it.


theres a lot of rumours about what the new line up will be,

by the time it comes out if things go as currently "leaked" then zen 1.5 or 2.0 will be coming out around the same time, and intel will end up playing catch up again.... I don't really care so long as the price of cpus starts falling to a more reasonably level then they can have at it.

but intel has form for taking a current lineup of hardware changing the numbers on the cpu lids and sending it out as if they were a whole new line up because they felt they had to push something out the door ...

on the other hand you have amd that basically sat around doing nothing with current chips whilst it was working on zen, which left intel releasing its lineup time and again with ever increasing prices and daft people constantly buying everything to get another epeen badge and maybe see a couple of higher scores in some benchmark..... for the last decade the GPU and ram has been more important than the cpu


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nanotm*
> 
> by the time it comes out if things go as currently "leaked" then zen 1.5 or 2.0 will be coming out around the same time


From what I see, they might go for a Ryzen refresh in early 2018. Coffee Lake will come this fall. They will have several months to sell. By the time a Ryzen refresh is released, they can relese an i3 with HT. So they will keep trading blows and the prices will drop. If Intel don't screw up (and these companies usually do), they can remain competitive. But they have to be agressive, because if Ryzen 2 or a refresh comes bug free, they will have a hard time if they keep thinking they are the boss.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> would i be stupid on buying a 7700K for gaming and streaming right now? I mean i dont need the 6 core i7


You will heartbroken because the much cheaper 8350K which is an i3 will perform as fast as ur 7700K. You are talking about smth less than $200.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> You will heartbroken because the much cheaper 8350K which is an i3 will perform as fast as ur 7700K. You are talking about smth less than $200.


It will perform as fast as a 7600K, not a 7700K, especially for streaming. The 8350K stands no chance against a 7700K.


----------



## Scotty99

Actually 4c4t is fine for streaming, that has been completely overblown by reviewers and their ryzen testing. Using the preset OBS is most optimized at, you can easily stream on an i5.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Actually 4c4t is fine for streaming, that has been completely overblown by reviewers and their ryzen testing. Using the preset OBS is most optimized at, you can easily stream on an i5.


Regardless, it won't match a 7700K.


----------



## Scotty99

Well ive seen two different leaks on i3's lol. One had them with hyperthreading, one didnt. Maybe both are right and the higher end i3's have hyperthreading? I mean they did that with pentium line up this gen, who knows.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> http://wccftech.com/intel-coffee-lake-core-i3-8350k-cpu-benchmarks-leak/
> 
> What if this turns to be true?


I don't know if this has been brought up already, but this particular leak is not true.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Leaked-benchmark-shows-lower-clocked-i3-8350K-has-slightly-better-single-core-performance-than-i7-7700K.244558.0.html
Quote:


> One of our readers (FHWu) has alerted us to a thread on the Chinese forum, Tieba. In this thread, the *originator of the leak admits to faking the information using a current commercial Intel processor* and reportedly using registry edits to trick programs into presenting the wrong CPU name.


Here's the original thread that the images came from: http://tieba.baidu.com/p/5290271400?pid=111061966888&cid=0#111061966888

Using translate, you can see some of the forum members discussing the faked results. In truth, it was an overclocked 4790K presumably with HT disabled.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> Regardless, it won't match a 7700K.


I am sure there will be a 4C 8T Processor and I can forsee it will rival 7700K.

As the 6 cores are taking up the moniker of I7 and I5. That quad core CPU will be a I3, hence a 7700K will be considered as a I3 as well. Whatever it is, it is not a good time to get a 7700K unless CFL is schedule for next year release.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> I don't know if this has been brought up already, but this particular leak is not true.
> 
> https://www.notebookcheck.net/Leaked-benchmark-shows-lower-clocked-i3-8350K-has-slightly-better-single-core-performance-than-i7-7700K.244558.0.html
> Here's the original thread that the images came from: http://tieba.baidu.com/p/5290271400?pid=111061966888&cid=0#111061966888
> 
> Using translate, you can see some of the forum members discussing the faked results. In truth, it was an overclocked 4790K presumably with HT disabled.


I still strongly advise you not to recommend 7700K and misled ppl into buying them at this point of time as it is, from a monetary POV, just not worth it. An I5 CPU from 8th gen will definitely crushed the 7700K, so it is definitely not even the standard of I5.

I would rather they try to get a 2nd-hand 6700K from ebay/amazon and use it first. Though if u can wait, just wait, it is not that long.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> I still strongly advise you not to recommend 7700K and misled ppl into buying them at this point of time as it is, from a monetary POV, just not worth it. An I5 CPU from 8th gen will definitely crushed the 7700K, so it is definitely not even the standard of I5.
> 
> I would rather they try to get a 2nd-hand 6700K from ebay/amazon and use it first. Though if u can wait, just wait, it is not that long.


Did I anywhere recommend a 7700K?

Here's an official statement on the 7700K: don't buy it; wait for an 8700K, or go used like you recommend. The 7700K was never really worth buying if you could get a 6700K for cheaper.

However, no 8th gen i3 is going to match it; they can be considered current gen i5s, not current gen i7s. Even that fake benchmark shows the 7700K winning by 33% in multithread. It's not in the same performance tier. SMT/HT is not a trivial difference.

I also don't think that it's going to be crushed by an i5. It should be about equal across a lot of use cases. The i5 probably will be faster on average, but it's going to be close.


----------



## kd5151




----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> So far I see its single core 4.5GHz boost from the same site, so I am thinking it is the same IPC.
> 
> I was wondering the definition of IPC and Intel marketing for 11% improvement in IPC. I know it means Instruction Per-Clock, but could it be applied to context outside single core, it could be comparing multicore threading performance at the same clock?
> 
> If the communication and latency between the cores are improved, does that considered as an IPC improvement.


Where did Intel claim 11% higher IPC?


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> Did I anywhere recommend a 7700K?
> 
> Here's an official statement on the 7700K: don't buy it; wait for an 8700K, or go used like you recommend. The 7700K was never really worth buying if you could get a 6700K for cheaper.
> 
> However, no 8th gen i3 is going to match it; they can be considered current gen i5s, not current gen i7s. Even that fake benchmark shows the 7700K winning by 33% in multithread. It's not in the same performance tier. SMT/HT is not a trivial difference.
> 
> I also don't think that it's going to be crushed by an i5. It should be about equal across a lot of use cases. The i5 probably will be faster on average, but it's going to be close.


There are some inconsistencies here. First, that fake benchmark is not that fake. The 33% underscore in MT is roughly what a current i5 is capable of, and the Coffee Lake i3 will be just like any current i5 with the advantage of being unlocked and with higher clocks IIRC. So what you say it is not true. The i3 will be very competitive for the price, especially if they release later on a premium version with HT, which would be basically a current i7-7700K.

And second, 6/6 will be better than 4/8 no doubt about it, so the Coffee Lake i5 will be better than an i7-7700K if it clocks to 5Ghz as well. Even if it loses some 200mhz to the 7700K, in general the two extra cores will be more valuable. I might be wrong on this one, but even it the i5 loses some frames to the 7700K, I would still prefer the six cores for a more smooth gaming experience.

Oh, and yes, to buy an i7-7700K at this point is to shoot your own foot. The leaked benchmarks are showing the i7-8700K as a little beast.


----------



## jprovido

I'm getting the 8700k asap and will just give my 7700k+motherboard to my brother. his i5 3570k is showing its age


----------



## Cybertox

We have had 6 core processors since what feels like forever, what is needed are 8 to 10 core CPUs without completely dumped frequencies.

Also, first time that I come across a modern CPU with only 1 thread per core instead of 2 threads.


----------



## azanimefan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Where did Intel claim 11% higher IPC?


https://videocardz.com/72112/intel-claims-i7-8700k-to-be-11-faster-than-7700k

Right here. Granted IPC never appears, but this is where that 11% number seems to have come from. They also apparently claimed a 51% multithread improvement.

the 11% number appears to be completely false judging by the early benches. If anything single thread IPC might be lower. And there are 50% more cores/threads, so unless their multithreaded number was talking about number of cores and not any objective measure of the performance...


----------



## Cyph3r

So... When can we buy Coffee Lake CPUs?


----------



## Nightbird

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyph3r*
> 
> So... When can we buy Coffee Lake CPUs?


September


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Of course not. Just because something new comes out does not mean that the current hardware its replacing gets slower. The 7700K will be a fantastic CPU for years to come (I still consider my ancient 2600K to be a decently powerful CPU even today).


knowing coffee lake is just few months ago and knowing intel rendered useless all the compatibility seems like a waste of money when coffee lake could be slighly higher priced than a 7700k while having 50% higher core count and a longer lifespan of compatibility
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> I am sure there will be a 4C 8T Processor and I can forsee it will rival 7700K.
> 
> As the 6 cores are taking up the moniker of I7 and I5. That quad core CPU will be a I3, hence a 7700K will be considered as a I3 as well. Whatever it is, it is not a good time to get a 7700K unless CFL is schedule for next year release.


well from the rumours there is no space for 4c-4t since the 8350k is 4c-4t unless intel decides to make a 8370k(sounds similar to the FX CPU) and probably the people wouldnt buy the 8350k and it would be really close in price unless intel changed their pricing and puts 6c/6t for nearly 300usd the 4c/8t for 200-240 and the 4c-4t for 150-170


----------



## Nautilus

Too bad Intel will release X470 chipset with their next CPU and make Coffee Lake incompatible with it. I'm fed up with this. All this greediness from Intel makes me one step closer to AMD and AM4 platform for my next upgrade.

Knowing that I'll be safe until 2020 and there will be several compatible CPU upgrades in the coming years is much better than %5 better IPC.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nautilus*
> 
> Too bad Intel will release X470 chipset with their next CPU and make Coffee Lake incompatible with it. I'm fed up with this. All this greediness from Intel makes me one step closer to AMD and AM4 platform for my next upgrade.
> 
> Knowing that I'll be safe until 2020 and there will be several compatible CPU upgrades in the coming years is much better than %5 better IPC.


Wait coffee lake should have at least 1 compatible CPU generation more which should be CannonLake


----------



## nanotm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Wait coffee lake should have at least 1 compatible CPU generation more which should be CannonLake


thought they already announced cannon is either ditched or part of the new architecture and its on a totally separate socket to existing chips along with announcing them pushing it back another 12 months while they try and jury rig the coffee range, and that cannon itself wil llikely only have one refresh before yet another socket change between now and 2020 (or at least that's what I read last week on several "new" sites)


----------



## pas008

I still dont understand why people complain about buying new mobo for new generation cpus
yes be nice to have backwards compatibility but from my years of building you get new mobo eventually for newer features(even though how little it is) or building another pc with old cpu and its been always easier to sell


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pas008*
> 
> I still dont understand why people complain about buying new mobo for new generation cpus
> yes be nice to have backwards compatibility but from my years of building you get new mobo eventually for newer features(even though how little it is) or building another pc with old cpu and its been always easier to sell


+1


----------



## svenge

People tend to forget that Intel actually adds new features to their updated chipsets. One example would be Intel adding native USB 3.0 support to their motherboards as early as Ivy Bridge's Z77 in 2012, while AMD's aging 900-series chipset (which was their top-end product up through early this year) only supported the 2.0 version and required slower 3rd-party controllers for their motherboards to get USB 3.0 ports.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pas008*
> 
> I still dont understand why people complain about buying new mobo for new generation cpus
> yes be nice to have backwards compatibility but from my years of building you get new mobo eventually for newer features(even though how little it is) or building another pc with old cpu and its been always easier to sell


the z370 (first round of boards coming out this year) is a rebranded z270
no new features
next year will bring USB 3.1 *gen 2* over this year's USB 3.1 *gen 1*
as far as I know that's about it (for desktop at least)
integrating wifi more instead of having it as a third party chip isn't going to be interesting at all, except on mobile

the "jump" from z170 to z270 brought newer features that aren't even worth mentioning

to put it another way

we're not talking sandy bridge to coffee lake backwards support

we're talking about the third iteration of skylake on a 1151 Socket
no one would even look at coffee lake at this point weren't it for the 2 additional cores

and that's why people complain
there is no magical jump in IPC
no whoa awesome more features

why can't coffee lake fit into z170/z270 when a 7700k can be made for x299?
just because Intel doesn't want to


----------



## nanotm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pas008*
> 
> I still dont understand why people complain about buying new mobo for new generation cpus
> yes be nice to have backwards compatibility but from my years of building you get new mobo eventually for newer features(even though how little it is) or building another pc with old cpu and its been always easier to sell


perhaps because you spent £400 on a top of the line ROG mobo and another £600 on a i7 cpu and latest top of the line ram and your not happy with needing to spend the same amount again to get an extra couple of hundred MHz out of the new stuff when it could of been issued on the same socket and your mobo maker could of just issued a new bios update.....

I bought an am3 mobo and the phenom ii x6 1055t chip in 2010 and its still running today, its moved to one of my kids who only got the 1055t in 2015 when I upgraded to the fx8350 because I needed a better chip for rendering work loads (and I begrudge forking out the prices intel charges) that's over 7 years of using the same amd socket
I was annoyed when they announced ryzen as am4 because it meant any new upgrades was going to mean ddr4 (never mind its benefits) and that's yet more expense on top, indeed if amd hadnt been charging peanuts for their older kit back In the 2001>2007 era I would of been supremely annoyed at how often they swapped socket on kit and they learned from that mistake....

theres no reason why intel cant make all their last 7 years worth of chips on a single socket size, amd did it for years, just by working out that the chip we are currently dreaming of will be this 940 pin monster so lets make all our current line up fit that universal socket size just without all the pins on current chips .... it saves them time and effort it saves them money and it saves their board partners lots of cash as well... all of which gets passed on to the consumer as savings in the end user price tag of the bits n bobs...

yes every year or two a new connection standard will get ratified and start getting used so folks will be encouraged to upgrade their motherboard, but that's all they have to buy, not new everything to fit on it as well ..... intel have been fleecing people for years and bribing people to hush things up for years, there so prolific they almost got banned from selling or making products in the EU over it, in the end they got let off with a fine, (but hey that's another good reason not to buy their overpriced hardware, you just paying their trillion euro fine or is it multiples I know they've been fined several times lol)

and yes I've bought new mobos to give new connectivity in the last 7 years and even bought new cpu's for better performance and I'll do it again in the future but I wont be forced to keep buying other bits everytime because the socket changed as well ....


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> There are some inconsistencies here. First, that fake benchmark is not that fake. The 33% underscore in MT is roughly what a current i5 is capable of, and the Coffee Lake i3 will be just like any current i5 with the advantage of being unlocked and with higher clocks IIRC. So what you say it is not true. The i3 will be very competitive for the price, especially if they release later on a premium version with HT, which would be basically a current i7-7700K.
> 
> And second, 6/6 will be better than 4/8 no doubt about it, so the Coffee Lake i5 will be better than an i7-7700K if it clocks to 5Ghz as well. Even if it loses some 200mhz to the 7700K, in general the two extra cores will be more valuable. I might be wrong on this one, but even it the i5 loses some frames to the 7700K, I would still prefer the six cores for a more smooth gaming experience.
> 
> Oh, and yes, to buy an i7-7700K at this point is to shoot your own foot. The leaked benchmarks are showing the i7-8700K as a little beast.


The benchmark is 100% fake; it's an overclocked 4790K. The i3-8350K won't be as fast as that, not out of the box.

I don't deny that the i5s are going to beat the 7700K, but they aren't going to "destroy" it either. It will be very close.

If Intel ever does release a 4C/8T i3, it won't be for a while, not in generation 8. Intel doesn't want to turn its old i7s into i3s right off the bat. I think Intel is going to keep them in the i5 tier for a good long period.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nanotm*
> 
> snap


Don't think you are on the right site..

I do understand you. But you are being unrealistic. They make money by selling new boards.

Why would AMD keep their ancient AM3 socket?


----------



## kmac20

To be fair at least AMD announced am4 would be for four years. Intel doesn't really announce it and sometimes it's not even 2 years.

LGA775 lasted four years. No reason they need to add or remove a single pin other than to, as you put it, fleece people. As I'll put it it's to take advantage of people and make fanboys think they've got something cutting edge just because it's new.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> The i3-8350K won't be as fast as that, not out of the box..


You don't understand. A benchmark that shows 30% under the i7-7700K is the same as a current i5. The i3-8350K will be an i5. So yes, it will be very competitive for middle / low end cards.


----------



## pas008

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> the z370 (first round of boards coming out this year) is a rebranded z270
> no new features
> next year will bring USB 3.1 *gen 2* over this year's USB 3.1 *gen 1*
> as far as I know that's about it (for desktop at least)
> integrating wifi more instead of having it as a third party chip isn't going to be interesting at all, except on mobile
> 
> the "jump" from z170 to z270 brought newer features that aren't even worth mentioning
> 
> to put it another way
> 
> we're not talking sandy bridge to coffee lake backwards support
> 
> we're talking about the third iteration of skylake on a 1151 Socket
> no one would even look at coffee lake at this point weren't it for the 2 additional cores
> 
> and that's why people complain
> there is no magical jump in IPC
> no whoa awesome more features
> 
> why can't coffee lake fit into z170/z270 when a 7700k can be made for x299?
> just because Intel doesn't want to


source on rebrand?
170vs270
4 pcie lanes dont care if they are semi fake still very important to many users just may not include you

wifi might not be important to you either but important to others


----------



## nanotm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Don't think you are on the right site..
> 
> I do understand you. But you are being unrealistic. They make money by selling new boards.
> 
> Why would AMD keep their ancient AM3 socket?


I think you meant snip....

I was really annoyed that ddr4 ram prices doubled as soon as ryzen was given an official release time frame i'd spent months seeing prices for 16gb kits at under £90 and suddenly its over £160.... that wouldn't have happened had amd launched something that took ddr4 a couple of years back like intel did... and making money selling boards is a big % of intels income and that's the sole reason why they push out minor chip refreshes on new sockets.....


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *azanimefan*
> 
> https://videocardz.com/72112/intel-claims-i7-8700k-to-be-11-faster-than-7700k
> 
> Right here. Granted IPC never appears, but this is where that 11% number seems to have come from. They also apparently claimed a 51% multithread improvement.
> 
> the 11% number appears to be completely false judging by the early benches. If anything single thread IPC might be lower. And there are 50% more cores/threads, so unless their multithreaded number was talking about number of cores and not any objective measure of the performance...


Since when was 11% higher single thread perf the same exact thing as 11% higher IPC? We can't be so sloppy with our terminology.

I specifically talked about this with Guttheslayer, and he's still going around talking about IPC.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Since when was 11% higher single thread perf the same exact thing as 11% higher IPC? We can't be so sloppy with our terminology.
> 
> I specifically talked about this with Guttheslayer, and he's still going around talking about IPC.


To clear up this 11% single-thread performance increase, I believe it's coming primarily from the turbo 3.0 clock speed bump. 8700K is 4.7GHz, 7700K is 4.4GHz, that accounts for 7% of the 11% from clocks alone. The other 4% might be IPC, better cache, or just margin of error.

The 11%/51% figures from Intel are really IPS increases.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> To clear up this 11% single-thread performance increase, I believe it's coming primarily from the turbo 3.0 clock speed bump. 8700K is 4.7GHz, 7700K is 4.4GHz, that accounts for 7% of the 11% from clocks alone. The other 4% might be IPC, better cache, or just margin of error.
> 
> The 11%/51% figures from Intel are really IPS increases.


How did you go from saying 7% of the 11% are from higher clocks, therefore the entire 11% are IPC increases?

It seemed obvious to me from the very start Intel would probably clock the parts higher and call that a win on single-thread perf, especially with a generation that very well might not include any architecture change.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> How did you go from saying 7% of the 11% are from higher clocks, therefore the entire 11% are IPC increases?


He didn't say that at all. He specifically said that only 4% are potentially IPC increases. He then specifically said that the figures being bandied about are in fact IPS increases which != IPC increases.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> He didn't say that at all. He specifically said that only 4% are potentially IPC increases. He then specifically said that the figures being bandied about are in fact IPS increases which != IPC increases.


Quote:


> The 11%/51% figures from Intel are really IPS increases.


Maybe he meant to say the figures are partly due to IPC increases.

It's Intel marketing, expect them to round up for some magic performance we very well might not get.







(I wouldn't be surprised if his numbers are about right, and I wouldn't be surprised if the final 4% lead in single thread perf becomes a no show in reviewer's hands. Dunno if it would be turbo boost 3.0 though, I thought that's Skylake X only.)


----------



## sticks435

TB 3.0 was on Broadwell and broadwell-e if i remember correctly, and now skylake-x, but has never made it to mainstream desktop.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Another Update:
Quote:


> Core i7-8700K benchmarks leak: 51% faster than 7700K
> 
> 
> 
> In multi-threaded performance the new Coffee Lake-based 8700K and its 6C/12T of CPU grunt pushes it to be 51% faster. HotHardware posted some comparison scores between the aggregated Core i7-7700K and the new 8700K:
> 
> 
> Processor Arithmetic: 217.98 GOPS (versus 149.99 GOPS)-45 percent increase
> Processor Multi-Media: 658.57 Mpix/s (versus 447.76 Mpix/s)-47 percent increase
> Processor Cryptography: 10.47 GB/s (versus 9.34 GB/s)-12 percent increase
> Scientific Analysis (Single Precision): 61.41 GFLOPS (versus 48.51 GFLOPS)-26 percent increase
> Scientific Analysis (Double Precision): 32.11 GFLOPS (versus 24.40 GFLOPS)-32 percent increase


*Source:* http://www.tweaktown.com/news/58912/core-i7-8700k-benchmarks-leak-51-faster-7700k/index.html


----------



## CrazyHeaven

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> the z370 (first round of boards coming out this year) is a rebranded z270
> no new features
> next year will bring USB 3.1 *gen 2* over this year's USB 3.1 *gen 1*
> as far as I know that's about it (for desktop at least)
> integrating wifi more instead of having it as a third party chip isn't going to be interesting at all, except on mobile
> 
> the "jump" from z170 to z270 brought newer features that aren't even worth mentioning
> 
> to put it another way
> 
> we're not talking sandy bridge to coffee lake backwards support
> 
> we're talking about the third iteration of skylake on a 1151 Socket
> no one would even look at coffee lake at this point weren't it for the 2 additional cores
> 
> and that's why people complain
> there is no magical jump in IPC
> no whoa awesome more features
> 
> why can't coffee lake fit into z170/z270 when a 7700k can be made for x299?
> just because Intel doesn't want to


All of this is true. So if upgraded in the last year or 2 then skip on Coffee Lake. I doubt it will make any real difference in most applications. They will not do this again if Coffee Lake turns out to be a poor seller. It would just lead to move layoffs because too many people showed up to a meeting...


----------



## naz2

50% more threads = 50% faster

stop the presses!

cfl is literally (read: literally) kbl with 2 additional cores. not sure why there's 86 pages of discussion about this


----------



## TMatzelle60

When is the desktop Processors expected to come out

I have my ITX stuff ready. Is it ok the PSU,Graphic card and Computer case sit to the side while i wait


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *naz2*
> 
> 50% more threads = 50% faster
> 
> stop the presses!
> 
> cfl is literally (read: literally) kbl with 2 additional cores. not sure why there's 86 pages of discussion about this


----------



## CrazyHeaven

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> When is the desktop Processors expected to come out
> 
> I have my ITX stuff ready. Is it ok the PSU,Graphic card and Computer case sit to the side while i wait


The bet is that it will be here by sometime in October. But they haven't promised a thing. Have not even announced it yet.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *naz2*
> 
> 50% more threads = 50% faster
> 
> stop the presses!
> 
> cfl is literally (read: literally) kbl with 2 additional cores. not sure why there's 86 pages of discussion about this


oh common man, don't be the party pooper !









Because we're all bored ****less out of our minds while waiting on the official release and results so speculating here is all we have until then =P =P


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *naz2*
> 
> 50% more threads = 50% faster
> 
> stop the presses!
> 
> cfl is literally (read: literally) kbl Skylake with 2 additional cores. not sure why there's 86 pages of discussion about this


FTFY


----------



## AlphaC

Upgrade to slightly slower single core performance in some applications!









In all seriousness I want to see the i5-8600K (6c/6t) vs an i7-7700K @ 5GHz. It should be interesting since the i7-8700K has a 50% thread advantage but the i5-8600K doesn't.

Also comparing these CPUs vs a stock Ryzen 7 1700 is disingenuous because nobody compares a stock Ryzen 7 1700 without including a 3.8 or 3.9GHz Ryzen 7 1700 as comparison (or at the least a Ryzen 7 1700X or Ryzen 7 1800X). At 1.35V most Ryzen 7 CPUs can attain 3.8GHz (stock Ryzen 7 1700 has 3.75GHz 4 threads , 3.0GHz all core = over +25% all core performance when overclocked).

http://www.madshrimps.be/articles/article/1000977/AMD-Ryzen-5-1600X-Processor-Review/16
~ 19K Fritz chess for R 5 1600X , ~21K for R7 1700X suggests poor scaling (I've also seen i7-6800k get ~19K , I7-6900k get ~ 24K, R7 1800X @ stock get ~22K , R7 1800X @4GHz ~23.5K)
---> I'd expect 31.5K for a 4.7GHz i7-8700K
---> see also Threadripper result of 21.7K , which suggests it is not threaded enough https://www.chiphell.com/portal.php?mod=view&aid=18425&page=7

I'd expect just under 1800 CB R15 nT for the i7-8700K @4.7GHz. (compared to 1750 or so for 4GHz Ryzen 7)

I'd also expect about 19.7 for CB R11.5 nT for a [email protected] (compared to 18.1 for a Ryzen 7 @ 3.7GHz with 2666MHz RAM and ~ 19.5 for a R7 1700 @ 4GHz).

For wprime nT, 4GHz Ryzen 7 gets 3.1seconds or so and I expect the same for a 4.7GHz i7-8700k.

The i7-8700K & i7-8600K will be horrid CPUs if the motherboards aren't up to par as far as pricing goes. You will likely need to buy a half decent CPU cooler, delid the thing, and then buy a midrange $150 motherboard to overclock these 95W TDP CPUs , so Ryzen 7 1700 CPUs have the value of not needing to delid and having $150-180 boards such as the X370 Prime Pro / X370-F STRIX ($415+tax @ Microcenter combo), Gigabyte x370 G5 & K7 , Biostar X370 GT7, along with the Asrock X370 Taichi (Microcenter combo = $430+tax). Without overclocking (past 4.6GHz all core), the value of the Coffee Lake CPUs is just not there, since 4GHz all core is attainable on Ryzen 5 1600X @ ~$200.


----------



## Seyumi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> To clear up this 11% single-thread performance increase, I believe it's coming primarily from the turbo 3.0 clock speed bump. 8700K is 4.7GHz, 7700K is 4.4GHz, that accounts for 7% of the 11% from clocks alone. The other 4% might be IPC, better cache, or just margin of error.
> 
> The 11%/51% figures from Intel are really IPS increases.


The 7700k boosts up to 4.5Ghz btw not 4.4Ghz, so it should only account for 5% of that magical 11% marketing # and not 7%. I do agree with everything else though.

I'm glad I didn't get the 7900x I was pretty close to pulling the trigger. Would have only gotten 4.8Ghz single core on a $1,500 Silicon Lottery 7900x when I'm fairly confident a 5.0ghz+ 8700k (probably around $500) will get more FPS out of games. Even the 7700k still beats the 7900x in 90% of all gaming scenarios from all the various reviews, the 8700k will probably make it better in 100% of all gaming scenarios than a 7900x.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seyumi*
> 
> The 7700k boosts up to 4.5Ghz btw not 4.4Ghz, so it should only account for 5% of that magical 11% marketing # and not 7%. I do agree with everything else though.
> 
> I'm glad I didn't get the 7900x I was pretty close to pulling the trigger. Would have only gotten 4.8Ghz single core on a $1,500 Silicon Lottery 7900x when I'm fairly confident a 5.0ghz+ 8700k (probably around $500) will get more FPS out of games. Even the 7700k still beats the 7900x in 90% of all gaming scenarios from all the various reviews, the 8700k should make that gap even more.












Thanks. Well, that makes the IPC increase look better then, at around 6%, which can't be accounted completely for by margin of error anymore.

Anyway, missing the forest with this point. BF1 will be very happy.


----------



## Nightbird

Well for 11%/51%, obviously it depends on the task/benchmark. The 51% is concerning to me, since the 8700K has 50% more cores already, so this could indicate a 0% IPC increase. The 11% single thread could be a encoding/decoding task getting some hardware optimization for all we know. If it was 5% IPC increase per thread, I would expect 6cores*1.05/4cores=57.5% multi-threading performance increase. Obviously not the case.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nightbird*
> 
> Well for 11%/51%, obviously it depends on the task/benchmark. The 51% is concerning to me, since the 8700K has 50% more cores already, so this could indicate a 0% IPC increase. The 11% single thread could be a encoding/decoding task getting some hardware optimization for all we know. If it was 5% IPC increase per thread, I would expect 6cores*1.05/4cores=57.5% multi-threading performance increase. Obviously not the case.


All core turbo is lower than single thread.

Also

https://www.custompcreview.com/news/intel-coffee-lake-6-core-geekbench-benchmarks-leaked/

https://www.techpowerup.com/236550/intel-core-i7-8700k-and-i5-8400-sandra-benchmarks-surface

MSRP supposedly $268 for i5-8600K and $385 for i7-8700K
http://techreport.com/news/32446/rumor-intel-eighth-gen-cpu-prices-spill-out-of-canadian-e-tailer


----------



## Nightbird

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Nightbird*
> 
> Well for 11%/51%, obviously it depends on the task/benchmark. The 51% is concerning to me, since the 8700K has 50% more cores already, so this could indicate a 0% IPC increase. The 11% single thread could be a encoding/decoding task getting some hardware optimization for all we know. If it was 5% IPC increase per thread, I would expect 6cores*1.05/4cores=57.5% multi-threading performance increase. Obviously not the case.
> 
> 
> 
> All core turbo is lower than single thread.
Click to expand...

You're right, I missed that all core boost for 8700K is 4Ghz and 4.4Ghz for 7700K, that's promising if it pans out (not for a specific application but in general).


----------



## CrazyHeaven

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seyumi*
> 
> The 7700k boosts up to 4.5Ghz btw not 4.4Ghz, so it should only account for 5% of that magical 11% marketing # and not 7%. I do agree with everything else though.
> 
> I'm glad I didn't get the 7900x I was pretty close to pulling the trigger. Would have only gotten 4.8Ghz single core on a $1,500 Silicon Lottery 7900x when I'm fairly confident a 5.0ghz+ 8700k (probably around $500) will get more FPS out of games. Even the 7700k still beats the 7900x in 90% of all gaming scenarios from all the various reviews, the 8700k will probably make it better in 100% of all gaming scenarios than a 7900x.


This was my thoughts as well when I was going to pick up the 7900x. Along with it I was going to grab a high dollar motherboard. It really just made sense for me to wait.

I really should have just brought a haswell i7 to replace my i5. All test point to a bad cpu. Games is only about 20% of what I do. The games still run decently enough despite all my cores not functioning correctly. It is all my non gaming software that is really taking the hits. Without my laptop I do not believe I could afford to wait.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pas008*
> 
> source on rebrand?


Chipsets for Coffee Lake: Z370 as an old intermediate solution to the new Cannon Lake PCH

also


those are both for coffee lake
the one on the left is the "rebrand" has the same features as a Z270

the one on the right (dubbed CNL cannon lake PCH) is the newer chipset with some more features (like USB 3.1 Gen 2, *integrated* WiFi)


well feature wise its a snooze really
same pcie lanes, same configs of how they get split
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pas008*
> 
> 170vs270
> 4 pcie lanes dont care if they are semi fake still very important to many users just may not include you


it would be hard to come up with any real world use to saturate all the pci-e lanes having dual graphics cards and a M2 drive on a Z170
if one is so starved of lanes better move to HEDT, no?

not that using more than one graphics card, which is still a tiny niche to begin with, seems to be more and more going away anyway

I was saying that no one in they're right mind would replace a Z170 that he payed 350$ with a Z270 for the same price because of Optane support and 4 measly pci-e lanes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pas008*
> 
> wifi might not be important to you either but important to others


I got great WiFi on my Formula VIII thank you (and Bluetooth, and many fan headers, pump header, ...)
many Z170 have onboard WiFi, as do Z270 ones, high end boards usually come with plenty of stuff
what actually made most a difference was the inclusion of MU-MIMO from ASUS

this isn't what is changing here
whats changing with coffee lake is the inclusion of WiFi *into the chipset itself*
which isn't really interesting to desktop users

its a nice touch for mobile as it should save on space and lower energy consumption by a few watts


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> I think the Z370 is especially appealing for those that are still on Z97 or older. If you only do games, your 7700k should last you some years


Yeah, I'm not too concerned. Raw gaming performance has been great and I have no complaints.

I'm more on being rebellious about Intel pulling their petty BS. I'll gladly move onto AMD in a year or so when IPC has improved even more and I've moved onto 3840x1600 and 100hz







.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Let's be fair and clarify this statement a bit, since I've seen it thrown around a lot. RyZen is fine for GPU-bound gaming, where image quality (and resolution) are prioritized. Where it doesn't do as well as the Intel counterparts is where high FPS (144+) is prioritized. Pick your poison, if you're cash-strapped. For me, I like the versatility that the Intel counterparts can handle both priorities well.


Bingo.

For those that still play older titles (ya know...the good ones







) IPC is king.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Chipsets for Coffee Lake: Z370 as an old intermediate solution to the new Cannon Lake PCH
> 
> also
> 
> 
> those are both for coffee lake
> the one on the left is the "rebrand" has the same features as a Z270
> 
> the one on the right (dubbed CNL cannon lake PCH) is the newer chipset with some more features (like USB 3.1 Gen 2, *integrated* WiFi)
> 
> 
> well feature wise its a snooze really
> same pcie lanes, same configs of how they get split
> it would be hard to come up with any real world use to saturate all the pci-e lanes having dual graphics cards and a M2 drive on a Z170
> if one is so starved of lanes better move to HEDT, no?
> 
> not that using more than one graphics card, which is still a tiny niche to begin with, seems to be more and more going away anyway
> 
> I was saying that no one in they're right mind would replace a Z170 that he payed 350$ with a Z270 for the same price because of Optane support and 4 measly pci-e lanes
> I got great WiFi on my Formula VIII thank you (and Bluetooth, and many fan headers, pump header, ...)
> many Z170 have onboard WiFi, as do Z270 ones, high end boards usually come with plenty of stuff
> what actually made most a difference was the inclusion of MU-MIMO from ASUS
> 
> this isn't what is changing here
> whats changing with coffee lake is the inclusion of WiFi *into the chipset itself*
> which isn't really interesting to desktop users
> 
> its a nice touch for mobile as it should save on space and lower energy consumption by a few watts


I'm not sure how much it matters if USB 3.1 gen 2 is off the chipset?

for example some random boards I picked off Newegg...

ASus z270-A 1 x USB 3.1 Gen 2 port(s) https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/PRIME-Z270-A/specifications/
---> includes thunderbolt 3
ASUS ROG STRIX Z270E 2 x USB 3.1 Gen 2 Type-A + USB Type-C https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-Z270E-GAMING/specifications/
ASUS ROG STRIX Z270G 2 x USB 3.1 Type-A + USB Type-C https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-Z270G-GAMING/specifications/
ROG MAXIMUS IX HERO ASMedia® USB 3.1 controller 2 x USB 3.1 Gen 2 port(s) https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-IX-HERO/

Asrock Z270 Taichi - 1 x USB 3.1 Gen2 Type-A Port (10 Gb/s) 1 x USB 3.1 Gen2 Type-C Port http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z270%20Taichi/index.asp#Specification
Asrock Z270 Extreme4 - 1 x USB 3.1 Gen2 Type-A Port (10 Gb/s) 1 x USB 3.1 Gen2 Type-C Port http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z270%20Extreme4/index.asp#Specification
Asrock Z270 Fatal1ty K6 - 2 USB 3.1 Gen2 http://asrock.com/mb/Intel/Fatal1ty%20Z270%20Gaming%20K6/#Specification

Gigabyte GA-Z270X-Gaming SOC 1 x USB 3.1 Gen 2 Type-A port 1 x USB Type-C™ port on the back panel, with USB 3.1 Gen 2 support http://www.gigabyte.us/Motherboard/GA-Z270X-Gaming-SOC-rev-10#sp
Gigabyte Z270X UD5 https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/GA-Z270X-UD5-rev-10#kf
---> includes thunderbolt 3 connector
Gigabyte Z270XP-SLI https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/GA-Z270XP-SLI-rev-10#kf
Gigabyte Z270MX Gaming 5 https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/GA-Z270MX-Gaming-5-rev-10#kf

MSI Z270 Gaming Pro Carbon 1 x USB 3.1 Gen2 Type-A port , 1 x USB 3.1 Gen2 Type-C port https://us.msi.com/Motherboard/Z270-GAMING-PRO-CARBON.html#productSpecification-section
MSI z270 Mpower - 2 x USB 3.1 Gen2 https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/Z270-MPOWER-GAMING-TITANIUM.html#productSpecification-section
MSI Z270 GAMING M6
MSI Z270 SLI PLUS
MSI Z270I GAMING PRO CARBON AC https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/Z270I-GAMING-PRO-CARBON-AC.html

Supposedly ASM2142 controller can do 16Gb/s on up to 2 ports.

What matters more for Intel users is Thunderbolt , such as Thunderbolt 3 (Alpine Ridge) which can do 40 Gbit/s.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I just think its worth noting that within just a few months of AMD releasing Ryzen all of the sudden most of the classic Intel paradigms we have been stuck with for the last 7-8 years have gone by the wayside. I mean, now we are getting an 18C flagship HEDT, 6C/12T i7's on mainstream, quad core i3's, etc. All I can say is that even if you are the bluest of Intel fan's you should thank AMD for making such an amazing comeback in the CPU sector this year and forcing Intel to compete. I know it was a long time coming and that we had to suffer from the construction cores for all this time but the fact remains that had Ryzen been another BD we may not have seen any of this...


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nightbird*
> 
> Well for 11%/51%, obviously it depends on the task/benchmark. The 51% is concerning to me, since the 8700K has 50% more cores already, so this could indicate a 0% IPC increase. The 11% single thread could be a encoding/decoding task getting some hardware optimization for all we know. If it was 5% IPC increase per thread, I would expect 6cores*1.05/4cores=57.5% multi-threading performance increase. Obviously not the case.


If you have realised, add more cores usually induce more lag which lead to lesser performance, the fact that it has 2 more cores and yet able to maintain a full 50% shows it have a slight Perf-per core bump for single threaded. It could be more clocks or IPC or both.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> If you have realised, add more cores usually induce more lag which lead to lesser performance, the fact that it has 2 more cores and yet able to maintain a full 50% shows it have a slight Perf-per core bump for single threaded. It could be more clocks or IPC or both.


http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_run.php?q=c2ffcee889e8d5e2d2e2d6e5dcfa88b585a3c6a39eae88fbc6fe&l=en

6700K at 4100mhz
7700K at 4200mhz
8700K at 4400mhz IMC ( NB clock in cpu-z? )
That's one way of boosting performance without touching the Core clock.
Increased ram to 2667mhz should add some too.


----------



## pas008

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I just think its worth noting that within just a few months of AMD releasing Ryzen all of the sudden most of the classic Intel paradigms we have been stuck with for the last 7-8 years have gone by the wayside. I mean, now we are getting an 18C flagship HEDT, 6C/12T i7's on mainstream, quad core i3's, etc. *All I can say is that even if you are the bluest of Intel fan's you should thank AMD for making such an amazing comeback in the CPU sector this year and forcing Intel to compete.* I know it was a long time coming and that we had to suffer from the construction cores for all this time but the fact remains that had Ryzen been another BD we may not have seen any of this...


should have happened years ago
I believe intel could have done this yrs ago too think they were just waiting for competition in other words you can blame amd for the stagnation too

i'm only hoping this arch can be improved on for yrs especially single threaded area to keep the competition going


----------



## Scotty99

Dagger in ryzen coffin for me:





Stock 7350k beating an overclocked 1700 in destiny 2. I understand its a poorly coded game, still does not change the fact these are the types of games i play.


----------



## azanimefan

Per this video -

Destiny doesn't even utilize AMD's SMT - something we've seen on other games, which patches later fixed. Meanwhile Intel's Hyperthreading worked just fine

FRAPS didn't even work on testing; in fact most of their benching tools were basically broken by the game while they were testing due to "anti hacking" software the game uses. At the 9 minute mark he talks at length why the CPU results are junk across the board (not just AMD) due to huge swings in results from test to test on the cpu tests. Furthermore not a single graphic setting difference made a change in the bench results. period.

Anyone who makes a decision based on this video of a closed beta with major bugs was always a team blue fanboy who was going to buy an intel anyway.


----------



## Yvese

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Dagger in ryzen coffin for me:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stock 7350k beating an overclocked 1700 in destiny 2. I understand its a poorly coded game, still does not change the fact these are the types of games i play.


It's not poorly coded at all...


----------



## WexleySnoops

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Dagger in ryzen coffin for me:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stock 7350k beating an overclocked 1700 in destiny 2. I understand its a poorly coded game, still does not change the fact these are the types of games i play.


Destiny 2 *Beta*

Hard to take these benchmarks at 100% face value.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yvese*
> 
> It's not poorly coded at all...


Well clearly its poorly coded if it cant take advantage of AMD's version of hyperthreading. I am on the beta right now and it runs pretty good, but knowing a 120 dollar i3 would grant me higher framerates than my overlcocked 300 dollar 8 core chip is quite frustrating. AAA beta's are usually pretty close to launch versions guys, things usually dont change.


----------



## Scotty99

Lets take virtual cores out of the convo for a second, if they didnt exist a 1700 should still be wiping the floor with an i3. Yes, this game is TERRIBLY coded, really was hoping an MMO launched in the later half of 2017 could use more cores but its not seeming like thats the case.


----------



## AlphaC

An MMO is inherently single threaded because most things happen in series.

The Ryzen CPU may very well be using a Bulldozer code path designed for Clustered Multi threading instead of Simultaneous MultiThreading.

That means a faster core clock combined with higher IPC results in massive performance gains.

Per amdahl's law if you have 4 cores clocked high it will provide most of the performance vs 6 or 8 cores.

I would want to see the Intel CPU for a 8 core i7-5960X identification spoofed on the Ryzen octocore to draw a conclusion.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Regardless the beta still felt buttery smooth


----------



## Scotty99

Ya ill agree with that, very smooth even at 1440p with a 1060. Still does not excuse the fact an i3 is beating an overclocked 300 dollar 8 core, its actually disgusting.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well clearly its poorly coded if it cant take advantage of AMD's version of hyperthreading. I am on the beta right now and it runs pretty good, but knowing a 120 dollar i3 would grant me higher framerates than my overlcocked 300 dollar 8 core chip is quite frustrating. AAA beta's are usually pretty close to launch versions guys, things usually dont change.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Lets take virtual cores out of the convo for a second, if they didnt exist a 1700 should still be wiping the floor with an i3. Yes, this game is TERRIBLY coded, really was hoping an MMO launched in the later half of 2017 could use more cores but its not seeming like thats the case.


Surely the Intel stuff is going to eventually take it's crown back, but if the devs of Destiny 2 don't improve or patch the game to take advantage of the Ryzen CPUs, that should say more about the game to you than the CPU you're using. A game coming out in 2017 that doesn't take advantage of a CPU/platform that's seeing a high adoption rate already isn't really a game PC gamers should be investing in.


----------



## nanotm

if its inherently single threaded as you claim, then the only difference in scores between all the chips should be based around single thread performance the only difference between the i3 i5 and i7 would be clock speed, the r7 1700 would still be beating the i3....

its clearly a multithreaded workflow as per the posts, however its also clear that something is very strange with it all


----------



## Scotty99

No a stock 7350k is clocked higher than an overclocked 1700.


----------



## nanotm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> Surely the Intel stuff is going to eventually take it's crown back, but if the devs of Destiny 2 don't improve or patch the game to take advantage of the Ryzen CPUs, that should say more about the game to you than the CPU you're using. A game coming out in 2017 that doesn't take advantage of a CPU/platform that's seeing a high adoption rate already isn't really a game PC gamers should be investing in.


or its a marketing ploy to flog more intel chips because its not like intel hasn't leveraged a game dev to do this in the past ... infact they got fined more than 1billion euros for doing it .... and there in jeopardy of loosing the entire euro market for countless other similar underhanded practices ...


----------



## Scotty99

Its most likely they didn't have ryzen chips to test with when they were writing the game, i dont disagree with steve that something is afoot here and people should probably wait for launch benchmarks.....but my experience with AAA beta's (been in quite a few) is that things dont change drastically.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nanotm*
> 
> or its a marketing ploy to flog more intel chips because its not like intel hasn't leveraged a game dev to do this in the past ... infact they got fined more than 1billion euros for doing it .... and there in jeopardy of loosing the entire euro market for countless other similar underhanded practices ...


Very possible. I just highly suggest that people vote with their wallets and choose their moral battles accordingly.


----------



## nanotm

yeah well when the r51600x scores higher or the same In the cpu bench as the overclocked r7 1700 theres definatly something wobbly about the benchmarks and its not all going to be the fault of the game


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> An MMO is inherently single threaded because most things happen in series.
> 
> The Ryzen CPU may very well be using a Bulldozer code path designed for Clustered Multi threading instead of Simultaneous MultiThreading.
> 
> That means a faster core clock combined with higher IPC results in massive performance gains.
> 
> Per amdahl's law if you have 4 cores clocked high it will provide most of the performance vs 6 or 8 cores.
> 
> I would want to see the Intel CPU for a 8 core i7-5960X identification spoofed on the Ryzen octocore to draw a conclusion.


But star citizen is multithreaded


----------



## nanotm

taken in context with this though https://venturebeat.com/2017/06/12/intel-worked-with-bungie-to-maximize-destiny-2-for-powerful-new-cpus/

and the fact intel and bungie are in partnership its does make you wonder if the entire thing isn't part of intel's marketing strategy and a way to hit back at Microsoft for ditching them on the xbox one cpu's after several decades of glad handing each other and diddling their competitors....

if it is the case then destiny2 wont play very well on the xbox but work a bit better on the ps4 (because they also use amd cpu & gpu....)

either way "plays like trash" will be a killer for their marketing hype when the majority of folks use the competitors products .....


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya ill agree with that, very smooth even at 1440p with a 1060. Still does not excuse the fact an i3 is beating an overclocked 300 dollar 8 core, its actually disgusting.


Not sure the point you're trying to make here? Its not exactly been a secret that AMD has not yet matched Intel's IPC so games (especially those that don't even take advantage of Ryzen's extra cores and threads) are of course going to be faster on Intel CPU's, regardless of their sku name. If all you wanted was a cheap CPU for games like this and had no use for an octocore processor then I am struggling to understand why you bought a 1700 in the first place?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Not sure the point you're trying to make here? Its not exactly been a secret that AMD has not yet matched Intel's IPC so games (especially those that don't even take advantage of Ryzen's extra cores and threads) are of course going to be faster on Intel CPU's, regardless of their sku name. If all you wanted was a cheap CPU for games like this and had no use for an octocore processor then I am struggling to understand why you bought a 1700 in the first place?


Are you messing with me right now?

Is it unreasonable to expect games to start taking advantage of more cores in the latter half of 2017? I kept my last PC 6 years, that is why i bought a 1700....

There is no excuse for an i3 besting a ryzen 7 for any game released this year.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Are you messing with me right now?
> 
> Is it unreasonable to expect games to start taking advantage of more cores in the latter half of 2017? I kept my last PC 6 years, that is why i bought a 1700....
> 
> *There is no excuse for an i3 besting a ryzen 7 for any game released this year.*


Why? Because it says i3 on the box and therefore it MUST be inferior to an R7 at everything? Those are just marketing names mate. Believe it or not, there are quite a lot of other uses people have for their PC's besides just playing video games. Try running multiple VM's, video transcoding and editing, running [email protected], live-streaming, and using a multi-track like ProTools all at the same time on that i3 and then tell me there is no excuse for a 1700...


----------



## WexleySnoops

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> There is no excuse for an i3 besting a ryzen 7 for any game *released* this year.


Good thing Destiny 2 hasn't been released yet then, eh? There's a reason it's called beta. Doesn't matter if it's AAA title or not. It's still beta.

Also, Ryzen was never marketed as the gaming killer.

Also, Ryzen has had a rocky release since day 1. It's going to take time to work all the kinks out. Patience my friend.


----------



## Scotty99

So your argument is all games need to be coded poorly and rely on clock speed?

lol this forum....


----------



## Nautilus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Why? Because it says i3 on the box and therefore it MUST be inferior to an R7 at everything? Those are just marketing names mate. Believe it or not, there are quite a lot of other uses people have for their PC's besides just playing video games. Try running multiple VM's, video transcoding and editing, running [email protected], live-streaming, and using a multi-track like ProTools all at the same time on that i3 and then tell me there is no excuse for a 1700...


Yeah, I for instance am employed in a video production agency. My company lets me work at home. The work involves editing multi camera 1080p h.264 files in Adobe Premiere Pro and exporting final video to be uploaded on YouTube. I do it on my PC on which I also game. That's why I am considering upgrading to Ryzen 1800x over 6700k. 1800x is equal to i7 6700K in terms of gaming @1440p, but it's much faster in encoding h.264.


----------



## kmac20

I agree with you its ridiculous. It is ridiculous as hell. But I know that over the next year a lot of games will take advantage of all the threads as a result of the gamers market share AMD has recaptured as well as Intel coming out with higher core/thread processors. I wouldn't count on those Intel processors being much faster for long. Don't forget Xbox/playstation use a lot of cores/threads so devs have learned to code taking advantage of more threads more and more and more.

Its coming my friend. Thats why I got a 1700. I do mostly gaming but I do a lot of multitasking, but I dont regret getting it for gaming. It is though as you said ridiculous that games still don't take huge advantage of this many cores, YET. But they will be sooner rather than later.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nautilus*
> 
> Yeah, I for instance am employed in a video production agency. My company lets me work at home. The work involves editing multi camera 1080p h.264 files in Adobe Premiere Pro. I do it on my PC on which I also game. That's why I am considering Ryzen 1800x over 6700k. 1800x is a sideways upgrade in terms of gaming @1440p, but it's much faster in encoding h.264.


Tell me about it. I use Cubase SX for recording my band's demos and doing 40-50 track mixdowns in real time certainly makes me glad I have at least a hexa these days. Back in 2007 when I was using a C2D mixdowns would take HOURS to finish!

And don't get me started on rendering times in Premiere...


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Intel and Nvidia are just the save choice these days. With Zen and Vega you are hopping for the future in terms of gaming performance. I do want to upgrade eventually and most likely go Intel unless Zen+ or 2 can clock more than 4.0GHz. I do not think 8700K is the CPU for me considering it has 3 years old IPC already.


----------



## kingduqc

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> So your argument is all games need to be coded poorly and rely on clock speed?
> 
> lol this forum....


You guys need to understand that not every game is going to scale work many cores. If it perform well on two cores why would they bother?


----------



## kmac20

^ Because probably the largest segment of gamers play games on the PS4 and XBOX ONE (combined) and they are both multicore systems with weak single cores, but capable of amazing multicore performance.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kmac20*
> 
> ^ Because probably the largest segment of gamers play games on the PS4 and XBOX ONE (combined) and they are both multicore systems with weak single cores, but capable of amazing multicore performance.


Hence 30 fps cap. They did not bother to optimize on the CPU front at all.


----------



## b0oMeR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Hence 30 fps cap. They did not bother to optimize on the CPU front at all.


Yeah the 30 fps cap with AMD chips is ridiculous. I guess they never thought anyone would buy a high refresh rate monitor.


----------



## kd5151

Hardware unboxed did a video on what it takes to play destiny 2.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Are you messing with me right now?
> 
> Is it unreasonable to expect games to start taking advantage of more cores in the latter half of 2017? I kept my last PC 6 years, that is why i bought a 1700....
> 
> There is no excuse for an i3 besting a ryzen 7 for any game released this year.


I'm afraid it is unreasonable. Yes there will be a few multithread optimized games and yes their number will slowly grow over the years to come, but it's totally not going to solve itself completely, not ever.

The problem is not that it's just an evolution that takes time, no the bottleneck is inherent to the functionality and it's design.

It's easy as a gamer to look at a game, see 1 core of your cpu peak up to it's maximum and respond with: "wow that game is poorly coded", but as soon as you try to become a programmer and realize the limitations of software and hardware dictate that things have no other option than working that way, that there is no way to spread that load over cores.

to illustrate why that is let me give an example:

If your workload is to compile 70 video sections then it's dead easy to program your video editing software to equally divide that long sequence of 70 essentially not-to-eachother-related tasks in a many different threads as you have cores, or even more and make sure that all cores or virtual (hyperthreaded) cores are all hard at work. That is why all video editing software works that way

If you program a game, the part where you are completely alone in a room, or a bigger area like a city, the drawing of things around you into a 3D model again can similarly be separated into different "jobs" so you will see all cores being used lightly and all the load will be on your GPU

But as soon as you add all players, npc's and other objects that interact or relate to your character to that environment you have to program the 'engine' part, the heart of the intelligence into the game and that typically is a linear process. For example the engine in a mmo battleground should calculate wether it should draw an animation of you dying or not, but that depends on whether one of the other 50 npc's and other players around you launch one of their 250 possible combinations of spells/gunfire/... skills compared to your 50 combinations of dodge/shield/vanish/misdirect/... skills all racked up in 1 long equation where at the end for eacht npc, character and object the outcome needs to be calculated 144 times per second ! Since all those objects in your programming are dependent on eachother they HAVE to be programmed into 1 serial single long thread that cannot be split off into another. I'm giving a very gross simplification of the process here but you get the picture. My only goal is make you understand why things are the way they are so you can sleep better









Any so called "multi thread optimizing" of the game becomes then identifying which processes of things happening can be seen as totally not related to eachother and therefore program them into a seperate long single thread, possibly setting yourself up (as a programmer) for failure in the future when the gamers suddenly request a feature where those object now suddenly DO need to depend on eachother, a risk that cannot be taken obviously.

So yes, online multiplayer games in direct relation to their complexity will inherently always be dependent on the speed of your IPC+singlethread performance and therefore in that regard the best gaming cpu will always be the one with less cores (less internal overheating) that allways the highest clock per given IPC. Right now that is the 7700K from Intel. There is no way they will be able to produce an 8 core right now (nor Intel nor AMD) that will be capable of giving that same highest 5.2Ghz OC'd amazing singlethread performance as a 4-core cpu.

That being said it will be a big breakthrough imho if Intel manages to produce a 6-core cpu (coffeelake) that achieves the same stable OC'd singlethread performance but with 50% more multicore performance. Even if it clocks only 100Mhz lower it's still really good since it's not just the game we run nowadays in a modern windows 10 64-bit OS, but also all the other programs (antivirus, internet browsers,...) so 4 cores will slowly become a bottleneck over the years to come. In that regard Intel coffeelake can be seen as a gamechanger for gaming where the AMD counterparts (zen,threadripper) are not because none of them met that singlethread performance standard of a 5+ghz 7700K in the first place that is still the one and only bottleneck for gaming.

ps: this whole explanation is only when talking about the gaming performance and choice of cpu, for parallel work loads such as video editing it's a whole different story, There the AMD's shine in performance per dollar ofc


----------



## Scotty99

Do not try and lecture me on how MMO's function ive been playing them longer than most of you have been alive, the point i am trying to make here is that a 130 dollar CPU should not be besting a 300 dollar CPU for a game released in the latter half of 2017. Just because MMO's have traditionally relied on a 1-2 cores does not mean we should expect that behavior going forward. One of the main bottlenecks in MMO's is how draw calls are done, a proper dx12 mmo should be able to drastically increase performance in those scenarios.

Destiny runs smooth as butter for me but that is ENTIRELY besides the point, i was expecting more of game devs now that ryzen has been out for half a year. Yes its a beta and things can change, and i hope they do.


----------



## Scotty99

Hardware unboxed has ryzen much closer to intel. Really the question is which idiot on youtube is doing benches correctly.


----------



## e-gate

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hardware unboxed has ryzen much closer to intel. Really the question is which idiot on youtube is doing benches correctly.


Those results are much more closer to reality and what I expected from Ryzen. We know that Ryzen has not the IPC of Kaby but hell it's not SO far behind.


----------



## Skylinestar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya ill agree with that, very smooth even at 1440p with a 1060. Still does not excuse the fact an i3 is beating an overclocked 300 dollar 8 core, its actually disgusting.


Reminds me of the old days of Intel Pentium MMX optimized games.


----------



## pez

This thread continuously is going in a loop of Ryzen-related things and now Crapstiny 2 has been thrown into the mix.

Me thinks this thread should be closed.


----------



## kevindd992002

Exactly. Why can't we talk about the eigth gen Intel CPU's and not about Ryzen.


----------



## WexleySnoops

Here here!

Gimme some of that Coffee Cake!


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Exactly. Why can't we talk about the eigth gen Intel CPU's and not about Ryzen.


After the first 500-600 posts there was nothing left to talk about other than speculation against it's competitor.


----------



## MaKeN

Guys ive read somewhere that cofee lake is expected in 2018 and not october, is it true?


----------



## Menta

geez


----------



## sticks435

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Guys ive read somewhere that cofee lake is expected in 2018 and not october, is it true?


CPU's and Motherboards with Z370 (rebranded Z270 boards) will be available in the fall. Your thinking of motherboards with the "Z390" chipset/PCH, which will be shared with the 10nm CannonLake CPU's.


----------



## MaKeN

Interesting if there will be again that "need to dellid" thing with this one.....


----------



## bigjdubb

I can't see them soldering Coffee lake if they didn't solder SkylakeX. Unless there is another wall that stops clocks before the temps do, I think the need to delid will continue.


----------



## MaKeN

i hate losing warranty because of delliding... my first 7700k died, second 7700k degraded a lot( requires 1.38v at stock clocks)

But the warranty is lost







feels like a sort of strategy from intel


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Interesting if there will be again that "need to dellid" thing with this one.....


Enthusiast CPU arent soldered.


----------



## MaKeN

I see...
so there is no hope that this chip would run not as hot as 7700k ?


----------



## nanotm

until it gets unveiled officially and actual benchmarks start rolling out theres no way to know for sure...

intel will undoubtedly mount the IHS with its custom brand of toothpaste and it will also undoubtedly be prone to deformation or indeed come out of the factory deformed.... and just as undoubtedly the fans will make delidding vids and start lapping them or even just showing how to swap the toothpaste for something that works..... and noobs will do those things still burn out the chip and cry that they wasted a few hundred bucks

amd at least neatly side steps all of this with soldered parts, avoiding all the salt mining that happens around intel's chips.... and they still get slated for it / its a loose loose proposition but at this point its fair to say intel is trolling buyers with just how bad a thermal mixture it can provide


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I see...
> so there is no hope that this chip would run not as hot as 7700k ?


if 7800x cant run cool, and Intel keeps using the same TIM/no solder there will be same scenario as a 7700k/6700k/4770k/3770k


----------



## WexleySnoops

A little while ago Tom's Hardware did a comparison of a large amount of thermal pastes/liquid metals. They also had toothpaste on that list, and surprisingly it didn't actually do terribly. I feel like Intel's custom solution is probably worse. Ahahaha.


----------



## MaKeN

The paste itself used by intel is actually really good.... i've seen people delid a 7700k and just remove the glue/silicon that holds the ihs ,and then putting the ihs back , result is a smaller gap between the chip and ihs , and they did get some good results with intels default paste. In other words just removing the silicone alone already helped...

So we can add a price of a delliding tool to the price of the cpu than... that adds up.
Also because of a needed new mobo prise goes even bigger... in the end the price comes out to also something expensive


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> The paste itself used by intel is actually really good.... i've seen people delid a 7700k and just remove the glue/silicon that holds the ihs ,and then putting the ihs back , result is a smaller gap between the chip and ihs , and they did get some good results with intels default paste. In other words just removing the silicone alone already helped...


Most people who splurt pigeon poop never learned about that or they are fans.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> The paste itself used by intel is actually really good.... i've seen people delid a 7700k and just remove the glue/silicon that holds the ihs ,and then putting the ihs back , result is a smaller gap between the chip and ihs , and they did get some good results with intels default paste. In other words just removing the silicone alone already helped...
> 
> So we can add a price of a delliding tool to the price of the cpu than... that adds up.
> Also because of a needed new mobo prise goes even bigger... in the end the price comes out to also something expensive


not really it seems worse than AS5 https://www.computerbase.de/2015-12/intel-skylake-heatspreader-delid-die-mate-test/2/ worse than soviet TIM, in case of HWR
https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/uncategorized/anton-shilov/intels-devils-canyon-chips-ngptim-is-still-not-efficient-research/


----------



## MaKeN

Intells tim is not better then as5 or mx-4 or noctuas , its a bit not by much worse then them , im not defending their tim , but from my own expirience i can tell that using anything but not LM under ihs , int a really short time becomes degraded/bad in thermal conductivity, intells paste shouldn't as i asume ... but anyway i wont argue ... i havent tried intells tim myself is just what ive read .... i did try mx-4 and noctua, they wont stand long.

But then again , delliding .....


----------



## pez

It's never been that the stock TIM was bad, it's that the gap the silicone causes is larger than ideal and creates the heat 'issues'. If you want to make the argument that delidding is expensive because of a tool, you're better off using the razor method and you're only out of about $2 plus the cost of the CLU.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I see...
> so there is no hope that this chip would run not as hot as 7700k ?


Expect 8700K to run hotter than a 7700K given 2 more "Kaby" cores to add to the heat


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> It's never been that the stock TIM was bad, it's that the gap the silicone causes is larger than ideal and creates the heat 'issues'. If you want to make the argument that delidding is expensive because of a tool, you're better off using the razor method and you're only out of about $2 plus the cost of the CLU.


Much higher risk of destroying the CPU with the razor blade method though, especially if its your first rodeo.


----------



## wingman99

I expect the i7 8700k to run as hot and cost the same as the i7 7800X .


----------



## b0oMeR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I expect the i7 8700k to run as hot and cost the same as the i7 7800X .


But not quite as hot as the Ryzen chips of course.

Ryzen chips are literally a volcano spewing out of a chip. Need a bucket to contain the lava...


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *b0oMeR*
> 
> But not quite as hot as the Ryzen chips of course.
> 
> Ryzen chips are literally a volcano spewing out of a chip. Need a bucket to contain the lava...


Yeah, sure.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Much higher risk of destroying the CPU with the razor blade method though, especially if its your first rodeo.


Indeed. I'd say the razor blade method is either much cheaper, or much more expensive, depending on a combination of skill, practice, attention to detail, and luck. Certainly not something that should be required of a $300+ part.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Much higher risk of destroying the CPU with the razor blade method though, especially if its your first rodeo.


If you treat like you should treat just about any PC part, it's really not hard. My first delid was done using the razor method and as long as you exert the patience you should, it's honestly better than spending $30-50 on a kit. I did end up buying a kit to do my 7700K, though. The biggest downside to the razor method is the time it takes to do it.


----------



## Ding Chavez

Intel really needs to redesign the top cover on chips it's terrible. The new 6 cores will create more heat, if they use the same setup as on the 7700K I'd expect the heat issues to be even worse.

How hard is it to make it a lot better, doesn't seem too hard, what are they doing seems ******ed.

Ryzen only clocks to 4GHz so a lot less heat, how hot would Ryzen be at say 4.8GHz, probably very hot.

I think my old Athlon 1GHz just had the top of the chip directly to the heatsink, no cover or poop on top of it, don't know why they don't do it better.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Well, Ryzen is AMD's very first attempt to compete with an Intel-like design. Intel has had literally a decade to perfect their methods. I fully expect Zen 2 to dramatically increase clock speeds (and they already have a decent efficiency lead over Intel). At any rate, Intel should just be soldering their chips, end of story. Its not that costly (especially when you factor in Intel's built-in margin advantage over AMD).


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Well, Ryzen is AMD's very first attempt to compete with an Intel-like design. Intel has had literally a decade to perfect their methods. I fully expect Zen 2 to dramatically increase clock speeds (and they already have a decent efficiency lead over Intel). At any rate, Intel should just be soldering their chips, end of story. Its not that costly (especially when you factor in Intel's built-in margin advantage over AMD).


What do you mean AMD is more efficient than Intel? Intel has a higher IPC then AMD.


----------



## brucethemoose

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Well, Ryzen is AMD's very first attempt to compete with an Intel-like design. Intel has had literally a decade to perfect their methods. I fully expect Zen 2 to dramatically increase clock speeds (and they already have a decent efficiency lead over Intel). At any rate, Intel should just be soldering their chips, end of story. Its not that costly (especially when you factor in Intel's built-in margin advantage over AMD).
> 
> 
> 
> What do you mean AMD is more efficient than Intel? Intel has a higher IPC then AMD.
Click to expand...

It's also higher than ARM, but that doesn't tell us squat about power efficiency









Seriously though, I'm not sure about "better", but Zen does seem to be on par with Skylake in terms of power efficiency (at least with the server and desktop SKUs). Better in some workloads, worse in others.


----------



## czin125

http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_run.php?q=c2ffc9ef8eefd2ebdbeddae8cebc81b197f297aa9abccff2ca&l=en 37.0 ns inter-core latency

http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_system.php?q=cea598ab9eaf9daf9cbadde0cdfcdaa895a583ead7e6c0a895a086fec3f2d4b1d4e9d9ff8cb189&l=en new msi board

http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_run.php?q=c2ffcfe988e9d4ecddeadbe8dafc8eb383a5c0a598a88efdc0f8&l=en
Seems to go up to 118W in all core turbo mode.

Will they make an Z370 version of this board?
http://i.imgur.com/IqTtpg2.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/wEhBN2G.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/px3QnSe.jpg


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_run.php?q=c2ffcfe988e9d4ecddeadbe8dafc8eb383a5c0a598a88efdc0f8&l=en
> Seems to go up to 118W in all core turbo mode.


My 1700 at 3.9 goes up to 83.9 watts in the same test for reference: http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_run.php?q=c2ffcfe988e9d4ecddeadbefdafc8eb382a4c1a499a98ffcc1f1

Edit: Hmm they are using an older version of sisoftware sandra(2.20), what's up with that? I'm not familiar with this benchmark.


----------



## Nightbird

What's the news on solder versus glue?


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nightbird*
> 
> What's the news on solder versus glue?


Don't expect them to be soldered the Skylake-X 12-18 core parts aren't.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> It's never been that the stock TIM was bad, it's that the gap the silicone causes is larger than ideal and creates the heat 'issues'. If you want to make the argument that delidding is expensive because of a tool, you're better off using the razor method and you're only out of about $2 plus the cost of the CLU.


Quote:


> n both cases Intel's NGPTIM could only outperform KPT-8 (an old thermal paste developed in 1974 in the USSR) paste and was less efficient than inexpensive Arctic Cooling MX-2. Highly-efficient Coollaboratory Liquid Pro compound proved to be dramatically better than Intel's NGPTIM.


and the Soviet TIM was 1c hotter


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> My 1700 at 3.9 goes up to 83.9 watts in the same test for reference: http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_run.php?q=c2ffcfe988e9d4ecddeadbefdafc8eb382a4c1a499a98ffcc1f1
> 
> Edit: Hmm they are using an older version of sisoftware sandra(2.20), what's up with that? I'm not familiar with this benchmark.


Your CPU reads 3.9GHz , 83W seems low, did you get a golden chip that needs 1.2-1.3V? Is the test really that low power consumption on Ryzen?

I noticed a R7 1700 on Asrock Taichi @ 4GHz also uses ~86W. http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_run.php?q=c2ffcfe988e9d4ecddecd5e0d9ff8db080a6c3a69bab8dfec3f3&l=en


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brucethemoose*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Well, Ryzen is AMD's very first attempt to compete with an Intel-like design. Intel has had literally a decade to perfect their methods. I fully expect Zen 2 to dramatically increase clock speeds (and they already have a decent efficiency lead over Intel). At any rate, Intel should just be soldering their chips, end of story. Its not that costly (especially when you factor in Intel's built-in margin advantage over AMD).
> 
> 
> 
> What do you mean AMD is more efficient than Intel? Intel has a higher IPC then AMD.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's also higher than ARM, but that doesn't tell us squat about power efficiency
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously though, I'm not sure about "better", but Zen does seem to be on par with Skylake in terms of power efficiency (at least with the server and desktop SKUs). Better in some workloads, worse in others.
Click to expand...

Skylake is outdated and Kaby lake has 14nm+.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Your CPU reads 3.9GHz , 83W seems low, did you get a golden chip that needs 1.2-1.3V? Is the test really that low power consumption on Ryzen?
> 
> I noticed a R7 1700 on Asrock Taichi @ 4GHz also uses ~86W. http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_run.php?q=c2ffcfe988e9d4ecddecd5e0d9ff8db080a6c3a69bab8dfec3f3&l=en


I need 1.312 for 3.9. Ryzen and GloFo 14nm LPP are pretty efficient it seems.

The highest I've seen is with the cache b/w bench(122 watts): http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_run.php?q=c2ffcdfcdabbdae7d3e2d5ecddfb89b485a3c6a39eae88fbc6f6

An overclocked 7900x hits 308 watts in the same bench: http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_run.php?q=c2ffcdfcdabbdae7d3e2d0e9dcfa88b585a3c6a39eae88fbc6f6&l=en


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Skylake is outdated and Kaby lake has 14nm+.


Skylake still is the architecture Kaby Lake,Coffee Lake and Cannonlake will use









also clock per clock there is no performance gain


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Skylake is outdated and Kaby lake has 14nm+.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylake still is the architecture Kaby Lake,Coffee Lake and Cannonlake will use
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also clock per clock there is no performance gain
Click to expand...

Coffee lake will have six cores, 200MHz increase in clock speed from 14nm++.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Coffee lake will have six cores, 200MHz increase in clock speed from 14nm++.


yes still probably same IPC as skylake and similar OC abiliy


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I expect the i7 8700k to run as hot and cost the same as the i7 7800X .


yeah

since it won't be soldered

but it should clock higher and have better IPC (should still use ring bus like kaby) than skylake-x
5Ghz (hmm, maybe a tad more on average) kaby with 2 more cores
sounds good

throw in some eDRAM as icing on the cake

I'd be happy about the chip (minus me having to delid the thing) if I wouldn't have to throw out a perfectly good and great mainboard

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I'm not sure how much it matters if USB 3.1 gen 2 is off the chipset?


mmm

well first I was trying to point out that the new features are nothing to go all crazy about
we're not talking a jump between SATA 1.0 to M2 and SATA 3.0
also USB 3.1 should already be integrated
it's just getting a bump in speed

it's Wifi that gets integrated

secondly
ASmedia is always inferiour, always has been

thirdly

like I said
it's a nice touch for *mobile*, means laptops
for desktop, ehh

more features in the chipset instead of third party means more room under the hood
means *potentionally* more space for battery (or alternatively thinner device)
and usually it's more power efficient
again
a nice touch for mobile things
but its still only by a hand full of watts

and finally fourth

USB 3.1 gen 2 doubles the speed of gen 1
all you need is periphery to actually support that speed
and have a need to pay that premium

like I said
lame features to buy a new board for

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> I'm more on being rebellious about Intel pulling their petty BS.


I'm seeing it the same way

just some BS from Intel

if they can make a 7700k fit into HEDT then they could fit a coffee lake into z170/z270
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Much higher risk of destroying the CPU with the razor blade method though, especially if its your first rodeo.


well even if you got experience

the more core chips also tend to have more stuff under the IHS that can potentionally be broken

skylake-x seems to be difficult enough to delid, even with tools, that silicon lottery didn't want to do a delid service for those in the beginning


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Coffee lake will have six cores, 200MHz increase in clock speed from 14nm++.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yes still probably same IPC as skylake and similar OC abiliy
Click to expand...

Folks will be able to clock from 5.0GHz kaby lake to 5.2GHz with coffee lake with good cooling.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I expect the i7 8700k to run as hot and cost the same as the i7 7800X .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah
> 
> since it won't be soldered
> 
> but it should clock higher and have better IPC (should still use ring bus like kaby) than skylake-x
> 5Ghz (hmm, maybe a tad more on average) kaby with 2 more cores
> sounds good
> 
> throw in some eDRAM as icing on the cake
> 
> I'd be happy about the chip (minus me having to delid the thing) if I wouldn't have to throw out a perfectly good and great mainboard
Click to expand...

Yes I hate to throw away my great Gigabyte Z170 HD3.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Folks will be able to clock from 5.0GHz kaby lake to 5.2GHz with coffee lake with good cooling.


If by good you mean phase change, then sure.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Folks will be able to clock from 5.0GHz kaby lake to 5.2GHz with coffee lake with good cooling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If by good you mean phase change, then sure.
Click to expand...

I predict with coffee lake at 5.2GHz it will need less Vcore than kaby lake at 5.0GHz.


----------



## SuperZan

That'd be a hell of a trick after adding two cores, but stranger things have happened.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> That'd be a hell of a trick after adding two cores, but stranger things have happened.


More cores is increased AMPs, not Core voltage.


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> More cores is increased AMPs, not Core voltage.


I hope current requirement will not increase as well.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> More cores is increased AMPs, not Core voltage.
> 
> 
> 
> I hope current requirement will not increase as well.
Click to expand...

AMPs= current.


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> AMPs= current.


Oh the "capital letters with a small 's', almost didn't recognize that.








Well I was talking about per core current requirement.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> More cores is increased AMPs, not Core voltage.


If the process and architecture are not fundamentally different from Kaby, core voltage to drive two additional cores at a similar overclock is likely to increase slightly; best case scenario from a minor process improvement is that it would be about the same. All things being equal, adding cores is not a notable way to decrease required vcore.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> I hope current requirement will not increase as well.


Indubitably it shall.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> More cores is increased AMPs, not Core voltage.
> 
> 
> 
> If the process and architecture are not fundamentally different from Kaby, core voltage to drive two additional cores at a similar overclock is likely to increase slightly; best case scenario from a minor process improvement is that it would be about the same. All things being equal, adding cores is not a notable way to decrease required vcore.
Click to expand...

14nm to 14nm+ to 14nm++ lowers the power and improves the clock speed for each process.


----------



## nanotm

dropping voltage but increasing the amps will give the same power requirements and more heat, higher current = higher heat always


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> 14nm to 14nm+ to 14nm++ lowers the power and improves the clock speed for each process.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


I see the increased performance, but the voltage scaling appears to be level.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> 14nm to 14nm+ to 14nm++ lowers the power and improves the clock speed for each process.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I see the increased performance, but the voltage scaling appears to be level.
Click to expand...

Did you look at the intel chart? The power lowers with 14nm to 14nm+ to 14nm++. When folks go from sky lake to kaby lake the voltage and power went down stock and overclocked, it will be the same for coffee lake 14nm++.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Did you look at the intel chart? The power lowers with 14nm to 14nm+ to 14nm++. When folks go from sky lake to kaby lake the voltage and power went down stock and overclocked, it will be the same for coffee lake 14nm++.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


I took the time to spoiler-tag it, so yes, I looked at it. I see where 14nm++ is offering increased performance to 14nm, but the dynamic capacitance (voltage scaling) is level for all 14nm variants (and 10nm variants relative to 10nm). It'll offer better performance for the power, but the power requirements themselves aren't massively different from Skylake to Kaby Lake; 14nm+ was primarily oriented around achieving higher clockspeeds. 14nm++ appears to offer greater performance, but without substantially different power and thus thermal properties. I remain skeptical of a plethora of 5.2GHz overclocks without phase change or better.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> and the Soviet TIM was 1c hotter


Because there's no source there, I'll say this:

Unless they had a fresh batch of the TIM that Intel uses so they could recreate an actual test scenario, rather than re-using what was on the chip already, the quote is a bit misguided.

You should always see positive results with an enthusiast grade TIM, however.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Possible leak of Oct 5th release date


----------



## TMatzelle60

Can we expect some high end Z370 itx boards?


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Serious question here as I've never delayed a build due to something that's about to be released, but I am now.

How long should we expect to wait for unbiased reviews, and how unwise would it be to buy one of the new motherboards within a few weeks of release ?

In this case I'm mostly talking about the motherboards, but also the CPU's.

Ram shouldn't be an issue since this isn't something completely new like Ryzen.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Serious question here as I've never delayed a build due to something that's about to be released, but I am now.
> 
> How long should we expect to wait for unbiased reviews, and how unwise would it be to buy one of the new motherboards within a few weeks of release ?
> 
> In this case I'm mostly talking about the motherboards, but also the CPU's.
> 
> Ram shouldn't be an issue since this isn't something completely new like Ryzen.


I expect reviews in sep and availability oct / q4

I don't see why you would wait for a "Z390" over Z370. The added features are useless for most people building a gaming rig anyway.. I for sure don't need thunderbolt or intel audio solution..


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Serious question here as I've never delayed a build due to something that's about to be released, but I am now.
> 
> How long should we expect to wait for unbiased reviews, and how unwise would it be to buy one of the new motherboards within a few weeks of release ?
> 
> In this case I'm mostly talking about the motherboards, but also the CPU's.
> 
> Ram shouldn't be an issue since this isn't something completely new like Ryzen.


Just be sure to get something with quality VRMs, these processors will run hot (hotter than Kaby due to +2 cores) and will draw a lot of power. Having a quality mobo will ensure you get the best stability and performance out of your system.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I remain skeptical of a plethora of 5.2GHz overclocks without phase change or better.


A 14nm cpu needs phase change to run 5290mhz in this link http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?t=144316

http://www.overclock.net/t/1619559/kaby-lake-binning/100#post_25788712 A user here is able to run a 14nm+ cpu w/ an enthusiast board at 5400mhz ( 1.36v )and even 5455mhz with that watercooling setup. An average 14nm++ cpu should be capable of matching the clocks of a binned 14nm+ cpu. Kind of like how an average 7700K can consistently clock as high as a binned 6700K.


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> 14nm to 14nm+ to 14nm++ lowers the power and improves the clock speed for each process.


I was under the impression we were talking about OC only and not the stock, I mean 5.0-5.2 GHz CL, since KL i7 consumes about 40%+ more power at 11.1% more clocks(4.5 GHz vs 5GHz) and a little bit more clock requires even significant current/voltage.
7700k's stock is 4.2 GHz with 4.5 GHz single/quad turbo.
8700k's stock is 3.7 GHz with 4.7 GHz single and 4.3 GHz six core turbo.
If the info is correct then it does look like Intel hasn't reduced six core turbo for no reason as it could have been done so due to above normal temperature and since more temp has a relation to more power consumption and If we follow current voltage power characteristics of KL i7 then it is very likely that CL i7 might consume much higher power at 5.0 or 5.2 GHz.
I think at least 200watts when all cores at 5.0 GHz, Yeah this kinda speculation is not very strong and I might be wrong though, well, we'll see.

But regardless, if performance, stability and SMT scaling is good that frequency and with mid range air/AIO then who cares about power consumption.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> I expect reviews in sep and availability oct / q4
> 
> I don't see why you would wait for a "Z390" over Z370. The added features are useless for most people building a gaming rig anyway.. I for sure don't need thunderbolt or intel audio solution.


Z370 boards aren't out yet and that's what's needed for Coffee Lake.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Just be sure to get something with quality VRMs, these processors will run hot (hotter than Kaby due to +2 cores) and will draw a lot of power. Having a quality mobo will ensure you get the best stability and performance out of your system.


"draw alot of power" I doubt it


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Z370 boards aren't out yet and that's what's needed for Coffee Lake.


Neither are the CPU's - So it's all good..


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Z370 boards aren't out yet and that's what's needed for Coffee Lake.


Z370 is not yet out and ppl are already talking about Z390.

But knowing Intel pattern, they might release Z470 within 6 months haha.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> 14nm to 14nm+ to 14nm++ lowers the power and improves the clock speed for each process.
> 
> 
> 
> I was under the impression we were talking about OC only and not the stock, I mean 5.0-5.2 GHz CL, since KL i7 consumes about 40%+ more power at 11.1% more clocks(4.5 GHz vs 5GHz) and a little bit more clock requires even significant current/voltage.
> 7700k's stock is 4.2 GHz with 4.5 GHz single/quad turbo.
> 8700k's stock is 3.7 GHz with 4.7 GHz single and 4.3 GHz six core turbo.
> If the info is correct then it does look like Intel hasn't reduced six core turbo for no reason as it could have been done so due to above normal temperature and since more temp has a relation to more power consumption and If we follow current voltage power characteristics of KL i7 then it is very likely that CL i7 might consume much higher power at 5.0 or 5.2 GHz.
> I think at least 200watts when all cores at 5.0 GHz, Yeah this kinda speculation is not very strong and I might be wrong though, well, we'll see.
> 
> But regardless, if performance, stability and SMT scaling is good that frequency and with mid range air/AIO then who cares about power consumption.
Click to expand...

I was just showing that the coffee lake stock clock went up 200 MHz to 4.7GHz and that would translate from skylake ~5.0GHz to coffee lake ~5.2GHz overclock. Power will go up with 6 cores coming from 4 cores.


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> I took the time to spoiler-tag it, so yes, I looked at it. I see where 14nm++ is offering increased performance to 14nm, but the dynamic capacitance (voltage scaling) is level for all 14nm variants (and 10nm variants relative to 10nm).


That's power usage - they're showing all three processes at the same voltage, basically, and power staying the same while performance improves notably.

At the same volts we just know that 14nm did 4.7ghz, 14nm+ did 5.0ghz and that jump to 14nm++ is supposed to be several times larger - similar gains apply to both low and high clock speeds.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Z370 boards aren't out yet and that's what's needed for Coffee Lake.
> 
> 
> 
> Z370 is not yet out and ppl are already talking about Z390.
> 
> But knowing Intel pattern, they might release Z470 within 6 months haha.
Click to expand...

I want to upgrade to both the Z370 and Z390 I hope it's every six months like you say.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Don't get me wrong i love intel but this whole 6 month cycle is getting annoying lol


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> Because there's no source there, I'll say this:
> 
> Unless they had a fresh batch of the TIM that Intel uses so they could recreate an actual test scenario, rather than re-using what was on the chip already, the quote is a bit misguided.
> 
> You should always see positive results with an enthusiast grade TIM, however.


there source is linked in the article but it was comparing HWR TIM which is probably the same as SKL TIM. also as bad as a TIM from 1974, that is just silicone based tim
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Neither are the CPU's - So it's all good..


it makes sense to wait the platform news if z370 wil have the same compatibility as Z270 only 1 cycle


----------



## wingman99

Skylake was Q3'15, kaby lake Q1'17 coffee lake Q4'17. I don't see six months yet.


----------



## JackCY

Launch date and reviews?


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> Launch date and reviews?


I would think October. They still have yet to announce when they will release.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> That's power usage - they're showing all three processes at the same voltage, basically, and power staying the same while performance improves notably.
> 
> At the same volts we just know that 14nm did 4.7ghz, 14nm+ did 5.0ghz and that jump to 14nm++ is supposed to be several times larger - similar gains apply to both low and high clock speeds.


That I understood and agreed with. What I'm saying is that the power requirements and thermal characteristics at a given voltage are not going to be reduced in any significant way. At a KL quad-core 5GHz level, we're already talking about delids and excellent cooling if you're interested in real stability. My contention is that adding two cores to the package is going to mitigate some of those process gains in terms of power and thus thermals. 5GHz will, in my opinion, again be the province of delids and custom loops and the tap out point for the majority of setups. I'll be happy to be wrong, but I'll need to see proof in practical testing before I'm sold on 14nm++ being so revolutionary.


----------



## kd5151

6 months is better than 6 years.









RiP Sandy Bridge 2011-2017.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> That I understood and agreed with. What I'm saying is that the power requirements and thermal characteristics at a given voltage are not going to be reduced in any significant way. At a KL quad-core 5GHz level, we're already talking about delids and excellent cooling if you're interested in real stability. My contention is that adding two cores to the package is going to mitigate some of those process gains in terms of power and thus thermals. 5GHz will, in my opinion, again be the province of delids and custom loops and the tap out point for the majority of setups. I'll be happy to be wrong, but I'll need to see proof in practical testing before I'm sold on 14nm++ being so revolutionary.


Not really. I've hit 5 GHz on a 7700K no delid using a 80$ AIO


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Not really. I've hit 5 GHz on a 7700K no delid using a 80$ AIO


Not in any serious workload you don't. Not talking about games, of course.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Not in any serious workload you don't. Not talking about games, of course.


Yeah. Rock solid.

I'm not sure why you would even doubt that. Because your Ryzen can't hit 4 GHz stable?

Plenty of people hit 5 GHz on 7700K without delidding. Delid can help with temps but it's doable without. Maybe look in the 7700K thread.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> That I understood and agreed with. What I'm saying is that the power requirements and thermal characteristics at a given voltage are not going to be reduced in any significant way. At a KL quad-core 5GHz level, we're already talking about delids and excellent cooling if you're interested in real stability. My contention is that adding two cores to the package is going to mitigate some of those process gains in terms of power and thus thermals. 5GHz will, in my opinion, again be the province of delids and custom loops and the tap out point for the majority of setups. I'll be happy to be wrong, but I'll need to see proof in practical testing before I'm sold on 14nm++ being so revolutionary.
> 
> 
> 
> Not really. I've hit 5 GHz on a 7700K no delid using a 80$ AIO
Click to expand...

I hope that translates to increased clock for coffee lake.


----------



## TMatzelle60

It only sucks that i was about to build the 7700K build now with new stuff coming i have my computer parts (Case, AIO, PSU) sitting for the Z370 itx build now


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Not really. I've hit 5 GHz on a 7700K no delid using a 80$ AIO


What sort of stability testing?

I won't discount the silicon lottery, but your sample size of one does not a universal fact make.

Edit: Scrolling through the information in Darkwizzie's KL OC thread, I'm seeing that the majority of chips at 5GHz or better are delidded. Again, I'm not discounting the possibility of lottery winners that don't need a delid, but I am saying that these chips are not standard.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> What sort of stability testing?
> 
> I won't discount the silicon lottery, but your sample size of one does not a universal fact make.
> 
> Edit: Scrolling through the 7700k leaderboard thread, I'm seeing that the majority of chips at 5GHz or better are delidded. Again, I'm not discounting the possibility of lottery winners that don't need a delid, but I am saying that these chips are not standard.


Well, you can lower PPL voltage to reduce temps alot. I've hit 4.8 GHz on another 7700K using cheap air too (Scythe Kotetsu). I'm sure it would hit 5 GHz with better cooling like the other 7700K I overclocked.

Prime95 and LinX.

Most people just settle with 5 GHz I guess, delid or not, it's doable on most regardless (if you know what you're doing). It's a nice number. Just like 4 GHz on Ryzen. It's doable in most cases. From my experience 7700K hitting 5 GHz is more normal than Ryzen hitting 4... The 1600 and 1700 I tried maxed out at 3925 and 3950. 4 GHz was never totally stable (Maybe if it was my own build I would have bothered using hours and hours to optain it, but it was not). Just like most Ryzen reviews, they use Ryzen Master or change multi and run a few benches, never test for totalt stability - That's not how I overclock.


----------



## chaosblade02

Have there been any comments from Intel about putting better thermal compound under the lids of the new CPU line? Those 2 extra cores are going to produce more heat, and if they put the same stuff under the lids as they did with Kaby, they're going to run very hot, which means we probably won't be OCing these very much on air.

I'm thinking about upgrading, but if Intel doesn't put quality thermal compound under the lids, then I'm probably just gonna wait for the 10nm chip, which is likely to run cooler.

I've seen temps for kaby with no delid on air that run even hotter than my old Sandy Bridge would run under loads. I'm talking Sandy Bridge OC'd to 4.5 on a 212+ cooler running at lower temps than kaby @ 4.5ghz on the same cooler. Sandy Bridge runs cooler than Kaby with no delid? HAHAHAHHAHA. That's horrendously pathetic.

If it wasn't for the fact that Zen processors also run hot, and don't OC very well, I'd have bought one already. It's almost like both Intel and AMD are conspiring to screw OCers. Intel should at least put better thermal compound under the lids of the K models. I'd rather pay Intel $10 more than the current price for an I7 K model that I don't have to freaking de-lid.

I don't think Coffee Lake is going to be that much better over Broadwell to justify an upgrade, anyway. Going from sandy, or ivy to coffee would be a considerable upgrade though.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chaosblade02*
> 
> Have there been any comments from Intel about putting better thermal compound under the lids of the new CPU line? Those 2 extra cores are going to produce more heat, and if they put the same stuff under the lids as they did with Kaby, they're going to run very hot, which means we probably won't be OCing these very much on air.
> 
> I'm thinking about upgrading, but if Intel doesn't put quality thermal compound under the lids, then I'm probably just gonna wait for the 10nm chip, which is likely to run cooler.
> 
> I've seen temps for kaby with no delid on air that run even hotter than my old Sandy Bridge would run under loads. I'm talking Sandy Bridge OC'd to 4.5 on a 212+ cooler running at lower temps than kaby @ 4.5ghz on the same cooler. Sandy Bridge runs cooler than Kaby with no delid? HAHAHAHHAHA. That's horrendously pathetic.
> 
> If it wasn't for the fact that Zen processors also run hot, and don't OC very well, I'd have bought one already. It's almost like both Intel and AMD are conspiring to screw OCers. Intel should at least put better thermal compound under the lids of the K models. I'd rather pay Intel $10 more than the current price for an I7 K model that I don't have to freaking de-lid.
> 
> I don't think Coffee Lake is going to be that much better over Broadwell to justify an upgrade, anyway. Going from sandy, or ivy to coffee would be a considerable upgrade though.


Sandy bridge is only 3.40 GHz then kaby lake is 4.4 GHz on 4 core load.


----------



## chaosblade02

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Sandy bridge is only 3.40 GHz then kaby lake is 4.4 GHz on 4 core load.


Which goes further into the point I was making. SB OC'd by a considerably higher % margin still runs cooler than Kaby OC'd at a lower % margin. On average. Using the same cooler.


----------



## Lass3

SB is considerably slower than KL when both are at the same clock, not sure why this matters


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chaosblade02*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Sandy bridge is only 3.40 GHz then kaby lake is 4.4 GHz on 4 core load.
> 
> 
> 
> Which goes further into the point I was making. SB OC'd by a considerably higher % margin still runs cooler than Kaby OC'd at a lower % margin. On average. Using the same cooler.
Click to expand...

I'm using the same cooler as Sandy bridge and kaby lake overclock higher and cooler than my sandy bridge I use to have. Sandy bridge is soldered IHS and I'm still running cooler with kaby lake increased overclock.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> It only sucks that i was about to build the 7700K build now with new stuff coming i have my computer parts (Case, AIO, PSU) sitting for the Z370 itx build now


Yeah, my build is delayed until we find out if CL is worth it.

Also have to take into consideration what I was coming from.


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> That I understood and agreed with. What I'm saying is that the power requirements and thermal characteristics at a given voltage are not going to be reduced in any significant way. At a KL quad-core 5GHz level, we're already talking about delids and excellent cooling if you're interested in real stability. My contention is that adding two cores to the package is going to mitigate some of those process gains in terms of power and thus thermals. 5GHz will, in my opinion, again be the province of delids and custom loops and the tap out point for the majority of setups. I'll be happy to be wrong, but I'll need to see proof in practical testing before I'm sold on 14nm++ being so revolutionary.


4.7ghz is easy mode for Kaby, though, and that was your
Quote:


> delids and excellent cooling if you're interested in real stability


of the original skylake


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> 4.7ghz is easy mode for Kaby, though, and that was your
> of the original skylake


Yes, but assuming a general mean 300MHz advantage at identical voltage between SKL and KL at a 1:1 core count, I think it's reasonable to suggest that adding two cores will alter the power requirements and thus the thermal properties of the six-core chips. I'm not discounting that 14nm++ will be another step forward for Intel, I'm only theorising that these advances will largely be expended in adding additional cores to the package.

Simply put, 14nm to 14nm+ allowed for higher clocks at a given voltage with identical core counts. The 7800X doesn't allow for a great comparison, because it's using a distinctly different mesh design, but that's still six cores on 14nm+. Assuming that 14nm++ improves the thermal and power situation considerably to a best case, we're still likely left with a part that performs thermally like a quad-core KL. Six cores at 5GHz on good cooling isn't anything to sneeze at. I'm just advising people not to count on 5.2GHz AIO overclocks on these chips.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Neither are the CPU's - So it's all good..


it makes sense to wait the platform news if z370 wil have the same compatibility as Z270 only
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> 4.7ghz is easy mode for Kaby, though, and that was your
> of the original skylake


I think that intel possibly reduced slihgly the gap on 7700k but still not close enough


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> SB is considerably slower than KL when both are at the same clock, not sure why this matters


Lol, SB is 6 years older than KL too. A 5GHz 2600K doesn't seem 6 years slower than a 5GHz 7700K IMO. To keep it in perspective, how much faster was the 2600K than a Prescott Pentium 4?

The stagnation is real.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Lol, SB is 6 years older than KL too. A 5GHz 2600K doesn't seem 6 years slower than a 5GHz 7700K IMO. To keep it in perspective, how much faster was the 2600K than a Prescott Pentium 4?
> 
> The stagnation is real.


Well apart from price you have to compare something with more cores from Intel. I mean when 2600K came out Intel only had 6 Core for High end. Up until now they had 10 Core and now 18 Core. Yeah 2600K to 7700K is a small upgrade. I have been using my 3770K and need a replacement but probably will wait for PCIE4 before making the upgrade.


----------



## wingman99

Sandy bridge does not do to bad overclocked, take a look at this Video.


----------



## Scotty99

Some of those charts are goofy, how is a stock 6900k beating a 5.1ghz 7700k in watch dogs?


----------



## evensen007

Ive got a 4.7 overclocked sandy pushing a 1080ti just fine at 3440x1440. This CL would be a 'nice to have', but i definitely dont feel like i need to upgrade. Its more about wanting the new chipset features, byt even then i could go either way.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Well apart from price you have to compare something with more cores from Intel. I mean when 2600K came out Intel only had 6 Core for High end. Up until now they had 10 Core and now 18 Core. Yeah 2600K to 7700K is a small upgrade. I have been using my 3770K and need a replacement but probably will wait for PCIE4 before making the upgrade.


Not with a 1080Ti, it isn't. My 2700K OC'd to 4.5GHz just bottlenecks my 1080Ti.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Not with a 1080Ti, it isn't. My 2700K OC'd to 4.5GHz just bottlenecks my 1080Ti.


Never played a game where the CPU was holding me back.


----------



## Scotty99

You have a 4k monitor.....you arent going to find a CPU bottleneck there.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You have a 4k monitor.....you arent going to find a CPU bottleneck there.


Exactly.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You have a 4k monitor.....you arent going to find a CPU bottleneck there.


I test all resolutions and really never see the GPU under 99%. Who in the right mind would get 1080 Ti for 1080p. 1440p or 4K is the only option. Even if I am being held back by 3770K its so minuscule or game is poorly optimized.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Some of those charts are goofy, how is a stock 6900k beating a 5.1ghz 7700k in watch dogs?


Because it's Watch Dogs 2. It takes good advantage of high core counts.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Some of those charts are goofy, how is a stock 6900k beating a 5.1ghz 7700k in watch dogs?


The 6900k has 8 cores and he is testing games that use more than 4 cores.


----------



## Scotty99

There are plenty of games that use more than 4 cores, that is the first time ive ever seen a stock CPU beating an overclocked 7700k. EIther way ive heard tons of people say watch dogs 2 is the worst optimized game in the history of PC games, so probably cant take much from those results.


----------



## b0oMeR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Yeah, sure.


It's true this is the remnants of my Ryzen.


----------



## Scotty99

If there is one thing that ryzen isnt is hot. Nearly 1.4v into my chip it never see's 70c with an air cooler. Really hoping coffee is soldered, i went from sandy to ryzen and im used to cool running chips now lol.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *b0oMeR*
> 
> It's true this is the remnants of my Ryzen.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> If there is one thing that ryzen isnt is hot. Nearly 1.4v into my chip it never see's 70c with an air cooler. Really hoping coffee is soldered, i went from sandy to ryzen and im used to cool running chips now lol.


I would bet four figures on it not being soldered.


----------



## Scotty99

Ya you are probably right, but given the bad press intel has gotten recently maybe someone there with influence can change it.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Not in any serious workload you don't. Not talking about games, of course.


Why are you telling him what his CPU can do? Unless you know him or something.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> What sort of stability testing?
> 
> I won't discount the silicon lottery, but your sample size of one does not a universal fact make.
> 
> Edit: Scrolling through the 7700k leaderboard thread, I'm seeing that the majority of chips at 5GHz or better are delidded. Again, I'm not discounting the possibility of lottery winners that don't need a delid, but I am saying that these chips are not standard.


Want to point out, if you're talking about my threads, they're not supposed to be leaderboards. The entries are supposed to be voltage levels people are willing to run, and it's not supposed to be a contest.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You have a 4k monitor.....you arent going to find a CPU bottleneck there.


Depends on the game. And as GPU tech gets faster while single thread perf continues to improve at a snail's pace, my situations will just be more and more CPU bound even as I go up in resolution.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *b0oMeR*
> 
> It's true this is the remnants of my Ryzen.


Jeeze, we get it. You don't like AMD. You're like Guttheslayer team blue version.

(Only more annoying and scams people...)


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> If there is one thing that ryzen isnt is hot. Nearly 1.4v into my chip it never see's 70c with an air cooler. Really hoping coffee is soldered, i went from sandy to ryzen and im used to cool running chips now lol.


I don't think your looking at it correctly. I can run i7 7700k at 4.0GHz beat Ryzen IPC and run cooler. Intel does not care about overclocking to use soldered IHS on just a few k series folks.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Want to point out, if you're talking about my threads, they're not supposed to be leaderboards. The entries are supposed to be voltage levels people are willing to run, and it's not supposed to be a contest.


That's fine, it was just meant colloquially in the sense that many CPU overclocking threads are titled 'leaderboard' or '5GHz club' or whatever. I'll happily amend what I said to 'Scrolling through the information in @Darkwizzie's KL OC thread'.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> That's fine, it was just meant colloquially in the sense that many CPU overclocking threads are titled 'leaderboard' or '5GHz club' or whatever. I'll happily amend what I said to 'Scrolling through the information in @Darkwizzie's KL OC thread'.


Sure, that's cool. Just didn't want people to get the wrong idea is all.


----------



## SuperZan

Fair play







and for what it's worth, I also take the data from that thread more seriously than some of the more cavalier suicide-run threads. Fun-runs are neat, but 24/7 expectations are much more important for most people.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Never played a game where the CPU was holding me back.


You're a high resolution 60 Hz gamer, that's why

But your 1080 Ti is being hold back in some games anyway. You probably just don't care as much about your fps and smoothness / responsiveness of games like us 144-240 Hz users

I hate 60 Hz for most games, if I really want to play a casual game in 2160p 60 Hz I'm using my TV and a controller


----------



## Cyro999

nvm


----------



## Mampus

I've got a feeling that this 8th Gen will be like 1st Gen Core Series. It's good for it's time, but when the next Gen (2nd) come out , it got destroyed by architecture disadvantages compared to the next Gen...

Just my 2c


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> You're a high resolution 60 Hz gamer, that's why
> 
> But your 1080 Ti is being hold back in some games anyway. You probably just don't care as much about your fps and smoothness / responsiveness of games like us 144-240 Hz users
> 
> I hate 60 Hz for most games, if I really want to play a casual game in 2160p 60 Hz I'm using my TV and a controller


My 3770K get 150 fps + in BF1, Overwatch, CS:GO. That is all I care about. If you want to get a CPU for that one game that does not run high fps then what is your problem. 20% faster 7700K is not going to go from 70 fps to 140 fps.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> AFAIK the 7800x was also using *14nm*, not 14nm+. Like most of the intel enthusiast platform, they're based on an older core design and process


https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Intel-Core-i9-7900X-10-core-Skylake-X-Processor-Review


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Never played a game where the CPU was holding me back.


RTS there you have it








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Depends on the game. And as GPU tech gets faster while single thread perf continues to improve at a snail's pace, my situations will just be more and more CPU bound even as I go up in resolution.


yeha that doesnt worklike that if you are having lower FPS is because it is GPU bound








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mampus*
> 
> I've got a feeling that this 8th Gen will be like 1st Gen Core Series. It's good for it's time, but when the next Gen (2nd) come out , it got destroyed by architecture disadvantages compared to the next Gen...
> 
> Just my 2c


more like the 10th gen of Core CPUs will be that.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> yeha that doesnt worklike that if you are having lower FPS is because it is GPU bound


???


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> ???


higher resolution is more demanding to GPU, the CPU cant be bottlenecked even more unless you add more frames


----------



## kmac20

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> higher resolution is more demanding to GPU, the CPU cant be bottlenecked even more unless you add more frames


Uh, what?


----------



## nanotm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kmac20*
> 
> Uh, what?


I think he's saying the gpu does all the work of creating/drawing the frames, and rendering the textures for the static stuff, whilst the cpu renders the moving parts, passing them inside the frame back top the gpu for display, when the resolution goes up the gpu tends to work slower meaning lower frame rates and when the frame rate drops the cpu's workload decreases,

so swapping from low res to high res without changing anything else the gpu lowers the frame rate and the cpu gets to slack off....


----------



## kmac20

I understand that, but hes saying its impossible for a CPU to bottleneck before the GPU does which is just an absurd statement.

Go get a 1080Ti and a Core2Duo and tell me where your bottleneck is and why your FPS is low.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> The 7800X doesn't allow for a great comparison, because it's using a distinctly different mesh design, but that's still six cores on 14nm+
> 
> 
> 
> AFAIK the 7800x was also using *14nm*, not 14nm+. Like most of the intel enthusiast platform, they're based on an older core design and process
Click to expand...

Pcper.com says i9 is 14nm+







Link: https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Intel-Core-i9-7900X-10-core-Skylake-X-Processor-Review

Also link: http://wccftech.com/intel-core-i9-7900x-review-cpu-gaming-oc-performance/


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Skylake was Q3'15, kaby lake Q1'17 coffee lake Q4'17. I don't see six months yet.


Cannonlake fall in the same 8th generation hence my reasoning for 6 months. Intel plan to release them shortly after and therefore it falls in the same generation. Some marketing gimmick to cover their ass when the truth is still, Cannon-lake was the successor to kaby lake.


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Pcper.com says i9 is 14nm+
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Link: https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Intel-Core-i9-7900X-10-core-Skylake-X-Processor-Review
> 
> Also link: http://wccftech.com/intel-core-i9-7900x-review-cpu-gaming-oc-performance/


My bad then ;0


----------



## Contiusa

AMD overtakes Intel CPU sales in Germany. Intel is being hanging for a thread, meaning "i7-7700K".

Wake up Intel and do things right with Coffee Lake for once, price included... Don't expect us to pay HEDT prices because it won't stick. And don't make the mistake to release Coffee Lake in 2018. People are fed up, me included. The whole hexacore deal is already going sour after so many expectations for so many years.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> You're a high resolution 60 Hz gamer, that's why
> 
> But your 1080 Ti is being hold back in some games anyway. You probably just don't care as much about your fps and smoothness / responsiveness of games like us 144-240 Hz users
> 
> I hate 60 Hz for most games, if I really want to play a casual game in 2160p 60 Hz I'm using my TV and a controller
> 
> 
> 
> My 3770K get 150 fps + in BF1, Overwatch, CS:GO. That is all I care about. If you want to get a CPU for that one game that does not run high fps then what is your problem. 20% faster 7700K is not going to go from 70 fps to 140 fps.
Click to expand...

Clock for Clock the I7 7700k is 20% faster in games, 25% faster in multithreaded applications compared to the i7 2600k.

IPC review i7 7700k vs i7 2600k LINK: https://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/01/13/kaby_lake_7700k_vs_sandy_bridge_2600k_ipc_review/4


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Clock for Clock the I7 7700k is 20% faster in games, 25% faster in multithreaded applications compared to the i7 2600k.
> 
> IPC review i7 7700k vs i7 2600k LINK: https://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/01/13/kaby_lake_7700k_vs_sandy_bridge_2600k_ipc_review/4


so should we wait for CL or just get now? Will the CL i7 be just as fast in gaming?


----------



## JackCY

Either wait for Intel to catch up with AMD or just get AMD IMHO. 1600 or 1700 are the way to go for desktop PCs.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> AMD overtakes Intel CPU sales in Germany. Intel is being hanging for a thread, meaning "i7-7700K".
> 
> Wake up Intel and do things right with Coffee Lake for once, price included... Don't expect us to pay HEDT prices because it won't stick. And don't make the mistake to release Coffee Lake in 2018. People are fed up, me included. The whole hexacore deal is already going sour after so many expectations for so many years.


Intel could care less about the DIY market, OEM sales is what they care about.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Intel could care less about the DIY market, OEM sales is what they care about.


And how are they doing?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Clock for Clock the I7 7700k is 20% faster in games, 25% faster in multithreaded applications compared to the i7 2600k.
> 
> IPC review i7 7700k vs i7 2600k LINK: https://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/01/13/kaby_lake_7700k_vs_sandy_bridge_2600k_ipc_review/4


Yeah 20% is nothing.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Skylake was Q3'15, kaby lake Q1'17 coffee lake Q4'17. I don't see six months yet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cannonlake fall in the same 8th generation hence my reasoning for 6 months. Intel plan to release them shortly after and therefore it falls in the same generation. Some marketing gimmick to cover their ass when the truth is still, Cannon-lake was the successor to kaby lake.
Click to expand...

I still don't see Cannonlake 6 moths after coffee lake, Intel is not that fast with product updates in the past and I don't think things will change anytime soon.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Intel could care less about the DIY market, OEM sales is what they care about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And how are they doing?
Click to expand...

Intel's stock is 35.09USDPrice increase0.02 (0.06%)


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Clock for Clock the I7 7700k is 20% faster in games, 25% faster in multithreaded applications compared to the i7 2600k.
> 
> IPC review i7 7700k vs i7 2600k LINK: https://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/01/13/kaby_lake_7700k_vs_sandy_bridge_2600k_ipc_review/4
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah 20% is nothing.
Click to expand...

Yes very little IPC progression from the i7 2600k.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Intel could care less about the DIY market, OEM sales is what they care about.


If sales stall and Intel flops in the desktop market, there will be a domino effect to the OEM market as well whenever there is an AMD chip to compete. It is never good for a company to get such a blow and get such a bad rep. I mean, wasn't Göring who said "If one enemy bomb falls on Berlin, you can call me Meyer"? Look what happened.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Clock for Clock the I7 7700k is 20% faster in games, 25% faster in multithreaded applications compared to the i7 2600k.
> 
> IPC review i7 7700k vs i7 2600k LINK: https://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/01/13/kaby_lake_7700k_vs_sandy_bridge_2600k_ipc_review/4


20% faster after SIX years is hardly what I'd call setting the world on fire. How much faster clock-for-clock was the 2600K compared to a Q6600?


----------



## primalfear45365

I'm still on Q6600 waiting for coffee lake release, should be a huge upgrade for me.


----------



## Scotty99

Still no release date leak? Got my board and cpu sold, gonna be using HTPC board and cpu til coffee hits i guess lol.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Still no release date leak? Got my board and cpu sold, gonna be using HTPC board and cpu til coffee hits i guess lol.


Thinking OCT release maybe


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Thinking OCT release maybe


Is the only "info" we have so far the coffee mug lol? If its that close you think we would have had actual leaks, or a confirmation from intel even.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Clock for Clock the I7 7700k is 20% faster in games, 25% faster in multithreaded applications compared to the i7 2600k.
> 
> IPC review i7 7700k vs i7 2600k LINK: https://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/01/13/kaby_lake_7700k_vs_sandy_bridge_2600k_ipc_review/4
> 
> 
> 
> 20% faster after SIX years is hardly what I'd call setting the world on fire. How much faster clock-for-clock was the 2600K compared to a Q6600?
Click to expand...

With the Q6600 locked review sites do not overclock to test 2.4GHz VS i7 2600k 3.6GHz.


----------



## MGX1016

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Never played a game where the CPU was holding me back.


Flight Sim X or P3D

Literally been building PCs for this game for years and still don't have anything that really works well


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MGX1016*
> 
> Flight Sim X or P3D
> 
> Literally been building PCs for this game for years and still don't have anything that really works well


So true. I can run FSX and P3d without a graphic card and be just fine with like 30 fps


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> yeha that doesnt worklike that if you are having lower FPS is because it is GPU bound





> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> higher resolution is more demanding to GPU, the CPU cant be bottlenecked even more unless you add more frames


I see what's going on.

I said:

Quote:


> ...as GPU tech gets faster while single thread perf continues to improve at a snail's pace, my situations will just be more and more CPU bound...


That's the statement which I've selectively quoted. I think here you agree with me.

Quote:


> ...even as I go up in resolution


This is the final part of that sentence. It's meant to mean, situations get more CPU bound with time, which is true even in the case of higher resolutions (also meant to imply that CPU bound situations happen even in high resolution gaming). I didn't say or mean to say that my CPU gets more bottlenecked because I go up in resolution.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Why are you telling him what his CPU can do? Unless you know him or something.


He's neither the first nor the last to claim "I've got x overclock with cheap cooling on my x processor" without any screenshot of actual testing on this forum, we've got quite a few









Without delid if you push any workload that's pushing the CPU with a cheapo AIO it's more likely that you'll crash (due to thermals) than reach stability. Of course, it's a lottery.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Clock for Clock the I7 7700k is 20% faster in games, 25% faster in multithreaded applications compared to the i7 2600k.
> 
> IPC review i7 7700k vs i7 2600k LINK: https://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/01/13/kaby_lake_7700k_vs_sandy_bridge_2600k_ipc_review/4


This is misleading due to the fact that the 7700k was running faster ram, in most games that makes a huge difference, look at W3 for example:


















If you want to compare the 2600k to the 7700k spec for spec you have to use the exact same memory speed and timings too. Obviously in a real world scenario you can reach way faster memory speeds with the 7700k and push way past the 2600k but that's a different comparison.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Why are you telling him what his CPU can do? Unless you know him or something.
> 
> 
> 
> He's neither the first nor the last to claim "I've got x overclock with cheap cooling on my x processor" without any screenshot of actual testing on this forum, we've got quite a few
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Without delid if you push any workload that's pushing the CPU with a cheapo AIO it's more likely that you'll crash (due to thermals) than reach stability. Of course, it's a lottery.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Clock for Clock the I7 7700k is 20% faster in games, 25% faster in multithreaded applications compared to the i7 2600k.
> 
> IPC review i7 7700k vs i7 2600k LINK: https://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/01/13/kaby_lake_7700k_vs_sandy_bridge_2600k_ipc_review/4
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is misleading due to the fact that the 7700k was running faster ram, in most games that makes a huge difference, look at W3 for example:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to compare the 2600k to the 7700k spec for spec you have to use the exact same memory speed and timings too. Obviously in a real world scenario you can reach way faster memory speeds with the 7700k and push way past the 2600k but that's a different comparison.
Click to expand...

He did use faster than stock DDR4 2133mhz ram, it was DDR4 2666MHz. The test still stands 20% improvement in gaming.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> He did use faster than stock DDR4 2133mhz ram, it was DDR4 2666MHz. The test still stands 20% improvement in gaming.


From the link you've posted:
Quote:


> Just to be clear, the 7700K has 2666MHz DDR4 RAM, and our 2600K has 2133MHz DDR3 RAM.


Not the same ram speed (and probably different timings). So this isn't a purely clock for clock comparison.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Is the only "info" we have so far the coffee mug lol? If its that close you think we would have had actual leaks, or a confirmation from intel even.


I have a bad feeling that they will push Coffee Lake for 2018 to sell Skylake-Xs. The August false alarm was weird, and even weirder was the silence after that.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Is the only "info" we have so far the coffee mug lol? If its that close you think we would have had actual leaks, or a confirmation from intel even.
> 
> 
> 
> I have a bad feeling that they will push Coffee Lake for 2018 to sell Skylake-Xs. The August false alarm was weird, and even weirder was the silence after that.
Click to expand...

I watched the Intel live product launch and they said later this year they will have more information on coffee lake.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> He did use faster than stock DDR4 2133mhz ram, it was DDR4 2666MHz. The test still stands 20% improvement in gaming.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From the link you've posted:
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Just to be clear, the 7700K has 2666MHz DDR4 RAM, and our 2600K has 2133MHz DDR3 RAM.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not the same ram speed (and probably different timings). So this isn't a purely clock for clock comparison.
Click to expand...

You cant have the same ram speed the i7 2600k is the slower DDR3 and after the i7 7700k clock for clock with faster DDR4 2666Mhz ram it is only 20% faster in gaming.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I watched the Intel live product launch and they said later this year they will have more information on coffee lake.


Yeah... It all indicates 2018.


----------



## Scotty99

Ya im starting to think 2018 as well, guess ill be running a pentium for a bit longer lol.


----------



## kevindd992002

So what then would be the news for "fall"?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya im starting to think 2018 as well, guess ill be running a pentium for a bit longer lol.


did you sell your ryzen?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> did you sell your ryzen?


Basically, its on craigslist if it doesnt sell ill give it to my cousin lol. (he is using it now)


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I watched the Intel live product launch and they said later this year they will have more information on coffee lake.


Can you post a vid link with a time stamp ?

I've delayed a build to see if CL is worth it since I thought we were within 2 months of release.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I see what's going on.
> 
> I said:
> 
> That's the statement which I've selectively quoted. I think here you agree with me.
> 
> This is the final part of that sentence. It's meant to mean, situations get more CPU bound with time, which is true even in the case of higher resolutions (also meant to imply that CPU bound situations happen even in high resolution gaming). I didn't say or mean to say that my CPU gets more bottlenecked because I go up in resolution.


Then I misread the last part


----------



## kevindd992002

I hate this waiting game  Why can't Intel just release CL already, sigh.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> 20% faster after SIX years is hardly what I'd call setting the world on fire.


It's not bad for being two tocks ahead, architecturally. Kaby does clock moderately higher than Sandy as well.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> How much faster clock-for-clock was the 2600K compared to a Q6600?


Around 25%, with large variability, depending on tests.

A 2600K will clock way higher than is practical on a Q6600 though. Same high-end air cooler will get good samples of the Q6600 to 3.6GHz and a 2600K to 4.6GHz, stable.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> It's not bad for being two tocks ahead, architecturally. Kaby does clock moderately higher than Sandy as well.
> Around 25%, with large variability, depending on tests.
> 
> A 2600K will clock way higher than is practical on a Q6600 though. Same high-end air cooler will get good samples of the Q6600 to 3.6GHz and a 2600K to 4.6GHz, stable.


25% lol. In that rock have you been living.

http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2898-amd-phenom-ii-cpu-revisit-in-2017-x6-1090t-1055t/page-3

X6 loses to 2600K more than that.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> I hate this waiting game
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why can't Intel just release CL already, sigh.


Tell me about it i have my stuff sitting on the side lol i might just go with Kaby and so be it


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> 25% lol. In that rock have you been living.


~25% IPC differential between the Kentsfield/Yorkfield and Sandy Bridge samples I've owned, without taking into account HT or instructions not possessed by the former.

Yorkfield vs. Sandy, with a moderate clock speed advantage in favor of the sandy part (100MHz base, 400MHz turbo): http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/49?vs=363

Obviously, AVX, hyperthreading, and especially memory limited tasks, will skew dramatically in favor of Sandy, but core architectural IPC differential is in the ballpark of 25%.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2898-amd-phenom-ii-cpu-revisit-in-2017-x6-1090t-1055t/page-3
> 
> X6 loses to 2600K more than that.


Most of those tests (all games and thus a pretty narrow spectrum of tasks for an IPC comparison) are showing 20-35% advantage vs. similarly clocked 1090T and the stock 2500k. Core 2's IPC generally matched or very slightly beat Phenom II.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Tell me about it i have my stuff sitting on the side lol i might just go with Kaby and so be it


I'm in the same boat as you are, man. I have all the parts for a 7700K build and this CL news keeps on delaying my build.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> I'm in the same boat as you are, man. I have all the parts for a 7700K build and this CL news keeps on delaying my build.


Right now i have.

Fractal Design Core 500
Corsair SF450
Fractal Design Celsius S24

Probably going to pick up some small other stuff like Fans, Sata cables and stuff like that


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> I'm in the same boat as you are, man. I have all the parts for a 7700K build and this CL news keeps on delaying my build.


If they are planning only to release CL in 2018 they are going to lose alot more shares. I doubt Intel will be this slow with fire on their asses.

Gigabyte have already confirm Z370 at Q4 lunch. I am strongly rooting for that period for CL to be launch. At worst it will be paper launch and real availability is nearer to Xmas. Lol.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> If they are planning only to release CL in 2018 they are going to lose alot more shares. I doubt Intel will be this slow with fire on their asses.
> 
> Gigabyte have already confirm Z370 at Q4 lunch. I am strongly rooting for that period for CL to be launch. At worst it will be paper launch and real availability is nearer to Xmas. Lol.


I heard and read some people think its October because of the cups that were at the 8th gen launch party had october 2017 on it.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I watched the Intel live product launch and they said later this year they will have more information on coffee lake.
> 
> 
> 
> Can you post a vid link with a time stamp ?
> 
> I've delayed a build to see if CL is worth it since I thought we were within 2 months of release.
Click to expand...

I can't find a video of the live event during the eclipse.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I can't find a video of the live event during the eclipse.


----------



## TMatzelle60

They need to release already lol im waiting for this my build is on hold lol


----------



## TMatzelle60

Videocardz "WhyCry" is saying october release


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I can't find a video of the live event during the eclipse.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Time stamp 13.11 Intel mentions the desktop. No change in architecture only adding 2 cores.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Thanks. Time stamp 13.11 Intel mentions the desktop. No change in architecture only adding 2 cores.


So the only performance boost we would get is if games use multi cores? since the architecture is the same. So a 5.0ghz single core on Kaby will be the same on a single core 5.0ghz on Coffee


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Thanks. Time stamp 13.11 Intel mentions the desktop. No change in architecture only adding 2 cores.
> 
> 
> 
> So the only performance boost we would get is if games use multi cores? since the architecture is the same. So a 5.0ghz single core on Kaby will be the same on a single core 5.0ghz on Coffee
Click to expand...

Yes single core performance will be the same IPC Clock for Clock. However coffee lake will have a stock single core clock of 4.7GHz do to 14nm++.

If the games can use 6 cores coffee lake will do better.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Yes single core performance will be the same IPC Clock for Clock. However coffee lake will have a stock single core clock of 4.7GHz do to 14nm++.


Thanks its crazy its like wait dont wait. lol

Really hope for Oct release

Ill probably go head and purchase my M.2 drive, software, Fans


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> So the only performance boost we would get is if games use multi cores? since the architecture is the same. So a 5.0ghz single core on Kaby will be the same on a single core 5.0ghz on Coffee


More like you hope you haven't lost a chunk of IPC because of the two extra cores.

Hence all the talk about hoping it uses a new/slightly better refined process so you don't lose any single threaded performance.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> More like you hope you haven't lost a chunk of IPC because of the two extra cores.


More cores does not always mean less performance. IPC is the same like stated. Doubt intel would go backwards right now and lose more ground


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> More cores does not always mean less performance. IPC is the same like stated. Doubt intel would go backwards right now and lose more ground


Except the Skylake-X, that came with regressed IPC








Yeah CL probably shouldn't come like this.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> More cores does not always mean less performance. IPC is the same like stated. Doubt intel would go backwards right now and lose more ground
> 
> 
> 
> Except the Skylake-X, that came with regressed IPC
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah CL probably shouldn't come like this.
Click to expand...

Sky lake X had a architecture change to Mesh and Cache.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Like i said im excited to see a 6 Core.

Currently using a Gaming laptop while i wait.

6 core 12 threads = better streaming and multi tasking


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Sky lake X had a architecture change to Mesh and Cache.


as well as lower IPC.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Define "regressed"


----------



## sumitlian

Overall IPC or just the CPUz one ? Because specific wise if you want to take, Ryzen has the highest IPC in real world AES and SHA benchmark. but Ryzen do not have overall higher IPC than the competition.
Also look at the i7 5960X vs i7 6950X in CPUz 1.8.
Or do you really think Broadwell-E has 19.4% higher single thread IPC than Haswell-E, both are shown as 3.0 GHz ? I was in the impression that except the AVX part, haswell to kaby lake is under 20% IPC increase, or am I wrong ?
Now look at i7 4790k vs i7 6700k.
i7 6700k has only 5% higher IPC in there. What's right, this or the previous comaprison ?
Or is it the turbo that is working but CPUz ?

7900X has twice as much memory bandwidth than 7700k, both have 4.5 GHz max single core turbo. But 7900X is not faster.
Also 6950x has single core turbo of 4.0 GHz and 7900X has 4.5 GHz. Why is 7900X only 1.5% faster while having 12.5% higher core clock, memory channel same ?


Also look at this, this clearly isn't about multithreading right ? Then how is 7700k is that much fast.


Something similar in here as well, and there are many but lets not fill the whole thread with.


Gaming performance is looking good. And many times overclocked i9 is at the top too, I agree, Skylake-X is not lower IPC in all applications but there certainly are many where the performance per clock looks regressed, sometimes in single thread and sometimes in multithread.
Unlike previous generations, Skylake-X does not have overall high IPC.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> It's not bad for being two tocks ahead, architecturally. Kaby does clock moderately higher than Sandy as well.
> Around 25%, with large variability, depending on tests.
> 
> A 2600K will clock way higher than is practical on a Q6600 though. Same high-end air cooler will get good samples of the Q6600 to 3.6GHz and a 2600K to 4.6GHz, stable.


welll Since SB intel has been binning CPUs more often, 2600k were 3.4GHz nowadays 7700k is almost 4.4GHz


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> 7900X has twice as much memory bandwidth than 7700k, both have 4.5 GHz max single core turbo. But 7900X is not faster.
> Also 6950x has single core turbo of 4.0 GHz and 7900X has 4.5 GHz. Why is 7900X only 1.5% faster while having 12.5% higher core clock, memory channel same ?


You might want to read the title of the graph. It answers a lot of your questions here.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Overall IPC or just the CPUz one ? Because specific wise if you want to take, Ryzen has the highest IPC in real world AES and SHA benchmark. but Ryzen do not have overall higher IPC than the competition.
> Also look at the i7 5960X vs i7 6950X in CPUz 1.8.
> Or do you really think Broadwell-E has 19.4% higher single thread IPC than Haswell-E, both are shown as 3.0 GHz ? I was in the impression that except the AVX part, haswell to kaby lake is under 20% IPC increase, or am I wrong ?
> Now look at i7 4790k vs i7 6700k.
> i7 6700k has only 5% higher IPC in there. What's right, this or the previous comaprison ?
> Or is it the turbo that is working but CPUz ?
> 
> 7900X has twice as much memory bandwidth than 7700k, both have 4.5 GHz max single core turbo. But 7900X is not faster.
> Also 6950x has single core turbo of 4.0 GHz and 7900X has 4.5 GHz. Why is 7900X only 1.5% faster while having 12.5% higher core clock, memory channel same ?
> 
> 
> Also look at this, this clearly isn't about multithreading right ? Then how is 7700k is that much fast.
> 
> 
> Something similar in here as well, and there are many but lets not fill the whole thread with.
> 
> 
> Gaming performance is looking good. And many times overclocked i9 is at the top too, I agree, Skylake-X is not lower IPC in all applications but there certainly are many where the performance per clock looks regressed, sometimes in single thread and sometimes in multithread.
> Unlike previous generations, Skylake-X does not have overall high IPC.


How true because of the architecture failure of the new Mesh and Cache.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> How true because of the architecture failure of the new Mesh and Cache.


Mesh is OCing...keep in mind +30% as minimum with only a mare +200-250mV
Here's mine @3ghz, now is running 3300..Could not say IPC is very bad...keep in mind my memory is very poor...
220+ Single core CB15

And these are 24/7 gaming settings...pushing the CPU further is capable of 225+ SC scores...
Here's just w/o OC Mesh and even slower RAM speeds:


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Some dude has the 18 core 7980XE at 5 ghz. So more cores does not mean less IPC.

I found it in the X299 thread.


----------



## Cyph3r

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Some dude has the 18 core 7980XE at 5 ghz. So more cores does not mean less IPC.
> 
> I found it in the X299 thread.


IPC does not vary with clock speed btw.


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> How true because of the architecture failure of the new Mesh and Cache.


I wouldn't call it a failure, it is not a very big issue, it probably needs refinements. I'm sure future iteration of CPUs will be fixed if Intel ever launches similar architecture. It looks like core i9 is slower in latency sensitive applications, but it is very fast in bandwidth hevay SIMD based workload where most of the latencies can be hidden and this is where it utilizes the new cache very efficiently.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> I wouldn't call it a failure, it is not a very big issue, it probably needs refinements. I'm sure future iteration of CPUs will be fixed if Intel ever launches similar architecture. It looks like core i9 is slower in latency sensitive applications, but it is very fast in bandwidth hevay SIMD based workload where most of the latencies can be hidden and this is where it utilizes the new cache very efficiently.


Iirc the latency disadvantage can be "solved" by using faster memory with tighter timings and overclocking the mesh. Maybe someone who has the 6950x and the 7900x can compare the two with fast ram and OC.


----------



## DStealth

Correct - there are examples giving better transfer rates from memory than L3 ...of course despite the latency...
Good memory settings give less than 50ns access times also...


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyph3r*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Some dude has the 18 core 7980XE at 5 ghz. So more cores does not mean less IPC.
> 
> I found it in the X299 thread.
> 
> 
> 
> IPC does not vary with clock speed btw.
Click to expand...

Instructions per cycle increases with clock speed.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> How true because of the architecture failure of the new Mesh and Cache.
> 
> 
> 
> I wouldn't call it a failure, it is not a very big issue, it probably needs refinements. I'm sure future iteration of CPUs will be fixed if Intel ever launches similar architecture. It looks like core i9 is slower in latency sensitive applications, but it is very fast in bandwidth hevay SIMD based workload where most of the latencies can be hidden and this is where it utilizes the new cache very efficiently.
Click to expand...

Skylake X does worse in benchmarks compared to Broadwell-E I would call that a failure for a upgrade.


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Instructions per cycle increases with clock speed.


No, it really doesn't. Per cycle means per CLOCK cycle, as clock speed increases IPC stays the same.

In case anyone missed the sarcasm.


----------



## ACleverName

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Instructions per cycle increases with clock speed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


What? So if a truck with 50 pounds loaded going 30 miles a hour suddenly stomps on his gas to 47 miles a hour now has a 70 pound load?


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Instructions per cycle increases with clock speed.


How ? Please Elaborate.


----------



## bigjdubb

Maybe he was confusing instructions per cycle with instructions per second.


----------



## ACleverName

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> Maybe he was confusing instructions per cycle with instructions per second.


I think you may be correct good sir.


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> Maybe he was confusing instructions per cycle with instructions per second.


Technically, a second is a cycle.


----------



## CynicalUnicorn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> Technically, a second is a cycle.


Yes, but only at a clockrate of 1Hz.


----------



## nanotm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> Technically, a second is a cycle.


no a cycle 1 one hertz, the number of cycles is the speed of the processor, (for instance 1MHz) which means it running at 1 million cycles per second

if your ipc is 0.5 then increasing the sped ot 1 Ghz will still mean your IPC is 0.5, but you as an end user will see that your CPU is now working 1000x faster.... because its doing 500,000,000 instructions per second instead of 500,000 .... but the ipc value hasn't changed !


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> Technically, a second is a cycle.


Actually variable IPC with varying clock speed is not impossible.
You just have to add some circuit that will increase the number of multi stage pipelines at some specific stages of increasing clock speed. And there you go, you get variable IPC with variable clock speed.








Since such CPU doesn't exist, this talk is nothing more than a fantasy.


----------



## nanotm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Actually variable IPC with varying clock speed is not impossible.
> You just have to add some circuit that will increase the number of multi stage pipelines at some specific stages of increasing clock speed. And there you go, you get variable IPC with variable clock speed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since such CPU doesn't exist, this talk is nothing more than a fantasy.


yeah no doubt a quantum processor in the future will use such a thing as part of its power saving options to have a multiplier based on core load and boost speed, or the option to disable certain cores so your upping the ipc throughput on the chosen overclocked cores to get maximum throughput....

I cant see it myself because its an unnecessary level of complexity.... then again intel went with virtual cores which in a way already does this so who knows maybe they will continue to use it /


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nanotm*
> 
> yeah no doubt a quantum processor in the future will use such a thing as part of its power saving options to have a multiplier based on core load and boost speed, or the option to disable certain cores so your upping the ipc throughput on the chosen overclocked cores to get maximum throughput....
> 
> I cant see it myself because its an unnecessary level of complexity.... then again intel went with virtual cores which in a way already does this so who knows maybe they will continue to use it /


Yeah I agree, the idea might still bring some efficiency if that tech becomes reality in future. I mean most of instruction cycles do have holes( when reciprocal throughput for that instruction cycle is less than 1.0) in it if didn't get enough data but that cycle does consumes same power(though I have no further knowledge if this is actually truth or not, nevermind I am assuming it consumes same power out of my illiteracy). If you could detect the amount of incoming data and enable/disable new magic pipelines in advance inside the execution unit for that data set while letting the accuracy intact, we could definitely save some amps. But it still is invoking additional latency. Also we have no idea how much addition power that extra circuit require so this idea still doesn't sound that good. Looks like we will always have to compromise between performance and power. Well I am pretty sure scientists must have thought all about that long before I was born lol.


----------



## nanotm

yeah well a lot of people were claiming that the virtual cores were some kind of cheat on the power front....

but I suspect there is merit to that idea because when your not using them your chip runs at half power, it might also explain why intel cpu's run at around 80celcius with everything switched on and overclocked and amd run closer to 60celcius (given the same water cooling system and installed in the same case with the same fans present) so maybe there cheat to get the lower power specs is true and undoes itself as soon as you switch it all on and it heats up more...

hopefully in the future things will cost less go faster and have better thermal management but I doubt it, it seems like every new die size the chips get down graded in speed then gradually get clocked up to match the performance of the previous die size, with the same resultant overheat problems in each refresh of each generation....

maybe if they start using a different substrate they will figure out how to make the chips in double digit pico meter dies improve both output performance and thermal performance as well as taking much less electrical power to run, and hey the virtual core idea might just be the ultimate top out if your getting a 40 core 80 thread cpu that can run for 4 weeks off a single 3v battery









I suspect though that such efficiency will only be possible if your running an external heat sink on a star ship which to be fair is probably the only place such a cpu would ever be needed .... and maybe that's part of the reason why we don't have star ships cruising around our solar system, because we don't have the compute technology to support doing so.....


----------



## unityole

i wonder when will silicon lottery have binned chips for sale on these


----------



## Brutuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> welll Since SB intel has been binning CPUs more often, 2600k were 3.4GHz nowadays 7700k is almost 4.4GHz


Not really binning. SB was hitting 5Ghz left right and centre back in the day. Intel kept clocks low at first and mainly increased efficiency of higher clock speeds so that stock clocks could improve even if IPC didn't improve that much. Efficiency at high clocks took a large hit with FinFETs because it allowed Intel to target a specific clock speed with their fabs, usually resulting in the best efficiency around those clock speeds and overclocks a few hundred Mhz higher which usually coincides with what they want to launch their flagships at. Same thing with GF; their 14nm FinFET process is centred around mobile SoCs maxing out around 3.2Ghz and it shows with Ryzen being very efficient at 3.2-3.4Ghz and maxing out around 3.8-4.2 depending on the binning. (Very few making it above 4)
I doubt it's something specific to FinFETs entirely, but it really does seem like the process really does dictate how far a chip can OC more than anything else at the moment from what I've seen online.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brutuz*
> 
> Not really binning. SB was hitting 5Ghz left right and centre back in the day. Intel kept clocks low at first and mainly increased efficiency of higher clock speeds so that stock clocks could improve even if IPC didn't improve that much. Efficiency at high clocks took a large hit with FinFETs because it allowed Intel to target a specific clock speed with their fabs, usually resulting in the best efficiency around those clock speeds and overclocks a few hundred Mhz higher which usually coincides with what they want to launch their flagships at. Same thing with GF; their 14nm FinFET process is centred around mobile SoCs maxing out around 3.2Ghz and it shows with Ryzen being very efficient at 3.2-3.4Ghz and maxing out around 3.8-4.2 depending on the binning. (Very few making it above 4)
> I doubt it's something specific to FinFETs entirely, but it really does seem like the process really does dictate how far a chip can OC more than anything else at the moment from what I've seen online.


Intel sold Core i7 and i5 K SKU as lower clocked CPUs which the chance to get a CPU that was an exceptional clocker werent good enough you could get anything,

With Haswell R they have to release a 1GHz higher clocked CPU there had to be some sort of binning process to achieve 4.4/4GHz+

Now with Intel Skylake X the multicore CPUs arent really low on clock speed compared to their older counteter parts a 6900k is at most a 3.7GHz boost clock CPU with 3,2GHz base clock, a 7820x is a 4.2GHz Boost Clock cpu with a 3.6GHz base clock, there should be CPU


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I still don't consider a 7700K anywhere near the upgrade over a 2600K that a 2600K was over something like a C2Q (or especially a Duo which was priced more similarly to today's mainstream i7's).


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CynicalUnicorn*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> Technically, a second is a cycle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but only at a clockrate of 1Hz.
Click to expand...

That's what I said.

More instructions per second is the same as more IPC at 1Hz.

It was a joke, though.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nanotm*
> 
> yeah well a lot of people were claiming that the virtual cores were some kind of cheat on the power front....
> 
> but I suspect there is merit to that idea because when your not using them your chip runs at half power, it might also explain why intel cpu's run at around 80celcius with everything switched on and overclocked and amd run closer to 60celcius (given the same water cooling system and installed in the same case with the same fans present) so maybe there cheat to get the lower power specs is true and undoes itself as soon as you switch it all on and it heats up more...


By and large, SMT actually improves performance per watt. It's actually why it was reintroduced back with Nehalem...for every percent of power, it added more than two percent to performance in most tasks that utilized it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brutuz*
> 
> SB was hitting 5Ghz left right and centre back in the day.


I've had a lot of SB parts...never one that was what I'd consider stable at 5GHz.

I think my best 2700K reached 4.8GHz stable with enough cooling, but I normally ran it at 4.6GHz on air.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brutuz*
> 
> it really does seem like the process really does dictate how far a chip can OC more than anything else at the moment from what I've seen online.


Architecture is the overriding consideration here...process is secondary to that.

Intel's core architecture has generally been an accumulation of very gradual changes since Core 2, which is why we've seen peak stable clocks bouncing between 4GHz to 5GHz over the course of eight generations and node shrinks from 45nm to 14nm.

Process refinements have generally been done for manufacturing yields and power considerations first, and keeping clock speed up second.


----------



## Darkpriest667

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> By and large, SMT actually improves performance per watt. It's actually why it was reintroduced back with Nehalem...for every percent of power, it added more than two percent to performance in most tasks that utilized it.
> I've had a lot of SB parts...never one that was what I'd consider stable at 5GHz.
> 
> *I think my best 2700K reached 4.8GHz stable with enough cooling, but I normally ran it at 4.6GHz on air.*
> Architecture is the overriding consideration here...process is secondary to that.
> 
> Intel's core architecture has generally been an accumulation of very gradual changes since Core 2, which is why we've seen peak stable clocks bouncing between 4GHz to 5GHz over the course of eight generations and node shrinks from 45nm to 14nm.
> 
> Process refinements have generally been done for manufacturing yields and power considerations first, and keeping clock speed up second.


That's a 41% overclock.. what gets a 41% overclock these days?


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> That's a 41% overclock.. what gets a 41% overclock these days?


In this current era of CPUs, getting a 41% overclock would indicate the company set its stock clocks too low in the first place.


----------



## Brutuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> Architecture is the overriding consideration here...process is secondary to that.
> 
> Intel's core architecture has generally been an accumulation of very gradual changes since Core 2, which is why we've seen peak stable clocks bouncing between 4GHz to 5GHz over the course of eight generations and node shrinks from 45nm to 14nm.
> 
> Process refinements have generally been done for manufacturing yields and power considerations first, and keeping clock speed up second.


That last bit is very true for the most part: 14nm+ is Intel using their tightly integrated fabs to their advantage to design a process specifically to allow slightly higher clocks, it's much easier to modify an existing process than to shrink to an entirely new one and it allowed them to give us a new generation of CPUs despite not having the newest, smallest process ready yet. CFL is meant to use 14nm++ and OC slightly higher again with the exact same core design as Sky/Kaby Lake for the third time, meanwhile historical examples of architectural limitations preventing higher clocks happened regardless of new nodes in every single case with the Cyrix 6x86, first-gen Pentium III (ie. Pentium II with SSE) and Athlon64/Phenom line being good examples...Do you really think it's architecture that's dictating how fast we can clock a CPU still?

It's all down to process and has been for the longest time, it's also why making a CPU centred around high clock speeds doesn't make sense as even the "slower" designs that do more per clock can max out current processes quite easily. The last CPU line to be architecturally limited was the Athlon64/Phenom line and that was down to AMD reusing parts of those CPUs from as far back as the K7 or only having slight modifications (Apart from the obvious larger ones to include AMD64 and NX Bit support among other things) which shows, all of those CPUs max out around or just above 3Ghz regardless of cooling (ie. Athlon XP, Athlon64, Athlon64 x2, Phenom x4, etc) or process (130nm, 90nm and 65nm all have those CPUs landing within 300Mhz of each other. On LN2. Over 5 years of improvements when CPUs were vastly increasing in speed in comparison to today, hell even the 180nm Palomino Athlon XPs maxed out at around 2.3Ghz under LN2 to show you how long the K7/K8/K10 cores were limited in some way by their architecture for OCing. 130nm put the limit on the architecture and AMD didn't really fix it until K10.5 allowed 3.6-4.2Ghz to be a typical OC...limited again by process)

The fact that Intel can literally pretty much reuse the exact same core design, just change the process slightly (14nm to 14nm+) and allow for higher OCing across the board kinda gives the complete and utter process bottleneck away...Even the lower OCs for their higher end chips: An architectural limit would mean that if the typical HEDT CPU couldn't go above say, 4.5Ghz then neither could a smaller i5 or i7, instead its usually a temperature limit that prevents the OCs that the smaller chips can get (Makes sense, more cores = more heat) but that's something which has been dictated by process for a long time. (FinFETs especially allow both Intel and GF to specialise a process for a specific clock speed, Ryzen shows it completely: Built on a process for mobile SoCs that max out just above 3Ghz, its very efficient at those speeds and tops out at 4Ghz.)


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> That's a 41% overclock.. what gets a 41% overclock these days?


Not much of anything.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> In this current era of CPUs, getting a 41% overclock would indicate the company set its stock clocks too low in the first place.


Yeah, competition requires Intel to actually sell parts without gobs of headroom.


----------



## Nightbird

That fab advantage is basically insurmountable to AMD. They would need to come up with an architecture with 25% more IPC to make up for Intel's 25% clock freq fab advantage, and I doubt Intel's engineers left that much performance on the table. We'll see how much of that gap GloFo can close with the next iteration.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> That's a 41% overclock.. what gets a 41% overclock these days?


7900x/7820x(non boost) 6700k 5960x 5820k


----------



## Scotty99

The newest CPU you linked is 2 years old, when the context was suggesting something much more recent.

Bottom line is when sandy released they didnt need to clock them like do now, not only did AMD not have any competition it allowed them to sell the same product for 6 years by just turning clocks up.

This is also why i refused to buy a 7700k, 8700k changes the game.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> The newest CPU you linked is 2 years old, when the context was suggesting something much more recent.
> 
> Bottom line is when sandy released they didnt need to clock them like do now, not only did AMD not have any competition it allowed them to sell the same product for 6 years by just turning clocks up.


Skylake X has some months in the market? also 2 years is pretty much recent with the schedule intel has.2years is the same cycle Skylake has been sold as 2 different CPU lines

when 4790k, AMD still didnt have anything to be competitive,still Intel released it with higher clock speed than 4770k


----------



## Scotty99

They could have easily sold 4.5ghz 2600k's, their plan all along was to give minor clockspeed boosts every gen to give the illusion of progress.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> They could have easily sold 4.5ghz 2600k's, their plan all along was to give minor clockspeed boosts every gen to give the illusion of progress.


they already had done that the 1st gen Core CPU is 2.8GHz SB is 3.4Ghz, there was no need to increase clock speed further since the performance it delievered was a lot better than 1st gen


----------



## Scotty99

Well no, sandy was a major boost in IPC over nehalem.

Anywho, any new leaks on release date? Gettin itchy lol.


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well no, sandy was a major boost in IPC over nehalem.
> 
> Anywho, any new leaks on release date? Gettin itchy lol.


Me too, but no. There was this, though:

https://videocardz.com/72416/exclusive-asrock-z370-motherboards


----------



## stangflyer

Looking for some information or gaming benchmarks in higher res. I know that as res increases the gpu becomes more important than the cpu.

I game at 7680x1440 75hz now and I am considering a 3440x1400 minimum 100 hz or better GSync monitor. Next gen possible the 200hz hdr ones.

I have a 3570 non k running all cores at 4.2 24/7 at 1.1 volts. 16 gigs of DDR 3 at 1600mhz. 1080Ti is at 2025 while gaming.

Running at 7680x1440 75 hz or 3440x1440 100-120hz how many more frames would either a 7700k or CL 8700k at 4.6-4.8 get then my current pc?

I only game- no streaming - no encoding- just have TeamSpeak window, Steam friends and AB up on 4th extended monitor.

I would assume the minimum fps would go up some. But would average be much higher? Right now I am playing Titanfall2. If I am getting 70 average at my current setting what would a new pc get me? I would get 3200 or faster memory.

Any benches comparing CPU between generations at 2560x1440, 4k at 3440x1440 res. links?

Thanks


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Me too, but no. There was this, though:
> 
> https://videocardz.com/72416/exclusive-asrock-z370-motherboards


Whoa thats my board lol. Nice grey theme, wish they put beefier heatsinks on VRM tho.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stangflyer*
> 
> Looking for some information or gaming benchmarks in higher res. I know that as res increases the gpu becomes more important than the cpu.
> 
> I game at 7680x1440 75hz now and I am considering a 3440x1400 minimum 100 hz or better GSync monitor. Next gen possible the 200hz hdr ones.
> 
> I have a 3570 non k running all cores at 4.2 24/7 at 1.1 volts. 16 gigs of DDR 3 at 1600mhz. 1080Ti is at 2025 while gaming.
> 
> Running at 7680x1440 75 hz or 3440x1440 100-120hz how many more frames would either a 7700k or CL 8700k at 4.6-4.8 get then my current pc?
> 
> I only game- no streaming - no encoding- just have TeamSpeak window, Steam friends and AB up on 4th extended monitor.
> 
> I would assume the minimum fps would go up some. But would average be much higher? Right now I am playing Titanfall2. If I am getting 70 average at my current setting what would a new pc get me? I would get 3200 or faster memory.
> 
> Any benches comparing CPU between generations at 2560x1440, 4k at 3440x1440 res. links?
> 
> Thanks


TBH if i didnt play MMO's i would keep this ryzen chip as there is hardly any difference in the vast majority of games at 1440 and above.


----------



## Scotty99

In all honesty, MMO's are the only games people should even worry about CPU. The reason destiny 2 cannot hit 60 fps on console is the CPU inside of it, many better looking games on console can hit 60 fps no problem.


----------



## stangflyer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> TBH if i didnt play MMO's i would keep this ryzen chip as there is hardly any difference in the vast majority of games at 1440 and above.


Thanks for the quick reply. So you are saying that at res 2560x1440 and higher it does not do me any good to upgrade?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stangflyer*
> 
> Thanks for the quick reply. So you are saying that at res 2560x1440 and higher it does not do me any good to upgrade?


That's right, unless you play games that are 100% reliant on CPU for performance (mainly MMO's) then it really does not matter who you go with. The caveat is core count is starting to matter more in GPU bound games so you are due for an upgrade either way, i5's are on the way out.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stangflyer*
> 
> Thanks for the quick reply. So you are saying that at res 2560x1440 and higher it does not do me any good to upgrade?


There's def difference at 1440p *100+ Hz*. Ryzen has lower min, max, avg. fps in pretty much all games compared to 7700K. Tested and tried myself. Ryzen 1600 3.9 GHz and 1700 3.95 GHz vs 7700K 5 GHz. In some games the difference was pretty huge. You can easily find benchmarks that prove this.

High Hz gamers needs to think twice about going Ryzen, that's for sure.

People that use 60 Hz and just use "Ultra Preset" won't notice much difference.


----------



## Scotty99

While it is true that intel has higher fps for high refresh gamers, that is not near as big of an issue as MMO's. For example im completely fine with 150 fps in overwatch compared to 180, but im not cool with 50 fps vs 70 in an mmo. 75 vs 60 fps is actually a very noticeable difference, once you get above 100 most people will not be able to differentiate that.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> While it is true that intel has higher fps for high refresh gamers, that is not near as big of an issue as MMO's. For example im completely fine with 150 fps in overwatch compared to 180, but im not cool with 50 fps vs 70 in an mmo. 75 vs 60 fps is actually a very noticeable difference, once you get above 100 most people will not be able to differentiate the differences.


Overwatch is really easy to drive and does run "fine" on Ryzen. In many other games, that's not the case.

Besides, we all have different needs and requirements. I can def tell the difference between 100 and 200 fps on my 240 Hz monitor. It's actually very easy. I pretty much only play fast paced fps.


----------



## Clukos

Important to note that for Ryzen memory speed, timings and sub-timings are very, _very_ important and make a huge difference (I assume that's the same case for Skylake-X). This is what I noticed for the 1700 at 3.9 going from 3200 CL14 to 3466 CL14 with optimized subs:


































20+ fps difference (that's at 1080p with Ultra graphics preset in Dx12). That is with Shadowplay recording in both cases so without it I'm getting 2-4 fps higher.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Overwatch is really easy to drive and does run "fine" on Ryzen. In many other games, that's not the case.
> 
> Besides, we all have different needs and requirements. I can easily tell the difference between 100 and 200 fps.


Well we can agree to disagree on that one. High hz gaming imo is not reason enough to buy intel over AMD currently, its the older titles where you really need that clock speed to bring minimums up.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Important to note that for Ryzen memory speed, timings and sub-timings are very, _very_ important and make a huge difference (I assume that's the same case for Skylake-X). This is what I noticed for the 1700 at 3.9 going from 3200 CL14 to 3466 CL14 with optimized subs:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 20+ fps difference (that's at 1080p with Ultra graphics preset in Dx12).


Yeah, but this is old news. Even with 3200/CL14 Ryzen will lose to 7700K 3000/CL15 or better.

I used G.Skill Flare X 3200 in both Ryzen builds I did.


----------



## Scotty99

I really shouldnt say older, i should say MMO's. Destiny 2 is massively CPU bottlenecked as well, game came out today lol.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Yeah, but this is old news. Even with 3200/CL14 Ryzen will lose to 7700K 3000/CL15 or better.
> 
> I used G.Skill Flare X 3200 in both Ryzen builds I did.


Using fast memory with DOCP doesn't mean much, the Auto sub-timings are terrible for most motherboards with Ryzen. Optimizing subs gives a significant boost.


----------



## Scotty99

I think 1080p is an irrelevant argument for people posting on this forum with 300+ dollar CPU's and 500 dollar graphics cards. Memory makes almost no difference at 1440p and above, same with cpu for most titles.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I think 1080p is an irrelevant argument for people posting on this forum with 300+ dollar CPU's and 500 dollar graphics cards. Memory makes almost no difference at 1440p and above, same with cpu for most titles.


Yeah but memory does make a difference, that's why I'm testing in a CPU limited scenario. Of course as you up the res you get less and less difference with either memory or CPU and only GPU matters. But in any case, having optimized memory increases min frames as well.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I think 1080p is an irrelevant argument for people posting on this forum with 300+ dollar CPU's and 500 dollar graphics cards. Memory makes almost no difference at 1440p and above, same with cpu for most titles.


Not true for high fps gaming at 1440p/144-165 Hz.

And I use 1080p/240 Hz because I won it, and sold my 1440p/144 Hz while I wait for the newer 1440p high Hz models early 2018.

As I said, I play very fast paced games and prefer smoothness and responsiveness over IQ any day.

http://www.144hzmonitors.com/knowledge-base/144hz-vs-240hz/

TLDR: "There is definitely a noticeable difference between 144Hz and 240Hz. Higher refresh rates obviously mean smoother gameplay and that is also the case when going from 144Hz to 240Hz. Although there is a noticeable improvement, it isn't as huge as an improvement compared to the jump from 60Hz to 144Hz. Note that you need to have ridiculous frame rates in order to take proper advantage of 240Hz monitors and most game engines don't even support it yet, as of 2017."

Not going less than 165 Hz ever again for my gaming monitor.


----------



## Scotty99

You have a 750 dollar graphics card and a run of the mill 1080p ips monitor, im not sure i can take a whole lot of what you are saying serious lol.

Im not trying to be a dick, i just cannot imagine the thought process of buying a 1080ti and owning a 60hz 1080p monitor. Why didnt you get a 1070 and a 1440p 165hz monitor like i have and drastically improve your gaming experience?


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You have a 750 dollar graphics card and a run of the mill 1080p ips monitor, im not sure i can take a whole lot of what you are saying serious lol.
> 
> Im not trying to be a dick, i just cannot imagine the thought process of buying a 1080ti and owning a 60hz 1080p monitor. Why didnt you get a 1070 and a 1440p 165hz monitor like i have and drastically improve your gaming experience?


I didn't buy the card for gaming, compute and rendering is the main focus. I'm not buying a monitor till Asus or Acer release the 4k 144hz 1000 nits HDR goodness (I read that's late 2017 or early 2018). No point in buying a new monitor right now, it'll be outdated tech by the time these two beasts show up









Till then DSR is good enough for me.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Not true for high fps gaming at 1440p/144-165 Hz.
> 
> And I use 1080p/240 Hz because I won it, and sold my 1440p/144 Hz while I wait for the newer 1440p high Hz models early 2018.
> 
> As I said, I play very fast paced games and prefer smoothness and responsiveness over IQ any day.
> 
> http://www.144hzmonitors.com/knowledge-base/144hz-vs-240hz/
> 
> TLDR: "There is definitely a noticeable difference between 144Hz and 240Hz. Higher refresh rates obviously mean smoother gameplay and that is also the case when going from 144Hz to 240Hz. Although there is a noticeable improvement, it isn't as huge as an improvement compared to the jump from 60Hz to 144Hz. Note that you need to have ridiculous frame rates in order to take proper advantage of 240Hz monitors and most game engines don't even support it yet, as of 2017."
> 
> Not going less than 165 Hz ever again for my gaming monitor.


Sure 3 guys can tell the difference between 144 and 240hz monitors, but they are the exception. I cannot tell a difference between 100 and 165 fps, im sure i wouldnt be able to tell 165 vs 240 either. 60 vs 75 on the other hand? I can tell between that instantly, that is why i will keep recommending AMD to high hz gamers, intel if you play MMO's.

BTW i watch a lot of twitch streamers, not one of them say 240hz is a drastic improvement, or anywhere near necessary....even at that level. These are top 500 players making hundreds of thousands a year.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> *I didn't buy the card for gaming*, compute and rendering is the main focus. I'm not buying a monitor till Asus or Acer release the 4k 144hz 1000 nits HDR goodness (I read that's late 2017 or early 2018). No point in buying a new monitor right now, it'll be outdated tech by the time these two beasts show up
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Till then DSR is good enough for me.


...


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> ...


Is it so hard for you to imagine that people use GPUs for something _other_ than gaming? And this discussion is off-topic anyway.


----------



## Scotty99

Its fine you do you, just not sure why you are posting when the discussion is about gaming....


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Its fine you do you, just not sure why you are posting when the discussion is about gaming....


I've posted *gaming results* with different memory speeds/timings, you are the one who started this "why did you buy x GPU" discussion to try to invalidate what I've posted in some weird way


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Sure 3 guys can tell the difference between 144 and 240hz monitors, but they are the exception. I cannot tell a difference between 100 and 165 fps, im sure i wouldnt be able to tell 165 vs 240 either. 60 vs 75 on the other hand? I can tell between that instantly, that is why i will keep recommending AMD to high hz gamers, intel if you play MMO's.
> 
> BTW i watch a lot of twitch streamers, not one of them say 240hz is a drastic improvement, or anywhere near necessary....even at that level. These are top 500 players making hundreds of thousands a year.


Whatever. You watch alot of streamers, so you know best haha

I could not care less about this 1080p/240Hz monitor. I won it. Did not pay a dime. 144 Hz vs 240 Hz side-by-side, yes it was obvious.

I have zero reason trying to justify and 144HzMonitors says there is a difference too.

As I said, we have different needs and requirements. ALOT of people can see the difference between 100 and 200 fps. Not all play casual MMO's.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Whatever. You watch alot of streamers, so you know best haha
> 
> I could not care less about this 1080p/240Hz monitor. I won it. Did not pay a dime. I have zero reason trying to justify and 144HzMonitors says there is a difference too.


Again my entire point here is high refresh rate gaming should not be the deciding factor for someones CPU purchase, oddly enough older titles and ESPECIALLY MMO's is how someone should be making a CPU decision.

I can say this with confidence, 99/100 people will be able to tell a difference between 60hz and 75hz. 1/100 people will be able to tell a difference between 165 and 240hz.


----------



## rbarrett96

What is the difference between these 6 cores and the X processors on the other platform?


----------



## Cyph3r

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Instructions per cycle increases with clock speed.


What? Is that a joke?

The Instructions Per Clock will remain the same from no matter the speed. The amount of instructions *per clock* remains the same, you're just doing more "clocks".

A bus that can carry 50 passengers going 50mph, doesn't gain the ability to carry more passengers just by driving faster. But it will carry more passengers over time as it can drop off and pick up new passengers faster.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rbarrett96*
> 
> What is the difference between these 6 cores and the X processors on the other platform?


Coffee is a newer/faster architecture, and will be better for the majority of users. X platform is for people that use multiple m.2 ssd's and/or an SLI setup.


----------



## kd5151

Just looking at leaks on the X370 mobo.









Edit :I mean Z370.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rbarrett96*
> 
> What is the difference between these 6 cores and the X processors on the other platform?


Looks like same IPC, without quad channel memory support, without AVX512 support, without the Mesh architecture (the last one might be good for games).

Edit: Late leak point towards Skylake IPC, 1.415 vcore for 5.0 GHz this is with a delid most probably:


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rbarrett96*
> 
> What is the difference between these 6 cores and the X processors on the other platform?


Skylake X will use a mesh cache which seems to underperform in games, 8.25MB cache vs 12MB Cache L3


----------



## Scotty99

Mesh design isnt inferior, games are simply coded to work best with older designs. As time goes on you will see ryzen and skylake x surpass kaby lake in gaming benchmarks. (assuming dx12 eventually goes mainstream)


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Whatever. You watch alot of streamers, so you know best haha
> 
> I could not care less about this 1080p/240Hz monitor. I won it. Did not pay a dime. 144 Hz vs 240 Hz side-by-side, yes it was obvious.
> 
> I have zero reason trying to justify and 144HzMonitors says there is a difference too.
> 
> *As I said, we have different needs and requirements. ALOT of people can see the difference between 100 and 200 fps. Not all play casual MMO's.*


WoW still has 10 million players, destiny 2 is going to be absolutely massive. I also disagree with the assumption a lot of people can differentiate between 100 and 200 fps, even tho my assertion was 150 vs 180 fps (normal fps difference between a ryzen chip and a 7700k).


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Mesh design isnt inferior, games are simply coded to work best with older designs. As time goes on you will see ryzen and skylake x surpass kaby lake in gaming benchmarks.


Still Skylake S has lower cache latency


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Again my entire point here is high refresh rate gaming should not be the deciding factor for someones CPU purchase, oddly enough older titles and ESPECIALLY MMO's is how someone should be making a CPU decision.
> 
> I can say this with confidence, 99/100 people will be able to tell a difference between 60hz and 75hz. 1/100 people will be able to tell a difference between 165 and 240hz.


75 Hz is just as bad as 60 Hz. 15 more Hz makes pretty much no difference. Most overclocked 60 Hz monitors does frameskipping at 75 Hz anyway.

It seems to me you know very little about high fps gaming. CPU choice is very important. Ryzen will lower the min, max and avg fps in pretty much all games, when aiming for best possible fps. Which is why people still choose 7700K for high fps gaming.


----------



## Scotty99

Nah you are straight up wrong on that one bub.

75hz is where things start to feel smooth (and a far cry from 60), 100 fps is where its actually smooth, anything above that is massive diminishing returns. If you put two identical systems next to the top 500 overwatch players only difference being a 1800x vs a 7700k, there is no way more than 5% would be able to accurately depict which is which....and those are the top players in the world.


----------



## Scotty99

On the flip side, if you put these two monitors next to the same group of people EVERY SINGLE ONE of them would be able to pick out the 75hz model:
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/xbKhP6/asus-monitor-vp228h
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/hqmxFT/aoc-monitor-g2260vwq6


----------



## czin125

https://videocardz.com/newz/first-look-at-msi-z370-godlike-gaming
18 phases! Doesn't list the components though. 3 slots of m.2 + possibly 2 more from the PCI-E attachment. No fins on the heatsink. Might be only 1 8pin there?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Important to note that for Ryzen memory speed, timings and sub-timings are very, _very_ important and make a huge difference (I assume that's the same case for Skylake-X). This is what I noticed for the 1700 at 3.9 going from 3200 CL14 to 3466 CL14 with optimized subs:
> 
> 20+ fps difference (that's at 1080p with Ultra graphics preset in Dx12). That is with Shadowplay recording in both cases so without it I'm getting 2-4 fps higher.


Do you have one for 3200 CL14 optimized and 3466 CL14 auto too? 3466 CL14 has a higher clock and higher performance index ( 247 vs 228 ). 4000C17 2T with 235 perf index > 3000C12 1T with 250 perf index in games.


----------



## WexleySnoops

How about we get the discussion back onto *Coffee Lake*?

This back and forth of Ryzen R7 vs 7700K has been beaten to a dead horse in every other thread, and now this one too. Just stop. We get it. I want to know about 8700k.


----------



## MaKeN

Damn! Msi god like gaming is my next board!


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Nah you are straight up wrong on that one bub.
> 
> 75hz is where things start to feel smooth (and a far cry from 60), 100 fps is where its actually smooth, anything above that is massive diminishing returns. If you put two identical systems next to the top 500 overwatch players only difference being a 1800x vs a 7700k, there is no way more than 5% would be able to accurately depict which is which....and those are the top players in the world.


75 Hz is terrible for serious gaming. It might be fine for casual MMO tho.

A far cry from 60, haha, it's 15 Hz more. Pretty much no one will be able to tell the difference between 60 and 75 Hz in a blindtest. Anyone will be able to tell the diff between 60 and 120-240 on a rig that is set up properly.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WexleySnoops*
> 
> How about we get the discussion back onto *Coffee Lake*?
> 
> This back and forth of Ryzen R7 vs 7700K has been beaten to a dead horse in every other thread, and now this one too. Just stop. We get it. I want to know about 8700k.


Please pay attention, the discussion is about coffee lake. I am giving the best advice possible in that your CPU decision should be based on the worst coded games you play, it is in my opinion (and i wouldnt be giving my opinion if i believed it to be false) that you should not be buying a CPU based on how many FPS it can get in a shooter like overwatch, but how LOW of FPS you will be getting in an MMO like WoW or the newly released destiny 2. The difference between a 60 FPS minimum in an intense part of these types of games compared to 75 fps minimums is a much more noticeable change for someone running on a high hz monitor than something like 150 vs 180 fps would be, the latter being imperceptible to the majority of people.


----------



## rbarrett96

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Coffee is a newer/faster architecture, and will be better for the majority of users. X platform is for people that use multiple m.2 ssd's and/or an SLI setup.


I guess the last question is cost then. At $400 for the 6 core, the entry level X seemed like a good value. Heard it ran hot though which is why I didn't pull the trigger.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> 75 Hz is terrible for serious gaming. It might be fine for casual MMO tho.
> 
> A far cry from 60, haha, it's 15 Hz more. Pretty much no one will be able to tell the difference between 60 and 75 Hz in a blindtest. Anyone will be able to tell the diff between 60 and 120-240 on a rig that is set up properly.


Everyone will be able to tell the difference between 60 and 75hz, its a massive difference. And im talking about minimums, the reason someone should be choosing an intel over a ryzen chip.

It is really amazing how misinformed people are on this forum, destiny 2 is a TERRIBLE experience on console because of its 30 FPS limit, and that is 100% down to the CPU in consoles. The same thing translates to the PC realm, some games do need a fast CPU not for maximums but minimums.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Everyone will be able to tell the difference between 60 and 75hz, its a massive difference. And im talking about minimums, the reason someone should be choosing an intel over a ryzen chip.
> 
> It is really amazing how misinformed people are on this forum, destiny 2 is a TERRIBLE experience on console because of its 30 FPS limit, and that is 100% down to the CPU in consoles. The same thing translates to the PC realm, some games do need a fast CPU not for maximums but minimums.


Just stop justifying your purchase. 75 Hz is pretty much as bad as 60 Hz for gaming. Ask any 120-240 Hz gamer. They will all tell you the same; 75 Hz is meh.

You are the one misinformed. 75 fps/Hz vs 120 fps/120 Hz (or better) is like day and night in terms of smoothness and responsiveness.

Anyways, I'm out - This is waste of time and I don't want to derail the thread even more.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rbarrett96*
> 
> I guess the last question is cost then. At $400 for the 6 core, the entry level X seemed like a good value. Heard it ran hot though which is why I didn't pull the trigger.


Well the 8700k will be a faster chip than a 7800x, dont forget that. It should also be cheaper, rumors have it at 350-375, with motherbaords/memory being cheaper as well. I really only suggest people go skylake if they have use for multiple nvme ssd's.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Just stop justifying your purchase. 75 Hz is pretty much as bad as 60 Hz for gaming. Ask any 120-240 Hz gamer. They will all tell you the same; 75 Hz is meh.
> 
> You are the one misinformed.


Justify what purchase? I have a 165hz 1440p monitor. I also made the right choice of CPU at the time, no way was i buying a quad core cpu in 2017. I dont only play MMO's, nor do i only play games on my PC.

Trust me guy, far more people would notice the bump from 60hz to 75hz than my example of 150 vs 180, how you dont realize this shows me how little experience you have with high refresh rate monitors.

That is my last reply to you.


----------



## tw2

I will buy which ever one is cheaper out of 8700K and ryzen. Just need to wait and see. I don't think I would be able to tell the differrence either way at 1440p with settings maxed.


----------



## MaKeN

Its 100% that ryzen is cheaper. If you are from US.
The 8700k cpu itself as people say is about 380$.
For 380$ you can buy a ryzen cpu with a motherboard

Edit:
Nvm, i just saw you are from. New zealand, not familiar with the prices there.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> I will buy which ever one is cheaper out of 8700K and ryzen. Just need to wait and see. I don't think I would be able to tell the differrence either way at 1440p with settings maxed.










Wanted Ryzen. Waited for Vega. Now I'm like 8700K + wait for Vega. I can build my system on the igpu then wait for aftermarket Vega 56's. Plus I don't have to deal with overpriced memory.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WexleySnoops*
> 
> How about we get the discussion back onto *Coffee Lake*?
> 
> This back and forth of Ryzen R7 vs 7700K has been beaten to a dead horse in every other thread, and now this one too. Just stop. We get it. I want to know about 8700k.


The 8700k is a i7 7700k with two extra cores and increased level 3 Cache, that is it.


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Its 100% that ryzen is cheaper. If you are from US.
> The 8700k cpu itself as people say is about 380$.
> For 380$ you can buy a ryzen cpu with a motherboard
> 
> Edit:
> Nvm, i just saw you are from. New zealand, not familiar with the prices there.


The 7700K is cheaper than the 1800x by $150-200 and the same as the 1700x ryzen. I am not sure how the 8700K will be priced. Could be interesting.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wanted Ryzen. Waited for Vega. Now I'm like 8700K + wait for Vega. I can build my system on the igpu then wait for aftermarket Vega 56's. Plus I don't have to deal with overpriced memory.


I wanted vega but gave up and got the 1080ti- non regrets there other than no longer being able to use freesync. My cpu will last more than long enough to see what happens with this. Ryzen is especially appealing as if they can increase the ipc and/or clocks in the next generation then it should be a simple cpu swap for the next few years. Certainly can't guarantee anything with future intel cpu/chipsets.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Mesh design isnt inferior, games are simply coded to work best with older designs.


Cache is largely transparent to apps and games aren't so much coded for older cache hierarchies as much as the mesh/exclusive LLC setup simply has trade-offs vs. the old ring-bus/inclusive LCC. Skylake-X has more fast, local, cache, which helps with cache contention. However, intercore communication suffers.

I'm sure some changes could be made to minimize inter-core communication needs in games while simultaneously taking advantage of the larger L2, but whether or not such optimizations will be made or how much they'll really help in practice remains to be seen.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> A far cry from 60, haha, it's 15 Hz more. Pretty much no one will be able to tell the difference between 60 and 75 Hz in a blindtest.


75 is more Hz is 25% more than 60. That's much greater than the threshold of perception for most people.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The 8700k is a i7 7700k with two extra cores and increased level 3 Cache, that is it.


Pretty much.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> I am not sure how the 8700K will be priced. Could be interesting.


I'm expecting to slot in at the traditional peak mainstream pricing. Somewhere between 350 and 400 usd.


----------



## bigjdubb

I take my local Microcenter for granted. The 1800x is only $350 and the 1700x and 7700k are $300, and you get $30 off if you buy a motherboard at the same time.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Again my entire point here is high refresh rate gaming should not be the deciding factor for someones CPU purchase, oddly enough older titles and ESPECIALLY MMO's is how someone should be making a CPU decision.
> 
> I can say this with confidence, 99/100 people will be able to tell a difference between 60hz and 75hz. 1/100 people will be able to tell a difference between 165 and 240hz.


But 3 people so far have already told you that they can tell a difference between the refresh rates. Hell, the difference between 100hz and 144hz is massive.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Nah you are straight up wrong on that one bub.
> 
> 75hz is where things start to feel smooth (and a far cry from 60), 100 fps is where its actually smooth, anything above that is massive diminishing returns. If you put two identical systems next to the top 500 overwatch players only difference being a 1800x vs a 7700k, there is no way more than 5% would be able to accurately depict which is which....and those are the top players in the world.


My monitor has gotten reset to be at 80hz in Overwatch multiple times and 80hz is garbage. You might as well invest your money in something better than a GTX 1060 instead of a 75hz panel. 75hz panels are a consolation price to make you feel slightly better. If 75hz were so grand, why don't they make g-sync panels (ignoring 4K/60) with them?









Also, it's very clear your imperceptible to higher refresh rates and that's fine. You're scolding people for valuing gaming performance and their need/want for the absolute best performance because of something you personally don't or literally can't see value in.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Again my entire point here is high refresh rate gaming should not be the deciding factor for someones CPU purchase, oddly enough older titles and ESPECIALLY MMO's is how someone should be making a CPU decision.
> 
> I can say this with confidence, 99/100 people will be able to tell a difference between 60hz and 75hz. 1/100 people will be able to tell a difference between 165 and 240hz.
> 
> 
> 
> But 3 people so far have already told you that they can tell a difference between the refresh rates. Hell, the difference between 100hz and 144hz is massive.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Nah you are straight up wrong on that one bub.
> 
> 75hz is where things start to feel smooth (and a far cry from 60), 100 fps is where its actually smooth, anything above that is massive diminishing returns. If you put two identical systems next to the top 500 overwatch players only difference being a 1800x vs a 7700k, there is no way more than 5% would be able to accurately depict which is which....and those are the top players in the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My monitor has gotten reset to be at 80hz in Overwatch multiple times and 80hz is garbage. You might as well invest your money in something better than a GTX 1060 instead of a 75hz panel. 75hz panels are a consolation price to make you feel slightly better. If 75hz were so grand, why don't they make g-sync panels (ignoring 4K/60) with them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, it's very clear your imperceptible to higher refresh rates and that's fine. You're scolding people for valuing gaming performance and their need/want for the absolute best performance because of something you personally don't or literally can't see value in.
Click to expand...

When I play games at 144 FPS minimum with 144Hz monitor, then switch to 60Hz the difference is massive. When sweeping side to side fast in game there is no blur at 144hz 144 FPS, When at 60hz and 60 FPS I can't see the enemy fast it is a real disadvantage and makes me slow on the mouse.


----------



## Scotty99

Edsel is a professional CS:GO player (think he declined a contract to work for linus) and couldnt tell a lick of difference on a 240hz panel, yet the people who post on this backwoods forum can lol.

You do you guys, ill keep giving good advice on who i think will and will not benefit by ponying up the extra cash for a 8700k over a 1600x.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> The 8700k cpu itself as people say is about 380$.


This is a rumor from a Canadian store that was also selling the i7-8700 for the same price of the i7-7700. If you take that rumor for granted, the i7-8700K will have the same price of the i7-7700K in big websites like Newegg, around U$340-350. Which it should.

But this was a rumor that came up before the fake August release, so it is mostly likely a hoax. But they will not have much success if they try to sell it around U$400.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Looks like the new 8th gen is coming soon with the release of some shots of motherboards


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Looks like the new 8th gen is coming soon with the release of some shots of motherboards


October 5th is the latest rumor.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> October 5th is the latest rumor.


Starting to look pretty true to me


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> October 5th is the latest rumor.


Time to start speculating on the price because the release can't come fast enough, tired of this potato laptop.

Shouldn't be ram issues since it's not something completely new like Ryzen was. Should we expect issues with launch bios for most boards ?


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Time to start speculating on the price because the release can't come fast enough, tired of this potato laptop.
> 
> Shouldn't be ram issues since it's not something completely new like Ryzen was.


Agreed. I need my ITX build lol


----------



## MaKeN

Z370 msi GodLicke gaming rumored to come out october 5 at 400$
https://www.google.com/amp/wccftech.com/msi-z370-godlike-gaming-z370-a-pro-motherboards-leak/amp/


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Z370 msi GodLicke gaming rumored to come out october 5 at 400$


What about the devillike Z666 edition lol


----------



## MaKeN

Hah , good one








I gues in next 3 gens ahead


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edsel is a professional CS:GO player (think he declined a contract to work for linus) and couldnt tell a lick of difference on a 240hz panel, yet the people who post on this backwoods forum can lol.
> 
> You do you guys, ill keep giving good advice on who i think will and will not benefit by ponying up the extra cash for a 8700k over a 1600x.


This 'backwoods' forum has been around for many years, and if you think that just because someone almost worked for Linus is more credible, let alone Twitch streamers, we'll continue not to listen to your advice. I almost feel sorry for those that do at this point.


----------



## Captain318

As a long time Intel guy I was set on getting a 8700k until yesterday. After much contemplating and already owning a 2600k, 4790k and a 6700k and selling off my X79 rig, I decided I want to try tinkering with something radically different than what I'm used to and see what kind of legs AM4 has so I ordered a 1800X and a ASRock Taichi.

I admit, one thing that has bugged me for awhile with Intel is that every time I want to tinker with a new gen chip I have to swap platforms. It's not even the motherboard cost that irritates me so much as I get comfortable with the board I have. They tend to have personalities and some you just love while some you hate.

Also, I'm really big into BeamNG right now and as I understand it I can get more cars on screen with better performance with more cores so that alone has me looking forward to this build.

Maybe I'll enjoy Ryzen maybe I won't but I won't know until I try it. Definitely moving outside of my comfort zone here that's for sure. I haven't ran a AMD rig since 2005.

I will be keeping a close eye on the 8700k though. It's nice Intel is finally offering a true upgrade on the mainstream platform. But knowing Intel they'll move platforms again in 6 months to a year lol


----------



## TrevBlu19

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edsel is a professional CS:GO player (think he declined a contract to work for linus) and couldnt tell a lick of difference on a 240hz panel, yet the people who post on this backwoods forum can lol.
> 
> You do you guys, ill keep giving good advice on who i think will and will not benefit by ponying up the extra cash for a 8700k over a 1600x.


Agree I'm happy with my 144


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Captain318*
> 
> As a long time Intel guy I was set on getting a 8700k until yesterday. After much contemplating and already owning a 2600k, 4790k and a 6700k and selling off my X79 rig, I decided I want to try tinkering with something radically different than what I'm used to and see what kind of legs AM4 has so I ordered a 1800X and a ASRock Taichi.
> 
> I admit, one thing that has bugged me for awhile with Intel is that every time I want to tinker with a new gen chip I have to swap platforms. It's not even the motherboard cost that irritates me so much as I get comfortable with the board I have. They tend to have personalities and some you just love while some you hate.
> 
> Also, I'm really big into BeamNG right now and as I understand it I can get more cars on screen with better performance with more cores so that alone has me looking forward to this build.
> 
> Maybe I'll enjoy Ryzen maybe I won't but I won't know until I try it. Definitely moving outside of my comfort zone here that's for sure. I haven't ran a AMD rig since 2005.
> 
> I will be keeping a close eye on the 8700k though. It's nice Intel is finally offering a true upgrade on the mainstream platform. But knowing Intel they'll move platforms again in 6 months to a year lol


I would have taken the same plunge, if not for the RyZen segfaults that are only solvable via RMA at the moment. Depending on your needs, it may pose no problem for you.

In the long run, it's going to be a tug-of-war between the 8700K and the 1800x, due to the 8700k's potential for higher clocks. Just not sure why you didn't opt for the much cheaper 1700(-x).


----------



## Asmodian

I am quite curious how long it will take to get these in a Surface Pro. It might finally be time to switch to a real computer for a tablet (currently using an iPad).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TrevBlu19*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edsel is a professional CS:GO player (think he declined a contract to work for linus) and couldnt tell a lick of difference on a 240hz panel, yet the people who post on this backwoods forum can lol.
> 
> You do you guys, ill keep giving good advice on who i think will and will not benefit by ponying up the extra cash for a 8700k over a 1600x.
> 
> 
> 
> Agree I'm happy with my 144
Click to expand...

This was about claiming 60 v.s. 240Hz was unnoticeable, not 144 to 240 Hz.

Anyone who cannot tell 60 v.s. 120+ Hz isn't paying attention.









Edit: never mind, it is 144 to 240 after all. The benefits are probably input lag more then perceived smoothness but I have never tested a display >144 Hz myself.


----------



## kd5151

Its not 60hz to 144+. Its 144hz+ back to 60hz is where you see just how laggy 60hz can be.


----------



## Ph42oN

I don't understand why someone says 75hz is as bad as 60hz. For example, i play planetside 2 that got some optimization problems, in big battles i may get drops to 50fps, with some weapons i feel like i start to do bad when fps drops to 65 or lower. So in that case 60 vs 75 is acceptable vs unacceptable.

I have tested 240hz screen, just moving mouse on desktop felt so smooth, it was big difference compared to 144hz, bigger than 120 to 144. I think even 144hz can feel laggy after 240hz.

Edit: It sounds like you mean that 75hz is not better at all vs 60hz, even if it's small difference it's always better.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ph42oN*
> 
> I don't understand why someone says 75hz is as bad as 60hz. For example, i play planetside 2 that got some optimization problems, in big battles i may get drops to 50fps, with some weapons i feel like i start to do bad when fps drops to 65 or lower. So in that case 60 vs 75 is acceptable vs unacceptable.
> 
> I have tested 240hz screen, just moving mouse on desktop felt so smooth, it was big difference compared to 144hz, bigger than 120 to 144. I think even 144hz can feel laggy after 240hz.


One has to have the FPS match the monitor refresh rate to see the difference.


----------



## Captain318

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> I would have taken the same plunge, if not for the RyZen segfaults that are only solvable via RMA at the moment. Depending on your needs, it may pose no problem for you.
> 
> In the long run, it's going to be a tug-of-war between the 8700K and the 1800x, due to the 8700k's potential for higher clocks. *Just not sure why you didn't opt for the much cheaper 1700*(-x).


I really wanted the flagship. The absolute best out of the box chip I could get from AMD. I'm in uncharted waters and don't feel like fiddling more than I have to. This machine isn't going to need to be OC'd. I just want it to work and to be stable 24/7


----------



## TMatzelle60

im excited about the Strix Z370i Gaming. Hopefully they kept the 2 m.2


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Z370 msi GodLicke gaming rumored to come out october 5 at 400$
> https://www.google.com/amp/wccftech.com/msi-z370-godlike-gaming-z370-a-pro-motherboards-leak/amp/


The leak first appeared on Videocardz, give them the clicks instead of wccftech.

https://videocardz.com/newz/rumor-intel-i7-8700k-to-launch-on-5th-october

Edit - wccftech links to videocardz which cites a Reddit source.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ph42oN*
> 
> I don't understand why someone says 75hz is as bad as 60hz. For example, i play planetside 2 that got some optimization problems, in big battles i may get drops to 50fps, with some weapons i feel like i start to do bad when fps drops to 65 or lower. So in that case 60 vs 75 is acceptable vs unacceptable.
> 
> I have tested 240hz screen, just moving mouse on desktop felt so smooth, it was big difference compared to 144hz, bigger than 120 to 144. I think even 144hz can feel laggy after 240hz.


For something that benefits from high FPS like Overwatch, CS:GO, etc, 75Hz might as well be 60Hz.


----------



## kmac20

This is off topic but as someone who has used a 75hz monitor almost his entire life including in esports such as CSGO and Dota2 I will say it is noticeably better than 60hz and does in fact make a difference. But then again some people are arguing here you cant even tell the difference between X and Y hz monitors anyway so it seems like everyone here is just pulling *stats* and *info* out of their behinds. Because I doubt most of the people here have ever done a side by side of all the refresh rates they're even talking about which is why I'm not going to talk about 144hz or 240hz or anything like that because I not only have never used one but I've never done a side by side comparison with 120, 75 or 60

This thread has gotten very derailed.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kmac20*
> 
> This is off topic but as someone who has used a 75hz monitor almost his entire life including in esports such as CSGO and Dota2 I will say it is noticeably better than 60hz and does in fact make a difference. But then again some people are arguing here you cant even tell the difference between X and Y hz monitors anyway so it seems like everyone here is just pulling *stats* and *info* out of their behinds. Because I doubt most of the people here have ever done a side by side of all the refresh rates they're even talking about which is why I'm not going to talk about 144hz or 240hz or anything like that because I not only have never used one but I've never done a side by side comparison with 120, 75 or 60
> 
> This thread has gotten very derailed.


I'm personally not saying it doesn't make a difference, but 75Hz shouldn't be touted as a true upgrade to 60Hz in 2017. There's a very clear difference to me when going from 80Hz to 100Hz and then 100Hz to 144Hz. All of the posts I'm seeing regarding 75Hz being defended seem like people trying to justify why a 75Hz panel is 'perfectly fine'.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> There's a very clear difference to me when going from 80Hz to 100Hz


Proportionally the same difference between 60 and 75 as between 80 and 100.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> Proportionally the same difference between 60 and 75 as between 80 and 100.


Right -- but I didn't go from a 80Hz monitor to a 100Hz monitor. I went from a 60Hz monitor to a 100Hz and 144Hz monitor







.


----------



## Scotty99

Its amazing that people think i am arguing for buying a 75hz monitor lol. Please reread my comments, i am talking about bringing minimums up in mmo's, and reasons to be buying 5ghz cpu's over ryzen...

And please this is far from derailing the thread, its exactly what someone should be thinking about when buying a CPU. Most people are better off buying a 1600x, its going to be 85-90% of the performance for half the price, but there are certain titles like mmo's where buying intel is going to bring up minimums enough to have a noticeable effect.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Its amazing that people think i am arguing for buying a 75hz monitor lol. Please reread my comments, i am talking about bringing minimums up in mmo's, and reasons to be buying 5ghz cpu's over ryzen...
> 
> And please this is far from derailing the thread, its exactly what someone should be thinking about when buying a CPU. Most people are better off buying a 1600x, its going to be 85-90% of the performance for half the price, but there are certain titles like mmo's where buying intel is going to bring up minimums enough to have a noticeable effect.


It's probably because your reputation here in this thread is more like a person that keeps on arguing with everybody.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> I think my best 2700K reached 4.8GHz stable with enough cooling, but I normally ran it at 4.6GHz on air.
> Architecture is the overriding consideration here...process is secondary to that.


I got my 2600K in Feb 2011 and it ran fully stable at 4.8 GHz (P95 and IBT) for years, but not a bit further. 5 GHz was simply a no-go, but I still considered 4.8 to be fantastic. Then I got a 3960X when it came out and it did exactly the same; 4.8 GHz and not a MHz further. The premise that ALL Sandy's did 5 GHz was simply hyperbole. They did seemingly usher in a new era of easy OCing at the time, at least by my recollection.


----------



## Scotty99

I dont argue with people, i correct them and they get upset.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I got my 2600K in Feb 2011 and it ran fully stable at 4.8 GHz (P95 and IBT) for years, but not a bit further. 5 GHz was simply a no-go, but I still considered 4.8 to be fantastic. Then I got a 3960X when it came out and it did exactly the same; 4.8 GHz and not a MHz further. The premise that ALL Sandy's did 5 GHz was simply hyperbole. They did seemingly usher in a new era of easy OCing at the time, at least by my recollection.


It was pretty close actually, at least for 2500k's. Boards mattered back then some had REALLY poor VRM designs, if sandy had board quality of z270 pretty much every 2500k would have been 5.0 or 4.9. I had a biostar board and was limited to 4.8.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> I'm personally not saying it doesn't make a difference, but 75Hz shouldn't be touted as a true upgrade to 60Hz in 2017. There's a very clear difference to me when going from 80Hz to 100Hz and then 100Hz to 144Hz. All of the posts I'm seeing regarding 75Hz being defended seem like people trying to justify why a 75Hz panel is 'perfectly fine'.


Speaking as someone who is still more than satisfied with my old 1440p / 60Hz Korean IPS monitors, I just don't care much about high refresh monitors. I mean, I actually had a 1080p / 120Hz monitor before I got these and decided that the "smoothness" was something I could absolutely sacrifice for the higher resolution. Now of course you can get high refresh rate 1440p monitors but they are still pricey and mine still do the job just fine for me.

The upside of not caring about high FPS is that I can get away with still using Kepler GPU's!


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Its amazing that people think i am arguing for buying a 75hz monitor lol. Please reread my comments, i am talking about bringing minimums up in mmo's, and reasons to be buying 5ghz cpu's over ryzen...
> 
> And please this is far from derailing the thread, its exactly what someone should be thinking about when buying a CPU. Most people are better off buying a 1600x, its going to be 85-90% of the performance for half the price, but there are certain titles like mmo's where buying intel is going to bring up minimums enough to have a noticeable effect.


Half the price of? If that's the case and raw gaming performance is critical, why would you suggest Ryzen over an i5 7600K? The systems come in at such similar price points that anything that needs pure IPC is going to favor the i5 and anything remotely multi-threaded optimized should favor Ryzen.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Speaking as someone who is still more than satisfied with my old 1440p / 60Hz Korean IPS monitors, I just don't care much about high refresh monitors. I mean, I actually had a 1080p / 120Hz monitor before I got these and decided that the "smoothness" was something I could absolutely sacrifice for the higher resolution. Now of course you can get high refresh rate 1440p monitors but they are still pricey and mine still do the job just fine for me.
> 
> The upside of not caring about high FPS is that I can get away with still using Kepler GPU's!


I'm all for people enjoying what they have and what they desire. I personally chose 100Hz 21:9 IPS over 144Hz 16:9 TN because immersion and color representation meant more to me in the grand scheme of things. However, every time I use my GFs PC, I do know I am eager to get my hands on a 144Hz version of my panel, if not a '4K 21:9' panel.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

My next monitor will absolutely be a 40+" 4K 60Hz monitor. Again, for me, resolution trumps FPS all day long. I'm perfectly happy to play games at 30 FPS. I know I'm in the minority but I am not a serious gamer in the first place. Most of the games I play nowadays are on my TV and Xbox One (mostly Forza 6 and GTA V). Even when I did play more PC games I was always much more interested in benching (until I couldn't afford to keep keeping up with the Jones' every 6 months).

TLDR; If you have to have 200+ FPS in twitch FPS games and don't care about anything else, you can't go wrong with a 7700K. Well, you really can't go wrong with a 7700K at all for that matter. But Ryzen and TR are close enough that they can make you think about whether or not twice the cores (or more) for the same price (or less) might be useful.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I dont argue with people, i correct them and they get upset.


Not all of them. Most try to counter-argue with you but you don't listen to what they have to say and just keep pushing what you think is correct.


----------



## Scotty99

Nah that's not true at all, i was merely countering people in here saying that the difference between 150fps and 180 is a bigger deal than 60 vs 75, that simply isnt true.

Truly the only reason to buy a 5ghz CPU is for older titles, or ones that rely on 1-2 cores for performance. Just so happens i am one of those people, but for most a ryzen 1600x is going to be the smarter purchase.

Too many people use the argument that high FPS gaming is intel only territory, without thinking about what they are saying. Again 60 vs 75 is a difference anyone can see, 150 vs 180 is not something many are going to be able to discern.


----------



## Tojara

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Still Skylake S has lower cache latency


It's honestly irrelevant. The only reason low core count Intels are doing so well because people with <=4c/8t was >90% of the market and the 32+32+256+x MB was there nearly for a decade. Having more cache with a slightly higher latency can rack up performance very quickly.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> Right -- but I didn't go from a 80Hz monitor to a 100Hz monitor. I went from a 60Hz monitor to a 100Hz and 144Hz monitor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


I went from a 170Hz monitor to a 60Hz monitor.


----------



## profundido

I just skimmed through the last 10 pages of this thread. I know this won't be relevant to the whole 60 vs 144fps discussion but here is some news about the upcoming coffee lake processors for those interested ! =P =P

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/intel-6-core-coffee-lake-processors-launch-october-5th.html


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I dont argue with people, i correct them and they get upset.


You don't correct, you just don't know better.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> I just skimmed through the last 10 pages of this thread. I know this won't be relevant to the whole 60 vs 144fps discussion but here is some news about the upcoming coffee lake processors for those interested ! =P =P
> 
> http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/intel-6-core-coffee-lake-processors-launch-october-5th.html


Really hope that is true









Destiny 2 is like october 24th. Also cooler master H500 case releases in october apparently for anyone interested.


----------



## _Chimera

Why does Intel insist in disabling hyperthreading on Core i5s? Is there any hardware difference? or it's just a software flag disabling it?

Can someone enlighten me on this please? More interested in the "why" than anything else, really.

No hyperthreading on a $200+ CPU sounds pretty ******ed...


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *_Chimera*
> 
> Why does Intel insist in disabling hyperthreading on Core i5s?


Market segmentation. It's a feature they don't want in less expensive parts to incentive the purchase of more expensive parts.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *_Chimera*
> 
> Is there any hardware difference? or it's just a software flag disabling it?


The silicon responsible for HT (the doubled architectural state and expanded front-end) are present in every die flavor of these architectures, and defects specific to HT are probably very rare. However, Intel can fuse off access to various areas, killing them in hardware, after the fact...again, for market segmentation.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *_Chimera*
> 
> Why does Intel insist in disabling hyperthreading on Core i5s? Is there any hardware difference? or it's just a software flag disabling it?
> 
> Can someone enlighten me on this please? More interested in the "why" than anything else, really.
> 
> No hyperthreading on a $200+ CPU sounds pretty ******ed...


Segmentation, that's why. They don't want you buying the i5 instead of the i7, pretty simple actually. That's why they have locked CPUs as well.


----------



## Scotty99

He was probably wondering why i5's arent 4c/8t, that is personally what i expected them to be with coffee. Obviously intel wouldnt sell a single i7 if i5's were 6c/12t.

Also any news/pics on strix z370?


----------



## _Chimera

Thank you guys, good info.

I don't like Intel's reasoning if that is the case, and I'll go with team red for my next upgrade.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *_Chimera*
> 
> Thank you guys, good info.
> 
> I don't like Intel's reasoning if that is the case, and I'll go with team red for my next upgrade.


because i5 dont have HT? then you dont want to go with AMD because Ryzen 3 has no SMT, Intel offering always has been more expensive, if your budget doesnt allow it then its beter looking at the alternatives


----------



## jprovido

Why aren't people excited with the new Cofee Lake i5's? I could be wrong here but 6c/6t i5 would probably destroy my i7 7700k and I dare say even my Ryzen 7 1700x. would probably still lose to a Ryzen 7 cpu in terms of benchmarks/multithreadded apps but I'm pretty sure 6c/6t with high IPC/clock speed would do great with gaming+streaming and multithreadded workloads. Intel has the advantage in gaming right now but struggles with more threadded workloads like gaming and streaming, etc. with these new i5's wouldn't it be the best of both worlds for cheap?


----------



## Scotty99

Eh 6c/6t will still be a limiting CPU a few years from now, AMD has a 6c12t CPU for sub 200 dollars that is still going to be a default recommendation. Really most people should still be skipping i5's, and those poor souls who bought a 7600k.....ouch.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Eh 6c/6t will still be a limiting CPU a few years from now, AMD has a 6c12t CPU for sub 200 dollars that is still going to be a default recommendation. Really most people should still be skipping i5's, and those poor souls who bought a 7600k.....ouch.


tbh I disagree. Ryzen cpus struggle with high refresh rate gaming. my 1700x at 3.9ghz with a 16gb kit at 3333MHz struggles with games like Dota 2 because of the IPC and clock speed disadvantage. with these new i5's It won't be a problem and I'm pretty sure 6 cores @ 5ghz would be beastly for years to come


----------



## Scotty99

Huh? Of course gaming is going to be the same story as kaby vs ryzen, my point is i would not advise anyone to be buying a 6c non hyperthreaded part at the tail end of 2017 when AMD has the 1600 and 1600x for less money. The 8700k is really the only chip from intels stable i would be recommending at the higher end.

The reason for this is the 8700k will be matching (or close) the 1700x in multithreaded workloads, the 8600k will be getting destroyed by a 1600x.


----------



## _Chimera

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> because i5 dont have HT? then you dont want to go with AMD because Ryzen 3 has no SMT, Intel offering always has been more expensive, if your budget doesnt allow it then its beter looking at the alternatives


Ryzen 3 is not of my interest, a core i5 very well could be. I think my best option is to go for a Ryzen 5 which packs 6 cores and 12 threads for the same or less money.

I'm just saying that a $200+ CPU without HT is dumb nowadays, even more so after ryzen. That's why I asked in my first post, if there was some architectural reason behind it then ok, if it's just because Intel wants me to pay more and get an i7 then I'm sorry but no.

Not hating, I've used intel for years. Still do, maybe until my next upgrade.

Other people can do whatever they want with their money, it's fine


----------



## Scotty99

Ya the only thing changing with coffee is the i7's now can be a broad recommendation, they still have no competition for ryzen 5's. Does anyone know if they are going to be offering an unlocked i3 with 4c/4t? That could be a real compelling part for budget builders, if priced right.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *_Chimera*
> 
> Ryzen 3 is not of my interest, a core i5 very well could be. I think my best option is to go for a Ryzen 5 which packs 6 cores and 12 threads for the same or less money.
> 
> I'm just saying that a $200+ CPU without HT is dumb nowadays, even more so after ryzen. That's why I asked in my first post, if there was some architectural reason behind it then ok, if it's just because Intel wants me to pay more and get an i7 then I'm sorry but no.
> 
> Not hating, I've used intel for years. Still do, maybe until my next upgrade.
> 
> Other people can do whatever they want with their money, it's fine


for the same reason people shoudlnt be paying for a 1300x when a Ryzen 1400 has SMT.. the same goes for an i5 and an i7 there should be a difference in the CPUs

price brackets are different and probably performance is also you pay more for an i5 if you are willing to get higher OC ability,better IMC,more PCIE lanes and higher IPC

if you are going to need more cores/threads then go with ryzen


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Huh? Of course gaming is going to be the same story as kaby vs ryzen, my point is i would not advise anyone to be buying a 6c non hyperthreaded part at the tail end of 2017 when AMD has the 1600 and 1600x for less money. The 8700k is really the only chip from intels stable i would be recommending at the higher end.
> 
> The reason for this is the 8700k will be matching (or close) the 1700x in multithreaded workloads, the 8600k will be getting destroyed by a 1600x.


I'm not just talking about gaming. the new i5 is just a more balanced chip. great for gaming and decent with multithreadded apps. compared to the current i5 and i7 it's still better imo. I would never get the Ryzen 5 over the 6 core/6thread i5 unless the price difference is too big to justify


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I'm not just talking about gaming. the new i5 is just a more balanced chip. great for gaming and decent with multithreadded apps. compared to the current i5 and i7 it's still better imo. *I would never get the Ryzen 5 over the 6 core/6thread i5* unless the price difference is too big to justify


That would be a poor decision, there are going to be games in the future that will run better on ryzen 5 due to the extra threads. 8700k is so appealing to me because it offers the best of both worlds, and is nearly as future proof as a ryzen 7.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> That would be a poor decision, there are going to be games in the future that will run better on ryzen 5 due to the extra threads. 8700k is so appealing to me because it offers the best of both worlds, and is nearly as future proof as a ryzen 7.


it's just me though. I have both the 7700k and the Ryzen 7. I think I know them both pretty well I've had them both for a while now. if you're talking right now i5 4c/4t vs. Ryzen 5 1600/1600x then it's a no brainer id buy the Ryzen cpu but 6c/6t @ 5ghz is just too good. I think a lot of people will be surprised when the official reviews comes out


----------



## Scotty99

Not really, you can extrapolate and even at 5ghz a 8600k is still going to be quite a ways behind a 1600x at 4.0. On the flip side the 8700k will have the same single core lead as kaby lake did, while matching overclocked ryzen 7's in multithreaded stuff. Remember as more ryzens get in more peoples hands and time goes on game devs are going to be coding games with these high thread chips in mind, this is why i will not be recommending 8600k to anyone.


----------



## Clukos

I just wish these came out sooner so we could be done with these masturbatory "It'll pass a 1800x in multi threaded apps!" posts, latest leaks put it in the 1600 CB range when highly overclocked (5.0 GHz with a delid). That's still a good ways off the 1800-1900 range of highly overclocked R7s. CPU-z bench is the same deal, around the 4400 MT mark when the R7s are in the 5000-5100 range when overclocked.


----------



## Scotty99

Eh dont think anyone said its going to be surpassing a ryzen 7, but its should be within spitting distance when both are overclocked. i5's on the other hand will look like a potato next to a (cheaper) ryzen 1600 in cinebench.


----------



## AlphaC

If your application is poorly threaded and from before 2009, then the extra threads of a Ryzen CPU won't matter unless you run 4 or more of those poorly threaded apps *concurrently*. See Amdahl's law for parallelism.

It is no different than a i5-7600K vs Ryzen 5 1600X situation, it's just the core counts went up by two. A logical thread from SMT is only about 30-40% performance of a "real core". That said, the locked i5s and i3s are looking to be very poor choices.

In other news the Z370 Extreme4 looks to be a great board if the power delivery pans out (I have confidence in the Taichi moreso since it has a heatpipe as well)
https://videocardz.com/72416/exclusive-asrock-z370-motherboards
* The chokes alone appear to have been upgraded to the Z370 Extreme6 / Z270 Supercarrier level

The MSI Z370 Godlike Gaming on the other hand looks to be a mess of RGB.


----------



## Scotty99

Ya i love that asrock put beefy heatsinks on the extreme 4, i am likely gonna hold out for asus this time around, ive always wanted to see how well their AI tuning software does when you set it to per core overclocking, something that cant be done on ryzen currently.


----------



## MaKeN

You can always turn off the leds, leds arent a problem, but that 18phase design is something sweet about it, i also really like the number of m.2 on it....


----------



## Ph42oN

I believe AMD will drop prices after coffee lake releases, and you will get r7 1700 for just little more than 8600k, and 1800x maybe close to 8700k


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ph42oN*
> 
> I believe AMD will drop prices after coffee lake releases, and you will get r7 1700 for just little more than 8600k, and 1800x maybe close to 8700k


I would like to see the price of the APU with SMT a better deal than the i3


----------



## wingman99

The i5 8600k still has it's place. I can't think of a game where my i5 7600k does not produce minimum of 60 FPS. It's going to take a lot of years for true DX12 games to be abundant that need more than 4 cores 4 threads to run well.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *_Chimera*
> 
> Ryzen 3 is not of my interest, a core i5 very well could be. I think my best option is to go for a Ryzen 5 which packs 6 cores and 12 threads for the same or less money.
> 
> I'm just saying that a $200+ CPU without HT is dumb nowadays, even more so after ryzen. That's why I asked in my first post, if there was some architectural reason behind it then ok, if it's just because Intel wants me to pay more and get an i7 then I'm sorry but no.
> 
> Not hating, I've used intel for years. Still do, maybe until my next upgrade.
> 
> Other people can do whatever they want with their money, it's fine


Disabling or restricting features for segmentation has been a thing forever.

That Ryzen 5 is a 6c/12t part because AMD disabled one core per CCX...because they want people to pay more for 8c/16t parts.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I'm not just talking about gaming. the new i5 is just a more balanced chip. great for gaming and decent with multithreadded apps. compared to the current i5 and i7 it's still better imo. I would never get the Ryzen 5 over the 6 core/6thread i5 unless the price difference is too big to justify


As somebody who has no issue pushing high frame rates in many games with my ancient 4930K I have to laugh at all the "well Ryzen sucks at IPC and therefore is a no-go with high refresh rate monitors" comments that I've seen cropping up around here lately. Last I checked a 4 GHz R7 has better IPC than my 4.5 GHz IB-E so let's hold off on the hyperbole please. Sure KL is the fastest available, but that's a long way from saying ANYTHING less than that performance is completely inadequate.

I would argue that ANY high end CPU from the last 4-5 years is still plenty capable of most gaming needs (short of having to have 200+ FPS in all games).


----------



## pez

Whose saying it sucks? People are saying that it's just not at the level that justifies an upgrade for most people.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> As somebody who has no issue pushing high frame rates in many games with my ancient 4930K I have to laugh at all the "well Ryzen sucks at IPC and therefore is a no-go with high refresh rate monitors" comments that I've seen cropping up around here lately. Last I checked a 4 GHz R7 has better IPC than my 4.5 GHz IB-E so let's hold off on the hyperbole please. Sure KL is the fastest available, but that's a long way from saying ANYTHING less than that performance is completely inadequate.
> 
> I would argue that ANY high end CPU from the last 4-5 years is still plenty capable of most gaming needs (short of having to have 200+ FPS in all games).


Well that is wrong. 4ghz Ryzen is about 4 ghz BW-E.

My old 1700 at 3900 was 25/22% worse in min/avg compared to my 4800 7800X. If I have my 7800X. That was with the same RAM as I had on the R7 machine. I now have 4x4GB 3800mhz compared to 2x8 3200..

The CPU perform the same on 4600, 4700 and 4800 in games..


----------



## Scotty99

You are the guy claiming battlefield 1 runs poorly on ryzen right? That is the one game that ryzen actually keeps up in, something should have alerted you to your odd results when comparing to others before you went out and bought a new platform.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You are the guy claiming battlefield 1 runs poorly on ryzen right? That is the one game that ryzen actually keeps up in, something should have alerted you to your odd results when comparing to others before you went out and bought a new platform.


Nah. Ryzen is still outmatched in Battlefield. Even this Hardware Unboxed guy shows it 15-20ish fps behind and Intel chips have more OC headroom.

https://www.techspot.com/review/1465-amd-ryzen-threadripper-1950x-1920x/page5.html

Of course it doesn't matter much considering the frames anyway. So I get both sides of the argument here.


----------



## Scotty99

I see a 11 FPS difference between a 1700 and his 7800x, if you read the dudes post he is claiming 25% difference. He had something wrong with his testing, as those techspot numbers are what ive seen across the board for bf1, very close to intel.

Being 11 fps behind is "keeping up" when we are at framerates this high, might want to edit out your "nah".


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I see a 11 FPS difference between a 1700 and his 7800x, if you read the dudes post he is claiming 25% difference. He had something wrong with his testing, as those techspot numbers are what ive seen across the board for bf1, very close to intel.
> 
> Being 11 fps behind is "keeping up" when we are at framerates this high, might want to edit out your "nah".


Again, he is comparing a high overclocked 7800x vs a Ryzen at around it's max overclock. His numbers sound about right to me. Other members on this forum with both platforms have posted similar differences in other games.


----------



## Scotty99

That actually suits my viewpoint more, 1700 is a potato at stock, all core boost is a measly 3200mhz.


----------



## Scotty99

Point being, you dont switch platforms for a game as optimized as BF1 is. He should have looked a bit deeper into why his results were so different from all the review sites.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Point being, you dont switch platforms for a game as optimized as BF1 is. He should have looked a bit deeper into why his results were so different from all the review sites.


Did he say that was the reason he switched? Not being smart I just don't see that anywhere.

And we love to blow money around here. I switched from a 4790k mostly because I was bored with it.

I also want to point out that Battlefield is usually benchmarked in single player.
Which doesn't tell us much of anything. If you see results with all the CPU's within 5 frames of eachother I'm guessing it was a single player benchmark.


----------



## Scotty99

Well he can clear it up if he wants, but pretty sure ive seen him state BF1 was his main game. Im going to switch because of MMO's but i see that as being a more valid reason than getting 180 fps vs 200 for example. Id just like to keep perspective when talking about ryzen and intel, and what a 5ghz cpu actually gets you.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well he can clear it up if he wants, but pretty sure ive seen him state BF1 was his main game. Im going to switch because of MMO's but i see that as being a more valid reason than getting 180 fps vs 200 for example. Id just like to keep perspective when talking about ryzen and intel, and what a 5ghz cpu actually gets you.


I wish I could hit 5ghz


----------



## Scotty99

Well 5ghz comment was assuming 8700k will hit that, at least on a few cores. I think 4.8 should be a common OC on these.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well 5ghz comment was assuming 8700k will hit that, at least on a few cores. I think 4.8 should be a common OC on these.


that would be about my prediction as well


----------



## Clukos

Again, memory matters more than clock speed for Ryzen, this is what I'm getting in 64P Conquest:






Not to say that I don't expect Skylake-X to perform better, just that GreedyMuffin's results must be taken with a grain of salt, he couldn't get past 2933 on his memory kit (I think its Hynix, maybe that's why).


----------



## Scotty99

Memory is not more important than clock speed on ryzen, that is absolute crazy talk. Ryzen gains a bit more from memory than intel does, but it does not begin to encroach on being more important than clock speeds.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Memory is as important on Skylake-X from what I have tested.,


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Memory is not more important than clock speed on ryzen, that is absolute crazy talk. Ryzen gains a bit more from memory than intel does, but it does not begin to encroach on being more important than clock speeds.


Oh really, explain this then:

2666 Auto timings










3466 Optimized










Just because you can't push your CPU with the 1060 to show the difference doesn't mean that there isn't any. From my testing, in CPU limited scenarios, memory makes a bigger difference than clock speed with few exceptions (Crysis 3 for example).


----------



## aDyerSituation

Memory speeds are also more important than most people think on all platforms. But in that first picture there seems to be more rain and stuff going on.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Memory speeds are also more important than most people think on all platforms. But in that first picture there seems to be more rain and stuff going on.


That's on the game, each time you load the save rain differs, doesn't make a difference in fps (at least from the CPU side).


----------



## Scotty99

Those two screenshots do nothing to back up your claims of "memory speed matters more than clockspeed".

Downclock your ryzen to 3ghz and come back to me.

Im not saying its possible that 3200 vs 2133 ram will give more gains than a 3800>4000mhz overclock thats entirely possible, but what you are saying is not that.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Those two screenshots do nothing to back up your claims of "memory speed matters more than clockspeed".
> 
> Downclock your ryzen to 3ghz and come back to me.
> 
> Im not saying its possible that 3200 vs 2133 ram will give more gains than a 3800>4000mhz overclock thats entirely possible, but what you are saying is not that.


Way ahead of you, already did that months ago:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> That's on the game, each time you load the save rain differs, doesn't make a difference in fps (at least from the CPU side).


The game looks more detailed. More shadows, more fog, textures clearer. ground smoother.


----------



## Scotty99

Not sure exactly what im looking at there, the only big dips i see is in hitman your 3.0ghz 1700 is 60 fps behind whatever else those numbers are. I did a bunch of testing when i had a 4000 mhz trident kit and no ram speed showed more FPS gain than moving my cpu from 3800 to 3900 mhz. As you know i play MMO's which are entirely CPU bound, memory does almost nothing there.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> The game looks more detailed. More shadows, more fog, textures clearer. ground smoother.












^ Just loaded a couple times to get heavy rain, no difference.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ^ Just loaded a couple times to get heavy rain, no difference.


----------



## Scotty99

Pretty sure i could load up every game i own, and the difference between 3200 and 2400 ram would make less difference than moving my cpu from 3800 to 3900. I understand you think your results show something, but to me it says something is goofy with your testing.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Pretty sure i could load up every game i own, and the difference between 3200 and 2400 ram would make less difference than moving my cpu from 3800 to 3900. I understand you think your results show something, but to me it says something is goofy with your testing.


Pretty sure you are talking out of your ass, without testing, without results. I did some tests, I provided the results. All you do in this thread is insult people and play the smartass, everyone can do that


----------



## Scotty99

Nah i play the voice of reason, at no time in history has memory been more important than clockspeed for games.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Nah i play the voice of reason, at no time in history has memory been more important than clockspeed for games.


"The voice of reason", without any data backing that up whatsoever. Nah, that's called being a smartass.


----------



## Scotty99

Its also massively overblown the benefits ryzen specifically gains from memory, intel gets very similar gains, maybe only slightly less.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Didn't digital foundry have a video demonstrating ram overclock vs cpu overclock?


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Didn't digital foundry have a video demonstrating ram overclock vs cpu overclock?


Yup:


----------



## Scotty99

All that shows is whatever game that is (is that witcher?) cannot use cpu cores properly. A 4.8ghz cpu should be mopping up a 4.2ghz model (stock 7700k), no matter what the ram is set to.


----------



## aDyerSituation

this one too


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> this one too


Crysis 3 doesn't care at all about memory speed (maybe slightly but not a huge difference). It's the one game that comes up always in their videos with the same results. Most current gen games see a nice boost from memory speed.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Crysis 3 doesn't care at all about memory speed. It's the one game that comes up always in their videos with the same results. Most current gen games see a nice boost from memory speed).


I know that's why I showed this one. Because even that is a noticeable differences


----------



## Scotty99

I don't debate memory can make a difference depending on the game and resolution (wish people with 1080ti's in here would stop with the 1080p benchmarks btw), but blanket statements like "memory is more important than clock speed" should not be allowed, gives the wrong idea to people browsing the thread.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I don't debate memory can make a difference depending on the game and resolution (wish people with 1080ti's in here would stop with the 1080p benchmarks btw), but blanket statements like "memory is more important than clock speed" should not be allowed, gives the wrong idea to people browsing the thread.


Or maybe people should learn to read and not make up "blanket statements".


----------



## Scotty99

More like, "this unoptimized game seems to like ram speed because it cannot use the CPU cores effectively". Again man lots of factors involved when talking about ram speed, your statement of "ram speed matters more on ryzen than clock speed" is a blanket statement that is going to be false far more times than true.

You drank the koolaid from ryzen launch reviews my dude, ram doesnt matter as much as you think it does.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> More like, "this unoptimized game seems to like ram speed because it cannot use the CPU cores effectively". Again man lots of factors involved when talking about ram speed, your statement of "ram speed matters more on ryzen than clock speed" is a blanket statement that is going to be false far more times than correct.
> 
> You drank the koolaid from ryzen launch reviews my dude, ram doesnt matter as much as you think it does.


The definition of a blanket statement:
Quote:


> A blanket statement is a vague and noncommittal statement asserting a premise *without providing evidence* (such as specific numbers)


And who's not providing numbers to back up his argument in this thread? You. I'm done with this argument, not in the mood to feed trolls









And as long as you do not provide anything to back up your claims, nobody is going to take you seriously.


----------



## Scotty99

The way i understand blanket statement is that it is all encompassing, as in no matter what situation ram is going to trump clockspeed, this is what you are trying to insinuate with your comments. You didnt say "sometimes ram can be more important than clockspeed, depending on the situation."


----------



## Scotty99

I see the confusion here now, you didn't understand what blanket statement means (i had to look up the actual definition, no idea where you got that one lol). It means exactly what i thought it did.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> The way i understand blanket statement is that it is all encompassing, as in no matter what situation ram is going to trump clockspeed, this is what you are trying to insinuate with your comments. You didnt say "sometimes ram can be more important than clockspeed, depending on the situation."


That is correct, I could've worded that differently. In the context of my comment I meant to say RAM makes a bigger difference in CPU limited scenarios for games like Battlefield 1. From what I've tested RAM speed, timings and subs make a bigger difference than moving up let's say 500 MHz. Some games don't see a difference with ram, others do.


----------



## Scotty99

And from what i've tested, ram makes almost no difference. I tested 2133 vs 3200 in a spot in WoW that was CPU bound but without variables (no people on my screen or in my area). There was 0 fps difference. Going from 3800 to 3900 on my CPU gave a measurable and repeatable difference.

MMO's are known in the industry to be the most CPU bound titles in existence, not sure how your results are more valid than mine because you made nice looking graphs.


----------



## Timur Born

If lots of high resolution textures have to be shoved from CPU memory to GPU memory then memory bandwidth and even more so latency (lots of small data) likely play a bigger role.


----------



## Clukos

Wow is running on an outdated engine, older titles don't seem to favor ram speed much. I might download the game to test but I don't expect much of anything. Recent games like Overwatch see a nice boost in performance.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> As somebody who has no issue pushing high frame rates in many games with my ancient 4930K I have to laugh at all the "well Ryzen sucks at IPC and therefore is a no-go with high refresh rate monitors" comments that I've seen cropping up around here lately. Last I checked a 4 GHz R7 has better IPC than my 4.5 GHz IB-E so let's hold off on the hyperbole please. Sure KL is the fastest available, but that's a long way from saying ANYTHING less than that performance is completely inadequate.
> 
> I would argue that ANY high end CPU from the last 4-5 years is still plenty capable of most gaming needs (short of having to have 200+ FPS in all games).


my 1700x @3.9ghz 3333mhz can't run Dota 2 at 144hz(minimums sometimes goes below 100fps in heavy team fights). My Ryzen rig is awesome don't get me wrong and it destroys my 7700k @ 5Ghz in most of the workloads I put it through but it's an "okay" gaming cpu. that's why I really think these 6 core coffee lake i5's are a lot more exciting than most people think.


----------



## Scotty99

I also tested overwatch (albeit at 1440p) literally no difference from 2133 to 3200. Those are the two games i play the most.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I also tested overwatch (albeit at 1440p) literally no difference from 2133 to 3200. Those are the two games i play the most.


Did you test that with a 1060 by any chance? At 1440p or even 1080p you'll most likely be GPU bottlenecked.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I also tested overwatch (albeit at 1440p) literally no difference from 2133 to 3200. Those are the two games i play the most.


Overwatch lovess threads. they did a good job optimizing this game. I get 200fps+ easy on overwatch even when I was stuck at 2400mhz before the agesa update.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> Overwatch lovess threads. they did a good job optimizing this game. I get 200fps+ easy on overwatch even when I was stuck at 2400mhz before the agesa updatae.


Can confirm on the 200+ fps


----------



## Scotty99

I tested OW at both resolutions actually (while i had my old monitor) and saw no difference on either.


----------



## aDyerSituation

I get about 30-40 more fps in Overwatch depending on the situation from 2133 to 4000. And that ram wasn't even 100% stable


----------



## Scotty99

Yes my 1700 destroyed my 2500k in minimums for overwatch, that was the first time i realized where the industry is going in regards to multithreaded CPU's.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I get about 30-40 more fps in Overwatch depending on the situation from 2133 to 4000. And that ram wasn't even 100% stable


I can attest to this. I believe I got 25-30 more fps from 2400mhz to 3333MHz on overwatch with my 1700x


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I tested OW at both resolutions actually (while i had my old monitor) and saw no difference on either.


You are likely GPU bottlenecked then, in both cases. Ram speed won't make much of a difference in that case.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I can attest to this. I believe I got 25-30 more fps from 2400mhz to 3333MHz on overwatch with my 1700x


I also want to point out I play mostly on low(textures/models on high) and my gpu usage is very low.

So I am 100% CPU bound


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I also want to point out I play mostly on low(textures/models on high) and my gpu usage is very low.
> 
> So I am 100% CPU bound


the only way to do it tbh lol. even my 1080ti gets pummeled without turning down the settings. with that said my 7700k still outperformed my 1700x in overwatch. but with fps going above 300fps+ it doesn't really matter with the monitors we have today


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I can attest to this. I believe I got 25-30 more fps from 2400mhz to 3333MHz on overwatch with my 1700x


What area were you testing in? Assume training zone?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> the only way to do it tbh lol. even my 1080ti gets pummeled without turning down the settings. with that said my 7700k still outperformed my 1700x in overwatch. but with fps going above 300fps+ it doesn't really matter with the monitors we have today


There are a lot of settings in Overwatch that I can't tell are on or off lol. But those settings are the ones that kill fps


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> What area were you testing in? Assume training zone?


quick match just eyeballing the fps numbers. not doing anything fancy like recording the average fps. was just playing around with both my 7700k and 1700x systems just to see the performance difference in gaming. Ryzen have improved over the past few months. I remember it doing horrible with dota 2 when I first got it. it's been getting better after updates/optimizations


----------



## Scotty99

Well in the training zone i couldnt measure a single FPS difference between 2133 and 3200, this while on low at 1080p when i had my old monitor (cpu bottleneck). In quick play or comp it would be pretty hard to come up with FPS gains unless you can rule out variables 100%, this is why its so hard to benchmark games like WoW as well.


----------



## Scotty99

Even the same map would be hard, unless you had the exact same team comp, with the same players pressing the same buttons at the same time


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Even the same map would be hard, unless you had the exact same team comp, with the same players pressing the same buttons at the same time


that's why reviewers benchmarks overwatch with bots in the game with the all the same characters so they'd get a somewhat measurable number. it's really hard to benchmark games like overwatch, pubg, dota etc.


----------



## Scotty99

Right and i was just pointing out your claimed 25-30 fps was in a quickplay match, and you didnt denote if it was the same map or not.

Training zone isnt an accurate portrayal of gameplay but it at least has no variables, when positioning my character exactly in the same spot i saw 1-2 FPS going from 2133 to 3200. Again this was at 1080p low and i was in the 280 fps range on my 1060, i think we can call that a cpu bottleneck at that point.


----------



## Scotty99

Another curious situation, a 1080ti on low setting should be running into the 300 fps cap at 1440p. Just wondering how you would notice a gain in that situation. I get 130-170 fps depending on the map with a 1060 at medium details, a 1080ti is well over twice as powerful as my card, 300 would be no problem on low preset 1440p.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Yes my 1700 destroyed my 2500k in minimums for overwatch, that was the first time i realized where the industry is going in regards to multithreaded CPU's.


Isn't it expected for an R7 at 4ghz + 2666CL15 to beat a Sandybridge sans HT at 4.8ghz + 2133CL11? + 25% IPC +HT + quicker ram.
http://cdn.overclock.net/2/27/278e1d6e_IMG0050985_1.jpeg

https://www.techpowerup.com/236861/asrock-announces-x299-oc-formula-motherboard

These new sticks should work out of the box without issues on the 8700K as it'll be the 2nd optimization of Skylake.

4500mhz XMP 2T!
16GB (2x8GB) DDR4-4500 production kit by Corsair. It's listed as 1.45v on MSI's page in their QVLs for Kabylake-X.


----------



## Scotty99

Well depends on the game, overwatch does not necessarily need a 8c CPU, i was just glad to see games finally starting to leverage more cores.


----------



## Clukos

Yup like I expected WOW doesn't see a huge difference with RAM (older engine), but enough to make a difference where it's pushing the CPU more I guess. I haven't played WOW in years so I don't really know where to go to test heavy CPU areas (cities maybe):

2133 auto









3466 optimized









30 fps boost in the same area (all I did was restart and log-in again in the same spot). Oh and this is with maxed out settings, just with CMAA instead of SSAA.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Wow is running on an outdated engine, older titles don't seem to favor ram speed much. I might download the game to test but I don't expect much of anything. Recent games like Overwatch see a nice boost in performance.


hey Clukos,

I was looking at the screenshots from your earlier tests and trying to make sense of all the facts happening there, as I find them very interesting and there's definately something going on there. They made me think immediately of that digital foundry video review (of Skylake-X I think) where the guy also spoke about the importance of ram speed and compared to older cpu's.

Is there any chance you have the free to play game ESO (elder scrolls online) on your harddrive to do a few tests (of standing still in major towns/cities) in lower as well as higher resolutions ? That game uses a customized version of the Hero engine and is known to be notorious for it's single thread cpu limitations in all people-dense area's like towns whereas in dungeons it gives the opposite (no cpu limitations at all, GPU handles 1440p @ 144fps stable without breaking a sweat)

I for one would be very interested to see what results you get on your system and in your tests, purely from a continuous self educational point of view and to compare to my own findings


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> hey Clukos,
> 
> I was looking at the screenshots from your earlier tests and trying to make sense of all the facts happening there, as I find them very interesting and there's definately something going on there. They made me think immediately of that digital foundry video review (of Skylake-X I think) where the guy also spoke about the importance of ram speed and compared to older cpu's.
> 
> Is there any chance you have the free to play game ESO (elder scrolls online) on your harddrive to do a few tests (of standing still in major towns/cities) in lower as well as higher resolutions ? That game uses a customized version of the Hero engine and is known to be notorious for it's single thread cpu limitations in all people-dense area's like towns whereas in dungeons it gives the opposite (no cpu limitations at all, GPU handles 1440p @ 144fps stable without breaking a sweat)
> 
> I for one would be very interested to see what results you get on your system and in your tests, purely from a continuous self educational point of view and to compare to my own findings


If you could link me the free version I'd be willing to test it during the weekend, I can't find it on the steam store.


----------



## profundido

My apologies. I just checked and it seems the base version is not free yet, I thought it was because my subscription is free but apparently only after you have bought the base game except during free play week. And there is not free play week coming up soon that I can see









https://www.elderscrollsonline.com/en-us/freeplayweek

A true shame because that must be like the best sample of a cpu bottlenecked game (regardless of resolution even !!) to test with. For instance upon zoning from your last completed dungeon back into wayrest city wayshrine to return your quest this game will litterally drop fps all the way from stable flatlined 144fps to 45-60fps regardless of resolution (even on my 4K monitor) and you see my 6950x @ 4.2Ghz go from 10-20% load on all cores straight to being completely pegged on 1 core. On another machine I have with a [email protected] the exact same behaviour happens but the lowest fps numbers are much higher. I never cared to test the memory speed impact but I might do it now actually.

All this time my dual Titan xp's or 1080ti on the other pc are not even used 60%


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Yup like I expected WOW doesn't see a huge difference with RAM (older engine), but enough to make a difference where it's pushing the CPU more I guess. I haven't played WOW in years so I don't really know where to go to test heavy CPU areas (cities maybe):
> 
> 2133 auto
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3466 optimized
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 30 fps boost in the same area (all I did was restart and log-in again in the same spot). Oh and this is with maxed out settings, just with CMAA instead of SSAA.


I am baffled you saw those kind of gains, makes no sense to me. The spot you are testing puts almost no strain on a CPU, open areas of WoW are all GPU bound. I tested in suramar city which is a CPU killer even when no one is around because of all the mobs on screen, i didnt see a 1 fps difference between 2133 and 3200. I could go to that exact spot and with my rig i wouldnt see any difference whatsoever. /shrug

Also odd you started your sentence with "wow does not see much gain" then follow it up with screenshots showing a 30 fps improvement? I dunno dude, my results clash with yours big time.


----------



## Scotty99

Just to clarify, if you overclocked your video card in those screenshots an saw an FPS boost that would make sense, CPU/memory not so much. There arent even mobs on the screen to give the CPU a workout. Very odd results indeed.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Also odd you started your sentence with "wow does not see much gain" then follow it up with screenshots showing a 30 fps improvement? I dunno dude, my results clash with yours big time.


I mean, 30 fps isn't that huge when compared to other games, RotTR saw 56 fps increase in the same spot going from 2666 to 3466. I guess 21% increase in the case of wow is not that small.


----------



## Scotty99

That's kind of what i am getting at here, no one is seeing these kind of FPS increases in games but you. 56 fps going from 2666 to 3400 ram? I have watched reviews pretty much constantly since ryzen launched from all the techtubers, never have i seen anything close to those kind of gains.

If you want to prove what you are doing i suggest an uncut video.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> That's kind of what i am getting at here, no one is seeing these kind of FPS increases in games but you. 56 fps going from 2666 to 3400 ram? I have watched reviews pretty much constantly since ryzen launched from all the techtubers, never have i seen anything close to those kind of gains.
> 
> If you want to prove what you are doing i suggest an uncut video.


I'm tuning timings as well, this is one area almost none of the reviewers have touched. I used the timings The Stilt provided in the C6H thread and they helped a lot.

Edit:


http://imgur.com/xICFy


^ RotTR going from 3200C14 with auto timings (what the motherboard sets) vs 3466C14 with tweaked timings. Not as huge as going from 2666 to 3466 but still, there's a difference there. I would guess most of it is due to sub-timings.


----------



## Scotty99

If there really are that many gains to be had fiddling with subtimings, why have i not heard much about it or seen a video on it?

If you are confident your results are accurate make a video on it and try and make some money, im not kidding btw lol.

When i say never seen a video im talking from the big channels, gamersnexus/pcper etc. If this was real it would have been covered in depth.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> When i say never seen a video im talking from the big channels, gamersnexus/pcper etc. If this was real it would have been covered in depth.


Instead of me proving that to you, go in one of these threads:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1624603/rog-crosshair-vi-overclocking-thread/26530#post_26329100
http://www.overclock.net/t/1624139/official-ryzen-7-1800x-1700x-1700-owners-club-4ghz-club/16790#post_26328770

And type "I don't believe that sub-timings make a difference in game performance when using a Ryzen CPU", you'll get a faster result than way. You won't believe anything I post anyway


----------



## Scotty99

Of course i dont believe you, you are some random on the internet claiming 56 fps increases going from 2666 to 3444 ram lol. Again if this was real i would have seen an in depth video from one of the channels listed above.

You do realize the gains you are claiming here are on the order of magnitude (or higher) than going from a ryzen 5 to a ryzen 7? These gains are also surpassing what most people see from doing an overclock on a ryzen 7.

I am NOT saying here there aren't gains to be had from messing with subtimings of course there are most ram on the market is tuned for intel, but never have i seen anything close to the gains you are claiming.


----------



## Scotty99

Keep pestering gamersnexus on their twitter showing your 56 FPS gain in ROtTR. If they can reproduce those results i GUARANTEE you they will publish a video on it.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Of course i dont believe you, you are some random on the internet claiming 56 fps increases going from 2666 to 3444 ram lol. Again if this was real i would have seen an in depth video from one of the channels listed above.


These channels don't have the time to go in-depth with timings an performance, it's the same deal with reported performance for Skylake-X, they don't care nor have enough time to fix something that isn't plug and play. This is for the 7900x:


http://imgur.com/XU6na


I guess that's lies too, eh? Get off your high horse and do your own research, don't expect to be spoon-fed every time.


----------



## Scotty99

You really dont know who gamersnexus is if you think they wouldnt have time to showcase the kind of results you are claiming. They did a video on how best to apply thermal paste to threadripper.....you dont think their audience would be interested in a 56 fps gain going from 2666 to 3400 ram?


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You really dont know who gamersnexus is if you think they wouldnt have time to showcase the kind of results you are claiming. They did a video on how best to apply thermal paste to threadripper.....you dont think their audience would be interested in a 56 fps gain going from 2666 to 3400 ram?


I've actually linked GN my results and they said that they'll look into it after PAX West, so maybe you'll get spoon-fed again


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> I've actually linked GN my results and they said that they'll look into it after PAX West, so maybe you'll get spoon-fed again


1. You said yourself you got those subtimings from someone else.
2. I think you are full of it.

Have a good one.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 1. You said yourself you got those subtimings from someone else.
> 2. I think you are full of it.


That "someone else" is @The Stilt. And I used the sub-timings he provided as a base line to optimize my memory.


----------



## Scotty99

Mmk, well you make sure to get back to us with gamersnexus reply. Looking forward to that video.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Mmk, well you make sure to get back to us with gamersnexus reply. Looking forward to that video.


Nah I'm sure you can find that yourself, I would expect that you can at least navigate youtube. And there's no "us" here, only you. As other members have already posted with their findings memory does make a difference in their setups as well.


----------



## czin125

Couldn't you provide them all the timings/subtimings in both setups and what board you were using?


----------



## Scotty99

Except that is blatantly false? Show me one other dude that found 56 fps by messing with subtimings.

I am not sure you are trolling or not to be honest, but if you are that is some of the best trolling ive seen lol. Did you actually try to contact gamersnexus or just saying that after i suggested it?


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> Couldn't you provide them all the timings/subtimings in both setups and what board you were using?


Yup, 2666 Auto ends up looking like this:









What I'm currently running:









Board is Asus Crosshair VI hero with 9920 BIOS.


----------



## profundido

Clukos,

before I deep dive into this and start reading the forum links you mentioned. Is this large gain through memory tweaking something exclusive to Ryzen, or should I be able to see this on 7700K and 6590X as well ? If so I might try some suggested tweakings as well here and see if I get any gains worth mentioning.


----------



## peter2k

I skimmed the last 3-4 pages or so

I thought it's common knowledge by now that the inifnte fabric is tied to RAM speed

faster infinity fabric
less latency inside the chip

well with skylake-x you can OC the mesh, right?

some people here claim to increase IPC that way to (nearly?) kaby lake levels

same idea for the infinity fabric
just that you can't directly OC it


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> Clukos,
> 
> before I deep dive into this and start reading the forum links you mentioned. Is this large gain through memory tweaking something exclusive to Ryzen, or should I be able to see this on 7700K and 6590X as well ? If so I might try some suggested tweakings as well here and see if I get any gains worth mentioning.


7700k and 6950x should both see gains in CPU limited scenes, how much depends on the setup you have and how much you can push the memory









Ryzen just sees an additional boost because the IF is connected to memory speed so the faster you run your memory the faster IF runs and reduced inte-core latency, which helps in games most of all.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> Clukos,
> 
> before I deep dive into this and start reading the forum links you mentioned. Is this large gain through memory tweaking something exclusive to Ryzen, or should I be able to see this on 7700K and 6590X as well ? If so I might try some suggested tweakings as well here and see if I get any gains worth mentioning.


some games are a bit more sensitive to RAM speeds and timings than others

however Ryzen infinity fabric is tied to RAM speed (at 2:1)
infinity is the way the cores communicate and get data to and from the caches/RAM

like ring bus on kaby lake
mesh on skylake-x


----------



## Scotty99

Except that infinity fabric works on memory clock rate, sub timings should have no direct effect...

People reading cluckos results, take them with an enormous grain of salt....


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> People reading cluckos results, take them with an enormous grain of salt....


Yup what this guy said, trust the one that "tested" things in theory and provided no results, no screens, no benchmarks, absolutely nothing, over me









Edit: This is a test by a youtuber for the 7700k:






In-game bench (skip to 7:00) sees a 30 fps increase in average fps just by increasing memory speed.


----------



## Scotty99

The onus is on you here clukos, remember you are the guy claiming a 56 fps boost by fiddling with subtimings. You also magically found 30+ fps in an area in WoW that doesn't stress a CPU one iota.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> The onus is on you here clukos, remember you are the guy claiming a 56 fps boost by fiddling with subtimings. You also magically found 30+ fps in an area in WoW that doesn't stress a CPU one iota.


You clearly have no understanding of how CPU bottlenecking in games works. As long as the GPU isn't pinned to 100% and the game has no artificial FPS limit you _are_ CPU limited.


----------



## Scotty99

The WoW screenshot you provided is 100% GPU limited, your CPU is basically idle there yet you claim a 30 fps improvement, heh.

Go do that exact same test again with a GPU overlock, tell me what happens.


----------



## Scotty99

If you want to prove your story here cluckos here is what you do. You open your phones camera go into the bios and show it at default ram profile, load up ROtTR and WoW and show us the FPS, restart the PC (without cutting video) and load up your 3444 profile. If you can reproduce those results on video you may be onto something, until then you are a random on the internet claiming FPS gains that ive yet to see any professional reviewer come close to achieving with memory overlocks.


----------



## Scotty99

I think what is more likely here is there is something wrong with your PC when running ram at stock. Would be interested in you testing multiple kits.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I think what is more likely here is there is something wrong with your PC when running ram at stock.


no idea what that means really

a boatload of people buy i7 K's and don't overclock them
plenty of people buy RAM rated 2400 because it "doesn't matter"

loads of people leave things at stock
which is 2400 or even less for Ryzen
depending on number of sticks

stock RAM speed for Intel is 2400 as well (JEDEC specification)

many leave things at stock

this forum is just a collection of likeminded people


----------



## Scotty99

You don't get what im saying. Clearly his results are wrong, or he has stumbled upon something that needs to be covered more in depth by the tech media. I am simply stating its more *likely* and would be easier to explain his results if his PC wasnt running correctly with his ram at stock.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You don't get what im saying. Clearly his results are wrong, or he has stumbled upon something that needs to be covered more in depth by the tech media. I am simply stating its more *likely* and would be easier to explain his results if his PC wasnt running correctly with his ram at stock.


Is this "wrong" as well:


http://imgur.com/XU6na

 ?

It's not by me, completely different setup. 70 fps difference in RotTR Syria benchmark.


----------



## Scotty99

Honestly dude im not gonna click any of your links unless its a video showing on screen FPS numbers comparing stock vs your "optimized" subtimings. You cant claim gains like that without showing real proof, 56 fps is a GIGANTIC deal for 2666 vs 3400, that is MORE than going from AMD to intel. Do you really expect us to believe the numbers you are tossing out?


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> expect us


I don't think the word "us" means what you really think it means, there's no "us" in here. It's just you having a tantrum over nothing. It's not like you'll see any difference with your 1060, why even bother engaging in this discussion in the first place?









Your only argument is "b-b-but the hardware media", that's it?


----------



## Scotty99

Oh i think plenty reading this thread are questioning your results as well, they just aren't as vocal as i am about it.

Again, a 56 fps gain in RoTTR is HIGHER than if someone switched from a ryzen 1700 to a 7700k. You would think someone would instantly question their results before publishing their findings on a forum.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Oh i think plenty reading this thread are questioning your results as well, they just aren't as vocal as i am about it.


Oh dear, now you are bringing up imaginary posters with your imaginary results, this might be worse than I originally thought.

Someone described you yesterday in this very thread and he nailed it:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Not all of them. Most try to counter-argue with you but you don't listen to what they have to say and just keep pushing what you think is correct.


----------



## Scotty99

Plenty of people browsing this thread, just you and me posting....

I think logical people will side with me, others who dont like my posting style/and or dont care about real world results would take your side.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Plenty of people browsing this thread, just you and me posting....
> 
> I think logical people will side with me, others who dont like my posting style/and or dont care about real world results would take your side.


So those imaginary posters you imagine taking your side, because of your imaginary results that you haven't posted yet. Sure, that makes sense









"B-b-but the hardware media"


----------



## Scotty99

Again my dude, onus is on YOU. I am not the one claiming enormous FPS gains with memory overclocking, on a greater level than someone switching platform from ryzen to kaby lake...

Amazing that you are ok with these results, think something would have tipped you off to the fact something is goofy in your testing...


----------



## Clukos

I'm not claiming anything, I've posted actual results (unlike you, you are claiming things i.e. without data) with the only difference being memory speed and timings. You can take that as you want, I don't really care. If the findings make people look into timings and memory speeds for their own setup, I'm okay with it.


----------



## Scotty99

You are literally claiming going from 2666 ram to "optimized" 3400 is a bigger FPS uptick than someone switching from a ryzen chip to a kaby lake, and you are ok with this?






32 FPS difference between 1800x and a 7700k in ROtTR, and that is BEFORE it got patched. You must be some kind of magician, your ram tweaks were nearly 100% faster than going from ryzen to kaby lake before it got a patch.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You are literally claiming going from 2666 ram to "optimized" 3400 is a bigger FPS uptick than someone switching from a ryzen chip to a kaby lake, and you are ok with this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 32 FPS difference between 1800x and a 7700k in ROtTR, and that is BEFORE it got patched. You must be some kind of magician, your ram tweaks were nearly 100% faster than going from ryzen to kaby lake before it got a patch.


There's no way you are _not_ trolling, you actually compare the difference I've found in a single area _after the patch_ with a result of a random benchmark in who knows what area before the patch. Have you thought that maybe, just maybe, all these Intel CPUs over there are actually GPU limited?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> There's no way you are _not_ trolling, you actually compare the difference I've found in a single area with a result of a random benchmark in who knows what area.


Excuse me? You literally claimed a 56 FPS gain in RoTTR with your ram tweaks, i linked the original review video from PCPer timestamped to show there was only a 32 fps difference between an 1800x and 7700k. You are trying to convince people in here that tweaking ram is not only faster than switching from AMD to intel, but nearly a 2x performance improvement. Why would anyone buy an intel chip if all they have to do is "optimize" their memory?

My goodness.


----------



## Clukos

For your sake, I hope you are trolling. I don't have to explain why your logic is incredibly flawed, it should be obvious.


----------



## Scotty99

No matter how hard you try clukos, you cant turn this one around.....you are the guy making these claims, i am showing you examples of why i dont believe your results, and why others should be questioning them as well.

When i post i look out for the greater good, claiming messing around with memory can achieve greater results than swapping over to the superior gaming platform should have had the "whoa whats up with these results" button flashing for you, but apparently you do not possess that button.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> blah blah blah


Just for you, you adorable troll









2666 Auto









3466 optimized









With HWiNFO, CPU-Z, RTC, RTSS on. Maybe all of these are in on the conspiracy?


----------



## kevindd992002

There's enough hurricanes in the real world. Can we please not have another hurricane in the forum world? Sigh. COFFEE LAKE topics man, c'mon! I'm surprised there is still no mod interference at this point.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> There's enough hurricanes in the real world. Can we please not have another hurricane in the forum world? Sigh. COFFEE LAKE topics man, c'mon! I'm surprised there is still no mod interference at this point.


True, this was a discussion about CL and Scotty99 turned it to monitor talk then conspiracy theory talk. At least people may pay the extra for faster ram to get better performance with CL now


----------



## stangflyer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Just for you, you adorable troll
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2666 Auto
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3466 optimized
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With HWiNFO, CPU-Z, RTC, RTSS on. Maybe all of these are in on the conspiracy?


GPU utilization is 49% is first screen shot vs 89% is second one. Or is that fan speed?


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stangflyer*
> 
> GPU utilization is 49% is first screen shot vs 89% is second one. Or is that fan speed?


It's GPU utilization. Faster memory is pushing the GPU a lot more, turning that into extra frames as long as you are below 99-100% of course.


----------



## kmac20

You know you can edit posts so you don't have to make two back to back, right?

Why are you so insistent on saying that other people's experiences are false? Maybe you are right and in general you shouldn't see such gains (I am not making this claim myself as I believe such gains are possible), but even if you are you can't really argue with someone's own experience and results and gains they've seen.

He's not saying everyone will see the gains, he's saying that HE has and shown evidence of it. If you don't believe his evidence and claims why are you even bothering to respond?

To be honest I think one or both of you might as well block the other neither of you agreed with the other one anyway and nor does it appear that proof from either side will sway the other one.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> It's GPU utilization. Faster memory is pushing the GPU a lot more, turning that into extra frames as long as you are below 99-100% of course.


I would be interested in seeing AID64 memory bench screenshots of the different memory settings, to rule out any inconsistencies that may explain the large unexpected fps gains. I know that on Z97, we've had various motherboards bench differently at same memory speeds, and that is usually attributed to poorly-optimized auto-timings by the specific board for specific speeds.

For people unaware of how the memory bus clock has been de-coupled from the CPU clock since Ivy-Bridge, they may find memory benefits unbelievable. What's really happening is that memory has been handi-capped ever since in favor of pursuing consistently higher CPU clock speeds, so anyone clever and patient enough is likely to reap the benefits in the right situations. Just think about it... the insane maximum frame rates of 7700K vs RyZen, or 7700K consistently beating Intel HEDT in general gaming performance. At stock, the ring bus on 7700K runs at 4GHz while IF and mesh default at 2400MHz.

At the time everyone was tuning their Haswell uncore, there was mass media broadcasting that uncore overclocking has no worthy gains outside of memory benchmarks. If somehow, that mentality transferred over into RyZen and HEDT -- then almighty help us.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> I would be interested in seeing AID64 memory bench screenshots of the different memory settings, to rule out any inconsistencies that may explain the large unexpected fps gains.


Yup I can do that


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



2666 "Auto"









3466 Optimized











Cache seems largely unaffected while b/w sees a nice boost.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> I would be interested in seeing AID64 memory bench screenshots of the different memory settings, to rule out any inconsistencies that may explain the large unexpected fps gains. I know that on Z97, we've had various motherboards bench differently at same memory speeds, and that is usually attributed to poorly-optimized auto-timings by the specific board for specific speeds.
> 
> *For people unaware of how the memory bus clock has been de-coupled from the CPU clock since Ivy-Bridge, they may find memory benefits unbelievable.* What's really happening is that memory has been handi-capped ever since in favor of pursuing consistently higher CPU clock speeds, so anyone clever and patient enough is likely to reap the benefits in the right situations. Just think about it... the insane maximum frame rates of 7700K vs RyZen, or 7700K consistently beating Intel HEDT in general gaming performance. At stock, the ring bus on 7700K runs at 4GHz while IF and mesh default at 2400MHz.
> 
> At the time everyone was tuning their Haswell uncore, there was mass media broadcasting that uncore overclocking has no worthy gains outside of memory benchmarks. If somehow, that mentality transferred over into RyZen and HEDT -- then almighty help us.


There are no doubt more gains to be had with current gen stuff than back in sandy days, this guy is claiming something a bit different tho...

I am not exactly saying his results are inaccurate, merely suggesting he has something wrong with either his testing methods/setup or has some setting in the bios enabled that is nerfing his PC when he has his ram at stock.

This isnt for me as i know something is "off" with his testing, i am posting for others so they dont take these results as gospel, needs to be put under a bit more scrutiny. The disappointing thing to me is how the guy never questioned these results, he saw some numbers and posted them. He didnt look into what kind of gains games had even when doing something major like a platform switch, that is clearly going to have more effect on performance than any amount of memory overclocking ever will.

Also cuckos, is that monitor in your sig correct? Cant remember if you were the guy who said they bought a 1080ti but do not game, or a different guy with a $750.00 GPU and ~$150.00 run of the mill 1080p screen.


----------



## Clukos

There's no way to help you, just stop derailing this thread. Maybe open up some new thread to deal with your problems. This is the thread about Coffee Lake, not "Scotty99"'s ramblings. It's too bad these CPUs are a month out so reliable info about CL is scarce, maybe a mod should just lock this thread and be done with it.


----------



## Scotty99

Its entirely relevant to the discussion, someone asked you earlier in the thread if subtimings would effect intel the same way and you said yes.

Please stop with the run around, start back at square 1 with your testing and post a video if you want us to believe your results.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Yup I can do that
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 2666 "Auto"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3466 Optimized
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cache seems largely unaffected while b/w sees a nice boost.


Can't see the images. Can you upload to this site directly, please?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Its entirely relevant to the discussion, someone asked you earlier in the thread if subtimings would effect intel the same way and you said yes.
> 
> Please stop with the run around, start back at square 1 with your testing and post a video if you want us to believe your results.


I agree, it's semi-relevant -- there is concern to be had now that Intel is tacking on 2 cores onto mainstream. Are they sticking with Ring bus and possibly down-clocking it or go straight up with a lower-clocked Mesh topology like Skylake-X?

Even if Intel sticks with a Ring bus, there is likely going to be a larger disparity between the bus clock and cpu clock, due to the additional cores. For example, for 7700K it is 45x vs 40x, but for 7800x it's 40x vs 24x.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Its entirely relevant to the discussion, someone asked you earlier in the thread *if subtimings would effect intel the same way and you said yes*.


Stop twisting reality to fit your narrative, it's very transparent and everyone can look through the bs that you keep posting. He didn't ask about subtimings specifically, but memory tweaking in general, which includes everything from speed, primary timings and subs. Of course I believe they make a difference for Intel systems, it would be stupid not to.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> us


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Can't see the images. Can you upload to this site directly, please?


Yup, I'll just import them


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You said yourself *most* of these gains you claim were attributed to subtimings, but all of a sudden when someone asks you if it applies to intel were not talking subtimings?


You can read the question and read the answer, the bs you inject in-between is all on you.


----------



## Scotty99

Is this guy being serious right now? Hello?

You said yourself *most* of these gains you claim were attributed to subtimings, but all of a sudden when someone asks you if it applies to intel were not talking subtimings?

Man, what a piece of work you are.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Yup, I'll just import them
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> images...


Thanks. All those gains show linear increases of roughly 30%. Was the 56fps increase in line with this 30%?


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Thanks. All those gains show linear increases of roughly 30%. Was the 56fps increase in line with this 30%?


It doesn't work like that, else Skylake-X and Threadripper would see double the framerate with faster memory (both reach 100 GB/s read/writte and 95 copy). There's much more to it than just pure bandwidth or latency unfortunately.


----------



## Scotty99

ROTR results with (i assume) XMP sub timings:

1700x=12 fps gain from 2133 to 3200
7700k=23 fps gain from 2133 to 3600 (20 fps gain from 2133 to 3200, fair bit amount more than AMD had)

So taking the 1700x results that linus's crew got, cuckos effectively found 44 extra fps going from xmp 3200 to optimized 3433.


----------



## Clukos

XMP doesn't even work properly for AMD platforms Scatty99









And it's 3466, not 3433. You can work that out. Anyway, if all you got is name jokes and "muh youtubers" I'm out.


----------



## Ding Chavez

So is this the Ryzen memory thread now...? Seriously go to a Ryzen thread you idiots...

You're wasting your time the mods will delete the last 10 pages.


----------



## Scotty99

So you again are claiming subtimings make that much difference eh? I link a video of the most popular techtuber on the planet who has a very competent and well paid staff testing this stuff, and it does not raise a red flag to you that they only found 12 fps from 2133 to 3200?

I just don't know where we can go from here man, not sure were on the same wavelength.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ding Chavez*
> 
> So is this the Ryzen memory thread now...? Seriously go to a Ryzen thread you idiots...
> 
> You're wasting your time the mods will delete the last 10 pages.


Originally it was about Coffee Lake, then monitors, then memory speed then whatever happened. I realize that I should not have fed the troll.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ding Chavez*
> 
> So is this the Ryzen memory thread now...? Seriously go to a Ryzen thread you idiots...
> 
> You're wasting your time the mods will delete the last 10 pages.


Try and pay attention, the discussion is ultimately about coffee lake, as this poster claims the kind of differences he is finding can be had on both platforms.


----------



## Timur Born

Different things are thrown into one pot here:

- Increasing memory frequency on AMD Zen is more or less equivalent to increasing "uncore" frequency. This also directly affects latency (likely more important) and bandwidth of the interconnects (fabric).

While on Skylake-X systems you may be able to directly overclock the Mesh, on Zen increasing memory frequency is the only way to do something equivalent. So for applications that benefit from faster fabric the memory frequency is only of secondary importance, it's what you overclock along with it that matters.

There is another twist to it, memory latency itself is bottlenecked by fabric latency. This is where memory frequency becomes important for Zen.

- Decreasing memory latency is something that games really seem to like, at least according to various online reports. If the game has to access lots of rather small bits of data in memory, like shoving textures of new scenes from memory to the GPU then this makes sense.

Just writing about "increased memory clocks" when decreased latencies are meant is rather misleading. Yes, you may decrease latencies by increasing frequency, but obviously only if you keep using the same timings for all frequencies. I miss the timing/latency aspect/information in this thread's discussions.

This likely is where memory bound games may see performance improvements on any CPU. I suspect that games that need to load lots of textures during game-play are among those and games where the CPU has to crunch data that does not fit into the L3 cache (Zen's CCX structure is affected by the first point above here).

- Increasing memory bandwidth. I don't remember having read anything about bandwidth increase to make any much of a difference in games, but that could just be me not reading awful lots about game benchmarks. I would rather expect this to be the case for initial loading rather than ongoing gameplay, but I frankly don't really know and don't have time to check myself at the moment.

This is the only real case of "increased memory clocks" in the truest sense of the sentence, but I suspect the other two cases are the more important ones unless some gaming data get really big.

I lack time to test this myself at the moment, so feel free to correct me or do your own tests to present results for the three different cases.


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> I realize that I should not have fed the troll.


You realized that 10 pages ago, but that didn't stop you.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> It doesn't work like that, else Skylake-X and Threadripper would see double the framerate with faster memory (both reach 100 GB/s read/writte and 95 copy). There's much more to it than just pure bandwidth or latency unfortunately.


Please don't assume that I only looked at the bandwidth increase. There was a latency increase of roughly 28% by dropping the memory speed down also. As Timur mentioned, if anything, it would be the latency decrease that benefits gaming in general and more so in specific scenarios since the bandwidth is so high already. FYI, even your best latency is still far from what was achievable with good DDR3, where the best can hang at <40ns. The HEDT latencies are atrocious compared to what lean mainstream platform can achieve, without as much effort. Hoping for this trend to continue with Coffee-Lake hexacore.

It would have been nice to see the reference fps rates that the 44fps or 56fps increases were relative to. The increase values themselves are meaningless.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> You realized that 10 pages ago, but that didn't stop you.


As did other people when he was rambling about monitor refresh rates. I must admit that I'm at fault here for continuing down this rabbit hole, although someone should have warned this guy a few days ago, he's been derailing this thread for days now.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> It would have been nice to see the reference fps rates that the 44fps or 56fps increases were relative to. The increase values themselves are meaningless.


Extrapolating AIDA64 numbers to games is also meaningless but hey


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Please don't assume that I only looked at the bandwidth increase. There was a latency increase of roughly 28% by dropping the memory speed down also.


This is one point of weakness for AMD Zen. You can try doing 2400-C6 all day long, but the latency will still be worse/higher than 3200-C14, simply because of how fabric latency depends on memory frequency. And data fabric is what connects the memory controller to the rest of the CPU.

Personally I will likely have to get a 6C Coffee Lake despite owning this 1800X (3.95 + 3333-C14) already. Most of the none gaming software I use still cannot make good use of all the cores and needs single core clocks to crunch the numbers.

This particularly includes viewing image heavy PDF files (very serial standard) on high resolution displays ("only" using 2K here), but also the likes of Photoshop and Lightroom. Audio applications are somewhat of a mixed bunch, because it depends on what kinds of processing loads are combined into the final stream (does one effect have to wait for one earlier in series or not?).


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> This is one point of weakness for AMD Zen. You can try doing 2400-C6 all day long, but the latency will still be worse/higher than 3200-C14, simply because of how fabric latency depends on memory frequency. And data fabric is what connects the memory controller to the rest of the CPU.
> 
> Personally I will likely have to get a 6C Coffee Lake despite owning this 1800X (3.95 + 3333-C14) already. Most of the none gaming software I use still cannot make good use of all the cores and needs single core clocks to crunch the numbers.
> 
> This particularly includes viewing image heavy PDF files (very serial standard) on high resolution displays ("only" using 2K here), but also the likes of Photoshop and Lightroom. Audio applications are somewhat of a mixed bunch, because it depends on what kinds of processing loads are combined into the final stream (does one effect have to wait for one earlier in series or not?).


Coffee Lake is just a more balanced chip compared to Ryzen. sure Ryzen probably would edge it out with multithreadded workloads but having more powerful cores albeit 2 less cores is actually beneficial to a lot of workloads that are not that well threadded. *ehem gaming* and those workloads that you said still can't use all the threads. what's funny is this is the exact argument I had with Ryzen a few months back. Ryzen was more of an "all rounder" and the 7700k's are just good at one thing and mediocre with threadded workloads. it's funny what competition does to the market #cpuwars.

I have a decision to make when the 8700k comes out. I have a Ryzen 7 1700x VR/htpc in my living room right now.(with a cheap b350 motherboard) I'm still not sure whether to get rid of my current cpu+motherboard on my main pc (7700k and maximux IX hero) or trasfer it over to my pc in the living room and get rid of my 1700x. my 7700k is delidded so I'm in the impression that I will have a harder time selling it. I still have time to think about it though


----------



## anonjoe

Some games see huge gains from faster ram, this a bit old but relevant.


----------



## bigjdubb

The real advantage to owning an Intel processor is how much of the available software is optimized for your processor.


----------



## nanotm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> The real advantage to owning an Intel processor is how much of the available software is optimized for your processor.


doesn't that just mean anti trust issues are still prevalent? intel's been in hot water on bother sides of Atlantic to some degree over the last few years for this stuff( like when it started doing funny things with chipsets to make the NVidia gfx cards not work properly trying to push its own integrated graphics solution for instance ) it got caught, ordered to pay fines and fix the issue... this is just more of the same thing but on a much broader scope... its like the whole "you can only sell computers made with intel chips and you must tell everyone you don't make inferior products debacle they pushed with system makers that saw them fined 3 times in 3 years when they were trying to get rid of amd as a competitor...

its long been known that certain programs don't perform as well as they should do on amd based systems yet they perform really well with similar specked parts from intel at the same speeds....


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anonjoe*
> 
> Some games see huge gains from faster ram, this a bit old but relevant.


But again the graphs don't tell us anything about memory latency, but only about memory frequency. This is rather useless information, because it lacks context.

Furthermore the memory frequency/bandwidth at that point in time was overall lower, so diminishing returns might not have set in so much as we see nowadays with high bandwidth being the norm.


----------



## sumitlian

Many thanks to Clukos for giving so much information. These are almost like unlimited free hot cakes, it is very rare to see members nowadays in OCN doing their homework and showing the results.








I don't know what rock Scotty99 has been living under because by now It has become very common for enthusiasts to know about Zen architecture that it is indeed very sensitive to memory frequency and it's connection to IF, as well as timings/subtimings. Google search results are filled with articles,news,forums,videos regarding Ryzen memory/timing prformance gain. AMD too had officially created an article on community.amd.com on how mem speed and timing increase performance of Zen based CPUs, though they used only up to 2933MHZ 14-14-14 and many users like you have already surpassed AMD's performance gains, by setting even higher memory speed and tighter tiimgs.


----------



## mouacyk

I think RAM scaling on Mesh overclocks is more relevant to Coffee-Lake hexacore, but since the OCN Skylake-X owners are too busy pushing their CPUs to the limit, we'll take what we can... sigh.


----------



## Timur Born

Do we know yet whether Coffee Lake will use a mesh or a ring-bus?


----------



## evensen007

Not sure how credible this truly is, but it looks like launch day could be Oct. 5.

http://www.fudzilla.com/news/processors/44467-intel-coffee-lake-could-be-launching-on-october-5th


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> Do we know yet whether Coffee Lake will use a mesh or a ring-bus?


This might be totally irrelevent, but Coffee Lake has 256 KB of L2 cache memory per core, unlike Skylake-X's 512 KB.


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nanotm*
> 
> *doesn't that just mean anti trust issues are still prevalent?*


That is the sentiment I was trying to convey. I don't know if the optimization side falls into anti-trust, I think the optimizations are an effect of a market dominated by intel. It makes sense for a developer to optimize their software for the processors used by a large majority of users. However, I do think that all of the anti-trust actions have led to the market domination.


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> This might be totally irrelevent, but Coffee Lake has 256 KB of L2 cache memory per core, unlike Skylake-X's 512 KB.


Yes, the cache sizes surely look like Coffee Lake might follow the "conventional" structure of consumer 4-core processors.

On the other hand there are two more cores to go around with a ring-bus, which means more hops in between. No idea at what point one architecture is more beneficial than the other, but I suspect that the mesh is more important for much higher core counts and the lower Skylake-X processors (8 and maybe 10 core) just have to use the same technology due to their family membership. It's all about modularity for those big CPUs.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROTR results with (i assume) XMP sub timings:
> 
> 1700x=12 fps gain from 2133 to 3200
> 7700k=23 fps gain from 2133 to 3600 (20 fps gain from 2133 to 3200, fair bit amount more than AMD had)
> 
> So taking the 1700x results that linus's crew got, cuckos effectively found 44 extra fps going from xmp 3200 to optimized 3433.




the clukos conspiracy lol
how you explain my ROTR benchie?
1800x btw XD



Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



wait wait a live video i did on aug 15, dont mind my spanish XD


----------



## Fediuld

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> Do we know yet whether Coffee Lake will use a mesh or a ring-bus?


Ring topology, hence makes no sense to buy anything less than 7900X on the X299 platform.
7800X and 7820X are terrible against the 8700K.

The only other X299 CPU that makes sense (sort off) is the 7740 if someone wants a quad core at 5.4ghz (delided)


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fediuld*
> 
> Ring topology, hence makes no sense to buy anything less than 7900X on the X299 platform.
> 7800X and 7820X are terrible against the 8700K.
> 
> The only other X299 CPU that makes sense (sort off) is the 7740 if someone wants a quad core at 5.4ghz (delided)


LOL what?


----------



## Fediuld

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> LOL what?


what you didn't understand?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fediuld*
> 
> what you didn't understand?


All of it because none of it is true.

7900x uses mesh. also 7820x and 7900x are right up there with 7700k in latest gaming benchmarks.

8700k is just a 7700k with 2 more cores. They will be near equal


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> LOL what?


Hand swooshes over head...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> All of it because none of it is true.
> 
> 7900x uses mesh. also 7820x and 7900x are right up there with 7700k in latest gaming benchmarks.
> 
> 8700k is just a 7700k with 2 more cores. They will be near equal


You didn't read the post properly. Post answers that Coffee-Lake will be on Ring-bus. Then it goes on to say that only the 10-core is worth it since all Skylake-X uses Mesh, unless you're craving to play with a 5.4GHz CPU Skylake-X anyway.

And regarding "7800X and 7820X are terrible against the 8700K", that is quite true in the context of this thread. You don't need the extra expenses for the lighter workload that can be handled by the 8700K on a leaner platform.


----------



## aDyerSituation

No I read his post. He said that the 7820x/7800x is terrible against a 8700k(which isn't even out yet) which simply won't be true off of what we know. Unless it gets an IPC increase.


----------



## Fediuld

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> No I read his post. He said that the 7820x/7800x is terrible against a 8700k(which isn't even out yet) which simply won't be true off of what we know. Unless it gets an IPC increase.


8700K is not the same as the 7800X. One is made with Ring based topology, the other with Mesh based topology.

And because the latter requires a lot of game optimisations, shows the same performance as the much slower Ryzen 1600.
Funnily enough, Mesh and Infinity Fabric require exactly the same optimisations and both are ram speed dependent.

8700K is "brute force - old tech" CPU. Everything will run to it, no optimisations needed, on the contrary it will scale better compared to quad cores.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> Do we know yet whether Coffee Lake will use a mesh or a ring-bus?


Same as Skylake S


----------



## MaKeN

I appreciate clukos for his efort here even if its a tiny bit of topic. Thx for tests and links


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fediuld*
> 
> 8700K is not the same as the 7800X. One is made with Ring based topology, the other with Mesh based topology.
> 
> And because the latter requires a lot of game optimisations, shows the same performance as the much slower Ryzen 1600.
> Funnily enough, Mesh and Infinity Fabric require exactly the same optimisations and both are ram speed dependent.
> 
> 8700K is "brute force - old tech" CPU. Everything will run to it, no optimisations needed, on the contrary it will scale better compared to quad cores.


Yes that is true but mesh doesn't show much of a difference in new games. It's also been optimized since Skylake-X release.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Fediuld*
> 
> what you didn't understand?
> 
> 
> 
> All of it because none of it is true.
> 
> 7900x uses mesh. also 7820x and 7900x are right up there with 7700k in latest gaming benchmarks.
> 
> 8700k is just a 7700k with 2 more cores. They will be near equal
Click to expand...

Did the games get updated to do better with sky lake X compared to i7 7700k?

Game Video Benchmarking.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Those benchmarks don't line up with other reviewers. Plus he LOVES Ryzen and LOVES to bash Skylake X.

This is the same guy that claimed his chip burnt out


----------



## Timur Born

A double ring-bus around 6 cores means a maximum of 3 hops for core-to-core communication. That is a 50% increase over the maximum of 2 hops with a 4 core. Unless the ring-bus got improved I would expect some kind of penalty being measurable from this.


----------



## Asmodian

There were still some BIOS issues with power states when Skylake-X released as well. However, the mesh and Skylake X'es cache structure _is_ worse than the ring bus in games, latency is higher through Intel's mesh network, similar to AMD's on-die infinity fabric (the two dies in TR have an inter-die latency similar to dual socket systems, i.e. much higher).

The 8700K will probably be better, clock for clock, than the 7800X for this reason. Probably not a huge difference when using fast memory on the 7800X but when building a pure gaming box the 8700K will win all comparisons. This is probably going to be true compared to anything else available for the next year too (except price/performance or value, that gets a lot more complicated).








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> A double ring-bus around 6 cores means a maximum of 3 hops for core-to-core communication. That is a 50% increase over the maximum of 2 hops with a 4 core. Unless the ring-bus got improved I would expect some kind of penalty being measurable from this.


Good point, we don't know the latency penalty for going through two cores yet. However, games usually prefer the larger inclusive L3 cache too.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Those benchmarks don't line up with other reviewers. Plus he LOVES Ryzen and LOVES to bash Skylake X.
> 
> This is the same guy that claimed his chip burnt out


Ok lets cherry pick reviews. This one shows the same performance loss with Sky lake X VS i7 7740X.


----------



## Timur Born

At high memory frequency the inter CCX latency (core on one CCX reading from L3 of the other CCX) of my 1800X is a bit lower than memory latency, in the low 60s ns at 3333 MT afair. This also demonstrates that the fabric is not bottlenecking memory latency at these frequencies anymore.
.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asmodian*
> 
> There were still some BIOS issues with power states when Skylake-X released as well. However, the mesh and Skylake X'es cache structure _is_ worse than the ring bus in games, latency is higher through Intel's mesh network, similar to AMD's on-die infinity fabric (the two dies in TR have an inter-die latency similar to dual socket systems, i.e. much higher).
> 
> The 8700K will probably be better, clock for clock, than the 7800X for this reason. Probably not a huge difference when using fast memory on the 7800X but when building a pure gaming box the 8700K will win all comparisons. This is probably going to be true compared to anything else available for the next year too (except price/performance or value, that gets a lot more complicated).


No doubt clock for clock the 7800x will be VERY slightly behind in a few games. Far Cry Primal and Civilization are the only games I've noticed Skylake-X is noticeably behind in. Unfortunately I can't find a review that has recent tests say 4.5ghz vs 4.5ghz.

Here are some benchmarks though showing it competing well with the 7700k across different reviewers


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











and it's not cherry picking. cherry picking is linking the same hardware unboxed video over and over again. Even though the guy claimed he burnt a pin on his chip and then posted that video later. Not to mention he writes for tweaktown and his results were different there as well.

Here is his tweaktown review. Notice the difference?
https://www.techspot.com/review/1433-intel-core-i9-core-i7-skylake-x/page3.html


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> At high memory frequency the internet CCX latency (core on one CCX reading from L3 of the other CCX) of my 1800X is a bit lower than memory latency, in the low 60s ns at 3333 MT afair. This also demonstrates that the fabric is not bottlenecking memory latency anymore then.
> .


That's interesting.


----------



## tashcz

11% gain in ST apps, is that IPC improvement or just their standard higher single-core turbo and same IPC?


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tashcz*
> 
> 11% gain in ST apps, is that IPC improvement or just their standard higher single-core turbo and same IPC?


same IPC


----------



## tashcz

Jeez... 3 generations with same IPC. And even 4790K is comparable to LGA1151 by IPC. Thanks Intel, every year you clock your CPU's turbo to 100MHz higher and sell it as a new generation. People that happily overcocked their 4790K or Skylake won't have a need to upgrade soon. Maturing the process is great, we can get a few MHz more out of it but come on, do some real stuff. This was like AMD's GPUs back in the days, just rebranding. Though 6 core variants do come in play today. I think price will determine the position of the CPU. I just don't see the need for their rush since the 4790K. Just wanna see Ryzen 2nd gen and Intel's mainstream i7 at that time head to head compared. Even Ryzen 1st gen vs this 8 series i7 will be fun to compare. Again, price will set the game I think. And I don't think 6 core i7's will cost even a bit like 7700K or such. Probably a 20 to 30 pct increase in price. But... why the new high-end platform and just after that, when we even didn't get CPUs and mobos in all countries, we see new i7s pop up...


----------



## AlphaC

https://videocardz.com/72452/gigabyte-z370-aorus-motherboards-pictured

https://videocardz.com/72459/gigabyte-aorus-z370-motherboard-specs

Gigabyte delivering more RGB motherboards.

I don't understand the rationale behind releasing an Intel chipset motherboard with the only Killer LAN onboard? (Z370 Gaming 3)


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Not sure how credible this truly is, but it looks like launch day could be Oct. 5.
> 
> http://www.fudzilla.com/news/processors/44467-intel-coffee-lake-could-be-launching-on-october-5th


If you've been following this thread, you'll know that this is old news.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Asmodian*
> 
> There were still some BIOS issues with power states when Skylake-X released as well. However, the mesh and Skylake X'es cache structure _is_ worse than the ring bus in games, latency is higher through Intel's mesh network, similar to AMD's on-die infinity fabric (the two dies in TR have an inter-die latency similar to dual socket systems, i.e. much higher).
> 
> The 8700K will probably be better, clock for clock, than the 7800X for this reason. Probably not a huge difference when using fast memory on the 7800X but when building a pure gaming box the 8700K will win all comparisons. This is probably going to be true compared to anything else available for the next year too (except price/performance or value, that gets a lot more complicated).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No doubt clock for clock the 7800x will be VERY slightly behind in a few games. Far Cry Primal and Civilization are the only games I've noticed Skylake-X is noticeably behind in. Unfortunately I can't find a review that has recent tests say 4.5ghz vs 4.5ghz.
> 
> Here are some benchmarks though showing it competing well with the 7700k across different reviewers
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and it's not cherry picking. cherry picking is linking the same hardware unboxed video over and over again. Even though the guy claimed he burnt a pin on his chip and then posted that video later. Not to mention he writes for tweaktown and his results were different there as well.
> 
> Here is his tweaktown review. Notice the difference?
> https://www.techspot.com/review/1433-intel-core-i9-core-i7-skylake-x/page3.html
Click to expand...

Your just Cherry Picking Gaming reviews that favor more cores than 4 and the Broadwell-e does better than sky lake X in those benchmarks.

This is not the same review.


----------



## aDyerSituation

That video further proves my point. Where are you going with this?

Edit: I watched the video in it's entirety. Like I said a few games show weird results but in the rest of the tests it was up there with the 7700k and beating out previous HEDT Intel CPUs. This video is also a month and a half old. Things could have definitely changed within that time.

I'm not sure why Ryzen gets a pass on growing pains but Skylake-X doesn't. Also I don't recall him mentioning overclocking the mesh which could possibly fix some of those weird issues.


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I'm not sure why Ryzen gets a pass on growing pains but Skylake-X doesn't. Also I don't recall him mentioning overclocking the mesh which could possibly fix some of those weird issues.


Price.

Even buying the cheapest, most barebones X299 motherboard on the market a Skylake-X rig will cost you more than $600 for the CPU and motherboard alone. That's $200 more than the 7700k with a similar barebones motherboard. And you can get the Ryzen 5 1600X with a barebones motherboard for around $280, less than half the price of the Skylake-X

So yeah, if Skylake-X cost more than twice as much I would expect to be given a lot less slack for any shortcomings in performance. At more than twice the price of a 6 core Ryzen and over $200 more than a 7700k I would expect it to have unquestionably better performance at all tasks. If it doesn't then what exactly are you paying all of that extra money for?


----------



## aDyerSituation

No. More like bashing Intel is the fun thing to do.


----------



## kd5151

AMD VS Intel.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> No. More like bashing Intel is the fun thing to do.


Because Ryzen hasn't had plenty of detractors? Like Vega hasn't been (deservedly) lambasted? AMD is getting a lot of credit for Ryzen, because it's a good product at an outstanding price. Intel gets less slack because they're massively advantaged due to much better management over the years. If it helps you, think of it as a compliment. We expect more from the fully loaded market leader.

I say 'we' in a generalised sense. I don't personally believe in emotionally judging any company, but it's not just because of a fanboy conspiracy against team blue. Besides, if you're happy with it, who cares about online anatomisation.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Whoa thats my board lol. Nice grey theme, wish they put beefier heatsinks on VRM tho.


So my guess is CFL CPU is releasing really soon?


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fediuld*
> 
> 8700K is not the same as the 7800X. One is made with Ring based topology, the other with Mesh based topology.
> 
> And because the latter requires a lot of game optimisations, shows the same performance as the much slower Ryzen 1600.
> Funnily enough, Mesh and Infinity Fabric require exactly the same optimisations and both are ram speed dependent.
> 
> 8700K is "brute force - old tech" CPU. Everything will run to it, no optimisations needed, on the contrary it will scale better compared to quad cores.


I am so confused, so let me get this, 8700K is ring topo, 7800X is mesh topo, that is what you guys saying right?

Ring topo is what all the Intel quad cores mainstream CPU been using way before Skylake right?


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> I am so confused, so let me get this, 8700K is ring topo, 7800X is mesh topo, that is what you guys saying right?
> 
> Ring topo is what all the Intel quad cores mainstream CPU been using way before Skylake right?


We don't know for certain about Coffee-Lake. L1/L2 Cache sizes do currently suggest it uses the Ring bus topology. Not sure where @Fediuld got the certainty that Coffee-Lake is using Ring bus, though.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> I am so confused, so let me get this, 8700K is ring topo, 7800X is mesh topo, that is what you guys saying right?
> 
> Ring topo is what all the Intel quad cores mainstream CPU been using way before Skylake right?
> 
> 
> 
> We don't know for certain about Coffee-Lake. L1/L2 Cache sizes do currently suggest it uses the Ring bus topology. Not sure where @Fediuld got the certainty that Coffee-Lake is using Ring bus, though.
Click to expand...

Intel 8th Generation Coffee Lake Keynote Presentation they did not mention any architectural change besides cores 14nm.


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Intel 8th Generation Coffee Lake Keynote Presentation they did not mention any architectural change besides cores 14nm.


I'm still not convinced if it's a 6 core Skylake on 14nm++, or a backported 6 core cannonlake on 14nm++. Will it have a FIVR?


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quick little update, although probably mentioned already:
Quote:


> Intel Core "Coffee Lake" Desktop Processors Launch Date Revealed
> 
> *Intel could launch the first wave of 8th generation Core "Coffee Lake" desktop processors in the retail channel, on the 5th of October, 2017.* It's also becoming ominous that with increasing core counts across the lineup, Intel is also raising prices by anywhere between 12.5 to 25 percent. For example, the Core i7-8700K, which logically succeeds the $339 Core i7-7700K, could be priced upwards of $400. The i5-8600K, which succeeds the $249 i5-7600K, could be priced a little over $300. One can expect similar price-hikes across the board for other Core i5 six-core and Core i3 quad-core SKUs.
> 
> The first wave of 8th generation Core "Coffee Lake" desktop processor launches could be limited to certain overclocker-specific Core i7 and Core i5 SKUs. It is also launching just one compatible motherboard chipset option with this first wave, the Z370 Express, which supports CPU overclocking. Among the SKUs to look out for, are the top-dog Core i7-8700K six-core processor with HyperThreading enabling 12 threads, 12 MB of L3 cache; and the Core i5-8600K, which is also a six-core part but lacks HyperThreading, and comes with 9 MB of L3 cache.


*Source:* https://www.techpowerup.com/236863/intel-core-coffee-lake-desktop-processors-launch-date-revealed


----------



## SuperZan

Potential good news for those waiting on Coffee Lake. I'm very interested in the performance on the i5. That should be a fairly compelling product for many gamers, as six real cores should be better than 8 logical threads in many games.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Potential good news for those waiting on Coffee Lake. I'm very interested in the performance on the i5. That should be a fairly compelling product for many gamers, as six real cores should be better than 8 logical threads in many games.


Looking forward to seeing the 6C/6T 8600k benchmarks as well. Something tells me it is going to be the next 2500k. If it can clock to 4.8-5.2GHz it will easily be faster than a 7700k/7740X. Without HT should give it better overclocking headroom, although the 8700k will be binned better. Definitely the chip I'm currently interested in the most. If you can get 7740X/7700k clockspeeds and better than 7700k performance for the price of an i5 but as a 6C/6T chip I think that is a solid bang for the buck part.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Potential good news for those waiting on Coffee Lake. I'm very interested in the performance on the i5. That should be a fairly compelling product for many gamers, as six real cores should be better than 8 logical threads in many games.


That is what I hope to see eventhough I don't need it with my i5 7600k because it is able to maintain a minimum of 60 FPS in all games stock.

I can't think of a game where the i5 7600k does not do a minimum of 60 FPS?


----------



## Ding Chavez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Quick little update, although probably mentioned already:
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Intel Core "Coffee Lake" Desktop Processors Launch Date Revealed
> 
> *Intel could launch the first wave of 8th generation Core "Coffee Lake" desktop processors in the retail channel, on the 5th of October, 2017.* It's also becoming ominous that with increasing core counts across the lineup, Intel is also raising prices by anywhere between 12.5 to 25 percent. For example, the Core i7-8700K, which logically succeeds the $339 Core i7-7700K, could be priced upwards of $400. The i5-8600K, which succeeds the $249 i5-7600K, could be priced a little over $300. One can expect similar price-hikes across the board for other Core i5 six-core and Core i3 quad-core SKUs.
> 
> The first wave of 8th generation Core "Coffee Lake" desktop processor launches could be limited to certain overclocker-specific Core i7 and Core i5 SKUs. It is also launching just one compatible motherboard chipset option with this first wave, the Z370 Express, which supports CPU overclocking. Among the SKUs to look out for, are the top-dog Core i7-8700K six-core processor with HyperThreading enabling 12 threads, 12 MB of L3 cache; and the Core i5-8600K, which is also a six-core part but lacks HyperThreading, and comes with 9 MB of L3 cache.
> 
> 
> 
> *Source:* https://www.techpowerup.com/236863/intel-core-coffee-lake-desktop-processors-launch-date-revealed
Click to expand...

Was hoping Intel wouldn't put prices up but suspected they might. Bit of a downer. Getting i7 or better performance for i5 price would be good but they just can't help themselves, hope this is wrong...


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ding Chavez*
> 
> Was hoping Intel wouldn't put prices up but suspected they might. Bit of a downer. Getting i7 or better performance for i5 price would be good but they just can't help themselves, hope this is wrong...


Make the trip to Mecca then (Microcenter).







Will be able to get a Motherboard and CPU combo for probably around $350-60


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Really considering this CPU but want to wait for Zen 2. Knowing its same IPC as Skylake I can wait a bit longer.


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> No. More like bashing Intel is the fun thing to do.


Yes yes It is







, specially when you know how a pathetic company like Intel actually came into existence.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Yes yes It is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , specially when you know how a pathetic company like Intel actually came into existence.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


That video is garbage, half-truths and re-purposing of facts to fit an agenda. When meanwhile:


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> That video is garbage, half-truths and re-purposing of facts to fit an agenda. When meanwhile:


No it isn't. It just didn't suit your interests.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> No it isn't. It just didn't suit your interests.


Read the Wikipedia entries and watch the Linus Fast as Possible. Then go watch AdoredTV's theatrical exaggeration and disinformation piece and you quickly realize it has nothing to do with personal interests, other than the personal interests of AdoredTV which favor AMD like yours do.


----------



## AlphaC

For poorly threaded applications, the i5 should be competitive, if not better than an overclocked i7-6700k. Hyperthread is ~+30% performance of a true core in applications that actually make use of it.

Hyperthread is a liability in applications that charge per logical core.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Potential good news for those waiting on Coffee Lake. I'm very interested in the performance on the i5. That should be a fairly compelling product for many gamers, as six real cores should be better than 8 logical threads in many games.


$400 for a mainstream i7 and *$300 for an i5*...

I'll do a Ryzen 7 (3.5GHz all core or 3.8-3.9GHz all core) with SMT off vs i5-8600K showdown if Microcenter puts up a half-decent deal (i.e. not $30 off motherboard with retail priced CPU ... more like $50-100 off vs Newegg combo would be OK).

I miss $200 i7s ...


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Yes yes It is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , specially when you know how a pathetic company like Intel actually came into existence.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That video is garbage, half-truths and re-purposing of facts to fit an agenda. When meanwhile:
Click to expand...

Yep it comes down to what product can do to make it sell well.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> my 1700x @3.9ghz 3333mhz can't run Dota 2 at 144hz(minimums sometimes goes below 100fps in heavy team fights). My Ryzen rig is awesome don't get me wrong and it destroys my 7700k @ 5Ghz in most of the workloads I put it through but it's an "okay" gaming cpu. that's why I really think these 6 core coffee lake i5's are a lot more exciting than most people think.


Minimums of "only" 100 FPS on 1440p and its just an "okay" gaming CPU?

And what percentage of the FPS are at the "minimum" anyway? Much less than 1% I would guess. That's why it has always killed me that people worry so much about minimums and not average FPS. Sure a drop to minimum may cause a very minor stutter, but if its only happening less than 1% of the time, I can live with that.

Of course my preferences are only my own so I'm not saying its empirically irrelevant, just that its significance seems to me to be woefully overhyped (usually by those who have high refresh monitors whose eyes apparently bleed any instance in which the FPS dare to fall below the refresh rate of their particular monitor).


----------



## IMI4tth3w

I still don't understand why reviewers do CPU reviews running games at max settings. doesn't matter if its a 1080ti at 1080p. its still going to GPU bound it. Crank down the settings and see what she'll do. And even then changing settings has different effects on different setups.

There's just too many scenarios to test with PC gaming that even benchmarks only give just a tiny piece of the pie. It would be impossible to test every scenario with every different hardware combination.

Benchmarks of specific hardware using specific settings in specific games need to be treated as such. A very specific case example. Not blanked statements. Just because there was one benchmark where something made a huge difference, doesn't mean it will be the same case for you unless you are using identical specs.

Are benchmarks still useful? Sure, but people need to understand one benchmark doesn't make one CPU better than the other.

One thing i can say that is relate-able to the Ryzen vs Intel situation, i have found that i prefer the higher single core performance of Intel to be more beneficial _to me and my use cases_.


----------



## Scotty99

Still makes no sense we havent heard anything from intel if those leaks are true, i mean thats like 3 weeks away....


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Found the original source for the October 5 date:



*Source:* https://www.pcauthority.com.au/news/retailer-confirms-october-5-date-for-6-core-coffee-lake-processors-472901


----------



## Scotty99

ya that was linked yesterday but wouldnt we have heard something official from intel by now?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> ya that was linked yesterday but wouldnt we have heard something official from intel by now?


Intel officially said this year.


----------



## Scotty99

Well the quote i recall was something like "you will hear more about desktop processors later this year". If its really OCT 5th, i dont see how we havent had official confirmation.


----------



## SuperZan

Hope for the best, expect the worst.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Minimums of "only" 100 FPS on 1440p and its just an "okay" gaming CPU?
> 
> And what percentage of the FPS are at the "minimum" anyway? Much less than 1% I would guess. That's why it has always killed me that people worry so much about minimums and not average FPS. Sure a drop to minimum may cause a very minor stutter, but if its only happening less than 1% of the time, I can live with that.
> 
> Of course my preferences are only my own so I'm not saying its empirically irrelevant, just that its significance seems to me to be woefully overhyped (usually by those who have high refresh monitors whose eyes apparently bleed any instance in which the FPS dare to fall below the refresh rate of their particular monitor).


I say "only" because my 7700k @ 5Ghz 3200MHz kit(stock) never goes below 144fps (comfortable stays at 200fps+ with v-sync off). sadly I have a freesync monitor with a GTX 1080 Ti (and the same with my Ryzen pc which has a GTX 1080). during team fights in Dota when it goes lower than 100fps you can definitely feel the stuttering/choppiness you don't even have to look at the fps counter. surely I'm not the only who gets this issue.I'm pretty sure even others with older intel cpus that don't overclock experience this.

It would probably be less relevant to people with gsync but not for me. again I'm not saying it's a bad gaming CPU. it's "okay" it's not Bulldozer or Piledriver bad. it's pretty decent but if you want high refresh rate gaming it's not the best option. I've been playing with my 1700x for a few months now. I know it pretty well. I had to deal with the early adopter quirks like the others. it has gotten better but I wish for more tbh


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> https://videocardz.com/72452/gigabyte-z370-aorus-motherboards-pictured
> 
> https://videocardz.com/72459/gigabyte-aorus-z370-motherboard-specs
> 
> Gigabyte delivering more RGB motherboards.
> 
> I don't understand the rationale behind releasing an Intel chipset motherboard with the only Killer LAN onboard? (Z370 Gaming 3)


Meanwhile they still feel it's relevant to throw on the rather hideous looking DVI-D port and exclude Wifi from all but maybe 2 or 3 of their top-end offerings. Hopefully by now they've fixed their awful BIOS fan control.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Minimums of "only" 100 FPS on 1440p and its just an "okay" gaming CPU?
> 
> And what percentage of the FPS are at the "minimum" anyway? Much less than 1% I would guess. That's why it has always killed me that people worry so much about minimums and not average FPS. Sure a drop to minimum may cause a very minor stutter, but if its only happening less than 1% of the time, I can live with that.
> 
> Of course my preferences are only my own so I'm not saying its empirically irrelevant, just that its significance seems to me to be woefully overhyped (usually by those who have high refresh monitors whose eyes apparently bleed any instance in which the FPS dare to fall below the refresh rate of their particular monitor).


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I say "only" because my 7700k @ 5Ghz 3200MHz kit(stock) never goes below 144fps (comfortable stays at 200fps+ with v-sync off). sadly I have a freesync monitor with a GTX 1080 Ti (and the same with my Ryzen pc which has a GTX 1080). during team fights in Dota when it goes lower than 100fps you can definitely feel the stuttering/choppiness you don't even have to look at the fps counter. surely I'm not the only who gets this issue.I'm pretty sure even others with older intel cpus that don't overclock experience this.
> 
> It would probably be less relevant to people with gsync but not for me. again I'm not saying it's a bad gaming CPU. it's "okay" it's not Bulldozer or Piledriver bad. it's pretty decent but if you want high refresh rate gaming it's not the best option. I've been playing with my 1700x for a few months now. I know it pretty well. I had to deal with the early adopter quirks like the others. it has gotten better but I wish for more tbh


^^

For high FPS gaming, you *should* be worried about minimum FPS. G-sync fixes a lot of nasty frame drops, but those frame drops aren't magically imperceptible with G-sync and Freesync.

You're going to be more susceptible to notice a game going from 180FPS down to 100FPS even if it is happening once every 60 seconds. However, you're not going to notice (or likely care) if you're sitting 'only' at 150FPS because your minimum is 145FPS.

I'll take consistent FPS and higher minimums over a stupidly inflated higher FPS with extreme drops.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Found the original source for the October 5 date:
> 
> 
> 
> *Source:* https://www.pcauthority.com.au/news/retailer-confirms-october-5-date-for-6-core-coffee-lake-processors-472901


Why are u bothered when all u gunning for is the overly ripped off 7740K lol.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> No it isn't. It just didn't suit your interests.


We all know its all thanks to Intel that we are stuck in quad cores since the Q6600 days for mainstream. lol.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Why are u bothered when all u gunning for is the overly ripped off 7740K lol.


Check post #1460


----------



## Timur Born

I doubt that most people on here are able to discern 10 ms (100 fps) inter-frame lag from 5 ms (200 fps). Most people wouldn't notice it in audio even and our brain usually reacts to audio faster than video (even more so video watched via the center of our eyes).


----------



## naz2

so prices are gonna be closer to $400, combined with the forced chipset incompatibility. yeah not regretting picking up ryzen right now, even with the performance gap
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> I doubt that most people on here are able to discern 10 ms (100 fps) inter-frame lag from 5 ms (200 fps). Most people wouldn't notice it in audio even and our brain usually reacts to audio faster than video (even more so video watched via the center of our eyes).


maybe not visually, but you'll notice it through mouse responsiveness


----------



## Timur Born

Earlier it was said that a drop from 180 fps to 100 fps would be discernible, that is an increase from 5.5 ms inter-frame lag to 10 ms.

"Mouse response" is a visual thing only, you move the mouse the screen outputs the result. Your mouse reacts anytime between a couple of µs to 8 ms, depending on USB poll-rate and when you moved your mouse in between polls. At 100 fps display rate the result on the screen can be seen anytime between a couple of µs to 10 ms, at 200 fps it's a couple of µs to 5 ms.

To give you an idea what 5 ms means: Start music on a speaker and try to discern the lag between turning it on and you hearing the sound. Stop playback, step back 5 feet (1.5 m), start playback and try to discern the difference. Good luck!


----------



## Gauanqh6764

..


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *naz2*
> 
> so prices are gonna be closer to $400


We'll have to wait and see. Looking at the links, seems to be a Canadian store, perhaps the same store that was announcing the i7-8700K and i7-8700 for sale a month ago. But here's the catch -- in this Canadian store they were selling the i7-8700 for the same price of the i7-7700. If you do the math and it is pretty straightforward, the US20 more on the i7-8700K (the i7-7700K was 360-370$ IIRC) should be just for being the premium flagship release. And stores like Newegg are way cheaper.

I still believe it can come with the same prices of Kaby Lake, as it should. They kept us with no improvements for half a decade. Whatever they do now, should be for the same price because they owe to the market for a long time.


----------



## Scotty99

Well i live near a microcenter and the 7700k goes on sale regularly for 279.99, hoping 8700k gets same treatment


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well i live near a microcenter and the 7700k goes on sale regularly for 279.99, hoping 8700k gets same treatment


Haha, that would be a dream, but I'm happy with 340U$ on release







Just for them to show us that they aren't a rip-off.


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nobelharvards*


And the average difference between 180 fps and 120 fps in that graph is 2 ms. And that's some measured input latency, not what the user in front of the screen is noticing when 180 fps dips to 120 fps for a short time. Anyway, just keep some perspective when discussing these already edge case (trained user) numbers.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Haha, that would be a dream, but I'm happy with 340U$ on release
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just for them to show us that they aren't a rip-off.


I think this is what we will see on release:

Microcenter: 329.99
Everywhere else: 379.99


----------



## Scotty99

Also hoping the motherboards are in the same realm of pricing as z270, would like to get a strix for under 200.


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Yeah 20% is nothing.


Indeed. Especially when older Intel CPUs do +30% OC. Hence why Intel is blocking OC as much as they can and started milking those MHz themselves so their marketing can claim +5% performance increase, hell of course when they raised the clock by 5% on stock again.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MGX1016*
> 
> Flight Sim X or P3D
> 
> Literally been building PCs for this game for years and still don't have anything that really works well


Yeah games are not that hard to find that will max out a quad core, just play any simulators, even newer FPS games etc. can do it and I think BF1 is one of them. That being said, it largely depends on what fps one wants to run as well, though for pure simulators with light graphics nothing will help.


----------



## Scotty99

Ill sound like a broken record but truly MMO's are where people should be interested in intel chips. Destiny 2 is such a great example of this, even ported over from a 8 core low clocked console ryzen gets DECIMATED by intel here, and is the reason this game is capped at 30 on console. There is not another genre on the market that this happens to, if you dont play MMO's ryzen really is the better choice.


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *naz2*
> 
> so prices are gonna be closer to $400, combined with the forced chipset incompatibility. yeah not regretting picking up ryzen right now, even with the performance gap


What a weird way of thinking. You had to buy new CPU + mobo for Ryzen build, just like you would need to buy new CPU + mobo for Coffee Lake.


----------



## czin125

There wouldn't be any difference between printing more boards for new customers and creating/designing new boards for new chipsets? They could still create a new board design for the old chipset just to support higher maximum OC, or beefier VRM? Or could take an existing board design and strip out the LN2 features at a reduced cost?


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Looking forward to seeing the 6C/6T 8600k benchmarks as well. Something tells me it is going to be the next 2500k. If it can clock to 4.8-5.2GHz it will easily be faster than a 7700k/7740X. Without HT should give it better overclocking headroom, although the 8700k will be binned better. Definitely the chip I'm currently interested in the most. If you can get 7740X/7700k clockspeeds and better than 7700k performance for the price of an i5 but as a 6C/6T chip I think that is a solid bang for the buck part.


that was the 6600k and 6700k which had the equivalent of SB, but still not the big IPC increase


----------



## naz2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> What a weird way of thinking. You had to buy new CPU + mobo for Ryzen build, just like you would need to buy new CPU + mobo for Coffee Lake.


ryzen cpus are cheaper and AM4 is supported through 2020. saving money now and at least 1 free upgrade in the future. we all know how long z370 is going to be relevant for. isn't z390 coming out shortly afterwards anyways? what a joke


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> If there really are that many gains to be had fiddling with subtimings, why have i not heard much about it or seen a video on it?


I tune the snot out of my subtimings on all of my systems and not just because I like to to tweak stuff. Auto vs. well tuned subtimings, not even taking into account primary timings, are easily worth two steps in memory clock on most platforms.

Not going to claim I've ever seen huge gaming performance gains from either subtiming tweaks or two steps in memory multiplier, in and of themselves, however.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> What I'm currently running:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Board is Asus Crosshair VI hero with 9920 BIOS.


I have very little experience with Ryzen's IMC, but I would be very surprised if tWCL couldn't be tightened a bit further.

Also, tCKE doesn't usually do anything to steady state performance.

That's a huge reduction in tRFC and I'd be surprised if it were fully stable. You can usually achieve the same performance effect by increasing tREFI further while leaving tRFC closer to stock, if you do run into issues.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anonjoe*
> 
> Some games see huge gains from faster ram, this a bit old but relevant.


Go low enough and you'll find a bottleneck.

Fallout 4 is quite memory sensitive, but even in it's case diminishing returns crop up well before the memory speeds some advocate as being beneficial.

Still, ignoring memory when doing one's tweaking is often giving up a fair bit of free performance.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Skylake-X's 512 KB.


1MiB.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> A double ring-bus around 6 cores means a maximum of 3 hops for core-to-core communication. That is a 50% increase over the maximum of 2 hops with a 4 core. Unless the ring-bus got improved I would expect some kind of penalty being measurable from this.


That 50% increase in ring stops is less than a 10% increase in peak latency (the latency of the ring is much less than the access latency of the cache slices themselves), with the average increase being much less than that (because most L3 accesses aren't going to need the slices furthest away).

I can't think of a single situation where a native quad core die from the same core architecture was appreciably outperforming a native 6, 8, or even 10 core die at the same core and uncore clocks.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Really considering this CPU but want to wait for Zen 2. Knowing its same IPC as Skylake I can wait a bit longer.


I'm considering making an 8700K the first mainstream Intel CPU I've used in a build for myself since my 2700K.

Will probably use it for an SFF gaming system and then build a Zen2 Threadripper for my new virtualization box whenever DDR4 becomes affordable again.


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *naz2*
> 
> ryzen cpus are cheaper and AM4 is supported through 2020. saving money now and at least 1 free upgrade in the future. we all know how long z370 is going to be relevant for. isn't z390 coming out shortly afterwards anyways? what a joke


You honestly think someone will buy a shiny new CPU in the year 2020 and stick it in a 3-4 year old first gen AM4 motherboards? Sorry but I just have to laugh at that thinking. No one in their right mind will do that when PCIE4 and other new technologies will already be pretty old news by that time in motherboards of year 2020.

You can laugh at Intel all you want, yet 7700K is still the king of gaming and soon 8700K will turn Ryzen into a joke.


----------



## kd5151

Intel is still number #1.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> You honestly think someone will buy a shiny new CPU in the year 2020 and stick it in a 3-4 year old first gen AM4 motherboards? Sorry but I just have to laugh at that thinking. No one in their right mind will do that when PCIE4 and other new technologies will already be pretty old news by that time in motherboards of year 2020.
> 
> You can laugh at Intel all you want, yet 7700K is still the king of gaming and soon 8700K will turn Ryzen into a joke.


How much does it matter really? Sure 8700K will be 20% in some games than 1600 if you do specific testing but you will end up playing double the price. Keep believing Ryzen is a joke lol. The problem is most people do not care with CPU wins after 100 fps.


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> How much does it matter really? Sure 8700K will be 20% in some games than 1600 if you do specific testing but you will end up playing double the price. Keep believing Ryzen is a joke lol. The problem is most people do not care with CPU wins after 100 fps.


We will know exact numbers when reviews are out. Apparently people care, and you care, because this thread has 151 pages in already. Intel/Nvidia always had a price premium over AMD, you aren't saying anything new here. Not everyone is strapped for cash who has to choose cheapest parts.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> We will know exact numbers when reviews are out. Apparently people care, and you care, because this thread has 151 pages in already. Intel/Nvidia always had a price premium over AMD, you aren't saying anything new here. Not everyone is strapped for cash who has to choose cheapest parts.


8700K does nothing new for gaming. If that was the case 1600 would have been better than 7700K in some games. People what want to get 8700K are those what want to be a bit safer for the future core scaling.


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> 8700K does nothing new for gaming. If that was the case 1600 would have been better than 7700K in some games. People what want to get 8700K are those what want to be a bit safer for the future core scaling.


1600 isn't better than 7700K because it has crappy clocks and doesn't OC that great. 8700K will be great at single thread as well as multi thread AND will probably OC like a champ. You will not have to make compromise like you do now with Ryzen.

8700K has all the strengths of 7700K as well as 2 extra cores. So yeah, it will be a pretty spectacular release.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> 1600 isn't better than 7700K because it has crappy clocks and doesn't OC that great. 8700K will be great at single thread as well as multi thread AND will probably OC like a champ. You will not have to make compromise like you do now with Ryzen.
> 
> 8700K has all the strengths of 7700K as well as 2 extra cores. So yeah, it will be a pretty spectacular release.


You do not seem to get it. In gaming the extra cores that 1600 has never give it the edge or technically match 7700K meaning 8700K right now will not be better at gaming than 7700K.


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> You do not seem to get it. In gaming the extra cores that 1600 has never give it the edge or technically match 7700K meaning 8700K right now will not be better at gaming than 7700K.


You heard here first folks, it's official, 8700K will not be better in gaming. Thanks ZealotKi11er


----------



## Triniboi82

I have always been an intel person myself, but I decided to give the Ryzen 1600 a shot because of the price/perf value. I do believe however that the 8700K will be the new king of gaming, but at the end of the day it's all speculation till actual real world reviews are released.

Definitely looking forward to seeing how the 1600 stacks up against it and will most likely move back to intel when ice lake comes out. You can't deny from a value standpoint what Ryzen offers, hoping it's as stable as my current 2500K setup.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> You heard here first folks, it's official, 8700K will not be better in gaming. Thanks ZealotKi11er


Well we knew this already! The only help will be a couple of frames with the Higher 4.7 single core boost. It will help in gaming when you stream.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



THANKS FOR SUCH GREAT INFO Zea


----------



## Raghar

Why is this thread saying 4.7 turbo confirmed when retail pages said 4.3 tubo? And I somewhat doubt Intel provided them with more than basic frequency. Turbo is likely under NDA.


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> You do not seem to get it. In gaming the extra cores that 1600 has never give it the edge or technically match 7700K meaning 8700K right now will not be better at gaming than 7700K.


You're wrong. Some games like BF1 will see nice increases over an OC'd 7700K, especially in minimum FPS where it counts most.


----------



## Menta

https://teknigaming.com/coffeelake-preorder/


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> Why is this thread saying 4.7 turbo confirmed when retail pages said 4.3 tubo? And I somewhat doubt Intel provided them with more than basic frequency. Turbo is likely under NDA.


Single core turbo is 4.7. Love how people dont read and complain and fight how amd is better intel is better. Keep the thread on topic about the 8th gen and nothing else


----------



## zGunBLADEz

I find hillarious the references to stock reviews not even optimized/overclocked right/not even tweaked.

Not only clukos have put evidence i followed thru with the same type of gains.

But lets quote the "pelu" from nexus XD or linus lol if ryzen cannot have good perf no matter what.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> You honestly think someone will buy a shiny new CPU in the year 2020 and stick it in a 3-4 year old first gen AM4 motherboards? Sorry but I just have to laugh at that thinking. No one in their right mind will do that when PCIE4 and other new technologies will already be pretty old news by that time in motherboards of year 2020.
> 
> You can laugh at Intel all you want, yet 7700K is still the king of gaming and soon 8700K will turn Ryzen into a joke.


The 7820x didnt what you think the cut down version will?


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

https://teknigaming.com/coffeelake-preorder/
Quote:


> We can expect the Core i7-8700K to cost around $349 US when it launches in Q3 2017


I hope this turns out to be true as it would still fit my $1500 budget since it's very close to a 7700k in price.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Lets cut the AMD vs intel stuff please.

Reported for off topic


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I say "only" because my 7700k @ 5Ghz 3200MHz kit(stock) never goes below 144fps (comfortable stays at 200fps+ with v-sync off). sadly I have a freesync monitor with a GTX 1080 Ti (and the same with my Ryzen pc which has a GTX 1080). during team fights in Dota when it goes lower than 100fps you can definitely feel the stuttering/choppiness you don't even have to look at the fps counter. surely I'm not the only who gets this issue.I'm pretty sure even others with older intel cpus that don't overclock experience this.
> 
> It would probably be less relevant to people with gsync but not for me. again I'm not saying it's a bad gaming CPU. it's "okay" it's not Bulldozer or Piledriver bad. it's pretty decent but if you want high refresh rate gaming it's not the best option. I've been playing with my 1700x for a few months now. I know it pretty well. I had to deal with the early adopter quirks like the others. it has gotten better but I wish for more tbh


Show me deus ex fully maxed or the division or witcher 3 running over those hz 99%


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Single core turbo is 4.7. Love how people dont read and complain and fight how amd is better intel is better. Keep the thread on topic about the 8th gen and nothing else











The only reliable info is this. It shows rather lower, but definitelly expected, base frequency 3.7 GHz. We all know limit of 14 nm Intel technology, and basically it's just matter if Intel would optimize it for high speed, or low temperature. Of course improvement in comparison to Kabbylake might get 1/2 of best Coffeelake CPUs the same power characteristics as 1/10 of best Kabbylake CPUs. But, these limits also say that setting the speed to 4.7 would be unwise.

And there is another small problem. It would be likely just a selected core set to highest obtainable speed, and it would require compatible OS. (And perhaps even compatible MB, which might be the real reason why Intel suddenly wants to release Z370.)

Considering turbo speeds are limited by load, all core IBT, or Prime, correctly set max loads would likely be somehow low. 128 W CPU with TDP 95W. Either Intel would lock power limits, at least on auto, or Intel's thermal paste might prove to be nasty problem.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zGunBLADEz*
> 
> Show me deus ex fully maxed or the division or witcher 3 running over those hz 99%


I'm not even kidding I don't play those games and I don't plan on playing them in the future at all. just not my thing especially the witcher series









October 5 release is perfect! I'm getting the 8700k ofcourse







I still have my delid tool hopefully it overclocks to 5GHz too


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sheyster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> You do not seem to get it. In gaming the extra cores that 1600 has never give it the edge or technically match 7700K meaning 8700K right now will not be better at gaming than 7700K.
> 
> 
> 
> You're wrong. Some games like BF1 will see nice increases over an OC'd 7700K, especially in minimum FPS where it counts most.
Click to expand...

BF1 does not need more cores. My i5 7600k runs BF1 at 144 FPS minimum.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> BF1 does not need more cores. My i5 7600k runs BF1 at 144 FPS minimum.


I get over 120 fps in BF1 easily with my CPU. I do not know why anyone would need more fps.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I get over 120 fps in BF1 easily with my CPU. I do not know why anyone would need more fps.


PG279Q ( 2560x1440 x 165hz ) or ASUS PG35VQ ( 3440 x 1440 x 200hz ) could use more fps.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I get over 120 fps in BF1 easily with my CPU. I do not know why anyone would need more fps.


People running 144-240 Hz could use more..

I bet you drop below 100 fps sometimes in huge 64 MP battles tho


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> You do not seem to get it. In gaming the extra cores that 1600 has never give it the edge or technically match 7700K meaning 8700K right now will not be better at gaming than 7700K.


There's a large core performance difference between a 1600 and a 7700k at overclocks. Your logic is that the scaling from extra cores is not enough to overcome this pretty big gap, therefore it doesn't exist at all - that's not correct.

If you compare a 4c8t zen to a 6c12t zen there is significant scaling in some games, none in others - exact same will happen for 8700k

And at a few above comments.. why wouldn't you want or benefit from more powerful hardware? No CPU runs everything functionally perfectly. The lower framerates you want to play at the more often it will happen, but even for 100hz gaming a 7700k is a major bottleneck for entire genres of games. At 240hz it's the absolute core component of game performance that will make or break your ability to hold high FPS even in an unlimited budget system.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I get over 120 fps in BF1 easily with my CPU. I do not know why anyone would need more fps.
> 
> 
> 
> People running 144-240 Hz could use more..
> 
> I bet you drop below 100 fps sometimes in huge 64 MP battles tho
Click to expand...

No I don't drop below 144FPS in 64MP Battes with i5 7600k.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> No I don't drop below 144FPS in 64MP Battes with i5 7600k.


I'm guessing that's not with Ultra settings as the 1070 just can't push that many frames even at 1080p Ultra. Everything to low?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> There's a large core performance difference between a 1600 and a 7700k at overclocks. Your logic is that the scaling from extra cores is not enough to overcome this pretty big gap, therefore it doesn't exist at all - that's not correct.
> 
> If you compare a 4c8t zen to a 6c12t zen there is significant scaling in some games, none in others - exact same will happen for 8700k
> 
> And at a few above comments.. why wouldn't you want or benefit from more powerful hardware? No CPU runs everything functionally perfectly. The lower framerates you want to play at the more often it will happen, but even for 100hz gaming a 7700k is a major bottleneck for entire genres of games. At 240hz it's the absolute core component of game performance that will make or break your ability to hold high FPS even in an unlimited budget system.


7700K provides enough. Just look at all the other 6 Core CPUs from Intel. They are not faster than 7700K.


----------



## Lass3

i5-7600K gets much worse minimum's than i7-7700K in BF1:






Even on low preset the i5-7600K at 4.8 GHz is only able to maintain around 100 fps.

4C/4T is not enough in many newer/demanding games these days. Minimum fps will suffer.


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> 7700K provides enough. Just look at all the other 6 Core CPUs from Intel. They are not faster than 7700K.


Skylake-X has large regressions in core performance due to not clocking as high and their new cache/uncore system not being as efficient for games. Completely different story if core performance is maintained instead of dropping sometimes more than 20%.

If you disable all cores but 4 on skylake X and then compare it to 6 on the exact same CPU, yes you see performance gains in many games - same as Ryzen and the other CPU archs.


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Read the Wikipedia entries and watch the Linus Fast as Possible. Then go watch AdoredTV's theatrical exaggeration and disinformation piece and you quickly realize it has nothing to do with personal interests, other than the personal interests of AdoredTV which favor AMD like yours do.


Yeh AdoredTV made it like a thriller movie, I agree, but I've been reading this from wikipedia and other sources since at least 8 years or so, I know what's the truth and all of it is the truth.


----------



## naz2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> You honestly think someone will buy a shiny new CPU in the year 2020 and stick it in a 3-4 year old first gen AM4 motherboards? Sorry but I just have to laugh at that thinking. No one in their right mind will do that when PCIE4 and other new technologies will already be pretty old news by that time in motherboards of year 2020.
> 
> You can laugh at Intel all you want, yet 7700K is still the king of gaming and soon 8700K will turn Ryzen into a joke.


elaborate on these "new technologies". integrated wifi, optane memory, more LEDs? lol


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> No I don't drop below 144FPS in 64MP Battes with i5 7600k.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm guessing that's not with Ultra settings as the 1070 just can't push that many frames even at 1080p Ultra. Everything to low?
Click to expand...

Until I get a GTX 1080Ti I run BF1 at 720p and everything on ultra.









165 FPS 64MP map


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Until I get a GTX 1080Ti I run BF1 at 720p and everything on ultra.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 165 FPS 64MP map


Well 99% CPU, 165 fps and GPU is 94%. Better CPU you get even more fps. You need 240 fps these days.


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> No I don't drop below 144FPS in 64MP Battes with i5 7600k.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm guessing that's not with Ultra settings as the 1070 just can't push that many frames even at 1080p Ultra. Everything to low?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Until I get a GTX 1080Ti I run BF1 at 720p and everything on ultra.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 165 FPS 64MP map
Click to expand...

You're missing out, dude. You could have bought a 240 Hz monitor and run BF1 Ultra at 480p 240 Hz.

Anyway, another OCN moment: run stuff at resolutions from 2001 to claim 4/4 CPU's are enough nowadays.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> Skylake-X has large regressions in core performance due to not clocking as high and their new cache/uncore system not being as efficient for games. Completely different story if core performance is maintained instead of dropping sometimes more than 20%.
> 
> If you disable all cores but 4 on skylake X and then compare it to 6 on the exact same CPU, yes you see performance gains in many games - same as Ryzen and the other CPU archs.


disabling cores never improved performance , it keeps having mesh design?

also in poorly programmed games required to disable cores


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> No I don't drop below 144FPS in 64MP Battes with i5 7600k.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm guessing that's not with Ultra settings as the 1070 just can't push that many frames even at 1080p Ultra. Everything to low?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Until I get a GTX 1080Ti I run BF1 at 720p and everything on ultra.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 165 FPS 64MP map
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You're missing out, dude. You could have bought a 240 Hz monitor and run BF1 Ultra at 480p 240 Hz.
> 
> Anyway, another OCN moment: run stuff at resolutions from 2001 to claim 4/4 CPU's are enough nowadays.
Click to expand...

Going from 60 FPS/60Hz to 144 FPS/144Hz is a big difference no blur when sweeping let to right fast. Gaming now is awesome.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Going from 60 FPS/60Hz to 144 FPS/144Hz is a big difference no blur when sweeping let to right fast. Gaming now is awesome.


I hope the strix board itx keeps the same look.

Looking to build a itx red and black theme


----------



## Echoa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *epic1337*
> 
> so if their i5s are 6C/6T, does that mean their i3s will finally become 4C/8T?
> then theres pentium chips that could possibly be 4C/4T chips.


I think i3 might become 4c/4t and Pentium will be 2c/4t


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> no blur when sweeping let to right fast. Gaming now is awesome.


We already had that 20 years ago, they're called CRT's with perfect blacks and instant response times. Japan had a new CRT type display waiting to replace the old giant CRT's but they never went past the prototype stage because the average person drooled over flat panels.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> We already had that 20 years ago, they're called CRT's with perfect blacks and instant response times. Japan had a new CRT type display waiting to replace the old giant CRT's but they never went past the prototype stage because the average person drooled over flat panels.


Yeah, it was good to stop staring at a laser gun that was constantly aimed at you.


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> disabling cores never improved performance , it keeps having mesh design?
> 
> also in poorly programmed games required to disable cores


I meant that the 6 core setup with the same cores at the same speed would at least match and often outperform the 4 core setup

4c ryzen loses to 6c ryzen

4c skylake-x loses to 6c skylake-x

the reason that Skylake usually beats both of those is because the cores are just that much faster, not because adding a fifth core isn't helping at all.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> I meant that the 6 core setup with the same cores at the same speed would at least match and often outperform the 4 core setup
> 
> 4c ryzen loses to 6c ryzen
> 
> 4c skylake-x loses to 6c skylake-x
> 
> the reason that Skylake usually beats both of those is because the cores are just that much faster, not because adding a fifth core isn't helping at all.


4C Ryzen to 6C Ryzen is like 5-10% and 8C is like 2-3%.


----------



## darksideleader

I doubt there will be any real increase in clock for clock performance, 6 cores and 12 threads for mainstream is nice and way over due.


----------



## kd5151




----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> 4C Ryzen to 6C Ryzen is like 5-10% and 8C is like 2-3%.


Depends a lot on the game - sometimes 4c to 6c is 0%, others a lot more than 10%.

nonzero overall


----------



## TMatzelle60

Do you think there will be much change over the looks of the motherboards for z370? i dont think so ?


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> You're missing out, dude. You could have bought a 240 Hz monitor and run BF1 Ultra at 480p 240 Hz.
> 
> Anyway, another OCN moment: run stuff at resolutions from 2001 to claim 4/4 CPU's are enough nowadays.


He is limited by the CPU @ 720p so @ 480p he will still be limited by the cpu and 165FPS because that is all the cpu can handle.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> that was the 6600k and 6700k which had the equivalent of SB, but still not the big IPC increase


7600k and 7700k had more SB likeness than 6600k and 6700k though.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I say "only" because my 7700k @ 5Ghz 3200MHz kit(stock) never goes below 144fps (comfortable stays at 200fps+ with v-sync off). sadly I have a freesync monitor with a GTX 1080 Ti (and the same with my Ryzen pc which has a GTX 1080). during team fights in Dota when it goes lower than 100fps you can definitely feel the stuttering/choppiness you don't even have to look at the fps counter. surely I'm not the only who gets this issue.I'm pretty sure even others with older intel cpus that don't overclock experience this.
> 
> It would probably be less relevant to people with gsync but not for me. again I'm not saying it's a bad gaming CPU. it's "okay" it's not Bulldozer or Piledriver bad. it's pretty decent b*but if you want high refresh rate gaming it's not the best option.*I've been playing with my 1700x for a few months now. I know it pretty well. I had to deal with the early adopter quirks like the others. it has gotten better but I wish for more tbh


You'll get no argument from me there. The 7700k still rules that roost hands down.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Do you think there will be much change over the looks of the motherboards for z370? i dont think so ?


Probably not much. We might get MB that where missing from Z270 line. I do not think many ITX showed up this time around. Maybe they will be identical and we will get the real new MB with Z390


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> 7600k and 7700k had more SB likeness than 6600k and 6700k though.


Ontopic:
Yeah, it is beacuse intel choose to make it more likable.







Both were good CPUs. i7-8700k might significantly change the situations though.

On competitive topic regarding Coffe Lake i3:
AMD's most entry level Ryzen CPU that is $109 Ryzen 3 1200 3.4 GHz(turbo) is being so much adorable as comapred to the mainstream king, the $350 i7-7700k (4.5GHz turbo), both at defaul clocks and entry level DDR4 RAM, I think this is the greatest power efficiency I've ever seen in a while.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1928?vs=1826

The new i3 already have got the competition. Ryzen 3 has got hyper threads, and many games are already needing more threads than 4 to eliminate microstuttering. Any background processes utilizing even a little bit of CPU resource is going to affact the gaming performance with only 4 thread CPU. I think 4c/8t i3 will be the real competitor.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> You're missing out, dude. You could have bought a 240 Hz monitor and run BF1 Ultra at 480p 240 Hz.
> 
> Anyway, another OCN moment: run stuff at resolutions from 2001 to claim 4/4 CPU's are enough nowadays.
> 
> 
> 
> He is limited by the CPU @ 720p so @ 480p he will still be limited by the cpu and 165FPS because that is all the cpu can handle.
Click to expand...

That is true I'm at the limit of my i5 7600k at 4.6GHz. If I lower the Clock speed to 4.0GHz I loose ~15 FPS. I wonder if the Coffee lake 6 core will do even better with BF1? I have not seen Intel 6 core Benefit BF1 with increased FPS. link: https://www.techspot.com/review/1433-intel-core-i9-core-i7-skylake-x/page3.html


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> 7600k and 7700k had more SB likeness than 6600k and 6700k though.
> 
> 
> 
> Ontopic:
> Yeah, it is beacuse intel choose to make it more likable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Both were good CPUs. i7-8700k might significantly change the situations though.
> 
> On competitive topic regarding Coffe Lake i3:
> AMD's most entry level Ryzen CPU that is $109 Ryzen 3 1200 3.4 GHz(turbo) is being so much adorable as comapred to the mainstream king, the $350 i7-7700k (4.5GHz turbo), both at defaul clocks and entry level DDR4 RAM, I think this is the greatest power efficiency I've ever seen in a while.
> http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1928?vs=1826
> 
> The new i3 already have got the competition. Ryzen 3 has got hyper threads, and many games are already needing more threads than 4 to eliminate microstuttering. Any background processes utilizing even a little bit of CPU resource is going to affact the gaming performance with only 4 thread CPU. I think 4c/8t i3 will be the real competitor.
Click to expand...

From what I have seen Coffee lake will be 4c/4t i3. link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffee_Lake


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> I meant that the 6 core setup with the same cores at the same speed would at least match and often outperform the 4 core setup
> 
> 4c ryzen loses to 6c ryzen
> 
> 4c skylake-x loses to 6c skylake-x
> 
> the reason that Skylake usually beats both of those is because the cores are just that much faster, not because adding a fifth core isn't helping at all.


well that usualyl is true, but I understood that a quad core would beat a hexa core









but the advantage skylake has is core clock and a slighly higher IPC other than that it would be as fast as Ryzen


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> From what I have seen Coffee lake will be 4c/4t i3. link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffee_Lake


That is strange, how could Intel miss the 4c/8t one ?
Or who knows, may be that comes under one of their future plans.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Probably not much. We might get MB that where missing from Z270 line. I do not think many ITX showed up this time around. Maybe they will be identical and we will get the real new MB with Z390


Im def looking forward to the strix line of itx


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> That is strange, how could Intel miss the 4c/8t one ?
> Or who knows, may be that comes under one of their future plans.


It must be out of Intel's sheer shame to not want to explain why the much-loved flagship i7-7700K turned into a pumpkin overnight, since the i3 is supposed to come unlocked (?). I imagine a lot of people would be pissed. Then they release an i3 with 4/4 and later in 2018 they release the real deal i3 with 4/8. I also think that an i7-7700K rebranded as an i3 (cheaper) would hurt the sales of the i7-8700K. Many people would save the money and keep the i3.

People tend to forget things fast and the market knows it.


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> It must be out of Intel's sheer shame to not want to explain why the much-loved flagship i7-7700K turned into a pumpkin overnight, since the i3 is supposed to come unlocked (?). I imagine a lot of people would be pissed. Then they release an i3 with 4/4 and later in 2018 they release the real deal i3 with 4/8. I also think that an i7-7700K rebranded as an i3 (cheaper) would hurt the sales of the i7-8700K. Many people would save the money and keep the i3.
> 
> People tend to forget things fast and the market knows it.


Pretty much.

Or may be the secret 4c/8t i3 have already been pushed into the market in the form of *cough* i7-7740X.







, nevermind, that's just my opinion.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Im def looking forward to the strix line of itx


Strix is actually in the low end of ROG. Looking at X370 stuff from AMD Strix is just X370 Prime Pro with new skin.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Strix is actually in the low end of ROG. Looking at X370 stuff from AMD Strix is just X370 Prime Pro with new skin.


STRIX 'low-end' still outweighs a lot of manufacturer's top-end stuff half the time. My 'low-end' STRIX board has more features than most middle-to-high tier Z270 boards from others. Your high-end STRIX stuff usually only entails the inclusion of a waterblock, a debug display and various other niceties that are far from a standard offering.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> STRIX 'low-end' still outweighs a lot of manufacturer's top-end stuff half the time. My 'low-end' STRIX board has more features than most middle-to-high tier Z270 boards from others. Your high-end STRIX stuff usually only entails the inclusion of a waterblock, a debug display and various other niceties that are far from a standard offering.


I was just comparing X370 Strix vs CH Hero. I though based on the look that Strix was just as good. Hero was much better complements and power delivery. You just have to look at every MB by itself and dont get misled by ASUS naming unless is ultra high end. You MB is good but ASUS used to make better ITX for Z170 : Maximums Impact. Z270i Strix is just a dressed up Pro gaming Z170.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Asus reps already stated the impact line is end of life. Strix will be the new impact. Meaning no impact motherboards anymore.


----------



## kd5151

Strix boards are sexy on both platforms.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Asus reps already stated the impact line is end of life. Strix will be the new impact. Meaning no impact motherboards anymore.


Did not know what but they are nothing alike. Just look at the Impact. That is a true high end MB. I hope someone make another high end ITX MB like that again. 6 Core will need more power after OC.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Pretty much.
> 
> Or may be the secret 4c/8t i3 have already been pushed into the market in the form of *cough* i7-7740X.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , nevermind, that's just my opinion.


But the i7-7740X costs U$330. Just about the same price of the i7-7700K. There is no trade off. You are paying the same bang for buck regardless. It is not an i3, it is a full priced i7.

But if they released an i7-7700K rebranded as an i3, the price would have to be around U$150 (less than half the price). So many gamers would choose the "i3" instead of the i7-8700K. The i7-8700K would be relegated to the top end enthusiasts and would not be a blockbuster. Since they are releasing an i3 with 4/4, people will be forced to buy at least an i5. The i3 will continue to be a low end CPU for games, since the i5 was dead for quite some time now and Ryzen 5 was the last nail in its coffin.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Did not know what but they are nothing alike. Just look at the Impact. That is a true high end MB. I hope someone make another high end ITX MB like that again. 6 Core will need more power after OC.


Dont take me i am trying to find the post about the impact. I do love the impact but then again the strix is still a great board.


----------



## delboy67

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> You honestly think someone will buy a shiny new CPU in the year 2020 and stick it in a 3-4 year old first gen AM4 motherboards? Sorry but I just have to laugh at that thinking. No one in their right mind will do that when PCIE4 and other new technologies will already be pretty old news by that time in motherboards of year 2020.
> 
> You can laugh at Intel all you want, yet 7700K is still the king of gaming and soon 8700K will turn Ryzen into a joke.


What a dumb comment, if I could put a 7700k in my z77 board I absolutely would.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Pretty much.
> 
> Or may be the secret 4c/8t i3 have already been pushed into the market in the form of *cough* i7-7740X.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , nevermind, that's just my opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But the i7-7740X costs U$330. Just about the same price of the i7-7700K. There is no trade off. You are paying the same bang for buck regardless. It is not an i3, it is a full priced i7.
> 
> But if they released an i7-7700K rebranded as an i3, the price would have to be around U$150 (less than half the price). So many gamers would choose the "i3" instead of the i7-8700K. The i7-8700K would be relegated to the top end enthusiasts and would not be a blockbuster. Since they are releasing an i3 with 4/4, people will be forced to buy at least an i5. The i3 will continue to be a low end CPU for games, since the i5 was dead for quite some time now and Ryzen 5 was the last nail in its coffin.
Click to expand...

I don't know why you say the i5 is dead, it beats the Ryzen5 in gaming benchmarks.


----------



## TMatzelle60

This Thread is starting to turn into a AMD VS Intel all over. Have yet to see one person post the leaks of z370 motherboard.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> This Thread is starting to turn into a AMD VS Intel all over


More like i5 user in denial than actual vs









Don't expect much if the release is about a month away, and that's not even official, just a rumor (however plausible it may be).


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I don't know why you say the i5 is dead, it beats the Ryzen5 in gaming benchmarks.


Maybe you are looking at the worng places or numbers or you are just in denial. The i5 was dead even before Ryzen, which just gave it the stroke of mercy.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *delboy67*
> 
> What a dumb comment, if I could put a 7700k in my z77 board I absolutely would.


I would not. The MB side of things brings more stuff than the CPU does.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Maybe you are looking at the worng places or numbers or you are just in denial. The i5 was dead even before Ryzen, which just gave it the stroke of mercy.


I know, I used my i5 with the 1080 Ti for a few days









OT: Last actual leak about the 8700k points towards a mainstream 7800x:



1.415 vcore for 5.0 GHz (not sure how that compares vs Kaby or Sky-X), about the same IPC as Skylake. Only difference with the 7800x is no quad channel support, no AVX512 support and ring bus instead of mesh.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I don't know why you say the i5 is dead, it beats the Ryzen5 in gaming benchmarks.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you are looking at the worng places or numbers or you are just in denial. The i5 was dead even before Ryzen, which just gave it the stroke of mercy.
Click to expand...

The only major difference from i5 7600k to i7 7700k is SMT.

i5 smokes the Ryzen in gaming.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The only major difference from i5 7600k to i7 7700k is SMT.


This is neither the thread about Ryzen nor the thread about your 7600k, you can start your very own thread somewhere else


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The only major difference from i5 7600k to i7 7700k is SMT.
> 
> 
> 
> This is neither the thread about Ryzen nor the thread about your 7600k, you can start your very own thread somewhere else
Click to expand...

I was making a comparison to the coffee lake i3 4c/4t so it is on subject.


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *delboy67*
> 
> What a dumb comment, if I could put a 7700k in my z77 board I absolutely would.


Of course you would. And then you would whine at Intel and in this forum why your new CPU doesn't perform as advertised and why half of features are missing.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I was making a comparison to the coffee lake i3 4c/4t so it is on subject.


An inaccurate comparison at that:



Nobody would want to play a game with these frametimes









OT: European CL pricing: http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/european-core-i7-8700k-coffee-lake-prices-spotted-in-germany.html

That's with 19% VAT (Germany).


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I was making a comparison to the coffee lake i3 4c/4t so it is on subject.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> An inaccurate comparison at that:
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody would want to play a game with these frametimes
Click to expand...

That benchmark is with a GTX 1060.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That benchmark is with a GTX 1060.


Does not change a whole lot with a Titan Pascal -> 




Quad 4C/4T is simply not enough in many games. This has been true for years now. Crysis 3 is 4.5 years old and i5 has way lower fps than 4C/8T or better CPU's.

Afterall, current i5's are going to be next gen i3's









i5-8600K is probably going to make i5 viable for gaming again tho.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> OT: Last actual leak about the 8700k points towards a mainstream 7800x:
> 
> 1.415 vcore for 5.0 GHz (not sure how that compares vs Kaby or Sky-X), about the same IPC as Skylake. Only difference with the 7800x is no quad channel support, no AVX512 support and ring bus instead of mesh.


Capacitance per core is equal to the 6700K ( from the graphs from march ) and the voltage scaling should be even lower than the 7700K ( more amps , lower voltage per clock ). 5.0 -> 5.4 required the same voltage for the 6700K -> 7700K with the mocf.
http://abload.de/image.php?img=6700k5.0ghzocfmq1q2c.png
https://bbs.io-tech.fi/threads/intel-kaby-lake-lga-1151-z270-kellotukset-kokemukset.6251/page-27 This one's even measured too.

5.0 for the 8700K should be possible at less than 1.20v if the 7700K can reach 5.0ghz at ~1.20v.


----------



## Scotty99

The only question that needs to be answered for me is its cache structure, even if it can only do 4.8 or 4.9 id be fine with that.


----------



## Raghar

Well it can be two core glued to quad core. That would get everyone.


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> You're missing out, dude. You could have bought a 240 Hz monitor and run BF1 Ultra at 480p 240 Hz.
> 
> Anyway, another OCN moment: run stuff at resolutions from 2001 to claim 4/4 CPU's are enough nowadays.
> 
> 
> 
> He is limited by the CPU @ 720p so @ 480p he will still be limited by the cpu and 165FPS because that is all the cpu can handle.
Click to expand...

CPU bottlenecking isn't binary.


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> CPU bottlenecking isn't binary.


if you are limited by say 120FPS @ 1080p and CPU is @ 99% usage. then at 720P you will still be limited by 120FPS because your cpu is @ max load 99% usage and it cant put out any more FPS


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> CPU bottlenecking isn't binary.
> 
> 
> 
> if you are limited by say 120FPS @ 1080p and CPU is @ 99% usage. then at 720P you will still be limited by 120FPS because your cpu is @ max load 99% usage and it cant put out any more FPS
Click to expand...

I meant that the CPU isn't used in a vacuum. It's constantly working with the GPU and memory. Changing the resolution has a non-zero impact in its performance, either directly or indirectly (the latter being the GPU working faster, facilitating serial load).


----------



## Menta




----------



## Ascii Aficionado

$470 for a 6 core, not sure what I think about this.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menta*


$350USD i7 8700k not bad


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> $350USD i7 8700k not bad


Where'd you get $350 USD from ?


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Where'd you get $350 USD from ?


me want to know too.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> me want to know too.


Possibly this


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/6z74zq/european_core_i7_8700k_coffee_lake_prices_spotted/dmtbwbq/


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Possibly this
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/6z74zq/european_core_i7_8700k_coffee_lake_prices_spotted/dmtbwbq/


No, no. I meant I too along with you wanted to know where he got the $350 pricing from.
Nevermind.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That benchmark is with a GTX 1060.
> 
> 
> 
> Does not change a whole lot with a Titan Pascal ->
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quad 4C/4T is simply not enough in many games. This has been true for years now. Crysis 3 is 4.5 years old and i5 has way lower fps than 4C/8T or better CPU's.
> 
> Afterall, current i5's are going to be next gen i3's
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i5-8600K is probably going to make i5 viable for gaming again tho.
Click to expand...

What games will the new i3 Coffee lake 4c/4t not be viable and get a minimum of 60 FPS?


----------



## lilchronic

$389 USD The exchange rate does not effect price.


----------



## darksideleader

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That benchmark is with a GTX 1060.
> 
> 
> 
> Does not change a whole lot with a Titan Pascal ->
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quad 4C/4T is simply not enough in many games. This has been true for years now. Crysis 3 is 4.5 years old and i5 has way lower fps than 4C/8T or better CPU's.
> 
> Afterall, current i5's are going to be next gen i3's
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i5-8600K is probably going to make i5 viable for gaming again tho.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What games will the new i3 Coffee lake 4c/4t not be viable and get a minimum of 60 FPS?
Click to expand...

real question is, who still plays crysis 3 after 4.5 years


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> $389 USD The exchange rate does not effect price.


I do expect the i7 8700k to sell for the same price as the i7 7800X. Just like the i7 7700k and the i7 7740X are the same price now.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I do expect the i7 8700k to sell for the same price as the i7 7800X. Just like the i7 7700k and the i7 7740X are the same price now.


Did we forget the 8600K? Maybe the prices are high.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darksideleader*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That benchmark is with a GTX 1060.
> 
> 
> 
> Does not change a whole lot with a Titan Pascal ->
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quad 4C/4T is simply not enough in many games. This has been true for years now. Crysis 3 is 4.5 years old and i5 has way lower fps than 4C/8T or better CPU's.
> 
> Afterall, current i5's are going to be next gen i3's
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i5-8600K is probably going to make i5 viable for gaming again tho.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What games will the new i3 Coffee lake 4c/4t not be viable and get a minimum of 60 FPS?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> real question is, who still plays crysis 3 after 4.5 years
Click to expand...

I just played it two days ago and it runs smooth as butter on my i5 2500k to i5 7600k.







The old saying 4.5 years ago was, can my PC run Crysis.


----------



## Scotty99

With as many people that are buying ryzen, 6c6t i5 is something id recommend most to pass on. There are going to be game optimizations going forward for at least 6c12t as thats the most popular ryzen chip, something ya gotta think about.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> With as many people that are buying ryzen, 6c6t i5 is something id recommend most to pass on. There are going to be game optimizations going forward for at least 6c12t as thats the most popular ryzen chip, something ya gotta think about.


I will wait on the benchmarks for the i5 coffee lake before I suggest what to get. It could do real good against Ryzen for performance in gaming.


----------



## Scotty99

Launch reviews are going to be fine for i5's, im talking down the road. We are at a stage right now where the tides are changing because of ryzen, its going to take a couple years but trust me there will be titles that will have optimizations putting a 1600x ahead of a 8600k.

Thats just on the gaming side of course, a 1600x is simply a much more powerful overall CPU than a 8600k, for less money.


----------



## TMatzelle60

I think Intel release will be good. But now with Ryzen on there backs they cant be pulling any BS 3-5% faster crap. Unless Zen 2 fails which i doubt it. Im a Intel user and have used AMD in the past. Competition is always good to drive down prices and also give others more choices.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Launch reviews are going to be fine for i5's, im talking down the road. We are at a stage right now where the tides are changing because of ryzen, its going to take a couple years but trust me there will be titles that will have optimizations putting a 1600x ahead of a 8600k.
> 
> Thats just on the gaming side of course, a 1600x is simply a much more powerful overall CPU than a 8600k, for less money.


I have never seen CPU optimization make a drastic change other than folks hoping for it like they did for past AMD CPUs. Do you have a link for Rzen optimization that makes a signification improvement?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> I think Intel release will be good. But now with Ryzen on there backs they cant be pulling any BS 3-5% faster crap. Unless Zen 2 fails which i doubt it. Im a Intel user and have used AMD in the past. Competition is always good to drive down prices and also give others more choices.


I find Intel does not lower there price due to competition. AMD does lower there prices on CPUs.


----------



## kd5151

Core2quads pulled ahead core2duos. I7s pulled ahead i5s. This is where the theory lies.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I have never seen CPU optimization make a drastic change other than folks hoping for it like they did for past AMD CPUs. Do you have a link for Rzen optimization that makes a signification improvement?


Look at reviews from fx series cpu compared to today, they aged incredibly well. You are unaware the shift that is happening because of ryzen, a 6c6t cpu for over 200 dollars is not something i recommend anyone buying. Yes the 8600k is going to beat ryzen in everygame on launch just as 7700k does, i dont see anyone in the market for an i5 that upgrade every 2 years, ryzen 5 is the smarter play.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Look at reviews from fx series cpu compared to today, they aged incredibly well. You are unaware the shift that is happening because of ryzen, a 6c6t cpu for over 200 dollars is not something i recommend anyone buying. Yes the 8600k is going to beat ryzen in everygame on launch just as 7700k does, i dont see anyone in the market for an i5 that upgrade every 2 years, ryzen 5 is the smarter play.


While i agree. The market for itx is in intel favor. I also dont see any motherboards that have features that i need with am4. I would love to go that way but i wont


----------



## sumitlian

i5 8600k will obviously have more IPS. 5 GHz 8600k should be plenty.
Minimum fps will be higher with Intel, imo.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I have never seen CPU optimization make a drastic change other than folks hoping for it like they did for past AMD CPUs. Do you have a link for Rzen optimization that makes a signification improvement?


Ashes of the Singularity before and after Ryzen patch.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!





Up to *31%* performance improvement.


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I find Intel does not lower there price due to competition. AMD does lower there prices on CPUs.


Well, Intel still do not have any competition as far as IPS is concerned, hence their stable prices.
Ryzen 2 might change that.


----------



## Scotty99

Intel does not have the IPC, they have the clockspeeds. Not every game needs clockspeed, and not everyone games.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menta*


Updated OP:
Quote:


> The European prices of the upcoming Coffee Lake processors have surfaced for the entire range of products, in this news item an overview. Of course Canadian prices already had been listed, but in the EU the pricing model differs quite a bit due to taxes and exchange rates. Looking at the differences we see that Coffee Lake will be a bit more expensive compared to the current Core i5 and i7 lines. The Core i7 8700K with six-cores and one thread will cost €389,- the 8600K with six cores and threads €273. Below an overview of prices, cores and frequencies. The prices listed will differ here and there a bit basically due to differences of VAT per country.


*Source:* http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/european-core-i7-8700k-coffee-lake-prices-spotted-in-germany.html


----------



## caenlen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Intel does not have the IPC, they have the clockspeeds. Not every game needs clockspeed, and not everyone games.


Majority of us on this forum game. So...


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Intel does not have the IPC, they have the clockspeeds. Not every game needs clockspeed, and not everyone games.


Intel(stock) does have at least 8% more IPC advantage over Ryzen(stock) as well as more single core clock speed aka IPS.
Every game needs more CPU clock speed if your GPU is not fully utilized, this is the universal truth, period.


----------



## Scotty99

Let me explain.

Yes of course most games that are on the market when 8600k comes out will run better on it than ryzen. But look today how much better a 7700k runs games than a 7600k. Are the few amount of FPS you gain today with an 8600k worth the risk of it losing out in tomorrows games by a much bigger margin? (i7 vs i5 example that games today show).

To me i5 is a no buy chip, 8700k is the one to get. Save up, its only a bit more money.

To be clear i mean its either ryzen 5 or i7. i5 would only be my recommendation (or an overclockable i3) to strictly mmo players.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I find Intel does not lower there price due to competition. AMD does lower there prices on CPUs.


This is true. Mostly because Intel is better. But is that really the way you see it? Phenom 2 started at $240 and ended up being $90 on newegg before being discontinued or because of faildozer was out by then. Intels prices don't change. They might have sales but the msrp hasnt moved and they dont discount the older ones. The best sale I have ever seen Intel run was black friday 2011 when i7s where i5s prices and i5s where i3 prices. At tigerdirect I believe. Don't make me look it up.









But now Ryzen is hot AMD is still knocking off big bucks. 1700x @ $300 many times.







sooner or later I think that 1800x is going to budge. Which it has if you live next to microcenter. Seen them for $350 usd.

Edit: Microcenter had 2500k @ $99! http://www.overclock.net/t/1327794/intel-core-i5-2500k-99-microcenter


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Let me explain.
> 
> Yes of course most games that are on the market when 8600k comes out will run better on it than ryzen. But look today how much better a 7700k runs games than a 7600k. Are the few amount of FPS you gain today with an 8600k worth the risk of it losing out in tomorrows games by a much bigger margin? (i7 vs i5 example that games today show).
> 
> *To me* i5 is a no buy chip, 8700k is the one to get. Save up, its only a bit more money.


Yes, To you i5 may be a no buy chip but that doesn't account for everyone.

This time i5 has six cores and most games use up to quad core only. Older i5s may occur issues like microstuttering or occational low fps if interfered by background system processes, and HT(i7) may help in that case but not like real addition cores. This time you have two extra real cores with i5 and your gaming performance should not be affacted by any background system processes most of the times. That will only happen when your game really utilizes all six cores, there are not many games like that. Imo i5 should be enough even for gaming.
But yeah if more DirectX 12 titles come out in future then imo it is better to have a CPU with as many cores/threads as possible since DX12 titles apart from some DX11 titles have been the ones which have utilized 5-8 threads. Other than that HT will only benefit in heavy multithreading tasks like Video transcoding/rendering, compression etc.


----------



## Scotty99

Did i mayhap trigger someone that was interested in the 8600k?









Its gonna be a fine chip for a year or two, but its not a chip for someone who keeps their PC for any appreciable amount of time. Look at 2600k vs 2500k benchmarks, its gonna be that and more because of ryzen down the road.


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Did i mayhap trigger someone that was interested in the 8600k?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its gonna be a fine chip for a year or two, but its not a chip for someone who keeps their PC for any appreciable amount of time.


You are out of valid arguments.
No Intel chip can trigger me.







My next CPU will be AMD only regadless of Intel's IPC, IPS, AVX advantage.
Also I am a simple man, 60 fps gamer and multitasking for which Ryzen is looking the best.
But that doesn't mean I will play immoral fanboyism just because I don't want to buy some specific product.


----------



## Scotty99

I am giving the *most valid argument possibl*e. Please go right now and look at 2017 2600k vs 2500k benchmarks, the 2600k DESTROYS a 2500k. At launch they were dead even but now games are taking advantage of that hyperthreading.

8600k is not a CPU with legs, you will see this is the not too distant future.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I am giving the *most valid argument possibl*e. Please go right now and look at 2017 2600k vs 2500k benchmarks, the 2600k DESTROYS a 2500k. At launch they were dead even but now games are taking advantage of that hyperthreading.
> 
> 8600k is not a CPU with legs, you will see this is the not too distant future.


For sure lol. 8600K is good if to want to upgrade it in 1-2 year.

2500K still fine for 95% of games out there ans is 6 years old CPU now.


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Did i mayhap trigger someone that was interested in the 8600k?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its gonna be a fine chip for a year or two, but its not a chip for someone who keeps their PC for any appreciable amount of time. Look at 2600k vs 2500k benchmarks, its gonna be that and more because of ryzen down the road.


We heard that same argument when Bulldozer came out and it didn't happen. I doubt most games will need more than 6 cores 6 threads for the next five years, assuming no multitasking. Maybe they will, but buying PC hardware that is worse now assuming it will be better in three years because of some predicted change in software that has never happened before is not wise.

Future proofing computers is best done by spending a lot of money on them, not predicting the future 3-5 years out and buying hardware for that.


----------



## Scotty99

Except it did happen? 8350 beats 2500k in some 2017 titles, back when these cpu's launched the 2500k walked all over fx, wasnt even close.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asmodian*
> 
> We heard that same argument when Bulldozer came out and it didn't happen. I doubt most games will need more than 6 cores 6 threads for the next five years, assuming no multitasking. Maybe they will, but buying PC hardware that is worse now assuming it will be better in three years because of some predicted change in software that has never happened before is not wise.
> 
> Future proofing computers is best done by spending a lot of money on them, not predicting the future 3-5 years out and buying hardware for that.


We just got a huge influx of core right now. 4 Core came out in 2006-7 and it took 3-4 years to become mainstream but when they did Dual Core just could not keep up. This is more like E8400 vs Q6600.


----------



## Scotty99

Ryzen 5 being so popular obsoleted 8600k before it even came out, thats the real story here.

Ryzen 7 has no reason for existing tho with 8700k, thus my cpu and board being on craigslist lol.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I find Intel does not lower there price due to competition. AMD does lower there prices on CPUs.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, Intel still do not have any competition as far as IPS is concerned, hence their stable prices.
> Ryzen 2 might change that.
Click to expand...

Intel prices I believe are set before Ryzen 2 just like that have been slowly increasing the prices since sandy bridge. I never have seen competition effect Intel pricing.

From what I have seen from Intel pricing they only compete with them selves from there last product generation.


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> For sure lol. 8600K is good if to want to upgrade it in 1-2 year.


...says the guy who have been believing, and have claimed many times in the past that his quad core ivyb i7 was/is still enough for most types of gaming. Wow.
And now same guy is implying that a new upcoming i5 CPU with relatively about 15% faster IPC and with 50% more cores will become obsolete in next 1-2 years. Wowwww.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Intel prices I believe are set before Ryzen 2 just like that have been slowly increasing the prices since sandy bridge. I never have seen competition effect Intel pricing.
> 
> From what I have seen from Intel pricing they only compete with them selves from there last product generation.


Yeah I agree to some extent.
But back in Q4 2010, HEDT i7 930 with triple channel memory support was under $300(I remember I was able to buy one at even around $250) when that CPU did not posses any significant IPS advantage over Phenom II X6, it came at 2.8 GHz and stopped at 4.0 GHz OCing almost same as Pheonm II X6 in ocing. General people do not understand IPC/IPS at all. They see clock speed. Intel is very strong in clock speed, AMD for now isn't. imo, Intel will/might only change their prices when AMD brings similar clocked CPUs, imo.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> ...says the guy who have been believing, and have claimed many times in the past that his quad core ivyb i7 was/is still enough for most types of gaming. Wow.
> And now same guy is implying that a new upcoming i5 CPU with relatively about 15% faster IPC and with 50% more cores will become obsolete in next 1-2 years. Wowwww.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah I agree to some extent.
> But back in Q4 2010, HEDT i7 930 with triple channel memory support was under $300(I remember I was able to buy one at even around $250) when that CPU did not posses any significant IPS advantage over Phenom II X6, it came at 2.8 GHz and stopped at 4.0 GHz OCing almost same as Pheonm II X6 in ocing. General people do not understand IPC/IPS at all. They see clock speed. Intel is very strong in clock speed, AMD for now isn't. imo, Intel will/might only change their prices when AMD brings similar clocked CPUs, imo.


There is a difference. When 2500K came out and until about 2015 it was as fast as 2600K in gaming. The moment its 5% slower it means i5 is not as fast. My 3770K is enough because it has 8 threads and I play at 4K.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asmodian*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Did i mayhap trigger someone that was interested in the 8600k?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its gonna be a fine chip for a year or two, but its not a chip for someone who keeps their PC for any appreciable amount of time. Look at 2600k vs 2500k benchmarks, its gonna be that and more because of ryzen down the road.
> 
> 
> 
> We heard that same argument when Bulldozer came out and it didn't happen. I doubt most games will need more than 6 cores 6 threads for the next five years, assuming no multitasking. Maybe they will, but buying PC hardware that is worse now assuming it will be better in three years because of some predicted change in software that has never happened before is not wise.
> 
> Future proofing computers is best done by spending a lot of money on them, not predicting the future 3-5 years out and buying hardware for that.
Click to expand...

I spend least amount needed then upgrade with new DX12 technology for gaming. I spent $99.00 Gigabyte Z170 HD3 motherboard and $219.00 on i5 7600k. I will do the same with coffee lake.


----------



## kd5151

quad core 100% load is strong with this one.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Did i mayhap trigger someone that was interested in the 8600k?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its gonna be a fine chip for a year or two, but its not a chip for someone who keeps their PC for any appreciable amount of time. Look at 2600k vs 2500k benchmarks, its gonna be that and more because of ryzen down the road.


It's going to take 3 years before we see a lot of DX12 only games built on DX12 API from the ground up where more than 6 threads really makes a difference, most games don't benefit from more than 4 cores. Buying for the future is just a waste of money, it is better to just get what you will use for now spending the least amount of money then upgrade in 3 years.

There are only 6 DX12 exclusive games on the market now. LINK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_with_DirectX_12_support


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Where'd you get $350 USD from ?


Prices in US=/= Prices in EU, suaully prices are usually higher in EU
Quote:


> The prices listed will differ here and there a bit basically due to differences of VAT per country.


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Intel does not have the IPC, they have the clockspeeds. Not every game needs clockspeed, and not everyone games.


They do.


https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/

The IPC defiency is still well manageable, while the real issue is the frequency advantage Intel has (due to superior manufacturing processes).


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darksideleader*
> 
> real question is, who still plays crysis 3 after 4.5 years


Me. And it's still one of the best looking games on PC to this day.


----------



## kingduqc

This is something curious I've been seeing here. As soon as intel saw how competitive ryzen was, they started offering more interesting options to the consumer after 6 years of incrementalism on all their different markets. You guys seem pretty excited to jump on the first real upgrade from the blue team in years. Isn't it a bit counterproductive to reward this kind of behavior? I mean, do you really need a new cpu? To me it's the same story for the CPU and GPU market, consumers are really excited about Amd's new products because they know intel and Nvidia will stop resting on their laurels for half a year. It's quite sad to see and realize what was happening all those past years. I guess 5% increase a year or mid range Gpu die for 700$ ain't that bad after all. I guess I have been a part of that problem too...


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> that was the 6600k and 6700k which had the equivalent of SB, but still not the big IPC increase


SB still clock better than Skylake overall. It is Coffee-lake that is the true successor to SB with all 3 factors (IPC, Cores and Clock speed) improvement. Unfortunately it might still lose out in temps.

So it take Intel 6 years to release a new sandy bridge against the old sandy bridge. With a extra effort and risk on the consumer part to delid for it to be a complete successor. lol.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingduqc*
> 
> This is something curious I've been seeing here. As soon as intel saw how competitive ryzen was, they started offering more interesting options to the consumer after 6 years of incrementalism on all their different markets. You guys seem pretty excited to jump on the first real upgrade from the blue team in years. Isn't it a bit counterproductive to reward this kind of behavior? I mean, do you really need a new cpu? To me it's the same story for the CPU and GPU market, consumers are really excited about Amd's new products because they know intel and Nvidia will stop resting on their laurels for half a year. It's quite sad to see and realize what was happening all those past years. I guess 5% increase a year or mid range Gpu die for 700$ ain't that bad after all. I guess I have been a part of that problem too...


Solid points. Personally, I'll always buy from the underdog if they're offering the performance I need at a competitive price. Right now, that's AMD. If things were reversed, I'd favour Intel/Nvidia. Not out of any romantic notion of personal loyalty, but because I feel my job as a consumer is to encourage competition where possible so long as my needs are met.


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> SB still clock better than Skylake overall. It is Coffee-lake that is the true successor to SB with all 3 factors (IPC, Cores and Clock speed) improvement. Unfortunately it might still lose out in temps.


I think there is a bit of romanticism going on with SB, they didn't all clock to 5GHz.









Also we are at the point that the IPC is actually significantly better on Intel's new CPUs. Generation to generation improvement has slowed a lot since SB but SB was a long time ago, slowing doesn't mean stopping.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingduqc*
> 
> This is something curious I've been seeing here. As soon as intel saw how competitive ryzen was, they started offering more interesting options to the consumer after 6 years of incrementalism on all their different markets. You guys seem pretty excited to jump on the first real upgrade from the blue team in years. Isn't it a bit counterproductive to reward this kind of behavior? I mean, do you really need a new cpu? To me it's the same story for the CPU and GPU market, consumers are really excited about Amd's new products because they know intel and Nvidia will stop resting on their laurels for half a year. It's quite sad to see and realize what was happening all those past years. I guess 5% increase a year or mid range Gpu die for 700$ ain't that bad after all. I guess I have been a part of that problem too...


Intel does not give a squat what AMD is doing with new products and they don't know before hand, they plan 3-4 years a head for what there going to do this year and next is Ice lake already set in stone.


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Except it did happen? 8350 beats 2500k in some 2017 titles, back when these cpu's launched the 2500k walked all over fx, wasnt even close.


To the point that someone would wish they had bought a 8350 instead of a 2500K, *when they launched*, because the 2500K is so much worse now, 5-6 years later?









No. Maybe just now, in a few games, four threads has started to be limiting. How long before 6-threads becomes limiting is hard to predict but claiming it will be, for sure, in the next 4-5 years, to the point that going with what has the best performance now is not a good idea, seems really unsubstantiated. Maybe more slower threads will be slightly better in four years, but fewer faster threads will definitely be better for the next three. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Intel does not give a squat what AMD is doing with new products and they don't know before hand, they plan 3-4 years a head for what there going to do this year and next is Ice lake already set in stone.


If you don't think that Intel moved things up, around, and over to better position themselves relative to Ryzen/TR/Epyc, you're not paying attention. No, Intel is not in mortal danger, and no, they didn't design a bunch of products right after Ryzen released. What they did do was change timelines, shift products from one range to another, and accelerate platform releases to a degree we haven't seen from them in a decade.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> If you don't think that Intel moved things up, around, and over to better position themselves relative to Ryzen/TR/Epyc, you're not paying attention. No, Intel is not in mortal danger, and no, they didn't design a bunch of products right after Ryzen released. What they did do was change timelines, shift products from one range to another, and accelerate platform releases to a degree we haven't seen from them in a decade.


100% agreed. We probably would not be seeing anything beyond the 7900X in the HEDT segment had there been no TR. Certainly no 18-core behemoth.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Intel does not give a squat what AMD is doing with new products and they don't know before hand, they plan 3-4 years a head for what there going to do this year and next is Ice lake already set in stone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you don't think that Intel moved things up, around, and over to better position themselves relative to Ryzen/TR/Epyc, you're not paying attention. No, Intel is not in mortal danger, and no, they didn't design a bunch of products right after Ryzen released. What they did do was change timelines, shift products from one range to another, and accelerate platform releases to a degree we haven't seen from them in a decade.
Click to expand...

No Intel did not move things up coffee lake is right on time it will be a year after kaby lake.









Intel does not go with look what AMD is doing we better come up with something fast and make it produce it LOL.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> No Intel did not move things up coffee lake is right on time it will be a year after kaby lake.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intel does not go with look what AMD is doing we better come up with something fast and make it produce it LOL.


I just said that they didn't 'come up with something fast and make it produce it [sic]'. One year of Kaby desktop would've seen Coffee Lake released in January of '18 (desktop Kaby debuted January 2017). For reference, the 6700k was launched in August 2015. No matter how you slice it, this is early. The top of Intel's current HEDT range is clearly hastily shifted Xeon SKU's moved down a notch to high-end consumer. Quad-cores on HEDT? Both of these moves were specified by board makers as surprises. It's not going to make your Intel chip any slower to acknowledge that Intel can recognise the need to adjust.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

And why wouldn't Intel adjust, really? I mean they fully understand that AMDs total range of Ryzen skus immediately made their offerings and price points seem unimpressive. The SB paradigm they've been coasting on since 2011 is finally having to change, and we are now getting more exciting offerings from Intel as a result of AMDs surprising competitiveness. It's win/win for everybody!


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> And why wouldn't Intel adjust, really? I mean they fully understand that AMDs total range of Ryzen skus immediately made their offerings and price points seem unimpressive. The SB paradigm they've been coasting on since 2011 is finally having to change, and we are now getting more exciting offerings from Intel as a result of AMDs surprising competitiveness. It's win/win for everybody!


Exactly. It's a win-win for all involved, even Intel.


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Asmodian*
> 
> Future proofing computers is best done by spending a lot of money on them, not predicting the future 3-5 years out and buying hardware for that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I spend least amount needed then upgrade with new DX12 technology for gaming. I spent $99.00 Gigabyte Z170 HD3 motherboard and $219.00 on i5 7600k. I will do the same with coffee lake.
Click to expand...

Yes, that usually offers better price/performance than the "spend lots of money very rarely" option, over the long term, but it isn't future proofing exactly.

It is smart to spend as little as possible to get reasonably high end hardware for your current software and upgrade often. This allows more rapid upgrade cycles (assuming you don't upgrade every cycle already







) and the hardware specs can rapidly adapt to any changes in software. Constant near top of the line performance without spending that much.









Of course, in the context of this discussion, an even better price/performance option would be to get a system that, while maybe not the fastest available today, ages much better. I simply doubt that a Coffee Lake i5 with 6 cores and 6 threads, and which is noticeably faster in games today, would be enough slower in four years that it would have been better to get any similarly priced 8+ thread CPU which would have been noticeably slower during those four years.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> No Intel did not move things up coffee lake is right on time it will be a year after kaby lake.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intel does not go with look what AMD is doing we better come up with something fast and make it produce it LOL.
> 
> 
> 
> I _just_ said that they didn't 'come up with something fast and make it produce it [sic]'. One year of Kaby desktop would've seen Coffee Lake released in January of '18 (desktop Kaby debuted January 2017). For reference, the 6700k was launched in August 2015. No matter how you slice it, this is early. The top of Intel's current HEDT range is _clearly_ hastily shifted Xeon SKU's moved down a notch to high-end consumer. Quad-cores on HEDT? Both of these moves were specified by board makers as surprises. It's not going to make your Intel chip any slower to acknowledge that Intel _can_ recognise the need to adjust.
Click to expand...

What do you think the engineers and staff are doing over the years waiting to see what AMD is doing then design and produce a Intel chip. Companies don't work that way, they work hard all the time with product deadlines. Just because AMD released Ryzen and late on that, Intel can't rush a product into production from design, testing, production, there busy all the time, they just can't say AMD released ryzen so lets move up are scheduled time to get busy.









Folks seem to think companies work like football players lets see what you got, nothing could be further from the truth, they just try to out do them selves with a upgraded design.

If you look at it like this Ryzen has been out since February 2017 and if coffee lake is released october that is 8 months, what is it that you think Intel is doing in that regard?

The Z390 chip set will be out 2H of 2018. what are they doing there?
This is Intel's road map from 2016.


----------



## SuperZan

You keep reiterating something that I'm not saying. I've gone out of my way to explicitly repeat that I am NOT SAYING that Intel is designing new products in a few months after seeing what AMD releases. They ARE moving SKU's from one range to another range (HEDT), accelerating the release of products which were largely finished (Coffee Lake desktop), and making simple adaptations to better position themselves in a new market environment. I'm going to assume that you'll put the wrong words in my mouth again so this is the last time I'll repeat myself.


----------



## MattBaneLM

well a 7700k of mine just died after only one month.... delidded so no warranty.... we fix em, they remove warranty instead of us sending them the bill for the fix.. grrrr.

don't want amd, don't luv intel atm....

might go back to just using 2nd hand stuff i can purchase.... no day to day loss anyway... all can lick me


----------



## BoredErica

If you think Intel just randomly decided to give us a major core count bump on mainstream (first in maybe a decade) and to reverse their original strategy of boning us with crap like the decacore last time several months after Ryzen launched I dunno what to tell you.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> You keep reiterating something that I'm not saying. I've gone out of my way to explicitly repeat that I am NOT SAYING that Intel is designing new products in a few months after seeing what AMD releases. They ARE moving SKU's from one range to another range (HEDT), accelerating the release of products which were largely finished (Coffee Lake desktop), and making simple adaptations to better position themselves in a new market environment. I'm going to assume that you'll put the wrong words in my mouth again so this is the last time I'll repeat myself.


This is Intel's road map from ~2016. The time line is close to what has happened, they were set in 2016 on what they are going to do with Coffee lake now. Coffee lake release date has nothing to do with completion like I was saying.


----------



## BoredErica

But Coffee Lake being known ahead of time doesn't mean Intel didn't pivot and add more cores to Coffee Lake than they originally intended. All that slide does is give a name and a date, nothing more.


----------



## SuperZan

It's also worth noting that Coffee Lake is itself a relatively recent addition to the roadmap. Leaked slides in 2016 indicated that Cannon Lake would be the next stack. We only started hearing about Coffee Lake once we learned about the issues Intel has had with 10nm. http://linleygroup.com/newsletters/newsletter_detail.php?num=5671&year=2017&tag=3


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> But Coffee Lake being known ahead of time doesn't mean Intel didn't pivot and add more cores to Coffee Lake than they originally intended. All that slide does is give a name and a date, nothing more.


8 months is not enough time for a design change and production. Companies take years for product changes and testing then production.


----------



## BoredErica

There was serious talk about Zen having 40% IPC improvement in May 2015. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/05/amd-admits-it-cant-be-the-cheaper-solution-will-refocus-on-performance/. Even as early as May 2014 (that's right, 2014) Jim Keller was out in public talking about working on Zen: 



. If you're Intel, you better know what your competition is doing before random people get an inkling on Youtube. So they had over 3.5 years.

It wouldn't surprise me if Intel prepared years ago to some extent for this day to come and had some plan in place to more quickly roll in better chips if need be.


----------



## caenlen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> For sure lol. 8600K is good if to want to upgrade it in 1-2 year.
> 
> 2500K still fine for 95% of games out there ans is 6 years old CPU now.


yep after I am done with University I am selling my gtx 1070 laptop, buying a used rx 480 on ebay, and hooking up my old (currently in storage cause of college) 2500k, putting her back at 4.8ghz with my noctua nh-d14 with fresh paste and dusting...

and will play a lot of older games on my backlog until 7nm 2019 Vega 2 comes out. im in no rush.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> There was serious talk about Zen having 40% IPC improvement in May 2015.


And they actually hit 52%, maybe that's why they caught Intel with their pants down. It'll be interesting to see Intel 10nm vs GloFo 7nm next year (if both hit their targets), that's where we'll finally see Intel improve on Skylake IPC most likely, and AMD will have a more refined Zen and up the clocks (due to 7nm GloFo being optimized for 5 GHz operation for data centers, servers etc.). Next few years will be very nice for consumers, finally some movement after a long period of stagnation


----------



## jpm888

The 7700k is already a warm chip

If they just increase the cores, an 8700k may need decent cooling just to maintain stock clocks


----------



## Defoler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> But Coffee Lake being known ahead of time doesn't mean Intel didn't pivot and add more cores to Coffee Lake than they originally intended. All that slide does is give a name and a date, nothing more.


Personally I think intel had coffee lake planned for the better part of the last 2 years at least, since zen talks and expectations where surfacing and they just wanted to wait and see how ryzen is going to impact.
Skylake, kaby lake, they both felt just like a small incremental than actual upgrades. Which could show that intel were just playing the patience game before they take coffee lake into production.
They could get another option to just upscale kaby lake again by adding a bit faster clocks and better manufacturing process, aka, minimal work.

Now with ryzen on the table, they could pick what is a better option, which ended up being the expected coffee lake, so they wrapped up the design in the last few months and started sending it to production, which shouldn't take that long considering.
If ryzen was a flop, they could basically release a kaby lake v2 and get away with it and waltz to the bank smiling.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jpm888*
> 
> The 7700k is already a warm chip
> 
> If they just increase the cores, an 8700k may need decent cooling just to maintain stock clocks


7700k was never a warm chip. it's just the pigeon poop that they used. it sucks you have to delid to get decent temps.

just did a cinebench run at 5GHz. temps never went above 60 degrees at full load lol. this is my summer overclock btw. will dial it back up to 5.1ghz when it gets cooler

if Intel isn't using indium solder on their HEDT then there's no way they're gonna use it on Coffee lake. come on intel stop with the pigeon poop lol


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jpm888*
> 
> The 7700k is already a warm chip
> 
> If they just increase the cores, an 8700k may need decent cooling just to maintain stock clocks


TDP increase is only 4 watts though.


----------



## Glottis

Not sure of this was posted, first 8700K benchmark:

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/3928583


----------



## Clukos

https://videocardz.com/72471/first-intel-core-i7-8700k-benchmarks-leaked

Cinebench at stock (4.7 GHz single core boost 4.something all core boost):










Anyone with a 7700k at 4.7 GHz for comparison?


----------



## e-gate

I'm really really concerned about the thermals. 7700k was a furnace with just 4 cores. Adding another 2 will cause problems unless they use better TIM or something.


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> Not sure of this was posted, first 8700K benchmark:
> 
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/3928583
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Slower single thread IPC than Kaby Lake !?








Edit: If 4.7 GHz turbo is working.


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *e-gate*
> 
> I'm really really concerned about the thermals. 7700k was a furnace with just 4 cores. Adding another 2 will cause problems unless they use better TIM or something.


At the same power dissipation CNL should run much cooler, due to the larger die size.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *e-gate*
> 
> I'm really really concerned about the thermals. 7700k was a furnace with just 4 cores. Adding another 2 will cause problems unless they use better TIM or something.


You also have to remember that the 7700K has the core voltage control outside the chip and motherboard manufacturers go nuts with it. Many people will have a vcore around 1.35 to 1.4v running a stress test in stock or even gaming. I've seen people gaming with 1.4v of core voltage in stock settings in entry level boards.

In general, if you set the core voltage manually, it will have decent temperatures in stock just like any other Intel chip. And 4.4Ghz on all cores is already a true overclock, not a 'turbo'. The problem is when people buy entry level motherboards with no option to set core voltage just to take advantage of the i7-7700K turbo clock. They get stuck with whatever the motherboard sets as core voltage. In some cases you are literally screwed.

In other words, I think there is nothing different in the i7-7700K in terms of temperatures or dissipation. It is the context it came wrapped in.


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> Not sure of this was posted, first 8700K benchmark:
> 
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/3928583


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> https://videocardz.com/72471/first-intel-core-i7-8700k-benchmarks-leaked
> 
> Cinebench at stock (4.7 GHz single core boost 4.something all core boost):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone with a 7700k at 4.7 GHz for comparison?


5820k @ 4.7Ghz
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/3960823


----------



## Scotty99

Just means that leaked bench isnt correct.


----------



## czin125

Stock 8700K with stock NB Clock ( 4400mhz ) with 2400mhz CL15 or CL16 2T single thread performance = 5773
5820K at 4700mhz Core + 4500mhz NB Clock + 3200mhz 14-14-14-32-350 1T single thread performance = 5740

100mhz slower NB Clock
800mhz slower ram frequency
Probably CL15 or 16 timings vs CL14 timings
2T command rate vs 1T command rate + tweaked trfc


----------



## Scotty99

Ah well geekbench must like memory then, most programs dont really see much difference. I think i saw 1-2 points difference from 2133 to 2933 cas 14 on cinebench single thread. 158vs157 iirc.


----------



## Scotty99

Never ran geekbench before, here is a ryzen for comparison:
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/3961145

Thats with 3200 cas 16 ram running at 2933 cas 14, cpu is at 3.9.


----------



## azanimefan

looks like a small drop (1%-3%) in IPC from kaby.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> SB still clock better than Skylake overall. It is Coffee-lake that is the true successor to SB with all 3 factors (IPC, Cores and Clock speed) improvement. Unfortunately it might still lose out in temps.
> 
> So it take Intel 6 years to release a new sandy bridge against the old sandy bridge. With a extra effort and risk on the consumer part to delid for it to be a complete successor. lol.


Coffee lake is Skylake-S,there is no IPC improvement and SB didnt increase core count

Skykale Improved IPC, allowed higher OC ability and it is an architecture to last many years.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *azanimefan*
> 
> looks like a small drop (1%-3%) in IPC from kaby.


There is none.


----------



## Scotty99

Im really not worried about temps tbh, then again im not a guy that pushes things to absolute limit. Dont 4.8ghz 7700k's stay relatively cool without a delid?


----------



## MaKeN

Some of 7700k stay some sort of cool, but most are hot even stock...


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Some of 7700k stay some sort of cool, but most are hot even stock...


all keep using TIM and the space/gap between Die and IHS reduces greatly the contact and proper heat transfer. every mainstrema CPU since IB


----------



## Scotty99

I think a 8700k with a moderate 4.8ghz oc should stay below 80c with a good air cooler or 240 aio, im gonna be running a 360 tho.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I think a 8700k with a moderate 4.8ghz oc should stay below 80c with a good air cooler or 240 aio, im gonna be running a 360 tho.


I Doubt nothing less than a high end heatsink with phase change TIM will get below 80c on an overclcoked CPU without delidding

a 7700k goes above that with 33% less cores


----------



## Scotty99

Im talking moderate overclocks, not pushed to absolute limit. But maybe im underestimating how hot 7700k's get. My ryzen with nearly 1.4v stays under 70c at all times with an air cooler.


----------



## MaKeN

See the thing is, for exemple lets say some 7700k would need 1.32v for 4.8 ( for exemple) and stay at 80c
And the same chip after deliding would drop about 15c from removing the gap, and becouse of the temp drop you would also be able to drop the voltage a notch, that again would bonus you with 1-2c .....
Knowing this, personally for me, that gets in the situation that i want to delid the chip


----------



## czin125

Techspot has a 7800X ( this puts out more heat than 1.5x a 7700K ) and it could reach 4.7ghz on 360mm cooling without delidding w/ liquid metal or using Kryonaut on the IHS.

It shouldn't be too hard to cool. 50% more cores = 50% more amps but lower V^2 for Coffeelake should still end up being 1.30x more power draw spread over 50% more die space, so it's more or less the same temperature if the cooler can handle it.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Defoler*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> But Coffee Lake being known ahead of time doesn't mean Intel didn't pivot and add more cores to Coffee Lake than they originally intended. All that slide does is give a name and a date, nothing more.
> 
> 
> 
> Personally I think intel had coffee lake planned for the better part of the last 2 years at least, since zen talks and expectations where surfacing and they just wanted to wait and see how ryzen is going to impact.
> Skylake, kaby lake, they both felt just like a small incremental than actual upgrades. Which could show that intel were just playing the patience game before they take coffee lake into production.
> They could get another option to just upscale kaby lake again by adding a bit faster clocks and better manufacturing process, aka, minimal work.
> 
> Now with ryzen on the table, they could pick what is a better option, which ended up being the expected coffee lake, so they wrapped up the design in the last few months and started sending it to production, which shouldn't take that long considering.
> If ryzen was a flop, they could basically release a kaby lake v2 and get away with it and waltz to the bank smiling.
Click to expand...

Intel had to do a 6 core upgrade with coffee lake what else could they do after kaby lake at 4.5GHz?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *jpm888*
> 
> The 7700k is already a warm chip
> 
> If they just increase the cores, an 8700k may need decent cooling just to maintain stock clocks
> 
> 
> 
> TDP increase is only 4 watts though.
Click to expand...

They also cut down the 6 core clock speed to 4.3Ghz.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> Techspot has a 7800X ( this puts out more heat than 1.5x a 7700K ) and it could reach 4.7ghz on 360mm cooling without delidding w/ liquid metal or using Kryonaut on the IHS.
> 
> It shouldn't be too hard to cool. 50% more cores = 50% more amps but lower V^2 for Coffeelake should still end up being 1.30x more power draw spread over 50% more die space, so it's more or less the same temperature if the cooler can handle it.


I can do 4800, and even 4900 for gaming no issues without delid on my 7800X.

4800 at 1.260V is 2 hours Realbench (AVX no offset) 2.54 stable. I can do 4900, but then it is getting too hot to even stresstest properly. I can game for hours tho. Running a 1080TI in the loop with a XT240 + MO-RA3. Fans at 500-700 RPM only. Silent yet hefty hardware! :-D


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> Not sure of this was posted, first 8700K benchmark:
> 
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/3928583
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slower single thread IPC than Kaby Lake !?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: If 4.7 GHz turbo is working.
Click to expand...

Why do you think coffee lake has a slower IPC?


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> Stock 8700K with stock NB Clock ( 4400mhz ) with 2400mhz CL15 or CL16 2T single thread performance = 5773
> 5820K at 4700mhz Core + 4500mhz NB Clock + 3200mhz 14-14-14-32-350 1T single thread performance = 5740
> 
> 100mhz slower NB Clock
> 800mhz slower ram frequency
> Probably CL15 or 16 timings vs CL14 timings
> 2T command rate vs 1T command rate + tweaked trfc


4.7Ghz / 4.4Ghz / 2133Mhz CL15


----------



## Raghar

I recalculated that Benchmark, and if that CPU wasn't overclocked it ran at 4.5 GHz. Now the only thing that remains is to answer if Turbo 2.0 was enabled, or Turbo 3.0 was enabled, and if this CPU can have turbo 3.0.

For overclockers stuff like Turbo 3.0 is pointless. When they would want to use only single core at high speed, they can set it manually. And for games. Running one core much higher than other cores causes problems with synchronization. It's about allowing all to max, or nothing.

It would be nice when trade committee would consider this as a method to cheat in HW reviews and consider it as an expensive method to cheat final user.


----------



## TriWheel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Killer007*
> 
> I'm not that experienced here, has it ever happenned in the past that mobo manufacturers would block compatibility of newer CPUs only to certain models of one chipset?
> 
> After all, Z170 is the highest chipset of 100 series so... if they really split it to compatible and non-compatible ones...


I do believe some 890FX had bios updates for bulldozer, while some did not, but in that case i think it was a vrm thing.


----------



## Scotty99

This is odd:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/antonyleather/2017/09/11/leaked-prices-reveal-stunning-intel-8th-generation-coffee-lake-cpus-six-cores-from-300/#74720b333586

The locked i5 is nearly 100 dollars less than the k version, god i really hate intel but they are like cable companies, no other choices for some people.


----------



## unityole

guys u know, with more and more leaks, it seems the 11% ST performance increase over 7700k is undoubtedly fake, which is to be expected if 8700k is built on same architecture as old skylake 6700k. infact some how these leaks show ST actually loses performance with 8700k vs 7700k.. What the heck ntel? rather disappointing.

8700k wont have mesh or cache rework should be the same as 7700k.


----------



## Scotty99

Eh no one is really expecting IPC to be higher than 7700k anyways, the news is the extra 2 cores.


----------



## IMI4tth3w

the higher prices for this lineup isn't much of a shock IMO. Fingers crossed i'll be able to find a good black friday deal on an 8700k.


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *unityole*
> 
> 8700k wont have mesh or cache rework should be the same as 7700k so this is bs.


It's unlikely it would have the same direct communication as quad core, die is 2D.

At best it would have ringbus, at worst it would be a mesh or 2 core glued to 4 cores.


----------



## Contiusa

This release is being a total mess. There is too much misinformation, fake leaked dates, uncertain clocks and lineups and too much expectation. They might be freaking out.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> https://videocardz.com/72471/first-intel-core-i7-8700k-benchmarks-leaked
> 
> Cinebench at stock (4.7 GHz single core boost 4.something all core boost):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone with a 7700k at 4.7 GHz for comparison?


Since nobody has said it yet and people are afraid of IPC dropping by adding two more cores, the multithreaded benchmark is locked at its 3.7GHz baseclock and is spot-on for a 6-core Kaby Lake at 3.7GHz (which I calculated to be 1233). In other words, there's no IPC loss.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> 8 months is not enough time for a design change and production. Companies take years for product changes and testing then production.


It does not take years to decide to tack on two extra cores to an already designed quad.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Defoler*
> 
> Personally I think intel had coffee lake planned for the better part of the last 2 years at least, since zen talks and expectations where surfacing and they just wanted to wait and see how ryzen is going to impact.
> Skylake, kaby lake, they both felt just like a small incremental than actual upgrades. Which could show that intel were just playing the patience game before they take coffee lake into production.
> They could get another option to just upscale kaby lake again by adding a bit faster clocks and better manufacturing process, aka, minimal work.
> 
> Now with ryzen on the table, they could pick what is a better option, which ended up being the expected coffee lake, so they wrapped up the design in the last few months and started sending it to production, which shouldn't take that long considering.
> If ryzen was a flop, they could basically release a kaby lake v2 and get away with it and waltz to the bank smiling.


This was my point all along though. We can thank Ryzen almost directly for Intel offering better options in their consumer products this year.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> It does not take years to decide to tack on two extra cores to an already designed quad.


6 cores for Coffee Lake has been rumored since last year. 8 cores was rumored for Cannonlake before it became clear that first gen 10nm would be low power only


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Regardless of "rumors", I think it's safe to say that if there had been no Ryzen (or if it had been as bad as some around here had predicted) we would not have gotten a 6-core mainstream i7 or an 18-core HEDT. Make of that what you will.


----------



## Scotty99

Nah i think it would have been that either way. We are at a clockspeed limit right now they had to add more cores to get people to upgrade from all the same i7's they have released the past 6 years. Skylake x was a reaction to ryzen, coffee was gonna be this no matter what.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> quad core 100% load is strong with this one.


Did you see techspot's post with i5-2500K @ 4.4GHz vs Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 3 @ 4 GHz?

https://www.techspot.com/review/1474-ryzen-vs-older-budget-cpus/page2.html

The GPU and game chosen for benchmarking has a significant impact ; the i5-4460 only has 3.4GHz max turbo


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> This was my point all along though. We can thank Ryzen almost directly for Intel offering better options in their consumer products this year.


You thank Ryzen by buying Ryzen. This is voting with your wallet. After all the year of Intel just milking people its better to lose some with Ryzen so Intel takes a hit. If people still buy Intel but acknowledge AMD it does nothing for AMD. $ speak now words.


----------



## Lexi is Dumb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Did you see techspot's post with i5-2500K @ 4.4GHz vs Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 3 @ 4 GHz?
> 
> https://www.techspot.com/review/1474-ryzen-vs-older-budget-cpus/page2.html
> 
> The GPU and game chosen for benchmarking has a significant impact ; the i5-4460 only has 3.4GHz max turbo


It just won't die.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> 8 months is not enough time for a design change and production. Companies take years for product changes and testing then production.
> 
> 
> 
> It does not take years to decide to tack on two extra cores to an already designed quad.
Click to expand...

I take it your a Intel engineer and you know how to build processor like the much improved sky lake X mesh?


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Regardless of "rumors", I think it's safe to say that if there had been no Ryzen (or if it had been as bad as some around here had predicted) we would not have gotten a 6-core mainstream i7 or an 18-core HEDT. Make of that what you will.


I don't agree about this 6-core, it was coming no matter what AMD did. Intel cannot simply tack on two extra cores to an already designed quad core given their architecture, that kind of modularity is part of the genius of Ryzen.

The 18-core HEDT is another story, I completely agree that the i9-7940X, i9-7960X, and i9-7980XE would not exist without Threadripper.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asmodian*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Regardless of "rumors", I think it's safe to say that if there had been no Ryzen (or if it had been as bad as some around here had predicted) we would not have gotten a 6-core mainstream i7 or an 18-core HEDT. Make of that what you will.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't agree about this 6-core, it was coming no matter what AMD did. Intel cannot simply tack on two extra cores to an already designed quad core given their architecture, that kind of modularity is part of the genius of Ryzen.
> 
> The 18-core HEDT is another story, I completely agree that the i9-7940X, i9-7960X, and i9-7980XE would not exist without Threadripper.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with HEDT not all being sorted out price and skus before Threadripper. Sky lake X product release information was Jun 12. Threadripper product release information July 27.

Here is the Intel HEDT compete product line and pricing.


----------



## SuperZan

We had leaks about Threadripper long before the official information launch. Earliest Skylake-X rumours were for 6, 8, and 10-core SKU's. We didn't start seeing the additional SKU's tacked onto the roadmap until after we knew that Threadripper would be offering up to 16c/32t. I mean, seriously. Look at the graphic you've just posted. Does that look like everything was neatly sorted without any sort of effect from Threadripper? It's okay for Intel to adjust. They're not omnipotent or omniscient. They're just a processor vendor.


----------



## PostalTwinkie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I don't agree with HEDT not all being sorted out price and skus before Threadripper. Sky lake X product release information was Jun 12. Threadripper product release information July 27.
> 
> Here is the Intel HEDT compete product line and pricing.


We know the "full" SL-X as we see it now wasn't planned until Threadripper, since board partners publicly commented on not getting notice of the above 12 core option.

Thus the performance issues and a lot of unknown out of the gate.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> We had leaks about Threadripper long before the official information launch. Earliest Skylake-X rumours were for 6, 8, and 10-core SKU's. We didn't start seeing the additional SKU's tacked onto the roadmap until after we knew that Threadripper would be offering up to 16c/32t. I mean, seriously. Look at the graphic you've just posted. Does that look like everything was neatly sorted without any sort of effect from Threadripper? It's okay for Intel to adjust. They're not omnipotent or omniscient. They're just a processor vendor.


Well if you believe that then why did AMD not make a 18 core?


----------



## Lexi is Dumb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Well if you believe that then why did AMD not make a 18 core?


What? Because of the MCM and core complex design and the IMC of Zen, they can't. They're technically limited to 1 die, 2 dies or 4 dies at 8 cores each, you do the math on that, even disabling cores wouldn't make 18 fit.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lexi is Dumb*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Well if you believe that then why did AMD not make a 18 core?
> 
> 
> 
> What? Because of the MCM and core complex design and the IMC of Zen, they can't. They're technically limited to 1 die, 2 dies or 4 dies at 8 cores each, you do the math on that, even disabling cores wouldn't make 18 fit.
Click to expand...

Well guess AMD should of made a 24 core to beat Intel.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PostalTwinkie*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I don't agree with HEDT not all being sorted out price and skus before Threadripper. Sky lake X product release information was Jun 12. Threadripper product release information July 27.
> 
> Here is the Intel HEDT compete product line and pricing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We know the "full" SL-X as we see it now wasn't planned until Threadripper, since board partners publicly commented on not getting notice of the above 12 core option.
> 
> Thus the performance issues and a lot of unknown out of the gate.
Click to expand...

So what are folks going to do so they can use i9 7980XE?


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> You thank Ryzen by buying Ryzen. This is voting with your wallet. After all the year of Intel just milking people its better to lose some with Ryzen so Intel takes a hit. If people still buy Intel but acknowledge AMD it does nothing for AMD. $ speak now words.


I'm not buying Ryzen - and accept worse performance in most games and programes I use - just to reward AMD. I have no reason to punish Intel for doing what any other company would have done.

If AMD had delivered products worth buying, Intel would not be dominating now.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> I'm not buying Ryzen - and accept worse performance in most games and programes I use - just to reward AMD. I have no reason to punish Intel for doing what any other company would have done.
> 
> If AMD had delivered products worth buying, Intel would not be dominating now.


Sure. You do not have to get AMD. This is only for people that are talking good about AMD. If you have nothing to say that is fine. I got sick of Intel after wasting money from side-grade to side-grade. I am not buying Intel or AMD if I do not have too. When I purchase my next CPU it would be enough time since my last Intel CPU that it does not really help them in any way.


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Sure. You do not have to get AMD. This is only for people that are talking good about AMD. If you have nothing to say that is fine. I got sick of Intel after wasting money from side-grade to side-grade. I am not buying Intel or AMD if I do not have too. When I purchase my next CPU it would be enough time since my last Intel CPU that it does not really help them in any way.


Understand your point of view, but I don't feel 'milked' like you said. I bought a Sandy Bridge in 2011 that has lasted me 6 years. I think that's a pretty good value, and I want the highest gaming performance that will last me another 5-6 and that seems to be Coffee Lake, not Ryzen.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Understand your point of view, but I don't feel 'milked' like you said. I bought a Sandy Bridge in 2011 that has lasted me 6 years. I think that's a pretty good value, and I want the highest gaming performance that will last me another 5-6 and that seems to be Coffee Lake, not Ryzen.


Yeah but a lot of people did upgrade. I wanted to upgrade to something better but it was either pay more money for more cores and different platform or get 5% increase each gen. Coffee Lake just came out because of Ryzen. Would you say 7700K last longer than 1700? I too would get CL over Ryzen but I have reason to wait.


----------



## mouacyk

8-core RyZen would have been the best value build for my hobby Linux server and I had funds saved up for it even prior to release. Unfortunately, the segfault/MCE/VM fiascos have deterred me and I'm now looking for tried and true stability with higher clocks to compensate for the decrease in cores. Going into a purchase knowing you have to spend hours doing beta testing and days on RMA shipping and waiting is not acceptable.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Understand your point of view, but I don't feel 'milked' like you said. I bought a Sandy Bridge in 2011 that has lasted me 6 years. I think that's a pretty good value, and I want the highest gaming performance that will last me another 5-6 and that seems to be Coffee Lake, not Ryzen.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah but a lot of people did upgrade. I wanted to upgrade to something better but it was either pay more money for more cores and different platform or get 5% increase each gen. Coffee Lake just came out because of Ryzen. Would you say 7700K last longer than 1700? I too would get CL over Ryzen but I have reason to wait.
Click to expand...

Coffee lake is just Intel's normal upgrade cycle after kaby lake, just like Cannonlake's is next then Ice lake. There already set what there going to do before AMD knows what is going on with Intel and vice versa. Intel has always sold new main stream desktop products every year however they have a lot of delays like everyone else.


----------



## Asterox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> I'm not buying Ryzen - and accept worse performance in most games and programes I use - just to reward AMD. I have no reason to punish Intel for doing what any other company would have done.
> 
> *If AMD had delivered products worth buying, Intel would not be dominating now*.


This is not a "Speed Comedy Club" for beginers, if it was you will fail absurdly.


----------



## azanimefan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> If AMD had delivered products worth buying, Intel would not be dominating now.


so an 8c/16t broadwell sold at $300 isn't worth it, but a 4c/8t skylake sold at $370 is totally worth it? How about a 6c/12t broadwell sold at $200 vs a 4c/4t skylake at $270?

See Ryzen happens to perform rather similar to broadwell, even clocks about the same (or close enough). Funny how your argument looks sort of silly in comparison once we change the name from Ryzen R5 or Ryzen R7 to Core i5 or Core i7.


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *azanimefan*
> 
> so an 8c/16t broadwell sold at $300 isn't worth it, but a 4c/8t skylake sold at $370 is totally worth it? How about a 6c/12t broadwell sold at $200 vs a 4c/4t skylake at $270?
> 
> See Ryzen happens to perform rather similar to broadwell, even clocks about the same (or close enough). Funny how your argument looks sort of silly in comparison once we change the name from Ryzen R5 or Ryzen R7 to Core i5 or Core i7.


I think he was referring to the AMD products from Phenom up to Ryzen as being not worth buying, I think most would agree.


----------



## Scotty99

^That exactly, broadwell was the target, not kaby.

It really is quite sad how people compare ryzen to kaby, because its priced similarly.

Pre ryzen launch was anyone complaining about broadwell gaming performance lol? AMD gave us a 1000 dollar CPU (6900x) for sub 300 bucks.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *azanimefan*
> 
> so an 8c/16t broadwell sold at $300 isn't worth it, but a 4c/8t skylake sold at $370 is totally worth it? How about a 6c/12t broadwell sold at $200 vs a 4c/4t skylake at $270?
> 
> See Ryzen happens to perform rather similar to broadwell, even clocks about the same (or close enough). Funny how your argument looks sort of silly in comparison once we change the name from Ryzen R5 or Ryzen R7 to Core i5 or Core i7.


They want Intel clock speeds, Ryzen Cores and Price. There is finally competition and people still buy Intel.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> 7700k and 6950x should both see gains in CPU limited scenes, how much depends on the setup you have and how much you can push the memory
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ryzen just sees an additional boost because the IF is connected to memory speed so the faster you run your memory the faster IF runs and reduced inte-core latency, which helps in games most of all.


Yesterday I found the time to deep dive into this. In the extreme cpu limited scenario in the game ESO that I described earlier I couldn't see any difference when lowering the memory speed from 3200Mhz down to 2800Mhz but when I went down to 2000 I saw the nb ring speed being automatically adjusted as well and upon next test the fps went down along with it. Ofcourse this Intel ring architecture is not at all comparable to the AMD Ryzen you got but it got me thinking that the nb speed might actually be the sole direct factor for the bottleneck in my situation.

As a test I put all settings back to exactly what they were before with the memory speed back at 3200Mhz and cpu ratio back at 42 but manually started increasing only the nb ratio of the cpu manually from 31 to 36, per 2. I couldn't believe my eyes when upon every test (logging into the game and comparing to my initial 50fps scenario under exact same conditions) I saw the huge minimum fps drops increase all the way up to 66 !! At 3800Mhz nb my pc wouldn't boot anymore so I happily settled for 36 ratio and a 30% increase in fps and gamed the rest of the evening stable on these settings









Thanks Clukos for sharing your results which got me into investigating this in the first place !


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> They want Intel clock speeds, Ryzen Cores and Price. There is finally competition and people still buy Intel.


There are plenty of people buying AMD right now. It will probably swing back to Intel when coffee lake launches but it's possible that it will be disregarded by consumers like SkylakeX.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> They want Intel clock speeds, Ryzen Cores and Price. There is finally competition and people still buy Intel.
> 
> 
> 
> There are plenty of people buying AMD right now. It will probably swing back to Intel when coffee lake launches but it's possible that it will be disregarded by consumers like SkylakeX.
Click to expand...

What do you mean it will be disregarded by consumers like Skylake X?


----------



## Nightbird

The real news is 50% more cores, no price hike. You can be sure a hike was planned before Ryzen dropped







Don't expect IPC change but if good chips can clock 5.2 Ghz with water and everyday use voltage, then I'll get one for sure.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Yeah but a lot of people did upgrade. I wanted to upgrade to something better but it was either pay more money for more cores and different platform or get 5% increase each gen. Coffee Lake just came out because of Ryzen. Would you say 7700K last longer than 1700? I too would get CL over Ryzen but I have reason to wait.


I dont think Cofffee lake came due to ryzen
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/6-core-intel-processors-going-mainstream-in-2018-with-coffee-lake.html
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> They want Intel clock speeds, Ryzen Cores and Price. There is finally competition and people still buy Intel.


Those still buy Intel either wanted the best singlethread performance due to games and that games mostly dont see an advantage right now with more than 6c/12t but maybe later


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> I think he was referring to the AMD products from Phenom up to Ryzen as being not worth buying, I think most would agree.


Exactly. Ryzen is decent. Not for me tho.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PostalTwinkie*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I don't agree with HEDT not all being sorted out price and skus before Threadripper. Sky lake X product release information was Jun 12. Threadripper product release information July 27.
> 
> Here is the Intel HEDT compete product line and pricing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We know the "full" SL-X as we see it now wasn't planned until Threadripper, since board partners publicly commented on not getting notice of the above 12 core option.
> 
> Thus the performance issues and a lot of unknown out of the gate.
Click to expand...

Intel leaked the 18c/32t on Nov 19, 2016 http://wccftech.com/intel-coffee-lake-2018-cpu-details/


----------



## Nightbird

CL didn't come due to Ryzen, the CPU dev cycle is 3-4 years minimum, so the plan to go 6/18 core came much earlier. That been said, price is based on today, without Ryzen there would have been a price hike on the 6core i7, but thanks to Ryzen there isn't going to be one.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nightbird*
> 
> CL didn't come due to Ryzen, the CPU dev cycle is 3-4 years minimum, so the plan to go 6/18 core came much earlier. That been said, price is based on today, without Ryzen there would have been a price hike on the 6core i7, but thanks to Ryzen there isn't going to be one.


Intel went 6/18 solely because of Ryzen. Stuff like that does not take more than a few weeks. They simply glue more cores on it.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Intel went 6/18 solely because of Ryzen. Stuff like that does not take more than a few weeks. They simply glue more cores on it.


You don't just 'glue' cores on to an existing quad core design and tape out a product in a few weeks.

Coffee Lake-S was planned as a native hex core part from it's inception, years ago, while Zen was still being designed.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> You don't just 'glue' cores on to an existing quad core design and tape out a product in a few weeks.
> 
> Coffee Lake-S was planned as a native hex core part from it's inception, years ago, while Zen was still being designed.


I think theey were talking about Threadripper and Skylake X(eons)

but I am not sure if he was talking about Coffee lake if it he wasnt then,maybe he means they just added 2 cores and respective cache into the CPU,


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nightbird*
> 
> CL didn't come due to Ryzen, the CPU dev cycle is 3-4 years minimum, so the plan to go 6/18 core came much earlier. That been said, price is based on today, without Ryzen there would have been a price hike on the 6core i7, but thanks to Ryzen there isn't going to be one.


Hope there is not going to be a price hike on coffee lake i7 6 core, do you have some inside information on what the price will be in the USA?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> You don't just 'glue' cores on to an existing quad core design and tape out a product in a few weeks.
> 
> Coffee Lake-S was planned as a native hex core part from it's inception, years ago, while Zen was still being designed.
> 
> 
> 
> I think theey were talking about Threadripper and Skylake X(eons)
> 
> but I am not sure if he was talking about Coffee lake if it he wasnt then,maybe he means they just added 2 cores and respective cache into the CPU,
Click to expand...

And a larger Ring bus or Mesh with all that entails, then testing for stock cooling with clock speeds also voltage demands from the motherboards.


----------



## Blameless

Intel was due to move to 6c/12t on the mainstream platform regardless of how well Zen did (and if Zen did poorly Intel could simply have charged a premium for Coffee Lake hex cores, rather than slotting them into the existing mainstream positions), but scaling the HEDT parts to 18 cores by rebranding higher-core count dies that were originally intended to be Xeon only was very likely a direct response to Threadripper.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> You don't just 'glue' cores on to an existing quad core design and tape out a product in a few weeks.
> 
> Coffee Lake-S was planned as a native hex core part from it's inception, years ago, while Zen was still being designed.


Tell me you're kidding...


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Tell me you're kidding...


I think they should have glued even more cores on, maybe the month after...


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> Intel was due to move to 6c/12t on the mainstream platform regardless of how well Zen did (and if Zen did poorly Intel could simply have charged a premium for Coffee Lake hex cores, rather than slotting them into the existing mainstream positions), but scaling the HEDT parts to 18 cores by rebranding higher-core count dies that were originally intended to be Xeon only was very likely a direct response to Threadripper.


Sky lake X 18c/32t was in the planing stage long before Threadripper leak.

Sky lake X 18c/32t leak was back at Nov 19, 2016 http://wccftech.com/intel-coffee-lake-2018-cpu-details/


----------



## ZealotKi11er

What puts me off is even though CF is the best IPC and Clock speed it is still Skylake IPC from 3 years ago. I am waiting for next gen architecture. I want my 5%.


----------



## Nightbird

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> What puts me off is even though CF is the best IPC and Clock speed it is still Skylake IPC from 3 years ago. I am waiting for next gen architecture. I want my 5%.


Just take your 50% more cores and go home







We can cry over a beer together


----------



## Clukos

i5 8600k Geekbench 3: https://browser.geekbench.com/geekbench3/8443595
i5 8600k Firestrike Ultra: https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13597307


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> What puts me off is even though CF is the best IPC and Clock speed it is still Skylake IPC from 3 years ago. I am waiting for next gen architecture. I want my 5%.


Kaby lake got that 5% through clockspeed. Does it really matter where it comes from?


----------



## TheWizardMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> What puts me off is even though CF is the best IPC and Clock speed it is still Skylake IPC from 3 years ago. I am waiting for next gen architecture. I want my 5%.


What puts me off is that it's not compatible with Z270, for no reason.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> What puts me off is even though CF is the best IPC and Clock speed it is still Skylake IPC from 3 years ago. I am waiting for next gen architecture. I want my 5%.


Skylake launched 2 years ago and Kaby Lake hits ~200 MHz more on avg.

I'll take the 2 more cores now. Not going to wait another 9-12 months for Cannon Lake. My Ivy is getting too slow, even at 5 GHz.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> i5 8600k Geekbench 3: https://browser.geekbench.com/geekbench3/8443595
> i5 8600k Firestrike Ultra: https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13597307


Ya that cant be right, my ryzen gets higher single core than that. It should be well over 5k.

Also that multi seems too high for a 6c6t chip.


----------



## Clukos

That's Geekbench 3, not 4.


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Tell me you're kidding...


It has been planned as 10 nm. And release was planned year later.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> That's Geekbench 3, not 4.


Is Geekbench free to use?


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Is Geekbench free to use?


Yup, both 3 and 4.


----------



## Scotty99

Oh didnt know 3 was still a thing, here is a 3.9ghz 1700:
http://browser.geekbench.com/geekbench3/8444370

How is single core so close?


----------



## Scotty99

Can someone with a ivy/haswell run that, just to compare.


----------



## lilchronic

http://browser.geekbench.com/geekbench3/8444388


----------



## Scotty99

Ya so that leaked 8600k is definitely off, it boosts to 4.4 at stock, should be higher.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> i5 8600k Geekbench 3: https://browser.geekbench.com/geekbench3/8443595
> i5 8600k Firestrike Ultra: https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13597307


The coffee lake IPC is lower. I did a bench test apples to apples at 4.3GHz. My single core score 4530 compared to score of 4113. http://browser.geekbench.com/geekbench3/8444394


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> Kaby lake got that 5% through clockspeed. Does it really matter where it comes from?


people could expect an improvement in performance since the same architecture has been used since 2015

has this been linked? http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_run.php?q=c2ffcdeb8aebd6e2daebdce4d1f785b888aecbae93a385f6cbf3&l=en


----------



## Scotty99

IPC isnt lower lol, lake simply isnt accurate.

leak*


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The coffee lake IPC is lower. I did a bench test apples to apples at 4.3GHz. My single core score 4530 compared to score of 4113. http://browser.geekbench.com/geekbench3/8444394


reduce ram clock speed.and uncore(if there is any increase frequency in uncore)


----------



## Scotty99

Coffee lake laptops for purchase at costco:
https://www.costco.com/CatalogSearch?sortBy=PriceMax%7C1&keyword=intel0912&EMID=B2C_2017_0912_1392_Intel_Solo


----------



## Scotty99

Kinda odd, i5's and i7's are same core count on mobile, just looks like i7's boost higher.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The coffee lake IPC is lower. I did a bench test apples to apples at 4.3GHz. My single core score 4530 compared to score of 4113. http://browser.geekbench.com/geekbench3/8444394
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> reduce ram clock speed.and uncore(if there is any increase frequency in uncore)
Click to expand...

This is memory at CL 15 and 2133 speed uncore stock at 3800mhz, 4.3GHz.
http://browser.geekbench.com/geekbench3/8444410


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The coffee lake IPC is lower. I did a bench test apples to apples at 4.3GHz. My single core score 4530 compared to score of 4113. http://browser.geekbench.com/geekbench3/8444394


Some of you are really desperate to prove this that this IPC wall at over 4 cores exists, huh? I'm starting to think that it's just Kaby Lake buyers trying to justify their purchase against Ryzen and Coffee Lake.

Just wait for benchmarks on identical systems instead of throwing around hottakes like this. This is one benchmark, and you're comparing it to your completely different system. Definitively saying that this proves that IPC is down is just confirmation bias at its worst.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Tell me you're kidding...


I'm not.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Sky lake X 18c/32t was in the planing stage long before Threadripper leak.
> 
> Sky lake X 18c/32t leak was back at Nov 19, 2016 http://wccftech.com/intel-coffee-lake-2018-cpu-details/


36t*

Sockets SP3/TR4 were announced before Novement 2016 and rumored even further back. Intel probably decided on a response to TR about a year ago, which is still quite rapid since their roadmaps are usually 3-5 years in advance.

http://www.fudzilla.com/news/processors/41164-amd-2017-opteron-comes-in-three-sockets

If Fudzilla was talking about a desktop socket 16-core Zen part in July 2016, Intel knew about it before that.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Kinda odd, i5's and i7's are same core count on mobile, just looks like i7's boost higher.


It's always been like that for the lower power chips.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> I'm not.


He meant that the glued on comment he made was sarcastic.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> It's always been like that for the lower power chips.


Nah i5's never had 4c8t, i know some of the lower end i5's had same layout as mobile i3's tho.


----------



## Techhog

So, after doing some more calculations, I concede that both the Cinebench and the Geekbench results so an IPC drop of 4%. It's an interesting coincidence, though we need to be wary of assuming that it's anything more than that at this point, especially when dealing with beta BIOS.

Edit: By the way, I want you guys to keep in mind that this is the top Geekbench 3 score: http://browser.geekbench.com/geekbench3/8363999
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Nah i5's never had 4c8t, i know some of the lower end i5's had same layout as mobile i3's tho.


No, what I mean is that, previously, 15W processors in the i3, i5, and i7 lines were all 2c/4t. Kaby Lake-R added two cores.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Tell me you're kidding...
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Sky lake X 18c/32t was in the planing stage long before Threadripper leak.
> 
> Sky lake X 18c/32t leak was back at Nov 19, 2016 http://wccftech.com/intel-coffee-lake-2018-cpu-details/
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 36t*
> 
> Sockets SP3/TR4 were announced before Novement 2016 and rumored even further back. Intel probably decided on a response to TR about a year ago, which is still quite rapid since their roadmaps are usually 3-5 years in advance.
> 
> http://www.fudzilla.com/news/processors/41164-amd-2017-opteron-comes-in-three-sockets
> 
> If Fudzilla was talking about a desktop socket 16-core Zen part in July 2016, Intel knew about it before that.
Click to expand...

Fudzill link is about AMD Opteron, Intel has sever processors also.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Fudzill link is about AMD Opteron, Intel has sever processors also.


That's not remotely the point. If you have to see an announcement that says "Threadripper: overclockable, consumer, 16-core desktop CPU" you are already three steps behind and won't have time to get a counter ready.

I was referencing the comment regarding the 16-core part being pin compatible with the mainstream socket. This actually didn't turn out to be true, but that's precisely the sort of thing that made people think AMD was going to push for a 16-core consumer part. If some of us were thinking this 15 months ago, Intel was certainly acting on more accurate information further back.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Fudzill link is about AMD Opteron, Intel has sever processors also.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's not remotely the point. If you have to see an announcement that says "Threadripper: overclockable, consumer, 16-core desktop CPU" you are already three steps behind and won't have time to get a counter ready.
> 
> I was referencing the comment regarding the 16-core part being pin compatible with the mainstream socket. This actually didn't turn out to be true, but that's precisely the sort of thing that made people think AMD was going to push for a 16-core consumer part. If some of us were thinking this 15 months ago, Intel was certainly acting on more accurate information further back.
Click to expand...

I think AMD made a 16 core desktop now because of Intel rumors about the 18 core they were talking about for the desktop.


----------



## sumitlian

I had believed Coffee Lake would come with at least 5% more IPC and acording to the current benchmarks the performance is disappointing for most real world general purpose applications.

Why would anybody want 2015 level IPC (or may be worse than 2015 as current weird benchmark scores are linking toward).
Imo, Coffeel Lake might turn out to be exactly like Faildozer *if* following condition is met.
If all core OC of i7 8700k doesn't turn out to be higher than i7-7700k @ 5.0 GHz (which is very common according to most Intel users) then i7-7700k's IPS will undoubtedly remain faster than i7-8700k in single, dual, triple and quad threaded applications, this is a common sense.
Only thing you are going to get better with i7-8700k is 5 and 6 thread multithreading performance.

I would be "dumb" and "not so smart" for if I were to be any one of these two types of enthusiasts; lets say A and B type respectively.
Enthusiast A: In 2017, I have Skylake or Kaby Lake i7 CPU and want to upgrade to new Coffee Lake i7 and most of the time I don't use apps that utilize 5 or 6 threads at a time. = Dumb
Enthusiast B: In 2017, I have Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge or Haswell or Boradwell i7 and want to upgreade to Coffee Lake i7 and don't use highly threaded applications = not so smart, why ? Beacuse this time you are buying 2015 level IPC in 2017, you should wait for at least one more year since the next CPU that hopefully is expected to have architecture/ISA upgrade and should come with at least the usual ~5% or 5%+ IPC improvement from Intel, then will your upgrade be considerd best since you will have a CPU with relatively faster IPC than others, exactly like when you had bought SB or Ivy or Haswell at their launch.
All imo.


----------



## lilchronic

Well in geekbench cache speed plays a big role in performance and on my 5820k and 7350k cache clocks are 300Mhz lower than the base clock frequency.
5820K base clock 3.3Ghz but cache stay's at 3.0Ghz
http://ark.intel.com/products/82932/Intel-Core-i7-5820K-Processor-15M-Cache-up-to-3_60-GHz
7350k base clock 4.2Ghz cache clock 3.9Ghz
https://ark.intel.com/products/97527/Intel-Core-i3-7350K-Processor-4M-Cache-4_20-GHz

So if the base clock on the 8700k is 3.7Ghz cache might be running @ 3.4Ghz. That paired with slow memory would be a good reason for the lower performance....


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> Well in geekbench cache speed plays a big role in performance and on my 5820k and 7350k cache clocks are 300Mhz lower than the base clock frequency.
> 5820K base clock 3.3Ghz but cache stay's at 3.0Ghz
> http://ark.intel.com/products/82932/Intel-Core-i7-5820K-Processor-15M-Cache-up-to-3_60-GHz
> 7350k base clock 4.2Ghz cache clock 3.9Ghz
> https://ark.intel.com/products/97527/Intel-Core-i3-7350K-Processor-4M-Cache-4_20-GHz
> 
> So if the base clock on the 8700k is 3.7Ghz cache might be running @ 3.4Ghz. That paired with slow memory would be a good reason for the lower performance....


As I said, too many variables

Can someone with a 7700K or 7740X run Geekbench 4 at 4.7GHz?


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> I'm not.


You didn't get the sarcasm I see.

Wow...


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> As I said, too many variables
> 
> Can someone with a 7700K or 7740X run Geekbench 4 at 4.7GHz?


Why 4.7GHz? In case Coffee lake will not have Turbo 3.0, the CPU in benchmark ran at 4.5 GHz. And that was its peak frequency for single core only. For overclockers, high turbo speeds on auto settings are bit pointless. And normal users are complaining loudly when they discover they would have hard time to cool heavily overvolted CPU when some game/application actually uses all cores to the max. I kinda prefer reasonably set CPUs, over CPUs that run at full speed 3 years until end of warranty, then spark.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> Why 4.7GHz? In case Coffee lake will not have Turbo 3.0, the CPU in benchmark ran at 4.5 GHz. And that was its peak frequency for single core only. For overclockers, high turbo speeds on auto settings are bit pointless. And normal users are complaining loudly when they discover they would have hard time to cool heavily overvolted CPU when some game/application actually uses all cores to the max. I kinda prefer reasonably set CPUs, over CPUs that run at full speed 3 years until end of warranty, then spark.


There's a GB4 benchmark for the 8700K floating around, and that CPU has a max single core turbo of 4.7GHz according to rumors/leaks. We're trying to see if IPC has dropped or not.


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The coffee lake IPC is lower. I did a bench test apples to apples at 4.3GHz. My single core score 4530 compared to score of 4113. http://browser.geekbench.com/geekbench3/8444394


Couldn't help but notice that you've got 16GB of RAM compared to the 8600k tested with 8GB of RAM, and that you're memory scores are nearly 50% higher than the 8600k because of it.

Not so Apples to Apples and you claim. Try removing half your RAM and set the RAM speed and timings to the same as the 8600k. Then it will be Apples to Apples. But when you're running twice as much ram, faster RAM, and at faster timing settings, yeah, you're going to score higher. Has nothing to do with the CPU.


----------



## Scotty99

There is no IPC loss, guy mentioned in this article scored a 196 single core in cinebench, which is a bit higher than 7700k's score at stock:
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/09/intel-i7-8700k-coffee-lake-benchmarks-leak/?&comments=1


----------



## azanimefan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> There is no IPC loss, guy mentioned in this article scored a 196 single core in cinebench, which is a bit higher than 7700k's score at stock:
> https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/09/intel-i7-8700k-coffee-lake-benchmarks-leak/?&comments=1


it's single core boost is higher then the i7-7700k (4.5ghz vs 4.7ghz).


----------



## mouacyk

The only relevant RyZen information to this thread is when RyZen2/+ will be released and at what clock speeds. Who knows that?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *azanimefan*
> 
> it's single core boost is higher then the i7-7700k (4.5ghz vs 4.7ghz).


Right but people in here are trying to insinuate an IPC loss, i just dont see how that would happen.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> I had believed Coffee Lake would come with at least 5% more IPC and acording to the current benchmarks the performance is disappointing for most real world general purpose applications.
> 
> Why would anybody want 2015 level IPC (or may be worse than 2015 as current weird benchmark scores are linking toward).
> Imo, Coffeel Lake might turn out to be exactly like Faildozer *if* following condition is met.
> If all core OC of i7 8700k doesn't turn out to be higher than i7-7700k @ 5.0 GHz (which is very common according to most Intel users) then i7-7700k's IPS will undoubtedly remain faster than i7-8700k in single, dual, triple and quad threaded applications, this is a common sense.
> Only thing you are going to get better with i7-8700k is 5 and 6 thread multithreading performance.
> 
> I would be "dumb" and "not so smart" for if I were to be any one of these two types of enthusiasts; lets say A and B type respectively.
> Enthusiast A: In 2017, I have Skylake or Kaby Lake i7 CPU and want to upgrade to new Coffee Lake i7 and most of the time I don't use apps that utilize 5 or 6 threads at a time. = Dumb
> Enthusiast B: In 2017, I have Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge or Haswell or Boradwell i7 and want to upgreade to Coffee Lake i7 and don't use highly threaded applications = not so smart, why ? Beacuse this time you are buying 2015 level IPC in 2017, you should wait for at least one more year since the next CPU that hopefully is expected to have architecture/ISA upgrade and should come with at least the usual ~5% or 5%+ IPC improvement from Intel, then will your upgrade be considerd best since you will have a CPU with relatively faster IPC than others, exactly like when you had bought SB or Ivy or Haswell at their launch.
> All imo.


I dont know but the node keeps being 14nm until there is a node shrink i dont think they will not increase IPC at al(even slighliest)

Wait so under thay logic everyone who is buying Ryzen isnt so smart because the CPU they are buying have IPC from 2014?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *azanimefan*
> 
> it's single core boost is higher then the i7-7700k (4.5ghz vs 4.7ghz).


Uncore frequency and Memory)frequency-latency) seems to make a whole difference in geekbench


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> The only relevant RyZen information to this thread is when RyZen2/+ will be released and at what clock speeds. Who knows that?


This indicates much higher clock speeds for Zen 2: https://www.globalfoundries.com/sites/default/files/product-briefs/7lp-product-brief.pdf
Quote:


> 5GHz operation for Server, Data Center, ASICs


Plus, more than 60% savings in power consumption versus 14 LPP (the one current Ryzen CPUs are using): https://www.globalfoundries.com/sites/default/files/product-briefs/product-brief-14lpp.pdf
Quote:


> >3GHz operation for Server, Data Center, ASICs


----------



## azanimefan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Right but people in here are trying to insinuate an IPC loss, i just dont see how that would happen.


I don't think there is a loss either, however the MATH from the leaked slides does imply a 1%-3% loss in IPC

now these are leaked benches and some "assuming" is going on about system setups. If true there may be some reasons for it (light temp throttling? I mean we know the i7-7700K will throttle at stock if you have a bad cooler or an air bubble in the toothpaste they put in the lids of these things, I can't imagine a 6 core being easier to cool then a 4). My buddy at intel hasn't said anything about performance loss for this chip, though he has said they have a lot of temp problems for it, and told me it simply won't clock as high as kaby because of them.


----------



## Clukos

The IPC "loss" might as well just be lower base frequency for the cache. I really don't expect CL to be worse than Kaby Lake clock for clock, they should be pretty much identical.


----------



## Scotty99

I am curious to see how well asus software works for per core overclocking, id love a 8700k that does 5.1-5.2 on one core, even if its only ~4.7 on all cores.


----------



## Scotty99

I know you can do that manually of course, out of the gate i kind of trust the work effort asus put into tuning the software tho.


----------



## Clukos

Turbo boost is causing stuttering issues in some games according to Digital Foundry, I would opt for an all core boost instead of having some cores turbo higher.


----------



## Scotty99

Never heard anything like that before, that assumes a stock cpu would also be experiencing stutter in these titles?

I just think it would be kind of a waste not to do per core overclocking, surely some cores on these 8700k's will be able to hit 5.2 or maybe even higher, mmo's really want that 1 fast core.


----------



## wickedld9

While it is fun to speculate about the performance of the upcoming processor, that is all that it is.

For folks trying to draw definitive conclusions between an OEM system vs a DIY.; OEMs are going to adhere to the letter of Intel's power design for Turbo boost. Many, if not all, DIY motherboards disregard Turbo boost limitations and do not throttle the processor unless there is thermal run away.

It is great to see the QS/ES in the wild and performing well, but I do not believe that we can conclude that there is an IPC deficit from a dissimilar environment.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wickedld9*
> 
> While it is fun to speculate about the performance of the upcoming processor, that is all that it is.
> 
> For folks trying to draw definitive conclusions between an OEM system vs a DIY.; OEMs are going to adhere to the letter of Intel's power design for Turbo boost. Many, if not all, DIY motherboards disregard Turbo boost limitations and do not throttle the processor unless there is thermal run away.
> 
> It is great to see the QS/ES in the wild and performing well, but I do not believe that we can conclude that there is an IPC deficit from a dissimilar environment.


except it is not speculation Intel would be using Skykale architecture until 2019


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Wait so under thay logic everyone who is buying Ryzen isnt so smart because the CPU they are buying have IPC from 2014?


I explicitely stated "who don't use highly threaded applications", since most people who buy Ryzen wants more multithreading and multitasking performance, their choice is okay since there was/is no alternative at this price point.


----------



## Scotty99

I mean its not like ryzen are potatoes in single core, 1700x equates to a 4670k with 8c/16t. It just shows how hard it is to do clockspeed/ipc these days, i am curious to see when the next sandy bridge is and what they do to achieve a sizable gain in that area. I dont know what is the limiting factor with 10nm but something must be going wrong since they are still on 14.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> This indicates much higher clock speeds for Zen 2: https://www.globalfoundries.com/sites/default/files/product-briefs/7lp-product-brief.pdf
> Plus, more than 60% savings in power consumption versus 14 LPP (the one current Ryzen CPUs are using): https://www.globalfoundries.com/sites/default/files/product-briefs/product-brief-14lpp.pdf


That sounds awesome! RyZen 2 with potential for 5GHz on 8c/16t. Unfortunately, it's not expected until 2019:
Quote:


> These new 14nm+ Zen CPUs are expected to launch in early 2018, as GlobalFoundries' 7nm process is only expected to reach risk production on mid-2018, which means that Zen 2 will not be ready until at least late 2018/early 2019.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wickedld9*
> 
> While it is fun to speculate about the performance of the upcoming processor, that is all that it is.
> 
> For folks trying to draw definitive conclusions between an OEM system vs a DIY.; OEMs are going to adhere to the letter of Intel's power design for Turbo boost. Many, if not all, DIY motherboards disregard Turbo boost limitations and do not throttle the processor unless there is thermal run away.
> 
> It is great to see the QS/ES in the wild and performing well, but I do not believe that we can conclude that there is an IPC deficit from a dissimilar environment.


This, pretty much. We need to wait for reviews with variables removed, especially when stuff like Cinebench can have 2-3% score variations.


----------



## Greg121986

So in the midst of all this bickering, I just want to know one thing. Should I upgrade my 4770K at 4.5Ghz or wait until the end of 2018? Being sarcastic but also serious because I am having a hard time comparing to the latest generation silicon.


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Greg121986*
> 
> So in the midst of all this bickering, I just want to know one thing. Should I upgrade my 4770K at 4.5Ghz or wait until the end of 2018? Being sarcastic but also serious because I am having a hard time comparing to the latest generation silicon.


Do you need more threads? If not, wait for 2018/2019.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Greg121986*
> 
> So in the midst of all this bickering, I just want to know one thing. Should I upgrade my 4770K at 4.5Ghz or wait until the end of 2018? Being sarcastic but also serious because I am having a hard time comparing to the latest generation silicon.


If you do any streaming while you play, a 6-core is going to give you better frame rates. And if you play BF1, you will have more frame rate stability. Otherwise, there is little reason to until Ryzen 2 arrives with 8 cores at 4.8GHz for $300-$350.


----------



## Greg121986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> If you do any streaming while you play, a 6-core is going to give you better frame rates. And if you play BF1, you will have more frame rate stability. Otherwise, there is little reason to until Ryzen 2 arrives with 8 cores at 4.8GHz for $300-$350.


"Wait until Ryzen 2" was what I had been thinking. Thanks!


----------



## OrweII

*EU Prices on all CFL CPUs with 20% VAT*


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> I explicitely stated "who don't use highly threaded applications", since most people who buy Ryzen wants more multithreading and multitasking performance, their choice is okay since there was/is no alternative at this price point.


There is people who dont use highly threaded application and that is ok with the highest possible singlethread performance on a quad core, OCed 6700k/7700k/7740x and now 8700k, but before there were altenrative and didnt imply to wait for Ryzen? 3930k,5820k,6800k

waiting for a hexa core with IPC level from 2015 is not so smart. but waiting for hexa/octa 2014 IPC is ok (even though there were CPUs with same core/ thread count) 3-2 years ago?


----------



## Blameless

Not expecting any IPC loss. Not expecting any IPC change at all really.

This is a refresh of a refresh and core architectural changes are virtually non-existent. There also isn't a significant cache hierarchy/topology alteration like there was with Skylake-X. What mild IPC changes there are will likely be a wash overall.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> You didn't get the sarcasm I see.


I did not.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I just think it would be kind of a waste not to do per core overclocking, surely some cores on these 8700k's will be able to hit 5.2 or maybe even higher, mmo's really want that 1 fast core.


In some scenarios sure, especially if you can guarantee affinity.

However, I try to keep clocks the same between cores and minimize the use of features like AVX offsets, to keep things as consistent as possible.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Greg121986*
> 
> So in the midst of all this bickering, I just want to know one thing. Should I upgrade my 4770K at 4.5Ghz or wait until the end of 2018? Being sarcastic but also serious because I am having a hard time comparing to the latest generation silicon.


Do you need more cores?

If no, then no.


----------



## Nightbird

The pain... I sort of feel that 9700K will go to 8 cores next gen... Intel must or else they face the very real threat of AMD releasing 4.8Ghz 8 core Zen 2 CPUs that will butcher any 6 core Intel offering. If they do that, the new socket won't support it, so this socket with EOL after 1 year LOL!!!!


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> Not expecting any IPC loss. Not expecting any IPC change at all really.
> 
> This is a refresh of a refresh and core architectural changes are virtually non-existent. There also isn't a significant cache hierarchy/topology alteration like there was with Skylake-X. What mild IPC changes
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> there are will likely be a wash overall.
> I did not.
> In some scenarios sure, especially if you can guarantee affinity.
> 
> However, I try to keep clocks the same between cores and minimize the use of features like AVX offsets, to keep things as consistent as possible.
> Do you need more cores?
> 
> 
> 
> If no, then no.


In 2019 we get the Node Shrink of the refresh of the refresh of Skylake?








Intel when has used an architecture so long? even there is competition in the market?


----------



## Lass3

Ryzen 2 at 4.8 GHz yeah lets hope that, meanwhile current Ryzen barely hit 4 GHz, most max out at ~3.9 on all cores








I expect the Ryzen refresh in 2018 to hit ~200 MHz more tho.

Not really going to bother with AM4. Will get Z370 + i7-8700K and hit ~5 GHz on all cores, delid or not, don't care.

When it's not fast enough anymore, I'm changing platform to PCI-E 5.0 and DDR5 anyway. AM4 won't "futureproof" me.
Never been a fan of re-using motherboards. I want new features when I change CPU and with 8700K I don't need to bother about changing CPU before 2020+


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Ryzen 2 at 4.8 GHz yeah lets hope that, meanwhile current Ryzen barely hit 4 GHz, most max out at ~3.9 on all cores
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I expect the Ryzen refresh in 2018 to hit ~200 MHz more tho.
> 
> Not really going to bother with AM4. Will get Z370 + i7-8700K and hit ~5 GHz on all cores, delid or not, don't care.
> 
> When it's not fast enough anymore, I'm changing platform to PCI-E 5.0 and DDR5 anyway. AM4 won't "futureproof" me.
> Never been a fan of re-using motherboards. I want new features when I change CPU and with 8700K I don't need to bother about changing CPU before 2020+


I expect more than 200MHz bump from Zen. If you look back Phenom I did barely 2.8-3.0GHz while Phenom II took it up 4.0-4.4GHz.


----------



## Nightbird

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I expect more than 200MHz bump from Zen. If you look back Phenom I did barely 2.8-3.0GHz while Phenom II took it up 4.0-4.4GHz.


I second this, it would be foolish on Intel's part to assume Zen 2 fails, with all the chaos Zen is creating on their pricing model today. I for one will welcome the 8 core i7 @ 400$ this time next year


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> There's a GB4 benchmark for the 8700K floating around, and that CPU has a max single core turbo of 4.7GHz according to rumors/leaks. We're trying to see if IPC has dropped or not.


That benchmark provably ran at 4.5 GHz. I don't want to show how I calculated it because when someone would want to falsify GB4 benchmark it would be much harder to spot.

Coincidentally 4.7/4.5 = 1.0444444 . Which might be why some people talked about IPC loss. (There isn't any IPC loss, just that leak about 4.7 GHz was mistaken. Or requiring Turbo 3.0 which wasn't active in that benchmark. But I thought only Sky-X CPUs got Turbo 3.0, mainstream would still stay as it was.)


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> That benchmark provably ran at 4.5 GHz. I don't want to show how I calculated it because when someone would want to falsify GB4 benchmark it would be much harder to spot.
> 
> Coincidentally 4.7/4.5 = 1.0444444 . Which might be why some people talked about IPC loss. (There isn't any IPC loss, just that leak about 4.7 GHz was mistaken. Or requiring Turbo 3.0 which wasn't active in that benchmark. But I thought only Sky-X CPUs got Turbo 3.0, mainstream would still stay as it was.)


Certainly possible, especially given the Cinebench results. I doubt that the leak was wrong though. I also don't know why you keep mentioning Turbo Boost 3.0 since that's not included in any leaks.


----------



## Scotty99

Well surely it has turbo 3.0, thats where they are getting the 1 core 4.7 from.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well surely it has turbo 3.0, thats where they are getting the 1 core 4.7 from.


Why would that necessitate 3.0? I'm confused. Single-core turbo isn't a new feature.

On another note, I think that it might actually be 4.6GHz that all of these benchmarks are running at. What if the 8700 is being detected as the 8700K for some reason?


----------



## Scotty99

Cause the chip has two other turbo frequencies, figured 3.0 was the single core....maybe its not.


----------



## Scotty99

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/turbo-boost/turbo-boost-max-technology.html


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Cause the chip has two other turbo frequencies, figured 3.0 was the single core....maybe its not.


There have always been turbo bins.


----------



## Scotty99

Ya but with 3.0 it seems to get that liitle bit extra out of the fastest core, click above.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The coffee lake IPC is lower. I did a bench test apples to apples at 4.3GHz. My single core score 4530 compared to score of 4113. http://browser.geekbench.com/geekbench3/8444394
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Couldn't help but notice that you've got 16GB of RAM compared to the 8600k tested with 8GB of RAM, and that you're memory scores are nearly 50% higher than the 8600k because of it.
> 
> Not so Apples to Apples and you claim. Try removing half your RAM and set the RAM speed and timings to the same as the 8600k. Then it will be Apples to Apples. But when you're running twice as much ram, faster RAM, and at faster timing settings, yeah, you're going to score higher. Has nothing to do with the CPU.
Click to expand...

I did what you said to do except the amount off memory Geekbench only uses 100MB and I still beat the score by 4%.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I did what you said to do except the amount off memory Geekbench only uses 100MB and I still beat the score by 4%.


It's still not necessarily apples to apples though. Just wait for official specs and reviews. Sorry, but I just don't buy that there's something about Skylake that causes a drop in IPC with more than 4 cores. It doesn't make sense.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wickedld9*
> 
> While it is fun to speculate about the performance of the upcoming processor, that is all that it is.
> 
> For folks trying to draw definitive conclusions between an OEM system vs a DIY.; OEMs are going to adhere to the letter of Intel's power design for Turbo boost. Many, if not all, DIY motherboards disregard Turbo boost limitations and do not throttle the processor unless there is thermal run away.
> 
> It is great to see the QS/ES in the wild and performing well, but I do not believe that we can conclude that there is an IPC deficit from a dissimilar environment.


That is not true mine throttles at 100c.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya but with 3.0 it seems to get that liitle bit extra out of the fastest core, click above.


Turbo boost 3.0 is just a option. Intel is getting higher clock speeds with the 14nm++ process of the silicon die.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I did what you said to do except the amount off memory Geekbench only uses 100MB and I still beat the score by 4%.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's still not necessarily apples to apples though. Just wait for official specs and reviews. Sorry, but I just don't buy that there's something about Skylake that causes a drop in IPC with more than 4 cores. It doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

The ring bus runs longer by 50% for the extra 2 cores. For the increased amount of cores in Sky lake X Intel switched to Mesh.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The ring bus runs longer by 50% for the extra 2 cores. For the increased amount of cores in Sky lake X Intel switched to Mesh.


Cool, except that it wasn't a problem with older architectures. There was no loss in IPC going from 2 to 8 cores on Haswell. Just wait a couple more weeks before jumping to conclusions. Again, don't let confirmation bias blind you. We have one test from an easily spoofed benchmark, and another where turbo wasn't working properly. I'm just not convinced.


----------



## Techhog

Also, I'd like to direct you to this:

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/6znxyt/comment/dmx7gdo

In this case the numbers actually add up unless hyperthreading is cutting into IPC.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The ring bus runs longer by 50% for the extra 2 cores.


Two more stops on the ring bus isn't 50% more, as the SA and IGP get stops as well.

Each extra stop is also only one or two more cycles of peak latency to the LLC, and the bulk of the LLCs latency isn't from the ring bus.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> For the increased amount of cores in Sky lake X Intel switched to Mesh.


The mesh does mitigate latency and allow the the designs to be more modular, but Intel had ring buses for similar core counts with prior architectures.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> There was no loss in IPC going from 2 to 8 cores on Haswell.


Or from two cores to twenty four on Broadwell vs. Broadwell-EX.

Peak LLC latency increases, but this is rarely a significant factor and for every scenario where it is, there is another where the larger LLC capacity offers an advantage.


----------



## lilchronic

7350k 4.7Ghz / 3.4Ghz cache. Cache 300Mhz below base clock of 3.7ghz




https://videocardz.com/72471/first-intel-core-i7-8700k-benchmarks-leaked

Edit
--
7350K @ 4.3Ghz / 3.3Ghz cache 300Mhz below base clock frequency


8600k
https://browser.geekbench.com/geekbench3/8443595


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> 7350k 4.7Ghz / 3.4Ghz cache. Cache 300Mhz below base clock of 3.7ghz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://videocardz.com/72471/first-intel-core-i7-8700k-benchmarks-leaked


Wallpaper watermarks... Thanks for ruining my evening!


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> Wallpaper watermarks... Thanks for ruining my evening!


----------



## sumitlian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> There is people who dont use highly threaded application and that is ok with the highest possible singlethread performance on a quad core, OCed 6700k/7700k/7740x and now 8700k, but before there were altenrative and didnt imply to wait for Ryzen? 3930k,5820k,6800k
> 
> waiting for a hexa core with IPC level from 2015 is not so smart. but waiting for hexa/octa 2014 IPC is ok (even though there were CPUs with same core/ thread count) 3-2 years ago?


I also said, "All imo" at the very end in that post and my opinion may be wrong or at least not the universal kind.








But I had already though all about that before posting that, If you go back to that post you'll see I emphasized on a very specific condition and specaially written the conjuction "*If*" that challenges the first paragraph of this post of yours. The last line of the second para of that post did imply that it is okay if you want multithreading performance by writing, "_Only thing you are going to get better with i7-8700k is 5 and 6 thread multithreading performance._"

Also, most previous hexa/octa core CPUs from Intel were not at all affordable before Ryzen for majority of users who wanted more multithreaded performance, I have not seen many who owned ivy/haswell/broadwell and were running over 4.3 GHz switched to Ryzen for single thread performance, have you heard of such users ?

The whole talk was the enthusiasts who were already useing overclocked CPUs and switching to a new borad and CPU for no significant speed in up to 4 core performance was "not so smart" choice imo.
Okay, I re-read and admit the B type one was an exaggeration, I should not have included Sandy Bridge and Ivy bridge users in that example, my bad for that.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Ryzen 2 at 4.8 GHz yeah lets hope that, meanwhile current Ryzen barely hit 4 GHz, most max out at ~3.9 on all cores
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I expect the Ryzen refresh in 2018 to hit ~200 MHz more tho.
> 
> Not really going to bother with AM4. Will get Z370 + i7-8700K and hit ~5 GHz on all cores, delid or not, don't care.
> 
> When it's not fast enough anymore, I'm changing platform to PCI-E 5.0 and DDR5 anyway. AM4 won't "futureproof" me.
> Never been a fan of re-using motherboards. I want new features when I change CPU and with 8700K I don't need to bother about changing CPU before 2020+


Cool! Enjoy your new 8700K, I'm sure it will be an amazing processor (I'm still more than satisfied with my 4930K).









Still, that's not exactly an indictment of Ryzen 2, which I absolutely expect to see at least 4.5 GHz clock speeds out of. I still don't think AMD will reach absolute parity with Intel even then because they are still so far behind in the game, but its just nice to see just how far they have closed the gap already with Ryzen and its not impossible to believe they will close it even further with a new revision.


----------



## inedenimadam

Looking at those numbers...is intel back into the IPC game again? and adding cores?

Thanks AMD!

Let the battle begin!


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Shouldn't we expect the usual Youtubers/sites to get a hold of these early ?


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Shouldn't we expect the usual Youtubers/sites to get a hold of these early ?


Intel is stubbornly not feeling the fire lit under its wild horse. All those EU shop reports should mean something.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I expect more than 200MHz bump from Zen. If you look back Phenom I did barely 2.8-3.0GHz while Phenom II took it up 4.0-4.4GHz.


I don't. The refresh is going to be on 14nm+ instead of 14nm. Just like Skylake -> Kaby Lake. That gave ~200 MHz.

Phenom 1 vs 2 has 20nm diff and there was def not a "up to" 1.6 GHz difference in max overclocks !


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> I don't. The refresh is going to be on 14nm+ instead of 14nm. Just like Skylake -> Kaby Lake. That gave ~200 MHz.
> 
> Phenom 1 vs 2 has 20nm diff


The 4.5 - 4.8GHz hopes for Zen are on 7nm in late 2018 or early 2019 and will likely be named Zen 2, not Z+ (refresh).


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> The 4.5 - 4.8GHz hopes for Zen are on 7nm and will likely be used for Zen 2, not Z+ (refresh).


Hopes being the keyword here - We're talking Ryzen refresh.

Talk is cheap - 7nm is going to be very difficult.


----------



## Scotty99

Anyone else getting sick of waiting haha? I just want my 8700k, cooler master h500p and thermaltake floe 360 and move on with my life.


----------



## Scotty99

Also z170 ram _should_ work at xmp with z370 boards aye? I mean, assuming this is kaby with 2 cores tacked on. Was thinking about getting rgb ram down the road, out the gate would be nice if my current stuff just worked.


----------



## Curseair

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Anyone else getting sick of waiting haha? I just want my 8700k, cooler master h500p and thermaltake floe 360 and move on with my life.


Yeah it's a long wait when you want something and it's not released yet but you know the date..


----------



## evensen007

I feel it... I figure if I've waited 6 years, I can wait another month lol. Plus, this 1080ti is really making it feel like I don't really NEED the upgrade anyway. It's more of a 'want'.


----------



## Scotty99

Ya a 2600k is still a beast, i had the 2500k and ryzen/coffee are real upgrades.


----------



## WexleySnoops

https://www.ncix.com/products/?sku=TD0A8026

Canadian preorder price = $503 + tax

=$412 USD

yey.


----------



## Scotty99

Nah it wont be over 400 for US, pretty sure canada always pays more for stuff.


----------



## WexleySnoops

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Nah it wont be over 400 for US, pretty sure canada always pays more for stuff.


Yep, I agree.

I was just showing how stupid the canadian peso is for us.


----------



## Contiusa

Perhaps just some store trying to make some money out of it. For them to ask for U$ 400 they will have to deliver a rocket, and I don't mean R7 1700 standards.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WexleySnoops*
> 
> Yep, I agree.
> 
> I was just showing how stupid the canadian peso is for us.


I'm sure it's a placeholder. That said, NCIX isn't where you go looking for good prices.


----------



## Curseair

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Perhaps just some store trying to make some money out of it. For them to ask for U$ 400 they will have to deliver a rocket, and I don't mean R7 1700 standards.


Well in games it should be a rocket compared to Ryzen.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Curseair*
> 
> Well in games it should be a rocket compared to Ryzen.


Nah... And Ryzen 2 should come smoking and there might be a refresh in 2018. Intel does not have much wiggle room this time. But who knows, they might be tripping and ask for HEDT prices, choose mesh and keep the pigeon poop on the IHS. They've done worse.

But the market is responding in kind. Like I said before, they might not recover until Ice Lake if they screw this time around. It might be too late. They waited too long to release the hexacore and AMD has been toppling them in sales in Europe (I imagine everywhere). Twitter times -- bad and good news travels fast.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sumitlian*
> 
> I also said, "All imo" at the very end in that post and my opinion may be wrong or at least not the universal kind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But I had already though all about that before posting that, If you go back to that post you'll see I emphasized on a very specific condition and specaially written the conjuction "*If*" that challenges the first paragraph of this post of yours. The last line of the second para of that post did imply that it is okay if you want multithreading performance by writing, "_Only thing you are going to get better with i7-8700k is 5 and 6 thread multithreading performance._"
> 
> Also, most previous hexa/octa core CPUs from Intel were not at all affordable before Ryzen for majority of users who wanted more multithreaded performance, I have not seen many who owned ivy/haswell/broadwell and were running over 4.3 GHz switched to Ryzen for single thread performance, have you heard of such users ?
> 
> The whole talk was the enthusiasts who were already useing overclocked CPUs and switching to a new borad and CPU for no significant speed in up to 4 core performance was "not so smart" choice imo.
> Okay, I re-read and admit the B type one was an exaggeration, I should not have included Sandy Bridge and Ivy bridge users in that example, my bad for that.


yes basically SB-HW is still a good upgrade,Haswell to Skylake for just 4c is not so much, even Ryzen is beter upgrade patch for those using Haswell since is cheaper than going x299/z270


----------



## NFL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> yes basically SB-HW is still a good upgrade,Haswell to Skylake for just 4c is not so much, even Ryzen is beter upgrade patch for those using Haswell since is cheaper than going x299/z270


That's the upgrade route I ended up taking, sold my 4690K and moved to Ryzen. Have to say, I'm pretty pleased with the results


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> I don't. The refresh is going to be on 14nm+ instead of 14nm. Just like Skylake -> Kaby Lake. That gave ~200 MHz.
> 
> Phenom 1 vs 2 has 20nm diff and there was def not a "up to" 1.6 GHz difference in max overclocks !


Judging by the overall tenor of your posts concerning AMD and Ryzen, my guess is that you actually believe there will be no frequency improvement with Zen+ at all and that they can NEVER be as good as the Blue Team. I think the 200MHz bump you said you expected earlier was just a hedge; come on now, be honest and let your true inner fanboy free! Just say that you expect Zen+ will be a total failure, Intel will release a 6GHz Cannon Lake, and AMD will shortly thereafter file Chapter 11 (after publicly admitting that Intel is just the best there is and there is no point in even competing any more)!


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> I don't. The refresh is going to be on 14nm+ instead of 14nm. Just like Skylake -> Kaby Lake. That gave ~200 MHz.
> 
> Phenom 1 vs 2 has 20nm diff and there was def not a "up to" 1.6 GHz difference in max overclocks !
> 
> 
> 
> Judging by the overall tenor of your posts concerning AMD and Ryzen, my guess is that you actually believe there will be no frequency improvement with Zen+ at all and that they can NEVER be as good as the Blue Team. I think the 200MHz bump you said you expected earlier was just a hedge; come on now, be honest and let your true inner fanboy free! Just say that you expect Zen+ will be a total failure, Intel will release a 6GHz Cannon Lake, and AMD will shortly thereafter file Chapter 11 (after publicly admitting that Intel is just the best there is and there is no point in even competing any more)!
Click to expand...

I don't think AMD can compete, they always would loose to Intel if they did.


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> That's the upgrade route I ended up taking, sold my 4690K and moved to Ryzen. Have to say, I'm pretty pleased with the results


Problem is all the software that still runs heavy processing on single threads. Ryzen doesn't do anything for us in that department. This is not AMD's fault, but still reality is what it is.

I am currently trying to get Tracker Software to improve the multi-threading implementation in their Editor PDF software to improve viewing performance. It's quite a chore to make companies realize that you even know what you are talking about when it comes to such highly specialized problems, and you can hardly blame them. And then you first need to find someone at the company who knows what you are talking about, too. Face recognition in Adobe Lightroom is a single-threaded plugin that works on one face at a time, try that with thousands of images and make sure to get a good book to read along the way.

Overall anything that involves image decoding - in practice mostly JPG - doesn't seem to benefit from multiple cores in practice unless several images need to be decoded concurrently, which usually is not the case and even then the software likely doesn't make use of these (yet).

PDF and JPG are two good examples to demonstrate that we need new formats with less serialized structures to make full use of multiple cores.


----------



## Glottis

It's (almost) happening, Z370 motherboards start to appear in shop listings here in Europe


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I don't think AMD can compete, they always would loose to Intel if they did.


Well they made your CPU irrelevant so that's at least something


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Well they made your CPU irrelevant so that's at least something


It's one of those cringe worthy comments...









How, just how Ryzen made his 7600K irrelevant. Please tell me? It's not like the moment Ryzen came out his CPU halved in performance or something, it's still performing as fast as the day he bought it. Not only that, 7600K still beats 1600 and 1700 in games at a similar or lower price.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> It's one of those cringe worthy comments...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How, just how Ryzen made his 7600K irrelevant. Please tell me? It's not like the moment Ryzen came out his CPU halved in performance or something, it's still performing as fast as the day he bought it. Not only that, 7600K still beats 1600 and 1700 in games at a similar or lower price.


I think you are a bit outdated. These tests are non specific and don't take in consideration stutters and frame drops. You can hardly call it a review. i5 as we know it is dead. It was parting for a couple years now. Ryzen only nailed the last nail in the coffin, that's all. Now it will become an i3, which is more in line with what it offers.


----------



## kd5151

me back in march. me after coffee lake.


----------



## Nightbird

Anyone interested in theorizing how likely an 8 core i7 is for next year?


----------



## nanotm

cannon lake is likely to be 8core mainstream cpu, the only question is will intel stick to the i3/5/7/9 names or will they move on to something new since amd started calling their chips r3/5/7... I expect they will call the new chips something else unless the packaging is already made /


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> I think you are a bit outdated. These tests are non specific and don't take in consideration stutters and frame drops. You can hardly call it a review. i5 as we know it is dead. It was parting for a couple years now. Ryzen only nailed the last nail in the coffin, that's all. Now it will become an i3, which is more in line with what it offers.


Oh, so it's review to blame and random poster on the internet without any credibility whatsoever knows better. Yeah OK, gotcha.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> Oh, so it's review to blame and random poster on the internet without any credibility whatsoever knows better. Yeah OK, gotcha.


You can't deny that he's correct in saying that average frame rate is only half the story though.


----------



## Glottis

Are you saying the moment Ryzen came out, 7600K magically started stuttering and dropping frames? Because I'm pretty sure before that it was a perfectly fine gaming CPU.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nanotm*
> 
> cannon lake is likely to be 8core mainstream cpu, the only question is will intel stick to the i3/5/7/9 names or will they move on to something new since amd started calling their chips r3/5/7... I expect they will call the new chips something else unless the packaging is already made /


Source on 8 core canon lake?

https://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/09/29/intel-corporation-will-finally-be-upping-its-core.aspx

Could be counting logical cores.


----------



## bigjdubb

I don't think an 8 core canon lake is all that likely, I'm sure they want to continue trying to sell some HEDT processors.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> perfectly fine


Define "perfectly fine"



This should not be "perfectly fine" for pretty much every gamer. The i5s were all we had available at a tight budget and the i7s were *obviously* the better buy pretty much always. That's no longer the case with Ryzen, therefore "made irrelevant" because it's all it is at this point. Intel moving the 4c/4t parts to the i3 line just officially confirms exactly that


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> I don't think an 8 core canon lake is all that likely, I'm sure they want to continue trying to sell some HEDT processors.


Based on rumors, the original plan was to move to 8 cores.

That said, Cannonlake isn't coming to desktops. 9th gen will be Ice Lake.


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Define "perfectly fine"
> 
> 
> 
> This should not be "perfectly fine" for pretty much every gamer. The i5s were all we had available at a tight budget and the i7s were *obviously* the better buy pretty much always. That's no longer the case with Ryzen, therefore "made irrelevant" because it's all it is at this point. Intel moving the 4c/4t parts to the i3 line just officially confirms exactly that


Yes, yes, nothing new. 1 game runs better on Ryzen, 5 other games run better on i5/i7. That's why TPU overall gaming benchmark summary shows 7600K taking a lead.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Source on 8 core canon lake?
> 
> https://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/09/29/intel-corporation-will-finally-be-upping-its-core.aspx
> 
> Could be counting logical cores.


No, no it can't be counting logical cores.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> perfectly fine
> 
> 
> 
> Define "perfectly fine"
> 
> 
> 
> This should not be "perfectly fine" for pretty much every gamer. The i5s were all we had available at a tight budget and the i7s were *obviously* the better buy pretty much always. That's no longer the case with Ryzen, therefore "made irrelevant" because it's all it is at this point. Intel moving the 4c/4t parts to the i3 line just officially confirms exactly that
Click to expand...

I have played Cysis 3 when it first came out with a i5 2500k before they started doing frame time benchmarks and it plays smooth as butter and I did not hear of anyone complain back February 19, 2013 about that game on a i5.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

AMD fans sure love to cherry pick results.

Here's the entire video, Crysis 3 starts at 6:44


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I have played Cysis 3 when it first came out with a i5 2500k before they started doing frame time benchmarks and it plays smooth as butter and I did not hear of anyone complain back February 19, 2013 about that game on a i5.


but on 2014 people did with BF4
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> AMD fans sure love to cherry pick results.
> 
> Here's the entire video, Crysis 3 starts at 6:44
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


the moment when it is CPU Bound it reduced FPS on 7700K and Ryzen was faster


----------



## Contiusa

I'm hearing about i5s and stutter for a couple years now. Glad they are gone to the i3 realm. By the way DigitalFoundry picked the R5 1600 over the i5-7600K. What happens is that whoever has an i5 right now won't admit that they have an overpriced i3 on their hands.


----------



## Nightbird

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *nanotm*
> 
> cannon lake is likely to be 8core mainstream cpu, the only question is will intel stick to the i3/5/7/9 names or will they move on to something new since amd started calling their chips r3/5/7... I expect they will call the new chips something else unless the packaging is already made /
> 
> 
> 
> Source on 8 core canon lake?
> 
> https://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/09/29/intel-corporation-will-finally-be-upping-its-core.aspx
> 
> Could be counting logical cores.
Click to expand...

Nice find! I think that is 8 physical cores.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> I'm hearing about i5s and stutter for a couple years now. Glad they are gone to the i3 realm. By the way DigitalFoundry picked the R5 1600 over the i5-7600K. What happens is that whoever has an i5 right now won't admit that they have an overpriced i3 on their hands.


The only place I hear about i5 stutter is on Digital foundry, I don't trust him because he does not show the actual game stuttering. I have a i5 running BF4, BF1, Crysis 3, etcetera and they run smooth a butter, no stuttering. Look if there was a problem I would know it.


----------



## Ding Chavez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Define "perfectly fine"
> 
> 
> 
> This should not be "perfectly fine" for pretty much every gamer. The i5s were all we had available at a tight budget and the i7s were *obviously* the better buy pretty much always. That's no longer the case with Ryzen, therefore "made irrelevant" because it's all it is at this point. Intel moving the 4c/4t parts to the i3 line just officially confirms exactly that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, yes, nothing new. 1 game runs better on Ryzen, 5 other games run better on i5/i7. That's why TPU overall gaming benchmark summary shows 7600K taking a lead.
Click to expand...

Is that Crysis 3? Ran fine on my 4690K no problems at all very smooth.

According to this Techpowerup review Ryzen has a bit inconsistent gaming performance, some games are good others not so much. Some games the average and minimum FPS are a lot lower than even the i5... even with DDR4-3200.
Dishonoured 2, Far Cry Primal, Hitman, Watchdogs 2, the Ryzen CPUs are all significantly lower in min FPS than the 7600K. Personally I wouldn't buy Ryzen for gaming. Too inconsistent and only does 4.0GHz, but that's just my 2c. For me the i5 8600K six core will probably be the one to get, should be better than the 7700K and cheaper... which sounds OK.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_3_1300X/15.html


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> the moment when it is CPU Bound it reduced FPS on 7700K and Ryzen was faster


Yet you ignore most of the video and even most of Crysis 3 where the 7700k is on top, aka cherry picking. Looks like there was a huge spike in draw calls and the extra physical Ryzen cores helped, which makes sense and is expected ?

It also seems like there's another argument on this forum, price vs performance, where people live seems to matter and it gets mixed up in the real argument of 'what's better for XX situation.'

I don't care which one is faster, I'm just tired of the AMD circle jerk and facts not being presented properly. We've had an incredible amount of cases of Ryzen benchmarks with an obvious GPU bottleneck to show Ryzen and Intel CPU's as equal, some with obviously different settings (that one Joker video especially), extremely cherry picked results in the middle of a benchmark or entire benchmarks that don't compare games, games usually not shown as a benchmark, a specific game selected as 'proof' that Ryzen > Intel instead of a plethora of other games that would make more sense and don't show that result, AMD fans screaming "GAMES USING MORE CORES ARE COMING" (for the last 5 years) when they aren't as most of the performance occurring code is in 1-2 threads. The exceptions being Crysis 3 and a few others, but even then the SMT that's available on both brands renders them close, or at least one isn't left in the dust.

I don't see anyone arguing that Ryzen isn't great, but I am seeing an incredible amount of biased and sheer stupidity on this forum and many other places whereas when I joined in 2011 people seemed to actually care more about facts instead of blind loyalty to a brand (talking about CPU's, not GPU's). This resulted in people owning Intel because it was the better choice, not because they were 'fanboys'. Now that AMD is actually relevant for the first time in I don't even remember how long, everyone's coming out of the woodwork, or perhaps I'm just seeing the normal AMD thought process spilling over into every other thread instead of it just being contained in the AMD section. This is the first time I've paid attention to a CPU release.

I had more extreme poorly worded reactions to this in the past and got in trouble with the mods because people on this forum were behaving like they just came from 4chan and it rubbed off on me, but now I'm calmly talking about it.

So as the general consensus is you go Ryzen to; save some money, multitasking, to 'stick it' to Intel, and for 60hz gaming.
You go Intel for; high refresh rate gaming, higher minimums, better single thread performance.

Edit - added the word 'game' to the end of a sentence.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Yet you ignore most of the video and even most of Crysis 3 where the 7700k is on top, aka cherry picking. Looks like there was a huge spike in draw calls and the extra physical Ryzen cores helped, which makes sense and is expected ?


So the CPU Bound is meaningless but the most GPU limited Scenarios are the way to compare CPUs








Quote:


> It also seems like there's another argument on this forum, price vs performance, where people live seems to matter and it gets mixed up in the real argument of 'what's better for XX situation.'


Well that is dependent on the purpose of use but for most uses and games Ryzen does just fine for both for lower price Specially Ryzen 7
Quote:


> We've had an incredible amount of cases of Ryzen benchmarks with an obvious GPU bottleneck to show Ryzen and Intel CPU's as better, some with obviously different settings (that one Joker video especially), extremely cherry picked results in the middle of a benchmark or entire benchmarks that don't compare


ftfy
Quote:


> games usually not shown as a benchmark, a specific game selected as 'proof' that Ryzen > Intel instead of a plethora of other games that would make more sense


So Cherry Picking? what makes a game more important than other if you dont play it?
Quote:


> and don't show that result, AMD fans screaming "GAMES USING MORE CORES ARE COMING" (for the last 5 years) when they aren't as most of the performance occurring code is in 1-2 threads. The exceptions being Crysis 3 and a few others, but even then the SMT that's available on both brands renders them close, or at least one isn't left in the dust.


only poor coded games and indie games use 1-2 cpu cores/threads we arent in 2010 anymore consoles have pushed multithreading in games games focused onto multicore show now use of Quad core with HT, Hexa cores, and Hexa cores with HT and even few can use 8c/16t

Quote:


> I don't see anyone arguing that Ryzen isn't great, but I am seeing an incredible amount of biased and sheer stupidity on this forum and many other places whereas when I joined in 2011 people seemed to actually care more about facts instead of blind loyalty to a brand (talking about CPU's, not GPU's). This resulted in people owning Intel because it was the better choice, not because they were 'fanboys'. Now that AMD is actually relevant for the first time in I don't even remember how long, everyone's coming out of the woodwork, or perhaps I'm just seeing the normal AMD thought process spilling over into every other thread instead of it just being contained in the AMD section. This is the first time I've paid attention to a CPU release.


So when People chooses intel it is fine and They arent fanboys due to performance but when AMD is competitive then People becomes AMD fan? well maybe some of them maybe were using Intel because they were forced to since AMD had nothing comparable but using Intel doesnt exclude to be a AMD Fan
Quote:


> I had more extreme poorly worded reactions to this in the past and got in trouble with the mods because people on this forum were behaving like they just came from 4chan and it rubbed off on me, but now I'm calmly talking about it.


i think reddit and 4chan
Quote:


> So as the general consensus is, you go Ryzen to; save some money, multitasking, to 'stick it' to Intel, and for 60hz gaming.
> You go Intel for; high refresh rate gaming, higher minimums, better single thread performance.


60Hz? I see Ryzen can be suitable for games Above Crysis 3 has 90 min FPS which well aove 60FPS Ryzen is just performing poorly in games which arent programmed for SMT+modular architecture with the cache type Ryzen does, it is like Skylake X doesnt perform as good as Skylake S because Cache


----------



## WexleySnoops

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> AMD fans sure love to cherry pick results.
> 
> Here's the entire video, Crysis 3 starts at 6:44


Intel fans do the same thing. Nothing new.

Personally, I'm tired of it.

The last "gaming" desktop I had was a P4 with a Geforce FX 5200.
After that I had a gaming laptop with a 9800GTX
Then eventually HP Probook laptop with e-GPU GTX 670.

This will be the first real gaming desktop I build in a long time, and I'm having trouble choosing between Intel and AMD because people keep cherry picking their results and circle jerking themselves until the cows come home.


----------



## PriestOfSin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WexleySnoops*
> 
> Intel fans do the same thing. Nothing new.
> 
> Personally, I'm tired of it.
> 
> The last "gaming" desktop I had was a P4 with a Geforce FX 5200.
> After that I had a gaming laptop with a 9800GTX
> Then eventually HP Probook laptop with e-GPU GTX 670.
> 
> This will be the first real gaming desktop I build in a long time, and I'm having trouble choosing between Intel and AMD because people keep cherry picking their results and circle jerking themselves until the cows come home.


Well, basically, the 7700k is top dog right now in terms of gaming performance. However, we've seen that generally the future leans towards more cores and threads, so a quad-core isn't really ideal for someone building *right now.* If I were building right now, I wouldn't dare get a quad-core, they're dead.

If you have programs that take advantage of extra cores and threads right now (productivity), I'd say get the 1700, OC it, and forget about it. If it's a primarily gaming system, wait for benchmarks of the 8700k.

Since the 8700k is 6 cores, 12 threads, it's more *futureproof* by design, and if it keeps that same gaming performance of the 7700k, seems like a winner to me.

I will note that AMD has stated that Zen 2 will be on the AM4 socket, so there's a good chance (better than good chance) that many current AM4 motherboards will support the series coming down the pipe. Could be a factor in your decision.

Either way, you can't really go wrong right now. The R5 1600 does fine in gaming, my R7 1700 does very well at 4k, the 8700k will most likely be the gaming king for awhile. I just wouldn't get a quad core, lol.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PriestOfSin*
> 
> Well, basically, the 7700k is top dog right now in terms of gaming performance. However, we've seen that generally the future leans towards more cores and threads, so a quad-core isn't really ideal for someone building *right now.* If I were building right now, I wouldn't dare get a quad-core, they're dead.
> 
> If you have programs that take advantage of extra cores and threads right now (productivity), I'd say get the 1700, OC it, and forget about it. If it's a primarily gaming system, wait for benchmarks of the 8700k.
> 
> Since the 8700k is 6 cores, 12 threads, it's more *futureproof* by design, and if it keeps that same gaming performance of the 7700k, seems like a winner to me.
> 
> I will note that AMD has stated that Zen 2 will be on the AM4 socket, so there's a good chance (better than good chance) that many current AM4 motherboards will support the series coming down the pipe. Could be a factor in your decision.
> 
> Either way, you can't really go wrong right now. The R5 1600 does fine in gaming, my R7 1700 does very well at 4k, the 8700k will most likely be the gaming king for awhile. I just wouldn't get a quad core, lol.


unless that quad core is on AM4/X299/z370/z390/(x99?) and is cheap enough


----------



## WexleySnoops

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PriestOfSin*
> 
> Well, basically, the 7700k is top dog right now in terms of gaming performance. However, we've seen that generally the future leans towards more cores and threads, so a quad-core isn't really ideal for someone building *right now.* If I were building right now, I wouldn't dare get a quad-core, they're dead.
> 
> If you have programs that take advantage of extra cores and threads right now (productivity), I'd say get the 1700, OC it, and forget about it. If it's a primarily gaming system, wait for benchmarks of the 8700k.
> 
> Since the 8700k is 6 cores, 12 threads, it's more *futureproof* by design, and if it keeps that same gaming performance of the 7700k, seems like a winner to me.
> 
> I will note that AMD has stated that Zen 2 will be on the AM4 socket, so there's a good chance (better than good chance) that many current AM4 motherboards will support the series coming down the pipe. Could be a factor in your decision.
> 
> Either way, you can't really go wrong right now. The R5 1600 does fine in gaming, my R7 1700 does very well at 4k, the 8700k will most likely be the gaming king for awhile. I just wouldn't get a quad core, lol.


Yea, that's basically my thought process right now. I wouldn't say I mainly game, but that'll be a big part of it. Along with 3D CAD work, and then whatever the future brings. Don't want to limit myself being my main concern.

1700 has been at the top of my list, but then CL got announced. So I'll probably just wait for those results and decide from their. Couldn't agree more about quad core though!


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nightbird*
> 
> Anyone interested in theorizing how likely an 8 core i7 is for next year?


Intel has had 8 cores for how many years already?


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> So the CPU Bound is meaningless but the most GPU limited Scenarios are the way to compare CPUs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well that is dependent on the purpose of use but for most uses and games Ryzen does just fine for both for lower price Specially Ryzen 7


I don't understand your logic since the same GPU was used, so how are you saying "Ryzen pushed ahead when it became CPU bound" when it was only ahead for a short amount of time, and since I formed it as a question I was asking if in that specific situation the extra physical cores made a difference because of draw calls. We're not talking about price (you may be focused on it because of where you live, question, not assumption), we're talking about Ryzen fanatics cherry picking results, literally just as you did. Then when I question it you mention price, which obviously is a factor for many people, but all the facts need to be presented. This almost sounds like a poster from another forum that screams his pro Ryzen agenda with biased benchmarks, then when someone presents all the facts he screams another agenda of "why would anyone buy xxx hardware when I can play xx game at xx settings and maintain xx framerate", or "why are people different !" and this is an argument that I commonly see on that forum.

What definitely should be discussed is freq vs freq, stock vs stock, turbo vs turbo performance.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> ftfy


What ?

This is how you benchmark CPU's...you show the potential of the CPU so you use the best GPU you can in hopes the bottleneck shifts to the CPU. Since the release of Ryzen a majority of the benchmarks I've seen pro Ryzen people post have an agenda of either showing Ryzen as dead equal to what Intel has (via a GPU bottleneck and/or cherry picking), or then when they're proven wrong screams "IT DOESN'T MATTER". It varies via forum though. The biased Intel benchmarks tend to come from Intel and other sites, but we're talking about user benchmarks which includes Youtube uploads and certain sites.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> So Cherry Picking? what makes a game more important than other if you dont play it?


Because people need to be able to make an informed decision, that means seeing all the facts, not cherry picked facts. If someone only cares about a specific game then obviously that's fine, but they should be presented with multiple benchmarks from multiple sources that also contain minimums, maximums, and averages for that game where the first or second best GPU is used to show the potential of the CPU's.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> only poor coded games and indie games use 1-2 cpu cores/threads we arent in 2010 anymore consoles have pushed multithreading in games games focused onto multicore show now use of Quad core with HT, Hexa cores, and Hexa cores with HT and even few can use 8c/16t


Yet the performance resulting code is obviously still in 1-2 threads, the extra threads are mostly irrelevant. SMT and Crysis 3 were surprises and are an exception.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> So when People chooses intel it is fine and They arent fanboys due to performance but when AMD is competitive then People becomes AMD fan? well maybe some of them maybe were using Intel because they were forced to since AMD had nothing comparable but using Intel doesnt exclude to be a AMD Fan


I honestly can't recall anyone on here owning Intel simply to own Intel and being vocal about it (not denying it happens), they own Intel because of better performance, and they explained that. Of course there are actual Intel fanboys, but since Ryzen's release all I see are Intel owners waiting to upgrade, and Ryzen fans doing whatever they can to get Ryzen to sell more, regardless of facts. I openly admit to being an Nvidia fan, but I'll never misrepresent AMD GPU performance and If I don't know what the AMD equivalent of an Nvidia GPU is I state that and I leave it up to other people to make recommendations.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> i think reddit and 4chan


Obviously/definitely 4chan, Reddit... it depends. I've been paying attention to the Intel section for months and I've yet to see a single circle jerk or misrepresented facts from anyone recommending Intel. The Intel owners do quite often recommend Ryzen if it's better for someone's build and they usually supply unbiased benchmarks that weren't cherry picked. Having said that, I haven't visited the AMD subreddit in ages so I can't comment on that. Since I haven't been active in both I'm not using Reddit as an example for both, either. I only talk about what I know.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> 60Hz? I see Ryzen can be suitable for games Above Crysis 3 has 90 min FPS which well aove 60FPS Ryzen is just performing poorly in games which arent programmed for SMT+modular architecture with the cache type Ryzen does, it is like Skylake X doesnt perform as good as Skylake S because Cache


Oh it can be, I'd never misrepresent Ryzen and have recommended it many times on other forums as it made more sense for what the buyer wanted. It's awesome and we need competition. People should be presented all the facts so they can make an informed decision, when usually you just see some incredibly flawed YouTube video and/or a single benchmark from one game and they base their decision on it. I have seen countless hardware illiterate people ready to build a new system (usually a friend builds it) or someone that didn't know enough to select parts made a thread on a forum and explained what they wanted, and they made a decision because every single response or most were the AMD fanboys showing the cherry picked benchmarks.

Before and after Ryzen released I glanced at the AMD section on OCN and many responses were people acting like kids and yelling "HAHA AMD IS GOING TO RULE" and circle jerking to cherry picked benchmarks and/or assumptions, whereas the Intel section were Intel owners (not fanboys) sharing all the facts because what they care about is performance. This is especially prevalent whenever the question of "AMD or Intel" comes up. I know this itself sounds like I'm saying only AMD fans are fanboys, that's not exactly what I'm saying. What I'm saying is many AMD fans appear to be circle jerking fanboys that only care about AMD getting sales and/or sticking it to Intel. Perhaps I'm older and have forgotten when what I've seen over the last 5 years as well as being ignorant to an extent since I never paid attention to a CPU release before. This is why I focused on the post Ryzen release since I paid attention. I myself actually almost bought the 1700x when it was on sale for $300 two weeks ago, but I slept on it because I knew I'd want those extra 10-60 fps/higher minimums depending on the GPU, game, and situation.

I can't comment on Skylake X, don't know much of anything about it. I have absolutely no agenda except wanting everyone to be presented all the facts.

There's a thought I'd love to bring up but never have, I decided to do it just now. Is anyone really naive enough to think AMD wouldn't do what Intel does if they could actually get away with it ? I know that's a hypothetical and shouldn't be brought up, especially when the point of my posts were about informed decisions and facts.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Wow people never played Crysis 3 before? The level they test was the first time I have seen in gaming for HT to make a difference. This game was huge CPU bottleneck. Sure 50 fps with i5 is fine but not for everyone. This was not entirely true for every game. Also with a lot of game you do not want to be playing when CPU is at 100% in all core. I had this problem playing games with PII @ 4.2GHz. Fps looks fine but if major load hit the CPU than you get low downs and stutter. All is playable to the person playing the game but for many people it is not a pleasant experience. Even at 4K i hot 50%+ CPU usage with i7 meaning i5 would limit me.


----------



## Scotty99

New video only has the 1600 (4.0) 5% slower on average than the 7700k (4.9). 1440p hardly any difference, paltry 2%.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> AMD fans sure love to cherry pick results.


Yeah when there's literally nothing on screen you get higher fps because of clock speed, when there's anything demanding the 7700k and 7600k choke, the 7700k less than the 7600k of course because of HT. Same thing in Battlefield 1. i5s are pegged at 100% across all cores with any modern GPU. i5s? Sorry, I meant i3s because that's a thing now for 4c/4t Intel CPUs.


----------



## wickedld9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New video only has the 1600 (4.0) 5% slower on average than the 7700k (4.9). 1440p hardly any difference, paltry 2%.


...using a GTX 1080 FE, so GPU limited in several games especially at 1440.

Average is the key word. 5% average. 1600 is 3% faster in Ashes, it's only win, and up to 19% slower in several titles.


----------



## Scotty99

Wow you got me with that underline, the price difference doesnt begin to make up 19%.......rolls eyes.


----------



## wickedld9

But you didn't say anything about the price difference, nor does your "headline." Since you have now I will gladly respond. Price/perf isn't linear and never has been. Some people aren't buying on a budget. Which CPU offers the best performance there, regardless of price?

The "headline" is insinuating that they are nearly equals in performance. There is a gulf of difference between the two in some games, which is exacerbated when a faster graphics card is used.

Your post was in no way on topic, which is Coffee Lake. Please keep that in mind.

Edit: Even /r/AMD calls this video misleading.


----------



## Scotty99

Right i forgot, price/performance ratios on this forum are shunned lol. Not sure how this is off topic, coffee is kaby+cores, most of those results are going ring true once 8700k hits. Reason i posted it is to show that for most people there is not enough difference between them to justify the extra costs, tho i am actually one of the people that can truly benefit from a faster core clock given i play a bunch of mmo's.


----------



## Nightbird

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Nightbird*
> 
> Anyone interested in theorizing how likely an 8 core i7 is for next year?
> 
> 
> 
> Intel has had 8 cores for how many years already?
Click to expand...

i7? link plz, unless you mean the extreme processors, which I didn't include


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nightbird*
> 
> i7? link plz, unless you mean the extreme processors, which I didn't include


You mean a mainstream x700K i7? That doesn't exist and probably won't for a while.

Otherwise there is the i7-5960x, i7-6900k, and i7-7820x


----------



## kd5151

5960x,6900k,7820x.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nightbird*
> 
> i7? link plz, unless you mean the extreme processors, which I didn't include


----------



## lilchronic

3570k @ 5Ghz - 51FPS - 99% CPU usage

4790k @ 5Ghz - 86FPS - 99% CPU usage

5820k @ 4.7Ghz - 122FPS - 70-90% CPU usage


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> 3570k @ 5Ghz - 51FPS - 99% CPU usage
> 
> 4790k @ 5Ghz - 86FPS - 99% CPU usage
> 
> 5820k @ 4.7Ghz - 122FPS - 70-90% CPU usage


with the 4790k and 5820k what were the clock speed and RAM clock speed? also did you unparked cores?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> 3570k @ 5Ghz - 51FPS - 99% CPU usage
> 
> 4790k @ 5Ghz - 86FPS - 99% CPU usage
> 
> 5820k @ 4.7Ghz - 122FPS - 70-90% CPU usage


That is insane difference lol. That what games will look in 2-3 years.


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> witht eh 4790k and 5820k what were the clock speed and RAM clock speed? also did you unparked cores?


4790k and 3570k 2400Mhz 9-11-11
5820k 3200Mhz cl14
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> That is insane difference lol. That what games will look in 2-3 years.


Yeah my brother had a 3770k back than and was around 73FPS.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> AMD fans sure love to cherry pick results.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah when there's literally nothing on screen you get higher fps because of clock speed, when there's anything demanding the 7700k and 7600k choke, the 7700k less than the 7600k of course because of HT. Same thing in Battlefield 1. i5s are pegged at 100% across all cores with any modern GPU. i5s? Sorry, I meant i3s because that's a thing now for 4c/4t Intel CPUs.
Click to expand...

My i5 runs at 80% to 100% in BF1, it is not pegged. I can run minimum of 144 FPS ultra settings with a GTX 1080Ti in BF1.


----------



## kd5151

Whats more efficient in terms of power draw. 7600K at 100% or Ryzen 7 below 50% load?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Whats more efficient in terms of power draw. 7600K at 100% or Ryzen 7 below 50% load?


That is actually a good question. Probably the Ryzen.


----------



## Scotty99

Well a 1700 at stock draws less power than a 7600k lol.

Kinda crazy if you think about it, 16t cpu being more efficient than a 4t. Wonder why amd cant do that on mobile as well.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Whats more efficient in terms of power draw. 7600K at 100% or Ryzen 7 below 50% load?


if you mena power consumption Ryzen isnt just better AT 100%? 

OR YOU mean performance efficiency? then depends ont he workload i5>Ryzen singlethread, Ryzen>I5 multithread
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well a 1700 at stock draws less power than a 7600k lol.
> 
> Kinda crazy if you think about it, 16t cpu being more efficient than a 4t. Wonder why amd cant do that on mobile as well.


Ryzen uses a different node and still Skylake has 2 years in the market


----------



## Scotty99

I meant GPU, not sure why i said mobile.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> if you mena power consumption Ryzen isnt just better AT 100%?
> 
> OR YOU mean performance efficiency? then depends ont he workload i5>Ryzen singlethread, Ryzen>I5 multithread
> Ryzen uses a different node and still Skylake has 2 years in the market


During gaming. If the i5 is 80% or higher. It's going to be drawing most of its power and generating more heat. Where as a Ryzen 1700 is going to chugging along without a sweat and consuming less power. Of course all that goes out the window however once you start creeping up on to 4ghz with ryzen or a overclocked 7800x.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Intel has had 8 cores for how many years already?


For less than $300 they have???


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> That is insane difference lol. That what games will look in 2-3 years.


Crysis 3 is still to this day one of the most impressively designed and engineered games ever made. It boggles my mind what Crytek managed to do with that game over 4 years ago! Of course it also boggles my mind what they managed to accomplish with the original Crysis back in 2007! Such a hugely underrated game and series overall. For all the flak Crysis 2 got when it came out, its still actually my favorite of them all.


----------



## Twirlz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> My i5 runs at 80% to 100% in BF1, it is not pegged. I can run minimum of 144 FPS ultra settings with a GTX 1080Ti in BF1.


Nice screenshot. 99% usage with no action going on. I bet there is some nasty FPS drops and frametime spikes during explosions or when some kind of action is taking place. Stuttering in BF1 on an i5 is a common topic.

Having recently used a 4790K, i5 7600K and 1700, I simply couldn't recommend an i5 when Ryzen 5 was released. Not only would the 1600 platform cost less, but you would also get significantly better multithread performance and more consistent frametimes and FPS in games. Sure, it doesn't always achieve higher average FPS than a 7600K, but if FPS drops and frametime spikes are common it can result in an unpleasant experience.

A range of recent games have been able to push the i5 to 100% which obviously causes stuttering to be more common. Additionally, imagine playing BF1 at 100% usage and something tries to utilize resources in the background. Many users have a range of applications in the background and all it would take is a small update or task to further highlight the stuttering issue if you're already at 100%.

Is the 7600K a bad processor? Not at all, it still pushes out good performance but it just isn't worth it versus the 1600 for gaming IMO _unless_ you play games which love as fast cores as possible (ARMA, Primal etc). Even before Ryzen some games were able to push it very hard resulting erratic frametimes but it was almost just accepted because you had no other choice apart from pay more for an i7.


----------



## nanotm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Crysis 3 is still to this day one of the most impressively designed and engineered games ever made. It boggles my mind what Crytek managed to do with that game over 4 years ago! Of course it also boggles my mind what they managed to accomplish with the original Crysis back in 2007! Such a hugely underrated game and series overall. For all the flak Crysis 2 got when it came out, its still actually my favorite of them all.


crisis was great for the single player but the online side of the game was a total hackfest, yes the game looked fantastic and played pretty well on an sli rig (iirc I was running either yetson 9600gt's or powercolour 9800 gt's) having donated my 8600gt's to the kids


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> For less than $300 they have???


$999,$1099,$599


----------



## TMatzelle60

Do you think a 7700K to 8700K would be a worthy upgrade for gaming only? I mean the extra MHZ is nice not huge but some boost and the cores help in some games but honestly


----------



## Gauanqh6764

..


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nobelharvards*
> 
> Depends on the game.
> 
> Be aware you will have to buy a new Z370 motherboard. The 8700k will not be compatible with Z170 or Z270 chipsets, despite still being LGA 1151.
> 
> When the NDA lifts some time in October, search up some reviews on Google, find reviews with benchmarks from your favourite games, look at the performance.
> 
> Then look at the cost of a new Z370 motherboard, the cost of the 8700k, and your current financial situation. You decide for yourself.
> 
> 7700k owners got ****ed here. Just a simple clock bump from from Skylake, zero IPC gain, and now, a mainstream 6 core is around the corner.
> 
> Kaby Lake was released in January 2017. They didn't even get a full year as the top end mainstream chip, and still paid full price for a 4 core 8 thread CPU.


7740X was in July. For $40 more you get the 7800X.







Same scenario with the 1500x vs the 1600.


----------



## TheWizardMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nobelharvards*
> 
> Depends on the game.
> 
> Be aware you will have to buy a new Z370 motherboard. The 8700k will not be compatible with Z170 or Z270 chipsets, despite still being LGA 1151.
> 
> When the NDA lifts some time in October, search up some reviews on Google, find reviews with benchmarks from your favourite games, look at the performance.
> 
> Then look at the cost of a new Z370 motherboard, the cost of the 8700k, and your current financial situation. You decide for yourself.
> 
> 7700k owners got ****ed here. Just a simple clock bump from from Skylake, zero IPC gain, and now, a mainstream 6 core is around the corner.
> 
> Kaby Lake was released in January 2017. They didn't even get a full year as the top end mainstream chip, and still paid full price for a 4 core 8 thread CPU.


Actually Kaby Lake is looking better everyday. Kaby felt like a ripoff when we were speculating an August launch but if CL doesn't launch until late October or later, that's just Intel's normal release cycle.


----------



## unityole

Quote:


> We are planning to update Tornado F5 to Z390 chipset supporting 8C/16T CPUs coming in H2/18. We will launch F7 at the same time too. We will skip z370 chipset. Meantime we added support for Quadro P5000 and P3000.


so somewhat unrelated but thought i'd share this. for those who doesnt know tornado F5 is currently being sold by eurocom but it is an MSI 15" barebone model which uses desktop LGA CPU 7700k and has a MXM slot for 1 dGPU laptop 1080. F7 is gonna be a new model 17 as number suggest.

i thought intel isnt going to release CNL desktop so some how it'll now come with 8 cores on mainstream?


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *unityole*
> 
> so somewhat unrelated but thought i'd share this. for those who doesnt know tornado F5 is currently being sold by eurocom but it is an MSI 15" barebone model which uses desktop LGA CPU 7700k and has a MXM slot for 1 dGPU laptop 1080. F7 is gonna be a new model 17 as number suggest.
> 
> i thought intel isnt going to release CNL desktop so some how it'll now come with 8 cores on mainstream?


Maybe Icelake?


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nobelharvards*
> 
> 7700k owners got ****ed here. Just a simple clock bump from from Skylake, zero IPC gain, and now, a mainstream 6 core is around the corner.
> 
> Kaby Lake was released in January 2017. They didn't even get a full year as the top end mainstream chip, and still paid full price for a 4 core 8 thread CPU.


Everyone knew that, it was fastest CPU for half year, and that was about that.

We need radical improvement in IPC area, and keeping power and clocks the same. Until then, it would be 6 and 8 cores for mainstream, and that's about it.


----------



## MaKeN

@nobelharvards

Agree, but at least 7700k wasnt that expensive to switch to , because of z170 mobo compatibility....
And i guess there is still a lot of time were 7700k will run games properly.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Crysis 3 is still to this day one of the most impressively designed and engineered games ever made. It boggles my mind what Crytek managed to do with that game over 4 years ago! Of course it also boggles my mind what they managed to accomplish with the original Crysis back in 2007! Such a hugely underrated game and series overall. For all the flak Crysis 2 got when it came out, its still actually my favorite of them all.


Crysis 3 has the proper graphics and optimization Crysis 2 should have recieved, but basically they both use similar Cryengine 3 version but it is good to noice NO other game had 8c/16thread scaling when there was no 8c/16t CPU,was there?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nanotm*
> 
> crisis was great for the single player but the online side of the game was a total hackfest, yes the game looked fantastic and played pretty well on an sli rig (iirc I was running either yetson 9600gt's or powercolour 9800 gt's) having donated my 8600gt's to the kids


Crysis 1? Crysis 1 hacking wasnt a thing when I played it in 2012 but there were few servers
now I think in crysis 3 there were aimbots
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> For less than $300 they have???


E5 2670?


----------



## Ding Chavez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *nobelharvards*
> 
> 7700k owners got ****ed here. Just a simple clock bump from from Skylake, zero IPC gain, and now, a mainstream 6 core is around the corner.
> 
> Kaby Lake was released in January 2017. They didn't even get a full year as the top end mainstream chip, and still paid full price for a 4 core 8 thread CPU.
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone knew that, it was fastest CPU for half year, and that was about that.
> 
> We need radical improvement in IPC area, and keeping power and clocks the same. Until then, it would be 6 and 8 cores for mainstream, and that's about it.
Click to expand...

I think we are really now reaching towards the end of current silicon technology. There will be no big increases like we've seen in the past. Next will come 10nm then 7 nm and that will be the end of silicon, there will have to be something new to go forward for computing.
Judging by Intel's previous node shrinks the performance gains from 2 more cycles so to speak will not be very big. We've seen per core 4-8% per generation so we are now in the ball park for the end of silicon.
Adding more cores is possibly the last remaining way to increase CPU power with current technology, thus perhaps that is one of the reasons why Intel are now increasing the core count on the mainstream platform, plus competition from AMD with Ryzen offering a lot more cores. Clockspeeds seem to have completely topped out at about the 5GHz mark, and IPC gains seem more and more difficult to obtain.
On the plus side we don't really need to upgrade CPUs like we did in decades past and CPUs can last a lot longer. Now people argue about 5% I can remember when we used to get 100% plus gains in a year or so now that is unheard of.


----------



## nanotm

I cant see them making 10 or 7nm silicon they need a different substrate given particle size of silicon is 10nm ....

graphene looks like it might be an option but nothing is certain at this point, the wafers will be problematic regardless due to particle size constraints, there going to need to find a substrate that has at most double digit picometer size atoms if they wish to continue using current fabrication techniques to make ever smaller chips,

it would be better for them to figure out how to increase the speed at the current wall without totally blowing the thermal and power envelopes, there is no reason why they cannot figure out how to make a 10 ghz 14nm cpu running at 1.4v other than lack of interest in achieving that level of performance...

however were they to invest in such a discovery then it would also scale downwards on the new substrate(s) which would mean any R&D at this point would be an investment that doesn't need to be made in the future

of course nothing will need to be scaled much below 700nm until after they figure out FTL signals.... though were they to figure it out it would be a boost towards quantum computing and nobody is going to look into that ......

also if they were able to figure out how to go above 10ghz its highly likely they would require wave guides which would mean computers could be reworked into weaponry.... still no point miniaturising something until you know it works in a larger more easily worked on scale, and better materials technology would mean lower voltage, I suspect its more likely that the next great evolution in desktops will be geared around using better materials to lower the voltage and heat whilst sticking quite close to the 5ghz speed,


----------



## TMatzelle60

Would there be anything wrong going with a 7700K for gaming?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Twirlz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> My i5 runs at 80% to 100% in BF1, it is not pegged. I can run minimum of 144 FPS ultra settings with a GTX 1080Ti in BF1.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nice screenshot. 99% usage with no action going on. I bet there is some nasty FPS drops and frametime spikes during explosions or when some kind of action is taking place. Stuttering in BF1 on an i5 is a common topic.
> 
> Having recently used a 4790K, i5 7600K and 1700, I simply couldn't recommend an i5 when Ryzen 5 was released. Not only would the 1600 platform cost less, but you would also get significantly better multithread performance and more consistent frametimes and FPS in games. Sure, it doesn't always achieve higher average FPS than a 7600K, but if FPS drops and frametime spikes are common it can result in an unpleasant experience.
> 
> A range of recent games have been able to push the i5 to 100% which obviously causes stuttering to be more common. Additionally, imagine playing BF1 at 100% usage and something tries to utilize resources in the background. Many users have a range of applications in the background and all it would take is a small update or task to further highlight the stuttering issue if you're already at 100%.
> 
> Is the 7600K a bad processor? Not at all, it still pushes out good performance but it just isn't worth it versus the 1600 for gaming IMO _unless_ you play games which love as fast cores as possible (ARMA, Primal etc). Even before Ryzen some games were able to push it very hard resulting erratic frametimes but it was almost just accepted because you had no other choice apart from pay more for an i7.
Click to expand...

Look I play the game daily there is only 144 FPS minimum drop with action like i already said, also no stuttering with my i5. If there was I would of spent the extra $100 on a i7 7700k when I upgraded to the i5 7600k. Don't tell me what I'm seeing when you don't have a i5 experience.


----------



## Blaze051806

think ill just stay with my 7700k


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *unityole*
> 
> so somewhat unrelated but thought i'd share this. for those who doesnt know tornado F5 is currently being sold by eurocom but it is an MSI 15" barebone model which uses desktop LGA CPU 7700k and has a MXM slot for 1 dGPU laptop 1080. F7 is gonna be a new model 17 as number suggest.
> 
> i thought intel isnt going to release CNL desktop so some how it'll now come with 8 cores on mainstream?


http://wccftech.com/intel-10nm-ice-lake-8-core-16-thread-mainstream-cpu-leak/


----------



## PontiacGTX

why keep looking to upgrade to a Quad core from 2015 when a Hexa core in 2018 will have a slighly higher price for 50% more cores/threads/cache


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nanotm*
> 
> crisis was great for the single player but the online side of the game was a total hackfest, yes the game looked fantastic and played pretty well on an sli rig (iirc I was running either yetson 9600gt's or powercolour 9800 gt's) having donated my 8600gt's to the kids


Can't comment about the MP because I only ever play SP. That's with all my games (BFBC2 remains the best campaign I've ever played but C2 had a brilliant story too).


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Would there be anything wrong going with a 7700K for gaming?


Of course not. That's a silly question.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Can't comment about the MP because I only ever play SP. That's with all my games (BFBC2 remains the best campaign I've ever played but C2 had a brilliant story too).


Yeah from all the fps I got to say BF BC2 also my favorite. I still do remember Crysis 1 the most and despite people not liking BF1 campaign It had it memorable moments.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Would there be anything wrong going with a 7700K for gaming?


That's the exact use I would give a 7700k without any qualifiers. For pure gaming, a 7700k is excellent.


----------



## Nightbird

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *unityole*
> 
> so somewhat unrelated but thought i'd share this. for those who doesnt know tornado F5 is currently being sold by eurocom but it is an MSI 15" barebone model which uses desktop LGA CPU 7700k and has a MXM slot for 1 dGPU laptop 1080. F7 is gonna be a new model 17 as number suggest.
> 
> i thought intel isnt going to release CNL desktop so some how it'll now come with 8 cores on mainstream?
> 
> 
> 
> http://wccftech.com/intel-10nm-ice-lake-8-core-16-thread-mainstream-cpu-leak/
Click to expand...

Great, if that is accurate it uses the same chipset so the same motherboard should support 8 cores. I'd be worried if it didn't.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nightbird*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *unityole*
> 
> so somewhat unrelated but thought i'd share this. for those who doesnt know tornado F5 is currently being sold by eurocom but it is an MSI 15" barebone model which uses desktop LGA CPU 7700k and has a MXM slot for 1 dGPU laptop 1080. F7 is gonna be a new model 17 as number suggest.
> 
> i thought intel isnt going to release CNL desktop so some how it'll now come with 8 cores on mainstream?
> 
> 
> 
> http://wccftech.com/intel-10nm-ice-lake-8-core-16-thread-mainstream-cpu-leak/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Great, if that is accurate it uses the same chipset so the same motherboard should support 8 cores. I'd be worried if it didn't.
Click to expand...

Coffee lake witll be Z370 Chipset and Ice lake will be Z390 chipset.


----------



## wingman99

I'm going to purchase both.


----------



## czin125

If they make Z390 a larger socket ( 7700K -> 7740X ), they could make it clock slightly higher and be easier to cool.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> http://wccftech.com/intel-10nm-ice-lake-8-core-16-thread-mainstream-cpu-leak/


So MSI's going to create their first 17.3" LGA laptop in 2018 and the custom version will have much better vrm and unlocked bios.

http://i.imgur.com/ofg9Hx6.jpg
The one on the right supports overclocking and the one on the left is the standard PCB.


----------



## Ding Chavez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Nightbird*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *unityole*
> 
> so somewhat unrelated but thought i'd share this. for those who doesnt know tornado F5 is currently being sold by eurocom but it is an MSI 15" barebone model which uses desktop LGA CPU 7700k and has a MXM slot for 1 dGPU laptop 1080. F7 is gonna be a new model 17 as number suggest.
> 
> i thought intel isnt going to release CNL desktop so some how it'll now come with 8 cores on mainstream?
> 
> 
> 
> http://wccftech.com/intel-10nm-ice-lake-8-core-16-thread-mainstream-cpu-leak/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Great, if that is accurate it uses the same chipset so the same motherboard should support 8 cores. I'd be worried if it didn't.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Coffee lake witll be Z370 Chipset and Ice lake will be Z390 chipset.
Click to expand...

M understanding is that Coffee Lake will be Z370 this year, 2017, then next year Z390 will be released with some new features. Cannon lake will be the first 10nm and mobile only. Ice lake will be 10nm+ and for desktop and come in 2019. Then Tiger lake will be 10nm++ and 7nm will come in 2020 or later. So Coffee lake should be around for a while maybe 2 years before Ice lake. And you'll probably need a new MB for ICE knowing Intel.
Intel have had some serious problems with 10nm which has pushed back the whole schedule.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/08/intels-next-generation-chip-plans-ice-lake-and-a-slow-10nm-transition/


----------



## jologskyblues

Hmmm. Another day, another leak...

My 4790K is still serving my gaming needs well so I guess I will just wait for Ice Lake. Hopefully there will be more meaningful gains for gaming to be had by then.


----------



## Nightbird

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ding Chavez*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Nightbird*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *unityole*
> 
> so somewhat unrelated but thought i'd share this. for those who doesnt know tornado F5 is currently being sold by eurocom but it is an MSI 15" barebone model which uses desktop LGA CPU 7700k and has a MXM slot for 1 dGPU laptop 1080. F7 is gonna be a new model 17 as number suggest.
> 
> i thought intel isnt going to release CNL desktop so some how it'll now come with 8 cores on mainstream?
> 
> 
> 
> http://wccftech.com/intel-10nm-ice-lake-8-core-16-thread-mainstream-cpu-leak/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Great, if that is accurate it uses the same chipset so the same motherboard should support 8 cores. I'd be worried if it didn't.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Coffee lake witll be Z370 Chipset and Ice lake will be Z390 chipset.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> M understanding is that Coffee Lake will be Z370 this year, 2017, then next year Z390 will be released with some new features. Cannon lake will be the first 10nm and mobile only. Ice lake will be 10nm+ and for desktop and come in 2019. Then Tiger lake will be 10nm++ and 7nm will come in 2020 or later. So Coffee lake should be around for a while maybe 2 years before Ice lake. And you'll probably need a new MB for ICE knowing Intel.
> Intel have had some serious problems with 10nm which has pushed back the whole schedule.
> 
> https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/08/intels-next-generation-chip-plans-ice-lake-and-a-slow-10nm-transition/
Click to expand...

So, 1 year with Z370 and EOL? Awesome!


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ding Chavez*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Nightbird*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *unityole*
> 
> so somewhat unrelated but thought i'd share this. for those who doesnt know tornado F5 is currently being sold by eurocom but it is an MSI 15" barebone model which uses desktop LGA CPU 7700k and has a MXM slot for 1 dGPU laptop 1080. F7 is gonna be a new model 17 as number suggest.
> 
> i thought intel isnt going to release CNL desktop so some how it'll now come with 8 cores on mainstream?
> 
> 
> 
> http://wccftech.com/intel-10nm-ice-lake-8-core-16-thread-mainstream-cpu-leak/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Great, if that is accurate it uses the same chipset so the same motherboard should support 8 cores. I'd be worried if it didn't.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Coffee lake witll be Z370 Chipset and Ice lake will be Z390 chipset.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> M understanding is that Coffee Lake will be Z370 this year, 2017, then next year Z390 will be released with some new features. Cannon lake will be the first 10nm and mobile only. Ice lake will be 10nm+ and for desktop and come in 2019. Then Tiger lake will be 10nm++ and 7nm will come in 2020 or later. So Coffee lake should be around for a while maybe 2 years before Ice lake. And you'll probably need a new MB for ICE knowing Intel.
> Intel have had some serious problems with 10nm which has pushed back the whole schedule.
> 
> https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/08/intels-next-generation-chip-plans-ice-lake-and-a-slow-10nm-transition/
Click to expand...

I have never seen Intel release a new chip set without a new processor, also Intel in the past has not kept a processor SKU more than a little longer than a year.


----------



## Ding Chavez

Z390 is a bit of a mystery. The naming of it is odd and no new CPU for it has been given, it just appears on a roadmap chart with no mention of Ice lake. Just speculating here could be a Coffee lake refresh with a high end i7 8c16t.
Ice Lake 10nm+ desktop CPUs are still a long way off can't see them coming before early 2019.
Quote:


> Intel are dethroning the Z370, before it's even been released, and replacing it with the Z390 as the top enthusiast chipset for the Intel Coffee Lake processors...


Quote:


> A possible reason for the Z390 chipset could potentially be to accommodate a Cannonlake-based desktop processor, although 10nm Ice Lake would be just on the horizon and could feature a new socket design. It's also a possibility that Intel will launch refreshed 14nm++ processors alongside the Z390 chipset, offering expanded features with the top-end chipset. Otherwise, without stepping down the Z370 motherboard platform from the top-end feature set, or cannibalising their HEDT X299 platform, it's not yet obvious as to why Intel require another high-end chipset.


https://www.pcgamesn.com/intel-z390-coffee-lake

Edit: If you include refresh CPUs a series lasts for longer than 1 year sometimes 2. Skylake was released august 2015, Coffee lake oct 2017. Kaby Lake was just a Skylake refresh virtually the same mainly a marketing thing to bring something that seems new but really isn't. Ice lake possibly late 2019 so Coffee lake with a refresh could be 2 years.


----------



## czin125

https://dlcdnimgs.asus.com/websites/global/products/90zovFvWmRoa2s67/img/performance/chart-1.png
8C/16T on 10nm+ shouldn't have problems matching these clocks if a 7900X can clock at 5ghz on 14nm+.


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> https://dlcdnimgs.asus.com/websites/global/products/90zovFvWmRoa2s67/img/performance/chart-1.png
> 8C/16T on 10nm+ shouldn't have problems matching these clocks if a 7900X can clock at 5ghz on 14nm+.


Smaller nm under certain level means:
- lower durability at 24/7 load.
- (14/10)^2 smaller area to radiate heat.
- possibly higher voltage for the same frequency.
- more likely voltage jumping to near line and messing stuff up.

Smaller nm is king for tablets and cell phones, but the most important for these devices is battery endurance, and as Intel found efficiency per watt is more important than bit better speed.

Actually I think the attempt to move to smaller and smaller nm created a trap for companies. They competed by reducing nm, which increased number of CPU per waffer, reduced power consumption per Hz, and allowed to put more transistors per same price.

Now changing to smaller nm means: lower frequency, more CPU killing defects per wafer, and higher costs per finished wafer because need of special coatings and multiple passes for each wafer.

Obviously companies that are manufacturing equipment for manufacturing wafers are unwilling to make equipment for large wafers, because it would be used by Intel, AMD and possibly TSMC, and that would be economically nonviable.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I'm going to purchase both.


Its neat when consumers not only reward anti-consumer corporate policy with their wallets but also double down and cheer lead for those companies at the same time! Congrats on your unquestioned Team Blue pedigree.

Look, its one thing to claim Intel has the best performance in the CPU sector (they do), or that a particular Intel product simply fits your own personal needs better than any other available product, but its another thing entirely to gleefully support shenanigans like 10-month life spans for a socket or brag about how often you buy new mobos just to enjoy the latest in Intel performance.

I've never owned an AMD processor and have supported Intel over the years with my wallet because they offered the best products that fit my needs. That doesn't mean that I'm happy about how Intel plays ball or that I am going to hope AMD fails like you seem to be doing. Everybody should be hoping for close competition between these two companies so that both of them have to play by rules that are beneficial to us consumers.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I'm going to purchase both.
> 
> 
> 
> Its neat when consumers not only reward anti-consumer corporate policy with their wallets but also double down and cheer lead for those companies at the same time! Congrats on your unquestioned Team Blue pedigree.
> 
> Look, its one thing to claim Intel has the best performance in the CPU sector (they do), or that a particular Intel product simply fits your own personal needs better than any other available product, but its another thing entirely to gleefully support shenanigans like 10-month life spans for a socket or brag about how often you buy new mobos just to enjoy the latest in Intel performance.
> 
> I've never owned an AMD processor and have supported Intel over the years with my wallet because they offered the best products that fit my needs. That doesn't mean that I'm happy about how Intel plays ball or that I am going to hope AMD fails like you seem to be doing. Everybody should be hoping for close competition between these two companies so that both of them have to play by rules that are beneficial to us consumers.
Click to expand...

I'm not even a speck to intel. I just upgrade for something to do and a change in SKUs.







I like easy overclocking for memory and CPU.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

That's fair, but your posts in this entire thread would indicate more than just a "suits my needs" mentality. Maybe its just me...


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Yeah when there's literally nothing on screen you get higher fps because of clock speed, when there's anything demanding the 7700k and 7600k choke, the 7700k less than the 7600k of course because of HT. Same thing in Battlefield 1. i5s are pegged at 100% across all cores with any modern GPU. i5s? Sorry, I meant i3s because that's a thing now for 4c/4t Intel CPUs.


I think a big issue is running a multiplayer game with voice coms + browser and other garbage in the background can't be benchmarked as consistently as a clean install.

At the end of the day, Ryzen has single threaded performance of Haswell , roughly.

@ Majin SSJ Eric , it's nice for forum-users to cheer-lead for AMD and all... but at the end of the day _money talks_.

All the people that say Ryzen is a great CPU for their needs and then go buy an overpriced Intel CPU that has equal or less performance ... does not help consumers.

Back when AMD made CPUs that were truly competitive with Intel, Intel basically bribed vendors into selling Intel CPUs. Back when AMD had "real quad cores" with Phenom I (albeit with TLB bug) , Intel "glued their CPUs together" just like AMD's Threadripper. Funny how Intel is calling AMD out on Threadripper.

I have had both AMD and Intel systems at the same time and I still do (until Core2 , AMD had compelling offerings such as the K6, K6-2, K6-3, Athlon XP, Athlon 64 , Phenom II). The only time I don't upgrade either is when AMD or Intel don't provide a compelling upgrade. For example: on AM3 , upgrading to Bulldozer from Phenom II , or to Phenom I with TLB bugs on Am2. I had a Core 2 Quad Q6600 (and Core Duo) because of the performance differences.

Ryzen 7 vs a six core Intel i7 8th gen seems to me like a Phenom II x6 vs Intel i7-920 situation. It arrived earlier in response to an older competitor. So Ryzen revision / Ryzen + will be the competitor to the Intel 8th gen CPUs.

Some Phenom II headlines / conclusions:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



"AMD Phenom II X4 940 & 920: A True Return to Competition"

"Some tough realities remain for AMD, but I'd say they're now tempered by a little more hope. Although the Phenom II is a marked improvement over the original 65nm Phenom, AMD still can't match the fastest Core 2 Quads in clock-for-clock or outright performance. And obviously, the Core i7 is yet another step beyond the Core 2. "

"AMD Phenom II: striking back with a vengeance?"

"AMD has brought two years of pain to a close. Phenom II is competitive where it counts"

"Phenom II X4 920 und 940 Black Edition im Test: AMD ist wieder da" (AMD is back again)

"AMD Phenom II X4, le retour" (AMD returns)

" Should you choose the Phenom II X4 940 BE or the similarly priced Q9550? We cannot really answer this question because they are almost completely equal in matters of gaming or work use. But one thing can be said at least: AMD is back in the game. "



Ryzen 7 launch headlines:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



"AMD Ryzen 7 1800X still behind Intel, but it's great for the price"

"The AMD Ryzen 7: plenty of power, but underwhelming gaming"

"AMD Ryzen 7 1700 review: a bargain-priced 8-core that just needs some overclocked lovin'"

"AMD is back : AMD's vaunted Ryzen CPU is a multithreaded monster with one glaring weakness.

"CPU competition at last: AMD Ryzen brings 8 cores from just $329 AMD is back in the performance game... finally."

" AMD Ryzen 7 1700 review Eight is great: AMD's Ryzen 7 1700 conquers every challenge with many cores "

"AMD Ryzen Review: Ryzen 7 1800X & 1700X Put to the Test: It's finally here and ready to compete with the latest and greatest"

"AMD is back, and it just made desktop gaming a whole lot cheaper"

"AMD's new Ryzen processor is a huge leap forward and a true competitor to Intel"

"Bottom line: building a high-performance PC in the coming months? There are, once again, compelling reasons to consider an AMD CPU."

"To round up our thoughts, Ryzen 1800X gives the consumer fantastic choice, it performs wonderfully and is aggressively priced."

"AMD's Ryzen 7 1800X, Ryzen 7 1700X, and Ryzen 7 1700 CPUs reviewed : Ryzen up, back on the street"

...



I'm still waiting for AMD to bring the power efficiency of Ryzen to the mobile space. Intel has had an advantage as far back as 2004/2005 (first AMD Sempron mobile CPUs).

People should vote with their wallet.


----------



## jologskyblues

I'm going to wait for Ice Lake or Zen 2 and choose whichever is the best for gaming.


----------



## Contiusa

These latest leaks are strange. It shows the i7-8700K ahead in single thread compared to the i7-7700K and 30% higher than Ryzen. But in multithread it has the same score of the R5 1600X.

Something is not adding up.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I think a big issue is running a multiplayer game with voice coms + browser and other garbage in the background can't be benchmarked as consistently as a clean install.
> 
> At the end of the day, Ryzen has single threaded performance of Haswell , roughly.
> 
> @ Majin SSJ Eric , it's nice for forum-users to cheer-lead for AMD and all... but at the end of the day _money talks_.
> 
> All the people that say Ryzen is a great CPU for their needs and then go buy an overpriced Intel CPU that has equal or less performance ... does not help consumers.
> 
> Back when AMD made CPUs that were truly competitive with Intel, Intel basically bribed vendors into selling Intel CPUs. Back when AMD had "real quad cores" with Phenom I (albeit with TLB bug) , Intel "glued their CPUs together" just like AMD's Threadripper. Funny how Intel is calling AMD out on Threadripper.
> 
> I have had both AMD and Intel systems at the same time and I still do (until Core2 , AMD had compelling offerings such as the K6, K6-2, K6-3, Athlon XP, Athlon 64 , Phenom II). The only time I don't upgrade either is when the AMD or Intel don't provide a compelling upgrade. For example: on AM3 , upgrading to Bulldozer from Phenom II , or to Phenom I with TLB bugs on Am2. I had a Core 2 Quad Q6600 (and Core Duo) because of the performance differences.
> 
> Ryzen 7 vs a six core Intel i7 8th gen seems to me like a Phenom II x6 vs Intel i7-920 situation. It arrived earlier in response to an older competitor. So Ryzen revision / Ryzen + will be the competitor to the Intel 8th gen CPUs.
> 
> The some Phenom II headlines / conclusions:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> "AMD Phenom II X4 940 & 920: A True Return to Competition"
> 
> "Some tough realities remain for AMD, but I'd say they're now tempered by a little more hope. Although the Phenom II is a marked improvement over the original 65nm Phenom, AMD still can't match the fastest Core 2 Quads in clock-for-clock or outright performance. And obviously, the Core i7 is yet another step beyond the Core 2. "
> 
> "AMD Phenom II: striking back with a vengeance?"
> 
> "AMD has brought two years of pain to a close. Phenom II is competitive where it counts"
> 
> "Phenom II X4 920 und 940 Black Edition im Test: AMD ist wieder da" (AMD is back again)
> 
> "AMD Phenom II X4, le retour" (AMD returns)
> 
> " Should you choose the Phenom II X4 940 BE or the similarly priced Q9550? We cannot really answer this question because they are almost completely equal in matters of gaming or work use. But one thing can be said at least: AMD is back in the game. "
> 
> 
> 
> Ryzen 7 launch headlines:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> "AMD Ryzen 7 1800X still behind Intel, but it's great for the price"
> 
> "The AMD Ryzen 7: plenty of power, but underwhelming gaming"
> 
> "AMD Ryzen 7 1700 review: a bargain-priced 8-core that just needs some overclocked lovin'"
> 
> "AMD is back : AMD's vaunted Ryzen CPU is a multithreaded monster with one glaring weakness.
> 
> "CPU competition at last: AMD Ryzen brings 8 cores from just $329 AMD is back in the performance game... finally."
> 
> " AMD Ryzen 7 1700 review Eight is great: AMD's Ryzen 7 1700 conquers every challenge with many cores "
> 
> "AMD Ryzen Review: Ryzen 7 1800X & 1700X Put to the Test: It's finally here and ready to compete with the latest and greatest"
> 
> "AMD is back, and it just made desktop gaming a whole lot cheaper"
> 
> "AMD's new Ryzen processor is a huge leap forward and a true competitor to Intel"
> 
> "Bottom line: building a high-performance PC in the coming months? There are, once again, compelling reasons to consider an AMD CPU."
> 
> "To round up our thoughts, Ryzen 1800X gives the consumer fantastic choice, it performs wonderfully and is aggressively priced."
> 
> "AMD's Ryzen 7 1800X, Ryzen 7 1700X, and Ryzen 7 1700 CPUs reviewed : Ryzen up, back on the street"
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> I'm still waiting for AMD to bring the power efficiency of Ryzen to the mobile space. Intel has had an advantage as far back as 2004/2005 (first AMD Sempron mobile CPUs).
> 
> People should vote with their wallet.


Well the reason I haven't upgraded my CPU since 2013 is because my 4930K is still more than enough power for everything I use it for. But when I do upgrade (possibly later this year) I will definitely be buying a Ryzen/AM4 system; probably a 1800X if prices keep tumbling. I wouldn't really consider TR at this point just because I don't need more than 8 cores, and an 1800X/AM4 setup will probably cost less than the 6-core CL while offering an upgrade path and comparable performance.

I agree that its not enough to pat AMD on the back for getting back into the CPU game, but CPU's tend to last a long time nowadays and I just haven't had a need to improve upon my 4930K yet.


----------



## artemis2307

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> These latest leaks are strange. It shows the i7-8700K ahead in single thread compared to the i7-7700K and 30% higher than Ryzen. But in multithread it has the same score of the R5 1600X.
> 
> Something is not adding up.


AMD's SMT is said to be 10% better than Intel's HT. And maybe 8700k's all core boost is very low


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artemis2307*
> 
> AMD's SMT is said to be 10% better than Intel's HT. And maybe 8700k's all core boost is very low


these two things sound likely to me. SMT is noticeably better in most benchmarks I've seen.


----------



## kd5151

https://videocardz.com/newz/intel-kabylake-cpus-will-not-work-with-z370-motherboards-at-least-not-yet,


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Well the reason I haven't upgraded my CPU since 2013 is because my 4930K is still more than enough power for everything I use it for. But when I do upgrade (possibly later this year) I will definitely be buying a Ryzen/AM4 system; probably a 1800X if prices keep tumbling. I wouldn't really consider TR at this point just because I don't need more than 8 cores, and an 1800X/AM4 setup will probably cost less than the 6-core CL while offering an upgrade path and comparable performance.
> 
> I agree that its not enough to pat AMD on the back for getting back into the CPU game, but CPU's tend to last a long time nowadays and I just haven't had a need to improve upon my 4930K yet.


Save yourself about $150 bucks and go with the 1700X. Amazon,newegg,refurb4less on ebay has had them for many times for $299.99.


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artemis2307*
> 
> AMD's SMT is said to be 10% better than Intel's HT. And maybe 8700k's all core boost is very low


It's better, but not by 10%.



Average of 22 different workloads.

There are cases where Ryzen's SMT is superior, however that's not always the case.


----------



## paulerxx

i5 8600k vs i7 7700k.

6 cores vs 4/8. Which do you think will be faster at the same clocks?

EDIT: For gaming only. I've seen tons of benchmarks where HT actually hurts performance 1-8%,


----------



## kd5151

7600K scores 700 points in cbr15. So 700 divided by 2 is 350. So 350 + 350 + 350 is 1050 points in cbr15. 7700K is just under 1000. Intel glued a fast pentium to the the i5. Curious how close my logic is.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Well the reason I haven't upgraded my CPU since 2013 is because my 4930K is still more than enough power for everything I use it for. But when I do upgrade (possibly later this year) I will definitely be buying a Ryzen/AM4 system; probably a 1800X if prices keep tumbling. I wouldn't really consider TR at this point just because I don't need more than 8 cores, and an 1800X/AM4 setup will probably cost less than the 6-core CL while offering an upgrade path and comparable performance.
> 
> I agree that its not enough to pat AMD on the back for getting back into the CPU game, but CPU's tend to last a long time nowadays and I just haven't had a need to improve upon my 4930K yet.


I dont see really an upgrade to get a 1800x if your Apps only use 6c/12t
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> It's better, but not by 10%.
> 
> 
> 
> Average of 22 different workloads.
> 
> There are cases where Ryzen's SMT is superior, however that's not always the case.


Can you compare with Skylake X and later Coffee lake?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> It's better, but not by 10%.
> 
> 
> 
> Average of 22 different workloads.
> 
> There are cases where Ryzen's SMT is superior, however that's not always the case.


Technically its 13% faster there.


----------



## artemis2307

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *paulerxx*
> 
> i5 8600k vs i7 7700k.
> 
> 6 cores vs 4/8. Which do you think will be faster at the same clocks?
> 
> EDIT: For gaming only. I've seen tons of benchmarks where HT actually hurts performance 1-8%,


for gaming?
6c/6T any day of the week
other tasks?
I'd still pick the 6C/6T


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artemis2307*
> 
> for gaming?
> 6c/6T any day of the week
> other tasks?
> I'd still pick the 6C/6T


At this point I would still get at least 6C/12T. 6C/6T will push another 1-2 with no performance difference compared to HT i7 but eventually will end up in the same pace as current i5s.


----------



## artemis2307

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> At this point I would still get at least 6C/12T. 6C/6T will push another 1-2 with no performance difference compared to HT i7 but eventually will end up in the same pace as current i5s.


true
in futureproofing terms, 7700k/8600k still has no chance against 1600/1700


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artemis2307*
> 
> AMD's SMT is said to be 10% better than Intel's HT. And maybe 8700k's all core boost is very low


Not really. If the i7-8700K is better in single thread over the 7700K, it should be clocking above 4.5Ghz in one core. Then I imagine it would reach at least 4.2Ghz in all cores. Even if it only clocks 4Ghz in all cores you have to remember that the i7-7800X also has six cores, has mesh architecture, 4Ghz turbo (which might clock around 3.7Ghz in all cores) and comes only 6% below the R7 1700 in multithread. If they kept the ring bus architecture, two cores should not have such a burden to force it to clock around 3.7Ghz. Since the mainstream cores tend to be stronger than the HEDT ones, an i7-8700K should never compare to the R5-1600X. it would have to tank in all aspects, not only multithreaded applications and Intel would be simply murdering a classic line that started with Sandy Bridge.

The test might have been done with different settings for single and multi or is just a fake. Or people at Intel went nuts over the last months (also possible).


----------



## Scotty99

Ya know not sure im gonna go back to intel yet. I got a guildmate in WoW that has a 7700k and a gtx 1070, standing right next to me in game he was only 8-10 fps higher than my ryzen chip. Same graphics setting/view distance, i honestly expected a larger delta in a CPU bound scenario like that.

Side note, craigslist people are funny. Guy offered me 300 for my ryzen 1700 and x370 motherboard lol.


----------



## OrweII

*i7 8700K tested*


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OrweII*
> 
> *i7 8700K tested*


----------



## Scotty99

My 3.9ghz 1700 gets 1710 in cinebench multi, for reference.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> My 3.9ghz 1700 gets 1710 in cinebench multi, for reference.


https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/1603


----------



## Contiusa

So the i7-8700K is tied with the 1700 according to AnandTech. That's more like it, but we'll only know when they release the reviews with CPUs tested with the same metodology.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> So the i7-8700K is tied with the 1700 according to AnandTech. That's more like it, but we'll only know when they release the reviews with CPUs tested with the same metodology.


https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/1862

Yikes.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> So the i7-8700K is tied with the 1700 according to AnandTech. That's more like it, but we'll only know when they release the reviews with CPUs tested with the same metodology.


In multi-core, and 6 vs 8.


----------



## Scotty99

Gotta remember tho,1700 is like 100 bucks cheaper. (assuming my 379.00 prediction is accurate).


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> In multi-core, and 6 vs 8.


1T 3.7ghz vs 4.7ghz
MT Base 3.0ghz vs 3.7ghz
Boost is what 3.2ghz vs 4.3ghz???


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Gotta remember tho,1700 is like 100 bucks cheaper. (assuming my 379.00 prediction is accurate).


But I think in this case people are paying for the higher single core performance -- and because it is a ring bus architecture, ideal for gaming and core performance (Office, Adobe). For who has the extra cash, the i7-8700K is a no brainer, really.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> 1T 3.7ghz vs 4.7ghz
> MT Base 3.0ghz vs 3.7ghz
> Boost is what 3.2ghz vs 4.3ghz???


I was qualifying a blanket statement. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make quoting me.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*


that around a 6900k score but obviously there is a big Clock advantage

also why they hide the number is it a 8700k?8750k? 8790k? are there any plans to release something with higher default clock? or it is under NDA?


----------



## Scotty99

Well the appeal is the extra cores, coffee isnt seeing an uptick in IPC. Its appealing to me because its the best of both worlds type scenario, 4c8t is not going to be nearly as future proof as 6c12t is, we are seeing that already today.


----------



## Techhog

Paging Ryan Shrout

It's probably not going to happen, but I hope this can hit 4.8 GHz on all cores on high-end air.


----------



## Scotty99

I hope the strix z370 comes out on release too, really like the style of those boards.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> I was qualifying a blanket statement. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make quoting me.


fast 6 core vs slow 8 core.

Edit: 1700/all of ryzen 7 vs 8700k


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> fast 6 core vs slow 8 core.


That's not fair at all, its a 6900k for 1/3rd the price. Now i suppose a 6900k qualifies as "slow"? lol


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> That's not fair at all, its a 6900k for 1/3rd the price. Now i suppose a 6900k qualifies as "slow"? lol


slow cores. 1ghz faster cores.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> fast 6 core vs slow 8 core.
> 
> Edit: 1700/all of ryzen 7 vs 8700k


If Ryzen is "slow", what the hell is Bulldozer?


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> If Ryzen is "slow", what the hell is Bulldozer?


slower.


----------



## SuperZan

Nothing with Haswell or better IPS is qualitatively slow in nearly any possible consumer workload. Ryzen IPS is good; SL/KL/CL IPS is excellent. That said, we are on OCN, so I'll return you to your regularly scheduled hyperbole.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> slow cores. 1ghz faster cores.


You gotta keep things in perspective, ryzen launched to compete with intels HEDT (broadwell e) for a much much lower price.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Nothing with Haswell or better IPS is qualitatively slow in nearly any possible consumer workload. Ryzen IPS is good; SL/KL/CL IPS is excellent. That said, we _are_ on OCN, so I'll return you to your regularly scheduled hyperbole.


Clock speeds! Big problem for ryzen! Even a 1600x or 6800k with decent clock start creeping up on 8 cores. Mostly the 6800k cuz ryzen cant go much over 4ghz.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You gotta keep things in perspective, ryzen launched to compete with intels HEDT (broadwell e) for a much much lower qprice.


you're right. The 8700 will probably be $100 more still.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Clock speeds! Big problem for ryzen! Even a 1600x or 6800k with decent clock start creeping up on 8 cores. Mostly the 6800k cuz ryzen cant go much over 4ghz.


6800k typically tops out at 4.4GHz with a good chip using cooling appropriate for a Ryzen at 4GHz. With largely similar IPC, there is not a massive difference in IPS between the two when comparing a 4GHz Ryzen to a 4.4GHz 6800k. At Ryzen's launch there was very little reason to purchase a 6800k over Ryzen with such a small ST performance delta while the 6800k cost more. It's only recently been priced more appropriately, but it's still not a very good deal as Ryzen will give you much the same performance with a drop-in upgrade option in (probably) 2018 and Skylake-X offers a more significant ST performance delta versus Ryzen so long as you have appropriate cooling.

That's to say nothing of Coffee Lake, which should once again change the mainstream landscape provided Intel prices it correctly.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> 6800k typically tops out at 4.4GHz with a good chip using cooling appropriate for a Ryzen at 4GHz. With largely similar IPC, there is not a massive difference in IPS between the two when comparing a 4GHz Ryzen to a 4.4GHz 6800k. At Ryzen's launch there was very little reason to purchase a 6800k over Ryzen with such a small ST performance delta while the 6800k cost more. It's only recently been priced more appropriately, but it's still not a very good deal as Ryzen will give you much the same performance with a drop-in upgrade option in (probably) 2018 and Skylake-X offers a more significant ST performance delta versus Ryzen so long as you have appropriate cooling.
> 
> That's to say nothing of Coffee Lake, which should once again change the mainstream landscape provided Intel prices it correctly.


Ryzen pricing is amazing. The 1700/1700X is the way to go. 8700K will be as much as the 7800x. If not I have no clue what Intel is doing. Keep in mind they think a quad is HEDT.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Ryzen pricing is amazing. The 1700/1700X is the way to go. 8700K will be as much as the 7800x. If not I have no clue what Intel is doing. Keep in mind they think a quad is HEDT.


To be fair, those quads are really just for extreme overclockers. My guess is that Intel came up with the idea a year ago just in case Zen managed to OC very well.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> To be fair, those quads are really just for extreme overclockers. My guess is that Intel came up with the idea a year ago just in case Zen managed to OC very well.


https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117791&cm_re=Kaby-lake_x-_-19-117-791-_-Product

0 reviews on newegg. Your quess is as good as mine.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117791&cm_re=Kaby-lake_x-_-19-117-791-_-Product
> 
> 0 reviews on newegg. Your quess is as good as mine.


Yeah, I doubt that they've shipped any past launch lol


----------



## Neo_Morpheus

Looking at the Pass Mark performance test baseline searches at AMD cpu's in system tests and it showed they lacked fast memory (rarely over 3000Mhz) and 2d Graphics, and the scores were down. I would go for the 8700k over the 1700x or 1800x.


----------



## czin125

http://tieba.baidu.com/p/5328908012

http://imgsrc.baidu.com/forum/w%3D580/sign=bfa6fed701d162d985ee621421dea950/81ae2edda3cc7cd930be84ca3201213fb80e9117.jpg

2668 19-19-19-43 CR2 NB Clock 4400mhz
Aida64 60.9 ns

Should be possible to drop it back down to high 30s with 4000C17 2T.


----------



## Nightbird

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> If Ryzen is "slow", what the hell is Bulldozer?
> 
> 
> 
> slower.
Click to expand...


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Save yourself about $150 bucks and go with the 1700X. Amazon,newegg,refurb4less on ebay has had them for many times for $299.99.


Oh I know but I've seen the 1800X for as low as $350 so I can eat the extra $50 to get the top dog. Epeen and all that!


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> *I dont see really an upgrade to get a 1800x if your Apps only use 6c/12t*
> Can you compare with Skylake X and later Coffee lake?


That's the reason I still have the 4930K. I haven't been motivated to go to all the trouble of a complete platform rebuild (especially having to deal with my custom loop) for an 8-core simply because my usage doesn't dictate the need. For the last 9 months I've been using my 2600K rig as my daily driver because I've been too lazy to get some issues resolved with my main rig. 99% of the time the 2600K/270X rig fulfills my computing needs adequately now that I no longer am heavy into benching.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> But I think in this case people are paying for the higher single core performance -- and because it is a ring bus architecture, ideal for gaming and core performance (Office, Adobe). *For who has the extra cash, the i7-8700K is a no brainer,* really.


Not really for those who have a real need for 2 more cores and 4 more threads. IPC really only matters significantly for gaming and even then its not like Ryzen is bad, just not quite as fast. For a lot of other popular multi-core apps Ryzen will still be faster than the 8700K I believe.

That said, for all the reasons the 7700K currently is the best fit for certain consumers, the 8700K will be that much better.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> *I dont see really an upgrade to get a 1800x if your Apps only use 6c/12t*
> Can you compare with Skylake X and later Coffee lake?
> 
> 
> 
> That's the reason I still have the 4930K. I haven't been motivated to go to all the trouble of a complete platform rebuild (especially having to deal with my custom loop) for an 8-core simply because my usage doesn't dictate the need. For the last 9 months I've been using my 2600K rig as my daily driver because I've been too lazy to get some issues resolved with my main rig. 99% of the time the 2600K/270X rig fulfills my computing needs adequately now that I no longer am heavy into benching.
Click to expand...

Do you play games on the 2600k rig and if you do what games do you play?


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> That said, for all the reasons the 7700K currently is the best fit for certain consumers, the 8700K will be that much better.


But that's what I'm saying.

I work with my i7-3770K and I would never buy a Ryzen 7. Literally never. I don't need it and I don't like the fact that it resembles the mesh of the HEDT line and does not overclock much, but I sure could benefit from an i7-8700K paired with a Samsung 960 or similar. And I also game and do some editing. Then I don't mind paying the extra U$100 for a CPU that can take me into the 2020s without much hassle. We do that kind of stuff in all areas of our lives, paying premium (when we can afford) for a better sneaker, a better pair of skis, a new car, a good restaurant and so on. In general it is well worth the price, just like paying premium for Noctua fans.

Now if I was editing films or converting huge PDF files and such, it is obvious that Ryzen would be a sweater deal, although I would wait for Ryzen 2 to skip the bugs.

And I mean "premium" the prediction that it will come roughly at the same price of the 7700K, perhaps a little over it, especially because the 7800X is selling for U$379 and is HEDT. If they want to rip us off, I'll wait for Ryzen 2, which should come with some 10-15% improvement in IPC and with better oc-bilities.


----------



## Timur Born

The advancement of multi-core CPUs is hindered by software developers. Here is one discussion that demonstrates why I am more or less forced to buy a high frequency/IPC CPU again despite only owning an AMD 1800X for some months. I got no further answer from the developer since last week, so I do not know if he still scoffs at the idea "Ideal Cores" being allocated by the application instead of relying on some quasi-random Windows process.

Copy and paste from here on:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Software Developer of a highly multi-threaded PDF application*
> We do not set threads or process affinity (as in most cases this does not give significant performance boost and may result performance degradation), so OS manage them.


And this is where I see a possible culprit. But let me quote from the linked [by the same above quoted software developer] Mark E. Russinovich and David A. Solomon article first and highlight some lines:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mark E. Russinovich and David A. Solomon*
> The ideal processor for a thread is chosen when a thread is created using a seed in the process block. The *seed is incremented each time a thread is created so that the ideal processor for each new thread in the process will rotate through the available processors* on the system.
> ...
> Note that this assumes the threads within a process are doing an equal amount of work. *This is typically not the case in a multithreaded process*, which normally has one or more housekeeping threads and then a number of worker threads. Therefore, *a multithreaded application that wants to take full advantage of the platform might find it advantageous to specify the ideal processor numbers for its threads* by using the SetThreadIdealProcessor function.
> ...
> *On hyperthreaded systems, the next ideal processor is the first logical processor on the next physical processor.*


Now let's get back to what I actually measured when running XXX using 8 rendering threads on my 8C/16T CPU. For more clarity I reformat my last measurement:

Actively rendering (as in actual CPU load happening) "Ideal Processor" cores, sorted by physical cores (AMD 1800X), measured via Process Explorer:

Core 1 (CCX1): 3
Core 4 (CCX2): 6, 7
Core 5 (CCX2): 10, 11, 11,
Core 7 (CCX2): 14, 15
XXX.exe: Core 7: 14

*- Out of 8 physical cores only 4 were used by XXX, out of 16 logical cores only 7 were used by XXX. The other cores remained mostly idle and unused on my system.*
- Only 1 out of 9 threads were allocated to a single physical core.
- 6 out of 9 threads were allocated to only two physical cores, with 3 threads sharing a single physical core (Hyperthreading/SMT).
- 4 out of 9 threads even shared the same (Hyperthreading/SMT) logical core with another thread (11+11 and 14+14) while the other logical core of the same physical core was also utilized.

This was with the number of rendering threads being set to 8 and number of working threads being set to 16. If Windows just brainlessly "rotates through the available processors" then giving it a hint in form of "Ideal Processor" affinity seems like a good idea and exactly what the function "SetThreadIdealProcessor(Ex)" was implemented for?! I understand it as a "suggestion" to the Windows processors scheduler to help it make better educated decisions.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Windows Dev Center*
> Sets a preferred processor for a thread. The system schedules threads on their preferred processors whenever possible.


It seems that my expensive hardware is not put to good use by XXX current multi-threading implementation, as some cores (even Hyperthreading) seem over-utilized while others remain idle. This is why I feel that XXX could maybe be improved in these areas.



PS: Setting the software to 8 rendering + 8 working threads (instead of 16) does not help the situation. There are too many other minor "housekeeping" threads being created first (some of which produce no CPU load) and thus Windows is not able to allocate free cores for the most load intensive threads.


----------



## nanotm

I bet the program your trying to use is adobe, which is an intel partnership company.....

if you install it on an intel 8c/16t cpu the program will magically work better ....


----------



## Timur Born

No, it's a competitor to Adobe's PDF solution whose software is faster in many aspects. At least they allow the number of threads to be set in their preferences, they just don't allocate them well enough and still use single-threaded processing in some operations (PDF search).

But Adobe software is another problematic area, with far too many processes still not being properly multi-threaded or even being single-threaded (face recognition in Lightroom, PDF search in Reader DC, opening large PSD files in Photoshop or applying certain filters).


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Ryzen pricing is amazing. The 1700/1700X is the way to go. 8700K will be as much as the 7800x. If not I have no clue what Intel is doing. Keep in mind they think a quad is HEDT.


there is a chance it is cheaper than 7800x


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> there is a chance it is cheaper than 7800x


It'll most likely be the same price as the 7700K, so a little cheaper. However, that's before including platform cost.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Ryzen pricing is amazing. The 1700/1700X is the way to go. 8700K will be as much as the 7800x. If not I have no clue what Intel is doing. *Keep in mind they think a quad is HEDT*.


They are highly-binned HEDT toys, based on early overclocks of 5.3GHz+ on water. I wish they weren't.


----------



## Scotty99

Tom logan just released a video saying only 2 boards from asus will be available at launch, so probably no strix









He said it was the same two asus had for z270, which i think were maximus formula and code.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> The advancement of multi-core CPUs is hindered by software developers. Here is one discussion that demonstrates why I am more or less forced to buy a high frequency/IPC CPU again despite only owning an AMD 1800X for some months. I got no further answer from the developer since last week, so I do not know if he still scoffs at the idea "Ideal Cores" being allocated by the application instead of relying on some quasi-random Windows process.


Ultimately it all boils down to the fact that multi-threaded programming is ridiculously difficult. Programming itself is difficult enough. And nobody teaches _parallel_ programming outside of advanced graduate courses. So the majority of software developers out there don't know anything about parallel programming beyond having heard of the topic. And those that do are often self-taught.

To be frank, a lot of companies (including my workplace) have plenty of trouble finding appropriate candidates that can do this sort of programming. There's so few of them and everybody wants to hire them.

All the various tools out there try to do their best to make it easier to do parallel programming. On the development side, there are better and better programming languages, threading libraries, etc... On the environment side, the OS tries to adapt.

The whole point of Windows "randomly throwing threads around" the cores is to counter these inherent imbalances in work-loads to prevent certain cores from getting oversubscribed while others are idle. These heuristic approaches generally provide decent performance. But there's still a lot more performance to be gained by taking things into your hands - if you know what you're doing that is...

The case that you're describing with the pathological use of "SetThreadIdealProcessor" happens when the developer _thinks_ they are smarter than the OS when they really aren't. So they try to take things into their own hands (which Windows gladly obliges) only to shoot themselves after Windows gives them the gun. Similar situations arise with hand optimizations vs. compiler optimizations. Though it's much harder to notice when things go wrong there since it doesn't show up in Task Manager.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Tom logan just released a video saying only 2 boards from asus will be available at launch, so probably no strix
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He said it was the same two asus had for z270, which i think were maximus formula and code.


On one hand that makes the choice between Hero and Code easier. On the other hand, $350 for a motherboard...


----------



## Scotty99

Ya maximus too rich for my blood, ill be wating for strix which should come in around 189.00.


----------



## kd5151

https://www.anandtech.com/show/11843/prices-of-intels-coffee-lakes-cpus-published-400-for-core-i78700k


----------



## Scotty99

EU usually pays more for stuff, my guess is in the states its gonna be 379.00. I really cant see it being any higher than that.


----------



## Scotty99

Ya know the best cpu is gonna be the i5 8500. Locked of course but iirc it boosts to like 4.2 or 4.4 and was rumored to be 220 bucks?


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> EU usually pays more for stuff, my guess is in the states its gonna be 379.00. I really cant see it being any higher than that.


take it with a grain of salt but 8400 is $4 more than the 8350K.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya know the best cpu is gonna be the i5 8500. Locked of course but iirc it boosts to like 4.2 or 4.4 and was rumored to be 220 bucks?


At that price and locked clocks, R7 1700 up to 4GHz is a far better choice for the SMT and extra 2-cores.


----------



## Bloodcore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Tom logan just released a video saying only 2 boards from asus will be available at launch, so probably no strix
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He said it was the same two asus had for z270, which i think were maximus formula and code.


I am quite sure Asus had 4 different motherboards at launch.
Maybe he meant Maximus and Strix.

edit: https://rog.asus.com/articles/maximus-motherboards/press-release-rog-unveils-latest-maximus-ix-and-strix-gaming-motherboards/


----------



## Scotty99

Talking from the coffee lake cpu's, of course. There is a huge price delta between the 8600k and 8500, most people should probably just buy the locked model.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bloodcore*
> 
> I am quite sure Asus had 4 different motherboards at launch.
> Maybe he meant Maximus and Strix.
> 
> edit: https://rog.asus.com/articles/maximus-motherboards/press-release-rog-unveils-latest-maximus-ix-and-strix-gaming-motherboards/


I dunno i was just going by tom logan, he said only two asus boards would be available at launch.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/11843/prices-of-intels-coffee-lakes-cpus-published-400-for-core-i78700k


UK prices are sometimes exaggerated, the Tax % is different and the item is in pre order which usually has higher price

only the Tax is £58(20%) of the price


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> UK prices are sometimes exaggerated, the Tax % is different and the item is in pre order which usually has highe prrice


Plus, it's still placeholder pricing which is usually higher than actual retail. Stuff like this happened for the 7700K too; people only care this time because the idea that Intel would give two more cores for around the same price (I predict no more than a 10% increase) sounds too unbelievable to many.


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Talking from the coffee lake cpu's, of course. There is a huge price delta between the 8600k and 8500, most people should probably just buy the locked model.


The problem is that there hasn't been anything leaked about an i5-8500. There's a pretty big gap between the i5-8400 (2.8 base / 3.8 all-core turbo) and the i5-8600K (3.6 base / 4.1 all-core turbo), whose specs have been leaked.

That said, I will repeat what I've consistently said for the past 5 years: When you're building a rig for a friend, who like 95% of customers (outside of enthusiast forums like OCN) can't be trusted with overclocking, the best "set and forget" configuration is a locked i5 combined with a H-series motherboard.

With the additional 2 cores of the 8th-gen Core i5 models, this is more true than ever. Slap one on a H370 mobo and pair it with natively-supported 2666MHz DDR4 memory, add on a mid-range Pascal card like a GTX 1060/6GB with its "GPU Boost 3.0" which takes care of the clocks by itself, and the end result should be good for several years of general usage and moderate gaming without much (if any) maintenance.


----------



## Scotty99

I saw it somewhere, i dont recall the name of it but i definitely saw >4ghz boost locked i5 for the 200-220 dollar price point.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> UK prices are sometimes exaggerated, the Tax % is different and the item is in pre order which usually has highe prrice
> 
> only the Tax is £58(20%) of the price


I concur.


----------



## Techhog

Actually... Now that I think about it Anandtech already has review samples and press info most likely. Maybe they know that article is accurate and want to preemptively soften the blow..









Most likely not, but it's something to consider. I'm still betting on $385 or less.


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> The whole point of Windows "randomly throwing threads around" the cores is to counter these inherent imbalances in work-loads to prevent certain cores from getting oversubscribed while others are idle. These heuristic approaches generally provide decent performance.


My criticism somewhat goes into the opposite direction, though.









From practical measurements it seems that Windows does not seem to use much of a "heuristic" approach. Instead W10 Creators still seems to do the same old "The seed is incremented each time a thread is created so that the ideal processor for each new thread in the process will rotate through the available processors on the system". That quote is from a 2009 article and my measurements 8 years later still don't find any "smart" behavior happening from Windows' side.

From what I can perceive Windows starts by allocating the first created thread of a process to a physical core. Then the next thread gets allocated to the next physical core and so on until all physical cores are used up, then it likely starts allocating threads to logical (SMT/Hyperthreading) cores. But just like written in that 2009 article "this assumes the threads within a process are doing an equal amount of work".

So here I have a heavily multi-threaded process that first creates a number of very low load "housekeeping" threads and even two threads that never seem to produce any kind of CPU load. These threads get allocated to physical cores fine and dandy. Then the process creates 2/4/8/16 (depending on preferences setting) heavy load rendering threads. These rendering threads are created dynamically when they are needed and can vanish after leaving the process idle for some time, just to be created anew when work is again to be done.

Since Windows has no idea that these are the heavy load threads and since most physical cores were already used in the rotation, now Windows allocates these new threads to all kinds of logical cores with no apparent "heuristic" to be seen. One outcome was demonstrated by me earlier, with heavy load rendering threads running only on a limited number of cores and sharing SMT cores while other physical cores remained idle.
Quote:


> But there's still a lot more performance to be gained by taking things into your hands - if you know what you're doing that is...
> 
> The case that you're describing with the pathological use of "SetThreadIdealProcessor" happens when the developer _thinks_ they are smarter than the OS when they really aren't. So they try to take things into their own hands (which Windows gladly obliges) only to shoot themselves after Windows gives them the gun.


Again my criticism goes rather in the opposite direction. I wish those developers would make use of "SetThreadIdealProcessor" instead of "We do not set threads or process affinity (as in most cases this does not give significant performance boost and may result performance degradation), so OS manage them". I would really like them to do give Windows an "educated hint" about spreading heavy load threads over free physical cores and only sharing lesser loaded threads on same cores.

Another approach would be to make sure that low load housekeeping threads are not spread around, so that later created heavy load threads can be spread over physical cores. It also seems to make sense not to create too many low load housekeeping threads to begin with, even less so threads that don't do anything anyway (like a Dropbox plugin thread when the Dropbox plugin was disabled in preferences).

I am no programmer, but I really wonder if there is no API/mechanic more sophisticated than "SetThreadIdealProcessor" that allows Windows to tell apart heavy load threads from light load threads? So that a process would not dictate "Ideal Cores", but instead tell Windows what kind of load to expect from a thread?
Quote:


> Similar situations arise with hand optimizations vs. compiler optimizations. Though it's much harder to notice when things go wrong there since it doesn't show up in Task Manager.


I understand the mine-field, but seeing how in practice much of my expensive hardware remains unused while I twiddle thumbs in front of the screen suggests that software still has to come a long way to make good use of multi-core CPUs. On top of that bugs in Windows' "Creators" processor scheduler can turn this into quite a tragedy (I can bring my system to a halt for up to 5 seconds by overloading a single CPU core while the other 15 logical cores are idle).

Part of the problem may be the old file formats being used. JPG and PDF seem to be two examples of wide-spread file formats that are heavily serialized and hard to decode in parallel. This seems to be because of the formats themselves, not because of developers lacking prowess. Apple just began using HEIC instead of JPG all over their ecosystem, the first question that came to my mind was whether this format allows more parallelized decoding?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> My criticism somewhat goes into the opposite direction, though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From practical measurements it seems that Windows does not seem to use much of a "heuristic" approach. Instead W10 Creators still seems to do the same old "The seed is incremented each time a thread is created so that the ideal processor for each new thread in the process will rotate through the available processors on the system". That quote is from a 2009 article and my measurements 8 years later still don't find any "smart" behavior happening from Windows' side.
> 
> From what I can perceive Windows starts by allocating the first created thread of a process to a physical core. Then the next thread gets allocated to the next physical core and so on until all physical cores are used up, then it likely starts allocating threads to logical (SMT/Hyperthreading) cores. But just like written in that 2009 article "this assumes the threads within a process are doing an equal amount of work".
> 
> So here I have a heavily multi-threaded process that first creates a number of very low load "housekeeping" threads and even two threads that never seem to produce any kind of CPU load. These threads get allocated to physical cores fine and dandy. Then the process creates 2/4/8/16 (depending on preferences setting) heavy load rendering threads. These rendering threads are created dynamically when they are needed and can vanish after leaving the process idle for some time, just to be created anew when work is again to be done.
> 
> Since Windows has no idea that these are the heavy load threads and since most physical cores were already used in the rotation, now Windows allocates these new threads to all kinds of logical cores with no apparent "heuristic" to be seen. One outcome was demonstrated by me earlier, with heavy load rendering threads running only on a limited number of cores and sharing SMT cores while other physical cores remained idle.
> Again my criticism goes rather in the opposite direction. I wish those developers would make use of "SetThreadIdealProcessor" instead of "We do not set threads or process affinity (as in most cases this does not give significant performance boost and may result performance degradation), so OS manage them". I would really like them to do give Windows an "educated hint" about spreading heavy load threads over free physical cores and only sharing lesser loaded threads on same cores.


My observations are different. Windows does round-robin time-slice scheduling that moves threads around. So if I start off with 16 threads on 8 cores, and 8 of those threads finish early, Windows will move the remaining threads that are still running to a more optimal assignment (1 thread per physical core).

Windows is pretty random when it comes to assigning threads. But the critical point is that it actively migrates threads around to prevent sustained over-contention on a single core. (this is assuming that the program doesn't do any sort of hints or affinity locks) Now I can't say how fast Windows is to detect such an imbalance and correct for it. (I believe it's on the order of milliseconds) But the fact that it does it in the first place means it's able to "correct" for the vast majority of imbalanced applications that don't mess with the thread affinities or even provide hints.

This is actually very easily to test programmatically. Being a programmer myself, I can easily launch a bunch of threads and have them terminate at different times. The throughput of the amount of work done (per second) doesn't drop off dramatically until the # of live threads drops below the # of physical cores. This is hard to see in Task Manager since Windows will migrate threads between two hyperthreads of a core on millisecond intervals which is too fast for Task Manager to pick it up. So instead you see CPU utilization to be pretty much random.

Linux on the other hand isn't as aggressive with moving threads around. So it's slower to correct for imbalances, but at the same time, there's a lot less overhead. (Since every time you migrate a thread, you effectively flush the cache for that thread and repopulate it in the new core.) So some applications perform better in one OS than the other depending on which scheduler is better for them.
Quote:


> I am no coder, but I really wonder if there is no API/mechanic more sophisticated than "SetThreadIdealProcessor" that allows Windows to tell apart heavy load threads from light load threads? So that a process would not dictate "Ideal Cores", but instead tell Windows what kind of load to expect from a thread?
> I understand the mine-field, but seeing how in practice much of my expensive hardware remains unused while I twiddle thumbs in front of the screen suggests that software still has to come a long way to make good use of multi-cores CPUs. On top of that bugs in Windows' "Creators" processor scheduler can turn this into quite a tragedy (I can bring my system to stalls by overloading a single CPU core while the other 15 logical cores are idle).


There's no way to do that and there's no point. First of all, there's no concept of "heavy or light" threads to the OS. A thread is either running or it isn't. There's no in-between. There's also no point in hinting to the OS how long each thread will last because:

The programmer providing those hints will be wrong more often than not. Even if a thread is "supposed" to take only 5 seconds, it may end up taking 30+ seconds if it gets starved or even indefinitely if it gets needs to wait on disk IO or the network.
The OS doesn't need to know because it will be simply re-migrate the existing threads to correct for any imbalance.
This form of "dynamic rebalancing" that's done by every major OS is why it's so difficult to actually beat the OS scheduler. Even if you know exactly how the program behaves and can provide optimal thread/core assignments, whose to say there won't be another application contending for the same cores and starving out yours thereby ruining your "plan" of execution?

To beat the OS, you need either be the only thing running. Or you need to be aware of all other applications that are running. And if you're willing to go that far in the latter case, you might as well be writing your own OS scheduler.

Exceptions arise when topology of the system is more complicated (such as NUMA). Those are usually the cases where I find it necessary to "help" the OS with scheduling. But even then, it's only a nudge towards running threads on the right set of cores rather than specific cores.
Quote:


> Part of the problem is in the old file formats being used. JPG and PDF seem to be two examples of wide-spread file formats that are heavily serialized and hard to decode in parallel. This is because of the formats themselves, not because of developers lacking prowess. Apple just began using HEIC instead of JPG all over their ecosystem, the first question that came to my mind was whether this format allows more parallelized decoding?


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Actually... Now that I think about it Anandtech already has review samples and press info most likely. Maybe they know that article is accurate and want to preemptively soften the blow..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most likely not, but it's something to consider. I'm still betting on $385 or less.


From my experience they either have an agenda with Intel (to push the price or gauge the reaction) or they are clueless. In general they are all in bed with these companies. Nowadays you have to look hard for a review that compares products against their direct rivals. In the cooling business no website ever mentions that the closed loop AIOs are generally OEM from Asetek (several models from brands like Corsair, NZXT, EVGA, Thermaltake) and that you are just paying extra for the brand in most cases. It is such a shame. And they keep doing reviews comparing the same OEM with a different name. Even blocks from DeppCool, Cooler Master and CoolIT are similar to the competition. In other words, these websites are not reviewing the hardware per se, but the pre-applied thermal paste and fans (it is even funny if we think that way). Not to mention the blunders and methodology mistakes.

In this day and age it is hard to find a website that is unbiased and tells what we want to know, not what the manufactures wants us to know.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ding Chavez*
> 
> Z390 is a bit of a mystery. The naming of it is odd and no new CPU for it has been given, it just appears on a roadmap chart with no mention of Ice lake. Just speculating here could be a Coffee lake refresh with a high end i7 8c16t.
> Ice Lake 10nm+ desktop CPUs are still a long way off can't see them coming before early 2019.
> 
> https://www.pcgamesn.com/intel-z390-coffee-lake
> 
> Edit: If you include refresh CPUs a series lasts for longer than 1 year sometimes 2. Skylake was released august 2015, Coffee lake oct 2017. Kaby Lake was just a Skylake refresh virtually the same mainly a marketing thing to bring something that seems new but really isn't. Ice lake possibly late 2019 so Coffee lake with a refresh could be 2 years.


Z390 is suppose to support 8 cores sku and i believe that is icelake itself.

Inte had their ass burning and they wont wait till 2019 for their ice lake to push out. Everything is accelerating now including their coffee lake

I am 99% sure ice lake will be out in less than 12 months from coffee lake


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> My observations are different. Windows does round-robin time-slice scheduling that moves threads around. So if I start off with 16 threads on 8 cores, and 8 of those threads finish early, Windows will move the remaining threads that are still running to a more optimal assignment (1 thread per physical core).


I understand that, but there is a critical point in your explanation: "if those threads finish early". But what if these threads never finish?

Lots of processes don't seem to kill their threads once they run idle, because they may start working at some later point in time again. Are threads that produce zero (0) CPU load considered "finished" by Windows?

And then there are those threads that keep producing very low CPU load (<0.01% according to Process Explorer). Obviously these threads are not finished, but they occupy an "Ideal Core" (as determined by Windows, not the programmer). Will other threads get a time-slice of said core when obviously it's mostly not busy anyway?

Look at this (Core Parking disabled):

Idle:


Busy:




Are those <0.01% threads ever considered as "finished" by Windows and what about the listed (present) threads that produce no load at all?

And does the processor scheduler allow other threads of the same process to use time-slices of physical cores that still run those <0.01% threads (of the same process)? The latter seems crucial, because several of the busy (higher load) threads in the above screenshot share the same physical ideal cores (as determined by Windows).

The relatively low load does not mean that the process isn't busy enough, it introduces noticeable lag in between flipping PDF pages (that are not present in its memory cache yet). I can throw as many cores at it as I want, the lag remains and no single core hardly ever maxes out.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> I understand that, but there is a critical point in your explanation: "if those threads finish early". But what if these threads never finish?
> 
> Lots of processes don't seem to kill their threads once they run idle, because they may start working at some later point in time again. Are threads that produce zero (0) CPU load considered "finished" by Windows?


By "finish", I mean either by terminating completely or entering a sleep state. (as a result of disk I/O, attempting to acquire a locked mutex, or waiting on a condition variable) The moment the thread reaches one of these states, it is no longer running and the OS is free to put something else on that logical core.

So it's very possible to have hundreds of mostly idle threads on the same core with little to no loss of efficiency.
Quote:


> And then there are those threads that keep producing very load CPU load (<0.01% according to Process Explorer). Obviously these threads are not finished, but they occupy an "Ideal Core" (as determined by Windows, not the programmer). Will other threads get a time-slice of said core when obviously it's mostly not busy anyway?
> 
> Look at this (Core Parking disabled):
> 
> Idle:
> 
> 
> Busy:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are those <0.01% threads ever considered as "finished" by Windows and what about the listed (present) threads that produce no load at all? And does the processor scheduler allow other threads of the same process to use time-slices of physical cores that still run those <0.01% threads (of the same process)? The latter would be crucial, because several of the busy (higher load) threads in the above screenshot share the same physical ideal cores.


From those screenshots, I can deduce that there is absolutely no core contention at all. Not a single logical core is running at 100%. And no two threads on the same physical core sum up to more than 100%. IOW, the OS is doing its job perfectly. It is spreading out the work load enough to prevent any one core from being at 100% while there are other idle cores.

The most heavily loaded logical core is #4 (thread 0) at 60% and its hyperthread is 0%. So even that core is idle 40% of the time.

If this CPU usage is what it looks like under a rendering load that's supposed to use all the cores, then your bottleneck is not the CPU. It's something else. Either it be disk I/O, network, or simply bad programming on the part of the software.

Quote:


> The relatively low load does not mean that the process isn't busy enough, it introduces noticeable lag in between flipping PDF pages (that are *not present in its memory cache yet*). I can throw as many cores at it as I want, the lag remains and no single core hardly ever maxes out.


Sounds like the bottleneck is your disk and not the CPU or the OS scheduler.


----------



## Timur Born

The file fits entirely into Windows' cache and loads from a SSD, so disk I/O is not the bottleneck (not even happening). I concur that "bad programming" might be a possible explanation (lesser threads being used lead to higher load per core, btw, with same practical results). This bring us back to what I posted originally: "The advancement of multi-core CPUs is hindered by software developers."










I think in reality this is a case of the file format not allowing much more parallelization (Adobe Reader would run this mostly on a single-thread) and threads waiting for each others' results. It's worth mentioning that this still is one of the fasted rendering PDF software available for Windows, so others are rather worse than better.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/11843/prices-of-intels-coffee-lakes-cpus-published-400-for-core-i78700k


No word on solder but not keeping hopes up. It seems there is quite a hefty price premium for the i7-8700k & i5-8600K.

In order for these CPUs to be a good value they need to be ~30-40% faster per core vs Ryzen , which is only attainable with the unlocked CPUs.

It's close to what was leaked earlier
https://videocardz.com/72147/intel-core-8th-gen-coffee-lake-cpus-listed-for-back-order , https://www.hardocp.com/news/2017/08/20/rumored_pricing_for_intel_coffee_lake_cpus/
Quote:


> INTEL BOXED 8TH GEN INTEL I7-8700K PROCESSOR [BX80684I78700K]: $484.44 CAD ($378.63)
> INTEL BOXED 8TH GEN INTEL I7-8700 PROCESSOR [BX80684I78700]: $407.73 CAD ($318.68)
> INTEL BOXED 8TH GEN INTEL I5-8600K PROCESSOR [BX80684I58600K]: $338.00 CAD ($264.18)
> INTEL BOXED 8TH GEN INTEL I5-8400 PROCESSOR [BX80684I58400]: $237.58 CAD ($185.69)
> INTEL BOXED 8TH GEN INTEL I3-8350K PROCESSOR [BX80684I38350K]: $233.41 CAD ($182.43)
> INTEL BOXED 8TH GEN INTEL I3-8100 PROCESSOR [BX80684I38100]: $152.51 CAD ($119.20)


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> It seems there is quite a hefty price premium for the i7-8700k & i5-8600K.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> It seems there is quite a hefty price premium for the i7-8700k & i5-8600K.
Click to expand...

The are going to cost a litte bit more than last year. $400.00 is not to bad for the i7 8700k.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> $400.00 is not to bad for the i7 8700k.


I disagree. I personally don't feel inclined to pay more than 360-370U$. This if the i7-8700K comes competing with the R7 1700, which seems to be the case.


----------



## Scotty99

Glad i live near microcenter is all i can say. I should be able to get it for ~320 plus 30 bucks off a board.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Do you play games on the 2600k rig and if you do what games do you play?


I still play all my favorites on the 2600K rig including (believe it or not) Crysis 3 (and all the other Crysis games). I only really have to turn down settings minimally even with my 270X on my 1440p monitors, but I am just fine with 30 FPS avg so obviously it would be a no-go for many around here. Others that I play are BFBC2, BF4, Forza 6, and Metro Last Light.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> $400.00 is not to bad for the i7 8700k.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. I personally don't feel inclined to pay more than 360-370U$. This if the i7-8700K comes competing with the R7 1700, which seems to be the case.
Click to expand...

The question would be will the i7 8700k beat the R7 1700? So folks would have to pay more for the increased performance.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Do you play games on the 2600k rig and if you do what games do you play?
> 
> 
> 
> I still play all my favorites on the 2600K rig including (believe it or not) Crysis 3 (and all the other Crysis games). I only really have to turn down settings minimally even with my 270X on my 1440p monitors, but I am just fine with 30 FPS avg so obviously it would be a no-go for many around here. Others that I play are BFBC2, BF4, Forza 6, and Metro Last Light.
Click to expand...

Not to bad for a R9 270X.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The question would be will the i7 8700k beat the R7 1700? So folks would have to pay more for the increased performance.


Better yet, my question is by how much will it outclock a i7-6850K (typical is 4.2GHz-4.5GHz) ? IIRC , top third hit 4.5GHz.

Right now Microcenter has i7-6850K at $350 , with $100 off a compatible motherboard. Total platform cost would be ~ $450+tax.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The question would be will the i7 8700k beat the R7 1700? So folks would have to pay more for the increased performance.


I imagine it will come to a draw in general (1700 and 8700K), but people are already paying more than 100U$ if it releases for 360-370U$. 400$ is almost double. Then if AMD releases a bug free refresh in Q1 or Q2 2018, they will be back in the situation they are now, trailing AMD in sales on the desktop market. I just think it is suicide to trail AMD for another year knowing that Ryzen 2 might be an Intel killer. Unless Intel releases a whole new architecture just like AMD did with Ryzen.

When people start to get used to buy the competition product it is hard to flip sides again. If they spend two generations behind AMD, they might take a decade to recover. AMD knows this better than anyone.

Honestly, the market is full of incompetent / narrowed minded people. AMD is back on business because of one person specifically. Apple became this empire because of one single person, and this way it goes. It won't surprise me to see Intel struggling in the next years.


----------



## Scotty99

Ive used this ryzen system since launch and its been the most stable PC ive ever built, not sure where all these problems people keep talking about are coming from. Just ram doing 2933 instead of 3200, which is a motherboard thing.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ive used this ryzen system since launch and its been the most stable PC ive ever built, not sure where all these problems people keep talking about are coming from. Just ram doing 2933 instead of 3200, which is a motherboard thing.


I know about workstation people and Linux people with problems (in the last month), but I never really researched about it because I know that I won't buy a Ryzen now. From what I hear, it is a bet depending on what you use in terms of hardware (capture cards for example) and software.


----------



## Scotty99

Well lol linux is a pretty small fraction of the population, i would expect bugs if i used that operating system. I am actually amazed how well this PC has ran given that i bought it a week after it launched, i expected a lot more problems, only real frustration was memory speeds but that was almost universal across the board unless you spent 200 dollars on ram and 250 on a mobo.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> I know about workstation people and Linux people with problems (in the last month), but I never really researched about it because I know that I won't buy a Ryzen now. From what I hear, it is a bet depending on what you use in terms of hardware (capture cards for example) and software.


I've had no issues with Ryzen doing work projects under Fedora 26. Certain hardware combinations are issues with Linux whether you use Intel or AMD. AMD does have a very specific issue under Linux that most users will never experience. I would possibly have experienced it under some of my working conditions, so I submitted an RMA request for a post Week 25 chip, and now I've got a new chip on the way. If you're not using a pre-week 25 chip, you shouldn't experience any CPU-related issues in Linux.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ive used this ryzen system since launch and its been the most stable PC ive ever built, not sure where all these problems people keep talking about are coming from. Just ram doing 2933 instead of 3200, which is a motherboard thing.


Actually running higher than default memory speeds is a CPU endeavor.


----------



## Scotty99

Nah its a bios thing, 3200 b die ram still isnt validated on my board for example. Lazy dudes at asrock.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The question would be will the i7 8700k beat the R7 1700? So folks would have to pay more for the increased performance.
> 
> 
> 
> I imagine it will come to a draw in general (1700 and 8700K), but people are already paying more than 100U$ if it releases for 360-370U$. 400$ is almost double. Then if AMD releases a bug free refresh in Q1 or Q2 2018, they will be back in the situation they are now, trailing AMD in sales on the desktop market. I just think it is suicide to trail AMD for another year knowing that Ryzen 2 might be an Intel killer. Unless Intel releases a whole new architecture just like AMD did with Ryzen.
> 
> When people start to get used to buy the competition product it is hard to flip sides again. If they spend two generations behind AMD, they might take a decade to recover. AMD knows this better than anyone.
> 
> Honestly, the market is full of incompetent / narrowed minded people. AMD is back on business because of one person specifically. Apple became this empire because of one single person, and this way it goes. It won't surprise me to see Intel struggling in the next years.
Click to expand...

My belief is that since Intel is number one they can charge what they want and they have always done just that. If Intel does not do well in the desktop market I don't think they care that much because OEM notebooks is where the profit is. DIY market is small world wide.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Nah its a bios thing, 3200 b die ram still isnt validated on my board for example. Lazy dudes at asrock.


So nobody is running 3200 speed with your ram selection and motherboard?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> So nobody is running 3200 speed with your ram selection and motherboard?


Not with my ram nah, some may have b-die running with tweaks tho. There are no memory controller issues up to 3200, its all down to bios revisions.


----------



## Lexi is Dumb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Nah its a bios thing, 3200 b die ram still isnt validated on my board for example. Lazy dudes at asrock.


Probably gonna sound like a shill, but surely it's not laziness and more likely a priority thing. I mean this year they've had to do Z270, AM4, X299, X399 and should now be working on Z370 boards, all of the companies would surely have a hell of a backlog of certain board bioses needing tweaks/fixes.


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lexi is Dumb*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Nah its a bios thing, 3200 b die ram still isnt validated on my board for example. Lazy dudes at asrock.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably gonna sound like a shill, but surely it's not laziness and more likely a priority thing. I mean this year they've had to do Z270, AM4, X299, X399 and should now be working on Z370 boards, all of the companies would surely have a hell of a backlog of certain board bioses needing tweaks/fixes.
Click to expand...

Yes, there has been unusual amounts of work for motherboard manufactures this year, or at least it seems like there has.

This is a good reason to get very "flagship" motherboards when buying early in a new generation, they usually get any updates first. It can be the reasonably priced flagship instead of the ultimate board, often those are even first, but getting one of the many alternatives up and down the product stack can be frustrating from any brand. However, I must admit I am not familiar enough with Asrock's lineup to tell you which boards those might be.









edit: Based on their TR4 boards their flagships are probably the Fatal1ty Professional Gaming and Taichi.


----------



## Scotty99

Well too lazy to hire more people then lol. Ive had an overall good experience with this board, but i think im going asus for my z370 swap. I did forget one bug i had (and it was a massive one):
http://www.overclock.net/t/1633417/motherboard-fan-control-not-working/10#post_26332124

The motherboard was basing my fan control on a temperature that only showed up in one temp monitoring program on the market, took them months to fix....and probably because of this post i made.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> I disagree. I personally don't feel inclined to pay more than 360-370U$. This if the i7-8700K comes competing with the R7 1700, which seems to be the case.


me2. Intel prices have ryzen over the years. Get it, Ryzen? Oh, I crack myself up. Lol. Anyways. One good thing about Intel is that they are very consistent on price however. When the new stuff comes out its pretty much the same price. AMD however is not consistent. Someone explain to me how AMD is selling 1700x on newegg and amazon for $299.99, which is $100 cheaper at times.The 1700 is just as good and even cheaper. My quess is they don't want to spend more than $350 because that's what the i7 has been since nov 2008.


----------



## svenge

I seriously doubt that there's going to be such a large jump to $400 / $284 USD for the i7/i5 K-models, honestly. That would not be a good marketing look despite Intel's unprecedented jump to 6-core CPUs on the mainstream platform, especially since there is an credible alternative (i.e. Ryzen) which already makes the situation unlike any Intel launch over the past 10 years.

Also note that the trendline in the chart above fails to recognize that Broadwell was a very different beast than what came before and after it, due to its 128MB L4 cache (for the Crystal Well GT3e integrated graphics). That clearly drove up production costs over its Haswell predecessor due to increased die sizes.

My prediction for ARK pricing on the 8700K / 8600K: $359 and $259 respectively.


----------



## QuadDamage

I'm going to pull the trigger on a 8700k just waiting for stuff to show up in stores/online to get


----------



## evensen007

If the 400 US dollar price rumor is true for the 8700k, I may hold off. I can afford it, but I would protest a price hike like that out of principle. On a side note, I just bought my wife a Swift 3 Acer laptop that has the new Coffee Lake i5-8520u although technically I think it is considered a Kaby lake R.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> My prediction for ARK pricing on the 8700K / 8600K: $359 and $259 respectively.


Yup, I won't pay more than that. They have no leeway with me (and with a lot of people so it seems).


----------



## Yvese

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> If the 400 US dollar price rumor is true for the 8700k, I may hold off. I can afford it, but I would protest a price hike like that out of principle. On a side note, I just bought my wife a Swift 3 Acer laptop that has the new Coffee Lake i5-8520u although technically I think it is considered a Kaby lake R.


I'll likely end up doing the same. Been itching to upgrade my 4770k and going to a 6 core i7 seems like the logical next step where I'd actually feel it's worth it. $400 though? I could get a decent 1700 + motherboard combo @ microcenter for close to that price.

Intel don't have the luxury of being greedy anymore when AMD can actually compete now.


----------



## aDyerSituation

If these clock as well as 7700k's I will consider switching.


----------



## PontiacGTX

it is likely they will plus they dont have the disadvantage of the new cache


----------



## Scotty99

October 5th yet?


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> October 5th yet?


Still september 20. All day. No leaks today.


----------



## Scotty99

Dam lol. Really im more excited about getting a new case, coffee gives me a reason


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> October 5th yet?


~Wake me up, when September ends~


----------



## PontiacGTX

Now AMD will use 12nm node will be interesting to see how it compares to Intel Coffee lake, if Ryzen gest a overclock/frequency uplift


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Dam lol. Really im more excited about getting a new case, coffee gives me a reason


Going to reuse my fractal design arc midi r2. Not sure if coffelake or ryzen is going into it. Been savin for it tho.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> it is likely they will plus they dont have the disadvantage of the new cache


the "cache disadvantage" is highly exaggerated. Most of the differences in early benchmarks are simply from being a new platform.

If you are referring to gaming, that is


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Now AMD will use 12nm node will be interesting to see how it compares to Intel Coffee lake, if Ryzen gest a overclock/frequency uplift


They are currently at haswell levels of IPC, next gen will probably still be a bit behind skylake.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> the "cache disadvantage" is highly exaggerated. Most of the differences in early benchmarks are simply from being a new platform.
> 
> If you are referring to gaming, that is


I still see some benchmarks had Skylake S ahead, Skylake X, are there any updated benchmarks?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> They are currently at haswell levels of IPC, next gen will probably still be a bit behind skylake.


If Ryzen overclocks to 4.7ghz or so(and IMC allows better memory frequency) this will be really close to a 5GHz 8700k at noticeably lower power consumption and at a lower price with a advantage in multithreaded applications

but Ryzen Gen2 will be probably same deal or maybe they match Cannnonlake but Ice Lake will be faster


----------



## Neo_Morpheus

PontiacGTX must be talking about those liquid nitrogen tests that get mixed up sometimes with normal cooling.









The 8700k has to cost around a 7800x anyway other wise they are shooting themselves in the foot.


----------



## Scotty99

Nah a 4.7ghz ryzen would be equal to a 4.7ghz 4790k.


----------



## Scotty99

Zen 2 is still going to be behind skylake/kaby in IPC, clocks should go up a bit tho.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Nah a 4.7ghz ryzen would be equal to a 4.7ghz 4790k.


in Cinebench a Ryzen 7 does similar a BW-E CPU so it varies and in games once there is multithreading optimization 8cores/16thread will scare better than 6c/12t and IPC difference is really small


----------



## aDyerSituation

If Zen refresh or whatever comes next has higher clocks and allows for higher speed ram(4000 instead of 3200 for example) it will be very competitive against coffee lake

assuming it happens before Intel introduces another chipset, lmao


----------



## ZealotKi11er

If Zen+ can get 4.4GHz+ it will again be very good for AMD. The main problem is Zen is clock speed right now. 4.0GHz is not slow but compare to 5.0GHz it is. Thats 20% difference which is huge.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> If Zen+ can get 4.4GHz+ it will again be very good for AMD. The main problem is Zen is clock speed right now. 4.0GHz is not slow but compare to 5.0GHz it is. Thats 20% difference which is huge.


Thank You!


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> If Zen+ can get 4.4GHz+ it will again be very good for AMD. The main problem is Zen is clock speed right now. 4.0GHz is not slow but compare to 5.0GHz it is. Thats 20% difference which is huge.


so a 4.7GHz Ryzen(speculated oc frequency) will be 5-10%< slower than Skylake/CoffeeLake (4.7GHz) with even lower power consumption and 25% higher core count/5-10% better multithreading, I dont think the 5-10% difference will be worth to pay at 80-100usd more


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> in Cinebench a Ryzen 7 does similar a BW-E CPU so it varies and in games once there is multithreading optimization 8cores/16thread will scare better than 6c/12t and IPC difference is really small


My 3.9ghz 1700 scores same as a stock 4670k in cinebench single core. Single core is really where the relevance lies in this discussion.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> My 3.9ghz 1700 scores same as a stock 4670k in cinebench single core. Single core is really where the relevance lies in this discussion.


I guess it depends but I have seen benchmarks put Ryzen similar level at HW-E to BW-E ST IPC,7% difference which is between HW-E (and HW-E (6-10%)


----------



## Scotty99

Cinebench single core is the gold standard for me, ive found it most accurately represents real world performance in games. My 1700 at 3.9ghz was slightly faster than my 4.2ghz 2500k in WoW, exactly as cinebench predicts.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> it is likely they will plus they dont have the disadvantage of the new cache
> 
> 
> 
> the "cache disadvantage" is highly exaggerated. Most of the differences in early benchmarks are simply from being a new platform.
> 
> If you are referring to gaming, that is
Click to expand...

Do you have links to new benchmarks that show better results?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Do you have links to new benchmarks that show better results?


any of the threadripper reviews

example: https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8303/amd-ryzen-threadripper-1950x-1920x-cpu-review/index7.html


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Do you have links to new benchmarks that show better results?
> 
> 
> 
> any of the threadripper reviews
> 
> example: https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8303/amd-ryzen-threadripper-1950x-1920x-cpu-review/index7.html
Click to expand...

I can't find threadripper reviews with Broadwell-e and Skylake X.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I can't find threadripper reviews with Broadwell-e and Skylake X.


Pretty sure 6950x still wins against the 7900x in some games. Usually games where they both beat the 7700k, however. So I'm not sure what to make of that.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I can't find threadripper reviews with Broadwell-e and Skylake X.
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty sure 6950x still wins against the 7900x in some games. Usually games where they both beat the 7700k, however. So I'm not sure what to make of that.
Click to expand...

Yes I just found gaming benchmarks for threadripper with Broadwell-e also Skylake X and skylake X is just as bad as the release benchmarks. LINK: https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/AMD-Ryzen-Threadripper-1950X-and-1920X-Review/Gaming-Performance-and-Mega-tasking


----------



## AlphaC

Supposedly the launch date is October 5 for Coffee Lake. Whether that includes i7-8700K & i5-8600k is not stated.






__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/910192371576356864%5B%2FURL


----------



## kd5151

Oct 5 might just be motherboards and reviews or nda lifts.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Yes I just found gaming benchmarks for threadripper with Broadwell-e also Skylake X and skylake X is just as bad as the release benchmarks. LINK: https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/AMD-Ryzen-Threadripper-1950X-and-1920X-Review/Gaming-Performance-and-Mega-tasking


Only outlier here is far cry primal, and users on here have posted fps way higher than that. Ryzen also struggles in that game for some reason.

sorry and civ. That game also has weird performance.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Yes I just found gaming benchmarks for threadripper with Broadwell-e also Skylake X and skylake X is just as bad as the release benchmarks. LINK: https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/AMD-Ryzen-Threadripper-1950X-and-1920X-Review/Gaming-Performance-and-Mega-tasking
> 
> 
> 
> Only outlier here is far cry primal, and users on here have posted fps way higher than that. Ryzen also struggles in that game for some reason.
> 
> sorry and civ. That game also has weird performance.
Click to expand...

I would expect users here to have way higher FPS with overclocking Mesh and Cores.


----------



## CrazyHeaven

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Dam lol. Really im more excited about getting a new case, coffee gives me a reason


I wanted a new case but needed a place for drives. So many cases without a spot to put optical drives.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> If the 400 US dollar price rumor is true for the 8700k, I may hold off. I can afford it, but I would protest a price hike like that out of principle. On a side note, I just bought my wife a Swift 3 Acer laptop that has the new Coffee Lake i5-8520u although technically I think it is considered a Kaby lake R.


I can agree with that thinking. I mean, when I bought my 2600K brand new in Feb 2011 it cost $319 iirc. The 8700K is supposed to be basically the new 2600K right, so why is it now nearly $100 more for the same market segment. I understand Intel would just say "Well you are getting a 6-core now (and we were just charging $1000 for hexas just a few years ago so its really a bargain)" but that argument is vapid IMO. Its still the same segment, i.e. the mainstream flagship, and with its main competitor offering 8 competitive cores for more than $100 less, its just a bad look for Intel. But they've never shied away from milking before so nobody should expect them to stop anytime soon.


----------



## Kana Chan

5300mhz on all 6 cores!


http://imgur.com/Vqp2w

 http://www.xaluan.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1902263


----------



## delboy67

The i5 would be my pick here, I dont think the i7 will be much better at games other than the clock advantage. This will be the new 2500k.


----------



## Scotty99

Gonna go with no on that. 6c chips when AMD is offering double the threads for less money, its a really bad value proposition. It used to be true that i5's were the gamer's choice, but a lot of games today game much better on an i7. I would recommend most skip the i5, be better suited finding a used 7700k imo.

If anything the r5 1600/ is the new 2500k, 8700k being the 2600k


----------



## Scotty99

And how do we know 6c6t is going to game better than 4c8t? I am not convinced this is the case yet.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> If anything the r5 1600/ is the new 2500k


Honestly, these are very large shoes for the R5 to fill







The i5-2500K should be immortalized. Perhaps Intel should retire the i5 name the same way they retire some jerseys when players like Jordan or Kobe go out of business (haha...). Just kidding, but I don't think we'll se another i5-2500K for years to come.


----------



## Scotty99

I had the 2500k, it wasnt that great of a cpu lol. The reason it lasted so long is intel refused to up core counts, they had no reason to until now. The great thing about sandy was they were soldered, something intel hasnt done since. (and AMD did with ryzen).

Had ivy bridge or haswell been soldered, i bet a lot more people would have upgraded their sandy rigs. No one wanted a downgrade in temps.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I had the 2500k, it wasnt that great of a cpu lol. The reason it lasted so long is intel refused to up core counts, they had no reason to until now. The great thing about sandy was they were soldered, something intel hasnt done since. (and AMD did with ryzen).
> 
> Had ivy bridge or haswell been soldered, i bet a lot more people would have upgraded their sandy rigs. No one wanted a downgrade in temps.


Compare to Nehalem and Phenom's in single threaded aplications -- very relevant at the time -- and you'll see the picture. Perhaps you have a short memory







Intel is sailing on the breeze of Sandy Bridge ultil today.


----------



## Scotty99

The two main reasons the 2500k had such longevity, people's ignorance about games taking advantage of hyperthreading, and the fact it was soldered.

The IPC gains over nehalem are kind of besides the point, the real champion is the 2600k.

This is also part of the reason i believe the "new 2500k" will be the ryzen 1600/1600x. Its going to have actual longevity not only because of its core count, but if AMD decides to use toothpaste on zen 2/3/4.


----------



## Scotty99

This is also why i suggest people skip the i5 8600k, unless they are fine with games running half as good as 8700k in 3 years, which it will.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Also
> 
> Z370 prices
> B1FD862 MAXIMUS X APEX LGA1151 DDR4 DP HDMI M.2 Z370 DESIGNED FOR EXTREME PERFORMANCE $327.97
> B1FD863 MAXIMUSXHEROWI-FIAC LGA1151 DDR4 DP HDMI M.2 Z370 11AC WIRELESS GIGABIT USB 3.1 $266.82
> *B1FD869 PRIME Z370-A LGA1151 DDR4 DP HDMI DVI M.2 8TH GENERATION INTEL CORE $170.45*
> B1FD870 PRIME Z370-P LGA1151 DDR4 HDMI DVI M.2 Z370 5X PROTECTION III GIGABIT LAN AND HD $135.10
> B1FD864 STRIX Z370-E GAMING LGA1151 DDR4 DP HDMI DVI 11AC WIRELESS AND USB 3.1 FOR 8TH $201.64
> B1FD865 STRIX Z370-F GAMING LGA1151 DDR4 DP HDMI DVI M.2 GIGABIT LAN AND USB 3.1 FOR 8TH $185.16
> B1FD866 STRIX Z370-H GAMING LGA1151 DDR4 HDMI DVI M.2 8TH GENERATION INTEL CORE $162.77
> *B1FD867 STRIX Z370-I GAMING LGA1151 DDR4 DP HDMI M.2 USB 3.1 FOR 8TH GENERATION INTEL $184.52*
> B1FD868 TUF Z370 PLUS GAMING LGA1151 DDR4 HDMI DVI M.2 USB 3.1 FOR 8TH GENERATION INTEL $146.13
> 
> http://www.shopblt.com/search/order_id=%21ORDERID%21&s_max=25&t_all=1&s_all=z370&search=Search


Hu ho .. No Formula at launch ?








Apex is tempting though ...


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> This is also why i suggest people skip the i5 8600k, unless they are fine with games running half as good as 8700k in 3 years, which it will.


Yeah but i5 still good now even though i7 is better. Yeah if I had 3570K instead of 3770K right now I would have upgraded long time ago to an i7 and used more money in the long run.


----------



## czin125

Is the Z370 Apex designed like the X299 version or the Z270?

So it looks like Coffeelake can reach 5300mhz on a single 240/360? It may be possible to reach 5400-5500mhz+ with more massive radiator sizes.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> Is the Z370 Apex designed like the X299 version or the Z270?
> 
> So it looks like Coffeelake can reach 5300mhz on a single 240/360? It may be possible to reach 5400-5500mhz+ with more massive radiator sizes.


I imagine like the Z270, since Z370 ans Z270 are pretty close.


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> The two main reasons the 2500k had such longevity, people's ignorance about games taking advantage of hyperthreading, and the fact it was soldered.
> 
> The IPC gains over nehalem are kind of besides the point, the real champion is the 2600k.
> 
> This is also part of the reason i believe the "new 2500k" will be the ryzen 1600/1600x. Its going to have actual longevity not only because of its core count, but if AMD decides to use toothpaste on zen 2/3/4.


I might be just disabled ex-game developer, but I did lot of speed testing and overclocking with ability to change executable. The main reason why games don't care about HT is they need real cores, when they are properly written, and HT is just harmful because two threads on single core compete for ALU.

There are two reasons why HT isn't massive disaster for properly written multithreaded game. 1. Windows detects heavily used threads and schedule them on real cores first. 2. CPU has likely a detection for certain common patterns and gives less resources for these threads that are just checking for things.

So HT might help when W10 decide to do sneaky update behind your back without even telling you what it updates, without SSD and HT performance tanks, but so helps 6 cores when game needs only 4. (And of course large cache helps as well.)


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> I might be just disabled ex-game developer, but I did lot of speed testing and overclocking with ability to change executable. The main reason why games don't care about HT is they need real cores, when they are properly written, and HT is just harmful because two threads on single core compete for ALU.
> 
> There are two reasons why HT isn't massive disaster for properly written multithreaded game. 1. Windows detects heavily used threads and schedule them on real cores first. 2. CPU has likely a detection for certain common patterns and gives less resources for these threads that are just checking for things.
> 
> So HT might help when W10 decide to do sneaky update behind your back without even telling you what it updates, without SSD and HT performance tanks, but so helps 6 cores when game needs only 4. (And of course large cache helps as well.)


What? Games have been using HT and SMT and been getting performance gains from it this isnt 2010 when games had bad performance due to HT


----------



## mouacyk

For purely gaming that uses 4 threads which is common-place now, the 8600K is perfect. Best clocks, best latency, lower price, and a little CPU headroom. HT's primary purpose isn't gaming since gaming prefers lower latency. HT was designed to improve execution throughput when there are branch mis-predictions or memory or I/O stalls, and therefore can waste precious L1/L2 cache. Having said that, there are some games that continuously stream assets in real-time and/or have very complex real-time branching, but this should not be the norm.

HT was great when 4c/8t was the mainstream, because it provided the needed buffer when games utilized all 4 real cores. 6 highly clocked real cores is plenty of buffer and will be for quite a while, since it is essentially difficult to make naturally serial game logic parallel. It's true that you can have more/better sounds and graphics with more utility threads, but that doesn't enhance the serial core game logic.


----------



## evensen007

Quick question as I missed a couple of days of posts and got confused. Is there some magic z390 board coming out that will supposedly support IceLake (or whatever the 8/16 update to Coffee Lake will be)?

Does that mean I shouldn't buy a z370 setup when they come out because it won't support the jump to the 8/16 Cannon/IceLake?


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Quick question as I missed a couple of days of posts and got confused. Is there some magic z390 board coming out that will supposedly support IceLake (or whatever the 8/16 update to Coffee Lake will be)?
> 
> Does that mean I shouldn't buy a z370 setup when they come out because it won't support the jump to the 8/16 Cannon/IceLake?


they probably will keep 2 iterations for z370 and that will be coffee lake and cannonlake


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> they probably will keep 2 iterations for z370 and that will be coffee lake and cannonlake












I'm confused by your response. Maybe my question didn't make any sense.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Quick question as I missed a couple of days of posts and got confused. Is there some magic z390 board coming out that will supposedly support IceLake (or whatever the 8/16 update to Coffee Lake will be)?
> 
> Does that mean I shouldn't buy a z370 setup when they come out because it won't support the jump to the 8/16 Cannon/IceLake?


Do no bother if you plan to get Ice Lake. You want the MB that comes with the CPU when it comes to Intel. You can buy Z370 setup and sell it before Z390.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm confused by your response. Maybe my question didn't make any sense.


z370 will support probably 2 generations which are coffee lake and cannonlake (or whatever intel names node shrink of 1151 cpus),unless intel decides to make a refresh of coffee lake

if your 2600k plays games just fine hold for zen 2 or icelake if not get a 8700k/cannonlake 6core with HT or *ryzen refreh (*if it overclocks 4.6ghz+)


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Quick question as I missed a couple of days of posts and got confused. Is there some magic z390 board coming out that will supposedly support IceLake (or whatever the 8/16 update to Coffee Lake will be)?
> 
> Does that mean I shouldn't buy a z370 setup when they come out because it won't support the jump to the 8/16 Cannon/IceLake?


The Z390 will come out in the second half of 2018. Game on.


----------



## evensen007

Thanks guys, I think I got it. Didn't realize z390 wasn't until late next year. So, follow up question:

Is there a version of Coffee lake that will be 8/16 so I could use it on the z370 platform, or is that relegated to the z390/Icelake platform only? I may hold off as my 2600k is still chewing up games with my 1080ti. Maybe see what Ryzen 2 offers.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Coffee lake(on z370) wont have 8cores Cannonlake/Ice lake or whatever CPU works on z390 will


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Quick question as I missed a couple of days of posts and got confused. Is there some magic z390 board coming out that will supposedly support IceLake (or whatever the 8/16 update to Coffee Lake will be)?
> 
> Does that mean I shouldn't buy a z370 setup when they come out because it won't support the jump to the 8/16 Cannon/IceLake?
> 
> 
> 
> Do no bother if you plan to get Ice Lake. You want the MB that comes with the CPU when it comes to Intel. You can buy Z370 setup and sell it before Z390.
Click to expand...

This is my instinct as well. Don't buy into a chipset expecting to upgrade the CPU later, there may be an important feature missing or simple incompatibility.

Also Z370 is amazingly similar to Z270, hopefully Z390 has some improvements.


----------



## Scotty99

Got a question about per core overclocking. Say i get an asus board and it decides core 4 can hit 5.2ghz (for example), how do games know that is my fastest core, or do they even? Would i have to tell the game which cores to prefer?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Got a question about per core overclocking. Say i get an asus board and it decides core 4 can hit 5.2ghz (for example), how do games know that is my fastest core, or do they even? Would i have to tell the game which cores to prefer?


They don't know. For the most part, both games and the OS see all the cores as the same. Games might be able to tell which pairs of cores are hyperthreads of the same physical core. But for the part, you'll need to go into Task Manager and manually lock the game to the faster cores.

That said, things are a bit different with Turbo Boost 3.0. OS and driver supported is needed for it since you need a way to tell the OS which are the good cores. So the functionality is there in _some_ form. But I'm not sure if it can be made to work with overclocking though. I've noticed on my 7900X that Windows stops preferring the two "preferred cores" the moment I manually override any of multipliers.

Maybe in the future there will be better support for this - even if all it takes is a suitable BIOS update.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> They don't know. For the most part, both games and the OS see all the cores as the same. Games might be able to tell which pairs of cores are hyperthreads of the same physical core. But for the part, you'll need to go into Task Manager and manually lock the game to the faster cores.
> 
> That said, things are a bit different with Turbo Boost 3.0. OS and driver supported is needed for it since you need a way to tell the OS which are the good cores. So the functionality is there in _some_ form. But I'm not sure if it can be made to work with overclocking though. I've noticed on my 7900X that Windows stops preferring the two "preferred cores" the moment I manually override any of multipliers.
> 
> Maybe in the future there will be better support for this - even if all it takes is a suitable BIOS update.


Hmm alright guess i will have to test how turbo 3.0 works when overclocking is enabled, thanks. My senses tell me that using asus ai suite is going to be the best way to overclock in this regard.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Hu ho .. No Formula at launch ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apex is tempting though ...


Apex is only for extreme overclockers though. Giving up RAM slots and SATA ports doesn't make sense otherwise.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> The IPC gains over nehalem are kind of besides the point, the real champion is the 2600k.


How so? There was nothing at that time with such single threaded power, and the i5 was cheaper than the i7, and HT had problems in several games. The i5 was "the gamer CPU" back then. I have to see the day that either AMD or Intel releases a CPU that is 35% stronger in single thread than the competition. Even to Nehalem, everyone today with i5 and i7s would upgrade to a CPU 30% stronger than the last generation (with no added cores, mind you).

Now if you want to judge the i5-2500K by today's standards I have to step aside because then it is really besides the point / useless. It was a 2011 CPU


----------



## Scotty99

You aren't getting the gist, of course the IPC gain was awesome but that isnt why 2500k was held in such high regard. Its two fold like i said before (well three fold):

~Intel not raising core counts
~People being unaware that games were taking advantage of hyperthreading
~Sandy using solder

All of that added up to people holding onto 2500k's for so long, like myself. 2600k is what i should have bought, that CPU is still completely relevant today, and was a much better purchase than 2500k in hindsight.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You aren't getting the gist, of course the IPC gain was awesome but that isnt why 2500k was held in such high regard. Its two fold like i said before (well three fold):
> 
> ~Intel not raising core counts
> ~People being unaware that games were taking advantage of hyperthreading
> ~Sandy using solder
> 
> All of that added up to people holding onto 2500k's for so long, like myself. 2600k is what i should have bought, that CPU is still completely relevant today, and was a much better purchase than 2500k in hindsight.


Wrong again in my opinion.

Sandy Bridge's IPC gains obliterated the competition







in games especially, when they relied heavily in single threaded applications with the old DX versions. And AMD also overclocked and it also had soldered IHS, so I don't see the point. And after so many generations and architecture refinements, a delided i7-7700K overclocks better that Sandy Bridge. The ratio of chips reaching +5Ghz is way higher than back then. You could say that Sandy Bridge overclocked better out of the box, but you find cheap delid kits out there for who really wants to reach high clocks.

And how core counts is related to Sandy Bridge? I'm judging it by 2011 standards. To judge it by today's standards is biased.


----------



## Scotty99

The discussion is why is sandy bridge considered the best of all time by many. IPC gains were going to come either way, its the intangibles that i listed above that put sandy bridge into legendary status, mostly from intels own doings.

This same scenario could happen for AMD if they make similar decisions, making ryzen 1600 the new 2500k. I do expect higher clocks for latter zen revisions so its unlikely it will happen, but its a better candidate to become the new 2500k than the 8600k has.


----------



## aDyerSituation

1600 is not even close to being a modern 2500k


----------



## Scotty99

Oh really lol.

~Uses solder, games just as well as the i7 version (ryzen 1700) should be a viable gaming CPU for ~5 years (as the 2500k was, til games started using hyperthreading).

8600k is nothing like that, we already know games use hyperthreading and has no chance of becoming the next 2500k. For years 2500k was toe to toe with 2600k, we dont even have that at LAUNCH with 8600k/8700k as you will see from the benches.


----------



## aDyerSituation

I didn't say the 8600k is either.

2500k at 4.8ghz is probably faster in single threaded than ryzen at 3.9

So all it has is more threads for the same price..6 years later. Don't get me wrong 1600 is what I would recommend to most people but it's definitely not the "new 2500k"


----------



## Scotty99

Nothing is going to become the new 2500k but the 1600 resembles that sort of scenario far better than 8600k does, which is where this convo started...

This is especially true if AMD uses paste for zen 2, i dont think people realize how big of a part that played into sandy's status. People held off for years because they didnt want to see an increase in temps at lower clockrates.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Where has this zen 2 using paste rumor came from? just curious. thanks


----------



## Scotty99

It isnt a rumor lol, im just saying that is the sort of thing that would elevate ryzen to sandy like status. If ivy/haswell etc all were soldered, sandy wouldnt have had the aura of magnificence it does now.


----------



## Scotty99

Now if coffee is soldered.....thats a different story. I havent heard a single thing about that tho, and given x299 uses paste its pretty unlikely.


----------



## aDyerSituation

what? lol sandy wasn't great because it used solder. It was great because it kept up with the i7 2600k for years in gaming, had noticeably better IPC than Nehalem, and clocked upwards to 5ghz.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> the 1600 resembles that sort of scenario far better than 8600k does


Geez, you exceed yourself... The i7-7700K is already holding its own against the 1600 and you have to bring the 7800K to the table?

The 1600 has no resemblance whatsoever to what the i5 was. It does not overclock and it is weaker in IPC than the competition. How's that supposed to account for something? The only bragging rights the R5 could have is to have been the last nail in the current i5s. That's all. And it is no small feat. The market was trying to get rid of the i5 for years and no one could do what the R5 did -- force Intel to bury the quad cores for good. But don't push your luck on the subject


----------



## Scotty99

We clearly see this in a different light, we can just agree to disagree at this point.


----------



## wingman99

The i5 7600k still lives, I can't think of a game where the processor can't maintain a minimum of 60 FPS.


----------



## nanotm

I doubt AMD will use paste on a 12nm fin/fet chip tbh, besides it wouldn't surprise me if they launched Ryzen 1.5 just before Christmas with higher clock speeds out of the box and came with the ability to hit 5ghz out of the box....

when r2.0 hits in 2018 on the 12nmlp (as suggested by new leaks) i would expect the mto only relase the low binned stock with again poorer overclocking and do a semi refresh of the best chips as higher clock speeds in q4 2018 as well...

ryzen wont be the best of the bunch but if they can push out the chips fast enough at a reasonable price (like they did with the initial am4 release) then a lot of people will buy them, especially if the platform cost works out cheaper than intel's constant need to flog new mobo's every year


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Oh really lol.
> 
> ~Uses solder, games just as well as the i7 version (ryzen 1700) should be a viable gaming CPU for ~5 years (as the 2500k was, til games started using hyperthreading).
> 
> 8600k is nothing like that, we already know games use hyperthreading and has no chance of becoming the next 2500k. For years 2500k was toe to toe with 2600k, we dont even have that at LAUNCH with 8600k/8700k as you will see from the benches.


so the poor optimization there was in 2011 games made the 2500k a good cpu onyl becuase matches 2600k? then that doesnt make sense you cant expect games that have multithreading perform just as good on a 8600k with 6t


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> How so? There was nothing at that time with such single threaded power, and the i5 was cheaper than the i7, and HT had problems in several games. The i5 was "the gamer CPU" back then. I have to see the day that either AMD or Intel releases a CPU that is 35% stronger in single thread than the competition. Even to Nehalem, everyone today with i5 and i7s would upgrade to a CPU 30% stronger than the last generation (with no added cores, mind you).
> 
> Now if you want to judge the i5-2500K by today's standards I have to step aside because then it is really besides the point / useless. It was a 2011 CPU


I agree. SB was the last great architectural release for Intel and everything since has been incremental at best. I think of SB as analogous to Conroe in terms of revolutionary releases. I guess an argument could be made for Nehalem as well, but SB's performance was just so off the charts at the time, especially when you also factored in its incredible OCing range (with 5+ GHz clock speeds possible on air which I don't remember anything really coming close to at the time). I type this post on my 4.6 GHz 2600K that's been beat to hell for over 6 years and is still perfectly acceptable in all performance metrics I care about even now.


----------



## Scotty99

Ryzen was a far greater leap in performance from excavator than nehalem>sandy was.

There is nothing special about sandy aside from the fact it was soldered, market stagnation is the only reason people were able to keep them so long.

Remember, i had a 2500k for 6 years lol.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ryzen was a far greater leap in performance from excavator than nehalem>sandy was.
> 
> *There is nothing special about sandy aside from the fact it was soldered*, market stagnation is the only reason people were able to keep them so long.
> 
> Remember, i had a 2500k for 6 years lol.


I'm sorry but that statement just runs absolutely counter to the general consensus of pretty much the entire PC fan base. In fact, I can't remember anybody buying SB back in 2011 because it had a soldered IHS? That only even became an issue long after SB launched because Intel switched to TIM IHS. People flocked to SB back then because it offered revolutionary IPC increases on top of incredible OCing abilities (and was also priced very well).


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ryzen was a far greater leap in performance from excavator than nehalem>sandy was.


Are you still on this wrong rap? Ryzen was just a greater leap over its predecessor because AMD did not improved in almost a decade. So much so that what you call a "far greater leap" left it still behind. I really don't undertand why you used this argument. It is totally flawled.

Seriously, I am starting to doubt you ever had a Sandy Bridge


----------



## Scotty99

You guys simply have it in your heads sandy was great, but you have no actual reason for it lol. Ivy was great, haswell was great, skylake was great. What is the standout feature sandy has over all of them? It could take an incredible amount of volts and stay cool with a 30 dollar air cooler, what else shares that trait.....oh right AMD ryzen!

I am telling you, if sandy was not soldered it's place in history would have been far far different.


----------



## Scotty99

Yes it clocked to the stars, but so did ivy/haswell/skylake/kaby lake lol. Its overclocking prowess is not what kept it relevant for so many years, the fact intel did not raise core counts is.


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You guys simply have it in your heads sandy was great, but you have no actual reason for it lol. Ivy was great, haswell was great, skylake was great. What is the standout feature sandy has over all of them? It could take an incredible amount of volts and stay cool with a 30 dollar air cooler, what else shares that trait.....oh right AMD ryzen!
> 
> I am telling you, if sandy was not soldered it's place in history would have been far far different.


It was great because it was the first gen CPU that could clock that high. If you recall the 2600k was beating the i7 980x, a 6 core 32nm CPU. Nehalem gen was good for around 4.0 GHz, and Sandy Bridge could clock up to 5.0 GHz. That's the reason it is revered as being great. You must not have been around then?


----------



## Scotty99

Ivy also clocked to 5.0ghz.... yet no one talks about ivy because it didnt have solder, people kept skipping gen to gen to gen because they didnt want a sidegrade (slight ipc gain for a big rise in temps).

Seriously, how is this not common knowledge among this crowd? Sounds more like you havent kept up with each release since sandy.


----------



## Scotty99

Its truly mind boggling how people cannot see the similarities between ryzen and sandy. In 5 years do you think we will be talking about how great of a CPU the 8600k was lol? Of course not, we will be talking about how much value AMD offered with the ryzen 5 6 cores, this is going to be especially true if AMD decides not to solder zen+.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> It was great because it was the first gen CPU that could clock that high. If you recall the 2600k was beating the i7 980x, a 6 core 32nm CPU. Nehalem gen was good for around 4.0 GHz, and Sandy Bridge could clock up to 5.0 GHz. That's the reason it is revered as being great. You must not have been around then?


Ryzen 1700 is a 6900k for 1/3rd the price, literally the exact same thing as 2600k vs 980x.

Wait even a bigger deal actually, forgot 980x was a hexacore chip.


----------



## DStealth

6900k is far far away from 1700...
More like comparing almost 4Y from now 5960x with them 1800x and tr1900 ....for almost 1/2 the price...but now there's the 7820x cpu with almost identical price/performance ratio with 8c AMD cpu's


----------



## NYU87

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ryzen 1700 is a 6900k for 1/3rd the price, literally the exact same thing as 2600k vs 980x.
> 
> Wait even a bigger deal actually, forgot 980x was a hexacore chip.


Sadly while 1700 is cheaper, the 6900K still has better IPC and overclocks better. 1700 is more comparable to 5960x.

Another problem with Ryzen is the 3.8-3.9GHz max overclock.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> *6900k is far far away from 1700.*..
> More like comparing almost 4Y from now 5960x with them 1800x and tr1900 ....for almost 1/2 the price...but now there's the 7820x cpu with almost identical price/performance ratio with 8c AMD cpu's


Huh?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NYU87*
> 
> Sadly while 1700 is cheaper, the 6900K still has better IPC and overclocks better. 1700 is more comparable to 5960x.
> 
> Another problem with Ryzen is the 3.8-3.9GHz max overclock.


The 1700 isnt "cheaper" its ONE THIRD THE PRICE lol. A max overclocked 6900k is barely faster than a max overclocked 1700, i was responding to the guy making the 2600k to 980x comparison and how much value intel gave people then, 1700 is an even greater value given the 2600k was only a quad vs the hexa 980x.


----------



## Scotty99

And you cant compare 7820x to ryzen people, it was not on the market when ryzen released.

Ugh holy intel fanboys batman.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Huh?


Missreadd with 10c 6950 ..my bad








Yes 6900k was not the optimal price/performance CPU...but now 7820k is just on par with them comparing stock and OC results.


----------



## Scotty99

Again skylake x was a RESPONSE to ryzen, its not a fair or valid comparison. But if you want to do that comparison you can get a x370motherboard/1700/16gb's of 3200 memory for less money than *JUST* a 7820x, and have 85-90% of the performance.


----------



## DStealth

From this point of view yes. But how about buying TR1900x with quad memory and comparing to 7820x ?
Yes 1700(w/o)X is still very good value for money after OC. But comparing with old actually almost 4 years old CPU from intel 5960x 8/16 in terms of price is just not fair...there are recent cpu's on par with price and performance for the moment. Again response or not 2-3 months later, it's not a fanboys statement it's just the reality


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> From this point of view yes. But how about buying TR1900x with quad memory and comparing to 7820x ?
> Yes 1700(w/o)X is still very good value for money after OC. But comparing with old actually almost 4 years old CPU from intel 5860x 8/16 in terms of price is just not fair...there are recent cpu's on par with price and performance for the moment. Again response or not 2-3 months later, it's not a fanboys statement it's just the reality


Are you being serious right now lol? The 1900x should not even exist, nor should the 1920x. 1950x is the only threadripper anyone should be buying, who in their right mind would spend 800 dollars for a 12 core cpu when a mere 200 dollars more gets you a 16 core? (which demolishes intels 1000 dollar 10 core 7900x)

You are either trolling or are not aware of what people are buying.


----------



## DStealth

Don't know what should people buy. Yesterday just checked the prices as there was 1900x on my local distributor(on stock) and was shocked how AMD combos "cheap" are








In my local currency:
AMD CPU Desktop Ryzen Threadripper 8C/16T 1900X (3.8/4.0GHz, 16MB, 180W, sTR4) box 1030 w/o VAT
ASROCK Main Board Desktop X399 (sTR4, 8xDDR4, 4xPCIE3.0,1xPCIx1, SATA III,M.2,Raid,GLAN,USB3.1) ATX retail 641 w/o VAT

just for comparison Intel platform same board(Asrock Taichi) and core count CPU same distributor
CPU Desktop Core i7-7820X (3.6GHz, 11MB,LGA2066) box 1140 w/o VAT
ASROCK Main Board Desktop iX299 (S2066, 8xDDR4, 4xPCIE3.0,1xPCIx1, SATA III, Raid,GLAN,USB3.0) ATX retail 502 w/o VAT


----------



## Scotty99

Why are you so concerned with the 1900x lol? Its a terrible value CPU and is not something anyone should be buying. If you want a fair comparison compare the 1900x vs 7740x, two CPU's that should not exist.


----------



## DStealth

While 7740x being the fastest single core performer....the 1900x is just the most expensive 8core AMD made


----------



## Scotty99

Yep fanboy, moving on.


----------



## DStealth

How about promoting Ryzen as value CPU in Intel thread








Yes, move on please.


----------



## Scotty99

Well the discussion started when someone proclaimed the 8600k as being the next "2500k". I completely disagreed with this and gave reasons as to why i think ryzen 1600 has a better chance of gaining elite status 5 years from now.

It then devolved when fanboys like yourself started posting.


----------



## profundido

it's....STARTING !!
















http://wccftech.com/intel-core-i7-8700k-msi-z370-krait-benchmarks-overclocking-leaked/


----------



## Glottis

6 cores at 5Ghz+ with Noctua NH-D15? Yes please.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> it's....STARTING !!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Very good info!
> 
> If that z270 compatibles ade true, its indeed a big win!
> 
> http://wccftech.com/intel-core-i7-8700k-msi-z370-krait-benchmarks-overclocking-leaked/


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Got a question about per core overclocking. Say i get an asus board and it decides core 4 can hit 5.2ghz (for example), how do games know that is my fastest core, or do they even? Would i have to tell the game which cores to prefer?


not the game, but the OS you will tell what core to launch the game on. You can add the /affinity {corenumberStartingAt0} switch to a shortcut in windows, or I think you can set it in the steam lauch options too (in the game properties).

Besides that there are small applications out there that are called game launchers and designed exactly for this just for convenience reasons.

All these apps and shortcut methods are basically the same as launching a process/application first then when it's running already opening taskmanager and manually ajusting the core affinity for that process. Just make sure you plan your core choice well since all the other processes and threads keep launching at random on different cores unless also manually adjusted. this means if you plan badly you may actually interfere with other sotware running on your pc (antivirus, default OS processes, other applications,...) and cripple your game's performance because they happen to end up on the same core as your game.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> 6 cores at 5Ghz+ with Noctua NH-D15? Yes please.


Tigerlake should be capable of it. 10nm++ is +15% perf vs 10nm at 1.00v vs 1.00v ( +10% perf vs 14nm++ at 1.00v vs 1.00v I think ). 7740X is on 14nm+ and could even reach 5.4/5.5ghz.
Two more processe improvements until the 1st 6ghz processor?
8700K is just a tad above 1.00v so 10nm++ should be capable of ~4ghz or so at that voltage.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> it's....STARTING !!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://wccftech.com/intel-core-i7-8700k-msi-z370-krait-benchmarks-overclocking-leaked/


I don't really trust this site, but if I can get at least 4.7GHz on my NH-D15s (with two fans) without delidding I'll be beyond satisfied. If I can hit 5GHz I'll die.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well the discussion started when someone proclaimed the 8600k as being the next "2500k".


Jesus dude, stop trolling. Nobody proclaimed the 8600K being anything. You were the one who brought the 8700K into the comparison with the R5. Go read the thread you are posting in.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Jesus dude, stop trolling. Nobody proclaimed the 8600K being anything. You were the one who brought the 8700K into the comparison with the R5. Go read the thread you are posting in.


edit
or start reading the things you write for starters


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> I don't really trust this site, but if I can get at least 4.7GHz on my NH-D15s (with two fans) without delidding I'll be beyond satisfied. If I can hit 5GHz I'll die.


There are some examples in Skylake-X thread doing 4.7-4.8 in 1.2 voltage ranges on air, so seems doable even on 8+ CPUs ....
I'm gaming all day long on my [email protected] with 1.31v set in BIOS on a simple AIO water cooler


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> There are some examples in Skylake-X thread doing 4.7-4.8 in 1.2 voltage ranges on air, so seems doable even on 8+ CPUs ....
> I'm gaming all day long on my [email protected] with 1.31v set in BIOS on a simple AIO water cooler


Yeah, but I have an air cooler. Lol. It can be better than lower-end AIOs but results are mixed. Plus the heatspreader and die will be much smaller.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ryzen was a far greater leap in performance from excavator than nehalem>sandy was.
> 
> There is nothing special about sandy aside from the fact it was soldered, market stagnation is the only reason people were able to keep them so long.
> 
> Remember, i had a 2500k for 6 years lol.


Yes by Then AMD was competitive and Intel released a CPU better than the competition.now AMD hasnt been competitve and Released a CPU which technically is not better than the competitor's offer

then it wasnt nothing special to make such a performance jump while beating the competitor's offer? Ryzen has gotten maybe a big IPC jump but will it remain as relevant as Sandy Bridge? is the overclock ability even close as Sandy Bridge?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You guys simply have it in your heads sandy was great, but you have no actual reason for it lol.


Yes it wasnt impressive such overclock and performance gains,the IPC increase,remaining relevant during 7-8years, plus being ahead the past generation and close to the incoming whihc was barely 1-3% better








Quote:


> Ivy was great, haswell was great, skylake was great. What is the standout feature sandy has over all of them? It could take an incredible amount of volts and stay cool with a 30 dollar air cooler,


Ivy bridge was a node shrink of SB so nothing to stand out, power consumption is not a problem.Haswell used new AVX2 but still 7% ahead IB in non AVX2 workload seem not good as IPC increase from SB,now Skylake is the closest to Sandy Bridge but still didnt get as big IPC increase as SB, and No a 30usd coole couldnt handle a 5GHz SB unless you like 85-90c or so temperature
Quote:


> what else shares that trait.....oh right AMD ryzen!


Ryzen probaly has as a big IPC increase but still it was years late to compete with intel and its overclock ability are really limited
Quote:


> I am telling you, if sandy was not soldered it's place in history would have been far far different


Skylake is not soldered and still is as good as SB OC
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Yes it clocked to the stars, but so did ivy/haswell/skylake/kaby lake lol. Its overclocking prowess is not what kept it relevant for so many years, the fact intel did not raise core counts is.


Ivy Bridge has worse levels of overclock not even comparable to SB.Haswell has as bad overclock as IB if it werent for the refresh intel did the CPU in average only were a slight improvement for overclock,Broadwell is a really bad overclocker,now Skylake is the only who stands for being as good overclocker as SB


----------



## czin125

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/256127-rumors-imply-intel-pushed-10nm-cannon-lake-back-2018
Appears to be an update to this and that Cannonlake will be released at the end of 2017.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> There are some examples in Skylake-X thread doing 4.7-4.8 in 1.2 voltage ranges on air, so seems doable even on 8+ CPUs ....
> I'm gaming all day long on my [email protected] with 1.31v set in BIOS on a simple AIO water cooler


Temps? Is that delidded?


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> https://www.extremetech.com/computing/256127-rumors-imply-intel-pushed-10nm-cannon-lake-back-2018
> Appears to be an update to this and that Cannonlake will be released at the end of 2017.


by the end of 2017 then that would mean it would work on z270? if not then in what motherboards?also Cannonlake is the node shrink why Intel is Skipping the node shrink?


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Temps? Is that delidded?


Not. Close to 70s in this scenario.

And in low 60s during heavy game sessions. Using this PC mainly for gaming so don't ask me about LinX/Prime hours load temps...not prefer running them.


----------



## bigjdubb

I read a dirty little rumor that Cannonlake was pushed back to the end of 2018. It was on WCCFTech so I am not sure if their has been any other mention of this rumor.


----------



## kd5151

I see more leaks came out today. CPUs are starting to get faster. Yesterdays performance at a lower price. Either give me us more ipc or give us moar cores!


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> I see more leaks came out today. CPUs are starting to get faster. Yesterdays performance at a lower price. Either give me us more ipc or give us moar cores!


i dont know if more cores on intel means higher price it wouldnt be better to wait for the higher core count and a better IPC


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> by the end of 2017 then that would mean it would work on z270? if not then in what motherboards?also Cannonlake is the node shrink why Intel is Skipping the node shrink?


Cannonlake is only for low-power laptops. It's not coming to desktops at all. The reason is power scaling issues with the first generation of 10nm.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Not. Close to 70s in this scenario.
> 
> And in low 60s during heavy game sessions. Using this PC mainly for gaming so don't ask me about LinX/Prime hours load temps...not prefer running them.


Yeah, that's a high end AIO... My D15 definitely wouldn't match anything like that and I really don't want to buy an AIO.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Cannonlake is only for low-power laptops. It's not coming to desktops at all. The reason is power scaling issues with the first generation of 10nm.


and early news/rumours didnt show Intel Cannonlake for desktop?

then what is doing to be node shrink of Coffee lake? it made sense Cannonlake would come after Coffee lake


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> and early roadmaps didnt show Intel Cannonlake for desktop?
> 
> then what is doing to be node shrink of Coffee lake? it made sense Cannonlake would come after Coffee lake


It doesn't matter what early roadmaps show. Things change. If you look at those early roadmaps, they don't have Kaby Lake or Coffee Lake. There's a reason for that.

10nm+ will come to the desktop as Ice Lake late next year or early 2019.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> i dont know if more cores on intel means higher price it wouldnt be better to wait for the higher core count and a better IPC


Ryzen was SMT 8 cores and ipc. Vs CMT 8 cores with backwards IPC. 6 years is a long wait.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> It doesn't matter what early roadmaps show. Things change. If you look at those early roadmaps, they don't have Kaby Lake or Coffee Lake. There's a reason for that.
> 
> 10nm+ will come to the desktop as Ice Lake late next year or early 2019.


It could be said that AMD made changes to Intel expected releases and maybe Skylake would end before 2019, and Intel dismantled the Tick Tock model and didnt really fulfilled the Process-Architecture-Optimization at all(for desktop)

Quote:


> Intel predicts that Skylake will last approximately 4 years
> Posted: Sep 2, 2015
> 
> Read more: https://www.tweaktown.com/news/47345/intel-calls-new-skylake-cpus-best-cpu-ever/index.html


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Ryzen was SMT 8 cores and ipc. Vs CMT 8 cores with backwards IPC. 6 years is a long wait.


I guess but i thought you were talking a about intel

@ 6C Coffee Lake Lineup: i7-8700K & i5-8600K / CPU-Z + 4.7GHz Turbo / Prices


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> I guess but i thought you were talking a about intel
> 
> @ 6C Coffee Lake Lineup: i7-8700K & i5-8600K / CPU-Z + 4.7GHz Turbo / Prices


About CPUs in general. Going from Dozer to Ryzen would be the closest thing to seeing more cores and ipc jump at the same time. Intel already has the ipc so just give us more cores. The glue jokes are strong with this one.


----------



## kevindd992002

Why is always have to be Scotty against the world? That troll! Lol.


----------



## Nightbird

After how many years on 4 cores mainstream, 6 cores for one year and 8 cores next year. Progress!


----------



## QuadDamage

I'm still hoping for the 10/5/2017 release
I am hopeful


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> I'm still hoping for the 10/5/2017 release
> I am hopeful


I haven't seen anything pointing to a delay.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nightbird*
> 
> After how many years on 4 cores mainstream, 6 cores for one year and 8 cores next year. Progress!


I want to get the 6 core then 8 core, bring it on.


----------



## Contiusa

I'm not sure if it was posted, but i7-8700K reaching 5.3Ghz with TIM paste. (chinese edit* delid) i3 reaching 5Ghz. And the article says: "Expreview points out that the chips will have really low voltage".


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> I'm not sure if it was posted, but i7-8700K reaching 5.3Ghz with TIM paste. i3 reaching 5Ghz. And the article says: "Expreview points out that the chips will have really low voltage".


And thats not dellided.

I hope that they tried the worst sample








Golden one would go up to 5.5 or more


----------



## Scotty99

Lets not get carried away here lol, thats simply a CPU-z screenshot. I highly doubt 5.3ghz all core overclock is going to be achievable by any 8700k's.....but lets hope im wrong.


----------



## Scotty99

Also best case on the market is up for preorder








https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811119327&cm_re=h500p-_-11-119-327-_-Product


----------



## QuadDamage

^^ I'm pretty Happy with 800D but should I upgrade my case for my I7 2600k?


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> ^^ I'm pretty Happy with 800D but should I upgrade my case for my I7 2600k?


Going to be putting ryzen or coffeelake into a fractal design arc midi r2. I love it. I don't see me getting rid of it anytime soon. Also build a htpc in a 88r. Very nice little micro atx case. Just wish it had more room behind the back panel. 2nd choice at the time when I bought my fractal was the 450d. I can't fit full tower on my desk and if I could I'd be looking at phanteks cases.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Also best case on the market is up for preorder
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811119327&cm_re=h500p-_-11-119-327-_-Product


I just switched to a fractal design s .. i love that you can fit many rads in it ....
but i hate that it looks kinda Old...
That MasterCase H500P looks really good , but i cant find info of how many rads of max size can fit there all together, any owners manual link?


----------



## aDyerSituation

I was going to get a definse S but the h500p looks too darn good


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I just switched to a fractal design s .. i love that you can fit many rads in it ....
> but i hate that it looks kinda Old...
> That MasterCase H500P looks really good , but i cant find info of how many rads of max size can fit there all together, any owners manual link?


I dont want to turn this into the H500p thread but i know it can fit a 360mm up top, i wouldnt touch the front fans personally they look too good lol.

The cool thing about H500p is cooler master is the only company i know of that has fans (including the 200mm ones that come with the case) that sync up with asus aura. This means you can sync everything in your PC from one software. THis is the radiator i want for this case:
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835856107

Assuming they eventually make a black one, then i would add 3 120mm cooler master rgb fans for the rad, and one 140mm for the back. All synced with asus aura.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I was going to get a definse S but the h500p looks too darn good


Right ! This thing looks attractive
And a define s is the one that feets lots of rads inside and a really good airflow
Thats my unfinished build that i run for now before i get 8700k and z370, after i will hard tube it....


All in all there is a 280mm rad push/pull a 360mm on top push pull and one pasive 120 mm rad on the botom... and still space left to extend the pum reservoir... temps i get with it are simply very good after switching from nzxt 340 .
But again , this case looks kinda old for me ,but it performs good

I wonder if all that fits in h500p one . For some reason i feel that 8700k needs lots of cooling


----------



## Scotty99

Honestly a 360mm rad would be enough cooling for a 1080ti and a 8700k. I would skip a super slim one like fractal s36 tho.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Honestly a 360mm rad would be enough cooling for a 1080ti and a 8700k. I would skip a super slim one like fractal s36 tho.


A 360 one for those 2 is ok , only if you keep them on stock oc,/ and not going for its all juice at max oc it does.and then the cooler they are the better reaoults.
Imho a 360 would cover a cpu only( if heavy overcklocked).I may be wrong , but with 7700k i felt that way .... and adding a 1080ti to it ,.... no , 360 isnt enought in my opinion...
For exemple with a 760mm rad total that i have and its push/pull in a case that is simply amazing for it, at max load i get 40-42c on a gpu and 60c on a cpu during stress tests ...

But anyways , let it be,i feel like ill make things work, just preordered that h500p .
Thx for the link!


----------



## Scotty99

Hah nice, i am going to wait for reviews in case there is something that would bother me enough not to buy it, but i doubt anything could be that major.






Review of EK's fluid gaming kit which includes a full cover GPU waterblock and relies on a 240 rad for both.

TLDR CPU same temps as AIO, GPU 13c cooler than EVGA hybrid.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Hah nice, i am going to wait for reviews in case there is something that would bother me enough not to buy it, but i doubt anything could be that major.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Review of EK's fluid gaming kit which includes a full cover GPU waterblock and relies on a 240 rad for both.
> 
> TLDR CPU same temps as AIO, GPU 13c cooler than EVGA hybrid.


its a sort of a commercial.
After owning owning your personal custom loop, look at this video again....
I just do not want go deep in it to explain...
But beleve me a 240mm rad wont keep a 7700k at 5.0 1.37v and a 1080ti at 2075 ( not undervolted) at that temps stable
Ps: this may be a really golden 7700k not dellided at 5.0 1.375v to run 76 c under load in the same loop with a gpu, at a 240mm for it and a gpu


----------



## Scotty99

Not sure why kyle would lie about temps, his 7700k is at 1.375v and the 1080 was boosting to 2050. Obviously a 1080ti is going to dump more heat into the system, but given his 52c max temps on a 1080 i dont see a ti going much over 60c.

On top of that, why would EK release a kit if it wasnt sufficient? They would be getting returns left and right, they dont want that. That isnt to say i agree with the 240 rad id much rather see a 360, but given the results on a 240 a 360 is surely enough cooling for the parts in question.

There is only so much heat that can be dissipated from these parts, i am sure EK tested a 360 vs 240 and found there was not enough difference for the inclusion and extra cost of a 360.

Edit: In fact if this thing came with a 360mm rad id consider it, as my 1060 is on the compatibility list for that universal waterblock. I just really wanna fill the top slot of the h500p with a 360 lol.


----------



## Scotty99

If anything, that video shows how poor hybrid GPU's are in comparison to full cover. Also if EK reads this, you would sell 50% more of those kits if you included braiding for the tubes


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> If anything, that video shows how poor hybrid GPU's are in comparison to full cover. Also if EK reads this, you would sell 50% more of those kits if you included braiding for the tubes


Not really. My 1080 Ti get 44C with single 120mm RAD. He was getting 52C with 1080 which is like 100W less.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Not really. My 1080 Ti get 44C with single 120mm RAD. He was getting 52C with 1080 which is like 100W less.


EVGA hybrid=65c
Full cover block with 240 rad shared CPU=53c

Maybe just the evga model is trash.


----------



## kd5151

http://www.microcenter.com/product/472529/Core_i7-7700K_Kaby_Lake_42_GHz_LGA_1151_Boxed_Processor Can't wait for coffeelake? $250 with mobo combo. i5s are $160 with mobo combo.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> EVGA hybrid=65c
> Full cover block with 240 rad shared CPU=53c
> 
> Maybe just the evga model is trash.


Something wrong with his Hybrid. 65C could be possible with 40C ambient temp. I never seen money over 55C even in hot summer day 33C in my room.


----------



## Scotty99

I think the 1080ti got upgraded parts, i remember seeing a review of MSI vs EVGA 1080's and MSI beat the EVGA by like 15c.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Not. Close to 70s in this scenario.
> 
> And in low 60s during heavy game sessions. Using this PC mainly for gaming so don't ask me about LinX/Prime hours load temps...not prefer running them.


Are the temps in the 70s under Cinebench?

I get upto the 80s at around the same voltage as you.. Custom loop, D5, XT240 and a huge MO-RA3..

What sort of cooling do you have..?


----------



## nanotm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Are the temps in the 70s under Cinebench?
> 
> I get upto the 80s at around the same voltage as you.. Custom loop, D5, XT240 and a huge MO-RA3..
> 
> What sort of cooling do you have..?


according ot rig in sig an nh d-14

at a guess to get those temps i'd say its mounted on an open air benchmark rig in a fully air conned room ....


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I think the 1080ti got upgraded parts, i remember seeing a review of MSI vs EVGA 1080's and MSI beat the EVGA by like 15c.


EVGA got upgraded parts to with there ICX coolers


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> http://www.microcenter.com/product/472529/Core_i7-7700K_Kaby_Lake_42_GHz_LGA_1151_Boxed_Processor Can't wait for coffeelake? $250 with mobo combo. i5s are $160 with mobo combo.


probably they are due to arrive soon?


----------



## TMatzelle60

Microcenter already has them in storage. No i will not be taking pictures lol


----------



## Yvese

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Microcenter already has them in storage. No i will not be taking pictures lol


What about price? No need to take pics


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yvese*
> 
> What about price? No need to take pics


Sorry thats all covered under NDA. I also just work in HR so i wouldnt know to much


----------



## kd5151

https://videocardz.com/72817/intel-coffelake-s-8th-gen-desktop-and-z370-controversy

I see.


----------



## gigafloppy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> https://videocardz.com/72817/intel-coffelake-s-8th-gen-desktop-and-z370-controversy
> 
> I see.


I don't understand why they would hide the turbo clocks? Every idiot with CPU-Z will know what they are after a couple minutes of tinkering. Could it be because they are lower than Kaby Lake turbos and are considered bad publicity?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> https://videocardz.com/72817/intel-coffelake-s-8th-gen-desktop-and-z370-controversy
> 
> I see.


2666 MHz lol. Kaby Lake does 4133MHz already.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Nice little update:
Quote:


> Intel Core i7 8700K Reportedly Reaches 4.8 GHz Easily, 5 GHz+ Requires Delid
> 
> A report out of Expreview says that users should expect Intel's 8700K 6-core processor to easily clock up to 4.8 GHz with conventional cooling methods. Apparently, the chip doesn't even need that much voltage to achieve this feat either; however, thermal constraints are quickly hit when pushing Intel's latest (upcoming) leader for the mainstream desktop parts. Expreview says that due to the much increased temperatures, users who want to eke out the most performance from their CPU purchase will likely have to try and resort to delidding of their 8700K. While that likely wouldn't have been necessary with Intel's 7700K processors, remember that here we have two extra CPU cores drawing power and producing waste heat, so it makes sense that thermals will be a bigger problem.


https://www.techpowerup.com/237258/intel-core-i7-8700k-reportedly-reaches-4-8-ghz-easily-5-ghz-requires-delid


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> 2666 MHz lol. Kaby Lake does 4133MHz already.


Thats for standard NON OC. 4133 is considered oc


----------



## Frosted racquet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Thats for standard NON OC. 4133 is considered oc


Yes, but they've made it sound like the electrical changes to the 370 MoBos are necessary to support such "ludicrous" speeds of 2666MHz...


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Frosted racquet*
> 
> Yes, but they've made it sound like the electrical changes to the 370 MoBos are necessary to support such "ludicrous" speeds of 2666MHz...


Intel is on there heels alittle now with amd coming out with knock down


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Frosted racquet*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Thats for standard NON OC. 4133 is considered oc
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but they've made it sound like the electrical changes to the 370 MoBos are necessary to support such "ludicrous" speeds of 2666MHz...
Click to expand...

They did make some changes to the motherboards to guarantee 2666MHz with everyone in the world who will run that speed.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Frosted racquet*
> 
> Yes, but they've made it sound like the electrical changes to the 370 MoBos are necessary to support such "ludicrous" speeds of 2666MHz...


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> They did make some changes to the motherboards to guarantee 2666MHz with everyone in the world who will run that speed.


At least to me, it's not really surprising that they would take the step to ensure a universal minimum of 2666. All things considered, with the prices of kits down to fairly reasonable levels, most people running DDR4 seem more than willing to cough up the extra and get kits in the 2800-3200 range. It seems to be settling into the same relationship 1333 and 1600 had with DDR3.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nanotm*
> 
> according ot rig in sig an nh d-14
> 
> at a guess to get those temps i'd say its mounted on an open air benchmark rig in a fully air conned room ....


The signature is outdated...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Are the temps in the 70s under Cinebench?
> 
> I get upto the 80s at around the same voltage as you.. Custom loop, D5, XT240 and a huge MO-RA3..
> 
> What sort of cooling do you have..?


70's and 72-3*C on the hottest Core. Almost the same cooling.
As you know from CPU to CPU the thermal losses are not equivalent.
Just reduced 1.299v for 5055 and 1.075v for 32x mesh.
As for gaming seems stable for last two days...


----------



## Scotty99

I just wanna say that its a bunch of BS that new boards are required because of the extra cores lol. They absolutely could have been supported on a large % of z170 and 270 boards. You can slot a 1800x into a 60 dollar b350 board (tho i wouldnt overclock one on that lol), this is just intel being intel.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> https://videocardz.com/72817/intel-coffelake-s-8th-gen-desktop-and-z370-controversy
> 
> I see.


So intel is not aware that high end motherboards can support 6core CPUs? probably the low end H370 will be worse than high end Z170 this sounds like pure excuses


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> So intel is not aware that high end motherboards can support 6core CPUs? probably the low end H370 will be worse than high end Z170 this sounds like pure excuses


Reread the page. Says only z370 are coming this year. :c


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Reread the page. Says only z370 are coming this year. :c


yes but
Quote:


> The biggest controversy comes from a lack of support for Coffeelake-S on Z170/270 motherboards. Intel explained that it was necessary to make Z370 mandatory for Coffeelake-S because the power delivery on Z370 had to be upgraded for 6 cores. *Unfortunately, Intel did not explain why quad-core Kabylake-S would not work on Z370, or why high-end motherboards with powerful VRMs are not suitable for Coffeelake-S*.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Getting the max out of 6 core processor required changes to our motherboards, specifically to provide improved power delivery to new 6-core processors.
Click to expand...

but later we could see low end H370 and B350 would run 6cores with no issues and then why not high end z170 or z270? why it cant run a kaby lake CPU if it has same pin count and and probably same pin layout


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> yes but
> but ;ater we could see low end H370 and B350 would run 6cores with no issues and then why not high end z170 or z270? why it cant run a kaby lake CPU if it has same pin count and and probably same pin layout


Hopefully a bios update fixes that. But who would buy a kaby lake cpu and a z370 board. If you're forced to buy z370 might as well get those 6 cores.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Hopefully a bios update fixes that. But who would buy a kaby lake cpu and a z370 board. If you're forced to buy z370 might as well get those 6 cores.


anyone who wants to keep their CPU as a placeholder untilt hey cna afford the 6cores? also this shows the artifitial limit intle is imposing


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> https://videocardz.com/72817/intel-coffelake-s-8th-gen-desktop-and-z370-controversy
> 
> I see.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So intel is not aware that high end motherboards can support 6core CPUs? probably the low end H370 will be worse than high end Z170 this sounds like pure excuses
Click to expand...

I think Intel said they went with FIVR with Coffee lake so they need to use Z370 motherboard for the Different VRM on the motherboard.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> anyone who wants to keep their CPU as a placeholder untilt hey cna afford the 6cores? also this shows the artifitial limit intle is imposing


Some people might stick with the 7700K and 6700K. They are still great chips


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Some people might stick with the 7700K and 6700K. They are still great chips


Think about how nice it would have been for most people if this CPU worked with Z170. You would have had people with 6700K/7700K upgrading and selling their still good Core i7s and people with i5s or i3 or Pentium would have gotten a cheap upgrade.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Think about how nice it would have been for most people if this CPU worked with Z170. You would have had people with 6700K/7700K upgrading and selling their still good Core i7s and people with i5s or i3 or Pentium would have gotten a cheap upgrade.


It would have been nice. But all the MB companys will now make double the money.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> It would have been nice. But all the MB companys will now make double the money.


Yeah, they are happy about this. They get to release new MB every year.


----------



## Scotty99

I keep going back and forth lol. My 3.9ghz 1700 is only 16% behind the leaked single core cpu-z score of the 8700k. Is that really enough of a difference to justify a switch?


----------



## Scotty99

Lets say best case scenario there is a 20% FPS difference in CPU bound games. Instead of getting 70 fps id be getting 84.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Lets say best case scenario there is a 20% FPS difference in CPU bound games. Instead of getting 70 fps id be getting 84.


Depending on the game if it uses since core you probably see more like 1-4 fps more. Since nothing has changed other then the Cores and thread count. No IPC change


----------



## Scotty99

Ya im talkin MMO's or titles that really want that IPC. Multi isnt much of a concern as a 8700k should basically match a 1700. When you break down the actual FPS gains its pretty hard to justify going intel.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Some people might stick with the 7700K and 6700K. They are still great chips
> 
> 
> 
> Think about how nice it would have been for most people if this CPU worked with Z170. You would have had people with 6700K/7700K upgrading and selling their still good Core i7s and people with i5s or i3 or Pentium would have gotten a cheap upgrade.
Click to expand...

I keep the cost down on the motherboards, I only paid $99.00 for my GA Z170 HD3 and I overclocked my i5 7600k to 4.8GHz.


----------



## Scotty99

There is an open box z170 board at my local microcenter for 48 bucks, thats also kind of why i was hoping 8700k would work on them lol.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I think Intel said they went with FIVR with Coffee lake so they need to use Z370 motherboard for the Different VRM on the motherboard.


where?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I think Intel said they went with FIVR with Coffee lake so they need to use Z370 motherboard for the Different VRM on the motherboard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> where?
Click to expand...

Quote:


> We also took the opportunity to improve our overclocking capabilities by improving the package power delivery to the CPU. This is an another change that required motherboard changes. https://videocardz.com/72817/intel-coffelake-s-8th-gen-desktop-and-z370-controversy


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*


From you're own link
Quote:


> I don't know how about you, but I'm still not convinced and neither were reviewers who asked about it.


Intel also said (in youre link) that they *need* to improve the *board layout* to get memory running at 2666

Which sounds even more ridiculous
Show me a z170 that can't do 3000

Also it's not mentioned what they *actually* improved on the power delivery
For all we know all they did is put some more heatsinks on the VRM's or added a few more
Like high end boards already come with

However
Since Kaby Lake physically fits into the z370

https://www.pcper.com/news/Processors/Apparently-Kaby-Lake-Incompatible-Z370-Chipsets
Quote:


> aby Lake-based processors will physically fit into the LGA-1151 socket of Z370 motherboards, they will fail to boot. Since their post, *Guru3D* asked around to various *motherboard manufacturers*, and they claim that Intel is only going to support 8th Generation processors with that chipset via, again, allegedly, a firmware lock-out


Can't be that much they actually changed

And on top of it

Skylake-x uses different voltage regulation than Kaby Lake as well
And still we have a 7700k made to fit into x299

Hell an i3 is coming for x299 as well

All nickel and diming


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Between a Ryzen at 3850 and a 7800X at 4700 it was a 22/25% difference in min and avg... I sold the Ryzen system, could simply not keep up in gaming.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Between a Ryzen at 3850 and a 7800X at 4700 it was a 22/25% difference in min and avg... I sold the Ryzen system, could simply not keep up in gaming.


Ryzen for high fps/Hz gaming simply falls very short from my experience. Even my old Ivy 4C delivers same or better fps than Ryzen 5/7 at 3.9ish when games are CPU bound, which they will be in pretty much all games, when chasing highest possible fps / 100+

Not to mention that most popular games and esport games are heavily CPU dependant and prefer high clocks on fewer cores.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> what? lol sandy wasn't great because it used solder. It was great because it kept up with the i7 2600k for years in gaming, had noticeably better IPC than Nehalem, and clocked upwards to 5ghz.


What are u talking, u think u can clock upward to 5ghz with tim? It was the solder that did the trick.

Had kabylake been soldered it will be able to hit 5 too!


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> What are u talking, u think u can clock upward to 5ghz with tim? It was the solder that did the trick.
> 
> Had kabylake been soldered it will be able to hit 5 too!


Kaby lake is hitting 5.1 and 5.2 from what I've seen. Almost all hit 5 if cooling is up to it. Not sure what you mean.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Kaby lake is hitting 5.1 and 5.2 from what I've seen. Almost all hit 5 if cooling is up to it. Not sure what you mean.


None of those are hitting those speeds with stock TIM under the IHS
Maybe 5Ghz, it's not gonna be a cool setup, even with a custom loop
And why invest in more exotic cooling(phase change, water chiller) if a delid can drop temps by 20 degrees
I've seen 5Ghz with stock TIM and usually they start to throttle, even watercooled, when testing stability
Even with more forgiving programs as RealBench
Not even mentioning Prime

I have yet to see a Kaby hitting 5Ghz+ with stock TIM
I think every overclock ever that high has at least a delid done

Running bare, without IHS, gives a negligible difference on temp compared to a delid

So yes, solder is actually really important

But architecture is important as well
As is the maturity of the process

Has no one noticed that since Sandy every IPC increase we've gotten also slightly decreased max achievable frequency?
At least in average

Skylake on average didn't get as far as Kaby
Kaby(14+) has a more mature(advanced) manufacturing process

And since coffee lake (14++) has one more step than Kaby I'm sure it can achieve 5Ghz easy
*if* one is willing to delid it
Or buy it delided

That being said
I'm more curios if we can get some user hacked UEFI to run coffee lake in z170/z270
And if it's really just a firmware block

Or one of those board manufacturer accidents
Like the one revision that enabled BCLK overclocking on none K chips


----------



## GreedyMuffin

My 7700K did 5 ghz under a custom loop. Stock tim.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> My 7700K did 5 ghz under a custom loop. Stock tim.


And what temps did you have with Prime?
Or with what did you actually test stability?


----------



## kd5151

I got a 5.8ghz cordless phone. Does that count?


----------



## fuark

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Intel-Core-i7-8700K/Rating/3937

thoughts?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> I got a 5.8ghz cordless phone. Does that count?


how many cores does it have?


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> None of those are hitting those speeds with stock TIM under the IHS
> Maybe 5Ghz, it's not gonna be a cool setup, even with a custom loop
> And why invest in more exotic cooling(phase change, water chiller) if a delid can drop temps by 20 degrees
> I've seen 5Ghz with stock TIM and usually they start to throttle, even watercooled, when testing stability
> Even with more forgiving programs as RealBench
> Not even mentioning Prime
> 
> I have yet to see a Kaby hitting 5Ghz+ with stock TIM
> I think every overclock ever that high has at least a delid done
> 
> Running bare, without IHS, gives a negligible difference on temp compared to a delid
> 
> So yes, solder is actually really important
> 
> But architecture is important as well
> As is the maturity of the process
> 
> Has no one noticed that since Sandy every IPC increase we've gotten also slightly decreased max achievable frequency?
> At least in average
> 
> Skylake on average didn't get as far as Kaby
> Kaby(14+) has a more mature(advanced) manufacturing process
> 
> And since coffee lake (14++) has one more step than Kaby I'm sure it can achieve 5Ghz easy
> *if* one is willing to delid it
> Or buy it delided
> 
> That being said
> I'm more curios if we can get some user hacked UEFI to run coffee lake in z170/z270
> And if it's really just a firmware block
> 
> Or one of those board manufacturer accidents
> Like the one revision that enabled BCLK overclocking on none K chips


I've hit 5 GHz on two diff 7700K's no delid using high end Air (Noctua D15 and Cheap 240mm AIO - CM ML240). So it's doable. Lowering PLL can lower temp quite alot and stability is maintained.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> I've hit 5 GHz on two diff 7700K's no delid using high end Air (Noctua D15 and Cheap 240mm AIO - CM ML240). So it's doable. Lowering PLL can lower temp quite alot and stability is maintained.


240mm AIO is overkill for CPU with such TDP.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> 240mm AIO is overkill for CPU with such TDP.


Ok


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Ok


My 3770K at 4.6GHz with 1.4v gets same temp with H100 GTX as my custom 360 RAD + EK loop. The RAD does not get that hot. 3-5C difference is not going to make or break a OC. I know most people that have 5GHz in 7700K because its only under normal use that it can stay below critical temps.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

It'd be interesting to see the ratio of people able to hit 5+ delidded vs not delidded.

Some of it certainly comes down to getting lucky with a good chip, and definitely the patience to sit there and tweak everything to find a chip's sweet spot.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> It'd be interesting to see the ratio of people able to hit 5+ delidded vs not delidded.
> 
> Some of it certainly comes down to getting lucky with a good chip, and definitely the patience to sit there and tweak everything to find a chip's sweet spot.


Good MB also effect the last 100-200MHz overclocks.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I never use Prime. It is an idiotic "stresstest" imho.

I use [email protected] Nacl, gaming and RB. I don't remember the temps. Under 80'C at least.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*


they could be referring to power phases deicated to the CPU Cores in the motherboard


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I never use Prime. It is an idiotic "stresstest" imho.
> 
> I use [email protected] Nacl, gaming and RB. I don't remember the temps. Under 80'C at least.


What ever works for people. I want to have the CPU 100% stable so I do not have to blame other problems with the CPU every time I encounter them.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> What ever works for people. I want to have the CPU 100% stable so I do not have to blame other problems with the CPU every time I encounter them.


So run real world test like handbrake


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> So run real world test like handbrake


Had my CPU stable for Prime95 and Handbrake but would crash in BF1.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Had my CPU stable for Prime95 and Handbrake but would crash in BF1.


degradation,run same test again,also memory clock/motherbard were the same? if the mobo was diferent voltage may vary


----------



## Yvese

I don't have BF1 but back when I got my 4770k and my 2600k I'd use BF3 and BF4 to stress test my OC's. All I'd do is spectate a 64 player Metro server ( and w/e that Jail close quarter map was in BF4 ) for about an hour. Stresses the CPU nicely and is an actual gaming load. I'd imagine BF1 is even better.

Prime is a pointless way to stress test if you only game and do the occasional encode.


----------



## Darkpriest667

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yvese*
> 
> I don't have BF1 but back when I got my 4770k and my 2600k I'd use BF3 and BF4 to stress test my OC's. All I'd do is spectate a 64 player Metro server ( and w/e that Jail close quarter map was in BF4 ) for about an hour. Stresses the CPU nicely and is an actual gaming load. I'd imagine BF1 is even better.
> 
> Prime is a pointless way to stress test if you only game and do the occasional encode.


I use prime for temperature testing.


----------



## Yvese

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> I use prime for temperature testing.


If all you do is game then your temps will never get anywhere near what it does in Prime. That's like using FurMark to test your GPU temps.. absolutely pointless for most people.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> I've hit 5 GHz on two diff 7700K's no delid using high end Air (Noctua D15 and Cheap 240mm AIO - CM ML240). So it's doable. Lowering PLL can lower temp quite alot and stability is maintained.


Didn't say it's impossible
Said it would be rather warm
Also means not very quiet, depending

I've also come across many (users) that can't get to 5Ghz (even in statistics in the OC guide for Kaby, people that are not happy about they're OC usually don't post results a lot)
And are complaining about temp

Here's the thing

Not all de-lids get the same temp reduction
Some see 20, some less than 10 degrees (that's why we have a delid thread handy here at overclock.net)

It's good luck vs bad luck really
Depends on how thick the silicon glue is Intel used
But that also means there are 7700k's out there that are hotter than others
Hell we had one user in Intel section not being able to get 4.7 stable on his 7700k

and about PLL
It always needs to stay at the default value (which is a low value actually)
If left on auto it can ramp up depending on manufacturer
But lowering, well practically you're messing with the temp sensor, that's really all

Had some long drawn out discussion about it in the Kaby OC thread, like 4 months ago


----------



## Hl86

My 5820k would hit 100 C in 10 sec in intel extreme. Hits max 70 C in normal gaming.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hl86*
> 
> My 5820k would hit 100 C in 10 sec in intel extreme. Hits max 70 C in normal gaming.


if you had stock clocks and voltage you need a better cpu cooler


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> 
> 
> they could be referring to power phases deicated to the CPU Cores in the motherboard
Click to expand...

That is already said here.
Quote:


> Getting the max out of 6 core processor required changes to our motherboards, specifically to provide improved power delivery to new 6-core processors.


FIVR would be here.
Quote:


> We also took the opportunity to improve our overclocking capabilities by improving the package power delivery to the CPU. This is an another change that required motherboard changes.


https://videocardz.com/72817/intel-coffelake-s-8th-gen-desktop-and-z370-controversy


----------



## Lexi is Dumb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yvese*
> 
> I don't have BF1 but back when I got my 4770k and my 2600k I'd use BF3 and BF4 to stress test my OC's. All I'd do is spectate a 64 player Metro server ( and w/e that Jail close quarter map was in BF4 ) for about an hour. Stresses the CPU nicely and is an actual gaming load. I'd imagine BF1 is even better.
> 
> Prime is a pointless way to stress test if you only game and do the occasional encode.


Off topic but in case you're interested, BF1 was recently added to origin access. Not sure how preferable the subscription model is to most people, i like it though.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That is already said here.
> FIVR would be here.
> https://videocardz.com/72817/intel-coffelake-s-8th-gen-desktop-and-z370-controversy


In what way does that imply FIVR?

You're just making stuff up to feel better about your own purchase at this point...


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fuark*
> 
> http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Intel-Core-i7-8700K/Rating/3937
> 
> thoughts?


My 1700 got a 116 single, 464 quad, 1305 multi.

http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/5135159


----------



## TMatzelle60

I must say the i5 8600K even looks sweet


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> My 1700 got a 116 single, 464 quad, 1305 multi.
> 
> http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/5135159


I am testing my 7800X on all stock voltages (4400 core, 3000 mesh, stock voltage, or well, minus 10mv from stock).

And I get this at 4.4ghz: 131, 549 and 1122P.

At 4.8ghz i get: 152, 607 and 1246.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I am testing my 7800X on all stock voltages (4400 core, 3000 mesh, stock voltage, or well, minus 10mv from stock).
> 
> And I get this at 4.4ghz: 131, 549 and 1122P.
> 
> At 4.8ghz i get: 152, 607 and 1246.


Your 4.4 is only two points behind that 8700k score which should have been boosting to 4.7. Not sure what memory they used tho.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> My 1700 got a 116 single, 464 quad, 1305 multi.
> 
> http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/5135159


Just curious why you chose the 7-1700 over the 5-1600X... even in multi threaded applications it's been repeatedly shown to have very negligible, if any, performance gain.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Your 4.4 is only two points behind that 8700k score which should have been boosting to 4.7. Not sure what memory they used tho.


The 6-core boost is 4.3GHz.

Edit: Oh, single core. Maybe it wasn't boosting all the way for some reason.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> Just curious why you chose the 7-1700 over the 5-1600X... even in multi threaded applications it's been repeatedly shown to have very negligible, if any, performance gain.


R7 1700 stock is rather slow, but he's CPU is at 3850mhz it seems like.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> Just curious why you chose the 7-1700 over the 5-1600X... even in multi threaded applications it's been repeatedly shown to have very negligible, if any, performance gain.


Price/performance for 1600 (non x) is better than 1700, but i had the money and ryzen 5 wasnt out when i bought this. Looking back tho i think i still would have gone ryzen 7 if i had the choice, the stock cooler on 1700 is only one with RGB lighting, and sells very well on ebay.

Ya im at 3.9, and using ryzen master it XFR boosts to 4.0.....dont ask me how (its not supposed to xfr when you overclock, but mine does lol).


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> The 6-core boost is 4.3GHz.
> 
> Edit: Oh, single core. Maybe it wasn't boosting all the way for some reason.


Ya i dunno, either that or memory affects the CPU bench which is probably the case.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya i dunno, either that or memory affects the CPU bench which is probably the case.


It also loses to the 7700K, yet wins in quad-core against it. It's weird.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya i dunno, either that or memory affects the CPU bench which is probably the case.


Here's mine: http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/5134071

It says AVG turbo, not turbo. If my 4.4ghz is 4.2 ghz avg, I wonder what the 4.3 avg on the 8700K is.. 4.6?


----------



## Scotty99

That is odd lol. It should be beating 7700k in all the tests, maybe 8700k does not have a 4.7ghz single core turbo.


----------



## Scotty99

Also possible background tasks were open, i forgot to close mine which may make a difference.


----------



## Scotty99

http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/5135651

About same CPU score, turned off gsync and gpu score went way up as expected tho.

Really curious to see what price microcenter offers the 8700k day one, and what boards they stock.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/5135651
> 
> About same CPU score, turned off gsync and gpu score went way up as expected tho.
> 
> Really curious to see what price microcenter offers the 8700k day one, and what boards they stock.


I'm pretty sure that they stick with MSRP for the first month or so.

Even if they don't, I'm still going to try getting it on Newegg because the lack of tax will save me more money than whatever discount Microcenter has, at least before they offer bundles.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That is already said here.
> FIVR would be here.
> https://videocardz.com/72817/intel-coffelake-s-8th-gen-desktop-and-z370-controversy


Only once released we will see if they use FIVR or it is just gimmick to make more money from the motherboards parnerts


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> I'm pretty sure that they stick with MSRP for the first month or so.
> 
> Even if they don't, I'm still going to try getting it on Newegg because the lack of tax will save me more money than whatever discount Microcenter has, at least before they offer bundles.


You probably right, they didnt offer bundles on ryzen 7 for like a month.


----------



## Scotty99

Anyone else in here got a 1060? Curious if that benchmark compares my gpu to other 1060's or an overall type of thing.


----------



## kd5151

https://videocardz.com/72831/intel-coffeelake-s-8th-gen-core-desktop-processors-final-specs-and-highlights








Leaks!


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Intel Core 8th Gen Coffeelake architecture
> 
> Intel Pentium / Celeron: Entry Performance
> 
> Leadership performance at entry system price points
> Enjoy content and connect to the world through the Internet
> 8th Gen Intel Core: Premium Performance - Launching October 5, 2017
> 
> i7-8700K - Intel's BEST gaming desktop processor
> Wide range of performance options for consumers
> Up to 6 cores and 12 threads
> A range of unlocked K SKU processors
> Up to 40 platform PCIe 3.0 lanes
> Intel Core-X Series: Extreme Performance
> 
> Ultimate performance and extreme mega-tasking
> Scalable from Intel Core i5 through Core i9 Extreme Edition
> All processors unlocked
> Up to 4 memory channels
> Up to 68 platform PCIe 3.0 lanes
> NEW 8th Gen Intel Core Desktop Processor Family Market Insights
> 
> GAMING
> 36% Annual Growth in Retail Gaming PC Sales over the last 5 years
> CONTENT CREATION
> 130M+ Digital Content Creators
> OVERCLOCKING
> 80% Increase in Unlocked CPU Sales Q2'14 vs. Q2'17
> NEW 8th Gen Intel Core Desktop Platform Overview
> 
> MORE CORES
> MORE INTEL SMART CACHE
> BEST IN CLASS DESIGN
> ENHANCED OVERCLOCKING
> IMPROVED 14NM PROCESS
> NEW Intel Z370 Chipset Motherboard
> 
> Improved power delivery for 6-core processors
> Enhanced package power delivery for overclocking
> Memory routing support for DDR4-2666
> 8TH GEN INTEL CORE DESKTOP PROCESSORS REQUIRE INTEL 300 SERIES CHIPSET MOTHERBOARDS TO DELIVER THE RATED PERFORMANCE
> 
> NEW 8th Gen Intel Core Desktop Processor Family
> 
> Delivering Premium Performance for What Comes Next
> 
> i7-8700K - Intel's BEST gaming desktop processor ever
> First 6-core Intel Core i5 desktop processor
> First 4-core Intel Core i3 desktop processor
> Up to 12MB Intel Smart Cache
> Amazing Responsiveness with Intel Optane Memory
> 
> Accelerate System Responsiveness
> Optimize Overall Productivity
> High-Performance Large Capacity Storage
> Built for Gamers, Content Creators, and Overclockers
> 
> A range of unlocked K SKU processors that deliver maximum tuning flexibility
> Up to 40 platform PCIe 3.0 lanes for system expandability on graphics, storage, and I/O
> Supported with Intel Z370 chipset motherboards
> Better Gaming with 8th Gen Intel Core Processors
> 
> POWERFUL, FLUID, VIVID GAMING
> 
> i7-8700K - Intel's BEST gaming desktop processor ever
> Up to 195 FPS on Gears of War 4
> Up to 25% more FPS on Gears of War 4 vs 7th Gen
> AN OPTION FOR EVERY GAMER
> 
> A wide range of performance options for gamers
> Unlocked SKU available at each Intel Core brand
> Launch gamers FASTER with Intel Optane memory
> THE WORLD IS WATCHING
> 
> Up to 80 FPS while mega-tasking
> Game + Stream + Record up to 45% better with PUBG vs. 7th Gen
> Game + Stream + Record up to 2x faster with PUBG vs. a 3 yr old PC
> Better Content Creation with 8th Gen Intel Core Processors
> 
> ADVANCE YOUR CREATIVITY
> 
> Up to 32% faster 4K video editing vs 7th Gen
> Load media projects FASTER with Intel Optane memory
> Hardware support for 4K HDR
> CREATE up to 4.5x faster (Power Director HEVC Video workload)
> EDIT up to 65% faster (Photo Editing Adobe Photoshop Lightroom workload)
> SHARE 7.8x faster (Handbrake Transcore workload)
> Better Overclocking with 8th Gen Intel Core Processors
> 
> PERFORMANCE MATTERS
> 
> New Features:
> Per Core Overclocking (When more than one core is active, the lower ratio is applied. Per core P-states and per core, voltage are not supported)
> Max Memory Ratio up to 8,400 MT/s
> Real-Time Memory Latency Control
> Enhanced PLL Trim Controls
> Enhanced Package Power Delivery
> EXTREME TUNING
> 
> Intel Extreme Tuning Utility (Intel XTU)
> Intel Extreme Memory Profile 2.0 (Intel XMP) technology
> PACE OF MIND
> 
> Performance Tuning Protection Plan available
> Summary
> 
> i7-8700K - Intel's Best Gaming Desktop Processor(1) with up to 25% more FPS(2) and up to 45% better(3) mega-tasking vs 7th Gen
> Up to 32% faster(4) 4K video editing vs. 7th Gen
> First 6-core Intel Core i5 and first 4-core Intel Core i3
> Available beginning October 5th 2017; OEM systems Q4'17
> [1] As measured by sampling of AAA game titles using games benchmark mode measuring frames per second (FPS) on Intel Core i7-8700K processor
> [2] As measured by Gears of War 4 Workload comparing Intel Core i7-8700K Processor (6C/12T) vs. Intel Core i7-7700K Processor (4C/8T)
> [3] As measured by Mega-tasking Gaming Scenario on Playerunknown's battleground comparing Intel Core i7-8700K Processor (6C/12T) vs. Intel Core i7-7700K Processor (4C/8T)
> [4] As measured by 4K Video Adobe Premier Pro workload comparing Intel Core i7-8700K Processor (6C/12T) vs. Intel Core i7-7700K Processor (4C/8T)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> S


----------



## Scotty99

25% claimed fps gains in gears of war 4, being its only 2017 this is exactly why no one should be buying an i5









Games are slowly starting to care about more cores.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 25% claimed fps gains in gears of war 4, being its only 2017 this is exactly why no one should be buying an i5
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Games are slowly starting to care about more cores.


i5 8600/k has same core count as the i7


----------



## kd5151

up to 25% more fps vs 7700K.


----------



## Raghar

I said multiple times 8700K has single core 4.5 GHz turbo at best. As long as these benchmarks are reliable. Considering it has 3.7 GHz base frequency, 4.4 or 4.5 GHz single core turbo seems just right.
All benchmarks I seen and analysed said 4.5 GHz.
(From point of view of Intel, it's better to increase number of cores, but keep single core speed the same as with 7700K, even with improved process.)

7800X has 1 MB L2 cache which might make up for 0.1GHz lower clock for the same benchmark score.

Kinda wonder why Intel so adamantly said to Chinese reviewer they will not share info about turbo.

BTW that table on Videocardz has VERY likely correct baseclocks. It has also very likely bogus turbo speeds. (Well, basically these base clock means get K, or bust.)


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> i5 8600/k has same core count as the i7


Be my guest and get the 8600k. i personally learned my lesson with 2500k purchase.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Be my guest and get the 8600k. i personally learned my lesson with 2500k purchase.


I would prefer to see what Ryzen refresh brings since the price arent that good and overclocking on ryzen can close the gap


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> I said multiple times 8700K has single core 4.5 GHz turbo at best. As long as these benchmarks are reliable. Considering it has 3.7 GHz base frequency, 4.4 or 4.5 GHz single core turbo seems just right.
> All benchmarks I seen and analysed said 4.5 GHz.
> (From point of view of Intel, it's better to increase number of cores, but keep single core speed the same as with 7700K, even with improved process.)
> 
> 7800X has 1 MB L2 cache which might make up for 0.1GHz lower clock for the same benchmark score.
> 
> Kinda wonder why Intel so adamantly said Chinese they will not share info about turbo.
> 
> BTW that table on Videocardz has VERY likely correct baseclocks. It has also very likely bogus turbo speeds. (Well, basically these base clock means get K, or bust.)


I dunno pretty much every leak has max turbo at 4.7, but like you said benches dont reflect this. Has to be down to memory, maybe coffee needs new memory to keep up with 7700k's? Kind of like flarex with ryzen.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> I would prefer to see what Ryzen refresh brings since the price arent that good and overclocking on ryzen can close the gap


Zen 2 will still be behind 7700k, i am fairly certain of this. As we can see IPC is hard, much harder than adding cores.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Zen 2 will still be behind 7700k, i am fairly certain of this. As we can see IPC is hard, much harder than adding cores.


around 4.7-5GHz Ryzen could be really close to Skylake IPC. at 4.5-4.6 (on cinebench) Ryzen itself just need proper suppor tin games to beat intel in multithreading/multicore


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I dunno pretty much every leak has max turbo at 4.7, but like you said benches dont reflect this. Has to be down to memory, maybe coffee needs new memory to keep up with 7700k's? Kind of like flarex with ryzen.


I actually think Intel decided to leak wrong info. Leakers would build up expectations, but Intel would have time until release to decide on final turbo speeds, and when they will be lower everyone would know Intel never said anything about 4.7 GHz.

When I tried to calculate speeds, it gave me nearly exactly 4.5 GHz. Slower RAM shouldn't drop effective speed by exactly 0.198 GHz. Might be just early BIOS setting turbo to lower speeds, but that shouldn't affect all leaks.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Zen 2 will still be behind 7700k, i am fairly certain of this. As we can see IPC is hard, much harder than adding cores.


If you reckon that by nearly a decade of iterating off of the same architectural template, then yes, that's true. AMD isn't even a single revision into the process. I expect there is more low-hanging fruit with Zeppelin than there is with Lake Bridgewell.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Zen 2 will still be behind 7700k, i am fairly certain of this. As we can see IPC is hard, much harder than adding cores.


Zen 2 is not cooing until 7nm so 2019-2020. I am sure they can match or beat 2016 IPC.


----------



## Scotty99

I heard 2019 at latest, i even saw some put it at end of 2018. Either way i still will stick to my prediction, zen 2 will be behind 7700k in games, whether it be ipc or clockspeed.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> I actually think Intel decided to leak wrong info. Leakers would build up expectations, but Intel would have time until release to decide on final turbo speeds, and when they will be lower everyone would know Intel never said anything about 4.7 GHz.
> 
> When I tried to calculate speeds, it gave me nearly exactly 4.5 GHz. Slower RAM shouldn't drop effective speed by exactly 0.198 GHz. Might be just early BIOS setting turbo to lower speeds, but that shouldn't affect all leaks.


*Every* leak tho?

Arent there CPU-z screenshots of it turbo'ing to 4.7?


----------



## Scotty99

Not sure if this was posted yet:
https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cpu_mainboard/seven_asus_z370_motherboard_designs_have_been_leaked/1

Man i really dislike the looks of that m.2 shield on the strix, how its connected to the chipset heatsink looks bad lol.


----------



## PontiacGTX

it is just an excuse from intel to release new motherboards when this is pretty much a z270


----------



## Scotty99

Ya but they are different aesthetically. z270 strix is a better looking board than 370....


----------



## kd5151

Z370-H Gaming. Dat RED!


----------



## navjack27

I'll throw in my direct comparable to the 8700k

My system - http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/5135286
8700k - http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/5086155


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> I actually think Intel decided to leak wrong info. Leakers would build up expectations, but Intel would have time until release to decide on final turbo speeds, and when they will be lower everyone would know Intel never said anything about 4.7 GHz.
> 
> When I tried to calculate speeds, it gave me nearly exactly 4.5 GHz. Slower RAM shouldn't drop effective speed by exactly 0.198 GHz. Might be just early BIOS setting turbo to lower speeds, but that shouldn't affect all leaks.


Or maybe the 4% IPC drop theory is true... :/


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> From you're own link
> Intel also said (in youre link) that they *need* to improve the *board layout* to get memory running at 2666
> 
> Which sounds even more ridiculous
> *Show me a z170 that can't do 3000*


I think their point was that they wanted to be able to validate for 2666 MHz *at stock and not overclocked*. Still a BS explanation for why it was supposedly impossible to permit use of the Coffee Lake CPU's on current mobos.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> None of those are hitting those speeds with stock TIM under the IHS
> Maybe 5Ghz, it's not gonna be a cool setup, even with a custom loop
> And why invest in more exotic cooling(phase change, water chiller) if a delid can drop temps by 20 degrees
> I've seen 5Ghz with stock TIM and usually they start to throttle, even watercooled, when testing stability
> Even with more forgiving programs as RealBench
> Not even mentioning Prime
> 
> I have yet to see a Kaby hitting 5Ghz+ with stock TIM
> I think every overclock ever that high has at least a delid done
> 
> Running bare, without IHS, gives a negligible difference on temp compared to a delid
> 
> So yes, solder is actually really important
> 
> But architecture is important as well
> As is the maturity of the process
> 
> Has no one noticed that since Sandy every IPC increase we've gotten also slightly decreased max achievable frequency?
> At least in average
> 
> Skylake on average didn't get as far as Kaby
> Kaby(14+) has a more mature(advanced) manufacturing process
> 
> And since coffee lake (14++) has one more step than Kaby I'm sure it can achieve 5Ghz easy
> *if* one is willing to delid it
> Or buy it delided
> 
> That being said
> I'm more curios if we can get some user hacked UEFI to run coffee lake in z170/z270
> And if it's really just a firmware block
> 
> Or one of those board manufacturer accidents
> Like the one revision that enabled BCLK overclocking on none K chips


Its a massively false narrative around here that ALL 7700K's hit 5 GHz. A lot of them do, sure, but not anywhere near ALL of them do (and I suspect probably not a majority either). That said, I'd imagine the likelihood of getting a 5 GHz 7700K is generally just as high as it was with the 2600K (I bought my 2600K new back on release and it never went above 4.8 GHz stable).


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Its a massively false narrative around here that ALL 7700K's hit 5 GHz. A lot of them do, sure, but not anywhere near ALL of them do (and I suspect probably not a majority either). That said, I'd imagine the likelihood of getting a 5 GHz 7700K is generally just as high as it was with the 2600K (I bought my 2600K new back on release and it never went above 4.8 GHz stable).


7700K hit 5GHz more than 2600K does. I mean stock is 4.5GHz. Most people with 2600K for 4.6GHz-4.8GHz. 5GHz where like 10%


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Maybe my memory is playing tricks on me but I seem to recall a pretty high rate of SB CPU's hitting 5+ GHz back on release.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Maybe my memory is playing tricks on me but I seem to recall a pretty high rate of SB CPU's hitting 5+ GHz back on release.


No way. 5GHz where every lucky people and even than they where using un-save 1.45v+. People that got 5GHz under 1.4v had Golden CPUs. Almost everyone an get 5GHz with 7700K. 5GHz SB is like 5.2-3GHz 7700K.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Maybe my memory is playing tricks on me but I seem to recall a pretty high rate of SB CPU's hitting 5+ GHz back on release.


I could not get my i5 2500k stable at 4.5Ghz at 1.344v.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> I said multiple times 8700K has single core 4.5 GHz turbo at best. As long as these benchmarks are reliable. Considering it has 3.7 GHz base frequency, 4.4 or 4.5 GHz single core turbo seems just right.
> All benchmarks I seen and analysed said 4.5 GHz.
> (From point of view of Intel, it's better to increase number of cores, but keep single core speed the same as with 7700K, even with improved process.)
> 
> 7800X has 1 MB L2 cache which might make up for 0.1GHz lower clock for the same benchmark score.
> 
> Kinda wonder why Intel so adamantly said to Chinese reviewer they will not share info about turbo.
> 
> BTW that table on Videocardz has VERY likely correct baseclocks. It has also very likely bogus turbo speeds. (Well, basically these base clock means get K, or bust.)


Well, that theory is dead: https://www.pcper.com/news/Processors/Intel-Announces-8th-Gen-Core-Architecture-Coffee-Lake?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I could not get my i5 2500k stable at 4.5Ghz at 1.344v.


I had to use 1.465v got my 2500K at 4.8GHz.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Well, that theory is dead: https://www.pcper.com/news/Processors/Intel-Announces-8th-Gen-Core-Architecture-Coffee-Lake?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter


You da man!


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Well, that theory is dead: https://www.pcper.com/news/Processors/Intel-Announces-8th-Gen-Core-Architecture-Coffee-Lake?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter






only USB 3.1 gen 1 from CPU chipset but there's Thunderbolt 3...

i5-8400 is pretty garbage. 2.8GHz clockspeeds w/ 6 cores & 6 threads...
i3-8100 is confusing since it is a 4 core 4 thread CPU with 3.6 GHz clocks that nobody should be upgrading to if they have Haswell or better. Even a Ryzen 3 is a better deal , likely.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> only USB 3.1 gen 1 from CPU chipset but there's Thunderbolt 3...
> 
> i5-8400 is pretty garbage. 2.8Ghz clockspeeds w/ 6 cores & 6 threads...
> i3-8100 is confusing since it is a 4 core 4 thread CPU with 3.6 GHz clocks that nobody should be upgrading to if they have Haswell or better.


Unless you're using a really crappy cooler or PSU, you're never going to be running at base clocks on the i5 or i7.


----------



## AlphaC

IIRC i3s don't have boost.

edit: and the single core boost on the i5 isn't that amazing , since unless Coffee Lake has an IPC advantage over Kaby Lake I don't see the value in a CPU that has +10% IPC vs Ryzen 5 but with half the threads.

edit 2: seems 40 PCIE lanes on i7-8700k , which is good
https://www.tweaktown.com/news/59247/intel-coffee-lake-flagship-8700k-cpu-40-pcie-lanes/index.html



edit 3 : press deck https://videocardz.com/72831/intel-coffeelake-s-8th-gen-core-desktop-processors-final-specs-and-highlights
Quote:


> 8th Gen Intel Core: Premium Performance - Launching October 5, 2017
> 
> i7-8700K - Intel's BEST gaming desktop processor
> Wide range of performance options for consumers
> Up to 6 cores and 12 threads
> A range of unlocked K SKU processors
> Up to 40 platform PCIe 3.0 lanes


*Per Core Overclocking (When more than one core is active, the lower ratio is applied. Per core P-states and per core, voltage are not supported)*
Quote:


> i7-8700K - Intel's Best Gaming Desktop Processor(1) with up to 25% more FPS(2) and up to 45% better(3) mega-tasking vs 7th Gen
> Up to 32% faster(4) 4K video editing vs. 7th Gen
> First 6-core Intel Core i5 and first 4-core Intel Core i3
> Available beginning October 5th 2017; OEM systems Q4'17
> 
> [1] As measured by sampling of AAA game titles using games benchmark mode measuring frames per second (FPS) on Intel Core i7-8700K processor
> [2] As measured by Gears of War 4 Workload comparing Intel Core i7-8700K Processor (6C/12T) vs. Intel Core i7-7700K Processor (4C/8T)
> [3] As measured by Mega-tasking Gaming Scenario on Playerunknown's battleground comparing Intel Core i7-8700K Processor (6C/12T) vs. Intel Core i7-7700K Processor (4C/8T)


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> IIRC i3s don't have boost.


Correct, which is why I specified i5 or i7.

Either way, you're kinda stating the obvious by saying that people on Haswell shouldn't be moving to the i3.


----------



## kd5151

All locked Intel cpu's are going to have a hard time with Ryzen. 8350K is still going up against the 1600. The 8600K/old i7 is going up against Ryzen 1700. And the 8700K is going to battle it out with Ryzen 7 also.


----------



## Scotty99

Yep intel only wins at high end, anything below i7 and ryzen is a much better choice.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Yep intel only wins at high end, anything below i7 and ryzen is a much better choice.


I mean, the 8600K is probably the best pure gaming CPU, though it might not be the best value... And streaming is big these days which certainly helps Ryzen 5.

Well, at least the prices are much better than most were expecting.


----------



## Scotty99

For todays titles maybe, how about 3 years down the road when a r5 1600 walks the floor with a 8600k. Thats probably gonna happen even in a few titles even today.

Also that just talking games, not to mention how much raw horsepower the 1600 has over the 8600. Oh and.....60 dollars cheaper.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> I mean, the 8600K is probably the best pure gaming CPU, though it might not be the best value... And streaming is big these days which certainly helps Ryzen 5.
> 
> Well, at least the prices are much better than most were expecting.


8600K is a tough cookie to crack. I would like to know if it's better than 7700K. The 8350K looks like a cheaper 4ghz i5 without the turbo. 8700K gets a 7350K glued to it. Prices are better. Wonder how AMD will be respond also. They have the 1500x to close to the 1600 and the 1800x is way out in left field.


----------



## Scotty99

If you could buy a 8600k for 200 bucks its worth considering depending on your use case, but at 280 (thats where leaks have it right?) its a laughable affair.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> If you could buy a 8600k for 200 bucks its worth considering depending on your use case, but at 280 (thats where leaks have it right?) its a laughable affair.


It's ~$360 i7-8700k (6c/12t) , ~$260 for i5-8600k (6c/6t) , ~$170 for i3-8350k (4c/4t)


----------



## Scotty99

Are those prices confirmed? All leaks had i7 at 400, i5 at 280.


----------



## Scotty99

Coffee lake i3 and i5 reviews are going to be brutal lol. 20 dollars more than 8350 you can get a 6c 12t cpu ...


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Are those prices confirmed? All leaks had i7 at 400, i5 at 280.


Confirmed prices https://www.pcper.com/news/Processors/Intel-Announces-8th-Gen-Core-Architecture-Coffee-Lake?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter


----------



## Scotty99

Oh nice, microcenter should have them at about 319.99 then. Even at those prices tho the i5 and i3 are absurdly overpriced.


----------



## Scotty99

8700k should come close to or match the 1700 in multi threaded apps, this is why you dont see me complain about its pricing. Rest of that lineup tho is a joke compared to ryzen, absolute laughing stock.


----------



## Scotty99

Did anyone buy a 7700k from microcenter at launch? I dont recall them not offering combo deals or msrp discounts on anything other than ryzen (because of the board shortage) but i could be wrong on that.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Confirmed prices https://www.pcper.com/news/Processors/Intel-Announces-8th-Gen-Core-Architecture-Coffee-Lake?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter


Oh, that's juicy... I might strongly consider an upgrade (I was kind of eying for Ice Lake).


----------



## kd5151




----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Oh boy, that 8700 non K looks mighty tasty, especially for my incredibly strict $1500 budget.

This is excellent news, although the turbo freq for every core hasn't been confirmed yet.


----------



## kd5151




----------



## Scotty99

.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Oh boy, that 8700 non K looks mighty tasty, especially for my incredibly strict $1500 budget.
> 
> This is excellent news, although the turbo freq for every core hasn't been confirmed yet.


You can easily fit a k chip in:
https://pcpartpicker.com/list/Jwtkpb

Assuming you can buy a z370 prime for 150, which is a pretty safe assumption.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*


Added to OP.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> .
> You can easily fit a k chip in:
> https://pcpartpicker.com/list/Jwtkpb
> 
> Assuming you can buy a z370 prime for 150, which is a pretty safe assumption.


Out of everything on that list I already have an SSD and mechanical HDD's.

I didn't want to skimp too much on most of the parts as I wanted it to last 5+ years.

I think I might have a heart attack if I could somehow fit a 1080 Ti into that, and not one of those crazy overpriced versions either. I was already assuming that I'd be using an unactivated copy of Windows 10 for a month until I can buy a key, my budget really is that strict.


----------



## Seyumi

Wow 40 PCIE lanes on the 8700k mainstream platform? That’s really going to hurt x299 sales since that was 1 of the few major reasons why you would get that platform over z270. That’s enough for 2x16x GPUs and a 4x m.2


----------



## Scotty99

Well your not too far off the 1500 just removing storage (and adding a 1080ti). As for OS, ive bought my last 3 on ebay for sub 5 bucks each, worked great.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seyumi*
> 
> Wow 40 PCIE lanes on the 8700k mainstream platform? That's really going to hurt x299 sales since that was 1 of the few major reasons why you would get that platform over z270. That's enough for 2x16x GPUs and a 4x m.2


Yup, glad i didnt buy a 7800x (really debated it for a while)


----------



## kd5151

Reviewers already have these on hand. Benchmarks are Oct 5.

Source:wccftech for the win. #whydoeseveryhatethissite?


----------



## czin125

https://scontent.fhen1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/21462584_10203850980071677_2926759224231119185_n.jpg?oh=a3f79e8b21d7be659ed4ad911267d73f&oe=5A558679
So X299 + 7740X = 5400mhz at 1.275v on 14nm+ while Z170/Z270 + 7700K can clock at 5400mhz at 1.36v
8700K at 5400mhz should require even lower voltage than the 7700K for a 14nm++ vs 14nm+ node.


----------



## Scotty99

Just curious....what do these things have for integrated graphics lol.


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Not sure if this was posted yet:
> https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cpu_mainboard/seven_asus_z370_motherboard_designs_have_been_leaked/1


All of these come with a single 8-pin CPU power connector. Will this suffice for overclocking all 6 cores of a 8700K?


----------



## dVeLoPe

as a Rampage V Extreme / 5820k user what would i see in performance gaming wise by upgrading to a 8700k??


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> All of these come with a single 8-pin CPU power connector. Will this suffice for overclocking all 6 cores of a 8700K?


http://www.reviewstudio.net/2488-asrock-x299-taichi-review-wheels-in-motion/overclocking
8-pin connector is enough to feed 8/16 quad memory and 4 times the L2 cache @4700 /without throttling the CPU/...so should be more than enough to not restrict 6 core CPU with 5+Ghz


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

More Official Slides:





















*Source 23:* https://videocardz.com/press-release/intel-announces-8th-gen-intel-core-processors-family-for-desktop


----------



## aDyerSituation

Single 8 pin on the maximus?


----------



## Unsaid90

Have they said anything about Z370 supporting any next-gen cpus (past coffee lake) ?


----------



## bl4ckdot

Ho wow, I was not expecting the 40 PCIe lanes. That is huge








Can't wait !


----------



## DStealth

Memory up to 8400 Wow


----------



## Scotty99

BTW intels 18 core benchmarks are showing up, make sure to remind people how much it costs compared to a 1950x when looking at benchmarks


----------



## DStealth

Scotty please stop trolling all Intel threads...people buying 18 core CPUs are not giving a $hit about slow 16c ones price...


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Scotty please stop trolling all Intel threads...people buying 18 core CPUs are not giving a $hit about slow 16c ones price...


What?

So you are telling me a small business owner who has software that can make use of all those cores does not care about price/performance ratios?

Get out of here.

7890xe (2,000 usd): 3400 cinebench points
1950x (1000 usd): 3000 cinebench points

Just so people have an idea of relative performance.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> What?
> 
> So you are telling me a small business owner who has software that can make use of all those cores does not care about price/performance ratios?
> 
> Get out of here.


What's the point of posting that in this thread ? We already have 238 pages with more than 50% of people arguing AMD vs INTEL. You are not helping


----------



## DStealth

If he's aiming for the fastest CPU up to date yes. 1k$ premiums are nothing...If not you go with lower models i.e 7900/20/40/60 or 1950x


----------



## Scotty99

People should be aware of how unbelievably terrible value 95% of intels CPU's are, this isnt 2011 anymore....


----------



## Scotty99

Thats no different than me telling people 8700k is the only coffee lake CPU to consider.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> If he's aiming for the fastest CPU up to date yes. 1k$ premiums are nothing...If not you go with lower models i.e 7900/20/40/60 or 1950x


When you buy an oven, do you pay 1000 extra for the samsung? Like what are you talking about, CPU's arent vanity items lol.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> People should be aware of how unbelievably terrible value 95% of intels CPU's are, this isnt 2011 anymore....


You are really not helping the thread.
If AMD has 18 or 18+CPU the price won't be any different considering the competitor does not offer the top of the cake one...not even to mention in this consideration IPC and clock advantages








If you have the best product on the market you suggest the price...simple as that








People seeking for the best possible product are always ready to pay the premium price even it's twice or even triple the lower model has.


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> https://scontent.fhen1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/21462584_10203850980071677_2926759224231119185_n.jpg?oh=a3f79e8b21d7be659ed4ad911267d73f&oe=5A558679
> So X299 + 7740X = 5400mhz at 1.275v on 14nm+ while Z170/Z270 + 7700K can clock at 5400mhz at 1.36v
> 8700K at 5400mhz should require even lower voltage than the 7700K for a 14nm++ vs 14nm+ node.


That's a binned chip probably or just a really nice clocking one. wait till we see higher binned 8700k's . i mean its not even released yet, while there has been plenty of time for people to test 7740x
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dVeLoPe*
> 
> as a Rampage V Extreme / 5820k user what would i see in performance gaming wise by upgrading to a 8700k??


20% to 25%. 25% if there is a 5% increase over skylake \ kabylake.


----------



## Scotty99

All im doing dude is asking people keep things in perspective. Intel is expected to have the top product they have so much more money to throw at R+D it would be a complete failure as a company otherwise. You will see headlines all day like "threadripper killer" etc, ok ya its faster by a few %, but its also double the price.


----------



## bazh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seyumi*
> 
> Wow 40 PCIE lanes on the 8700k mainstream platform? That's really going to hurt x299 sales since that was 1 of the few major reasons why you would get that platform over z270. That's enough for 2x16x GPUs and a 4x m.2


pretty sure that 40 PCIe lanes number is the marketing way of saying 16 lanes from CPU and the rest from the chipset.


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> You are really not helping the thread.
> If AMD has 18 or 18+CPU the price won't be any different considering the competitor does not offer the top of the cake one...not even to mention in this consideration IPC and clock advantages
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you have the best product on the market you suggest the price...simple as that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People seeking for the best possible product are always ready to pay the premium price even it's twice or even triple the lower model has.


+1


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> When you buy an oven, do you pay 1000 extra for the samsung? Like what are you talking about, CPU's arent vanity items lol.


Honestly, you are not making much sense. You can buy an i5-8600K for a little more than the R5 1600X and overclock it past 5Ghz with delid. It will mostly smoke the R5 in CPU bound games. And we are not even talking about the i7-8700K. People are not paying for vanity, people are paying for premium products.

Who bought Ryzen chips must understand that they are compromising for the price. There is nothing wrong in admitting that Intel has the best IPC. Now that they released hexacores for these prices, Intel is a no brainer for games for who has some extra bills in the pocket. It is really a no brainer.

Why then there is single malt? Heh...


----------



## Scotty99

I have outlined in this thread why the 8600k is an end of life chip before it even releases. By all means buy a 6c6t chip to play old games on, its going to perform better than the competition, so will the 4c4t 8350k in most titles.

I bought a 2500k in 2011 when nearly all games on the market would play the same on it as the 2600k which had a 150 dollar price premium. Fast forward 3-5 years and 2500k cannot hold a candle to 2600k in many titles, who are you to say that the same story isnt going to happen with 8600k vs 8700k? Spending that lil extra now (or alternatively, ryzen 1600) is simply the better choice.

Not having enough cores in games is a WAYYYYY bigger detrement to performance than having a clock speed disadvantage. You will see as time goes on the 1600 is the smarter purchase.

Edit: And again that is ONLY talking about gaming. 1600 is going to curbstomp the 8600 in multithreading, for less money!

8700k is the only CPU people should be considering from coffee lake lineup, AMD has better options at every other price point.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I have outlined in this thread why the 8600k is an end of life chip before it even releases. By all means buy a 6c6t chip to play old games on, its going to perform better than the competition, so will the 4c4t 8350k in most titles.
> 
> I bought a 2500k in 2011 when nearly all games on the market would play the same on it as the 2600k which had a 150 dollar price premium. Fast forward 3-5 years and 2500k cannot hold a candle to 2600k in many titles, who are you to say that the same story isnt going to happen with 8600k vs 8700k? Spending that lil extra now (or alternatively, ryzen 1600) is simply the better choice.
> 
> Not having enough cores in games is a WAYYYYY bigger detrement to performance than having a clock speed disadvantage. You will see as time goes on the 1600 is the smarter purchase.


OK, it is confirmed. You are an AMD fanboy.


----------



## Scotty99

An AMD fanboy who is going to buy an intel 8700k....

I dont even...


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> An AMD fanboy who is going to buy an intel 8700k....
> 
> I dont even...


Well, you said you had an i5-2500K and I don't believe it. So whatever.


----------



## 970Rules

$257 US Intel Core i5-8600K.

Not 100% cool with that. However, I'm buying it anyway because my Haswell is getting pretty dated paired with my GTX 1080 Ti. I have been spending all my money on GPU upgrades as that has been the best bang for my buck.

The true rip off to me is going to be buying 16 GB of fast DDR4....


----------



## Scotty99

Lets think about this for a second, who is the 8600k for?

1. Guy who plays old games and has no plans to ever pick up a new title. This is the only legitimate person i can come up with that i would feel good about recommending 8600k over 1600 from AMD.
2. Guy who upgrades every 3 years. You see this guy does not exist (at least i have never met him). If they upgrade every 3 years, why wouldnt they have simply dropped down the cash for the high end CPU and just upgrade GPU every 3?

I cannot predict the future i can only go by the past and what is trending, and whats trending now is AMD ryzen CPU's and their high core counts. The more people that get ryzen in their PC's the more game studios are going to code games with that in mind, consoles having 8+ cores should only add to this.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *970Rules*
> 
> $257 US Intel Core i5-8600K.
> 
> Not 100% cool with that. However, I'm buying it anyway because my Haswell is getting pretty dated paired with my GTX 1080 Ti. I have been spending all my money on GPU upgrades as that has been the best bang for my buck.
> 
> The true rip off to me is going to be buying 16 GB of fast DDR4....


Why not spend the extra 100 dollars to avoid the situation you are in now 3 years down the road....

You see i learned my lesson getting a 2500k, i am sharing my experience with people and am somehow getting called out as a fanboy for it! Had i got a 2600k originally i would not have upgraded to ryzen, and i would be on the fence about coffee lake.

Spending just that little bit more on CPU goes succccchhh a long ways, it really does. This is not as true for GPU's.


----------



## DStealth

Can someone disable HT on 6 or 8 core CPU and run some game benchmarks with 6 cores with and w/o HT to compare results. IMO 6 real cores will act at least on par if not faster on the same platform and frequencies.
There are many examples where 4 threads are bottleneck but not sure 6 real ones will be, especially considering 5+Ghz OCing capabilities...
Edit:Can run some benches but in at least 6-7 hours from now.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Can someone disable HT on 6 or 8 core CPU and run some game benchmarks with 6 cores with and w/o HT to compare results. IMO 6 real cores will act at least on par if not faster on the same platform and frequencies.
> There are many examples where 4 threads are bottleneck but not sure 6 real ones will be, especially considering 5+Ghz OCing capabilities...
> Edit:Can run some benches but in at least 6-7 hours from now.


This is all you need for that:





2600k demolishes 2500k in a ton of games, like nearly 50% ahead. Yes of course 6c is going to last longer than 4c, but with the ever increasing thread counts and ryzen exisiting i am not comfortable suggesting 8600k when 8700k is only 100 bucks more.

Just remember at sandy bridge launch, you would be hard pressed to find *ONE* game where 2600k was above 2500k. i5 used to be the best choice, times have changed and now it isnt.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *970Rules*
> 
> $257 US Intel Core i5-8600K.
> 
> Not 100% cool with that. However, I'm buying it anyway because my Haswell is getting pretty dated paired with my GTX 1080 Ti. I have been spending all my money on GPU upgrades as that has been the best bang for my buck.
> 
> The true rip off to me is going to be buying 16 GB of fast DDR4....


What happens is that the i5 Skylake and Kabylake were released by U$ 243. The i7-8700K got a bigger bump of almost U$20. But I am OK with it, because I feared it would be close to U$ 400 (and they are still below Broadwell price)

The i5-8600K will come ahead of the i7-7700K by my calculations. If you overclock it, it will open even more because we are talking about real cores, not threads. But if you intend to keep the CPU for several years, better invest in the i7-8700K. But if you don't have money, I don't see the R5 as an option unless you are gaming in 4K and the bottleneck will be on the GPU, but even then I think the i5-8600K is a better option for games, especially if you already have a water cooler to take it to 4.8Ghz without delid.


----------



## Contiusa

*edit* repeated post.


----------



## Scotty99

Just to be clear, if all you are going by is launch benchmarks then yes of course 8600k will be ahead of a ryzen 1600......so will 8350k in a lot of titles.

But of course, that is not really what is being discussed.


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> 
> 
> *Source 23:* https://videocardz.com/press-release/intel-announces-8th-gen-intel-core-processors-family-for-desktop


And now there is just a remaining question. Why all these benchmarks shown the same single core speed as 4.5 GHz CPU? Also Intel, stop selling overclocked CPU, you are depriving overclockers of fun.


----------



## Scotty99

Well in reality 2500k-4770k were "underclocked"









I know what you mean tho, not much fun overclocking 300mhz when i had a 1ghz overclock on my 2500k. Same thing with GPU's, oh boy a whole 100mhz, i dont even bother with GPU's anymore.

As for leaked benchmarks, im convinced its down to memory. I would blame it on turbo boost 3.0 but skylake x has that and the scores look normal at stock speeds.


----------



## 970Rules

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Why not spend the extra 100 dollars to avoid the situation you are in now 3 years down the road....
> 
> You see i learned my lesson getting a 2500k, i am sharing my experience with people and am somehow getting called out as a fanboy for it! Had i got a 2600k originally i would not have upgraded to ryzen, and i would be on the fence about coffee lake.
> 
> Spending just that little bit more on CPU goes succccchhh a long ways, it really does. This is not as true for GPU's.


Because being a PC gamer core count is all that really matters to me. Hence the reason kept upgrading my gpu while keeping my Haswell from 2013.

I get why people love the I7 for anything besides video games thru. What really affects right now is my 1080 ti is bottlenecked to all hell.

Take this screenshot showing how badly the GTX 1080 TI gets bottlenecked with even the latest CPUs and RAM:



The 97th percentile number is the one I care about most when playing games because that's what you can feel the most.

My Haswell with ddr3 is the bottleneck. The 1080 Ti is too powerful for anything made in 2013. I knew this was going to happen someday anyway.

Right now the plan is to overclock the 8600k to 4.8ghz as the rumors all suggest it hit easily that and maybe go with 16gb of G.SKILL TridentZ DDR4 3600.

I wait for the official reviews and plan to take a very close look at all the game benchmarks pairing it with the 1080 Ti.


----------



## Scotty99

Did you happen to click on the link i posted above? Its gamers nexus testing the 2600k in 2017, it is head and shoulders ahead of the 2500k in a good amount of games. You seem to have the same mindset as someone buying a cpu in 2011, where i5's were the bargain because you saved 150 bucks and almost no games benefited from those extra threads. Not only is this starting to happen today, but there is now only a 100 dollar price hike from the unlocked i5 to i7, going forward we will be seeing more and more games take advantage of exra threads not only because of intel, but because of ryzen being on the market (amd is currently outselling intel in desktop cpu sales).

Ram can make a difference in games of course, but it does not being to compete with the FPS loss you can experience by not having enough cores that the game wants to make use of. Keep in mind again, launch reviews of coffee lake only tell part of the story, the real answer is going to happen a few years down the road.


----------



## Scotty99

I think intel intentionally priced 8600k and 8700k so close, they know where the market is going and this is their way of saying "buy this, not that".


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *970Rules*
> 
> I get why people love the I7 for anything besides video games thru. What really affects right now is my 1080 ti is bottlenecked to all hell.


I find it more remarkable how much of an impact memory speed and - likely even more - latency has. If games have to dynamically load so many textures during gameplay then I wonder what good is all that graphic-card onboard memory (aside from AA modes)? Why don't games load all that big chunk of many small and large textures to the graphic-card in the beginning of a level and then be good with it?


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seyumi*
> 
> Wow 40 PCIE lanes on the 8700k mainstream platform? That's really going to hurt x299 sales since that was 1 of the few major reasons why you would get that platform over z270. That's enough for 2x16x GPUs and a 4x m.2


No it's not. It's the same setup as Kaby Lake: 16 CPU lanes and 24 chipset lanes. Intel is using some dubious wording.


----------



## Scotty99

https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Electronics-Computer-CPU-Processors/zgbs/electronics/229189

I wanted to post this to try and further my point to people. Ryzen 1600 is the 2nd best selling CPU on amazon and has been for almost as long as its been out. Do we really want to be purchasing 6c6t CPU's taking that into consideration? Are you not able to envision a scenario where dx12 becomes the mainstream API and cores are trumping clockspeed?

I think the gen after this one mainstream i7's are going to be 8c16t and i5's will be 6c12t.


----------



## svenge

Based on this news story by Tech Report, the Cofffee Lake pricing will be as such:

*Core i7-8700K* 6c/12t 3.7/4.7 $359
*Core i7-8700* 6c/12t 3.2/4.6 $303
*Core i5-8600K* 6c/6t 3.6/4.3 $257
*Core i5-8400* 6c/6t 2.8/4.0 $182
*Core i3-8350K* 4c/4t 4.0/4.0 $168
*Core i3-8100* 4c/4t 3.6/3.6 $117

This is the current ARK pricing for their Kaby Lake predecessors:

*Core i7-7700K* 4c/8t 4.2/4.5 $339
*Core i7-7700* 4c/8t 3.6/4.2 $303
*Core i5-7600K* 4c/4t 3.8/4.2 $242
*Core i5-7400* 4c/4t 3.0/3.5 $182
*Core i3-7350K* 2c/4t 4.2/4.2 $168
*Core i3-7100* 2c/4t 3.9/3.9 $117

If you compare closely, the only models getting price increases from the 7th-gen to the 8th-gen are the i7 and i5 K-models ($20 and $15, respectively). This makes the i3 Coffee Lake models pretty interesting, as essentially they're nearly identical to the Kaby Lake i5 models in terms of clock speed and core/thread count but are priced as the old 2c/4t Kaby Lake i3 models were. That makes the i3-8100 a pretty hard counter on the Ryzen 3 line, given the latter's inferior IPC.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Did anyone buy a 7700k from microcenter at launch? I dont recall them not offering combo deals or msrp discounts on anything other than ryzen (because of the board shortage) but i could be wrong on that.


You may have been high while shopping then... MicroCenter bundles the snot out of Intel CPU/MB combos all day everyday... even at launch.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> You may have been high while shopping then... MicroCenter bundles the snot out of Intel CPU/MB combos all day everyday... even at launch.


When ryzen 7 launched, there were not only no board/cpu bundles, but CPU's were at MSRP. I remember this clearly because that is the first time i bought a CPU/board from newegg since college lol. I think it took a month for the combo deals to show up.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> Based on this news story by Tech Report, the Cofffee Lake pricing will be as such:
> 
> *Core i7-8700K* 6c/12t 3.7/4.7 $359
> *Core i7-8700* 6c/12t 3.2/4.6 $303
> *Core i5-8600K* 6c/6t 3.6/4.3 $257
> *Core i5-8400* 6c/6t 2.8/4.0 $182
> *Core i3-8350K* 4c/4t 4.0/4.0 $168
> *Core i3-8100* 4c/4t 3.6/3.6 $117
> 
> This is the current ARK pricing for their Kaby Lake predecessors:
> 
> *Core i7-7700K* 4c/8t 4.2/4.5 $339
> *Core i7-7700* 4c/8t 3.6/4.2 $303
> *Core i5-7600K* 4c/4t 3.8/4.2 $242
> *Core i5-7400* 4c/4t 3.0/3.5 $182
> *Core i3-7350K* 2c/4t 4.2/4.2 $168
> *Core i3-7100* 2c/4t 3.9/3.9 $117
> 
> If you compare closely, the only models getting price increases from the 7th-gen to the 8th-gen are the i7 and i5 K-models ($20 and $15, respectively). This makes the i3 Coffee Lake models pretty interesting, as essentially they're nearly identical to the Kaby Lake i5 models in terms of clock speed and core/thread count but are priced as the old 2c/4t Kaby Lake i3 models were. That makes the i3-8100 a pretty hard counter on the Ryzen 3 line, given the latter's inferior IPC.


To that end, the 7350k would be a consideration. At 130 dollars it would be the better buy for someone who only needs a couple fast cores (mmo's etc).

Its not currently on sale at newegg but ive seen it for 130 there plenty lately.

Also at microcenter its 129.99+30 off a board:
http://www.microcenter.com/product/473230/Core_i3-7350K_Kaby_Lake_42GHz_LGA_1151_Boxed_Processor


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Electronics-Computer-CPU-Processors/zgbs/electronics/229189
> 
> I wanted to post this to try and further my point to people. Ryzen 1600 is the 2nd best selling CPU on amazon and has been for almost as long as its been out. Do we really want to be purchasing 6c6t CPU's taking that into consideration? Are you not able to envision a scenario where dx12 becomes the mainstream API and cores are trumping clockspeed?


It could also be that the diehard AMD fans that had been holding onto their Phenom II rigs even through the dark days of Bulldozer/Piledriver finally found a AMD CPU that's actually worth a damn and responded accordingly.

Either way, buying the the near and mid-term future is usually a far wiser course of action than pie-in-the-sky dreams of a future AMD-driven software development paradigm. Remember HSA and how that was going to revolutionize everything? Yeah, me neither.

And until difficult questions regarding multi-core programming and real-time gaming (especially in terms of AI) are resolved, throwing "moar corez" ad infinitum without regard to IPC as you are advocating for is a fool's errand.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> Based on this news story by Tech Report, the Cofffee Lake pricing will be as such:
> 
> *Core i7-8700K* 6c/12t 3.7/4.7 $359
> *Core i7-8700* 6c/12t 3.2/4.6 $303
> *Core i5-8600K* 6c/6t 3.6/4.3 $257
> *Core i5-8400* 6c/6t 2.8/4.0 $182
> *Core i3-8350K* 4c/4t 4.0/4.0 $168
> *Core i3-8100* 4c/4t 3.6/3.6 $117
> 
> This is the current ARK pricing for their Kaby Lake predecessors:
> 
> *Core i7-7700K* 4c/8t 4.2/4.5 $339
> *Core i7-7700* 4c/8t 3.6/4.2 $303
> *Core i5-7600K* 4c/4t 3.8/4.2 $242
> *Core i5-7400* 4c/4t 3.0/3.5 $182
> *Core i3-7350K* 2c/4t 4.2/4.2 $168
> *Core i3-7100* 2c/4t 3.9/3.9 $117


What people need to remember is that these prices Intel gives are Intel's retail price per 1,000 units. Resale outlets pay wholesale pricing on much larger bulk orders, so we the consumer will likely see prices under those mentioned within a month of launch, as we have with many previous generations.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> It could also be that the diehard AMD fans that had been holding onto their Phenom II rigs even through the dark days of Bulldozer/Piledriver finally found a AMD CPU that's actually worth a damn and responded accordingly.
> 
> Either way, buying the the near and mid-term future is usually a far wiser course of action than pie-in-the-sky dreams of a future AMD-driven software development paradigm. Remember HSA and how that was going to revolutionize everything? Yeah, me neither.


I dont think you understand what im saying, might want to go back and reread my posts. This isnt an amd vs intel thing, this happened without ryzen as that video i linked with 2600k 2017 review shows, amd ryzen existing and in so many peoples hands is only going to bolster thread count going forward, not to mention if we ever get widespread adoption of dx12.


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I dont think you understand what im saying, might want to go back and reread my posts. This isnt an amd vs intel thing, this happened without ryzen as that video i linked with 2600k 2017 review shows, amd ryzen existing and in so many peoples hands is only going to bolster thread count going forward, not to mention if we ever get widespread adoption of dx12.


And I maintain that a 6c/6t Coffee Lake CPU will be more than sufficient (especially against its recent 4c/8t predecessors) that by the time the extra virtual threads of the 6c/12t model would become important for gaming in general, the CPU architecture and associated platform would be so old as to make the point moot. Being able to fully utilize 6 threads in gaming is quite difficult as it is, and I don't see developers improving on that count significantly (let alone getting to 12 threads) in the foreseeable future.

Also, DX12 is basically the DX10 of our times. It's just not going to reach the penetration that DX11 has, as it doesn't bring nearly enough to software development (especially for the 1-3 year old cards that most of the user base owns) to justify changing over completely.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> And I maintain that a 6c/6t Coffee Lake CPU will be more than sufficient (especially against its recent 4c/8t predecessors) *that by the time the extra virtual threads of a 6c/12t model would become important for gaming the CPU architecture would be too old for the point to not be moot.* Being able to fully utilize 6 threads in gaming is quite difficult as it is, and I don't see developers improving on that count (let alone getting to 12 threads) significantly in the foreseeable future.
> 
> Also, DX12 is basically the DX10 of our times. It's just not going to reach the penetration that DX11 has, as it doesn't bring nearly enough to software development (especially for the 1-3 year old cards that most of the userbase owns) to justify changing over completely.


See i can only disagree with that, a 2600k is still a beast of a gaming CPU today......for a lot of titles on the market the same cannot be said for a 2500k.

You combine 2600k vs 2500k results, ryzen outselling every intel cpu on the market sans the 7700k, the fact intel is moving up core counts this gen (and rumored 8c16 on z390) not to mention the smaller price gap from unlocked i5>i7 and its a no brainer.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> And I maintain that a 6c/6t Coffee Lake CPU will be more than sufficient (especially against its recent 4c/8t predecessors) that by the time the extra virtual threads of the 6c/12t model would become important for gaming in general, the CPU architecture and associated platform would be so old as to make the point moot. Being able to fully utilize 6 threads in gaming is quite difficult as it is, and I don't see developers improving on that count significantly (let alone getting to 12 threads) in the foreseeable future.
> 
> Also, DX12 is basically the DX10 of our times. It's just not going to reach the penetration that DX11 has, as it doesn't bring nearly enough to software development (especially for the 1-3 year old cards that most of the user base owns) to justify changing over completely.


Yeah that 6/6 8600k gonna be a beast of a cpu for gaming.
Intel pure core without HT on ringbus always has the upper hand on fps. Before this nobody disables HT on hedt ringbus cpus. If they did the would see how terrible HT actually is.


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> See i can only disagree with that, a 2600k is still a beast of a gaming CPU today......for a lot of titles on the market the same cannot be said for a 2500k.
> 
> You combine 2600k vs 2500k results, ryzen outselling every intel cpu on the market sans the 7700k, the fact intel is moving up core counts this gen (and rumored 8c16 on z390) not to mention the smaller price gap from unlocked i5>i7 and its a no brainer.


Except for the part where you're ignoring the fact that programming additional threads doesn't scale linearly in terms of difficulty. Unless you can propose a way to circumvent Amdahl's law especially to relatively non-parallel workloads such as gaming, the difficulty of using more than 6 threads effectively is not going to be as easy as you believe it to be.

Also, the number of Ryzen rigs in the user base is _miniscule_ compared to the number of modern (Sandy Bridge and later) Intel CPUs in use. There's not going to be nearly enough of them out in the wild to matter to game developers for quite some time, outside of the few "money hats" that AMD likes to give out now any then.


----------



## Scotty99

Its like you guys havent watched a benchmark since 2011. Hyperthreading clearly makes a difference, how else are we explaining the large leads a 2600k has over its little brother?


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Its like you guys havent watched a benchmark since 2011. Hyperthreading clearly makes a difference, how else are we explaining the large leads a 2600k has over its little brother?


It's also like you haven't learned that your shtick is getting old. IPC matters far more than you give it credit for.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> It's also like you haven't learned that your shtick is getting old.


That is very helpful in explaining how 2600k puts a whooping onto the 2500k, especially when at launch nearly every game on the market played the same on both chips.


----------



## Scotty99

Of course IPC is important never said it wasn't. Thing is not having enough cores that the game wants to take advantage of is a bigger detriment to performance than having a clockspeed disadvantage. Go look at benchmarks, there are plenty of titles where a ryzen 1600 or 1700 demolishes a 7350k even tho that 7350k has a 1ghz clockspeed advantage when you overclock it.

Im not saying people need to buy a 1600 over a 8600k (although i would, given the rumors of 8c16t i7 in 2019) but rather pony up that extra 100 bucks and get the 8700k.


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Go look at benchmarks, there are plenty of titles where a ryzen 1600 or 1700 demolishes a 7350k even tho that 7350k has a 1ghz clockspeed advantage when you overclock it.


One would hope that a modern CPU with 6 physical cores would defeat one with 2 physical cores, even with the latter having higher clock-speed and IPC. Programming has indeed come far enough to make having 6 weaker physical cores usually work better than 2 stronger ones for gaming (Bulldozer derivatives notwithstanding). It would be far more disappointing if a 6-core Ryzen couldn't outperform a Kaby Lake 2c/4t chip.

Even so, then that's a pretty marginal case that you're presenting as being representative of all use cases, just like your insistence on relying on a 6-year-old CPU (Sandy Bridge i5/i7 chips) to make generalizations for how current chips will play out. This is especially so considering that going the jump in difficulty in terms of programming for 2 to 4 threads is much lower than going from 4 to 8 (or especially 12) threads.


----------



## Scotty99

Ok then you tell us, how many cores exactly will we need in 2020? How about 2023?

I already said in here i am not a clairvoyant, i can only go by whats happening in games now and where the market is headed in regards to core counts. I am not sure why you dont think 2600k vs 2500k example is a good one, we have been on 4c4t i5's and 4c8t i7's for what 10 years now?

It is a changing of the guard right now, and its going to happen for a couple more years before things settle. I personally wouldnt want to be the guy stuck with a 6c6t cpu when all signs point to core counts rising next gen as well.

To me it seems you are a guy who learned some things some time ago but does not keep up with current trends. You continually state games do not benefit from hyperthreading even in the face of evidence showing it does. I am only trying to give the best advice i can here, not sure why you are so against me telling people to skip this iteration of i5's in the current marketplace.


----------



## svenge

It would be a better fate that being the one who continually clogs up a thread with unfounded assertions and pie-in-the-sky nonsense.


----------



## Scotty99

Clogs up a thread, that's how you view my analysis of the i5 situation? No good info, just me on some quest to rob people of 100 bucks?

Man, what a jerk i am.


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Clogs up a thread, that's how you view my analysis of the i5 situation? No good info, just me on some quest to rob people of 100 bucks?
> 
> Man, what a jerk i am.


The part where you quixotically keep pressing the issue while ignoring all evidence and logic to the contrary is the issue.


----------



## Zorborg

As someone posted earlier, for gaming, it's been a wiser choice to spend money (for me at least) on GPU upgrades over CPU and MOBO upgrades. I've still got my i7 4770K, but I will be upgrading to Icelake as I already have a 1080 Ti.


----------



## Scotty99

Again i think this is simply a case of you not keeping up with current trends, and how games do actually use hyperthreading.

I am not a game developer but if i was i surely would try and design my game to play as good as it can on the most common hardware that is out there on the market. Ryzen is on a tear right now, for the first time in who knows how long they are outselling intel in the consumer desktop space. I am simply advising people to err on the side of caution here and plop down that extra benjamin if they want the best chance of future proofing their pc, as much as is possible with that term.


----------



## Scotty99

I could link you just as many benchmarks showing a 7700k beating a 7600k handily, and this is only going to become more and more true as times goes on.

It is actually so weird to me that people are fighting me on this one, i honestly dont understand it lol.


----------



## svenge

Whatever. I've said my peace.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Yeah that 6/6 8600k gonna be a beast of a cpu for gaming.
> Intel pure core without HT on ringbus always has the upper hand on fps. Before this nobody disables HT on hedt ringbus cpus. If they did the would see how terrible HT actually is.


Haha. What are you talking about. HT is what makes the 2600K still worth using. 2500K is showing it's age and cores are maxed completely out in most demanding games.

If I disable HT on my CPU, pretty much all newer games perform worse, some of them, much worse. Makes no diff in the older games.

i7-7700K beats the i5-7600K clock for clock.
https://www.techspot.com/review/1360-amd-ryzen-5-1600x-1500x-gaming/

The i7-8700K will beat i5-8600K in demanding games in a few years too.


----------



## Scotty99

^even in a easy to run game like OW my 2500k was nearly at 100%. That's just overwatch, imagine whats going to happen with witcher 4....

Ya, skip the 8600k guys.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Wonder if i can use my ddr4 ram on the 6700K with new board


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Wonder if i can use my ddr4 ram on the 6700K with new board


Id imagine you should be fine. I am using memory labeled "z170 optimized" as well, and i envision xmp to be certified on z370 boards.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> One would hope that a modern CPU with 6 physical cores would defeat one with 2 physical cores, even with the latter having higher clock-speed and IPC. Programming has indeed come far enough to make having 6 weaker physical cores usually work better than 2 stronger ones for gaming (Bulldozer derivatives notwithstanding). It would be far more disappointing if a 6-core Ryzen couldn't outperform a Kaby Lake 2c/4t chip.
> 
> Even so, then that's a pretty marginal case that you're presenting as being representative of all use cases, just like your insistence on relying on a 6-year-old CPU (Sandy Bridge i5/i7 chips) to make generalizations for how current chips will play out. This is especially so considering that going the jump in difficulty in terms of programming for 2 to 4 threads is much lower than going from 4 to 8 (or especially 12) threads.


Couldn't you guys test this with a 4C/8T at 2ghz vs a simulated 2C/4T at 4ghz ( keeps the extra cache to fit more data )


----------



## TrevBlu19

http://www.expreview.com/57166-all.html

Benchmarks for 8700k


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

What amazes me is that people were asking to test and compare... right after someone posts a table showing clearly that with the same GPU, almost all these different processors including i3s, i5s, i7s, and 6 and 8 core HEDTs... are within 3-4% of each other... hyperthreading and not... no real difference...


----------



## kd5151

I wanted to point out. Intel claims up to 25% more fps in gears. If true that isn't coming from IPC or clock speeds. Having more real cores? The 8350K should be the same as the 7600K as long as clocks and ipc are the same. The real question however is? Does the 8600K pull ahead of the almighty 7700K and does the 8700K pulled ahead of both of these?


----------



## writer21

Would x99/z170 Trident-z ddr4 3200 ram work on this platform?


----------



## Scotty99

I see no reason why not, id imagine most kits will get xmp certification on z370. I know gskill is coming out with ryzen specific kits (not flare x, newer stuff) so those may be the exception.


----------



## naz2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> What amazes me is that people were asking to test and compare... right after someone posts a table showing clearly that with the same GPU, almost all these different processors including i3s, i5s, i7s, and 6 and 8 core HEDTs... are within 3-4% of each other... hyperthreading and not... no real difference...


*cherry picked games
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *writer21*
> 
> Would x99/z170 Trident-z ddr4 3200 ram work on this platform?


sure but you might have tweak the timings manually for optimal performance


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> I wanted to point out. Intel claims up to 25% more fps in gears. If true that isn't coming from IPC or clock speeds. Having more real cores? The 8350K should be the same as the 7600K as long as clocks and ipc are the same. The real question however is? Does the 8600K pull ahead of the almighty 7700K and does the 8700K pulled ahead of both of these?


People are simply unwilling to accept cores/threads make a difference. Its not that i blame people really, i5's have kept up with i7's so long its probably a hard idea to let go of.


----------



## Zorborg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *naz2*
> 
> *cherry picked games


Here's 4 more to go with the 3 I posted earlier.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> What amazes me is that people were asking to test and compare... right after someone posts a table showing clearly that with the same GPU, almost all these different processors including i3s, i5s, i7s, and 6 and 8 core HEDTs... are within 3-4% of each other... hyperthreading and not... no real difference...


I was beginning to think people couldn't see my post, maybe just ignored it because it's an inconvenient truth. I can't find benches for 1440p or 4K right now though.


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zorborg*
> 
> Here's 4 more to go with the 3 I posted earlier.
> I was beginning to think people couldn't see my post, maybe just ignored it because it's an inconvenient truth. I can't find benches for 1440p or 4K right now though.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


People are ignoring you because you are posting irrelevant benchmarks with a gtx 980 at the end of 2017...


----------



## kd5151




----------



## Zorborg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> [/spoiler]
> 
> People are ignoring you because you are posting irrelevant benchmarks with a gtx 980 at the end of 2017...


Wake up. 1080p, the 900 series nVidia (especially the 980) and previous high end CPUs including the 4770K are hardly irrelevant. Many people still have them. The charts show that for 1080p gaming, it almost doesn't matter what generation high end CPU you have.

I have a 4770K (4 cores) and 1440p with a 1080 Ti, there is little to no bottlnecking. Only RAM speeds have a big impact. (chart is 1080p anyway)


----------



## aDyerSituation

Those benchmarks are irrelevant because you are posting gpu limited scenarios.


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zorborg*
> 
> Wake up. 1080p, the 900 series nVidia (especially the 980) and previous high end CPUs including the 4770K are hardly irrelevant. Many people still have them. The charts show that for 1080p gaming, it almost doesn't matter what generation high end CPU you have.
> 
> I have a 4770K (4 cores) and 1440p with a 1080 Ti, there is little to no bottlnecking. Only RAM speeds have a big impact. (chart is 1080p anyway)


Or you are just cherry picking what you post.


----------



## Zorborg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Those benchmarks are irrelevant because you are posting gpu limited scenarios.


At 1080p on a 980? Not sure.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> Or you are just cherry picking what you post.


Not cherry picking mate, just posting what I found here https://www.anandtech.com/show/10968/the-intel-core-i7-7700k-91w-review-the-new-stock-performance-champion

But thanks for contributing some content, as you can see from your image, the 4790K, 6700K and 7700K are reasonably close. Which mostly supports the charts from Anandtech I posted.


----------



## evensen007

Lol Scotty, you love to fight. Although I disagree with how you interact with people here (ends up being useless and just taking up pages), I actually agree that it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to save a hundred bucks and get a 6/6 cpu in 2017. At any rate, WOO! That 8700k is looking good, and I'm stoked to finally be building my first new rig since 2011. I will definitely miss this Sandy i7. Thing is a LEGEND.

Anyone have any idea what will be the best memory to buy for this setup? Since I haven't built from scratch since 2011, I'm kind of outta the memory loop. Link to a DDR4 kit that will push this properly?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

So much unneeded attention for the CPU. We know gamers will get this manly and at the same time 7700K does fine there yet people want this for "future-proofing"


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Lol Scotty, you love to fight. Although I disagree with how you interact with people here (ends up being useless and just taking up pages), I actually agree that it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to save a hundred bucks and get a 6/6 cpu in 2017. At any rate, WOO! That 8700k is looking good, and I'm stoked to finally be building my first new rig since 2011. I will definitely miss this Sandy i7. Thing is a LEGEND.
> 
> Anyone have any idea what will be the best memory to buy for this setup? Since I haven't built from scratch since 2011, I'm kind of outta the memory loop. Link to a DDR4 kit that will push this properly?


Thats actually easy with hynix skyrocketing since ryzen launch (got my kit for 98 bucks in march, they are now 160....)
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/8Mbkcf/gskill-memory-f43200c14d16gtz

Thats the cheapest kit of b-die out atm, and will perform a fair amount better than hynix for a small price bump.

And believe it or not i really do not enjoy arguing with people, although i can see how someone would think that.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Clogs up a thread, that's how you view my analysis of the i5 situation? No good info, just me on some quest to rob people of 100 bucks?
> 
> Man, what a jerk i am.


By this time, you should've already realized that you are definitely a jerk. You tend to fight and disagree with most of the people here and fill the thread with too much garbage. I bet you have the most number of posts/double-posts in this thread.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Lol Scotty, you love to fight. Although I disagree with how you interact with people here (ends up being useless and just taking up pages), I actually agree that it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to save a hundred bucks and get a 6/6 cpu in 2017. At any rate, WOO! That 8700k is looking good, and I'm stoked to finally be building my first new rig since 2011. I will definitely miss this Sandy i7. Thing is a LEGEND.
> 
> Anyone have any idea what will be the best memory to buy for this setup? Since I haven't built from scratch since 2011, I'm kind of outta the memory loop. Link to a DDR4 kit that will push this properly?


Does that mean it is better to sell my brand new 7700K and Z270 board now while I'm waiting for all my parts for my new build to arrive?


----------



## PsYcHo29388

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> So much unneeded attention for the CPU. We know gamers will get this manly and at the same time 7700K does fine there yet people want this for "future-proofing"


Here I am on my 6600k and while I want one of these, I can't justify spending the money on a platform change when there really isn't anything wrong with my current setup.

If people on a 7700k want these, I hope they at least have the money and a use for it once removed from their system.


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> By this time, you should've already realized that you are definitely a jerk. You tend to fight and disagree with most of the people here and fill the thread with too much garbage. I bet you have the most number of posts/double-posts in this thread.
> 
> Does that mean it is better to sell my brand new 7700K and Z270 board now while I'm waiting for all my parts for my new build to arrive?


If you can a get decent amount for it, I would hands down. You're talking about similar (or possibly a bit better) IPC with 12 threads for a similar price. I would regret that because of how close to coffee we now are. If you would have bought it a year ago, I wouldn't feel as badly.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*


WHY THEY KEEP USING THE RAM CRIPPLED THE PERFORMANCE








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> So much unneeded attention for the CPU. We know gamers will get this manly and at the same time 7700K does fine there yet people want this for "future-proofing"


well i5 doesnt seem that bad of a deal the thing is what would perform better a 6core or a 6c12t since HT gains wont be as high on a quadcore with SMT since the games probably are ok with 6 cores


----------



## Techhog

I wonder if this will sell out. The 14nm process and Skylake architecture are super mature so yields should not be an issue, but I can see high demand for these.

I hope I can get the board I want too...


----------



## czin125

It would be more interesting to see 4000C16 on all 3 of them + lock the cores to 4500mhz on all. Also set NB clock for the 7700K/8700K to 4500mhz and NB clock for the 7800X at 3000 or 3200.

Previous max for the 630 igpu was 1150mhz ( 1200mhz now ). So the 95TDP is including faster memory and faster igpu.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> It would be more interesting to see 4000C16 on all 3 of them + lock the cores to 4500mhz on all. Also set NB clock for the 7700K/8700K to 4500mhz and NB clock for the 7800X at 3000 or 3200.
> 
> Previous max for the 630 igpu was 1150mhz ( 1200mhz now ). So the 95TDP is including faster memory and faster igpu.


why not 4GHz and 5GHz all







same uncore, all at 3200MHz DDR4 CL14

also the TDP is ot a measure for power. this CPU will have higher power than a 7700k it has 50% more cores


----------



## 113802

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> why not 4GHz and 5GHz all
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> same uncore, all at 3200MHz DDR4 CL14
> 
> also the TDP is ot a measure for power. this CPU will have higher power than a 7700k it has 50% more cores


The Core i7 8700k should be the same TDP as the 7700K. AMD's Ryzen 7 1700 uses less power than the current 7700K which has 100% more cores.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WannaBeOCer*
> 
> The Core i7 8700k should be the same TDP as the 7700K. AMD's Ryzen 7 1700 uses less power than the current 7700K which has 100% more cores.


7700K 91w tdp
8700K 95w tdp
1700 65w tdp
1600x/1700x/1800x 95w tdp.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WannaBeOCer*
> 
> The Core i7 8700k should be the same TDP as the 7700K. AMD's Ryzen 7 1700 uses less power than the current 7700K which has 100% more cores.


They cant be the same TDP since 8700k should output more power, it is on the same node and power improvement have to be as good as 10nm FF to make a noticeably power reduction

4cores at similar voltage will output less heat than 6cores

also TDP on intel lately is more like of a arbitrary number


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Those benchmarks are irrelevant because you are posting gpu limited scenarios.


Gaming is very much more so GPU dependent. I could have a build with a 7700K @5Gigglehertz, but it's going suck an egg trying to run 1440p if I give it a 1050Ti or 1060 compared to a 980Ti/1080/1080Ti.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> Or you are just cherry picking what you post.


You actually kind of proved his point for him... the last couple generations of i7s do just fine if they are given a GPU with the oomph necessary.... Stock SB i7 is neck and neck with Ryzen7 1800x at stock clocks... It may leave out the 3770K and 4770K but it illustrates the point that the latest 3 or 4 generations of i7s still perform well enough to continue to use them instead of upgrading. My Haswell i5 and 780 for instance... ehhhh.... not as much. For 1080 it will do alright for another 6 months to a year (Ice Lake and Volta build next fall maybe... hmmmm)... but as a 4c/4t CPU... it's getting to the point where it's long in the teeth.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> If you can a get decent amount for it, I would hands down. You're talking about similar (or possibly a bit better) IPC with 12 threads for a similar price. I would regret that because of how close to coffee we now are. If you would have bought it a year ago, I wouldn't feel as badly.


Exactly. I'm full of regrets getting the 7700K and Asus Maximus IX Hero and never getting to use them until Coffee Lake comes out in October 5. So yeah, I'll just go ahead and sell them and hope for the best for the 8700K.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Okay but the whole point of this argument is life of a cpu for gaming. You don't post benchmarks with old cards to show CPU performance numbers..


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> Gaming is very much more so GPU dependent. I could have a build with a 7700K @5Gigglehertz, but it's going suck an egg trying to run 1440p if I give it a 1050Ti or 1060 compared to a 980Ti/1080/1080Ti.
> You actually kind of proved his point for him... the last couple generations of i7s do just fine if they are given a GPU with the oomph necessary.... Stock SB i7 is neck and neck with Ryzen7 1800x at stock clocks... It may leave out the 3770K and 4770K but it illustrates the point that the latest 3 or 4 generations of i7s still perform well enough to continue to use them instead of upgrading. My Haswell i5 and 780 for instance... ehhhh.... not as much. For 1080 it will do alright for another 6 months to a year (Ice Lake and Volta build next fall maybe... hmmmm)... but as a 4c/4t CPU... it's getting to the point where it's long in the teeth.


There's still quite a few games that are cpu bound today, but it's mostly single core speed that is the issue. My 7700k @ 5.1 ghz still gets huge gpu usage drops in pubg at 1440p from the single thread bottleneck. Battlefield 1 used to peg the whole cpu at 100% pretty often, but they seemed to have alleviated that issue. CPU's have barely gotten faster over the last 5 years, but gpu's are much much more powerful.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*


Ryzen 7 is still going to be a better deal unless you have 120Hz + or a 720p 240Hz monitor due to the known future Intel Z390 chipset.

i7-7800x got destroyed though... that mesh







. Also supposedly 40 PCIe lanes.

I wonder if Microcenter will have $100 off next month or in 3 months (1 fiscal quarter), or if the lame $30 off with minimal pricecuts on CPUs will be for the foreseeable future.

Now it comes down to motherboards.

X299 (LGA2066) motherboard typically runs $300 although there's a Asrock Fatal1ty K6 for just under $250.
X370 (Am4) motherboards typically $120-150ish .

Z370 mainstream boards can't cost more than $150
By mainstream I mean boards with naming such as the Asus Z370 Prime A , Asrock Z370 Fatal1ty K6 , MSI Z370 SLI PLUS , Gigabyte Z370 AORUS Gaming 3 .

If Intel can offer 40 PCIE lanes on the i5-8600k, it would be excellent for render rigs with 2 GPUs at PCIE 3 x16.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Destroyed? How?


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Ryzen 7 is still going to be a better deal unless you have 120Hz + or a 720p 240Hz monitor due to the known future Intel Z390 chipset.
> 
> i7-7800x got destroyed though... that mesh
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Also supposedly 40 PCIe lanes.
> 
> I wonder if Microcenter will have $100 off next month or in 3 months (1 fiscal quarter), or if the lame $30 off with minimal pricecuts on CPUs will be for the foreseeable future.
> 
> Now it comes down to motherboards.
> 
> X299 (LGA2066) motherboard typically runs $300 although there's a Asrock Fatal1ty K6 for just under $250.
> X370 (Am4) motherboards typically $120-150ish .
> 
> Z370 mainstream boards can't cost more than $150
> By mainstream I mean boards with naming such as the Asus Z370 Prime A , Asrock Z370 Fatal1ty K6 , MSI Z370 SLI PLUS , Gigabyte Z370 AORUS Gaming 3 .
> 
> If Intel can offer 40 PCIE lanes on the i5-8600k, it would be excellent for render rigs with 2 GPUs at PCIE 3 x16.


I feel like I've said this a million times today, but Intel did not increase the number of PCIe lanes. They just added together the 24 on the chipset and the 16 on the CPU. It's exactly the same setup as Skylake and Kaby Lake. Intel is just using some clever (and clearly misleading) marketing to make themselves look more competitive against Ryzen. Note how they also now claim that the Core-X platform has "up to 68" lanes.

So yeah, 2x8 for GPUs is still the best you get on the mainstream platform.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Well, you said you had an i5-2500K and I don't believe it. So whatever.


He very definitely had that 2500k. Scotty has exasperated blue and red fanboys, so whatever else you want to say about him, he's not playing for either team in my experience.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Hmmm... pull the trigger on Coffee Lake or wait another year for Ice Lake and do a GPU step up... like a 1060 or 1070... and then go full ****** on IL and Volta next year... ugh... decisions decisions.


----------



## 113802

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> Hmmm... pull the trigger on Coffee Lake or wait another year for Ice Lake and do a GPU step up... like a 1060 or 1070... and then go full ****** on IL and Volta next year... ugh... decisions decisions.


Wait and buy Zen 14nm+


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> I feel like I've said this a million times today, but Intel did not increase the number of PCIe lanes. They just added together the 24 on the chipset and the 16 on the CPU. It's exactly the same setup as Skylake and Kaby Lake. Intel is just using some clever (and clearly misleading) marketing to make themselves look more competitive against Ryzen. Note how they also now claim that the Core-X platform has "up to 68" lanes.
> 
> So yeah, 2x8 for GPUs is still the best you get on the mainstream platform.


That's disappointing.

i7-7800x is still a terrible value with i7-8700k launched though.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Destroyed? How?


It is being matched by a mainstream CPU clock for clock despite having quad channel RAM , while likely having less overclock potential & higher platform cost.


The only exception appears to be Sisoft Sandra multimedia


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WannaBeOCer*
> 
> Wait and buy Zen 14nm+


The only thing that makes me nervous about waiting is seeing what RAM prices are doing lately.... Although... that might be the strongest point in favor of just doing a mid range GPU step up for now...


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Ryzen 7 is still going to be a better deal unless you have 120Hz +
> 
> I wonder if Microcenter will have $100 off next month or in 3 months (1 fiscal quarter), or if the lame $30 off with minimal pricecuts on CPUs will be for the foreseeable future.


Ryzen can still play esports games @144hz+. But yes Intel is better at higher refresh rates. I find anything over 45fps to be smooth enough. For twitch shooters like csgo. No, I gotta have 144hz.

I'm sure microcenter will run deals. $30 off mobo combo is likely.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Ryzen 7 is still going to be a better deal unless you have 120Hz + or a 720p 240Hz monitor due to the known future Intel Z390 chipset.
> 
> i7-7800x got destroyed though... that mesh
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Also supposedly 40 PCIe lanes.
> 
> I wonder if Microcenter will have $100 off next month or in 3 months (1 fiscal quarter), or if the lame $30 off with minimal pricecuts on CPUs will be for the foreseeable future.
> 
> Now it comes down to motherboards.
> 
> X299 (LGA2066) motherboard typically runs $300 although there's a Asrock Fatal1ty K6 for just under $250.
> X370 (Am4) motherboards typically $120-150ish .
> 
> Z370 mainstream boards can't cost more than $150
> By mainstream I mean boards with naming such as the Asus Z370 Prime A , Asrock Z370 Fatal1ty K6 , MSI Z370 SLI PLUS , Gigabyte Z370 AORUS Gaming 3 .
> 
> If Intel can offer 40 PCIE lanes on the i5-8600k, it would be excellent for render rigs with 2 GPUs at PCIE 3 x16.


40 PCIE lanes are the total between 16PCIe from CPU and 24 PCIE from PCH, then it is more like 16 PCIe+4x+4x like Skylake/Kaby Lake


----------



## darksideleader

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Destroyed? How?


With pitchforks and torches


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> The only thing that makes me nervous about waiting is seeing what RAM prices are doing lately.... Although... that might be the strongest point in favor of just doing a mid range GPU step up for now...


I'm looking on ebay for used memory. Decent deal might show up. I keep telling myself don't go crazy on fast ram at crazy high prices.


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> Hmmm... pull the trigger on Coffee Lake or wait another year for Ice Lake and do a GPU step up... like a 1060 or 1070... and then go full ****** on IL and Volta next year... ugh... decisions decisions.


The GTX 1070Ti rumored to come out in the next month or so looks like something that might fit your bill. Combining that with your 4670K should hold off having to go "full ******" for a decent amount of time...


----------



## kd5151

http://wccftech.com/intel-core-i7-8700k-review/

Some more benchmarks at the bottom of page.


----------



## Colossus1090

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> http://wccftech.com/intel-core-i7-8700k-review/
> 
> Some more benchmarks at the bottom of page.


Pretty much what I expected on the Cinebench scores, I'm gonna sit back and see how long the "new" socket lasts before my next upgrade.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Colossus1090*
> 
> Pretty much what I expected on the Cinebench scores, I'm gonna sit back and see how long the "new" socket lasts before my next upgrade.


The ones one the bottom don't seem right. Look at the power and thermals. That seems to be right. More heat and power.


----------



## mouacyk

Can't believe 4c/8t 7700K is out-performing 6c/6t 8600K. The expanded ports on Kabylake really must have allowed HT to stretch its legs.

Pretty poor core scaling on 8600K.
866 / 692 = 1.25x (expected 1.5x)

If cores scaled perfectly, 8600k should be scoring 1038. Something's off.


----------



## kd5151

https://videocardz.com/72940/intel-z370-motherboards-unboxing-videos-are-here mobo unboxing videos.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Can't believe 4c/8t 7700K is out-performing 6c/6t 8600K. The expanded ports on Kabylake really must have allowed HT to stretch its legs.
> 
> Pretty poor core scaling on 8600K.
> 866 / 692 = 1.25x (expected 1.5x)
> 
> If cores scaled perfectly, 8600k should be scoring 1038. Something's off.


clockspeeds and cache? single thread on i5-8600k was 184 ; stock is 3.6GHz base clocks and 4.3GHz turbo.
CPU world claims 4300 MHz (1 core) , 4200 MHz (2, 3 or 4 cores) , 4100 MHz (5 or 6 cores)

i5-7600k was 180 (4.2Ghz boost, 3.8Ghz base).

i5-7500 they used was 3.4GHz base, 3800 MHz (1 core) , 3700 MHz (2 or 3 cores) , 3600 MHz (4 cores) so the sub 900 CB R15 score is proportional

They had i5-7500 score 590 multicore CB R15 and 155 Single thread (pretty horrendous given a Ryzen gets about that at stock too).

590*1.5=885 ... within 2% of the result

i5-7600k with an overclock of +43% = 897CB:
http://hwbot.org/submission/3554073_samba_cinebench___r15_core_i5_7600k_897_cb

i5-7600k with an overclock of 37% to 5.2GHz = 881CB:
http://hwbot.org/submission/3455487_guik_cinebench___r15_core_i5_7600k_881_cb

http://hwbot.org/benchmark/cinebench_-_r15/rankings?hardwareTypeId=processor_5274&cores=4


----------



## PontiacGTX

AotS


----------



## QuadDamage

Are we going to have to wait for the next gen water blocks to come out? Think any of the N D55's fan's will work on this chip?


----------



## TheWizardMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> Are we going to have to wait for the next gen water blocks to come out? Think any of the N D55's fan's will work on this chip?


Absolutely not. All existing 1151 should fit IMO.


----------



## wingman99

The price for the i5 8600k looks OK. My i5 7600k is working perfect for gaming I don't need to upgrade, however I like to have the latest upgrade just to have it. Now I'm looking forward to the 8 core Z390.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> http://wccftech.com/intel-core-i7-8700k-review/
> 
> Some more benchmarks at the bottom of page.


Those temps...







You'll need water to hit 4.5GHz on this POS


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Those temps...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You'll need water to hit 4.5GHz on this POS


delid


----------



## Scotty99

Wait a second, are those temps at stock? That cant be right.


----------



## Scotty99

And it uses more power than an 1800x? Holy.....that i did not expect.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> delid


No.


----------



## Scotty99

If those are stock temps, depending on the cooler they used a delid might be necessary for any overclocking it seems.


----------



## Scotty99

It blows my mind it uses more power than an 1800x, 1800x is nearly pushed to the limit out of the box same as 8700k (but 2 less cores 4 less threads). Weird seeing AMD ahead in that category lol.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> And it uses more power than an 1800x? Holy.....that i did not expect.


Why does that surprise you? Ryzen was always more efficient.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> No.


then dont buy intel if you wont delid to achieve maximum overclock potential
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> It blows my mind it uses more power than an 1800x, 1800x is nearly pushed to the limit out of the box same as 8700k (but 2 less cores 4 less threads). Weird seeing AMD ahead in that category lol.


Zen is more efficient than Skylake and also is clocked lower


----------



## Scotty99

Speaking specifically about the 1800x, that drew a fair amount more power than a 7700k. Given the 1800x is the most comparable to the 8700k in the fact they are both pushed near limits out of the box, i didnt expect the 6c model to draw more juice.

But ya the more concerning thing is temps, id like to know what cooler they used.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> then dont buy intel if you wont delid to achieve maximum overclock potential
> Zen is more efficient than Skylake and also is clocked lower


I've thought about it but due to recent events I can't afford it. I'm holding off now though. I think waiting for Zen+ is better.


----------



## Scotty99

Just as a comparison, my 1700 is overclocked nearly to the max with 1.38v and it never see's 70c in any stress test with an air cooler. 76c is unacceptable for stock speeds.....intel and their toothpaste sigh.


----------



## NFL

Any word on if Intel's changing their stock cooler?


----------



## Scotty99

I find it so incredibly odd intel talks about overclocking in their brochures then continues to use a thermal solution that prohibits it......./facepalm

Also no stock coolers for K series chips, thats why i was wondering what cooler was used in that test.


----------



## Techhog

The only thing that I don't get is the delta between the i5s and i7s. It seems a little high.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I find it so incredibly odd intel talks about overclocking in their brochures then continues to use a thermal solution that prohibits it......./facepalm
> 
> Also no stock coolers for K series chips, thats why i was wondering what cooler was used in that test.


The unlocked processors don't come with a cooler and there clocked higher stock.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> AotS


It'd be helpful if we had a translation on the captions for the context here... I think peeps should reserve reactions until we know exactly what we're looking at there.


----------



## kd5151

power and temps are in line with the 7800x. 

Mean while 7980XE @ 4.1GHZ is a whole other ball game.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> power and temps are in line with the 7800x.
> 
> Mean while 7980XE @ 4.1GHZ is a whole other ball game.


This chart doesn't show temps.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I find it so incredibly odd intel talks about overclocking in their brochures then continues to use a thermal solution that prohibits it......./facepalm
> 
> Also no stock coolers for K series chips, thats why i was wondering what cooler was used in that test.


It's simple really. They use the high temps as a way to force people who want to overclock to delid and void their warranty, thus reducing RMAs from botched overclocks.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> This chart doesn't show temps.


no chart for temps.

https://www.techspot.com/review/1493-intel-core-i9-7980xe-and-7960x/page4.html

At stock clock speeds the 7980XE only pushed temps as high as 65 degrees which is certainly getting up there given that we have a massive 360mm radiator attached to the loop.


----------



## Scotty99

Intel claims the 8700k is supposed to run cooler than the 7700k when overclocked:





We only have that one chinese site to go by of course, but thats not looking to be the case.


----------



## axiumone

All of gigabytes z370 pages went live. http://www.gigabyte.us/Motherboard/Intel-Z370


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Intel claims the 8700k is supposed to run cooler than the 7700k when overclocked:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We only have that one chinese site to go by of course, but thats not looking to be the case.


Oh cool. We all know that Intel would never lie so that clams all of my fears!


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *axiumone*
> 
> All of gigabytes z370 pages went live. http://www.gigabyte.us/Motherboard/Intel-Z370


Nothing new with those board and so much RGB. They really need to stop. Can they strip all the RGB and pass the cost savings to me?


----------



## kevindd992002

Can we safely assume that all existing Delid tools will work with the 8700K?


----------



## axiumone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Can we safely assume that all existing Delid tools will work with the 8700K?


I would think so. Neither the pcb, nor the ihs has changed much, plus it's the same socket.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*


z370 only in 2017. Other chipsets in 2018 . Locked CPU on z370?


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *axiumone*
> 
> All of gigabytes z370 pages went live. http://www.gigabyte.us/Motherboard/Intel-Z370


Intersil ... hopefully the ISL99227 Powerstages
Quote:


> AORUS Z370 series motherboards use an all digital CPU power design which includes both digital PWM Controllers and Smart Power Stage controllers. Intersil is the world leading provider for high performance power IC solutions, capable of providing up to 60A of power. These 100% digital controllers offer incredible precision in delivering power to the motherboard's most power-hungry and energy-sensitive components, allowing enthusiasts to get the absolute maximum performance from their new 8th Gen Intel® Core Processors.




K7 seems to be the only one listing this.

Gaming 5 seems to be the next top board but doesn't have it listed.

Gigabyte is likely going to lose out on performance / featureset vs ASUS and Asrock let alone MSI for all pricepoints except the top tier.

edit: if the ISL99227 Smart Powerstages are used, expect a price premium. They're about $6-7 a piece , x 10 = +$60-$70 for VRM alone
https://octopart.com/search?q=ISL99227
https://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/intersil/ISL99227IRZ/ISL99227IRZ-ND/6236227

For midrange (because Z370 is a one year board basically since Z390 is a known) , I'd expect the ASUS ROG STRIX Z370-F GAMING / ROG STRIX Z370-E GAMING to be strong contenders (without Debug LEDs though) as well as the Asrock Z370 Taichi & Extreme 4 (if Asrock doesn't cheap out with Sinopowers) and maybe FAtal1ty K6. No real good reason to buy an overkill motherboard for one CPU gen.


Spoiler: Asrock Z370 Fatal1ty K6









Spoiler: MSI Z370 Pro carbon (underwhelming)





crooked choke passed QA.





Spoiler: MSI Z370 SLI PLUS (likely budget midrange)









Spoiler: ASUS Z370-F STRIX









Spoiler: ASUS Z370-A PRIME


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Intersil ... hopefully the ISL99227 Powerstages
> 
> K7 seems to be the only one listing this.
> 
> Gaming 5 seems to be the next top board but doesn't have it listed.


What do you think the chances are that either of those will be sub $200 ?

We're all speculating here, doesn't seem inappropriate to ask.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Haha. What are you talking about. HT is what makes the 2600K still worth using. 2500K is showing it's age and cores are maxed completely out in most demanding games.
> 
> If I disable HT on my CPU, pretty much all newer games perform worse, some of them, much worse. Makes no diff in the older games.
> 
> i7-7700K beats the i5-7600K clock for clock.
> https://www.techspot.com/review/1360-amd-ryzen-5-1600x-1500x-gaming/
> 
> The i7-8700K will beat i5-8600K in demanding games in a few years too.


I really dont get how brainwashed ppl are thinking ht is a good thing. It was just a low cost solution which went on for 5 gens. In that respect good job intel.

Hence developers used it. Its not like they applauded it

Now with 8600k coming in at pure 6cores.
Than extra 2 cores will negate any gain on ht that a 7700k had.

Y do you think when game engine that doesnt use HT a 7600k for example will destroy a 7700k.

Any further discussion at this point is useless. Just wait and see the benchmarks. At that point the brainwashed will finally have the same feeling some christians reach when they swear by "Jesus is their Saviour". Cleansing.

Only benchmarks from digitalfoundry .. one can draw a conclusion. So wait for it.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> It'd be helpful if we had a translation on the captions for the context here... I think peeps should reserve reactions until we know exactly what we're looking at there.


Ashes of the singularity..


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> No way. 5GHz where every lucky people and even than they where using un-save 1.45v+. People that got 5GHz under 1.4v had Golden CPUs. Almost everyone an get 5GHz with 7700K. 5GHz SB is like 5.2-3GHz 7700K.


I never mentioned voltage though. I ran my 2600K at 1.5v for years to get to 4.8 GHz and its still running strong to this day so I think the "safe" voltage idea was vastly overblown, at least on a 32nm CPU that was very robust from my own personal experience. There has been degradation of course over the years (it will only do 4.6 GHz stably now, 6.5 years later) but I have beat on this processor for years so that's to be expected, and its well outside the reasonable service life of a CPU at this point anyway.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Hmmm... Seems the Aorus Ultra and the Aorus 5 are the best value in the Gaming line...

Here's the side by sides for the full gaming line of Gigabyte's Z370 board.

https://www.gigabyte.com/Comparison/Result/2?pids=6417,6418,6419,6423,6436


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *axiumone*
> 
> All of gigabytes z370 pages went live. http://www.gigabyte.us/Motherboard/Intel-Z370


Wow the Z370 HD3 looks great, I like it.


----------



## rudyae86

So does anyone know how much of a performance gap there is between the i5 8600k and the i7 8700k?

The reason I ask is because of the price difference. I know there is usually a wide gap between the 2 but this time around, it could be different, especially for games. Maybe the performance gap between the 2 is not that much?

I am still trying to figure out which one to get or I might just get the Non K version of the 8700......

decisions, decisions...........


----------



## PriestOfSin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Wow the Z370 HD3 looks great, I like it.


The Z370XP SLI has an interesting color scheme. Could look really slick in a black and white build








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rudyae86*
> 
> So does anyone know how much of a performance gap there is between the i5 8600k and the i7 8700k?
> 
> The reason I ask is because of the price difference. I know there is usually a wide gap between the 2 but this time around, it could be different, especially for games. Maybe the performance gap between the 2 is not that much?
> 
> I am still trying to figure out which one to get or I might just get the Non K version of the 8700......
> 
> decisions, decisions...........


I think it just depends on what you're doing. If I were just gaming, I'd probably grab the 8600K just so that I could OC easier, since 6/6 and 6/12 probably won't be that different in gaming, especially since 6 real cores will probably be better than 4/8.


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Ryzen can still play esports games @144hz+. But yes Intel is better at higher refresh rates. I find anything over 45fps to be smooth enough. For twitch shooters like csgo. No, I gotta have 144hz.
> 
> I'm sure microcenter will run deals. $30 off mobo combo is likely.


SOME esports games, not all







and harder to do 240


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rudyae86*
> 
> So does anyone know how much of a performance gap there is between the i5 8600k and the i7 8700k?
> 
> The reason I ask is because of the price difference. I know there is usually a wide gap between the 2 but this time around, it could be different, especially for games. Maybe the performance gap between the 2 is not that much?
> 
> I am still trying to figure out which one to get or I might just get the Non K version of the 8700......
> 
> decisions, decisions...........


Depends on the task, some will get 0% gain from the changes (Hyperthreading from 6c to 6c12t, little more L3) and others will get 30%+.

"gaming" is too general of a description to be exact but the vast majority of games have scaling that is poor or nonexistant beyond 6 cores


----------



## Yetyhunter

Found some leaked 8700k full review here. Was posted at Guru3d first https://www.eteknix.com/full-intel-i7-8700k-cpu-review-leaks-out-ahead-of-launch/


----------



## pez

Seems that in CPU-bound/preferential games it provides a nice little bump. Those Witcher 3 results look nice.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> I really dont get how brainwashed ppl are thinking ht is a good thing. It was just a low cost solution which went on for 5 gens. In that respect good job intel.
> 
> Hence developers used it. Its not like they applauded it
> 
> Now with 8600k coming in at pure 6cores.
> Than extra 2 cores will negate any gain on ht that a 7700k had.
> 
> Y do you think when game engine that doesnt use HT a 7600k for example will destroy a 7700k.
> 
> Any further discussion at this point is useless. Just wait and see the benchmarks. At that point the brainwashed will finally have the same feeling some christians reach when they swear by "Jesus is their Saviour". Cleansing.
> 
> Only benchmarks from digitalfoundry .. one can draw a conclusion. So wait for it.


Not brainwashed. Personal experience. HT helps alot in some games. HT can handle background tasks too. No HT meaning these background tasks will draw power from the main cores that the game use and this can result in dips.

HT on earlier 2C i3's also saved the gaming performance, or newer Pentiums. Disabling HT on these and fps dropped ALOT. So maybe you are the one brainwashed. I've personal experience with this. Very easy to test.

The i5-8600K might perform "good enough" in the beginning, but in a few years, the exact same thing will happen. The i7-8700K will start to pull ahead because of HT.

The i5-7600 does not destroy i7-7700K in ANY GAME, clock for clock / overclocked.
https://www.techspot.com/review/1360-amd-ryzen-5-1600x-1500x-gaming/

i7 also has more cache.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Ashes of the singularity..


It was hitting 76C in a game?

............


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> And until difficult questions regarding multi-core programming and real-time gaming (especially in terms of AI) are resolved, throwing "moar corez" ad infinitum without regard to IPC as you are advocating for is a fool's errand.


What questions? I spend quite a bit of time with mutithreaded programming and AI.

Multithreaded programming is about talent not about schools education. Never had problem with multithreaded games, and my home made stuff scaled to 200 cores without problems.
Main problem was: HT violated principle that stated on PC each core allows run application at full speed, and running half of the application on one core will not slow down with second half running on second core. Basically HT violated principle of ISOLATION. When each core isn't equal, it harms properly designed applications, and when loading ALL cores will provide much less execution time than one core * n, it kills possibility of applications that adapt theirs workload on number of cores.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Wondering if i should Rock a Mini Itx gaming build with i7 8700K and GTX 1080


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Did they say what is the socket called? Would be confusing if they keep same name as in Z170/270.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Did they say what is the socket called? Would be confusing if they keep same name as in Z170/270.


not really that confusing. Most people that dont know computer will go by Z370


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> not really that confusing. Most people that dont know computer will go by Z370


You say that but back in the day when I started getting interested in building my own PC I had all these different problems when selecting parts. For example I got Nvidia GPU because I though it was the only one that would works with nForce Chipset.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Thats why i said most people that don't know.

My guess its a V2


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Thats why i said most people that don't know.
> 
> My guess its a V2


It's just LGA 1151.

https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Intel-Socket-1151


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> It was hitting 76C in a game?
> 
> ............


Depends on the cooling solution... if it was a cheap, single fan, AIO rad, or an air tower cooler that's totally believable... especially with two more cores than previous i7 mainstream CPUs.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Did they say what is the socket called? Would be confusing if they keep same name as in Z170/270.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> not really that confusing. Most people that dont know computer will go by Z370


Exactly why sites like PC Part Picker exist, and why I recommend them to people that aren't very familiar with the PC world. If someone goes top to bottom it does the majority of compatibility checks for you.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Wondering if i should Rock a Mini Itx gaming build with i7 8700K and GTX 1080


That's why I'm torn about waiting to upgrade til next year... I really want to do a CaseLabs Bullet BH2 build and tackle the challenge of SFF water cooling. And it honestly wouldn't cost me too much to do it.... adulting... sigh, lol.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> Depends on the cooling solution... if it was a cheap, single fan, AIO rad, or an air tower cooler that's totally believable... especially with two more cores than previous i7 mainstream CPUs.


The i5s were running super cool though. This processor is a joke. If this review is legit nobody should buy this.


----------



## TMatzelle60

https://videocardz.net/mobo/asrock-z370m-itxac#

based on this its going to be a v2


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> If those are stock temps, depending on the cooler they used a delid might be necessary for any overclocking it seems.


Considering that the temps slides are thrown in with benchmarking slides regarding power consumption under load, along with slides about 4K frame rate while gaming... I'm pretty sure the 40/41 degrees was an Idle temp and the 76 was full stress load during benching. I couldn't find the original articles those additional bar graphs came from, so there's no way to put the context of what cooling solution was being used. And given those temps, I'd be suprised if they were using a AIO or other liquid cooling solution, my money is on a tower cooler, and not a good one at that. Plus... I find it very unlikely to see a 15+ degree gap in temps between the i5 and i7.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> https://videocardz.net/mobo/asrock-z370m-itxac#
> 
> based on this its going to be a v2


What are you talking about?

Edit: Oh. Piece of **** mobile site. Either way, that's just what Videocardz is choosing to call it. Officially it's LGA 1151 because, well, that's what it is.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Mkay all.. I found the PConline.cn article the often pointed to slides are coming from... and no dice. Of course, the clowns failed to mentioned ANYWHERE in there article what the specs of the test rig used were. For those interested I do have the article roughly translated thanks to Google, but it really doesn't say much that we haven't already seen elsewhere.

http://diy.pconline.com.cn/1001/10017885.html


----------



## profundido

don't worry, in a big week from now we'll know all we we need to know. In the words of Christina Aguilera: "Good things come to boys who wait..."


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> Mkay all.. I found the PConline.cn article the often pointed to slides are coming from... and no dice. Of course, the clowns failed to mentioned ANYWHERE in there article what the specs of the test rig used were. For those interested I do have the article roughly translated thanks to Google, but it really doesn't say much that we haven't already seen elsewhere.
> 
> http://diy.pconline.com.cn/1001/10017885.html


I see. Can you look at some other reviews of theirs and see if there's anything fishy?

Either way all of you should wait at least 24 hours to CPUs and motherboards so initial reviews can go out.


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> I see. Can you look at some other reviews of theirs and see if there's anything fishy?
> 
> Either way all of you should wait at least 24 hours to CPUs and motherboards so initial reviews can go out.


Uhhh, I think that goes without saying. Thanks for the protection though? You realize most of us have been upgrading hardware for 10-20 years?


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Uhhh, I think that goes without saying. Thanks for the protection though? You realize most of us have been upgrading hardware for 10-20 years?


Some people might be tempted to order as soon as they launch in case there are stock issues. This is Intel's first big change on the mainstream platform since Sandy Bridge, and it's rushed, so some might assume that it'll sell out quickly.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> don't worry, in a big week from now we'll know all we we need to know. In the words of Christina Aguilera: "Good things come to boys who wait..."


If its coming from her, I'll pass thanks lol. I'm mostly wanting to find out what the context of the temperature slide at the end of the article is. They provided no text to compliment it so it's sort of baffling how they came to registering such a disparity between the i5 and i7 temps.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Did they say what is the socket called? Would be confusing if they keep same name as in Z170/270.


1151, even every single socket from Sandy Bridge could be called 1155 if they wanted just now intel didnt evne take care to hide that this processor can be compatible with z270/z170's socket

Quote:


> Support for 8th Generation Intel® Core™ i7 processors/Intel® Core™ i5 processors/ Intel® Core™ i3 processors in the *LGA1151* package
> L3 cache varies with CPU


https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z370-AORUS-Gaming-7-rev-10#sp


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> If its coming from her, I'll pass thanks lol. I'm mostly wanting to find out what the context of the temperature slide at the end of the article is. They provided no text to compliment it so it's sort of baffling how they came to registering such a disparity between the i5 and i7 temps.


Yeah. It should be more like 5-10C in a heavy stress test, not 20C in gaming.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> 1151, even every single socket from Sandy Bridge could be called 1155 if they wanted just now intel didnt evne take care to hide that this processor can be compatible with z270/z170's socket
> 
> https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z370-AORUS-Gaming-7-rev-10#sp


Err, no, that's not true. 1155, 1150, and 1151 all have different pin layouts.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Yeah. It should be more like 5-10C in a heavy stress test, not 20C in gaming.
> Err, no, that's not true. 1155, 1150, and 1151 all have different pin layouts.


What I mean is they could have used 1155 for every single CPU they had released keeping the layout is probably a change done since they dont have same pin count and they ddint have the same power scheme? like haswell using a FIVR


----------



## AlphaC

Even if Z170 / Z270 boards with LGA1151 COULD support i7-8700K with a BIOS flash, I would not recommend most of them for the power consumption.

We're talking about *50% more power* assuming it is just as efficient as Kaby Lake. Most boards are using 4 phases of cheapo mosfets without doubled low side ,so they'd likely throttle heavily.

I would only trust boards such as the MSI Z170 Xpower , ASUS Maximus VIIII Hero (& Formula) , Gigabyte Z270X-Gaming SOC,, or Asrock OC Formula / Asrock Z270 Taichi / Asrock Z170 Extreme 7+

Table from anandtech suggest about 150-180W overclocked for i7-7700K (difference to idle is ~ 90-130W)

https://www.anandtech.com/show/10968/the-intel-core-i7-7700k-91w-review-the-new-stock-performance-champion/11

& http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/

Even the i7-7700 can draw up to 88W when using Intel's Power Thermal Utility. i7-7800x supposedly draws 150W out of the box.

+50% = 135 to 195W power output , so unless boards can handle 195W 24/7 I doubt they would be suitable for 5GHz on six cores


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Even if Z170 / Z270 boards with LGA1151 COULD support i7-8700K with a BIOS flash, I would not recommend most of them for the power consumption.
> 
> We're talking about *50% more power* assuming it is just as efficient as Kaby Lake. Most boards are using 4 phases of cheapo mosfets without doubled low side ,so they'd likely throttle heavily.
> 
> I would only trust boards such as the MSI Z170 Xpower , ASUS Maximus VIIII Hero (& Formula) , Gigabyte Z270X-Gaming SOC,, or Asrock OC Formula / Asrock Z270 Taichi / Asrock Z170 Extreme 7+
> 
> Table from anandtech suggest about 150-180W overclocked for i7-7700K (difference to idle is ~ 90-130W)
> 
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/10968/the-intel-core-i7-7700k-91w-review-the-new-stock-performance-champion/11
> 
> & http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/
> 
> Even the i7-7700 can draw up to 88W when using Intel's Power Thermal Utility. i7-7800x supposedly draws 150W out of the box.
> 
> +50% = 135 to 195W power output , so unless boards can handle 195W 24/7 I doubt they would be suitable for 5GHz on six cores


It's not 50% more power. The power doesn't scale linearly with cores, and the cores aren't the only things on the CPU. On top of that, the new boards all have the same number of power phases, and even if they didn't it would still be Intel's fault for not designing it to be more future proof. Coffee Lake didn't come out of nowhere. They planned this at least 6 months before the Kaby Lake launch.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> It's not 50% more power. The power doesn't scale linearly with cores, and the cores aren't the only things on the CPU. On top of that, the new boards all have the same number of power phases, and even if they didn't it would still be Intel's fault for not designing it to be more future proof. Coffee Lake didn't come out of nowhere. They planned this at least 6 months before the Kaby Lake launch.


I think you missed the part where i7-7800x consumes 150W

https://www.anandtech.com/show/11550/the-intel-skylakex-review-core-i9-7900x-i7-7820x-and-i7-7800x-tested/8


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Prime...? Nice..


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I think you missed the part where i7-7800x consumes 150W
> 
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/11550/the-intel-skylakex-review-core-i9-7900x-i7-7820x-and-i7-7800x-tested/8


*points to the CPU directly below the 7800X in that chart, then points to the TDP*

The power consumption of the 7800X is irrelevant. It's a completely different die with different design considerations. By your logic, the 7980XE should consume something like 400W at stock.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yetyhunter*
> 
> Found some leaked 8700k full review here. Was posted at Guru3d first https://www.eteknix.com/full-intel-i7-8700k-cpu-review-leaks-out-ahead-of-launch/


Updated OP:
Quote:


>


https://www.eteknix.com/full-intel-i7-8700k-cpu-review-leaks-out-ahead-of-launch/


----------



## kd5151

http://wccftech.com/intel-arbitrarily-breaks-coffee-lake-compatibility-z270-force-users-buy-new-z370-motherboards/

Another leak about motherboards.


----------



## kd5151

https://videocardz.com/72976/intel-core-i7-8700k-official-performance

Since a 'review' of i7-8700K was already posted by Expreview, I do not think this leak will have a big value to you. What we have are official benchmark results directly from Intel's reviewers guide thanks to our Chinese friends. Use this as a reference for upcoming reviews or compare values to your own CPU.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> *points to the CPU directly below the 7800X in that chart, then points to the TDP*
> 
> The power consumption of the 7800X is irrelevant. It's a completely different die with different design considerations. By your logic, the 7980XE should consume something like 400W at stock.


It does consume 400W at similar clocks once throttling is prevented


https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3066-intel-i9-7980xe-7960x-thermals-power-review


https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8348/intel-core-i9-7980xe-7960x-cpu-review/index7.html

That's why you see 4 core i7s (~90W) consume roughly double an i3 (~50W).

We see this even on Ryzen when overclocked, Ryzen 5 1600X consumes ~20W for the memory controller, and ~ 20W per core = 140W , while Ryzen 7 CPUs consume ~ 20W for memory controller and ~20W per core = 180W , basing off the XFR power usage per core. (When they aren't overclocked it's about 10W per core = ~80W for Ryzen 5 hexcore while ~100W for Ryzen 7).


https://www.anandtech.com/show/11244/the-amd-ryzen-5-1600x-vs-core-i5-review-twelve-threads-vs-four/2


----------



## czin125

Shouldn't the power be slightly less than 1.50x?

4700mhz 6700K at 1.35v^2 avg -> 5000mhz 7700K at 1.35v^2 avg ( This does mean the 7700K would use less power than the 6700K at 4700mhz )

-> 5000mhz 8700K at X^2 ( X less than 1.35v^2 )

If 1.25v -> (1.25/1.35)^2 * 1.5 = 1.286x
If 1.26v -> (1.26/1.35)^2 * 1.5 = 1.306x
If 1.28v -> (1.28/1.35)^2 * 1.5 = 1.348x
If 1.29v -> (1.29/1.35)^2 * 1.5 = 1.369x


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> Shouldn't the power be slightly less than 1.50x?
> 
> 4700mhz 6700K at 1.35v^2 avg -> 5000mhz 7700K at 1.35v^2 avg ( This does mean the 7700K would use less power than the 6700K at 4700mhz )
> 
> -> 5000mhz 8700K at X^2 ( X less than 1.35v^2 )
> 
> If 1.25v -> (1.25/1.35)^2 * 1.5 = 1.286x
> If 1.26v -> (1.26/1.35)^2 * 1.5 = 1.306x
> If 1.28v -> (1.28/1.35)^2 * 1.5 = 1.348x
> If 1.29v -> (1.29/1.35)^2 * 1.5 = 1.369x


It's _roughly_ 1.5x if you base on cores. i7-8700k is a 6 core CPU.

You're basing off clocks & voltages.


----------



## looniam

do these go here?


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!





http://diy.pconline.com.cn/1001/10017885.html


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> It does consume 400W at similar clocks once throttling is prevented
> 
> 
> https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3066-intel-i9-7980xe-7960x-thermals-power-review
> 
> That's why you see 4 core i7s (~90W) consume roughly double an i3 (~50W).
> 
> We see this even on Ryzen when overclocked, Ryzen 5 1600X consumes ~20W for the memory controller, and ~ 20W per core = 80W , while Ryzen 7 CPUs consumes ~ 20W for memory controller and ~20W per core = 100W.


You're going to need citations on the Ryzen numbers, especially for the memory controller. As for i3 vs. i7, first of all 90 is not twice as much as 50. Second, you're still ignoring the point about the difference between the 7800X and 7900X (or lack thereof). Third... Well, take a look at this chart:










Ignoring the fact that it shows that you attempted to mislead by rounding down with the 7350K, note the power consumption compared to TDP. Notice anything interesting?


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> do these go here?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://diy.pconline.com.cn/1001/10017885.html


Sure do, added to OP.


----------



## TheWizardMan

SiliconLottery has 8X00s for sale.


----------



## Snaporz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheWizardMan*
> 
> SiliconLottery has 8X00s for sale.


Could just be placeholder listing. Or they did sell out that quickly.


----------



## TheWizardMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Snaporz*
> 
> Could just be placeholder listing. Or they did sell out that quickly.


I think they are placeholders, but they have prices.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> http://wccftech.com/intel-arbitrarily-breaks-coffee-lake-compatibility-z270-force-users-buy-new-z370-motherboards/
> 
> Another leak about motherboards.


This seems the only reason
Quote:


> Truth be told the only apparent reason Intel is breaking compatibility with existing motherboards is that they're simply after your money. Intel is a company trying to make a buck after all. If you're upgrading to Coffee Lake from Broadwell or an older processor this doesn't really affect you. But, we believe that this decision will only work to discourage Kaby Lake owners from upgrading to Coffee Lake.


----------



## LogitechFan2

76c under load?! without OC? This is unacceptable.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LogitechFan2*
> 
> 76c under load?! without OC? This is unacceptable.


well it has 50% more cores and maybe has higher voltage and hence higher temperatures than a quad


----------



## LogitechFan2

And I'm sure if not for the tim, the temps would've been at least 15c lower. Also 1800x has 2 more cores and 4t, yet the temps are in mid 50s... food for thought.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LogitechFan2*
> 
> And I'm sure if not for the tim, the temps would've been at least 15c lower. Also 1800x has 2 more cores and 4t, yet the temps are in mid 50s... food for thought.


I have some friends with R7s and they are having problems to reach 3.8Ghz (which is a base clock for entry level Intel) with good temperatures (Noctua cooling included). I tend to think the temps are about the same if not greater on a Ryzen if you delid an i7-8700K and lock it at 3.7Ghz both chips.

This guy that I know sold his R7 that was reaching 3.9Ghz at 1.44V. Now he has one that is reaching 3.9Ghz at 1.35V (he's happy as a bumblebee). In both chips he cannot go above 3.9Ghz. At the other hand, people can get to 5.1Ghz on an Intel chip with 1.35V.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> I have some friends with R7s and they are having problems to reach 3.8Ghz (which is a base clock for entry level Intel) with good temperatures (Noctua cooling included). I tend to think the temps are about the same if not greater on a Ryzen if you delid an i7-8700K and lock it at 3.7Ghz both chips.
> 
> This guy that I know sold his R7 that was reaching 3.9Ghz at 1.44V. Now he has one that is reaching 3.9Ghz at 1.35V (he's happy as a bumblebee). In both chips he cannot go above 3.9Ghz. At the other hand, people can get to 5.1Ghz on an Intel chip with 1.35V.


You know that AMD is binning the top 5 % of dies to make threadripper out of them right?

What I'm saying is: it might be a bit difficult finding a Ryzen reliably clock to 4-4.1 Ghz in the wild

I'm sure that an Intel i7 would be cooler than a Ryzen given they are using the same frequency, cores and the i7 got a delid (and same workload)


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> I have some friends with R7s and they are having problems to reach 3.8Ghz (which is a base clock for entry level Intel) with good temperatures (Noctua cooling included). I tend to think the temps are about the same if not greater on a Ryzen if you delid an i7-8700K and lock it at 3.7Ghz both chips.
> 
> This guy that I know sold his R7 that was reaching 3.9Ghz at 1.44V. Now he has one that is reaching 3.9Ghz at 1.35V (he's happy as a bumblebee). In both chips he cannot go above 3.9Ghz. At the other hand, people can get to 5.1Ghz on an Intel chip with 1.35V.


It's largely due to a crappy process node that it can't go higher.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Even if Z170 / Z270 boards with LGA1151 COULD support i7-8700K with a BIOS flash, I would not recommend most of them for the power consumption.
> 
> We're talking about *50% more power* assuming it is just as efficient as Kaby Lake. Most boards are using 4 phases of cheapo mosfets without doubled low side ,so they'd likely throttle heavily.
> 
> I would only trust boards such as the MSI Z170 Xpower , ASUS Maximus VIIII Hero (& Formula) , Gigabyte Z270X-Gaming SOC,, or Asrock OC Formula / Asrock Z270 Taichi / Asrock Z170 Extreme 7+
> 
> Table from anandtech suggest about 150-180W overclocked for i7-7700K (difference to idle is ~ 90-130W)
> 
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/10968/the-intel-core-i7-7700k-91w-review-the-new-stock-performance-champion/11
> 
> & http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/
> 
> Even the i7-7700 can draw up to 88W when using Intel's Power Thermal Utility. i7-7800x supposedly draws 150W out of the box.
> 
> +50% = 135 to 195W power output , so unless boards can handle 195W 24/7 I doubt they would be suitable for 5GHz on six cores


Except there's no such thing as VIIII


----------



## navjack27

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LogitechFan2*
> 
> And I'm sure if not for the tim, the temps would've been at least 15c lower. Also 1800x has 2 more cores and 4t, yet the temps are in mid 50s... food for thought.


Oooooo it matters on if you trust the monitoring method.


----------



## Scotty99

Ryzen does not have temp problems...

Nearly at 1.4v and my CPU stays under 70c even in prime 95 on a dual tower air cooler. These leaks have the 8700k at 76c in a *game*, which i dont really believe (or at least, hope its not true lol).


----------



## navjack27

Oh it's the truth. It's just the new normal of Intel. Buy a high end CPU + delidding kit + liquid metal + high end cooler


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Real Reviews should be out soon, JayzTwoCents was showing off his 8700k and Z370 motherboard:


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> http://wccftech.com/intel-arbitrarily-breaks-coffee-lake-compatibility-z270-force-users-buy-new-z370-motherboards/
> 
> Another leak about motherboards.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> This seems the only reason


Yeah this is pretty much my feeling on the issue.

Honestly, a new CPU this soon would feel a bit silly considering I don't have any inherent need for the extra cores....but....I just want 'em







.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *navjack27*
> 
> Oh it's the truth. It's just the new normal of Intel. Buy a high end CPU + delidding kit + liquid metal + high end cooler


The probem is, AMD does 'not overclock'. In between the two I rather go with Intel. Nowadays it is muscle cars vs sedans in the mainstream socket. If you want some cruise speed and economy, go with AMD. If you want to burn some rubber and tune the engine, go with Intel (but prepar to spend more money).

Honestly, for who likes to overclock and tune, these Intel chips might be the last stand. They might soon replace this architecture with something similar to AMD, more efficient by clock, auto overclock and just with better voltage and such.


----------



## Scotty99

A ryzen 1700 overlocks up to 800mhz on all cores....a 8700k might get 600 if you are lucky.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> A ryzen 1700 overlocks up to 800mhz on all cores....a 8700k might get 600 if you are lucky.


Big whoop it OC's 800MHz when that still puts it under the performance of a i7 4c/8t in most scenarios. That's more like AMD being conservative of stock clocks rather than it really being a great OC'er.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> A ryzen 1700 overlocks up to 800mhz on all cores....a 8700k might get 600 if you are lucky.


i7-8700K has a 3.7Ghz base clock and there are reviews of it reaching 5.3Ghz. That's 1600Mhz right there (just double). If you want to keep trolling here, at least do some research (homework).


----------



## Scotty99

Read what the guy said....he said AMD does not overclock.

I was merely pointing out the fact AMD indeed leaves a good margin for OC on their chips, given you did your research and bought the right SKU.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> i7-8700K has a 3.7Ghz base clock and there are reviews of it reaching 5.3Ghz. That's 1600Mhz right there (just double). If you want to keep trolling here, at least do some research (homework).


They boost to 4.3ghz on all cores....base=/=boost.

My guess is these things are going to be limited to 4.8 at *most* without a delid.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> i7-8700K has a 3.7Ghz base clock and there are reviews of it reaching 5.3Ghz. That's 1600Mhz right there (just double). If you want to keep trolling here, at least do some research (homework).


They boost to 4.3ghz on all cores....base=/=boost.

My guess is these things are going to be limited to 4.8 at *most* without a delid.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Read what the guy said....he said AMD does not overclock.
> 
> I was merely pointing out the fact AMD indeed leaves a good margin for OC on their chips, given you did your research and bought the right SKU.


Right, but you're not doing research on any of your facts as Contiusa pointed out.

They do OC, but you trying to bring out semantics in the argument to point out technicalities....just come on lol. 1k+ replies later and you're still trolling this thread.


----------



## Kokin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> The probem is, AMD does 'not overclock'. In between the two I rather go with Intel. Nowadays it is muscle cars vs sedans in the mainstream socket. If you want some cruise speed and economy, go with AMD. If you want to burn some rubber and tune the engine, go with Intel (but prepar to spend more money).
> 
> Honestly, for who likes to overclock and tune, these Intel chips might be the last stand. They might soon replace this architecture with something similar to AMD, more efficient by clock, auto overclock and just with better voltage and such.


AMD/Intel and RTG/Nvidia products all auto overclock on their own through some form of "boost" nowadays. Many CPUs/GPUs are already hitting their upper limits from the factory.

I can't even control how much my 1080Ti will clock since it varies from game to game. My FuryX couldn't even overclock 150MHz over stock, while my 7950 shipped at 800MHz, but could be overclocked an extra 500MHz.

7950 core maxed 1300 (waterblock)
290 core maxed at 1200 (waterblock)
FuryX core maxed at 1150 (stock AIO)
1080Ti core maxes between 1987~2050 (aircooled, waterblock at some point soon)

Intel Core series from Sandy Bridge to Kaby Lake pretty much maxed out at 4.5-5GHz for most people. There hasn't been an advancement for the overclocking wall in a while now.


----------



## Scotty99

What? The dude literally said AMD does not overclock, and for people that "like to tune" intel is the only choice.

He is simply wrong on that account.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kokin*
> 
> AMD/Intel and RTG/Nvidia products all auto overclock on their own through some form of "boost" nowadays. Many CPUs/GPUs are already hitting their upper limits from the factory.
> 
> I can't even control how much my 1080Ti will clock since it varies from game to game. My FuryX couldn't even overclock 150MHz over stock, while my 7950 shipped at 800MHz, but could be overclocked an extra 500MHz.
> 
> 7950 core maxed 1300 (waterblock)
> 290 core maxed at 1200 (waterblock)
> FuryX core maxed at 1150 (stock AIO)
> 1080Ti core maxes between 1987~2050 (aircooled, waterblock at some point soon)
> 
> Intel Core series from Sandy Bridge to Kaby Lake pretty much maxed out at 4.5-5GHz for most people. There hasn't been an advancement for the overclocking wall in a while now.


I'm actually a huge fan of NVIDIA's newest boost tech. It took a while for people to understand that cooling the card to it's max potential gets you 95% of the OC you'd normally see (unless you overvolt and play with power curves). I'd actually be very happy if Intel did that (on a full core/package) basis.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> What? The dude literally said AMD does not overclock, and for people that "like to tune" intel is the only choice.
> 
> He is simply wrong on that account.


No, you're still trying to argue a technicality.

He's making the point that AMD overclocks to a point, but if you want raw performance and true overclocking, you start with Intel. If you're familiar with cars, it's like trying to tune a high-strung platform to gain more performance rather than starting with something like an LS and adding TTs or SCs to make more reliable power.


----------



## Scotty99

No he literally said AMD does not overclock, please man reading comprehension.

There are two things here:

1. Intel clocks higher. Of course this is true, i am not going to argue with someone saying 5 is higher than 4 lol.
2. Margin of overclock available from the factory. Maybe the guy does not know non x sku's exist from AMD, but these are the ones people are buying....and they have plenty of overclock potential in them. As i pointed out the 1700 has more in it than a 8700k does.

People used to buy 5820k's after broadwell launched because they could overclock higher but at an IPC loss, this is what the guy was referencing with "tuners". I just had to make clear that AMD actually has "more left in the tank" than intel does given you bought the right SKU.

Also im going to outline what we are going to see with coffee lake reviews:

Ryzen 7 1700 now has real competition from intel in the 8700k. You give up a slight amount of mutltasking potential for better gaming performance, a trade many (like myself) are willing to make.
AMD still has no competition in the midrange space, 8600k is a bad product with ryzen 1600 existing at ~200 dollars.
Ryzen 3 is dead with coffee lake 4c4t i3's, no one should be purchasing them.

Its a big move by intel, but they are leaving a hole in the midrange.....the most popular segment.

Like i said earlier in this thread i believe i5's are going to be 6c12t next go round, intel had to go 6c6t for i5's to differentiate the i7's, but i feel they will be 8c16t as early as next year.


----------



## Scotty99

There are two things here:

1. Intel clocks higher. Of course this is true, i am not going to argue with someone saying 5 is higher than 4 lol.
2. Margin of overclock available from the factory. Maybe the guy does not know non x sku's exist from AMD, but these are the ones people are buying....and they have plenty of overclock potential in them. As i pointed out the 1700 has more in it than a 8700k does.

People used to buy 5820k's after broadwell launched because they could overclock higher but at an IPC loss, this is what the guy was referencing with "tuners". I just had to make clear that AMD actually has "more left in the tank" than intel does given you bought the right SKU.


----------



## Scotty99

Also im going to outline what we are going to see with coffee lake reviews:

Ryzen 7 1700 now has real competition from intel in the 8700k. You give up a slight amount of mutltasking potential for better gaming performance, a trade many (like myself) are willing to make.
AMD still has no competition in the midrange space, 8600k is a bad product with ryzen 1600 existing at ~200 dollars.
Ryzen 3 is dead with coffee lake 4c4t i3's, no one should be purchasing them.

Its a big move by intel, but they are leaving a hole in the midrange.....the most popular segment.

Like i said earlier in this thread i believe i5's are going to be 6c12t next go round, intel had to go 6c6t for i5's to differentiate the i7's, but i feel they will be 8c16t as early as next year.


----------



## WexleySnoops

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> What? The dude literally said AMD does not overclock, and for people that "like to tune" intel is the only choice.
> 
> He is simply wrong on that account.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> No he literally said AMD does not overclock, please man reading comprehension.


No you.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> The probem is, AMD does *'not overclock'.* In between the two I rather go with Intel. Nowadays it is muscle cars vs sedans in the mainstream socket. If you want some cruise speed and economy, go with AMD. If you want to burn some rubber and tune the engine, go with Intel (but prepar to spend more money).
> 
> Honestly, for who likes to overclock and tune, these Intel chips might be the last stand. They might soon replace this architecture with something similar to AMD, more efficient by clock, auto overclock and just with better voltage and such.


Also, can you stop with the double/triple/quad posts? There's an edit button for a reason.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WexleySnoops*
> 
> No you.
> Also, can you stop with the double/triple/quad posts? There's an edit button for a reason.


Ding ding ding.

Also, if your argument is based on you not being able to read-between-the-lines or decipher what the quotations in his post mean....then....enjoy your Ryzen build







.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Also im going to outline what we are going to see with coffee lake reviews:
> 
> Ryzen 7 1700 now has real competition from intel in the 8700k. You give up a slight amount of mutltasking potential for better gaming performance, a trade many (like myself) are willing to make.
> AMD still has no competition in the midrange space, 8600k is a bad product with ryzen 1600 existing at ~200 dollars.
> Ryzen 3 is dead with coffee lake 4c4t i3's, no one should be purchasing them.
> 
> Its a big move by intel, but they are leaving a hole in the midrange.....the most popular segment.
> 
> Like i said earlier in this thread i believe i5's are going to be 6c12t next go round, intel had to go 6c6t for i5's to differentiate the i7's, but i feel they will be 8c16t as early as next year.


The i3 coffee lake is still a good CPU for gaming with a GTX 1070.


----------



## Scotty99

Do you guys really not see what that guy was saying lol?

The question isn't "whats faster amd or intel" its referencing specifically the ability for parts to overclock past their factory boost clocks.

A 1800x is basically maxxed out of the box and it is true amd does "not overclock" in that scenario, thing is the x parts are not the ones people are buying. 1600/1700 both have lots of headroom to overclock, more than what intel is offering on their unlocked sku's.

Its really hard to have a conversation on this forum when the reading comprehension is at such low levels. The guy was right btw overclocking is coming to an end, we are almost there now with the 8700k boosting to 4.7 out of the box, GPU's have been this way for a few generations now.

Eh wingman, i said exactly that. Ryzen 3's are dead with the introduction of 4c4t i3's from intel. Even a max overclocked ryzen 3 1200 will not be able to compete with a factory clocked i3 8100.


----------



## Scotty99

Eh wingman, i said exactly that. Ryzen 3's are dead with the introduction of 4c4t i3's from intel. Even a max overclocked ryzen 3 1200 will not be able to compete with a factory clocked i3 8100.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The i3 coffee lake is still a good CPU for gaming with a GTX 1070.


Indeed. It makes a _really_ decent budget system even more obtainable. And with that raw IPC, it'd be hard not to choose the i3 over Ryzen at that point. i3+1060 is an even bigger bang for the buck so long as you can get the GPU (and now RAM) at a reasonable price







.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Do you guys really not see what that guy was saying lol?
> 
> The question isn't "whats faster amd or intel" its referencing specifically the ability for parts to overclock past their factory boost clocks.
> 
> A 1800x is basically maxxed out of the box and it is true amd does "not overclock" in that scenario, thing is the x parts are not the ones people are buying. 1600/1700 both have lots of headroom to overclock, more than what intel is offering on their unlocked sku's.
> 
> Its really hard to have a conversation on this forum when the reading comprehension is at such low levels. The guy was right btw overclocking is coming to an end, we are almost there now with the 8700k boosting to 4.7 out of the box, GPU's have been this way for a few generations now.


If you still don't understand what is intended by his quotations and accentuation of the words, then I'm sorry to say that part of the conversation truly has come to an end.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> i3+1060 is an even bigger bang for the buck so long as you can get the GPU (and now RAM) at a reasonable price.


I see what you are saying. I just need the ram and newer gpu.


----------



## Scotty99

i3 8350k at microcenter for ~130 would be an incredible chip for a budget build. Who knows when or if it hits that price, but that is what they are selling the 7350k for currently (as well as 30 bucks off a board).


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> I see what you are saying. I just need the ram and newer gpu.


RAM prices due to the high demand and the GPU prices due to mining/flipping are two of the major factors that have kept me from building an HTPC or even building a new system in general. It's a rather depressing time to build







.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Wow, I had no idea memory prices were so outrageous! I mean, I'd heard about it around the threads but assumed that was for DDR4 but I just checked out DDR3 prices on NE and they are crazy! One of my Vengeance dimms on my backup rig died the other night so I need to buy a new kit and can't believe how much they are now. I remember buying a 2 x 4GB G.Skill kit a few years ago and it was $29! Now that same exact kit of Ripjaws 1600MHz 2 x 4GB is $66! I was even hoping naively that I could up capacity to 2 x 8GB sticks but those are all well over $100! You're right, depressing...


----------



## Scotty99

On the plus side of that argument "good" ram has stayed the same since march. The difference between samsung and hynix used to be 70-80 dollars, now its like 20 bucks.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

I got two 4GB sticks of G.Skill Ripjaws X DDR3 1333 for $40 last year, the same kit I got in 2011.

Ram is ridiculous right now, I could easily fit an 8700k and 1080 Ti in my $1500 budget without sacrificing something if the prices weren't out of control.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Lol, its been like 5 years since I've had to buy RAM so I'm a bit out of the loop. Gotta get something though because I had to scavenge two sticks out of my main rig to keep my backup rig up and running. Thinking of just getting this Ripjaws kit:

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231428

Like I said, in 2012 that kit was $29! I really wish I hadn't given it away to my buddy now!


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Lol, its been like 5 years since I've had to buy RAM so I'm a bit out of the loop. Gotta get something though because I had to scavenge two sticks out of my main rig to keep my backup rig up and running. Thinking of just getting this Ripjaws kit:
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231428
> 
> Like I said, in 2012 that kit was $29! I really wish I hadn't given it away to my buddy now!


I have 4 of those sticks but in 1333 form.


----------



## pez

The RAM in my sig rig was bought in May of this year, but is now $156.99 vs the $126.99 I paid for it, then







. Most people are spending that much for a budget CPU now....half that for a budget mobo







.


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> A 1800x is basically maxxed out of the box and it is true amd does "not overclock" in that scenario, thing is the x parts are not the ones people are buying. 1600/1700 both have lots of headroom to overclock, more than what intel is offering on their unlocked sku's.


This is not entirely true. The 1800X can be overclocked to 4 Ghz and slightly beyond, even though there is a very hard wall towards 4 GHz (like needing 0.1 V for a measly 4.00 to 4.05 Ghz step).

When CPU overclock is combined with memory overclock then things get a bit more complicated, because of the whole system on a chip thing and data fabric dependency on memory frequency.

I am currently using 3.95 GHz + 3333-C14 (tight sub-timings). CPU temperature hits 70° C max under Prime95 load, using a good (enough) AIO cooler (240 mm, push/pull, thick radiator).

Since I do not use LLC my VCore is set to 1.43 V in P0 state to battle Vdroop. VCore drops to 1.337 V under Prime95 v28, 1.331 V under ITB AVX 10 GB). Using LLC2 to LLC3 would need less VCore to begin with, as long as the VCore after droop remains the same to keep the stress test stable (which means 30 loops of ITB AVX 12 GB for me).


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> This is not entirely true. The 1800X can be overclocked to 4 Ghz and slightly beyond, even though there is a very hard wall towards 4 GHz (like needing 0.1 V for a measly 4.00 to 4.05 Ghz step).
> .


And what are your boost frequencies and XFR ?








The OC is to match all the cores with the best one...great


----------



## Scotty99

Eh id leave an 1800x at stock if i owned one, you throw power consumption out the window for ~300mhz, as well as likely lose single core performance (boosts to 4.1 xfr at stock).

Now if you could overclock ryzen per core that would be a different story, but currently you cannot.


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> And what are your boost frequencies and XFR ?


Boost is 3.7 for all cores (base 3.6) and 4.0 for 2 cores, XFR is 4.1 for two cores. Both don't apply once the CPU is set to OC mode.
Quote:


> The OC is to match all the cores with the best one...great


There is no "best" core on Ryzen, XFR happens on all cores, depending on local temperature and core load/need.

So overclocking all cores towards 4 GHz from a normal boost of 3.7 GHz surely qualifies as overclock.

All that being said, it doesn't matter for the decision between a 1800X and 8700K. The lack of proper multi-core support in much of the desktop software I am using forces me to get the 8700K despite of only owning the 1800X for a few months. Coffee Lake currently seems to offer the best compromise between single- vs. multi-threaded performance. Z370 leaves me very unenthusiastic, though.

I am still very happy to have given my money (and thus support/approval) to AMD. Zen was and is very much needed.


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Eh id leave an 1800x at stock if i owned one, you throw power consumption out the window for ~300mhz,


Idle power consumption is the same and unused cores still enter deep sleep (C) states. So the main scenario of using more power is when you also make use of the higher performance.
Quote:


> as well as likely lose single core performance (boosts to 4.1 xfr at stock).


This is my main grief and reason for me to switch back and forth to experience the practical impact. Albeit the overclocking difference for single core performance loss is smaller (around 3.5%) than the gain for multi core performance (around 6.5%).

And when software uses many threads without making good use of them then XFR won't even help. Here is an example where using more threads still leads to the same total CPU load, while load is just spread over cores and thus makes XFR rather useless (no single core is maxed out).

*2 rendering threads:*


*16 rendering threads:*


This particular program allows to manually change the number of threads (down, because its default is to use threads = cores). Many other programs offer no such setting while still being badly optimized for multiple cores.


----------



## Scotty99

Ill agree with the giving money to AMD thing. If i didnt play mmo's id have no reason to consider intel, AMD just gives you so much more for your dollar.


----------



## Techhog

The temps posted before had multicore enhancement enabled.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Eh id leave an 1800x at stock if i owned one, you throw power consumption out the window for ~300mhz, as well as likely lose single core performance (boosts to 4.1 xfr at stock).
> 
> Now if you could overclock ryzen per core that would be a different story, but currently you cannot.


Weren't you losing your mind all day yesterday trying to debate someone after they pointed out this exact fact?


----------



## czin125

8700K = 181W ( + 28.6% increase in power for +50% die space +42% in MT )
7700K = 141W

6 core 7700K = 211.5W ( 14nm+ uses more voltage for the equivalent clock speeds )
6 core 8700K = 181W

https://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2017/09/8700K-8600K-Power-Consumption.png


----------



## Ph42oN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Eh wingman, i said exactly that. Ryzen 3's are dead with the introduction of 4c4t i3's from intel. Even a max overclocked ryzen 3 1200 will not be able to compete with a factory clocked i3 8100.


Even if that is case, Ryzen 3 won't became bad choice, amd will for sure drop price if its too bad performance compared to coffee lake i3.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> 8700K = 181W ( + 28.6% increase in power for +50% die space +42% in MT )
> 7700K = 141W
> 
> 6 core 7700K = 211.5W ( 14nm+ uses more voltage for the equivalent clock speeds )
> 6 core 8700K = 181W
> 
> https://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2017/09/8700K-8600K-Power-Consumption.png


I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that those are full system numbers.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ph42oN*
> 
> Even if that is case, Ryzen 3 won't became bad choice, amd will for sure drop price if its too bad performance compared to coffee lake i3.


Actually yes by definition 4c4t i3's make ryzen 3 a bad choice lol. Ryzen 3 needs to dip down to pentium level prices to consider them, or at least somewhere in the middle (80 bucks for 1200). You will see this in benchmarks, the g4560 was already beating ryzen 3 in a lot of things.


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> 8700K = 181W ( + 28.6% increase in power for +50% die space +42% in MT )
> 7700K = 141W
> 
> 6 core 7700K = 211.5W ( 14nm+ uses more voltage for the equivalent clock speeds )
> 6 core 8700K = 181W
> 
> https://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2017/09/8700K-8600K-Power-Consumption.png


Crazy Chinese are overclocking. Which is reason why I typically look only at coolaler forums, because looking at some reviews spoils the fun from overclocking. In fact 3/5 CPUs could be worse than they obtained.

Set both CPUs at the same voltage and frequency, and then compare power consumption.

10 W is typically IO in 14 nm, in dual channel memory controller is probably 7 W, in 4 channel memory controller (and related stuff) is 10 W.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> Crazy Chinese are overclocking. Which is reason why I typically look only at coolaler forums, because looking at some reviews spoils the fun from overclocking. In fact 3/5 CPUs could be worse than they obtained.
> 
> Set both CPUs at the same voltage and frequency, and then compare power consumption.
> 
> 10 W is typically IO, in dual channel 7 W is probably memory controller, in 4 channel memory controller (and related stuff) is 10 W.


It's not overclocking. Those numbers are for the full system with multicore enhancement enabled. You'd need to have an absolute dud of a CPU to fail with ME enabled.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Eh id leave an 1800x at stock if i owned one, you throw power consumption out the window for ~300mhz, as well as likely lose single core performance (boosts to 4.1 xfr at stock).
> 
> Now if you could overclock ryzen per core that would be a different story, but currently you cannot.


I don't get the point of per core overclocking when programs like games use all cores.


----------



## Timur Born

Many programs do not use all cores. And many of those that do use multiple cores don't necessarily do so effectively.


----------



## Scotty99

Its really just MMO's that need 1-2 fast cores, games have been scaling really well with cores lately and that is going to be the trend going forward, something about how MMO's are coded tho requires most of the work done on just a couple.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Its really just MMO's that need 1-2 fast cores, games have been scaling really well with cores lately and that is going to be the trend going forward, something about how MMO's are coded tho requires most of the work done on just a couple.


The problem is software can't pick the fastest core or cores.


----------



## grss1982

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> RAM prices due to the high demand and the GPU prices due to mining/flipping are two of the major factors that have kept me from building an HTPC or even building a new system in general. It's a rather depressing time to build
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Rep for you, sir.

I totally agree. This has got to be the worse time to build a new rig with the way GPU & RAM prices are.
















It's had me considering just buying used hardware and even pre-built PCs.


----------



## MaKeN

I understand that gpu prices are big and know why, question what really influences on the ram prices now?


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *grss1982*
> 
> Rep for you, sir.
> 
> I totally agree. This has got to be the worse time to build a new rig with the way GPU & RAM prices are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's had me considering just buying used hardware and even pre-built PCs.


I'm searching ebay for ddr4 memory. Looking for deals.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I understand that gpu prices are big and know why, question what really influences on the ram prices now?


Well because of smart phones and nand storage. Almost all connected devices have flash memory.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I understand that gpu prices are big and know why, question what really influences on the ram prices now?


It's likely to be some combination of these factors:

Strong DRAM demand from the mobile market in the second half of 2016.
Strong DRAM demand from all the new CPU architectures this year (Kaby Lake in Q1, Ryzen in Q1 - Q2, Skylake X and Skylake Xeon in Q2, Threadripper and Epyc in Q3, Skylake X again in Q4, Coffee Lake in Q4.). By comparison, the only thing in 2016 was Broadwell-E.
DRAM manufacturers shifting some of their manufacturing capacity over to flash due to the oversupply of DRAM back in early 2016.
Rumors of DRAM price fixing by the current manufacturers. (The Micron fab fire can be considered part of this if you listen to the conspiracy theorists.)
DRAM manufacturers realize that the demand for DRAM is inelastic and price insensitive. Since people are buying DRAM anyway at these increased prices, the DRAM manufacturers have no incentive to increase supply to drive them back down.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I understand that gpu prices are big and know why, question what really influences on the ram prices now?


DDR4 Ram prices are up because of producing DDR4 DRAM for mobile devices, followed by servers, and then finally desktops creating a shortage.


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I understand that gpu prices are big and know why, question what really influences on the ram prices now?


Supply, they are unable/unwilling to scale with demand, happens every few years once a certain RAM starts to get popular in usage. Everything uses DDR4 right now pretty much and companies are slow to ramp up production, because why when they can milk with higher prices instead on something that costs pennies to make. Lack of competition.


----------



## MaKeN

Thx for replies, understood a bit the logic.

And that cant be stopped? In other words whats need to happen for the prices to stop raising ?
This way we can expect ram prices to be on pair with gpus?


----------



## DStealth

While awaiting some OC results with 8700k pushed the memory with 7800x just for a comparision


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Thx for replies, understood a bit the logic.
> 
> And that cant be stopped? In other words whats need to happen for the prices to stop raising ?
> This way we can expect ram prices to be on pair with gpus?


I would look at hard drives prices after the 2009 Thailand floods. What set off that chain of events is very similar to what's happening to DRAM right now.

Hard drive prices (prior to 2009) were very cheap - and getting exponentially cheaper. DRAM prices (early 2016) were also dirt cheap.
The Thailand floods knock out the hard drive supply chain causing a shortage. DRAM makers voluntarily cut their supply just as the mobile market ramps up - thereby causing a shortage.
Hard drive prices skyrocket. DRAM prices skyrocket.
People keep buying hard drives at inflated prices because they need them. People keep buying DRAM at inflated prices because they need them.
Seeing that hard drives will sell at inflated prices, hard drive makers are in no hurry to fix their supply chain and increase supply. They produce "just enough" to satisfy all the inelastic demand at the inflated prices, but not more.
Hard drive prices ($/GB) never dropped below their 2009 pre-flood mark until around 2014? And even now, the $/GB trend has basically stopped. Drives aren't getting any bigger. Prices aren't coming down.
Assuming DRAM follows a similar path as hard drives, I don't see them coming down any time soon. Unless of course everybody stops buying DRAM completely - and that's not going to happen.


----------



## artemis2307

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I would look at hard drives prices after the 2009 Thailand floods. What set off that chain of events is very similar to what's happening to DRAM right now.
> 
> Assuming DRAM follows a similar path as hard drives, I don't see them coming down any time soon. Unless of course everybody stops buying DRAM completely - and that's not going to happen.


Man I miss those days, 8GB DDR3 stick for 18$


----------



## kd5151

DDR3 went up a little a couple years ago but not like this.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> While awaiting some OC results with 8700k pushed the memory with 7800x just for a comparision


This is not delidded? I ran mine a 5ghz 1.325V amd boom, high 80s in Cinebench.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> While awaiting some OC results with 8700k pushed the memory with 7800x just for a comparision


Have you redownloaded Cinebench recently? They changed how scoring works sometime this year.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Have you redownloaded Cinebench recently? They changed how scoring works sometime this year.


They did..? Info and/or sources? I am very curious! Thank you!


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Have you redownloaded Cinebench recently? They changed how scoring works sometime this year.


I think you may be referring to CPUz and not Cinebench?


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> They did..? Info and/or sources? I am very curious! Thank you!


I saw it mentioned on a forum somewhere. I believe it because stock 7700K scores from January beat stock 7740K scores in some reviews.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> I think you may be referring to CPUz and not Cinebench?


Nope.


----------



## TheWizardMan

Wow, Battlefront 2 lists its minimum CPU requirement as a 6600K, what is this world coming to?


----------



## oxidized

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheWizardMan*
> 
> Wow, Battlefront 2 lists its minimum CPU requirement as a 6600K, what is this world coming to?


No wonder, BF1 is very heavy on CPUs, that will probably be even heavier...


----------



## kd5151

Quad cores are dead.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheWizardMan*
> 
> Wow, Battlefront 2 lists its minimum CPU requirement as a 6600K, what is this world coming to?


Should be same as all BF games. It scales well with CPU cores so its not bad. Also i3 will have 4 Core so its not that bad. 6600K means any SB i5 will do fine.


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> I saw it mentioned on a forum somewhere. I believe it because stock 7700K scores from January beat stock 7740K scores in some reviews.
> Nope.


Sources on this? how did cinebench scores change?


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> Sources on this? how did cinebench scores change?


Hm... Actually, I think I was mistaken.


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheWizardMan*
> 
> Wow, Battlefront 2 lists its minimum CPU requirement as a 6600K, what is this world coming to?


It's about damn time isn't it, I wish every game would move to 4c a minimum requirement.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> It's about damn time isn't it, I wish every game would move to 4c a minimum requirement.


6600K, not 6700K


----------



## oxidized

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> 6600K, not 6700K


Yeah that's right, 6600K is a 4C/4T


----------



## bigjdubb

I corrected my post. My original intent was to state that I feel like the minimum should be 4c/8t on pc games. I edited the sentence but missed the 8t.

I would be 1,000 percent on board with making the minimum 8 threads though.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> I corrected my post. My original intent was to state that I feel like the minimum should be 4c/8t on pc games. I edited the sentence but missed the 8t.
> 
> I would be 1,000 percent on board with making the minimum 8 threads though.


Make minimum 4 Core and we already in the right step. Even if 6600K is min it will still get a lot of fps in BF1 and SW:BF2.


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> Sources on this? how did cinebench scores change?


Cinbench got updated to 15.038 which scores slightly higher than the 15.0 version.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> Cinbench got updated to 15.038 which scores slightly higher than the 15.0 version.


Slightly ...in 1% margin ...while installed it on 5820 earlier this year the score jumped less than 20 point in 1400+ range....







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> This is not delidded? I ran mine a 5ghz 1.325V amd boom, high 80s in Cinebench.


Not delidded ...still, but have some future plans But yes, the temperatures are in this range low 70's with 1.3v set in BIOS with LLC 1


----------



## caenlen

Would you guys say with certainty that Ice Lake from Intel will be out next summer/Fall? I really want to wait for that 8 core 16 thread Intel $360 mark before I upgrade my 2500k.


----------



## Yvese

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> Would you guys say with certainty that Ice Lake from Intel will be out next summer/Fall? I really want to wait for that 8 core 16 thread Intel $360 mark before I upgrade my 2500k.


If you want to upgrade then just get the 8700k, otherwise you'll just keep waiting.

New hardware is always around the corner. Pick a platform and run with it until DDR5 releases. No point waiting unless you need the extra 2 cores in which case AMD is the way to go.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> Would you guys say with certainty that Ice Lake from Intel will be out next summer/Fall? I really want to wait for that 8 core 16 thread Intel $360 mark before I upgrade my 2500k.


If I were you I would wait for Ice lake 8 core 16 thread. I don't see anything happening big after Ice lake.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yvese*
> 
> New hardware is always around the corner. Pick a platform and run with it until DDR5 releases. No point waiting unless you need the extra 2 cores in which case AMD is the way to go.


+1


----------



## caenlen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> If I were you I would wait for Ice lake 8 core 16 thread. I don't see anything happening big after Ice lake.


this is my thinking... i only upgrade cpu every 5-6 years... so might as well wait one more year for that 8 core variant (which probably will hit 4.7-4.9ghz on all 8 cores) obliterating anything AMD can offer, lets face it AMD just cant OC anymore, vega or ryzen. and last gen either their OC was rather pitiful. gtx 1180 ti and Ice Lake both OC'd I think this time next year will be my long term build until 2022 or so. get a solid 4 years out of it, maybe double that if a wife and kids enter the picture, but i doubt it since i cant get dates for crap LOL


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> Would you guys say with certainty that Ice Lake from Intel will be out next summer/Fall? I really want to wait for that 8 core 16 thread Intel $360 mark before I upgrade my 2500k.


Yes and no. I think next year will have an 8-core Coffee Lake, rather than Ice Lake.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> Would you guys say with certainty that Ice Lake from Intel will be out next summer/Fall? I really want to wait for that 8 core 16 thread Intel $360 mark before I upgrade my 2500k.


Just get i7-8700K now. It will be a huge upgrade over 2500K.

I'll do that. And then replace the whole thing in ~2020 with DDR5 (not early modules), PCIe 4.0-5.0 and 7nm or lower CPU.

I don't see much happening the next few gens. 2 more cores on Intel mainstream mayb, but I personally don't really need more than 6C/12T at high clocks.

Now, with CFL, is a good time to upgrade..


----------



## fisher6

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Just get i7-8700K now. It will be a huge upgrade over 2500K.
> 
> I'll do that. And then replace the whole thing in ~2020 with DDR5 (not early modules), PCIe 4.0-5.0 and 7nm or lower CPU.
> 
> I don't see much happening the next few gens. 2 more cores on Intel mainstream mayb, but I personally don't really need more than 6C/12T at high clocks.
> 
> Now, with CFL, is a good time to upgrade..


Would you recommend the same for a 4790k oc'ed to 4.7? Only gaming is concerned, ulttrawide with 1080ti.


----------



## caenlen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Just get i7-8700K now. It will be a huge upgrade over 2500K.
> 
> I'll do that. And then replace the whole thing in ~2020 with DDR5 (not early modules), PCIe 4.0-5.0 and 7nm or lower CPU.
> 
> I don't see much happening the next few gens. 2 more cores on Intel mainstream mayb, but I personally don't really need more than 6C/12T at high clocks.
> 
> Now, with CFL, is a good time to upgrade..


yep I agree. going to wait for reviews first but it looks like I will be rolling 8700k. ryzen 1700X is on sale for $290 free ship no tax at the moment, super tempted, $70 cheaper than 8700k and its the X version (not that it really matters) lol... I wonder if my Nocuta NH-D15 with 3x 140mm fans in push pull could run it at 4ghz all 8 cores under 70 celsius.


----------



## oxidized

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Just get i7-8700K now. It will be a huge upgrade over 2500K.
> 
> I'll do that. And then replace the whole thing in ~2020 with DDR5 (not early modules), PCIe 4.0-5.0 and 7nm or lower CPU.
> 
> I don't see much happening the next few gens. 2 more cores on Intel mainstream mayb, but I personally don't really need more than 6C/12T at high clocks.
> 
> Now, with CFL, is a good time to upgrade..


Hopefully 8700k's temps won't be as high as showed in those chinese tests, otherwise it's pretty bad.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fisher6*
> 
> Would you recommend the same for a 4790k oc'ed to 4.7? Only gaming is concerned, ulttrawide with 1080ti.


Probably not if you're GPU bound







Depends on game.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> Hopefully 8700k's temps won't be as high as showed in those chinese tests, otherwise it's pretty bad.


Yeah, I'm looking forward to proper reviews.

Temps can't be that bad if several people claim 4.8 GHz is easy on cheaper air cooling and 5 GHz for 240+ AIOs or high end air. We'll see.

I'll probably delid anyway tho - Aiming for 5.2+


----------



## oxidized

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Temps can't be that bad if several people claim 4.8 GHz is easy on cheaper air cooling and 5 GHz for 240+ AIOs or high end air. We'll see.
> 
> I'll probably delid anyway tho - Aiming for 5.2+


The thing that doesn't look quite right in those tests is 8600K being 21, TWENTYONE degrees cooler


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> The thing that doesn't look quite right in those tests is 8600K being 21, TWENTYONE degrees cooler


HT / SMT will raise temps this is nothing new - But I'm looking foward to more testing

I get a decent drop in load temp on my Ivy when I disable HT


----------



## oxidized

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> HT / SMT will raise temps this is nothing new - But I'm looking foward to more testing
> 
> I get a decent drop in load temp on my Ivy when I disable HT


Yeah i know that, but 21 degrees seems a bit too much


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> Yeah i know that, but 21 degrees seems a bit too much


Agreed, a little too much


----------



## TMatzelle60

https://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Fatal1ty%20Z370%20Gaming-ITXac/index.us.asp

Wow this board looks sweet!


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Probably not if you're GPU bound
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Depends on game.
> Yeah, I'm looking forward to proper reviews.
> 
> Temps can't be that bad if several people claim 4.8 GHz is easy on cheaper air cooling and 5 GHz for 240+ AIOs or high end air. We'll see.
> 
> I'll probably delid anyway tho - Aiming for 5.2+


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> The thing that doesn't look quite right in those tests is 8600K being 21, TWENTYONE degrees cooler


Agreed. When I tracked down that original article on PConline.cn, it left me with the impression that they're a publication that does things pretty half-cocked. After a rough translate (ty Google), there's no mention of the test rig setup, no mention of what cooling solution they used, and no context what so ever given to that temp slide. For all we know they took numbers from previous tests, with different hardware, and threw them together.

I'm not too inclined to pay attention to any of those slides simply for that. We got a little over a week to go, and more thorough, reputable sites will be releasing a lot more info in the next week.


----------



## Techhog

So those the temps might actually be under Cinebench load

So, Cinebench with stock voltage and 4.7GHz multicore enhancement


----------



## oxidized

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> Agreed. When I tracked down that original article on PConline.cn, it left me with the impression that they're a publication that does things pretty half-cocked. After a rough translate (ty Google), there's no mention of the test rig setup, no mention of what cooling solution they used, and no context what so ever given to that temp slide. For all we know they took numbers from previous tests, with different hardware, and threw them together.
> 
> I'm not too inclined to pay attention to any of those slides simply for that. We got a little over a week to go, and more thorough, reputable sites will be releasing a lot more info in the next week.


Hopefully...Even if i'm really not that eager to build a new pc right now, feels like my 4.5GHz 2600K will still handle another year, at that point i'll evaluate if either 16 threads coffee lake/ice lake, or ryzen refresh


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> So those the temps might actually be under Cinebench load
> 
> So, Cinebench with stock voltage and 4.7GHz multicore enhancement


It didn't seem likely, from what I remember, the power consumption slide directly above the temp slide had been under full load while running the game benches. Rise of the Tomb Raider, Ashes of the Singularity, The Witcher 3, The Division, and Hitman were the 5 games they used. The implication is that would be the temps are the highest experienced while running the same. But I won't hold my breath for anything from that article other than official specs that we already know from numerous other sources...

http://diy.pconline.com.cn/1001/10017885.html

If you go to the bottom of the article, very roughly translated via Google:

"....Simple summary: Anyway, this 8th generation update is very surprising, but we have to hide the results temporarily, and on October 5 we can once again display all the test results openly..."

So it seems it's not worth bothering with that site at all seeing as how they apparently only had a temporary NDA lift to post benchmark results.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> Yeah i know that, but 21 degrees seems a bit too much


Cache size is different tho...some millions of transistors cut....
Edit: https://ark.intel.com/compare/126684,126685


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> HT / SMT will raise temps this is nothing new - But I'm looking foward to more testing
> 
> I get a decent drop in load temp on my Ivy when I disable HT


Ivy-E quad cores HT eats 10-12W. Considering normal power consumption, not really sure if it's worthy. Decent drop in temp is weird, that would suggest the CPU disables some communication lines. 5C degree is expected drop when someone disables HT.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> Ivy-E quad cores HT eats 10-12W. Considering normal power consumption, not really sure if it's worthy. Decent drop in temp is weird, that would suggest the CPU disables some communication lines. 5C degree is expected drop when someone disables HT.


On normal operation, maybe, but I'm talking burn in. 5C is about right on my custom water tho. On air it would probably be 10C or more, depending on OC.

I have seen i7 Quads increase 10-15C HT On vs Off on normal air cooling when OC'ed.

That said. I would never disable HT, so it does not really matter. A few years back a some games performed worse with HT enabled. This is not the case today.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> https://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Fatal1ty%20Z370%20Gaming-ITXac/index.us.asp
> 
> Wow this board looks sweet!


Personally, ASRock makes some decent boards, but I can see a lot of people passing on this with the M.2 slot being mounted on the backside of the board.


----------



## oxidized

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Cache size is different tho...some millions of transistors cut....
> Edit: https://ark.intel.com/compare/126684,126685


Yeah surely, but i don't think that increased cache quantity can affect temperatures, we're still talking about an increase of 35-40% in temps, which is more than huge.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> https://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Fatal1ty%20Z370%20Gaming-ITXac/index.us.asp
> 
> Wow this board looks sweet!


I like that it is not read but as far as power delivery goes it does not seem much of an upgrade. My Z77 has same power delivery.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> Personally, ASRock makes some decent boards, but I can see a lot of people passing on this with the M.2 slot being mounted on the backside of the board.


Not many boards especially itx have front M.2. Only Asus


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> Personally, ASRock makes some decent boards, but I can see a lot of people passing on this with the M.2 slot being mounted on the backside of the board.


Isn't that the norm for mITX?


----------



## drBlahMan

I wish I had waited for this but in my line of work, not having a pc for a day cost me ca$h I can't afford to waste. I can get an in-store credit refund (but I would need to lie







) & enjoy having my 1st 6-core workstation/gaming rig. I know I can easily run with this Z270 platform for the next 3 years since I still have an upgrade path from my 7350k. It's great with everything I do from autocad to gaming with no problem. I stream while working & when it's time to play, I simply just focus on gaming (no streaming or recording gameplay while playing).

I was going back & forward about going with Ryzen but after seeing how Intel is responding to AMD, I will never doubt Intel. Intel, I'm very sorry for even considering to switch sides. Go Intel









I mean, WOW! $219.99 to $249.99 for a 6-core at MicroCenter with this type of power!? I'll just look forward to having something even better than this when I upgrade 2 to 3yrs from now


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> Yeah surely, but i don't think that increased cache quantity can affect temperatures, we're still talking about an increase of 35-40% in temps, which is more than huge.


Quite wrong approach measuring temperatures with percentages. You have 20* delta...could be due to the fact the cooler is close to it's limit with 8700...or ambien temperatures...or inadequate SW reading from sensor...different VID CPU(thermal/package/ losses), thermal paste apply(both sides of IHS)...so many factors are involved not only HT, Cache and [email protected] and boost...


----------



## oxidized

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Quite wrong approach measuring temperatures with percentages. You have 20* delta...could be due to the fact the cooler is close to it's limit with 8700...or ambien temperatures...or inadequate SW reading from sensor...different VID CPU(thermal/package/ losses), thermal paste apply(both sides of IHS)...so many factors are involved not only HT, Cache and [email protected] and boost...


Yeah, that's why IF confirmed, those are pretty bad temps


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> Yeah, that's why IF confirmed, those are pretty bad temps


For anyone planning to maximize the OC potential of this CPU, a delid is necessary, just like since Ivy Bridge 3770K. The only show stopper is if the die size has shrunk enough that the contact surface is so small that even a liquid metal TIM cannot wisk the heat away fast enough to cool it down. That would suck.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> https://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Fatal1ty%20Z370%20Gaming-ITXac/index.us.asp
> 
> Wow this board looks sweet!


All ASRock z370 have been posted.


----------



## caenlen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> For anyone planning to maximize the OC potential of this CPU, a delid is necessary, just like since Ivy Bridge 3770K. The only show stopper is if the die size has shrunk enough that the contact surface is so small that even a liquid metal TIM cannot wisk the heat away fast enough to cool it down. That would suck.


What does a delid mean? You take off the top part fully? My laptop has a 7820HK CPU, and it is delidded )it is literally the tiny little rectangle silicon bare naked, no square top on it.

So when people say delid, do they mean take off the square top and replace the paste then put the square top back on, or leave it off like its off in my laptop?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Replace the tim, and remove some of the silicon that binds the IHS (Integrated heatspreader) to the PCB.

On older CPUs you could mount your EK block directly on the die/silicon itself.


----------



## caenlen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Replace the tim, and remove some of the silicon that binds the IHS (Integrated heatspreader) to the PCB.
> 
> On older CPUs you could mount your EK block directly on the die/silicon itself.


ill have to youtube this LOL

and teh ASRock MoBo looks gorgeous... wow I swear the quality just runs circles around AM4 mobos (looking at pictures only)


----------



## doom26464

I just want an 8 core cpu that will allow me to game+stream whill still having the single core performance of my [email protected]


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *doom26464*
> 
> I just want an 8 core cpu that will allow me to game+stream whill still having the single core performance of my [email protected]


7820K is your CPU.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> 7820K is your CPU.


X but yeah. Unless he can wait for Z390 next year, for better pricing.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> X but yeah. Unless he can wait for Z390 next year, for better pricing.


I have a feeling 8 core next year will slot higher than current 8700K.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Not many boards especially itx have front M.2. Only Asus


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Isn't that the norm for mITX?


Nope, there really isn't a norm for mITX.

ASRock Z370M-ITX AC
https://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z370M-ITXac/index.us.asp

ASUS Strix Z270
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/mpM323/asus-rog-strix-z270i-gaming-mini-itx-lga1151-motherboard-strix-z270i-gaming

MSI B250 Pro
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/4p4NnQ/msi-b250i-pro-mini-itx-lga1151-motherboard-b250i-pro

ASUS Strix B250
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/rdhj4D/asus-strix-b250i-gaming-mini-itx-lga1151-motherboard-strix-b250i-gaming

MSI H270 Pro AC
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/7wZ2FT/msi-h270i-gaming-pro-ac-mini-itx-lga1151-motherboard-h270i-gaming-pro-ac

MSI H110 Pro AC
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/wTnG3C/msi-motherboard-h110iproac

Gigabyte Z270M - wifi
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/2hdFf7/gigabyte-ga-z270n-wifi-mini-itx-lga1151-motherboard-ga-z270n-wifi

MSI B250I Gaming Pro
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/fdYWGX/msi-b250i-gaming-pro-ac-mini-itx-lga1151-motherboard-b250i-gaming-pro-ac

Probably quite a few other models out there as well. It's certainly not a standardized thing by chipset or manufacturer, and again, up to personal preference.


----------



## Mampus

Asrock put the Z370 lineup in their website makes me itch to go to 8700K...


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *doom26464*
> 
> I just want an 8 core cpu that will allow me to game+stream whill still having the single core performance of my [email protected]


5960x,7820x or wait for Ice Lake


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *doom26464*
> 
> I just want an 8 core cpu that will allow me to game+stream whill still having the single core performance of my [email protected]


Ryzen 7 under liquid nitrogen:


It's an 8-core.
It can game.
It can stream.
At ~5 GHz, it'll have similar (if not better) single core performance as the 4790K @ 4.7 GHz.
But you didn't say it had to be low maintenance.


----------



## kd5151

ASRock boards can do 4333mhz vs Gigabyte 4133mhz

Gskill fastest is 4400mhz.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> ASRock boards can do 4333mhz vs Gigabyte 4133mhz
> 
> Gskill fastest is 4400mhz.


So I wonder if thereos any price range for them? also would the 140< USD one able to handle 6cores just fine? because they seem pretty much like midrange z270


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> ASRock boards can do 4333mhz vs Gigabyte 4133mhz
> 
> Gskill fastest is 4400mhz.


ASTock lies. My MB says it can do 2800 but cant even do 2400.


----------



## oxidized

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Ryzen 7 under liquid nitrogen:
> 
> 
> It's an 8-core.
> It can game.
> It can stream.
> At ~5 GHz, it'll have similar (if not better) single core performance as the 4790K @ 4.7 GHz.
> But you didn't say it had to be low maintenance.


I think that even the refresh won't reach those speeds, but hopefully i'm wrong


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> I think that even the refresh won't reach those speeds, but hopefully i'm wrong


The current Ryzens can do 5.0+ GHz (benchable at ~5.5-ish). But the voltage needed to break the 4 GHz barrier is so high that you might as well be using LN2.


----------



## oxidized

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> The current Ryzens can do 5.0+ GHz (benchable at ~5.5-ish). But the voltage needed to break the 4 GHz barrier is so high that you might as well be using LN2.


Yeah that was implicit


----------



## kd5151

https://ark.intel.com/products/126684/Intel-Core-i7-8700K-Processor-12M-Cache-up-to-4_70-GHz

https://ark.intel.com/products/126685/Intel-Core-i5-8600K-Processor-9M-Cache-up-to-4_30-GHz

https://ark.intel.com/products/126689/Intel-Core-i3-8350K-Processor-8M-Cache-4_00-GHz


----------



## ogider

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> ASRock boards can do 4333mhz vs Gigabyte 4133mhz
> 
> Gskill fastest is 4400mhz.


Can You tell which one? from z270 family.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ogider*
> 
> Can You tell which one? from z270 family.


I was comparing the ASRock Z370 Taichi to the Gigabyte Z370 AORUS Gaming 7.







no data on QVL list yet. 3600mhz is the most affordable any way.


----------



## czin125

Any reviews of the igpu with 4000C17? The new igpu is 50mhz higher!


----------



## ogider

kd5151
Wonder why no OC z270, z370 formula.

z170 OC Formula was quite descent.Also x299 OC Formula can hit 4600MHz on DDR4.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> If I were you I would wait for Ice lake 8 core 16 thread. I don't see anything happening big after Ice lake.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this is my thinking... i only upgrade cpu every 5-6 years... so might as well wait one more year for that 8 core variant (which probably will hit 4.7-4.9ghz on all 8 cores) obliterating anything AMD can offer, lets face it AMD just cant OC anymore, vega or ryzen. and last gen either their OC was rather pitiful. gtx 1180 ti and Ice Lake both OC'd I think this time next year will be my long term build until 2022 or so. get a solid 4 years out of it, maybe double that if a wife and kids enter the picture, but i doubt it since i cant get dates for crap LOL
Click to expand...

Sounds like a good plan. I'm going for the Ice lake 8 core also.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> Would you guys say with certainty that Ice Lake from Intel will be out next summer/Fall? I really want to wait for that 8 core 16 thread Intel $360 mark before I upgrade my 2500k.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes and no. I think next year will have an 8-core Coffee Lake, rather than Ice Lake.
Click to expand...

I have never seen Intel stay with the same name on a new generation.


----------



## doom26464

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> 5960x,7820x or wait for Ice Lake


More then likely wait for ice lake as x299 is not very appealing.

Or wait and see what z390 does. If they bring a decent 8 core on z390 then take my $$


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I have never seen Intel stay with the same name on a new generation.


You've also never seen them release a second Z chipset in the same series.

I'm half expecting Intel to make a mainstream Core i9 series for the 8-core honestly.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ogider*
> 
> kd5151
> Wonder why no OC z270, z370 formula.
> 
> z170 OC Formula was quite descent.Also x299 OC Formula can hit 4600MHz on DDR4.


z270 over z170 wouldnt bring much to their lineup?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I have never seen Intel stay with the same name on a new generation.
> 
> 
> 
> You've also never seen them release a second Z chipset in the same series.
> 
> I'm half expecting Intel to make a mainstream Core i9 series for the 8-core honestly.
Click to expand...

Z 370 and Z 390 is different numbers, I don't see your point about Intel using the same name on the eight core next year.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Z 370 and Z 390 is different numbers, I don't see your point about Intel using the same name on the eight core next year.


I said nothing about using the same name. You said that.


----------



## lilchronic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> You've also never seen them release a second Z chipset in the same series.
> 
> I'm half expecting Intel to make a mainstream Core i9 series for the 8-core honestly.


The 8 core is a i7, I9's are 10+cores.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lilchronic*
> 
> The 8 core is a i7, I9's are 10+cores.


It's just a brand. They can change anything about it at any time.


----------



## Scotty99

As i figured my z170 ram is on QVL for z370 boards.

I do feel for people building from scratch, cas 16 3200 starts at 150 dollars today.....ouch. On plus side for those people they should just spend another 30 and get this:
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/s898TW/gskill-tridentz-series-16gb-2-x-8gb-ddr4-3200-memory-f4-3200c14d-16gtzsk

My guess is ram is going to continue to rise in the month after coffee releases, b die is probably gonna go over 200 for a while.


----------



## czin125

The Apex seems to appear with every new chipset ( Z270 -> Z370 )


----------



## Scotty99

Funny enough RGB lighting is a big factor in board choice for me. Asrock really let me down here, gigabyte has addressable rgb headers and i assume asus does as well. This means the cool looking fans like corsair HD series _should_ be able to sync up with aura software.


----------



## Malinkadink

I'm just slightly ticked off since i got a 7700k around march when i was seeing if Ryzen or the 7700k was better for me, and as it turns out i need better single thread for my applications so the i7 it was. Now the 8700k bringing the same single threaded performance is here with two extra cores and four extra threads matching the 8 core ryzens in multithreading. Damn it.


----------



## TheWizardMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Funny enough RGB lighting is a big factor in board choice for me. Asrock really let me down here, gigabyte has addressable rgb headers and i assume asus does as well. This means the cool looking fans like corsair HD series _should_ be able to sync up with aura software.


Actually, most fans don't sync with mobo RGB headers.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheWizardMan*
> 
> Actually, most fans don't sync with mobo RGB headers.


Yes with current headers, z370 (and maybe some x299) have addressable headers which should in theory make a lot of the good looking fans compatible with asus aura. Adapters may be necessary tho.

http://www.gigabyte.us/Motherboard/Z370-AORUS-Ultra-Gaming-rev-10#kf

Scroll down to the "RGB fusion with digital LED" section. Funny enough, addressable headers have less pins than traditional RGB headers, heh.


----------



## tw2

If they confirmed the 8 cores would work on z370 eventually I would get the 8700k, otherwise at least ryzen offers an upgrade path despite being no inc in single threaded performance over devils canyon. Maybe 12nm ryzen in February will clock a bit higher.

I hate to admit I quite like the new rbg stuff. It's nice to be able to select a colour for your entire system and leave it... strobing not so much. Trident rbg here I come.


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> If they confirmed the 8 cores would work on z370 eventually I would get the 8700k, otherwise at least ryzen offers an upgrade path despite being no inc in single threaded performance over devils canyon. Maybe 12nm ryzen in February will clock a bit higher.
> 
> I hate to admit I quite like the new rbg stuff. It's nice to be able to select a colour for your entire system and leave it... strobing not so much. Trident rbg here I come.


I have trident rgb ram in my z270 maximus so that means i can sync the lights together with aura sync i think its called but what did i do instead? turned all the rgbs off. Only thing giving off significant light in my case is a zotac 1080 and the only reason its leds are still on is because i need to download their own firestorm oc utility to turn them off and im too lazy to do that especially when msi afterburner already gives me all the ocing options i need









TLDR: RGBs are meh.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> If they confirmed the 8 cores would work on z370 eventually I would get the 8700k, otherwise at least ryzen offers an upgrade path despite being no inc in single threaded performance over devils canyon. Maybe 12nm ryzen in February will clock a bit higher.
> 
> I hate to admit I quite like the new rbg stuff. It's nice to be able to select a colour for your entire system and leave it... strobing not so much. Trident rbg here I come.


Ya my goal is to sync everything with motherboard software, problem is so far no addressable AIO pumps (kraken x62, thermaltake floe etc) are yet confirmed to work with asus aura/gigabyte fusion etc. There is no reason these shouldnt be able to work with the addition of these new headers, just needs to be implemented in their software packages.

So far the only way to sync everything is single color RGB, example would be cooler master rgb fans, inwin 101c case, deepcool 240ex rgb, gskilll ram. You could sync all of that including motherboard and GPU lighting (asus strix) with asus aura.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malinkadink*
> 
> I have trident rgb ram in my z270 maximus so that means i can sync the lights together with aura sync i think its called but what did i do instead? turned all the rgbs off. Only thing giving off significant light in my case is a zotac 1080 and the only reason its leds are still on is because i need to download their own firestorm oc utility to turn them off and im too lazy to do that especially when msi afterburner already gives me all the ocing options i need
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TLDR: RGBs are meh.


Then why did you get the RGB version!? You people complain about RGB stuff, and then you just go ahead and buy it, even when you don't have to! It makes no sense!


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fisher6*
> 
> Would you recommend the same for a 4790k oc'ed to 4.7? Only gaming is concerned, ulttrawide with 1080ti.


I think a 4790K at 4.7 GHz is still plenty of CPU for gaming for years to come. That's still a lot of processor and I really doubt more cores will be a necessity for just gaming for the next few years. Games are now utilizing more cores for sure these days, but its not like they are falling on their face on fast 4C / 8T CPU's.

That said, if you are actually in the market for a new CPU now it doesn't make much sense NOT to go with more cores if you can afford it, but that in no way means that I think a 4790K is somehow inadequate, or will be any time soon.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malinkadink*
> 
> I'm just slightly ticked off since i got a 7700k around march when i was seeing if Ryzen or the 7700k was better for me, and as it turns out i need better single thread for my applications so the i7 it was. Now the 8700k bringing the same single threaded performance is here with two extra cores and four extra threads matching the 8 core ryzens in multithreading. Damn it.


Your 7700K will not get slower when CL comes out. It will still be plenty of power for gaming for years to come.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malinkadink*
> 
> I'm just slightly ticked off since i got a 7700k around march when i was seeing if Ryzen or the 7700k was better for me, and as it turns out i need better single thread for my applications so the i7 it was. Now the 8700k bringing the same single threaded performance is here with two extra cores and four extra threads matching the 8 core ryzens in multithreading. Damn it.


Don't be upset, just upgrade to the i7 8700k and you will feel better.


----------



## ogider

It looks like that asrock update their z370 description.Didnt saw before 4300MHz for memory.

I was thinking about Asus..like Hero/Apex for high memory clock.
But Taichi looking good , Z370 Extreme4 got nice improvements
over z270...VRM looks like in Taichi.

https://www.asrock.com/mb/compare.us.asp?Models=Z370%20Taichi,Z270%20Taichi,Z270%20Extreme4,Z370%20Extreme4


----------



## Lass3

I'm beginning to think there will be no Z390 chipset. It has been Z370 only all along.

Z370 + K CPU's release on Oct 5.

Non-K CPU's + Lower end / Business chipsets in Q1 2018.

Why would they launch a Z390. Makes no sense. The features that people claimed would be on Z390, is to be found on Z370.

Improved Power Delivery for 6 Core processors
Enhanced Package Power Delivery For overclocking
Memory routing support for DDR4-2666
Rec.2020 & HDR Support, HEVC 10-bit HW Decode/Encode, VP9 10-bit HW Decode
Integrated USB 3.1 Gen2 (10 Gbps)
Support for integrated Intel wireless AC (WiFi 802.11ac R2 & Bluetooth 5)
Intel Optane memory support
Intel Smart Sound Technology with quad core audio DSP
24 Chipset PCIe 3.0 Lanes
10 USB 3.1 Ports With Up To 6 USB 3.1 Gen 2 (10 Gbps) Ports
Up To 6 SATA 3.0 Ports
Intel Rapid Storage Technology 16
PCIe 3.0 x4 Storage Support


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> I'm beginning to think there will be no Z390 chipset. It has been Z370 only all along.
> 
> Z370 + K CPU's release on Oct 5.
> 
> Non-K CPU's + Lower end / Business chipsets in Q1 2018.
> 
> Why would they launch a Z390. Makes no sense. The features that people claimed would be on Z390, is to be found on Z370.


Because there's a rumored 8 core coffee lake coming and Intel being Intel they have to "redesign" power delivery for 8 cores compared to 6?

Maybe it's becoming a new tradition of bringing a new chipset out every 9 months or so for Intel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Improved Power Delivery for 6 Core processors
> Enhanced Package Power Delivery For overclocking
> Memory routing support for DDR4-2666
> Rec.2020 & HDR Support, HEVC 10-bit HW Decode/Encode, VP9 10-bit HW Decode
> Integrated USB 3.1 Gen2 (10 Gbps)
> Support for integrated Intel wireless AC (WiFi 802.11ac R2 & Bluetooth 5)
> Intel Optane memory support
> Intel Smart Sound Technology with quad core audio DSP
> 24 Chipset PCIe 3.0 Lanes
> 10 USB 3.1 Ports With Up To 6 USB 3.1 Gen 2 (10 Gbps) Ports
> Up To 6 SATA 3.0 Ports
> Intel Rapid Storage Technology 16
> PCIe 3.0 x4 Storage Support


Sure sure

Lo and behold all the new features compared to z270 courtesy of ASUS on one of it's high end boards (Formula)


Ohh, ahh
Now it's *2* RGB connectors, 5gbit Lan, a heatsink for M2 drives and a live dash display

Or the Apex


They sure go out of there way to highlight all the different chokes and power delivery, etter lanes for RAM OC'ing n stuff /s


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Lo and behold all the new features compared to z270 courtesy of ASUS on one of it's high end boards (Formula)
> 
> 
> Ohh, ahh
> Now it's *2* RGB connectors, 5gbit Lan, a heatsink for M2 drives and a live dash display
> 
> Or the Apex
> 
> 
> They sure go out of there way to highlight all the different chokes and power delivery, etter lanes for RAM OC'ing n stuff /s


Well that doesn't help me choosing between these two







Formula is a more "complete" board but the Apex is badass.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Well that doesn't help me choosing between these two
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Formula is a more "complete" board but the Apex is badass.


Then go for the one that you think looks best

Apex is for even better OC'ing, especially RAM
But you also need the fitting RAM modules, means RAM kits rated for very high speeds
And a delid, obviously (or buying a delidded 8700k)

Manufacturers are already binning all the Samsung B-dies they can get to sell them in high rated kits

Personally I dig the Formulas cleaner look, but I wpuld be worried that the live dash would be blocked a bit by a graphics card

Or the lower port would block the view of the Asus logo

1st world problems for sure
But buying a Formula is already buying for it's looks


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Then go for the one that you think looks best
> 
> Apex is for even better OC'ing, especially RAM
> But you also need the fitting RAM modules, means RAM kits rated for very high speeds
> And a delid, obviously (or buying a delidded 8700k)
> 
> Manufacturers are already binning all the Samsung B-dies they can get to sell them in high rated kits


I'm getting a 8700K delidded from Silicon.
About the RAM I either go with 32Gb (3600) for ramdisk or 16Gb (4000) and no ramdisk with the Apex. I don't mind either.

About the look ... can't decide they both are very nice









EDIT : About the Apex and the dual power connector for the CPU : is the second one mandatory ? I would have to also change my PSU


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Because there's a rumored 8 core coffee lake coming and Intel being Intel they have to "redesign" power delivery for 8 cores compared to 6?
> 
> Maybe it's becoming a new tradition of bringing a new chipset out every 9 months or so for Intel


You mean just like AMD's upcoming X470?








10 months after release af X370.

This is good tho. I prefer new chipsets with new CPU's. I remember how terrible AMD has been in the past because of severly outdated chipsets and features.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> I'm getting a 8700K delidded from Silicon.
> About the RAM I either go with 32Gb (3600) for ramdisk or 16Gb (4000) and no ramdisk with the Apex. I don't mind either.
> 
> About the look ... can't decide they both are very nice












There is no *guarantee* that the Apex can hit higher speeds than the Formula
It's also very high build quality









The Formula should also do 4000, the Apex should be good for those 4500/4600 rated kits

At least that's my guess anyway

Those 4600 kits were certified with 2 modules only
Albeit on x299


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> You mean just like AMD's upcoming X470?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 10 months after release af X370.
> 
> This is good tho. I prefer new chipsets with new CPU's. I remember how terrible AMD has been in the past because of severly outdated chipsets and features.


But in AMD's case, nothing stops you from running Zen 2 on X370 

Short of a BIOS update, obviously.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> But in AMD's case, nothing stops you from running Zen 2 on X370
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Short of a BIOS update, obviously.


Can you tell me more about the upcoming chipset and CPU's? Can i get some numbers?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> You mean just like AMD's upcoming X470?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 10 months after release af X370.
> 
> This is good tho. I prefer new chipsets with new CPU's. I remember how terrible AMD has been in the past because of severly outdated chipsets and features.


I understand that sentiment

But not when nothing has changed and taking away the upgrade path "just because"

Which AMD hasn't


----------



## ogider

Why z370 Apex didn't get extra 2 SATA :/ like x299 have.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Can you tell me more about the upcoming chipset and CPU's? Can i get some numbers?


Only AMD's commitment to support ZEN 2 on the boards that are out now
And it's on a better fab

Also

https://m.hardocp.com/news/2017/09/21/amd_transitioning_to_12nm_lp_process_for_vega_ryzen_in_2018


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Only AMD's commitment to support ZEN 2 on the boards that are out now
> And it's on a better fab
> 
> Also
> 
> https://m.hardocp.com/news/2017/09/21/amd_transitioning_to_12nm_lp_process_for_vega_ryzen_in_2018


I know, but 12nm won't change much.

I need a new platform this year. Pref ASAP. This is why Z370 + 8700K interrests me. 6C/12T with high clocks and best single thread perf, which is very important to me. I have tried Ryzen 5 and 7 at 3.9ish GHz and I was not impressed with the performance in the tasks I do. This rig is for fun and games, nothing else. I'm CPU bound in pretty much everything (high fps/Hz gaming).

It would make no sense for me, to buy 1st gen Ryzen, replace with Ryzen refresh in ~6 months, STILL HAVE INFERIOR performance to 8700K, wait till 2019ish for 7nm Ryzen CPU's to MAYBE get 8700K single thread perf / gaming performance.

At this point, I'd just change to a completely new platform anyway. With DDR5, PCI-E 4.0 / 5.0... So..


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Can you tell me more about the upcoming chipset and CPU's? Can i get some numbers?


Why would I? Nothing other than socket compatibility and underlying architecture has been released.










Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> I know, but 12nm won't change much.
> 
> I need a new platform this year. Pref ASAP. This is why Z370 + 8700K interrests me. 6C/12T with high clocks and best single thread perf, which is very important to me. I have tried Ryzen 5 and 7 at 3.9ish GHz and I was not impressed with the performance in the tasks I do. This rig is for fun and games, nothing else. I'm CPU bound in pretty much everything (high fps/Hz gaming).
> 
> It would make no sense for me, to buy 1st gen Ryzen, replace with Ryzen refresh in ~6 months, STILL HAVE INFERIOR performance to 8700K, wait till 2019ish for 7nm Ryzen CPU's to MAYBE get 8700K single thread perf / gaming performance.
> 
> At this point, I'd just change to a completely new platform anyway. With DDR5, PCI-E 4.0 / 5.0... So..


Which is fair enough. Everyone chooses whichever suits their application best. In my particular scenario, a 1700 stomped anything Intel had at the time in that price range (or 2-300 EUR above for that matter, platform costs factored in), so it was the purchase I made.

Coffee Lake is now faster? It better be, it's a year newer. But the point being made was around future compatibility, not performance, and it still stands.


----------



## ogider

http://lab501.ro/procesoare-chipseturi/review-intel-core-i7-8700k-intel-core-i5-8600k-coffee-lake-aorus-z370-ultra-gaming
first major review


----------



## profundido

Yess ! My favorite board for Z370, the Asus Maximus Formula with integrated watercooling circuit exists already and is in testing phase ! I'm glad to see it exists because it wasn't mentioned in the list of announced motherboards. It probably won't come with the first batch of released motherboards but I can wait







By then first proper bios updates will be coming out and we'll have solid testresults from alot of systems in so I know what to expect



More info and lineup of all Asus boards:

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/asus-announces-rog-prime-and-tuf-z370-series-motherboards.html


----------



## Olivon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ogider*
> 
> http://lab501.ro/procesoare-chipseturi/review-intel-core-i7-8700k-intel-core-i5-8600k-coffee-lake-aorus-z370-ultra-gaming
> first major review


Thanks !

8600K and 8700K are bombs !


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Olivon*
> 
> Thanks !
> 
> 8600K and 8700K are bombs !


5+ GHz on air, sounds nice

Looking forward to see how high I can get 8700K on custom water + delid


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ogider*
> 
> http://lab501.ro/procesoare-chipseturi/review-intel-core-i7-8700k-intel-core-i5-8600k-coffee-lake-aorus-z370-ultra-gaming
> first major review


21 pages...even thats my native language still lazy to read








Can you tell in 2 -3 words the best moments from there?







plz


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ogider*
> 
> http://lab501.ro/procesoare-chipseturi/review-intel-core-i7-8700k-intel-core-i5-8600k-coffee-lake-aorus-z370-ultra-gaming
> first major review


OMG that's amazing, alot better than what I expected even unless this guy had a golden sample and then stil... If this is what we can expect, this cpu is gonna be the absolute bomb of 2017 for enthusiast gamers

Thx for sharing that !


----------



## ogider

Sorry.Not my native


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> 21 pages...even thats my native language still lazy to read
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you tell in 2 -3 words the best moments from there?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> plz


even better:


----------



## Techhog

Hm, that review really makes the 8700K look kinda lame. It's not much of a boost in any area, and for the first time it looks like we're going to see an i7 have lower overclocking headroom than an i5 simply because the pigeon poop can't keep up. I feel confident saying that my NH-D15S can get the 8700K to 4.9GHz though, and even 5GHz if I'm lucky with voltages. 5.3GHz with a delid and custom loop sounds about right.


----------



## Scotty99

8600k is going to look good on launch reviews, resist the temptation and get the i7 for a mere 100 bucks more.


----------



## kd5151

First major review? Wait did I over sleep? Is it oct 5 already!


----------



## Artikbot

That's quite impressive actually.

That i5 is definitely the chip to get for gaming, and it's cool to see it has the grunt to handle more than just that.

Oh, the things competition does!


----------



## mouacyk

Oh man, 6 physical threads and decent voltage at 5.3GHz!


----------



## d3v0

good lord, over 5ghz in two separate places


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Oh man, 6 physical threads and decent voltage at 5.3GHz!


You delidders will be happy! I'll be more than satisfied with 5GHz if I get there. Looks like the previous rumors were true in any case.


----------



## anonjoe

What a crappy review , how can you possibly tell witch is witch. Do they only have three colors.?


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> That's quite impressive actually.
> 
> That i5 is definitely the chip to get for gaming, and it's cool to see it has the grunt to handle more than just that.
> 
> Oh, the things competition does!


why would you not take the 8700k ? With a custom loop and delid the 8700K should blow it's little brother away right ?


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> why would you not take the 8700k ? With a custom loop and delid the 8700K should blow it's little brother away right ?


One might be able to put that $100 towards a better GPU, which will net higher returns.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anonjoe*
> 
> What a crappy review , how can you possibly tell witch is witch. Do they only have three colors.?


The graph lines up with the legend exactly 1-to-1 in order. Yes, only 3 colors suck.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> One might be able to put that $100 towards a better GPU, which will net higher returns.
> The graph lines up with the legend exactly 1-to-1 in order. Yes, only 3 colors suck.


There's definitely more than 3 colors there. They're just distributed sub-optimally.


----------



## Scotty99

I would argue the 100 is better spent on i7 actually.

~This might be the only i5 that has 6c6t, if rumors of 8c i7 are true i5's would surely be 6c12t.
~8700k is a 5 year CPU, 8600k isnt
~Much easier to sell a gpu on used market than a cpu, not to mention you would lose less money in the process.

In a world of 6c12t 200 dollar ryzen 5's i wouldnt want to be stuck with a 6c6t chip, were in the middle of a thread war and coffee isnt the end of it.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I would argue the 100 is better spent on i7 actually.
> 
> ~This might be the only i5 that has 6c6t, if rumors of 8c i7 are true i5's would surely be 6c12t.
> ~8700k is a 5 year CPU, 8600k isnt
> ~Much easier to sell a gpu on used market than a cpu, not to mention you would lose less money in the process.
> 
> In a world of 6c12t 200 dollar ryzen 5's i wouldnt want to be stuck with a 6c6t chip, were in the middle of a thread war and coffee isnt the end of it.


The only real valid point is the HT difference evident in the CBR15 benchmark:

A whopping +43.5% stock difference with HT. However, not many games/apps are coded for HT and they need to be specially optimized to really take advantage of HT.


----------



## doom26464

Ill hold on tight for z390. If intel makes an 8c chip that can hit 5ghz on an overclock im sold. 6c is not quite enough power for x264 encoding for me quite yet.Though I am intrested to see encoding test of 8700k vrs any ryzen 7.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *doom26464*
> 
> Ill hold on tight for z390. If intel makes an 8c chip that can hit 5ghz on an overclock im sold. 6c is not quite enough power for x264 encoding for me quite yet.Though I am intrested to see encoding test of 8700k vrs any ryzen 7.


There will be NO Z390 chipset. SAUCE
Quote:


> The Z370 and future 300 series boards will support all 8th generation core processors that will come out on the desktop.


and
Quote:


> Also for those of you talking about Z370 being obsolete, Intel confirmed that all 8th generation core series CPUs will be compatible with the Z370 chipset and all future 300 series chipsets.


The leaked Coffee Lake chipset road map shows that only the B,H and Q chipsets are left to launch in early 2018. SAUCE


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> The only real valid point is the HT difference evident in the CBR15 benchmark:
> 
> A whopping +43.5% stock difference with HT. However, not many games/apps are coded for HT and they need to be specially optimized to really take advantage of HT.


There's a 9% clockspeed advantage too though, along with a 33% L3 cache advantage. HT is likely adding under 30%.


----------



## Scotty99

We are in the middle of a thread race, the market is still optimizing for 4c cpu's. I am not telling people how to spend their money, i just feel the 8600k is a bad product in todays marketplace and only compares favorably to the 8700k today, in time you will see that 100 dollars is well spent.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *doom26464*
> 
> Ill hold on tight for z390. If intel makes an 8c chip that can hit 5ghz on an overclock im sold. 6c is not quite enough power for x264 encoding for me quite yet.Though I am intrested to see encoding test of 8700k vrs any ryzen 7.


There won't be a Z390 - Official roadmaps are out.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> There won't be a Z390 - Official roadmaps are out.


Source or link?


----------



## WexleySnoops

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> There will be NO Z390 chipset. SAUCE
> and
> The leaked Coffee Lake chipset road map shows that only the B,H and Q chipsets are left to launch in early 2018. SAUCE


I really hope you are right. That would be some really swell news.

I was going to jump on Ryzen (like many people) due to the confirmation of Zen2 being on the same chipset. Seeing what Intel pulled with Z370, and no current confirmation of Z270 being supported, I was weary...I didn't want to buy Z370 knowing that that was the only CPU it would support without having to upgrade to Z390. If indeed Z370 is all you need for future Coffee Lake/8C support...then I think I'm sold.


----------



## doom26464

Bummer really was hoping for a 8c chip.

Guess I will wait till next gen HEDT or see what ryzen refresh does.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WexleySnoops*
> 
> I really hope you are right. That would be some really swell news.
> 
> I was going to jump on Ryzen (like many people) due to the confirmation of Zen2 being on the same chipset. Seeing what Intel pulled with Z370, and no current confirmation of Z270 being supported, I was weary...I didn't want to buy Z370 knowing that that was the only CPU it would support without having to upgrade to Z390. If indeed Z370 is all you need for future Coffee Lake/8C support...then I think I'm sold.


Based on the leaked road map, there is neither Z390 nor octacore Coffee Lake. If you want octacore, you will have to go X299.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Based on the leaked road map, there is neither Z390 nor octacore Coffee Lake. If you want octacore, you will have to go X299.


the Roadmap only shows up to Q1 2018 as far as I can see...

Not very convincing actually since 8 cores are rumored for H2 2018 instead.


----------



## mdd1986

Intel comes out with a 6C processor that can hit 5+Ghz on air without delid for a responsible price yet people are complaining that its not an 8C. Just amazing. There are 8C processors out from AMD and Intel that you can purchase right now if this doesn't tickle your fancy. No need to complain here.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> Intel comes out with a 6C processor that can hit 5+Ghz on air without delid for a responsible price yet people are complaining that its not an 8C. Just amazing. There are 8C processors out from AMD and Intel that you can purchase right now if this doesn't tickle your fancy. No need to complain here.


Most people complaining wouldn't be buying anyway. This looks like a good release so far.

Can't wait for proper reviews next week.. If 5+ is doable on most chips with decent air/AIO it will be a homerun for Intel.

I'll take 6C at 5+ GHz with best possible single thread perf over 8C at 3.9ish with subpar single thread perf any day of the week.


----------



## Nightbird

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> Intel comes out with a 6C processor that can hit 5+Ghz on air without delid for a responsible price yet people are complaining that its not an 8C. Just amazing. There are 8C processors out from AMD and Intel that you can purchase right now if this doesn't tickle your fancy. No need to complain here.


Trust me, if an 8C mainstream processor was coming out tomorrow, we'll be complaining there wasn't a 12C. This website is not called STOCK dot NET


----------



## mdd1986

Yes of course. People should just take this release at face value thats all. This seems like a great release especially for someone like me that has been holding out from going with Ryzen/kaby lake. I figured if I was going to upgrade from 2500K should have at least 6Cores. Thats why I wanted to wait to see what Coffee Lake is all about.


----------



## Scotty99

I cant decide if im gonna delid or have silicon lottery do it. Im not worried about messing the chip up but once you figure in the cost of delid kit, liquid metal, adhesive to replace cover you are already above MSRP for the chip, and cutting into microcenter savings.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> There will be NO Z390 chipset. SAUCE
> and
> The leaked Coffee Lake chipset road map shows that only the B,H and Q chipsets are left to launch in early 2018. SAUCE


That roadmap only covers the first quarter. Z390 is for 2H.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> That roadmap only covers the first quarter. Z390 is for 2H.


Says who?


----------



## mdd1986

Honestly if I can hit 5ghz on an air cooler without a delid, I see no reason to de-lid it. Especially for gaming needs.


----------



## Scotty99

Way i see it, if im going from ryzen to intel i wanna go all the way and get ~5.3 on at least a couple cores lol.

I just need to figure out how to get my mmo's to prefer those cores, and how turbo boost 3.0 functions when overlocked (manually, and with asus software).


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Most people complaining wouldn't be buying anyway. This looks like a good release so far.
> 
> Can't wait for proper reviews next week.. If 5+ is doable on most chips with decent air/AIO it will be a homerun for Intel.
> 
> I'll take 6C at 5+ GHz with best possible single thread perf over 8C at 3.9ish with subpar single thread perf any day of the week.


Same here


----------



## xioros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> That roadmap only covers the first quarter. Z390 is for 2H.
> 
> 
> 
> Says who?
Click to expand...

The official slides?

Also:


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nightbird*
> 
> Trust me, if an 8C mainstream processor was coming out tomorrow, we'll be complaining there wasn't a 12C. This website is not called STOCK dot NET


Couldn't agree more. We just can't get enough 

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> Honestly if I can hit 5ghz on an air cooler without a delid, I see no reason to de-lid it. Especially for gaming needs.


Yeah but people here (like me) like to push each components' limits. I' coming from a 2600K setup and bought all parts for a 7700K upgrade (with the delid kit and all). I'm selling my 7700K tomorrow locally but will keep the delid kit for my 8700K. I just hope that it will be compatible (I see no reason it shouldn't).


----------



## PontiacGTX

however did the lab501 graphics doesnt know there are other colors other than blue?


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Says who?


https://hothardware.com/news/intel-z390-chipset-h2-2018-8-core-16-thread-enthusiast-cpus


----------



## doom26464

I dont think anyone is complaining that its not a 8c chip.

Just for my needs a high single core perf 8 core chip is the sweet spot. If intel made that on the main stream it would be my most ideal chip.

No doubt for gamers and some minor multithreaded work load coffe lake 6c chips will be great


----------



## czin125

Looks like Coffeelake-S clocks higher and at lower voltage than Kabylake-S. Are they going to release a Coffeelake-X simultaneously?

A pic from a finnish site

https://www.techspot.com/review/1299-intel-core-kaby-lake-desktop/page11.html
[email protected]
http://www.legitreviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/5100mhz-overclock.jpg
[email protected]
https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Intel-Core-i7-7700K-Review-Kaby-Lake-and-14nm/Overclocking-Kaby-Lake
[email protected]


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> Looks like Coffeelake-S clocks higher and at lower voltage than Kabylake-S. Are they going to release a Coffeelake-X simultaneously?
> 
> A pic from a finnish site
> 
> https://www.techspot.com/review/1299-intel-core-kaby-lake-desktop/page11.html
> [email protected]
> http://www.legitreviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/5100mhz-overclock.jpg
> [email protected]
> https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Intel-Core-i7-7700K-Review-Kaby-Lake-and-14nm/Overclocking-Kaby-Lake
> [email protected]


Lol. I'm totally expecting Coffee Lake-X 8640X and 8740X in 2018.

That said, this is either fake or a golden chip.


----------



## PontiacGTX




----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Lol. I'm totally expecting Coffee Lake-X 8640X and 8740X in 2018.
> 
> That said, this is either fake or a golden chip.


Yeah, only question is all it be on 2011v4 or 2066v2


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*


After a dlid, that 8600K @ 5.1GHz should drop to around 75C.


----------



## PontiacGTX

also it seems 7800x is hotter than the 8700k. because the TIM, they improved the contact/gap? or the CPU uses less voltage?


----------



## mdd1986

92 degrees is pretty hot. Whats the hottest it can go safely?


----------



## PontiacGTX

100c


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I will upgrade my 7800X to a CF-X when that comes out.

I don't know about you guys, but my 7800X is pretty cool. At 4.9 ghz the hottest core is 64'C after an hour of GTA O.

Max power usage is 483W from the wall, and 450W blank for the system. This is not bad considering my rig got a 1080TI OCed and UVed. Pumps, several SSDs, fans and heavy OC on the CPU. I am really looking forward to the 8700K and the next 8800X.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Yeah, only question is all it be on 2011v4 or 2066v2


Heh. LGA 1151v2 wasn't real btw.


----------



## czin125

28C Ambient temp in that chart.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Heh. LGA 1151v2 wasn't real btw.


but it will be real on all incoming reviews and boxes which will show there is no way 1151 can run Coffee lake


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Heh. LGA 1151v2 wasn't real btw.


Mmm

But it doesn't run in the socket, artificially I'm sure

Also
My meaning was the HEDT line doesn't enjoy a more stable upgrade path per sé
As the "old" HEDT socket had 3 iterations (2011)
And we were "talking" about 8740X, something that would imply to me a HEDT chip
Like 7740X on 2066 Socket


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> I'm beginning to think there will be no Z390 chipset. It has been Z370 only all along.
> 
> Z370 + K CPU's release on Oct 5.
> 
> Non-K CPU's + Lower end / Business chipsets in Q1 2018.
> 
> Why would they launch a Z390. Makes no sense. The features that people claimed would be on Z390, is to be found on Z370.
> 
> Improved Power Delivery for 6 Core processors
> Enhanced Package Power Delivery For overclocking
> Memory routing support for DDR4-2666
> Rec.2020 & HDR Support, HEVC 10-bit HW Decode/Encode, VP9 10-bit HW Decode
> Integrated USB 3.1 Gen2 (10 Gbps)
> Support for integrated Intel wireless AC (WiFi 802.11ac R2 & Bluetooth 5)
> Intel Optane memory support
> Intel Smart Sound Technology with quad core audio DSP
> 24 Chipset PCIe 3.0 Lanes
> 10 USB 3.1 Ports With Up To 6 USB 3.1 Gen 2 (10 Gbps) Ports
> Up To 6 SATA 3.0 Ports
> Intel Rapid Storage Technology 16
> PCIe 3.0 x4 Storage Support


Maybe the 8 core processor will use a different socket also a change in power delivery.


----------



## Scotty99

https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-Z370-F-GAMING/

Scroll down the page to "OC Design Asus pro clock", are they claiming a 5.5ghz overclock? Wonder if some of these can hit that on 1-2 cores with asus software....hmmm


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> There won't be a Z390 - Official roadmaps are out.
> 
> 
> 
> Source or link?
Click to expand...


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Some people might be tempted to order as soon as they launch in case there are stock issues. This is Intel's first big change on the mainstream platform since Sandy Bridge, and it's rushed, so some might assume that it'll sell out quickly.


Gotcha.

I might be a sadist but I think having to de-lid the CPU, add my own favorite thermal, put it under water, and crank the clocks as high as they can go while tweaking with voltage, turbo, and PLL is one of the draws for me to the Intel chips.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-Z370-F-GAMING/
> 
> Scroll down the page to "OC Design Asus pro clock", are they claiming a 5.5ghz overclock? Wonder if some of these can hit that on 1-2 cores with asus software....hmmm


5.5 Ghz!? Jesus. I want to see if this is possible on my crazy custom loop!


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Gotcha.
> 
> I might be a sadist but I think having to de-lid the CPU, add my own favorite thermal, put it under water, and crank the clocks as high as they can go while tweaking with voltage, turbo, and PLL is one of the draws for me to the Intel chips.
> 5.5 Ghz!? Jesus. I want to see if this is possible on my crazy custom loop!


Probablyit can achieve 5.5Ghz all core on water/TEC


----------



## czin125

https://dlcdnimgs.asus.com/websites/global/products/JwLQlGA6fr7nw6Wy/img/performance/CPU-Frequency.jpg
This picture? That's a Z370 / 8700K clearly and it should do it delidded.

https://dlcdnimgs.asus.com/websites/global/products/ouGRuCxPqXbYglEa/img/performance/chart-2.png
This one's for the Z270 / 7700K rated up to 5.4ghz ( possible on water + delid )

https://dlcdnimgs.asus.com/websites/global/products/6LPvJB3Wo4uZiUT7/img/M8E/performance_mode_4.png
Z170 / 7700K at 5.2ghz ( possible on water + delid )

https://dlcdnimgs.asus.com/websites/global/products/90zovFvWmRoa2s67/img/performance/chart-1.png
X299 / 7740X at 5.5ghz ( possible on water + delid )


----------



## Scotty99

I bet a non delidded chip would do over 5ghz on a couple cores, can this stuff release already lol.


----------



## TheWizardMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> 5.5 Ghz!? Jesus. I want to see if this is possible on my crazy custom loop!


Asus OC software is awful. The auto OC put my 6700K to 4.95 and wasn't stable at all.


----------



## AlphaC

https://videocardz.com/73061/yet-another-core-i7-8700k-i5-8600k-review-posted-ahead-of-launch
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *http://lab501.ro/procesoare-chipseturi/review-intel-core-i7-8700k-intel-core-i5-8600k-coffee-lake-aorus-z370-ultra-gaming/20*
> Overclocking 8600K to 5.1 GHz makes it really power hungry, it needs almost 70W more.


5.1GHz = 190W @ 1.34V vs stock 120W

The same review has *Prime 95 - Intel Core i7 8700K - 5000MHz - 1.35v*

I suspect the wall will be lower , maybe 4.9GHz.


----------



## Scotty99

You probably didnt have the stress test set long enough is all, i know a lot of people that had good luck with it. Its not exactly software btw, works the same as if you are going into the bios, you can even unistall the software after overclocking and it saves the settings in bios.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-Z370-F-GAMING/
> 
> Scroll down the page to "OC Design Asus pro clock", are they claiming a 5.5ghz overclock? Wonder if some of these can hit that on 1-2 cores with asus software....hmmm


Saw that. Calling BS. lol


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> https://videocardz.com/73061/yet-another-core-i7-8700k-i5-8600k-review-posted-ahead-of-launch
> 5.1GHz = 190W @ 1.34V vs stock 120W
> 
> The same review has *Prime 95 - Intel Core i7 8700K - 5000MHz - 1.35v*
> 
> I suspect the wall will be lower , maybe 4.9GHz.


You know those are full system wattage numbers, right?


----------



## Phixit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheWizardMan*
> 
> Asus OC software is awful. The auto OC put my 6700K to 4.95 and wasn't stable at all.


Yep, mine too.

.. AI Suite 3, right ?


----------



## TheWizardMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Phixit*
> 
> Yep, mine too.
> 
> .. AI Suite 3, right ?


Yes. It also caused a ton of conflicts with other software I was running. I couldn't get my memory stable with it running. Overall, it was a giant disaster and I would suggest everyone run from it, as far as they can.

The only feature I wish I could use is the FanAI, which is bundled with AI Suite, unfortunately.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> You know those are full system wattage numbers, right?


You know that the delta doesn't matter if it's full system when there is only a CPU load, right?

Also the Lab501 review is skewed because they used Hynix based CL16 RAM on the Ryzen system when they used CL14 Samsung B-die for Intel x299 systems.

The X299 system is likely being held back by the x299 raider as well.

My Superpi result out of the box with Ryzen 7 1700X with 3200MHz CL16 Hynix was ~ 11seconds for 1M and 32M ~9 min 18s ( = 558s) back in June. I'm pretty sure newer BIOs , Samsung B-die, and better boards (i.e. not the Gaming 5 they used that I also used) would score better.


----------



## Yetyhunter

We have another review here https://wasd.ro/hardware-reviews/mobo-cpu/intel-core-i7-8700k-review/ page needs translation. We have power consumption, overclocking and temperatures at respective speeds. The 8600k is also mentioned in the review as being the next big thing for gaming. The reviewer claims that he easily reached 5.3 ghz with acceptable temps with an H115i.


----------



## TMatzelle60

i know the i7 8700k is the best. But honestly the 8600K is just as good. When games use more cores it will be really great. it might not have the best ghz boost but still


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

I actually just got the money ($1500 budget) for a build and I'm excited, just hope on Oct 5th there's a plethora of proper/unbiased range of benchmarks from most sources since they should have been sitting on them for a week or more.

After 6 months of this potato laptop I've had enough, I'd even go with a cheap 7700k if CL takes too long to be in stock.


----------



## TMatzelle60

how many FPS difference would a stock 4.3 GHz single core boost to a 4.7 Ghz single core boost be in gaming? Single core used in game?

Will the i5 8600k be good for gaming?


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> how many FPS difference would a stock 4.3 GHz single core boost to a 4.7 Ghz single core boost be in gaming? Single core used in game?
> 
> Will the i5 8600k be good for gaming?


my biggest issue is finding a card and not overpaying for memory.









The 8600K will be good. The cpu market has been so stagnant. Going forward we will get more for less money. We the people need this.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> You know that the delta doesn't matter if it's full system when there is only a CPU load, right?
> 
> Also the Lab501 review is skewed because they used Hynix based CL16 RAM on the Ryzen system when they used CL14 Samsung B-die for Intel x299 systems.
> 
> The X299 system is likely being held back by the x299 raider as well.
> 
> My Superpi result out of the box with Ryzen 7 1700X with 3200MHz CL16 Hynix was ~ 11seconds for 1M and 32M ~9 min 18s ( = 558s) back in June. I'm pretty sure newer BIOs , Samsung B-die, and better boards (i.e. not the Gaming 5 they used that I also used) would score better.


Yeah, but you posted it as if the CPU was using 190W overclocked.


----------



## guttheslayer

All this ppl talking about Z390 not existing have no clue on what they are talking about.

The roadmap by GamerNexus only show up to March 2018 and Intel road clearly show Z390 wont be coming in before H2, which is July next year.



So please, execise some common sense?


----------



## jprovido

like what I said a few weeks ago. people should be more excited about the i5 8600k. looking at the leaked benchmarks it's very promising.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yetyhunter*
> 
> We have another review here https://wasd.ro/hardware-reviews/mobo-cpu/intel-core-i7-8700k-review/ page needs translation. We have power consumption, overclocking and temperatures at respective speeds. The 8600k is also mentioned in the review as being the next big thing for gaming. The reviewer claims that he easily reached 5.3 ghz with acceptable temps with an H115i.


I didn't see exactly where he talks about hitting 5.3, but he had it pegged out at 5.0 with an H115 and max load it was spiking in the low 90s, and averaged about 87. So as everyone suspected, it can and will hit 5.0+, but it gets pretty toasty, so if someone wants to push that 24/7, 5+ range OC, they'd better delid and put it under custom water or that chip is cooked within a couple years for sure... which is on par with what everyone has suspected would be the case.

Also, in line with what most everyone has been expecting, from some of the render tests he shows, and others, at the peak 4.7 boost, it looks like the 8700 is on par with or a little ahead of a 7700 at 5+... given the 6-8% IPC gains, and the 2c/4t bump in size, also about what was most sensibly expected. Which... as much as I hate to say it, means I am just doing a GPU upgrade to give another decent year of life to my Haswell i5 and waiting for Ice Lake. sigh... At least the 8c/16t mainstream i7 is at the end of the tunnel and the combination of 4 times the threads and the jump from DDR3 to DDR4 should be an astonishing difference... and again the upgrade every 4-5 years rings true lol.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> like what I said a few weeks ago. people should be more excited about the i5 8600k. looking at the leaked benchmarks it's very promising.


Yeah 8600K is very good right now. It will be like all i5s though. In the end you wished you got the i7s


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yetyhunter*
> 
> We have another review here https://wasd.ro/hardware-reviews/mobo-cpu/intel-core-i7-8700k-review/ page needs translation. We have power consumption, overclocking and temperatures at respective speeds. The 8600k is also mentioned in the review as being the next big thing for gaming. The reviewer claims that he easily reached 5.3 ghz with acceptable temps with an H115i.


The result looks respectable for 4.7GHz (75°C maximum in CPU-z bench, 83°C maximum spike when encoding but average is around 75°C).

5GHz on the i7-8700k definitely is yearning for a delid, it peaks at 92°C on encode and 87°C in CPU-Z benchmark. CPU-Z is benchmark hardly a power hog.

Per the review:

i7-8700k power out at 4.3GHz is 85W on the +12V rail @ 1.152V , during CPU-Z bench , in comparison to i7-7700k @ 4.4GHz requiring 85W on the +12V rail at 1.232V

i7-8700k power out at 4.7GHz is 108W on the +12V rail @ 1.272V , during CPU-Z bench
(+23W over stock 4.3GHz turbo)

i7-8700k power out at 5Ghz is 145W on the +12V rail @ 1.392V , during CPU-Z bench
(+60W versus stock 4.3GHz turbo)

----

Adobe After Effects must be poorly threaded because the i7-8700K is matched by i7-7700k @ 5GHz.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> All this ppl talking about Z390 not existing have no clue on what they are talking about.
> 
> The roadmap by GamerNexus only show up to March 2018 and Intel road clearly show Z390 wont be coming in before H2, which is July next year.
> 
> 
> 
> So please, execise some common sense?


Well, the original question was quite delicate... will Z370 support a potential future 8-core Coffee Lake? Sin (well-known for motherboard VRM compilation) says that Z370 shoudl support all 8th generation CPUs. I just asked him whether 8-core will be limited to Z390 and he doesn't know. So as to the original question, the answer seems to be yes, thus rendering Z390 moot.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Well, the original question was quite delicate... will Z370 support a potential future 8-core Coffee Lake? Sin (well-known for motherboard VRM compilation) says that Z370 shoudl support all 8th generation CPUs. I just asked him whether 8-core will be limited to Z390 and he doesn't know. So as to the original question, the answer seems to be yes, thus rendering Z390 moot.


Permanently Z390 is the true next gen chip set coming with more features.


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Then why did you get the RGB version!? You people complain about RGB stuff, and then you just go ahead and buy it, even when you don't have to! It makes no sense!


Long story short it was when Ryzen was new and had difficulty with getting higher frequency ram working and single rank b die samsung dies were said to be having the best luck and sources were all saying the rgb trident z kits were all confirmed to be b die.


----------



## Scotty99

I know this is offtopic but for people putting a new system together for coffee this is a crazy deal:
http://www.microcenter.com/product/471493/960_EVO_Series_1TB_NVMe_M2_Internal_SSD

That is barely more expensive than an 850 evo.


----------



## mohit9206

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> like what I said a few weeks ago. people should be more excited about the i5 8600k. looking at the leaked benchmarks it's very promising.


How about i5-8400? Although its 2.8 base it boosts to 3.6.For less than $200 sounds like a great deal once cheaper H and B series motherboards come out.Tough decision between 8400 and R5-1600.


----------



## Scotty99

In my opinion, ryzen 5 is a much better product than i5. You can find the 1600x for 219.00 and that boosts to 3.7 all core xfr and 4.1ghz single core while having double the threads of the i5's.

A 1600x scores around 460 single core in cpu-z, that will put it ahead on an 8400 for most games (some games just love intel for whatever reason, gta 5 comes to mind). i3 8100 and 8700k imo are the only core chips anyone should be considering from coffee, 8350k is too expensive and i5's make no sense with 1600x existing.

If you play singularly older titles that only care about clockspeed you are better off getting a 7350k and a cheap z170 board on open box or refurb and clocking it past 5ghz.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohit9206*
> 
> How about i5-8400? Although its 2.8 base it boosts to 3.6.For less than $200 sounds like a great deal once cheaper H and B series motherboards come out.Tough decision between 8400 and R5-1600.


While that might be fine

The reason why people are more or less excited about coffee lake is that:
- it's strong IPC like Kaby
- no mesh but ringbus like Kaby
- clocks maybe even better than Kaby
- having more cores than Kaby

Non K CPU's can normally not be overclocked, or only with hassles
And this being an OC forum, well









And it's a sad truth a bit with Intel that you can not say that you pop a reasonably priced CPU in now and upgrade in a year or two
you probably won't be Upgrading to a better *new* CPU, but have to buy a better one from the 8th generation

With Intel you might want to save up 100 bucks more and get the best CPU you can (for desktop anyway), an i7, right from the start

In you're example
A used 7700k from a user ditching it for a 8th generation would yield way better performance for you
2 more cores and no HT is nothing to cheer for if you can't compensate with really high clocks
Which the 7700k already can give you


----------



## e-gate

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> In my opinion, ryzen 5 is a much better product than i5. You can find the 1600x for 219.00 and that boosts to 3.7 all core xfr and 4.1ghz single core while having double the threads of the i5's.
> 
> A 1600x scores around 460 single core in cpu-z, that will put it ahead on an 8400 for most games (some games just love intel for whatever reason, gta 5 comes to mind). i3 8100 and 8700k imo are the only core chips anyone should be considering from coffee, 8350k is too expensive and i5's make no sense with 1600x existing.
> 
> If you play singularly older titles that only care about clockspeed you are better off getting a 7350k and a cheap z170 board on open box or refurb and clocking it past 5ghz.


Ryzen is very well priced. You get what you pay for. Ryzen is the value for money King. However if you want raw gaming performance that will last for many years to come Intel's CFL is the choice albeit you will have to pay some extra premium. Unless games change to purely multi-thread IPC will matter in gaming. Unfortunately I don't see a change coming soon. DX12 is not adopted from devs and game engines will take some years to start propelry utilse more cores.


----------



## Twirlz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohit9206*
> 
> How about i5-8400? Although its 2.8 base it boosts to 3.6.For less than $200 sounds like a great deal once cheaper H and B series motherboards come out.Tough decision between 8400 and R5-1600.


I'd say the 1600 will be the better option between these two. Intel really benefits from their clock speed over Ryzen but the 8400 doesn't have that advantage. A 1600 can generally overclock to 3.7/3.8GHz on a stock cooler on budget boards. The single thread will be better on the 8400, but I wouldn't say it was significantly so.

I can imagine they would trade blows in some games/applications but IMO the 1600 would have the upper hand due to SMT and overclockablity.

The 8600K would likely push the 1600 aside in terms of performance, but the overall platform would cost more (CPU+cooler+Z370)


----------



## caenlen

8700k is the next 2500k, its going to last me a solid 5-6 years. i was going to wait for the 8 core Ice Lake, but it seems to me that when you hit that 8 core mark OC'ing becomes much harder... for some reason 6 cores is the sweet spot, so ill be delidding mine and doing 5.3ghz 24.7


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yetyhunter*
> 
> We have another review here https://wasd.ro/hardware-reviews/mobo-cpu/intel-core-i7-8700k-review/ page needs translation. We have power consumption, overclocking and temperatures at respective speeds. The 8600k is also mentioned in the review as being the next big thing for gaming. The reviewer claims that he easily reached 5.3 ghz with acceptable temps with an H115i.


Quote:


> But I'm telling you a secret. In terms of gaming, the star is not 8700K, but 8600K overclock. 8600K is a real beast. It's cool and can run steady at 5.3 GHz using an AIO cooler. You will see on Oct. 5 when I know that I can publish that processor to what I mean.


i5. As I said, real cores are real important in gaming. And the heat produced by HT is kinda harmful. (On the other hand 8700K has 12 MB cache, which while it produces more heat it's still awesome. That's like 2x more L3 cache than 6600K.)


----------



## Lass3

The i7-8700K will age much better than i5-8600K.

It's only a matter of time before the i7 will pull ahead. Just like 7700K vs 7600K.
The i5 has way lower fps in some games. Cores are peaked.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> like what I said a few weeks ago. people should be more excited about the i5 8600k. looking at the leaked benchmarks it's very promising.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Yeah 8600K is very good right now. It will be like all i5s though. In the end you wished you got the i7s


I'm with Zealot on this one... 3 years later, I'm definitely wishing I would spent the extra $100 for the i7.


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> how many FPS difference would a stock 4.3 GHz single core boost to a 4.7 Ghz single core boost be in gaming? Single core used in game?
> 
> Will the i5 8600k be good for gaming?


47/43 = 1.093x

----
Quote:


> Yeah 8600K is very good right now. It will be like all i5s though. In the end you wished you got the i7s


Quote:


> I'm with Zealot on this one... 3 years later, I'm definitely wishing I would spent the extra $100 for the i7.


It will take a while though! The first quad cores on mainstream were a decade ago. Even the shiny "new" graphics API's don't scale well if at all beyond 6 cores (dx12 no scaling, not sure about Vulkan) so scaling beyond 6 thread will be quite highly limited even if games can split their own workloads very well.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> 47/43 = 1.093x
> 
> ----
> 
> It will take a while though! The first quad cores on mainstream were a decade ago. Even the shiny "new" graphics API's don't scale well if at all beyond 6 cores (dx12 no scaling, not sure about Vulkan) so scaling beyond 6 thread will be quite highly limited even if games can split their own workloads very well.


Yeah but when i5 2500K came out we did not even have 8 Core/ 16 T CPU. We already have 8 Core / 16 T and soon Intel will have that too. The reason i5s did so well is because we where limited to 4 Cores for so long it made no difference. I have seen a lot of reviews where i5 does really well in average fps but if you look at the cores they are all at 99% and the frame times are not as smooth as CPUs with headroom left.


----------



## peter2k

Plenty of games that can utilize the more threads by HT/SMT

And even if avg and high fps stay the same, the minimum fps usually are higher with HT

Again
If one buys Intel then the upgrade path is kinda limited
The 100 bucks more or so are worth it of you keep the thing for the next 5 years

As a 6 core that clocks very high, with HT is most likely to last a long time

So the reference to the 2500k is kinda sound
Those are still good/relevant today
A great buy at the time

The 8700k is going to be a great buy as well, with a delid especially

I'd happily buy one, maybe pre tested and delided this time
If I wouldn't have to throw out a 350$ board


----------



## kd5151




----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> P*lenty of games that can utilize the more threads by HT/SMT*
> 
> And even if avg and high fps stay the same, the minimum fps usually are higher with HT
> 
> Again
> If one buys Intel then the upgrade path is kinda limited
> The 100 bucks more or so are worth it of you keep the thing for the next 5 years
> 
> As a 6 core that clocks very high, with HT is most likely to last a long time
> 
> So the reference to the 2500k is kinda sound
> Those are still good/relevant today
> A great buy at the time
> 
> The 8700k is going to be a great buy as well, with a delid especially
> 
> I'd happily buy one, maybe pre tested and delided this time
> If I wouldn't have to throw out a 350$ board


Please give some examples.


----------



## rudyae86

Good God....8600k is almost there with the 8700k when OC to 5.0+ghz......

I'll probably just end up with the 8700K in the end lol

But even for those on a budget, the 8600K is a no brainer.


----------



## Scotty99

Of course i5 is going to keep up with an i7 on launch day, the games on the market are mostly optimized for 4c8t cpu's......not sure why that would be surprising to anyone.

Look at benchmarks a mere two years from now, will be a completely different story. 8600k in 5 years might not even be a viable gaming CPU, its already at a huge disadvantage to the competition having half the thread count. A thread disadvantage will drop performance more than a clockspeed defecit more times than not, clockspeed is only required for the most unoptimized games on the market (mmo's mainly).

8600k is a bad product, do you think intel is happy with AMD's 220 dollar 1600x curbstomping the 260 dollar 8600k in overall compute power? Heck no, and the next i5 will surely not be a 6c6t part.

But by all means base your purchase on release benchmarks, seems some already have it in their minds i5's are the "best choice for gamers".


----------



## aDyerSituation

"8600k is a bad product"

just no.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> i know the i7 8700k is the best. But honestly the 8600K is just as good. When games use more cores it will be really great. it might not have the best ghz boost but still


They already support SMT in games, some are

Crysis 3,Ryse Son of Rome, Homefront the Revolution,Prey, CIV VI,Dragon Age Inquisition.Battlefront (II),Battlefield 1,AotS,Watch Dogs 2,Total War Warhammer, Dawn of War III, Far Cry Primal, Far Cry 5


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> "8600k is a bad product"
> 
> just no.


There is a very high possibility (near certainty) coffee lake i5's will be the only ones in existence to be 6c6t, that imo constitutes it as a bad product. Its a stop gap product and does not have legs.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Please give some examples.


do I need a lot or will some popular games do?

lucky for me some tester updated there suite of games to test when Ryzen came out



everyones favorite in yammering about cores is one of those that can profit
BF1

there is a 20% bump in fps from a 7600k to a 7700k
that's more than just a bit more turbo boosting can explain

there are some that benefit more, some less

I've put the article into google translate

of course keep in mind this is at low res (1080p) since moving up to 4k is obviously shifting the bottleneck to the GPU

what was also nice in this test was the inclusion of the 2500k and 2600k


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> do I need a lot or will some popular games do?
> 
> lucky for me some tester updated there suite of games to test when Ryzen came out
> 
> 
> 
> everyones favorite in yammering about cores is one of those that can profit
> BF1
> 
> there is a 20% bump in fps from a 7600k to a 7700k
> that's more than just a bit more turbo boosting can explain
> 
> there are some that benefit more, some less
> 
> I've put the article into google translate
> 
> of course keep in mind this is at low res (1080p) since moving up to 4k is obviously shifting the bottleneck to the GPU
> 
> what was also nice in this test was the inclusion of the 2500k and 2600k


add these to the list
Crysis 3,Ryse Son of Rome, Homefront the Revolution,Prey, CIV VI,Dragon Age Inquisition.Battlefront (II),Battlefield 1,AotS,Watch Dogs 2,Total War Warhammer, Dawn of War III, Far Cry Primal, Far Cry 5


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> There is a very high possibility (near certainty) coffee lake i5's will be the only ones in existence to be 6c6t, that imo constitutes it as a bad product. Its a stop gap product and does not have legs.


a 8600k at 5ghz will beat a 1600 at 3.9ghz, even if games do "utilize" more threads. I can't think of a single game that actually pegs 6 threads at 100% and I don't see that changing any time soon.


----------



## Scotty99

Even overwatch runs better on an i7:
https://www.techspot.com/review/1180-overwatch-benchmarks/page5.html

That isnt even what people should be taking away from this tho, just realize we are at a changing of the guard and core counts are still rising. Coffee isnt the end of it.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> a 8600k at 5ghz will beat a 1600 at 3.9ghz, even if games do "utilize" more threads. I can't think of a single game that actually pegs 6 threads at 100% and I don't see that changing any time soon.


People said that about 4c 2500k's back in 2011 as well....ya

You are missing the larger point tho, do you really want to be the guy who buys a 6c6t i5 when the next one is going to be 6c12t (most likely scenario)?. Game devs are going to code for the most common hardware on the market, and 6c12t ryzen chips are selling like hotcakes. Games are already taking advantage of hyperthreading on 4c8t chips, why do you not think the same possible on 6c12t chips?

I remember a coder coming in here earlier and saying something along the lines of "multi threaded coding is about skill, not limitations". This is the future, smart kids coming up the ranks. One exception seems to be MMO's, apparently there is no way around IPC in games of that type, which is why im a slave to IPC lol.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> People said that about 4c 2500k's back in 2011 as well....ya
> 
> You are missing the larger point tho, do you really want to be the guy who buys a 6c6t i5 when the next one is going to be 6c12t (most likely scenario)?. Game devs are going to code for the most common hardware on the market, and 6c12t ryzen chips are selling like hotcakes. Games are already taking advantage of hyperthreading on 4c8t chips, why do you not think the same possible on 6c12t chips?


I do think it's possible. But I am also realistic and don't expect my cpu purchase to last for a decade.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I do think it's possible. But I am also realistic and don't expect my cpu purchase to last for a decade.


8700k is a 5 year CPU, 8600k isnt. Not sure where you got that decade number, 5 years is a realistic expectation to keep a CPU/board for tho, at least in my eyes. 100 bucks more than well spent.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 8700k is a 5 year CPU, 8600k isnt. Not sure where you got that decade number, 5 years is a realistic expectation to keep a CPU/board for tho, at least in my eyes. 100 bucks more than well spent.


And we are just now to the point of a 2500k falling short in games. And that was 6 years ago. Also 6 real cores should be better than 4 cores with hyperthreading.

I agree that 8700k is a better buy if you don't upgrade often, but that doesn't make the 8600k a "bad product"


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> And we are just now to the point of a 2500k falling short in games. And that was 6 years ago. Also 6 real cores should be better than 4 cores with hyperthreading.
> 
> I agree that 8700k is a better buy if you don't upgrade often, but that doesn't make the 8600k a "bad product"


Eh no, you are missing one big aspect of that. 2500k is falling short WITHOUT the help of ryzen, these things are only going to be exacerbated with ryzen saturating the market as well as intel themselves increasing core counts.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Eh no, you are missing one big aspect of that. 2500k is falling short WITHOUT the help of ryzen, these things are only going to be exacerbated with ryzen saturating the market as well as intel themselves increasing core counts.


Yeah. 2500K lasted because there was no competition.


----------



## aDyerSituation

the 2500k lasted because it's IPC and clockspeed and games didn't take advantage of much more than 2 cores at the time.
Just because Ryzen is out doesn't mean games will magically make use for 16 threads.


----------



## Scotty99

No it didnt last because of IPC and clockspeed, it lasted because i5's were 4c and i7's were 4c8t for 7 years lol.

People simply did not keep up with benchmarks games have been using more cores earlier than ryzen release (when people started paying attention). Look at the g3258, that thing is a turd even tho you can clock it to nearly 5.0ghz, a lot of games on the market wont even LOAD with 2 cores. When that chip released it was praised left and right, now its not something id recommend to my grandma.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> No it didnt last because of IPC and clockspeed, it lasted because i5's were 4c and i7's were 4c8t for 7 years lol.
> 
> People simply did not keep up with benchmarks games have been using more cores earlier than ryzen release (when people started paying attention). Look at the g3258, that thing is a turd even tho you can clock it to nearly 5.0ghz, a lot of games on the market wont even LOAD with 2 cores. When that chip released it was praised left and right, now its not something id recommend to my grandma.












Majority of games today do not even use 8 threads. In 2011 most games used 2-4 threads. By your logic every game should have been using 4 to 8 threads in 2011. That certainly wasn't the case.


----------



## Ph42oN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the 2500k lasted because it's IPC and clockspeed and games didn't take advantage of much more than 2 cores at the time.
> Just because Ryzen is out doesn't mean games will magically make use for 16 threads.


That is true. There was no competition, that's why no today's cpu will last as long as 2500k or 2600k did. Still i think 8600k will be very good cpu at release, but it will fall behind in few years.


----------



## Scotty99

I think the guy is just bored and likes to argue, not interested in reality lol.

The only person i would feel good about recommending an 8600k to is someone that knows for sure they will not be buying AAA games in the future. They have their stable of games they play and those titles crave clockspeed and IPC.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the 2500k lasted because it's IPC and clockspeed and games didn't take advantage of much more than 2 cores at the time.
> Just because Ryzen is out doesn't mean games will magically make use for 16 threads.


Consoles have 8cores, Mainstream will be 6-8cores so We can expect much better multithreading on incoming games than before when not even a single developer made a game with muilticore in mind


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I think the guy is just bored and likes to argue, not interested in reality lol.
> 
> The only person i would feel good about recommending an 8600k to is someone that knows for sure they will not be buying AAA games in the future. They have their stable of games they play and those titles crave clockspeed and IPC.


No, that would be you. You literally argue everything.

Consoles have had 8 cores for years. Not much has really changed on that front.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Consoles have 8cores, Mainstream will be 6-8cores so We can expetc much better multithreading on incoming game sthan before when not even a single developer made a game with muilticore in mind


well here is hoping

however what makes this 8700K so sweet besides its cores is its high IPC and high clock speeds (apparently and of course with de-lid), so even badly optimized games benefit a lot
only thing I'd still wish for would be a hefty eDRAM








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> No, that would be you. You literally argue everything.
> 
> Consoles have had 8 cores for years. Not much has really changed on that front.


having 8 cores that are not even x86 isn't the same as just slapping in some AMD hardware

PC ports have become a lot better on average since there is AMD hardware in consoles


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> They already support SMT in games, some are
> 
> Crysis 3,Ryse Son of Rome, Homefront the Revolution,Prey, CIV VI,Dragon Age Inquisition.Battlefront (II),Battlefield 1,AotS,Watch Dogs 2,Total War Warhammer, Dawn of War III, Far Cry Primal, Far Cry 5


Most of those have little scaling beyond 6 cores


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Consoles have 8cores, Mainstream will be 6-8cores so We can expetc much better multithreading on incoming game sthan before when not even a single developer made a game with muilticore in mind


Consoles have 6-7C available to games and these cores are equal to a 2C on desktop, pretty much


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Consoles have 6-7C available to games and these cores are equal to a 2C on desktop, pretty much


Jaguar at 2.2ghz scores about 45 on cinebench r15, a coffee lake core at 4.7ghz scores ~205 without HT and 265 with it


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> Jaguar at 2.2ghz scores about 45 on cinebench r15, a coffee lake core at 4.7ghz scores ~205 without HT and 265 with it


Sources? 265 on singelcore? A 5 ghz SK-X scores 223P.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Am I crazy for thinking about getting an 8700 non K and still getting a NH D15 to keep it cool ?

I can't fit an 8700k in the budget unless I skimp on the motherboard or something else and that isn't wise to me, nor are the lower-range mobos available at launch.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Am I crazy for thinking about getting an 8700 non K and still getting a NH D15 to keep it cool ?
> 
> I can't fit an 8700k in the budget unless I skimp on the motherboard or something else and that isn't wise to me, nor are the lower-range mobos available at launch.


I'd skimp on the motherboard a bit since you don't have an upgrade path on Z370 anyway.

I'd probably go for a Z370-A from ASUS. If the Asrock Z370 Fatal1ty K6 isn't using Sinopower garbage then it should be decent as well. MSI might have a decent offering this time around, but I doubt they're opting for something other than NIKOS for budget / low midrange boards.

I'd stray FAR far away from Gigabyte as it seems their entire lineup is selling based off audio (WIMA) and the RGB.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Am I crazy for thinking about getting an 8700 non K and still getting a NH D15 to keep it cool ?
> 
> I can't fit an 8700k in the budget unless I skimp on the motherboard or something else and that isn't wise to me, nor are the lower-range mobos available at launch.


It will be overkill that's for sure.

Personally I'm never going big dual tower coolers again. Single tower 140mm does pretty much the same without filling your entire case. Much less weight/size. Lower price. Pretty much same cooling.

Take a look at Cryorig H5 Ultimate. I have overclocked two 7700K's to 5 GHz using that one, no delid. Cheap, great cooling and very low noise. Almost half price of D15. Not to mention the much better looks


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I'd skimp on the motherboard a bit since you don't have an upgrade path on Z370 anyway.
> 
> I'd probably go for a Z370-A from ASUS. If the Asrock Z370 Fatal1ty K6 isn't using Sinopower garbage then it should be decent as well. MSI might have a decent offering this time around, but I doubt they're opting for something other than NIKOS for budget / low midrange boards.
> 
> I'd stray FAR far away from Gigabyte as it seems their entire lineup is selling based off audio (WIMA) and the RGB.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> It will be overkill that's for sure.
> 
> Personally I'm never going big dual tower coolers again. Single tower 140mm does pretty much the same without filling your entire case.
> 
> Take a look at Cryorig H5 Ultimate. I have overclocked two 7700K's to 5 GHz on that one, with no delid. Cheap, great cooling and very low noise. Almost half price of D15.


In the past 24 hours I've made 6+ builds on Newegg, trying to min/max my extremely strict $1500 budget for a CPU + cooler, ram, mobo, case, PSU, and GPU as I already have the other components leftover from the dead 2500k system. I've even come to terms with having to use an unactivated copy of W10 until I can afford an oem key.

Everything revolved around at least having a 1080 and 7700k performance (with HT) and not skimping too much on parts as I want the system to last at least 6 years.

The biggest issue I had was trying to find a worthwhile mid range case. The difficulty was due to the cpu cooler and needing a single bay for my optical drive. I had thought if I got a cheaper motherboard that I was asking for trouble a few years down the road after running an OC and extreme use even at stock drastically shortened the boards lifespan. I was also unsure about quality 650watt PSU's with an OC, 1080 possibly with an OC, 2 HDD's and one SSD.

I'm open to changes, I also don't care about aesthetics in any aspect as long as the case isn't hideously ugly. I care about performance, lifespan/quality.

I also have a goal of having everything within two weeks, so I'd need to pre order.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I'd skimp on the motherboard a bit since you don't have an upgrade path on Z370 anyway.
> 
> I'd probably go for a Z370-A from ASUS. If the Asrock Z370 Fatal1ty K6 isn't using Sinopower garbage then it should be decent as well. MSI might have a decent offering this time around, but I doubt they're opting for something other than NIKOS for budget / low midrange boards.
> 
> I'd stray FAR far away from Gigabyte as it seems their entire lineup is selling based off audio (WIMA) and the RGB.


Whats wrong with asrock boards. What you mean sinopower? havnt heard this


----------



## AlphaC

There's plenty of cases that are cheap(ish) , can fit large CPU coolers, and have an optical drive.

Phanteks Enthoo Pro M for example.


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Sources? 265 on singelcore? A 5 ghz SK-X scores 223P.


You're quoting single *thread* performance. I did write that as well, but the second number that you quoted was the performance of a single *core* which includes hyperthreading (1c2t)

A skylake core (doesn't really matter if it's skylake, kaby, coffee or even skylake-x for this) can break 200 ST at 4.5ghz or 220 ST by 5ghz but hyperthreading is a significant multiplier to that


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I'd skimp on the motherboard a bit since you don't have an upgrade path on Z370 anyway.
> 
> I'd probably go for a Z370-A from ASUS. If the Asrock Z370 Fatal1ty K6 isn't using Sinopower garbage then it should be decent as well. MSI might have a decent offering this time around, but I doubt they're opting for something other than NIKOS for budget / low midrange boards.
> 
> I'd stray FAR far away from Gigabyte as it seems their entire lineup is selling based off audio (WIMA) and the RGB.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whats wrong with asrock boards. What you mean *sinopower*? havnt heard this
Click to expand...

makes mosfet drivers.

some may feel those aren't quality or even good components.


----------



## e-gate

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I'd skimp on the motherboard a bit since you don't have an upgrade path on Z370 anyway.
> 
> I'd probably go for a Z370-A from ASUS. If the Asrock Z370 Fatal1ty K6 isn't using Sinopower garbage then it should be decent as well. MSI might have a decent offering this time around, but I doubt they're opting for something other than NIKOS for budget / low midrange boards.
> 
> I'd stray FAR far away from Gigabyte as it seems their entire lineup is selling based off audio (WIMA) and the RGB.


Im a bit out of the loop with mobos. What's wrong with Gigabyte Z370s? Are they bad for some specific reason? Why many people praise Asus so much? Are they that good?


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I'd stray FAR far away from Gigabyte as it seems their entire lineup is selling based off audio (WIMA) and the RGB.


You mean that they are skimping on other stuff to focus on gimmicks so to speak? I say this because if I update now or with Ice Lake I would consider Gigabyte (until further notice).

I know little about motherboards, but I tend to don't like ASUS BIOS (too complicated for my taste), and when someone comes with an i7-7700K that is reaching 1.35V / 1.4V in stock at a forum in Brazil, usually is an ASUS or MSI board. I don't recall seeing a Gigabyte board with core voltage off the charts in the last year. Might be coincidence, but my impression is that ASUS is a more complex board, but not always a smooth ride. But I'm not talking about quality components. I have no idea.


----------



## kd5151

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?item=N82E16817151188

Great psu for the coffelake build and its 850w!


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?item=N82E16817151188
> 
> Great psu for the coffelake build and its 850w!


I got the 750W version of that!







I didn't actually need a new PSU but I wanted to have a backup lol


----------



## Cyro999

90 usd is a lot, don't have to pay that much considering it's twice as much power as a coffeelake/1080 system would need


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> 90 usd is a lot, don't have to pay that much considering it's twice as much power as a coffeelake/1080 system would need


Not if your using coffeelake and vega 64.


----------



## TMatzelle60

i just did a customer build with a 7700K and 1080 for 450w sfx psu


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> 90 usd is a lot, don't have to pay that much considering it's twice as much power as a coffeelake/1080 system would need


At the same time, 50% load = maximum efficiency.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> Most of those have little scaling beyond 6 cores


well for then there were only 6c/12t like Crysis 3, Dragon Age Inquisition

But


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> There's plenty of cases that are cheap(ish) , can fit large CPU coolers, and have an optical drive.
> 
> Phanteks Enthoo Pro M for example.


I'll likely go with that case, great recommendation, thanks.

One less piece of the puzzle.

Can I assume a quality 650watt would be enough for an 8700 non K and 1080 ?

I want a lighter NH-D15 alternative as well. The system will be moved off its wooden stand below a desk and put on a table every 2 months for cleaning and I don't want that cooler to stress the mobo too much.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Can I assume a quality 650watt would be enough for an 8700 non K and 1080 ?
> 
> I want a lighter NH-on D15 alternative as well. The system will be moved off its wooden stand below a desk and put on a table every 2 months for cleaning and I don't want that cooler to stress the mobo too much.


Yes. i7-8700 should come with a stock cooler. Use that for the time being.


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Can I assume a quality 650watt would be enough for an 8700 non K and 1080 ?
> 
> I want a lighter NH-D15 alternative as well. The system will be moved off its wooden stand below a desk and put on a table every 2 months for cleaning and I don't want that cooler to stress the mobo too much.


It's 6-core with HT, don't expect it to cool well.


----------



## kd5151

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Brand-new-PNY-Technologies-240GB-CS900-SATA-III-2-5-Internal-SSD-/172895941398?hash=item284166b316:g:hSQAAOSwUrJZ0CXC








I just bought one. Wish me luck!


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> There is a very high possibility (near certainty) coffee lake i5's will be the only ones in existence to be 6c6t, that imo *constitutes it as a bad product*. Its a stop gap product and *does not have legs*.


Those are two very different statements. I agree wholeheartedly with the latter but vehemently disagree with the former. The 8600K will certainly not have legs, as you put it but there is simply no way you can begin to argue that its in any way a "bad" product. That's just ridiculous to say IMO. For gamers the 8600K will be an upgrade even over the current gaming king 7700K and is certainly a productivity boon over previous i5's as well.

And besides all that, how can you call a product that clocks that high while also providing class-leading IPC a "bad product"? That just makes you look silly. I do agree with you, however, that the smarter buy is the 8700K for $100 more.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ph42oN*
> 
> That is true. There was no competition, *that's why no today's cpu will last as long as 2500k or 2600k did.* Still i think 8600k will be very good cpu at release, but it will fall behind in few years.


Depends on how you quantify that. Even today a 2600K is still a perfectly acceptable processor for gaming and I don't think for one second that in 2022 an 8700K (or even a 4790K for that matter) will somehow be unsuitable either. Remember guys, the processor is still pretty low down on the totem pole in terms of importance for gaming. And especially as 4k resolutions continue to gain traction as mainstream the biggest contributor to gaming performance will continue to be the GPU's over the coming years. Hell, a nearly decade old i7 920 still remains a viable CPU for gaming even in 2017...


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Brand-new-PNY-Technologies-240GB-CS900-SATA-III-2-5-Internal-SSD-/172895941398?hash=item284166b316:g:hSQAAOSwUrJZ0CXC
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just bought one. Wish me luck!


Online Deals


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Online Deals


Can't post ebay deals there.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Can't post ebay deals there.


but this is a news thread


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> It's 6-core with HT, don't expect it to cool well.


He's asking about a locked, 65W version. It's not gonna need a custom loop.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rudyae86*
> 
> Good God....8600k is almost there with the 8700k when OC to 5.0+ghz......
> 
> I'll probably just end up with the 8700K in the end lol
> 
> But even for those on a budget, the 8600K is a no brainer.


I'm on a budget, so the 8600k will be great then I will save up for 8 core Z390.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> but this is a news thread


coffeelake builds might need a ssd.









$20 is to good to be true but what the hell its worth a shot. However this seller is legit.http://www.ebay.com/itm/Brand-new-PNY-Technologies-240GB-CS900-SATA-III-2-5-Internal-SSD-/263095027591 $61 after using the coupon on the front page of ebay.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> coffeelake builds might need a ssd.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> $20 is to good to be true but what the hell its worth a shot. However this seller is legit.http://www.ebay.com/itm/Brand-new-PNY-Technologies-240GB-CS900-SATA-III-2-5-Internal-SSD-/263095027591 $61 after using the coupon on the front page of ebay.


have you seen any deal like this recently?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I'd stray FAR far away from Gigabyte as it seems their entire lineup is selling based off audio (WIMA) and the RGB.
> 
> 
> 
> You mean that they are skimping on other stuff to focus on gimmicks so to speak? I say this because if I update now or with Ice Lake I would consider Gigabyte (until further notice).
> 
> I know little about motherboards, but I tend to don't like ASUS BIOS (too complicated for my taste), and when someone comes with an i7-7700K that is reaching 1.35V / 1.4V in stock at a forum in Brazil, usually is an ASUS or MSI board. I don't recall seeing a Gigabyte board with core voltage off the charts in the last year. Might be coincidence, but my impression is that ASUS is a more complex board, but not always a smooth ride. But I'm not talking about quality components. I have no idea.
Click to expand...

I like my Gigabyte Z170 HD3 works great overclocking my i5 7600k to 4.8GHz easy, I just increased the multiplier that is it.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> have you seen any deal like this recently?


rufurb4less has ran this deal before. But I don't see SSD's on sale that often. The SSD market has been just as stagnant as everything else.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> rufurb4less has ran this deal before. But I don't see SSD's on sale that often. The SSD market has been just as stagnant as everything else.


I recall the last time I saw a deal on a SSD they were PNY they had better prices on sale than other brands


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> I recsall the last time I saw a deal on a SSD they were PNY they had better prices on sale than other brands


PNY do go on sale very often.







I haven't seen any good crucial sale's and every now and then you see samsung knock a few bucks off. The mass 240gb-256gb ssd market has been $90ish usd.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I like my Gigabyte Z170 HD3 works great overclocking my i5 7600k to 4.8GHz easy, I just increased the multiplier that is it.


Yeah







I consider Gigabyte the Volkswagen of motherboards (hassle free) and I find the BIOS to be way simpler to navigate (I might be used to it though).


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Yeah
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I consider Gigabyte the Volkswagen of motherboards (hassle free) and I find the BIOS to be way simpler to navigate (I might be used to it though).


DAS MOTHERBOARD


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> DAS MOTHERBOARD


Haha!


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> i know the i7 8700k is the best. But honestly the 8600K is just as good. When games use more cores it will be really great. it might not have the best ghz boost but still
> 
> 
> 
> They already support SMT in games, some are
> 
> Crysis 3,Ryse Son of Rome, Homefront the Revolution,Prey, CIV VI,Dragon Age Inquisition.Battlefront (II),Battlefield 1,AotS,Watch Dogs 2,Total War Warhammer, Dawn of War III, Far Cry Primal, Far Cry 5
Click to expand...

I don't see battlefield 1 scaling with more than 4 cores. link: https://www.techspot.com/review/1433-intel-core-i9-core-i7-skylake-x/page3.html


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Those are two very different statements. I agree wholeheartedly with the latter but vehemently disagree with the former. The 8600K will certainly not have legs, as you put it but there is simply no way you can begin to argue that its in any way a "bad" product. That's just ridiculous to say IMO. For gamers the 8600K will be an upgrade even over the current gaming king 7700K and is certainly a productivity boon over previous i5's as well.
> 
> And besides all that, how can you call a product that clocks that high while also providing class-leading IPC a "bad product"? *That just makes you look silly*. I do agree with you, however, that the smarter buy is the 8700K for $100 more.


heh

I have already quantified why i feel its a bad product, maybe you would be more comfortable with "bad purchase"?

It is a stop gap product and people will see in just a couple years why i am calling the 8600k a bad product.

Edit: Sometimes i feel i need to link definitions so people get what im saying around here:
Quote:


> stopgap (plural stopgaps)
> A temporary measure or short-term fix, a "gap filler", used until something better can be obtained; a band-aid solution.
> The small company uses their old product with a few kludged enhancements as a stopgap until they can develop a new product.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ




----------



## kd5151

Don't buy $20 ssd off ebay.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Don't buy $20 ssd off ebay.


Wait where is it 20 bucks?

I bought that exact one about a month ago for 64 bucks and that was a good deal lol.


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I don't see battlefield 1 scaling with more than 4 cores. link: https://www.techspot.com/review/1433-intel-core-i9-core-i7-skylake-x/page3.html


Ummm, correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the i5 7600k in that benchmark a 4 Core CPU? Why is the 1% Minimum FPS a full 22 FPS slower than the i7 7700k?

The maximum frame rate in that benchmark is 100% GPU limited, so no, you're not going to see any change in performance based on CPU scaling in a 100% GPU limited benchmark. But the minimum FPS clearly shows that it's making use of the 8 threads on the i7. Or can you give me another reason why the i7 has 17% faster performance despite only being clocked 10% higher than the i5?


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> heh
> 
> I have already quantified why i feel its a bad product, maybe you would be more comfortable with "bad purchase"?
> 
> It is a stop gap product and people will see in just a couple years why i am calling the 8600k a bad product.


I think you are DRASTICALLY overestimating the speed at which software will need more than 4 cores.

What percentage of the total PC userbase currently has a CPU with more than 4 cores? Probably something like 0.001%, right? Even if you looked at PC gaming exclusively you're still talking about over 99% of all PC gamers using a 4 core CPU. How many years do you think it's going to take for software developers to stop giving all those users proper support?

Realistically, 4-5 years MINIMUM before 6+ core CPUs will be necessary. And by that point anyone who buys an 8600k today would likely be ready to upgrade anyways.

It's not a "stopgap" CPU if the software will continue to provide good support and good performance for the entire planned lifespan of the CPU.

Or, to put it another way....

Intel released it's first quad core processor in 2006, and it's only been in the past 2 years that we've seen games that require quad core processors to run. Even today, 11 years later, most games will run just fine on a dual core i3 processor. If you think a 6 core processor is going to be totally obsolete within the next 5 years then you're just nuts. There isn't a shred of historical PC development that supports such a claim.


----------



## Scotty99

That's entirely irrelevant speculation, the reason i am saying its a bad product is because its a stop gap product from intel. There is no way intel lets AMD have a thread count lead like they do in the ryzen 5 series for long, in my estimation the coffee lake i5's will be the only 6c6t i5's in existence. Its very possible i7's will be the only 6c12t chips as well, but hyperthreading makes a huge difference here because it at least matches the thread count of the hugely popular ryzen 5 series.

No one is saying an i5 is going to be obsolete, but let me give you a scenario. Say in three years a game comes out that you are really interested in, but the benchmarks hit and your i5 is playing at 65% the performance of a 8700k and it is falling below ryzen 5 1600 because of its thread count as well. This is a completely plausible scenario and is the reason i feel the 8600k is a bad product in todays marketplace. Its not a bad chip in a vacuum of course, its going to look great for a couple years.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I'm on a budget, so the 8600k will be great then I will save up for 8 core Z390.


Because you absolutely needs 8C/16T when used to 4C/4T?

Didn't you upgrade from Skylake i5 to Kaby Lake i5...? Imagine if you have gotten an i7-6700K to begin with. Money saved and you would have better perf now. You wouldn't even have to think about getting 8600K.

This is why I won't buy 8600K over 8700K. It's only a matter of time before the i5 falls short, again. 100$ is nothing anyway, the i7-8700K will last much longer as a top gaming CPU. It will also be worth more when selling later. Money spent - Money saved.


----------



## Unsaid90

Intel is such a fraud, it probably conspired with game coders to force the gaming industry to stagnate









I mean, I remember buying a Q6600 in 2007 for "future-proofing" and then in 2011 I was basically forced to upgrade to YET ANOTHER 4C/4T cpu , 2500k, because the performance per core was just too low and further overclocking q6600 made it hotter than a bbq.

Will buying a cpu with 6/8 or more cores still ensure that it's a viable gaming cpu by the time the games actually start using 8+ threads , or will it be obsolete in terms of efficiency, technologies and per core performance... ?

I'm in a weird spot now, I haven't touched most parts of my system since early 2011 and some of it is starting to fail (RAM and HDD I think)... but I am yet to see one damn game that can justify getting rid of my 2500k. I don't want to buy some outdated parts to keep this PC alive and yet I can't upgrade to another 4C , 6C seems like a bad idea too... Z370 with like a 8600k could be justifiable if intel only promised to release another family of cpus, true 8cores for this chipset and socket so i could upgrade, but it's probably wishful thinking.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unsaid90*
> 
> Intel is such a fraud, it probably conspired with game coders to force the gaming industry to stagnate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mean, I remember buying a Q6600 in 2007 for "future-proofing" and then in 2011 I was basically forced to upgrade to YET ANOTHER 4C/4T cpu , 2500k, because the performance per core was just too low and further overclocking q6600 made it hotter than a bbq.
> 
> Will buying a cpu with 6/8 or more cores still ensure that it's a viable gaming cpu by the time the games actually start using 8+ threads , or will it be obsolete in terms of efficiency, technologies and per core performance... ?
> 
> I'm in a weird spot now, I haven't touched most parts of my system since early 2011 and some of it is starting to fail (RAM and HDD I think)... but I am yet to see one damn game that can justify getting rid of my 2500k. I don't want to buy some outdated parts to keep this PC alive and yet I can't upgrade to another 4C , 6C seems like a bad idea too... Z370 with like a 8600k could be justifiable if intel only promised to release another family of cpus, true 8cores for this chipset and socket so i could upgrade, but it's probably wishful thinking.


You think game dev's would optimize for 2-4C Intel CPU's when their main income comes from console sales? Atleast in most cases








It's hard to make games use many cores and threads and still have to support older CPU's. As long as the majority on steam uses 2C or 4C they will have to ..

2500K is beat ALOT by newer Intel CPU's, especially i7 4C/8T.
https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2773-intel-i5-2500k-revisit-benchmark-for-2017/page-3

So you can justify all you want, but 2500K is outdated alot and even a 6700K/7700K would be a huge upgrade.
For 120-240 Hz users, a 2500K, even with OC, will hold back fps tremendously. Minimums and avg will be very low compared to OC'ed i7 Skylake or better. As you can see.

Not sure why many 4C/4T users in this thread think 6C/12T or 6C/6T are too little. I mean seriously. You are using 6-7 year old CPU's with subpar single and multithreaded perf and 4 threads total. If you really needed 8C/16T minimum, you had upgraded long ago. Right?


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Because you absolutely needs 8C/16T when used to 4C/4T?
> 
> Didn't you upgrade from Skylake i5 to Kaby Lake i5...? Imagine if you have gotten an i7-6700K to begin with. Money saved and you would have better perf now. You wouldn't even have to think about getting 8600K.
> 
> This is why I won't buy 8600K over 8700K. It's only a matter of time before the i5 falls short, again. 100$ is nothing anyway, the i7-8700K will last much longer as a top gaming CPU. It will also be worth more when selling later. Money spent - Money saved.


a top gaming CPU with 16 PCI Express lanes, can't be a top gaming CPU.
a top gaming CPU should support multiple GPUs at full bandwidth, IMHO.


----------



## Lennyx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> a top gaming CPU with 16 PCI Express lanes, can't be a top gaming CPU.
> a top gaming CPU should support multiple GPUs at full bandwidth, IMHO.


Even nvidia and amd is slowing down support for multi gpu. The last years more and more game devs have dropped sli and xfire support all together.
So why do a top gaming cpu need to support more pci-e lanes?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> a top gaming CPU with 16 PCI Express lanes, can't be a top gaming CPU.
> a top gaming CPU should support multiple GPUs at full bandwidth, IMHO.


Ahh
This always comes up
Usually from gamers needing a reason / justifying going Threadripper or x299

So what do *gamers* need over 20 lanes anyway?
Is there a reaslitic way outside of benching that you can actually saturate all those lanes?

I also have a problem finding any fps analysis that show that lanes have an impact on fps outside of the error of margin

And to top it all off multi gpu us a dying breed
Was always niche
And people have noticed that frame timing is more important than high fps
Quad is going the way of the dodo already

So you need even less lanes

And with newer API's the burden falls to the dev to make it SLI work
So most will not bother with the hassle for a small group

And
A 1080ti is just (well barely) good enough for 4k
Next gen should be improving this again
A 1080 is 15 months old now? Seems like we are due for something new rather sooner than later

So again
What's the use for all the lanes on a gaming system?

Even if you raid 3 m2 drives together, you're bottlenecking everywhere else
And no game is going to tax even 1 M2 drive to it's limits

I'd really like an explanation of this
Because I have yet to receive an answer

Not just on these forums

edit:
ohh and please make it realistic
not a:
I need to convert all 5TB of cat videos from my mom, while twitch streaming my BF1 session while I do some Photoshopping on my 3rd monitor
thx
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lennyx*
> 
> Even nvidia and amd is slowing down support for multi gpu. The last years more and more game devs have dropped sli and xfire support all together.
> So why do a top gaming cpu need to support more pci-e lanes?


Well usually it strikes me as a purchase justification

I can see it in more professional setups

Hell x299 with Mining boards is great for those
Each slot gets 1x
So you can fit like 16 cards or so on a board

Would have to dig out the pics
But looked funny









Except that one is 1151 socket

Mmm


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Wait where is it 20 bucks?
> 
> I bought that exact one about a month ago for 64 bucks and that was a good deal lol.


it was scam. I knew it was to good to be true.


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Ahh
> This always comes up
> Usually from gamers needing a reason / justifying going Threadripper or x299
> 
> So what do *gamers* need over 20 lanes anyway?
> Is there a reaslitic way outside of benching that you can actually saturate all those lanes?
> 
> I also have a problem finding any fps analysis that show that lanes have an impact on fps outside of the error of margin
> 
> And to top it all off multi gpu us a dying breed
> Was always niche
> And people have noticed that frame timing is more important than high fps
> Quad is going the way of the dodo already
> 
> So you need even less lanes
> 
> And with newer API's the burden falls to the dev to make it SLI work
> So most will not bother with the hassle for a small group
> 
> And
> A 1080ti is just (well barely) good enough for 4k
> Next gen should be improving this again
> A 1080 is 15 months old now? Seems like we are due for something new rather sooner than later
> 
> So again
> What's the use for all the lanes on a gaming system?
> 
> Even if you raid 3 m2 drives together, you're bottlenecking everywhere else
> And no game is going to tax even 1 M2 drive to it's limits
> 
> I'd really like an explanation of this
> Because I have yet to receive an answer
> 
> Not just on these forums
> 
> edit:
> ohh and please make it realistic
> not a:
> I need to convert all 5TB of cat videos from my mom, while twitch streaming my BF1 session while I do some Photoshopping on my 3rd monitor
> thx
> Well usually it strikes me as a purchase justification
> 
> I can see it in more professional setups
> 
> Hell x299 with Mining boards is great for those
> Each slot gets 1x
> So you can fit like 16 cards or so on a board
> 
> Would have to dig out the pics
> But looked funny
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except that one is 1151 socket
> 
> Mmm


there are some games that want bandwidth, the witcher 3 is one of them.
please see this video at minutes 5:40




as you can see the performance difference is huge specially on minimum FPS.
so why buy a GTX1080 Ti if you are bottlenecked by the PCI lanes? Don't you get a top card just to have top performance?

This is always more true with PCI Express SSDs that consumes lanes.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> there are some games that want bandwidth, the witcher 3 is one of them.
> please see this video at minutes 5:40
> 
> 
> 
> 
> as you can see the performance difference is huge specially on minimum FPS.
> so why buy a GTX1080 Ti if you are bottlenecked by the PCI lanes? Don't you get a top card just to have top performance?
> 
> This is always more true with PCI Express SSDs that consumes lanes.


and for every youtube video from someone I don't know I can find sources that I know claiming otherwise





AND

if you use 1 (one) card then its always 16x
no matter how many M2 drives you have, as those don't take away from the GPU stack
Quote:


> so why buy a GTX1080 Ti if you are bottlenecked by the PCI lanes?


one is fine
if you have 2 then frame timing is way more important than raw fps anyway
in the titles that actually support it

so what you do when you come across a title you like and 2 cards are not supported?

or are causing issues, or with the current driver?

ohh
and what kind of i9 do I need for 2x16x lines? (hint, its a 1000$ CPU)
thats 32 already, more than a 7800x (28)

put it another way
why spent so much on a CPU to get more lanes, when you could buy a better GFX, or well 2? (1 grand on the CPU, and quite a lot for the board, and the need for quad channel RAM; more RAM to buy)


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lennyx*
> 
> Even nvidia and amd is slowing down support for multi gpu. The last years more and more game devs have dropped sli and xfire support all together.
> So why do a top gaming cpu need to support more pci-e lanes?


because DX12 brings multi gpu and we will see an increase in multi gpu support.


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> why spent so much on a CPU to get more lanes, when you could buy a better GFX, or well 2? (1 grand on the CPU, and quite a lot for the board, and the need for quad channel RAM; more RAM to buy)


we are talking about top gaming CPU, who buy a top gaming CPU has just bought the best GPU on the market.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> because DX12 brings multi gpu and we will see an increase in multi gpu support.


ohh
misinformed

the developer has to code that into the game, it will not come from the driver, Nvidia/AMD

same for Vulkan

so your hoping that devs that can't make *good* use of many cores/threads on CPU's to spent time on an even smaller group of people running more than one card?

its not going to be wide spread all of a sudden
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> we are talking about top gaming CPU, who buy a top gaming CPU has just bought the best GPU on the market.


but I would get better fps with a coffee lake 6 or 8 core CPU running 5ghz or more than I would get out of an i9 with more lanes

next your going to tell me games profit from quad channel


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> ohh
> misinformed
> 
> the developer has to code that into the game, it will not come from the driver, Nvidia/AMD
> 
> same for Vulkan
> 
> so your hoping that devs that can't make *good* use of many cores/threads on CPU's to spent time on an even smaller group of people running more than one card?
> 
> its not going to be wide spread all of a sudden


not wide spread but well supported on every AAA titles, as it was for the SLI for a little bit better because it will be a little bit easyer.


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> but I would get better fps with a coffee lake 6 or 8 core CPU running 5ghz or more


Async compute will make games scales better on threads,
2018 will be interesting


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> Async compute will make games scales better on threads,
> 2018 will be interesting


but how does that have anything to do with a 6 core/12 thread CPU vs a 12 core/24 thread one *in gaming*

even AotS doesn't scale endlessly, and that's like *the* title everyone always runs to when it comes to many cores and async

I'm saying 6 cores/12 threads with 5Ghz+ (because it *seems* to be easy on coffee lake) would be better than 10cores/20 threads with more lanes *for gaming*

also
making SLI work in DX 12 is not esier
in DX11 you don't have to do anything as its been handled by the driver (SLI profile), doesn't get easier than that for a dev

also what does top mea?
if you go by core and lane count one "should" buy the 2000$ CPU?

still reaks to me like someone justifying a 1000$ CPU because in Witcher 3, using 2 *GTX 980 ti* in SLI provides better fps because of the cards get both 16x lanes

if you would've said:
I'm using blender all day

I'd understand really

btw
you know the SLI bridge got a haul over with the GTX 1080 right?

so one would have to find a newer test with a new generation of cards to make an actual comparison (Witcher saw I think a few more fps with the High bandwidth one)


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> but how does that have anything to do with a 6 core/12 thread CPU vs a 12 core/24 thread one *in gaming*
> 
> even AotS doesn't scale endlessly, and that's like *the* title everyone always runs to when it comes to many cores and async
> 
> I'm saying 6 cores/12 threads with 5Ghz+ (because it *seems* to be easy on coffee lake) would be better than 10cores/20 threads with more lanes *for gaming*
> 
> also
> making SLI work in DX 12 is not esier
> in DX11 you don't have to do anything as its been handled by the driver (SLI profile), doesn't get easier than that for a dev
> 
> also what does top mea?
> if you go by core and lane count one "should" buy the 2000$ CPU?
> 
> still reaks to me like someone justifying a 1000$ CPU because in Witcher 3, using 2 *GTX 980* in SLI provides better fps because of the cards get both 16x lanes
> 
> if you would've said:
> I'm using blender all day
> 
> I'd understand really


we were talking about top gaming CPU, a 350€ CPU is a mainstream one, nothing related to the TOP word


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> we were talking about top gaming CPU, a 350€ CPU is a mainstream one, nothing related to the TOP word


and still a 7700k at stock is faster or on par in most games than a 10 core CPU at stock
so a 6 core version would handily beat it in most cases and be on the same level in those rare cases

the key here is top *gaming*

and even AotS doesnt benefit from 10 core+HT any more
and its like the number 1 boring game/benchmark to use for such things

btw
your trying to sell me the idea to spent 750€ on a more expensive CPU *becaue of more PCIe lanes when using 2 graphics cards*
not core count


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> Async compute will make games scales better on threads,
> 2018 will be interesting


asynchronous compute is used on GPUs


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> asynchronous compute is used on GPUs


but it's highly related to CPU scaling over threads.


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> btw
> your trying to sell me the idea to spent 750€ on a more expensive CPU *becaue of more PCIe lanes when using 2 graphics cards*
> not core count


I don't want to sell you anything, I'm only saying the with 350€ you don't buy the top, TOP of anything.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> but it's highly related to CPU scaling over threads.


how?


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> we were talking about top gaming CPU, a 350€ CPU is a mainstream one, nothing related to the TOP word


For gaming, yes. Just like the 7700K beats HEDT CPU's in pretty much all games.

8700K at 5+ will make i9's look silly in pretty much any game. Ring bus > Mesh.
Especially if 5.2-5.5 is doable with delid and proper cooling.

Seeing CFL 6C @ 5.1-5.3 GHz with no delid using air cooling in one of the leaked reviews makes me wonder how high these chips will go in the right hands. They will be gaming beasts.


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> how?


because it allow to compute more instructions with a single CPU call. it's meant for this.
the async calls are spreaded through the threads. there are some games that shows this.


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> For gaming, yes. Just like the 7700K beats HEDT CPU's in pretty much all games.
> 
> 8700K at 5+ will make i9's look silly in pretty much any game. Ring bus > Mesh.
> Especially if 5.2-5.5 is doable with delid and proper cooling.
> 
> Seeing CFL 6C @ 5.1-5.3 GHz with no delid using air cooling in one of the leaked reviews makes me wonder how high these chips will go in the right hands. They will be gaming beasts.


ok buy your top 350€ cpu.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> because it allow to compute more instructions with a single CPU call. it's meant for this.


that makes more instructions in GPU thread doesnt mean games will be multithreaded


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> I don't want to sell you anything, I'm only saying the with 350€ you don't buy the top, TOP of anything.


Do you realize that when people found out that sklyake-x suffers in gaming performance compared to Kaby Intel's response was
They know
It's because of the cache changes and mesh instead of ringbus
And Intel doesn't care

HEDT is not for gaming
But a great production platform

In some games broadwell-e is faster than you're top CPU


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> ok buy your top 350€ cpu.


I will (or actually I won't, since I get it for free). It's pretty much a fact that HEDT 6C+ is not that good for gaming. The most expensives ones are downright terrible. So much for a "top CPU"









It's the main reason I've never bothered with the HEDT platform. Gaming perf is meh. Terrible perf per dollar. You pay much more, for less.


----------



## peter2k

Curious to see what coffee lake can do
Still whish for some love for z270 at least


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> I will (or actually I won't, since *I get it for free*).


Please, master, teach me your ways!


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Because you absolutely needs 8C/16T when used to 4C/4T?
> 
> Didn't you upgrade from Skylake i5 to Kaby Lake i5...? Imagine if you have gotten an i7-6700K to begin with. Money saved and you would have better perf now. You wouldn't even have to think about getting 8600K.
> 
> This is why I won't buy 8600K over 8700K. It's only a matter of time before the i5 falls short, again. 100$ is nothing anyway, the i7-8700K will last much longer as a top gaming CPU. It will also be worth more when selling later. Money spent - Money saved.


I agree with you on the whole. The 8600K is a really nice product and if you are really strapped for cash then it is a much better buy than any previous i5 has been before, but if you CAN swing an extra hundred bucks the 8700K is really a much better buy. I can't imagine it will be outdated for at least 5 years or more whereas the 8600K "may" run up against issues in that time if software and games continue to become more well threaded moving forward. Both Intel releases are great products to be sure, but then so are the Ryzen offerings. Its just a great time for processors at the moment (and will get even better early in 2018 when we see the Ryzen revisions release).


----------



## kd5151




----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I'm on a budget, so the 8600k will be great then I will save up for 8 core Z390.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because you absolutely needs 8C/16T when used to 4C/4T?
> 
> Didn't you upgrade from Skylake i5 to Kaby Lake i5...? Imagine if you have gotten an i7-6700K to begin with. Money saved and you would have better perf now. You wouldn't even have to think about getting 8600K.
> 
> This is why I won't buy 8600K over 8700K. It's only a matter of time before the i5 falls short, again. 100$ is nothing anyway, the i7-8700K will last much longer as a top gaming CPU. It will also be worth more when selling later. Money spent - Money saved.
Click to expand...

I upgraded from i5 6600k to i5 7600k just for the fun of it. I upgrade for the fun of getting a new SKU not because I need to. My new games have been doing fine with a i5 and will continue to for the future because it takes so long for games needing more CPU performance. My GTX 1070 can't keep up with my i5 7600k.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I don't see battlefield 1 scaling with more than 4 cores. link: https://www.techspot.com/review/1433-intel-core-i9-core-i7-skylake-x/page3.html
> 
> 
> 
> Ummm, correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the i5 7600k in that benchmark a 4 Core CPU? Why is the 1% Minimum FPS a full 22 FPS slower than the i7 7700k?
> 
> The maximum frame rate in that benchmark is 100% GPU limited, so no, you're not going to see any change in performance based on CPU scaling in a 100% GPU limited benchmark. But the minimum FPS clearly shows that it's making use of the 8 threads on the i7. Or can you give me another reason why the i7 has 17% faster performance despite only being clocked 10% higher than the i5?
Click to expand...

My point is Battlefield 1 does not do better with 6, 8, 10, core.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> My point is Battlefield 1 does not do better with 6, 8, 10, core.


I've seen many BF1 benchmarks showing i5 4C/4T dip below i7 4C/8T, at same clocks.

Even Ryzen 1500X, 4C/8T, has almost 10 fps higher minimum than 7600K using 1070..

This even looks like a SP bench. It mostly is, for consistency. MP, especially with alot of players, requires much more of the CPU and the i5 will fall even more behind. 60 Hz gamers might not care that much, but 100+ Hz users will.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> My point is Battlefield 1 does not do better with 6, 8, 10, core.


It matters in multiplayer with max players

Many benches are only Single player to begin with


----------



## Thetbrett

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-8700K-vs-Intel-Core-i7-3770K/3937vs1317
I know it's very early, but those numbers make an upgrade look worthwhile. Trusty 3770k..


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> It matters in multiplayer with max players
> 
> Many benches are only Single player to begin with


Very correct! That's a good example and is not tested enough, but a common issue that consumers run into.

I remember when BF3 came out and Tomshardware showed that a dual core ran the game just as well as a quad on up. Oops, forgot to include mulitplayer. People were barking up a storm on the BF forums for quite some time about it. "Why can't my PC get good fps"...and similar threads.

The i5 pre Coffeelake gets a good workout in BF1 64p Conquest and will have some trouble where the i7 will not whatsoever. However, with that said I still think the 8600k will make a great gaming solution today and many years to come. Especially if they all hit 5ghz lol...wow.


----------



## evensen007

Decent info on what's in store, especialy from the gigabyte side.

https://www.kitguru.net/components/leo-waldock/gigabyte-uk-shows-gtx-1080ti-xtreme-edition-talks-z370-and-overclocking/


----------



## kd5151

https://videocardz.com/73126/coffeelake-and-kabylake-lga1151-pins-are-different


----------



## QuadDamage

^^ Anyone plan to use a AIO cooler with these bad boys yet? Wanted to know whats the best


----------



## PontiacGTX

So the pins are used to deliver more power for the core


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> ^^ Anyone plan to use a AIO cooler with these bad boys yet? Wanted to know whats the best


If you have the money... EK-XLC Predator 280. You can add the GPU to the loop if you want.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> If you have the money... EK-XLC Predator 280. You can add the GPU to the loop if you want.


When did they bring these back??


----------



## QuadDamage

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> ^^ Anyone plan to use a AIO cooler with these bad boys yet? Wanted to know whats the best
> 
> 
> 
> If you have the money... EK-XLC Predator 280. You can add the GPU to the loop if you want.
Click to expand...

Does Amazon or Newegg have anything like this quality as If i order it today takes 4 days and cost 25 bucks for shipping pretty pricey


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> Does Amazon or Newegg have anything like this quality as If i order it today takes 4 days and cost 25 bucks for shipping pretty pricey


I was eyeing this but didnt like the looks of the tubes, if that doesnt bother you this is a good quality unit.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01HQ6DCHI/?tag=pcpapi-20


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> When did they bring these back??


Yeah, they were out of stock for a while. And if you go through the AIO tab, there are no units available. A bug perhaps? I'm not sure. But I selected the product and it was added to the shopping cart, so they might have it available.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> My point is Battlefield 1 does not do better with 6, 8, 10, core.
> 
> 
> 
> It matters in multiplayer with max players
> 
> Many benches are only Single player to begin with
Click to expand...

Single player and multiplayer use the same game engine so they scale the same. I need to see benchmarks to prove your point otherwise what you say is pure 'forum-level' conjecture.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Single player and multiplayer use the same game engine so they scale the same. I need to see benchmarks to prove your point otherwise what you say is pure 'forum-level' conjecture.


http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Battlefield-1-2016-Spiel-54981/Specials/Battlefield-1-They-Shall-not-Pass-Benchmarks-1223170/


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> Does Amazon or Newegg have anything like this quality as If i order it today takes 4 days and cost 25 bucks for shipping pretty pricey


The Alphacool seems to be a good option for an AIO (cheap as well for a triple rad). You can research the FPI and see how the Alphacool blocks compare to the competitors, but $164 is almost the price of a regular 280mm unit. And it can be also expanded to a GPU loop (or whatever you want). Regular site reviews of these AIOs are usually a mess, so don't pay much attention to them.


----------



## MGX1016

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Battlefield-1-2016-Spiel-54981/Specials/Battlefield-1-They-Shall-not-Pass-Benchmarks-1223170/


4K really brings that to its knees with 38 min FPS Ultra HD


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Single player and multiplayer use the same game engine so they scale the same. I need to see benchmarks to prove your point otherwise what you say is pure 'forum-level' conjecture.


Engine might be the same, but there are many more calculations in MP, it's way more dynamic. This has been tested many times really. Even in BF3 the i7 pulled ahead of i5 in MP. BF4, BF1 same thing.

When I disable HT, my fps dips alot in most newer and demanding games. The minimum fps especially. 4C/4T is not enough in many games anymore. Not if you aim for highest possible fps that is. 60 Hz users and casuals gamers might not care, but the more serious gamers using 100+ Hz will, since the dips will be highly noticable.


----------



## Scotty99

Any leaks about microcenter pricing yet?


----------



## unityole

wow.. looks like im skipping 14nm++ 8700k because going to 8 core will likely need socket change.



source baidu http://tieba.baidu.com/p/5353174380


----------



## bl4ckdot

We are talking 10nm+ if it's true. So like in 2 years. Not waiting that long


----------



## Scotty99

Not to mention there is no guarantee it will be faster in single core than 8700k. It wouldnt surprise me cannonlake will be slower than coffe.

Whoa also check this out:





You can select to ramp fans up based on CPU or GPU temps in asus new software suite. Not sure if that is new, but i like it. They are also offering (maybe included on some boards?) a fan holder for 40/50mm fan to place over VRM area.


----------



## czin125

Coffeelake has no upgrade path unlike Ryzen1/2/3
Cannonlake-S 8750K is 6C/12T with AVX512 VBMI UMIP and DDR4-2800 stock
Cannonlake-X is 14nm++ and 10nm ( lower core counts are 14nm++ )
Icelake-S/X / AVX512 IFMA ACE / DDR4-3200
Tigerlake-S/X / AVX512 IFMA PMM ( Socket 2076 same with above ) / DDR4-3466

Icelake and Tigerlake are Socket 1161

8C/16T Tigerlake has a boost of 5.0ghz ( the first 6ghz on water cpu ? ) DDR4-5000 too?

That 4.5ghz base on the 9750K seems to match up with their graphs.


----------



## axiumone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Any leaks about microcenter pricing yet?


The 2066 chips launched at MSRP or even a little above. It took a bit over a month for the pricing to go to the traditional discounted price. I expect the same for this launch.


----------



## kd5151

The holiday season is right around around the corner.







Shopping Cart PC.


----------



## Asterox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> *Yeah 8600K is very good right now*. It will be like all i5s though. In the end you wished you got the i7s


Or precisely someone stole 6 Threads,







but no problem *R5 1600/200$ or R5 1600X/220$* is standing at the service.


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> Coffeelake has no upgrade path unlike Ryzen1/2/3
> Cannonlake-S 8750K is 6C/12T with AVX512 VBMI UMIP and DDR4-2800 stock
> Cannonlake-X is 14nm++ and 10nm ( lower core counts are 14nm++ )
> Icelake-S/X / AVX512 IFMA ACE / DDR4-3200
> Tigerlake-S/X / AVX512 IFMA PMM ( Socket 2076 same with above ) / DDR4-3466
> 
> Icelake and Tigerlake are Socket 1161
> 
> 8C/16T Tigerlake has a boost of 5.0ghz ( the first 6ghz on water cpu ? ) DDR4-5000 too?
> 
> That 4.5ghz base on the 9750K seems to match up with their graphs.


It'll likely take till Ryzen 3rd gen before AMD can match Coffeelake single thread performance too. So buy Coffeelake now or like many will do, just buy Ryzen 1, 2 and 3 as they come. You know this, while not a smart investment, is exactly what some people will do.

I'm all for keeping the motherboard and upgrading the cpu for that socket as they become available. But AMD is still several years behind in single thread performance. Their IPC is good, but the clocks need to come up at least 500 MHz. Some see this happening and others don't. Time will tell ?


----------



## bazh

So they already got speciffic SKU roadmaps for the next 3 years? That just looks oddly speciffic.

Of course they'll change socket again after Z390. FFS Intel.


----------



## Scotty99

Think i have decided on maximus x hero:
https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO/

M.2 heatsink on the strix is just too ugly lol.

Anyone have MSRP's for boards yet? GOing by z270 version of this board it should launch around ~230.00.


----------



## MaKeN

@Scoty99
I also was looking at it , and on Apex board 2.
Problem is if you go with CM h500p and use a 360 rad with push/pull on top, it will block the MoBo temp display....
need to find a mobo with that display on the botoom, Asrock seems to be like that


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> @Scoty99
> I also was looking at it , and on Apex board 2.
> Problem is if you go with CM h500p and use a 360 rad with push/pull on top, it will block the MoBo temp display....
> need to find a mobo with that display on the botoom, Asrock seems to be like that


Nice catch! Although i didnt plan on using push/pull, something to keep in mind.

I really like this x370 board from asrock, maybe i will give their lineup another look.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bazh*
> 
> So they already got speciffic SKU roadmaps for the next 3 years? That just looks oddly speciffic.
> 
> Of course they'll change socket again after Z390. FFS Intel.


That is normal for Intel to plan 3 years in advance.


----------



## czin125

Tigerlake-X ( Upped cache starting from Icelake-X
14Core
28MB L2 ( 14x2 ) Upped to 2048 KB from 1024 KB per Core of L2
28MB L3 ( 14x2 ) Upped to 2048 KB from 1408 KB per Core of L3

Icelake-X
14Core
28MB L2
28MB L3

8820X ( Cannonlake-X )
8Core
8MB L2 ( 8x1 )
11MB L3 ( 8x1.375 )


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Single player and multiplayer use the same game engine so they scale the same. I need to see benchmarks to prove your point otherwise what you say is pure 'forum-level' conjecture.


Using the same engine makes no sense. The cpu is under different loads with single player vs 64 player multiplayer.


----------



## Techhog

That roadmap is BS. Intel doesn't decide on clockspeeds until a month or two before production starts.

The real story is the news that that there will be big shortages again. I'm not paying $400+ for this thing so I guess my upgrade plans are cancelled.


----------



## QuadDamage

Comes out in 2 days no boards or chip are available or pre orders on any major site. Looking good


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> That roadmap is BS. Intel doesn't decide on clockspeeds until a month or two before production starts.
> 
> *The real story is the news that that there will be big shortages again*. I'm not paying $400+ for this thing so I guess my upgrade plans are cancelled.


Gonna need a link for that.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Gonna need a link for that.


http://www.overclock.net/t/1639296/sweclockers-intel-coffee-lake-a-scarcity-for-the-rest-of-the-year#post_26372336


----------



## Scotty99

Eh that's a swedish article lol.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Eh that's a swedish article lol.


The same thing happened with Skylake shortages. Sweden was the first place to warn us. Also, someone on Reddit heard the same thing for Asia so you can't claim that it's restricted to smaller markets. Intel ****ed us over again.


----------



## Scotty99

All that says is one swedish retailer is getting low stock, if there was an actual "big shortage" they wouldnt be getting any.

Im sure i could drive up to microcenter on the 5th and get a 8700k and a board, but imma wait a bit for reviews.


----------



## kevindd992002

Which is the best choice between Maximus X Hero, Code, or Apex? Is Apex really the best overclocker compared to the rest?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Which is the best choice between Maximus X Hero, Code, or Apex? Is Apex really the best overclocker compared to the rest?


I think they would pretty much all overclock your CPU the same, but the Apex would most likely overclock the memory the best if history is anything to go by


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I think they would pretty much all overclock your CPU the same, but the Apex would most likely overclock the memory the best if history is anything to go by


I see. The only reason I didn't choose the z270 Apex back then was because it was an EATX motherboard that won't fit the Phanteks Enthoo Evolv ATX case. But I've heard that the z370 version is now an ATX. Is that accurate?

Other than that, is there any notable diffrrencr that you'll be skimped on if you choose the Apex?


----------



## TMatzelle60

based on the leaks i think alot will be getting the i5 8600K. Games are only starting to utilize more cores. I dont seem many jumping more then 3-4 cores. Down the road i see more and more being used.

Both i5 and i7 are looking great


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> I see. The only reason I didn't choose the z270 Apex back then was because it was an EATX motherboard that won't fit the Phanteks Enthoo Evolv ATX case. But I've heard that the z370 version is now an ATX. Is that accurate?
> 
> Other than that, is there any notable diffrrencr that you'll be skimped on if you choose the Apex?


I have the same issue with my Evolve ATX I wanted the Z270 Extreme but cant fit it due to E-ATX which wont fit without a lot of modifying, new Apex is still E-ATX







Board selection really comes down to what features you really want or need, there will also be a Maximus X Formula if water cooling is your thing, possibly a Maximus X Extreme which usually comes later on, though it may not given it targets the same user the Apex does more or less.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I have the same issue with my Evolve ATX I wanted the Z270 Extreme but cant fit it due to E-ATX which wont fit without a lot of modifying, new Apex is still E-ATX
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Board selection really comes down to what features you really want or need, there will also be a Maximus X Formula if water cooling is your thing, possibly a Maximus X Extreme which usually comes later on, though it may not given it targets the same user the Apex does more or less.


It's just that I watch a Youtube video that shows the Z370 ROG boards line up and it says that the Apex is now an ATX. The Extreme remains an E-ATX though. I thought about the Formula but then people say that VRM and MOSFET watercooling is more for looks rather than performance so I don't know if the extra $100 for that board is justifiable. I will be doing a full custom waterloop.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> It's just that I watch a Youtube video that shows the Z370 ROG boards line up and it says that the Apex is now an ATX. The Extreme remains an E-ATX though. I thought about the Formula but then people say that VRM and MOSFET watercooling is more for looks rather than performance so I don't know if the extra $100 for that board is justifiable. I will be doing a full custom waterloop.


Apex is definitely E-ATX http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/z370-motherboard-guide-coffee-lake/2/
Formula is a great board put it to you this way my VRM's (Maximus VIII Formula) even under a heavy load never exceed 40 degrees C, keep in mind more cores will produce more load on the VRM's which equals more heat especially when overclocked.


----------



## MaKeN

Formula must be expensive as hell.... something as msi godlike gaming ...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Formula must be expensive as hell.... something as msi godlike gaming ...


Formula boards never are cheap







but it comes down to what features you want or need and in my case how the PCI-E slots are configured.


----------



## Buris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *epic1337*
> 
> so if their i5s are 6C/6T, does that mean their i3s will finally become 4C/8T?
> then theres pentium chips that could possibly be 4C/4T chips.


Not going to happen

What will most likely happen

Pentium 2c/4t
i3 - 4c/4t
i5 - 6c/6t
MOBILE i5 - 4c/8t
i7 - 6c/12t

a 4c/8t would basically make getting an i5 completely worthless.


----------



## kd5151

i see 3 asus z370 mobos on newegg.

GO!


----------



## Scotty99

Those are all ugly lol. Those prices cant be right either, 178 bucks for the prime?


----------



## MaKeN

Lol out of stock 2 of them already... People are crazy after cofeelake


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Those are all ugly lol. Those prices cant be right either, 178 bucks for the prime?


They're sold and shipped by...BuyVPC.com or whatever.









ASRock


----------



## Scotty99

The extreme 4 is probably the best looking z370 board ive seen:
https://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z370%20Extreme4/index.us.asp#Memory

One note, of all the things they could have put on the IO shield to illuminate they chose "purity sound 4".....


----------



## mdd1986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> The extreme 4 is probably the best looking z370 board ive seen:
> https://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z370%20Extreme4/index.us.asp#Memory
> 
> One note, of all the things they could have put on the IO shield to illuminate they chose "purity sound 4".....


all about those beats man.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> They're sold and shipped by...BuyVPC.com or whatever.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASRock


Asrock Fatal1ty K6 , Taichi , Extreme4 look to be decent boards

https://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Fatal1ty%20Z370%20Gaming%20K6/index.us.asp
https://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z370%20Extreme4/index.us.asp
https://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z370%20Taichi/index.us.asp
https://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z370M-ITXac/index.us.asp
"Dual-Stack MOSFET (DSM) is another innovative MOSFETs design by ASRock. The silicon die area is increased by stacking two dies into one MOSFET. The larger the die area, the lower Rds(on). Compared to traditional discrete MOSFET, DSM with larger die area provides extreme lower Rds(on) 1.2 mΩ, so the power supply for the CPU Vcore is more efficient."
---- marketing speak for TI NexFETs

For ASUS the ITX board looks okay too but no word on power delivery:
https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-Z370-I-GAMING/

Other ASUS boards:
https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/PRIME-Z370-A/
https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO/
https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-Maximus-X-Formula/
https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-Z370-G-GAMING/ (mATX)
https://www.asus.com/ROG-Republic-Of-Gamers/ROG-STRIX-Z370-F-GAMING/
https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-Z370-E-GAMING/

Gigabyte boards to watch:
https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z370-AORUS-Gaming-7-rev-10#kf
https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z370-AORUS-Gaming-5-rev-10#kf

MSI boards (need to unheatsink these):
https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/Z370-GODLIKE-GAMING
https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/Z370-GAMING-M5
https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/Z370-GAMING-PRO-CARBON
https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/Z370-TOMAHAWK
https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/Z370-SLI-PLUS


----------



## Scotty99

Im curious about extreme 4 price, traditionally those are 150 or less, might be the best buy for coffee.


----------



## mdd1986

I also really like the extreme 4. When I was looking to build a 7700K system that was the board I was going to go with mainly because of the color scheme (Z270 was white and black instead of gray and black on Z370). How does ASRock compare to Asus/MSI/GigaByte?


----------



## looniam

yeah, another mobo round up.

http://wccftech.com/intel-z370-motherboard-roundup-asus-msi-asrock-aorus-gigabyte/


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> I also really like the extreme 4. When I was looking to build a 7700K system that was the board I was going to go with mainly because of the color scheme (Z270 was white and black instead of gray and black on Z370). How does ASRock compare to Asus/MSI/GigaByte?


As with ASUS , Gigabyte , MSI you need to do your due diligence.

All manufacturers tend to have garbage lower tier boards.

With Z series chipsets the bar is higher than H series which doesn't allow for overclocking, but the cheaper boards are still garbage.

Start by counting chokes (the squares next to VRM heatsink), if it's less than 6 then it's very likely garbage. Any remotely decent VRM will be running 4 phases for CPU and 2 for the iGPU / other stuff.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> yeah, another mobo round up.
> 
> http://wccftech.com/intel-z370-motherboard-roundup-asus-msi-asrock-aorus-gigabyte/


Thanks.


----------



## Scotty99

Look at size of heatsinks too, like id pass on the SLI/AC version it has even smaller heatsinks than my x370 version. SLI/AC is also cut down, isnt full size ATX.


----------



## MaKeN

Gigabyte gaming 7 looks decent


----------



## mdd1986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> As with ASUS , Gigabyte , MSI you need to do your due diligence.
> 
> All manufacturers tend to have garbage lower tier boards.
> 
> With Z series chipsets the bar is higher than H series which doesn't allow for overclocking, but the cheaper boards are still garbage.
> 
> Start by counting chokes (the squares next to VRM heatsink), if it's less than 6 then it's very likely garbage. Any remotely decent VRM will be running 4 phases for CPU and 2 for the iGPU / other stuff.


what would you say the minimum number of phases would be for overclocking 10? I'm seeing most of the mid range to top end board have 10 to 12 depending on the brand. Like the ASRock Extreme 4 has 12 which seems great for around $150.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Single player and multiplayer use the same game engine so they scale the same. I need to see benchmarks to prove your point otherwise what you say is pure 'forum-level' conjecture.
> 
> 
> 
> Using the same engine makes no sense. The cpu is under different loads with single player vs 64 player multiplayer.
Click to expand...

AI or 64 players works out to be the same load for the CPU. The plotting of the 64 players comes from the server.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> what would you say the minimum number of phases would be for overclocking 10? I'm seeing most of the mid range to top end board have 10 to 12 depending on the brand. Like the ASRock Extreme 4 has 12 which seems great for around $150.


It depends on mosfet quality, but I have more hope in Asrock's Taichi + K6 than the rest. If it's anything like 6 for CPU +2 (doubled to 4) then it ought to be adequate.

The "DSM" they specify used in the prior Z87 / Z97 / Z170 / Z270 boards was the Texas Instruments NexFET capable of 90%+ efficiency at 25A while having 40A maximum rating, while cheaper mosfets tend to top out at 25-30A maximum before the heat turns to thermal runaway.

edit: It seems the differentiation between the Taichi & Extreme 4 / K6 is the BCLK (Hyper BCLK Engine II).
edit2: keep in mind that the PWM controller can only output 8 phases , or 6+2 which means anything with more than 8 phases is likely doubling up. 12 is likely 8+4 (doubled from 4+2) ; 10 is likely 8+2 (doubled from 4+1) or 6+4 (doubled from 3+2) , or similar.

see:
https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8333/asrock-z270-taichi-motherboard-review/index3.html , https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8062/asrock-fatal1ty-z270-gaming-i7-motherboard-review/index3.html,
https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8059/asus-rog-maximus-ix-apex-intel-z270-motherboard-review/index3.html ,
https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8018/asrock-fatal1ty-z270-gaming-itx-ac-motherboard-review/index3.html ,
https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/7742/asrock-z170m-oc-formula-intel-z170-motherboard-review/index3.html
https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/7580/asus-rog-maximus-viii-formula-intel-z170-motherboard-review/index3.html
https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/7485/asrock-fatal1ty-z170-gaming-itx-ac-intel-motherboard-review/index3.html
https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/7334/asrock-z170-oc-formula-intel-motherboard-review/index3.html


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> As with ASUS , Gigabyte , MSI you need to do your due diligence.
> 
> All manufacturers tend to have garbage lower tier boards.
> 
> With Z series chipsets the bar is higher than H series which doesn't allow for overclocking, but the cheaper boards are still garbage.
> 
> Start by counting chokes (the squares next to VRM heatsink), if it's less than 6 then it's very likely garbage. Any remotely decent VRM will be running 4 phases for CPU and 2 for the iGPU / other stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> what would you say the minimum number of phases would be for overclocking 10? I'm seeing most of the mid range to top end board have 10 to 12 depending on the brand. Like the ASRock Extreme 4 has 12 which seems great for around $150.
Click to expand...

All Z370s overclock the same for 24/7 water cooling limit. Just pick the motherboard with the features you want. I'm going for the $114.00 Gigabyte Z370 HD3 and will overclock to 5.0GHz+.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> AI or 64 players works out to be the same load for the CPU. The plotting of the 64 players comes from the server.


All of the information coming in over the network still has to be processed. All the animations, actions, player movement, player info, etc. has to be processed to be displayed. Unlike a single-player scenario, none of these actors or actions can just be set to 'inactive' whilst they're off-screen for you. This isn't new or revolutionary stuff. The reason benchmark sites don't benchmark this is because it's time-consuming and the numbers themselves will vary significantly based on the gameplay of that particular round, meaning that many rounds have to be played with each CPU to obtain a useful mean. GN's testing bears this out and the expectation for more multiplayer-focused testing would only be to move further along these lines.


----------



## domenic

Any insight into the release date for the Asus ROG Maximus X Formula motherboard? Perhaps on Thursday along with the launch of the processors? My fear is that Asus won't release all of the MBs immediately. Since this time around a new motherboard is required its important to be able to buy the board you want at the time the processors are released...

DOM


----------



## mdd1986

based on those pictures in the the article it looks like the Z370 Extreme 4, Taichi, Pro Gaming and K6 all have the same type and amount of chocks (14 total). The Z270 Extreme 4 had different looking chocks and only 12. This is probably due to the extra power requirements of coffee lake that is mentioned.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> All of the information coming in over the network still has to be processed. All the animations, actions, player movement, player info, etc. has to be processed to be displayed. Unlike a single-player scenario, none of these actors or actions can just be set to 'inactive' whilst they're off-screen for you. This isn't new or revolutionary stuff. The reason benchmark sites don't benchmark this is because it's time-consuming and the numbers themselves will vary significantly based on the gameplay of that particular round, meaning that many rounds have to be played with each CPU to obtain a useful mean. GN's testing bears this out and the expectation for more multiplayer-focused testing would only be to move further along these lines.


You are right. I have tried playing several games with HT off, and my fps is far worse in most of them. Minimums are much lower in general. I maybe notice this because of high Hz, a 60 Hz user probably won't. I'm used to fast and fluid gameplay. Huge fps dips I notice immediately.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

If boards are selling out in minutes I might as well just pull the trigger on a 7700k build, but I should at least wait until Thursday to see if the 7700k goes even lower than $300.

I've been using a potato laptop for the last 5 months and I'm almost at the limit of my patience.


----------



## tezza1982

Sorry if already answered or unknown but are these going to be available at retail on lifting of NDA on Thursday or is there a wait?


----------



## JedixJarf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> If boards are selling out in minutes I might as well just pull the trigger on a 7700k build, but I should at least wait until Thursday to see if the 7700k goes even lower than $300.
> 
> I've been using a potato laptop for the last 5 months and I'm almost at the limit of my patience.


Fry's had the 7700k for $259 on friday : /

Would recommend frequenting slickdeals.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> All Z370s overclock the same for 24/7 water cooling limit. Just pick the motherboard with the features you want. I'm going for the $114.00 Gigabyte Z370 HD3 and will overclock to 5.0GHz+.


There's also cost cutting of features.

VRM is only part of the picture: the Z370 HD3 does not have USB 3.1 Gen 2 or Thunderbolt support. It also uses ALC892.

IMO , Gigabyte hasn't been a good value since Z87 era. Most of their boards are selling based on RGB + WIMA audio caps these days.

edit:https://www.asrock.com/mb/compare.asp?Models=Z370%20Extreme4,Z370%20Taichi,Fatal1ty%20Z370%20Professional%20Gaming%20i7,Fatal1ty%20Z370%20Gaming%20K6

The 3 Asrock boards mentioned earlier also have Backup BIOS.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> AI or 64 players works out to be the same load for the CPU. The plotting of the 64 players comes from the server.
> 
> 
> 
> All of the information coming in over the network still has to be processed. All the animations, actions, player movement, player info, etc. has to be processed to be displayed. Unlike a single-player scenario, none of these actors or actions can just be set to 'inactive' whilst they're off-screen for you. This isn't new or revolutionary stuff. The reason benchmark sites don't benchmark this is because it's time-consuming and the numbers themselves will vary significantly based on the gameplay of that particular round, meaning that many rounds have to be played with each CPU to obtain a useful mean. GN's testing bears this out and the expectation for more multiplayer-focused testing would only be to move further along these lines.
Click to expand...

With multiplayer the players off your screen are not being processed by your PC the server handles those duties. The graphics on your screen is the demanding part. Like AI all the home PC has to do is plot X,Y,Z for each player that you see and the sever does all the calculations for the updates that is done on the map.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> All Z370s overclock the same for 24/7 water cooling limit. Just pick the motherboard with the features you want. I'm going for the $114.00 Gigabyte Z370 HD3 and will overclock to 5.0GHz+.
> 
> 
> 
> There's also cost cutting of features.
> 
> VRM is only part of the picture: the Z370 HD3 does not have USB 3.1 Gen 2 or Thunderbolt support. It also uses ALC892.
> 
> IMO , Gigabyte hasn't been a good value since Z87 era. Most of their boards are selling based on RGB + WIMA audio caps these days.
Click to expand...

It has USB 3.1 that I don't have anything to use it with. Also the Codec ALC892 has DACs with 95dB SNR that is great. I'm using a ALC 887 with 90dB SNR now and it works perfect for sound.

If I was going cold for benching at 7.0GHz+ I would purchase a better motherboard.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> All of the information coming in over the network still has to be processed. All the animations, actions, player movement, player info, etc. has to be processed to be displayed. Unlike a single-player scenario, none of these actors or actions can just be set to 'inactive' whilst they're off-screen for you. This isn't new or revolutionary stuff. The reason benchmark sites don't benchmark this is because it's time-consuming and the numbers themselves will vary significantly based on the gameplay of that particular round, meaning that many rounds have to be played with each CPU to obtain a useful mean. GN's testing bears this out and the expectation for more multiplayer-focused testing would only be to move further along these lines.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are right. I have tried playing several games with HT off, and my fps is far worse in most of them. Minimums are much lower in general. I maybe notice this because of high Hz, a 60 Hz user probably won't. I'm used to fast and fluid gameplay. Huge fps dips I notice immediately.
Click to expand...

With 4c/4t what games do you have large FPS dips, also what do you notice? My gaming is smooth as butter with i5 7600k and I have been playing for 22 years so I know when there is something off.


----------



## mdd1986

I honestly pick boards based on looks more than anything these days. Which one is the best looking?


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JedixJarf*
> 
> Fry's had the 7700k for $259 on friday : /
> 
> Would recommend frequenting slickdeals.


Thanks, wasn't aware of that site.

Looks like it was in-store only anyways.

For 16 years I used to live a mile away from the 2nd Micro Center ever built and I really miss it.

Now I'm trying to figure out if the NH D15 is worth the weight, and what mobo to get.


----------



## QuadDamage

Amazon put this up
https://www.amazon.com/TUF-Z370-Motherboard-Generation-Processors/dp/B075RJ8WN2/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&qid=1507065707&sr=8-9&keywords=z370+motherboard
If u want a ITX
https://www.amazon.com/Z370-I-mini-ITX-Motherboard-Generation-Intel-Core-Processors/dp/B075RJ16BQ/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&qid=1507065707&sr=8-10&keywords=z370+motherboard

2 bad I don't want a ITX board waiting for the rest to show up soon I hope


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> I honestly pick boards based on looks more than anything these days. Which one is the best looking?


Id say top 3 are:
Maximus x hero
Asrock extreme 4
MSI gaming pro carbon

MSI is really nice but it does not have front panel usb-c 3.1 apparently, kind of a deal breaker for me.

Edit, yep amazingly the only board from MSI to have front panel 3.1 type C is the godlike. What are you thinking MSI, there are already a bunch of cases on the market with this and there will be more releasing this year.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> Amazon put this up
> https://www.amazon.com/TUF-Z370-Motherboard-Generation-Processors/dp/B075RJ8WN2/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&qid=1507065707&sr=8-9&keywords=z370+motherboard
> If u want a ITX
> https://www.amazon.com/Z370-I-mini-ITX-Motherboard-Generation-Intel-Core-Processors/dp/B075RJ16BQ/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&qid=1507065707&sr=8-10&keywords=z370+motherboard
> 
> 2 bad I don't want a ITX board waiting for the rest to show up soon I hope


feels like they try to push that TUF Mobo


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> I honestly pick boards based on looks more than anything these days. Which one is the best looking?


for the taste and color , creyons are different


----------



## QuadDamage

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> Amazon put this up
> https://www.amazon.com/TUF-Z370-Motherboard-Generation-Processors/dp/B075RJ8WN2/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&qid=1507065707&sr=8-9&keywords=z370+motherboard
> If u want a ITX
> https://www.amazon.com/Z370-I-mini-ITX-Motherboard-Generation-Intel-Core-Processors/dp/B075RJ16BQ/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&qid=1507065707&sr=8-10&keywords=z370+motherboard
> 
> 2 bad I don't want a ITX board waiting for the rest to show up soon I hope
> 
> 
> 
> feels like they try to push that TUF Mobo
Click to expand...

Right

I'm sure a bunch will show up and be for prime; I'm waiting on the better boards to show up with the CPU hope in less then 2 days or have a like a pre order
2 day prime shipping isn't bad for us USA boyz


----------



## MaKeN

Why wouldn't you buy it from MC? If you stay in US?
Comes with a discount in bundles with a cpu,and you can always fast exchange if its bad or something...


----------



## QuadDamage

^^ I am in the Bay area. We had a micro center in San Jose I bought my i7 2600k on release date at the store but it's closed down now I have a 7 hour drive to the nearest micro center

I'm pretty happy with the amazon return policy as well. I order everything off amazon been pretty happy so far.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> With multiplayer the players off your screen are not being processed by your PC the server handles those duties. The graphics on your screen is the demanding part. Like AI all the home PC has to do is plot X,Y,Z for each player that you see and the sever does all the calculations for the updates that is done on the map.


What you describe is a pure client/server model which is largely outmoded and obsolete for modern action-oriented games. Here's a simple worksheet describing how shared client/server responsibilities have evolved.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Coffee Lake lineup details are available from Intel.







For comparison:


----------



## PontiacGTX

So I wonder if the high end motherboard has been announced?
are they going to release a Z370 OC Formula? a Z370 XPower? a Z370 Gaming G1/SOC? Z370 FTW/Classified? Z370GT9?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Coffee Lake lineup details are available from Intel.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Then the i3 get worse IMC or they will OC the memory about similar clock speed?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> With multiplayer the players off your screen are not being processed by your PC the server handles those duties. The graphics on your screen is the demanding part. Like AI all the home PC has to do is plot X,Y,Z for each player that you see and the sever does all the calculations for the updates that is done on the map.
> 
> 
> 
> What you describe is a pure client/server model which is largely outmoded and obsolete for modern action-oriented games. Here's a simple worksheet describing how shared client/server responsibilities have evolved.
Click to expand...

This is a quote from the link you posted.
Quote:


> Usually a server is a dedicated host that runs the game and is authoritative about world simulation, game rules, and player input processing.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> This is a quote from the link you posted.


It is and in no way detracts from the need for predictive processing on the client side, which affects every aspect of the player character as well as client-side checks and calculation, to say nothing of processing physics, maths, and everything else on screen. That's also just for Source, a relatively uncomplicated engine compared to Frostbite. You're arguing against the benchmark that you asked for and the facts of development. The onus is on you to prove why you're right and the world is wrong.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Then the i3 get worse IMC or they will OC the memory about similar clock speed?


Not sure about that but getting an unlocked i3 puts you in the same price point as the i5-7400...

The price increase across the lineup is just another means of Intel to maintain the same status quo

On a side note, anyone else curious about the 400 MHz turbo frequency deltas between the 8700K and the 8600K?


----------



## Timur Born

So Thunderbolt headers are replace with RGB headers these days? Which boards still offer the Thunderbolt header (for both TB and Intel based USB 3.1)? Asrock ones I see. Any others (Asus at all)?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> This is a quote from the link you posted.
> 
> 
> 
> It is and in no way detracts from the need for predictive processing on the client side, which affects every aspect of the player character as well as client-side checks and calculation, to say nothing of processing physics, maths, and everything else on screen. That's also just for Source, a relatively uncomplicated engine compared to Frostbite. You're arguing against the benchmark that you asked for and the facts of development. The onus is on you to prove why you're right and the world is wrong.
Click to expand...

All the things you mention also involve single player with AI.

I have not seen any comparisons with single player benchmarks and 64 player being worse.


----------



## mdd1986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Id say top 3 are:
> Maximus x hero
> Asrock extreme 4
> MSI gaming pro carbon
> 
> MSI is really nice but it does not have front panel usb-c 3.1 apparently, kind of a deal breaker for me.
> 
> Edit, yep amazingly the only board from MSI to have front panel 3.1 type C is the godlike. What are you thinking MSI, there are already a bunch of cases on the market with this and there will be more releasing this year.


I agree although I don't care too much for the Asus boards for some reason looks wise. They seem to plain to me or something.

My top 3 are
AORUS Z370 Gaming 5 Motherboard
Asrock extreme 4
MSI gaming pro carbon

Curious to see how much the Gaming pro carbon will be.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> All the things you mention also involve single player with AI.


To a significantly lesser degree, including the fact that AI can be 'switched off' with no need for polling. Also, predictive calculations run against the network aren't a thing for single-player because there is no need to compensate for latency. Again, the onus is on you to disprove what numbers have already shown you.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> I agree although I don't care too much for the Asus boards for some reason looks wise. They seem to plain to me or something.
> 
> My top 3 are
> AORUS Z370 Gaming 5 Motherboard
> Asrock extreme 4
> MSI gaming pro carbon
> 
> Curious to see how much the Gaming pro carbon will be.


Are you in the USA?

http://www.shopblt.com/search/order_id=%21ORDERID%21&s_max=25&t_all=1&s_all=z370&search=Search

ASUS MAXIMUS X APEX $327.97
MAXIMUSXHEROWI-FIAC $266.82
PRIME Z370-A $170.45
PRIME Z370-P $135.10 --- not recommended
STRIX Z370-E GAMING $201.64
STRIX Z370-F GAMING $185.16
STRIX Z370-H GAMING $162.77 --- not recommended
STRIX Z370-I GAMING $184.52
TUF Z370 PLUS GAMING $146.13 --- not recommended

Gigabyte Z370 AORUS GAMING 5 = $219.54
GIgabyte Z370 AORUS GAMING 7 = $271.29
Z370AORUSULTRAGAMING = $188.04 --- not recommended
Z370 HD3 $141.13 --- not recommended
Z370 HD3P $155.97 --- not recommended
Z370XP SLI $167.28 --- not recommended


----------



## Scotty99

266 for the maximus hero, wut? The z270 version is 200 bucks lol.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 266 for the maximus hero, wut? The z270 version is 200 bucks lol.


Could be worse if you're in Canada...
http://www.neutroncanada.com/prodsearch.cfm
2903879 LGA1151 DDR4 DP HDMI M.2 Z370 11AC WL GIGABIT USB 3.1 (MAXIMUSXHEROWI-FIAC) $299.27
2903952 LGA1151 DDR4 DP HDMI M.2 Z370 DESIGNED FOR EXTREME PERFORMANCE (MAXIMUS X APEX) $366.76
2903958 LGA1151 DDR4 DP HDMI M.2 USB 3.1 FOR 8TH GENERATION INTEL (STRIX Z370-I GAMING) $208.46
2904025 LGA1151 DDR4 HDMI DVI M.2 8TH GENERATION INTEL CORE (STRIX Z370-H GAMING) $184.45
2904056 LGA1151 DDR4 DP HDMI DVI M.2 GIGABIT LAN & USB 3.1 FOR 8TH (STRIX Z370-F GAMING) $209.17
2904112 LGA1151 DDR4 DP HDMI DVI M.2 8TH GENERATION INTEL CORE (PRIME Z370-A) $192.92
2904117 LGA1151 DDR4 HDMI DVI M.2 USB 3.1 FOR 8TH GENERATION INTEL (TUF Z370 PLUS GAMING) In Stock $166.09
2904163 LGA1151 DDR4 DP HDMI DVI 11AC WL & USB 3.1 FOR 8TH (STRIX Z370-E GAMING) $227.34
2904200 LGA1151 DDR4 HDMI DVI M.2 Z370 5X PROTECTION III GIGABIT LAN & HD (PRIME Z370-P) $153.92

2908628 HD3P Z370 MP LGA1151 MAX-64GB DDR4 ATX PCIE16 GBE LAN (Z370 HD3P) $326.05 <---








2908650 AORUS ULTRA GAMING Z370 LGA1151 MAX-64GB DDR4 ATX PCIE16 GBE LAN (Z370AORUSULTRAGAMING) $393.74
2910473 SLI Z370 XP MP LGA1151 MAX-64GB DDR4 ATX PCIE16 GBE LAN (Z370XP SLI) $350.01
2913695 AORUS GAMING5 Z370 MP LGA1151 MAX-64GB DDR4 ATX PCIE16 GBE LAN (Z370 AORUS GAMING 5) $459.75
2916262 HD3 Z370 MP LGA1151 MAX-64GB DDR4 ATX PCIE16 GBE LAN (Z370 HD3) $294.67 <---








2918641 AORUS GAMING7 Z370 MP LGA1151 MAX-64GB DDR4 ATX PCIE16 GBE LAN (Z370 AORUS GAMING 7) $569.78

I hope they're placeholders.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Not sure about that but getting an unlocked i3 puts you in the same price point as the i5-7400...
> 
> The price increase across the lineup is just another means of Intel to maintain the same status quo
> 
> On a side note, anyone else curious about the 400 MHz turbo frequency deltas between the 8700K and the 8600K?


well It looks more like a a 7700k with no HT(Quad core, 8MB cache,same IGP,similar base memory clock speed) but I mean the price of an i5 would be out of my range but do you think is worth the extra money? or that bundles can be cheaper with a 8600k?


----------



## lolredy

maximus ix hero in canada is 320CAD on newegg(they probably go often on sale though). So, to me 300CAD for maximus x hero sounds good


----------



## Scotty99

208 bucks here.
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/HHbkcf/asus-maximus-ix-hero-atx-lga1151-motherboard-maximus-ix-hero

Im not paying over 250 for a motherboard thats insane, may have to go with strix even tho that m.2 heatsink is heinous lol.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

So what are we expecting the actual retail prices of CL to be compared to the wholesale prices that we've seen ?

I want that Asus Prime z370-A, but I don't want to wait too much longer.


----------



## mdd1986

I'm in the US. Yea, I'm not paying anything over $200 for a motherboard. I always feel like you are paying more for the asus brand compared to the others. ASrock seems like great value to be honest. Will see what the MSI boards are.


----------



## Scotty99

I dont think those linked prices are accurate. -A boards from asus have always been 150 bucks, 170+ puts you into elite level territory. I expect gaming pro carbon to be ~180, extreme 4 to be ~165.


----------



## QuadDamage

I will go with the Msi Z370 board for sure I don't need anything crazy just a nice m2 and enough ports
Just waiting for them to show up online


----------



## Scotty99

I mean the taichi x370 is only 199 bucks MSRP, and that is a real elite level board. If z370 taichi is anything more than that you can attribute that to intel tax.

Id buy a taichi....but those gears lol. AMD version looks acceptable, z370 looks like a plastic cogwheel someone glued on there from a kids toy set.


----------



## svenge

The one thing I don't like about the upcoming CFL lineup is the lack of a i5-8500 SKU. There's too much of a gap between the $182 8400 (2.8GHz base / 4.0GHz max turbo) and the $257 8600K (3.6GHz / 4.3 GHz). Traditionally the i5-x400 CPU has always been relatively awful compared to its i5-x500 counterpart due to missing features and/or 300-400MHz slower clock speeds, so I don't know what happened this time. I guess Intel _really_ wants people to buy the 8600K this time even if they're not going to overclock...

Then again, if the Turbo Boost does work decently I guess it won't be _so_ bad. Still, it does leave a slightly sour taste in my mouth. For years, I've always advocated the combination i5-x500 CPUs and Hx70 motherboards (along with a NVIDIA card w/ "Turbo Boost 3.0" functionality) when building plug-and-play PCs intended for non-techie friends, so I hope that this move doesn't begin to invalidate that method.


----------



## AlphaC

Probably needs more process improvements to fit that sort of turbo on 65W.

It's also only the initial SKUs.


----------



## svenge

True enough. Perhaps they'll be a i5-8500 in the spring after yields improve.


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I mean the taichi x370 is only 199 bucks MSRP, and that is a real elite level board. If z370 taichi is anything more than that you can attribute that to intel tax.
> 
> Id buy a taichi....but those gears lol. AMD version looks acceptable, z370 looks like a plastic cogwheel someone glued on there from a kids toy set.


The x370 Taichi isn't that nice. I've built a few rigs with it. The PCB isn't real thick and overall I'd give it a 7 out of 10. In fact I've had many AM4 boards and they're not built as heavy duty as intels version most of the time. It's sketchy and disappointing.

I've had some SOLID intel boards that feel like you could park a car on them. Nothing AM4 has impressed me in that way yet. Not that AM4 boards are having a hard time keeping up with what Ryzen can dish out. I'm just stating what has actually been through my actual hands.

I wouldn't give the x370 Taichi anything higher than an Extreme 3 maybe 4 build quality wise. I'll do nicely, it looks nice but it ain't no MSI Xpower z87 board that when you pick it up, it's actually heafty and screams "wow this is a beast".


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> All the things you mention also involve single player with AI.
> 
> 
> 
> To a significantly lesser degree, including the fact that AI can be 'switched off' with no need for polling. Also, predictive calculations run against the network aren't a thing for single-player because there is no need to compensate for latency. Again, the onus is on you to disprove what numbers have already shown you.
Click to expand...

I have not seen any comparisons with single player benchmarks and 64 mutiplayer player being worse.


----------



## NorcalTRD

Whats a good z370 upper end mobo with wifi and bluetooth onboard?


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> Whats a good z370 upper end mobo with wifi and bluetooth onboard?


https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO-WI-FI-AC/overview/


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> Whats a good z370 upper end mobo with wifi and bluetooth onboard?


Depending on how much you want to spend but Asus Maximus X Hero WiFi, Asus Maximus X Code or Formula would all be good boards to consider


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> Whats a good z370 upper end mobo with wifi and bluetooth onboard?


wattercooling headers included /better vrms/integrated vrm watercooling ports/better audio/m.2 heatsinks/more fan headers/ better vrm cooling heatsink, and so on... there are things that high end mobos take the place of a high end mobos








Another question ,do you need all that?








Pick up the board that has all yoh need , this is where MoBosstart to be different for your needs.

For exemple :
I need a board the has a temp display on the bottom, preferably 3 m.2 slots , strong vrms/i dont care about audio/ front 3.1 usb port/as much as possible fan headers .... etc
From all that i asume there is no perfect board for each individual demand....
You just take/buy what fits you


----------



## NorcalTRD

Thanks, that looks like a good suggestion from both of you.

Ive had the Extreme 3 for my 2500k and liked it alot, was going to go with Extreme 4 for z370 but it has no onboard bluetooth/wifi.

MaKeN - I intend to make use of most of those components with the exception of an m2 drive for now and liquid cooling mobo components. Just going to do an h110i or something for the cpu and probably an air cooled Aourus 1080TI


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> wattercooling headers included /better vrms/integrated vrm watercooling ports/better audio/m.2 heatsinks/more fan headers/ better vrm cooling heatsink, and so on... there are things that high end mobos take the place of a high end mobos
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another question ,do you need all that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pick up the board that has all yoh need , this is where MoBosstart to be different for your needs.
> 
> For exemple :
> I need a board the has a temp display on the bottom, preferably 3 m.2 slots , strong vrms/i dont care about audio/ front 3.1 usb port/as much as possible fan headers .... etc
> From all that i asume there is no perfect board for each individual demand....
> You just take/buy what fits you


I think one important thing many people forget to consider is the quality of the UEFI, this is the main reason why personally I would not buy Gigabyte or MSI, not because their components are bad or lacking features but in the past their UEFI's have been severely lacking.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> Thanks, that looks like a good suggestion from both of you.
> 
> Ive had the Extreme 3 for my 2500k and liked it alot, was going to go with Extreme 4 for z370 but it has no onboard bluetooth/wifi.


Love ASRock? Then The Taichi is for you!


----------



## lolredy

nvm


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Could be worse if you're in Canada...
> http://www.neutroncanada.com/prodsearch.cfm
> 2903879 LGA1151 DDR4 DP HDMI M.2 Z370 11AC WL GIGABIT USB 3.1 (MAXIMUSXHEROWI-FIAC) $299.27
> 2903952 LGA1151 DDR4 DP HDMI M.2 Z370 DESIGNED FOR EXTREME PERFORMANCE (MAXIMUS X APEX) $366.76
> 2903958 LGA1151 DDR4 DP HDMI M.2 USB 3.1 FOR 8TH GENERATION INTEL (STRIX Z370-I GAMING) $208.46
> 2904025 LGA1151 DDR4 HDMI DVI M.2 8TH GENERATION INTEL CORE (STRIX Z370-H GAMING) $184.45
> 2904056 LGA1151 DDR4 DP HDMI DVI M.2 GIGABIT LAN & USB 3.1 FOR 8TH (STRIX Z370-F GAMING) $209.17
> 2904112 LGA1151 DDR4 DP HDMI DVI M.2 8TH GENERATION INTEL CORE (PRIME Z370-A) $192.92
> 2904117 LGA1151 DDR4 HDMI DVI M.2 USB 3.1 FOR 8TH GENERATION INTEL (TUF Z370 PLUS GAMING) In Stock $166.09
> 2904163 LGA1151 DDR4 DP HDMI DVI 11AC WL & USB 3.1 FOR 8TH (STRIX Z370-E GAMING) $227.34
> 2904200 LGA1151 DDR4 HDMI DVI M.2 Z370 5X PROTECTION III GIGABIT LAN & HD (PRIME Z370-P) $153.92
> 
> 2908628 HD3P Z370 MP LGA1151 MAX-64GB DDR4 ATX PCIE16 GBE LAN (Z370 HD3P) $326.05 <---
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2908650 AORUS ULTRA GAMING Z370 LGA1151 MAX-64GB DDR4 ATX PCIE16 GBE LAN (Z370AORUSULTRAGAMING) $393.74
> 2910473 SLI Z370 XP MP LGA1151 MAX-64GB DDR4 ATX PCIE16 GBE LAN (Z370XP SLI) $350.01
> 2913695 AORUS GAMING5 Z370 MP LGA1151 MAX-64GB DDR4 ATX PCIE16 GBE LAN (Z370 AORUS GAMING 5) $459.75
> 2916262 HD3 Z370 MP LGA1151 MAX-64GB DDR4 ATX PCIE16 GBE LAN (Z370 HD3) $294.67 <---
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2918641 AORUS GAMING7 Z370 MP LGA1151 MAX-64GB DDR4 ATX PCIE16 GBE LAN (Z370 AORUS GAMING 7) $569.78
> 
> I hope they're placeholders.


I wonder how much the Maximus X Hero Non-WiFi costs. The Maximus IX Hero did not have a WiFi version which is probably why it was cheaper on launch. I don't need both WiFi AC and Bluetooth so that's on thing to consider for me.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I think one important thing many people forget to consider is the quality of the UEFI, this is the main reason why personally I would not buy Gigabyte or MSI, not because their components are bad or lacking features but in the past their UEFI's have been severely lacking.


I couldn't agree more! ASUS' UEFI is just one of the best and I'm not being a fanboy here.


----------



## kd5151

https://www.asrock.com/MB/Intel/Z370%20Taichi/index.asp#Memory

just noticed this.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> I wonder how much the Maximus X Hero Non-WiFi costs. The Maximus IX Hero did not have a WiFi version which is probably why it was cheaper on launch. I don't need both WiFi AC and Bluetooth so that's on thing to consider for me.
> 
> I couldn't agree more! ASUS' UEFI is just one of the best and I'm not being a fanboy here.


In fairness all the Asrock boards I have used have a good UEFI as well, my only gripe about them is how thin the PCB on their cheaper mobos is.


----------



## NorcalTRD

I was also llooking at the Aorus Gaming 5 and then Fatal1ty Gaming i7 as they have the wifi/bluetooth onboard with the rest of my requirements.


----------



## NorcalTRD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> https://www.asrock.com/MB/Intel/Z370%20Taichi/index.asp#Memory
> 
> just noticed this.


What are you noticing about it?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> I was also llooking at the Aorus Gaming 5 and then Fatal1ty Gaming i7 as they have the wifi/bluetooth onboard with the rest of my requirements.


If you dont want problems with UEFI stay away from Gigabyte boards.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> What are you noticing about it?


they posted QVL list. Wasn't there a few days ago.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> In fairness all the Asrock boards I have used have a good UEFI as well, my only gripe about them is how thin the PCB on their cheaper mobos is.


I haven't really tried using Asrock board but I've heard good things about them. Do they have the same PCB thickness problem with their higher end boards though?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I think one important thing many people forget to consider is the quality of the UEFI, this is the main reason why personally I would not buy Gigabyte or MSI, not because their components are bad or lacking features but in the past their UEFI's have been severely lacking.


mSI BIOS made me a fan of MSI , lol....

For me is the best /and easiest BIOS to navigate is for sure MSI..... i feel it so simple.
From z370 lineup
I hate to say it but from MSI only ,gaming 5 would kinda feet my needs, but if gigabyte gaming 7 is at the same price or near i would go for it .... ( gb gaming 7 is the one that also fits my needs)
For each their own


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> The x370 Taichi isn't that nice. I've built a few rigs with it. The PCB isn't real thick and overall I'd give it a 7 out of 10. In fact I've had many AM4 boards and they're not built as heavy duty as intels version most of the time. It's sketchy and disappointing.
> 
> I've had some SOLID intel boards that feel like you could park a car on them. Nothing AM4 has impressed me in that way yet. Not that AM4 boards are having a hard time keeping up with what Ryzen can dish out. I'm just stating what has actually been through my actual hands.
> 
> I wouldn't give the x370 Taichi anything higher than an Extreme 3 maybe 4 build quality wise. I'll do nicely, it looks nice but it ain't no MSI Xpower z87 board that when you pick it up, it's actually heafty and screams "wow this is a beast".


I have to agree the Taichi PCB isn't that thick. However, it has featureset and VRM of a high end board.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> I haven't really tried using Asrock board but I've heard good things about them. Do they have the same PCB thickness problem with their higher end boards though?


Asrock higher end and even mid range boards are significantly thicker, if a PCB is really thin it flexes too much which is a potential problem as it can lead to broken tracks or soldered joints just from removing/installing memory or even graphics cards, I hare doing RMA's


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> I was also llooking at the Aorus Gaming 5 and then Fatal1ty Gaming i7 as they have the wifi/bluetooth onboard with the rest of my requirements.
> 
> 
> 
> If you dont want problems with UEFI stay away from Gigabyte boards.
Click to expand...

I don't have any problems with my Gigabyte Z170, works like a charm and easy to overclock.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I don't have any problems with my Gigabyte Z170, works like a charm and easy to overclock.


Z170 onwards might be different but based on what I have used in the past (Z87,Z97,X79) their UEFI has always been buggy, if you check most of the overclocking threads most issues with the UEFI seem to be people with Gigabyte and MSI boards, could be end users knowledge or lack thereof to some extent or a combination of both.


----------



## Scotty99

I got nothing but good things to say about asrock. I jumped into ryzen at launch and only two problems i had were memory compatibility (ryzen thing overall) and my mobo was basing fan speeds off the wrong temp until it got a bios update to select that value. Other than that great experience, and was one of the only boards at launch (maybe still) that allowed power savings like downclocking to be achieved at idle, 300 dollar MSI board does not have this functionality.

Only reason im considering asus is the superior RGB/fan control software honestly, asrock lacks in that area.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I have not seen any comparisons with single player benchmarks and 64 mutiplayer player being worse.


I have not come up any benchmarks sp vs mp

I only come across benchmarks using either of the two

The ones using mp always like to mention that mp is heavier on the CPU
Quote:


> Note that multiplayer is more abusive on the CPU, particularly when tracking the ammunition output of 64 players. For now, this is the most representative benchmark we could create given the obvious complexity with benchmarking a multiplayer game.


https://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/2673-battlefield-1-cpu-benchmark-dx11-vs-dx12-i5-i7-fx/page-2

To top that off
It's difficult finding a benchmark that is very recent and showing CPU scaling at all

Shrugs

At least we could agree that BF1 is one of those titles actually benefiting from more cores threads I guess


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I got nothing but good things to say about asrock. I jumped into ryzen at launch and only two problems i had were memory compatibility (ryzen thing overall) and my mobo was basing fan speeds off the wrong temp until it got a bios update to select that value. Other than that great experience, and was one of the only boards at launch (maybe still) that allowed power savings like downclocking to be achieved at idle, 300 dollar MSI board does not have this functionality.
> 
> Only reason im considering asus is the superior RGB/fan control software honestly, asrock lacks in that area.


Asus UEFI fan control is extremely good especially if you are into water cooling, being able to set fan ramp up/down delays or being able to add temperature probes for water temperature and base fan curves from that is great, more granular LLC control is another benefit, being able to update your UEFI without a CPU installed, something that is very usefull if you go from one generation of CPU to another


----------



## Scotty99

Yep, and with z370 asus added the ability from mobo fan headers to ramp up based on GPU temp, which is pretty cool.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Yep, and with z370 asus added the ability from mobo fan headers to ramp up based on GPU temp, which is pretty cool.


Did not know that, good to know







people might say Im a Asus fanboy but based on my experience with their motherboards I have no reason to change, they sell more boards than anyone else for a reason and it isn't just marketing.


----------



## kd5151

I have a Fractal Design Arc Midi R2 with build in fan controller.







Also love the pwm hub on Phanteks cases. Who needs motherboard fan headers!


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> I have a Fractal Design Arc Midi R2 with build in fan controller.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also love the pwm hub on Phanteks cases. Who needs motherboard fan headers!


I have a PWM fan controller on my Phanteks Evolve...didn't use it, it is not really PWM as such. You cant change ramp up/down rates or put in delays with those controllers, given the temperature spikes Kaby Lake CPU's have do you really want your fan speed trying to change with those spikes for really no reason?


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Did not know that, good to know
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people might say Im a Asus fanboy but based on my experience with their motherboards I have no reason to change, they sell more boards than anyone else for a reason and it isn't just marketing.


Well Asrock, Gigabyte , and MSI have stepped up fan control.

https://www.kitguru.net/components/motherboard/luke-hill/asrock-x370-taichi-motherboard-review/5/




http://www.ocinside.de/review/mainboard_asrock_x370_taichi/4/#uefi_8
http://www.ocinside.de/review/mainboard_asrock_z270_taichi/4/#uefi_8





https://techreport.com/review/31186/aorus-z270x-gaming-5-motherboard-reviewed/4
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/74183-gigabyte-aorus-z270x-gaming-5-motherboard-review-6.html




https://www.hardwarebbq.com/msi-z270-gaming-m5-motherboard-review/4/


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Well Asrock, Gigabyte , and MSI have stepped up fan control.
> 
> https://www.kitguru.net/components/motherboard/luke-hill/asrock-x370-taichi-motherboard-review/5/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.ocinside.de/review/mainboard_asrock_x370_taichi/4/#uefi_8
> http://www.ocinside.de/review/mainboard_asrock_z270_taichi/4/#uefi_8
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://techreport.com/review/31186/aorus-z270x-gaming-5-motherboard-reviewed/4
> http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/74183-gigabyte-aorus-z270x-gaming-5-motherboard-review-6.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.hardwarebbq.com/msi-z270-gaming-m5-motherboard-review/4/


Interesting looks like all the mobo manufacturers have improved their fan control







looks as though only MSI offer ramp up/down delays though?


----------



## AlphaC

Look at https://www.tweaktown.com/guides/8245/fan-control-guide-intel-z270-motherboard-edition/index.html as well.

Ramp up/down is "temperature interval" on Gigabyte. It's "spin up" / "spin down" time on Asus. Asrock calls it fan step up / step down.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Look at https://www.tweaktown.com/guides/8245/fan-control-guide-intel-z270-motherboard-edition/index.html as well.
> 
> Ramp up/down is "temperature interval" on Gigabyte.


Really good article written by a very knowledgeable guy, +1 rep


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I have a PWM fan controller on my Phanteks Evolve...didn't use it, it is not really PWM as such. You cant change ramp up/down rates or put in delays with those controllers, given the temperature spikes Kaby Lake CPU's have do you really want your fan speed trying to change with those spikes for really no reason?


Very true. I would plug in all my cases fans into the hub and plug the hub cable into one good motherboard header and set a custom fan curve. SpeedFan has always allowed you do this regardless of motherboard.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Very true. I would plug in all my cases fans into the hub and plug the hub cable into one good motherboard header and set a custom fan curve. SpeedFan has always allowed you do this regardless of motherboard.


Everyone has their own opinion about fan control some prefer software solutions others a standalone fan controller and some via the UEFI. Personally given how good UEFI fan control has become I prefer UEFI control, it takes a bit longer to set up properly with all the restarts and stuff but if I can reduce the number of running back ground processes all the better.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Very true. I would plug in all my cases fans into the hub and plug the hub cable into one good motherboard header and set a custom fan curve. SpeedFan has always allowed you do this regardless of motherboard.


Speedfan isn't perfect.

At the end of the day it still relies on the SuperIO chip on the motherboard. If the SuperIO chip links fan header 2& 3 , or has zero control over header 4 for example you're still stuck.

Nuvoton generally is better than ITE for that.

edit: keep in mind some boards use proprietary implementations which gives Speedfan problems, let alone lm-sensors in Linux. I know many MSI boards use Nuvoton NCT6795D and complaints are common on that chip since only MSI uses it.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Speedfan isn't perfect.
> 
> At the end of the day it still relies on the SuperIO chip on the motherboard. If the SuperIO chip links fan header 2& 3 , or has zero control over header 4 for example you're still stuck.
> 
> Nuvoton generally is better than ITE for that.


I agree. Have had no control on some headers.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Asus UEFI fan control is extremely good especially if you are into water cooling, being able to set fan ramp up/down delays or being able to add temperature probes for water temperature and base fan curves from that is great, more granular LLC control is another benefit, being able to update your UEFI without a CPU installed, something that is very usefull if you go from one generation of CPU to another


The temperature headers for ASUS ROG boards were also one of my deal-breaker considerations when I was picking among the Z270 boards as, like I said, I will be going full custom watercooling this time. It is better to base your fan speeds off of water temp rather than CPU/GPU when you're system has one custom water cooling loop.

What's that ASUS BIOS-flashing-without-CPU called again? Do the Hero, Code, and Formula all have that feature? And do they all have backup BIOS chips?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> The temperature headers for ASUS ROG boards were also one of my deal-breaker considerations when I was picking among the Z270 boards as, like I said, I will be going full custom watercooling this time. It is better to base your fan speeds off of water temp rather than CPU/GPU when you're system has one custom water cooling loop.
> 
> What's that ASUS BIOS-flashing-without-CPU called again? Do the Hero, Code, and Formula all have that feature? And do they all have backup BIOS chips?


You can update the UEFI without a CPU installed using USB Bios flashback (designated USB port on the I/O panel), this feature is on all the ROG boards as far as Im aware. Most mainstream Asus boards dont have a dual UEFI chips unlike Gigabyte. How you control fan speeds is up to you, some base their fan curves of water temperature and others use CPU core or package temps, using GPU temperature might not be a good idea considering you might be performing a task that doesn't utilise the GPU at all (different matter if you have a dual water loop though). I base mine off CPU core temps and have each fan and my water pump controlled from a separate header, that way I can monitor RPM of each fan/pump on my AIDA64 sidebar gadget, also allows you to control each fan separately if you choose







See screenshot for sidebar gadget


----------



## davidtran007

Live on Newegg

$379.99


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidtran007*
> 
> Live on Newegg
> 
> $379.99


Nice







limit one per customer...interesting.


----------



## NorcalTRD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Nice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> limit one per customer...interesting.


Price is supposed to be $359, its listed there for $379.99. Slightly odd for preorders.


----------



## davidtran007

8600K at $259.99


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> Price is supposed to be $359, its listed there for $379.99. Slightly odd for preorders.


Sounds right for supply constraints. I expected the launch price to be s little high so I'll live with it. If it drops within 60 days I'll even get the money back!


----------



## NorcalTRD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Sounds right for supply constraints. I expected the launch price to be s little high so I'll live with it. If it drops within 60 days I'll even get the money back!


Credit Card guarantee or Neweggs?


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> Credit Card guarantee or Neweggs?


Credit card. I don't think Newegg's goes that far.

Now where are the damn motherboards? I hope I can get the Hero on Amazon.


----------



## NorcalTRD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Credit card. I don't think Newegg's goes that far.
> 
> Now where are the damn motherboards? I hope I can get the Hero on Amazon.


I feel ya, I want the same board.
Gonna get an 8700k and would prefer to get it on amazon release day.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> I feel ya, I want the same board.
> Gonna get an 8700k and would prefer to get it on amazon release day.


My plan was to get the chip on Newegg (no tax) and the board on Amazon (I have $55 in credit). Halfway there!


----------



## Castaile

Reports have mentioned availability will be scarce too

https://www.techpowerup.com/237555/intel-core-coffee-lake-availability-scarce-until-2018-report


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Castaile*
> 
> Reports have mentioned availability will be scarce too
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/237555/intel-core-coffee-lake-availability-scarce-until-2018-report


Yeah, the 8700K only lasted about an hour and a half on Newegg so it's definitely constrained. Not as badly as I expected though.


----------



## Scotty99

380 what the...


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Just as same as the 7800X? Considering that I paid 20% off that, it was a bargain.


----------



## Scotty99

Its supposed to be 360, even if its "scarce" thats not something ive ever seen newegg do on a CPU at launch. Its either a typo or the price is actually 380.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Just as same as the 7800X? Considering that I paid 20% off that, it was a bargain.


Almost. It performs better in games, overclocks better, and is more power efficient.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I was thinking on the price.

Mine can do 5 ghz. Can this do 5400 or more?


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I was thinking on the price.
> 
> Mine can do 5 ghz. Can this do 5400 or more?


Your CPU is a very nice chip but don't disparage the 8700K to make yourself feel better about it or something. For pure gaming the ring bus is a little better than the mesh architecture and the extra PCIe lanes and memory bandwidth does not help. Intel has the 7800X MSRP at $383.00 - $389.00 so you did get a bargain.

Of course it isn't worth switching or anything but the 8700K is a better CPU for single GPU gaming. It doesn't need to do 5.4 GHz to be a better option then the 7800X even at the same price.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I was thinking on the price.
> 
> Mine can do 5 ghz. Can this do 5400 or more?


There was leaked Romanian review where the performance was lower then mine 5050Mhz 7800x with overclocked results in SuperPi and Cinebench @ 5200 and 5100 respectively. Have a feeling the gap between them on frequency advantage will be reduces by the performance from dual channel mem and 4times less L2 cache from the ring bus...we'll see...Keep in mind these result was on 1.4v+ ES chip thru...retail may be better may be worst we'll know in a couple of hours. The boards came to my country already and ZЗ70 Asrock ones are ~ 65% from the price of the x299 ones on comparable model line.


----------



## Timur Born

So I looked at motherboards to check which offer a Thunderbolt header. Did I get it right that Asus removed the header from all their ROG boards and thus either leaves me to either get the Prime or buy from another manufacturer if I want TB/Intel USB 3.1?


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I was thinking on the price.
> 
> Mine can do 5 ghz. Can this do 5400 or more?


Some will for sure.

Just like some 7800X does 5 GHz.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Some will for sure.
> Just like some 7800X does 5 GHz.


My assumption is 150-200 Mhz frequency advantage from going 14+ to 14++ processes. 400Mhz is way too generous, as for sure a non-delidded 8700k on water would't be able to hit 5500 Cinebench as mine does @5100...


----------



## Scotty99

lol @ newegg prices, 179.00 for 8350k....

At least this gives me time to sell my ryzen parts lol.

Also you never know, asus claimed 5.5ghz on one of their slides its possible golden chips can pass cinebench runs at that frequency.


----------



## TMatzelle60

i wonder how bad the shortage of i7 8700k will be







was looking to build one


----------



## Scotty99

Well its a bit odd that we can buy them on newegg, its the 4th....


----------



## czin125

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232629 429.99 USD 2x8GB 19-23-23-43 1.50v

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232628 429.99 USD 2x8GB 19-23-23-43 1.50v

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820236267 559.99 USD 2x8GB 19-26-26-46 1.50v ( comes with a fan )

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/team-group-xtreem-8pack-edition-16gb-2x8gb-ddr4-pc4-36000c18-4500mhz-dual-channel-kit-black-my-09a-tg.html
https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/posts/31079754/
"My ES 4500 are 4700 18-18-18 mem test stable."

https://videocardz.com/73155/intel-core-i7-8700k-delidded
delidded pics


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> https://videocardz.com/73155/intel-core-i7-8700k-delidded
> delidded pics


Glue.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> My assumption is 150-200 Mhz frequency advantage from going 14+ to 14++ processes. 400Mhz is way too generous, as for sure a non-delidded 8700k on water would't be able to hit 5500 Cinebench as mine does @5100...


There's people on this forum running their 7700K's at 5.4 GHz for 24/7.

I don't want 7800X because of mesh, lower clocks / lower st perf, watt usage and heat.

If HEDT had me interrested, I would be rocking a 7820X. But no. 8700K at 5.2+ it is.


----------



## DStealth

We'll know in a couple of hours for sure...but comparing 7700k to 8700k is not very relative even on delidded and good water cooled chips. On average 7700k are doing 5 to 5.2 stable.
Till now we have only one leaked review with top air Noktua D15 cooler on Eng Sample and 1.4v+ plus 5100 Cinebench and 5200 superPI....hardly believe over 5200 with the retail ones on water will be running 24/7...but hope my guess is wrong to have something new to play with incoming weekends


----------



## Nautilus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> There's people on this forum running their 7700K's at 5.4 GHz for 24/7.
> 
> I don't want 7800X because of mesh, lower clocks / lower st perf, watt usage and heat.
> 
> If HEDT had me interrested, I would be rocking a 7820X. But no. 8700K at 5.2+ it is.


Then you can't SLI, RAID nvm-e drives or get consistent fps in cpu heavy games.

With 7900x you can do all while running up to 4.8Ghz delidded.


----------



## evensen007

Can't wait to delid this and crank it to see what the max is under my 4x radiator loop. Scotty had linked me before, but what is everyone planning on buying for ram now that it's such a rip off? I figure I can get a few bucks for my 2600k setup with Mobo and ram so that should ease the pain a bit.


----------



## DStealth




----------



## Scotty99

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/jpH48d/gskill-memory-f43200c14d16gvk

Given how crazy ram prices have gotten i also find this kit fairly priced as well, given it has RGB:
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/9TRFf7/gskill-tridentz-rgb-series-16gb-2-x-8gb-ddr4-4133-memory-f4-4133c19d-16gtzr


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> https://pcpartpicker.com/product/jpH48d/gskill-memory-f43200c14d16gvk
> 
> Given how crazy ram prices have gotten i also find this kit fairly priced as well, given it has RGB:
> https://pcpartpicker.com/product/9TRFf7/gskill-tridentz-rgb-series-16gb-2-x-8gb-ddr4-4133-memory-f4-4133c19d-16gtzr


Thanks.

Are these a better deal?

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=G.SKILL+Ripjaws+V+Series+16GB


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Are these a better deal?
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=G.SKILL+Ripjaws+V+Series+16GB


Nope those are cas 16 and prices have skyrocketed on those. I bought that exact kit for 98 bucks in march, an extra 30 bucks for samsung ram (cas 14 stuff) is worth it.


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Nope those are cas 16 and prices have skyrocketed on those. I bought that exact kit for 98 bucks in march, an extra 30 bucks for samsung ram (cas 14 stuff) is worth it.


Dang, didn't even notice that!


----------



## czin125

6700K's phase change clocks = 7700K's water clocks
7700K's phase change clocks = 8700K's water clocks ?

5600-5800 is what the 7700K could run at if you gave it 1.55-1.60v ( should be possible on water with the 8700K )
https://d1ebmxcfh8bf9c.cloudfront.net/u62092/image_id_1749810.png


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Dang, didn't even notice that!


On the plus side B die has only went up 10-15 bucks since march, everyone should be skipping the 150 dollar ram and just going to 180 price point now.

That 4133 RGB kit is really priced well actually, if i could get 150 for my ram i would spend an extra 100 to get that lol.


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> On the plus side B die has only went up 10-15 bucks since march, everyone should be skipping the 150 dollar ram and just going to 180 price point now.
> 
> That 4133 RGB kit is really priced well actually, if i could get 150 for my ram i would spend an extra 100 to get that lol.


But the cas timing on the rgb kit seems to be 19. Is that normal for 4133 RAM? Would that be a net decrease in performance because of the timings?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> But the cas timing on the rgb kit seems to be 19. Is that normal for 4133 RAM? Would that be a net decrease in performance because of the timings?


Ya thats normal, it has to happen to reach those speeds. I think mhz will trump cas for the most part on coffee lake, at least for games. Varying by title probably.

Speaking mostly for 1080p, higher you go in resolution less ram speeds are going to make a difference. Most should just go for the 183 dollar ripjaw kit.


----------



## TMatzelle60

This really stinks that the 8th gen i might not be able to get right away


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> This really stinks that the 8th gen i might not be able to get right away


Its not even supposed to be able to be purchased today, think newegg is messing up lol.


----------



## TMatzelle60

do you think they will have stock problems?>


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> do you think they will have stock problems?>


Maybe for a week like ryzen, but i dont believe the rumors of "problems until 2018".


----------



## kd5151

OCT 4TH - Out of stock
OCT 5TH - In Stock


----------



## TMatzelle60

might just be place holders so they get ready


----------



## Techhog

Still no motherboard... I have to go somewhere today and I'm afraid I'll miss it! lol

I should get the CPU on Friday though.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Still no motherboard... I have to go somewhere today and I'm afraid I'll miss it! lol


You buy a chip?


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You buy a chip?


Yeah. $380 was on the high end of what I was willing to pay, but as soon as I saw that shortage story I knew there would be gouging. I budgeted for $380 so it's fine.


----------



## PontiacGTX

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231875


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Yeah. $380 was on the high end of what I was willing to pay, but as soon as I saw that shortage story I knew there would be gouging. I budgeted for $380 so it's fine.


Nutty lol, wonder if newegg gets in trouble.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231875


Saw those too, didnt link cause they look like they are for a board produced in 2011 lol.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Nutty lol, wonder if newegg gets in trouble.


No, it's a legal thing to do. But as I said if somewhere sells it for less in the next 60 days I get the money back. I doubt that would happen though. It'll hit RCP in January, but then Zen+ hits a month later and if that can clock well everyone should get that instead.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> No, it's a legal thing to do. But as I said if somewhere sells it for less in the next 60 days I get the money back. I doubt that would happen though. It'll hit RCP in January, but then Zen+ hits a month later and if that can clock well everyone should get that instead.


I meant im surprised they were purchasable on the 4th, reviews arent even out yet.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Saw those too, didnt link cause they look like they are for a board produced in 2011 lol.


it doesnt matter it works in any DDR4 mobo


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I meant im surprised they were purchasable on the 4th, reviews arent even out yet.


Ah, right. I assumed it would count as a pre-order but I just got a tracking number. ; By the way, everything except the 8700K and 8600K is in stock.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> it doesnt matter it works in any DDR4 mobo


I understand this lol, im talking about them being baby blue in color.

@techhog nice, you may be the first dude to post benches on here


----------



## TheWizardMan

They are available for 359 right now on amazon. I don't care cause if I buy it will be from SL, but if you're interested its there. I'd just wait until tomorrow when everything is official (or later, once the NDAs have lifted and we have reviews).


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheWizardMan*
> 
> They are available for 359 right now on amazon. I don't care cause if I buy it will be from SL, but if you're interested its there. I'd just wait until tomorrow when everything is official (or later, once the NDAs have lifted and we have reviews).


Link plox, search comes up empty for me.


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheWizardMan*
> 
> They are available for 359 right now on amazon. I don't care cause if I buy it will be from SL, but if you're interested its there. I'd just wait until tomorrow when everything is official (or later, once the NDAs have lifted and we have reviews).


Link?


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheWizardMan*
> 
> They are available for 359 right now on amazon. I don't care cause if I buy it will be from SL, but if you're interested its there. I'd just wait until tomorrow when everything is official (or later, once the NDAs have lifted and we have reviews).


Link? I'd like to get my $20 back while still avoiding tax.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nautilus*
> 
> Then you can't SLI, RAID nvm-e drives or get consistent fps in cpu heavy games.
> 
> With 7900x you can do all while running up to 4.8Ghz delidded.


I'm never going to use CF/SLI again, so it's fine.
Neither do I need to raid anything.

I'll take the 5.2+ GHz on 8700K.


----------



## TheWizardMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Link?


Looks like it got taken down. I can't find it now, though it was there 20 minutes ago.


----------



## QuadDamage

Everyone is saying newegg and amazon have boards and cpu's but are down I missed out
Feelsbadman


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> Everyone is saying newegg and amazon have boards and cpu's but are down I missed out
> Feelsbadman


Release date is tomorrow.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Just got an Asus Prime z370-A for $186.

I decided to take the chance instead of getting a 7700k build right now.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B075RJHN2D/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_eEp1zb590P9RD


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Just got an Asus Prime z370-A for $186.
> 
> I decided to take the chance instead of getting a 7700k build right now.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B075RJHN2D/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_eEp1zb590P9RD


You probably paid a premium ordering it a day early from a 3rd party from Amazon. Would suggest reordering tomorrow once products launch officially and saving a few bucks.


----------



## Scotty99

Was gonna say, 186 is 30-40 more than i expect prime-A to go for.


----------



## QuadDamage

I'm betting you can get a board with prime as well in a few hours


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> You probably paid a premium ordering it a day early from a 3rd party from Amazon. Would suggest reordering tomorrow once products launch officially and saving a few bucks.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Was gonna say, 186 is 30-40 more than i expect prime-A to go for.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> I'm betting you can get a board with prime as well in a few hours


This is all new to me.

I thought it was worth it since the z270 version is $160-177 between Newegg and Amazon, so I thought it was worth it based on that and not having to wait a month to get one.

I guess I will just cancel and wait.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> This is all new to me.
> 
> I thought it was worth it since the z270 version is $160-177 between Newegg and Amazon, so I thought it was worth it based on that and not having to wait a month to get one.
> 
> I guess I will just cancel and wait.


?
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/7VZ2FT/asus-prime-z270-a-atx-lga1151-motherboard-prime-z270-a

144 bucks.

-A boards should be 150
Strix around 180-190
Maximus hero should be 220 or less

The other boards make no sense to me lol.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> ?
> https://pcpartpicker.com/product/7VZ2FT/asus-prime-z270-a-atx-lga1151-motherboard-prime-z270-a
> 
> 144 bucks.


I prefer Newegg or Amazon, but I guess even that's diluted since the board was only available from 3rd party sellers even on Newegg.

Thing is I don't already have a worthwhile PC, and my patience is fluctuating.

I suppose I should just be patient, it's been 5 months, what's a few more weeks. At least I hope that's as long as I'll have to wait.

Anyways, I canceled it, patience wins again.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> I prefer Newegg or Amazon, but I guess even that's diluted since the board was only available from 3rd party sellers even on Newegg.
> 
> Thing is I don't already have a worthwhile PC, and my patience is fluctuating.
> 
> I suppose I should just be patient, it's been 5 months, what's a few more weeks. At least I hope that's as long as I'll have to wait.
> 
> Anyways, I canceled it, patience wins again.


Thats just a site that shows prices lol, you said newegg and amazon have the 270-A for 160-180 its 144 bucks at amazon and B+H.

And ya patience ftw, 186 bucks would be able to get you a strix level board.


----------



## aDyerSituation

If I can get a 5.2ghz+ 8700k I will probably switch to it from my current setup and get a Formula or something


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Thats just a site that shows prices lol, you said newegg and amazon have the 270-A for 160-180 its 144 bucks at amazon and B+H.


I swear it was $177 on Amazon for the last few days because I have a backup 7700k build waiting on a wishlist for each site, and I actually checked right before reading this post and I saw it was $144.99

Now I look crazy.


----------



## Scotty99

Nah its probably was lol, amazon prices move daily depending on how much other retailers have it for.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Thats just a site that shows prices lol, you said newegg and amazon have the 270-A for 160-180 its 144 bucks at amazon and B+H.
> 
> And ya patience ftw, 186 bucks would be able to get you a strix level board.


And ya patience ftw, 186 bucks would be able to get you a strix level board.

Isn't Strix the same quality as the -A's, but you're paying for RGB and wifi-bluetooth on some models ?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> And ya patience ftw, 186 bucks would be able to get you a strix level board.
> 
> Isn't Strix the same quality as the -A's, but you're paying for RGB and wifi-bluetooth on some models ?


Ya anything -A and above will overclock the same, paying for looks and stuff on strix, maybe better audio/heatsinks.

Just called my microcenter and he said they will have stock but it will be limited (not surprising), he wasnt sure on combo deals tho said to check website in the morning.


----------



## evensen007

A few prime eligible boards just popped up on Amazon.

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2?url=search-alias%3Delectronics&field-keywords=z370


----------



## kd5151

Wait for the benchmarks.


----------



## evensen007

Looks like MSI has almost their whole range available for Prime.

https://www.amazon.com/MSI-X370-GAMING-PRO-CARBON/dp/B06WGS4FJL/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1507137367&sr=1-3&keywords=z370


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Looks like MSI has almost their whole range available for Prime.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/MSI-X370-GAMING-PRO-CARBON/dp/B06WGS4FJL/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1507137367&sr=1-3&keywords=z370


that's X370 not Z370


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> that's X370 not Z370


DOH! They tricked me. lol


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Wait for the benchmarks.


We pretty much know exactly what these are, the question to me is what % of chips will hit 5.2ghz or higher.

BTW asus has this info, i am hoping JJ puts up a video on someones channel and tells us what they found internally


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Wait for the benchmarks.


Coming from a 2600k, I'm waiting for stock not benches. We already know it will outperform 7700k and that's all I need to know coming from 5 generations back.


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Coming from a 2600k, I'm waiting for stock not benches. We already know it will outperform 7700k and that's all I need to know coming from 5 generations back.


Considering IPC of Haswell was quite a bit better, I wonder why you waited with upgrade so long.


----------



## QuadDamage

Another i7 2600k @ 4.5ghz is a great chip even tho it's 5 year old it's been such a great chip
I'm upgrading to the i7 8700k hope to get 5ghz out of this bad boy as well. The point of any upgrade is to increase performance and it didn't make sense to go from a quad to a quad for me. Why not go to a 6 core that can do 5ghz


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Coming from a 2600k, I'm waiting for stock not benches. We already know it will outperform 7700k and that's all I need to know coming from 5 generations back.


Wait for the stock.


----------



## Techhog

So, Newegg has created a shipping label for my 8700K but they've also removed all 8th-gen listings, indicating that it might have been a mistake. Since it's already "shipped" (not really since they still have it but sent shipment info), I should still be safe, right?


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> So, Newegg has created a shipping label for my 8700K but they've also removed all 8th-gen listings, indicating that it might have been a mistake. Since it's already "shipped" (not really since they still have it but sent shipment info), I should still be safe, right?


If it was from a 3rd party seller then I would assume you're fine and they're just breaking the date and will go ahead with it.


----------



## Menta

7700k delided owner here, getting tired of upgrading\sidegrading, maybe wait for 10nm or go octa


----------



## QuadDamage

All the big vendors will have them in stock lets just let people know in this thread when it happens

What boards are you guys going with?


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> If it was from a 3rd party seller then I would assume you're fine and they're just breaking the date and will go ahead with it.


It wasn't third-party.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menta*
> 
> 7700k delided owner here, getting tired of upgrading\sidegrading, maybe wait for 10nm or go octa


octa core is next year or right now if you consider AMD viable.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> I prefer Newegg or Amazon, but I guess even that's diluted since the board was only available from 3rd party sellers even on Newegg.
> 
> Thing is I don't already have a worthwhile PC, and my patience is fluctuating.
> 
> I suppose I should just be patient, it's been 5 months, what's a few more weeks. At least I hope that's as long as I'll have to wait.
> 
> Anyways, I canceled it, patience wins again.












Also, may want to evaluate the reasoning behind the Intel build. Do you plan on overclocking or gaming primarily?


----------



## MaKeN

My local Microcenter sells boards already


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> All the big vendors will have them in stock lets just let people know in this thread when it happens
> 
> What boards are you guys going with?


ASRock







ASUS







Gigabyte went a little overboard on RGB.







MSI


----------



## bigjdubb

Gigabyte doesn't have any more or less RGB than Asus and MSI, gigabyte just chooses to photoshop fake lights into their product photos.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> Gigabyte doesn't have any more or less RGB than Asus and MSI, gigabyte just chooses to photoshop fake lights into their product photos.


About that...


----------



## bigjdubb

What about it? MSI and asus both have boards with similar lighting.


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> My local Microcenter sells boards already


Really?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> What about it? MSI and asus both have boards with similar lighting.


I dunno about that lol, that thing is a christmas tree.

I like me some RGB dont get me wrong, i just think its a bit much.


----------



## QuadDamage

I agree the RGP is pretty dumb and lame I'm not a big fan of it. I don't need the extras and would rather have the cost saving for performance over looking pretty.


----------



## Twirlz

More discussion of availability problems with Coffee Lake:

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/posts/31212273/
Quote:


> Unfortunately due to sites like Reddit these days, it makes it very hard for me to leak anything, whereas in the past leaks remained within the forum and people liked the inside info, it now gets spread so to maintain our relationships with the vendors its best I simply do not give away information.
> 
> All I will say is Coffee Lake is very short, like practically zero availability of the K versions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I forsee most who were planning an upgrade just getting a Kaby lake or Ryzen.


https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/intel-to-launch-6-core-coffee-lake-s-cpus-z370-chipset-5-october-2017.18776943/page-202#post-31209249
Quote:


> Gaming 7 seems sound. I only started testing it yesterday though so not 100% able to recommend.
> 
> On launch the stock levels are low world wide. We have many more boards than cpu's.
> 
> We do have delidded 5ghz and 5.1 ghz bins ready to go.


Also retail CPUs may overclock worse than the ES chips reviewers get.

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/intel-to-launch-6-core-coffee-lake-s-cpus-z370-chipset-5-october-2017.18776943/page-203#post-31210332
Quote:


> The retails in my experience not as good oc as ES.
> 
> Our binned chips are good otherwise we would not be offering them. Also they are tested with prime blend non avx and Realbench for stability.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> Gigabyte doesn't have any more or less RGB than Asus and MSI, gigabyte just chooses to photoshop fake lights into their product photos.


I don't like RGB that much. Maybe if I saw it in person I would learn to love it. I can always turn the lights off. The boards look good without the lights and would match my black and white case.


----------



## e-gate

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> What about it? MSI and asus both have boards with similar lighting.


RGB leds around PCIE slots nope. Only Gigabyte Aorus boards have this kind of lighting. Honestly they nailed the RGB thing. I just hate their quality of their boards and the horrible heatsinks.


----------



## Scotty99

I like classy RGB that can all be synced with one software program. People really into RGB should be considering MSI as they are the ones who are working with corsair and their upcoming sync it program.


----------



## TMatzelle60

well with the stock problem looks like i just go with 7700K and call it a day. That will last quite some times. or possible ryzen


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> well with the stock problem looks like i just go with 7700K and call it a day. That will last quite some times. or possible ryzen


Nooooo, don't do it! You're buying an EOL chip before the official launch date tomorrow! At least wait until then.


----------



## TMatzelle60

you think its as bad as they say. Would it be ok to buy my other stuff like motherboard psu and all that and just wait on the CPU?

Like have the ram and motherboard sitting on the side for alittle


----------



## QuadDamage

^^ I'm going to wait and order everything I hate to wait on one part


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> ^^ I'm going to wait and order everything I hate to wait on one part


lol. i hear you i might get certain things like case and fans and cooler


----------



## WexleySnoops

The wait is killing me...

I decided to take my first step a couple weeks ago and ordered my XB271HU monitor...now for the rest of the build...


----------



## TMatzelle60

i dont think it will be as bad as they say lol

i have my shift x sitting here lol


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> Really?


http://www.microcenter.com/search/search_results.aspx?ntt=Z370


----------



## Scotty99

Ya this thread is dead compared to ryzen pre launch one. They will sell out day 1 for sure, but once they come back in stock it should be as normal.


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> i dont think it will be as bad as they say lol
> 
> i have my shift x sitting here lol


Use one of those shopping alert crawlers that will send you an email or text when it shows ups!


----------



## TheReciever

Looks like were getting 6C laptops from clevo as well, good times ahead.

Too bad AMD isnt working with ODM's to get ryzen 7 in more laptops


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Also, may want to evaluate the reasoning behind the Intel build. Do you plan on overclocking or gaming primarily?


Gaming

Coming from a 2500k @ stock system it's a tremendous upgrade, even just for minimums.

But the reason to go with Intel is significantly better minimums, less/lack of performance drops, 10-60fps higher maximums.

I'd like to try to hit 4.8 on whatever I get assuming it won't degrade the chip that much or fry the motherboard in a few years.

I may very well just adapt a 'set it and forget it' mentality and stay with stock speeds, or just have an OC profile waiting for something that needs it.


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> I'd like to try to hit 4.8 on whatever I get assuming it won't degrade the chip that much or fry the motherboard in a few years.
> 
> I may very well just adapt a 'set it and forget it' mentality and stay with stock speeds, or just have an OC profile waiting for something that needs it.


Get a decent air cooler, set it to 4.8 GHz, and then forget it.









4.8 GHz on all cores will not need anything crazy.


----------



## HeliXpc

Im over the whole RGB thing.


----------



## mikailmohammed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asmodian*
> 
> Get a decent air cooler, set it to 4.8 GHz, and then forget it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4.8 GHz on all cores will not need anything crazy.


I seriously doubt that is real. If it is i would like to see what my watercooling loop will do to it. My 6800k can't go above 4.2ghz.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> Looks like were getting 6C laptops from clevo as well, good times ahead.
> 
> Too bad AMD isnt working with ODM's to get ryzen 7 in more laptops


It won't just be Clevo. All high-end gaming laptops should have 6 cores.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asmodian*
> 
> Get a decent air cooler, set it to 4.8 GHz, and then forget it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4.8 GHz on all cores will not need anything crazy.


I was planning on getting an NH-D15, but I'm still worried about the stress on the board.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> I was planning on getting an NH-D15, but I'm still worried about the stress on the board.


Have there actually been cases of this being an issue? Noctua's backplate is pretty heavy duty, so all stress should be transferred to the case.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Nooooo, don't do it! You're buying an EOL chip before the official launch date tomorrow! At least wait until then.


To be fair, Z370 is already a pretty much EOL before it even had a chance at a life.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Have there actually been cases of this being an issue? Noctua's backplate is pretty heavy duty, so all stress should be transferred to the case.


I've found a few, but they were comments on a random forum and I can't attest to their validity.

Here's a link to my setup, it's old and some things have been replaced, but you get the idea.

https://i.imgur.com/putsMqu.jpg

Rather not spam the thread with pics, so it's in link form.

The case sits on a piece of wood. My concern is if I'm moving it out every 2-3 months to clean it that I'll stress the motherboard too much. It's mostly just slight paranoia that most people have about things they want to last. I feel that if I got a lighter cooler then it would run too hot and not last as long. Having said that, moving it in and out should be considerably easier due to the new case being a mid-tower.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> I've found a few, but they were comments on a random forum and I can't attest to their validity.
> 
> Here's a link to my setup, it's old and some things have been replaced, but you get the idea.
> 
> https://i.imgur.com/putsMqu.jpg
> 
> Rather not spam the thread with pics, so it's in link form.
> 
> The case sits on a piece of wood. My concern is if I'm moving it out every 2-3 months to clean it that I'll stress the motherboard too much. It's mostly just slight paranoia that most people have about things they want to last. I feel that if I got a lighter cooler then it would run too hot and not last as long. Having said that, moving it in and out should be considerably easier due to the new case being a mid-tower.


If you're taking it out often you should consider an AIO.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> If you're taking it out often you should consider an AIO.


That was actually what I originally wanted, but I'm the type that's easily annoyed by noises/electronic 'hums' in these situations and I'm assuming the rad would annoy me far too much.

I know I basically just have to take a chance if I want proper cooling.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mikailmohammed*
> 
> I seriously doubt that is real. If it is i would like to see what my watercooling loop will do to it. My 6800k can't go above 4.2ghz.


You might be doing something wrong (or your voltages are too high), because even a Blizzard T2 might handle the 6800K at 4.2Ghz. A Loki II handles my i7-3770K at 4.2Ghz just fine (and I have 4 extra threads).

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Have there actually been cases of this being an issue? Noctua's backplate is pretty heavy duty, so all stress should be transferred to the case.


I have an Assassin II installed in my case and I left it laid down. It is too heavy in my opinion for my D3H board. It is not a Sabertooth I admit, but Tom's Hardware also advises to use these coolers in HEDT boards as well. Not to mention that a MasterLiquid 240 has a similar performance (at least with my i7-3770K). I'm also using Akasa Viper fans in the Assassin, then it should be around the NH-D15 level.


----------



## mikailmohammed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> You might be doing something wrong (or your voltages are too high), because even a Blizzard T2 might handle the 6800K at 4.2Ghz. A Loki II handles my i7-3770K at 4.2Ghz just fine (and I have 4 extra threads).
> I have an Assassin II installed in my case and I left it laid down. It is too heavy in my opinion for my D3H board. It is not a Sabertooth I admit, but Tom's Hardware also advises to use these coolers in HEDT boards as well. Not to mention that a MasterLiquid 240 has a similar performance (at least with my i7-3770K). I'm also using Akasa Viper fans in the Assassin, then it should be around the NH-D15 level.


I am cool at 4.2ghz with 1.34v. I got a bad cpu. But these cpus are not known to get past 4.4ghz if you are lucky. I wanna get the e 8700k as main gaming rig and use 6800k for work. Vms and stuff


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> To be fair, Z370 is already a pretty much EOL before it even had a chance at a life.


how do you know this? because there are plans to release z390?what if z390 is mainstream chipset allow enthusiast CPUs ut Z370 get same core count with ice lake architecture?
I mean Z370 doesnt even have 2 generations this is even worse than Skylake+Refresh


----------



## TMatzelle60

well z390 is coming out when that comes out z370 is eol too


----------



## WexleySnoops

And Z470 will probably come out 2019 resulting in Z3xx series becoming EOL too.

The world of computers is a never-ending cycle of "just wait for the next best thing" and the fact that 6 months later things are considered obsolete. Yes, some releases last longer than expected (2500k/2600k), but it isn't the case for everything.

Really just buy what will make you happy and work for what you want at the time you are looking.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Exactly. It will still be a couple of years if that before they start using multi core on ever gam if they will even do that


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WexleySnoops*
> 
> And Z470 will probably come out 2019 resulting in Z3xx series becoming EOL too.
> 
> The world of computers is a never-ending cycle of "just wait for the next best thing" and the fact that 6 months later things are considered obsolete. Yes, some releases last longer than expected (2500k/2600k), but it isn't the case for everything.
> 
> Really just buy what will make you happy and work for what you want at the time you are looking.


So wait the time of Wait Skylake replacement didnt take 2 years and no one was expecting increase in IPC? i didnt se Skylake become obsolete.. same with Haswell too 2-3 years to get a replacement on the same socket/chipset

It is more like Intel is taking advantage of an architecture before phasing it and make an improvement to IPC(after 4 years)


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> It won't just be Clevo. All high-end gaming laptops should have 6 cores.


Eventually yeah but i7 8700k wont have power restrictions like the mobile lineup is likely to have.


----------



## NorcalTRD

If anyone finds a live 8700k on sale from this point onwards please share the link!


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> If anyone finds a live 8700k on sale from this point onwards please share the link!


ill make sure to buy the last one and send link lol kidding....none of them are for sale yet. there all pre order


----------



## TMatzelle60

I love when people say oh the 7700K is crap dont even buy it. That chip will perform just as good. I dont expect games to run all cores and threads for quite some time. Not all games will be that way.

Also some of the games that do dont utilize it the right way.


----------



## kd5151

7700K vs 8600K. Reviews will tell us the truth tomorrow.


----------



## Scotty99

There will probably be a few games that run better on a 7700k because of optimizations, in 3 years from now we will see how terrible 4c cpu's really are lol. (maybe even a bit sooner than that)

Wow people are actually buying 8350k for 190+ dollars, smh....


----------



## QuadDamage

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> If anyone finds a live 8700k on sale from this point onwards please share the link!


I will post boards and cpu I'm keep a watchfull eye on all the major vendors will post when they come up for sale


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> 7700K vs 8600K. Reviews will tell us the truth tomorrow.


6 core beats 4c+ht even without the higher clocks

15% gain in MT if HT is giving 1.3x perf/core (6 / 5.2)
25% gain in MT if HT is giving 1.2x perf/core (6 / 4.8)

ST same

plus whatever you can get out of clock speeds

i5's tend to be a bit easier to overclock because HT increases the heat density in the core so removing HT improves temperatures notably


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> ill make sure to buy the last one and send link lol kidding...


----------



## Scotty99

We will definitely be seeing games that run better on 7700k due to optimizations in the engine, 7700k is going to beat 8700k in some games because of this as well.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Gaming
> 
> Coming from a 2500k @ stock system it's a tremendous upgrade, even just for minimums.
> 
> But the reason to go with Intel is significantly better minimums, less/lack of performance drops, 10-60fps higher maximums.
> 
> I'd like to try to hit 4.8 on whatever I get assuming it won't degrade the chip that much or fry the motherboard in a few years.
> 
> I may very well just adapt a 'set it and forget it' mentality and stay with stock speeds, or just have an OC profile waiting for something that needs it.


Does that mean that you will be going with the i5-8600K? May want to wait for reviews and see how it fairs vs a Ryzen 1600 especially if your focus is indeed on better minimums and less performance drops...

If Ryzen price cuts are true, should make for an interesting Q4


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> ill make sure to buy the last one and send link lol kidding....none of them are for sale yet. there all pre order


I might get mine tomorrow morning if Newegg doesn't hold it. lol. I have overnight shipping apparently. So it'll sit in a box until I get a board.


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> We will definitely be seeing games that run better on 7700k due to optimizations in the engine, 7700k is going to beat 8700k in some games because of this as well.


Why do you say that? They're _extremely_ similar architecturally, the main changes are moving to an improved manufacturing process and copy+pasting +50% more cores on the side. Stock clocks are increased, overclocks are higher as far as we can tell.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> Why do you say that? They're _extremely_ similar architecturally, the main changes are moving to an improved manufacturing process and copy+pasting +50% more cores on the side.


Because 8>6? I understand everyone on this forum thinks hyperthreading is terrible but there will be a few occassions where those two extra threads will put the 7700k on top. This is also why im passing on an i5 this gen.


----------



## QuadDamage

Only 2 left it's not prime + shipping
https://www.amazon.com/PRIME-LGA1151-Motherboard-Generation-Processors/dp/B075RJHN2D/ref=sr_1_1?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1507150755&sr=8-1&keywords=intel+z370

I'm going to wait for more stuff to be in stock


----------



## 970Rules

I keep seeing people in supply chain worrying about low K supply they getting. So I guess intel done ****ed up already and could just be forced on meeting OEM demand> over us small fries? We wait and see.


----------



## Scotty99

I am more concerned about a board shortage than chips.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> If Ryzen price cuts are true, should make for an interesting Q4


The 1600x was $199 on newegg. Look at the 1700x now! https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113429 The 1800x needs to come down. Who's with me!


----------



## 970Rules

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I am more concerned about a board shortage than chips.


Over in overclockers UK store the site, the owners [on their own forum] have said they have way more z370 boards then cpu's.

Again all info I saw just point to lack of strong supply CPU's. Again we know in a day how bad this is across the board.


----------



## prava

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anonjoe*
> 
> What a crappy review , how can you possibly tell witch is witch. Do they only have three colors.?


Welcome to the world of a colour blind!


----------



## Scotty99

I mean, i could definitely see k chips selling out on launch day that has happened before, i just cant believe the rumors that say it wont be fixed til 2018. My guess is they will go outta stock tomorrow for sure, come back in stock a few days later and will be fine from then on.

But like you said, who knows lol.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> The 1600x was $199 on newegg. Look at the 1700x now! https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113429 The 1800x needs to come down. Who's with me!


My local Microcenter has the 1800X for $349.99. Still waiting for better ITX boards to jump over to Ryzen... Might be next year when I finally replace my 6700K...


----------



## EDK-TheONE




----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> We will definitely be seeing games that run better on 7700k due to optimizations in the engine, 7700k is going to beat 8700k in some games because of this as well.


why would a CPU with same architecture and higher core count and less cache underperform at same frequency if the 8700k can be just as good if not better


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> why would a CPU with same architecture and higher core count and less cache underperform at same frequency if the 8700k can be just as good if not better


Well for one thing we need to figure out why 7700k was beating 8700k in a lot of the leaks for single core scores. On paper the 8700k should win across the board of course, but my guess is a few games will just prefer the 7700k for whatever reason, nothing to worry about tho.


----------



## stangflyer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> My local Microcenter has the 1800X for $349.99. Still waiting for better ITX boards to jump over to Ryzen... Might be next year when I finally replace my 6700K...


I really wish there was a Microcenter near me! Not for Ryzen but I do see some great deals sometimes!


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well for one thing we need to figure out why 7700k was beating 8700k in a lot of the leaks for single core scores. On paper the 8700k should win across the board of course, but my guess is a few games will just prefer the 7700k for whatever reason, nothing to worry about tho.


thaat could be explained by the difference in the BIOSower states,different uncore clock speed,RAM and also margin error and incosistency from a methodology


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> thaat could be explained by the difference in the BIOSower states,different uncore clock speed,RAM


Yep my guess is ram, point is it does not change the fact almost universally the 7700k was slightly ahead of 8700k in single core benchmarks, should be other way around.

Actually, this also (and more likely) could be down to turbo boost 3.0. Thats why i said we gotta figure this out


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Yep my guess is ram, point is it does not change the fact almost universally the 7700k was slightly ahead of 8700k in single core benchmarks, should be other way around.


where? these reviews arent the final ones and leaks could be rushed with flaws


----------



## QuadDamage

What ram are you guys going with? I'm going to get 16gb was thinking of this

Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 DRAM 3200MHz C16 Desktop Memory Kit - Black (CMK16GX4M2B3200C16)

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0143UM4TC/ref=ox_sc_act_title_4?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&psc=1

I don't really need all the stupid rgb stuff even thought my case will have it


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> What ram are you guys going with? I'm going to get 16gb was thinking of this
> 
> Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 DRAM 3200MHz C16 Desktop Memory Kit - Black (CMK16GX4M2B3200C16)
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0143UM4TC/ref=ox_sc_act_title_4?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&psc=1
> 
> I don't really need all the stupid rgb stuff even thought my case will have it


Spend another 25 bucks and get these:
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/jpH48d/gskill-memory-f43200c14d16gvk

Its much higher quality ram, and can overclock better if you want to dabble with it down the road.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> What ram are you guys going with?


16gb of 3000mhz or higher.


----------



## TheWizardMan

I'll be sticking with my g.skill 32 gb of 3733 if I upgrade.


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well for one thing we need to figure out why 7700k was beating 8700k in a lot of the leaks for single core scores. On paper the 8700k should win across the board of course, but my guess is a few games will just prefer the 7700k for whatever reason, nothing to worry about tho.


One more maximum hop on the ring bus could be one reason.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> One more maximum hop on the ring bus could be one reason.


My gut tells me turbo boost 3.0 specifically for coffee is not playing nice with benchmarks. CPU-z needed a patch for ryzen, same may be true of other benches for coffee.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> My gut tells me turbo boost 3.0 specifically for coffee is not playing nice with benchmarks. CPU-z needed a patch for ryzen, same may be true of other benches for coffee.


coffee doens't have boost 3.0. She is only 2.0. But I agree nonetheless.


----------



## Handrox




----------



## MaKeN

Is there really a big point to swap a 3400 mhz kit for a 4000+?


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Is there really a big point to swap a 3400 mhz kit for a 4000+?


higher performance on cpu bound?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> coffee doens't have boost 3.0. She is only 2.0. But I agree nonetheless.


Whoa you are right, i swear read somewhere it was 3.0.....what the heck.

But ya for example almost all the leaks i saw had single core cinebench at ~194-195, at 4.7ghz it should be consistently scoring 199-200 range.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Does that mean that you will be going with the i5-8600K? May want to wait for reviews and see how it fairs vs a Ryzen 1600 especially if your focus is indeed on better minimums and less performance drops...
> 
> If Ryzen price cuts are true, should make for an interesting Q4


I may very well have to due to price, it depends on how much they're actually going to retail for. This is what decides everything as an 8600k should give 7700k performance and for what I want a 7700k destroys anything Ryzen has to offer. I'm also not here to argue Ryzen vs Intel.

I much rather have an 8700 non K and 1080 than a slower GPU and 8700K. Regardless, it seems CL is going to need some serious cooling so the cooler I'd be getting for an OC wouldn't be wasted on an 8700 non K.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> What ram are you guys going with? I'm going to get 16gb was thinking of this
> 
> Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 DRAM 3200MHz C16 Desktop Memory Kit - Black (CMK16GX4M2B3200C16)
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0143UM4TC/ref=ox_sc_act_title_4?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&psc=1
> 
> I don't really need all the stupid rgb stuff even thought my case will have it


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Spend another 25 bucks and get these:
> https://pcpartpicker.com/product/jpH48d/gskill-memory-f43200c14d16gvk
> 
> Its much higher quality ram, and can overclock better if you want to dabble with it down the road.


That's the exact kit I was planning to get, but on Newegg.

Explain why the Ripjaw kit is much better when it just seems you're just paying for that silly heatsink.


----------



## WexleySnoops

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> That's the exact kit I was planning to get, but on Newegg.
> 
> Explain why the Ripjaw kit is much better when it just seems you're just paying for that silly heatsink.


Tighter timings.

That's one thing I want to see tested before I purchase ram, is whether CL is as dependent on timings/speed as Ryzen is.


----------



## Scotty99

You want to avoid cas 16 memory right now, that is sk hynix ram and has recently saw a massive price bump because of ryzen. Cas 14 ram however is much higher quality samsung ram and has not seen a price bump nearly as high (maybe 10-15 dollars, compared to 50+ for hynix).

Not only is it better out of the box, but can overclock far better. 3200 cas 14 ram can most likely hit 4000 speeds on every kit.


----------



## mouacyk

Tomorrow is the day!!!


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Whoa you are right, i swear read somewhere it was 3.0.....what the heck.
> 
> But ya for example almost all the leaks i saw had single core cinebench at ~194-195, at 4.7ghz it should be consistently scoring 199-200 range.


what if you use another comparison for singlethread performance until we get more reliable cinema4d benchmarks?


----------



## QuadDamage

Trigger has been pulled on everything but the board and CPU
http://www.overclock.net/t/1638861/i7-8700k-build#post_26375080

Going to wait till Amazon has the chip and board in stock build is coming together nicey. If anyone cares i will live stream me building it on twitch and have a youtube video on my brothers channel.


----------



## EDK-TheONE

8700K with Godlike:








https://valid.x86.fr/k819nl


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> what if you use another comparison for singlethread performance until we get more reliable cinema4d benchmarks?


Bro you need to settle down a little lol. All i am saying is nearly all of the leaks had the 8700k on par or slightly behind 7700k in single core cinebench (which in my experience is the best indicator of gaming performance). 8700k should be consistently scoring higher than its predecessor with its 4.7ghz boost clocks, its on us and reviewers to figure out what is causing this behavior.


----------



## PontiacGTX

for those are looking for RAM faster than 3400 https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?item=N82E16820313618


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WexleySnoops*
> 
> Tighter timings.
> 
> That's one thing I want to see tested before I purchase ram, is whether CL is as dependent on timings/speed as Ryzen is.


They weren't listed so I had assumed they were standard, my mistake.

But this brings up the issue of why even bother since high freq ram is what Intel the 'lake' architecture benefits from and those timings mean nothing, having said that I'm aware we're on OCN.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> They weren't listed so I had assumed they were standard, my mistake.
> 
> But this brings up the issue of why even bother since high freq ram is what Intel benefits from and those timings mean nothing, having said that I'm aware we're on OCN.


Some games will prefer latency over mhz. The overarching point tho is that hynix ram is priced terribly right now, that same kit in march was 98 bucks and samsung ram was ~170 at the lowest.

156 bucks for 98 dollar ram or 183 for a 170 dollar kit, thats the ram situation atm.


----------



## Topwned




----------



## QuadDamage

^^ that chart is unredable even zoom'ed in


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> My local Microcenter has the 1800X for $349.99. Still waiting for better ITX boards to jump over to Ryzen... Might be next year when I finally replace my 6700K...


Finally? Shoot... A lot of folks are still rocking, Sandy Bridge through Haswell i5s... You're sitting on a 6th gen i7 and complaining about it, lol?

Besides, at two gens back, If you're already talking about waiting until next year, you may as well wait to see how the Ice Lake i7 8 core stacks up against the second gen Ryzen 7s...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Topwned*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 8700k losing in 4/6 games to 7700k on that chart......like i said something fishy goin on with coffee.


Yeah... I would discount that chart as it looks like one put together in Google Sheets, so anyone could have done that. Also, the RAM speeds vary on each of those rigs from 2133 through 2666, which is significant enough it can make a difference. When there's not any information on what the test rig is, let alone a consistent test rig, anymore, I'm inclined to not give it much weight when considering my options.


----------



## Scotty99

8700k losing in 4/6 games to 7700k on that chart......like i said something fishy goin on with coffee.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> ^^ that chart is unredable even zoom'ed in


Open it in a new tab.

I'd like to start a new Coffee Lake thread, but with the cost of the new CPU binned and the new motherboard and the even faster ram to really justify the upgrade, I'm going to be spending an extra $800 or so (after I sell my stuff to recoup some of the cost).

I'm not even gaming this year, I'm working on Skyrim textures so I can play it next year. So I'd be upgrading without even using the faster speeds.


----------



## AlphaC

Spelling is not a strong suit at ASUS.



https://www.bit-tech.net/features/tech/motherboards/z370-motherboard-preview-roundup/1/


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Topwned*


what GPU?


----------



## Topwned

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> what GPU?


no idea, chart is from this guy http://pctforum.tyden.cz/viewtopic.php?p=9341171#p9341171


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Topwned*
> 
> no idea, chart is from this guy http://pctforum.tyden.cz/viewtopic.php?p=9341171#p9341171


Sig rig said 980Ti.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> Finally? Shoot... A lot of folks are still rocking, Sandy Bridge through Haswell i5s... You're sitting on a 6th gen i7 and complaining about it, lol?
> 
> Besides, at two gens back, If you're already talking about waiting until next year, you may as well wait to see how the Ice Lake i7 8 core stacks up against the second gen Ryzen 7s...


It could be worst, I went from 3700K to the 4700K just because of the chipset... Waiting on Ice Lake would have been the intent if I wait until next year. Only issue is that AMD would be launching Ryzen 2 in Q1 of 2019 which just makes it a never ending waiting game. More inclined to see what AMD can deliver with their updated chipset next year than jumping onto this dead end socket.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


These charts are completely illegible.


----------



## lolredy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 8700k losing in 4/6 games to 7700k on that chart......like i said something fishy goin on with coffee.


the memory used is bad though(2600mhz?)

Im sure 8700k will gain alot from faster ram such as 3200 cas 14+.


----------



## QuadDamage

For u uk guys

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Intel-BX80684I78700K-Core-i7-8700K-Processor/dp/B07598VZR8

Not in stock but the page

Still waiting game boyz


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Topwned*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> what GPU?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Topwned*
> 
> no idea, chart is from this guy http://pctforum.tyden.cz/viewtopic.php?p=9341171#p9341171


Not sure if he has dedicated benching rigs or not. But thanks to Google Translate I do know the reason behind the varied memory clock speeds is that he uses the native standard for the respective chipsets. He doesn't seem to mention anything else in the thread about the specs of the other equipment tested with.


----------



## Scotty99

I dunno lol, its starting to look like 8700k has an IPC deficit.....somehow.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> ^^ that chart is unredable even zoom'ed in


Just for you:


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I dunno lol, its starting to look like 8700k has an IPC deficit.....somehow.




Sounds like you're getting round to digging deep to bury your doubts, in these last few witching hours of the NDA, seeing that as of yet there's no definitive proof yet about 8700K performance, or lack thereof, in the hopes that instead of waiting for Coffee Lake, your gamble in jumping on the Ryzen 7 bandwagon won't turn out to be as a bad a choice in the end...

But that's none of my business...


----------



## azanimefan

I expect the IPC to be basically identical.

I also expect the overclocks to be closer to skylake then kaby


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like you're getting round to digging deep to bury your doubts, in these last few witching hours of the NDA, seeing that as of yet there's no definitive proof yet about 8700K performance, or lack thereof, in the hopes that instead of waiting for Coffee Lake, your gamble in jumping on the Ryzen 7 bandwagon won't turn out to be as a bad a choice in the end...
> 
> But that's none of my business...


what lol? Im buying it either way, just seems like IPC isnt quite what kaby was, for whatever reason. These are tiny %'s mind you, but they should be shifted the other way with 8700k's boost clocks.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *azanimefan*
> 
> I expect the IPC to be basically identical.
> 
> I also expect the overclocks to be closer to skylake then kaby


Thats hogwash, these will overlock way higher than skylake. Also all benchmarks that have leaked so far point to a very slight decrease in IPC. We will know tomorrow i guess.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> what lol? Im buying it either way, just seems like IPC isnt quite what kaby was, for whatever reason. These are tiny %'s mind you, but they should be shifted the other way with 8700k's boost clocks.


No... IPC is about the 3-5% increase it normally is... you have to remember that they rolled the stock clocks back, and these benches are done at stock clock settings. If you compare the overall performance of 8700K to 7700K, in the available benches... it adds up to the typical, generational 3-5% IPC gain.


----------



## kevindd992002

Why would Coffee Lake use Turbo Boost 2.0 rather than 3.0? Isn't that a tech downgrade?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

IPC is the same. Not a 2-3% decrease, not increase. Will be fun to see how these play out!


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> No... IPC is about the 3-5% increase it normally is... you have to remember that they rolled the stock clocks back, and these benches are done at stock clock settings. If you compare the overall performance of 8700K to 7700K, in the available benches... it adds up to the typical, generational 3-5% IPC gain.


Where are you seeing a gain? Nearly all of the leaked benches show an IPC deficit to kaby, and you do realize a 8700k is clocked higher than a 7700k.....right?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> IPC is the same. Not a 2-3% decrease, not increase. Will be fun to see how these play out!


Id like to believe that, but all the leaks point to a small loss of IPC. We have seen more than a handful of cinebench r15 single cores results, none of them have the 8700k at the 200+ mark as it should be scoring.


----------



## kd5151

Post #1 source 24. 7700K vs 8700K vs 7800x @4.5ghz

Go!


----------



## Scotty99

That's just a handful of titles that like cpu cores as well as multi core benchmarks, of course 8700k is gonna put a whoopin on kaby in that scenario. Im gonna be payin attention to single core benchmark scores and IPC dependent titles like GTA 5.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *azanimefan*
> 
> I expect the IPC to be basically identical.
> 
> I also expect the overclocks to be closer to skylake then kaby


I'm going to guess clocks will be in between Skylake and Kaby, but closer to Kaby.

Gibbs said they have 5.1ghz bins ready.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> That's just a handful of titles that like cpu cores as well as multi core benchmarks, of course 8700k is gonna put a whoopin on kaby in that scenario. Im gonna be payin attention to single core benchmark scores and IPC dependent titles like GTA 5.


https://videocardz.com/72976/intel-core-i7-8700k-official-performance








@ 4.5ghz the 7700K & 8700K score the same 1T Cinebench R15 of about 195.


----------



## Wetworks

With the 7700K and 8700K both at 4.5ghz the 8700K is showing a 7% average increase over the 7700K


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> https://videocardz.com/72976/intel-core-i7-8700k-official-performance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @ 4.5ghz the 7700K & 8700K score the same 1T Cinebench R15 of about 195.


There are more cinebench leaks in there, and not once have i seen it at 200+ (where it should score with its 4.7ghz boost clock).


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wetworks*
> 
> With the 7700K and 8700K both at 4.5ghz the 8700K is showing a 7% average increase over the 7700K


Please guys lets not confuse IPC with core count.

That is all multicore stuff, what people should concern themselves with is if 8700k is at least on par with 7700k in IPC, so far its not looking to be the case.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I'm going to guess clocks will be in between Skylake and Kaby, but closer to Kaby.
> 
> Gibbs said they have 5.1ghz bins ready.


http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/core_i7_6700k/
Skylake is 4,770MHz average on water, so anything 4.8GHz + would be decent for a 6 core

http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/core_i7_7700k/
Kaby Lake is on average 5,033 MHz on water


----------



## BoredErica

You know, I feel like I care more about single thread than any of you guys tbh. Literally every game I play right now has its perf based on single thread perf. But all this constant chatter right before the launch when obviously we will have better info then makes it seem like you guys care far more than I do.

Which is totally fine, do as you like. I'm just wondering out loud.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> You know, I feel like I care more about single thread than any of you guys tbh. Literally every game I play right now has its perf based on single thread perf. But all this constant chatter right before the launch when obviously we will have better info then makes it seem like you guys care far more than I do.
> 
> Which is totally fine, do as you like. I'm just wondering out loud.


Just making observations is all. 8700k should be trumping 7700k in every task, i expect a few outliers with some games but single core benchmarks should favor the 8700k across the board, something we havent exactly seen yet.

Just for example people. If i set my 1700 to 3.7ghz ill get something like 148 in cinebench single core, at my daily 3.9 i get ~158. There should be a noticeable and repeatable difference between the 7700k and 8700k in this test.


----------



## Asrock Extreme7

well just got i7 8700k £358 yippi


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Where are you seeing a gain? Nearly all of the leaked benches show an IPC deficit to kaby, and you do realize a 8700k is clocked higher than a 7700k.....right?


Kaby Lake i7-7700K

https://ark.intel.com/products/97129/Intel-Core-i7-7700K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_50-GHz

Base Clock 4.2GHz, Turbo Boost 2.0, 4.5GHz single,

Coffee Lake i7-8700K

https://ark.intel.com/products/126684/Intel-Core-i7-8700K-Processor-12M-Cache-up-to-4_70-GHz

Base Clock 3.7GHz, Turbo Boost 2.0, 4.7GHz Single,

So... the turbo boost profile is only a speed increase of 4.4%, where the base clock speed is an -11.9% reduction... so... technically, during routine operation, no sir, the Kaby Lake has a higher base clock. In regards to the comment about Turbo Boost 2.0 versus 3.0, Turbo Boost 3.0 is not supported on Kaby Lake or Sky Lake either. It seems that Turbo 3.0 is now going to be a feature exclusive to X series SKUs.

The relevant point is that NO ONE has benched them outside of NDA, nor with fully disclosing test rig specs and methods. How about y'all hold your horses, and wait for official results.


----------



## Handrox




----------



## Scotty99

542 seems really good on cpu-z, so good i wonder if thats stock (benchmark says 7700k's score 492).

For reference my ryzen scores 445.


----------



## Handrox

certainly not this standard frequency


----------



## Scotty99

Oh so thats your video lol? Thats actually impressive if its stock.

Why is he hiding the name of the chip, 80w TDP....cpu-z bug?

Ok ya that says quad channel memory, next lol.


----------



## Handrox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Oh so thats your video lol? Thats actually impressive if its stock.
> 
> Why is he hiding the name of the chip, 80w TDP....cpu-z bug?
> 
> Ok ya that says quad channel memory, next lol.


no, the video is not mine, but for other information, I see the results far above those obtained with standard frequency


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Handrox*
> 
> no, the video is not mine, but for other information, I see the results far above those obtained with standard frequency


Oh right i agree, seems high for stock settings. Either way tho likely fake, says quad channel memory...


----------



## Handrox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Oh right i agree, seems high for stock settings. Either way tho likely fake, says quad channel memory...


quad channel? Yeah, it's fake ...


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Because 8>6? I understand everyone on this forum thinks hyperthreading is terrible but there will be a few occassions where those two extra threads will put the 7700k on top. This is also why im passing on an i5 this gen.


4C/8T is matching 6C/6T in handbrake

Some games have better minimums for the 8600K vs the 7700K but in other games it's not. The 8600K has a higher max OC if you're able to cool it though.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

*z370 boards are in stock right now and sold by Newegg*

https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=z370&ignorear=0&N=-1&isNodeId=1

Is $175 too much for the Prime z270-A if it's sold by Newegg and not a 3rd party ?


----------



## Scotty99

OMG 280 for the maximus hero??? Ugh, looks like extreme 4 it is lol. I nailed that directly on, 165 bucks!

And yes i feel 175 is too much for the prime-A, get the extreme 4 its a better board.

I was spot on with all my guesses except maximus hero and prime-a. I cant believe asus made the -A a 175 dollar board, its not worth that much.

Edit: That is the maximus hero with wifi i just noticed, regular one should be ~20 bucks cheaper......still more than i expected tho.


----------



## czin125

From that chart, the 7740X has a 60C temp during the benchmark even while using 2666mhz memory while the 7700K reaches a temp of 65C when paired with 2400mhz memory.
4.5 x 4 = 18.0ghz ( 7740X )
4.5+4.4+4.4+4.4 = 17.7ghz ( 7700K )


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> OMG 280 for the maximus hero??? Ugh, looks like extreme 4 it is lol. I nailed that directly on, 165 bucks!
> 
> And yes i feel 175 is too much for the prime-A, get the extreme 4 its a better board.


Can anyone back this up ?

I'm ready to pull the trigger.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Can anyone back this up ?
> 
> I'm ready to pull the trigger.


All boards are a little high. I would consider the K6 or Extreme 4.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Can anyone back this up ?
> 
> I'm ready to pull the trigger.


Extreme 4 has better VRM AND larger heatsinks, i cant believe asus is asking 175 for the prime.....shame on them.

Ya after looking through that list thoroughly, extreme 4 for 165 bucks is hands down the best board for the money, no competition. It even has the bonus of being one of the most aesthetically pleasing









Can anyone explain the price difference between strix -e and -f? As far as i can tell they are the exact same board with different colored heatinks/io shield.


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> You know, I feel like I care more about single thread than any of you guys tbh. Literally every game I play right now has its perf based on single thread perf. But all this constant chatter right before the launch when obviously we will have better info then makes it seem like you guys care far more than I do.
> 
> Which is totally fine, do as you like. I'm just wondering out loud.


Which is fine, but i like to play more than one game at a time.

Fps + mmorpg is an efficient gaming session









Though i also tend to use my hardware far longer than i should...


----------



## Scotty99

How does this thread go dead once something actually happens haha. I guess everyone is out buying a board?









I am stuck between extreme 4, strix-f, and msi pro carbon. MSI is the wild card because they are the only manufacturer that is going to support corsair sync it, something i may regret not having down the road...


----------



## mdd1986

Aesthetically I like the pro carbon the best. But not sure its worth the extra money over the extreme 4. I think it should be around $165 not $189. Extreme 4 deff the best buy it seems.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> *z370 boards are in stock right now and sold by Newegg*
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=z370&ignorear=0&N=-1&isNodeId=1
> 
> Is $175 too much for the Prime z270-A if it's sold by Newegg and not a 3rd party ?


Where's the Formula?


----------



## 970Rules

Ever Z370 has the same Audio Chipset "Realtek ALC1220"

Any of you dealt with it before? Is it any good? My Haswell ASRock mobo had some low-level noise pollution when I got it. Pissed me off so much I went out and got a Xonar DG for 30 bucks to fix the sound.

I have no clue how far new mobos have come with sound quality.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Where's the Formula?


Formula usually comes out a bit later


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> 4C/8T is matching 6C/6T in handbrake


Still would waiymt for real benchmarks before drawing conclusions


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> Aesthetically I like the pro carbon the best. But not sure its worth the extra money over the extreme 4. I think it should be around $165 not $189. Extreme 4 deff the best buy it seems.


Ya i really like the subtle lighting on the pro carbon as well. I dunno i just view MSI as a third rate manufacturer lately, i actually put asrock above them in terms of quality these days.

That said im pretty shallow, and inclusion of corsair connector might seal the deal lol.


----------



## kd5151

WAIT!!!!!!!!!!!! Where's the Taichi?


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> WAIT!!!!!!!!!!!! Where's the Taichi?


where's my white motherboards?!?


----------



## Scotty99

Taichi not necessary with extreme 4 at that price imo









I mean aside from a VRM heatpipe whats the difference between the two?


----------



## jprovido

what motherboard did you guys get? still a bit hesitant maybe more will come in a few days


----------



## evensen007

Extreme 4 seems to have a 10 dollar rebate on it too, putting it at 155. Seems like the best deal going. I think ill get that one.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Ordered the Extreme 4 then added in a case and PSU to save some money on shipping since those two were on sale. There might be a sale on the other parts I want while I wait for CL to come back in stock since I'm not assuming I'll be able to get one tomorrow, and that's even if they're very close to the wholesale prices.

This locks me into an 8600k due to my budget, I guess I'm never getting HT, lol.

I realized that until I can actually test the ram I should hold off on buying it since I wouldn't be able to RMA it if it takes too long to get everything else.


----------



## jprovido

I'm having trouble picking a board. I didn't like my current board (z270 maximus IX Hero). thinking of getting MSI or asrock this time. was really looking forward to a white Taichi motherboard from Asrock. those gigabyte boards with the orange accent are hideous


----------



## Contiusa

Is it possible to remove the shroud that covers the AIO shield on these boards? Because I don't think you can fit a Lucifer V2 in one of those. I personally find it cheesy as hell. Good Lord... I miss the old days of the classic Gigabyte UD3, 5 and 7 line.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Ordered the Extreme 4 then added in a case and PSU to save some money on shipping since those two were on sale. There might be a sale on the other parts I want while I wait for CL to come back in stock since I'm not assuming I'll be able to get one tomorrow, and that's even if they're very close to the wholesale prices.
> 
> This locks me into an 8600k due to my budget, I guess I'm never getting HT, lol.
> 
> I realized that until I can actually test the ram I should hold off on buying it since I wouldn't be able to RMA it if it takes too long to get everything else.


Very good board choice, incredible value for 155 bucks after rebate.

Here is memory QVL for that board, already some 4133 kits validated. Just copy model number of ram and do a ctrl+f search on chrome to find it.
https://www.asrock.com/MB/Intel/Z370%20Extreme4/index.asp#Memory


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Ordered the Extreme 4 then added in a case and PSU to save some money on shipping since those two were on sale. There might be a sale on the other parts I want while I wait for CL to come back in stock since I'm not assuming I'll be able to get one tomorrow, and that's even if they're very close to the wholesale prices.
> 
> This locks me into an 8600k due to my budget, I guess I'm never getting HT, lol.
> 
> I realized that until I can actually test the ram I should hold off on buying it since I wouldn't be able to RMA it if it takes too long to get everything else.


Good choice in board. If prices are correct then there was a price increase on the boards in addition to the CPUs this generation.

That said, I am disheartened to see so many people eager to jump aboard this dead on arrival chipset without even seeing a single product review.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Taichi not necessary with extreme 4 at that price imo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mean aside from a VRM heatpipe whats the difference between the two?


Not much, I want to know the price. To be honest the K6 has more features than both it seems. I kinda leaning toward it more. I noticed the K6 has power and reset buttons on board. The taichi has solder points in the pictures but no buttons?







I like them all but for the price the Extreme 4 is tough to beat.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Good choice in board. If prices are correct then there was a price increase on the boards in addition to the CPUs this generation.
> 
> That said, I am disheartened to see so many people eager to jump aboard this dead on arrival chipset without even seeing a single product review.


there's been leaks already. it's still ring bus design so no hit in gaming performance, overclocking headroom is the same if not better so it's basically kaby lake + 2 more cores.


----------



## NorcalTRD

I was looking at the Hero X, but with it at $280 the Extreme 4 is really grabbing my attention for $155 after rebate.
I really wanted onboard wifi/bluetooth that the Hero X offers but for $150 difference I can live with an M.2 wifi/bluetooth chip added to the Extreme

Can someone list significant differences between the two boards?
Im short on time tonight.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Not much, I want to know the price. To be honest the K6 has more features than both it seems. I kinda leaning toward it more. I noticed the K6 has power and reset buttons on board. The taichi has solder points in the pictures but no buttons?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I like them all but for the price the Extreme 4 is tough to beat.


I know this will sound absurd to many but, i crossed the k6 off my list because of the tiny amount of red on the chipset heatsink lol.

I am fully aware of how ridiculous that sounds.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> I was looking at the Hero X, but with it at $280 the Extreme 4 is really grabbing my attention for $155 after rebate.
> I really wanted onboard wifi/bluetooth that the Hero X offers but for $150 difference I can live with an M.2 wifi/bluetooth chip added to the Extreme
> 
> Can someone list significant differences between the two boards?
> Im short on time tonight.


Only real differences are with software/lighting. WIth hero you get addressable RGB headers too. Both are going to achieve the same level of overclocks.

There are of course other things like display port (who cares), better/more expensive audio, more fan headers etc etc. Nothing that adds up to a 130 dollar price difference.


----------



## jprovido

are these aorus board really orange or is it just RGB Lighting?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> are these aorus board really orange or is it just RGB Lighting?


Thats just a photoshop, they are all RGB.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Thats just a photoshop, they are all RGB.


I saw a picture a few seconds ago they are indeed just black. I was close to buying the aorus but the I/O is pretty bad.

edit:

pretty much all of them are bad. why are the USB ports so scarce? most of them only have 5 USB ports



why does the z270 maximus ix hero have more usb ports than the z370 maximus x hero?


I have an oculus rift so usb ports are more important to me compared to most people but why the downgrade in ports?


----------



## z0ki

After my trusty x79 Rampage vi extreme died and my 3930K is still working but cant find any x79 boards it's time to upgrade. I was going to go with skylake x but I can't justify spending nearly $2500+ just on ram cpu and a high end mobo with the state the cpus are in.

My 3930k was used for gaming and video rendering and treated me well, now the 8700K is out and it has the same core count and threads am I right in assuming that rendering performance would be better than my 3930k at 4.8Ghz? I know it won't be as quick as a 10+ core cpu but being new architecture it should be much faster than Sandy Bridge E's 32nm counterpart?


----------



## Scotty99

Ya i dunno, that is odd. At least usb splitters/hubs are cheap.

Strix-e is a 210 dollar board and has 5 usb ports on the back lol.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *z0ki*
> 
> After my trusty x79 Rampage vi extreme died and my 3930K is still working but cant find any x79 boards it's time to upgrade. I was going to go with skylake x but I can't justify spending nearly $2500+ just on ram cpu and a high end mobo with the state the cpus are in.
> 
> My 3930k was used for gaming and video rendering and treated me well, now the 8700K is out and it has the same core count and threads am I right in assuming that rendering performance would be better than my 3930k at 4.8Ghz? I know it won't be as quick as a 10+ core cpu but being new architecture it should be much faster than Sandy Bridge E's 32nm counterpart?


Given 8700K has higher IPC and higher clocks yes it should be faster


----------



## axiumone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I saw a picture a few seconds ago they are indeed just black. I was close to buying the aorus but the I/O is pretty bad.
> 
> edit:
> 
> pretty much all of them are bad. why are the USB ports so scarce? most of them only have 5 USB ports
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> why does the z270 maximus ix hero have more usb ports than the z370 maximus x hero?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have an oculus rift so usb ports are more important to me compared to most people but why the downgrade in ports?


Hah! I've been on that hunt for ages. I'm using 4 sensors for room scale as well and they absolutely hate being on the same usb controller. I ended up picking up an add-in usb card 3.0 with 4 ports and individual controllers for each port.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya i dunno, that is odd. At least usb splitters/hubs are cheap.
> 
> Strix-e is a 210 dollar board and has 5 usb ports on the back lol.


VR is very finicky with USB ports. it has to be native controller or you will have issues with the both the headset and the sensors (I have 3 sensors too) so basically I need 4 USB 3.0 ports just for the VR headset alone.





I like this motherboard the most so far the MSI Z370 GAMING PRO CARBON(non AC). looks pretty neutral and the I/O is not that bad. haven't used MSI boards in a longgg time though.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *axiumone*
> 
> Hah! I've been on that hunt for ages. I'm using 4 sensors for room scale as well and they absolutely hate being on the same usb controller. I ended up picking up an add-in usb card 3.0 with 4 ports and individual controllers for each port.


4 sensors?!? lol. I'm able to manage with my current motherboard (has 4 native usb 3.0 ports) and 4 usb 2.0 ports. board manufacturers shouldn't skimp on this tbh. atleast MSI gives you 7 ports which is really good


----------



## Scotty99

Pro carbon is in the running for me as well, i just found out about their lighting cards too which would look really nice with this board.

I actually have never used an MSI motherboard, i can only recall issues with downclocking/downvolting at idle with them, is that still a thing? Like you couldnt use adaptive volts properly, i cant imagine thats still a problem.


----------



## kd5151

ASUS ROG Strix Z370-F is sold out on newegg. 1 down.


----------



## Scotty99

Maximus hero is oos as well, man dem asus fanboys...


----------



## z0ki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Given 8700K has higher IPC and higher clocks yes it should be faster


Let's hope that is the case









I'm still waiting to hear any news on the Maximus X Extreme. I'd expect this would be released December or January


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Can anyone back this up ?
> 
> I'm ready to pull the trigger.


Asrock Fatal1ty K6 is the best bet
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157788
$170 after $10 MIR , + $4 shipping

Asrock Extreme4 lacks the debug LED / Power & reset buttons and is $155 after $10 MIR + $4 shipping ... it does have dual BIOS though
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157789

ASUS Prime Z370-A is $175 + $4 Shipping ... it'll likely drop to $120 in a few months

Both the Asrock boards make the ASUS ROG Strix Z370-H look TERRIBLE at $170+$4 shipping.

In addition the Extreme4 & K6 have NE5532 Premium Headset Amplifier for Front Panel Audio Connector (Supports up to 600 Ohm headsets) , so it's not just the Thunderbolt AIB option , VRM, and Dual BIOs.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Formula usually comes out a bit later


Oh ok, I didn't know that. How "later" though?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *z0ki*
> 
> Let's hope that is the case
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm still waiting to hear any news on the Maximus X Extreme. I'd expect this would be released December or January


Normally Extreme is later however there may not be an Extreme this time around since we now have the Apex which targets a similar audience, wait and see i guess


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Oh ok, I didn't know that. How "later" though?


Maybe a couple of months? It has been announced so wont be too long







Not sure if I will bother this time around with upgrades, unless I can get a [email protected] or higher, I dont want to sacrifice single core performance which matters to me more than multicore


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Maybe a couple of months? It has been announced so wont be too long
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure if I will bother this time around with upgrades, unless I can get a [email protected] or higher, I dont want to sacrifice single core performance which matters to me more than multicore


No!!! My build is long overdue and I can't even start it. I hate this. I thought the Formula would be available at launch too. I wasn't expecting the Extreme but I was expecting the Formula.


----------



## NorcalTRD

When does the 8700k drop? In 3 minutes? 12pm EST?
Or 12pm PST?


----------



## NorcalTRD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Asrock Fatal1ty K6 is the best bet
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157788
> $170 after $10 MIR , + $4 shipping
> 
> Asrock Extreme4 lacks the debug LED / Power & reset buttons and is $155 after $10 MIR + $4 shipping ... it does have dual BIOS though
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157789
> 
> ASUS Prime Z370-A is $175 + $4 Shipping ... it'll likely drop to $120 in a few months
> 
> Both the Asrock boards make the ASUS ROG Strix Z370-H look TERRIBLE at $170+$4 shipping.
> 
> In addition the Extreme4 & K6 have NE5532 Premium Headset Amplifier for Front Panel Audio Connector (Supports up to 600 Ohm headsets) , so it's not just the Thunderbolt AIB option , VRM, and Dual BIOs.


Good assessment between the Extreme 4 and K6.
I did not realize the Extreme 4 lacked debug LED and reset cmos buttons.
K6 has only one BIOS? Would be great if it had two huh.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> No!!! My build is long overdue and I can't even start it. I hate this. I thought the Formula would be available at launch too. I wasn't expecting the Extreme but I was expecting the Formula.


Young people are so impatient these days







You could buy a Maximus X Hero Wi-Fi and fit a EK monoblock at a later date and achieve the same thing pretty much, EK have always made monoblocks for the Hero boards. Also you may not be able to get a 8700K at launch so waiting for a Formula board is not really an issue, I would wait for proper reviews about the 8700K before pulling the trigger.


----------



## kd5151

Weighing my options.


----------



## Twilex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> When does the 8700k drop? In 3 minutes? 12pm EST?
> Or 12pm PST?


Wondering the same thing myself....


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> When does the 8700k drop? In 3 minutes? 12pm EST?
> Or 12pm PST?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Twilex*
> 
> Wondering the same thing myself....


Supposedly Newegg and Amazon update listings at 3am EST, which agrees with the threads that appeared this morning for the 8700k.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asmodian*
> 
> Your CPU is a very nice chip but don't disparage the 8700K to make yourself feel better about it or something. For pure gaming the ring bus is a little better than the mesh architecture and the extra PCIe lanes and memory bandwidth does not help. Intel has the 7800X MSRP at $383.00 - $389.00 so you did get a bargain.
> 
> Of course it isn't worth switching or anything but the 8700K is a better CPU for single GPU gaming. It doesn't need to do 5.4 GHz to be a better option then the 7800X even at the same price.


The hyperbole is a little much. The "Better for gaming" claim needs some context. We are talking about what, 3-4 FPS max for the most part which is hardly significant in 99% of scenarios. Both products are great and I'd argue that choosing between the two should ultimately come down to whichever you can get cheaper for the majority of buyers. Unless of course you simply must have the latest and greatest for epeen (which I do sympathize with personally).


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> The hyperbole is a little much. The "Better for gaming" claim needs some context. We are talking about what, 3-4 FPS max for the most part which is hardly significant in 99% of scenarios. Both products are great and I'd argue that choosing between the two should ultimately come down to whichever you can get cheaper for the majority of buyers. Unless of course you simply must have the latest and greatest for epeen (which I do sympathize with personally).


Never under estimate the power of epeen....Intel relies on that


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> The hyperbole is a little much. The "Better for gaming" claim needs some context. We are talking about what, 3-4 FPS max for the most part which is hardly significant in 99% of scenarios. Both products are great and I'd argue that choosing between the two should ultimately come down to whichever you can get cheaper for the majority of buyers. Unless of course you simply must have the latest and greatest for epeen (which I do sympathize with personally).


Hyperbole? I only said the ring bus is a little better than the mesh architecture, and that the difference wasn't worth changing CPUs. My point was that the 8700K is not a terrible deal because the 7800X is basically the same price.

As far as epeen goes, is a 7800X or a 8700K better?


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Young people are so impatient these days
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You could buy a Maximus X Hero Wi-Fi and fit a EK monoblock at a later date and achieve the same thing pretty much, EK have always made monoblocks for the Hero boards. Also you may not be able to get a 8700K at launch so waiting for a Formula board is not really an issue, I would wait for proper reviews about the 8700K before pulling the trigger.


This build was supposed to start since June 2017. I already have all watercooling components and other necessities but then decided to wait for Coffee Lake. I don't think I can call myself impatient with that long of a wait


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> This build was supposed to start since June 2017. I already have all watercooling components and other necessities but then decided to wait for Coffee Lake. I don't think I can call myself impatient with that long of a wait


lol...I know what you are saying, you have been on other threads expressing the same thing







Thought you still had all your Kaby lake stuff? Or did you send it all back?


----------



## HeliXpc

8700K will be faster in gaming....Everything else the 7800X, more ram support also.


----------



## delboy67

Imo the new 6 core i5k will be the new gaming king, I cant see ht having the same effect on 6 core as 4 core in the gaming benches coupled with lower prices. New 2500k incoming me thinks.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

8700k - Not purchasable.

https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80684I78700K-Core-i7-8700K-Processor/dp/B07598VZR8

8700 non K - Purchasable

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07598HLB4

8600k - Purchasable

https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80684I58600K-Core-i5-8600K-Processor/dp/B0759FKH8K

Should I get the 8600k or 8700 non K ?

Edit - 8700 and 8600k were purchasable for about 10 minutes. Looks like 3am EST is the time to check.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> lol...I know what you are saying, you have been on other threads expressing the same thing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thought you still had all your Kaby lake stuff? Or did you send it all back?


Oh I see you're subscribed to other threads that I'm subscribed too  I did and I already sold the 7700K but the Maximus IX Hero is yet to be bought by a buyer. I cannot send them back because I bought them from the US and had them ship here in the Philippines.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HeliXpc*
> 
> 8700K will be faster in gaming....Everything else the 7800X, more ram support also.


Stock vs stock for sure.
Mesh is shinning once overclocked over 3Ghz and paired with the correct memory. L3 is having actually lower bandwidth in this case but x4 more L2 is great advantage tho...
I was also concerned reading reviews at stock with 2.4 GHz mesh and sub 3 GHz memory...


http://imgur.com/XU6na

Here you can see the benefit from OCing them - 30% to 50% In Farcry primal/TombRaider minimum and average FPS and 30% in GTA V with the same CPU frequency...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Oh I see you're subscribed to other threads that I'm subscribed too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did and I already sold the 7700K but the Maximus IX Hero is yet to be bought by a buyer. I cannot send them back because I bought them from the US and had them ship here in the Philippines.


I see, honestly I would question how much you are going to gain by having 2 extra cores, hence why im waiting for proper reviews before I make decision, single threaded performance matters a lot at least in my case, Z370 chipset offer nothing of real value over what I already have, so yeah decisions decisions, either way I will wait and see what Silicon lottery have to offer in the way of clockspeed


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> 8700k - Not purchasable.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80684I78700K-Core-i7-8700K-Processor/dp/B07598VZR8
> 
> 8700 non K - Purchasable
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07598HLB4
> 
> 8600k - Purchasable
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80684I58600K-Core-i5-8600K-Processor/dp/B0759FKH8K
> 
> Should I get the 8600k or 8700 non K ?
> 
> Edit - 8700 and 8600k were purchasable for about 10 minutes. Looks like 3am EST is the time to check.


Was the 8700K purchasable a few minutes ago?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I see, honestly I would question how much you are going to gain by having 2 extra cores, hence why im waiting for proper reviews before I make decision, single threaded performance matters a lot at least in my case, Z370 chipset offer nothing of real value over what I already have, so yeah decisions decisions, either way I will wait and see what Silicon lottery have to offer in the way of clockspeed


Right. I would've stayed with 7700K/Z270 if I was using it for a few months already but since this is a new build then might as well go with the latest gen. But yeah, I'll wait for proper reviews too.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Was the 8700K purchasable a few minutes ago?


Nope.

Some people on Reddit were able to purchase the 8700 and 8600k for 10 minutes, the 8700 went down to 2 left in stock before they weren't purchasable anymore.

I'm just going to go for the 8600k so I can go on with my life, it'll put that board to good use.

I just hope I don't need HT in the next 5 years.


----------



## kevindd992002

It's a few minutes away from launch. How do I monitor which store will have them first?


----------



## Nautilus

I wish it becames purchaseable in Micro Center GA/Marietta store in 2 days, otherwise i can't buy it for cheap since i'll be leaving us then.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

8600K on Newegg - Backordered

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117825&cm_re=8600k-_-19-117-825-_-Product

8700k on Newegg - Backordered

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117827&ignorebbr=1


----------



## Twilex

I like how it wasn't even searchable for me on newegg. How are you guys finding these lol.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Ordered the 8600k on Newegg since I can always cancel it if I can find it on Amazon.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Twilex*
> 
> I like how it wasn't even searchable for me on newegg. How are you guys finding these lol.


https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/

8700 is available again

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07598HLB4/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&psc=1

Sorry for the spam :/

Edit - Well that lasted about 10 minutes.

8700 available now on Newegg.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117826&cm_re=8700-_-19-117-826-_-Product

Won't spam the thread anymore.


----------



## z0ki

PCCG went live here in Australia on the CL release and the 8700K sold out within 10 minutes lol.

They must have literally only had 4 in stock


----------



## peter2k

https://m.hardocp.com/article/2017/10/05/intel_coffee_lake_core_i58600k_vs_7600k_at_5ghz_review

Both at 5Ghz


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *z0ki*
> 
> PCCG went live here in Australia on the CL release and the 8700K sold out within 10 minutes lol.
> 
> They must have literally only had 4 in stock


Yeah saw that none listed at Scorptec yet either


----------



## z0ki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Yeah saw that none listed at Scorptec yet either


And Umart also has no signs of it haha. Doesn't phase me as I'll wait until the formula is out and until I see first hand reviews from TTL and Steve from hardware unboxed which hopefully will drop before 10pm tonight!


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> It's a few minutes away from launch. How do I monitor which store will have them first?


https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/processors/intel/

This might be a useful tool^.

I used it with great success for obtaining my TXP, 1080, 1080Ti and 1070







. You can set up browser notifications and alerts to help take some of the stress of spamming F5







.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *z0ki*
> 
> And Umart also has no signs of it haha. Doesn't phase me as I'll wait until the formula is out and until I see first hand reviews from TTL and Steve from hardware unboxed which hopefully will drop before 10pm tonight!


Could not agree more both are reputable reviewers and like you IF i upgrade I would want the formula board too, however I want to see what Silicon lottery have available


----------



## EDK-TheONE

5Ghz @ 1.20v!










With our robust XSPC water cooling loop, (that consists of a waterblock, a 4-fan copper radiator, and a D5 pump and reservoir) is keeping it cool and below 65C easily. Our vCore is very low and I did have this 8600K running briefly at 5.2GHz with a 3600MHz memory bus for a while as I was trying to dial in stability, but we will be getting back to that on another day. I am not expecting Coffee Lake to be a magic bullet in terms of overclocking however, but it looks to have a tiny more headroom that Kaby Lake.

https://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/10/05/intel_coffee_lake_core_i58600k_vs_7600k_at_5ghz_review


----------



## czin125

That's not even delidded, right?

The voltage could be lower on the Aorus Gaming 7 or even lower with the Apex.


----------



## DStealth

From this article seems single core performance has degraded








Both 5 GHz


----------



## d0mini

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> From this article seems single core performance has degraded
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Both 5 GHz
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


I'd say that's well within the margin of error even over multiple tests. The tiniest of difference like that points to completely mirrored IPC in my honest opinion.

5 gigglehertz is making me excited. Help.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/processors/intel/
> 
> This might be a useful tool^.
> 
> I used it with great success for obtaining my TXP, 1080, 1080Ti and 1070
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . You can set up browser notifications and alerts to help take some of the stress of spamming F5
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Thanks!


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *d0mini*
> 
> I'd say that's well within the margin of error even over multiple tests. The tiniest of difference like that points to completely mirrored IPC in my honest opinion.
> 
> 5 gigglehertz is making me excited. Help.


Reaching 5 gigglehertz is amazing.


----------



## Contiusa

Did Harcop say which R7 they tested? I don't think so. I find it odd.


----------



## Menta

http://lab501.ro/procesoare-chipseturi/english-review-new-charts-intel-core-i7-8700k-intel-core-i5-8600k-coffee-lake-aorus-z370-ultra-gaming


----------



## scracy

Zero IPC gain comes as no surprise, clocks dont appear to be any higher than Kaby so if you are already have a Kaby CPU is 2 extra cores worth upgrading both your CPU and motherboard? Depends on your work load


----------



## Handrox

list of reviews

https://videocardz.com/73089/intel-8th-gen-core-coffee-lake-s-review-roundup


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Did Harcop say which R7 they tested? I don't think so. I find it odd.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Handrox*
> 
> list of reviews
> 
> https://videocardz.com/73089/intel-8th-gen-core-coffee-lake-s-review-roundup


Nice! No US reviews yet. What time EST does the NDA lift?


----------



## evensen007

Looks like people reacged 5.1ghz pretty easily, but with some high volts and heat.


----------



## z0ki

8700K Benchmarks. 4 pages

http://www.itocp.com/htmls/18/n-8218-6.html


----------



## Menta

Really nothing surprising here, predictable in all fronts..maybe in 1 or 2 years when games get optimised, for workloads its worth it but then Ryzen comes in to play. same old same old.

Dont get me wrong still pretty nice to see finally core count upgrade on mainstream, this should have been years ago though.


----------



## Handrox

of a Romanian review

4.3GHz = 63ºC
5GHz = 93ºC


----------



## reqq

Funny that HardOCP review. When AMD wins in games its because its "AMD game" . When Intel wins its not because its Intel optimized. right ..


----------



## Timur Born

Only found two German shops that list prices, one vanished again. The one that vanished listed October 15th as possible date for availability, that one also listed 420 EUR for the boxed version. The other shop lists no date and lists 375 EUR for the tray version. Talk about crazy prices.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Handrox*
> 
> of a Romanian review
> 
> 4.3GHz = 63ºC
> 5GHz = 93ºC


a SA review had the ~same:
(translated)


http://www.pcekspert.com/clanak/intel-i7-8700k-recenzija/?pg=5


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EDK-TheONE*
> 
> 5Ghz @ 1.20v!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/10/05/intel_coffee_lake_core_i58600k_vs_7600k_at_5ghz_review


As I said, 8600K would have temperature headroom, it's honest to the boot 6-core CPU. I wonder about HT 6-core. These temperatures would be harsher.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Handrox*
> 
> of a Romanian review
> 
> 4.3GHz = 63ºC
> 5GHz = 93ºC


That was expected.


----------



## kevindd992002

How was that expected?


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> How was that expected?


You know area, you know power requirements per MHz in previous two architectures, and you have half more cores than previous architecture had. It was possible to calculate expected temperatures from previous data. Increase in temperatures because of two more cores was undeniable.

(And you could look at differences between 4770K and 4790K.)


----------



## Scotty99

Wow it appears those leaks about shortages are right, even in the newegg email it says "limited stock" or "backordered". The heck intel.

Also does anyone know what time the NDA lifts?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Wow it appears those leaks about shortages are right, even in the newegg email it says "limited stock" or "backordered". The heck intel.


Talk about price gouging 8700K in Australia over $100 more than 7700K, nice one Intel


----------



## Scotty99

Ya in the states its at least only a 20 dollar price bump, but newegg says 15-20 day backorder. Im debating driving up to microcenter to be first in line before they open and just take my chances on whatever boards they have in stock lol.

BTW NDA lifts at 8am cst, 45 mintues.


----------



## evensen007

I keep waffle-ing back and forth between the Asrock Extreme4 and the Asrock Fatality K6!


----------



## 428cobra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> I keep waffle-ing back and forth between the Asrock Extreme4 and the Asrock Fatality K6!


looking at the K6 myself


----------



## TMatzelle60

anything wrong with going with the 8700 for gaming


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> anything wrong with going with the 8700 for gaming


Not at all. It boosts to 4.6Ghz. People will be over-clocking the 8700k to 5-5.1Ghz on avg. 300mhz is not going to make a difference except at 1080p 144hz gaming. You might get a few extra FPS if you REALLY need 144FPS in Overwatch.









I want the 8700k because I love to tinker; I know it won't really gain me any real world tangible performance improvements.


----------



## Scotty99

What are you gonna put in it tho lol, cant buy a chip. @even

And nah nothing wrong with 8700, boosts to 4.6ghz only 100 lower than the k chip, can recommend over ryzen 7 because of that.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> anything wrong with going with the 8700 for gaming


Nothing wrong just your OC will be quite limited with 46 maximum multiplier


----------



## gigafloppy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> anything wrong with going with the 8700 for gaming


Wondering about this myself. Especially what the 4 and 6 core turbos are going to be. Don't care about the 1 core turbo of 4.6 we already know about, that's useless anyway.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gigafloppy*
> 
> Wondering about this myself. Especially what the 4 and 6 core turbos are going to be. Don't care about the 1 core turbo of 4.6 we already know about, that's useless anyway.


Actually for people interested in intel single core turbo is quite important, literally only reason im even in the market for a new chip. If your games use a bunch of cores, ryzen is just as valid an option for most games.


----------



## fuark

Thinking about just pulling the trigger on the 8700 but not sure if i'll regret not getting the K version as i am still using 1080 144hz...


----------



## DStealth

You can always pray for cracked BIOS supporting 125 BLK strap for non-K CPU's on z370 platform


----------



## gigafloppy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Actually for people interested in intel single core turbo is quite important, literally only reason im even in the market for a new chip. If your games use a bunch of cores, ryzen is just as valid an option for most games.


I don't think you understood what I meant. On locked intels the CPU wil only run at the max turbo of 4.6Ghz when only 1 core is used. Any application that runs on more than 1 core will run at less than 4.6Ghz. With the 8700 base clock of only 3.2Ghz, who knows what the 4 core loaded frequency will be. Hopefully more than 4Ghz, or else the chip is 'useless' for gaming.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gigafloppy*
> 
> I don't think you understood what I meant. On locked intels the CPUs wil only run at the max turbo of 4.6Ghz when only 1 core is used. Any application that runs on more than 1 core will run at less than 4.6Ghz. With a base clock of 3.2Ghz, who knows what the 4 core loaded frequency will be. Hopefully more than 4Ghz, or else the chip is 'useless' for gaming.


K chips are the exact same, 4.7ghz turbo only on one core. Given that the 8700k boosts all cores to 4.3ghz i would assume the 8700 is 4.2.

But you also missed my point, the real reason for intel is single core turbo, older titles like mmo's really is where you need these high frequiencies, newer optimized titles will run nearly as well on ryzen.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *reqq*
> 
> Funny that HardOCP review. When AMD wins in games its because its "AMD game" . When Intel wins its not because its Intel optimized. right ..


----------



## gigafloppy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> K chips are the exact same, 4.7ghz turbo only on one core. Given that the 8700k boosts all cores to 4.3ghz i would assume the 8700 is 4.2.
> 
> But you also missed my point, the real reason for intel is single core turbo, older titles like mmo's really is where you need these high frequiencies, newer optimized titles will run nearly as well on ryzen.


Nobody who buys a K chip will let it clock down to less than the max turbo. Why else buy a K?
And are there really any games left that use only 1 core? 10 year old games already used 2 and when Windows decides to do something you're already at 3 or more.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> K chips are the exact same, 4.7ghz turbo only on one core. Given that the 8700k boosts all cores to 4.3ghz i would assume the 8700 is 4.2.
> 
> But you also missed my point, the real reason for intel is single core turbo, older titles like mmo's really is where you need these high frequiencies, newer optimized titles will run nearly as well on ryzen.


No they won't, for 120-240 Hz users, chasing 120+ fps - Ryzen is crap.

But we have already had this discussion. You said 75 fps/Hz was more than enough and a night and day difference from 60 fps/Hz. Still makes me giggle.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> No they won't, for 120-240 Hz users, chasing 120+ fps - Ryzen is crap.
> 
> But we have already had this discussion. You said 75 fps/Hz was more than enough and a night and day difference from 60 fps/Hz. Still makes me giggle.


Yes we had that discussion, i am right and you dont know what you are talking about lol. I am on a 165hz 1440p monitor, i am not interested in intel for high FPS gaming (as ryzen does perfectly fine there), i am interested in intel to bring minimum FPS up in my MMO's.


----------



## evensen007

The translated reviews so far are showing an easy 5 Ghz overclock, but with a lot of heat on the stock cooler (lol). I REALLY hope someone does a review with one de-lidded and cooled by an AIO or water. THEN we will see what this baby can do!


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Yes we had that discussion, i am right and you dont know what you are talking about lol. I am on a 165hz 1440p monitor, i am not interested in intel for high FPS gaming (as ryzen does perfectly fine there), i am interested in intel to bring minimum FPS up in my MMO's.


You are interested in casual MMO gaming. Who cares.

Ask any serious/good fps gamer if he would want to settle with 75 fps/Hz. He'd be rolling on the floor laughing


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> You are interested in casual MMO gaming. Who cares.
> 
> Ask any serious/good fps gamer if he would want to settle with 75 fps/Hz. He'd be rolling on the floor laughing


Guys, you've already had this battle a hundred pages ago. Can we not?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> You are interested in casual MMO gaming. Who cares.
> 
> Ask any serious/good fps gamer if he would want to settle with 75 fps/Hz. He'd be rolling on the floor laughing


Will be my last comment on this, you clearly never paid attention to what i was stating. I said most people would be able to differentiate 75hz vs 60hz much easier than 130vs150 ( a common difference between ryzen and intel for high hz gaming)


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Will be my last comment on this, you clearly never paid attention to what i was stating. I said most people would be able to differentiate 75hz vs 60hz much easier than 130vs150 ( a common difference between ryzen and intel for high hz gaming)


75/60 = 1.25

130*1.25 = 162.5


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> The translated reviews so far are showing an easy 5 Ghz overclock, but with a lot of heat on the stock cooler (lol). I REALLY hope someone does a review with one de-lidded and cooled by an AIO or water. THEN we will see what this baby can do!


Throttling hardly on one of the best AIR coolers D14S and not stock clooler








http://www.itocp.com/htmls/18/n-8218-8.html
CPU [email protected]*C ...and all this on ES processor
Hope real reviews will come shortly.


----------



## gigafloppy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Given that the 8700k boosts all cores to 4.3ghz i would assume the 8700 is 4.2.


With a TDP of 65W and a base clock of 3.2Ghz, I can't see how it will boost to only 100Mhz less than the 95W chip with a 3.7Ghz baseclock. Anyway, are there even going to be non-K 8700 reviews today?


----------



## kd5151

Reviews go live in 5.


----------



## Scotty99

Who is everyone going to be watching, tech deals is my fav techtuber so that's my go to


----------



## gigafloppy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Who is everyone going to be watching, tech deals is my fav techtuber so that's my go to


Techspot / Hardware unboxed for sure!


----------



## kd5151

Everyone.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gigafloppy*
> 
> Techspot / Hardware unboxed for sure!


Good choice, best game reviewer on youtube hands down.

For overclock results ill be watching tom on oc3d,


----------



## MaKeN

Looking at local Microcenter, they do have plenty of boards, but the 8700k is sold put at 500$ price... insane


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Looking at local Microcenter, they do have plenty of boards, but the 8700k is sold put at 500$ price... insane


Wow i just checked mine and same....

There must be a real shortage, and MC is trying to cash in......amazing.


----------



## looniam

knee jerk post:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i7_8700K/


----------



## Scotty99

5.0ghz without a delid, yep thats probably what most will do.


----------



## 970Rules

https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Coffee-Lake-Story-Intel-Core-i7-8700K-and-Core-i5-8400-Review

The Coffee Lake Story: Intel Core i7-8700K and Core i5-8400 Review


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> knee jerk post:
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i7_8700K/


thanks ^_^ I'll start with techpowerup!


----------



## Scotty99

Tech deals got a 593 cpu-z single core with a 5.0ghz overclock on his 8700k, how does that compare to 7700k owners?


----------



## SONICDK

so what motherboard would be ideal for 8700k, looking for high ram speed and overclocking of cpu ?


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SONICDK*
> 
> so what motherboard would be ideal for 8700k, looking for high ram speed and overclocking of cpu ?


ASRock Extreme 4/K6/Taichi or ASUS Prime/ Strix/Hero


----------



## Scotty99

Not sure it really matters at this point, cant buy a k chip lol.


----------



## kd5151

From anandtech. Locked looks good!


----------



## evensen007

Although I would balk at an 8600k, I am interested to see how that thing holds up against it's big bro in games and how much further it can overclock at reasonable temps and volts.


----------



## SONICDK

thanks ^^


----------



## Scotty99

My microcenter has 1 8600k which they are asking 350 for, and 3 8700k's for 499 lolololol.

How in the world did intel mess this up so badly.


----------



## BoredErica

Anybody got a clock for clock comparison on some article? PCper didn't do it this time.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> 7600K scores 700 points in cbr15. So 700 divided by 2 is 350. So 350 + 350 + 350 is 1050 points in cbr15. 7700K is just under 1000. Intel glued a fast pentium to the the i5. Curious how close my logic is.


Damn I'm good!


----------



## Scotty99

I mean we knew what these chips were performance wise more or less, it seems they are stuck to 5.0ghz without a delid (same as 7700k) but we cannot buy them lol.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I mean we knew what these chips were performance wise more or less, it seems they are stuck to 5.0ghz without a delid (same as 7700k) but we cannot buy them lol.


paper launch. I'm in no hurry. The i7-8700k non impresses me more than I thought it would.

quote from anandtech. There is one other comparison to note: the Core i5-8600K and the Core i7-8700. These two parts are $50 apart, however the Core i7-8700 has double the threads, +10% raw frequency, 33% more L3 cache, and 1/3 lower TDP. The Core i5-8600K has overclocking, however going up to the i7 ensures stability, and should offer more raw performance. It will be interesting to get these two in to test, and especially to see if the TDP rating makes a significant performance difference.


----------



## DStealth

Guru3d has very nice chip.
Shortage seems real all CPU-Z screens in reviews are stating ES not retail products


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I dunno lol, its starting to look like 8700k has an IPC deficit.....somehow.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> paper launch. I'm in no hurry. The i7-8700k non impresses me more than I thought it would.
> 
> quote from anandtech. There is one other comparison to note: the Core i5-8600K and the Core i7-8700. These two parts are $50 apart, however the Core i7-8700 has double the threads, +10% raw frequency, 33% more L3 cache, and 1/3 lower TDP. The Core i5-8600K has overclocking, however going up to the i7 ensures stability, and should offer more raw performance. It will be interesting to get these two in to test, and especially to see if the TDP rating makes a significant performance difference.


Like ive been saying this entire thread, 8600k is a skippable part.

I wouldnt blame anyone on here for buying the 8700 its a good part, i just need/want that 5.0ghz+ experience so ill have to wait.

Also a bit of info from tom at OC3d, once you enable xmp that turns on multicore enhancement, which basically puts all your cores to max turbo and volts really high. At that point its best to set a manual overclock.


----------



## fuark

Just ordered a strix e z370 + i5 8400 as it's still a massive upgrade over my 3570k. Am here in Australia and RRP for 8700K IS 550.00aud which are all out of stock so was a no brainer to get the 8400 for 243.00aud with a 10% max fps difference in games I play.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote



> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*


What bench is that?


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> What bench is that?


Quote:


> Intel Coffee Lake Single Core Clock-To-Clock Performance Results:
> I also tested the various chips of the same tier at adjusted clock speeds to note down any IPC improvements. It looks like that Coffee Lake has slightly better IPC thanks to process and little architectural tweaking that come from more stabilized clocks. The clock speeds used are listed as:


they dont mention


----------



## d3v0

172 fps in Witcher 3 (Novigrad)

*172.*

Next closest is a 4.8ghz 770K that gets 145. 3770K at 4.5ghz gets 121.2

I cant imagine what this will do for me playing Witcher 3. I'm ready.


----------



## Scotty99

What people should be taking from this is two fold:

1. Will z370 support rumored 8 core chips? My guess is yes.
2. Non k chips are finally good. Yes you wont get 5ghz+, but a 4.3ghz all core turbo is pretty darn good for a locked chip.

Oh right there is also the little tidbit that you cant buy k chips lol.


----------



## 970Rules

190 buck I5 8400 seems to be the runaway star on value. On games, it matches the others nicely.


----------



## kd5151

These aren't the cpu's you're looking for. Kaby-Lake,Kaby-Lake X,Skylake-X...especially 7800x


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *970Rules*
> 
> 190 buck I5 8400 seems to be the runaway star on value. On games, it matches the others nicely.


until games start using more than 6c/6t or you test a more cpu limited game in multithreading or with higher load in all cores
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> 
> 
> These aren't the cpu's you're looking for. Kaby-Lake,Kaby-Lake X,Skylake-X...especially 7800x


So Ryzen Refresh?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> What people should be taking from this is two fold:
> 
> 1. Will z370 support rumored 8 core chips? My guess is yes.
> 2. Non k chips are finally good. Yes you wont get 5ghz+, but a 4.3ghz all core turbo is pretty darn good for a locked chip.
> 
> Oh right there is also the little tidbit that you cant buy k chips lol.


According to Overclock3D he claims inside info that yes 8 core 16 thread CPU's will run on Z370 (21 extra power pins over z270) and that Z390 wont offer a whole lot more than Z370 except a few extra PCI-E lanes, no mention by him of PCI-E 4.0 coming to Z390


----------



## gigafloppy

The 



 review is interesting. The 8700K looks much better here for gaming than in other reviews.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> So Ryzen Refresh?


To be fair and balanced. Ryzen and Coffeelake are killer!














AMD will shake things up again with price drops and or with Ryzen +.


----------



## stangflyer

I hope this is not a silly question. What is the max frequency for the 8700 non k on all cores? On my 3570 non k I locked the multiplier at 42 and I run 24/7 4.2 at 1.12 volts. If I did the same thing on the 8700 non k what would be the equivalent max all core?


----------



## Kuivamaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Like ive been saying this entire thread, 8600k is a skippable part.
> 
> I wouldnt blame anyone on here for buying the 8700 its a good part, i just need/want that 5.0ghz+ experience so ill have to wait.
> 
> Also a bit of info from tom at OC3d, once you enable xmp that turns on multicore enhancement, which basically puts all your cores to max turbo and volts really high. At that point its best to set a manual overclock.


The 8600k should make the 7700k irrelevant when it becomes widely available.


----------



## PontiacGTX

So how many games will be like this?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stangflyer*
> 
> I hope this is not a silly question. What is the max frequency for the 8700 non k on all cores? On my 3570 non k I locked the multiplier at 42 and I run 24/7 4.2 at 1.12 volts. If I did the same thing on the 8700 non k what would be the equivalent max all core?


Not silly thats actually hard info to find, its 4.3ghz on all cores.....same as 8700k somehow. At least that is what someone posted a couple pages back in a graph.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kuivamaa*
> 
> The 8600k should make the 7700k irrelevant when it becomes widely available.


Ok but for another 50 why not get the 8700 non k? That makes the 8600k irrelevant. (for the most part, old unoptimized titles not withstanding)


----------



## gigafloppy

Another maybe silly question: Do locked CPUs support the XMP profiles of faster (3000+Mhz) memory?


----------



## Scotty99

Thats also a REALLY good question, and if so does enabling xmp push volts through the roof with multicore enhancement like it does on K chips?


----------



## Kuivamaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ok but for another 50 why not get the 8700 non k? That makes the 8600k irrelevant. (for the most part, old unoptimized titles not withstanding)


50 is a big deal for many people. If they only play games and do not stream, why go with the 8700k? This is no 7600k vs 7700k dilemma, the 8600k is a rock solid six core. But the point here is that in market, I cannot fathom how the 7700k can hold its price if it costs the same as 8600k, an overall better product.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gigafloppy*
> 
> Another maybe silly question: Do locked CPUs support the XMP profiles of faster (3000+Mhz) memory?


you just need a z370 board.


----------



## stangflyer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gigafloppy*
> 
> Another maybe silly question: Do locked CPUs support the XMP profiles of faster (3000+Mhz) memory?


My 3570 supports the XMP of my DDR3 ram so this should also. Am I correct everyone?


----------



## Scotty99

No brainer to me on 8600k vs 8700, 6 more threads for 50 bucks with much higher stock clocks and more cache. 8600k is seriously a bad part, like ive been saying all thread.


----------



## stangflyer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Not silly thats actually hard info to find, its 4.3ghz on all cores.....same as 8700k somehow. At least that is what someone posted a couple pages back in a graph.


I will have wait for a k then. Want to go to 4.6/4.7. Wherever the point before the big voltage increases are needed.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> you just need a z370 board.


I wonder what happens to multicore enhancement with non k chips when you enable xmp.

To people not know what that is, its basically an auto overclock that turns off power savings and pushes all cores to max turbo, same thing that happens on ryzen when you overclock.

Another thing id like to know, is it still possible to overclock per core on coffee if once you enable xmp multicore enhancement is forced on?


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I wonder what happens to multicore enhancement with non k chips when you enable xmp.


why does it do that? i gotta watch the video.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> why does it do that? i gotta watch the video.


I have no idea, and im wondering if you can still overclock per core on coffee. Tom at oc3d says once you enable xmp you are forced to enable multicore enhancement, i wonder if you could bypass this behavior by overclocking with asus ai suite for example.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stangflyer*
> 
> I will have wait for a k then. Want to go to 4.6/4.7. Wherever the point before the big voltage increases are needed.


post 3478.


----------



## stangflyer

I have a delidded 3570 at 4.2/ 16 gigs of 1600 MHz memory and a 1080ti. I game at 7560x1440. Will be moving to a 3440x1440 monitor in the next month or two depending if I upgrade to a 8700K or not. If I upgrade platform I will stay on current surround monitor setup for another year. If I keep cpu till Ice Lake I will get a new monitor.

I see all these cpu benchmarks and it is great. But when you get to 2k/4k res I would like to see the difference between generations of CPU. Since I have a 4c/4t cpu I would have to imagine minimum frame rate would be the biggest upgrade.

I have the money ready to go but I want to make sure the move is worth it. My cousin went from a 2500k to a 7600k and says he can barely tell the difference in gaming but the total system is snappier.


----------



## PontiacGTX




----------



## Scotty99

For the most part CPU does not matter at high res gaming. There are of course exceptions to this, one would be if the game can actually use more than 4 cores consistently, second if the game is CPU bound no matter the resolution (mmo's for the most part).


----------



## stangflyer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> For the most part CPU does not matter at high res gaming. There are of course exceptions to this, one would be if the game can actually use more than 4 cores consistently, second if the game is CPU bound no matter the resolution (mmo's for the most part).


So if I game at 7680x1440 75hz or 3440x1440 100-120 hz I will not see much benefit going from a 3570 at 4.2 to a 8700k at 4.6? I would have to think my minimum frames would increase.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stangflyer*
> 
> So if I game at 7680x1440 75hz or 3440x1440 100-120 hz I will not see much benefit going from a 3570 at 4.2 to a 8700k at 4.6? I would have to think my minimum frames would increase.


Entirely game dependent. Just keep in mind as time goes on the base level performance requirement for games is going to go from 4c to 6c, and that is already starting to happen. Some games just want raw frequency and dont care about cores, you could be playing WoW at 8k and still be CPU bound.


----------



## evensen007

I wonder if @techhog had his 8700k shipped that he snuck into his cart yesterday at newegg!


----------



## TMatzelle60

***** microcenter has the 8700k for 499 lol


----------



## czin125

http://www.gskill.com/en/press/view/g-skill-releases-new-extreme-ddr4-specifications-for-the-8th-gen-intel%C2%AE-core%E2%84%A2-processor-and-z370-platform
http://gskill.com/img/pr/2017.10.05_z370_new_specs/02.z370_4600mhz_2x8gb.PNG
Just released
4600 19-23-23-43 1.50v 2x8GB
New sticks

4600 19-25-25-45 1.50v 2x8GB
4500 19-19-19-39 1.45v 2x8GB
4200 19-21-21-41 1.40v 4x8GB
4000 19-19-19-39 1.35v 2x16GB


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*


What the hell? How will the 8700K perform in my country where the ambient averages at around 33C then? I'll be delidding this and install it in a water loop but still, isn't that extremely high for an AIO already?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> http://www.gskill.com/en/press/view/g-skill-releases-new-extreme-ddr4-specifications-for-the-8th-gen-intel%C2%AE-core%E2%84%A2-processor-and-z370-platform
> http://gskill.com/img/pr/2017.10.05_z370_new_specs/02.z370_4600mhz_2x8gb.PNG
> Just released
> 4600 19-23-23-43 1.50v 2x8GB
> New sticks
> 
> 4600 19-25-25-45 1.50v 2x8GB
> 4500 19-19-19-39 1.45v 2x8GB
> 4200 19-21-21-41 1.40v 4x8GB
> 4000 19-19-19-39 1.35v 2x16GB


How much do you think are these at release considering the high price of RAMs these days?


----------



## czin125

newegg has the first one 4600 19-23-23-43 1.50v ( 429.99 USD )


----------



## MaKeN

Siliconelotery sold all their 8700k at a very good price


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> For the most part CPU does not matter at high res gaming. There are of course exceptions to this, one would be if the game can actually use more than 4 cores consistently, second if the game is CPU bound no matter the resolution (mmo's for the most part).


The difference between high and lower res gaming is just that people are much more likely to be playing at lower FPS and with underpowered graphics hardware at higher resolutions. High FPS is almost equally challenging at a wide range of resolutions, if anything even harder on the CPU at the higher res


----------



## Menta

Euro price atm,


----------



## Scotty99

I dont think SL ever had any in stock.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I have no idea, and im wondering if you can still overclock per core on coffee. Tom at oc3d says once you enable xmp you are forced to enable multicore enhancement, i wonder if you could bypass this behavior by overclocking with asus ai suite for example.


Because DDR4 runs 1.35 volts when you turn XMP on. So if you have MCE on you have to manually set the vcore. Otherwise you will have 1.35 volts on the cpu. You don't have to enable xmp and mce at the same time?


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Siliconelotery sold all their 8700k at a very good price


? They didn't even started to sell them ..


----------



## MaKeN

I guess we need like another month for prices to stabilize....


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Because DDR4 runs 1.35 volts when you turn XMP on. So if you have MCE on you have to manually set the vcore. Otherwise you will have 1.35 volts on the cpu. You don't have to enable xmp and mce at the same time?







Timestamped for you.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> ? They didn't even started to sell them ..


Why would it say,"sold out"?
I did not check before , maybe there was a preorder open on their website?


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I guess we need like another month for prices to stabilize....


1 fiscal quarter is 3 months.

I don't know where you get the idea it will be one month.

Anyway with the i5-8400 at $250 at Microcenter next to a Ryzen 7 1700 at $250 or Ryzen 7 1700X at $260.... you'd be a super Intel diehard to buy the Intel Coffee Lake. Not to mention i7-8700k @ $500 next to the i7-7800x at $350 and i7-7820x at $550ish. You can even get an openbox i7-7800x for $263 , although some Microcenters have it for $297 openbox.

I found some Intel biased benchmarks that are clearly single threaded though.



http://www.4gamer.net/games/382/G038245/20171005108/



https://www.anandtech.com/show/11859/the-anandtech-coffee-lake-review-8700k-and-8400-initial-numbers/16
i5-8400 20% faster than Ryzen 5 1600x @ 1080p. That makes sense since R5 1600x is 3.6GHz base and 4.1 GHz XFR





https://www.computerbase.de/2017-10/intel-coffee-lake-8700k-8400-8350k-8100-test/4/#diagramm-dolphin-cpu-benchmark



http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/76162-intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-i5-8400-review-7.html






https://nl.hardware.info/reviews/7588/7/intel-core-i7-8700k--i5-8600k--i5-8400-coffee-lake-review-betaalbaar-zes-cores-benchmarks-content-creation-adobe-lightroom-photoshop-en-premiere











http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-cpu,5252-10.html






(LineageOS build times with and without caches)
https://www.xda-developers.com/intel-core-i7-8700k-i5-8400-coffee-lake-review/

4.7GHz limitation without delid it seems , no Prime95 though
*When using software that does not "pull" too much on the processor the Core i7 8700K happens to stay at 4.7 GHz. So far no worries to be done at first, on the other hand we can see that the TDP limit is exceeded with 187 Watts at the plug, the processor going from 95 Watts to almost 132 Watts. The temperature is also rather high with some cores at 80 °. We are already here far from the "normal" performances of the Core i7 8700K, but if we push a little more by launching Prime95 for example, which explodes consumption in general, see what we have:*

https://www.conseil-config.com/2017/test-intel-core-i7-8700k/2/#cmtoc_anchor_id_2


http://www.hardware.fr/articles/970-3/overclocking-pratique.html

Ring LLC effects


i5-8600k on the other hand seems to hit 5.3GHz (at least in one review) without overheating in Cinebench
https://tweakers.net/reviews/5733/9/intel-coffee-lake-meer-cores-hogere-prestaties-overklokken.html

https://www.sweclockers.com/test/24482-intel-core-i7-8700k-i5-8600k-och-i3-8350k-coffee-lake/23#content


http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-cpu,5252-12.html


https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3076-intel-i7-8700k-review-vs-ryzen-streaming-gaming-overclocking/page-2


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Why would it say,"sold out"?
> I did not check before , maybe there was a preorder open on their website?


This is just a place holder so you can enter your email and be notified when they are in stock. Prices there are MSRP and there are no preorders.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> newegg has the first one 4600 19-23-23-43 1.50v ( 429.99 USD )


Thanks. That's exorbitantly expensive.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> they dont mention


Seems to be no IPC improvements as those numbers are all within 1% of each other and well within the margin of error...


----------



## Menta

Prices are insane like 300€ for a rog hero x board.









Nah i really think i will stick to what i have this time, *** i only had the 7700k for around 5 months, i ll take the dive on octa maybe later, unless i can sell my stuff for a good price.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timestamped for you.


He says in the Asus bios. It asks you if you would like to turn on MCE when you enable xmp. So you choose no. If you choose yes then you have to manually set the vcore instead of leaving it on auto. I dunno







Maybe it's just a ASUS problem. I'm much more of a visually guy.


----------



## d3v0

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stangflyer*
> 
> I have a delidded 3570 at 4.2/ 16 gigs of 1600 MHz memory and a 1080ti. I game at 7560x1440. Will be moving to a 3440x1440 monitor in the next month or two depending if I upgrade to a 8700K or not. If I upgrade platform I will stay on current surround monitor setup for another year. If I keep cpu till Ice Lake I will get a new monitor.
> 
> I see all these cpu benchmarks and it is great. But when you get to 2k/4k res I would like to see the difference between generations of CPU. Since I have a 4c/4t cpu I would have to imagine minimum frame rate would be the biggest upgrade.
> 
> I have the money ready to go but I want to make sure the move is worth it. My cousin went from a 2500k to a 7600k and says he can barely tell the difference in gaming but the total system is snappier.


My friend, I highly recommend eurogamer articles for the generational comparisons.

8700K clock for clock is 42% faster than 3770K in the Witcher 3, for example (games highly populated cities take alot of CPU). Since the 3770k is 17% faster than 2500k clock for clock in TW3, I think I am going to be upgrading ASAP. Its time.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> He says in the Asus bios. It asks you if you would like to turn on MCE when you enable xmp. So you choose no. If you choose yes then you have to manually set the vcore instead of leaving it on auto. I dunno
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe it's just a ASUS problem. I'm much more of a visually guy.


Well what i am curious about here is per core overclocking. Is it simply a matter of leaving multicore enhancement off and setting your speeds per core in the bios? When i had my sandy rig multicore enhancement wasnt a thing, i am curious if people tend to enable this or leave it off.

My goal with 8700k is a 5.4ghz+ on 1-2 cores, rest can boost to 4.7 for all i care lol.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I have no idea, and im wondering if you can still overclock per core on coffee. Tom at oc3d says once you enable xmp you are forced to enable multicore enhancement, i wonder if you could bypass this behavior by overclocking with asus ai suite for example.
> 
> 
> 
> Because DDR4 runs 1.35 volts when you turn XMP on. So if you have MCE on you have to manually set the vcore. Otherwise you will have 1.35 volts on the cpu. You don't have to enable xmp and mce at the same time?
Click to expand...

What does MCE do?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What does MCE do?


Pins all your cores to max turbo (4.7 on 8700k) and raises volts thru roof.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What does MCE do?


https://www.anandtech.com/show/6214/multicore-enhancement-the-debate-about-free-mhz


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> 1 fiscal quarter is 3 months.
> 
> I don't know where you get the idea it will be one month.
> 
> Anyway with the i5-8400 at $250 at Microcenter next to a Ryzen 7 1700 at $250 or Ryzen 7 1700X at $260.... you'd be a super Intel diehard to buy the Intel Coffee Lake. Not to mention i7-8700k @ $500 next to the i7-7800x at $350 and i7-7820x at $550ish. You can even get an openbox i7-7800x for $263 , although some Microcenters have it for $297 openbox.


Well newegg.com has it for 379 on 15-20 days back order....


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What does MCE do?
> 
> 
> 
> Pins all your cores to max turbo (4.7 on 8700k) and raises volts thru roof.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I don't have that option on my Gigabyte motherboard, sounds like a useless ASUS option.


----------



## Scotty99

One of these reviewers with an asus board really needs to upload a video of what AI suite can push 1-2 cores to when selecting the per core overclocking option.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Thanks. I don't have that option on my Gigabyte motherboard, sounds like a useless ASUS option.


Gigabyte might have a different name for it.

Here is a quote from anandtech... With these motherboards, usually when XMP is enabled, the CPU is told to use the top turbo boost setting under all loads. That means a CPU like the i7-3770K has only two speeds - 3.9 GHz while under CPU load, and 1.2 GHz at idle. For motherboards that implement this feature, they get a significant boost in their CPU benchmark scores. As a result, the user who runs their processor at stock also gets up to 300 MHz more speed during multithreaded loading.


----------



## wingman99

Intel i7-8700k... does it suck?






Intel Core i7 8700K Review: The Fastest Gaming CPU Money Can Buy?
LINK:


----------



## QuadDamage

I was up to 1 AM and I didn't get the i7 8700k feelsbad

going to look around local shops but I think I'm stuck waiting a bit


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Seems to be no IPC improvements as those numbers are all within 1% of each other and well within the margin of error...


which was expected,until Ice Lake we shouldnt expect IPC improvement


----------



## davidtran007

Out of stock on Amazon but can order now for delivery later

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07598VZR8


----------



## Scotty99

Better to just wait, these prices are inflated.


----------



## Ding Chavez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Seems to be no IPC improvements as those numbers are all within 1% of each other and well within the margin of error...
> 
> 
> 
> which was expected,until Ice Lake we shouldnt expect IPC improvement
Click to expand...

Yesh looks like no IPC gain just slapping on 2 extra cores for the i3, i5 and i7. Pretty much what I expected. The coffee lake looks OK except for prices too high and not enough available...



https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i7_8700K/18.html

The CL i5s seem to do well for gaming extra 2 cores helps.


----------



## czin125

8700K stock + 2133mhz = 102 / 120 /
8700K stock + 2666mhz = 106 / 128
8700K stock + 3000mhz = 110 / 130
8700K at 5ghz +2133mhz = 104 / 124





5ghz / 2133 in witcher = 128
Stock + 3000mhz = 154

vs the 7700K in Crysis 3 up to +40%


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Anyway with the i5-8400 at $250 at Microcenter next to a Ryzen 7 1700 at $250 or Ryzen 7 1700X at $260.... you'd be a super Intel diehard to buy the Intel Coffee Lake.


You have a point.


----------



## QuadDamage

I just bought the from newegg ASRock Fatal1ty Z370 Gaming K6 LGA 1151 (300 Series) Intel Z370 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.1 ATX Intel Motherboar
I got the CPU from Amazon I hope they stock in faster then newegg I can always cancel so it's not a huge deal
Now I wait


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> they dont mention
> 
> 
> 
> Seems to be no IPC improvements as those numbers are all within 1% of each other and well within the margin of error...
Click to expand...

Well at least the i7 8700k has more IPC than the i7 7800X.

Intel Core i7 8700K Review: The Fastest Gaming CPU Money Can Buy?


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Well at least the i7 8700k has more IPC than the i7 7800X.
> 
> Intel Core i7 8700K Review: The Fastest Gaming CPU Money Can Buy?


probably is not IPC but the performance difference per core due to using a mesh cache


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Well at least the i7 8700k has more IPC than the i7 7800X.
> 
> Intel Core i7 8700K Review: The Fastest Gaming CPU Money Can Buy?


Wrong.

With my 7800X that is running 5000mhz and 3200 mhz on cache along with 4x4GB RAM at 4000mhz (17-19-19-36-300-1T) I can happily provw you wrong. In fact I get a much higher score in for example Cinebench R15.


----------



## Noufel

anyone has tested those cpus with z170 or 270 mobos ???


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidtran007*
> 
> Out of stock on Amazon but can order now for delivery later
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07598VZR8


When the prices settle, will all CL CPU's be at MSRP?


----------



## QuadDamage

370 at amazon is the lowest I have seen that you can back order it at least


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> anyone has tested those cpus with z170 or 270 mobos ???


When i had a z170 and 7700k came out it wont boot until bios update... i really doubt it will work on z270


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Well at least the i7 8700k has more IPC than the i7 7800X.
> 
> Intel Core i7 8700K Review: The Fastest Gaming CPU Money Can Buy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong.
> 
> With my 7800X that is running 5000mhz and 3200 mhz on cache along with 4x4GB RAM at 4000mhz (17-19-19-36-300-1T) I can happily provw you wrong. In fact I get a much higher score in for example Cinebench R15.
Click to expand...

Well that would not be a fair test to a stock i7 8700k running at default.


----------



## looniam

https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/processors/intel/


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Well at least the i7 8700k has more IPC than the i7 7800X.
> 
> Intel Core i7 8700K Review: The Fastest Gaming CPU Money Can Buy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> probably is not IPC but the performance difference per core due to using a mesh cache
Click to expand...

That is what IPC involves instructions per cycle do to mesh and cache.


----------



## 03fan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/processors/intel/


I ordered the 8700k and Aourus Gaming 7 combo from Amazon.


----------



## evensen007

Sooo... Everyone who is getting one of these is planning on de-lidding it right? Will the same tool for the 7700k work, and has any reviewer done this yet?


----------



## Timur Born

There are no 8700K in stock in Germany, we can only pre-order. Estimates for arrival span from October to December. Prices usually start north of 400 EUR, Mindfactory started at 375 EUR for a tray version and increased to 384 EUR while I was browsing their shop, for pre-orders that is.

Caseking (Der 8AUER) offer de-lidded and guaranteed to overclock CPUs at very high prices (pre-order).


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Sooo... Everyone who is getting one of these is planning on de-lidding it right? Will the same tool for the 7700k work, and has any reviewer done this yet?


I will. Will test it a few days at stock, then 5 GHz, then delid and aim for 5.2 or better.

Ordered two so far.


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> I will. Will test it a few days at stock, then 5 GHz, then delid and aim for 5.2 or better.


Good. That review that had temps at 90 under a 280 AIO water cooler have me worried. My 2600k (even when I had it at 4.8 Ghz) never crested 65c under my custom water loop.


----------



## TMatzelle60

is it me or does the asrock k6 and i7 look sexy as hell. I might not like the fatality name but still the heatsink color and all


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> is it me or does the asrock k6 and i7 look sexy as hell. I might not like the fatality name but still the heatsink color and all


It is beautiful. I feel the same way about the extreme4. STILL haven't pulled the trigger because I like them both!


----------



## TMatzelle60

i just picked up my case the meshify C


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> There are no 8700K in stock in Germany, we can only pre-order. Estimates for arrival span from October to December. Prices usually start north of 400 EUR, Mindfactory started at 375 EUR for a tray version and increased to 384 EUR while I was browsing their shop, for pre-orders that is.
> 
> Caseking (Der 8AUER) offer de-lidded and guaranteed to overclock CPUs at very high prices (pre-order).


Where is the pre order ?


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Where is the pre order ?


https://www.idealo.de/preisvergleich/ProductCategory/3019F662852oE2oJ0.html?q=intel+8700k


----------



## TMatzelle60

EVGA. UGLY BOARDS!!

https://www.evga.com/articles/01151/evga-z370-series-motherboards/


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> https://www.idealo.de/preisvergleich/ProductCategory/3019F662852oE2oJ0.html?q=intel+8700k


Cheers. They are not available in the english version of the website. Do you happen to know if they are reserved to germany ?


----------



## 03fan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> EVGA. UGLY BOARDS!!
> 
> https://www.evga.com/articles/01151/evga-z370-series-motherboards/


Yikes..... Those are hideous.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *03fan*
> 
> Yikes..... Those are hideous.


The chipset heatsink looks omg. They need to fire whoever designed that board!


----------



## Timur Born

Given how arrival estimates are all over the place in different shops I don't expect much of a reserve thing. Maybe large outlets like Mindfactory can make use of special channels, but really no idea. Consider that in the US there have been unit in stock at launch day, but not a single one in Germany. So we are positioned somewhere on the lower levels of the food chain.


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> The chipset heatsink looks omg. They need to fire whoever designed that board!


Well, compared to the sleek heat-sinks of other manufacturers these do provide larger surface areas in a very classical manner. You cannot beat physics with shine, paint and glitter alone.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Here's the video review round-up:
Quote:


>


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> Well, compared to the sleek heat-sinks of other manufacturers these do provide larger surface areas in a very classical manner. You cannot beat physics with shine, paint and glitter alone.


Not talking about that. There older boards were better looking. more sleek look. This looks like ****


----------



## WexleySnoops

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> i just picked up my case the meshify C


I think this is also going to be my case of choice! I saw news of the Cooler Master H500P coming out next week...but not sure how I feel about it. Going to wait for reviews. Meshify currently in top spot right now. So purdy.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> EVGA. UGLY BOARDS!!
> 
> https://www.evga.com/articles/01151/evga-z370-series-motherboards/


Oh god, my eyes!

The gigabyte orange tacky is one thing...but that...that is horrendous.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Written review round-up:


http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/76162-intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-i5-8400-review.html
https://www.kitguru.net/components/leo-waldock/intel-core-i7-8700k-and-core-i5-8400-with-z370-aorus-gaming-7/
https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3076-intel-i7-8700k-review-vs-ryzen-streaming-gaming-overclocking
https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Coffee-Lake-Story-Intel-Core-i7-8700K-and-Core-i5-8400-Review
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11859/the-anandtech-coffee-lake-review-8700k-and-8400-initial-numbers
https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8363/intel-core-i7-8700k-i5-8400-coffee-lake-cpu-review/index.html
https://hothardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i7-8700k-and-core-i5-8400-coffee-lake-processor-review
http://www.legitreviews.com/intel-core-i7-8700k-core-i5-8400-processor-review-coffee-lake_198473
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-cpu,5252.html#xtor=RSS-100
https://hexus.net/tech/reviews/cpu/110336-intel-core-i7-8700k-core-i5-8400-14nm-coffee-lake/
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-intel-coffee-lake-core-i7-8700k-review
https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/intel_coffee_lake_i7_8700k_review/1
https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/intel-core-i7-8700k-processor-review,1.html
https://arstechnica.co.uk/gadgets/2017/10/intel-coffee-lake-8700k-review/
https://techreport.com/review/32642/intel-core-i7-8700k-cpu-reviewed
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i7_8700K/
https://www.techspot.com/review/1497-intel-core-i7-8700k/


----------



## QuadDamage

How many people are in pre order with Amazon on the Boat with me


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> How many people are in pre order with Amazon on the Boat with me


Nice work! They won't even let you pre-order it now! You must have melted down the system.


----------



## bl4ckdot

der8auer Core i7-8700K @ 5,1 GHz - Ultra Edition ordered. Can't wait !


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *03fan*
> 
> Yikes..... Those are hideous.


EVGA Z370 Micro Motherboard isn't too bad. Given the Z370 MicroATX boards on the market it may be the best Z370 mATX.

edit: no USB 3.1 specified though


----------



## doom26464

It is litterally skylake/kabylake with 2 cores tacked on.

Rushed to deal with ryzen.

Nothing else nothing more.


----------



## axiumone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *doom26464*
> 
> It is litterally skylake/kabylake with 2 cores tacked on.
> 
> Rushed to deal with ryzen.
> 
> Nothing else nothing more.


You're saying that like it's a bad thing! Skylake is a fantastic chip for gaming.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *doom26464*
> 
> It is litterally skylake/kabylake with 2 cores tacked on.
> 
> Rushed to deal with ryzen.
> 
> Nothing else nothing more.


On a new incompatble chipset.


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *axiumone*
> 
> You're saying that like it's a bad thing! Skylake is a fantastic chip for gaming.


Exactly. So they took the best gaming chip available and added 2 core/4 threads to make it even better. Ok, I'm on-board!


----------



## QuadDamage

It's a very big upgrade for anyone running 4th gen i7's and lower so I will be just fine with it
The upgrade from my i7 for gaming and streaming should be great + 5ghz with AIO will be golden for a least a few years


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That is what IPC involves instructions per cycle do to mesh and cache.


that only implies games are not programmed to use mesh cache hence worse performance on Skylake X, and Ryzen than Skylake-s/Kabe/Coffee Lake-s


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> It's a very big upgrade for anyone running 4th gen i7's and lower so I will be just fine with it
> The upgrade from my i7 for gaming and streaming should be great + 5ghz with AIO will be golden for a least a few years


Sad as it is to say, as I've gotten older I'm less and less interested in upgrading often. My Sandy lasted me 6 years. I expect this Coffee will last me at least that as well.


----------



## Triniboi82

Quote:


> der8auer Core i7-8700K @ 5,1 GHz - Ultra Edition ordered. Can't wait !


You seriously paid double msrp


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> I expect this Coffee will last me at least that as well.


Although coffee does provide a jolt, the effects are anything but long lasting


----------



## jprovido

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813144107&ignorebbr=1


I'm going to order this motherboard right now. Yhay or ney? is there a better choice for the price?


----------



## Phixit

I guess I'll wait for Cannon Lake + Z390.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Phixit*
> 
> I guess I'll wait for Cannon Lake + Z390.


Ice Lake or Tiger Lake unless you want more of the same via Cannon Lake...


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Although coffee does provide a jolt, the effects are anything but long lasting












Well it is a LAKE of Coffee!


----------



## Nautilus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Triniboi82*
> 
> You seriously paid double msrp


And for that price he could buy 8 core, 4.8Ghz binned 7820x from Silicon Lottery. It can probably go up to 5Ghz with liquid cooling...


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Triniboi82*
> 
> You seriously paid double msrp


Yup. At first I was going to buy one at 5.1+Ghz from Silicon Lottery but with customs fees I would have ended with more or less the same price. Here I have 12 additional months of warranty, and a silver HIS.


----------



## QuadDamage

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813144107&ignorebbr=1
> 
> 
> I'm going to order this motherboard right now. Yhay or ney? is there a better choice for the price?


https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157788&cm_re=z370-_-13-157-788-_-Product

I went with this

Why

Main point was having the read out error code on the board and being a fan of ASrock in terms of heatskins and use them in a bunch of builds and being pretty happy

DDR4 4333+(OC)* if needed more better








The MSI has 2 m.2 slots if u need that

Onboard USB the Rock has more + it's cheaper it's a personal choice IMO both are good boards


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813144107&ignorebbr=1
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm going to order this motherboard right now. Yhay or ney? is there a better choice for the price?


get an eVGA board! everybody loves them!!


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> Well, compared to the sleek heat-sinks of other manufacturers these do provide larger surface areas in a very classical manner. You cannot beat physics with shine, paint and glitter alone.


Well, the shroud could be better, but the board in general has the old classic design. If the AIO shroud was less odd, it could have the Vengeance cases look from Corsair. If it was a Gigabyte I would buy it ten times other than any of these Transformers / Bot boards the other brands are releasing. I consider way cheesier and childish (they might be aiming to the youth market). And it also worries me if they are skipping important things to add these cosmetics and leds to the boards.


----------



## ViTosS

This is the first site that reviewed it side by side in realtime showing statistics from MSI AB, if you guys want to see (it's brazilian portuguese the language):


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That is what IPC involves instructions per cycle do to mesh and cache.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that only implies games are not programmed to use mesh cache hence worse performance on Skylake X, and Ryzen than Skylake-s/Kabe/Coffee Lake-s
Click to expand...

Do you have links for clock to clock benchmarks to prove your point?


----------



## WexleySnoops

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Yup. At first I was going to buy one at 5.1+Ghz from Silicon Lottery but with customs fees I would have ended with more or less the same price. Here I have 12 additional months of warranty, and a silver HIS.


Link to purchase site?


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> get an eVGA board! everybody loves them!!


I have successfully ID'd the resident member of the Legion of Doom.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WexleySnoops*
> 
> Link to purchase site?


https://www.idealo.de/preisvergleich/ProductCategory/3019F662852oE2oJ0.html?q=intel+8700k


----------



## looniam




----------



## HAL900

Max multiplier for 8700 in oc ??


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157788&cm_re=z370-_-13-157-788-_-Product
> 
> I went with this
> 
> Why
> 
> Main point was having the read out error code on the board and being a fan of ASrock in terms of heatskins and use them in a bunch of builds and being pretty happy
> 
> DDR4 4333+(OC)* if needed more better
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The MSI has 2 m.2 slots if u need that
> 
> Onboard USB the Rock has more + it's cheaper it's a personal choice IMO both are good boards


thanks. the RGB on the asrock fatality board is RGB right? for sure it's not red lol. maybe I will get this too I like how neutral it is with the black aesthetic (without the red led's of course)


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Yup. At first I was going to buy one at 5.1+Ghz from Silicon Lottery but with customs fees I would have ended with more or less the same price. Here I have 12 additional months of warranty, and a silver HIS.


You, Sir, leave me speachless...


----------



## Scotty99

I cant think of a situation where i have ever wanted a debug led, in fact i kind of want to avoid it because they arent rgb lol.


----------



## Kevin Sia

New Board








Intel always shine when it comes to anti-consumer practices


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I cant think of a situation where i have ever wanted a debug led, in fact i kind of want to avoid it because they arent rgb lol.




It ruins the look tbh. I've been considering putting like an electric tape just to get rid of it. the motherboard I'm considering right now the asrock fatality board doesn't have this so I'm good lol


----------



## Scotty99

Ya it just looks out of place lol. And im between the extreme 4, msi pro carbon, and asus strix-f. All good lookin boards to me.

Btw the fatality does have a debuf readout, on the bottom:
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157788&cm_re=z370-_-13-157-788-_-Product


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya it just looks out of place lol. And im between the extreme 4, msi pro carbon, and asus strix-f. All good lookin boards to me.
> 
> Btw the fatality does have a debuf readout, on the bottom:
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157788&cm_re=z370-_-13-157-788-_-Product


I like how the extreme 4 looks out of all the boards tbh. what I'm worried about is the price (I know it sounds weird) but it's the cheapest out of the bunch. I'm worried maybe there's a compromise like in power delivery etc.


----------



## mdd1986

After looking at the close up pictures of the MSI pro carbon I'm kind of off it now. It looks a bit cheesy and cheap in the pictures.

The Asus Strix-F, ASrock fatality and Extreme 4 are the top ones I'm considering. I think the Strix-F looks amazing.

MSI Pro Carbon
https://www.kitguru.net/components/motherboard/ryan-martin/msi-z370-gaming-pro-carbon-ac-motherboard-review/3/

Asus Strix-F
https://www.eteknix.com/asus-rog-strix-z370-f-gaming-motherboard-review/


----------



## Scotty99

I wouldnt worry about power delivery on extreme 4, its just priced well.

Strix was originally the board i wanted but i really dislike the looks of the m.2 heatsink.....they should have just added one to the top like the maximus hero has.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> After looking at the close up pictures of the MSI pro carbon I'm kind of off it now. It looks a bit cheesy and cheap in the pictures.
> 
> The Asus Strix-F, ASrock fatality and Extreme 4 are the top ones I'm considering. I think the Strix-F looks amazing.
> 
> MSI Pro Carbon
> https://www.kitguru.net/components/motherboard/ryan-martin/msi-z370-gaming-pro-carbon-ac-motherboard-review/3/
> 
> Asus Strix-F
> https://www.eteknix.com/asus-rog-strix-z370-f-gaming-motherboard-review/


I'm staying away from ASUS boards for now. I have used this Z270 Maximus IX Hero since 7700k launch and tbh I didn't like it that much. boot up time is really slow and I had a few issues here and there.

Asrock Extreme 4 looks really good and it's the cheapest one too. I wonder if it will overclock as good as the others that are more expensive


----------



## mdd1986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I like how the extreme 4 looks out of all the boards tbh. what I'm worried about is the price (I know it sounds weird) but it's the cheapest out of the bunch. I'm worried maybe there's a compromise like in power delivery etc.


I agree, I think that quality of the board, color scheme, and layout looks the best in my opinion. Everything else Asus I'm not a huge fan. I will most likely be going with the fatality or Extreme 4. It does have more phases (12) than most of the other boards so it should overclock just fine. ASRock seems more like a value brand and doesn't was money on useless things like extra LED lights and such.


----------



## ogider

Asrock Extreme 4
Need some bios update. I was up for this one as well but after read this:
https://www.eteknix.com/asrock-z370-extreme-4-motherboard-review/6/

Almost impossible that big performance difference
FarCry Deusex


----------



## Triniboi82

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Yup. At first I was going to buy one at 5.1+Ghz from Silicon Lottery but with customs fees I would have ended with more or less the same price. Here I have 12 additional months of warranty, and a silver HIS.


1 yr warranty and a silver IHS was worth that much to you









My entire ryzen platform upgrade cost about $200US less than that









Power to you brother, enjoy it nonetheless.


----------



## Digitalwolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menta*
> 
> Prices are insane like 300€ for a rog hero x board.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nah i really think i will stick to what i have this time, *** i only had the 7700k for around 5 months, i ll take the dive on octa maybe later, unless i can sell my stuff for a good price.


That's probably a good call to be honest.

I find the price point of this "new platform" a bit strange... but whatever. I'm going to keep sitting on my systems as well. That's not usual for me because I usually buy something on each platform to toy around with. I just keep hearing rumors about how this "new platform" was rushed due to Ryzen but then I look at comparable Core/Thread CPU's plus a decent motherboard and then I look at the price *ponder*...(edited to add): Yes I know an 8700K is obviously going to clock much higher than a Ryzen but... when people really are going highly threaded workloads many of them do not overclock as it can be either mission critical work or how they make a living so a bsod etc can cost you more than some lost game play.

I also keep wondering why exactly at least the WIfi version of the Hero is suddenly closing in on being a $300 motherboard...

Or why so many Z370 boards seem to have almost no USB on the back panel etc


----------



## MaKeN

Msi pro carbon is at the same price as Msi gaming m5 ... whats the main difference in between them? For some reason i would pick gaming m5 instead


----------



## Phixit




----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I cant think of a situation where i have ever wanted a debug led, in fact i kind of want to avoid it because they arent rgb lol.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3129188/width/500/height/1000
> 
> It ruins the look tbh. I've been considering putting like an electric tape just to get rid of it. the motherboard I'm considering right now the asrock fatality board doesn't have this so I'm good lol


This is why we can't have nice things.

You'll be wishing for a Debug LED if any problems occur.

Also the Fatal1ty K6 has dual BIOs, which makes the cheapo Gigabyte boards below Gaming 7 ($250) and Gaming 5 ($200) relatively pointless.

The cheapest boards I would consider on Z370 are:
1. Asus Z370-A --- overpriced right now, this is a high volume midrange board so I expect after a fiscal quarter it will be $120-130 .. thunderbolt, USB 3.1 gen 2 , DTS Connect, ALC1220 .. likely onsemi 4C09 + 4C06
2. Asrock Z370 Fata1ity K6 (Extreme4 a close second , but it lacks Debug LED and AMP) ... DSM (Ti NExFETs) , ALC1220, USB 3.1 gen 2 , Thunderbolt connector , Dual BIOs
---> If Asrock ditched the VGA for Displayport it would be better. Not sure why a VGA port is included
---> Second LAN is also an odd choice
3. Gigabyte z370 Gaming 5 because of Debug LED, dual BIOS, AMP for audio, Intersil Powerstages and WIMA audio caps / Gaming 7 ($250 for a dead end motherboard ...) , also wifi & DTS Connect if you need it
3a. Asrock Z370 Taichi if the BCLK / Baseclock generator turns out to be useful (that's the upgrade over Fatal1ty K6 , while you lose Power/reset buttons) or if you need wifi , 3rd M.2, or USB 3.1 type C front panel connector
4. All the overpriced ASUS ROG boards if they go on sale , with the STRIX E/F/G a distant option since they don't have many value-adds over the Z370-A and STRIX VRM is inferior to Fatal1ty K6

For Europeans , the MSI Z370 SLI Plus and Z370 Pro Carbon seem to be cheaper than in the USA. While they have USB 3.1 gen 2, ALC1220 , I don't see anything on Thunderbolt AIB connectors. They also seem to be using 6 phases of OnSemi mosfets for the CPU. I'd give them the valuation of below ASUS Z370-A and definitely below Asrock Z370 Fata1ity K6.

From K6 review
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *https://www.eteknix.com/asrock-z370-fatal1ty-gaming-k6-motherboard-review/2/*
> Another nice treat, this is the first Z370 board we've tested so far that also has a BIOS Debug LED, which is a real time saver when you're overclocking.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Yup. At first I was going to buy one at 5.1+Ghz from Silicon Lottery but with customs fees I would have ended with more or less the same price. Here I have 12 additional months of warranty, and a silver HIS.


I'M not really convinced that a silver IHS improves temps by *another* 10 degrees
The advanced version would be fine already
They lapp the IHS

Hmmm
Decisions decisions
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> der8auer Core i7-8700K @ 5,1 GHz - Ultra Edition ordered. Can't wait !


Btw
Why not the 5.2?
I know it's another step up, especially in price

But I'm kinda hoping since they test with Prime that I could squeeze out a bit more, with a program that's less intense
Something like Asus RealBench


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Triniboi82*
> 
> 1 yr warranty and a silver IHS was worth that much to you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My entire ryzen platform upgrade cost about $200US less than that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Power to you brother, enjoy it nonetheless.


Silicon Lottery was going to be around 650€ for me (all fees included). So all in all we are not that far. I have around 2,5K€ to have fun and build it so yeah, no regrets ^^
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> I'M not really convinced that a silver IHS improves temps by *another* 10 degrees
> The advanced version would be fine already
> They lapp the IHS
> 
> Hmmm
> Decisions decisions
> Btw
> Why not the 5.2?
> I know it's another step up, especially in price
> 
> But I'm kinda hoping since they test with Prime that I could squeeze out a bit more, with a program that's less intense
> Something like Asus RealBench


I was on the edge of going for the 5.2 but it was a bit to much, I guess. Silver HIS is a bonus, 12 additional months is something that weigh more (compared to Silicon).


----------



## kd5151

ASRock K6


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> This is why we can't have nice things.
> 
> You'll be wishing for a Debug LED if any problems occur.
> 
> Also the Fatal1ty K6 has dual BIOs, which makes the cheapo Gigabyte boards below Gaming 7 ($250) and Gaming 5 ($200) relatively pointless.
> 
> The cheapest boards I would consider on Z370 are:
> 1. Asus Z370-A --- overpriced right now, this is a high volume midrange board so I expect after a fiscal quarter it will be $120-130 .. thunderbolt, USB 3.1 gen 2 , ALC1220 .. likely onsemi 4C09 + 4C06
> 2. Asrock Z370 Fatality K6 (Extreme4 a close second , but it lacks Debug LED) ... DSM (Ti NExFETs)
> 3. Gigabyte Gaming 5 because Intersil Powerstages and WIMA audio caps / Gaming 7 ($250 for a dead end motherboard ...)
> 4. All the overpriced ASUS ROG boards if they go on sale


Ive been overclocking systems since 2001 and my 1600 athlon xp, like i said never once had i wished i had a debug led lol. If they were RGB sure bring it on, red just looks out of place in a day and age where RGB is so prevalent.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Phixit*


7.3Ghz at 1.25v? Is this the real vcore measure or bug?


----------



## Digitalwolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> It ruins the look tbh. I've been considering putting like an electric tape just to get rid of it. the motherboard I'm considering right now the asrock fatality board doesn't have this so I'm good lol


Some motherboards have a bios option you can set the Debug to "off" after you post... that way you can still get the codes if you have an issue and then after you boot it's not there to annoy you.

*clarity edit*


----------



## WexleySnoops

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> 7.3Ghz at 1.25v? Is this the real vcore measure or bug?


Bug.

Real vcore (if you look at the bios shot) was around 1.8-1.85 I believe


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Digitalwolf*
> 
> Some motherboards you can set the Debug to "off" after you post... that way you can still get the codes if you have an issue and then after you boot it's not there to annoy you.


What he said.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Digitalwolf*
> 
> Some motherboards have a bios option you can set the Debug to "off" after you post... that way you can still get the codes if you have an issue and then after you boot it's not there to annoy you.
> 
> *clarity edit*


my Maximux IX Hero doesn't have such feature which is annoying









still can't pull the trigger on any of these boards. still on the fence with the Asrock Extreme 4, MSI Gaming Pro carbon and the Fatality board


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> my Maximux IX Hero doesn't have such feature which is annoying
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> still can't pull the trigger on any of these boards. still on the fence with the Asrock Extreme 4, MSI Gaming Pro carbon and the Fatality board


The K6 is a really nice motherboard couldnt go wrong with that board. 2 m.2 if you want to use them and lots of features


----------



## erocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> The K6 is a really nice motherboard couldnt go wrong with that board. 2 m.2 if you want to use them and lots of features


I went with the Gigabyte Gaming 7 due to 3 m.2's Maybe Optane will take off or something... but the more m.2 slots the less I'll have to find space for a hdd/ssd.


----------



## evensen007

K6 and Extreme4 looking good. Both are neck and neck.

https://www.eteknix.com/asrock-z370-extreme-4-motherboard-review/8/


----------



## HAL900

https://www.alternate.pl/MSI/Z370-SLI-PLUS-P%C5%82yta-g%C5%82%C3%B3wna/html/product/1383832?campaign=Podstawka+1151/MSI/1383832
https://www.alternate.pl/ASUS/TUF-Z370-PLUS-GAMING-P%C5%82yta-g%C5%82%C3%B3wna/html/product/1381047?campaign=Podstawka+1151/ASUS/1381047
asus or msi

??


----------



## SquallPT

Can anyone tell me if the stock coolers on the unlocked chips (8400 and 8700 mainly) are the same Intel been shipping with the past chips ?


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *erocker*
> 
> I went with the Gigabyte Gaming 7 due to 3 m.2's Maybe Optane will take off or something... but the more m.2 slots the less I'll have to find space for a hdd/ssd.


z370 taichi would have been cheaper and still is a great board


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SquallPT*
> 
> Can anyone tell me if the stock coolers on the unlocked chips (8400 and 8700 mainly) are the same Intel been shipping with the past chips ?


Yup.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> https://www.komputronik.pl/product/424797/asus-tuf-z370-plus-gaming.html
> https://www.komputronik.pl/product/424096/msi-z370-sli-plus.html
> asus or msi
> 
> ??


MSI z370 SLI PLUS is better.

More VRM Phases, ALC1220 for starters.

ASUS Z370 TUF PLUS is ALC887...


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SquallPT*
> 
> Can anyone tell me if the stock coolers on the unlocked chips (8400 and 8700 mainly) are the same Intel been shipping with the past chips ?


The 8400 and 8700 are locked processors. The i5 8600k and i7 8700k are unlocked and don't come with coolers.

Stock coolers are fine with locked processors.


----------



## evensen007

So here we are. We all posted in this thread for months and now there's really not much to say or do without any stock. lol Here's to waiting for some more in depth reviews that de-lid and try some borderline unsafe things with these chips.


----------



## HAL900

Will you be able to do some oc on the i7 8700?


----------



## mdd1986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> So here we are. We all posted in this thread for months and now there's really not much to say or do without any stock. lol Here's to waiting for some more in depth reviews that de-lid and try some borderline unsafe things with these chips.


This will only make the wait harder when they are overclocking to 5.5 with a de-lid on air


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> Will you be able to do some oc on the i7 8700?


Folks need the i7 8700k to overclock with the multiplier.


----------



## kd5151

Best pun I have seen all day!


----------



## SquallPT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The 8400 and 8700 are locked processors. The i5 8600k and i7 8700k are unlocked and don't come with coolers.
> 
> Stock coolers are fine with locked processors.


I meant locked sorry


----------



## HAL900

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Folks need the i7 8700k to overclock with the multiplier.


Bclk oc ??


----------



## Asus11

havn't seen much of an upgrade path since owning the i7-6700k...

can't lie though my enthusiast side wants to kind of grab the i7 8700k .. delid oc etc and just run HT off with just 6 cores on

but its just not worth it


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

ASRock Fatal1ty Z370 Motherboard Review:


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> havn't seen much of an upgrade path since owning the i7-6700k...
> 
> can't lie though my enthusiast side wants to kind of grab the i7 8700k .. delid oc etc and just run HT off with just 6 cores on
> 
> but its just not worth it


Isn't the 8600k for you then?


----------



## HeliXpc

Best iteration of Sandy Bridge refresh so far lol....


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Folks need the i7 8700k to overclock with the multiplier.


8600k too


----------



## PontiacGTX

how is this measured?


----------



## Timur Born

Some drawbacks of the Asrock K6:

- "- Supports DVI-D with max. resolution up to 1920x1200 @ 60Hz" = low max. resolution and no DP to use instead. Of course we use this with a dedicated GPU, but for those times when the GPU needs to be removed (certain tests) I would like to use my 2560 x 1600 display via DVD-D or DP.

- "1 x USB 3.1 Gen1 Header (Supports 2 USB 3.1 Gen1 ports) (ASMedia ASM1074 hub) (Supports ESD Protection), 1 x Front Panel Type C USB 3.1 Gen1 Header (ASMedia ASM1074 hub)"

Asmedia USB 3.0 controllers/hubs don't fully adhere to USB 3.0 specs and Asmedia only fixed that in their 3.1 chipsets. Overall I am not a fan of using internal hubs to save PCB lanes instead of using USB 3.0 lanes directly from the chipset.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Folks need the i7 8700k to overclock with the multiplier.
> 
> 
> 
> Bclk oc ??
Click to expand...

In the past with Intel locked processors BCLK only overclock 100Mhz over stock.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> Some drawbacks of the Asrock K6:
> 
> - "- Supports DVI-D with max. resolution up to 1920x1200 @ 60Hz" = low max. resolution and no DP to use instead. Of course we use this with a dedicated GPU, but for those times when the GPU needs to be removed (certain tests) I would like to use my 2560 x 1600 display via DVD-D or DP.
> 
> - "1 x USB 3.1 Gen1 Header (Supports 2 USB 3.1 Gen1 ports) (ASMedia ASM1074 hub) (Supports ESD Protection), 1 x Front Panel Type C USB 3.1 Gen1 Header (ASMedia ASM1074 hub)"
> 
> Asmedia USB 3.0 controllers/hubs don't fully adhere to USB 3.0 specs and Asmedia only fixed that in their 3.1 chipsets. Overall I am not a fan of using internal hubs to save PCB lanes instead of using USB 3.0 lanes directly from the chipset.


Eh thats normal for a lot of mid range boards, the real question is why does your monitor not have hdmi


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> Some drawbacks of the Asrock K6:
> 
> - "- Supports DVI-D with max. resolution up to 1920x1200 @ 60Hz" = low max. resolution and no DP to use instead. Of course we use this with a dedicated GPU, but for those times when the GPU needs to be removed (certain tests) I would like to use my 2560 x 1600 display via DVD-D or DP.
> 
> - "1 x USB 3.1 Gen1 Header (Supports 2 USB 3.1 Gen1 ports) (ASMedia ASM1074 hub) (Supports ESD Protection), 1 x Front Panel Type C USB 3.1 Gen1 Header (ASMedia ASM1074 hub)"
> 
> Asmedia USB 3.0 controllers/hubs don't fully adhere to USB 3.0 specs and Asmedia only fixed that in their 3.1 chipsets. Overall I am not a fan of using internal hubs to save PCB lanes instead of using USB 3.0 lanes directly from the chipset.


1. No z370 motherboard has USB 3.1 (Gen 2 , not the fake USB 3.1 Gen 1 which is USB 3.0) without asmedia. It's not an innate part of the chipset.

2. Get an adapter for the few times you don't use a dedicated GPU , of all the things to complain about, this is almost at the bottom of the list , I would probably put "doesn't have RGB heatsinks" as another garbage reason not to buy it


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Added OC3D Video Review to OP:


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Eh thats normal for a lot of mid range boards, the real question is why does your monitor not have hdmi


Why would it? If you're not using the audio then HDMI is mostly just a bad version of displayport


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Added OC3D Video Review to OP:


No, it is a Skylake based CPU(in14nm,again, but improves overclock) with more cache l1/l2/l3 and 2 cores more


----------



## MaKeN

A question :
I7 8 gen not compatible with z170/270 because of powe delivery.
Why a 7700k wont work on z370?


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> A question :
> I7 8 gen not compatible with z170/270 because of powe delivery.
> Why a 7700k wont work on z370?


BIOS but also the socket has a slighly different layout for the power management, check anandtech and wccftech review both have the pins scheme


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> Why would it? If you're not using the audio then HDMI is mostly just a bad version of displayport


The dudes complaint about the board is he would "prefer" to use display port lol. This is not a fault of the motherboard, if you look at the z370 lineup most dont have a display port out....


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> 1. No z370 motherboard has USB 3.1 (Gen 2 , not the fake USB 3.1 Gen 1 which is USB 3.0) without asmedia. It's not an innate part of the chipset.


Read again, please. I pointed to the front USB 3.0 (Gen 1) ports - including the USB-C one - being connected via an Asmedia Hub.
Quote:


> 2. Get an adapter for the few times you don't use a dedicated GPU , of all the things to complain about, this is almost at the bottom of the list , I would probably put "doesn't have RGB heatsinks" as another garbage reason not to buy it


I often have to test with various GPUs, including using the CPU one when available. Being able to quickly unplug a DVD-D/DP cable from the graphic-card to the onboard ports makes things easier. Overall I don't get why onboard DVI-D ports do not support more than 1920 px, especially when no DP is available. My Dell U3014 does offer HDMI input, but it's somewhat flakey for full 2560 px resolution and not having to switch cables is a plus (and thus a drawback of the K6).


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> The dudes complaint about the board is he would "prefer" to use display port lol. This is not a fault of the motherboard, if you look at the z370 lineup most dont have a display port out....


It's not only about a missing Displayport, but about having either DVI-D or Displayport offering 2560 px (or higher) resolution instead of a measly 1920 px.


----------



## Timur Born

For comparison, this is the Asrock Z370 Taichi:
Quote:


> - Supports HDMI with max. resolution up to 4K x 2K (4096x2160) @ 30Hz
> - Supports DisplayPort 1.2 with max. resolution up to 4K x 2K (4096x2304) @ 60Hz


DisplayPort with full 4K resolution at 60 Hz. As the K6 does not offer this, I consider it a drawback. Not a big one for many people with dedicated GPUs, but a drawback nevertheless.


----------



## Scotty99

Well it is about missing display port you just said it again lol.

They put the proper connectors on the board for the segment, dvi being capped at 1080 is odd tho.

Taichi is in another tier of boards, almost all of the 200+ dollar ones come with DP. That is one of the things that bring costs down to lower level boards, and are the right kind of things to cut out.

Would like to add this for all the "ryzen sucks at high fps gaming" peeps:





Actually getting higher fps in overwatch on a ryzen chip than coffee. Overwatch being the most popular shooter on the planet, fairly relevant.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Yup. At first I was going to buy one at 5.1+Ghz from Silicon Lottery but with customs fees I would have ended with more or less the same price. Here I have 12 additional months of warranty, and a silver HIS.


You could've used a freight fowarder instead.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Added Tek Syndicate Video Review to OP:






Interesting thing about this video review is they do some BCLK overclocking, to simulate a locked i5 (HT disabled) and at least with the ASRock Z370 boards it is viable and possible.


----------



## Scotty99

I honestly think the 8700 non k is the winner from coffee. Even as an "enthusiast" i find overclocking kinda dumb at times, especially when finding 100% stability can take weeks. (searching for whea errors etc)

Intel found the sweet spot with this one, its a 65w chip and all core turbo is exact same as its 95w unlocked brother. You are only missing out on 100mhz single core turbo and the thing comes with a stock cooler that i assume is sufficient for the task.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I honestly think the 8700 non k is the winner from coffee. Even as an "enthusiast" i find overclocking kinda dumb at times, especially when finding 100% stability can take weeks. (searching for whea errors etc)
> 
> Intel found the sweet spot with this one, its a 65w chip and all core turbo is exact same as its 95w unlocked brother. You are only missing out on 100mhz single core turbo and the thing comes with a stock cooler that i assume is sufficient for the task.


4.3GHz vs potential 5.0GHz +?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I honestly think the 8700 non k is the winner from coffee. Even as an "enthusiast" i find overclocking kinda dumb at times, especially when finding 100% stability can take weeks. (searching for whea errors etc)
> 
> Intel found the sweet spot with this one, its a 65w chip and all core turbo is exact same as its 95w unlocked brother. You are only missing out on 100mhz single core turbo and the thing comes with a stock cooler that i assume is sufficient for the task.


It's only a winner if you don't overclock lol. The rest sounds like justification for you to spend less.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> 4.3GHz vs potential 5.0GHz +?


Well obviously yes this is what the k chip gets you. But if i had to pick a winner its the non k part, higher boost clocks than a 7700k with 2 more threads and 4 more cores for less money, pretty crazy when you think about it. In the past the non k i7's were wayyy behind in stock boost, this gen changes that.


----------



## svenge

While certainly _not_ the preferred chip for a site like OCN, I believe that the *i3-8100* is the real star of the show for "normal people". The 4c/4t i3-8100 is basically a better version of the previous 4c/4t i5-7400 but with a 36% price cut ($117 instead of $182), and is a vast improvement over Kaby Lake's $117 chip, the 2c/4t i3-7100. Trading 300MHz of frequency and hyperthreading for slightly better IPC, double the cache, and double the amount of physical cores for the same price is a very good deal if you ask me.

i3-8100 | 4c/4t CFL | 3.6/3.6 | 6MB cache | $117
i3-7100 | 2c/4t KBL | 3.9/3.9 | 3MB cache | $117
i5-7400 | 4c/4t KBL | 3.0/3.5 | 6MB cache | $182

Unlike the i5-8600K and i7-8700K, the i3-8100 will be in countless millions of pre-built PCs sold to individual families and bringing true quad-core performance to the lower-end SKUs from the likes of Dell and HP is a big deal.

There's also the part where the i3-8100 _absolutely annihilates_ the similarly-priced Ryzen 3 competition, but that's a discussion for another day...


----------



## Scotty99

Ya i3 range basically puts ryzen 3 out to pasture, its just not as exciting to me as the 8700 because of how high they got clockrates on a 65w part. I am actually curious to see if the stock cooler can handle it, its the exact same boost clocks as 8700k which is a 95w part.


----------



## kd5151

CPU A, $250. CPU B, $300.
CPU A has overclocking.
CPU B has double threads, +20% frequency at stock, +33% L3 cache, 1/3 less TDP, but no OC


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Added two more video reviews to OP:


----------



## Cascade

The i5 8400 seems to be the clear winner for performance/price. It performs similarly to the i7 7700k in many benchmarks, whilst cost a lot less, using less power and not requiring expensive after-market cooling.

One question I have is:

Can you enable constant all core turbo boost on this CPU through the overclocking abilities of the Z370 motherboards? I know that the 8400 is a locked CPU and has a 4ghz single core max boost, but if it's actually possible to create a 4ghz boost on all 6 cores that would be amazing.


----------



## MaKeN

After all benchmark reviews it feels like i wont feel any difference between 8700k and my 7700k at 5.0.....(pure gaming)
Makes me think if its worth dumping that 600$for like a 5-10fps in tho the new upgrade or just calm down and skip it. ( and im already getting that max of 144 fps in games)

One thing that i would really do is just swap for z370 MSI GodLike gaming for my 7700k , but as it was answered , its not possible.


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cascade*
> 
> Can you enable constant all core turbo boost on the Z370 chipset due to the overclocking features on these motherboards? I know that the 8400 is a locked CPU and has a 4ghz single core max boost, but if it's actually possible to create a 4ghz boost on all 6 cores that would be amazing.


I'm pretty sure that's up to the individual motherboard OEMs (and their BIOS teams) whether or not all-core turbo boost is enabled.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> For comparison, this is the Asrock Z370 Taichi:
> DisplayPort with full 4K resolution at 60 Hz. As the K6 does not offer this, I consider it a drawback. Not a big one for many people with dedicated GPUs, but a drawback nevertheless.


Your GPU usage case is exceedingly rare.

For *most* users reusing their cases the K6 is a good fit.

If lack of USB 3.1 type C front panel connector was such an issue, all the people with older motherboards would be complaining more.

LGA1151 Kaby Lake has few boards with front panel USB 3.1 such as ASUS ROG Maximus IX Hero , ASUS ROG Strix Z270E Gaming , ASUS ROG Strix Z270G Gaming, Gigabyte GA-Z270X-DESIGNARE , MSI Z270 Gaming M7.

AM4 has only a few boards with USB 3.1 front panel connectors: ASUS Prime X370-Pro , ASUS ROG Strix X370-F , ASUS ROG CH VI Hero , MSI X370 Gaming M7 ACK , MSI X370 XPower.

Anyway more reviews in professional apps


https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Lightroom-CC-2015-12-CPU-Performance-Core-i7-8700K-i5-8600K-i3-8350K-1056/


https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Revit-2018-Coffee-Lake-CPU-Comparison-1052/


https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/After-Effects-CC-2017-2-CPU-Performance-Core-i7-8700K-i5-8600K-i3-8350K-1055/


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cascade*
> 
> The i5 8400 seems to be the clear winner for performance/price. It performs similarly to the i7 7700k in many benchmarks, whilst cost a lot less, using less power and not requiring expensive after-market cooling.
> 
> One question I have is:
> 
> Can you enable constant all core turbo boost on the Z370 chipset due to the overclocking features on these motherboards? I know that the 8400 is a locked CPU and has a 4ghz single core max boost, but if it's actually possible to create a 4ghz boost on all 6 cores that would be amazing.


8400 only appears to be a good value in todays marketplace with most software/games optimized for 4c CPU's.

Good question with the multicore enhancement, i am honestly not sure on that one. If you can enable this on locked SKU's, does that mean you could get a 4.6ghz all core turbo 8700?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> After all benchmark reviews it feels like i wont feel any difference between 8700k and my 7700k at 5.0.....(pure gaming)
> Makes me think if its worth dumping that 600$for like a 5-10fps in tho the new upgrade or just calm down and skip it.
> 
> One thing that i would really do is just swap for z370 MSI GodLike gaming for my 7700k , but as it was answered , its not possible.


Its not. You are just falling for the Youtuber upgrade hype. Even older i5/i7 users do not need to upgrade. I play at 60Hz and not limited by CPU in any way. Yeah 180 fps > 120 fps but 120 fps is not bad.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 8400 only appears to be a good value in todays marketplace with most software/games optimized for 4c CPU's.
> 
> Good question with the multicore enhancement, i am honestly not sure on that one. If you can enable this on locked SKU's, does that mean you could get a 4.6ghz all core turbo 8700?


I know with IVY you can add +400MHz Turbo with Z77 MB. I think it is not possible after IVY though.


----------



## Wetworks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> how is this measured?


I wonder if the other boards are automatically setting the CPU to 4.7ghz while the Asrock is just leaving it at stock. Aside from that I don't see why there would be such a large difference.


----------



## Cascade

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Its not. You are just falling for the Youtuber upgrade hype. Even older i5/i7 users do not need to upgrade. I play at 60Hz and not limited by CPU in any way. Yeah 180 fps > 120 fps but 120 fps is not bad.
> I know with IVY you can add +400MHz Turbo with Z77 MB. I think it is not possible after IVY though.


If this is possible, then I will likely upgrade from an i5 3570k. I sure hope it is. I have seen a few examples from reviewers that somehow got all cores pinned to 3.8-4ghz during benchmarks.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wetworks*
> 
> I wonder if the other boards are automatically setting the CPU to 4.7ghz while the Asrock is just leaving it at stock. Aside from that I don't see why there would be such a large difference.


when i was watching jayztwocents he said his 8700k turbo all cores to 4.7 when running cinebench. He also got a much higher score than stock. So yea. Plus when he was dialing in his overclock...mce was on auto. But here we go with the mce thing again.


----------



## Scotty99

So lets figure this out lol. Will a 8700 with MCE turned on boost all cores to 4.6ghz (its single core turbo) or 4.3 (its multi core turbo).

If a 8700k boosts all its cores to 4.7 with MCE on what stops a 8700 going to 4.6? That drastically increases the value of this chip, especially if this can be done on the non z series boards that are releasing later.


----------



## tw2

8700k is $660 here, no motherboard prices yet. Ryzen 1700 is $460. I game at 1440p on a 144hz monitor with bias towards quality around 60-100fps. I am struggling to justify the intel over the amd. The 8700k review put it ahead of the ryzen by a few fps or exactly the same at this resolution. The dilemma's we face...


----------



## Scotty99

At 1440p just get a ryzen 1600 and buy the most graphics card you can afford. Only reason to buy a intel over ryzen at that res is if you play MMO's, which are cpu bound at any resolution.


----------



## Cascade

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> 8700k is $660 here, no motherboard prices yet. Ryzen 1700 is $460. I game at 1440p on a 144hz monitor with bias towards quality around 60-100fps. I am struggling to justify the intel over the amd. The 8700k review put it ahead of the ryzen by a few fps or exactly the same at this resolution. The dilemma's we face...


How much is the i5-8400 where you live?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> 8700k is $660 here, no motherboard prices yet. Ryzen 1700 is $460. I game at 1440p on a 144hz monitor with bias towards quality around 60-100fps. I am struggling to justify the intel over the amd. The 8700k review put it ahead of the ryzen by a few fps or exactly the same at this resolution. The dilemma's we face...


Well, I play BF1 alot and PUBG. When I went from my Ryzen 7 (at 3850mhz core, and 2x8GB 3200mhz kit (@2933mhz) to a 4700/3000mhz I7 7800X (core/mesh) using the same 2x8GB 3200 kit I got these results in BF1:

I7 7800X, MSI X299 Tomhawk, 2x8GB Corsair Vengance 3200 mhz, 1080Ti, AX1500I, Samsung 840 Pro, Windows 10

R7 1700, X370 Crosshair 6, 2x8GB Corsair Vengance 3200 mhz, 1080Ti, AX1500I, Samsung 840 Pro, Windows 10

I7 7800X: Min FPS 114 - Max FPS 173 - Avg FPS 141 - 64 players Conquest on Soissons - Ultra preset - 1440P

R7 1700: MIN FPS 91 - Max FPS 174 - Avg FPS 115 - 64 players Conquest on Soissons - Ultra preset - 1440P

Ryzen at 3850/2933 on mem - GPU at 2050/+500

SK-X at 4700/3000 and 3200 on mem - GPU at 2050/+500

I have later delidded the CPU and can do 5000mhz. I am at 4800 mhz so the temps don't exceed 60'C under almost any circumstances. Mesh is currently at 3300mhz and I switched the ram to a used kit - G.Skill Ripjaws V 3600mhz running at 4000mhz. So if I test again, I should probably get even better results.

PUBG went from a lagging system to a butter smooth system.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

I ordered an 8600k about half an hour after they appeared as backordered on Newegg, so hopefully it won't take too long since I can't test the other parts I got to see if they would need to be RMA'd within 30 days.

I hope I won't regret not having HT.


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> At 1440p just get a ryzen 1600 and buy the most graphics card you can afford. Only reason to buy a intel over ryzen at that res is if you play MMO's, which are cpu bound at any resolution.


Aleady have 1080ti. I would like either 8 core ryzen (might as well OC 1700) or the 8700k.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cascade*
> 
> How much is the i5-8400 where you live?


$303
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Well, I play BF1 alot and PUBG. When I went from my Ryzen 7 (at 3850mhz core, and 2x8GB 3200mhz kit (@2933mhz) to a 4700/3000mhz I7 7800X (core/mesh) using the same 2x8GB 3200 kit I got these results in BF1:
> 
> I7 7800X, MSI X299 Tomhawk, 2x8GB Corsair Vengance 3200 mhz, 1080Ti, AX1500I, Samsung 840 Pro, Windows 10
> 
> R7 1700, X370 Crosshair 6, 2x8GB Corsair Vengance 3200 mhz, 1080Ti, AX1500I, Samsung 840 Pro, Windows 10
> 
> I7 7800X: Min FPS 114 - Max FPS 173 - Avg FPS 141 - 64 players Conquest on Soissons - Ultra preset - 1440P
> 
> R7 1700: MIN FPS 91 - Max FPS 174 - Avg FPS 115 - 64 players Conquest on Soissons - Ultra preset - 1440P
> 
> Ryzen at 3850/2933 on mem - GPU at 2050/+500
> 
> SK-X at 4700/3000 and 3200 on mem - GPU at 2050/+500
> 
> I have later delidded the CPU and can do 5000mhz. I am at 4800 mhz so the temps don't exceed 60'C under almost any circumstances. Mesh is currently at 3300mhz and I switched the ram to a used kit - G.Skill Ripjaws V 3600mhz running at 4000mhz. So if I test again, I should probably get even better results.
> 
> PUBG went from a lagging system to a butter smooth system.


Interesting, average went up considerably. I should note I don't play online, just fallout, skyrim, deus ex, borderlands etc. Those sorts of games.

By the time the 8th gen are readily available here the ryzen refresh will be just around the corner too. Of course there is no point waiting forever for the next best thing but February isn't too far away.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I know with IVY you can add +400MHz Turbo with Z77 MB. I think it is not possible after IVY though.


I haven't tinkered with BIOS and clocking in a while, but I don't recall ever seeing that option with Z87 on my Max VI Hero.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> I ordered an 8600k about half an hour after they appeared as backordered on Newegg, so hopefully it won't take too long since I can't test the other parts I got to see if they would need to be RMA'd within 30 days.
> 
> I hope I won't regret not having HT.


8700 would have been a better purchase, in my opinion. If you can find a 8700 for msrp of 304 bucks, i would make that trade.

This is especially true if the 8700 can indeed hit 4.6ghz on all cores with MCE enabled (i asked earlier but no one seems to know). This is the behavior that happens with 8700k, i see no reason why it wouldnt occur with non k.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 8700 would have been a better purchase, in my opinion. If you can find a 8700 for msrp of 304 bucks, i would make that trade.
> 
> This is especially true if the 8700 can indeed hit 4.6ghz on all cores with MCE enabled (i asked earlier but no one seems to know). This is the behavior that happens with 8700k, i see no reason why it wouldnt occur with non k.


I came very close to getting it while it was purchasable on Newegg this morning for two hours. In fact that dilemma is why I missed getting either one on Amazon during that initial 10 minute window... I was posting on here notifying the thread and debating which one and it became unavailable again.

I couldn't verify that the turbo boost is the same for every core except that single core 100mghz increase, if I had been able to confirm that this morning I would have just gotten an 8700 and went to sleep. Then I wouldn't have to worry about not being able to test the parts I got that have a chance of being faulty and ordered everything else I needed for the build. I know if I have to RMA something 30 days after getting it then I'll have to deal with the manufacturer and most likely I'm just going to get a refurb which is a ripoff.

I'm not worried about the 8600k vs the 8700 anymore though, I made a decision and that's that. Now the question is when is the next shipment.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> I came very close to getting it while it was purchasable on Newegg this morning for two hours. In fact that dilemma is why I missed getting either one on Amazon during that initial 10 minute window... I was posting on here notifying the thread and debating which one and it became unavailable again.
> 
> I couldn't verify that the turbo boost is the same for every core except that single core 100mghz increase, if I had been able to confirm that this morning I would have just gotten an 8700 and went to sleep. Then I wouldn't have to worry about not being able to test the parts I got that have a chance of being faulty and ordered everything else I needed for the build. I know if I have to RMA something 30 days after getting it then I'll have to deal with the manufacturer and most likely I'm just going to get a refurb which is a ripoff.
> 
> I'm not worried about the 8600k vs the 8700 anymore though, I made a decision and that's that. Now the question is when is the next shipment.


https://www.anandtech.com/show/11859/the-anandtech-coffee-lake-review-8700k-and-8400-initial-numbers

Shows all the boost clocks for all coffee chips, hard to find info actually lol. 8600k is fine, its just not as future proof as 8700 but will be faster than a 8700 for a year maybe two once you overclock one


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Added two more Motherboard reviews to OP:


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/11859/the-anandtech-coffee-lake-review-8700k-and-8400-initial-numbers
> 
> Shows all the boost clocks for all coffee chips, hard to find info actually lol. 8600k is fine, its just not as future proof as 8700 but will be faster than a 8700 for a couple years once you overclock one


Yeah, if I had been able to confirm that I would have jumped on it, I had a two hour window to do so.

I couldn't care less about hitting 5GHz and I knew that from the start. I would of just enjoyed it with the turbo freq even though I had an Asrock Extreme 4. Definitely would have had to explain that to many OCN members for a while though, and likely deal with the jokes







I Originally got the Extreme 4 under the assumption that the cpu's wouldn't be anywhere near the listed wholesale price and that an 8700 would cost too much.

Anyways, I'm sure I'll be happy with what I got. Let's not forget what I came from.

Maybe I'll get lucky and find a 1080 Ti for under $600.


----------



## kd5151

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i5_8400/17.html. Best I could find about MCE. i5 locked to 3.8 instead of 4.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> .This is especially true if the 8700 can indeed hit 4.6ghz on all cores with MCE enabled (i asked earlier but no one seems to know). This is the behavior that happens with 8700k, i see no reason why it wouldnt occur with non k.


Anandtech suggested 4.3 for all cores on the 8700.


----------



## Scotty99

No i understand that, but if you turn MCE on with the 8700k you get an all core boost of 4.7ghz not 4.3 (shown by OC3D and jayztwocents). Will the 8700 boost to 4.6 on all cores with MCE on?

Very confusing honestly, ive never experienced this setting as i went from sandy to ryzen.


----------



## Contiusa

Strange to see the i5-8600K in a virtual draw with the i7-7700K in computing benches, many times behind the 4c/8t. Does not make much sense.

http://wccftech.com/review/intel-core-i7-8700k-core-i5-8600k-core-i5-8400-cpu-review/


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> No i understand that, but if you turn MCE on with the 8700k you get an all core boost of 4.7ghz not 4.3 (shown by OC3D and jayztwocents). Will the 8700 boost to 4.6 on all cores with MCE on?


Any verification of this being all cores?


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> 8700k is $660 here, no motherboard prices yet. Ryzen 1700 is $460. I game at 1440p on a 144hz monitor with bias towards quality around 60-100fps. I am struggling to justify the intel over the amd. The 8700k review put it ahead of the ryzen by a few fps or exactly the same at this resolution. The dilemma's we face...


Your gaming use-case is very similar to mine and I haven't regretted switching from a 6700k system to a 1700X. I also do development and parallel processing on my machine so Ryzen was an exceptional value for me, but in terms of gaming my circumstances are similar to yours and my gaming experience is great. Were I you, I'd save the money. You're not going to see the lion's share of benefit that Coffee Lake has to offer.


----------



## kd5151

false
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Any verification of this being all cores?


https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/intel_coffee_lake_i7_8700k_review/3


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> You're not going to see the lion's share of benefit that Coffee Lake has to offer.


Most people here only focus on gaming anyways... Jack of all Trades isn't something one can brag about








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> false
> https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/intel_coffee_lake_i7_8700k_review/3


Looks to be a high voltage temperature based solution. If cooler can handle then all cores at max boost frequency otherwise throttle to lower?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Most people here only focus on gaming anyways... Jack of all Trades isn't something one can brag about
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looks to be a high voltage temperature based solution. If cooler can handle then all cores at max boost frequency otherwise throttle to lower?


Well its basically auto overclocking to max turbo, the real question here tho is if the 8700 does it as well.


----------



## z0ki

My next build is sorted

8700k (will delid)
Maximus X Formula (when released or Extreme)
32gb 3200Mhz DDR4 Ram. G.Skill or Corsair (yet to decide)
Corsair AX1200i (already have)
2x EVGA 1080 Ti's (already have)
Corsair 900D (already have)

Cooling:
Custom acrylic loop
2x Alphacool 420mm rads (already have)
1x Monsta 240 Rad (already have)


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *z0ki*
> 
> My next build is sorted
> 
> 8700k (will delid)
> Maximus X Formula (when released or Extreme)
> 32gb 3200Mhz DDR4 Ram. G.Skill or Corsair (yet to decide)
> Corsair AX1200i (already have)
> 2x EVGA 1080 Ti's (already have)
> Corsair 900D (already have)
> 
> Cooling:
> Custom acrylic loop
> 2x Alphacool 420mm rads (already have)
> 1x Monsta 240 Rad (already have)


Now what games you going to play?


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Now what games you going to play?


All of them.


----------



## z0ki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Now what games you going to play?


All of the games! Lol

I've been computerless for nearly 7 months so I have a lot to catch up on!


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> All of them.


Just cant seem to find anything good recently. Last good game I played was on 2016 which was Witcher 3.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Just cant seem to find anything good recently. Last good game I played was on 2016 which was Witcher 3.


I'm currently playing Path of Exile, it's a Free-to-Play Hack & Slash that pays homage to Diablo. Very easy to get into and start off. Gets addicting rather quick. Currently logged 70 hours in it and already in the end game. End game is equally as long and hard, I think I'll at least get another 50 hours out of it minimum. Has an awesome trading system and website for it. Guides online are easy to follow. Really helpful community too.

Check it out. Don't expect to stress that 1080 Ti all that much though.


----------



## kd5151

Star wars beta opens tomorrow at 1pm pst.


----------



## Scotty99

If you want to challenge that 8700k buy WoW legion and do a world boss


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Your gaming use-case is very similar to mine and I haven't regretted switching from a 6700k system to a 1700X. I also do development and parallel processing on my machine so Ryzen was an exceptional value for me, but in terms of gaming my circumstances are similar to yours and my gaming experience is great. Were I you, I'd save the money. You're not going to see the lion's share of benefit that Coffee Lake has to offer.


This is what I think I will do. I would get a 8700k if it will be good value to me but I can't really see that value over an overclocked 1700 or an 1800X if one is on sale. I would also like some general improvements in windows tasks, 7zip, multi tab browsing etc but I think either cpu will offer that with the ryzen probably pulling ahead. And of course I will take the gamble that amd makes some even better cpus in the future to upgrade to.


----------



## Kana Chan

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Ditch-the-desktop-Clevo-debuts-the-world-s-first-gaming-notebooks-powered-by-Intel-Coffee-Lake-S-95W-CPUs.255686.0.html
New laptops for the 8700K and 8600K. Some vendors offer delidding for free.


----------



## chaosblade02

I'm thinking $800-1000 budget for I7 8700k + motherboard + ram + OS + delid kit. Got all the other parts. I'll probably have to keep using my R9 390 at least until the middle of next year, and spend another $1000 on a GPU + monitor upgrade.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asmodian*
> 
> Hyperbole? I only said the ring bus is a little better than the mesh architecture, and that the difference wasn't worth changing CPUs. My point was that the 8700K is not a terrible deal because the 7800X is basically the same price.
> 
> *As far as epeen goes, is a 7800X or a 8700K better?*


Two schools of thought on this one. The 7800X gives the far epeenier HEDT platform to post in the old sig, but the 8700K is shinier and newer and will slightly outperform the former in games. Just depends on which epeen you prefer...


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I have a feeling that the Ryzen refresh (If you can call it that) won't be what people is hoping for.


As a wild guess I expect we should see +200-300MHz max out of the Ryzen refresh. AMD is well aware that clock speed is the only real downside of their new architecture and most seem to believe this is a limitation of the node rather than the architecture itself. Hopefully they manage to get to at least 4.2-4.3 GHz (TR stock clocks are promising) as I believe a 4.5+ GHz Ryzen as-is would be beyond competitive with anything Intel is currently offering.


----------



## Lexi is Dumb

The 8700k does look really good, that OC headroom is awesome. For me personally I'm not sure I can justify the extra $140 aud over the 1700 though, I don't actually game all that much and I'll be GPU limited with my 1070 at 1440p either way. At the abysmally slow rate Im saving money for this platform upgrade, I should probably wait for Zen+ anyway


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Your GPU usage case is exceedingly rare.
> 
> For *most* users reusing their cases the K6 is a good fit.


Well possible. I am not complaining anyway, just listing drawbacks compared to other offers. Being limited to HDMI for 2560 px or even 30 fps for 4k is a real problem for anyone not wanting to use a dedicated GPU.

My real complaint remains that the whole Asus ROG line comes without Thunderbolt header. So unless I take the Prime-A I have to go Asrock or Gigabyte, knowing that with Asrock I have to watch out which board to get, in order to not suffer from said "drawbacks". It's about judging the offers.


----------



## SightUp

Is there a thread yet for the 8700k with everyone's overclocks?


----------



## Kuivamaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Two schools of thought on this one. The 7800X gives the far epeenier HEDT platform to post in the old sig, but the 8700K is shinier and newer and will slightly outperform the former in games. Just depends on which epeen you prefer...


I am not sure about the game part. I am in the market for a 2nd system and I really do not consider deliding. the 8700k seemed promising but a 7800X with clocked mesh and fast ram will be nearly identical performer,and will have better platform and upgrade paths. It is also readily available and cheaper ,which balances out the more expensive boards. I find little reason to consider a 8700X atm.


----------



## Techhog

Asus pls

My 8700K is hitting 1.4V with voltage on auto lol. That's obviously not necessary. Yeah, I'm gonna need to do some tweaking in the morning.


----------



## rudyae86

I wonder if there is any reviews on comparing performance between a locked 8700 and an 8700K? even with OC.....I'm not much of an OC but if the difference is there, I might go with the 8700K


----------



## z0ki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Asus pls
> 
> My 8700K is hitting 1.4V with voltage on auto lol. That's obviously not necessary. Yeah, I'm gonna need to do some tweaking in the morning.


Your main problem was leaving it on 'AUTO' to begin with lol!!

Never ever let anything 'auto' volt and never use software either! In saying that I remember how terrible the asus suite was for overclocking so this could have been changed by now! In this case I retract my comment. But BIOS overclocking is king


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kuivamaa*
> 
> I am not sure about the game part. I am in the market for a 2nd system and I really do not consider deliding. the 8700k seemed promising but a 7800X with clocked mesh and fast ram will be nearly identical performer,and will have better platform and upgrade paths. It is also readily available and cheaper ,which balances out the more expensive boards. I find little reason to consider a 8700X atm.


From the point of view of the very high-end of the market, you may be right about the X299 platform still being more appealing even with the advent of 6-core mainstream CPUs on the Z370. That said I am viewing CFL from a mass-public mindset, in which the i7-8700 (non-K) and i5-8400 may well be the most interesting CPUs of the bunch.

Given the early returns on the heat generated by OCing the 8700K, the standard 6c/12t 8700 with its native all-core turbo of 4.3 GHz (before any motherboard tweaks) is not that far away from where its unlocked counterpart can get to using cheap air cooling. Also, since CFL supports DDR4-2666 natively (near the price/performance sweet spot for RAM for general use), the need for getting an unlocked CPU to utilize faster ram is largely alleviated. All things being equal, I'd take the $56 (MSRP) savings over the 8700K and put that money elsewhere in an upcoming rig.

While the i7-8700 (non-K) has only a few disadvantages, the i5-8400 isn't quite as uncompromised. Still, the fact that you can get a 6c/6t CPU with KBL-class IPC and a decent if not spectacular 3.8 GHz all-core turbo and native DDR4-2666 support for an MSRP of only $182 is still quite remarkable. Even without hyperthreading, the 8400 could easily be the backbone of a 5+ year family PC that won't be sluggish even at the end of its tour of duty.

Since multi-GPU setups are largely a thing of the past, I maintain that getting a lower-end Z370 board without the bells and whistles (who needs RGB lighting anyway?) or 8x/8x CPU lanes and pairing it with the 8400 or 8700 (non-K) makes for the best deal that Intel has given us since the advent of Sandy Bridge. Keeping it at stock clocks also means that VRM quantity/quality is rather less important, which means that one can move down a couple of models to save some cash without limiting performance as well.


----------



## Glottis

Any Z370 motherboards with at least 8 SATA ports? All I've seen are maxing out at 6 ports.


----------



## z0ki

Look at this idiot from Australia trying his hand at selling an 8700K! LOOOOL!!

https://m.ebay.com.au/itm/i7-8700k-Coffee-lake-cpu-unlocked-/222668864680?_mwBanner=1


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *z0ki*
> 
> Look at this idiot from Australia trying his hand at selling an 8700K! LOOOOL!!
> 
> https://m.ebay.com.au/itm/i7-8700k-Coffee-lake-cpu-unlocked-/222668864680?_mwBanner=1


LoL...good luck with that


----------



## svenge

$1280 in actual non-dingo based money for a 8700K? Good lord that is dumb. Hopping on a Qantas to the States and back with one in tow would probably be cheaper.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> $1280 in actual non-dingo based money for a 8700K? Good lord that is dumb. Hopping on a Qantas to the States and back with one in tow would probably be cheaper.


A binned 5.2Ghz 8700K from Silicon Lottery would be cheaper already delided and shipped, I cant believe how dumb some people could be







scary to think someone would be dumb enough to pay that price.


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *z0ki*
> 
> Look at this idiot from Australia trying his hand at selling an 8700K! LOOOOL!!
> 
> https://m.ebay.com.au/itm/i7-8700k-Coffee-lake-cpu-unlocked-/222668864680?_mwBanner=1


Wow that's a good deal, do you think he'll take Monopoly money?







.

Intel can keep Coffee Lake, I'll stick to AMD thanks, least I know I wont have to change motherboards till 2020







.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Aussiejuggalo*
> 
> Wow that's a good deal, do you think he'll take Monopoly money?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> Intel can keep Coffee Lake, I'll stick to AMD thanks, least I know I wont have to change motherboards till 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Probably only Aussie Edition Monopoly money due to exchange rates and all


----------



## z0ki

I hope he includes the pen for that price! Then we are talking

Ahaha


----------



## Timur Born

8700K OC vs. 7800X OC vs. 7820X OC

Performance, not money. Discuss.


----------



## WillG027

Interested in the 8700 (non K) performance vs both 8700k and particularly the 8600k.

Can the 8700 (non K) OC memory at all? (3000 - 4000 mhz range)?


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WillG027*
> 
> Interested in the 8700 (non K) performance vs both 8700k and particularly the 8600k.
> 
> Can the 8700 (non K) OC memory at all? (3000 - 4000 mhz range)?


The 8700 non-K has at worst a 100MHz clock speed deficit when turbo'd as compared to the 8700K at stock clocks as the chart below indicates, so any review numbers of the 8700K taken using default settings before OCing should be pretty much identical.



In terms of memory speeds, KitGuru's review of the 8400 (which should share memory OCing characteristics with the 8700 non-K) shows it running 2 sticks of G.Skill TridentZ DDR4-3200MHz memory on a Gigabyte Z370 Aorus Gaming 7 basically on par with the 8700K. Of course, this kind of thing _may_ vary by motherboard and BIOS version, so I am hesitant to give an unqualified endorsement for the concept of non-K memory OCing being universal as of yet.


----------



## WillG027

Thanks Svenge. Got a set of 3600 c16 sticks ready to roll, but it seems hard to get a definitive answer online. Thinking of ordering the 8700.
With the extra heat output of these chips, IMO, the 8700 could be a sweet spot if it's performance is close to that of the 8700k.

Would like to see the 8700 straight up against a 8600k too.


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WillG027*
> 
> Thanks Svenge. Got a set of 3600 c16 sticks ready to roll, but it seems hard to get a definitive answer online. Thinking of ordering the 8700.
> With the extra heat output of these chips, IMO, the 8700 could be a sweet spot if it's performance is close to that of the 8700k.
> 
> Would like to see the 8700 straight up against a 8600k too.


That's what I was thinking as well. The 8700, given that the stock performance in reviews of the 8700K is stellar, seems like the sweet spot: good stock clocks, better TDP, and cheaper.


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WillG027*
> 
> Thanks Svenge. Got a set of 3600 c16 sticks ready to roll, but it seems hard to get a definitive answer online. Thinking of ordering the 8700.
> With the extra heat output of these chips, IMO, the 8700 could be a sweet spot if it's performance is close to that of the 8700k.
> 
> Would like to see the 8700 straight up against a 8600k too.


Probably the most succinct way to illustrate their respective performances would be using TechPowerUp's chart shown below. I would class the i7-8700K @ 3.7GHz (i.e. stock-clocked) line as being 2-3% faster than the 8700 non-K on average due to the 100MHz boost clock speed differential.

Personally were I to buy a rig today, I'd get a 8700 + a relatively cheap mobo like the Z370-HD3P or something like that. Pair it with a GTX 1060/6GB with its GPU Boost 3.0 auto-overclocking, and you have a set-and-forget rig that should be usable for quite some time. Those on a budget could replace the i7-8700 with an i5-8400 and the 1060/6GB with a 1050Ti and save a couple hundred bucks while having acceptable 1080p performance.


----------



## WillG027

Agreed, ToTheSun, should be exceptional stock performance without the hassle of OC.
- I've just got to ensure that my RAM won't be crippled in the Z370 Mobo. . .


----------



## Raghar

I looked at Asus support, and it looks kinda bleak. Old boards doesn't have 6-core support, new boards don't have Skylake and Kabylake support.
We still don't know if the same board would be usable for 10 nm.


----------



## WillG027

Yeah nice post Svenge - was thinking around 2% difference.

And seeing that the 8700k at 5.0Ghz only yields a 9% increase of performance - the 8700 boosting to it's default 4.3Ghz may provide within 6-7% of that mark hopefully. (or 103% on that graph)


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> I looked at Asus support, and it looks kinda bleak. Old boards doesn't have 6-core support, new boards don't have Skylake and Kabylake support.
> We still don't know if the same board would be usable for 10 nm.


The old boards (Z170/270) won't support Coffee Lake because the new chips use ~30 additional previously-reserved (i.e. unused) pins for better power delivery to the CPU for driving the 2 extra cores. The old 1151 (v1) socket isn't built to accept that kind of change in power distribution. As for Z370 supporting 10mm chips (coming in the 9th generation perhaps), who knows?

Honestly, I wish that Intel would've thrown in just one additional reserved pin to give a different socket number for the sake of reducing confusion, but then again there's already a precedent for this kind of thing with Socket 2011 (v1 being for Ivy/Haswell -EX chips and v3 being for Haswell/Broadwell -E and -EP chips). They probably did it to save some money by not having to redesign the CPU package / physical sockets and change the tooling, but it still sucks.


----------



## Raghar

Intel should simply made CPUs that would run even on Z170, and simply allow MB manufacturers to whitelist MB that would have sufficient power delivery to allow CPU run. Considering OC MB should survive 200 W CPUs, the 6-core should still be well withing engineering limits of well overengeneered board.

Or perhaps MB manufacturers are no longer PC HW fans, and no longer deliver overengeneered boards that survive anything, and support CPUs and devices they didn't even imagined 7 years ago. It kinda irks me when HW manufacturers are unwilling to add component that would double power delivery of MB and cost about half dollar, while adding 5 dollar RGB LED.

There are too many different MB, there is too large stratification, and too small market to even justify 80 new MB types per company each year.


----------



## TMatzelle60

The i7 8700 how would that be in gaming. was looking at doing a node 202 build but i see the 3.2ghz


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> The i7 8700 how would that be in gaming. was looking at doing a node 202 build but i see the 3.2ghz


That is just base clock. It will Turbo to 4.3GHz.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *z0ki*
> 
> Your main problem was leaving it on 'AUTO' to begin with lol!!
> 
> Never ever let anything 'auto' volt and never use software either! In saying that I remember how terrible the asus suite was for overclocking so this could have been changed by now! In this case I retract my comment. But BIOS overclocking is king


Auto is stock in this case.

I'm trying to overclock but it spikes up to 1.41V on its own no matter how I set it. What am I missing?


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> That is just base clock. It will Turbo to 4.3GHz.


i also see it single core turbo to 3.6

So basically this cpu can be kept cooler and still run fast with lower tdp. I wont be overclocking so this will run fine


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> That is just base clock. It will Turbo to 4.3GHz.
> 
> 
> 
> i also see it single core turbo to 3.6
> 
> So basically this cpu can be kept cooler and still run fast with lower tdp. I wont be overclocking so this will run fine
Click to expand...

Plus, with some UEFI tweaks, you can make it run at 4.6 GHz on all cores.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> Plus, with some UEFI tweaks, you can make it run at 4.6 GHz on all cores.


The way I see it is that if I am going to upgrade from 3770K @ 4.6GHz I want 5.0GHz minimum. Also considering how much money I spend in other part, trying to save $50-100 in CPU is pointless. 8700K is a 5 year CPU. I would just get i5-8400 if budget is a problem.


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Auto is stock in this case.
> 
> I'm trying to overclock but it spikes up to 1.41V on its own no matter how I set it. What am I missing?


If you change the clock speeds or enable several settings like "multi-core enhancement" or similar variations of all core max turbo etc then they override the stock voltage and give far higher volts

auto is only stock when it's set up the right way

otherwise you should probably manually define voltages for best results


----------



## Cascade

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> The way I see it is that if I am going to upgrade from 3770K @ 4.6GHz I want 5.0GHz minimum. Also considering how much money I spend in other part, trying to save $50-100 in CPU is pointless. 8700K is a 5 year CPU. I would just get i5-8400 if budget is a problem.


I'm basically in the same boat, but going from an i5 3570k @ 4.2ghz to an i5-8400 seems like a big upgrade according to reviews. The i5-8400 does have suspiciously good performance for the price, almost as if something has been wrong in testing


----------



## somethingname

I might get this as an upgrade from my 2600k. There's really no reason to since I game a 1080p 60fps. My rig is feeling really antique at this point.


----------



## stangflyer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> I haven't tinkered with BIOS and clocking in a while, but I don't recall ever seeing that option with Z87 on my Max VI Hero.


I have had my 3570 non k at 4.2 all turbo 24/7 delidded for 4.5 years. 1.12V. Never goes above 65C on Thermaltake Frio air cooler. Just gaming.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *somethingname*
> 
> I might get this as an upgrade from my 2600k. There's really no reason to since I game a 1080p 60fps. My rig is feeling really antique at this point.


I feel the same way. 2012 CPU just seems so old now. I just going to hold a bit longer for maybe 8-Core version next year.


----------



## Cascade

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> The way I see it is that if I am going to upgrade from 3770K @ 4.6GHz I want 5.0GHz minimum. Also considering how much money I spend in other part, trying to save $50-100 in CPU is pointless. 8700K is a 5 year CPU. I would just get i5-8400 if budget is a problem.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I feel the same way. 2012 CPU just seems so old now. I just going to hold a bit longer for maybe 8-Core version next year.


If you follow that idea of just waiting for the next best thing you'll never upgrade


----------



## evensen007

Man, there's been no refresh in stock for any of the chips I would consider (8600k/8700/8700k). Wondering how long it's going to be for regular availability. Hoping those rumors aren't true about the rest of the year.


----------



## looniam

having noticed a difference in MCE (multicore enhancement) than in the past, ie in a review a lock i5 didn't boost but to all core instead of single core clock when enabled; this might help explain it:

Intel Will No Longer Provide Per-Core Turbo Frequencies, Making Motherboard Tuning Impossible


----------



## evensen007

Anyone see a review yet of someone diving a little deeper after release day? Really interested in 8600k/8700 performance tuning as well as someone who has delidded an 8700k and run it under water with tuning.


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Anyone see a review yet of someone diving a little deeper after release day? Really interested in 8600k/8700 performance tuning as well as someone who has delidded an 8700k and run it under water with tuning.


Here you go, one of the most in depth reviews, delidding included.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> having noticed a difference in MCE (multicore enhancement) than in the past, ie in a review a lock i5 didn't boost but to all core instead of single core clock when enabled; this might help explain it:
> 
> Intel Will No Longer Provide Per-Core Turbo Frequencies, Making Motherboard Tuning Impossible


Rep+


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> If you change the clock speeds or enable several settings like "multi-core enhancement" or similar variations of all core max turbo etc then they override the stock voltage and give far higher volts
> 
> auto is only stock when it's set up the right way
> 
> otherwise you should probably manually define voltages for best results


what he said.







Disable mce and try xmp off.


----------



## Nightbird

After Ryzen, I waited for reviews for this to come out. I ordered parts for a Ryzen build yesterday.

If the IPC had improved 10-15%, it might have been a different story, but a cheap 260$ 1700 chip will tide me over until next year when I can plop a Ryzen 2 into the same MB. Intel's new MB for every generation tags 200+$ on top of what they charge for a new CPU made this a no brainer.


----------



## Cascade

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nightbird*
> 
> After Ryzen, I waited for reviews for this to come out. I ordered parts for a Ryzen build yesterday.
> 
> If the IPC had improved 10-15%, it might have been a different story, but a cheap 260$ 1700 chip will tide me over until next year when I can plop a Ryzen 2 into the same MB. Intel's new MB for every generation tags 200+$ on top of what they charge for a new CPU made this a no brainer.


That's a fair argument, but the vast majority of people don't upgrade their CPU every 2 years. They buy a CPU, RAM and motherboard and keep them for 3+ years. I.e. they keep them long after a new generation of CPUs is out


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kuivamaa*
> 
> I am not sure about the game part. I am in the market for a 2nd system and I really do not consider deliding. the 8700k seemed promising but a 7800X with clocked mesh and fast ram will be nearly identical performer,and will have better platform and upgrade paths. It is also readily available and cheaper ,which balances out the more expensive boards. I find little reason to consider a 8700X atm.


there is no reason to get a 7800x with current game optimization where it barely performs like Ryzen it is a lot of wasted money
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> 8700K OC vs. 7800X OC vs. 7820X OC
> 
> Performance, not money. Discuss.


7820x only wwins in multithreaded games like AOTS and nothing else, otherwise 8700k is better than both. if you mean games if you mean other kind of application 7820x is the best choice


----------



## Scotty99

Ya MCE shouldnt be on for K chips, but im still curious to see if a 8700 will boost all cores to 4.6 with it on.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> there is no reaosn to get a 7800x with current game optimization where it barely performs like Ryzen it is a lot of wasted money
> 7820x only wwins in multithreaded games like AOTS and nothing else, otherwise 8700k is better than both. if you mean games if you mean other kind fo application 7820x is the best choice


I disagree. You'll need to clock the cache.











http://imgur.com/XU6na


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I disagree. You'll need to clock the cache.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/XU6na


1/3 games need more cores and where is the 8700k?and have you thought uncore frequency can be overclock too ?


----------



## Scotty99

Greedy lives in his own world at times:


----------



## DStealth

The impact is not so crucial. OC mesh from 2.4 to 3.2 or even 3.3 makes miracles. Almost doubles the memory transfer from z370...having four times more L2 cache. In most of the games at least 150-200Mhz are needed to catch up with the x299 platform. Let them become more common and we can do a fair comparison while both overclocked.


----------



## Scotty99

Like steve said it helps, but be very weary of people claiming 20-30% gains with mesh OC. As you go up in CPU core clock it matters less, and no matter what is still going to be behind coffee in most titles.

WHat im curious about tho is future titles, given that ryzen has a similar cache structure maybe some games will prefer that cache style? Not sure if thats something you can code games to take advantage of.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Just to be clear.

I don't say this to feel better about my 7800X purchase. For the price I paid, it will is much cheaper than any 8700K setup will ever be. I got the ram for half price used, 20% off the CPU and 6% off on the motherboard, which is a cheap X299 Tomhawk.

That Aussue $hit channel can say what they want. They also says a 1600X is as good as the 7800X, so yeah.. no thanks lol.

And Scotty.. I'm living in my own world? That comes from the right person.









The uncore can be clocked, but as fair as I know, the gains are not as big compared to Skylake-X mesh OC.

The new CF-L chips are good, no doubt about it. But the hype is strong among many here.


----------



## Techhog

After playing around with it, I've concluded that my chip is a dud. Lol. Oh well. I have 4.7GHz 6-core. That's nothing to sneeze at either way.

So yeah, there's a decent chance that reviewers got binned chips.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Like steve said it helps, but be very weary of people claiming 20-30% gains with mesh OC.


Up to 50% in some cases paired with correct memory as less L3 cache needs better memory bandwidth and access to in as strike rate is lower. Very similar to Ryzen as memory goes up SakylakeX shines...This is the reason people are not satisfied seeing reviews with stock cache and sub 3 GHz memories on this platform...
Tomorrow i have time can make a table with scaling in let say Valley benchmark with all fixed just mesh and memory steps...was like shocked first when benched it @5G with stock mesh and 3 GHz memory was slower than [email protected] paired with the same memory...then pushed the mesh and Ram to 4 GHz and it flies almost 170fps with 1080ti 24/7 clocks 2050/12200


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> After playing around with it, I've concluded that my chip is a dud. Lol. Oh well. I have 4.7GHz 6-core. That's nothing to sneeze at either way.
> 
> So yeah, there's a decent chance that reviewers got binned chips.


One of the reviews claimed that all the reviews chips were cherry-picked ES chips need alot more voltage for the same 5000 mhz setting. I can look after the review again.


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> there is no reaosn to get a 7800x with current game optimization where it barely performs like Ryzen it is a lot of wasted money
> 7820x only wwins in multithreaded games like AOTS and nothing else, otherwise 8700k is better than both. if you mean games if you mean other kind fo application 7820x is the best choice


Thanks for the answer. I am not sure if the "other kind of application" answer is so clear-cut, though. The reason why I am looking at 8700K shortly after building a 1800X PC is because far too many of my desktop applications are regularly single-thread bottle-necked (or spread multi-threaded load over cores just to reach the same total load as a single thread, so no gain from cores).


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> After playing around with it, I've concluded that my chip is a dud. Lol. Oh well. I have 4.7GHz 6-core. That's nothing to sneeze at either way.
> 
> So yeah, there's a decent chance that reviewers got binned chips.


Hey you got an asus board right? Have you tried the AI suite auto overclock where it does the small stress tests and reboots the pc? If not can you try the "per core" option?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Up to 50% in some cases paired with correct memory as less L3 cache needs better memory bandwidth and access to in as strike rate is lower. Very similar to Ryzen as memory goes up SakylakeX shines...This is the reason people are not satisfied seeing reviews with stock cache and sub 3 GHz memories on this platform...
> Tomorrow i have time can make a table with scaling in let say Valley benchmark with all fixed just mesh and memory steps...was like shocked first when benched it with stock mesh and 3 GHz memory was slower than [email protected] paired with the same memory...then pushed the mesh and Ram to 4 GHz and it flies almost 170fps with 1080ti 24/7 clocks 2050/12200


See thats what im talking about lol. I link a video of a guy overclocking cache finding anywhere from 2-10% gains and you are claiming FIFTY PERCENT. You are telling me you can find *50%* FPS bump by simply overclocking the cache of a CPU? I find that not only hard to believe, but absurd lol.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Hey you got an asus board right? Have you tried the AI suite auto overclock where it does the small stress tests and reboots the pc? If not can you try the "per core" option?


Here's the thing: I know that it can hit 5GHz stable. It's just that it needs like 1.43-1.45V to get there. I'm going to see if I can squeeze out 4.9GHz.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Here's the thing: I know that it can hit 5GHz stable. It's just that it needs like 1.45V to get there. I'm going to see if I can squeeze out 4.9GHz.


Im just curious how high the asus software thinks it can overclock 8700k's on 1-2 cores, i havent seen anyone do that yet. Pretty important for people running older titles as they just want dat clockspeed


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Im just curious how high the asus software thinks it can overclock 8700k's on 1-2 cores, i havent seen anyone do that yet. Pretty important for people running older titles as they just want dat clockspeed


Oh. I'll try to remember to do it later then lol


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Oh. I'll try to remember to do it later then lol


I remember watching a video from z170 or 270 release, and while it was only able to do 4.9ish on all cores it got 5.3 on 1 core and 5.2 on two cores. I do agree tho asus software usually asks for more volts than needed.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I remember watching a video from z170 or 270 release, and while it was only able to do 4.9ish on all cores it got 5.3 on 1 core and 5.2 on two cores. I do agree tho asus software usually asks for more volts than needed.


Yeah, that's why I don't really want to use it.

Also, looks like 4.9GHz may work at 1.4V. If so I can live with that.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Yeah, that's why I don't really want to use it.
> 
> Also, looks like 4.9GHz may work at 1.4V. If so I can live with that.


Have you tried it at all yet? While it asks for more volts than needed it does put a cap on what they feel as "safe". I believe on z270 that was 1.325v. Maybe 1.375, not sure.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

1.400V on Kaby-lake is completely fine if you can cool it.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> The impact is not so crucial. OC mesh from 2.4 to 3.2 or even 3.3 makes miracles. Almost doubles the memory transfer from z370...having four times more L2 cache. In most of the games at least 150-200Mhz are needed to catch up with the x299 platform. Let them become more common and we can do a fair comparison while both overclocked.


3.4ghz is possible up to 3.6ghz on ambient cooling


----------



## Scotty99

Right i was just pointing out that the OC software does limit the upper end of volts to what their engineers deem as safe for 24/7 use. Ive heard both sides from asus ai suite, some say it can OC better than they could achieve manually, others have said nothing but trouble. I think im getting an asus board and im for sure gonna at least give it a try.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I'm currently running 3300 at 1.145V.. Should I to clock the mesh higher...?


----------



## rudyae86

Hmm I want to see 8600k vs 8700 (non K). Just because I'm cheap lol.

8700, how much performance can you get if I were to do some tweaks in Bios and OC RAM?

I wonder if anyone had gotten such increase even with locked 4790, 6700, 7700?


----------



## tknight

Have been able to run my 8700K at 5.3ghz on all cores, at 1.39 volts with LLC 6 so far. Cache is at 4.4ghz and memory is running at XMP 3600mhz. It is not delidded.


----------



## Scotty99

Dam 5.3, what programs is that "stable" with?


----------



## HAL900

Cpu-z xD


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Dam 5.3, what programs is that "stable" with?


I am still in the process of testing/overclocking. At the moment I am just seeing what frequencies and voltages the 8700K needs and what is the limit of my cpu.
I was reading through the posts on here and saw a few people wondering if the 8700K could do above 5ghz, hence my post.


----------



## kd5151

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/916256740890443776


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/916256740890443776


how does 1700 coffee cups compare to a Lake?


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Have been able to run my 8700K at 5.3ghz on all cores, at 1.39 volts with LLC 6 so far. Cache is at 4.4ghz and memory is running at XMP 3600mhz. It is not delidded.


You won the silicone lottery, sir. Nice volts and temps! Did you de-lid and liquid metal?


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> You won the silicone lottery, sir. Nice volts and temps! Did you de-lid and liquid metal?


No I haven't delidded it yet.


----------



## Scotty99

Will it pass back to back cinebench runs at that frequency?


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> how does 1700 coffee cups compare to a Lake?


about the size of a bathtub?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> No I haven't delidded it yet.


I want your chip


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> No I haven't delidded it yet.


Hope TechHog doesn't see this


----------



## SpartanJet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nightbird*
> 
> After Ryzen, I waited for reviews for this to come out. I ordered parts for a Ryzen build yesterday.
> 
> If the IPC had improved 10-15%, it might have been a different story, but a cheap 260$ 1700 chip will tide me over until next year when I can plop a Ryzen 2 into the same MB. Intel's new MB for every generation tags 200+$ on top of what they charge for a new CPU made this a no brainer.


I see this fallacy all the time from AMD camp. When/if Ryzen comes out with Ryzen 2, there will be new motherboards with new features and I'm sure higher memory speed support which is very important for Ryzen. You will end up wanting to upgrade your motherboard as well if you care about performance.

I'm still waiting on my 8700K but I never gave AMD a second thought as core freq is more important to me than core count atm. Buying another motherboard was going to happen with either the Ryzen or i7 8700k for me so that wasn't a consideration at all.


----------



## NoDestiny

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpartanJet*
> 
> I see this fallacy all the time from AMD camp. When/if Ryzen comes out with Ryzen 2, there will be new motherboards with new features and I'm sure higher memory speed support which is very important for Ryzen. You will end up wanting to upgrade your motherboard as well if you care about performance.


Want VS need. You don't NEED a new motherboard for Ryzen (2 or whatever), but you might want WANT it, giving you options. That's the real difference.


----------



## Ha-Nocri

Did anyone test 8600K vs 7700k clock for clock?


----------



## kd5151

https://videocardz.com/73268/intel-core-i7-8700k-ultra-edition-with-silver-ihs-teased

it just got real.


----------



## czin125

At 700watt heat output, the Silver IHS should drop temps by 10-12C+ vs a nickel plated copper, right? nickel->copper->nickel vs silver->silver->silver

The 1151 IHS doesn't even cover the entire socket area unlike the 4094 socket. Bitspower IHS covers a bit more than the normal 1151 IHS. Would that help much?


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> https://videocardz.com/73268/intel-core-i7-8700k-ultra-edition-with-silver-ihs-teased
> 
> it just got real.


price? i mean if its over 440usd... you are better buying something else(or an undelidded,unmodded 8700k)(im not including the IHS)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> At 700watt heat output, the Silver IHS should drop temps by 10-12C+ vs a nickel plated copper, right? nickel->copper->nickel vs silver->silver->silver
> 
> The 1151 IHS doesn't even cover the entire socket area unlike the 4094 socket. Bitspower IHS covers a bit more than the normal 1151 IHS. Would that help much?


it isnt too far

Silver 429 W/mk
Copper 399 W/mk


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> price? i mean if its over 440usd.


https://www.caseking.de/der8auer-core-i7-8700k-5-2-ghz-ultra-edition-cpbu-162.html


----------



## Jyssi

Im curious how hot these chips get without delidding with 1.4v under air and watercooling.. ;P


----------



## LancerVI

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpartanJet*
> 
> I see this fallacy all the time from AMD camp. When/if Ryzen comes out with Ryzen 2, there will be new motherboards with new features and I'm sure higher memory speed support which is very important for Ryzen. You will end up wanting to upgrade your motherboard as well if you care about performance.
> 
> I'm still waiting on my 8700K but I never gave AMD a second thought as core freq is more important to me than core count atm. Buying another motherboard was going to happen with either the Ryzen or i7 8700k for me so that wasn't a consideration at all.


Name a feature that is even remotely worth while from 270 to 370? It better be pretty compelling for me to have to shell out for a new board.

"Fallacy"......pfft! Indeed.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> https://www.caseking.de/der8auer-core-i7-8700k-5-2-ghz-ultra-edition-cpbu-162.html


with that much money you can get 1 threadripper CPU or skylake x or coffee lake S with a lot of ram


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Have been able to run my 8700K at 5.3ghz on all cores, at 1.39 volts with LLC 6 so far. Cache is at 4.4ghz and memory is running at XMP 3600mhz. It is not delidded.


Could you take a [high res] print with it running a stress test so that we can take a look at the temperatures and such?


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> You won the *silicone* lottery, sir. Nice volts and temps! Did you de-lid and liquid metal?


Yeah... This isn't the word you're looking for lol. It's silicon. Silicone is something else.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> with that much money you can get 1 threadripper CPU or skylake x or coffee lake S with a lot of ram


it's twice as much as stock. yikes!


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> price? i mean if its over 440usd... you are better buying something else(or an undelidded,unmodded 8700k)(im not including the IHS)
> it isnt too far
> 
> Silver 429 W/mk
> Copper 399 W/mk


but there's still nickel on both sides


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> Isn't the 8600k for you then?


sounds good, but id like the option to enable HT if I ever needed it in the future









plus I think the extra £100 for the i7 would be worth it in my case, for instance in the future it will be easier to sell for more also my PC will flow better









also atm trying to quit coffee this release isnt helping especially while watching the youtube reivews everyone is using actual coffee as a hint


----------



## QuadDamage

For anyone who pre ordered on Amazon got some information today about it


----------



## QuadDamage

Take it with a gain of salt within a week is what I got from Amazon


----------



## BlazeGaming

Do you guys think its worth upgrading to 8700k over my old 5820k? which currently sits at 4.2/4.4 depending on how I feel. I will lose around $300 when selling the old ones and buying the new CPU and mobo. Is the higher 5ghz (if lucky enough to not get a dud unit) and some small extra IPC improvement worth it?


----------



## QuadDamage

^^ it really depends on what you are doing? If you are streaming and gaming off 1 PC might be a good upgrade if u can get 5ghz out of ur chip
If money isn't an issue. You are still good and can wait if you want it's just depends on you.


----------



## tashcz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlazeGaming*
> 
> Do you guys think its worth upgrading to 8700k over my old 5820k? which currently sits at 4.2/4.4 depending on how I feel. I will lose around $300 when selling the old ones and buying the new CPU and mobo. Is the higher 5ghz (if lucky enough to not get a dud unit) and some small extra IPC improvement worth it?


If I were you, I wouldn't get the new i7. You got some sweet components that people buy even today (5820K as old as it is is still a choice for some people) and the CPU race just started. You're better off saving your money, or getting another thing you need, more SSD space, better GPU... the 8700K would do for me as I'm on an OC'd FX. Or some people that are on Haswell i5's that feel the need. I know the results are tempting, but if you don't need all this performance, why go for it. After some time it will even get cheaper.


----------



## Scotty99

Sweeet i just got my 50 dollar slick deals rebate in the mail finally and apparently i signed up for points with amex, i have 77 dollars in rewards i can use on amazon or the egg. Thats almost all the motherboard right there haha. Hope that amazon dude was right and next week they will have more chips.

Im sure you guys care









BTW slickdeals rebate took almost 4 months to get here lol, if anyone was curious about theirs.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> For anyone who pre ordered on Amazon got some information today about it


/r/Intel is full of comments like this but each one contradicts the previous one.


----------



## Scotty99

So is 379.00 the actual msrp? Thought i saw 359 somewhere.


----------



## tashcz

Any shops in Europe got it in stock? I wonder what the prices are, mostly the comparison vs 7700K so I know what I'd expect in Serbia.


----------



## tashcz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> So is 379.00 the actual msrp? Thought i saw 359 somewhere.


AFAIK MSRP doesn't exist for the 8th generation...


----------



## Scotty99

I think the 8600k was the only chip i saw at "msrp", everything else had a 10-20 markup.


----------



## kd5151

#wait for the stock.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

8700k is purchasable.

https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80684I78700K-Core-i7-8700K-Processor/dp/B07598VZR8

Edit - you can add it to your cart.


----------



## evensen007

LOL @ all the 1 star reviews on amazon because it's not in stock!


----------



## WexleySnoops

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> LOL @ all the 1 star reviews on amazon because it's not in stock!


They should honestly make it so that if you did not order the part from Amazon, it does not allow you to leave a review...

You would think Amazon would be able to implement such a thing...

We get it, the launch could have been much much better, but just because you're butthurt that you couldn't buy it, doesn't mean that the product is bad. Two different things people!


----------



## kd5151

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1356629-REG/intel_bx80684i58400_core_i5_8400_2_8_ghz.html
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1356630-REG/intel_bx80684i58600k_core_i5_8600k_3_6_ghz.html
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1356633-REG/intel_bx80684i78700_core_i7_8700_3_2_ghz.html

In Stock! Order now to ship Mon Oct 16?


----------



## NorcalTRD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> 
> 
> It ruins the look tbh. I've been considering putting like an electric tape just to get rid of it. the motherboard I'm considering right now the asrock fatality board doesn't have this so I'm good lol


If your talking about the fatality K6 board it does have a debug LED.


----------



## TMatzelle60

just recieved my K6 today great looking board with great features. Def worth it now i wait for i5 8600k


----------



## NorcalTRD

Sitting here waiting for stock to arrive somewhere lol


----------



## Cybertox

All this hype because of a CPU, lol. I am still gonna sit on my 4930K for a while. Then once the 9th series comes out I will build a new rig.


----------



## Fediuld

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cybertox*
> 
> All this hype because of a CPU, lol. I am still gonna sit on my 4930K for a while. Then once the 9th series comes out I will build a new rig.


Yeah. Holding my 6800K also. Makes no sense. At 2560x1440 with GTX1080ti, the difference is 1fps, even if the 8700K is OCed at 5Ghz and mine at 4.2Ghz.

Ryzen 7 is far more compelling upgrade.


----------



## Scotty99

Honestly ryzen and coffee is meant for people on old i5's, 4790k people are still fine for a couple years.


----------



## HAL900

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fediuld*
> 
> Yeah. Holding my 6800K also. Makes no sense. At 2560x1440 with GTX1080ti, the difference is 1fps, even if the 8700K is OCed at 5Ghz and mine at 4.2Ghz.
> 
> Ryzen 7 is far more compelling upgrade.


nope


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1356629-REG/intel_bx80684i58400_core_i5_8400_2_8_ghz.html
> https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1356630-REG/intel_bx80684i58600k_core_i5_8600k_3_6_ghz.html
> https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1356633-REG/intel_bx80684i78700_core_i7_8700_3_2_ghz.html
> 
> In Stock! Order now to ship Mon Oct 16?


Considering that it is taking 10 days to ship, isn't that back-ordering?

How things are looking at the local MicroCenter:



MicroCenter just dropped the price on the 1600 to $170, Ryzen 1600 + Motherboard + air cooler = i5-8400







:


----------



## NorcalTRD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fediuld*
> 
> Yeah. Holding my 6800K also. Makes no sense. At 2560x1440 with GTX1080ti, the difference is 1fps, even if the 8700K is OCed at 5Ghz and mine at 4.2Ghz.
> 
> Ryzen 7 is far more compelling upgrade.


Im coming from a 2500k @ 5ghz.
Wanted to go for a 7700k and waited out for this.


----------



## Fediuld

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Considering that it is taking 10 days to ship, isn't that back-ordering?
> 
> How things are looking at the local MicroCenter:
> 
> 
> 
> MicroCenter just dropped the price on the 1600 to $170, Ryzen 1600 + Motherboard + air cooler = i5-8400
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :


At OCUK in England, the 8700K goes for $1050!!!!! They took all their stock, including retail boxes, binned it, de-lided it, and selling it at this price
If you want to buy one, you have to buy those or else wait until stock arrives.

Same applies to other retailers here...

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/intel-8th-gen-coffee-lake-processors-will-be-hard-to-get-availability-dramatic.html

£600 for the 5.1gz is $920. The 5.2Ghz one goes for £800 or $1050-1100. roflmao.

While the 1700X is around £270!!!!!


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> Plus, with some UEFI tweaks, you can make it run at 4.6 GHz on all cores.
> 
> 
> 
> The way I see it is that if I am going to upgrade from 3770K @ 4.6GHz I want 5.0GHz minimum. Also considering how much money I spend in other part, trying to save $50-100 in CPU is pointless. 8700K is a 5 year CPU. I would just get i5-8400 if budget is a problem.
Click to expand...

You're missing the point. The extra performance from OC-ing past 4.5 ish is probably more readily seen in extremely CPU bottlenecked scenarios, which is not as common as some think. If one is looking for good performance, but doesn't want to sacrifice silence, thermals, or to bother with OC-ing and stability testing, the 8700 is a great buy.

As for the frequency comment, I don't care about frequency; I care about performance. The damned thing could come at 1 GHz for all I cared, as long as the performance was there. It's a bit pointless to obsess with that number because it doesn't necessitate a return.


----------



## Slomo4shO

This was posted a couple of days ago:

Quote:


> In conversation with Swedish retailers, it appears that the availability of Intel Coffee Lake is low on launch day and that they only get "a handful of". In addition, one of SweClocker's contacts speaks that no Nordic distributor received the unlocked Core i7-8700K, Core i5-8600K, and Core i3-8350K without launching sales with the locked sibling models Core i7-8700, Core i5-8400 and Core i3- 8100th
> 
> As announced to sales channels so far, it is *almost complete lack of Intels Coffee Lake family throughout October and November. The situation is not expected to improve until the middle of December*, but no one dares to provide any guarantees of good access until after the turn of the year.


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LancerVI*
> 
> Name a feature that is even remotely worth while from 270 to 370? It better be pretty compelling for me to have to shell out for a new board.
> 
> "Fallacy"......pfft! Indeed.


I agree, maybe there will be better memory suppory with ryzen but you can already run 3200 c14 with the right kit and motherboard. Not many people want more than this. Anything else? extra features? type c usb, thunderbolt, even pcie 4, it is all years away from being useful for the majority of us.


----------



## Menta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fediuld*
> 
> At OCUK in England, the 8700K goes for $1050!!!!! They took all their stock, including retail boxes, binned it, de-lided it, and selling it at this price
> If you want to buy one, you have to buy those or else wait until stock arrives.
> 
> Same applies to other retailers here...
> 
> http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/intel-8th-gen-coffee-lake-processors-will-be-hard-to-get-availability-dramatic.html
> 
> £600 for the 5.1gz is $920. The 5.2Ghz one goes for £800 or $1050-1100. roflmao.
> 
> While the 1700X is around £270!!!!!


Madness , Who in there right mind would pay? seems unbelievable people will actually pay those amounts, sounds stupid to me.


----------



## JedixJarf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tashcz*
> 
> AFAIK MSRP doesn't exist for the 8th generation...


Just like turbo stats.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menta*
> 
> Madness , Who in there right mind would pay? seems unbelievable people will actually pay those amounts, sounds stupid to me.


I can think of at least one:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> der8auer Core i7-8700K @ 5,1 GHz - Ultra Edition ordered. Can't wait !


He sticks out like a black dot


----------



## Menta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> I can think of at least one:


Well if you have cash to burn then go for it i guess









original pricing is already so expensive, every time i upgrade my wallet screams so i see these "scams" that stores allow so...maybe its just me


----------



## Scotty99

Hah i was right!





4.6ghz locked 8700 non k chips.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Hah i was right!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4.6ghz locked 8700 non k chips.


Rep+


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> I can think of at least one:
> He sticks out like a black dot


----------



## Scotty99

I havent even watched that video i just saw gigabyte usa comment that indeed 8700 chips can boost all cores to 4.6, you just need to enable it in bios (with asus xmp enables mce). Im too busy with overwatch


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I havent even watched that video i just saw gigabyte usa comment that indeed 8700 chips can boost all cores to 4.6, you just need to enable it in bios (with asus xmp enables mce). Im too busy with overwatch


not to rain on your parade but . . .

steve really didn't go over much more than anandtech did when discussing MCE during sandy/ivy bridge though a good vid none the less. thing is he tested an unlocked K cpu, which core clocks can be manipulated.

i wouldn't hesitated to agree with you (and believe me i do) if TPU had been able to max out all the cores on the i5-8400:
Quote:


> When we tested the latter, we noticed that no matter what we did, the maximum frequency the CPU would run at was 3800 MHz, not 4000 MHz as you would expect by going with the maximum-rated boost frequency.
> 
> Whether this is a bug or a feature is unknown at this time.


still waiting here.

edit:
double neg.


----------



## Scotty99

Scroll down in the comments, someone specifically asks if you can peg a 8700 to all core 4.6ghz and gigabyte responded that you can.


----------



## looniam

i am apprehensive regarding you tube comments, no matter who's account. i'll take testing results please.


----------



## Defoler

If the price is right locally, I might finally upgrade my system.
If almost every chip can reach an easy 5ghz, with my loop I can keep the temps more than cool enough.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Scroll down in the comments, someone specifically asks if you can peg a 8700 to all core 4.6ghz and gigabyte responded that you can.


watch the video. The guy says the 8700K voltage went up and he was crashing in blender. Some pics.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Hah i was right!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4.6ghz locked 8700 non k chips.


He states that chips are not stable and motherboard kicks up voltage. Since temps are an issue without delidding, you will also need a better cpu cooler. Might as well get the unlocked chip at this rate...

Recall the MCE power consumption compared to a 5GHz overclock:


----------



## Scotty99

I asked these questions days ago lol, im not saying this is all roses and is something k chips should avoid altogether. I am specifically talking about the 8700 non k as it adds value to the CPU, not all tasks are blender, and 4600mhz all core boost is pretty dang sweet at 303 bucks.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I asked these questions days ago lol, im not saying this is all roses and is something k chips should avoid altogether. I am specifically talking about the 8700 non k as it adds value to the CPU, not all tasks are blender, and 4600mhz all core boost is pretty dang sweet at 303 bucks.


5.2 GHz is even better







. People pay more money for 100-200MHz let alone 400+ guarantied.


----------



## Scotty99

But MCE should be avoided altogether on k chips, i knew this before steve put that video out. K chips seem to be perpetually out of stock and this is good news for someone that would be ok with a 4.6ghz all core turbo 8700


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> But MCE should be avoided altogether on k chips, i knew this before steve put that video out. K chips seem to be perpetually out of stock and this is good news for someone that would be ok with a 4.6ghz all core turbo 8700


MCE should be avoided all together period...


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> MCE should be avoided all together period...


Why in the world would you not enable MCE on a 8700. You may need a better cpu cooler than what comes stock if you are doing anything more stressful than gaming, but thats free performance.


----------



## kd5151

Can you change the voltage on a non k cpu with mce enabled or on auto? I assume you need a z370 motherboard as well.


----------



## Scotty99

I dunno, but steve should have talked about locked vs unlocked cpu's in his video because that makes all the difference.

8700k=off obviously, set your volts and clocks up PER CORE to get the most out of the chip
8700=turn that puppy on and enjoy your 300 dollar 12 thread 4.6ghz chip

Also if you are giving advice not to use MCE because of that video, please note he is using a K chip and specifically blender was crashing.....which steve noted crashed on other systems and not even due to MCE, prime was stable. This is most likely a blender thing than an MCE thing.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Like steve said it helps, but be very weary of people claiming 20-30% gains with mesh OC.
> 
> 
> 
> Up to 50% in some cases paired with correct memory as less L3 cache needs better memory bandwidth and access to in as strike rate is lower. Very similar to Ryzen as memory goes up SakylakeX shines...This is the reason people are not satisfied seeing reviews with stock cache and sub 3 GHz memories on this platform...
> Tomorrow i have time can make a table with scaling in let say Valley benchmark with all fixed just mesh and memory steps...was like shocked first when benched it @5G with stock mesh and 3 GHz memory was slower than [email protected] paired with the same memory...then pushed the mesh and Ram to 4 GHz and it flies almost 170fps with 1080ti 24/7 clocks 2050/12200
Click to expand...

Most folks don't overclock and overclocking is not guaranteed. That is why most reviews run stock mesh.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Why in the world would you not enable MCE on a 8700. You may need a better cpu cooler than what comes stock if you are doing anything more stressful than gaming, but thats free performance.


Free performance? In addition to the need for higher quality motherboards and cpu cooling, we have higher idle power consumption, higher load power consumption, higher load temps, higher voltage, and instability ...


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Can you change the voltage on a non k cpu with mce enabled or on auto? I assume you need a z370 motherboard as well.


not that it will mean anything _because things change_ but, i ran offset (-)voltage with MCE enable on this z77 in my rig and i5-2400 which worked like a treat.

swapping from an H67 board which wouldn't do it. very sparse bios in comparison. truth be told, i only got an i7K for benchmarks w/780ti.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Free performance? We have higher idle power consumption, higher load power consumption, higher load temps, higher voltage, instability, in addition to the need for higher quality motherboards and cpu cooling...


Eh were on an overclocking forum lol. The only valid point you bring up is cooling, i think the threshold for coffee is around the 4.6ghz mark, its very possible a 8700 can be cooled with stock cooler, gonna have to see a video.

I actually think tech deals ordered an 8700 non k yesterday, ill tweet to him to make sure he tests with MCE on for 10 minutes of prime or something (just anything more stressful than a user would see day to day).


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Eh were on an overclocking forum lol. The only valid point you bring up is cooling, i think the threshold for coffee is around the 4.6ghz mark, its very possible a 8700 can be cooled with stock cooler, gonna have to see a video.


42% increased power consumption for 8% gains...

You, Sir, are delusional if you think the stock cooler will cool a 8700 at 4.6 GHz while running above 1.35V...


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> 42% increased power consumption for 8% gains...
> 
> You, Sir, are delusional if you think the stock cooler will cool a 8700 at 4.6 GHz while running above 1.35V...


That was the k chip....

Again you are looking at this the completely wrong way. K chips shouldnt go anywhere near mce its worthless, its for LOCKED sku's. This is 300mhz of all core turbo which is HUGE. Again we dont know if 4600 can handle the stock cooler because steves video was at 4.7, if you have been an overclocker for long you know there are break points where volts massively increase temps, my guess is intel tuned the 8700 knowing users would be turning on MCE. Remember the 8700 is also a 65w chip, with only 100mhz less boost than 8700k, giving validity to my above point.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80684I58400-Core-i5-8400-Processor/dp/B0759FGJ3Q

8400 now says "In stock on October 10, 2017" which agrees with what Newegg reps were apparently saying about receiving more stock for other chips and why they're still available for backorder as well as the 8600k still says "temporarily our of stock" on Amazon.

I just ordered the rest of my hardware and changed the shipping speed on the 8600k.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> That was the k chip....


The same principals apply...

OC Wattage = TDP * ( OC MHz / Stock MHz) * ( OC Vcore / Stock Vcore )^2


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> The same principals apply...
> 
> OC Wattage = TDP * ( OC MHz / Stock MHz) * ( OC Vcore / Stock Vcore )^2


Why are you on a crusade to tell people not to take advantage of free performance? You do realize that even with MCE on you get full downclocking/speedstep right? MCE now just puts all your cores at 4.6ghz when it detects a load, and back to 800mhz while your reading your emails.

We get confirmation the 8700 can overclock 300 mhz and we got people mad about it, this forum sometimes lol.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Why are you on a crusade to tell people not to take advantage of free performance? You do realize that even with MCE on you get full downclocking/speedstep right? MCE now just puts all your cores at 4.6ghz when it detects a load, and back to 800mhz while your reading your emails.
> 
> We get confirmation the 8700 can overclock 300 mhz and we got people mad about it, this forum sometimes lol.


Yes and increases Voltage to the point where you need aftermarket cooling.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Yes and increases Voltage to the point where you need aftermarket cooling.


Link plox?

Again these are 65w chips im talking about, there is a real possiblity even the potato cooler intel includes will handle everyday tasks with MCE enabled. The question is will it handle stress tests.....that no one in the situation were talking about will be running.


----------



## svenge

Personally, I'd keep the 8700 non-K at stock. At best you're looking at getting +300MHz (or 7%) with MCE, but the power consumption required to get there is likely to be _much greater proportionally_. This is especially true since the best-binned chips will obviously be diverted to the 8700K stockpile.

Unless you're using it solely for highly multi-threaded productivity applications, the extra bit of clock-speed MCE provides really isn't worth it. Doubly so for gaming, where the GPU is a _much_ bigger driver in determining overall performance.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Why are you on a crusade to tell people not to take advantage of free performance? You do realize that even with MCE on you get full downclocking/speedstep right? MCE now just puts all your cores at 4.6ghz when it detects a load, and back to 800mhz while your reading your emails.
> 
> We get confirmation the 8700 can overclock 300 mhz and we got people mad about it, this forum sometimes lol.


I am not here to educate you on how voltage and frequency affect power consumption which, in turn, affects heat output. Go buy a 8700 and enable MCE with the stock cooler and then try claiming "free performance". Best of luck to you.


----------



## Scotty99

Truly baffling.

Yesterday i and many were excited at the possibility that the 303 dollar 8700 could boost to 4.6ghz on all cores, today we get confirmation and people are mad about it because they dont want their power bill going up 1.42 each month. (in reality, less than that even)

I dont get this forum sometimes, truly dont.


----------



## svenge

Personally, I just don't trust MCE since it's not part of the official spec and thus is heavily reliant on the motherboard maker's BIOS team knowing what the hell they're doing. _Pro-tip: Sometimes they don't._

It especially bothers me when it's turned on by default, which should _never_ happen for non-K chips.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I get 1655/219 in Cinebench on my 7800X at 4900.

Any 8700K results at the same speed with some fast ram and cache OC?


----------



## Cascade

So now that these revelations about the 8700 turbo boost has been known, is the same true for the 8400?


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cascade*
> 
> So now that these revelations about the 8700 turbo boost has been known, is the same true for the 8400?


YES but only 3.8ghz.









Source: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i5_8400/17.html


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I get 1655/219 in Cinebench on my 7800X at 4900.
> 
> Any 8700K results at the same speed with some fast ram and cache OC?


Anandtech reported 1645/220 with the 8700k at 5GHZ with DDR4 3200 RAM and no cache overclocking.

So less than 1% slower in multicore and slightly faster in single core, despite using a midrange RAM and no specific cache overclocking.


----------



## Cascade

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> YES but only 3.8ghz.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i5_8400/17.html


I meant is it possible for 4ghz all cores. I know that the boost goes - 4, 3.9,3.9,3.9,3.8,3.8


----------



## Scotty99

Motherboard companies: Here is 300mhz
Overclocking forum: No
Me:









Anyways lol, yes the 8400 will pin its cores to max turbo when it detects a load but like said above that is only 3.8ghz, not the astronomical 4.6ghz the 8700 has. Its just kind of disappointing to me how few people realize how big of a deal this is, and just want to complain about power consumption and what not.

Edit: Oh thought the guy did his research, yup it should do 4.0ghz on all cores (that review likely didnt have MCE engaged).


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Motherboard companies: Here is 300mhz
> Overclocking forum: No
> Me:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyways lol, yes the 8400 will pin its cores to max turbo when it detects a load but like said above that is only 3.8ghz, not the astronomical 4.6ghz the 8700 has. Its just kind of disappointing to me how few people realize how big of a deal this is, and just want to complain about power consumption and what not.


8700 is also a lot more expensive. Also getting 4.6GHz from 4.3GHz is not big deal. The extra heat and volts is not something I would run 24/7. You buy 8700 or 8400 for other people if you do not plan to OC. Ok get the K chip.


----------



## Scotty99

You do you man, ill continue to be excited about overclocking on a non k sku that puts this thing close to a 1700x in multithreaded workloads.


----------



## jpm888

The good news here is that we can recommend i3s for gaming again. These will trash the R3s

I want to build an itx i7 8700 h370 with air cooling


----------



## Timur Born

Photoshop Elements 2018 does multi-threaded face recognition, whereas my monthly paid Lightroom still only uses a single thread of my 8 core / 16 thread CPU. Time to update Lightroom, Adobe, that's what we pay subscriptions for.

Unfortunately Import only seems to run on a single core. Well, Intel will be happy that Adobe entices (forces) customers to still put money into CPUs with high single-core performance.


----------



## darksideleader

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Truly baffling.
> 
> Yesterday i and many were excited at the possibility that the 303 dollar 8700 could boost to 4.6ghz on all cores, today we get confirmation and people are mad about it because they dont want their power bill going up 1.42 each month. (in reality, less than that even)
> 
> I dont get this forum sometimes, truly dont.


Am i missing something? Couldn't you set the 8700's multiplier manually to its max 46, even though its not a K chip without EMC?


----------



## Scotty99

No lol, that is why k chips exist.

Ignore the haters, MCE is a big deal for locked SKU's.


----------



## Cascade

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Motherboard companies: Here is 300mhz
> Overclocking forum: No
> Me:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyways lol, yes the 8400 will pin its cores to max turbo when it detects a load but like said above that is only 3.8ghz, not the astronomical 4.6ghz the 8700 has. Its just kind of disappointing to me how few people realize how big of a deal this is, and just want to complain about power consumption and what not.
> 
> Edit: Oh thought the guy did his research, yup it should do 4.0ghz on all cores (that review likely didnt have MCE engaged).


So the 8400 can go to full boost of 4ghz on all cores? Is there a source for that?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cascade*
> 
> So the 8400 can go to full boost of 4ghz on all cores? Is there a source for that?


It absolutely will, as it has turbo boost. You just need a board that supports this, im sure the majority of z370 boards do but not sure about the lower end unreleased boards. For example the i3 8100 cannot use MCE because it does not have turbo boost, its fixed to 3.6ghz.


----------



## darksideleader

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darksideleader*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Truly baffling.
> 
> Yesterday i and many were excited at the possibility that the 303 dollar 8700 could boost to 4.6ghz on all cores, today we get confirmation and people are mad about it because they dont want their power bill going up 1.42 each month. (in reality, less than that even)
> 
> I dont get this forum sometimes, truly dont.
> 
> 
> 
> Am i missing something? Couldn't you set the 8700's multiplier manually to its max 46, even though its not a K chip without EMC?
Click to expand...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> No lol, that is why k chips exist.
> 
> Ignore the haters, MCE is a big deal for locked SKU's.


Sorry, but from what I'm reading I think your wrong. And from a hardware point of view, it doesn't make sense since, multipliers and voltages still change on a non-K chip when throttling up and down. Its better and more safe to disable EMC and just set it to the max multiplier and a safe voltage yourself.


----------



## Scotty99

You tell me homer, how are you going to set a locked CPU's frequency in the bios. The only option you have is BCLK and that is sketchy as it messes with all sorts of things like memory/bus speeds etc, MCE is the far better option.

Voltage i am unsure about, i dont know how that works on locked SKU's.

I dont know why people are so sketched out about MCE, is it really only because of that video and the problems steve had in one program? You guys do realize he also said blender has been acting weird lately and he had crashes on other machines right? He said prime was 100% stable with MCE, are you going to be doing something more stressful than prime 95 on a non k cpu lol?


----------



## darksideleader

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You tell me homer, how are you going to set a locked CPU's frequency in the bios. The only option you have is BCLK and that is sketchy as it messes with all sorts of things like memory/bus speeds etc, MCE is the far better option.
> 
> Voltage i am unsure about, i dont know how that works on locked SKU's.
> 
> I dont know why people are so sketched out about MCE, is it really only because of that video and the problems steve had in one program? You guys do realize he also said blender has been acting weird lately and he had crashes on other machines right? He said prime was 100% stable with MCE, are you going to be doing something more stressful than prime 95 on a non k cpu lol?


Everywhere I'm reading people are still able to set their multiplier of their locked chip to at least the turbo frequencies multiplier making EMC redundant. If someone with a non-k chip on this forum can confirm that would be great.

Personally I'd like as much control as possible. Plenty of motherboards in the past have turbo and auto ocing features that would automatically pump too much voltage for my taste.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You do you man, ill continue to be excited about overclocking on a non k sku that puts this thing close to a 1700x in multithreaded workloads.


Considering the 1700X is currently $300 or less and B350 boards can be had for as little as $70 for decent overclocking, congrats on paying an extra $75 to $150 for "close to 1700X in multithreaded workloads"...


----------



## Scotty99

No, that would be overclocking and requires a K sku.

Its whatever my dude, dont use it if you are that worried about it. Ill personally be recommending people use it across the board.


----------



## phenom01

I REALLY wanted to pick up a 8700k since I am feeling the upgrade bug but I really don't see the use of it now over my 4790k for strictly gaming. Guess I will wait for another gen or two =/.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> .
> 
> Its whatever my dude, dont use it if you are that worried about it. Ill personally be recommending people use it across the board.


Please get a clue about what you are talking about befor suggesting it to anyone else anywhere.... The last thing the world needs is more misinformation peddled by uninformed "tech enthusiasts" who can,t even tell the difference between TDP and power consumption....


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Considering the 1700X is currently $300 or less and B350 boards can be had for as little as $70 for decent overclocking, congrats on paying an extra $75 to $150 for "close to 1700X in multithreaded workloads"...


If you really dont see the benefit of another 300mhz all core boost for gaming as well as multithreaded workloads i dont think we have anything else to say to each other. Clockspeed is at the heart of the intel vs amd discussion everyone is having today.....and all you want to do is complain about power consumption.

300mhz is absolutely massive, AMD would kill for that......hell its probably as much or more than zen 2 is gonna bring.

Ya im done for today lol.


----------



## kd5151

no stock no 8700


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> If you really dont see the benefit of another 300mhz all core boost for gaming as well as multithreaded workloads i dont think we have anything else to say to each other. Clockspeed is at the heart of the intel vs amd discussion everyone is having today.....and all you want to do is complain about power consumption.
> 
> 300mhz is absolutely massive, AMD would kill for that......hell its probably as much or more than zen 2 is gonna bring.


You seem to be hell bent on pushing this narrative of "free performance" and are using strawman arguments to maintain your stance. I have, on multiple occasions, suggested going with an unlocked chip if you wish to obtain frequencies beyond the Intel specifications (overclocking). MCE is not useful in any situation, it draw way too much power for the performance it deliver. Advocating usage of MCE with the reference cooler is just asking for trouble. You have, thus far, ignored everyone that has made statements against MCE including the reviewers you continue to reference.

For some, learning from their own mistakes is the only means of acquiring knowledge/understanding. Please feel free to test your claim. Go buy a 8400 or 8700 and enable MCE while using the stock cooler. Until then, please refrain from making any recommendations to others. Thank you.

Edit: Seems like MCE has no tangible effect on locked cores which makes this entire discussion moot:
Quote:


> The Intel Core i5-8400 doesn't have the K suffix in its name, which indicates an unlocked multiplier. That means that you can't overclock it easily.
> 
> One option is to increase the BCLK, which can be raised to 102 MHz or 103 MHz from 100 MHz, but not more, for a 3% performance uplift, in theory.
> 
> *The second option is to adjust the CPU boost settings, making it so that the highest boost state is enabled not just for single-threaded workloads, but all - no matter the core count.
> 
> When we tested the latter, we noticed that no matter what we did, the maximum frequency the CPU would run at was 3800 MHz, not 4000 MHz as you would expect by going with the maximum-rated boost frequency.*
> 
> Whether this is a bug or a feature is unknown at this time.


----------



## darksideleader

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> No, that would be overclocking and requires a K sku.
> 
> Its whatever my dude, dont use it if you are that worried about it. Ill personally be recommending people use it across the board.


a K chip lets you set the multiplier as low and as high as you want.

Otherwise there is still a multiplier range the non-k chips can be set on, hence how the turbo clocks happen.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> You seem to be hell bent on pushing this narrative of "free performance" and are using strawman arguments to maintain your stance. I have, on multiple occasions, suggested going with an unlocked chip if you wish to obtain frequencies beyond the Intel specifications (overclocking). *MCE is not useful in any situation*, it draw way too much power for the performance it deliver. Advocating usage of MCE with the reference cooler is just asking for trouble. You have, thus far, ignored everyone that has made statements against MCE including the reviewers you continue to reference.
> 
> For some, learning from their own mistakes is the only means of acquiring knowledge/understanding. Please feel free to test your claim. Go buy a 8400 or 8700 and enable MCE while using the stock cooler. Until then, please refrain from making any recommendations to others. Thank you.


Ya cause no one would ever want to save 70-90 dollars and have an all core boost frequency higher than a k model sku, nah.
No one would ever want a one button press experience to avoid the time/trail and error of overclocking, nah.

You simply are unable to envision these scenarios, and that makes you look quite silly if im honest. I know plenty of people that just want a set and forget experience, MCE is exactly that option for them. The only chip that even has a question whether or not its stock cooler is sufficient is the 8700, and that is only in a situation such as a stress test, gaming load its going to be absolutely fine. 8400 you could run prime 95 all day long with MCE enabled and its not going to throttle ever.

I think MCE is great and it offers options for people not wanting to manually overclock their chips, cool thing is people can make up their own minds


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darksideleader*
> 
> a K chip lets you set the multiplier as low and as high as you want.
> 
> Otherwise there is still a multiplier range the non-k chips can be set on, hence how the turbo clocks happen.


You may be able to set it lower (been years since ive owned a non OCable chip), but to go higher than intels spec turbo you need a k chip, that im sure of. This is what makes MCE so appealing.


----------



## darksideleader

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *darksideleader*
> 
> a K chip lets you set the multiplier as low and as high as you want.
> 
> Otherwise there is still a multiplier range the non-k chips can be set on, hence how the turbo clocks happen.
> 
> 
> 
> You may be able to set it lower (been years since ive owned a non OCable chip), but to go higher than intels spec turbo you need a k chip, that im sure of. This is what makes MCE so appealing.
Click to expand...

No you don't son, unless Coffee lake has drastically changed from skylake

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/i5-6500-3-6ghz-on-4-cores.225567/

last chip i played with was a i7 3820, i was just unsure since it was "partially" unlocked and I could set the multiplier to 43 even tho the turbo clock was 39. Base clock was 3600mhz for 36.


----------



## Cascade

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> You seem to be hell bent on pushing this narrative of "free performance" and are using strawman arguments to maintain your stance. I have, on multiple occasions, suggested going with an unlocked chip if you wish to obtain frequencies beyond the Intel specifications (overclocking). MCE is not useful in any situation, it draw way too much power for the performance it deliver. Advocating usage of MCE with the reference cooler is just asking for trouble. You have, thus far, ignored everyone that has made statements against MCE including the reviewers you continue to reference.
> 
> For some, learning from their own mistakes is the only means of acquiring knowledge/understanding. Please feel free to test your claim. Go buy a 8400 or 8700 and enable MCE while using the stock cooler. Until then, please refrain from making any recommendations to others. Thank you.
> 
> Edit: Seems like MCE has no tangible effect on locked cores which makes this entire discussion moot:


*"MCE is not useful in any situation"* Read that back then ask yourself if you're making any sense.


----------



## fuark

What's the word on BCLK oc on the i5 8400? https://forum.level1techs.com/t/exploring-the-price-performance-advantage-of-bclk-overclocking-on-locked-coffee-lake-cpus/120099


----------



## kd5151

https://www.anandtech.com/show/11897/price-watch-core-i7-8700k-core-i5-8600k-and-core-i3-8350k-launch-day


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darksideleader*
> 
> No you don't son, unless Coffee lake has drastically changed from skylake
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/i5-6500-3-6ghz-on-4-cores.225567/
> 
> last chip i played with was a i7 3820, i was just unsure since it was "partially" unlocked and I could set the multiplier to 43 even tho the turbo clock was 39. Base clock was 3600mhz for 36.


Might want to scroll down that link "son":

He never got it running at 3.6ghz on all cores....

Ugh this forum.


----------



## NorcalTRD

Sooooo can we set aside the MCE silliness and post a link to 8700k in stock anywhere on the planet


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> The same principals apply...
> 
> OC Wattage = TDP * ( OC MHz / Stock MHz) * ( OC Vcore / Stock Vcore )^2
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you on a crusade to tell people not to take advantage of free performance? You do realize that even with MCE on you get full downclocking/speedstep right? MCE now just puts all your cores at 4.6ghz when it detects a load, and back to 800mhz while your reading your emails.
> 
> We get confirmation the 8700 can overclock 300 mhz and we got people mad about it, this forum sometimes lol.
Click to expand...

Who confirmed the 8700 will overclock on all cores to 4.6GHz?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Who confirmed the 8700 will overclock on all cores to 4.6GHz?


I think no one

4.6 is just the max Turbo for one core, right?

With Asus multi core enhancement on that can go to 4.6 on all cores and not just one

On the ivy and the sabertooth I had I was also able to set the multi a few steps higher on a non K CPU

However things might've changed on that front
Just as Intel didn't like it people having an easy OC with non K CPU's using BCLK


----------



## Scotty99

Gigabyte.

Quote:


> Alan pidick
> 6 hours ago
> so i7 8700 non-k when enabling xmp and the multi core enhancement does that lock all 6 to the 4.6 boost?﻿
> REPLY
> 
> mtdew332
> 5 hours ago
> Im not sure you can enable multicore enhancement with a non-K CPU.﻿
> REPLY
> 
> GIGABYTE USA
> 5 hours ago
> Yes, it would lock the CPU at 4.6... However not all boards will enable it with XMP. Our boards for instance do not change Turbo based on XMP. You have to manually set it to on.﻿


----------



## peter2k

Good news actually
Not surprised at that at all though

It's like a standard feature from all manufacturers for some time


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You tell me homer, how are you going to set a locked CPU's frequency in the bios. The only option you have is BCLK and that is sketchy as it messes with all sorts of things like memory/bus speeds etc, MCE is the far better option.
> 
> Voltage i am unsure about, i dont know how that works on locked SKU's.
> 
> I dont know why people are so sketched out about MCE, is it really only because of that video and the problems steve had in one program? You guys do realize he also said blender has been acting weird lately and he had crashes on other machines right? He said prime was 100% stable with MCE, are you going to be doing something more stressful than prime 95 on a non k cpu lol?


Gigabyte motherboards don't have MCE so they must be able to use the multiplier on the i7 8700.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Gigabyte motherboards don't have MCE so they must be able to use the multiplier on the i7 8700.


Wouldn't they have the same feature but under a different name?

Hard to imagine any manufacturers lacking behind in an Asus feature that's a few years old


----------



## Scotty99

Eh read the quote, he said its something you have to enable manually. Asus is the one where it prompts you to turn it on after enabling xmp.

And yes this is good news









Sorry for getting into it with the uninformed, i just cant let bad advice be given.....something triggers in me and i must stop them! I will try my best in the future to simply avoid/block these people.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darksideleader*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> No, that would be overclocking and requires a K sku.
> 
> Its whatever my dude, dont use it if you are that worried about it. Ill personally be recommending people use it across the board.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> a K chip lets you set the multiplier as low and as high as you want.
> 
> Otherwise there is still a multiplier range the non-k chips can be set on, hence how the turbo clocks happen.
Click to expand...

Intel use to have limited unlock, is what they called it.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> See thats what im talking about lol. I link a video of a guy overclocking cache finding anywhere from 2-10% gains and you are claiming FIFTY PERCENT. You are telling me you can find *50%* FPS bump by simply overclocking the cache of a CPU? I find that not only hard to believe, but absurd lol.


Said *up to* 50%. not only mesh but memory from 2400 to 4000 you can see this picture

Of course not all video cards or game engines/settings/resolutions are bottleneckinng so hard, but theoretically this are the numbers. Real world situation with ultra setting and higher than 1080p will be in 10 to 20% maximum difference. But it's quite huge, almost like day and night. My idea is not just staring at review with 2.4mhz mesh and sub 3ghz memory claiming SkylakeX cannot game as with 3.3 mesh and 4ghz ram the difference is huge ...


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Gigabyte motherboards don't have MCE so they must be able to use the multiplier on the i7 8700.
> 
> 
> 
> Wouldn't they have the same feature but under a different name?
> 
> Hard to imagine any manufacturers lacking behind in an Asus feature that's a few years old
Click to expand...

Yes you can set all the turbo ratios manually. I don't know if you can do that on a locked i7 8700.


----------



## Scotty99

Heh its kind of funny how misunderstood MCE really is:





Not once did they even *mention* MCE. To me its clear MCE simply wasnt on with kyles system, if they asked kyle if MCE was on or not they should have mentioned that, but nope not even that.

Just wanted to link showing that the largest tech tuber on the planet doesn't know what MCE is. Instead they blame it on "some boards not being fully tuned for coffee lake " or "vrm throttling" lol. The difference in scores are exactly what someone would expect on a system with MCE on and a system with MCE off...


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Heh its kind of funny how misunderstood MCE really is:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not once did they even *mention* MCE. To me its clear MCE simply wasnt on with kyles system, if they asked kyle if MCE was on or not they should have mentioned that, but nope not even that.
> 
> Just wanted to link showing that the largest tech tuber on the planet doesn't know what MCE is. Instead they blame it on "some boards not being fully tuned for coffee lake " or "vrm throttling" lol. The difference in scores are exactly what someone would expect on a system with MCE on and a system with MCE off...


Linus got better things to do lol.


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You tell me *homer*


That's not Homer, it's Grandpa Simpson.









Also regarding non-K chips, I buy them occasionally, for the wife's rig.







Let's get serious and buy the K shall we? Don't be a tightwad like that when you might get a nice 5.1+ GHz proc.


----------



## Scotty99

Oh im buying the k lol, just trying to make a point of how awesome it is you can put a locked cpu to 4.6ghz on all cores for the type that would rather not bother with an OC, like your wife.

8700 would have a 1ghz all core lead over 1800x, a 400-450 dollar CPU.....and all you have to do is set xmp/enable mce.

And like someone earlier mentioned, keep an eye out for bclk overclocking on the 8400, depending on the boards that could be a real thing.


----------



## looniam

i don't watch those guys but that shampoo analogy and hundred dollar bills in the box comment was pretty hilarious.

so there's that.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Oh im buying the k lol, just trying to make a point of how awesome it is you can put a locked cpu to 4.6ghz on all cores for the type that would rather not bother with an OC, like your wife.
> 
> 8700 would have a 1ghz all core lead over 1800x, a 400-450 dollar CPU.....and all you have to do is set xmp/enable mce.
> 
> And like someone earlier mentioned, keep an eye out for bclk overclocking on the 8400, depending on the boards that could be a real thing.


Yeah because overclocking this days is rocket science. If you are going to turn XMP and MCE ON you are "overclocking" and stability is not guarantied.


----------



## Scotty99

No it is guaranteed. Do not confuse what is going on in gamers nexus video:

1. MCE pushes volts past what is needed for these chips to run at their all core max boost, stability is guaranteed from this point of view.
2. Heat. The only chip that people even need to worry a little bit about is the 8700. We dont know yet if a stock cooler will handle a MCE'd 8700 under a stress test type of scenario, gaming load there will be no worries. My guess is it will be fine and stay under 90c (which is well below throttling levels)
3. Steve got instability because of blender, not MCE. Watch the video again please, he specifically stated blender has been "weird" lately and said prime 95 ran just fine, which is more stressful than anything a person buying a 8700 and enabling xmp is going to be doing.
4. 8700 is a 65w chip. Now before you type something about me not understanding how TDP changes based on frequency/volts, the 65w number actually matters here. Its going to go above spec here with MCE enabled there is no doubt, but its going to be well below what a 8700k runs at in terms of volts/temps. That 65w number is going to play a part, they binned these chips for a reason at 4.7 and 4.6ghz, its in my assessment that 4.6ghz is the point where coffee can stay below the "voltage wall" that people who have been overclocking a while know what that is.

Intel takes into account worst case scenarios, i do not forsee a situation where a 8700 would throttle even in a stress test with its stock cooler. Let me reiterate, stability is a NON ISSUE with MCE. I dont feel like i should have to explain this, but people watched a video from a youtube channel where a guy said a program crashed, common sense denotes that MCE pushing volts up high is going to add to stability (with a bit of excess heat of course) not take away from it.


----------



## ih2try

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Heh its kind of funny how misunderstood MCE really is:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not once did they even *mention* MCE. To me its clear MCE simply wasnt on with kyles system, if they asked kyle if MCE was on or not they should have mentioned that, but nope not even that.
> 
> Just wanted to link showing that the largest tech tuber on the planet doesn't know what MCE is. Instead they blame it on "some boards not being fully tuned for coffee lake " or "vrm throttling" lol. The difference in scores are exactly what someone would expect on a system with MCE on and a system with MCE off...


What is MCE ? How does it affect performance ?


----------



## kd5151




----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cascade*
> 
> *"MCE is not useful in any situation"* Read that back then ask yourself if you're making any sense.


Yes, absolutes are bad...

MCE is similar to ASUSs Auto tuning. You get higher clocks that are not always stable using voltages that are well beyond typical voltage for a specific frequency for the chip.

Hell, if you can enable MCE then you can also set the base multiplier to peak boost frequency and leave voltage to auto and end up with an overclock with lower voltage than if you simply enable MCE.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Yes, absolutes are bad...
> 
> MCE is similar to ASUSs Auto tuning. You get higher clocks that are not always stable using voltages that are well beyond typical voltage for a specific frequency for the chip.
> 
> Hell, if you can enable MCE then you can also set the base multiplier to peak boost frequency and leave voltage to auto and end up with an overclock with lower voltage than if you simply enable MCE.


Wrong on both points.

1. Extra volts does NOT take away from stability. I have been overclocking CPU's since ~2001 and never have i gotten a blue screen/crash from too many volts, always too little.
2. You cannot set the 8700 to run at its max turbo on all cores under load by changing multi's in the bios, this is reserved for K skus, only MCE is going to enable this behavior.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Wrong on both points.
> 
> 1. Extra volts does NOT take away from stability. I have been overclocking CPU's since ~2001 and never have i gotten a blue screen/crash from too many volts, always too little.
> 2. You cannot set the 8700 to run at its max turbo on all cores under load by changing multi's in the bios, this is reserved for K skus, only MCE is going to enable this behavior.


1. Again with the strawman....I never said voltage causes instability. Instability can arise if voltage is high and cooling is insufficient which will cause the system to shut down or cause other abnormalities as the chip reaches thermal limits. Setting core voltage way too high can burn out the chip. MCE does not set the voltage beyond identified safe thresholds so the latter point is moot in this discussion.

2. You are once again assuming that it does for unlocked chips. TPU suggests that locked chips default to Intel specific boost for all cores. The unverified statement from Gigabyte that you keep referencing also seems to imply variation between boards. Since MCE is infact a board manufacturer added feature, the only way to validate the claim is by individual board verification...

This is the last I will say on the topic of MCE. You are welcome to continue with conjecture. Considering you plan on going with a X chip and have no skin in the game, one can only hope that your recommendations for the locked chips fall upon deaf ears...


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> 1. Blue screens and crashes aren't the sole definitions of instability. Given what you've said about your own 'stability testing', I'd think that even you'd be inclined to say that this is not a topic in which your are either interested or particularly experienced.
> 
> 2. On every Intel CPU I've ever owned, locked or not, I've been able to manually adjust the multipliers up to (or well below) the maximum turbo frequency. Whether or not this is efficacious any longer, I don't know as I'm not particularly interested in Coffee Lake. MCE is like the XMP of Turbo pinning; it's not engaging any behaviour disallowed by Intel, it's just providing a simple toggle for lazy people and idiots.


Please read a little closer as to what is being discussed. No one is claiming bsod's/crashes are a sole source of instability, i am simply combating peoples false beliefs that MCE's higher than needed voltage would be cause for concern. The only reason these people are worried about stability is because of that video steve posted, and he had a blender crash lol. He then went on to say blender has been acting really funny lately, and was crashing on other systems.

As for 2, i am not aware of ever a time where you could manually set multiplier for a locked CPU so that ALL CORES will boost to the single core max. I know a few gens ago they had "semi unlocked" cpu's, but that is not the same as MCE and it surely would not allow you to set all cores to max single core boost when a load was detected.

MCE is simply a nice bonus for people looking to get a little more out of the cheaper locked SKU's, and again is something i recommend everyone doing if they arent ready to jump into a full overclock experience on a k chip.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> 1. Again with the strawman....I never said voltage causes instability. Instability can arise if voltage is high and cooling is insufficient which will cause the system to shut down or cause other abnormalities as the chip reaches thermal limits. Setting core voltage way too high can burn out the chip. MCE does not set the voltage beyond identified safe thresholds so the latter point is moot in this discussion.
> 
> 2. You are once again assuming that it does for unlocked chips. TPU suggests that locked chips default to Intel specific boost for all cores. The unverified statement from Gigabyte that you keep referencing also seems to imply variation between boards. Since MCE is infact a board manufacturer added feature, the only way to validate the claim is by individual board verification...
> 
> *This is the last I will say on the topic of MCE*. You are welcome to continue with conjecture. Considering you plan on going with a X chip and have no skin in the game, one can only hope that your recommendations for the locked chips fall upon deaf ears...


And i thank you for that.


----------



## kd5151

Lets worry about stock and sleep.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

https://www.hardocp.com/news/2017/10/06/intel_core_i58600k_overclocking_at_53ghz

https://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/10/05/intel_coffee_lake_core_i58600k_vs_7600k_at_5ghz_review


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Delidded Shots:







https://www.overclock3d.net/news/systems/intel_s_i7_8700k_has_been_delidded_and_pictured/1

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/delidded-core-i7-8700k-processor-spotted.html


----------



## peter2k

Hey cool

Nothing in the way under the lid


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Yes, absolutes are bad...
> 
> MCE is similar to ASUSs Auto tuning. You get higher clocks that are not always stable using voltages that are well beyond typical voltage for a specific frequency for the chip.
> 
> Hell, if you can enable MCE then you can also set the base multiplier to peak boost frequency and leave voltage to auto and end up with an overclock with lower voltage than if you simply enable MCE.
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong on both points.
> 
> 1. Extra volts does NOT take away from stability. I have been overclocking CPU's since ~2001 and never have i gotten a blue screen/crash from too many volts, always too little.
> 2. You cannot set the 8700 to run at its max turbo on all cores under load by changing multi's in the bios, this is reserved for K skus, only MCE is going to enable this behavior.
Click to expand...

Gigabyte does not have MCE. Only turbo multipliers for all of the cores and multiplier.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Wrong on both points.
> 
> 1. Extra volts does NOT take away from stability. I have been overclocking CPU's since ~2001 and never have i gotten a blue screen/crash from too many volts, always too little.
> 
> 2. You cannot set the 8700 to run at its max turbo on all cores under load by changing multi's in the bios, this is reserved for K skus, only MCE is going to enable this behavior.
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Blue screens and crashes aren't the sole definitions of instability. Given what you've said about your own 'stability testing', I'd think that even you'd be inclined to say that this is not a topic in which your are either interested or particularly experienced.
> 
> 2. On every Intel CPU I've ever owned, locked or not, I've been able to manually adjust the multipliers up to (or well below) the maximum turbo frequency. Whether or not this is efficacious any longer, I don't know as I'm not particularly interested in Coffee Lake. MCE is like the XMP of Turbo pinning; it's not engaging any behaviour disallowed by Intel, it's just providing a simple toggle for lazy people and idiots.
Click to expand...

Your calling me lazy.







I like settings that are easy so I can play with my Bios and flash set it back to easy overclocking when Im done.


----------



## peter2k

Not sure what's everyones gripe about MCE

It's useless if you do things by hand
It's borderline useless if you have a K CPU, in this instance it's use comes for people who don't want to overclock but leave settings at auto
Which number in legion









Most usefull it would be for locked CPU's
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Gigabyte does not have MCE. Only turbo multipliers for all of the cores and multiplier.


Depending on how locked down the non K CPU's are it is MCE all in but name

All it really does is Sync all cores to max multiplier

Don't think those times when MCE could boost *beyond* normal multipliers are coming back
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ih2try*
> 
> What is MCE ? How does it affect performance ?


Intel chips boost to certain frequencies

If only one core is stressed and the others are not really then one core gets boosted to 4.6 Ghz
If all cores are stressed then the max boost for all cores is 4.3Ghz

Now MCE, multi core enhancement, is a term I'm used to from Asus boards (like 3 generations at least for me)
If you leave everything on auto and have MCE on then all cores will be in sync and boosted to 4.6Ghz

Now I also had a Z97 board and a locked i5 (means not a K)
And MCE also let me choose a higher multiplier (I think 4 more) then what it was "allowed" to have

Like the slide showed
Partially unlocked and unlocked

I don't think those times will come back
And neither will BCLK OC'ing non K CPU's


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> [URL=https://www.hardocp.com/news/2017/10/06/intel_core_i58600k_overclocking_at_53ghz]https://www.hardocp.com/news/2017/10/06/intel_core_i58600k_overclocking_at_53ghz[/URL] [URL=https://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/10/05/intel_coffee_lake_core_i58600k_vs_7600k_at_5ghz_review]https://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/10/05/intel_coffee_lake_core_i58600k_vs_7600k_at_5ghz_review[/URL][/QUOTE]
> 1.428v seems quite high for 14nm++. Did they just do a mod similar to the 7740X (14nm+ ) for these chips?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Your calling me lazy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I like settings that are easy so I can play with my Bios and flash set it back to easy overclocking when Im done.
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, better than being an idiot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Things like XMP and MCE are fine if you're able to use them (in MCE's case that means applying an appropriate thermal solution) but a manually tuned system will always be best; it's just very time-consuming and involved.
Click to expand...

Id rather use my PC everyday then work on it everyday tweaking and crashing. I've been overclocking for 22 years and a easy overclocking brings sanity every good day of use. knock your self out for 2-6% improvement in performance.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Id rather use my PC everyday then work on it everyday tweaking and crashing. I've been overclocking for 22 years and a easy overclocking brings sanity every good day of use. knock your self out for 2-6% improvement in performance.


I will, thank you. My current system took about a week to get fully stable. I'd have to do the same routine even if I ran it bone-stock anyway (as I often bring home high-precision workloads), so I might as well get the extra performance.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> 1.428v seems quite high for 14nm++. Did they just do a mod similar to the 7740X (14nm+ ) for these chips?


No
Just trying to get 5.3 stable

no delid yet

So temp is an issue to get things stable
So you might need to pump in more voltage again trying to stabilize


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Id rather use my PC everyday then work on it everyday tweaking and crashing. I've been overclocking for 22 years and a easy overclocking brings sanity every good day of use. knock your self out for 2-6% improvement in performance.


Ya know
It's a hobby to some

And many might see it as more or less pointless

But seeing as this is an overclocker board, well I'm not arguing against bigger rims in a car tuning forum and they're usefulness

Just like HardOCP doing 1.4 something volt on a 6 core CPU
For fun and to see how far they can go
With and without delid


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ih2try*
> 
> What is MCE ? How does it affect performance ?


MCE is multi core enhancement, basically an Asus feature that allows a CPU to run all the cores at turbo boost speed instead of just one


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Id rather use my PC everyday then work on it everyday tweaking and crashing. I've been overclocking for 22 years and a easy overclocking brings sanity every good day of use. knock your self out for 2-6% improvement in performance.
> 
> 
> 
> Ya know
> It's a hobby to some
> 
> And many might see it as more or less pointless
> 
> But seeing as this is an overclocker board, well I'm not arguing against bigger rims in a car tuning forum and they're usefulness
> 
> Just like HardOCP doing 1.4 something volt on a 6 core CPU
> For fun and to see how far they can go
> With and without delid
Click to expand...

I'm not making a statment about what folks do for fun, it's just over 22 years at this I'm tired of trying to figure out what causing program crashes and the only thing I have control of is hardware. So I play it safe with hardware then I know it is the software that is causing the problem.


----------



## ih2try

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Intel chips boost to certain frequencies
> 
> If only one core is stressed and the others are not really then one core gets boosted to 4.6 Ghz
> If all cores are stressed then the max boost for all cores is 4.3Ghz
> 
> Now MCE, multi core enhancement, is a term I'm used to from Asus boards (like 3 generations at least for me)
> If you leave everything on auto and have MCE on then all cores will be in sync and boosted to 4.6Ghz
> 
> Now I also had a Z97 board and a locked i5 (means not a K)
> And MCE also let me choose a higher multiplier (I think 4 more) then what it was "allowed" to have
> 
> Like the slide showed
> Partially unlocked and unlocked
> 
> I don't think those times will come back
> And neither will BCLK OC'ing non K CPU's


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> MCE is multi core enhancement, basically an Asus feature that allows a CPU to run all the cores at turbo boost speed instead of just one


Thanks guys.
Btw, I'm surprised that this thread discusses everything about i7 8700k but the fact that it runs dangerously hot (92*C in Linus' video, with the corsair H115i under df speed). The chip is not only on par with Ryzen 7 in productivity performance but also the best for gaming, best of both worlds and that's expected. But how dare anyone build a system with that chip knowing it runs that hot ? That issue alone is enough to put everything else in shadow.
My x58 rig is dying, I skipped skylake and kabylake waiting for cofee lake, i don't like ryzen 7's gaming performance and its problem with high speed ram. Now i'm lost.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ih2try*
> 
> Thanks guys.
> Btw, I'm surprised that this thread discusses everything about i7 8700k but the fact that it runs dangerously hot (92*C in Linus' video, with the corsair H115i under df speed). The chip is not only on par with Ryzen 7 in productivity performance but also the best for gaming, best of both worlds and that's expected. But how dare anyone build a system with that chip knowing it runs that hot ? That issue alone is enough to put everything else in shadow.
> My x58 rig is dying, I skipped skylake and kabylake waiting for cofee lake, i don't like ryzen 7's gaming performance and its problem with high speed ram. Now i'm lost.


That is why most of us delid our CPU's


----------



## ih2try

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> That is why most of us delid our CPU's


Yeah I'm also surprised that that guy from Gamers Nexus made it in his i7 8700k review as if it was something absolutely normal to do with a $300-$400 cpu. He even broked one of his i9 chip to learn how to apply liquid metal properly. If you wanna improve the temp of a cpu that turns out to run hotter than you expected, you have to delid it, but would you have still bought it knowing that it would run hot ?
I also wonder about the effect delidding in longevity. Will liquid metal and the paste that you use to re-lid the cpu wear out after a while and you have to delid it again to fix that ? I'm not afraid of voiding warranty but having to maintain cpu after delidding is not something I have time for.


----------



## e-gate

So is 8700K run dangerously hot at stock speeds? Multi Core Enhancement is not a stock configuration but an OC profile from specific motherboards. MCE also applies automatic Vcore and auto settings are the worst as we know.
Does 8700K run that hot at Intel's rated stock speeds?


----------



## lombardsoup

'Stock TIM with liquid metal' Sigh. For that price, 8700k should ship soldered.

Doesn't liquid metal harden around a six month period? If they are making a new IHS I don't get why they don't solder. Way easier and cheaper than making a silver IHS. Just use indium foil and melt it on with a heat gun.


----------



## ih2try

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *e-gate*
> 
> So is 8700K run dangerously hot at stock speeds? Multi Core Enhancement is not a stock configuration but an OC profile from specific motherboards. MCE also applies automatic Vcore and auto settings are the worst as we know.
> Does 8700K run that hot at Intel's rated stock speeds?




And that is in an environment where the i7 7700k runs at just 71*C, I've never seen it running below 81*C without delidding.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ih2try*
> 
> Yeah I'm also surprised that that guy from Gamers Nexus made it in his i7 8700k review as if it was something absolutely normal to do with a $300-$400 cpu. He even broked one of his i9 chip to learn how to apply liquid metal properly. If you wanna improve the temp of a cpu that turns out to run hotter than you expected, you have to delid it, but would you have still bought it knowing that it would run hot ?
> I also wonder about the effect delidding in longevity. Will liquid metal and the paste that you use to re-lid the cpu wear out after a while and you have to delid it again to fix that ? I'm not afraid of voiding warranty but having to maintain cpu after delidding is not something I have time for.


Reality is most of us pretty much know that a delid is necessary these days if you want to get the most out of your CPU and get decent temps, each generation is getting hotter and hotter i dont see that ending anytime soon. Delid will void your Intel warranty but if you buy a speed binned CPU from Silicon lottery or caseking you get a warranty from them instead. In all the time that I have had a delided CPU I have never had to replace the liquid ultra that was originally applied, according to Silicon lottery they have never had to replace the liquid ultra on any of their customers CPU's







What I would like to see Intel do is cover deliding with their performance tuning plan warranty, as a good public relation gesture to at least appease some of its customers.


----------



## stefxyz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ih2try*
> 
> Thanks guys.
> Btw, I'm surprised that this thread discusses everything about i7 8700k but the fact that it runs dangerously hot (92*C in Linus' video, with the corsair H115i under df speed). The chip is not only on par with Ryzen 7 in productivity performance but also the best for gaming, best of both worlds and that's expected. But how dare anyone build a system with that chip knowing it runs that hot ? That issue alone is enough to put everything else in shadow.
> My x58 rig is dying, I skipped skylake and kabylake waiting for cofee lake, i don't like ryzen 7's gaming performance and its problem with high speed ram. Now i'm lost.


What are you saying here? Coffee Lake is cooler at stock speeds and OC on average betetr than Kaby Lake and thats what all the bars are saying too. Thats why no one complains about it. The rerason is rumored to be a better thermal paste.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lombardsoup*
> 
> 'Stock TIM with liquid metal' Sigh. For that price, 8700k should ship soldered.
> 
> Doesn't liquid metal harden around a six month period? If they are making a new IHS I don't get why they don't solder. Way easier and cheaper than making a silver IHS. Just use indium foil and melt it on with a heat gun.


No it stays liquid

It hardens out for some, because it's reacting with something else
And that something is usually copper

If the surfaces are Nickel plated then it stays liquid
The IHS is plated, and the die of the CPU doesn't react with it either

Now
Does silver mean better temps?
Probably not really

Using without any IHS gives usually around 4 degrees better temps compared to a delid
There are waterblocks made out of silver, those usually improve temps by low single digit values
The handful of test I remember, of which there aren't many at all, showed something like 3 degrees

Relatively far away from the 10 degrees caseking is claiming
Ehh
Marketing speak

Why don't they solder?
No one has done such a thing I think
But using the LM and glueing it back together people have experience with
So much so that they give out a replacement guarantee on it

Besides
If you're using a heat gun you could damage the CPU, or warp the IHS

It's not something that should be done and masse by hand (well relativly)

It's something that needs to be done by the manufacturer having the right tools at hand

But Intel never stated why they don't use solder any more
Maybe it does warp the IHS a bit
Having to Mapp an IHS was not that uncommon

Or maybe it is like we all think and it's just cheaper this way


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stefxyz*
> 
> What are you saying here? Coffee Lake is cooler at stock speeds and OC on average betetr than Kaby Lake and thats what all the bars are saying too. Thats why no one complains about it. The rerason is rumored to be a better thermal paste.


Or it's the 14++ process which is supposed to deliver better frequency with lower voltages

And still
No paste can be as good as solder
Only LM is as good, most likely because it's metal as well, just like solder









Also
As long as you run things at the value Intel wants you to, means 4.3 Ghz with all cores at 100%, then it will not run hotter
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Reality is most of us pretty much know that a delid is necessary these days if you want to get the most out of your CPU and get decent temps, each generation is getting hotter and hotter i dont see that ending anytime soon. Delid will void your Intel warranty but if you buy a speed binned CPU from Silicon lottery or caseking you get a warranty from them instead. In all the time that I have had a delided CPU I have never had to replace the liquid ultra that was originally applied, according to Silicon lottery they have never had to replace the liquid ultra on any of their customers CPU's
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What I would like to see Intel do is cover deliding with their performance tuning plan warranty, as a good public relation gesture to at least appease some of its customers.


What I would like to see is either returning to solder
Or
Sell the K line without gluing the IHS on

At least then after market cooling companies would have a big enough audience of customers to make mounting options available using no IHS


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Or it's the 14++ process which is supposed to deliver better frequency with lower voltages
> 
> And still
> No paste can be as good as solder
> Only LM is as good, most likely because it's metal as well, just like solder
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also
> As long as you run things at the value Intel wants you to, means 4.3 Ghz with all cores at 100%, then it will not run hotter
> What I would like to see is either returning to solder
> Or
> Sell the K line without gluing the IHS on
> 
> At least then after market cooling companies would have a big enough audience of customers to make mounting options available using no IHS


The problem is, Intel will not cover warranty once the IHS is off, it is extremely selfish on their part and I wish they will lose more shares for their arrogant decision.

Zen 2 please crush them!


----------



## bl4ckdot

Would you guys buy a 3600c15 RAM kit and call it a day or a 4000+ ?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Would you guys buy a 3600c15 RAM kit and call it a day or a 4000+ ?


To go along with you're 8700k

the 3600 is enough considering the uptick in price
On top of that DDR4 prices are inflated at the moment

And
Intel does not benefit as much from better RAM speed as Ryzen does
3600 is quite enough

If you want, you could still manually fine tune the speed as well


----------



## Lass3

Have you found any 8700K vs 8600K clock for clock gaming benches


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Have you found any 8700K vs 8600K clock for clock gaming benches


You mean locked at the same frequency right?


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> You mean locked at the same frequency right?


Yep. Seeing the i5-8400 do so well makes me wonder what the i5-8600K can do clock for clock *in gaming* compared to 8700K. Also taking into consideration that the i5 is like 15-20C cooler. For non-delidders especially important, as the i5 may be able to reach ~200 MHz higher than the i7-8700K.

Scary to see Linus get 92C load temps using 280mm AIO on the 8700K stock haha


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Would you guys buy a 3600c15 RAM kit and call it a day or a 4000+ ?


All B-die chips from 3333+ are 4000+ capable dependent on MB, timings and some optimizations...
So no problem grabbing even 3000 or 3200 c14 models with the right chips to complete OC in less than 1.5v from 4000+ cl14/15/16/17


----------



## stefxyz

Was asked probably 100 times already but how can you completely be sure to buy a B die?


----------



## peter2k

As far as I know you can't tell for sure without having it in your board and checking

However
It's very likely if it's of a fast speed and low timings

Like 3200 CL14; beyond 3200, like 3400 CL15 it should be B-dies


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> As far as I know you can't tell for sure without having it in your board and checking
> 
> However
> It's very likely if it's of a fast speed and low timings
> 
> Like 3200 CL14; beyond 3200, like 3400 CL15 it should be B-dies


Yes that is a good indicator.

Not sure about 3600/CL16 tho

Prices are going up daily on DDR4 tho... damn


----------



## jpm888

Ugh

We have to wait until december before stock of 8700ks arrives in the Philippines.

Good thing i didnt impulsively sel my 7700k


----------



## stefxyz

I ordered a binned one with silver HS and guaranteed 5200 mhz Thursday very close to launch. I hope to have one of the first charge. Will happily post some results here. The cpu will get a dedicated 560mm Radiator in push pull and the Pascal Titan will get a seperate loop on the other 560mm rad.


----------



## Timur Born

I am just trying the Auto Curate function of Photoshop Elements on my whole library. It only uses 2 CPU cores and thus takes its time.

Meanwhile I am testing various other photo management applications with face recognition, but most of those I tested yet only make use of a single CPU core during image analysis, too. Photo Bounce seems to use up to four cores for face recognition, though.

Two more applications to test, but it looks like single- and dual-thread processing is still the norm for image applications (including most simple viewers I tested).

So the highest single/dual core CPU is still the one to get for photo stuff.


----------



## gigafloppy

The i5-8400 really is an impressive budget gaming CPU. You'll often get i7 performance for less money than an i5 used to cost.


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stefxyz*
> 
> I ordered a binned one with silver HS and guaranteed 5200 mhz Thursday very close to launch. I hope to have one of the first charge. Will happily post some results here. The cpu will get a dedicated 560mm Radiator in push pull and the Pascal Titan will get a seperate loop on the other 560mm rad.


from OCUK? I know they are selling binned 5.2ghz 8700k for £799 / $1045

EDIT : ahh you mean this one? https://www.caseking.de/der8auer-core-i7-8700k-5-2-ghz-ultra-edition-cpbu-162.html

its very tempting!


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> from OCUK? I know they are selling binned 5.2ghz 8700k for £799 / $1045
> 
> EDIT : ahh you mean this one? https://www.caseking.de/der8auer-core-i7-8700k-5-2-ghz-ultra-edition-cpbu-162.html
> 
> its very tempting!


Cause they can.


----------



## TMatzelle60

With the 8700 non k i guess when gaming turbo boost will be used if the game uses 1 core it will boost to 4.6ghz which is pretty good?


----------



## Timur Born

You hardly ever see a CPU using only one core. There are too many background processes running that keep other cores busy, too. More aggressive core parking can help or manually shoving processes to specific cores.


----------



## TMatzelle60

would a 8700 be a stupid buy for use in a case like this http://www.lazer3d.com/product/lz7/

Also will it be good for gaming and be pretty top end for 1080P paired with a 1070


----------



## HAL900

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> With the 8700 non k i guess when gaming turbo boost will be used if the game uses 1 core it will boost to 4.6ghz which is pretty good?


Today turbo does not exist. This cpu in games will have 4.3GHZ


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> would a 8700 be a stupid buy for use in a case like this http://www.lazer3d.com/product/lz7/
> 
> Also will it be good for gaming and be pretty top end for 1080P paired with a 1070


It'll be good enough really

Now a game that may tax only 1 core might not exist any more

That being said, the more cores/threads are being used the less the higher freqnecy matters

Also most manufacturers have something like the Asus multi core enhancement
In such a case all cores would boost to 4.6 (or wait, the non K has a smaller boost steps I think) Ghz
But I think only on Z boards
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> Today turbo does not exist. This cpu in games will have 4.3GHZ


I'd wager on any Asus board with a Z370 if all things left on auto it would most likely boost all cores higher

Ahh here we go


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> would a 8700 be a stupid buy for use in a case like this http://www.lazer3d.com/product/lz7/
> 
> Also will it be good for gaming and be pretty top end for 1080P paired with a 1070


It would be bad for gaming, get a clue.


----------



## HAL900

peter2k
Nope 4.3 or 4.6 but in 10-15 years game


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> It would be bad for gaming, get a clue.


I'm guessing you mean the case?


----------



## kd5151

No stock


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> peter2k
> Nope 4.3 or 4.6 but in 10-15 years game


No idea what that means really with the years

If you're referring to using many cores
BF1 can do that today

If you mean overriding Intel's boosting steps, my old z97 Sabertooth was able to do that on a non K i5


----------



## HAL900

peter2k

ok ok. 4.4 or 4.3




end of story


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> from OCUK? I know they are selling binned 5.2ghz 8700k for £799 / $1045
> 
> EDIT : ahh you mean this one? https://www.caseking.de/der8auer-core-i7-8700k-5-2-ghz-ultra-edition-cpbu-162.html
> 
> its very tempting!


That's probably not even the best binned chip even on a 240m AIO. At least they provided a lapped silver IHS vs an unlapped nickel plated copper IHS.
https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/lapped-my-fx-8350-4-3ghz-oced-temps-lowered-by-9%C2%B0c.2300800/
Also liquid metal gets a few degrees lower than solder ( 86.0w/m-k for pure indium ).


----------



## kevindd992002

Any news if Amazon will have the 8700K for pre-order again? I just decided that I wanna buy it now even if it's a little bit overpriced at $370.


----------



## guppysb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Any news if Amazon will have the 8700K for pre-order again? I just decided that I wanna buy it now even if it's a little bit overpriced at $370.


I have no idea. I managed to preorder with Amazon on Friday, and there's no indication if they've shipped yet.


----------



## looniam

this might help


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







keep checking

https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/processors/intel/


----------



## Morti

So it looks like it will be the other way around: Ryzen CPUs included for free inside video game boxes if not just with a pack of corn flakes. Intel pushed AMD so hard that their top Ryzen 1800X will go against i3's. Evem i5-8400 wrecks all AMD lineup so hard.

And 8600K will almost certainly be the next 2500K, gaming CPU for 7 years to play.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Morti*
> 
> And 8600K will almost certainly be the next 2500K, gaming CPU for 9 months to play.


FTFY

Intel to drop the 8 core consumer chip next year on yet another chipset...


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> FTFY
> 
> Intel to drop the 8 core consumer chip next year on yet another chipset...


How do you think they will price that CPU? Make a tier higher than 8700K and price it s $469?


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Intel to drop the 8 core consumer chip next year on yet another chipset...


Where does it say 8-core?


----------



## Morti

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> FTFY
> 
> Intel to drop the 8 core consumer chip next year on yet another chipset...


So what? 8-core won't have much use in gaming anyway apart from streaming/recording where it matters. Game devs will take some time to switch from 4 to 6 core optimization which they'll do since Intel went to 6 in mainstream.

That's one consolation that Ryzen 1600 will be superior to Kaby Late quads in those games, but time will show how many of those will come out. Some (especially crappy MMOs) still run on 2-3 cores today.


----------



## stefxyz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> from OCUK? I know they are selling binned 5.2ghz 8700k for £799 / $1045
> 
> EDIT : ahh you mean this one? https://www.caseking.de/der8auer-core-i7-8700k-5-2-ghz-ultra-edition-cpbu-162.html
> 
> its very tempting!


Yes this time around I will cheat the lottery and just go for it. Its also good quality work and I am happy to pay for that.

Dinner is already prepared







:

https://www.facebook.com/Der8auerEcc/photos/a.384088938335130.93334.372492366161454/1544576838952995/?type=3&theater


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> How do you think they will price that CPU? Make a tier higher than 8700K and price it s $469?


Will likely replace the current offerings similar to how coffee lake replaced its predecessor and we will likely have a price increase on top chip similar to Coffee Lake. This is all speculation, Intel could just as well introduce an i9 lineup for the mainstream platform as well








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> Where does it say 8-core?


Was leaked by Eurocom support a month ago...



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Morti*
> 
> So what? 8-core won't have much use in gaming anyway apart from streaming/recording where it matters. Game devs will take some time to switch from 4 to 6 core optimization which they'll do since Intel went to 6 in mainstream.


Do you always contradict yourself?


----------



## kd5151

Intel really want to kill its own 7820x.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Will likely replace the current offerings similar to how coffee lake replaced its predecessor and we will likely have a price increase on top chip similar to Coffee Lake. This is all speculation, Intel could just as well introduce an i9 lineup for the mainstream platform as well
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Was leaked by Eurocom support a month ago...
> 
> 
> Do you always contradict yourself?


The ideal thing would be.

Pentium - 4C
Core i3 - 4C/8T
Core i5 - 6C/8T
Core i7 - 8C/16T

What will most likely happen is:

Core i3 - 4C
Core i5 - 6C
Core i7 - 6C/12T
Core i9 - 8C/16T - New Tier and New Price.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> The ideal thing would be.
> 
> Pentium - 4C
> Core i3 - 4C/8T
> Core i5 - 6C/*12T*
> Core i7 - 8C/16T
> 
> What will most likely happen is:
> 
> Core i3 - 4C
> Core i5 - 6C
> Core i7 - 6C/12T
> Core i9 - 8C/16T - New Tier and New Price.


FTFY

The outcome really depends on AMD. If Zen 2 ends up matching Ice Lake IPC and/or if AMD moves to a 6 core CCX then the former otherwise the latter.


----------



## TahoeDust

We need someone with a 8700 to enable MCE, confirm that all cores are running 4.6GHz, check the voltage and the temps.


----------



## HAL900

Maybe on Monday I will confirm


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> Maybe on Monday I will confirm


----------



## czin125

Is it not possible for the 8700K to just be a 1.5x7700K (14nm+ ) with a 7740X tweak to it? Given the 7980XE die and the 7900X die share the same core design and clocks the same with sufficient cooling.

Apparently the 7740X can run as low as 1.275v for a 5.4ghz OC. The 8350K should be capable of beating the 7740X, right? Since the core design is the same but supposedly newer process node?
https://scontent.fhen1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/21462584_10203850980071677_2926759224231119185_n.jpg?oh=a3f79e8b21d7be659ed4ad911267d73f&oe=5A558679


----------



## PontiacGTX

so is there any review with a R9 Fury (X)/RX 480/580 as GPU?


----------



## looniam

i'm sure there is some idiot on you tube that likes gpu bottlenecks . . . .


----------



## PontiacGTX

not if you play with a driver which is cpu limited to a core


----------



## looniam

news flash!

the ipc is the same.

this is not the driver magic you are looking for.


----------



## damtachoa

The I7 8700K is my next build since almost 5 years I7 3770K.


----------



## PontiacGTX

I am not looking for a driver. it is about a cpu comparison as simple as that if Ryzen or Skylake perform better using AMD GPUs


----------



## looniam

well i suppose you might have to wait until i3s are reviewed - i would expect ~RX 480/580s to be used then, not high(er) end mainsteam DT chips. a vega 56/64 would be more appropriate for those.

and yeah a shame there are none.


----------



## kd5151

Source:http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-cpu,5252-4.html

We generated some odd performance results with Intel's Core i7-8700. Despite more conservative specifications and a lower price, it outperformed the flagship Core i7-8700K in some of our gaming benchmarks. We verified our numbers on motherboards from different vendors, and those vendors confirmed that they're seeing what we see.
Initially, our attention turned to Turbo Boost, based on observations from Core i9-7980XE and its unpredictable behavior. But after careful analysis with multiple utilities, we believe the Turbo Boost algorithms are working correctly for both processors.
After recording higher package and core power consumption on the 65W Core i7-8700 compared to Intel's 95W -8700K in certain situations, we also reached out to Intel for comment. Once we have some answers, you can be sure we'll post our findings.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Source:http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-cpu,5252-4.html
> 
> We generated some odd performance results with Intel's Core i7-8700. Despite more conservative specifications and a lower price, it outperformed the flagship Core i7-8700K in some of our gaming benchmarks. We verified our numbers on motherboards from different vendors, and those vendors confirmed that they're seeing what we see.
> Initially, our attention turned to Turbo Boost, based on observations from Core i9-7980XE and its unpredictable behavior. But after careful analysis with multiple utilities, we believe the Turbo Boost algorithms are working correctly for both processors.
> After recording higher package and core power consumption on the 65W Core i7-8700 compared to Intel's 95W -8700K in certain situations, we also reached out to Intel for comment. Once we have some answers, you can be sure we'll post our findings.


Between this and the fact that my chip was a near-dud overclocker, I feel like I wasted money.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Between this and the fact that my chip was a near-dud overclocker, I feel like I wasted money.


What chip ?


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> What chip ?


My 8700K


----------



## kd5151

Here's two more video's


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> My 8700K


What can I say except that I buy "binned" CPU's for a reason, by the time you outlay enough cash for lets say 5 CPU's and then bin them yourself, keep the best one and sell the rest as "used" you really have to question if it is worthwhile, all the while even then there is no guarantee you will score a really high (top 5%) chip







then there is another issue for those of us that have custom loops with hardline, try binning CPU's in that situation, really not worth it.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Here's two more video's
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Interesting, cheers. The 1300 looks to be in a bit of trouble without adjustments. The 1400 looks alright, 1500X looks fine, and potentially better with a price drop. IMO, the locked i7's are the showstoppers for Coffee Lake in terms of value. I expect that most of the Ryzen range will see further price-cuts to better compete, but you're really spoiled for options in the $300 and under CPU tier right now.


----------



## rbarrett96

Is there a particular site you buy binned CPUs on or just like ebay?


----------



## looniam

Just how hot is Coffee Lake?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rbarrett96*
> 
> Is there a particular site you buy binned CPUs on or just like ebay?


Personally I have bought "binned" CPU's from Silicon lottery for the past 3 generations, all have performed as advertised and one performed even better than advertised, all delided by them so no risk to me as far as damage goes, very reputable company


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Morti*
> 
> So what? 8-core won't have much use in gaming anyway apart from streaming/recording where it matters. Game devs will take some time to switch from 4 to 6 core optimization which they'll do since Intel went to 6 in mainstream.
> 
> That's one consolation that Ryzen 1600 will be superior to Kaby Late quads in those games, but time will show how many of those will come out. Some (especially crappy MMOs) still run on 2-3 cores today.


That is where I see you being wrong... with both manufacturers having 6+ core processors in the mainstream flagship slots as of right now... and 8 cores guaranteed within the next 12-18 months, I think game developers are going to start utilizing 4+ cores much sooner than you might imagine... I'd say in as little as 18-30 months we could, and honestly should, see a significant shift in the number of titles capable to take advantage of the additional cores and threads that now saturate the mainstream processor range.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> so is there any review with a R9 Fury (X)/RX 480/580 as GPU?


Not too long ago JayzTwoCents was going to do that for his 5 years of GPUs comparison, but with virtually all AMD cards being swallowed up by miners it still hasn't come to fruition.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> That is where I see you being wrong... with both manufacturers having 6+ core processors in the mainstream flagship slots as of right now... and 8 cores guaranteed within the next 12-18 months, I think game developers are going to start utilizing 4+ cores much sooner than you might imagine... I'd say in as little as 18-30 months we could, and honestly should, see a significant shift in the number of titles capable to take advantage of the additional cores and threads that now saturate the mainstream processor range.


For most of us the HEDT platform is a complete waste of money, unless you are a content creator. HEDT is a server based platform and has always been one generation behind mainstream due to the extra validation involved


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Just how hot is Coffee Lake?


Got MCE?
















Hot!


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> What can I say except that I buy "binned" CPU's for a reason, by the time you outlay enough cash for lets say 5 CPU's and then bin them yourself, keep the best one and sell the rest as "used" you really have to question if it is worthwhile, all the while even then there is no guarantee you will score a really high (top 5%) chip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> then there is another issue for those of us that have custom loops with hardline, try binning CPU's in that situation, really not worth it.


I wouldn't do either of those things. You people are crazy. Almost every single chip can hit 4.7GHz on all cores, and most can hit 4.9GHz like mine (It can actually hit 5GHz but the heat is a bit too high to justify the gain). I don't see the point. Pretty much every chip can hit 5GHz and beyond with a delid as well.

That said, I think I got VID and Vcore confused so I might be able to hit 5GHz at 1.39V safely, which isn't the worst but obviously isn't great. I'm afraid to test it though since the VID in HWiNFO64 reports spikes to 1.5V and that's terrifying.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> I wouldn't do either of those things. You people are crazy. Almost every single chip can hit 4.7GHz on all cores, and most can hit 4.9GHz like mine (It can actually hit 5GHz but the heat is a bit too high to justify the gain). I don't see the point. Pretty much every chip can hit 5GHz and beyond with a delid as well.
> 
> That said, I think I got VID and Vcore confused so I might be able to hit 5GHz at 1.39V safely, which isn't the worst but obviously isn't great. I'm afraid to test it though since the VID in HWiNFO64 reports spikes to 1.5V and that's terrifying.


Crazy, maybe but given single threaded performance is more relevant these days given the fact IPC gains haven't been there and most of what general P.C users actually use their computers for is mostly single threaded, clockspeed is still king. I have no issue with mainstream platform getting more cores so long as it is not at the expense of clockspeed which so far it hasn't been. Take Kaby for example the worst were around 4.7 and the best around 5.3Ghz, 600Mhz is about 12% difference in performance. Dont make the mistake of thinking the Kaby Lake chart on these forums is a true indication of what clock speeds people have actually achieved, those with bad chips wouldn't have bothered even trying to chart their chips so the "average" overclock is miss leading.


----------



## rbarrett96

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Personally I have bought "binned" CPU's from Silicon lottery for the past 3 generations, all have performed as advertised and one performed even better than advertised, all delided by them so no risk to me as far as damage goes, very reputable company


So how much more do you generally pay for a binned CPU over MSRP?


----------



## rbarrett96

There is never going to be a perfect architecture for me especially for gaming. I waited for Ryzen and single core performance sucks for gaming and has few PCI-e lanes. Now Coffee lake gives me everything I want (not sure about the PCI-e lanes inclueding mobo) except you can cook an egg on it. I live in Miami and temps are a very real concern in the summer. Same reason I haven't gotten an AMD GPU in a while either.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rbarrett96*
> 
> There is never going to be a perfect architecture for me especially for gaming. I waited for Ryzen and single core performance sucks for gaming and has few PCI-e lanes. Now Coffee lake gives me everything I want (not sure about the PCI-e lanes inclueding mobo) except you can cook an egg on it. I live in Miami and temps are a very real concern in the summer. Same reason I haven't gotten an AMD GPU in a while either.


Yeah there is never a perfect CPU but there are CPUs which you can buy that do really well for the next 5 years. I am holding for as long as I can. Really want to see more than just Skylake IPC in 2017/2018.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rbarrett96*
> 
> So how much more do you generally pay for a binned CPU over MSRP?


~ $60 for 7700K.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rbarrett96*
> 
> So how much more do you generally pay for a binned CPU over MSRP?


Depends on what "bin" you are willing to pay for, that said top bin which usually around top 5% expect to pay double MSRP. But you still get a warranty after being delided which you currently cant get any other way and to be totally honest is necessary with modern CPU's getting hotter and hotter, if you want maximum performance. Im not suggesting it is worth it for everyone, but for some of us it is worth it, especially if you have never won the silicon lottery in any other way.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> What can I say except that I buy "binned" CPU's for a reason, by the time you outlay enough cash for lets say 5 CPU's and then bin them yourself, keep the best one and sell the rest as "used" you really have to question if it is worthwhile, all the while even then there is no guarantee you will score a really high (top 5%) chip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> then there is another issue for those of us that have custom loops with hardline, try binning CPU's in that situation, really not worth it.


I'm not paying $50-100 extra for a few more MHz lmao. That said, I think I got VID and Vcore confused so I might be able to hit 5GHz at 1.39V safely, which isn't the worst but obviously isn't great. I'm afraid to test it though since the VID in HWiNFO64 reports spikes to 1.5V and that's terrifying.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Crazy, maybe but given single threaded performance is more relevant these days given the fact IPC gains haven't been there and most of what general P.C users actually use their computers for is mostly single threaded, clockspeed is still king. I have no issue with mainstream platform getting more cores so long as it is not at the expense of clockspeed which so far it hasn't been. Take Kaby for example the worst were around 4.7 and the best around 5.3Ghz, 600Mhz is about 12% difference in performance. Dont make the mistake of thinking the Kaby Lake chart on these forums is a true indication of what clock speeds people have actually achieved, those with bad chips wouldn't have bothered even trying to chart their chips so the "average" overclock is miss leading.


I mean, with my bad luck I'm still at 4.9GHz @ 1.35V. The number of people who can't get higher than 4.7GHz with good cooling is going to be very small, so I don't see the point in paying 30% more for a maximum 12% performance gain. Just buy any old chip and delid it, and you'll probably get 5GHz or better.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Source:http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-cpu,5252-4.html
> 
> We generated some odd performance results with Intel's Core i7-8700. Despite more conservative specifications and a lower price, it outperformed the flagship Core i7-8700K in some of our gaming benchmarks. We verified our numbers on motherboards from different vendors, and those vendors confirmed that they're seeing what we see.
> Initially, our attention turned to Turbo Boost, based on observations from Core i9-7980XE and its unpredictable behavior. But after careful analysis with multiple utilities, we believe the Turbo Boost algorithms are working correctly for both processors.
> After recording higher package and core power consumption on the 65W Core i7-8700 compared to Intel's 95W -8700K in certain situations, we also reached out to Intel for comment. Once we have some answers, you can be sure we'll post our findings.
> 
> 
> 
> Between this and the fact that my chip was a near-dud overclocker, I feel like I wasted money.
Click to expand...

What did you get for overclock on the i7 8700k?


----------



## Hueristic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> Or just buy the best product that fits your needs and budget with 0 loyalty to some huge corporation that views you as less than a rounding error.


Which is the reason why you have no competitors to wally world anymore.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skafo*
> 
> Yeah each to their own. But imo that's plain stupid. I'm no welfare, just like neither Intel nor AMD are. They're profit oriented companies (despite the popular belief AMD is everyones buddy and Intel is the evil incarnate). Why would I buy either ones product when the other is better? I thought about buying a new CPU earlier this year and would have gotten a 1600X because it was just the more appealing offer. If Intel does have the better offer within my budget when I actually need and want a new CPU I will buy theirs. And I'm aware "if one dies the other has a monopoly" but frankly that's how things work, it's not my job as a customer to support a struggeling company by buying their inferior products, it's their job to not produce products that are so inferior they are struggeling.
> 
> Besides, with all the "Intel is beaten", "Intel is dead" and what not headlines, shouldn't we buy Intel now by that logic?


Because thats why we can't have nice things.









Or at least not at a decent price that the average Joe can afford. If both company's supply a chip that suits my needs I'll support the one that hasn't been hosing me.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> For most of us the HEDT platform is a complete waste of money, unless you are a content creator. HEDT is a server based platform and has always been one generation behind mainstream due to the extra validation involved


Dude... the i7 -7700K, 8700k etc is the mainstream flagship... not HEDT. Ryzen 7 is mainstream flagship, not HEDT.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> I'm not paying $50-100 extra for a few more MHz lmao. That said, I think I got VID and Vcore confused so I might be able to hit 5GHz at 1.39V safely, which isn't the worst but obviously isn't great. I'm afraid to test it though since the VID in HWiNFO64 reports spikes to 1.5V and that's terrifying.
> I mean, with my bad luck I'm still at 4.9GHz @ 1.35V. The number of people who can't get higher than 4.7GHz with good cooling is going to be very small, so I don't see the point in paying 30% more for a maximum 12% performance gain. Just buy any old chip and delid it, and you'll probably get 5GHz or better.


Im not interested in having an argument with you about this, there is no right or wrong in this, for some people it is not worth buying a binned chip and for some people it is worth buying one, everyone has a different usage scenario, for those of us that do a bit of benchmarking that few % makes a big difference in scores, for others having a warranty after deliding it is worth the peace of mind, once you go 5Ghz and beyond you simply cant go back to anything below that magical figure


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> Dude... the i7 -7700K, 8700k etc is the mainstream flagship... not HEDT. Ryzen 7 is mainstream flagship, not HEDT.


Really? I didn't know that







I was simply trying to point out that having more cores is not always beneficial to every type of user that's all.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Im not interested in having an argument with you about this, there is no right or wrong in this, for some people it is not worth buying a binned chip and for some people it is worth buying one, everyone has a different usage scenario, for those of us that do a bit of benchmarking that few % makes a big difference in scores, for others having a warranty after deliding it is worth the peace of mind, once you go 5Ghz and beyond you simply cant go back to anything below that magical figure


Fair enough. I just feel that 5GHz is consistent enough on its own.


----------



## Liranan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> I wouldn't do either of those things. You people are crazy. Almost every single chip can hit 4.7GHz on all cores, and most can hit 4.9GHz like mine (It can actually hit 5GHz but the heat is a bit too high to justify the gain). I don't see the point. Pretty much every chip can hit 5GHz and beyond with a delid as well.
> 
> That said, I think I got VID and Vcore confused so I might be able to hit 5GHz at 1.39V safely, which isn't the worst but obviously isn't great. I'm afraid to test it though since the VID in HWiNFO64 reports spikes to 1.5V and that's terrifying.
> 
> 
> 
> Crazy, maybe but *given single threaded performance is more relevant these days given the fact IPC gains haven't been there and most of what general P.C users actually use their computers for is mostly single threaded*, clockspeed is still king. I have no issue with mainstream platform getting more cores so long as it is not at the expense of clockspeed which so far it hasn't been. Take Kaby for example the worst were around 4.7 and the best around 5.3Ghz, 600Mhz is about 12% difference in performance. Dont make the mistake of thinking the Kaby Lake chart on these forums is a true indication of what clock speeds people have actually achieved, those with bad chips wouldn't have bothered even trying to chart their chips so the "average" overclock is miss leading.
Click to expand...

If this statement was true we would still be on single core CPU's with AMD and Intel trying to reach ever high gigglehertz. That you have bought an 8 core CPU and still don't understand what you have bought or what purpose it serves shows that you have no idea what you are talking about or are trying so hard to justify your purchase you are willing to make wild claims that haven't been true since the advent of dual cores.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Fair enough. I just feel that 5GHz is consistent enough on its own.


Agreed...5Ghz is becoming more common with later generation CPU's than in the past with the exception being Sandy


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Liranan*
> 
> If this statement was true we would still be on single core CPU's with AMD and Intel trying to reach ever high gigglehertz. That you have bought an 8 core CPU and still don't understand what you have bought or what purpose it serves shows that you have no idea what you are talking about or are trying so hard to justify your purchase you are willing to make wild claims that haven't been true since the advent of dual cores.


So you are suggesting that an 8 core chip with slower cores is always better than a 4 core chip with faster ones? For every type of user?


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Really? I didn't know that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was simply trying to point out that having more cores is not always beneficial to every type of user that's all.


Then reread the post you originally quoted. I was making the point that with the mainstream lines from AMD and Intel both now featuring 6 and cores core CPUs we'll very likely see developers that want a leg up on the competition begin adapting their development towards multiple core / thread optimization now, meaning in a couple years, we're likely to see a noticeable influx of titles launching with support for 6 and 8 core processors.


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> So you are suggesting that an 8 core chip with slower cores is always better than a 4 core chip with faster ones? For every type of user?


If so, I better get me a truckload of FX-8150 chips before they run out!


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> Then reread the post you originally quoted. I was making the point that with the mainstream lines from AMD and Intel both now featuring 6 and cores core CPUs we'll very likely see developers that want a leg up on the competition begin adapting their development towards multiple core / thread optimization now, meaning in a couple years, we're likely to see a noticeable influx of titles launching with support for 6 and 8 core processors.


Im not arguing that point about gaming developers, but P.C's are not only being used by gamers for gaming 24/7 I did state general purpose usage.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Just how hot is Coffee Lake?


Business as usual, need high end AIO to keep the chip cool if you don't delid. More of the same since Ivy...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Im not arguing that point about gaming developers, but P.C's are not only being used by gamers for gaming 24/7 I did state general purpose usage.


I am failing to grasp your argument. Would you care to elaborate?

On a side note, I am curious how K chips would be affected if both locked and unlocked chips were the same base and boost frequency. I am willing to wager most individuals who purchase unlocked chips don't acutally overclock and only purchase the unlocked chips because they run at higher frequencies than their unlocked counterparts.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Just how hot is Coffee Lake?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Business as usual, need high end AIO to keep the chip cool if you don't delid *when you add vcore.* More of the same since Ivy...
Click to expand...












Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Builders planning to cool the chip at stock speeds should certainly be able to get away with an inexpensive cooler like a Hyper 212 Evo, but those hoping for a Prime95-stable overclock without a delid and repaste need to budget for a substantial liquid cooler. In that sense, the i7-8700K is no different than the Core i7-6700K and Core i7-7700K before it, and it's definitely harder to cool than AMD's Ryzen CPUs.


----------



## czin125

https://d1ebmxcfh8bf9c.cloudfront.net/u4526/image_id_1913613.png

5930mhz at 1.536v for the 8700K ( higher clocks and lower voltage on 4dimm board )

5800mhz at 1.600v for the 7700K ( done on a 2dimm board )


----------



## Slomo4shO

Code:

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*


I apologize for the confusion. Overclocking was implied but not stated.

And yes, a cool 78 degrees at stock using a MasterAir Pro 4.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> https://d1ebmxcfh8bf9c.cloudfront.net/u4526/image_id_1913613.png
> 
> 5930mhz at 1.536v for the 8700K ( higher clocks and lower voltage on 4dimm board )
> 
> 5800mhz at 1.600v for the 7700K ( done on a 2dimm board )


There have been multiple claims of inacurate voltage readings on CPU-Z so take those results with a grain of salt...


----------



## looniam

with hitting 90c OCing w/AIO you can say 78c is the new 68c.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> https://d1ebmxcfh8bf9c.cloudfront.net/u4526/image_id_1913613.png
> 
> 5930mhz at 1.536v for the 8700K ( higher clocks and lower voltage on 4dimm board )
> 
> 5800mhz at 1.600v for the 7700K ( done on a 2dimm board )


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> There have been multiple claims of inacurate voltage readings on CPU-Z so take those results with a grain of salt...


Voltage readings askew or not, by what most people have found, even with the best binned chips thus far, is that the only way someone is gonna hit 5.8 - 5.9 Gigglehertz is on exotic cooling.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> Voltage readings askew or not, by what most people have found, even with the best binned chips thus far, is that the only way someone is gonna hit 5.8 - 5.9 Gigglehertz is on exotic cooling.


On water I would expect the very best 8700K's to hit 5.3 to 5.4Ghz same as 7700K at best, at least with any sort of stability and not just a CPU-Z validation screenshot.


----------



## z0ki

ROG Maximus X Formula and Apex are apparently due to release in the U.S/Canada in November.
I wonder if Australia will also have them then?

https://rog.asus.com/articles/maximus-motherboards/rog-introduces-new-z370-gaming-motherboards-for-coffee-lake/


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *z0ki*
> 
> ROG Maximus X Formula and Apex are apparently due to release in the U.S/Canada in November.
> I wonder if Australia will also have them then?
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/articles/maximus-motherboards/rog-introduces-new-z370-gaming-motherboards-for-coffee-lake/


Interesting usually these boards are released at the same time worldwide so yeah looks like November for us, as for getting a 8700K at that point???


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> On water I would expect the very best 8700K's to hit 5.3 to 5.4Ghz same as 7700K at best, at least with any sort of stability and not just a CPU-Z validation screenshot.


You have very high expectations dude. Best binned chips are delidded with exchanged IHS and 5.2Ghz tested on custom loops








In this thread you can see one owning a CPU where 5ghz are not possible. So better expect 5 to 5.1 if better...welcome. While seeing reviewers with binned ES is not the optimal approach to extrapolate retail CPU capabilities...
As for the discussion on the previous pages for SkylakeX tested Valley extremeHD 1080p8AA etc the influence of mesh and ram OC is 10-11% on the average FPS and 23% on the maximum FPS this with [email protected] and both MESH and RAM stock 2.4/2.4 and OC 3.2/4
Anyway just achieved my best result with 7800x awaiting some 8700k competition when arrive


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> You have very high expectations dude. Best binned chips are delidded with exchanged IHS and 5.2Ghz tested on custom loops
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In this thread you can see one owning a CPU where 5ghz are not possible. So better expect 5 to 5.1 if better...welcome. While seeing reviewers with binned ES is not the optimal approach to extrapolate retail CPU capabilities...
> As for the discussion on the previous pages for SkylakeX tested Valley extremeHD 1080p8AA etc the influence of mesh and ram OC is 10-11 on the average and 23% on the maximum FPS this with [email protected] and both MESH and RAM stock 2.4/2.4 and OC 3.2/4
> Anyway just achieved my best result with 7800x awaiting some 8700k competition when arrive


Im simply basing my expectations based on what we already know about Kaby, the best Kaby 7700K's were able to achieve 5.3 to 5.4Ghz on water, one that Im aware of was able to achieve 5.3Ghz stable at 1.36V without being delided


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Im simply basing my expectations based on what we already know about Kaby)


Don't







8700k has 50% more from everything


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Don't
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 8700k has 50% more from everything


50% more of everything doesn't seem to have translated into 50% more heat though, time will tell







5.3/[email protected] not delided post #2246
http://www.overclock.net/t/1519033/5-ghz-24-7-oc-club/2240


----------



## DStealth

No doubt for 7700k and yes 50% is not translating in 50% more heat but translate enough to be 100-200mhz behind based on thermal limitations of the die. Just telling you to reduce your expectation a little from "8700K's to hit 5.3 to 5.4Ghz" just not to have a frustration at some point.








Edit: Gonna quote myself in this part
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> In this thread you can see one owning a CPU where 5ghz are not possible. So better expect 5 to 5.1 *if better...welcome*. While seeing reviewers with binned ES is not the optimal approach to extrapolate retail CPU capabilities...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> No doubt for 7700k and yes 50% is not translating in 50% more heat but translate enough to be 100-200mhz behind based on thermal limitations of the die. Just telling you to reduce your expectation a little from "8700K's to hit 5.3 to 5.4Ghz" just not to have a frustration at some point.


I understand that more cores does equal more heat but it hasn't so far translated into a lot more heat than what 7700K produced, as it stands we only have a very small sample size of 8700K's to base any opinion on, I have seen a screenshot of a Coffee 8700K at 5.3Ghz but stability? Dont know the article didn't say. When I stated that the very best Kaby's were getting 5.3 to 5.4Ghz I was talking about top 0.5%, something Silicon lottery etc are unlikely to offer with Coffee







they didn't with Kaby.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

So what are we looking at temp-wise for an 8600k @ 4.7 with something like an NH-D15

I was hoping for only a slight vcore nudge


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> So what are we looking at temp-wise for an 8600k @ 4.7 with something like an NH-D15
> 
> I was hoping for only a slight vcore nudge


I thought one of the review managed a 5GHz with just a +80 mV nudge?


----------



## Liranan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Liranan*
> 
> If this statement was true we would still be on single core CPU's with AMD and Intel trying to reach ever high gigglehertz. That you have bought an 8 core CPU and still don't understand what you have bought or what purpose it serves shows that you have no idea what you are talking about or are trying so hard to justify your purchase you are willing to make wild claims that haven't been true since the advent of dual cores.
> 
> 
> 
> So you are suggesting that an 8 core chip with slower cores is always better than a 4 core chip with faster ones? For every type of user?
Click to expand...

Trying to obfuscate the discussion now? You were talking about how single threaded performance is all that matters yet now you bring in quad cores and octa cores into the discussion.

To answer your question: yes, four slower cores are better than 2 fast ones as has been proven already and we are entering the era in which 8 slower cores are better than 4 faster ones. If that were not the case then Intel's i5's would have consistently trumped AMD's FX line but they didn't. There are workloads that benefit from more cores over fewer cores, regardless of how fast they are.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Liranan*
> 
> Trying to obfuscate the discussion now? You were talking about how single threaded performance is all that matters yet now you bring in quad cores and octa cores into the discussion.
> 
> To answer your question: yes, four slower cores are better than 2 fast ones as has been proven already and we are entering the era in which 8 slower cores are better than 4 faster ones. If that were not the case then Intel's i5's would have consistently trumped AMD's FX line but they didn't. There are workloads that benefit from more cores over fewer cores, regardless of how fast they are.


So by that logic a 8 core 16 thread Ryzen is better than a 4 core 8 thread 7700K in gaming or any other application that doesn't utilise more than 4 cores ( I know some games do use more than 4 cores ) I never stated that more cores is not usefull in certain usage scenarios...enjoy your FX cores


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> I thought one of the review managed a 5GHz with just a +80 mV nudge?


isn't that stock voltage?



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> So what are we looking at temp-wise for an 8600k @ 4.7 with something like an NH-D15
> 
> I was hoping for only a slight vcore nudge


actually that looks quite good

Kyle at HardOCP had his 8600K at 5.1 Ghz running on air without a delid
now he needed to increase voltage for those speeds and sure it ran a bit toasty, but since it didn't have a delid, running Prime with AVX and your aiming for less frequency its quite promising

again thats on air, using AVX Prime, and no delid


https://hardforum.com/threads/intel-core-i5-8600k-overclock-at-5-2ghz-with-3600mhz-ram.1945332/page-2#post-1043256618


----------



## tknight

Ran Cinebench R15 on my 8700K at 5.3ghz on all cores at 1.39 volts and at 3600 XMP memory timings. The cpu is not delidded and I have hit the limit of the cpu temperature wise, as it peaked at 91-92 degrees during the run.


----------



## Yetyhunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Ran Cinebench R15 on my 8700K at 5.3ghz on all cores at 1.39 volts and at 3600 XMP memory timings. The cpu is not delidded and I have hit the limit of the cpu temperature wise, as it peaked at 91-92 degrees during the run.


You hit the jackpot with CPU. What cooling do you have ?


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yetyhunter*
> 
> You hit the jackpot with CPU. What cooling do you have ?


Custom water loop with an EK cpu water block, 480mm rad and a D5 pump.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Ran Cinebench R15 on my 8700K at 5.3ghz on all cores at 1.39 volts and at 3600 XMP memory timings. The cpu is not delidded and I have hit the limit of the cpu temperature wise, as it peaked at 91-92 degrees during the run.


Ambient temps?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Ran Cinebench R15 on my 8700K at 5.3ghz on all cores at 1.39 volts and at 3600 XMP memory timings. The cpu is not delidded and I have hit the limit of the cpu temperature wise, as it peaked at 91-92 degrees during the run.


Can you buy me a 8700K







you always seem to score the jackpot every generation, very nice 5.3Ghz! So it clocks much like Kaby...who would have thought


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Ambient temps?


Ambient temp was 22 degrees.


----------



## Yetyhunter

That explains it. I wonder how well will a DH-15 cool this CPU.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Can you buy me a 8700K
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you always seem to score the jackpot every generation, very nice 5.3Ghz! So it clocks much like Kaby...who would have thought


Lol just luck of the draw.

Yes it is very similar to Kabylake. but the Z370 bios has a lot more memory overclocking settings. The Dram Frequency list in my bios goes upto 8533mhz. And there is all these new memory training options.

Here are screens of the Z370 bios on my board. You can see all the Dram Frequencies to choose from.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Lol just luck of the draw.
> 
> Yes it is very similar to Kabylake. but the Z370 bios has a lot more memory overclocking settings. The Dram Frequency list in my bios goes upto 8533mhz. And there is all these new memory training options.
> 
> Here are screens of the Z370 bios on my board. You can see all the Dram Frequencies to choose from.


Very impressive, wish I had your luck with the Silicon lottery that would save me buying a binned CPU lol. Since it seems Coffee lake has the same IPC as Kaby and clocks just as high that might inspire me to upgrade from my 7700K, not that a lot of things I do on my P.C can use more than 8 threads (only 1 or 2 programs) but still a bit of future proofing never hurts







I recall 8pack saying in one of his youtube videos that Coffee has a better IMC and improved cache.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> Voltage readings askew or not, by what most people have found, even with the best binned chips thus far, is that the only way someone is gonna hit 5.8 - 5.9 Gigglehertz is on exotic cooling.


Yes, but at least it shows it has potential to clock higher on similar voltage.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Ambient temp was 22 degrees.


Argh, I'm wondering how it would fair in a 34C ambient temp in my place. The only difference is that I'll delid mine when I get it.


----------



## oxidized

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Argh, I'm wondering how it would fair in a 34C ambient temp in my place. The only difference is that I'll delid mine when I get it.


Apparently, delidding it will decrease like 20+°C

Well actually, delidding it, and applying liquid metal.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> Apparently, delidding it, will decrease like 20+°C


Gamers Nexus uploaded a video today stating that in their opinion 8700K actually runs slightly cooler than Kaby given the larger die size


----------



## oxidized

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Gamers Nexus uploaded a video today stating that in their opinion 8700K actually runs slightly cooler than Kaby given the larger die size


I don't understand why he uses TIM as a term to refer to conductive paste, TIM is generic, even solder is TIM in this case, also, i don't understand what's "CPU Core", "10s high" and "Liquid" in his graphs.

His graphs are confusing and not really clear.


----------



## Liranan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Liranan*
> 
> Trying to obfuscate the discussion now? You were talking about how single threaded performance is all that matters yet now you bring in quad cores and octa cores into the discussion.
> 
> To answer your question: yes, four slower cores are better than 2 fast ones as has been proven already and we are entering the era in which 8 slower cores are better than 4 faster ones. If that were not the case then Intel's i5's would have consistently trumped AMD's FX line but they didn't. There are workloads that benefit from more cores over fewer cores, regardless of how fast they are.
> 
> 
> 
> So by that logic a 8 core 16 thread Ryzen is better than a 4 core 8 thread 7700K in gaming or any other application that doesn't utilise more than 4 cores ( I know some games do use more than 4 cores ) I never stated that more cores is not usefull in certain usage scenarios...enjoy your FX cores
Click to expand...

HAHA, thanks for showing how little you know and understand about CPU evolution.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> I don't understand why he uses TIM as a term to refer to conductive paste, TIM is generic, even solder is TIM in this case, also, i don't understand what's "CPU Core", "10s high" and "Liquid" in his graphs.
> 
> His graphs are confusing and not really clear.


"CPU Core" would be the core temp as opposed to "CPU package" temp
"Liquid temp" is the temperature of the fluid inside the cooler he used
Not sure what "10s high" is maybe what the sustained core temp was for a 10 second period as opposed to brief temperature spikes?


----------



## oxidized

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> "CPU Core" would be the core temp as opposed to "CPU package" temp
> "Liquid temp" is the temperature of the fluid inside the cooler he used
> Not sure what "10s high" is maybe what the sustained core temp was for a 10 second period as opposed to brief temperature spikes?


Basically "Liquid" is another version of ambient temperature, except it's not ambient but it's liquid's temp, pretty weird and useless honestly, even because nobody else or most of, don't do that.

Also, thinking about that, how did the measure the temp inside Kraken x62 exactly?


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> Apparently, delidding it will decrease like 20+°C
> 
> Well actually, delidding it, and applying liquid metal.


You're right. It would be my first time delidding and going with a watercooled system so I guess I'll see for myself







Hopefully I can OC the hell out of it.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> also, i don't understand what's "CPU Core", "10s high" and "Liquid" in his graphsr.


"Liquid" is liquid metal [with delid] as he says. A drop of 20ºC.


----------



## oxidized

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> "Liquid" is liquid metal [with delid] as he says. A drop of 20ºC.


"Liquid" graph is also present in the non-delidded 8700K


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> Basically "Liquid" is another version of ambient temperature, except it's not ambient but it's liquid's temp, pretty weird and useless honestly, even because nobody else or most of, don't do that.
> 
> Also, thinking about that, how did the measure the temp inside Kraken x62 exactly?


It has a temp sensor to measure liquid temp

It is interesting in a way because the heat transfer is difficult since Intel switched to TIM instead of solder
TIM is a very general term
Still it's used all around since there are many brands I guess
Intel does, as well as when they changed from the even worse TIM to another





We only referr to liquid metal differently because of its obviously different behaviour/ performance and the simple fact that it is indeed a liquid metal (gallium)

Or are using specific brands by name

But sure
They all are thermal interface materials

There are many temp sensor in a CPU these days, including per core ones

10s is most likely a temp reading over 10 seconds
As has been seen with Kaby Lake that you can have rather extremes spikes of temp, but only for a second or 2


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> "Liquid" graph is also present in the non-delidded 8700K


Ah, he has another graphic (my bad). The second one at 4:54 seems to be the liquid metal one. *edit -- or maybe not, since he was mentioning fluid temperature before (which is weird).


----------



## Contiusa

*repeated post*


----------



## oxidized

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> It has a temp sensor to measure liquid temp
> 
> It is interesting in a way because the heat transfer is difficult since Intel switched to TIM instead of solder
> TIM is a very general term
> Still it's used all around since there are many brands I guess
> Intel does, as well as when they changed from the even worse TIM to another
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We only referr to liquid metal differently because of its obviously different behaviour/ performance and the simple fact that it is indeed a liquid metal (gallium)
> 
> Or are using specific brands by name
> 
> But sure
> They all are thermal interface materials


It's a feature the kraken x62 has? Wow interesting actually, but again, if nobody else does that, there's not much to compare it to, also, the temp of that liquid will probably be roughly the same if ambient temperature and enclosure is similar, but whatever, i just think he should specify a bit better the stuff he puts on those graphs, because if someone who's not used to his method looks at them, could confuse things easily (i'm an example), however he does pretty good reviews, i reckon he was one of the few who did a decent temp test for 8700K whereas the others didn't do temp tests at all or very superficial ones.

In the end they're all Thermal Interface Materials indeed.


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> I don't understand why he uses TIM as a term to refer to conductive paste, TIM is generic, even solder is TIM in this case, also, i don't understand what's "CPU Core", "10s high" and "Liquid" in his graphs.


Thermal Insulation Material. Nickname "chicken poop".


----------



## oxidized

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> Thermal Insulation Material. Nickname "chicken poop".


Pigeon, actually


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> It's a feature the kraken x62 has? Wow interesting actually, but again, if nobody else does that, there's not much to compare it to, also, the temp of that liquid will probably be roughly the same if ambient temperature and enclosure is similar, but whatever, i just think he should specify a bit better the stuff he puts on those graphs, because if someone who's not used to his method looks at them, could confuse things easily (i'm an example), however he does pretty good reviews, i reckon he was one of the few who did a decent temp test for 8700K whereas the others didn't do temp tests at all or very superficial ones.
> 
> In the end they're all Thermal Interface Materials indeed.


You will find Steve from Gamers Nexus is one of the more credible YouTube reviewers


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> Pigeon, actually


I thought that was previous generation, which Intel used on Skylake-X. It's unlikely Intel is still using pigeons after that backslash.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> I thought that was previous generation, which Intel used on Skylake-X. It's unlikely Intel is still using pigeons after that backslash.


Dunno pigeon poop supply is plentiful







not to mention cheap


----------



## evensen007

I may actually ride this out for a bit and see where the chips fall surprisingly. Between several reviewers getting better results with an 8700 over the 8700k, not enough info of the delta and potential of the 8600k (overclocking,heat,gaming), and the general lack of any availabilty anyway i may wait a month or 2.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> So what are we looking at temp-wise for an 8600k @ 4.7 with something like an NH-D15
> 
> I was hoping for only a slight vcore nudge


Unless you have a dud chip, an NH-D15 can easily handle it up to 5GHz.


----------



## Cascade

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> I may actually ride this out for a bit and see where the chips fall surprisingly. Between several reviewers getting better results with an 8700 over the 8700k, not enough info of the delta and potential of the 8600k (overclocking,heat,gaming), and the general lack of any availabilty anyway i may wait a month or 2.


I'm most interested in how many benchmarks the i5-8400 is above the 7700k and keeps up with the 8700k occasionally. That seems too good to be true.


----------



## guttheslayer

So 5 Ghz without delidding on 240mm AIO cooler is possible?


----------



## stefxyz

If u r lucky may be.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Q3 earnings (Oct 26) will be interesting for Intel. At least they still maintain a monopoly in the laptop market...

Mindfactory.de data:





Being supply strained is definately not going to help Intel's Q4 results...


----------



## kd5151

No stock.


----------



## Scotty99

Well you can preorder from B+H and it says they will ship on 15th, but who knows how much stock they have.


----------



## Scotty99

Im annoyed by the lack of 1440p reviews for coffee. I understand why they do it, but on the same token if you are buying a 400 dollar CPU you probably have a screen that isnt tech from 2010 lol.


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Very impressive, wish I had your luck with the Silicon lottery that would save me buying a binned CPU lol. Since it seems Coffee lake has the same IPC as Kaby and clocks just as high that might inspire me to upgrade from my 7700K, not that a lot of things I do on my P.C can use more than 8 threads (only 1 or 2 programs) but still a bit of future proofing never hurts
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I recall 8pack saying in one of his youtube videos that Coffee has a better IMC and improved cache.


weird the video I watched he says the IPC of kaby and coffee is exactly the same

3:11 in


----------



## RXWX

I wonder how 8C-16T Cannon Lake on Z390 will compare...........These numbers from CFL are good signs!


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> Yes, but at least it shows it has potential to clock higher on similar voltage.


But we're talking like a phase exchange cooler, or more likely LN2 to have handled those voltages. Absolutely not feasible and hardly any relevance to 99.9999% of people.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

The difference in cooling between Kaby Lake and Coffee Lake is the size of the cooler. The cooling efficiency is the same. If you had a massive cooler for 7700K and getting 85C than 8700K will get same temps. If you had a small cooler and was at the limit you will not be able to cool 8700K. This is because the die size of 8700K is bigger which means the heat transfer is still the same.


----------



## AlphaC

Has anyone tested for Skylake / Kaby Lake hyperthreading bug?

https://www.pcworld.com/article/3021023/hardware/how-to-test-your-pc-for-the-skylake-bug.html
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/06/skylake-kaby-lake-chips-have-a-crash-bug-with-hyperthreading-enabled/

If it is still an issue on Z370 boards then the i5-8600k may very well be the better CPU of the two unlocked ones , especially since it seems i5s are hitting 5GHz without delid or overheating


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Im annoyed by the lack of 1440p reviews for coffee. I understand why they do it, but on the same token if you are buying a 400 dollar CPU you probably have a screen that isnt tech from 2010 lol.


I'm curious to see how it does at 1440p as well... but honestly, performance can't be too much different than the 7700K. With a 4+ cores and hyper threading, the GPU and having the game installed on an SSD would be make a bigger difference than the processor at stock clocks. I could see making a justifiable point towards going to 21:9 ratio at 3440 x 1440p, but there's not any real reason to go to a standard 16:9 ratio 1440p right now. Personally, I'd hold off for 6 months and see what plays out surrounding Vega 2nd Gen and Volta release timeline. If Volta is the same kind of performance jump that Pascal was to Maxwell, and Maxwell to Kepler, then Volta seemingly should be able to handle most anything at 4k on a single card (xx80 / xx80 Ti). So why drop $450 for a 1070 Ti if those become a reality, or $500+ a 1080, and another $250+ for a decent 1440p monitor now, when in as little as early as May or June, Volta desktop SKUs could be announced, unless you want to turn around within 9 to 18 months of doing a build and drop another $1,000-1,300 on a Volta xx80 and a 4K monitor...


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Has anyone tested for Skylake / Kaby Lake hyperthreading bug?
> 
> https://www.pcworld.com/article/3021023/hardware/how-to-test-your-pc-for-the-skylake-bug.html
> https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/06/skylake-kaby-lake-chips-have-a-crash-bug-with-hyperthreading-enabled/
> 
> If it is still an issue on Z370 boards then the i5-8600k may very well be the better CPU of the two unlocked ones , especially since it seems i5s are hitting 5GHz without delid or overheating


thought all that was cleared up awhile ago(?)

ASRock Kills Intel Skylake Bug With BIOS Update, Fire


Gigabyte Releases BIOS Update To Squash Intel Skylake Bug


----------



## AlphaC

Well supersitition (not sure if that's the right user) was stating Asrock didn't fix the ITX board all over the Ryzen thread as a reason to not buy an Asrock X370 board...

edit: http://www.overclock.net/t/1633994/will-asrock-ever-bother-to-update-the-bios-to-fix-hyperthreading-bug-z170-gaming-itx-ac

Z270 version seems to have it fixed August 2017 https://www.asrock.com/MB/Intel/Fatal1ty%20Z270%20Gaming-ITXac/index.asp#BIOS

Z270 Taichi is on BETA July 2017 http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z270%20Taichi/index.asp#BIOS
Z270 K6 on BETA 7/2017 http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Fatal1ty%20Z270%20Gaming%20K6/index.asp#BIOS
Z270 Extreme4 is on BETA 7/2017 http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z270%20Extreme4/index.asp#BIOS
Z270 ITX on BETA 7/2017 http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z270M-ITXac/index.asp#BIOS
Z170 Extreme7+ BETA 7/2017 http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z170%20Extreme7+/index.asp?cat=Beta
Z170 OC Formula BETA 7/2017 http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z170%20OC%20Formula/index.asp?cat=Beta
Z170M OC Formula BETA 7/2017 http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z170M%20OC%20Formula/index.asp?cat=Beta
Z170 Extreme6 BETA 7/2017 http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z170%20Extreme6/index.asp?cat=Beta
Z170 Extreme4 BETA 7/2017 http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z170%20Extreme4/index.asp?cat=Beta
Z170 K6 BETA 7/2017 http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Fatal1ty%20Z170%20Gaming%20K6/index.asp?cat=Beta
Z170 ITX BETA 7/2017 http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Fatal1ty%20Z170%20Gaming-ITXac/index.asp?cat=Beta

Asus Z270-A fixed in July https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/PRIME-Z270-A/HelpDesk_BIOS/
Asus Z170-A fixed in August https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/Z170-A/HelpDesk_BIOS/
Asus Maximus 8 Hero fixed August https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/MAXIMUS-VIII-HERO/HelpDesk_BIOS/
Asus Z270 TUF Mark I is fixed July https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/TUF-Z270-MARK-1/HelpDesk_BIOS/
Asus Z270-I fixed https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-Strix-Z270I-Gaming/HelpDesk_BIOS/
Asus Z270G STRIX fixed July https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-Z270G-GAMING/HelpDesk_BIOS/
Asus Z270F STRIX fixed https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-Z270F-GAMING/HelpDesk_BIOS/

Gigabyte fixed Gaming 5 in July https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/GA-Z270X-Gaming-5-rev-10#support-dl , http://www.gigabyte.us/Motherboard/GA-Z170X-Gaming-5-rev-10#support-dl
XP SLI fixed in July https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/GA-Z270XP-SLI-rev-10#support-dl , http://www.gigabyte.us/Motherboard/GA-Z170XP-SLI-rev-10#support-dl
Gigabyte fixed UD5 in August 2017 https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/GA-Z270X-UD5-rev-10#support-dl
Ultra Gaming fixed in July https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/GA-Z270X-Ultra-Gaming-rev-10#support-dl , http://www.gigabyte.us/Motherboard/GA-Z170X-Ultra-Gaming-rev-10#support-dl

EDIT: It is a stark contrast to AMD's Ryzen 7 response in less than 6 months in which they give NEW CPUs without hyperthreading issues. Bug was first reported around April and in May on official AMD forum, users received new CPUs starting around August , with all newer CPUS (i.e. week 25+ , so manufactured in July) supposedly not having the bug.


----------



## looniam

having not checked all your links, which i thank you for, so it took them a ~year and half to actually roll out what they did?

i'll just hold off buying anything . . .


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> So 5 Ghz without delidding on 240mm AIO cooler is possible?


That's possible with high-end air even.


----------



## looniam

for no reason:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## jprovido

Not being able to reach 5ghz on coffeelake where I can get 5.1ghz on my 7700k would be really dissapointing. just the feeling that crappy games that only use 2 threads will result into a downgrade in performance for me is quite disturbing. I will wait till more people get the consumer versions and decide from there


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> Not being able to reach 5ghz on coffeelake where I can get 5.1ghz on my 7700k would be really dissapointing. just the feeling that crappy games that only use 2 threads will result into a downgrade in performance for me is quite disturbing. I will wait till more people get the consumer versions and decide from there


If I remember correctly, everything you play is single-threaded anyway. I'm not sure why you'd be interested in moving away from a 7700k. Best-case after a delid, you get the same single-threaded performance and some additional multithreaded performance that you won't really use. Might as well wait for Intel's next actual IPC gain.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> That is where I see you being wrong... with both manufacturers having 6+ core processors in the mainstream flagship slots as of right now... and 8 cores guaranteed within the next 12-18 months, I think game developers are going to start utilizing 4+ cores much sooner than you might imagine... I'd say in as little as 18-30 months we could, and honestly should, see a significant shift in the number of titles capable to take advantage of the additional cores and threads that now saturate the mainstream processor range.
> 
> 
> Not too long ago JayzTwoCents was going to do that for his 5 years of GPUs comparison, but with virtually all AMD cards being swallowed up by miners it still hasn't come to fruition.


wlel yeha i was expecting to compare how it performed against Ryzen 5 1600 and the i3 8350k


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> weird the video I watched he says the IPC of kaby and coffee is exactly the same
> 
> 3:11 in


I said Integrated memory controller (IMC) not IPC


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I said Intel memory controller (IMC) not IPC


This again prooves that a 240 mm rad isnt enought to cool an oc cpu and oc gpu in the same loop


----------



## RXWX

https://segmentnext.com/2017/10/03/intel-tiger-lake-ice-lake/


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> This again prooves that a 240 mm rad isnt enought to cool an oc cpu and oc gpu in the same loop


Im not sure what you are getting at there? If you are suggesting that a 240mm radiator does not have enough surface area to cool an OC CPU plus OC GPU, that I would agree with







I brought up the same 8pack video simply to point out improvements to the IMC/Cache but somehow that got interpreted as being IPC improvement claims made by me, I wish people could read


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Im not sure what you are getting at there? If you are suggesting that a 240mm radiator does not have enough surface area to cool an OC CPU plus OC GPU, that I would agree with
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I brought up the same 8pack video simply to point out improvements to the IMC/Cache but somehow that got interpreted as being IPC improvement claims made by me, I wish people could read


Some pages ago you tried to convince me that the EK aio you are about to get , is enough for a oc cpu and oc gpu


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Some pages ago you tried to convince me that the EK aio you are about to get , is enough for a oc cpu and oc gpu


I did?








EDIT: Nope never said that, I dont have any plans to replace my custom loop with an EK AIO why would I? PM sent


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> This again prooves that a 240 mm rad isnt enought to cool an oc cpu and oc gpu in the same loop


It's not a concrete rule, but most people I asked when I first looked into custom water suggest that a loop's radiator capacity should be # of blocks + 1 fan slot... although.. if there's space in the build for a thicker, high performance 280, a single 280 may be sufficient for a cpu/single gpu.


----------



## scracy

The generally accepted rule of thumb for water cooling is 120mm of radiator per component as an absolute minimum not accounting for any overclocking, ideally more than that


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *oxidized*
> 
> Apparently, delidding it, will decrease like 20+°C
> 
> 
> 
> Gamers Nexus uploaded a video today stating that in their opinion 8700K actually runs slightly cooler than Kaby given the larger die size
Click to expand...

That does not make any sense because the lager die size is filled with more transistors equaling more heat.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> This again prooves that a 240 mm rad isnt enought to cool an oc cpu and oc gpu in the same loop
> 
> 
> 
> It's not a concrete rule, but most people I asked when I first looked into custom water suggest that a loop's radiator capacity should be # of blocks + 1 fan slot... although.. if there's space in the build for a thicker, high performance 280, *a single 280 may be sufficient for a cpu/single gpu.*
Click to expand...

very very close if looking for <10c delta:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!





S1 ambient (~20mm from rad fan intake on fan edge) S2 water temp.

it went up ~1.5c more 30 minutes later.



pump going full blast w/push only fans ~1200 or less RPMs


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RXWX*
> 
> 
> 
> https://segmentnext.com/2017/10/03/intel-tiger-lake-ice-lake/


----------



## HAL900

icylake 2018 or 2019 launched?


----------



## looniam

ask AMD.


----------



## NorcalTRD

Question \for those looking at the 8700k, are you doing a pre-order at B+H or waiting for live stock to show somewhere on the web?


----------



## HAL900

AMD will not have anything for 4 years
And this table can be fejk


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*


I mean, that leak is fake but I don't know why you'd expect Tigerlake to be on LGA 1151.


----------



## HAL900

What a difference that will be at 1151 as for the x570


----------



## RXWX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> I mean, that leak is fake but I don't know why you'd expect Tigerlake to be on LGA 1151.


Could be fake tbh. I'm pretty skeptical about it.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RXWX*
> 
> Could be fake tbh. I'm pretty skeptical about it.


Intel never decides on full specs that early because so many things could affect it. It's obviously not real.

Edit: There's also the fact that there's a desktop Cannonlake chip thrown in there...


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mean, that leak is fake but I don't know why you'd expect Tigerlake to be on LGA 1151.
Click to expand...

yeah i know. the post was more to be amusing of an emotional roller coaster ride . . . nevermind.


----------



## HAL900

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_Lake_(microarchitecture)

Icy lake in 2019. Canno nlake 99% nothing will bring

Clocks are low according to this table.
Maybe it's fejk. Squad comes intel I dropped or someone had fun in the point ?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Im annoyed by the lack of 1440p reviews for coffee. I understand why they do it, but on the same token if you are buying a 400 dollar CPU you probably have a screen that isnt tech from 2010 lol.


1440p benchtests does not show CPU scaling from the i7 7700k to i7 87700k. 1440p shows zero performance difference even with my i5 7600.


----------



## HAL900

8700k and no avx 512









Cannon lake had but in home is nothing

Intel in product grading is better than nvidia


----------



## RXWX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Intel never decides on full specs that early because so many things could affect it. It's obviously not real.
> 
> Edit: There's also the fact that there's a desktop Cannonlake chip thrown in there...


Why is Cannon Lake not going to appear in desktops?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *RXWX*
> 
> Could be fake tbh. I'm pretty skeptical about it.
> 
> 
> 
> Intel never decides on full specs that early because so many things could affect it. It's obviously not real.
> 
> Edit: There's also the fact that there's a desktop Cannonlake chip thrown in there...
Click to expand...

Intel has said in statements that they work and plan 3 years ahead of launch of a new product.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RXWX*
> 
> Why is Cannon Lake not going to appear in desktops?


The first iteration of 10nm can't scale up to higher power levels very well, so it's going to be ULV only. Ice Lake will basically be Cannonlake on 10nm+.


----------



## RXWX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> The first iteration of 10nm can't scale up to higher power levels very well, so it's going to be ULV only. Ice Lake will basically be Cannonlake on 10nm+.


Ice Lake will be its own thing I think. What about the rumored Z390 chipset? What arch will it support?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RXWX*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> The first iteration of 10nm can't scale up to higher power levels very well, so it's going to be ULV only. Ice Lake will basically be Cannonlake on 10nm+.
> 
> 
> 
> Ice Lake will be its own thing I think. What about the rumored Z390 chipset? What arch will it support?
Click to expand...

The Z390 is in Intel's road map from 2016.



Intel Z390 Chipset Allegedly Launching In H2 2018 Supporting 8-Core, 16-Thread Enthusiast CPUs https://hothardware.com/news/intel-z390-chipset-h2-2018-8-core-16-thread-enthusiast-cpus


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RXWX*
> 
> Ice Lake will be its own thing I think. What about the rumored Z390 chipset? What arch will it support?


I doubt that Ice Lake is a full on new arch; that seems more like what Tiger Lake will be. As for Z390, it's either going to be for Coffee Lake or Ice lake. Reports are mixed other than that there will be 8-core chips for it.


----------



## HAL900

Maybe all the lake is the same









Sky/kaby/coffy is


----------



## RXWX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> I doubt that Ice Lake is a full on new arch; that seems more like what Tiger Lake will be. As for Z390, it's either going to be for Coffee Lake or Ice lake. Reports are mixed other than that there will be 8-core chips for it.


Idk about the future. But anything's possible. Maybe we'll see CNL in desktop as Z390 but in scarce volumes, idk. Or maybe Z390 will be CFL based with 8c idk, Sky's the limit.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Intel has said in statements that they work and plan 3 years ahead of launch of a new product.


Of course! However, that's not what I'm saying. They don't just decide final specs on day 1. That takes a lot of R&D. Final clockspeeds are decided within months of the final release, which is why every time something is leaked like that we're warned that the final clockspeeds can change at any time, and why we didn't get full Skylake-X specs at first.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*


Ice Lake and Tiger Lake = same socket
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> icylake 2018 or 2019 launched?


2018 unless it gets pushed back...


----------



## Contiusa

Anyone wondering why the i5-8600K is coming short against the i7-7700K on computing benchs (not games), like the tests made by wccftech.com? The i7-7700K is a bit ahead of the i5-8600K in some of them. And even when the i5-8600K is ahead, is by a marginal margin.

Which we would have to assume that HT on the i7-7700K is adding gains of 50% or more. Is that so or Windows 10 (and benches) is not working properly with a true hexacore? From my understanding, the i5-8600K should be at least 15% faster, right? Or did they optimize HT so much that the true core lost its value?


----------



## steelbom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Anyone wondering why the i5-8600K is coming short against the i7-7700K on computing benchs (not games), like the tests made by wccftech.com? The i7-7700K is a bit ahead of the i5-8600K in some of them. And even when the i5-8600K is ahead, is by a marginal margin.
> 
> Which we would have to assume that HT on the i7-7700K is adding gains of 50% or more. Is that so or Windows 10 (and benches) is not working properly with a true hexacore? From my understanding, the i5-8600K should be at least 15% faster, right? Or did they optimize HT so much that the true core lost its value?


Clock speed differences, maybe? The i5 8600K is 3.6GHz and turbos to 4.3. The i7 7700 is 4.2GHz and turbos to 4.5GHz.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Ice Lake and Tiger Lake = same socket
> 2018 unless it gets pushed back...


wait for Ice lake?


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *steelbom*
> 
> Clock speed differences, maybe? The i5 8600K is 3.6GHz and turbos to 4.3. The i7 7700 is 4.2GHz and turbos to 4.5GHz.


It will be just 300Mhz. The 7700K turbo to 4.4Ghz on all cores. The 8600K to 4.1Ghz. Even less in single thread. It is not enough to close the gap of 15-20% that the 8600K should be ahead.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *steelbom*
> 
> Clock speed differences, maybe? The i5 8600K is 3.6GHz and turbos to 4.3. The i7 7700 is 4.2GHz and turbos to 4.5GHz.
> 
> 
> 
> It will be just 300Mhz. The 7700K turbo to 4.4Ghz on all cores. The 8600K to 4.1Ghz. Even less in single thread. It is not enough to close the gap of 15-20% that the 8600K should be ahead.
Click to expand...

In Handbrake 4K H.264 the i7 7700k is only 1.8% faster than the i5 8600k and with 300Mhz deficit clock speed costing 6% performance that would put the i5 8600k ahead by 4%.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> In Handbrake 4K H.264 the i7 7700k is only 1.8% faster than the i5 8600k and with 300Mhz deficit clock speed costing 6% performance that would put the i5 8600k ahead by 4%.


6% for 300Mhz? That much? Anyway, 4% is basically a tie. If HT gives 20-30% the most in multithread, so let's assume a 25% average with 4% of clock, you still have to have the 8600K 15% ahead. In reality the i5 is trailing in most benches. Something is not adding up.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Some pages ago you tried to convince me that the EK aio you are about to get , is enough for a oc cpu and oc gpu


So did you find that post?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> In Handbrake 4K H.264 the i7 7700k is only 1.8% faster than the i5 8600k and with 300Mhz deficit clock speed costing 6% performance that would put the i5 8600k ahead by 4%.
> 
> 
> 
> 6% for 300Mhz? That much? Anyway, 4% is basically a tie. If HT gives 20-30% the most in multithread, so let's assume a 25% average with 4% of clock, you still have to have the 8600K 15% ahead. In reality the i5 is trailing in most benches. Something is not adding up.
Click to expand...

For every 100Mhz on Intel it is about 2% performance increase. i5 is only trailing around 2% most benchmarks so with 6% clock speed defect - 2% Bench mark difference = 4% the i5 is ahead with a clock speed increase of 300Mhz. I still think it is the clock speed difference.


----------



## Contiusa

Taking into account that HT gives an improvement in the best case scenario of 20-30%, and lets say 25% is the average for 'the best case scenario', the i5-6800K should be at least 20% ahead in the benches.

Then you are saying -- taking into account the clocks -- that the 8600K is 4% ahead. Where did go the other 16%? That's a lot. And this if we assume HT is pushing the 7700K 25% ahead.

By these tests, the HT would have to be pushing some 40% over each core. Overclock does not scale simetrically, then the difference could be bigger and the i5 has more cache.

That's what I'm saying. Did HT got that proficient over the years (+40%)? I don't think so, but I might be wrong.


----------



## HeliXpc

so were not going to be able to buy the 8700K anytime soon are we? anyone know any insider info on the stock situation? I have customers waiting to build with the 8700K.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HeliXpc*
> 
> so were not going to be able to buy the 8700K anytime soon are we? anyone know any insider info on the stock situation? I have customers waiting to build with the 8700K.


Considering what I've seen people post on /r/intel about dates, Amazon and Newegg still accepting orders for backorder and also saying "temporarily out of stock", it seems like there should be large amounts appearing in stock soon.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Considering what I've seen people post on /r/intel about dates, Amazon and Newegg still accepting orders for backorder and also saying "temporarily out of stock", it seems like there should be large amounts appearing in stock soon.


I don't see Amazon accepting pre-orders now. Are you pertaining to the pre-orders that were available last Oct. 6?


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> I don't see Amazon accepting pre-orders now. Are you pertaining to the pre-orders that were available last Oct. 6?


My mistake, I was looking at the 8600k.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Taking into account that HT gives an improvement in the best case scenario of 20-30%, and lets say 25% is the average for 'the best case scenario', the i5-6800K should be at least 20% ahead in the benches.
> 
> Then you are saying -- taking into account the clocks -- that the 8600K is 4% ahead. Where did go the other 16%? That's a lot. And this if we assume HT is pushing the 7700K 25% ahead.
> 
> By these tests, the HT would have to be pushing some 40% over each core. Overclock does not scale simetrically, then the difference could be bigger and the i5 has more cache.
> 
> That's what I'm saying. Did HT got that proficient over the years (+40%)? I don't think so, but I might be wrong.


Stock for stock the i5 8600k was only behind around 2% of the i7 7700k in some of the benchmarks. Clock for Clock the i5 8600k would be 4% ahead. 6 threads to 8 not bad for the benchmarks of i5 8600k vs i7 7700k.


----------



## darksideleader

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Taking into account that HT gives an improvement in the best case scenario of 20-30%, and lets say 25% is the average for 'the best case scenario', the i5-6800K should be at least 20% ahead in the benches.
> 
> Then you are saying -- taking into account the clocks -- that the 8600K is 4% ahead. Where did go the other 16%? That's a lot. And this if we assume HT is pushing the 7700K 25% ahead.
> 
> By these tests, the HT would have to be pushing some 40% over each core. Overclock does not scale simetrically, then the difference could be bigger and the i5 has more cache.
> 
> That's what I'm saying. Did HT got that proficient over the years (+40%)? I don't think so, but I might be wrong.


HT isn't some magical thing that automatically increases performance by 40%. Long story short, it creates more logical processors with an optimized scheduler that can handle more multithread loads better. It can even potentially lower performance if the application only needs good single threaded performance since you virtually turned the single core into two.

It's not HT getting more "proficient", its just software being better optimized and multi-threaded for more cores and threads since its the hardware trend now.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> My mistake, I was looking at the 8600k.


You got me excited for a moment there.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darksideleader*
> 
> HT isn't some magical thing that automatically increases performance by 40%. Long story short, it creates more logical processors with an optimized scheduler that can handle more multithread loads better. It can even potentially lower performance if the application only needs good single threaded performance since you virtually turned the single core into two.
> 
> It's not HT getting more "proficient", its just software being better optimized and multi-threaded for more cores and threads since its the hardware trend now.


Nonetheless the gain of the 7700K compared to the 8600K is of +40% just by having HT. No matter the reason, you just do the math. The result is that the i5-8600K is getting spanked by the R5 1600X, which is cheaper. Or you could get even a cheaper 1600 and overclock it with a cheap air cooler... Not only that, but this will trickle down to the i3 as well (that has no HT). In short, there is a big void / hindering in the Intel lineup.

Why no one is talking that the i5 is being halted right off the gate for the lack of HT? Either that or the benches / Windows are not used to six real cores.

Edit: not talking about games, but computing performance.


----------



## murenitu

I have already for 2 days at home a 8700k and a Hero X, I am waiting to disassemble the 7700k and Hero IX, this week ... to change the hardware!

I just made delid to the 8700k, and ready I have everything to mount. I am waiting for an order from EKWB to deal with the subject.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Nonetheless the gain of the 7700K compared to the 8600K is of +40% just by having HT. No matter the reason, you just do the math. The result is that the i5-8600K is getting spanked by the R5 1600X, which is cheaper. Or you could get even a cheaper 1600 and overclock it with a cheap air cooler... Not only that, but this will trickle down to the i3 as well (that has no HT). In short, there is a big void / hindering in the Intel lineup.
> 
> Why no one is talking that the i5 is being halted right off the gate for the lack of HT? Either that or the benches / Windows are not used to six real cores.
> 
> Edit: not talking about games, but computing performance.


Seems to me like you're overthinking a lot, or are overexpecting

If you're into compute then you're on the wrong line of chips
You need to go HEDT

HT is not a flat out bonus that always gives a noticeable speed bump
Of course if one can go i7, that's better
Always has been
I5 is always the regret after a few months, it's just not such a huge price difference as buying a new board and chip combo again

As for Ryzen getting spanked










Looks to me like it's doing ok









Long story short
It really matters what you do

High refresh gaming or 4k
And of course I picked that test at 4k for a reason








If someone on a budget can grab a cheap z170 and 7700k combo (used) then that's a good deal as well


----------



## stefxyz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Seems to me like you're overthinking a lot, or are overexpecting
> 
> If you're into compute then you're on the wrong line of chips
> You need to go HEDT
> 
> HT is not a flat out bonus that always gives a noticeable speed bump
> Of course if one can go i7, that's better
> Always has been
> I5 is always the regret after a few months, it's just not such a huge price difference as buying a new board and chip combo again
> 
> As for Ryzen getting spanked
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looks to me like it's doing ok
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Long story short
> It really matters what you do
> 
> High refresh gaming or 4k
> And of course I picked that test at 4k for a reason
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If someone on a budget can grab a cheap z170 and 7700k combo (used) then that's a good deal as well


I really like the Ryzen CPUs but showing a benchmark which oobviously is completely GPU bound does not show any CPU capability. Probably an OC 2600k would look the same here.


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> If you're into compute then you're on the wrong line of chips
> You need to go HEDT


This is not entirely true. A lot of my desktop computing tasks are still bound to one or two threads and thus keep me waiting, sometimes for hours on end. All the cores in the world will not change that, it is a software problem at which you can only throw megahertz/IPC.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stefxyz*
> 
> I really like the Ryzen CPUs but showing a benchmark which oobviously is completely GPU bound does not show any CPU capability. Probably an OC 2600k would look the same here.


It would. 100% GPU bound scenario. I think even a stock 2500K would deliver the same fps..


----------



## HAL900




----------



## HAL900

78 vs 128 in stock and oc 8700K end graphic or ram in 8700K


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> This is not entirely true. A lot of my desktop computing tasks are still bound to one or two threads and thus keep me waiting, sometimes for hours on end. All the cores in the world will not change that, it is a software problem at which you can only throw megahertz/IPC.


Exactly, my workloads put me in the same boat







but not a difference in hours maybe a few seconds.


----------



## peter2k

I knew someone would whine









I even wrote I picked 4k on purpose
Ehh

In that bench even the Pentium does great compared

Know what you're doing

8600k slower than 7700k?
A problem?
Maybe at 480p it is
At 1080p it might be a little, nothing some fine tuning by hand would cure

And as you move up in res it becomes a hypothetical discussion, for obvious reasons


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> This is not entirely true. A lot of my desktop computing tasks are still bound to one or two threads and thus keep me waiting, sometimes for hours on end. All the cores in the world will not change that, it is a software problem at which you can only throw megahertz/IPC.


Well you must be furious that we didn't get a meaningful IPC increase in 5 years then

Btw
If you're actually waiting for hours then I can't imagine a few hundred Mhz shaving off a lot either
That being said
Guaranteed 5.2Ghz is only about 900€ away


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> I knew someone would whine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I even wrote I picked 4k on purpose
> Ehh
> 
> In that bench even the Pentium does great compared
> 
> Know what you're doing
> 
> 8600k slower than 7700k?
> A problem?
> Maybe at 480p it is
> At 1080p it might be a little, nothing some fine tuning by hand would cure
> 
> And as you move up in res it becomes a hypothetical discussion, for obvious reasons


If 8700K has same IPC as 7700K assuming you can achieve same clocks say 5.2Ghz how can the 8700K be slower assuming everything else is equal?


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> I knew someone would whine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I even wrote I picked 4k on purpose
> Ehh
> 
> In that bench even the Pentium does great compared
> 
> Know what you're doing
> 
> 8600k slower than 7700k?
> A problem?
> Maybe at 480p it is
> At 1080p it might be a little, nothing some fine tuning by hand would cure
> 
> And as you move up in res it becomes a hypothetical discussion, for obvious reasons


You are not getting the point of these 720p CPU bound benchmarks. They are to show what will happen when you upgrade GPU 1-2 years from now. Right now 1440p, 1080p, 720p is CPU bound, soon enough 4K will be CPU bound.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> You are not getting the point of these 720p CPU bound benchmarks. They are to show what will happen when you upgrade GPU 1-2 years from now. Right now 1440p, 1080p, 720p is CPU bound, soon enough 4K will be CPU bound.


I know what they are there for, ive been saying the same thing like 100 pages ago or so
Or it's the other coffee lake rumor thread

Btw
Looks to me that future proofing is not a thing any more
Except on AM4


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> If 8700K has same IPC as 7700K assuming you can achieve same clocks say 5.2Ghz how can the 8700K be slower assuming everything else is equal?


Better IMC and therefore better RAM speed
More PCIe lanes on the z390 hopefully

Is it worth buying again

Probably not


----------



## HAL900

There is a mistake
6700K 94 and 7700K 128 FPS ?? NOPE
If it was with the same ram ,max 10% fps


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Better IMC and therefore better RAM speed
> More PCIe lanes on the z390 hopefully
> 
> Is it worth buying again
> 
> Probably not


But since 8pack has stated the 8700K has a better IMC and therefore can run faster memory than a 7700K would that not make the 8700K faster? not the other way around given same IPC and clocks.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> But since 8pack has stated the 8700K has a better IMC and therefore can run faster memory than a 7700K would that not make the 8700K faster? not the other way around given same IPC and clocks.


Sorry I missed you're "slower" there at the end
Thought it's the other way around

Why is the 8th generation slower?

Early UEFI?
Also I haven't watched it
But if one leaves things on auto with z boards then some things might be auto OC'ing a bit

Especially on the more mature platform

Like increasing BCLK by 2Mhz would result in higher frequency on the CPU for instance

It's a reason why an Asus board is sometimes faster then a Gigabyte one in benches

MCE comes to mind on Asus

So when you're doing an apples to apples you have to make sure all is the same

Looks close enough to me









That test isn't multithreading


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Sorry I missed you're "slower" there at the end
> Thought it's the other way around
> 
> Why is the 8th generation slower?
> 
> Early UEFI?
> Also I haven't watched it
> But if one leaves things on auto with z boards then some things might be auto OC'ing a bit
> 
> Especially on the more mature platform










cool had me confused for a minute there lol


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cool had me confused for a minute there lol


If I had an itch now the 8700k would be a great choice no matter what

It *has* the stuff to be another 2600k

I'd never buy an i5 again

Always regretting not spending that little bit more


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> If I had an itch now the 8700k would be a great choice no matter what
> 
> It *has* the stuff to be another 2600k


Since Im not going to loose single threaded performance due to lower clocks but will gain in the few multi threaded applications that I use Im getting an itch, my wallet hates me


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darksideleader*
> 
> HT isn't some magical thing that automatically increases performance by 40%. Long story short, it creates more logical processors with an optimized scheduler that can handle more multithread loads better. It can even potentially lower performance if the application only needs good single threaded performance since you virtually turned the single core into two.
> 
> It's not HT getting more "proficient", its just software being better optimized and multi-threaded for more cores and threads since its the hardware trend now.


Actually, it's about game developers adding source code to test for HT, and locking important threads to real cores. Multithreaded SW from before HT era is in serious trouble. It's not like SW was more optimized. SW worked fine with some who spend 3000 hours of spare time by self-education and by doing multithreaded tests and various other stuff. They just added non existing cores, variable CPU core frequency, and TPM absurdity.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> There is a mistake
> 6700K 94 and 7700K 128 FPS ?? NOPE
> If it was with the same ram ,max 10% fps


Actually they tested with turbo enabled. 6700K has 4.2 GHz max, and 7700K has 4.5 GHz max. Funny is Watch Dogs 2 internal update rate is 2^7 updates per seconds max, thus it will not run faster.


----------



## HAL900




----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> So did you find that post?


Yep post nr
#2204 and a #2206.


----------



## Raghar

I looked at Skylake-X current stocks, and the results were like this:
7800X, shop removed it from inventory completely. For special order only.
7820X, nobody cares and it's fully stocked.
7900X, looks like there are some sales.

If HEDT was an Intel idea to get large margin per CPU, it backfired spectacularly.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Honestly a 360mm rad would be enough cooling for a 1080ti and a 8700k. I would skip a super slim one like fractal s36 tho.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Yep post nr
> #2204 and a #2206.


Were they me or someone else? Check your facts and try replying to P.M before you look stupid


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> I looked at Skylake-X current stocks, and the results were like this:
> 7800X, shop removed it from inventory completely. For special order only.
> 7820X, nobody cares and it's fully stocked.
> 7900X, looks like there are some sales.
> 
> If HEDT was an Intel idea to get large margin per CPU, it backfired spectacularly.


Hehe. And the 7800X was on huge sale just a few weeks before CFL launch. Like 20-30% Off. EOL?

I'd personally go with 7820X minimum for the "HEDT" platform. I don't see the point in any of the cheaper ones really.


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> If I had an itch now the 8700k would be a great choice no matter what
> 
> It *has* the stuff to be another 2600k
> 
> I'd never buy an i5 again
> 
> Always regretting not spending that little bit more


I'd agree with you there (early 2600k adopter), but a lot of gaming benches are showing the 8600k ahead of or equal to the 8700k. Tom's even reached out to Intel to get their input as they 8600k regularly pulled ahead in gaming benches. Looks like a good chip to me.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Ran Cinebench R15 on my 8700K at 5.3ghz on all cores at 1.39 volts and at 3600 XMP memory timings. The cpu is not delidded and I have hit the limit of the cpu temperature wise, as it peaked at 91-92 degrees during the run.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Ran Cinebench R15 on my 8700K at 5.3ghz on all cores at 1.39 volts and at 3600 XMP memory timings. The cpu is not delidded and I have hit the limit of the cpu temperature wise, as it peaked at 91-92 degrees during the run.


congratz on your chip ! May I ask your singlecore cinebench test result as well plz ?


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Exactly, my workloads put me in the same boat
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but not a difference in hours maybe a few seconds.


Try to have Picasa, Lightroom, Photoshop Elements, Corel Paint Shop Pro, Magic Photo Manager or Photobounce do a face recognition run of thousands of image files. You can leave your computer for a few hours now while the majority of your CPU cores twiddle their virtual thumbs idling.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> Try to have Picasa, Lightroom, Photoshop Elements, Corel Paint Shop Pro, Magic Photo Manager or Photobounce do a face recognition run of thousands of image files. You can leave your computer for a few hours now while the majority of your CPU cores twiddle their virtual thumbs idling.


Sounds like a rather very specific problem

Just like that one user that you have in a thread saying they *need* 10cores/20 threads because they like streaming, gaming and having hundreds of tabs open in chrome

Maybe invest in phase change cooling and get those sweet Mhz up
Or a water chiller, or head on over to the peltier guys
If it is so important/making money because

IPC isn't going through the roof any time soon, or if it is then at the cost of frequency, again

Also most of those tasks should benefit from an M2 drive(even better in an aray)/RAM drive for scrubbing and more RAM speed should do quite something there as well

And at Overclockers UK you can get a 7740x binned at 5.4Ghz, with some phase change equpiment you might get even a few more hundred Mhz out of it


----------



## Cascade

So who has an i5-8400 now? How does your own performance compare to the conclusions of the reviews


----------



## Scotty99

Eh i also never claimed a 240 is a good idea, merely pointed out that is what EK includes in their fluid gaming kits with the waterblock. A normal thickness 360 tho is more than fine for GPU and CPU.


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Sounds like a rather very specific problem


Yes, just as specific as decoding JPG (and other image) files for viewing, even more so as part of PDF files, the latter of which are rather unusual nowadays, too. LibreOffice and MS Office are also very specific indeed. As is virus scanning, program installations, MMORPGs, single browser tabs, Windows services, printing, cloud drive indexing/syncing and all the other common desktop tasks where my computer let's me wait for it to finish while all but 1 or 2 CPU cores are idle.

Oh, wait, I think we had a misunderstanding there. I was just giving one specific example, not claiming a single specific use for my PC. I also mean to remember to have stated that this mostly is a software problem, as in software not making good use of all the cores we throw at it. That must have been where we lost each other...


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> Yes, just as specific as decoding JPG (and other image) files for viewing, even more so as part of PDF files, the latter of which are rather unusual nowadays, too. LibreOffice and MS Office are also very specific indeed. As is virus scanning, program installations, MMORPGs, single browser tabs, Windows services, printing, cloud drive indexing/syncing and all the other common desktop tasks where my computer let's me wait for it to finish.
> 
> Oh, wait, I think we had a misunderstanding there. I was just giving one specific example, not claiming a single specific use for my PC. That must have been where we lost each other...


Programm installation should mutlitread, and usually it takes longer to download 50gb of installation data than it does installing
writing a letter I'm not sure how much IPC one needs
But a q6600 usually has enough for that

Kaspersky sure used more than one core
Chrome can multithread, edge can make use 9f it
Firefox finally does and the rest doesn't even use the CPU beyond single digit%

Really, you're waiting hours long on printing because the spooler doesn't multithread but needs high IPC?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> You can leave your computer for a few hours now while the majority of your CPU cores twiddle their virtual thumbs idling.


Ohh and

Having a Raid 5 array made out of M2 drives on x299 would definatly do something for you if you're handling so many pictures all the time
Or a RAM drive, where 128gb of RAM would be useful as well


----------



## czin125

That 7740X has a mininum cooling of only a 240mm AIO or the A240 and it was probably binned on a lower end X299 board. The R6A should be able to get 5.5+ on water. Maybe even 5.55 on decent voltage.


----------



## Timur Born

Yes, there are many things that "should". If only practice would meet theory more often... we wouldn't even be in this thread, but happily use our 8+ core CPUs ever after.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> The R6A should be able to get *5.5+ on water*. Maybe even 5.55 on decent voltage.


----------



## profundido

I just digested alot of reviews and testing results/linked in the many posts here and all the opinions on whether it's justifiable to buy double the price for a binned 8700k or not. My situation is easy: money is not an issue with every year a few thousand of budget available for meaningful hardware upgrades, so the question becomes what is meaningful to my specific user case.

2 years ago I made a new platform (case+WC+computer hardware) from scratch with a really good custom water loop to grant me thermal headroom for the future because I believed that this would become more important than the pure luxury it used to be at that point in time. I paid arond 1800€ I believe for the 6950x processor which was a beast at that time (and still is in terms of multicore performance). To all US friends here, you can convert that to dollars...

It turned out to be a poor clocker but at 4.2Ghz but I found that it gave me more than enough multicore processing power for my video editing and all other tasks, more than I really need anyway. I could litteraly do with less but I rather safe than sorry. However the single core performance turned out to be roughly the same as my then previous platform. That was a bit of a let down tbh, since I notice that most of the programs are still singlethread-bound even up till today anno 2017 (almost 2018)

Gaming wise I only play mmo's which turn out to be cpu bound in ways that gamereview tests don't even come close to. The one I'm currently playing seems to scale 1 on 1 with singlethread performance fps wise.

so where my previous 6950x processor cost me 1800€ for the cpu alone (still no problem at all) while having dissapointing single thread performance I can now easily upgrade to a new cpu for 780€ which will give me almost the same multicore performance but a netto 25% singlethread performance increase. That's a no-brainer to me. I really have to laugh at how all reviews talk about a 1.6% fps increase in a 1080p cpu-bound scenario while my game litteraly gets 25% fps increase from upgrading to this cpu. Therefore I'm going to order a [email protected] as soon as my preferred motherboard is available for purchase and I won't regret it for a single second.

Binned, pre-delidded for convenience and polished IHS for better contact is enough for me. I don't believe a Silver IHS will make a significant thermal difference on water, maybe on liquid nitrogen but then I'd just rather omit the IHS all together. Anyway that's beyond the scope of daily longterm use.

I have a platform with a [email protected] at another location that I delidded myself. Poor clocker again with a thermal hard cap that will be the exact same in 8700K no doubt. I do miss some multicore performance on that machine which sometimes bottlenecks me but love the singlethread performance. Therefore I feel that [email protected] will be the sweet spot for my personal profile but this time -with my eternal piss poor luck- I want a absolute guarantee that I'll be able to reach the desired clockspeed, and as I said money is not an issue. So I'll gladly pay for the binned 8700K and reassign the 6950X platform to a new life in a different and specific multicore role


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*


Probably referring to me And the 5.4Ghz binned

which was available for order last week, says out of stock now


Quote:


> PLEASE NOTE: Minimum cooling for this binned CPU is as follows:
> 
> EK Water Blocks A240 Fluid Gaming Performance Water Cooling Kit
> OCUK techlabs 240mm AIO Liquid cooler


It may clock higher with better cooling, more voltage and using "only" Asus Realbench like silicon lottery uses


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> a very long, yet very thoughtful post


If money isn't an issue you should know that Caseking tests the binned CPU's with Prime, which is harder to pass than RealBench that Silicon Lottery uses

On top of that, while I'm not sure if it does anything, they also offer lapped IHS, or custom silver ones

So all in all you might be able to OC even more by ordering from them (using only RealBench as well, some fine tuning, better cooling with custom/lapped IHS)
Which might also be more expensive of course


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> If money isn't an issue you should know that Caseking tests the binned CPU's with Prime, which is harder to pass than RealBench that Silicon Lottery uses
> 
> On top of that, while I'm not sure if it does anything, they also offer lapped IHS, or custom silver ones
> 
> So all in all you might be able to OC even more by ordering from them (using only RealBench as well, some fine tuning, better cooling with custom/lapped IHS)
> Which might also be more expensive of course


Ah thx, I didn't know that about the stress testing. Good to know ! Nevertheless I was planning on ordering there because I hate customs and this is closest to my country and fastest delivery. My current whish list item is this one:

https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-core-i7-8700k-5-2-ghz-pro-edition-cpbu-159.html


----------



## Contiusa

For you guys that are satisfied with the 6800K performance, you seem to be missing the point. For the record, gaming benches means anything.

On both Cinebench tests in multithread:

I7-8700K is 52% ahead of the i7-7700K. If we take into account that the 8700K has 100mhz less, we have 54%. Impressive, it scaled correctly with two extra cores.

I7-8700K is 51% ahead of the i5-8600K. If we take into account the 8600K IS 200mhz behind, we have 47%. So Hyper Threading is accounting for 47% gains?

But let's go further.

The i5-8600K is 23% ahead of i5-7600K. The 7600K might be 100mhz behind, so we have 21% of gains. Literally ***? Where did go the other 30%?

And some more...

The i7-7700K is 22% ahead of the i5-7600K. If we take into account the 300mhz advantage of the i7-7700K, we have 16% ahead, which is more in line with the 20-30% gains max with HT.

See the difference of how the chips are scaling and how the i5-8600K is not scaling at all, only 21% ahead of the i5-7600K? If this is it, the chip is a dud and the i3 might go down the same path. Or then it is a bench / Windows problem.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> Ah thx, I didn't know that about the stress testing. Good to know ! Nevertheless I was planning on ordering there because I hate customs and this is closest to my country and fastest delivery. My current whish list item is this one:
> 
> https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-core-i7-8700k-5-2-ghz-pro-edition-cpbu-159.html


I had the same thoughts process and went for it


----------



## Scotty99

You could have gotten a 7820x and a motherboard for that price lol.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You could have gotten a 7820x and a motherboard for that price lol.


Would have been worse for games


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Seems to me like you're overthinking a lot, or are overexpecting
> 
> If you're into compute then you're on the wrong line of chips
> You need to go HEDT
> 
> HT is not a flat out bonus that always gives a noticeable speed bump
> Of course if one can go i7, that's better
> Always has been
> I5 is always the regret after a few months, it's just not such a huge price difference as buying a new board and chip combo again
> 
> As for Ryzen getting spanked
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looks to me like it's doing ok
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Long story short
> It really matters what you do
> 
> High refresh gaming or 4k
> And of course I picked that test at 4k for a reason
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If someone on a budget can grab a cheap z170 and 7700k combo (used) then that's a good deal as well


I really don't get people like this. Ryzen is great cpu everyone knows it. I even bought a Ryzen 1700x for myself but you don't have to cherry pick benchmarks just to make it look good. we all know what its strengths and weaknesses are. as for me I know them very well. I was an early adopter with Ryzen. bought my 1700x on day 1


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> Ah thx, I didn't know that about the stress testing. Good to know ! Nevertheless I was planning on ordering there because I hate customs and this is closest to my country and fastest delivery. My current whish list item is this one:
> 
> https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-core-i7-8700k-5-2-ghz-pro-edition-cpbu-159.html


It's right in the item description, just need to translate:
Quote:


> Note 2:For overclocked processors of the Intel "Coffee Lake" series, an offset value should be set in relation to the OC clock for the use of (rare) applications with AVX support in the UEFI in order to avoid overheating. In order to evaluate the maximum clock values of the booted CPUs and to ensure their stability, the analyst tests each individual copy for at least one hour under Prime95 26.6 with 1344K.


And yes, it's decapitated!









BTW, is 1344K 1 hour in prime95 really that much more stressfull than 1 hour of RB?


----------



## Scotty99

I hate to break it to you but given that you are on a 1440p screen most games arent going to see even a 1 fps difference fro ma 4790k to a 8700k. There are only a handful of titles that are CPU bottlenecks at 1440, mmo's being the most obvious.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I hate to break it to you but given that you are on a 1440p screen most games arent going to see even a 1 fps difference fro ma 4790k to a 8700k. There are only a handful of titles that are CPU bottlenecks at 1440, mmo's being the most obvious.


Well ge did specific that he knows, and that some of the titles he play just need that IPC and freqnecy gain


----------



## Scotty99

K as long as he knows lol.

Not being critical, i am in the same boat : )

Whats funny is how 1440 changes the game. You can save yourself a boatload of money on a CPU if you just buy a 1440p screen, and those have come down in price a lot lately.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> It's right in the item description, just need to translate:
> And yes, it's decapitated!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BTW, is 1344K 1 hour in prime95 really that much more stressfull than 1 hour of RB?


Mmm
Usually it's more difficult, way more

That being said it's 26.6
that's without AVX

Sadly I don't have 26.6 on this chart handy
Note that more temp does not necessarily mean more difficult









Thats from the Kaby Lake OC thread


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> K as long as he knows lol.
> 
> Not being critical, i am in the same boat : )
> 
> Whats funny is how 1440 changes the game. You can save yourself a boatload of money on a CPU if you just buy a 1440p screen, and those have come down in price a lot lately.


Ho I know that I should not expect a big jump in FPS coming from a 4790K (even though I play a lot of CSGO and sometimes WoW when I feel like it). But I wanted to upgrade for about a year, and kinda went all in








Also my 4790K is a POS that doesn't oc very well.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Mmm
> Usually it's more difficult, way more
> 
> That being said it's 26.6
> that's without AVX
> 
> Sadly I don't have 26.6 on this chart handy
> Note that more temp does not necessarily mean more difficult
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thats from the Kaby Lake OC thread


The problem with synthetic tests are that they tend to exercise only a few instructions in tight loops and leave most other instructions (ports) unstressed. Just saying, you're paying good money for this binning service -- just understand that at best, you're getting a baseline and not necessarily complete stability as you might believe.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Ho I know that I should not expect a big jump in FPS coming from a 4790K. But I wanted to upgrade for about a year, and kinda went all in
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also my 4790K is a POS that doesn't oc very well.


Well on the upside you might find yourself without a worthy repcament for a long time

Kaby Lake IPC with 6 cores/12 threads at 5.2 Ghz isn't going to be easily replaced









If I had to take a guess it's either that something died or the platform just getting too old to force an upgrade








Not because Intel actually got something better


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Ho I know that I should not expect a big jump in FPS coming from a 4790K. But I wanted to upgrade for about a year, and kinda went all in
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also my 4790K is a POS that doesn't oc very well.


Legit only reason im considering coffee is world of warcraft. I need to test for myself tho to see if its worth it, ive asked people with 7700k's in game to stand next to me and our FPS difference is only ~5-10%, but they are likely at stock speeds as well.

Oh right and destiny 2, but apparently that game is not recognizing AMD's hyperthreading properly, or wasnt in beta at least.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Legit only reason im considering coffee is world of warcraft. I need to test for myself tho to see if its worth it, ive asked people with 7700k's in game to stand next to me and our FPS difference is only ~5-10%, but they are likely at stock speeds as well.


I edited my post to add some details : I play a lot of CSGO and PUBG. I also tend to play WoW when I and my friends feel like it.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> The problem with synthetic tests are that they tend to exercise only a few instructions in tight loops and leave most other instructions (ports) unstressed. Just saying, you're paying good money for this binning service -- just understand that at best, you're getting a baseline and not necessarily complete stability as you might believe.


I don't say that at all I think

Just mentioned that when it comes to stesstesting programs Prime is harder than RealBench

However RealBench tries to imitate a more usual workload I think
At least it's using Blender as part of its test

Just noting that a CPU tested with Prime *might* achieve higher clocks under more usual conditions (stable) than a CPU tested with RealBench
That one might really already at the max it can do


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> I edited my post to add some details : I play a lot of CSGO and PUBG. I also tend to play WoW when I and my friends feel like it.


Ya PUBG could be a good reason, ive heard most play that on low anyways since its optimized so poorly.


----------



## czin125

He's binning them with a X61 ( 280mm AIO ) on caseking.


----------



## Scotty99

Im a newegg premiere member and i just called to see if they had any info on 8700k's and he said its the most popular CPU they have ever had, and that they made an order on the 6th for around 5000 units and just to keep an eye out lol.

Well he didnt say exactly that, he said its the fastest he had ever seen a CPU sell.


----------



## kd5151

No stock.


----------



## mdd1986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Im a newegg premiere member and i just called to see if they had any info on 8700k's and he said its the most popular CPU they have ever had, and that they made an order on the 6th for around 5000 units and just to keep an eye out lol.
> 
> Well he didnt say exactly that, he said its the fastest he had ever seen a CPU sell.


fake news media.


----------



## Scotty99

I mean id rather wait for microcenter, but i think its gonna be a while before they offer combo discounts and until then newegg will be cheaper since no tax for me.


----------



## kd5151

https://www.techpowerup.com/237695/newegg-confirms-limited-availability-of-intel-core-8th-gen-processors


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/237695/newegg-confirms-limited-availability-of-intel-core-8th-gen-processors


Well the guy on the phone was right then they did put in a big order, he didnt know when tho so that 3-5 week timeframe is probably accurate


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well the guy on the phone was right then they did put in a big order, he didnt know when tho so that 3-5 week timeframe is probably accurate


3000, 5000. Is that enough? Better order quick!


----------



## QuadDamage

I'm still waiting on amazon when I did my pre order on the 5th 9 am batch
If you guys want talk with chat online and ask for a gift card for the long wait I have 2 $5 gift cards as they can't give me a eta date yet just keep getting a different chat rep and ask for compensation.

I know 10 bucks big deal still better then nothing.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Probably referring to me And the 5.4Ghz binned
> 
> which was available for order last week, says out of stock now


The joke is in buying X299 Kaby Lake parts


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> The joke is in buying X299 Kaby Lake parts


I see

Buy why wouldn't you buy a platform with quad channel and a load of PCIe lanes only to not have them using a desktop chip









Frankly a 8700k with quad channel and all the lanes a 6 core chip on x299 gets (since Intel loves segregation) would make me jump to x299

I really like an Asus board on that line


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well the guy on the phone was right then they did put in a big order, he didnt know when tho so that 3-5 week timeframe is probably accurate


5000 isn't a larger order by any stretch of the imagination for one of the biggest hardware retail sites...


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> 5000 isn't a larger order by any stretch of the imagination for one of the biggest hardware retail sites...


The reading comprehension on this forum is lower than any i've visited in recent memory.

The 5000 number means nothing here, simply the fact that its in the ballpark of what i was told would in turn lend credence to the 3-5 week availability window.


----------



## Scotty99

Personal attacks lol? That's simply me making an observation, clearly you didnt understand what was being implied with my statement.

3000, 5000, 7000 whatever that isnt the point, the fact two people got a number out of newegg gives the 3-5 week rumor more credibility.


----------



## TMatzelle60

i wonder how long it will take before these chips come in stock


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> i wonder how long it will take before these chips come in stock


Given the newegg info, 3-5 weeks sounds pretty accurate. That isnt too far off the original rumors from the swedish sites saying 2018.

Usually when stuff goes out of stock there is a "auto notify" button, we dont even have that soooo ya its looking pretty grim lol.


----------



## TMatzelle60

i might just buy all my stuff and wait for the cpu ill order it and just wait


----------



## mdd1986

dude its really 5,231 units. Come on get it right


----------



## TMatzelle60

Would it be wrong to get all my stuff while cpu is on back order?

Just wait for cpu


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Would it be wrong to get all my stuff while cpu is on back order?
> 
> Just wait for cpu


No but you might as well wait for more motherboard reviews to pop up and such


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *darksideleader*
> 
> HT isn't some magical thing that automatically increases performance by 40%. Long story short, it creates more logical processors with an optimized scheduler that can handle more multithread loads better. It can even potentially lower performance if the application only needs good single threaded performance since you virtually turned the single core into two.
> 
> It's not HT getting more "proficient", its just software being better optimized and multi-threaded for more cores and threads since its the hardware trend now.
> 
> 
> 
> Nonetheless the gain of the 7700K compared to the 8600K is of +40% just by having HT. No matter the reason, you just do the math. The result is that the i5-8600K is getting spanked by the R5 1600X, which is cheaper. Or you could get even a cheaper 1600 and overclock it with a cheap air cooler... Not only that, but this will trickle down to the i3 as well (that has no HT). In short, there is a big void / hindering in the Intel lineup.
> 
> Why no one is talking that the i5 is being halted right off the gate for the lack of HT? Either that or the benches / Windows are not used to six real cores.
> 
> Edit: not talking about games, but computing performance.
Click to expand...

The i5 8600k spanks the R5 1600X in PCMark 10.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> 78 vs 128 in stock and oc 8700K end graphic or ram in 8700K


Also it could be that game does not know what to do with 12 threads.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cool had me confused for a minute there lol
> 
> 
> 
> If I had an itch now the 8700k would be a great choice no matter what
> 
> It *has* the stuff to be another 2600k
> 
> I'd never buy an i5 again
> 
> Always regretting not spending that little bit more
Click to expand...

I'm happy with my i5 7600k for gaming and all other tasks that I do because I use my PC for everything no regrets from me and the i5 8600k will be great and I will see no improvement on anything.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> For you guys that are satisfied with the 6800K performance, you seem to be missing the point. For the record, gaming benches means anything.
> 
> On both Cinebench tests in multithread:
> 
> I7-8700K is 52% ahead of the i7-7700K. If we take into account that the 8700K has 100mhz less, we have 54%. Impressive, it scaled correctly with two extra cores.
> 
> I7-8700K is 51% ahead of the i5-8600K. If we take into account the 8600K IS 200mhz behind, we have 47%. So Hyper Threading is accounting for 47% gains?
> 
> But let's go further.
> 
> The i5-8600K is 23% ahead of i5-7600K. The 7600K might be 100mhz behind, so we have 21% of gains. Literally ***? Where did go the other 30%?
> 
> And some more...
> 
> The i7-7700K is 22% ahead of the i5-7600K. If we take into account the 300mhz advantage of the i7-7700K, we have 16% ahead, which is more in line with the 20-30% gains max with HT.
> 
> See the difference of how the chips are scaling and how the i5-8600K is not scaling at all, only 21% ahead of the i5-7600K? If this is it, the chip is a dud and the i3 might go down the same path. Or then it is a bench / Windows problem.


I think it is a software problem since there is only 6 threads instead of 8 threads.


----------



## HAL900

i7 8700k has 4.3 and 7700K 4.4 in real turbo mode


----------



## TMatzelle60

Im really worried im building a sff computer and looking at getting the 8700 non k. will this hurt gaming performance?

What will the lower base clock effect?


----------



## Scotty99

Enable multicore enhancement and dont worry about it. Base clocks on coffee are weird, i dont know how they work.


----------



## HAL900

cannon lake will be 8/16?


----------



## Scotty99

WIth all the problems they have had with 10nm do we really expect 5ghz on the first iteration? My guess is they will have to add cores to make up for the lower clock speeds.


----------



## RXWX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> cannon lake will be 8/16?


ppl told me that that there will be no cannon lake in desktop.


----------



## Scotty99

Oh thats possible too i guess, if there is no desktop variation for cannonlake that would give them time to work on 10nm clockspeeds.


----------



## Dennybrig

Guys, do anyone know if there is currently a Z370 MOBO that supports 4 way SLI?

I was surprised (while browsing on Newegg) that there is not a single one that implies that it supports it.

I mean, with MOBOS like the Asrock Z270 Supercarrier around i don´t see why nobody has just sticked a PLX chip on a MOBO and called it a day.

Please let me know if you guys know of one.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> WIth all the problems they have had with 10nm do we really expect 5ghz on the first iteration? My guess is they will have to add cores to make up for the lower clock speeds.


I guess it's a good thing that it's not coming to desktop until the second iteration.


----------



## axiumone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dennybrig*
> 
> Guys, do anyone know if there is currently a Z370 MOBO that supports 4 way SLI?
> 
> I was surprised (while browsing on Newegg) that there is not a single one that implies that it supports it.
> 
> I mean, with MOBOS like the Asrock Z270 Supercarrier around i don´t see why nobody has just sticked a PLX chip on a MOBO and called it a day.
> 
> Please let me know if you guys know of one.


None out there at the moment. The PLX chip boards usually come out a few months after launch.


----------



## dubldwn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> i might just buy all my stuff and wait for the cpu ill order it and just wait


Don't buy anything until you can buy everything. _Especially_ if you're talking several weeks. One reason is you want to make sure everything works right away. Another is sales. Another is preference changes.


----------



## Jyssi

Which settings should I change in order to OC 8700k on Gigabyte Aorus 5? List them all pls, I'm going mad









I can't get past this 4300mhz 6core cap. PC boots normally to windows and I can see 4.9GHz clocks, but immediately after I start stress test, all cores dive to 4.3GHz and wont rise again before reboot. I'd assume its power setting somewhere?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The i5 8600k spanks the R5 1600X in PCMark 10.


My 7700K spanks both of them


----------



## Scotty99

Never overclocked on a gigabyte board, but it should be as easy as changing a multiplier and having "sync all cores" checked. I prefer to overclock per core, but most usually check that box.


----------



## Leopard2lx

Is it worth upgrading from a i5 4670k to play exclusively at 4K where CPU is not that big of a factor? Or is it just better to spend that money on a 1080ti?


----------



## SuperZan

If you play any demanding games, get the 1080 Ti and reevaluate the cpu scene next cycle. If you play MMOs/Mobas and the like and do some streaming, recording, voice comms, etc. while gaming, Coffee Lake could be good for you, though I’d still lean towards the 1080 Ti.


----------



## tw2

Definitely get the 1080ti. It is probably worth upgrading cpu too but no question of which order to go in.


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Leopard2lx*
> 
> Is it worth upgrading from a i5 4670k to play exclusively at 4K where CPU is not that big of a factor? Or is it just better to spend that money on a 1080ti?


If playing at 4K, I'd put that money on the GPU. Not to mention that there's still those rumors of a 8-core mainstream chip coming in the next year or so, which would be pretty amazing if true.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jyssi*
> 
> Which settings should I change in order to OC 8700k on Gigabyte Aorus 5? List them all pls, I'm going mad
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can't get past this 4300mhz 6core cap. PC boots normally to windows and I can see 4.9GHz clocks, but immediately after I start stress test, all cores dive to 4.3GHz and wont rise again before reboot. I'd assume its power setting somewhere?


Give more information on what you have done and temperature also what stress test?


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dennybrig*
> 
> Guys, do anyone know if there is currently a Z370 MOBO that supports 4 way SLI?
> 
> I was surprised (while browsing on Newegg) that there is not a single one that implies that it supports it.
> 
> I mean, with MOBOS like the Asrock Z270 Supercarrier around i don´t see why nobody has just sticked a PLX chip on a MOBO and called it a day.
> 
> Please let me know if you guys know of one.


The real question is, why would you want 4-way SLI? Pascal cards don't support it, and dual 1080 Ti's will beat any older 4-way config.


----------



## tw2

Slightly off topic but what ram are you guys using, i see gskill have just brought out a trident series specifically for the 8th gen. Is there actually a difference in ram designed for particular platforms? I see they released a ryzen one too.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> Slightly off topic but what ram are you guys using, i see gskill have just brought out a trident series specifically for the 8th gen. Is there actually a difference in ram designed for particular platforms? I see they released a ryzen one too.


I dont think there is a difference in RAM design for this generation other than higher RAM speeds, coffee has a better memory controller than Kaby from all reports


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dennybrig*
> 
> Guys, do anyone know if there is currently a Z370 MOBO that supports 4 way SLI?
> 
> I was surprised (while browsing on Newegg) that there is not a single one that implies that it supports it.
> 
> I mean, with MOBOS like the Asrock Z270 Supercarrier around i don´t see why nobody has just sticked a PLX chip on a MOBO and called it a day.
> 
> Please let me know if you guys know of one.


Because anything other than 2 way SLI is no longer supported by Nvidia, anyone who still wants to use more than 2 cards is either a miner or someone who benches 3DMark all day in which case they are more likely to use X299, PLX chips are expensive to put on a board as well as adding latency and is aimed at a very small market


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> The real question is, why would you want 4-way SLI? Pascal cards don't support it, and dual 1080 Ti's will beat any older 4-way config.


It's hard, but not impossible to get 4-way SLI working on Pascal.


----------



## NorcalTRD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> Slightly off topic but what ram are you guys using, i see gskill have just brought out a trident series specifically for the 8th gen. Is there actually a difference in ram designed for particular platforms? I see they released a ryzen one too.


https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232485&cm_re=3200_gskill_trident_ddr4-_-20-232-485-_-Product

16gb of DDR4 3200mhz CAS 14 latency


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> If you play any demanding games, get the 1080 Ti and reevaluate the cpu scene next cycle. If you play MMOs/Mobas and the like and do some streaming, recording, voice comms, etc. while gaming, Coffee Lake could be good for you, though I'd still lean towards the 1080 Ti.


QFT.

Seriously, if gaming is your primary concern then the CPU/platform you get should be way down the list of priorities. For now and probably well into the future its all about the GPU (unless you are already severely limited by the CPU with whatever GPU you currently have). The CPU is really fairly inconsequential for FPS in games unless, again, you are severely bottlenecked already. If you already have anything remotely modern (think any i7 or i5 from SB onwards) then you will absolutely see much more significant gains from upgrading the GPU and then dealing with the CPU later (caveat being if you want to play 1080p/200+Hz, although I still think you will see better FPS with a more powerful GPU rather than CPU).

Another reason the CPU should be down on your priorities list is that its much more impractical to change a CPU than a GPU since you will also have to get the entire platform and probably new memory as well (DDR4 vs DDR3).


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> The real question is, why would you want 4-way SLI? Pascal cards don't support it, and dual 1080 Ti's will beat any older 4-way config.


AFAIK no Nvidia cards have ever technically supported 4-way SLI (but of course it still works regardless of what the specs say). I know Baasha has 4-way working just fine with his Pascal cards...


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> AFAIK no Nvidia cards have ever technically supported 4-way SLI (but of course it still works regardless of what the specs say). I know Baasha has 4-way working just fine with his Pascal cards...


You recall incorrectly. That was the original reason why higher end cards had two fingers. If it wasn't supported in the past it wouldn't have been possible in the first place. Also, define "just fine"


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> You recall incorrectly. That was the original reason why higher end cards had two fingers. If it wasn't supported in the past it wouldn't have been possible in the first place. Also, define "just fine"


Just search for the user Baasha on this forum. 95-99% usage across 4 GPUs is impressive for something that doesn't have official support for 4-way SLI.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Nvidia officially supported 3-way but not 4. Though I could be wrong, but that was what I always heard.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Nvidia officially supported 3-way but not 4. Though I could be wrong, but that was what I always heard.


You heard incorrectly. 4-way SLI would never have existed if it were never supported because then the bridges wouldn't exist, at least not from AIB partners or motherboard makers.

Edit: Just to make sure that this debate doesn't go on forever: https://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-980-ti/specifications


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232485&cm_re=3200_gskill_trident_ddr4-_-20-232-485-_-Product
> 
> 16gb of DDR4 3200mhz CAS 14 latency


I saw that one, looks like a good combination of timing and speed.

Does anyone know if there are any tests of best memory combinations/settings yet for coffee lake? Timing vs speed etc.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Nvidia officially supported 3-way but not 4. Though I could be wrong, but that was what I always heard.
> 
> 
> 
> You heard incorrectly. 4-way SLI would never have existed if it were never supported because then the bridges wouldn't exist, at least not from AIB partners or motherboard makers.
> 
> Edit: Just to make sure that this debate doesn't go on forever: https://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-980-ti/specifications
Click to expand...

The pascal GeForce GTX SLI HB bridge only supports 2x Nvidia cards. LINK: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/products/10series/geforce-gtx-1080-ti/


----------



## Kana Chan

4way Titan Xp

http://www.nvidia.com/object/quadro-sync.html Up to 8 way with Quadro cards. Can this be used to play games?


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dennybrig*
> 
> Guys, do anyone know if there is currently a Z370 MOBO that supports 4 way SLI?
> 
> I was surprised (while browsing on Newegg) that there is not a single one that implies that it supports it.
> 
> I mean, with MOBOS like the Asrock Z270 Supercarrier around i don´t see why nobody has just sticked a PLX chip on a MOBO and called it a day.
> 
> Please let me know if you guys know of one.


it's not anymore worth it due to really bad support in drivers and games. In addition the PLX chip adds unwanted latency. Even 2-way SLI is losing it's support nowadays

Natively on Z370 platform the PCIE lanes already go down to 8 lanes per card instead of x16 , just enough for a 2-way SLI with negligible fps loss.

I would be truly surprised if motherboard manufacturers would even make a z370 board with a PLX chip


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dennybrig*
> 
> Guys, do anyone know if there is currently a Z370 MOBO that supports 4 way SLI?
> 
> I was surprised (while browsing on Newegg) that there is not a single one that implies that it supports it.
> 
> I mean, with MOBOS like the Asrock Z270 Supercarrier around i don´t see why nobody has just sticked a PLX chip on a MOBO and called it a day.
> 
> Please let me know if you guys know of one.


I'm not sure what for any more

GeForce GTX 1080 and 1070 3-Way and 4-Way SLI will not be enabled for games

Have not seen anything to the contrary yet
Like a news saying they brought it back

Has that changed?
Quad SLI is rare enough as is

Also Vega
AMD Confirms RX Vega Won't Support 3-Way, 4-Way, Crossfire Configurations

Those are the most recent news I'm aware of the matter


----------



## looniam

some folks have found an unsupported work around:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1606006/3dmark-time-spy-benchmark-top-30/0_50


any more info is hanging around the nvidia sub forum . . in posts here and there.

edit: nevermind, too early and forgot nvidia said they _would support benchmarks_. however, there are few using in games by invidia instector settings/driver mod. check those users' posts in the respective owners clubs.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> some folks have found an unsupported work around:
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1606006/3dmark-time-spy-benchmark-top-30/0_50
> 
> 
> any more info is hanging around the nvidia sub forum . . in posts here and there.


that's true, they managed to get it working driver wise at OS level but the practical usage of that 3 and 4 way sli is limited to the synthetic benchmark you posted and 1 or 2 extremely optimized games in which only a few scenes optimally use it. Practical use zero in other words...


----------



## looniam

check my edit. sorry don't have time getting ready for work to search myself.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The pascal GeForce GTX SLI HB bridge only supports 2x Nvidia cards. LINK: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/products/10series/geforce-gtx-1080-ti/


I know. Read a conversation before butting into it lol


----------



## evensen007

Ok, so back to Coffee Lake...


----------



## kevindd992002

Yes, please bring back the discussion to Coffee Lake.


----------



## profundido

right, I just preordered my binned cpu ! It will take a few weeks probably so that should be perfectly timed for when the formula X emerges next month. Meanwhile I got time to order a few extra parts to rework my watercooling loop and then get glubbering







happy times !


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> right, I just preordered my binned cpu ! It will take a few weeks probably so that should be perfectly timed for when the formula IX emergens next month. Meanwhile I got time to order a few extra parts to rework my watercooling loop and then get glubbering
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> happy times !


Nice. I'm also waiting for the Formula X. Are we sure about the next month release ? I heard different things about that.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Nice. I'm also waiting for the Formula X. Are we sure about the next month release ? I heard different things about that.


looks like November http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/z370-motherboard-guide-coffee-lake/


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> looks like November http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/z370-motherboard-guide-coffee-lake/


Thank you for this article, I wasn't aware of it


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Nice. I'm also waiting for the Formula X. Are we sure about the next month release ? I heard different things about that.


Because I now know just how much cooling will matter -thx to all reviews and first user experiences here- I plan to integrate the Formula X integrated VRM watercooling loop into my custom loop and the memory as well.

I have 2 amazing buttight timing memory modules waiting (G.Skill Trident Z F4-3600C15D-16GTZ - DDR4) to be inaugrated and OC'd


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Thank you for this article, I wasn't aware of it


No dramas...its the board Im looking at too but prices in Australia for motherboards are high for some reason, Asus Maximus X Hero is $469 that's a $100 price increase from what Z270 Hero was released at







price for Formula X who knows.


----------



## Glottis

5820K -> 8700K. What do you guys think, would that be a decent upgrade or merely a sidegrade? Tasks mostly gaming and some productivity. Very hard to find comparison between the two CPUs.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> 5820K -> 8700K. What do you guys think, would that be a decent upgrade or merely a sidegrade? Tasks mostly gaming and some productivity. Very hard to find comparison between the two CPUs.


could you download and install Cinebench R15 and run both the singlethread and multithread benchmark ? If you post it here we can compare and predict what improvement you can expect.


----------



## Scotty99

Coffee nor ryzen are upgrade paths for a 5820k, thats still a beast of a CPU.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> right, I just preordered my binned cpu ! It will take a few weeks probably so that should be perfectly timed for when the formula X emerges next month. Meanwhile I got time to order a few extra parts to rework my watercooling loop and then get glubbering
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> happy times !


Where' you preorder your CPU?


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Where' you preorder your CPU?


https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-core-i7-8700k-5-2-ghz-pro-edition-cpbu-159.html

purely because i hate customs and it's closest to my country (and best priced)


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-core-i7-8700k-5-2-ghz-pro-edition-cpbu-159.html
> 
> purely because i hate customs and it's closest to my country (and best priced)


Oh ok. Yeah, goodluck!


----------



## Yetyhunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-core-i7-8700k-5-2-ghz-pro-edition-cpbu-159.html
> 
> purely because i hate customs and it's closest to my country (and best priced)


I will be ordering a system from them and I am also from Belgium, do they charge allot for sipping ? How would you rate them ?

Edit: Please excuse my off topic post.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yetyhunter*
> 
> I will be ordering a system from them and I am also from Belgium, do they charge allot for sipping ? How would you rate them ?


It's a bit off topic, but I order quite a lot from caseking and I'm from France. Shipping starts at 10€ and is by either DHL or UPS. Always been happy with them


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yetyhunter*
> 
> I will be ordering a system from them and I am also from Belgium, do they charge allot for sipping ? How would you rate them ?


I happen to have ordered a very specific monitor from them recently. They were fast on delivery, good priced and cheap on transport cost. I was pleasantly surprised which made me less hesitant to buy again. They are a typical german company after all and those tend to have a good reputation when it comes to doing business...

As for that binned cpu, made by Der8auer: We all know his world famous skills by now so that's not gonna be an issue. Just that the unavailability of the 8700K cpu in general may cause me a really unpleasant long waiting time but we have Intel's paper launch to thank for hat, not the supplyer. It might take long before I get my top binned one but I'm patient. I'm confident to have it somewhere before the end of november, which is when I want to rework my machine and waterloop

oh and they have tracking etc, always nice to have


----------



## AlphaC

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Premiere-Pro-CC-2017-1-2-CPU-Performance-Core-i7-8700K-i5-8600K-i3-8350K-1047/


https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Revit-2018-Coffee-Lake-CPU-Comparison-1052/


https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/After-Effects-CC-2017-2-CPU-Performance-Core-i7-8700K-i5-8600K-i3-8350K-1055/


https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Lightroom-CC-2015-12-CPU-Performance-Core-i7-8700K-i5-8600K-i3-8350K-1056/


https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Photoshop-CC-2017-1-1-CPU-Performance-Core-i7-8700K-i5-8600K-i3-8350K-1057/




http://www.hardwarezone.com.sg/feature-intel-coffee-lake-vs-amd-ryzen-intel-s-answer-ryzen/test-setup-performance-3


----------



## Sharchaster

8700K now is available on where I'm living at, but I'm not sure to pre-order it, I'm afraid I get the bad chip that can't RUN 5 GHz un-delid. Because mine now can did 5 GHz on 7700K.


----------



## Raghar

Folks I looked around and there is a lot of chips incoming. So I wouldn't be worried about availability.


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sharchaster*
> 
> 8700K now is available on where I'm living at, but I'm not sure to pre-order it, I'm afraid I get the bad chip that can't RUN 5 GHz un-delid. Because mine now can did 5 GHz on 7700K.


Easy. Wait for SiliconLottery to sell de-lidded and binned chips. Says 'coming October 20th'.

https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/products/8700k


----------



## evensen007

I've actually decided to wait and let the dust settle. At 3440x1440 resolution (80hz), I'm not really cpu limited and realized I WANTED this thing more than I needed it. That's a real testament to how well Sandy Bridge was designed. My 1080ti is running everything I throw at it at Ultra settings. The only time I feel the Sandy shows it's age is in the random dips in FPS, but it's really few and far between. Looking forward to seeing how you guys do with your tweaking. In the end, I will probably wait for a binned chip from SiliconLottery and be done with it. Have fun.


----------



## Scotty99

Does anyone know exactly how corsair fans interact with MSI boards like the pro carbon?

If anyone doesnt know MSI specifically includes an addressable corsair HD RGB cable. I cannot find any info on the internet about this, does that mean:
1. MSI board lighting is addressable?
2. Corsair HD (addressable) RGB fans can be synced up and controlled with MSI mystic app?

Welp i think i figured it out.

Its just a link connector so that you can sync MSI boards with corsairs lighting program "sync it"

Just odd because they named the cable specifically "- 1 x CORSAIR Individually Addressable RGB LED strip 5V connector" pulled that right from MSI's site.


----------



## jprovido

Got my Gigabyte Z370 Aorus Gaming 7




Still waiting for the 8700k to get back on stock and my Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut. Delidding this beast hopefully I get a better chip this time. my 7700K was ok but needed a lot of voltage at 5.1GHz. hopefully the silicon gods will bless me with a good cpu. I've been a good boy


----------



## NorcalTRD

With the delays and some reviews coming out Im starting to question this 8700k move and possibly wait for z390 platform so im not upgrading to a dead socket.
2500k @ 4.6Ghz, 980ti, 1440p 144hz, primarily gaming and usually only GPU upgrade until a rebuild after 5 years... Worthwhile rebuilding for 8700k and 1080ti atm or wait for Icelake?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> With the delays and some reviews coming out Im starting to question this 8700k move and possibly wait for z390 platform so im not upgrading to a dead socket.
> 2500k @ 4.6Ghz, 980ti, 1440p 144hz, primarily gaming and usually only GPU upgrade until a rebuild after 5 years... Worthwhile rebuilding for 8700k and 1080ti atm or wait for Icelake?


You are always going to be upgrading to a dead socket unless you go AMD.

Personally I don't like re-using motherboards so I don't mind. We don't know anything about Icelake as far as I know(ipc increase? core increase? ghz increase?)

8700k would be a huge upgrade for you and that 144hz monitor.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> Got my Gigabyte Z370 Aorus Gaming 7
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still waiting for the 8700k to get back on stock and my Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut. Delidding this beast hopefully I get a better chip this time. my 7700K was ok but needed a lot of voltage at 5.1GHz. hopefully the silicon gods will bless me with a good cpu. I've been a good boy


Can you please tell me if you can disable Killer NIC in the bios ?


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Can you please tell me if you can disable Killer NIC in the bios ?


I don't have my 8700k yet so I can't help you with this sorry


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I don't have my 8700k yet so I can't help you with this sorry


look in the manual.


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> look in the manual.


https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z370-AORUS-Gaming-7-rev-10#support-manual


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sheyster*
> 
> https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z370-AORUS-Gaming-7-rev-10#support-manual


page 59.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Nice to see that you can disable it. This motherboard seems quite nice.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> look in the manual.


I haven't touched a manual in over a decade lmao


----------



## BiG StroOnZ




----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sharchaster*
> 
> 8700K now is available on where I'm living at, but I'm not sure to pre-order it, I'm afraid I get the bad chip that can't RUN 5 GHz un-delid. Because mine now can did 5 GHz on 7700K.


Where are they available?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> Folks I looked around and there is a lot of chips incoming. So I wouldn't be worried about availability.


Looked around where?


----------



## erocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Where are they available?
> Looked around where?


Ordered mine on the 5th. Newegg still has no idea when.


----------



## QuadDamage

Yeah same Amazon on the 5th at 8 am the second they came on the market
I'm stuck on no information I see a few UK people getting there orders; feelsintelman


----------



## Cascade

Short video of an i5-8400 and GTX 1070. All 6 cores locked at 3.8ghz using a ASUS Prime Z370-a.


----------



## erocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I haven't touched a manual in over a decade lmao


Idk, I've been building computers 30 years and I generally always check the manual.


----------



## kd5151




----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*


The guy is insane recommending a Killer SLI when an Extreme4/ Fatal1ty K6 is like $20 more , let alone Asus Z370-A

Killer SLI is NOT A "tech deal". It has no USB 3.1 gen2, it lacks ALC1220 audio codec, worse VRM.

Same thing for his Ryzen platform. Nobody should buy a Tomahawk for single GPU setups when the B350 Pro Carbon exists. Penny pinching on a long term socket is outright stupid , buying low midrange or higher is smarter.


----------



## Scotty99

I love tech deals, but you are actually right here lol. For another 15 bucks extreme 4 is a much better option. Killer isnt as bad on AMD side surprisingly, i have it.

Side note, i simply cannot decide between strix 370f and msi pro carbon.


----------



## jprovido

Just got my conductonaut in the mail. this will be really unbearable for me since that I have everything I need now (minus the cpu). I haven't even preordered the 8770k yet


----------



## Scotty99

Im watching paul and kyles livestream, and they mentioned 30 days til stock starts showing up lol. Cant remember what source that was from but ya....


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Im watching paul and kyles livestream, and they mentioned 30 days til stock starts showing up lol. Cant remember what source that was from but ya....


30 days is wayy too long. If I get too impatient I might return the motherboard


----------



## Scotty99

Im curious to see what B+H says on the 15th, like are they going to be able to fulfill all the preorders?


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Im curious to see what B+H says on the 15th, like are they going to be able to fulfill all the preorders?


I don't trust em. they delayed my GTX 1080 order last year which I preordered. still got my 1080 on newegg faster without pre orders.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> The guy is insane recommending a Killer SLI when an Extreme4/ Fatal1ty K6 is like $20 more , let alone Asus Z370-A
> 
> Killer SLI is NOT A "tech deal". It has no USB 3.1 gen2, it lacks ALC1220 audio codec, worse VRM.
> 
> Same thing for his Ryzen platform. Nobody should buy a Tomahawk for single GPU setups when the B350 Pro Carbon exists. Penny pinching on a long term socket is outright stupid , buying low midrange or higher is smarter.


I so agree. I really like the ASRock K6. There is one thing that would get my OCD going. The USB 3.0 plug is angled on the prime and strix-f.







I hate the usb 3.0 plug. It's a big connector. Thick cable especially on my fractal. Doesn't bend for nothing. THIS LOOKS SO MUCH CLEANER !


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> I so agree. I really like the ASRock K6. There is one thing that would get my OCD going. The USB 3.0 plug is angled on the prime and strix-f.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hate the usb 3.0 plug. It's a big connector. Thick cable especially on my fractal. Doesn't bend for nothing. THIS LOOKS SO MUCH CLEANER !




https://www.moddiy.com/products/90-Degree-Angled-USB-3.0-19%252dPin-20%252dPin-Internal-Header-Mini-Connector.html ?

$10 problem.

or


https://modmymods.com/usb-3-0-20-pin-internal-header-mf-extension-cable-low-profile-connector-cab027.htmlv


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> https://www.moddiy.com/products/90-Degree-Angled-USB-3.0-19%252dPin-20%252dPin-Internal-Header-Mini-Connector.html ?
> 
> $10 problem.


I want!







Thank You!


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> 
> Just got my conductonaut in the mail. this will be really unbearable for me since that I have everything I need now (minus the cpu). I haven't even preordered the 8770k yet


8770K?


----------



## Scotty99

Ya its the one without a igpu, and 5.5ghz boost clocks.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya its the one without a igpu, and 5.5ghz boost clocks.


So technically that's better than the 8700K, right? Is it announced already? I didn't see it in most of the review articles I've read so far. What happens to the video output ports on the mobo's if you use a CPU without an iGPU?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> So technically that's better than the 8700K, right? Is it announced already? I didn't see it in most of the review articles I've read so far. What happens to the video output ports on the mobo's if you use a CPU without an iGPU?


lol...he was joking dude


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> lol...he was joking dude


Dope


----------



## Scotty99




----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*


I wonder how many reviews of coffee lake are skewed.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Coffee nor ryzen are upgrade paths for a 5820k, thats still a beast of a CPU.


I tend to agree here, unless you just want to have something new and shiny. Heck, I'm still not personally motivated enough to upgrade my ancient 4930K / X79 platform for anything new yet, and my prehistoric 2600K / P67 setup is the PC I'm typing this post on right now...


----------



## czin125

http://coolaler.com/threads/ddr4-4600asus-rog-maximus-x-apex8700k-5ghz-i5-8600k-5ghz-vs-ryzen-5-1600-4ghz.347525/
It looks like the Apex only needs 1.400v for 4600CL19 in this review.


----------



## chaosblade02

Unless I can hit 5.3ghz on the average I7 8700k, I don't see how it's really worth paying more for the K model + a delid over the non-K model. That and the non-K model might be able to squeeze out a couple hundred mhz over turbo with BCLK overclocking.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chaosblade02*
> 
> Unless I can hit 5.3ghz on the average I7 8700k, I don't see how it's really worth paying more for the K model + a delid over the non-K model. That and the non-K model might be able to squeeze out a couple hundred mhz over turbo with BCLK overclocking.


The non k only turbos 1 core at 4.6GHz. I think the i7 8700k is worth it.


----------



## scracy

Well you are desperate for a 8700K








http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Intel-Core-i7-8700K-Coffee-Lake-6-Core-3-7-GHz-LGA-1151-300-Series-95W-BX80684-/272882602669?hash=item3f891212ad:g:QAgAAOSwErFZ3UqM
Or 8600K
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Intel-i5-8600K-UNLOCKED-Coffee-Lake-6-Core-3-6-GHz-LGA-1151-300-Series-95W/222672432210?_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIM.MBE%26ao%3D2%26asc%3D20140106155344%26meid%3D8e9a5846931341feb6f3ce01db46a6ad%26pid%3D100005%26rk%3D6%26rkt%3D6%26sd%3D322813320441&_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m1851


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I wonder how many reviews of coffee lake are skewed.


Not many, if the reviewer knows what he's doing... Gamers Nexus, OC3D and more all mentioned this. And their results are with MCE off.

What I would like to see soon, is retail versions of 8700K/8600K being reviewed/overclocked to see how they compare to ES...

Also, 8700K vs 8600K at same clocks in a bunch of games, at 1080p and 1440p. 7700K and 7600K at same clocks would be even better.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I wonder how many reviews of coffee lake are skewed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not many, if the reviewer knows what he's doing... Gamers Nexus, OC3D and more all mentioned this. And their results are with MCE off.
> 
> What I would like to see soon, is retail versions of 8700K/8600K being reviewed/overclocked to see how they compare to ES...
> 
> Also 8700K vs 8600K at same clocks in a bunch of games, at 1080p and 1440p.
Click to expand...

Where did Gamers Nexus mention MCE?


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Where did Gamers Nexus mention MCE?


https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3077-explaining-coffee-lake-turbo-8700k-8600k


----------



## peter2k

It would be a fine feature
If it wouldn't make the system unstable (guess it's not applying enough voltage for all cores at 4.7Ghz)

At least with gamersnexus

But I'm sure with others as well

That aside
Any reviewer worth his salt should know to leave this off
You can't do an apples to apples test otherwise

Thats why I basically don't trust YouTubers
I've seen some written reviews were they specifically said they switched it off


----------



## e-gate

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> It would be a fine feature
> If it wouldn't make the system unstable (guess it's not applying enough voltage for all cores at 4.7Ghz)
> 
> At least with gamersnexus
> 
> But I'm sure with others as well
> 
> That aside
> Any reviewer worth his salt should know to leave this off
> You can't do an apples to apples test otherwise
> 
> Thats why I basically don't trust YouTubers
> I've seen some written reviews were they specifically said they switched it off


Because they are rushing to make their video and publish it first to grab those precious clicks/views. This is why I trust only reviews which appear later down the line. They usually come out with the real results and observations. That happened with Ryzen reviews. Early reviews were a mess. Few months later we go the real image of Ryzen. You can't thoroughly test something in 2 days.


----------



## stefxyz

Early Ryzen reviews were a mess because the launch was a mess and the mainboards and ram compatibility was a mess... Similar to X299 launch if not worse.


----------



## czin125

https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f139/oc-prozessoren-intel-sockel-1151-coffee-lake-laberthread-1175411-10.html#post25870991
https://abload.de/img/5500-5000-3800-cpuz-19fsrj.png

5500mhz Core at 1.408v ( possibly lower on the Apex )
5000mhz NB Clock
3800 17-18-18-38 378 CR2

https://abload.de/img/5300-5000-3200-nonavxt6seo.png
Same person
5300mhz Core at 1.328v

https://www.facebook.com/allen.golibersuch/videos/10203951298139566/

7740X is able to get 5.5ghz at 1.390v ( temps only 67C max ) and could be lower with a silver ihs and lower delta t?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f139/oc-prozessoren-intel-sockel-1151-coffee-lake-laberthread-1175411-10.html#post25870991
> https://abload.de/img/5500-5000-3800-cpuz-19fsrj.png
> 
> 5500mhz Core at 1.408v ( possibly lower on the Apex )
> 5000mhz NB Clock
> 3800 17-18-18-38 378 CR2


Impressive, I wonder how stable that is though?


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I wonder how many reviews of coffee lake are skewed.


The point of OEMs turning MCE on by default isn't to make Intel look good, it's to make their own boards look good vs. the competition using the same platform. Some reviewers (e.g. Tech Report) do at least note which boards use MCE automatically, which is a good step.

There is a philosophical quandry that reviewers face when comparing motherboards on charts: Should they use the manufacturers' default settings when testing them, or should they put them all on a level playing field and turn of MCE for those who have it on by default? There's good arguments to be made for either position.


----------



## Sharchaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Where are they available?


Indonesia. But it's out of stock now, next week they will be available for 5 pcs.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dennybrig*
> 
> Guys, do anyone know if there is currently a Z370 MOBO that supports 4 way SLI?
> 
> I was surprised (while browsing on Newegg) that there is not a single one that implies that it supports it.
> 
> I mean, with MOBOS like the Asrock Z270 Supercarrier around i don´t see why nobody has just sticked a PLX chip on a MOBO and called it a day.
> 
> Please let me know if you guys know of one.


maybe the flagship asus is he only might use PLX or the Z370GT9 if there is any


----------



## kd5151

Here we go again.


----------



## czin125

Kabylake-S 5.455 at 1.440v -> Kabylake-X 5.5 at 1.390v ( If they made a Coffeelake-X, it'd be possible for 5.5+ 1.358 from 5.5 at 1.408 ? )


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I wonder how many reviews of coffee lake are skewed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The point of OEMs turning MCE on by default isn't to make Intel look good, it's to make their own boards look good vs. the competition using the same platform. Some reviewers (e.g. Tech Report) do at least note which boards use MCE automatically, which is a good step.
> 
> There is a philosophical quandry that reviewers face when comparing motherboards on charts: Should they use the manufacturers' default settings when testing them, or should they put them all on a level playing field and turn of MCE for those who have it on by default? There's good arguments to be made for either position.
Click to expand...

Intel sets the default turbo speed specifications not the board manufactures. MCE is overclocking.

Do you know what motherboards have MCE on by default to help folks in the forums with stability trouble running stock?


----------



## kevindd992002

Was the 8700K limited to one per cuatomer also when it was available for pre-order in Amazon?


----------



## HAL900

i7 8700 had only 4.3 GHZ for all core
0 bclk and no 46 x
But 4.3 for gaming , in programed multiplier lower


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Here we go again.


I actually listened to the whole explanation by the Dwarf that escaped from Orgrimmar...







He's right but it doesn't affect or change the max overclock (on watercooling loop) results. It's just about How Intel masks through performance and plays a marketing trick with advertising the performance of their new processor line. Nothing groundbreaking or new here


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Here we go again.


I'll just go ahead and leave a dislike for that terrible thumbnail and title alone.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I'll just go ahead and leave a dislike for that terrible thumbnail and title alone.


Intel fanboy got hurt. You clearly have no idea how much reviews matter. Even-though for us that video does not matter becase we would run the most extreme clock speed, 400MHz matter a lot of the average buyer. 8400 case is also super important. We have no clue how much it will boost with cheap MB.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Intel fanboy got hurt. You clearly have no idea how much reviews matter. Even-though for us that video does not matter becase we would run the most extreme clock speed, 400MHz matter a lot of the average buyer. 8400 case is also super important. We have no clue how much it will boost with cheap MB.


"intel fanboy"

no just sick of these click baity tech youtubers


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> "intel fanboy"
> 
> no just sick of these click baity tech youtubers


Coffee Lake deserves same bad press as Vega. AdoredTV is not click bate. He has a following which enjoy his videos. You need people like him in this industry.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Coffee Lake deserves same bad press as Vega. AdoredTV is not click bate. He has a following which enjoy his videos. You need people like him in this industry.


No, I really don't. There's enough AMD riding and Intel bashing tech tubers already.

and Coffee Lake doesn't deserve anywhere near the same level of bad press as Vega, because Coffee Lake doesn't suck


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> No, I really don't. There's enough AMD riding and Intel bashing tech tubers already.
> 
> and Coffee Lake doesn't deserve anywhere near the same level of bad press as Vega, because Coffee Lake doesn't suck


People have been riding Intel for years and years. There is no reason to be nice to Intel. The moment you stop pushing Intel and Nvidia they will sleep with your money. AMD in the other hand you can love or hate but in the end they are too small to make your voice matter.


----------



## e-gate

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> "intel fanboy"
> 
> no just sick of these click baity tech youtubers


Click bait or not he has a point. What Intel does with their turbo boost may not matter for those who overclock but it does for those who do not. And they are the vast majority.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *e-gate*
> 
> Click bait or not he has a point. What Intel does with their turbo boost may not matter for those who overclock but it does for those who do not. And they are the vast majority.


Be surprised and the amount of build I have seen with 7700K + B250.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I wonder how many reviews of coffee lake are skewed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not many, if the reviewer knows what he's doing... Gamers Nexus, OC3D and more all mentioned this. And their results are with MCE off.
> 
> What I would like to see soon, is retail versions of 8700K/8600K being reviewed/overclocked to see how they compare to ES...
> 
> Also, 8700K vs 8600K at same clocks in a bunch of games, at 1080p and 1440p. 7700K and 7600K at same clocks would be even better.
Click to expand...

Gamers Nexus got caught with MCE on in there review.






Skewed 8700k reviews.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Here we go again.


Videos like these doesn't need to be in overclock.net. does anyone here really care about boost clocks lmao. the only thing we're concerned about is the actual overclocking headroom. both my Ryzen 1700x and 7700k only tasted stock clocks for the first few minutes of their life before I overclocked them both when windows finished installing. I'm pretty sure almost everyone here is the same


----------



## Scotty99

Well the thing is, the 8700 is a different discussion. With MCE on you have a 4.6ghz all core boost for 60-80 dollars less than K sku, and that chip might be far more readily available. In the past non k i7's could be overlooked because of the large clock speed difference, intel decided they wanted to change that with coffee for whatever reason.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well the thing is, the 8700 is a different discussion. With MCE on you have a 4.6ghz all core boost for 60-80 dollars less than K sku, and that chip might be far more readily available. In the past non k i7's could be overlooked because of the large clock speed difference, intel decided they wanted to change that with coffee for whatever reason.


This is a good thing right? locked 8700's will be @ 4.6ghz all cores out of the box just by enabling MCE. slap in a cheap air cooler voila 12 thread beast @ 4.6ghz


----------



## Scotty99

Yup, 8700 with MCE=rip ryzen 7. Good thing for AMD they still have ryzen 5 lol.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Yup, 8700 with MCE=rip ryzen 7. Good thing for AMD they still have ryzen 5 lol.


then what's with the "Con Lake" thumbnail on the video? if retail 8700k's suddenly sucks at overclocking like 4.8ghz+ then that's what I call a real con job. people are arguing about boost clocks now? this is sad


----------



## Phixit

I lost track of the discussion .. what is "MCE" ?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> then what's with the "Con Lake" thumbnail on the video? if retail 8700k's suddenly sucks at overclocking like 4.8ghz+ then that's what I call a real con job. people are arguing about boost clocks now? this is sad


exactly


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Phixit*
> 
> I lost track of the discussion .. what is "MCE" ?


Multicore Enhancement. "overclocks" the cpu to max boost clocks (all cores). if you call boost clock on all cores an overclock lmao.







so basically it's for newbs (and apparently for locked cpus now like i7 8700 etc.)


----------



## Scotty99

Ya it was never for K sku's, i find it mind boggling that two videos have released having the discussion if it should be on by default ......who cares lol. That is simply reviewers getting butthurt that some of their results didnt match up. The real discussion should be for non k sku's, not annoyances for reviewers.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Here we go again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Videos like these doesn't need to be in overclock.net. does anyone here really care about boost clocks lmao. the only thing we're concerned about is the actual overclocking headroom. both my Ryzen 1700x and 7700k only tasted stock clocks for the first few minutes of their life before I overclocked them both when windows finished installing. I'm pretty sure almost everyone here is the same
Click to expand...

The problem comes with comparing last gen with Coffee lake Reviews.

Skewed Reviews


----------



## iTurn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> "intel fanboy"
> 
> no just sick of these click baity tech youtubers


It's not click baity though, Jayz is in the comments agreeing that Adored has all rights calling him out.
Quote:


> JayzTwoCents
> 1 hour ago
> FOR THE RECORD.... after we were called out for testing with default board settings (by the audience by the way, not you) ASUS reached out to me to explain that MCE is OFF by default and Sync all Cores should NOT have been enabled by default, I explained to them that this is indeed FALSE. ASUS themselves aren't even clear on what the default settings were and it was only after clearing CMOS again and showing them what the optimized defaults are did they agree that they need to reel in their BIOS team and get to the bottom of this...
> 
> I also said in my video that we as reviewers need to be better at this, so although you calling me out in this video is accurate, I had already updated my content showing where the discrepancy was.


The problem I see with this is that we know Intel would lead AMD, ICP being Intels strong point and that Intel CPUs overclock very well (some looking to achieve 5GHZ OCs), but the reviews are making it seem that Intel is beating AMD at stock and interpreting that Intel's lead will grow exponentially.


----------



## Scotty99

Again people try and recognize the only reason this is getting coverage is for reviewers, not us! They are annoyed that their results are not lining up with each other, without recognizing how awesome this is for non k sku's.

Everyone has an agenda, reviewers dont care about anything but themselves.


----------



## tw2

Has anyone actually confirmed MCE with the 8700 non-k yet? I haven't managed to find anything.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The problem comes with comparing last gen with Coffee lake Reviews.
> 
> Skewed Reviews


*barf* all I know is my 7700k gets 1100-1150 on cinebench @ 5.1ghz not 900+







and my 1700x @ 3.9Ghz gets 1750cb. I have no idea what they score at stock clocks/boost I don't really care

again who cares about stock clocks/boost clocks. I don't even want to talk about it anymore tbh


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> Has anyone actually confirmed MCE with the 8700 non-k yet? I haven't managed to find anything.


I havent seen anyone do it on a video, but gigabyte did confirm this on a video in the comment section.


----------



## aDyerSituation

"not click baity"

*video title the great coffee lake con job with a thumbnail saying "con lake"*

not click bait btw


----------



## Draygonn

I fail to see how multicore enhancement is a bad thing.







This isn't something new, my 4790k uses it.


----------



## {core2duo}werd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Draygonn*
> 
> I fail to see how multicore enhancement is a bad thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This isn't something new, my 4790k uses it.


Gamers Nexus says it caused instability out of the box. That's pretty bad.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *{core2duo}werd*
> 
> Gamers Nexus says it caused instability out of the box. That's pretty bad.


No they didnt, they said they had a problem with blender.....prime didnt have any issues.

Again lol, higher volts does not lead to instability, low volts does. MCE pushes volts past what is needed, but being below "unsafe" ranges. Its not great for power consumption but it is for performance on a locked SKU.


----------



## coelacanth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *{core2duo}werd*
> 
> Gamers Nexus says it caused instability out of the box. That's pretty bad.


Yes the review said that MCE caused instability (crashing on ASUS Z370 in Blender), and that the 9% increase wasn't worth the 40% increase in power consumption.


----------



## Raghar

Any news about support of 8 cores on Z370?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The problem comes with comparing last gen with Coffee lake Reviews.
> 
> Skewed Reviews
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *barf* all I know is my 7700k gets 1100-1150 on cinebench @ 5.1ghz not 900+
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and my 1700x @ 3.9Ghz gets 1750cb. I have no idea what they score at stock clocks/boost I don't really care
> 
> again who cares about stock clocks/boost clocks. I don't even want to talk about it anymore tbh
Click to expand...

The reviews are not just about 1 benchmark it's all the benchmarks are effected by MCE.


----------



## erocker

Why are people concerned with MCE? 100's of reviews, some that use it, some don't. That's a good thing.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> Any news about support of 8 cores on Z370?


I doubt Intel knows at this point. No 8 cores anytime soon.


----------



## Scotty99

I think its just people confused about what MCE is, i had never heard of it before coffee as it appears this started with ivy (i was on a 2500k).


----------



## AlphaC

https://www.anandtech.com/show/6214/multicore-enhancement-the-debate-about-free-mhz
Quote:


> Since X79, ASUS has been implementing a feature they call 'MultiCore Enhancement' whenever XMP has been set. Gigabyte has implemented this since their Z77 suite but as of yet leave it un-named, and ASRock are going to start using 'MultiCore Acceleration' with their Z77 OC Formula. EVGA also has something in the pipeline for their Z77 boards. This feature, put simply, gives the CPU some extra speed.
> 
> With these motherboards, usually when XMP is enabled, the CPU is told to use the top turbo boost setting under all loads. That means a CPU like the i7-3770K has only two speeds - 3.9 GHz while under CPU load, and 1.2 GHz at idle. For motherboards that implement this feature, they get a significant boost in their CPU benchmark scores. As a result, the user who runs their processor at stock also gets up to 300 MHz more speed during multithreaded loading.
> 
> Technically, this is an overclock. Typically we are told that overclocking a system is liable to void the warranty on both the processor and the motherboard. With the case of the processor, typically what Intel put on the shelves is a safe speed - they are not pushing any competition to the limits, so these processors have breathing room and this 'overclock' should not harm longevity. Nevertheless, Intel is usually very willing to replace processors (if I extrapolate the stories of returns I have heard). With motherboards, they are designed to hold the top turbo bin at single core loads, so full threaded load should not be much of an issue.


flashbacks

The real issue at hand is whether Coffee Lake has been binned so terribly for i7-8700k that it can't even withstand rendering on MCE.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/6214/multicore-enhancement-the-debate-about-free-mhz
> flashbacks
> 
> The real issue at hand is whether Coffee Lake has been binned so terribly for i7-8700k that it can't even withstand rendering on MCE.


You mean like XFR where 1800X does 4.1GHz single core but cant even OC to 4.1GHz.


----------



## Scotty99

Clearly steves problems with blender was everything to do with blender and nothing to do with chip binning or MCE. MCE pushes volts close to what you would need for a 5.0ghz overclock. Why would anyone assume MCE was the problem with 1.35v 4.7ghz?

If you are someone who thinks MCE causes instability from steves video, by admission you are stating blender is more stressful than prime 95 lol.

Just like to add really getting sick of this steve guy, but i guess this is what happens when you give someone like that a microphone.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> You mean like XFR where 1800X does 4.1GHz single core but cant even OC to 4.1GHz.


Except we know the top 5% of Ryzen dies were used in Threadripper / EPYC, so it isn't a binning issue. They were binned properly...

The binning for Coffee Lake notebook chips should be similar to binning of R7 1700 , in contrast.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *erocker*
> 
> Why are people concerned with MCE? 100's of reviews, some that use it, some don't. That's a good thing.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> Any news about support of 8 cores on Z370?
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt Intel knows at this point. No 8 cores anytime soon.
Click to expand...

Well none of the i7 7700k reviews to compare to the 8700k use Overclocking MCE.


----------



## NorcalTRD

Tired of opening 5 new pages of this thread each day only to see people bickering at each other or arguing about MCE.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Well none of the i7 7700k reviews to compare to the 8700k use Overclocking MCE.


7700K MCE vs 4 Core Turbo is 100MHz. Not big deal


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Clearly steves problems with blender was everything to do with blender and nothing to do with chip binning or MCE. MCE pushes volts close to what you would need for a 5.0ghz overclock. Why would anyone assume MCE was the problem with 1.35v 4.7ghz?
> 
> If you are someone who thinks MCE causes instability from steves video, by admission you are stating blender is more stressful than prime 95 lol.
> 
> Just like to add really getting sick of this steve guy, but i guess this is what happens when you give someone like that a microphone.


Because when he turned off MCE blender worked fine.


----------



## NoDestiny

The real problem is the reviews. MCE on not giving the consumers the most accurate story, as scores are all over the place and showing an "unoverclocked" Intel processor doing better than it really is at standard clocks.

The actual usage of MCE, for the most part, is not the issue.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> Tired of opening 5 new pages of this thread each day only to see people bickering at each other or arguing about MCE.


That is what happens when review sites don't have a standard for testing the 8700k.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Well none of the i7 7700k reviews to compare to the 8700k use Overclocking MCE.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 7700K MCE vs 4 Core Turbo is 100MHz. Not big deal
Click to expand...

Well it's 2% performance increase and what about reviewing the 8700k with 6 cores MCE 400MHz increase at 4.7Ghz.


----------



## Scotty99

Do asrock boards usually take a while to get to amazon? I have a 20% off coupon there but no asrock boards yet.


----------



## QuadDamage

For anyone who pre order from Amazon US you should talk to your rep asap

12:24 PM PDT Agent: I've checked the order and see that the items are currently unavailable and thats the reason the item is delayed, please don't worry I've updated the shipping for the orders, once the item is back in stock you will receive it first. To make up the delay i would like to extent your prime for one month for free of charge, i know that it doesn't compensate the delay, please accept it as a goodwill.

Just got this deal changed my order to 1 day and got another month of prime free but still not date when I'll get my chip
I did order on 10/5/2017 around 8 AM PST still no idea when I'll get it


----------



## QuadDamage

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Do asrock boards usually take a while to get to amazon? I have a 20% off coupon there but no asrock boards yet.


I ended up getting my board off newegg

I had alot noticed that they are not in stock at Amazon I mean lets be honest I'm sure you will get ur board before ur cpu
Am i right


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> I ended up getting my board off newegg
> 
> I had alot noticed that they are not in stock at Amazon I mean lets be honest I'm sure you will get ur board before ur cpu
> Am i right


I usually buy stuff from the egg ive even got a premier membership or whatever they call it, but amazon is offering 20% off any order as long as part of your purchase is made with amex points. Up to 50 bucks off.


----------



## kd5151

No stock


----------



## erocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> For anyone who pre order from Amazon US you should talk to your rep asap
> 
> 12:24 PM PDT Agent: I've checked the order and see that the items are currently unavailable and thats the reason the item is delayed, please don't worry I've updated the shipping for the orders, once the item is back in stock you will receive it first. To make up the delay i would like to extent your prime for one month for free of charge, i know that it doesn't compensate the delay, please accept it as a goodwill.
> 
> Just got this deal changed my order to 1 day and got another month of prime free but still not date when I'll get my chip
> I did order on 10/5/2017 around 8 AM PST still no idea when I'll get it


I've only got the internet equivalent of a blank stare with Newegg....


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

A few days ago I changed the shipping speed on my 8600k order with the stipulation that if it changed my place in the queue I would just leave it at the speed I originally chose.

I'm hoping it didn't change it.


----------



## QuadDamage

^^ I checked with a rep it doesn't change the order # or processing speed they just don't have them in stock to ship out
No idea what order they will ship in


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> Tired of opening 5 new pages of this thread each day only to see people bickering at each other or arguing about MCE.


The only reason I am interested is if it works well on the 8700 at 4.6 then it is a good lower price alternative to the 8700K. Obviously it isn't very useful on an unlocked chip you can overclock properly.


----------



## WillG027

I'm interested in if the 8700 can clock to 4600Ghz on all cores with MCE and a negative voltage offset - if anyone finds some FACTUAL info . . .


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I wonder how many reviews of coffee lake are skewed.







Jay redid his benchmarks with MCE disabled.


----------



## evernessince

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Again people try and recognize the only reason this is getting coverage is for reviewers, not us! They are annoyed that their results are not lining up with each other, without recognizing how awesome this is for non k sku's.
> 
> Everyone has an agenda, reviewers dont care about anything but themselves.


Need to point out that people reviewing the exact same product and getting wildly different numbers is a problem for everyone. I'm sure you wouldn't want to buy a product and get 25% less performance than you expected. That's exactly the issue right now.


----------



## Scotty99

Not exactly.

Obviously MCE should be disabled at stock that isnt the question, the question is will a 8700 boost to 4.6ghz and can the stock cooler handle it. Asus simply had the wrong bios out and we got 5 videos because of it lol.

Your analogy is wrong btw, MCE only boosts performance it does not hinder it. And its not even relevant for people overclocking, only non k owners.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Not exactly.
> 
> Obviously MCE should be disabled at stock that isnt the question, the question is will a 8700 boost to 4.6ghz and can the stock cooler handle it. Asus simply had the wrong bios out and we got 5 videos because of it lol.
> 
> Your analogy is wrong btw, MCE only boosts performance it does not hinder it. And its not even relevant for people overclocking, only non k owners.


Very few people overclock and overclocking from MCE 4.7GHz to ~5.0GHz is not much to be gained in performance.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I wonder how many reviews of coffee lake are skewed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jay redid his benchmarks with MCE disabled.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the Video.


----------



## Tojara

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Very few people overclock and overclocking from MCE 4.7GHz to ~5.0GHz is not much to be gained in performance.


Yep. Having an option for MCE is only a good thing, but having it enabled by default is nothing but confusing. If you read half a dozen reviews thoroughly it's pretty obvious what's going on, but with anything less it's easy to not notice (or in cases like HWC, that actively claim their CPU was running at 4.1 initially) what the processor is doing. 5 GHz is 6 % over 4.7 and 16 % over the default all core turbo, which is very large difference with the tiny performance differences in most processors today. That's easily a years worth of improvements to the processor at current rate.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Very few people overclock and overclocking from MCE 4.7GHz to ~5.0GHz is not much to be gained in performance.


If you do not have fast RAM it will make 0 difference.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> *barf* all I know is my 7700k gets 1100-1150 on cinebench @ 5.1ghz not 900+
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and my 1700x @ 3.9Ghz gets 1750cb. I have no idea what they score at stock clocks/boost I don't really care
> 
> again who cares about stock clocks/boost clocks. I don't even want to talk about it anymore tbh


Then move along?

The point of all this is that some reviewers were duped into believing they were testing their CPU's at bone stock settings, but if MCE was enabled then the "stock" performance they were seeing was actually 4.7 GHz rather than the published 4.3 GHz. In reality, the chips are clocking themselves up beyond published speeds (due to MCE) and this leads average, impressionable consumers into believing that Coffee Lake CPU's are magically faster than they should be (and of course that Intel are a bunch of wizards).

The importance of all this isn't in actual usage or performance for people like us who are going to wring the best possible performance out of our CPU's anyway, but in the court of public opinion, where "false" stock speed review results are going to be bandied about as some sort of revolutionary leap in IPC performance of CL CPU's when in reality its just a marketing ploy to get better review performance charts at "stock" clocks (and most reviewers test at stock), when really they are just not reporting the real clock speed the chips were tested at.


----------



## Asrock Extreme7

dpd just been yippy hope i got a good clocker


----------



## jellybeans69

my 8600k is also ready for pick-up going to be getting it after i leave the office today )


----------



## prava

Availability in Europe is a no-no, and shops are saying mid-november at the earliest.

I wanted a 8600k or 8700k but got a 8350k as a place holder cause i cant wait without computer, and the i3 quad was the only sku on stock (package should arrive tomorrow, as it shipped yesterday) . We will see how it clocks, though reports are depressing. Oh well.


----------



## jellybeans69

I'm in east eu and all of 8600k get bought out very fast. Even shop i bought it from had only 3 available at the moment (8600k) , 8700k is pretty much unavailble and probably going to stay so for the next month. Even warehouses in bigger countries such as PL have a pre-order line of like 300 to get them.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prava*
> 
> Availability in Europe is a no-no, and shops are saying mid-november at the earliest.
> 
> I wanted a 8600k or 8700k but got a 8350k as a place holder cause i cant wait without computer, and the i3 quad was the only sku on stock (package should arrive tomorrow, as it shipped yesterday) . We will see how it clocks, though reports are depressing. Oh well.


Just order and you will probably recieve it sooner than you think. I know two people that have recieved their 8700K in Germany, even tho it has never been in stock on that particular store. They will send them out as they get them. And they are popular. So they probably won't be in stock for a long time.


----------



## Scotty99

Newegg page just went to auto notify from out of stock, so thats something lol.


----------



## Phixit

The rumor was true after all :

http://www.overclock.net/t/1639296/sweclockers-intel-coffee-lake-a-scarcity-for-the-rest-of-the-year/10


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

I probably should have just gone with that 7700k build when it was $300.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> I probably should have just gone with that 7700k build when it was $300.


Nah lol you will be glad you waited, 4c cpu's are already showing deficits in some games.

Side note, demand for z370 is crazy motherboards are starting to sell out on amazon.


----------



## prava

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Just order and you will probably recieve it sooner than you think. I know two people that have recieved their 8700K in Germany, even tho it has never been in stock on that particular store. They will send them out as they get them. And they are popular. So they probably won't be in stock for a long time.


I can't simply order something which doesn't even have an arrival date, that option doesn't work for me. I needed to upgrade the computer (short story: I have a 2600K that I can't overclock because the motherboard is on its dying breaths. Also, I can only use a single stock of ram, and that means 8GB only. Motherboards for LGA1155 are either non-existant or ridiculously priced), and I needed to do it the sooner the better. So, they had the 8350K and a Gigabyte Z370 XP SLI in stock and grabbed them both. They are both placeholders as I might migrate to mITX down the road but they will do for now. Once prices, availability and revisions (regarding motherboards... lol I still remember the P67 B2/B3 fiasco as it affected me







 ) are all sorted out, I'll figure it out.

But yes... ideally, it would have been to wait. I simply couldn't as I have a GTX1080 and a half-functional pc that needs upgrading and can't play half the things I want to.


----------



## azanimefan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The problem comes with comparing last gen with Coffee lake Reviews.
> 
> Skewed Reviews


the real story is the lowest scored reviews were the only chips that came off the shelf.


----------



## Contiusa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Skewed Reviews


The graph shows a 25% difference from the lower to the higher result. If we don't know the context, these numbers could come from stock, MCE, OC results, memory clock and so on so forth.

Click bait. Then we have a skewed bias analysis of the 'skewed' reviews.

I love how the internet is full of BS.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asrock Extreme7*
> 
> dpd just been yippy hope i got a good clocker


who cares about MCE. this is what I care about. COME ON! I NEED MY 8700K








I'm so ready for this lol


----------



## Yetyhunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> who cares about MCE. this is what I care about. COME ON! I NEED MY 8700K
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm so ready for this lol


And we need your before/ after results !


----------



## HAL900

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Well it's 2% performance increase and what about reviewing the 8700k with 6 cores MCE 400MHz increase at 4.7Ghz.


But
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> The graph shows a 25% difference from the lower to the higher result. If we don't know the context, these numbers could come from stock, MCE, OC results, memory clock and so on so forth.
> 
> Click bait. Then we have a skewed bias analysis of the 'skewed' reviews.
> 
> I love how the internet is full of BS.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> The graph shows a 25% difference from the lower to the higher result. If we don't know the context, these numbers could come from stock, MCE, OC results, memory clock and so on so forth.
> 
> Click bait. Then we have a skewed bias analysis of the 'skewed' reviews.
> 
> I love how the internet is full of BS.


Maybe ASIC


----------



## TMatzelle60

Need some help. God i want to build a small form factor but the problem is the 8700 what will the gaming performance be at stock compared to the k at stock?


----------



## HAL900

In game 4.3 GHz.This same in 8700K(non oc) but in programe mhz is lower. 4.0 -4.1 GHZ


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> In game 4.3 GHz.This same in 8700K(non oc) but in programe mhz is lower. 4.0 -4.1 GHZ


@ stock between the both how many fps will i lose in games?

basiclly will i be unhappy with the cpu for gaming


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> @ stock between the both how many fps will i lose in games?
> 
> basiclly will i be unhappy with the cpu for gaming


If you are going to leave both at stock you are only losing 100mhz between the 8700 and the 8700k, correct?

That will come out to about 1-2%. If you aren't overclocking no reason to get the K. Are you pushing high refresh rates or something? If you are at 60hz you will be more than satisfied


----------



## TMatzelle60

1080p @ 75hz

Just want to make sure its not a crap cpu


----------



## bl4ckdot

My 8700K from der8auer has been shipped !


----------



## HAL900

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> If you are going to leave both at stock you are only losing 100mhz between the 8700 and the 8700k, correct?
> 
> That will come out to about 1-2%. If you aren't overclocking no reason to get the K. Are you pushing high refresh rates or something? If you are at 60hz you will be more than satisfied


Zero


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> My 8700K from der8auer has been shipped !











With the silver heat sink?


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With the silver heat sink?


Yes


----------



## HAL900

Msi has very underdeveloped bios.
This may cause various cinebench results


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Yes


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Nah lol you will be glad you waited, 4c cpu's are already showing deficits in some games.
> 
> Side note, demand for z370 is crazy motherboards are starting to sell out on amazon.


So you are saying I should buy some z370 boards to find out the VRMs on them and then pawn the bad ones off on ebay for more money?









I don't see the Z370-A sold out though and that's what most people ought to buy (on Amazon) along with Gigabyte's Gaming 7.

Best combos:

$50 off Z370 Gaming 7 + i7-8700k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3649523 $590 <--- best VRM








$50 off Z370 Gaming 7 + i5-8600k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3649519 $480
$40 off Z370 ROG Maximus X Hero wifi +i7-8700K https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3654103 $630 --- has wifi
$40 off Z370 ROG Maximus X Hero wifi + i5-8600k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3654129 $520 --- has wifi

$30 off Z370-E STRIX + i7-8700k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3654105 $570 -- has wifi
$30 off Z370-E STRIX + i5-8600k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3654131 $460 --- has wifi
$20 off Z370-A + i7-8700k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3654117 $545
$20 off Z370-A + i5-8600K https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3654137 $435
$20 off Z370 Gaming 5 + i7-8700k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3650686 $570 --- has wifi
$20 off Z370 Gaming 5 + i5-8600k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3651131 $460 --- has wifi
$20 off Z370 Gaming M5 + i7-8700k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3649545 $570
$20 off Z370 Gaming M5 + i5-8600k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3649527 $460

$10 off







Z370 Fatal1ty ITX + i7-8700k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3651167 $560 --- has wifi
$10 off







Z370 Extreme4 + i7-8700k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3649467 $540
$10 off







Z370 Extreme4 + i5-8600k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3649483 $430
$10 off







Z370 Fatal1ty K6 + i7-8700k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3649465 $550
$10 off







Z370 Fatal1ty K6 + i5-8600k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3649481 $440

Memory dependency

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i7_8700K_Coffee_Lake_Memory_Performance_Benchmark_Analysis/


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Skewed Reviews
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The graph shows a 25% difference from the lower to the higher result. If we don't know the context, these numbers could come from stock, MCE, OC results, memory clock and so on so forth.
> 
> Click bait. Then we have a skewed bias analysis of the 'skewed' reviews.
> 
> I love how the internet is full of BS.
Click to expand...

At least he made a graph of what the review sites tested for cinebench r15 results for i7 7700k to i7 87700k. Those numbers are from reviews of the i7 8700k and vary 25% what kind of accuracy is that. We don't know what is going on from what you said and if you don't care about the accuracy of reviews why do you respond.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Well it's 2% performance increase and what about reviewing the 8700k with 6 cores MCE 400MHz increase at 4.7Ghz.
> 
> 
> 
> But
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> The graph shows a 25% difference from the lower to the higher result. If we don't know the context, these numbers could come from stock, MCE, OC results, memory clock and so on so forth.
> 
> Click bait. Then we have a skewed bias analysis of the 'skewed' reviews.
> 
> I love how the internet is full of BS.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> The graph shows a 25% difference from the lower to the higher result. If we don't know the context, these numbers could come from stock, MCE, OC results, memory clock and so on so forth.
> 
> Click bait. Then we have a skewed bias analysis of the 'skewed' reviews.
> 
> I love how the internet is full of BS.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe ASIC
Click to expand...

What does application-specific integrated circuit have to do with the i7 8700k.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> So you are saying I should buy some z370 boards to find out the VRMs on them and then pawn the bad ones off on ebay for more money?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see the Z370-A sold out though and that's what most people ought to buy (on Amazon) along with Gigabyte's Gaming 7.
> 
> Best combos:
> 
> $50 off Z370 Gaming 7 + i7-8700k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3649523 $590 <--- best VRM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> $50 off Z370 Gaming 7 + i5-8600k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3649519 $480
> $40 off Z370 ROG Maximus X Hero wifi +i7-8700K https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3654103 $630 --- has wifi
> $40 off Z370 ROG Maximus X Hero wifi + i5-8600k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3654129 $520 --- has wifi
> 
> $30 off Z370-E STRIX + i7-8700k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3654105 $570 -- has wifi
> $30 off Z370-E STRIX + i5-8600k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3654131 $460 --- has wifi
> $20 off Z370-A + i7-8700k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3654117 $545
> $20 off Z370-A + i5-8600K https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3654137 $435
> $20 off Z370 Gaming 5 + i7-8700k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3650686 $570 --- has wifi
> $20 off Z370 Gaming 5 + i5-8600k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3651131 $460 --- has wifi
> $20 off Z370 Gaming M5 + i7-8700k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3649545 $570
> $20 off Z370 Gaming M5 + i5-8600k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3649527 $460
> 
> $10 off
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z370 Fatal1ty ITX + i7-8700k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3651167 $560 --- has wifi
> $10 off
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z370 Extreme4 + i7-8700k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3649467 $540
> $10 off
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z370 Extreme4 + i5-8600k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3649483 $430
> $10 off
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z370 Fatal1ty K6 + i7-8700k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3649465 $550
> $10 off
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z370 Fatal1ty K6 + i5-8600k https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3649481 $440
> 
> Memory dependency
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i7_8700K_Coffee_Lake_Memory_Performance_Benchmark_Analysis/


Some interesting stuff in there

Mmm
Still funny
3200 CL14 is faster with 2t instead 1t
That goes against everything I ever heard about RAM


----------



## bl4ckdot

I wish TPU would have tested minimum FPS (min 1%). This is where having good RAM matter AFAIK.


----------



## azanimefan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> The graph shows a 25% difference from the lower to the higher result. If we don't know the context, these numbers could come from stock, MCE, OC results, memory clock and so on so forth.
> 
> Click bait. Then we have a skewed bias analysis of the 'skewed' reviews.
> 
> I love how the internet is full of BS.


If you watch the Youtube video I was referencing he goes into detail highlighting what causes the variance in scores.

Primarily it has to do with how different motherboards handle turbo, plus ASUS's own overclock tool.

Furthermore he noted that for the reviews who indicated where they got the chip,

Every chip scoring 1431 or lower was off the shelf.
Every chip scoring >1431 came from intel

Note, None of those scores were overclocked directly by the reviewer, however between Intel's Turbo boost and ASUS's auto overclock feature (which seems to be on by default on these boards) you have the variance in scores.


----------



## azanimefan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Some interesting stuff in there
> 
> Mmm
> Still funny
> 3200 CL14 is faster with 2t instead 1t
> That goes against everything I ever heard about RAM


that just means their overclock of the ram was bad.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Contiusa*
> 
> The graph shows a 25% difference from the lower to the higher result. If we don't know the context, these numbers could come from stock, MCE, OC results, memory clock and so on so forth.
> 
> Click bait. Then we have a skewed bias analysis of the 'skewed' reviews.
> 
> I love how the internet is full of BS.


Those were all at "stock" speeds... Only one showing bias is you since you are dismissing factual data withoit even watching the video or reading any of the mentioned reviews


----------



## QuadDamage

Has anyone here heard anything from amazon or newegg

I'm still stuck with no date and no information order 10/5 at 8 am within 1 or 2 minutes of the listing.


----------



## TheWizardMan

When is Asus releasing the formula boards?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> I wish TPU would have tested minimum FPS (min 1%). This is where having good RAM matter AFAIK.


Check the percentile there
I know its not coffee lake, and yes I'd wish they had tested way more speeds
But still interesting


A good read as well

https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&nv=1&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=de&sp=nmt4&tl=en&u=https://www.computerbase.de/2017-07/core-i-ryzen-ddr4-ram-benchmark/3/%3Famp%3D1&usg=ALkJrhi9EZ7D2UrHXyE7v1nNlxRcG-RM6w#chart-groups-72999


----------



## kd5151

No stock.


----------



## HAL900

Slomo4shO

In my 8700 cinebench there is no 4.3 ghz and 4 - 4.1
Maybe bios.........
Bad turbo and voltage modes
MSi works on new ones


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> Slomo4shO
> 
> In my 8700 cinebench there is no 4.3 ghz and 4 - 4.1
> Maybe bios.........
> Bad turbo and voltage modes
> MSi works on new ones


The same thing happens to my 8700K at stock. The single-core turbo won't work either. MCE works flawlessly though.


----------



## Menta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> My 8700K from der8auer has been shipped !


How much did you get Robbed?


----------



## Triniboi82

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menta*
> 
> How much did you get Robbed?


It's not robbery if you bent over willingly


----------



## kd5151




----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> Slomo4shO
> 
> In my 8700 cinebench there is no 4.3 ghz and 4 - 4.1
> Maybe bios.........
> Bad turbo and voltage modes
> MSi works on new ones


What do you expect from a rushed paper launch?


----------



## Asrock Extreme7

just tried quick oc on my i7 8700k all cores 5.2 1.35v boots in windows looking good only changed vcore
some help on other settings would be good


----------



## Scotty99

Extreme 4 just dropped another 5 bucks on newegg for some reason, for 159 dollars nothing comes close to its value.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Extreme 4 just dropped another 5 bucks on newegg for some reason, for 159 dollars nothing comes close to its value.


both the extreme 4 and k6 dropped. Just waiting on that stock. Yippee!


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Newegg bumped up the price on 8600K's to $280.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117825


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Then move along?
> 
> The point of all this is that some reviewers were duped into believing they were testing their CPU's at bone stock settings, but if MCE was enabled then the "stock" performance they were seeing was actually 4.7 GHz rather than the published 4.3 GHz. In reality, the chips are clocking themselves up beyond published speeds (due to MCE) and this leads average, impressionable consumers into believing that Coffee Lake CPU's are magically faster than they should be (and of course that Intel are a bunch of wizards).
> 
> The importance of all this isn't in actual usage or performance for people like us who are going to wring the best possible performance out of our CPU's anyway, but in the court of public opinion, where "false" stock speed review results are going to be bandied about as some sort of revolutionary leap in IPC performance of CL CPU's when in reality its just a marketing ploy to get better review performance charts at "stock" clocks (and most reviewers test at stock), when really they are just not reporting the real clock speed the chips were tested at.


Just to be fair about my earlier post, I guess most of the same argument could be used against XFR from the AMD camp as well. The big difference I see here is that at least there is no element of deception with XFR as AMD widely publicized the feature and reviewers were very clear about XFR and non-XFR performance results and there was a clear delineation when it came to truly "stock" performance results. With the 8700K reviews, unfortunately, it seems that some reviewers were duped into believing that their results were actually "stock' when in fact they were OC'd and they just didn't realize it. Now I believe that this was largely the fault of mobo makers and the way they shipped their bioses with MCE enabled as default (something Jayz2Sense elaborated on in his most recent video). I do believe that Intel utilized a "pumped up" version of this feature on CL as a direct result to XFR and should've been more proactive in ensuring that the reviewers didn't try to pass off MCE results as stock results but it was really largely out of their hands.

Anyway, I think MCE (and XFR) are overall really great features that allow more consumers the ability to enjoy better performance from their processors without having to do anything, but some of the reviews unfortunately gave the impression that 4.7 GHz results were really 4.3 GHz results and that resulted in many of the less informed of consumers to believe that there had been a huge IPC jump with CL over KL and that simply isn't the case. And even more unfortunately (as always is the case), the milk has already been spilled now and no number of revised results or videos will come close to having the same impact as the original review results did.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Just to be fair about my earlier post, I guess most of the same argument could be used against XFR from the AMD camp as well. The big difference I see here is that at least there is no element of deception with XFR as AMD widely publicized the feature and reviewers were very clear about XFR and non-XFR performance results and there was a clear delineation when it came to truly "stock" performance results. With the 8700K reviews, unfortunately, it seems that some reviewers were duped into believing that their results were actually "stock' when in fact they were OC'd and they just didn't realize it. Now I believe that this was largely the fault of mobo makers and the way they shipped their bioses with MCE enabled as default (something Jayz2Sense elaborated on in his most recent video). I do believe that Intel utilized a "pumped up" version of this feature on CL as a direct result to XFR and should've been more proactive in ensuring that the reviewers didn't try to pass off MCE results as stock results but it was really largely out of their hands.
> 
> Anyway, I think MCE (and XFR) are overall really great features that allow more consumers the ability to enjoy better performance from their processors without having to do anything, but some of the reviews unfortunately gave the impression that 4.7 GHz results were really 4.3 GHz results and that resulted in many of the less informed of consumers to believe that there had been a huge IPC jump with CL over KL and that simply isn't the case. And even more unfortunately (as always is the case), the milk has already been spilled now and no number of revised results or videos will come close to having the same impact as the original review results did.


Agree 100%. I think the feature itself is fine, and I have no problem with it existing. I do think that it should always be disabled by default, and that reviews should reflect the bone-stock performance, since a great many of the 'builders' I see around less knowledgeable enthusiast forums won't have the proper cooling or airflow and will inevitably throttle themselves or induce thermal instability. It's a good feature, but people should know what to expect with it.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> Slomo4shO
> 
> In my 8700 cinebench there is no 4.3 ghz and 4 - 4.1
> Maybe bios.........
> Bad turbo and voltage modes
> MSi works on new ones
> 
> 
> 
> The same thing happens to my 8700K at stock. The single-core turbo won't work either. MCE works flawlessly though.
Click to expand...

What does your i7 8700k clock at on 6 cores stock?


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *azanimefan*
> 
> the real story is the lowest scored reviews were the only chips that came off the shelf.


The lowest scored reviews are also well lower than they should be, given the stock specs. Top are auto-OC'd but the truth is somewhere in the middle, not the top or bottom reviews.


----------



## KGPrime

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Extreme 4 just dropped another 5 bucks on newegg for some reason, for 159 dollars nothing comes close to its value.


Easiest mobo decision i ever made no contest. Took me all of 30 seconds really. Basically, i saw it, did a double take and...


----------



## jellybeans69

Too bad my corsairs h110i backplate doesn't fit the mobo =/ had to screw it with only 3 screws so i can't oc or game at the moment.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What does your i7 8700k clock at on 6 cores stock?


It fluctuates between 4.0 and 4.3 a lot, typically around 4.1. No idea why.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Newegg bumped up the price on 8600K's to $280.
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117825


Bumped up the price on the 8700's also.


----------



## jellybeans69

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> It fluctuates between 4.0 and 4.3 a lot, typically around 4.1. No idea why.


My 8600k also tend to jump to 4.3 even 4.5 at times. Though given i had to screw corsair h110i with only 3 screws i can't stress-test not to burn up the cpu until my new cooler comes in.

The upgrade is nice though stock vs stock it gave me +30 fps in Disgaea 4 on PS3 emulator.


----------



## Jyssi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jyssi*
> 
> Which settings should I change in order to OC 8700k on Gigabyte Aorus 5? List them all pls, I'm going mad
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can't get past this 4300mhz 6core cap. PC boots normally to windows and I can see 4.9GHz clocks, but immediately after I start stress test, all cores dive to 4.3GHz and wont rise again before reboot. I'd assume its power setting somewhere?


This problem was caused by wanting to control RGB leds on the motherboard and since bios controls were too simple, I installed Gigabyte appcenter. With the appcenter comes ****ware called "easytune" which was causing the problem. I reinstalled windows because I was going mad after over 8hours of troubleshooting...

Now I can't control the leds, but I prefer this over not being able to overclock at all <_>

DO NOT INSTALL GIGABYTE APPCENTER OR EASYTUNE


----------



## Scotty99

Why wont a H110 mount up? Nothing has changed in 6 years for mounting systems.


----------



## jellybeans69

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Why wont a H110 mount up? Nothing has changed in 6 years for mounting systems.


4th screw doesn't fit without bending the backplate, im a ****** but not to such a degree







I've been using it with 3970x so i didn't need the backplate before
Top-right backplate of corsair h110 is what i have - https://imagescdn.tweaktown.com/content/5/2/5245_17_corsair_hydro_series_h110_aio_cpu_cooler_review.jpg


----------



## AlphaC

Jellybeans69,

Are you a "casual gamer" the board is marketed to?

https://www.techarp.com/articles/asus-z370-motherboards/

You're better off with a Asrock Extreme4 or Fatal1ty k6 board at that pricepoint. For starters you get ALC1220 instead of ALC 887.

ROG branding is diluted and now TUF is a joke.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jellybeans69*
> 
> 4th screw doesn't fit without bending the backplate, im a ****** but not to such a degree
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've been using it with 3970x so i didn't need the backplate before
> Top-right backplate of corsair h110 is what i have - https://imagescdn.tweaktown.com/content/5/2/5245_17_corsair_hydro_series_h110_aio_cpu_cooler_review.jpg


Oh so just missing the 1151 bracket?

TUF is fine for moderate overclocks, but if your gonna do a daily 5.0ghz id move up to the extreme 4


----------



## jellybeans69

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Jellybeans69,
> 
> Are you a "casual gamer" the board is marketed to?
> 
> https://www.techarp.com/articles/asus-z370-motherboards/
> 
> You're better off with a Asrock Extreme4 or Fatal1ty k6 board at that pricepoint. For starters you get ALC1220 instead of ALC 887.
> 
> ROG branding is diluted and now TUF is a joke.


Meh cheaper end boards aren't that bad, i've had i5-3570k running @ 4.9 24/7 on asrock 60$ board without any issues , and this was cheapest board available even though i wouldn't call 150e cheap







not much choice in bananaland i'm at.
Also i'm using dac so integrated sound board has doesn't matter to me.


----------



## AlphaC

I know it's a i5 but keep an eye on your power / VRM temps. These 6 cores are using more than the 4 cores , about 130-150W overclocked with some i7s even more than that (190W-200W).


----------



## jellybeans69

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I know it's a i5 but keep an eye on your power / VRM temps. These 6 cores are using more than the 4 cores , about 130-150W overclocked with some i7s even more than that (190W-200W).


I know i'll be testing it/seeing how it goes on weekend as i have to wait for noctua dh15s to arrive due to no s1151 backplate for h110. Either way i'm happy with purchase. As mentioned a page back quick look it gives +30 or so fps on average in Disgaea 4 on PS3 emulator and about +20-25 fps in Disgaea 3 (which unfortunately i not yet in playable state).


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jellybeans69*
> 
> Meh cheaper end boards aren't that bad, i've had i5-3570k running @ 4.9 24/7 on asrock 60$ board without any issues , and this was cheapest board available even though i wouldn't call 150e cheap
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> not much choice in bananaland i'm at.
> Also i'm using dac so integrated sound board has doesn't matter to me.


@AlphaC is referring to the information he has on this thread: http://www.overclock.net/t/1638955/z370-z390-vrm-discussion-thread where the TUF really has inferior components.


----------



## jellybeans69

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> @AlphaC
> is referring to the information he has on this thread: http://www.overclock.net/t/1638955/z370-z390-vrm-discussion-thread where the TUF really has inferior components.


Thanks for heads-up though i'm unlikely to run @ 5g for daily use anyway. Will monitor temps/have few 12/14cm coolers near vrms regardless of oc.







Also as i said i had to take what's available. Rog Strix was like +50-80 euros and that much i can't afford at the moment. I mean i'm not really a casual and probably will get a 5.3-5.4 suicide screen or two as i usually do when burning a new setup for for daily i usually use moderate settings.

And for the record this was the board i was running 3570k @ 4.9 24/7 - http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z77%20Pro4-M/


----------



## HAL900

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> The same thing happens to my 8700K at stock. The single-core turbo won't work either. MCE works flawlessly though.


When you turn on MCE, what is your clock for 6 cores?


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> When you turn on MCE, what is your clock for 6 cores?


Should it not be 4.7?


----------



## Yetyhunter

They use that much power ? Will a seasonic 550W be enough for a oc'ed 8700k and oc'ed GTX1080?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yetyhunter*
> 
> They use that much power ? Will a seasonic 550W be enough for a oc'ed 8700k and oc'ed GTX1080?


Of the top of my head you should be OK (just)







use calculator to know for sure as I dont know what else you have in your system https://seasonic.com/psu-calculator/


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> My 8700K from der8auer has been shipped !


WOW that's fast !! Gratz


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*


nice emoticon orchestra !


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yetyhunter*
> 
> They use that much power ? Will a seasonic 550W be enough for a oc'ed 8700k and oc'ed GTX1080?


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> WOW that's fast !! Gratz


Yeah I was not expecting that !


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> When you turn on MCE, what is your clock for 6 cores?


Locks to 4.7 under any load.


----------



## HAL900

yep but in 8700k
On 8700 ?


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> Slomo4shO
> 
> In my 8700 cinebench there is no 4.3 ghz and 4 - 4.1
> Maybe bios.........
> Bad turbo and voltage modes
> MSi works on new ones


Remember when Intel released X299 it was: Up to 18 cores, up to 48 PCI-E lanes, up to 4 channels, up to...
Now you have up to 4.3 GHz above basic speed when you enable turbo. Nothing to worry about, works as designed, you can still overclock manually.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> yep but in 8700k
> On 8700 ?


And you doubted me it would do that









Should be 4.6 For the non K as that's the max boost for one core
And MCE basically just let's all cores boost to the max single

I don't think MCE has been able to actually override the turbo multipliers to give even more since ivy bridge
On my old ivy it gave 4 more for the multiplier

Should be an option left off on default
Like a reviewer noted
It was unstable at 4.7

I've owned 3 Asus boards now for 3 different generations
Since MCE's introduction I could swear it was always on by default

Back then it mattered less
Turbo boost wasn't giving like 500mhz or more over lowest clock
And there were obviously less cores to feed with voltage


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> And you doubted me it would do that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Should be 4.6 For the non K as that's the max boost for one core
> And MCE basically just let's all cores boost to the max single
> 
> I don't think MCE has been able to actually override the turbo multipliers to give even more since ivy bridge
> On my old ivy it gave 4 more for the multiplier
> 
> Should be an option left off on default
> Like a reviewer noted
> It was unstable at 4.7
> 
> I've owned 3 Asus boards now for 3 different generations
> *Since MCE's introduction I could swear it was always on by default
> *
> Back then it mattered less
> Turbo boost wasn't giving like 500mhz or more over lowest clock
> And there were obviously less cores to feed with voltage


+1 Agreed has always been on by default


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> And you doubted me it would do that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Should be 4.6 For the non K as that's the max boost for one core
> And MCE basically just let's all cores boost to the max single
> 
> I don't think MCE has been able to actually override the turbo multipliers to give even more since ivy bridge
> On my old ivy it gave 4 more for the multiplier
> 
> Should be an option left off on default
> Like a reviewer noted
> It was unstable at 4.7
> 
> I've owned 3 Asus boards now for 3 different generations
> Since MCE's introduction I could swear it was always on by default
> 
> Back then it mattered less
> Turbo boost wasn't giving like 500mhz or more over lowest clock
> And there were obviously less cores to feed with voltage


On Hardware Unboxed it was said that MCE can't be enabled on locked SKUs, or at least the 8400.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> On Hardware Unboxed it was said that MCE can't be enabled on locked SKUs, or at least the 8400.


First line of UEFI issues maybe

I've read (and found Screenshots) On a Forum that showed BCLK overclocking an i5 8400 on an asrock board to 5Ghz

And according to a comments below it was deactivated in the next UEFI update

The BCLK engine is an Asrock thing
Or was at first anyway

Edit:
Just like some reviews show a decrease in IPC when locked at the same freqnecy, although it shouldn't have since the chips are the same architectural wise

Could simply be an UEFI optimization thing
We've gotten a lot of chipsets this year (AMD and Intel)
So manufacturers got theyre work cut out for them


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> First line of UEFI issues maybe
> 
> I've read (and found Screenshots) On a Forum that showed BCLK overclocking an i5 8400 on an asrock board to 5Ghz
> 
> And according to a comments below it was deactivated in the next UEFI update
> 
> The BCLK engine is an Asrock thing
> Or was at first anyway


It was simulated. They were actually using an 8700K underclocked and with HT off


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> It was simulated. They were actually using an 8700K underclocked and with HT off


Mmm
I see that now
However what's special here is the BCLK OC

Is it unlocked for K cpu's? On Kaby?
Not sure since I havent bothered to try

And locked for non K only? Or all?


----------



## HAL900

The moderator of the msi forum said that there will be not 4.6 and 4.3 at I7 8700


----------



## winter2

Since everyone is taling only about 8700k core frequency for OC and voltage I'd like to also know whats optimal / recommended Uncore ratio (RING /LLC clock) ?
Whats difference between default and higher and how it is affecting overclock stability.
Should everyone goes for same core and uncore frequency without any issues ?

Only thing what I was able to find about this Hardware.fr tangible differences between 3.7 and 4.4 GHz cache/ring frequency: http://www.hardware.fr/articles/970-17/attention-aux-overclockings-automatiques.html#graph0


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *winter2*
> 
> Since everyone is taling only about 8700k core frequency for OC and voltage I'd like to also know whats optimal / recommended Uncore ratio (RING /LLC clock) ?
> Whats difference between default and higher and how it is affecting overclock stability.
> Should everyone goes for same core and uncore frequency without any issues ?
> 
> Only thing what I was able to find about this Hardware.fr tangible differences between 3.7 and 4.4 GHz cache/ring frequency: http://www.hardware.fr/articles/970-17/attention-aux-overclockings-automatiques.html#graph0


http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics

First Post

Under:
Quote:


> Cache Frequency Doesn't Matter Much


It's better for performance if the uncore is fast as well

But looking at the chart for Kaby, some had to lower uncore to get stable

100Mhz more frequency for the cores is better than hundreds (it's been stated 1000Mhz) faster uncore

Of course if you can raise both that's better

If you have to sacrifice one of the 2 (core frequency *or* uncore/cache, testing will show if it's stable) then sacrificing uncore is the better option


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *winter2*
> 
> Since everyone is taling only about 8700k core frequency for OC and voltage I'd like to also know whats optimal / recommended Uncore ratio (RING /LLC clock) ?
> Whats difference between default and higher and how it is affecting overclock stability.
> Should everyone goes for same core and uncore frequency without any issues ?
> 
> Only thing what I was able to find about this Hardware.fr tangible differences between 3.7 and 4.4 GHz cache/ring frequency: http://www.hardware.fr/articles/970-17/attention-aux-overclockings-automatiques.html#graph0


I just keep mine at default, which is 4400MHz in Asus boards.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> I just keep mine at default, which is 4400MHz in Asus boards.


Well I see it like this

It does offer better performance when you tune it yourself

But it's only in the realm of getting that 3200 CL14 RAM to 3466 or so (with same timings)
Depending on the workload there might be an increase in performance
But it's not exactly a make or brake difference


----------



## wickedld9

No, MCE is not on by default on ASUS boards. It is auto (off) by default. When you set memory to XMP, it prompts asking if you want to run all cores, clicking OK/Yes enables it at that time.

I just checked this on Maximus VIII and X99 Deluxe.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wickedld9*
> 
> No, MCE is not on by default on ASUS boards. It is auto (off) by default. When you set memory to XMP, it prompts asking if you want to run all cores, clicking OK/Yes enables it at that time.
> 
> I just checked this on Maximus VIII and X99 Deluxe.


No MCE is on by default. When MCE is on AUTO it is still on and when selecting XMP, it is asking if you want to basically keep MCE turned on, as well as turning on XMP profiles.
If you were to choose Manual instead of XMP and have MCE on AUTO, you would see that your cores would still be overclocked to 4.7ghz in the case of the 8700K


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wickedld9*
> 
> No, MCE is not on by default on ASUS boards. It is auto (off) by default. When you set memory to XMP, it prompts asking if you want to run all cores, clicking OK/Yes enables it at that time.
> 
> I just checked this on Maximus VIII and X99 Deluxe.


It asks, but even though it asks it's on because it defaults "sync all cores" to on.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> It fluctuates between 4.0 and 4.3 a lot, typically around 4.1. No idea why.


Look in hwinfo and see if there's a reason listed in performance limit reasons.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> Look in hwinfo and see if there's a reason listed in performance limit reasons.


I don't feel like going back to stock lol. I'm pretty sure it was hitting TDP though.


----------



## wickedld9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> It asks, but even though it asks it's on because it defaults "sync all cores" to on.


I literally just re-checked this for the second time in 12 hours.
Disable XMP, MCE set to Auto, 7700K turbos to 4.4 all cores.
Enable XMP, enable MCE, 7700K turbos to 4.5 all cores.


----------



## Tojara

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> The lowest scored reviews are also well lower than they should be, given the stock specs. Top are auto-OC'd but the truth is somewhere in the middle, not the top or bottom reviews.


Even the lowest ones are actually perfectly within reason, a few hundred MHz above stock 3.7 GHz. If anything is out of reason it's the high scores, running above 4.7 GHz. The performance per clock in the seven different reviews that had results varied by about +-2 %, so that leaves a rather easy way to figure out the clock the processors were actually running at.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wickedld9*
> 
> I literally just re-checked this for the second time in 12 hours.
> Disable XMP, MCE set to Auto, 7700K turbos to 4.4 all cores.
> Enable XMP, enable MCE, 7700K turbos to 4.5 all cores.


Cool. This thread is about Coffee Lake.


----------



## wickedld9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> And you doubted me it would do that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Should be 4.6 For the non K as that's the max boost for one core
> And MCE basically just let's all cores boost to the max single
> 
> I don't think MCE has been able to actually override the turbo multipliers to give even more since ivy bridge
> On my old ivy it gave 4 more for the multiplier
> 
> Should be an option left off on default
> Like a reviewer noted
> It was unstable at 4.7
> 
> I've owned 3 Asus boards now for 3 different generations
> Since MCE's introduction I could swear it was always on by default
> 
> Back then it mattered less
> Turbo boost wasn't giving like 500mhz or more over lowest clock
> And there were obviously less cores to feed with voltage


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> +1 Agreed has always been on by default


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Cool. This thread is about Coffee Lake.


The smugness is not needed. I was rebutting the quotes above.


----------



## czin125

http://abload.de/image.php?img=5500-5090-3866-cb15-1dnsw3.png
He had to use a tad more voltage to get 5500mhz stable ( for R15 )
5500mhz Core ( 1.424v )
3866mhz 16-16-16-30 278 CR1
5100mhz NB Clock

http://www.overclock.net/t/1619559/kaby-lake-binning/140#post_26106559
7600K needs 1.440v for 5455mhz on a 2dimm board


----------



## Techhog

Turns out that the Strix boards were released with no QA done




This behavior is present on my board with the latest BIOS


----------



## HAL900

Now I'm testing a sound card for z370 vs aim 808


----------



## HAL900

Not bad but it's not the same level as aim808


----------



## TMatzelle60

god i hate waiting to buy everything lol. I am currently just buying cables and stuff lol


----------



## czin125

http://gskill.com/img/pr/2017.10.13_rgb_4266mhz_4x8gb/02.4266.4x8gb.5hr.test.report.png
4x8GB 4266 19-23-23-43 747 1.40v
December 2017 release


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Turns out that the Strix boards were released with no QA done
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This behavior is present on my board with the latest BIOS


Oh , jebus. I hope the Asrock boards don't have this issue. LLC not working is a big deal.


----------



## Rubinhood

Multi Core Enhancement on locked Coffee Lake cpus is not looking good.






(See 10:57 onwards in the video.) The guy says he tried three brands: MSI, GB and Asrock

*Edit: corresponding article is at https://www.techspot.com/review/1502-intel-core-i5-8400/page5.html


----------



## QuadDamage

Still waiting on Amazon like many other
I got the worst rep ever today telling me well you ordered it with unknown shipping date and it's still unknow

Told me to go f myself


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> Still waiting on Amazon like many other
> I got the worst rep ever today telling me well you ordered it with unknown shipping date and it's still unknow
> 
> Told me to go f myself


did he really though


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Turns out that the Strix boards were released with no QA done
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This behavior is present on my board with the latest BIOS


Well wth lol. Ive also heard MSI is having issues too. MSI pro carbon and strix-f were my two top picks, what do i go with now lol. Id get extreme 4 but its not on amazon, gigabyte gaming 5?


----------



## Timur Born

Just increase Vcore to counter droop, not much current going through at low load anyway. And then some weeks later you get a BIOS fix that enables LLC. Even then you should not overdo it (overshot and ripple).


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What does your i7 8700k clock at on 6 cores stock?
> 
> 
> 
> It fluctuates between 4.0 and 4.3 a lot, typically around 4.1. No idea why.
Click to expand...

What software were you running to get those clock speeds also what motherboard do you have?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jyssi*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jyssi*
> 
> Which settings should I change in order to OC 8700k on Gigabyte Aorus 5? List them all pls, I'm going mad
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can't get past this 4300mhz 6core cap. PC boots normally to windows and I can see 4.9GHz clocks, but immediately after I start stress test, all cores dive to 4.3GHz and wont rise again before reboot. I'd assume its power setting somewhere?
> 
> 
> 
> This problem was caused by wanting to control RGB leds on the motherboard and since bios controls were too simple, I installed Gigabyte appcenter. With the appcenter comes ****ware called "easytune" which was causing the problem. I reinstalled windows because I was going mad after over 8hours of troubleshooting...
> 
> Now I can't control the leds, but I prefer this over not being able to overclock at all <_>
> 
> DO NOT INSTALL GIGABYTE APPCENTER OR EASYTUNE
Click to expand...

Thanks for the information, I use Gigabyte motherboards.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> yep but in 8700k
> On 8700 ?
> 
> 
> 
> And you doubted me it would do that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Should be 4.6 For the non K as that's the max boost for one core
> And MCE basically just let's all cores boost to the max single
> 
> I don't think MCE has been able to actually override the turbo multipliers to give even more since ivy bridge
> On my old ivy it gave 4 more for the multiplier
> 
> Should be an option left off on default
> Like a reviewer noted
> It was unstable at 4.7
> 
> I've owned 3 Asus boards now for 3 different generations
> Since MCE's introduction I could swear it was always on by default
> 
> Back then it mattered less
> Turbo boost wasn't giving like 500mhz or more over lowest clock
> And there were obviously less cores to feed with voltage
Click to expand...

On Asus I think in the past MCH was off by default, then it asked if you wanted it enabled with XMP.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wickedld9*
> 
> No, MCE is not on by default on ASUS boards. It is auto (off) by default. When you set memory to XMP, it prompts asking if you want to run all cores, clicking OK/Yes enables it at that time.
> 
> I just checked this on Maximus VIII and X99 Deluxe.
> 
> 
> 
> No MCE is on by default. When MCE is on AUTO it is still on and when selecting XMP, it is asking if you want to basically keep MCE turned on, as well as turning on XMP profiles.
> If you were to choose Manual instead of XMP and have MCE on AUTO, you would see that your cores would still be overclocked to 4.7ghz in the case of the 8700K
Click to expand...

We were talking before coffee lake that MCE was off by default and activated with XMP if you select yes on Asus.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wickedld9*
> 
> I literally just re-checked this for the second time in 12 hours.
> Disable XMP, MCE set to Auto, 7700K turbos to 4.4 all cores.
> Enable XMP, enable MCE, 7700K turbos to 4.5 all cores.
> 
> 
> 
> Cool. This thread is about Coffee Lake.
Click to expand...

He was just proving that MCE was off for default in the past.


----------



## HAL900

In cpu K

MCE is only value for cpu without K








In K You can set any value multiplier


----------



## NorcalTRD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> who cares about MCE. this is what I care about. COME ON! I NEED MY 8700K
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm so ready for this lol


Can I borrow your tool when your done with it?


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> gigabyte gaming 5?


I am wondering about this one too. Anyone use it yet? Can't find any reviews but seems pretty well spec'd and $100 cheaper than the gaming 7 here at least.


----------



## NorcalTRD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> I am wondering about this one too. Anyone use it yet? Can't find any reviews but seems pretty well spec'd and $100 cheaper than the gaming 7 here at least.


Mine is on the way. wont have the chip in it until end of the month though of course


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> http://gskill.com/img/pr/2017.10.13_rgb_4266mhz_4x8gb/02.4266.4x8gb.5hr.test.report.png
> 4x8GB 4266 19-23-23-43 747 1.40v
> December 2017 release


Honestly, I'll admit the RGB ram looks neat... but how often do you actually just sit and look at a pc instead of the monitor and what you're doing? Are aesthetics worth an extra $25-30 on a 16 GB set? $50-60 or more on a 32 GB set?

In addition to the higher price tag for the aesthetics tax, uhh... I mean RGB cool points factor... anything past 2666 and unless you have a Ryzen machine, you're entering into the area of diminishing returns on the investment. Anything above the varied G.Skill sets available at 3200 (14-14-14-34) and the diminishing returns in both value (price per GB) and latency make it exponentially less and less performance per dollar... the performance gains are neglible, in fact, possibly slower.

[Does RAM speed really matter?](



)

Yeah, with 4266 you're gaining about 33% in clock speed over the 3200, but accepting a 35.71% increase to latency with the fastest sets of each speed available. In fact, so far, with Kingston's 2800 sets, they're the only other RAM provider with CL 14 ram above 2400, and GSKill remains the only one offering CL14 timings at 3000 and 3200. Past 3200 it goes to CL15 at 3600, CL17 at 3733, CL18 at 4000 and 4133, and CL 19 for 4266... You may see an average of an extra 1 - 3 fps with the 4266 over the 3200, and the 3200 is no more than 6-10 fps on avg above 2666. Even at these high frequencies we're getting on DDR4, latency still makes a more meaningful difference than frequency after 3200MHz as that's the highest speed that CL14 ram is available, period, from any manufacturer.

That's budget much better spent elsewhere on improving the quality of a build, like buying a U.2 NVMe SSD over a standard SSD, or an i7 instead of an i5, or an IPS monitor with a higher refresh rate...

[2x8GB DDR4-3200 Trident Z RGB CL 14- $215.99](https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232485&Tpk=N82E16820232485)

[2x8GB DDR4-3200 Trident Z NON rgb CL14 - $185.99](https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232205&Tpk=N82E16820232205)

[2x8GB DDR4-4266 Trident Z RGB CL19- $260.99](https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232497&Tpk=N82E16820232497)

[2x8GB DDR4-4266 Trident Z NON rgb CL-19 - $236.99](https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232472&Tpk=N82E16820232472)


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Honestly, I'll admit the RGB ram looks neat... but how often do you actually just sit and look at a pc instead of the monitor and what you're doing? Are aesthetics worth an extra $25-30 on a 16 GB set? $50-60 or more on a 32 GB set?


I admit I love looking at my PC, actually take pride in it's appearance!


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> I admit I love looking at my PC, actually take pride in it's appearance!


Nothing wrong with that, just illustrating the idea that if even if you wish to compromise some budget towards aesthetics, even if you have a ridiculous budget like $3,000 or more for a build there's not a real reason to go with that high of RAM, and this is coming from a guy planning out a full new system, a watercooled mITX rig in a decked out Mercury S3 and a 100Hz 34" ultra-wide IPS.

Working Title: Defcon 2
https://pcpartpicker.com/user/SpacemanSpliff/saved/xrgJVn


----------



## AlphaC

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/SOLIDWORKS-2018-Coffee-Lake-CPU-Comparison-i7-8700K-i5-8600K-i3-8350K-1053/


----------



## Zorborg

Almost all these charts and video reviews posted online lately show the 8700K with the 7700K and a handful of same/close competitors, but what about previous generations going back to the 3770K or 4770K?

Has Intel spoken about this? Because I don't think even a minority of their individual user customer base would even consider upgrading from gen i7 to gen i7.

Wouldn't they prefer to have the consumer review sites show actual incentives to upgrade?


----------



## SuperZan

It really should be done, but the predictable performance increases gen to gen with Intel’s products give you a very good idea of where your older Intel processor stands even if all you have are 7700k numbers.


----------



## jellybeans69

By the way MCE was on or auto Z370-Plus TUF Asus board.








Got another cooling so oc is good to go, booting into 5ghz was super easy


And quick test of cinebench i did at 4.8 ghz in previous boot


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

For a bit of reference for the folks curious to previous generations performance... Unfortunately, I wasn't brave enough in the days before 3D Printed delidding tools to literally put my 4670K under the X-Acto knife or 2x4, vice, and hammer... But even as such I think it was a decent overclocking chip. 4.6 was it's best stable point, but it took a significant boost in voltage (~1.29v) and it understandably ran hot to get there, reaching the high 80s under full load while doing the stability testing. It ran stable at 4.4 for nearly 4 years at 1.24v and peak temps in the low to mid 60s, but now it's degrading enough to where it requires a boost back up to ~1.27v to maintain stability at 4.4. I keep it at 4.2 on 1.22v and that keep temps in the lower 60s under full load.

Taken from the cb_ranking.txt file from my Cinebench runs on my rig at 4.2 GHz earlier this week.

GPU was overclocked to 1155MHz (+188) on the core and 1667MHz (+167) on the memory.

CBCPUX: 647.8
CB OPENGL: 141.2 fps

and at the Stock CPU settings (3.8 GHz Boost):

CB CPU X: 592.5
CB OPENGL: 122.2 fps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jellybeans69*
> 
> And quick test of cinebench i did at 4.8 ghz in previous boot


Soo... 6 Coffee cores/threads at 4.8 compared to 4 Haswell cores/threads at 4.2, and you got an 1166 to my 648.


----------



## TMatzelle60

What does MCE actually do? Is it turbo boost or something different


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> What does MCE actually do? Is it turbo boost or something different


Did you miss the 30 pages of Scotty arguing about it ?


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Did you miss the 30 pages of Scotty arguing about it ?


pretty much


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> pretty much


haha, let's not start that again.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> haha, let's not start that again.


i read up on it. nvm


----------



## kevindd992002

Hahaha, please don't start with Scotty again. It's very lame.


----------



## stefxyz

My Silver Coffee (8700k) from Caseking arrived today yay. I hope its a strong one.

I whish it had even less Volts but well I didnt expect it to arrive this year so I cannot complain so far.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stefxyz*
> 
> My Silver Coffee (8700k) from Caseking arrived today yay. I hope its a strong one.
> 
> I whish it had even less Volts but well I didnt expect it to arrive this year so I cannot complain so far.


Gratz ! Mine is scheduled to arrive by tuesday.


----------



## stefxyz

Must be off the same charge then so we are kinda CPU brothers then







Dont eat all the Haribos at once!


----------



## jellybeans69

Nice though 1.38v means it boots at 1.38 or is IBT/AVX instruction stable if so doesn't seem that much tbh. As i mentioned in one of other threads my 8600k is pretty stable and can play PS3 emu games etc just fine @ 5 ghz/1.35v or smtg but won't pass IBT even if i feed it 1.45v


----------



## stefxyz

It means the CPU stood stable for 1 hour with: Prime95 26.6 with 1344K. Will do some deep dive testing once my mono block and the other watercooling stuff arrives hopefully end of next week. If I can get it rockstable at 5100 or 5000 with a bit less Volts, High Speed RAM and some Cache OC I will be happy too.


----------



## czin125

It's binned with a X61 Kraken on a midrange board before it gets delidded. Since you receive it delidded and with a silver IHS, you should be able to lower the voltage a bit using the rated speed.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zorborg*
> 
> Almost all these charts and video reviews posted online lately show the 8700K with the 7700K and a handful of same/close competitors, but what about previous generations going back to the 3770K or 4770K?
> 
> Has Intel spoken about this? Because I don't think even a minority of their individual user customer base would even consider upgrading from gen i7 to gen i7.
> 
> Wouldn't they prefer to have the consumer review sites show actual incentives to upgrade?


Look at Digital Foundry. They tested it vs 3770K.


----------



## stefxyz

That would be nice. I will let you guys know how it goes. Got a dedicated 560mm Radiator in Push / Pull just for the CPU and VRMs shoudl be more than enough cooling capacity headroom. But then u never know some CPUs get hot easy some stay cool every CPU is different.


----------



## PontiacGTX

So people is spending 1000usd on a moded 8700k when in a year that could be more than the Ice Lake 8 core's price ?


----------



## domenic

The Asus ROG Maximus X Formula motherboard support page just showed up here including the PDF of the manual.

Win10 drivers are listed but no BIOS files yet. Man I hope this is a sign that this board is going to ship before late November. Then again no CPUs available to go with it. I managed to get an order into Newegg within ten minutes of launch and Amazon a few hours later for an 8700k but no word of even a ship date.

Just found something interesting in the manual. Says it supports the Asus HYPER M.2 X16 CARD (VROC) which I thought was only comparable with x299 boards. Apparently extended to Z370 now?


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> So people is spending 1000usd on a moded 8700k when in a year that could be more than the Ice Lake 8 core's price ?


Is there another guaranteed way to attain such binned chips?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jellybeans69*
> 
> By the way MCE was on or auto Z370-Plus TUF Asus board.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Got another cooling so oc is good to go, booting into 5ghz was super easy
> 
> 
> And quick test of cinebench i did at 4.8 ghz in previous boot


Looks good. Post how high you can clock with a stable stress test .


----------



## jellybeans69

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Looks good. Post how high you can clock with a stable stress test .


So far 4.9 @ 1.33v without AVX offset from what i've gathered, 5.0 doesn't want to pass IBT even at @ 1.43v but i'll keep testing. That's if we're talking rock-stable 24/7 without using AVX offset option which would be pretty pointless and cheating like some people using AVX 4 and calling their 5.3 "stable"


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stefxyz*
> 
> My Silver Coffee (8700k) from Caseking arrived today yay. I hope its a strong one.
> 
> I whish it had even less Volts but well I didnt expect it to arrive this year so I cannot complain so far.


its a binned CPU, already been tested I don't understand '' hope its a strong one'' maybe you mean longevity or IMC or cache speed?

anyway gratz! not sure I could do the same and buy a CPU for more than twice its price, think id buy 3 normal ones and pick the best sell the other 2 hehe


----------



## FlanK3r

Nice, Im waiting for two pieces, hope I will win a lotery also...
But Ryzen refresh seems better choice, u will see in few months.


----------



## Scotty99

I wouldnt get your hopes up for ryzen refresh, i dont see them gaining much except a couple hundred mhz, they arent going to leapfrog intel in clockspeeds nor IPC.


----------



## stefxyz

Ah was just a joke related to Coffee. Looks like not the best one... Now I wish I could build already...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> So people is spending 1000usd on a moded 8700k when in a year that could be more than the Ice Lake 8 core's price ?


Yes absolutely and we can only win: if the Icelake doesnt turn out to be great I have a good CPU and if its great we enthusiasts have a good reason to buy something new and even faster. I hope the latter. Stuff is still way too slow.

However looking at this chart there is a high chance that the first iterations of Icelake will not show the big gains:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/11722/intel-reveals-ice-lake-core-architecture-10nm-plus

Its the first chart.

The times are long gone where a shrink will guarantee a performance jump.


----------



## Scotty99

This actually shows how far intel is ahead of ryzen. 3.6ghz all core boost vs 3.9ghz on ryzen and intel is still leading in everything, including cinebench surprisingly.

Obviously 8100 is a hard sell currently as there are no budget boards yet, but come january no one should be buying ryzen 3's.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Is there another guaranteed way to attain such binned chips?


most could do 5- 5.2GHz is there a point to go beyond that? i dont think the extra frequency is wort it specially if there are other uses than games


----------



## Bigzeus

Hello overclockers,

Its been 5 years since my last post / build, I am finally building a new computer. However coming from a bare-die ivy I just don't see it having an IHS and was wondering if anyone could confirm that the pcb thickness is the same as skylake/kabylake.

If so, I plan on using something like aquacomputers spacerhttps://shop.aquacomputer.de/product_info.php?language=en&products_id=3378
Hoping they will make one for coffelake before I get the cpu, or maybe I could just cut it to make room for coffee's bigger die, if the die height compared to pcb are the same.

I am definitely ready to take the risk and even cut out some parts of the socket if necessary. Just for the fun and the few degrees. Oh and this time I won't forget to remove the waterblock's sticker


----------



## Cascade




----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This actually shows how far intel is ahead of ryzen. 3.6ghz all core boost vs 3.9ghz on ryzen and intel is still leading in everything, including cinebench surprisingly.
> 
> Obviously 8100 is a hard sell currently as there are no budget boards yet, but come january no one should be buying ryzen 3's.


AMD got cocky. I foresee a price drop on some products. Take the 1500x for example. The i5-8400 and AMD's own 1600 is a much better deal. 1500x vs i3-8100/8350K. Fight!


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cascade*
> 
> So who has an i5-8400 now, How is performance?


Here is a i5 8400 review. link: https://www.techspot.com/review/1502-intel-core-i5-8400/


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> AMD got cocky. I foresee a price drop on some products. Take the 1500x for example. The i5-8400 and AMD's own 1600 is a much better deal. 1500x vs i3-8100/8350K. Fight!


AMD has already lifted the sale they had on Ryzen for the Coffee Lake launch, but they have left the prices lower than what they had been... about $40-60 depending on the model with the R7-1800x at $439, the R7-1700x about $349, the R7-1700 at ~$289, R5-1600X at ~$229 and the R5-1600 at ~$199.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> AMD has already lifted the sale they had on Ryzen for the Coffee Lake launch, but they have left the prices lower than what they had been... about $40-60 depending on the model with the R7-1800x at $439, the R7-1700x about $349, the R7-1700 at ~$289, R5-1600X at ~$229 and the R5-1600 at ~$199.


microcenter has the deals on ryzen.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> microcenter has the deals on ryzen.


That's MicroCenter, not the AMD mandated universal price drop. Context yo... context, lol.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *domenic*
> 
> The Asus ROG Maximus X Formula motherboard support page just showed up here including the PDF of the manual.
> 
> Win10 drivers are listed but no BIOS files yet. Man I hope this is a sign that this board is going to ship before late November. Then again no CPUs available to go with it. I managed to get an order into Newegg within ten minutes of launch and Amazon a few hours later for an 8700k but no word of even a ship date.
> 
> *Just found something interesting in the manual. Says it supports the Asus HYPER M.2 X16 CARD (VROC) which I thought was only comparable with x299 boards. Apparently extended to Z370 now?*


There is no reason why this wouldn't work however unless something has changed unlike X299 CPU lanes (VROC) will not be bootable


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I wish I could score an 1800X for around $300 (or around the price of a 1700). Obviously the 8700K is a more powerful CPU, at least in IPC and OCing, but a $300 1800X would be very hard to walk away from, even if I don't actually have any disposable cash at the moment. I really don't see the 1800X coming down to that kind of price though unfortunately.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> That's MicroCenter, not the AMD mandated universal price drop. Context yo... context, lol.


I saw the sales. 1700x was $300 on amazon. Now it's $350. MSRP is $400 which I don't agree with but it is what it is for the time being.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

The sale here was $250 CAD for 1600X which is amazing.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> The sale here was $250 CAD for 1600X which is amazing.


the 1600's are still very good. The coffeelake i5's give them some more competition.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jellybeans69*
> 
> By the way MCE was on or auto Z370-Plus TUF Asus board.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Got another cooling so oc is good to go, booting into 5ghz was super easy
> 
> 
> And quick test of cinebench i did at 4.8 ghz in previous boot


Scores higher than my 7700k @ 5GHz (low 1100's) the new i5's are great


----------



## jellybeans69

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> Scores higher than my 7700k @ 5GHz (low 1100's) the new i5's are great


7970 on stock and 1x8gb 2400 mhz ram
5.2ghz/avx 3/fire strike 1.1

4.9ghz/avx off/firestrike 1.1 and timespy 1.0


5.2 ghz/avx3/cb


New i5 def looks pretty good


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> http://abload.de/image.php?img=5500-5090-3866-cb15-1dnsw3.png
> He had to use a tad more voltage to get 5500mhz stable ( for R15 )
> 5500mhz Core ( 1.424v )
> 3866mhz 16-16-16-30 278 CR1
> 5100mhz NB Clock


So close to [email protected] HT off 1.29v thru

Edit: Forgot to add single core result...Seems pretty decent with HT off


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> So people is spending 1000usd on a moded 8700k when in a year that could be more than the Ice Lake 8 core's price ?


lot of people don't want to wait a year and a half for 10nm+


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> lot of people don't want to wait a year and a half for 10nm+


Exactly. Waiting is not a luxury in building a PC. There's always something new around the corner. This has been said over and over again. 1.5 years is not a joke to wait for.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> So close to [email protected] HT off 1.29v thru
> 
> Edit: Forgot to add single core result...Seems pretty decent with HT off


It looks like Skylake-X performs better per clock in Cinebench R15. What's your NB Clock and Ram settings?

He's running 5090mhz NB and ram at 3866 16-16-16-30 278 CR1 to get 1385. As high as 3600mhz NB is possible on Skylake-X on ambient cooling.


----------



## DStealth

~3300 mesh and 4100 cl16-16-16-30-300 1t 24/7 settings


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> lot of people don't want to wait a year and a half for 10nm+


you are implying the only way to get a 8700k is via an overpriced binned model which will probably be cheaper delidding one self or buying of a cheaper source like SL now if you are talking you cant wait for 8core, you still can play games with your CPU Coffee lake hasnt changed the multicore scaling in current games making old CPU obsolete









it makes no sense to buy a highly overpriced CPU when you can buy same CPU now and later buy a 8core and probably you wont spend as much as 1000usd

Even today you can get more with 1000usd

7900x
1950x
8700K+Z370 mobo+16GB RAM
2x Ryzen Setup


----------



## svenge

I think for most people the most cost effective solution would be just to wait for the B360/H370 boards and combine them with an i7-8700 (non-K). It should perform _reasonably close_ to the 8700K even when the latter is OC'd, but with less-expensive motherboards and without the K-tax. For those on more of a budget, the i5-8400 would also fit the bill.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Why would you spend so little on a motherboard which probably wont allow using MCE and really always buying a locked CPU hasnt been a good idea people who bought a 2500 or 2600 over a 2500k or 2600k are regreting, same with IB and also people who run mgpu on Haswell and Skylake,not even Broadwell had locked. if it were not for boost clocks a 2.8GHz Skylake CPU would be pointless


----------



## svenge

Because the delta in clock speeds (by percentage) between the 8700 and 8700K (OC'd) is relatively low in terms of a historical context, while the heat seems to goes up exponentially on the 14nm++ process. It's not like going from 3.5 locked to 4.7 in the Sandy Bridge days.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> you are implying the only way to get a 8700k is via an overpriced binned model which will probably be cheaper delidding one self or buying of a cheaper source like SL now if you are talking you cant wait for 8core, you still can play games with your CPU Coffee lake hasnt changed the multicore scaling in current games making old CPU obsolete
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it makes no sense to buy a highly overpriced CPU when you can buy same CPU now and later buy a 8core and probably you wont spend as much as 1000usd
> 
> Even today you can get more with 1000usd
> 
> 7900x
> 1950x
> 8700K+Z370 mobo+16GB RAM
> 2x Ryzen Setup


agreed. With 1000usd.

The 2 biggest things that hurt the budget of 1000 is Ram and GPU. Which can kill a build. I see GPU coming down but ram is going up


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> Because the delta in clock speeds (by percentage) between the 8700 and 8700K (OC'd) is relatively low in terms of a historical context, while the heat seems to goes up exponentially on the 14nm++ process. It's not like going from 3.5 locked to 4.7 in the Sandy Bridge days.


Q6600 2.4GHz -> 3.6GHz ~ 1.2GHz OC ~ 50% OC
920 2.66GHz -> 4.0GHz ~ 1.4GHz OC ~ 50% OC
2600K 3.4GHz -> 4.8GHz ~ 1.4GHz OC ~ 41% OC
3770K 3.5GHz -> 4.6GHz ~ 1.1GHz OC ~ 31% OC
8700K 4.3GHz -> 5.0GHz ~ 0.7GHz OC ~ 16% OC

Numbers say it all. People are just misled by the 5GHz barrier just like 2GHz for Pascal.


----------



## chaosblade02

I don't guess I'm realistically going to be able to get an I7 8700 for MSRP, before Q1 2018?


----------



## Asus11

has anyone tried installing windows 7 on coffee lake or already has done it?

this video is interesting not sure how stable it would be though, I do remember having kaby on win7 not sure in coffee though.


----------



## kd5151

Looking for good stock. No results found.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Looking for good stock. No results found.


https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/processors/intel/

Last time I used this website was the GTX 1080 release. hopefully we get the 8700k sooner this time.


----------



## Scotty99




----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/processors/intel/
> 
> Last time I used this website was the GTX 1080 release. hopefully we get the 8700k sooner this time.


Yeah the 8700K is like GTX 1080. By the time its on stock and good price might as well get the 1080 Ti







. In this case the rumored 8-Core CPU.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*


sometime in December.


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> because it allow to compute more instructions with a single CPU call. it's meant for this.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> I will (or actually I won't, since I get it for free). It's pretty much a fact that HEDT 6C+ is not that good for gaming. The most expensives ones are downright terrible. So much for a "top CPU"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's the main reason I've never bothered with the HEDT platform. Gaming perf is meh. Terrible perf per dollar. You pay much more, for less.


yes, a chevvy can bring your everywhere.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> Because the delta in clock speeds (by percentage) between the 8700 and 8700K (OC'd) is relatively low in terms of a historical context, while the heat seems to goes up exponentially on the 14nm++ process. It's not like going from 3.5 locked to 4.7 in the Sandy Bridge days.


smart thinkering, congrats.


----------



## CrazyHeaven

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> has anyone tried installing windows 7 on coffee lake or already has done it?
> 
> this video is interesting not sure how stable it would be though, I do remember having kaby on win7 not sure in coffee though.


I'll give it a try if I ever get my hands on one. Have one preorder on newegg and one on b&h. Hoping they are not going to ship at the same time on me.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> I think for most people the most cost effective solution would be just to wait for the B360/H370 boards and combine them with an i7-8700 (non-K). It should perform _reasonably close_ to the 8700K even when the latter is OC'd, but with less-expensive motherboards and without the K-tax. For those on more of a budget, the i5-8400 would also fit the bill.


It's supposedly Q1 2018 for B360 / H370 boards.

At that point you might as well wait for Icelake...

If it's a locked CPU, then those 4 phase cheapo Z370 boards aren't as horrific.


----------



## looniam

an el cheapo Z370 mobo with usually better ram compatibility (well a better bios period) storage and i/o features, and what not might be a good choice based on the user.


----------



## HAL900




----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*


Why even bother with SP in BF1. It does nothing for the CPU test.


----------



## HAL900

This is test cpu


----------



## Triniboi82

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> you are implying the only way to get a 8700k is via an overpriced binned model which will probably be cheaper delidding one self or buying of a cheaper source like SL now if you are talking you cant wait for 8core, you still can play games with your CPU Coffee lake hasnt changed the multicore scaling in current games making old CPU obsolete
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it makes no sense to buy a highly overpriced CPU when you can buy same CPU now and later buy a 8core and probably you wont spend as much as 1000usd
> 
> Even today you can get more with 1000usd
> 
> 7900x
> 1950x
> 8700K+Z370 mobo+16GB RAM
> 2x Ryzen Setup


Epeen > common sense


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> This is test cpu


vids not working?


----------



## Mampus

I think the unorthodox way to upgrade from my (or other) 2500K users in this gaming era is to buy i5 8400 + Z370 mobo + fast RAM (like 3200/3666 MHz), then after 4-5 years, upgrade to used i7 8700K (delid is even better) + even faster RAM (5000 MHZ or more).

Any other thought?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mampus*
> 
> I think the unorthodox way to upgrade from my (or other) 2500K users in this gaming era is to buy i5 8400 + Z370 mobo + fast RAM (like 3200/3666 MHz), then after 4-5 years, upgrade to used i7 8700K (delid is even better) + even faster RAM (5000 MHZ or more).
> 
> Any other thought?


Would you upgrade 2500K to 3770K right now or would you get 8700K?


----------



## kd5151

https://event.asrock.com/usretailer/oct-z370-ne.17.asp Has anyone tried the ASRock review rebate on newegg? Thanks!

EDIT: having problems loading the page? it was just working!


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mampus*
> 
> I think the unorthodox way to upgrade from my (or other) 2500K users in this gaming era is to buy i5 8400 + Z370 mobo + fast RAM (like 3200/3666 MHz), then after 4-5 years, upgrade to used i7 8700K (delid is even better) + even faster RAM (5000 MHZ or more).
> 
> Any other thought?


I don't think there is any real benefit from going to really fast ram over 3200 or 3600 with tight timings. From what I have seen 3200 CL14 seems to be the best compromise and if you can afford it then a 8700K straight away would probably save you money later on.


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> now if you are talking you cant wait for 8core, you still can play games with your CPU Coffee lake hasnt changed the multicore scaling in current games making old CPU obsolete
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it makes no sense to buy a highly overpriced CPU when you can buy same CPU now and later buy a 8core and probably you wont spend as much as 1000usd
> 
> Even today you can get more with 1000usd


1000usd binned CPU's are not for people that lack money, nor those who want to pick up a CPU off the shelf. I'd guess most of them go to PC enthusiasts that have no problem dropping $2-5k a year to buy whatever and have their fun with it


----------



## Lisanderus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mampus*
> 
> buy i5 8400...then after 4-5 years


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> 1000usd binned CPU's are not for people that lack money, nor those who want to pick up a CPU off the shelf. I'd guess most of them go to PC enthusiasts that have no problem dropping $2-5k a year to buy whatever and have their fun with it


I think the point is that its daft to spend $1000 for 200 MHz, no matter how much money you have. I mean, that's good for what, 1-2 FPS on average over a 5 GHz 8700K that you can get for less than half the cost.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> 1000usd binned CPU's are not for people that lack money, nor those who want to pick up a CPU off the shelf. I'd guess most of them go to PC enthusiasts that have no problem dropping $2-5k a year to buy whatever and have their fun with it


More fun to buy 2-3 CPU and bin them yourself. I mean if 8700K was at stock you can buy 10 at $380, test them while having a blast and keep the best one. Sell the rest depending on the OC potential or sell them cheap for $300 and you back to $1000 but you got even better CPU.


----------



## mdd1986




----------



## Scotty99

That video shows you shouldnt look at average frame rate, the spots the game gets hairy ryzen is outperforming intel. Ive been telling people all along as time goes on cores are going to trump clockspeed, and its looking like its already starting to happen.

I cannot say it enough, skip 8600k and get the 8700. Its only 40-50 dollars difference, and i7 will buy you extra years for your pc.


----------



## kd5151

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3086-intel-i5-8400-cpu-review-2666mhz-vs-3200mhz-gaming


----------



## Mampus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Would you upgrade 2500K to 3770K right now or would you get 8700K?


3770K is indeed a compelling choice, if we're still in Skylake/Kabylake era, but with 6C i5, and IPC + Architecture advantage over Sandy/Ivy, I think it's time to 2500K to rest and receive a "Legendary" award and move on









8700K is the way to go if we have a high refresh rate monitor. As you can see in my sig, I only game at [email protected], so 8700K is way to much to my monitor to swallow. On the other hand, you can have i5 8400 + Z370 mobo for the price of i7 8700K









Single-threaded performance is still the drawback factor for me to not choose Ryzen this time. In some older, heavily-threaded games like Crysis 3, the 1600 is overall smoother in frame time, but in more modern games like Rise of the Tomb Raider, 1600 simply can't match the 8400 performance overall








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> I don't think there is any real benefit from going to really fast ram over 3200 or 3600 with tight timings. From what I have seen 3200 CL14 seems to be the best compromise and if you can afford it then a 8700K straight away would probably save you money later on.


Yeah, the 3200 is indeed the better choice, just don't bother with 2133/2400, they simply makes your lowly i5 looks like got an extra weight to carry


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mampus*
> 
> 3770K is indeed a compelling choice, if we're still in Skylake/Kabylake era, but with 6C i5, and IPC + Architecture advantage over Sandy/Ivy, I think it's time to 2500K to rest and receive a "Legendary" award and move on
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 8700K is the way to go if we have a high refresh rate monitor. As you can see in my sig, I only game at [email protected], so 8700K is way to much to my monitor to swallow. On the other hand, you can have i5 8400 + Z370 mobo for the price of i7 8700K
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Single-threaded performance is still the drawback factor for me to not choose Ryzen this time. In some older, heavily-threaded games like Crysis 3, the 1600 is overall smoother in frame time, but in more modern games like Rise of the Tomb Raider, 1600 simply can't match the 8400 performance overall
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, the 3200 is indeed the better choice, just don't bother with 2133/2400, they simply makes your lowly i5 looks like got an extra weight to carry


In 5 years i5 will be 8 Core 100%.


----------



## kd5151

https://event.asrock.com/usretailer/oct-z370-ne.17.asp

It's working again. I think. Can you get another $20-30 off Asrock boards???


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> More fun to buy 2-3 CPU and bin them yourself. I mean if 8700K was at stock you can buy 10 at $380, test them while having a blast and keep the best one. Sell the rest depending on the OC potential or sell them cheap for $300 and you back to $1000 but you got even better CPU.


True but that's not always practical if you have a hardline open loop cooler







different strokes for different folks


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> True but that's not always practical if you have a hardline open loop cooler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> different strokes for different folks


You got enough time and money to build a mini CPU only look just for testing.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> You got enough time and money to build a mini CPU only look just for testing.


time yes (broken ankle atm) money nope







luck in the past with playing the silicon lottery nope


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> Still waiting on Amazon like many other
> I got the worst rep ever today telling me well you ordered it with unknown shipping date and it's still unknow
> 
> Told me to go f myself


LOL serious ?! So funny. Tat totally reminds me of the statement: "That information is only provided on a need to know basis, and you don't need to know...." =P =P


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stefxyz*
> 
> It means the CPU stood stable for 1 hour with: Prime95 26.6 with 1344K. Will do some deep dive testing once my mono block and the other watercooling stuff arrives hopefully end of next week. If I can get it rockstable at 5100 or 5000 with a bit less Volts, High Speed RAM and some Cache OC I will be happy too.


gratz ! What mobo and ram did you go with ? let us know your single and multi cinebench results too please !


----------



## Arturo.Zise

From what I can see all the CL processors perform similar in 4K gaming scenarios. Am I better off grabbing the cheaper 4 or 6 core and putting the extra cash towards bigger GPU or faster ram? Looking at building a little ITX console PC for the living room.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arturo.Zise*
> 
> From what I can see all the CL processors perform similar in 4K gaming scenarios. Am I better off grabbing the cheaper 4 or 6 core and putting the extra cash towards bigger GPU or faster ram? Looking at building a little ITX console PC for the living room.


For 2160p @ 60Hz/~60fps CPU does not matter that much. I'd still choose 6 cores minimum tho. 4 cores and no HT will give you lower minimums for sure.


----------



## Mampus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lisanderus*


Gentleman, for what purpose this video are? I see near 100% usage of CPU and that's it. Can you elaborate more?


----------



## mdd1986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> That video shows you shouldnt look at average frame rate, the spots the game gets hairy ryzen is outperforming intel. Ive been telling people all along as time goes on cores are going to trump clockspeed, and its looking like its already starting to happen.
> 
> I cannot say it enough, skip 8600k and get the 8700. Its only 40-50 dollars difference, and i7 will buy you extra years for your pc.


Agreed. That was one of the only reviews so far that actually made some valid comparisons with overclocking and gaming across various CPUs.
What i finding interesting is that the I5 8600k Preforms almost identical to the 7700k and better than ryzen 5/7 in most games. I agree that the 8700k is the way to go. 8600k not a bad option if you don't plan to do much gaming over 60FPS.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Shouldn't we move this thread in a club or in the intel CPU category ?


----------



## Yetyhunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Shouldn't we move this thread in a club or in the intel CPU category ?


+1 So we could share overclocking tips/results.


----------



## Lisanderus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mampus*
> 
> I see near 100% usage of CPU and that's it. Can you elaborate more?


You are too optimistic about 4-5 years, nothing more.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyro999*
> 
> 1000usd binned CPU's are not for people that lack money, nor those who want to pick up a CPU off the shelf. I'd guess most of them go to PC enthusiasts that have no problem dropping $2-5k a year to buy whatever and have their fun with it


buy a 7900x then you get 4 cores more cores for same price. get a 1950x and you get 10 cores more for same price, get Ice lake with 2 cores more, even buying a non binned CPU will probably reach 95% OC while saving 600usd, the price of a flagship GPU which will increase performance much more than 200mhz


----------



## stefxyz

They are all considerably slower in games and applications that cant utilize all these cores so why would you buy something you have no use for or even better a CPU that is not available till earliest next year and with unproven performance gains? The 1950X is a great CPU but only for specific needs it is the best. For gaming its a compromise.


----------



## PontiacGTX





Ryzen 5 1600 is doing quite well here


----------



## QuadDamage

How I feel everyday


----------



## evensen007

#FakeLaunch


----------



## kd5151

How the grinch stole coffeelake.


----------



## evensen007




----------



## kd5151

Paperlake.


----------



## evensen007

Ok, im done. lol


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ryzen 5 1600 is doing quite well here


And that is a stock 1600. If you OC to 4.0GHz is will be a much closer battle. One thing that is weird is the last test. AoTS using all 12 T of 1600 and still losing to 8400.


----------



## HAL900

fejk







Ryzen slow in this








lake -30% = ryzen in crysis first map


----------



## Cascade

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> And that is a stock 1600. If you OC to 4.0GHz is will be a much closer battle. One thing that is weird is the last test. AoTS using all 12 T of 1600 and still losing to 8400.


What % of owners can actually OC to 4ghz? I mostly see 3.8ghz overclocks.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Yeah most 4ghz overclocks I see are probably not stable. A lot of reviewers mention that they struggle getting 4ghz


----------



## kd5151

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1356634-REG/intel_bx80684i78700k_core_i7_8700k_3_7_ghz.html

Nov 28th.


----------



## sblantipodi

is there some benches with 8700K vs Haswell-E?
possibly with an high end SLI at a resolution greater than 1080?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cascade*
> 
> What % of owners can actually OC to 4ghz? I mostly see 3.8ghz overclocks.


3.8GHz is more than what 1600 comes stock. Seen most people 3.9-4.1.


----------



## Cascade

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> 3.8GHz is more than what 1600 comes stock. Seen most people 3.9-4.1.


4.1ghz seems like silicon lottery winner-esque on a 1600


----------



## NoDestiny

3.7Ghz at 1.3v here. Can get 3.725Ghz at 1.375... don't really feel like the additional watt+heat is justified to go any higher, so trotting along with 3.7 until Ryzen 2 can hopefully come. Don't have any regrets, though, as it seems to do gaming just fine for me (not gonna argue the "more is better" debate, but I'm satisfied).


----------



## Mampus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lisanderus*
> 
> You are too optimistic about 4-5 years, nothing more.


Ok then, so how about 2.5 - 3.5 years? Is that still optimistic?


----------



## kd5151

720p benchmarks help me built a future proof pc.


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Yeah most 4ghz overclocks I see are probably not stable. A lot of reviewers mention that they struggle getting 4ghz


I don't know about the 1600X, but the 1800X can be made stable. That being said, the hard part is combining the core OC with memory OC, the latter of which also needs more Vcore and other voltages for said combination. Personally I settled on 3.95 GHz + 3333-C14 on BIOS 9920, it allows for more sane Vcore voltages (using LLC Auto/0). The wall towards 4 GHz is really steep, even more so above that.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1356634-REG/intel_bx80684i78700k_core_i7_8700k_3_7_ghz.html
> 
> Nov 28th.


This is just insane. How many more months of waiting


----------



## murenitu

I hang some of my data ....

currently at 4.9c all cores. and memory 3733Mhz. 32gb



http://imgur.com/W8elCA9




http://imgur.com/skq7bf4




http://imgur.com/DsZ7N8e




http://imgur.com/5JySzEb




http://imgur.com/BQaQQfB




http://imgur.com/JsfN9am




http://imgur.com/VTYAgMt


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> This is just insane. How many more months of waiting


i know.







it could be a long wait.

@ murenitu vtec kicks in at 5ghz!


----------



## Asus11

is there any benches above 1080p clearly dont care for 1080p gaming

I wonder if theres such a difference at 3440x1440


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> is there any benches above 1080p clearly dont care for 1080p gaming
> 
> I wonder if theres such a difference at 3440x1440


what are you upgrading to and from?

4th through 8th gen i7's probably won't be your bottleneck at that resolution.


----------



## Phixit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> is there any benches above 1080p clearly dont care for 1080p gaming
> 
> I wonder if theres such a difference at 3440x1440


Here is at 4k


----------



## Phixit

double post


----------



## murenitu

works seamlessly at 5ghz all cores! but I want to go little by little, to have been very very easy to make them stable at 4.9ghz, I am pleasantly surprised.

My photos of the project cars 2 are a 2k, with all the settings to ultra. filters etc, all to the maximum.


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> what are you upgrading to and from?
> 
> 4th through 8th gen i7's probably won't be your bottleneck at that resolution.


i7-6700k, most times I dont need to upgrade but if there's a tangible gain I like to keep my PC current

ive upgraded every iteration since 3770k, I got i7-7700k but it was disappointing so I sold it on

my 6700k is pretty much a golden chip... buttt if I can gain 20fps in games from a i7-8700k I don't mind the upgrade

to me my PC is like an investment too


----------



## Scotty99

I havent overclocked intel since sandy, is it still as easy as setting multi/offset volts bada bing bada boom?


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I havent overclocked intel since sandy, is it still as easy as setting multi/offset volts bada bing bada boom?


yes its pretty much simple as that, of course you can do alot more tweaking but that is all you need to do really

EDIT: actually since kabylabe you have to mess around with AVX offset or something


----------



## Triniboi82

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> i7-6700k, most times I dont need to upgrade but if there's a tangible gain I like to keep my PC current
> 
> ive upgraded every iteration since 3770k, I got i7-7700k but it was disappointing so I sold it on
> 
> my 6700k is pretty much a golden chip... buttt if I can gain 20fps in games from a i7-8700k I don't mind the upgrade
> 
> to me my PC is like an investment too


You won't be gaining that much at uw resolution. You literally have no reason to upgrade other than having the latest chip on the market.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fejk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ryzen slow in this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lake -30% = ryzen in crysis first map


in Crysis 3 the SMT form AMD is giving an advantage


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Triniboi82*
> 
> You won't be gaining that much at uw resolution. You literally have no reason to upgrade other than having the latest chip on the market.


that's what im thinking.. I guess sometimes you just to want play with new stuff hehe










what saddened me though is ASUS dropped the impact range & now its turned into ''ROG STRIX GAMING ITX '' seems abit nooby


----------



## Scotty99

SMT must not use same game coding as HT tho, destiny 2 beta didnt use SMT at all. Hopefully that gets fixed for launch.


----------



## PontiacGTX

maybe they released an update and it has compatibility with amd SMT or that scene specifially better on AMD architecture


----------



## Scotty99

Even if smt worked it would still be behind comparably priced intel chips cause mmo, but without smt a 3.9ghz overclocked ryzen 7 was behind a stock clocked 7350k lol.


----------



## PontiacGTX

crysis 3 is not a MMO, and it isnt a poorly singlthreaded game, the game was one of the first to take advantage of 6c/12t and I was talking about the video not something else


----------



## Triniboi82

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> that's what im thinking.. I guess sometimes you just to want play with new stuff hehe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what saddened me though is ASUS dropped the impact range & now its turned into ''ROG STRIX GAMING ITX '' seems abit nooby


Feel the same way when it comes to my 980Ti, would love to get the 1080Ti but I honestly don't need it. Trying my best to hold out for volta


----------



## HAL900

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> in Crysis 3 the SMT form AMD is giving an advantage


Nope.In first map and 90% other maps crysis 3 used max 4 core


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> This is just insane. How many more months of waiting


http://www.shopblt.com/cgi-bin/shop/shop.cgi?action=thispage&thispage=0110030005039_B2DF526P.shtml&order_id=!ORDERID!

They still have around 5,000 8700k's available for preorder with shipment expected on October 26.


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> is there any benches above 1080p clearly dont care for 1080p gaming
> 
> I wonder if theres such a difference at 3440x1440


You won't see any difference in a GPU limited scenario. All you're going to see are the limits of your GPU.

Crank up the resolution high enough and even an old i5 2500k will perform the same as the fastest CPUs in the shelves today.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> http://www.shopblt.com/cgi-bin/shop/shop.cgi?action=thispage&thispage=0110030005039_B2DF526P.shtml&order_id=!ORDERID!
> 
> They still have around 5,000 8700k's available for preorder with shipment expected on October 26.


Yeah but at that price? I would've gotten the one in Amazon for $370 though.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Triniboi82*
> 
> Feel the same way when it comes to my 980Ti, would love to get the 1080Ti but I honestly don't need it. Trying my best to hold out for volta










FWP like a motherf$#%*&^ lol. You're fighting off the urge to upgrade 980 Ti to 1080 Ti... and I'm down here like... damn... a 1060 6GB would actually give me that big a performance gain over the 780? WUUUUTTTTT? lol.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> A 980ti to 1080ti is a decent upgrade. Much more than most of us could ever get from these cpu upgrades especially just 1-2 generations.


Very true. The improvements over the previous two generations in GPUs have been absurd. Even a GTX 1060 6GB is like a 50% improvement over a GTX 780, and in most titles the 1080 is usually capable of 2.5 - 3 times the framerates of the 780, almost always at least double.


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Triniboi82*
> 
> Feel the same way when it comes to my 980Ti, would love to get the 1080Ti but I honestly don't need it. Trying my best to hold out for volta


A 980ti to 1080ti is a decent upgrade. Much more than most of us could ever get from these cpu upgrades especially just 1-2 generations.


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Even if smt worked it would still be behind comparably priced intel chips cause mmo, but without smt a 3.9ghz overclocked ryzen 7 was behind a stock clocked 7350k lol.


This is why i'm pawning my 1700x, and went with the 7700k. Literally a 30FPS difference at 1440p high settings.


----------



## Triniboi82

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FWP like a motherf$#%*&^ lol. You're fighting off the urge to upgrade 980 Ti to 1080 Ti... and I'm down here like... damn... a 1060 6GB would actually give me that big a performance gain over the 780? WUUUUTTTTT? lol.


Lol yeah with a 780 you are definitely due for an upgrade. But on the bright side you have so many options, I pretty much have one for now.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> A 980ti to 1080ti is a decent upgrade. Much more than most of us could ever get from these cpu upgrades especially just 1-2 generations.


I agree it's a 'decent' upgrade but I'm looking for a 'significant' upgrade which I feel I would get by holding out for volta. It's not like I'm struggling to play anything right now @ uw.

Way I see it by waiting I can go with volta or grab a used 1080Ti and be g2g for awhile.


----------



## kingduqc

Why did intel rush the release of the is no stock everywhere...?


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingduqc*
> 
> Why did intel rush the release of the is no stock everywhere...?


There's another batch due to be released here in about 10-14 days... so possibly. Usually when they do a launch, they've not had much if any competition... seems Ryzen's success caught them a little off guard and they may have accelerated the release schedule. That combined with the added interest from these being Intel's first consumer 6 cores... could be that they underestimated interest in Coffee Lake, but if I had to gamble, I'd bet the fly on the wall at Intel would say they moved the release schedule up and that's why they're slow getting more inventory out since launch.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> There's another batch due to be released here in about 10-14 days... so possibly. Usually when they do a launch, they've not had much if any competition... seems Ryzen's success caught them a little off guard and they may have accelerated the release schedule. That combined with the added interest from these being Intel's first consumer 6 cores... could be that they underestimated interest in Coffee Lake, but if I had to gamble, I'd bet the fly on the wall at Intel would say they moved the release schedule up and that's why they're slow getting more inventory out since launch.


amd said zen was going to be 2016. But they didn't rush and got it out by march 2017. Maybe Intel should of done the same.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

The only reason for this is not to get sale, Its to stop Ryzen for the holiday sales. Skylake-X failed Intel hard. They had to basically kill this high end platform in less than 2 months.


----------



## m4fox90

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> There's another batch due to be released here in about 10-14 days... so possibly. Usually when they do a launch, they've not had much if any competition... seems Ryzen's success caught them a little off guard and they may have accelerated the release schedule. That combined with the added interest from these being Intel's first consumer 6 cores... could be that they underestimated interest in Coffee Lake, but if I had to gamble, I'd bet the fly on the wall at Intel would say they moved the release schedule up and that's why they're slow getting more inventory out since launch.


"a little off guard"

that's uh, quite the understatement


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kingduqc*
> 
> Why did intel rush the release of the is no stock everywhere...?
> 
> 
> 
> There's another batch due to be released here in about 10-14 days... so possibly. Usually when they do a launch, they've not had much if any competition... seems Ryzen's success caught them a little off guard and they may have accelerated the release schedule. That combined with the added interest from these being Intel's first consumer 6 cores... could be that they underestimated interest in Coffee Lake, but if I had to gamble, I'd bet the fly on the wall at Intel would say they moved the release schedule up and that's why they're slow getting more inventory out since launch.
Click to expand...

Intel is right on time with the Z370 from the road map made in 2016.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> The only reason for this is not to get sale, Its to stop Ryzen for the holiday sales. Skylake-X failed Intel hard. They had to basically kill this high end platform in less than 2 months.


Well Zen+ is supposedly coming in Q1 2018, with +10% improvements.

If Intel can't pump out Coffee Lake en masse by Q3 2018 , it will die because Intel's own Ice Lake is projected for 2018/2019.


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Triniboi82*
> 
> Lol yeah with a 780 you are definitely due for an upgrade. But on the bright side you have so many options, I pretty much have one for now.
> I agree it's a 'decent' upgrade but I'm looking for a 'significant' upgrade which I feel I would get by holding out for volta. It's not like I'm struggling to play anything right now @ uw.
> 
> Way I see it by waiting I can go with volta or grab a used 1080Ti and be g2g for awhile.


I would say it is decent and significant. I got way more than double the performance going from 390x to 1080ti but it will still a huge amount from the better performing 980ti. Your lucky to get a few percent with cpu upgrades. Of course upgrading every gpu cycle is not practical for most people so waiting is not a bad move provided you are happy with current performance at your desired resolution.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> amd said zen was going to be 2016. But they didn't rush and got it out by march 2017. Maybe Intel should of done the same.


Are you kidding me? The platform still has serious memory issues. It was rushed for sure.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> A 980ti to 1080ti is a decent upgrade. Much more than most of us could ever get from these cpu upgrades especially just 1-2 generations.


Yeah it's a decent upgrade, yet most 980 Ti's with OC are around 1080 / Vega 64 performance. Most can wait for Volta. I'm waiting for new and proper [email protected] monitors anyway.

Meanwhile, 8700K on the way. It will give me a nice boost in high fps gaming.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> Are you kidding me? The platform still has serious memory issues. It was rushed for sure.


That's one of the reasons I'd rather be on a Intel platform but if Intel can't get their act together, I might as well go Ryzen. Or Ryzen +. Ryzen has gotten a lot better. Plus you can upgrade! 2nd gen is always better then the first? Some thing implies to Intel.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> That's one of the reasons I'd rather be on a Intel platform but if Intel can't get their act together, I might as well go Ryzen. Or Ryzen +. Ryzen has gotten a lot better. Plus you can upgrade! 2nd gen is always better then the first? Some thing implies to Intel.


Yes upgrade path is nice to have, but I don't see Ryzen refresh much faster than the current ones. New chipset and boards tho.
Maybe in 2019 with 7nm Zen it will be able to match CFL in gaming.

That's why I went with 8700K now. Good/best gaming performance now and till 2019-2020 where I change platform anyway; ~7nm CPU's. DDR5. PCI-E 4.0 / 5.0 etc.

I'm not buying Ryzen now and accept inferior performance for the next one and a half year. This machine is only used for high fps gaming. Ryzen will kill my fps. Tested and tried.


----------



## mjheikki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NoDestiny*
> 
> 3.7Ghz at 1.3v here. Can get 3.725Ghz at 1.375... don't really feel like the additional watt+heat is justified to go any higher, so trotting along with 3.7 until Ryzen 2 can hopefully come. Don't have any regrets, though, as it seems to do gaming just fine for me (not gonna argue the "more is better" debate, but I'm satisfied).


I recall reading the non-X and X SKUs might be binned for different leakage characteristics (among other things). My 1600 can do 3.9 on air, but the voltage efficiency is garbage after 3.7 or so. The stock frequencies and turbo bins seem to be selected with efficiency in mind for the non-X chips. If the X SKUs are indeed more "leaky", that could explain higher maximum overclocks (along with better quality silicon, of course). Can't find a source for that, so take with a grain of salt.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingduqc*
> 
> Why did intel rush the release of the is no stock everywhere...?


To stall AMD's momentum and win back some mind share. Their goal was not to sell chips, but to dissuade consumers from buying AMD chips now with the promise of something better in near future (like a carrot on a stick). This wouldn't work if they didn't have a better product (for gaming, at least), of course. So, basically marketing.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Got my CPU ! Didn't get lucky with voltage though


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Got my CPU ! Didn't get lucky with voltage though


I thought these were guaranteed to have a Vcore below 1.4V?


----------



## FarmerAl

Newbie to O/C -
Getting a new 8700-K desktop for video editing.
Planned config
Asus Prime Z370-A
32 GB DDR4 3200
Samsung 960 M.2 250GB (OS and Programs)
Corsair H115i water cooling
Would like to see all cores near 5Ghz
What are your impressions of Asus Prime m/boards?
All comments welcome Thanks


----------



## NeoandGeo

Went ahead and did a preorder with ShopBLT.com as the end of October seems better than any other sites current forecast, the ~$25 because we can tax is disappointing though. Has anyone dealt with them before on preorders/back order situations?


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> I'm not buying Ryzen now and accept inferior performance for the next one and a half year. This machine is only used for high fps gaming. Ryzen will kill my fps. Tested and tried.


I have seen you say this many times and fully understand.


----------



## kd5151

GO!


----------



## stefxyz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Got my CPU ! Didn't get lucky with voltage though


Try to not worry too much. Its possible they saw that the CPU went cool with higher voltages so it might perform just great at this voltage. Altho I would have expected an explanation coming along the CPU.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> GO!


Good video. There's no doubt this CPU is the absolute best gaming CPU available, and this won't change anytime soon.

Ring bus ftw.
If we see 8 cores on mainstream next year it's probably mesh and gaming perf will be like 7820X aka inferior to 8700K, even with OC'ed mesh.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> Nope.In first map and 90% other maps crysis 3 used max 4 core


check again the link you gave Ryzen 5 is ahead


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I thought these were guaranteed to have a Vcore below 1.4V?


Only if you order the highest bin classes ("*Pro*" or "*Ultra*" edition) which cost the most of all obviously. 1.42 guaranteed is the "*advanced*" bin class.

The guaranteed voltages are mentioned in the product description so you can choose your edition carefully before buying.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> Only if you order the highest bin classes ("*Pro*" or "*Ultra*" edition) which cost the most of all obviously. 1.42 guaranteed is the "*advanced*" bin class.
> 
> The guaranteed voltages are mentioned in the product description so you can choose your edition carefully before buying.


Well, mine is the ultra edition so....


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> Only if you order the highest bin classes ("*Pro*" or "*Ultra*" edition) which cost the most of all obviously. 1.42 guaranteed is the "*advanced*" bin class.
> 
> The guaranteed voltages are mentioned in the product description so you can choose your edition carefully before buying.


Maybe I cant read properly but the IHS says "ultra"


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Well, mine is the ultra edition so....


hmm yes indeed, I would launch an inquiry to be honest. Product page for ultra clearly states 1.4, not 1.42 (as opposed to "advanced"):

https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-core-i7-8700k-5-1-ghz-ultra-edition-cpbu-161.html


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Maybe I cant read properly but the IHS says "ultra"


You read very well my friend, don't worry







I didn't click the image itself but now that I do...you're right it does says ultra and at the same time @ 1.42v which is not what the product page lists. Unless they just raised their specs to 1.42v after binning the current batch but forgot to update the product page...


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> hmm yes indeed, I would launch an inquiry to be honest. Product page for ultra clearly states 1.4, not 1.42 (as opposed to "advanced"):
> 
> https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-core-i7-8700k-5-1-ghz-ultra-edition-cpbu-161.html


Yeah I'll open a case. Still waiting for the Asus Formula, so I have time.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> You read very well my friend, don't worry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't click the image itself but now that I do...you're right it does says ultra and at the same time @ 1.42v which is not what the product page lists. Unless they just raised their specs to 1.42v after binning the current batch but forgot to update the product page...


Old but not blind, at least not yet







I would be curious know how that silver IHS performs especially in time as silver tend to corrode easily.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Yeah I'll open a case. Still waiting for the Asus Formula, so I have time.


I would at least question it for sure, you might find on your board you may need a lower Vcore, wouldn't be the first time







I purchased a 4790K from silicon lottery some years back when they used to bin their CPU's much tighter than they do now, they claimed [email protected] but on my board with a better VRM than theirs I got [email protected]


----------



## profundido

The Formula, existing only with the purpose of doing this sort of stuff should definately be able to handle the specified settings, maybe even a tad better. After all, whatever binning they did it was done on a lesser board for sure since the Formula is not released yet.

0,02v more is not a big deal, nothing to worry about at least but still, it could just generate that tiny bit of extra heat that you weren't equipped to handle.

I'm curious to hear about the official answer you'll be getting back. Please let us know as I have ordered one too and might be in the same boat too soon


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> The Formula, existing only with the purpose of doing this sort of stuff should definately be able to handle the specified settings, maybe even a tad better. After all, whatever binning they did it was done on a lesser board for sure since the Formula is not released yet.
> 
> 0,02v more is not a big deal, nothing to worry about at least but still, it could just generate that tiny bit of extra heat that you weren't equipped to handle.
> 
> I'm curious to hear about the official answer you'll be getting back. Please let us know as I have ordered one too and might be in the same boat too soon


No doubt in my mind the Formula X should be an excellent board







IF I go to Z370 thats the board I would pick.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> The Formula, existing only with the purpose of doing this sort of stuff should definately be able to handle the specified settings, maybe even a tad better. After all, whatever binning they did it was done on a lesser board for sure since the Formula is not released yet.
> 
> 0,02v more is not a big deal, nothing to worry about at least but still, it could just generate that tiny bit of extra heat that you weren't equipped to handle.
> 
> I'm curious to hear about the official answer you'll be getting back. Please let us know as I have ordered one too and might be in the same boat too soon


Yeah I just want an official answer. No big deal


----------



## QuadDamage

Day 12 on the Amazon Pre Order Wait List <3

I love looking at my unfinished PC everyday. I'm not even mad I just laugh about it now


----------



## Cascade

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> check again the link you gave Ryzen 5 is ahead


and if you check the comments you can see the uploader said he is retesting many games (Crysis 3 included), which seems to imply he messed something up in the 8400 benchmarks.


----------



## HAL900

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> check again the link you gave Ryzen 5 is ahead


Nope this is fejk .Ryzen is slow


----------



## BiG StroOnZ




----------



## shremi

Bundles With motherboards are in stock @ the egg.

Go go go


----------



## BackwoodsNC

just ordered the combo gaming 7 and 8700k from the EGG. incase anyone is trying to get one.


----------



## BackwoodsNC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shremi*
> 
> Bundles With motherboards are in stock @ the egg.
> 
> Go go go


lolz you beat me!


----------



## shremi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BackwoodsNC*
> 
> lolz you beat me!


Ordered the same one .... Kinda torn between that one and the Asus Board .

Anyone has insights?


----------



## evensen007

Shoot. Already sold out.


----------



## erocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BackwoodsNC*
> 
> just ordered the combo gaming 7 and 8700k from the EGG. incase anyone is trying to get one.


In stock?!


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *erocker*
> 
> In stock?!


Not any more. All combos are sold out... In 20 minutes. #FakeLaunch


----------



## SpartanJet

kind of annoyed at the egg now. I mean shipping combos out when a ton of people are backordered on the 8700k is enough to make me not want to give them any business ever.


----------



## erocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpartanJet*
> 
> kind of annoyed at the egg now. I mean shipping combos out when a ton of people are backordered on the 8700k is enough to make me not want to give them any business ever.


I'm contacting them now, this is absolute crap.


----------



## evensen007

Wait, they're back!


----------



## erocker

Nope


----------



## VegetarianEater

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shremi*
> 
> Bundles With motherboards are in stock @ the egg.
> 
> Go go go


Thanks for the heads up!

Just got a 8700k + Asrock Taichi z370...

But why? I already have a Ryzen 1700x with a Crosshair VI Hero!

The answer: Despite my best efforts, I got a dud of a CPU, and it refuses to overclock past 3.7 (with 100% stability while streaming). So i'm selling my mobo/ processor to my roommate, who is getting a fantastic deal and I'm going to try and OC this puppy to 5.0 ghz!

Didn't want to get another Ryzen yet despite the downgrade from 8 cores to 6 cores. However since i'm mostly gaming/streaming, I doubt I'll miss those extra 2 cores.


----------



## VegetarianEater

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Not any more. All combos are sold out... In 20 minutes. #FakeLaunch


try going to the page of the mobo you want, it might not actually be sold out (the combos page shows all sold out, but when I went to the mobo I wanted, I was able to add to cart and buy)


----------



## erocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VegetarianEater*
> 
> try going to the page of the mobo you want, it might not actually be sold out (the combos page shows all sold out, but when I went to the mobo I wanted, I was able to add to cart and buy)


You sure the CPU is actually in the cart? I try but once the combo gets in the cart it says the CPU has insufficient stock.


----------



## jprovido

wow that's annoying. already bought my gaming 7 on newegg.


----------



## VegetarianEater

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *erocker*
> 
> You sure the CPU is actually in the cart? I try but once the combo gets in the cart it says the CPU has insufficient stock.


Ah sorry you literally just missed it. When I tried it 5 minutes ago it worked, now it's showing that message.


----------



## kd5151

and it's gone.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*


good video!


----------



## wickedld9

Keep refreshing, I was just able to find one and order it, just a few minutes ago.

Order Date: 10/17/2017 12:38:42 PM


----------



## HAL900

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> and it's gone.
> *good videos*!


nope


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> nope


video?


----------



## wickedld9

Seeing reports on /Intel that "shipping tomorrow" emails are going out to those who ordered from Newegg on the 5th.


----------



## Scotty99

So that amex code expires on 23rd gotta decide on a board. Strix-f (and hope asus get a bios out with LLC working) MSI gaming pro carbon, or gigabyte gaming 5? Ive had good luck with asrock boards but none are sold by amazon yet


----------



## evensen007

For gaming, this video has pretty much convinced me not to upgrade my overclocked Sandy setup. At 1440p, there's virtually no difference in frames. I was already leaning this way, but now I'm sure.


----------



## aDyerSituation

If you are gpu limited of course there isn't a reason to upgrade.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> good video!


Yeah, I've seen some videos over the years comparing newer archs to Sandy Bridge that made me say to myself, "stick to a GPU upgrade your 2600k is fine" after seeing similar results in gaming. I was thinking about going with the 8600k when Coffee first launched, however, after seeing HW Canucks video I'm pretty sure that I'm going to wait for Ice Lake at this point. If this time next year, there is an Ice Lake launch with Z390 and an 8C/8T or 8C/16T CPU for the same prices we're seeing with Coffee Lake. There really is no point in upgrading to an 8600k or even an 8700k. At least for someone who is already on a decent platform. You would definitely feel a bit of buyer's remorse if this is to be the case.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> For gaming, this video has pretty much convinced me not to upgrade my overclocked Sandy setup. At 1440p, there's virtually no difference in frames. I was already leaning this way, but now I'm sure.


Yup, same here. Glad GPU prices are somewhat decent. Want to see what happens to the market when this supposed 1070 Ti launches. Going to upgrade my GPU after then and see if I can hold out on the CPU for at least a little bit longer. Coffee Lake is a beast, but good ol' Sandy Bridge is still chugging along fine.


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> If you are gpu limited of course there isn't a reason to upgrade.


Yea; just got caught up in the hype machine I guess. I think it was more the itch to build out a new machine, but my 1080ti should hold that itch for a while. When I do get it again, it should be much easier to get a good binned 8700k.


----------



## Scotty99

While true, there are plenty of games on the market that are CPU bound at any resolution. MMO's particularly, but even popular games like PUBG can see gains with a CPU upgrade at 1440p. I think this is very relevant given how popular MMO's and games like PUBG are (what is pubg classified as lol?).

If i didnt play mmo's i would be using a g4560, rest of my games really dont care what CPU i have. Alas ive played wow since 2005 and game is still fun to me.


----------



## HAL900

2600K- 35 fps vs8700K - 60 fps in arma 3


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3600K- 35 fps vs8700K - 60 fps in arma 3


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For gaming, this video has pretty much convinced me not to upgrade my overclocked Sandy setup. At 1440p, there's virtually no difference in frames. I was already leaning this way, but now I'm sure.


You know 1080 Ti is a lot more powerful than 1070 which he used to test.


----------



## SpartanJet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpartanJet*
> 
> kind of annoyed at the egg now. I mean shipping combos out when a ton of people are backordered on the 8700k is enough to make me not want to give them any business ever.


I spoke too soon I guess I ordered the 8700k on the 5th and now my processor is in the packing stage. Maybe they filled all the backorders so they were able to sell some combo deals.


----------



## Asus11

i7-8700k seems like a hell of a CPU but 80c even after delid? what is going on lol even the old i7 980x could run in the 50-60c on water


----------



## Scotty99

Thats the one thing that really annoys me, to get my 5.0ghz+ i want on at least a couple cores im surely going to need to delid, and even then ill be getting higher temps than my sandy or ryzen CPU's.

Side note, you can buy delidded 8350k's from SL for 185 bucks right now.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> i7-8700k seems like a hell of a CPU but 80c even after delid? what is going on lol even the old i7 980x could run in the 50-60c on water


Pretty much like every CPU since IVY. My 3770K hits 80s with Delid. It only does it with Prime95 though. during normal use its in the 60s.


----------



## pcgaming247

ryzen 1700 is still the best option in the market for 2560 1440 high refresh rate gaming
clear upgrade path unlike intel with the z390
lower minimums and less big swings in fps

intel shills triggered


----------



## QuadDamage

Newegg has shipped a bunch out nothing from Amazon so far

Lets not forget you pay for fast 1 day shipping with newegg but most people like me got Amazon 1 day shipping for free if they ever get them in stock


----------



## Scotty99

That entirely depends on the game. I would say the two biggest genres for PC gaming are battle royale shooters and mmo's, these both can see gains from CPU upgrades at 1440p or higher resolutions.

As an aside, with 1.38v and after 30 min of aida 64 my 1700 hottest recorded temp was 68c.....on an air cooler. Come on intel lol.


----------



## QuadDamage

On the CPU topic they didn't talk about how the i7 8th gen really make use of fast DDR 4 ram that gives extra fps even with lower end cards like the gtx 1060 and above


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> That entirely depends on the game. I would say the two biggest genres for PC gaming are battle royale shooters and mmo's, these both can see gains from CPU upgrades at 1440p or higher resolutions.
> 
> As an aside, with 1.38v and after 30 min of aida 64 my 1700 hottest recorded temp was 68c.....on an air cooler. Come on intel lol.


As has been well documented by pretty much all reviews is that Ryzen is not thermally bound on it's OC headspace thus far, and so it seems much more likely that there is some kind of instability in the chipset or the architecture itself when trying to operate at higher speeds. Most chips struggle to hit 3.9 - 4.0 GHz on high end air, and those that can still do so with temps no higher than the lower 70s on CPU heavy benches. All the reviews I've watched where they try to hit 4.1 or higher the system can't post. Could be issues with memory control, maybe power delivery issues, maybe issues with the NB frequency at high clock speeds, who outside of AMD's CPU team knows for certain, but it certainly seems that something within the architecture or the chipset is the limiting factor... Once the limiting factor is removed, getting Ryzen into the 4.5- 5.0 GHz range will most certainly have high temps as well... Ryzen seems more power hungry, which makes sense with 8 cores to feed instead of 6... but don't act like Ryzen is some holy grail advancement. It has it's definite flaws with RAM controllers and OC. There is absolutely something going on with Ryzen to where AMD seems to intentionally be limiting Ryzen to a 4.1 hard cap on OC and it can't run any RAM above 3200.. and most are lucky to get RAM to 2933...


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> I was thinking about going with the 8600k when Coffee first launched, however, after seeing HW Canucks video I'm pretty sure that I'm going to wait for Ice Lake at this point. If this time next year, there is an Ice Lake launch with Z390 and an 8C/8T or 8C/16T CPU for the same prices we're seeing with Coffee Lake.


The longer you wait the better off you are. Just don't wait to long.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcgaming247*
> 
> ryzen 1700 is still the best option in the market for 2560 1440 high refresh rate gaming
> clear upgrade path unlike intel with the z390
> lower minimums and less big swings in fps
> 
> intel shills triggered


Why would you need a upgrade path for 8700K. The idea is to keep it for 4+ years. Also I do not see how Ryzen 7 has better mins than 8700K when both have more cores than games use today while 8700K has stronger cores due to IPC and clock speed.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*


why do they even waste their time to test a game which CPU performance doesnt vary at all due to its optimization and use of low level API?


----------



## nanotm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> As has been well documented by pretty much all reviews is that Ryzen is not thermally bound on it's OC headspace thus far, and so it seems much more likely that there is some kind of instability in the chipset or the architecture itself when trying to operate at higher speeds. Most chips struggle to hit 3.9 - 4.0 GHz on high end air, and those that can still do so with temps no higher than the lower 70s on CPU heavy benches. All the reviews I've watched where they try to hit 4.1 or higher the system can't post. Could be issues with memory control, maybe power delivery issues, maybe issues with the NB frequency at high clock speeds, who outside of AMD's CPU team knows for certain, but it certainly seems that something within the architecture or the chipset is the limiting factor... Once the limiting factor is removed, getting Ryzen into the 4.5- 5.0 GHz range will most certainly have high temps as well... Ryzen seems more power hungry, which makes sense with 8 cores to feed instead of 6... but don't act like Ryzen is some holy grail advancement. It has it's definite flaws with RAM controllers and OC. There is absolutely something going on with Ryzen to where AMD seems to intentionally be limiting Ryzen to a 4.1 hard cap on OC and it can't run any RAM above 3200.. and most are lucky to get RAM to 2933...


they probably took a leaf out of intels book and deliberately capped the first iteration chips so folks will have a reason to buy the refresh, which will come out at a slightly faster clock speed (but still be clock limited)

as to the heat issue, it might make it into a volcano like the average intel unlocked cpu but I suspect you will find that a decent cooler will keep it below 70degrees just as it did with the fx chips despite being more power hungry than their intel competitors.... that's the joy of soldered IHS over toothpaste...


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> why do they even waste their time to test a game which CPU performance doesnt vary at all due to its optimization and use of low level API?


Because they are nubs and have no clue how to test CPUs.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> As has been well documented by pretty much all reviews is that Ryzen is not thermally bound on it's OC headspace thus far, and so it seems much more likely that there is some kind of instability in the chipset or the architecture itself when trying to operate at higher speeds. Most chips struggle to hit 3.9 - 4.0 GHz on high end air, and those that can still do so with temps no higher than the lower 70s on CPU heavy benches. All the reviews I've watched where they try to hit 4.1 or higher the system can't post. Could be issues with memory control, maybe power delivery issues, maybe issues with the NB frequency at high clock speeds, who outside of AMD's CPU team knows for certain, but it certainly seems that something within the architecture or the chipset is the limiting factor... Once the limiting factor is removed, getting Ryzen into the 4.5- 5.0 GHz range will most certainly have high temps as well... Ryzen seems more power hungry, which makes sense with 8 cores to feed instead of 6... but don't act like Ryzen is some holy grail advancement. It has it's definite flaws with RAM controllers and OC. There is absolutely something going on with Ryzen to where AMD seems to intentionally be limiting Ryzen to a 4.1 hard cap on OC and it can't run any RAM above 3200.. and most are lucky to get RAM to 2933...


Not sure why you felt the need to type all this out, we have known what ryzen is for 6 months lol. I was merely posting what temps intel could achieve had they soldered these things.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Because they are nubs and have no clue how to test CPUs.


The GTX 1070 is a great upgrade to GTX 680.







Would be better to see 1080Ti. That's where the 8700K can really show you the true power of the dark side.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> The GTX 1070 is a great upgrade to GTX 680.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would be better to see 1080Ti. That's where the 8700K can really show you the true power of the dark side.
> 
> 
> 
> Because they are nubs and have no clue how to test CPUs.
Click to expand...

and then testing 1440 resolution with a 1070 (again in DOOM)


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> The GTX 1070 is a great upgrade to GTX 680.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would be better to see 1080Ti. That's where the 8700K can really show you the true power of the dark side.


1070 is not a bad card but its Mid 2015 performance on late 2017 CPU. Even 1080 Ti is getting old. If anyone is doing CPU test and not using 1080 Ti / Titan Xp they are doing it wrong.


----------



## Scotty99

Eh the majority of the games i play are well over 100 fps at 1440 on a measly gtx 1060. I was even getting over 100 fps in destiny 2 beta with a engine that could not take advantage of 8/16 of my cpu threads.

Side note, my pc just found fall creators update. Biggest thing to note for this build is GPU monitor in task manager


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> 1070 is not a bad card but its Mid 2015 performance on late 2017 CPU. Even 1080 Ti is getting old. If anyone is doing CPU test and not using 1080 Ti / Titan Xp they are doing it wrong.







over 600fps in cs:go. that's nuts ! and i like it!


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> over 600fps in cs:go. that's nuts ! and i like it!






60- 90fps on Crysis 4k







and it is CPU bound


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 60- 90fps on Crysis 4k
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and it is CPU bound


Skip 8th gen. Wait for big ipc gains paired with clockspeed. more cores can come to.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Skip 8th gen. Wait for big ipc gains paired with clockspeed. more cores can come to.


We got 6 Cores now. Next its IPC so all good.


----------



## pcgaming247

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Why would you need a upgrade path for 8700K. The idea is to keep it for 4+ years. Also I do not see how Ryzen 7 has better mins than 8700K when both have more cores than games use today while 8700K has stronger cores due to IPC and clock speed.


because i want 8 cores for multitasking and streaming at the same time
six is good 8 is better but the motherboard changes are horrible


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcgaming247*
> 
> because i want 8 cores for multitasking and streaming at the same time
> six is good 8 is better but the motherboard changes are horrible


8700K is as fast as 1700 in streaming and faster in gaming.


----------



## pcgaming247

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> 8700K is as fast as 1700 in streaming and faster in gaming.


marginally
the upgrade path alone makss ryzen worth it


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcgaming247*
> 
> marginally
> the upgrade path alone makss ryzen worth it


What upgrade path? Zen 2? 2019-2020? In 3 years you can afford $120 MB lol. I bet to get most out of Zen 2 you will want the latest chip set/ motherboard.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> The longer you wait the better off you are. Just don't wait to long.


Yeah, I'm mostly into RPG and Hack & Slash games, thus my current setup isn't really a hindrance in those genres. However, there are some new titles I want to throw in the mix and I need a new GPU for that, so that is top priority. Once I get a GPU, then finally I can decide what route I want to take CPU wise. However, this year mining hindered my ability to get a decent card which is why it hasn't happened yet. Only now am I seeing prices being somewhat acceptable. Except not too long ago you could get a 1070 for $330, and I'm going to try to wait until it gets to that again at least because I say that is an acceptable price for such a card this late in the cycle.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> why do they even waste their time to test a game which CPU performance doesnt vary at all due to its optimization and use of low level API?


I think they are more leaning towards trying to replicate some real world scenarios of what you would encounter with modern gaming today. Showing that especially now with Vulkan and DX12 that the 2600k still holds up well. I'm sure more people will compare it to older architectures in upcoming videos that will do a more in-depth analysis with a 1080 Ti and some more CPU bound games. Perhaps, maybe even do some 720p runs. I'm sure HardOCP or Gamer's Nexus will do it eventually.


----------



## aDyerSituation

People really overestimate how much processing power is needed when streaming.

While streaming at 3200 bit rate and recording with shadowplay, my cpu usage is around 40% on my 7820x while playing FortNite lol


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Yeah, I'm mostly into RPG and Hack & Slash games, thus my current setup isn't really a hindrance in those genres. However, there are some new titles I want to throw in the mix and I need a new GPU for that, so that is top priority. Once I get a GPU, then finally I can decide what route I want to take CPU wise. However, this year mining hindered my ability to get a decent card which is why it hasn't happened yet. Only now am I seeing prices being somewhat acceptable. Except not too long ago you could get a 1070 for $330, and I'm going to try to wait until it gets to that again at least because I say that is an acceptable price for such a card this late in the cycle.
> I think they are more leaning towards trying to replicate some real world scenarios of what you would encounter with modern gaming today. Showing that especially now with Vulkan and DX12 that the 2600k still holds up well. I'm sure more people will compare it to older architectures in upcoming videos that will do a more in-depth analysis with a 1080 Ti and some more CPU bound games. Perhaps, maybe even do some 720p runs. I'm sure HardOCP or Gamer's Nexus will do it eventually.


Now testing 720p and picking CPU bound game in CPU bound parts of games is also pointless and waste of time. DF already does this. they show the extreme difference between CPUs but in the real world the difference is much smaller.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Now testing 720p and picking CPU bound game in CPU bound parts of games is also pointless and waste of time. DF already does this. they show the extreme difference between CPUs but in the real world the difference is much smaller.


Well if you want to force it to become a CPU benchmark, and useful for comparing different CPUs; then you have no real choice other than 720p - 1080p runs in CPU heavy scenarios.

While real world difference is much smaller, it seems Hardware Canucks took care of that comparison.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Well if you want to force it to become a CPU benchmark, and useful for comparing different CPUs; then you have no real choice other than 720p - 1080p runs in CPU heavy scenarios.
> 
> While real world difference is much smaller, it seems Hardware Canucks took care of that comparison.


Their problem is the GPU. 1080p + 1080 Ti is something people still use. Next year 1070 level card will be as fast as 1080 Ti. 720p is pointless. Nobody care if a CPU is 200 vs 250 fps faster.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

MY 8600K SHIPPED FROM NEWEGG AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

IT'S HAPPENING

I ordered half an hour after it was available for backorder on the 5th.


----------



## Scotty99

Nice, wonder how many they got and if after they fulfill backorders will have any left lol.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Their problem is the GPU. 1080p + 1080 Ti is something people still use. Next year 1070 level card will be as fast as 1080 Ti. 720p is pointless. Nobody care if a CPU is 200 vs 250 fps faster.


I think GPU is fine. I think you are more likely to encounter someone with a 1070 and a 1080p monitor than a 1080 Ti and a 1080p monitor. While it is true with Volta a 1070 level card will be as fast as a 1080 Ti. Who knows what is going on in NVIDIA's mind. If they are planning on releasing a 1070 Ti do not expect to see anything related to Volta until next summer or spring minimum. Meaning, looking that far into the future relying on a 2070 or 1170 that is as fast as a 1080 Ti right now is more pointless. Lastly, it has nothing to do with 200 vs 250 fps. It is done to show which CPUs bottleneck high end graphics cards. Only recently have graphics cards gotten so fast, that you can run the test in 1080p and get similar results now as when they used to do 720p.


----------



## kd5151

soon we will have coffeelake owners thread.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> soon we will have coffeelake owners thread.


i've had my motherboard for a week now still no cpu








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcgaming247*
> 
> because i want 8 cores for multitasking and streaming at the same time
> six is good 8 is better but the motherboard changes are horrible


Have you bought a Ryzen CPU yet? just a warning I have a 1700x @ 3.9GHz([email protected] 3333MHz) and it's inferior in every way to the 7700k in gaming AND streaming especially if you have a high refresh rate monitor. the 8700k is just a far better option if you ask me not saying Ryzen is bad but having more cores is not always a good thing it does have drawbacks esp with apps/games that require faster cores. my 7700k is perfectly fine with streaming in twitch with OBS. my 1700x does have lower cpu usage but with lower in game FPS and streams just as good


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nanotm*
> 
> as to the heat issue, it might make it into a volcano like the average intel unlocked cpu but I suspect you will find that a decent cooler will keep it below 70degrees just as it did with the fx chips despite being more power hungry than their intel competitors.... that's the joy of soldered IHS over toothpaste...


The FX chips actually degraded pretty fast if you ran them long within a delta of 5-10 C of their Tj_max, and they could reach that pretty easily on air. It doesn't mean they were engineered better if they were designed to only run up to the 60-70 C range before they'd thermal throttle and go instable, it just means that AMD chose not to engineer them to handle higher temperatures.

The TJmax max suggested operating temp) ratings for the FX series as can be found on AMD's website and are as listed below:
http://www.amd.com/en-us/products/processors/desktop/fx#

*FX-4100*: 70.50 C, *FX-4130*: 70.00 C, *FX-4300*: 70.50 C, *FX-4320*: 70.50 C, *FX-4350*: 61.10 C
*FX-6100*: 70.00 C, *FX-6200*: 61.10 C, *FX-6300*: 70.50 C, *FX-6350*: 61.00 C
*FX-8300*: 70.50 C, *FX-8320E*: 70.50 C, *FX-8320*: 61.10 C, *FX-8350*: 61.00 C, *FX-8370E*: 70.50 C, *FX-8370*: 61.00 C
*FX-9370*: 57.00 C, *FX-9590*: 57.00 C

As you can see the older generations of FX series had more thermal headroom than the newer ones. Intels from Ivy Bridge on still have about 35-40C before the system hits a thermal shutdown compared to the FX series. As far as CFL, remember a big reason a lot of folks were seeing such high temps was that when optimized defaults got activated in BIOS, MCE, confirmed for all ASUS and possibly on other models, was setting to Auto and basically applying an OC to 4.7 on all cores under load, and quite possibly with more voltage than the minimum necessary to get there.

From what I could find on ark.intel.com, Intel didn't really state a definitive TjMax until Kaby Lake. My understanding of it is that they rated max suggested temps on the Tcase_Max formulations. At least back to Ivy Bridge, if not earlier, this formula used the TDP of a SKU to calculate the temperature point of a lidded part before performance and long term CPU degradation would occur with the stock thermal solution, meaning the pigeon poop, IHS, and the Intel's factory stock CPU heatsink and fan, while assuming a 2 DIMM configuration operating at the chipset's standard memory speeds (1333 for DDR3 and 2133 for DDR4 on Sky Lake, DDR4 2400 for Kaby Lake and Coffee Lake).

From Ivy Bridge through Devil's Canyon, the TCase Max was the point you would see the fan profile ramp up, then SDP protocols would engage when the Temperature Control Censors would trip at 80C. Above 80C the system would begin scaling back voltage and core frequencies (thermal throttling) and wouldn't initiate thermal shutdown until ~105C. From Sky Lake on, the Tj Max for TCC initiated thermal throttling was scaled up to 100C, and the factory defaults for the fan profile have the normal run up at Tcase max and then the additional aggressive acceleration was set to 80C in order to reduce the system's likely to need thermal throttling and inhibit performance, thanks to the continued use of pigeon poop TIM on the die.

If you can manage to drive it all the way to TJ max, it generally means you've done something wrong in BIOS while tweaking, or you're not achieving sufficient airflow, or you have insufficient cooling capacity for the voltage you want to push, or the chip you have just can't handle that much voltage...

Or more embarrassingly, you've derped, created your problem, and didn't connect your fans, or you mounted your fans in the wrong configuration. Been there and done the last one... imagine my panic when I saw HWinfo reporting that my Haswell was hitting 90C+ on Cinebench at stock when I first put my H100i in... as it turns out, it does no good having what should be your pull fans on top of your rad mounted with the hubs facing up, lol.









For the sake of Tcase Max comparisons across the board, I calculated them at 95W TDP and notated the Tcase Max formula for each generation along with their stock TDP.

Section 6.1, Table 6-2: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/3rd-gen-core-lga1155-socket-guide.html
Ivy Bridge 3770K (77W) - default TjMax / SDP protocols trip at 80C, (y = .29*power+ 45.1), 72.6C at 95W

Section 5.5, Table 28: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/4th-gen-core-family-desktop-vol-1-datasheet.html
Haswell 4770K (84W); Devil's Canyon 4790K (88W) - default Tj Max / SDP protocols trip at 80C (y = 0.33 * Power + 45.0) 76.4C at 95W

Section5.2.1, Figure 5.2, Table 5-4: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/desktop-6th-gen-core-family-datasheet-vol-1.html
Sky Lake 6700K (91W) default Tj Max / SDP protocols trip at 100C, (y= .22 x Power + 43.7), 64.6C at 95W

Section 5.2.1.1, Figure 5-2, Table 5-6: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-1.html
Kaby Lake 7700K (91W), suggested TjMax / SDP protocols trip at 100C, (y=0.22 x power + 43.7), 64.6C at 95W

Section 5.3.1, Figure 5-2, Table 5-5 https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/8th-gen-processor-family-s-platform-datasheet-vol-1.html
Coffee Lake 8700K (95W), suggested TjMax / SDP protocols trip at 100C, (y=0.22 x power + 43.7), 64.6C at 95W


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> i've had my motherboard for a week now still no cpu


I'm waiting on both. ASUS says they don't have an ETA for the Maximus X Code yet, and I want either that or the Extreme.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcgaming247*
> 
> because i want 8 cores for multitasking and streaming at the same time
> six is good 8 is better but the motherboard changes are horrible
> 
> 
> 
> Have you bought a Ryzen CPU yet? just a warning I have a 1700x @ 3.9GHz([email protected] 3333MHz) and it's inferior in every way to the 7700k in gaming AND streaming especially if you have a high refresh rate monitor. the 8700k is just a far better option if you ask me not saying Ryzen is bad but having more cores is not always a good thing it does have drawbacks esp with apps/games that require faster cores. my 7700k is perfectly fine with streaming in twitch with OBS. my 1700x does have lower cpu usage but with lower in game FPS and streams just as good
Click to expand...

8700k delidded at 5 GHz or more will beat Ryzen 7 in most multitasking situations I'll wager, similar to how it beats Ryzen 7 in most productivity and content creation applications and others that use multiple cores well. IPC too superior.

I went from 6700k to 1700X, and the impact of OBS on performance seems the same at 2560 x 1440. I agree that Ryzen right now has too many drawbacks for games, not to mention it is too damn picky about RAM.

NVIDIA GPUs, which are pretty much the only ones worth buying right now due to AMD prices and shortages (and AMD not having a good answer for the GTX 1080, and no answer for the GTX 1080 Ti), have driver issues with Ryzen in DX9 and DX12 titles and nobody knows if they will ever fix that.

With my setup, my 1700X often loses by 30-50% vs my 6700k in DX9 games, plenty of times 100% (basically all versions of Unreal Engine hate it, or at least hate NVIDIA + Ryzen), and it loses by as much as 1000% or more in the absolute worst case scenario lol (Rainbow Six 3 pre-mission planning, only time I've seen this but damn). To put this in perspective, in many DX9 games and probably any Unreal Engine 3 and 4 game, 1700X + GTX 1080 Ti performs the same or worse than overclocked 6700k + GTX 1080.

The CPU is hardly at fault for this but it is what it is.

The lack of an upgrade path for Coffee Lake doesn't concern me this time, because a delidded 8700k is something I can comfortably keep for a long time, until Zen 2 hopefully.


----------



## SuperZan

With your use-case, I'm genuinely surprised that you even tried Ryzen. You're operating in a niche of a niche, but it's a niche that wants single-core performance at the expense of any other consideration.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Well if you want to force it to become a CPU benchmark, and useful for comparing different CPUs; then you have no real choice other than 720p - 1080p runs in CPU heavy scenarios.
> 
> While real world difference is much smaller, it seems Hardware Canucks took care of that comparison.
> 
> 
> 
> Their problem is the GPU. 1080p + 1080 Ti is something people still use. Next year 1070 level card will be as fast as 1080 Ti. 720p is pointless. Nobody care if a CPU is 200 vs 250 fps faster.
Click to expand...

When review sites test with 720p it tells the story of the future CPU use with more demanding games.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcgaming247*
> 
> because i want 8 cores for multitasking and streaming at the same time
> six is good 8 is better but the motherboard changes are horrible


For about $450 dollars, get yourself a used Sandy Bridge (E5) or Ivy Bridge (E5 v2) 8 or 10 core Xeon, like an E5-2660, 2670, or 2680, readily available on ebay for $125-175. Next a used or refurbished workstation tower with a 2011 motherboard, most will even include a lower to mid range Quaddro in them, RAM, and at least 1 SSD or HDD, and PSU, for about $150-250. Think Dell Precision or Lenovo Thinkbox are the most common... but both can be readily found on eBay. Then get yourself a $100-150 capture card, 1080p 60 fps capable, and you're good to go. Spend an extra $100 on a basic 1080p monitor if you need an extra, $25 on a basic keyboard/mouse combo if needed... Dedicated streaming/rendering rig with 8-10 cores for significantly less than the cost of a complete, new Ryzen 3 rig.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> When review sites test with 720p it tells the story of the future CPU use with more demanding games.


Not really because different games use CPU different. There is no point on testing 1600 vs 7700K at 720p to predict the future of games. In the future you also have games using more core the the entire comperason is pointless. I think its better to run 1080p/1440p with Low/Medium/High Settings instead of Ultra to see how the CPU scales. I have been doing a lot of testing with 3770K to see where this CPU is holding me back. Even at 1080p its hard to push it. BF1 the CPU is about 88-92% usage.


----------



## kd5151

No stock.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> What upgrade path? Zen 2? 2019-2020? In 3 years you can afford $120 MB lol. I bet to get most out of Zen 2 you will want the latest chip set/ motherboard.


Its an argument more in principle than in application. Personally, I choose to reward companies for giving me the option to stay on a mobo through several CPU releases like AMD does, rather than conceding that I will have to get a new mobo (for mostly arbitrary reasoning) every time I want to upgrade the processor. Beyond the money aspect, there is a level of hassle that comes from changing out mobos (especially for us water coolers) that I typically would like to avoid if at all possible.

I'm not saying people should choose Ryzen over CL only because of the upgrade path, but it certainly is an important factor for many.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> When review sites test with 720p it tells the story of the future CPU use with more demanding games.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not really because different games use CPU different. There is no point on testing 1600 vs 7700K at 720p to predict the future of games. In the future you also have games using more core the the entire comperason is pointless. I think its better to run 1080p/1440p with Low/Medium/High Settings instead of Ultra to see how the CPU scales. I have been doing a lot of testing with 3770K to see where this CPU is holding me back. Even at 1080p its hard to push it. BF1 the CPU is about 88-92% usage.
Click to expand...

Reducing the in game settings lessons the demand on the processor by reducing the draw calls. When testing the processor for gaming the GPU does all the scaling for resolution so that is why test sites change resolution to remove the GPU bottle neck. Testing with 720p and 1080p gives all the CPU information that is needed by me to compare CPUs that I want to see how they perform.

The GPU does all the scaling when switching resolutions. When you reduce in game settings example medium 1080p the CPU can run the game at higher FPS than High at 720p.

Testing 720p and 1080p does tell the future we know from the past the i7 2600k does well and the i7 8700k is no better now compared to the i7 7700k. In the future games like crysis 3 will do well with the i7 8700k. We also know if you want High 144 FPS+ gaming Ryzen is not the choice.

1440p and 4K makes a GPU bottleneck


----------



## Arturo.Zise

Realistically how long does 1080p gaming have before it becomes obsolete? Surely 1440p UW HRR and 4K will become the norm in the next 2 years? The choice of CPU will take a back seat to raw GPU power once it starts to shift that way.


----------



## Scotty99

Thats why i find 1080p benchmarks for 400 dollar cpu's and 500+ dollar GPU's ridiculous. Simply not relevant, if you have this level of hardware and are still on a 1080p monitor (240hz aside) you spent your money in the wrong place. Not only could i not go back to 60hz, there is no way i could go back to 1080, 1440 on a 24" screen looks so good.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arturo.Zise*
> 
> Realistically how long does 1080p gaming have before it becomes obsolete? Surely 1440p UW HRR and 4K will become the norm in the next 2 years? The choice of CPU will take a back seat to raw GPU power once it starts to shift that way.


Steam survey shows 1366 x 768 17.36%, 1920 x 1080 56.79%, 2560 x 1440 2.68%. LINK: http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

People like me like the High 144 FPS+ gaming much better with 1080p.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arturo.Zise*
> 
> Realistically how long does 1080p gaming have before it becomes obsolete? Surely 1440p UW HRR and 4K will become the norm in the next 2 years? The choice of CPU will take a back seat to raw GPU power once it starts to shift that way.


As long as competitive FPS (even MOBAs) exist, 1080p will be a staple, TBH. Not only is 1080p a more CPU dependent resolution than 1440p and up, it's also very important for high framerate gaming.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arturo.Zise*
> 
> Realistically how long does 1080p gaming have before it becomes obsolete? Surely 1440p UW HRR and 4K will become the norm in the next 2 years? The choice of CPU will take a back seat to raw GPU power once it starts to shift that way.


Not sure, most good gamers (aka Pro's) use 1080p 144-240 Hz. Many years probably.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> As long as competitive FPS (even MOBAs) exist, 1080p will be a staple, TBH. Not only is 1080p a more CPU dependent resolution than 1440p and up, it's also very important for high framerate gaming.


Yeah! 144hz is just as hard to drive as 4K. On every game that is.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arturo.Zise*
> 
> Realistically how long does 1080p gaming have before it becomes obsolete? Surely 1440p UW HRR and 4K will become the norm in the next 2 years? The choice of CPU will take a back seat to raw GPU power once it starts to shift that way.


Honestly... Volta seems like it's going to be the first generation of desktop SKUs to be an honest, 80+ fps at Ultra settings in 98% of AAA titles, single card solution for 4K... And seeing as how those won't be out until sometime next summer at the earliest... I would guess that it will still be another year or two, as well as another architecture release after that before 4K will be widely adopted. Reading between the lines this is me guessing that until the GTX Xx70/Vega 56 level, 3rd tier cards can rock 80+ fps at 4K... most people still won't adopt it. As that's how long it will likely be before we see most games being developed and optimized for 4K. Of course at that point 1440p becomes the budget gaming default resolution, and 1080 finally becomes the same lowly status as 13" laptops and their 1366 by 768 resolutions are viewed by the gaming community today.


----------



## nanotm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> From what I could find on ark.intel.com, Intel didn't really state a definitive TjMax until Kaby Lake.


yeah I remember several silicon fires from stock clock intel volcanoes ...... intel never gave out a single status because it all depended which plant produced the chips, one plant the chips could barely go over 55 degrees without suffering problems whilst another plant's offerings were good to 140 degrees, this widely differing quality standard meant they couldn't give a broad brush your good for x since they never figured out how to clock up the chips without creating an internal thermal feedback loop also means they run hotter clock for clock over sustained loads than an equivalent system using identical coolers....

and yes the intel burners did actually look like volcanoes in those stupid plastic cartridges..... which is why they ditched that approach to building pc's......nowadays at least they put the thermal kill switch in the middle of the cores rather than having it mounted on the mobo..... doesn't mean it will save the cpu of course but at least it should prevent future fires /


----------



## G woodlogger

Low resolution testing could be don on 320p







I just want to have a gamer benchmark like passmark. Well one that are accurate







. I do not really need higher resolution testing much as I will be at 4k and only need 40-70 fps for single player games







.


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Thats why i find 1080p benchmarks for 400 dollar cpu's and 500+ dollar GPU's ridiculous. Simply not relevant, if you have this level of hardware and are still on a 1080p monitor (240hz aside) you spent your money in the wrong place. Not only could i not go back to 60hz, there is no way i could go back to 1080, 1440 on a 24" screen looks so good.


this! exactly what I think also..

I think I went 1440p like 5 years ago


----------



## Descadent

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> this! exactly what I think also..
> 
> I think I went 1440p like 5 years ago


6 years ago for me.... people need to dump the 1080p crap


----------



## chaosblade02

It wasn't until the last couple years where individual GPUs started getting powerful enough to push AAA games at 60fps @ 1440p with decent settings.

Increasing the resolution isn't as costly performance wise as it used to be on these newer GPUs, so it's viable now when it used to not be.

The problem I got, is decent monitors cost more than the freaking GPU does. You're looking at spending $500+ on a monitor. An additional $200 if you want Gsynch, then you're looking at $700-$800 for a monitor. 1080p/60hz monitors can be had for under $200. And have been that price for roughly 5 years. The price hasn't really dropped on 1440p/120hz monitors compared to what they were 5 years ago. I'd be willing to go maybe $350 on a 1440p/120hz monitor, but not any more.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chaosblade02*
> 
> It wasn't until the last couple years where individual GPUs started getting powerful enough to push AAA games at 60fps @ 1440p with decent settings.
> 
> Increasing the resolution isn't as costly performance wise as it used to be on these newer GPUs, so it's viable now when it used to not be.
> 
> The problem I got, is decent monitors cost more than the freaking GPU does. You're looking at spending $500+ on a monitor. 1080p/60hz monitors can be had for under $200. And have been that price for roughly 5 years. The price hasn't really dropped on 1440p/120hz monitors compared to what they were 5 years ago. I'd be willing to go maybe $350 on a 1440p/120hz monitor, but not any more.


Why are people willing to spend $700 on a GPU which will last 2 years but not $700 on monitor which will last longer?


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Why are people willing to spend $700 on a GPU which will last 2 years but not $700 on monitor which will last longer?


#Preachhhh.


----------



## Rubinhood

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Why are people willing to spend $700 on a GPU which will last 2 years but not $700 on monitor which will last longer?


Maybe they spent $700 on that 1080p monitor back when that was expensive, in the hope it *would* last longer


----------



## grss1982

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/920319748482699264
In the comparison above by HardwareCanucks between an 8700k and a 2600K, it seems to suggest that if you're a pure gamer you'll see minimal gains moving to Coffee Lake.









So what's the deal here? I thought we would see a huge leap from performance moving from Sandy Bridge to Coffee Lake?









Also on other stuff discussed in this thread.....1080p is now dead?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rubinhood*
> 
> Maybe they spent $700 on that 1080p monitor back when that was expensive, in the hope it *would* last longer


Not really. I spend $700 CAD in 2011 for my U2711 2560x1440 IPS screen. Still good today after 6 years. The screen is the most important thing on a PC these days.


----------



## Yetyhunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *grss1982*
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/920319748482699264
> In the comparison above by HardwareCanucks between an 8700k and a 2600K, it seems to suggest that if you're a pure gamer you'll see minimal gains moving to Coffee Lake.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what's the deal here? I thought we would see a huge leap from performance moving from Sandy Bridge to Coffee Lake?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also on other stuff discussed in this thread.....1080p is now dead?


They used a GTX1070, if you use a GTX1080ti the difference would be bigger especially on a high refresh monitor.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Not really. I spend $700 CAD in 2011 for my U2711 2560x1440 IPS screen. Still good today after 6 years. The screen is the most important thing on a PC these days.


Agreed since it is the component your eyes are constantly focused on, still happy with my Samsung S27B970D PLS 1440P monitor purchased way back in 2011


----------



## e-gate

1080p is dead. Long live 1080p.
1080p is not dead and will not die for years to come. Not until WQHD and 4K become more affordable. WQHD is still too expensive for what it is. High refresh monitors are expensive as well.
No surprise the vast majority of PC gamers are still on 1080p. Also for high refresh rate 1080p is easier to drive than anything bigger than that.
On HardwareCanucks' review. Well they used a GTX1070. Not really the best scanario to test. There is also the fact that more powerful GPUs are coming and assuming you will keep the same CPU for 5 years or more then you gonna need CFL's power.


----------



## kd5151

Who stole my oled monitor?


----------



## kevindd992002

I just got my Dell S2716DG


----------



## Rubinhood

Whoops.

http://www.bit-tech.net/features/tech/motherboards/asus-interview-andrew-wu-rog-motherboard-pm/1/

_"(Interviewer So if you wanted and Intel let you, you could make Z270 compatible [with Coffee Lake]?
(Asus engineer Yes"_

Sounds like locked 8400s, 8100s, or maybe 8700s could have worked in Z270 boards even with the fewer power pins there.
Not really a surprise, just a confirmation of what everyone suspected.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rubinhood*
> 
> Whoops.
> 
> http://www.bit-tech.net/features/tech/motherboards/asus-interview-andrew-wu-rog-motherboard-pm/1/
> 
> _"(Interviewer So if you wanted and Intel let you, you could make Z270 compatible [with Coffee Lake]?
> (Asus engineer Yes"_
> 
> Sounds like locked 8400s, 8100s, or maybe 8700s could have worked in Z270 boards even with the fewer power pins there.
> Not really a surprise, just a confirmation of what everyone suspected.


Maybe Asus should just focus on fixing the Strix LLC issues.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rubinhood*
> 
> Whoops.
> 
> http://www.bit-tech.net/features/tech/motherboards/asus-interview-andrew-wu-rog-motherboard-pm/1/
> 
> _"(Interviewer So if you wanted and Intel let you, you could make Z270 compatible [with Coffee Lake]?
> (Asus engineer Yes"_
> 
> Sounds like locked 8400s, 8100s, or maybe 8700s could have worked in Z270 boards even with the fewer power pins there.
> Not really a surprise, just a confirmation of what everyone suspected.


Yeah but it is kinda inline with Intel upgrading/changing sockets every 2 generations, whilst 8700K would have run on Z170/Z270 9th gen 8 core CPU's probably wouldn't have hence I would not expect a socket change from 1151V2 for Z390


----------



## ZealotKi11er




----------



## Rubinhood

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Yeah but it is kinda inline with Intel upgrading/changing sockets every 2 generations, whilst 8700K would have run on Z170/Z270 9th gen 8 core CPU's probably wouldn't have hence I would not expect a socket change from 1151V2 for Z390


Forced obsolescence may be in line with corporate practice, but it's not in line with the environment, or with consumers' wallets.

I do hope you're right that there's now enough power pins for 8 cores.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rubinhood*
> 
> Forced obsolescence may be in line with corporate practice, but it's not in line with the environment, or with consumers' wallets.
> 
> I do hope you're right that there's now enough power pins for 8 cores.


Im just going on Intel's history of changing sockets every 2 generations







and the fact they love our wallets!


----------



## ZealotKi11er

2600K, 3770K, 4770K should have all been one socket.
6700K, 7700K, 8700K also one socket.

That being said you have people here overpaying for their CPU for 100-200MHz and we are worried about having to buy $120 MB. I like the idea of running the CPU on a older MB but how many people run Z77 with 2600K or 7700K with Z170. The number is pretty small. People 90% of the time upgrade MB+CPU w/ RAM.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> 2600K, 3770K, 4770K should have all been one socket.
> 6700K, 7700K, 8700K also one socket.
> 
> That being said you have people here overpaying for their CPU for 100-200MHz and we are worried about having to buy $120 MB. I like the idea of running the CPU on a older MB but how many people run Z77 with 2600K or 7700K with Z170. The number is pretty small. People 90% of the time upgrade MB+CPU w/ RAM.


Yes, Im one of those people


----------



## TMatzelle60

Grrr more waiting on 8700k


----------



## domenic

I pre-ordered my 8700k from Newegg @ 3:05am Eastern on the 5th - just got this shipping notice & tracking #. Now I just need to wait for the Formula X to be released.

I guess in the meantime I could delid, relid, and even lap the IHS - will take out all of my frustration in giving it a mirror like sanding...


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> this! exactly what I think also..
> 
> I think I went 1440p like 5 years ago


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Descadent*
> 
> 6 years ago for me.... people need to dump the 1080p crap


For most people it's purely dependent on their budget and their willingness to upgrade to a capable rig. High refresh rate, decent IPS panel for 1440 still run $500 plus, most people have budgets of around $1,500 for a gaming rig, maybe $2,000... the panel and a card capable of running don't easily fit that budget range when other choices can have a greater impact on performance. That being said, now that the xx70 range is reaching a point where it can handle 1440p, I think that high refresh monitors will continue to drop in price, especially if Volta does 4K as well as what a lot of us think it will be.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Most of us won't upgrade from 1080p due to lack of 1440p monitors of the same 22-24 inch size. I think there are only 2 144hz 1440p 24 inch monitors on market
Anything bigger than that isn't good for competitive gaming.


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Anything bigger than that isn't good for competitive gaming.


They need bigger desks for competitions so you can sit further away from the screen.


----------



## VegetarianEater

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> For most people it's purely dependent on their budget and their willingness to upgrade to a capable rig. High refresh rate, decent IPS panel for 1440 still run $500 plus, most people have budgets of around $1,500 for a gaming rig, maybe $2,000... the panel and a card capable of running don't easily fit that budget range when other choices can have a greater impact on performance. That being said, now that the xx70 range is reaching a point where it can handle 1440p, I think that high refresh monitors will continue to drop in price, especially if Volta does 4K as well as what a lot of us think it will be.


1440p monitors were expensive for quite a while, but I bought a qnix 2710 1440p monitor that could overclock to 100hz over 3 years ago for only $320, and now they're only $200.

144hz freesync 1440p IPS monitors are now $400 from multiple companies (Nixeus, Monoprice, etc.). The truth of the matter is a lot of people will spends thousands on a computer but then use a crappy 1080p TN monitor. IMO 1080p is only worth it for a cheap 144hz+ monitor, and even then they can be expensive. And part of the problem is g sync keeping the prices of the best 1440p monitors over $600.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VegetarianEater*
> 
> 1440p monitors were expensive for quite a while, but I bought a qnix 2710 1440p monitor that could overclock to 100hz over 3 years ago for only $320, and now they're only $200.
> 
> 144hz freesync 1440p IPS monitors are now $400 from multiple companies (Nixeus, Monoprice, etc.). The truth of the matter is a lot of people will spends thousands on a computer but then use a crappy 1080p TN monitor. IMO 1080p is only worth it for a cheap 144hz+ monitor, and even then they can be expensive. And part of the problem is g sync keeping the prices of the best 1440p monitors over $600.


Free Sync 1440p, IPS panels that support refresh rates over 75Hz...

https://pcpartpicker.com/products/monitor/#A=2&p=1&H=75,240&r=256001440

All listings cost $489.99 and above.

On Newegg... $439.99 for a refub Acer, new start at $499.99 and up

https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100160979%20600012165%20600107132%20600311643%20600439463%20600012694%20600284704%20600338123%20600338132%20600338133%20600338135%20600417886%20600486457%20601115272%20601191223&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=36

Your argument about GSync being at a disproportionate degree of fault is invalid. Let's not make it about Team Red versus Team Green, let's be honest and accept that the reality of things is that until cards in the $300-400 range can run 1440p Ultra at 80+ fps, most people will not buy them. And buy the time cards in that range are capable, the $400-500 range will support 4K at the same settings and framerate easily on a single card. Volta and the Vega Refresh will help drive the prices of high resolution, high refresh rate monitors down further... and the generation after those will bring 4K into a much more respectable price point for the low to mid range budget consumer.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> 2600K, 3770K, 4770K should have all been one socket.
> 6700K, 7700K, 8700K also one socket.
> 
> That being said you have people here overpaying for their CPU for 100-200MHz and we are worried about having to buy $120 MB. I like the idea of running the CPU on a older MB but how many people run Z77 with 2600K or 7700K with Z170. The number is pretty small. People 90% of the time upgrade MB+CPU w/ RAM.


they should have been but Haswell had FIVR so it couldnt be possible? also the people who upgraded to z87 or z97 having z77/z68 was simply because discontinued the 1155 socket and AMD had no better offering, so selling the old platform could give them most of the cost of the old one so why not? what intel did with Skylake is pretty bad since it could have 4 generations in a single socket, if obo had proper VRM/mostfet


----------



## Yetyhunter

Asus just released the BIOS with the LLC fix
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?96800-Strix-Z370-UEFI-updates-UEFI-0419-0426


----------



## VegetarianEater

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> Free Sync 1440p, IPS panels that support refresh rates over 75Hz...
> 
> https://pcpartpicker.com/products/monitor/#A=2&p=1&H=75,240&r=256001440
> 
> All listings cost $489.99 and above.
> 
> On Newegg... $439.99 for a refub Acer, new start at $499.99 and up
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100160979%20600012165%20600107132%20600311643%20600439463%20600012694%20600284704%20600338123%20600338132%20600338133%20600338135%20600417886%20600486457%20601115272%20601191223&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=36
> 
> Your argument about GSync being at a disproportionate degree of fault is invalid. Let's not make it about Team Red versus Team Green, let's be honest and accept that the reality of things is that until cards in the $300-400 range can run 1440p Ultra at 80+ fps, most people will not buy them. And buy the time cards in that range are capable, the $400-500 range will support 4K at the same settings and framerate easily on a single card. Volta and the Vega Refresh will help drive the prices of high resolution, high refresh rate monitors down further... and the generation after those will bring 4K into a much more respectable price point for the low to mid range budget consumer.


I listed 2 144hz 1440p freesync monitors that are $399, the Monoprice one and the Nixeus, as well as some Korean monitors on ebay, and then there's the new Samsung CHG70 which isn't much more for the 27" I believe. Or you can still get a QNIX 2710 for $200 or less that will do 100hz over DVI... Not sure why you're trying to argue about that.

My argument about G-sync is perfectly valid, as the Acer predator and Asus swift monitors have been out for years now without a price drop, and the freesync version of that monitor has always been around $150 cheaper. I said it's PART of the problem, I didn't say it was a huge part or a bigger part than any other. I also was not trying to make it about red vs green, simply stating facts.

Cards in that range that can run 1440p Ultra at 80+ fps have been around for years now... I bought a 780ti classified for $390 in 2014, and at the time there weren't any games it couldn't max except maybe Crysis 3. A 1070 now is all you need for 1440p with the exception of a few games.

Obviously as more powerful cards come out the midrange cards are getting more and more capable of pushing 1440p at 100+ fps, and that will push higher resolutions and refresh rates on monitors, I'm not arguing against that at all.


----------



## kd5151

four reasons are killing me right now! #4 is funny lmao.




ITX?


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> four reasons are killing me right now! #4 is funny lmao.


Yep thats why I have a 1080ti and a freesync monitor. I also think they need a bit more time to sort their crap out. When I bought my 1440p 144hz tn, most of the ips had issues with freesync or gsync hz ranges stuttering blurring and other issues. I am hoping there will be some issue free high res medium to high refesh wide screens available when I next upgrade.


----------



## NoDestiny

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> Yep thats why I have a 1080ti and a freesync monitor. I also think they need a bit more time to sort their crap out. When I bought my 1440p 144hz tn, most of the ips had issues with freesync or gsync hz ranges stuttering blurring and other issues. I am hoping there will be some issue free high res medium to high refesh wide screens available when I next upgrade.


980ti to a freesync monitor myself. Tearing doesn't exist for me, despite the lack of G-sync. I played on a G-sync monitor and couldn't tell the difference...


----------



## aDyerSituation

I also used the freesync on my monitor when I had an AMD card and didn't notice a difference. Tearing isn't a big deal when pushing higher frames it seems


----------



## kd5151




----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> 2600K, 3770K, 4770K should have all been one socket.
> 6700K, 7700K, 8700K also one socket.


Seeing that the 4770K (along with the rest of the Haswell line) had an integrated FIVR for power delivery, that would make same-socket compatibility rather dicey. The same goes for the 8700K / Coffee Lake line due to needing to utilize an additional 30 "reserved" or previously-unused pins to deliver power to the CPU.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> Seeing that the 4770K (along with the rest of the Haswell line) had an integrated FIVR for power delivery, that would make same-socket compatibility rather dicey. The same goes for the 8700K / Coffee Lake line due to needing to utilize an additional 30 "reserved" or previously-unused pins to deliver power to the CPU.


intel could have allowed to use the pins from beggining on Z170 to make it compatible with incoming CPUs with 6cores there was no excuse even 7700k wasnt really an improvement over 6700k it was the same quad core and even then the z270 has no backwards compatbility( or forward)


----------



## QuadDamage

My buddy got one of the new egg bundles with motherboard he had pre ordered and didn't get it filled on the 5th at newegg and amazon and he is getting his combo he ordered a day ago
I'm still laughing at it

<-- Waiting on Amazon


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> Seeing that the 4770K (along with the rest of the Haswell line) had an integrated FIVR for power delivery, that would make same-socket compatibility rather dicey. The same goes for the 8700K / Coffee Lake line due to needing to utilize an additional 30 "reserved" or previously-unused pins to deliver power to the CPU.


Yeah almost like Intel is only looking 6-12 months into the socket future. They could build a future compatible socket to begin with.


----------



## kd5151

Intel didn't need Z370 if the Z270 was designed to work with 8th gen in the first place.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*


The i5 8600k looks sweet for gaming, it beats the i7 7700k.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The i5 8600k looks sweet for gaming, it beats the i7 7700k.


RIP 7600K.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> RIP 7600K.


8100 didnt kill the 7600< already? and the 8350k isnt a slighly cheaper 7600k?


----------



## Scotty99

Best purchase for most people=

8700 non k, cheapest 2666+ memory they can find, cheapest z370 board. Enable MCE and xmp and you are set for 5 years easy.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> 8100 didnt kill the 7600< already? and the 8350k isnt a slighly cheaper 7600k?


6600 without the max turbo. and the 8350k is 7600k without max turbo.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> 6600 without the max turbo. and the 8350k is 7600k without max turbo.


i mean price/performance

8100 is similar to any i5 Kaby lake/Skylake non K and the 8350k is the closest to a 7600k/6600k for less than the MSRP


----------



## tashcz

Nice. Serbia got a stock of 8700K. Priced at 500EUR.

Thank you Serbia. ****.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I also used the freesync on my monitor when I had an AMD card and didn't notice a difference. Tearing isn't a big deal when pushing higher frames it seems


Same thing here... i was trying to spot that freesync vs no fsync difference, and I couldn't... i really thought my monitor is defected...
now with 180ti on same freesync monitor and still cant see a difference.
Reading reviews , people say they feel/See freesync performing even watching youtube...

Same thing as buying a curved tv.... i own bought, there is almost no difference between them . But the hope we get from curved tv comercials makes you think that curved is better. Well it is, it just looks more expensive.

When we look at gpu benchmarks side by side, no one really mentions freesync/gsync monitor use...
I havent seen a post where it says that for exemple a CS Go players that benefit from those syncs, or any major benefit from those sync , i really in most cases see people say that it adds input lag


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Best purchase for most people=
> 
> 8700 non k, cheapest 2666+ memory they can find, cheapest z370 board. Enable MCE and xmp and you are set for 5 years easy.


I'd say wait until the B360/H370 boards come out and forego the MCE. The extra 300MHz aren't really worth it due to the heat generated and the fact that most people in the general population would use the stock cooler, and the cost savings on the less-expensive board would be hard to ignore. It's not like SLI/CFX is all that useful anymore, so the 8x/8x PCIe that is exclusive to the Z-series mainstream boards isn't much of a selling point these days.


----------



## Scotty99

Tearing is not why you buy a gsync monitor, fast sync fixes that on a regular monitor. You buy it to eliminate stutter, if i turn gsync off in overwatch or really any game i can see the stutter instantly, could not play without it after being used to having vsync on for years. Some people notice this, some people dont.


----------



## Rubinhood

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Best purchase for most people=
> 
> 8700 non k, cheapest 2666+ memory they can find, cheapest z370 board. Enable MCE and xmp and you are set for 5 years easy.


I was considering this route also, until several reviewers reported that MCE doesn't work on non-k processors after all.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

For the S&Gs of it... I decided to put together a parts list for a rig that can do 4K, not at ultra settings, just do 4 K... It includes the full expense of putting together a system, all the guts, the case and PSU, the OS, keyboard and mouse, and a monitor. If you don't mind medium settings on a 24" monitor... turns out you can do it _cheaper_ than some might expect... and I do mean to emphasize the cheaper part

https://pcpartpicker.com/user/SpacemanSpliff/saved/vhJnnQ

CPU: Intel - Core i7-6700 - $269.99 @ MicroCenter - in-store pickup

Cooler: Cooler Master - Hyper T4 - $29.99 @ Newegg ($15 MIR) free shipping

MB: ASRock - B250M-HDV mATX - $29.99 in-store pickup

RAM: Crucial Ballistix Sport LT CL16 (2 x 8GB) DDR4-2666 - $143.99 @ Amazon free shipping

Storage : Seagate - FireCuda 2TB 2.5" 5400RPM Hybrid Internal HD - $79.99 @ Amazon free shipping

GPU: Zotac - GeForce GTX 1080 Ti Mini - $712.89 @ B&H free Shipping

Case: Thermaltake - Versa H15 - $39.99 @ Amazon, free shipping

Power Supply: EVGA - SuperNOVA G2 650W 80+ Gold Full-Mod $89.99 ($20 MIR) @ Newegg $2.99 shipping

OS: Microsoft - Windows 10 Home OEM 64-bit - $92.99 @ Best Buy in-store pickup

Monitor: LG - 24UD58-B 23.8" 3840x2160 60Hz IPS Monitor - $284.94 @ Amazon free shipping

Keyboard: Logitech - MK520 Wireless Ergonomic Keyboard w/Laser Mouse - $36.99 @ Amazon free shipping

Base Total: $1811.74
Mail-in Rebates: -$35.00
Shipping: $2.99
Total: $1779.73

Lots of obvious sacrifices to overall performance, but if you want a bare bones but reasonably enjoyable experience at 4K, there it is.

Now for those insisting people drop 1080 like it's stolen... would you accept owning this rig? Probably not would be my guess...


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rubinhood*
> 
> I was considering this route also, until several reviewers reported that MCE doesn't work on non-k processors after all.


Actually all reports point to 8400 only turboing to 3.8ghz, but 8700 appears to be able to boost to 4.6ghz for whatever reason.






This guy confirmed in the comments with his strix-i board the 8700 boosts all cores to 4.6

Quote:


> atomkinder67
> 3 days ago
> Does the ROG board have Multicore Enhancement enabled by default?﻿


Quote:


> Tek Everything
> 3 days ago
> Yes it does, my cpu was boosting to 4.6GHz out of the box.﻿


Quote:


> Fred Flintstone
> 2 days ago
> Have you confirmed thats on all cores? Because someone tested the 8400 with MCE and it only boosts all cores to 3.8ghz, not the 4.0ghz it should run at with MCE.﻿


Quote:


> Highlighted reply
> Tek Everything
> 6 hours ago
> *Yes I a can confirm that it is all cores*. However there is a pretty steep power draw and heat penalty when using MCE.﻿


I dont think the heat/power consumption topic is a relevant concern for this forum, if you are buying a 300+ dollar CPU and post here i think you would also have enough sense to buy a 25 dollar aftermarket heatsink, even if used without mce.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Best purchase for most people=
> 
> 8700 non k, cheapest 2666+ memory they can find, cheapest z370 board. Enable MCE and xmp and you are set for 5 years easy.


and a cheap cooler. noise=bad
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> i mean price/performance
> 
> 8100 is similar to any i5 Kaby lake/Skylake non K and the 8350k is the closest to a 7600k/6600k for less than the MSRP


Much better price/performance. Kaby lake has put a bad taste in the mouths of people now coffee lake is here.

You know when Intel has the better product, AMD lowered prices. Phenom 2 had to come down and even piledriver had very aggressive pricing. And even now AMD is still price/performance king.
When AMD has the better product,you will not see Intel lower prices. Intel's MSRP has gone up over the years. But I will say that Kaby lake despite having a higher MSRP was selling lower then usually. Intel did exactly what they needed to do and we all saw it coming.

I still feel AMD need to balance the 1500x and 1800x a little bit better. And that might not happen until Ryzen+. But who knows. Maybe I'm crazy.


----------



## tashcz

AMD's maxed out currently. They can't go lower on prices, at least not on non-x models such as 1600 and 1700. The better binned ones are out of the equation, I won't take them into account, though they too are dropping prices.

Thing is, AMD's started the battle fight a good hit. Intel responded with same core counts as AMD, but superior SC performance. For a typical gamer, we had two choices, AMD for more cores or Intel for better SC performance. It was a hard decidion, but the price AMD offered gave them advantage. Maybe a bit lower performance, but almost double less the price. Intel needed to cut their losses, so they made the six core, non-enthusiast grade i7, bringing the best of both worlds, high IPC and just enough cores. Those that don't wanna make the compromise betweem 1700/1600 or 7700K, are going to pay 100-150-200$ more and get the 8700K. Pretty clear.

Now it's AMD's turn. Lowering the prices won't do much as they already are low enough for anyone to buy a 1600. So it's gonna be a single core performance improvement, or they're back at where they were, Visheras vs i7's, where more money for i7's would give you more but Visheras were still a good budget option that does the job. This may force AMD to get Ryzen 2nd gen a bit faster than they planned.

Prices are correct now. 8700K is expensive in Europe but the performance is outstanding. Anything else is just pure compromise. Intel again is dictating the game rules but AMD made them make a move.


----------



## tw2

Sorry if I missed it but has anyone actually confirmed mce 4.6 with 8700 non-k yet? I know gigabyte confirmed it but I would prefer to hear that someone did it in real life.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> Sorry if I missed it but has anyone actually confirmed mce 4.6 with 8700 non-k yet? I know gigabyte confirmed it but I would prefer to hear that someone did it in real life.


Scroll up 3 posts lol.


----------



## nanotm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tashcz*
> 
> AMD's maxed out currently. They can't go lower on prices, at least not on non-x models such as 1600 and 1700. The better binned ones are out of the equation, I won't take them into account, though they too are dropping prices.
> 
> Thing is, AMD's started the battle fight a good hit. Intel responded with same core counts as AMD, but superior SC performance. For a typical gamer, we had two choices, AMD for more cores or Intel for better SC performance. It was a hard decidion, but the price AMD offered gave them advantage. Maybe a bit lower performance, but almost double less the price. Intel needed to cut their losses, so they made the six core, non-enthusiast grade i7, bringing the best of both worlds, high IPC and just enough cores. Those that don't wanna make the compromise betweem 1700/1600 or 7700K, are going to pay 100-150-200$ more and get the 8700K. Pretty clear.
> 
> Now it's AMD's turn. Lowering the prices won't do much as they already are low enough for anyone to buy a 1600. So it's gonna be a single core performance improvement, or they're back at where they were, Visheras vs i7's, where more money for i7's would give you more but Visheras were still a good budget option that does the job. This may force AMD to get Ryzen 2nd gen a bit faster than they planned.
> 
> Prices are correct now. 8700K is expensive in Europe but the performance is outstanding. Anything else is just pure compromise. Intel again is dictating the game rules but AMD made them make a move.


same story as always intel price gouges and the fans still lap them up ....

amd clearly released early and with too many chips in the line up, they should have had the chips able to hit 5ghz + clock speeds, the fact they didn't have this indicates they knew the chips weren't up to the job from the start so lets hope the refresh actually fixes this problem (who knows maybe someone on team red was binning the chips in house and the first wave were all the failures so the next wave will be capable of actually competing clock for clock with the intel line up (not that it will matter as soon as cannon lake drops)


----------



## tashcz

I think Ryzen was already delayed a bit so they had to go all or nothing, they were losing the CPU game badly. They did what they could, deliver good performance and high core count at a good price. But that's practicly what Visheras were about. High cores and good performance on a budget. Sure, 1800x is great, but come on, what's the real world difference between 1800x and 1600? Price here is 500$ vs 250$ and I don't think that extra 250 is worth it. Basicly a 1600 does what a 1800x does. Again, same things from Vishera time. 8320E vs 9590.

We are just falling down to what happened 5-6 years ago. Same story is reapiting itself. AMD's low SC and good MT, Intel's good SC and MT, but double the price. Something's gotta change, no high-end users are gonna get AMD in a year or two if things don't change. If AMD gets Ryzen SC performance up by 20-25% and pushes the prices by 20-25% too, then we might go somewhere. Now it's just something I said 3 times already in this post, Visheras vs 2nd gen Intel CPUs.

Also worth noting... while 2nd gen Intel, and Haswell also which came later, were maxing out at ~4.7 or ~4.8GHz, Visheras with decent cooling were getting 4.7GHz easily on air. Now this has changed too. Visheras were a paradise for overclocking, as much as you invest in your power delivery and cooling, your clocks would go sky high. Now Intel's got that, hitting 5GHz which was basicly impossible a few years ago, and AMD's hitting 4GHz at best. AMD lost the OC game right now. I know, new platform, etc, etc, but still... we may compare Ryzen release to Intel's 1st gen i7 processors. Best is yet to come. And it better come fast.


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Scroll up 3 posts lol.


I presume you mean the 2nd quote of four? I saw this but I couldn't find where the original quote came from? I was hoping for a few extra details ie motherboard, asus mce or whatever gigabytes version is etc.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tashcz*
> 
> I think Ryzen was already delayed a bit so they had to go all or nothing, they were losing the CPU game badly. They did what they could, deliver good performance and high core count at a good price. But that's practicly what Visheras were about. High cores and good performance on a budget. Sure, 1800x is great, but come on, what's the real world difference between 1800x and 1600? Price here is 500$ vs 250$ and I don't think that extra 250 is worth it. Basicly a 1600 does what a 1800x does. Again, same things from Vishera time. 8320E vs 9590.
> 
> We are just falling down to what happened 5-6 years ago. Same story is reapiting itself. AMD's low SC and good MT, Intel's good SC and MT, but double the price. Something's gotta change, no high-end users are gonna get AMD in a year or two if things don't change. If AMD gets Ryzen SC performance up by 20-25% and pushes the prices by 20-25% too, then we might go somewhere. Now it's just something I said 3 times already in this post, Visheras vs 2nd gen Intel CPUs.
> 
> Also worth noting... while 2nd gen Intel, and Haswell also which came later, were maxing out at ~4.7 or ~4.8GHz, Visheras with decent cooling were getting 4.7GHz easily on air. Now this has changed too. Visheras were a paradise for overclocking, as much as you invest in your power delivery and cooling, your clocks would go sky high. Now Intel's got that, hitting 5GHz which was basicly impossible a few years ago, and AMD's hitting 4GHz at best. AMD lost the OC game right now. I know, new platform, etc, etc, but still... we may compare Ryzen release to Intel's 1st gen i7 processors. Best is yet to come. And it better come fast.


That's a bit drastic. Ryzen's single-threaded performance isn't toe to toe with Intel's, but they're playing on the same pitch. AMD's single-threaded performance during the BD/PD years wasn't even on the same planet. Orochi was a fundamentally bad choice as an architecture for a multitude of reasons. Zeppelin is very obviously not a bad choice. It is a solid foundation on which to build a few product ranges. This is something that the construction cores never offered. Orochi was a non-starter in enterprise, and it was a non-starter in mobile. Ryzen has considerable potential in both enterprise and mobile. I don't think your fatalistic interpretation is correct or even particularly sensible. This is a Coffee Lake thread, so I'll leave it at that.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> I presume you mean the 2nd quote of four? I saw this but I couldn't find where the original quote came from? I was hoping for a few extra details ie motherboard, asus mce or whatever gigabytes version is etc.


I linked the video just scroll down a bit, the 4th quote i posted had him confirming 4.6ghz on all cores with asus strix-i.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> With your use-case, I'm genuinely surprised that you even tried Ryzen. You're operating in a niche of a niche, but it's a niche that wants single-core performance at the expense of any other consideration.


Me? I also do a lot of video editing so it was a tradeoff. 8700k however, no tradeoff.


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I linked the video just scroll down a bit, the 4th quote i posted had him confirming 4.6ghz on all cores with asus strix-i.


Fantastic, thank you. This makes 8700 a solid option. I am watching the prices drop here 8700k $580, 8700 $493. No one has stock yet I don't think but considering 8700k started at $699 we are on the right track. For $100 or less difference 8700k makes sense. Too much more and 8700 with mce sounds like a great choice.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> Me? I also do a lot of video editing so it was a tradeoff. 8700k however, no tradeoff.


Yes, and fair enough. I just remember having seen that your games list includes lots of older titles and lots of DX9.


----------



## tashcz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> That's a bit drastic. Ryzen's single-threaded performance isn't toe to toe with Intel's, but they're playing on the same pitch. AMD's single-threaded performance during the BD/PD years wasn't even on the same planet. Orochi was a fundamentally bad choice as an architecture for a multitude of reasons. Zeppelin is very obviously not a bad choice. It is a solid foundation on which to build a few product ranges. This is something that the construction cores never offered. Orochi was a non-starter in enterprise, and it was a non-starter in mobile. Ryzen has considerable potential in both enterprise and mobile. I don't think your fatalistic interpretation is correct or even particularly sensible. This is a Coffee Lake thread, so I'll leave it at that.


Fair enough. I did go to extremes, it's not a 1 on 1 comparison. But the thing is, things are in the same direction they were. I know a lot of people didn't even wanna touch Visheras or equivalent, but currently my oc'd 8370E does the job at 4.75GHz. It's probably 30% slower than stock Haswell cores. Let's say, Haswells 3.5GHz = 4.7GHz on Vishera. But the thing is, Vishera still does the job for me. I got 8 cores and great multitasking, since Windows 8.1 it's even better. But no match for Haswells SC performance.

My whole post was pointing out AMD does have potential for great single core performance right now, but the whole architecture is slowed down by slow RAM. And current DDR4 doesn't work its best with AM4. Give current Ryzen a clock boost to 4.3GHz at least while OC'd, RAM speeds of around 3600MHz and you'd get a decent competitor in single core performance. My hopes are up for next gen Ryzen. Even if they don't catch up Intels SC performance and stay at low prices, performance of a 6 core oc'd Ryzen that has cores powerful as coffee/kaby's 4.5GHz should do the trick. All of our AMD's clubs were full of Intel regarded info and comparisons, it's not a bad thing to discuss that in coffee lake threads. We're just talking about what's available now. At this time, the 8700K is unbeatable if you can afford it. And that's the reason why I'm still rocking my Vishera. With every new CPU lineups release I feel like I'd regret getting the last one. If I got Ryzen and didn't wait for Coffee lake, I'd be really sad. Right now I'm just waiting for prices to cool down in Serbia and see the total cost of a mobo+cpu+ddr4. Vishera still does the job for me, 1080p 60FPS gaming is flawless - in some games I need to switch down from ultra to high or equivalent, but it's the heat that overclocked Visheras make what bugges me. And I know that 8700K would serve me a good 4 to 5 years. What scares me is that the Z370 is just released and probably already maxed. Don't know how much more we can expect from it.

What's odd is that I'm sniping prices in Serbia right now, the 7800K is 450EUR and 8700K is 500EUR. Shouldn't it be vice versa?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tashcz*
> 
> Fair enough. I did go to extremes, it's not a 1 on 1 comparison. But the thing is, things are in the same direction they were. I know a lot of people didn't even wanna touch Visheras or equivalent, but currently my oc'd 8370E does the job at 4.75GHz. It's probably 30% slower than stock Haswell cores. Let's say, Haswells 3.5GHz = 4.7GHz on Vishera. But the thing is, Vishera still does the job for me. I got 8 cores and great multitasking, since Windows 8.1 it's even better. But no match for Haswells SC performance.
> 
> My whole post was pointing out AMD does have potential for great single core performance right now, but the whole architecture is slowed down by slow RAM. And current DDR4 doesn't work its best with AM4. Give current Ryzen a clock boost to 4.3GHz at least while OC'd, RAM speeds of around 3600MHz and you'd get a decent competitor in single core performance. My hopes are up for next gen Ryzen. Even if they don't catch up Intels SC performance and stay at low prices, performance of a 6 core oc'd Ryzen that has cores powerful as coffee/kaby's 4.5GHz should do the trick. All of our AMD's clubs were full of Intel regarded info and comparisons, it's not a bad thing to discuss that in coffee lake threads. We're just talking about what's available now. At this time, the 8700K is unbeatable if you can afford it. And that's the reason why I'm still rocking my Vishera. With every new CPU lineups release I feel like I'd regret getting the last one. If I got Ryzen and didn't wait for Coffee lake, I'd be really sad. Right now I'm just waiting for prices to cool down in Serbia and see the total cost of a mobo+cpu+ddr4. Vishera still does the job for me, 1080p 60FPS gaming is flawless - in some games I need to switch down from ultra to high or equivalent, but it's the heat that overclocked Visheras make what bugges me. And I know that 8700K would serve me a good 4 to 5 years. What scares me is that the Z370 is just released and probably already maxed. Don't know how much more we can expect from it.


Its is not IPC why Intel wins. Its a combinations of a lot of thing. I think the main reason is games are optimized for Intel architecture and ring bus. If it was just IPC than 1600 @ 4GHz would be very close to 8400 but it lose in many games. You would need to literally switch places in terms of clock speed as in 1600 doing 5GHz and 8700K doing 4GHz to match each other in games. I just hope new games get optimized for Ryzen and we do not have to deal with same CPU anymore.


----------



## kd5151

holy cow !


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I think the main reason is games are optimized for Intel architecture and ring bus.


It's not a matter of anyone optimizing for a ring bus, because latency sensitivity is the default state for code. Developers have to make the effort to design their game to deal with high memory latency to optimize for Ryzen.



And to what effect? For all they know Zen 2 will fix the memory latency issue.


----------



## Scotty99

What i find odd about that is both ryzen and skylake x use mesh style cache, they went this route for a reason.....i find it hard to believe its going to be forever inferior to ring bus for gaming.

Why would intel and amd go this route if its an inferior design? This is one of the only reasons i am even slightly hesitant to go with coffee lake. Are games in 3-5 years going to run better on the new design?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> holy cow !


Great bench test. i5 7600k R.I.P.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> holy cow !


Personally, I don't think it's worth releasing that one by itself when they're all clearly hindered GPU bottleneck. It's all well and good to show what they all sit at under a GPU bottleneck, but do the same tests over and give them a GPU that won't hold them back, and through 4K in as well, to show the full gamut of their capabilities, and release it all as one video.That way he could have had an Intel and AMD rigs running simultaneously. Judging by the shelves in the background, I call BS if their excuse is not having enough hardware lol.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> What i find odd about that is both ryzen and skylake x use mesh style cache, they went this route for a reason.....i find it hard to believe its going to be forever inferior to ring bus for gaming.
> 
> Why would intel and amd go this route if its an inferior design? This is one of the only reasons i am even slightly hesitant to go with coffee lake. Are games in 3-5 years going to run better on the new design?


It's a different design, and inferior for consumer applications on low core count dies by the virtue of high latency. The ring bus doesn't scale for high core counts.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> It's a different design, and inferior for consumer applications on low core count dies by the virtue of high latency. The ring bus doesn't scale for high core counts.


So, hypothetical for you then.

I7 1170k launches in 2022 on 6nm process, its an 8c16t chip but because of the new process is only able to match a 8700k in performance (lower clocks, higher ipc etc) difference being this has mesh style cache. So this imaginary CPU would 100% in your eyes lose to a 5 year old CPU because of the cache design?

Im just trying to get a grasp on why intel or amd went with mesh cache design if it is inferior for things people do on their PC's lol.

To add onto this, could the 8700k be the last "good" gaming chip intel ever produces? I mean all the rumors point to 8c i7's next gen, if what you say is true they will be forced to move to mesh cache design on mainstream parts.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> So, hypothetical for you then.
> 
> I7 1170k launches in 2022 on 6nm process, its an 8c16t chip but because of the new process is only able to match a 8700k in performance (lower clocks, higher ipc etc) difference being this has mesh style cache. So this imaginary CPU would 100% in your eyes lose to a 5 year old CPU because of the cache design?
> 
> Im just trying to get a grasp on why intel or amd went with mesh cache design if it is inferior for things people do on their PC's lol.
> 
> To add onto this, could the 8700k be the last "good" gaming chip intel ever produces? I mean all the rumors point to 8c i7's next gen, if what you say is true they will be forced to move to mesh cache design on mainstream parts.


Well for one, the desktop chip would be still be low core count and targeted towards desktops. It wouldn't use a mesh optimized for high server count servers.

You have to realize that different designs are optimal for different usages. This isn't a hard concept.

Yes, assuming the 1170K has no meaningful IPC increase over 8700k and it's using the skylake server mesh, it will lose to the 8700k in gaming.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> *Well for one, the desktop chip would be still be low core count and targeted towards desktops. It wouldn't use a mesh optimized for high server count servers.*
> 
> You have to realize that different designs are optimal for different usages. This isn't a hard concept.
> 
> Yes, assuming the 1170K has no meaningful IPC increase over 8700k and it's using the skylake server mesh, it will lose to the 8700k in gaming.


Huh? You said above ring bus does not scale on high core count chips, all rumors point to next i7 being an octa core. Can ring bus scale up to 8 cores? Guess im not catching what you are implying with those two statements.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Huh? You said above ring bus does not scale on high core count chips, all rumors point to next i7 being an octa core. Can ring bus scale up to 8 cores? Guess im not catching what you are implying with those two statements.


Broadwell-E used a single ring with 10c.

High core count means 18, 28, 30+.


----------



## DStealth

100 times repeated lie ... becomes true








Mesh can be OC'd so does memory ...then after... Mesh CPU's are not that bad looking compared to ring ones.
Today i'll take 8700k and will make a comparison for you both max clocked [email protected]/5100 3200/3200 mesh and 4ghz c16 1t memory VS 8700k hopefully 5200+/4800+/4+cl16 1t memory.
Could run many benchmarks on my PC including Games/Synthetic benches as comparing ring with [email protected] with low memory is not optimal for Mesh cache CPU's in games while OC from 2.4 to 3.3 is ~40% also in memory performance Latency is greatly reduced and comes in upper 40's ns while optimized....


----------



## Scotty99

I dunno dstealth, ive seen 3 videos on overclocking mesh on skylake x and while there are gains ring bus seems to still win out.

Id like to believe there are optimizations to be had with mesh cache, but whenever i ask this people say there is nothing that can be done, ring is just physically faster.

Id like to add this is one of the reasons ive decided to jump ship on AMD, even if they catch up on clockspeeds (unlikely) they will still be at a cache disadvantage. If you clock a 7700k to 4ghz to match ryzen it still wins in a lot of titles (and by quite a lot) i can only assume that is down to cache structure given ryzen ipc isnt terrible.


----------



## DStealth

Will test it.
As for the moment in synthetic benches similar 1080ti's @2088/2100 running 1080p or 1440p are not getting better average or minimum from what my 7800x got with 100-200 Mhz higher even...looking 3dmark GPU and Valley results.
Will compare deeply this weekend hopefully


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Will test it.
> As for the moment in synthetic benches similar 1080ti's @2088/2100 running 1080p or 1440p are not getting better average or minimum from what my 7800x got with 100-200 Mhz higher even...looking 3dmark GPU and Valley results.
> Will compare deeply this weekend hopefully


Id personally be curious to your results, as microcenter actually has stock of 7800x's for less money than 8700k goes for lol.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Id personally be curious to your results, as microcenter actually has stock of 7800x's for less money than 8700k goes for lol.


microcenter prices 4 coffee lake atm.


----------



## aDyerSituation

I want to switch to coffee lake but at the same time I think the whole mesh vs ring thing is blown out or proportion.

Civ and Far Cry Primal are the only games that stand out in terms of difference.
I would love to see my 7820x @ 4700, 3.2 mesh, 3600mhz ram with 4 cores disabled against a 7700k @ 4.7 and 3600mhz ram.

So far just testing my chip ram speed matters A LOT. Like 60 fps in Overwatch a lot(1080p low settings)


----------



## Scotty99

Brian from tech yes city feels ring bus is just superior:






Its opinions like that i take into account more than benchmarks at times. I like that brian guy he knows what he is talking about.


----------



## aDyerSituation

I also do like Brian. One of the few tech channels I can trust so far.

If I can get a 5.3ghz binned chip I will switch for sure


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Id personally be curious to your results, as microcenter actually has stock of 7800x's for less money than 8700k goes for lol.


Motherboards are ~30-40% more x299 and also depends on the OC of 7800x some does 4.8 some 5+ so comparison is not that easy, also with today's memory prices quad channel is also additional overprice







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> If I can get a 5.3ghz binned chip I will switch for sure


I'm on the same boat...instead my 7800x is game stable up to 5100 with less than 1.3 volts...and benchable
~5200


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I also do like Brian. One of the few tech channels I can trust so far.
> 
> If I can get a 5.3ghz binned chip I will switch for sure


Ya what im curious about is per core overclocking, and how common 5.2 or 5.3 can be had on 1-2 cores. Almost no reviewer has done this, and its very relevant for people playing older titles, one of the reasons you buy intel in the first place lol.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya what im curious about is per core overclocking, and how common 5.2 or 5.3 can be had on 1-2 cores. Almost no reviewer has done this, and its very relevant for people playing older titles, one of the reasons you buy intel in the first place lol.


yeah for sure. Everyone is happy about the core wars but I'm still waiting on a chip that can hold 144 frames consistently in every game


----------



## Scotty99

Core wars is still a thing for someone who wants a future proof PC, coffee is cool in the notion i can still play my potato games while knowing its not going to be behind the competition in a few years like kaby will.


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> buy a 7900x then you get 4 cores more cores for same price. get a 1950x and you get 10 cores more for same price, get Ice lake with 2 cores more, even buying a non binned CPU will probably reach 95% OC while saving 600usd, the price of a flagship GPU which will increase performance much more than 200mhz


Those CPU's perform significantly worse than a binned 8700k at many tasks, they're not even close to being a straight upgrade; sometimes the performance gap is >25%. Icelake is a year and a half out and will also be available binned.

The type of person to spend $500 on 200-300mhz is also likely to just flip the CPU and buy a new one as soon as anything significantly better for their workloads is released

or even just buy a secondary encoding/rendering/etc system so that they can put a MT beast in there without ruining their ST performance.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Core wars is still a thing for someone who wants a future proof PC, coffee is cool in the notion i can still play my potato games while knowing its not going to be behind the competition in a few years like kaby will.


I'm in the business of upgrading often but I can understand that. Luckily for me this is my only hobby that is semi-expensive


----------



## Scotty99

Ive actually debated doing that LOL. It would just be weird swapping PC's to play a handful of old games. It would actually be cheaper for me to put together a 7350k system, those clock to the stars and would surpass a 8700k in old games (most of those clock to 5.2ghz, or so i hear).


----------



## DStealth

Just took them...


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Its is not IPC why Intel wins. Its a combinations of a lot of thing. I think the main reason is games are optimized for Intel architecture and ring bus. If it was just IPC than 1600 @ 4GHz would be very close to 8400 but it lose in many games. You would need to literally switch places in terms of clock speed as in 1600 doing 5GHz and 8700K doing 4GHz to match each other in games. I just hope new games get optimized for Ryzen and we do not have to deal with same CPU anymore.


Nobody is optimizing for ring bus. Games are written to work on fast CPU that don't have any exceptions on any cores. A large SW company can afford to make its normal SW optimized on some weird architectures, but games were made by rather small teams who didn't have even intention to make special version for each CPU. They assumed it would work even 10 years later without recompilation.

(In fact copyright law assumes SW would work even after copyright expiration, otherwise it couldn't be protected by copyright law.)


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> 
> 
> Just took them...


Took them from who?


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> 
> 
> Just took them...


Was any violence involved?


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Its is not IPC why Intel wins. Its a combinations of a lot of thing. I think the main reason is games are optimized for Intel architecture and ring bus. If it was just IPC than 1600 @ 4GHz would be very close to 8400 but it lose in many games. You would need to literally switch places in terms of clock speed as in 1600 doing 5GHz and 8700K doing 4GHz to match each other in games. I just hope new games get optimized for Ryzen and we do not have to deal with same CPU anymore.


Only Civ VI and maybe AotS now where is the FPS that favors ryzen?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> It's not a matter of anyone optimizing for a ring bus, because latency sensitivity is the default state for code. Developers have to make the effort to design their game to deal with high memory latency to optimize for Ryzen.
> 
> 
> 
> And to what effect? For all they know Zen 2 will fix the memory latency issue.


So there is no such latency in AotS and CivVi? No the latency is still there the game optimization is different its similar why Broadwell-E outperforms Skylake-X
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> Nobody is optimizing for ring bus. Games are written to work on fast CPU that don't have any exceptions on any cores. A large SW company can afford to make its normal SW optimized on some weird architectures, but games were made by rather small teams who didn't have even intention to make special version for each CPU. They assumed it would work even 10 years later without recompilation.
> 
> (In fact copyright law assumes SW would work even after copyright expiration, otherwise it couldn't be protected by copyright law.)


no?


----------



## xzamples

I'd rather invest in the AM4 platform


----------



## czin125

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/R2gPxr/asus-rog-maximus-x-apex-eatx-lga1151-motherboard-maximus-x-apex
It's 349.99 USD for the Z370 Apex.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> https://pcpartpicker.com/product/R2gPxr/asus-rog-maximus-x-apex-eatx-lga1151-motherboard-maximus-x-apex
> It's 349.99 USD for the Z370 Apex.


only 2 ram slot what year they think that we are ?


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> only 2 ram slot what year they think that we are ?


It's a Z370 board which a dual-channel platform to begin with, so I don't see much of a problem. Either way, the DIMM.2 slot does make for an interesting trade-off.


----------



## bigjdubb

Anyone pushing cpu and ram clock speeds as much as possible is only going to be using 2 sticks anyways.


----------



## PontiacGTX

well one of the best z170 mobo for RAM overclocking had 4 ram slot


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> https://pcpartpicker.com/product/R2gPxr/asus-rog-maximus-x-apex-eatx-lga1151-motherboard-maximus-x-apex
> It's 349.99 USD for the Z370 Apex.


Are Apex boards generally more expensive than Formula boards?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> Anyone pushing cpu and ram clock speeds as much as possible is only going to be using 2 sticks anyways.


What advantage do you get with 4 sticks aside from capacity?


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Are Apex boards generally more expensive than Formula boards?


They are a bit less expensive. Formula is expected at 400$


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> What advantage do you get with 4 sticks aside from capacity?


Nothing, and it pretty much always over clocks worse.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xzamples*
> 
> I'd rather invest in the AM4 platform


Depreciating assets are not investments if they don't make you money...


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Depreciating assets are not investments if they don't make you money...


Its not even that because all you have is a $120 in 2-3 years.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Its not even that because all you have is a $120 in 2-3 years.


What do you think a depreciating asset is?


----------



## DStealth

Distributor...actually took
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Was any violence involved?


Nope








This small thing is fast as hell, just from the box first boot...going to sleep anyway weekend gonna push some limits...also this w/o delid in sub 60's CB15 temps


----------



## kd5151

No humans or animals where harmed in the making of this 5.1ghz overclock.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Nice scores







Only 300ish lower than my 7820x @ 4.7


----------



## sblantipodi

this are for people considering on upgrading to Coffee Lake for gaming


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> this are for people considering on upgrading to Coffee Lake for gaming


Gpu limited scenarios.


----------



## kd5151

"RGB" ? RGB EVERYWHERE!!!

https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8377/gigabyte-z370-aorus-gaming-7-motherboard-review/index.html


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Gpu limited scenarios.


that equals to real life scenarios.
do you really buy a GPU to be CPU limited?
come one.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> that equals to real life scenarios.
> do you really buy a GPU to be CPU limited?
> come one.


Yes I do. Low settings = more fps = more visual clarity

most people I know play on low settings on popular games, Overwatch, PUBG, FortNite, etc.


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Yes I do. Low settings = more fps = more visual clarity
> 
> most people I know play on low settings on popular games, Overwatch, PUBG, FortNite, etc.


you can play at 120FPS and beeing GPU limited with the correct monitor/settings.
in any other case you are wasting your hardware


----------



## evensen007

8700k's available at newegg. GO GO GO!!!!


----------



## ZealotKi11er

If anyone needs some RAM try : https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232476D&ignorebbr=1
Promo Code : NEGM30


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> you can play at 120FPS and beeing GPU limited with the correct monitor/settings.
> in any other case you are wasting your hardware


Again, I don't play single player games on low settings. but in most of my games my CPU dictates my FPS and I'm not the only one who chooses their hardware like this.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> "RGB" ? RGB EVERYWHERE!!!
> 
> https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8377/gigabyte-z370-aorus-gaming-7-motherboard-review/index.html


now CPU can achieve 5GHz+ but the test will stabilize the overclock to 4.9GHz on every motherboard due to LLC.why would you hide these things?


----------



## evensen007

Oct 19 - 1:20 PM EST
Core i7-8700K BX80684I78700K IN STOCK for $389.99. Click the following link:
http://www.nowinstock.net/get29269/


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> If anyone needs some RAM try : https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232476D&ignorebbr=1
> Promo Code : NEGM30


is it 30% off? or 30usd off?

here there is another option https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01GCWQBQQ/ - https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232286


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Again, I don't play single player games on low settings. but in most of my games my CPU dictates my FPS and I'm not the only one who chooses their hardware like this.


this means that you are not able to set a computer games, I suggest you a good console


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> this means that you are not able to set a computer games, I suggest you a good console


Yeah because consoles can do 144fps/hz and have thriving competitive scenes

Do you even think before you post?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> is it 30% off? or 30usd off?
> 
> here there is another option https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01GCWQBQQ/ - https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232286


I think 30%.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I think 30%.


comes to $137. Good deal!!!!! Order order ORDER!!!!!!!


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> comes to $137. Good deal!!!!! Order order ORDER!!!!!!!


Those timings though.


----------



## evensen007

8700k's still available at the egg after 20 minutes. Maybe coming to the end of the supply problem?

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117827&cm_re=8700k-_-19-117-827-_-Product


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Those timings though.


RGB = -CL10.

Still its better not to overspend right now on RAM. 8700K does not need crazy good RAM to begin with. RAM will matter like 5 years in its like the 3770K with DDR3-2400 now where the CPU is at the limit.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> 8700k's still available at the egg after 20 minutes. Maybe coming to the end of the supply problem?
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117827&cm_re=8700k-_-19-117-827-_-Product


$400 though.


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> RGB = -CL10.


LOL! Is that like 'VTEC just kicked in YO!'? Giant spoiler adds +20HP hahahahha


----------



## mdd1986

yea I'm deff waiting out on the 8700K. $400 seems a bit to steep at the moment. Also is that memory a good deal considering the timings? Don't know much about what the best ram timing is for an 8700K.


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> It's not a matter of anyone optimizing for a ring bus, because latency sensitivity is the default state for code. Developers have to make the effort to design their game to deal with high memory latency to optimize for Ryzen.
> 
> 
> 
> And to what effect? For all they know Zen 2 will fix the memory latency issue.


The latencies listed in that graph are a result of the infinity fabric being the bottleneck. Unfortunately its speed is based on memory frequency. At higher memory clocks the bottleneck doesn't exist anymore. My own 1800X latency numbers are somewhere around 65 us at 3333-C14.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> yea I'm deff waiting out on the 8700K. $400 seems a bit to steep at the moment. Also is that memory a good deal considering the timings? Don't know much about what the best ram timing is for an 8700K.


Holiday season is right around the corner.







.

Also with RAM prices on the rise,right now could be the best time to buy ram. If you don't buy now who knows what you could be paying tomorrow. Ram with those timing with out the RGB has hovered around the $120-140 mark. It's not that bad. About $50 more on average. I would not pay $195 for that ! but $137? maybe. It's got RGB!

edit: price history on this one https://pcpartpicker.com/product/ybrcCJ/gskill-tridentz-rgb-16gb-2-x-8gb-ddr4-3200-memory-f4-3200c16d-16gtzr?history_days=365

edit once more. 8700K out of stock on newegg.


----------



## mdd1986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Holiday season is right around the corner.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> Also with RAM prices on the rise,right now could be the best time to buy ram. If you don't buy now who knows what you could be paying tomorrow. Ram with those timing with out the RGB has hovered around the $120-140 mark. It's not that bad. About $50 more on average. I would not pay $195 for that ! but $137? maybe. It's got RGB!
> 
> edit: price history on this one https://pcpartpicker.com/product/ybrcCJ/gskill-tridentz-rgb-16gb-2-x-8gb-ddr4-3200-memory-f4-3200c16d-16gtzr?history_days=365
> 
> edit once more. 8700K out of stock on newegg.


so is that a good deal for memory? Are the timings decent? i think at that price it could be a good deal just wasn't sure about the timings.


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> so is that a good deal for memory? Are the timings decent? i think at that price it could be a good deal just wasn't sure about the timings.


Timings will have minimal impact unless you're HEAVILY into benching the highest numbers you can get in synthetics. Also, those timings aren't THAT bad for it being 3333/3400 ram. As your RAM speed goes up, so do the timings. I wouldn't hesitate to buy them.


----------



## mdd1986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Timings will have minimal impact unless you're HEAVILY into benching the highest numbers you can get in synthetics. Also, those timings aren't THAT bad for it being 3333/3400 ram. As your RAM speed goes up, so do the timings. I wouldn't hesitate to buy them.


Thanks yea, other than browsing the web and playing MTGO, Its strictly a gaming PC.


----------



## evensen007

Well, I have to qualify it for the "in before the 1080p 20000000hz refresh guys chime in". lol You might see a SLIGHT reduction in FPS at 120-200FPS range at 1080p, but I'd say "prove it". The higher RAM speed should make it a wash.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> so is that a good deal for memory? Are the timings decent? i think at that price it could be a good deal just wasn't sure about the timings.


I think it's a good deal ATM. Memory prices right now have doubled. It's peaked at the moment. Before the memory craziness that memory without rgb would be like $70-80. This memory has RGB which is going to drive up the price a little. I would pay no more than $120-130 for DDR4 at 3200mhz. And I have seen some 3000mhz kits sale for around $100 for 16gb. Timing are also going to drive up price. That samsung b-die cl14 stuff was a little high before the ram prices sky rocketed.


----------



## mdd1986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> I think it's a good deal ATM. Memory prices right now have doubled. It's peaked at the moment. Before the memory craziness that memory without rgb would be like $70-80. This memory has RGB which is going to drive up the price a little. I would pay no more than $120-130 for DDR4 at 3200mhz. And I have seen some 3000mhz kits sale for around $100 for 16gb. Timing are also going to drive up price. That samsung b-die cl14 stuff was a little high before the ram prices sky rocketed.


Yea i was it seems I would have to pay about $50 more for the samsung Cl14 memory. Not sure if thats worth it or not. RGB doesn't matter too much to me. Nice to have but I wouldn't pay that much extra for it.


----------



## TMatzelle60

This is soooo horrible waiting for these CPU with not gaming pc


----------



## mdd1986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Well, I have to qualify it for the "in before the 1080p 20000000hz refresh guys chime in". lol You might see a SLIGHT reduction in FPS at 120-200FPS range at 1080p, but I'd say "prove it". The higher RAM speed should make it a wash.


I game at 1440 at 60hz. Haven't found any decent 120 HZ monitors that are reasonably affordable that I liked. I'm not a competitive gamer that needs super high HZ and refresh rates. I also don't want picture quality to suffer for more FPS ether.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Holiday season is right around the corner.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> Also with RAM prices on the rise,right now could be the best time to buy ram. If you don't buy now who knows what you could be paying tomorrow. Ram with those timing with out the RGB has hovered around the $120-140 mark. It's not that bad. About $50 more on average. I would not pay $195 for that ! but $137? maybe. It's got RGB!
> 
> edit: price history on this one https://pcpartpicker.com/product/ybrcCJ/gskill-tridentz-rgb-16gb-2-x-8gb-ddr4-3200-memory-f4-3200c16d-16gtzr?history_days=365
> 
> edit once more. 8700K out of stock on newegg.


If you want to tighten up the timings around the same price point, you'd be looking at this...

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/32nG3C/gskill-tridentz-rgb-16gb-2-x-8gb-ddr4-3000-memory-f4-3000c14d-16gtzr

$3 more, it's 3000MHz compared to 3200MHz, and 14-14-14-34 timings compared to 16-18-18-38, Namely... the biggest importance with timings is in regard to Ram overclocks. Anything above the JEDEC standard is considering an overclock in the first place. Timings become important for overclocking as they generally the tighter the timings are it can be indicative of a more stable set of DIMMs, so it's usually going to be easier to push for an additional overclock past the rated speed in the SPD chip on the DIMM.

Real world performance... you're looking at maybe 1-3 fps difference, which until you get into 1440 and 4K at Ultra settings, will be barely perceptible to the human eye at best. The difference between 3000 and 3200 is barely noticeable even on synthetic benches.


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> I game at 1440 at 60hz. Haven't found any decent 120 HZ monitors that are reasonably affordable that I liked. I'm not a competitive gamer that needs super high HZ and refresh rates. I also don't want picture quality to suffer for more FPS ether.


Hey, preaching to the choir! Different strokes for different folks. I'll take my 34" LG 3440x1440 @ 60hz any day of the week over a high refresh monitor. Picture quality/graphics/resolution are king for me! As an added bonus, I got my LG to overclock to 80hz stable, so there's that too!


----------



## mdd1986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Hey, preaching to the choir! Different strokes for different folks. I'll take my 34" LG 3440x1440 @ 60hz any day of the week over a high refresh monitor. Picture quality/graphics/resolution are king for me! As an added bonus, I got my LG to overclock to 80hz stable, so there's that too!


totally agree. I love my 27" 4k IPS LG. Looks 100 times better than monitors that cost double the price. I haven't tried to overclock it but some said it doesn't really work. Guess i could try.


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> If you want to tighten up the timings around the same price point, you'd be looking at this...
> 
> https://pcpartpicker.com/product/32nG3C/gskill-tridentz-rgb-16gb-2-x-8gb-ddr4-3000-memory-f4-3000c14d-16gtzr
> 
> $3 more, it's 3000MHz compared to 3200MHz, and 14-14-14-34 timings compared to 16-18-18-38, Namely... the biggest importance with timings is in regard to Ram overclocks. Anything above the JEDEC standard is considering an overclock in the first place. Timings become important for overclocking as they generally the tighter the timings are it can be indicative of a more stable set of DIMMs, so it's usually going to be easier to push for an additional overclock past the rated speed in the SPD chip on the DIMM.
> 
> Real world performance... you're looking at maybe 1-3 fps difference, which until you get into 1440 and 4K at Ultra settings, will be barely perceptible to the human eye at best. The difference between 3000 and 3200 is barely noticeable even on synthetic benches.


Nice explanation.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> totally agree. I love my 27" 4k IPS LG. Looks 100 times better than monitors that cost double the price. I haven't tried to overclock it but some said it doesn't really work. Guess i could try.


Nice monitor! Don't know about o/c a 4k monitor, but it definitely works on a 1440k UW. I can tell a slight difference, plus it gives my 1080ti a better workout. Afterburner and FRAPS confirming the 80hz/FPS functioning.


----------



## Scotty99

Check this out:





Actually would cost you more to build yourself. If anyone is looking for a new coffee build, this aint bad at all.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> They are a bit less expensive. Formula is expected at 400$


And Code should be less than Apex, correct?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asmodian*
> 
> Nothing, and it pretty much always over clocks worse.


Yeah, I thought so.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Code should be between Apex and Formula if they stick to the same logic as the z270.


----------



## Scotty99

I wish asus released the maximus hero without wifi so i can save some money, who uses wifi on a desktop pc?


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I wish asus released the maximus hero without wifi so i can save some money, who uses wifi on a desktop pc?


I swore i saw one on newegg @ launch i cant find it

https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO/

Its on there site might have to hunt it down


----------



## Scotty99

I know it exists but i havent found it yet on retail sites. I assume it should be ~20 bucks cheaper.


----------



## TMatzelle60

is the Asus Max X Hero a reliable well made board. i always here crap about asus


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> is the Asus Max X Hero a reliable well made board. i always here crap about asus


Their RMA is not the best. I personally do not like ASUS MB. Had money problem with ASUS MB than any other brand. Keep in min in 2017 they had to release Z270 and all the low end derivatives, X370, B350, X299, X399, Z370. All these MB need support for BIOS.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> is the Asus Max X Hero a reliable well made board. i always here crap about asus


Too early to say but ASUS has served me well in recent years. They have the best X370, I had no issues with the Maximus VIII Hero Z170 and neither have two friends of mine who used that board. I would put the most faith in ASUS, ASRock, and perhaps MSI right now (I say perhaps since I have no experience with MSI personally). Stay the hell away from Gigabyte if you want an enjoyable life!


----------



## evensen007

Back on stock again at newegg.


----------



## NeoandGeo

Back out of stock.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> Too early to say but ASUS has served me well in recent years. They have the best X370, I had no issues with the Maximus VIII Hero Z170 and neither have two friends of mine who used that board. I would put the most faith in ASUS, ASRock, and perhaps MSI right now (I say perhaps since I have no experience with MSI personally). Stay the hell away from Gigabyte if you want an enjoyable life!


Could not agree more


----------



## Scotty99

Id already own an asrock board but they messed up and didnt include a digital rgb header on any of them, as time goes on this is going to be an important feature for people into RGB.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Id already own an asrock board but they messed up and didnt include a digital rgb header on any of them, as time goes on this is going to be an important feature for people into RGB.


RGB is fin to make videos in Youtube. You really do not want RGB.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> RGB is fin to make videos in Youtube. You really do not want RGB.


Oh, but i do lol.

Addressable rgb headers are going to be required for the cool lighting coming out in 2018 and beyond, its baffling asrock is this far behind in that area.


----------



## kd5151

Make all your RGB orange,green,purple,black,grey?

Trick or treat.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> is the Asus Max X Hero a reliable well made board. i always here crap about asus
> 
> 
> 
> Too early to say but ASUS has served me well in recent years. They have the best X370, I had no issues with the Maximus VIII Hero Z170 and neither have two friends of mine who used that board. I would put the most faith in ASUS, ASRock, and perhaps MSI right now (I say perhaps since I have no experience with MSI personally). Stay the hell away from Gigabyte if you want an enjoyable life!
Click to expand...

My Gigabyte Z170 HD3 overclocks the i5 7600k to 4.8GHz on air with ease.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> My Gigabyte Z170 HD3 overclocks the i5 7600k to 4.8GHz on air with ease.


Considering MCE kicks things up to 4.7...


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> is the Asus Max X Hero a reliable well made board. i always here crap about asus


I've never had an issue with my Max VI Hero. Z87 is dated for sure, but the chipset, board, and BIOS have all aged very well in my experience. Manufacturers have had a ton of chipsets to launch for in the past year though, so BIOS updates have been slow depending on how much the manufacturer wants to support a particular chipset. My gut would say that Z370 will probably be well supported though, more so than some others (B350, X370 comes to mind, lol).


----------



## DStealth

Still testing...w/o delid in the low 70's in CB15









It's annoying there's no windows tool from Asrock for the moment and all adjustments needs to be made in BIOS and booting windows...


----------



## Scotty99

232 single core, ya i need that in my life lol. 3.9ghz ryzen=158

1.425v, isnt that kinda outside the realm of safe?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> My Gigabyte Z170 HD3 overclocks the i5 7600k to 4.8GHz on air with ease.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Considering MCE kicks things up to 4.7...
Click to expand...

When I get the i5 8600k it should do 5.0GHz with the Gigabyte Z370 HD3 with ease.


----------



## DStealth

Strange Geekbench result in multicore seems l2 and mesh are helping x299 a lot...
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/4296636?baseline=4537375
Scotty with HT off and a couple more Mhz 240+ are doable w/o issues


----------



## Scotty99

How many volts do you need for 5.0ghz? Ive been reading that asrock boards need more volts than other brands, for some reason.


----------



## DStealth

http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Fatal1ty%20Z370%20Gaming%20K6/index.asp#BIOS
1.00 10/3/2017 12.94MB Windows® How to Update *First released.*
1.10 10/16/2017 12.36MB Instant Flash How to Update *Fix the Vcore drop issue with load-line calibration setting.*
[Beta] 1.11 10/19/2017 12.35MB Instant Flash How to Update *Improve CPU Vcore voltage and cache ratio setting.
*
Maybe a rumor from the first BIOS release


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Fatal1ty%20Z370%20Gaming%20K6/index.asp#BIOS
> 1.00 10/3/2017 12.94MB Windows® How to Update *First released.*
> 1.10 10/16/2017 12.36MB Instant Flash How to Update *Fix the Vcore drop issue with load-line calibration setting.*
> [Beta] 1.11 10/19/2017 12.35MB Instant Flash How to Update *Improve CPU Vcore voltage and cache ratio setting.
> *
> Maybe a rumor from the first BIOS release


Found the source:
https://www.vortez.net/articles_pages/asrock_z370_extreme4_review,5.html

Quote:


> Extreme4 was able to reach the 5GHz milestone with the 8700K but to reach such an achievement we had to increase the CPU core voltage beyond 1.4v to 1.42v.


Hopefully that just has to do with bios revision, other boards with same 8700k he was able to hit 5.0ghz with 1.35-1.37v.


----------



## DStealth

Hell yeaa


DStealth --- I7 7800K / 5.2Ghz ---- 1080TI 2088/12500 ----170.4 FPS ---- Score 7129


[email protected] look at these maximum FPS...beauty


----------



## DStealth

Ok ...the first game benchmark confirms 8700k even +200mhz is not faster than mesh 7800x
[email protected] [email protected]/12400

[email protected] [email protected]/12400


----------



## Scotty99

Should try a cpu bound title, i think pubg is even at 1440p. You could also create a free WoW account, make a character on a busy server and go test your FPS in stormwind (stormrage server is very busy). Thats about the only way you are going to differentiate CPU's at qhd.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Ok ...the first game benchmark confirms 8700k even +200mhz is not faster than mesh 7800x
> [email protected] [email protected]/12400
> 
> [email protected] [email protected]/12400


GPU isn't fast enough.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 232 single core, ya i need that in my life lol. 3.9ghz ryzen=158
> 
> 1.425v, isnt that kinda outside the realm of safe?


1.52v is the package maximum. mileage may vary depending on the strength of the chip, what power delivery the motherboard has, and the effectiveness of cooling. But being at 5.2 @ 1.425v, in the low 70s on Air... that's pretty good.


----------



## Scotty99

Well that was just a cinebench run lol, if he loaded up prime or even the cpu-z built in stess test i bet it thermal throttles. I just rarely see people using over 1.4v on intel, thats kind of the number i plan on staying behind.


----------



## DStealth

Not air... Aio 360 rad... And not low 70s but high and yea CB only. It's colder, actually much colder than SL-x...


----------



## Scotty99

Yeaaa, i may as well just buy from silicon lottery. I really wanted to avoid a delid, but that looks to be a pipe dream lol.


----------



## Scotty99

If anyone simply cannot wait for coffee stock, newegg has this deal that is the best ive ever seen:
https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3615536


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> If anyone simply cannot wait for coffee stock, newegg has this deal that is the best ive ever seen:
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3615536


dang that's actually a hella good deal. That motherboard should be enough for that 6 core and a decent overclock I would think


----------



## Scotty99

The deal is basically, pay full price for this board and get a 7800x for 240 dollars. This beats microcenter pricing by a mile lol.

If i already had quad channel ram, id buy this.


----------



## DStealth

You can use it with dual channel...


----------



## Scotty99

True it would just look weird lol.

It really is a great deal, might have to think on it a bit.


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> When I get the i5 8600k it should do 5.0GHz with the Gigabyte Z370 HD3 with ease.


Without delid and with a 212 Evo? Hmm I wouldn't expect easy


----------



## DStealth

From my experience with Coffee Lake 8700k ....8600k should be easy on air with 5ghz if not more than 1.3v are needed...these CPU's a not that hot, just at some point they begin to overheat as the surface is way to small for the heat dissipation...


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Still testing...w/o delid in the low 70's in CB15
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's annoying there's no windows tool from Asrock for the moment and all adjustments needs to be made in BIOS and booting windows...


gratz ! Seems you hit the jackpot if you got that as a non-binned cpu. Happy for you and thx for posting your singlethread cb benchmark ! I know what to expect now


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> From my experience with Coffee Lake 8700k ....8600k should be easy on air with 5ghz if not more than 1.3v are needed...these CPU's a not that hot, just at some point they begin to overheat as the surface is way to small for the heat dissipation...


Depends on the CPU. Many reviewers didn't hit 5 GHz stabile using 240-280mm AIO's. This is engineering samples, probably not the worst CPU's outthere.

Expecting 5 GHz easily on a low end Gigabyte board, no delid, using cheap 212 Evo is optimistic. Not "easy". With some luck and decent CPU, probably..

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-core-i5-8600k-cpu,5264-11.html
"Our overclocking efforts started at an easy 5 GHz. Pushing up to 5.2 GHz, Windows would boot and most games still ran. However, Cinebench crashed on us. Then LuxRender started having stability issues at 5.1 GHz. In the end, Creo 3.0, SolidWorks, and some of the HPC applications also cratered at 5 GHz. So, we dropped to a completely stable 4.9 GHz."


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Still testing...w/o delid in the low 70's in CB15
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's annoying there's no windows tool from Asrock for the moment and all adjustments needs to be made in BIOS and booting windows...


Okay, there's definitely something wrong with my cooling. I'll have to thoroughly clean and repaste next week.


----------



## Scotty99

Nah he misspoke, and his sig isnt right. He was high 70's after one run of cinebench with a 360 AIO, that translates to thermal throttling 95c+ if he opened up an actual stress test.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-core-i5-8600k-cpu,5264-11.html
> "Our overclocking efforts started at an easy 5 GHz. Pushing up to 5.2 GHz, Windows would boot and most games still ran. However, Cinebench crashed on us. Then LuxRender started having stability issues at 5.1 GHz. In the end, Creo 3.0, SolidWorks, and some of the HPC applications also cratered at 5 GHz. So, we dropped to a completely stable 4.9 GHz."


Sounds like bad overclocking CPU not thermal related. A Good CPU can be Air cooled @5ghz if not much voltage is needed w/o delid. About bad air cooled and cheapo board...dunno


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Ok ...the first game benchmark confirms 8700k even +200mhz is not faster than mesh 7800x
> [email protected] [email protected]/12400
> 
> [email protected] [email protected]/12400


Looks GPU bound, margin of error, try low preset at 1080p/1440p and more than one game


----------



## DStealth

Already posted Valley extreme 1080p average is higher so does the Max FPS not by far but faster...








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> gratz ! Seems you hit the jackpot if you got that as a non-binned cpu. Happy for you and thx for posting your singlethread cb benchmark ! I know what to expect now


Today evening will test the second 8700k hope will be better....still not discovered the capabilities of the fist one...but will test deeply after work


----------



## Scotty99

I know i sound like a broken record, but if you want to see a real CPU bound scenario you have to test MMO's. WoW scales nearly perfectly with clock speed, you just need to know what areas of the game to test in (places where there are no variables, but is still CPU bound). An AMD fx chip can barely play WoW, its a stuttery mess. This is in stark contrast to how well fx has aged in titles that are making use of multi cores cpu's, some games fx has even leap frogged sandy bridge.

Once i finally get my stuff ill post results at 1440p, it will show a clear CPU bottleneck even at that res. (even 8k res would show a cpu bottleneck in most of the areas of the game)


----------



## Lass3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Already posted Valley extreme 1080p average is higher so does the Max FPS not by far but faster...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Today evening will test the second 8700k hope will be better....still not discovered the capabilities of the fist one...but will test deeply after work


Yeah I saw but CPU pretty much idles in valley and heaven, CPU is not the limiting factor, especially not with AAx8 and extreme preset

You would probably get same result with a i5-8400


----------



## TMatzelle60

im thinking of rocking the Gigabyte Gaming 7


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Already posted Valley extreme 1080p average is higher so does the Max FPS not by far but faster...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Today evening will test the second 8700k hope will be better....still not discovered the capabilities of the fist one...but will test deeply after work


to be honest all these modern gpu bound games that only give a few fps more (or none) with a cpu like this is not what I bought this cpu for. I personally happen to like and play games that appear to be completely utterly limited and bottlenecked by singlethread performance, regardless of the resolution (even at 4K or 8K). That's where this sort of cpu shines above the clouds. I whish benchmark lists would include tests of that category:

*World of Warcraft:* any people-dense area (e.g Major towns)
*Elder Scrolls Online:* any people-dense area (e.g Major towns)
*Starcraft II*. Watching replays at 8x speed the fps drops as low as 15-25fps on a 6950x @4.2Ghz. People with older weak cpu's simply cannot even use practically this functionality because it becomes spf instead of fps...also during normal games the fps easily drops down below 60fps. Also without a proper OC'd modern cpu the game cannot even load it's main interface without stuttering








....


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I know i sound like a broken record, but if you want to see a real CPU bound scenario you have to test MMO's. WoW scales nearly perfectly with clock speed, you just need to know what areas of the game to test in (places where there are no variables, but is still CPU bound). An AMD fx chip can barely play WoW, its a stuttery mess. This is in stark contrast to how well fx has aged in titles that are making use of multi cores cpu's, some games fx has even leap frogged sandy bridge.
> 
> Once i finally get my stuff ill post results at 1440p, it will show a clear CPU bottleneck even at that res. (even 8k res would show a cpu bottleneck in most of the areas of the game)


I'm in the same boat with ESO but you can already derive from the results that DStealth posted what gains you can expect right ? I'm looking at a net +20% fps increase or more. That's massive. Just buy a binned cpu Scotty. You know every 100Mhz counts in your particular case and is therefore worth it. If you have my (bad) luck and get a cpu that tops out on 4.8Ghz without a delid you'll probably eat your shoe and feel sad forever, not to mention a heavy stomach =P


----------



## Scotty99

Well i play all sorts of games, i wasnt going to let a 12 year old game dictate my CPU choice when AMD had a much better overall product for the money. 8700k changes that story tho lol.

And ya i should see 20-25% in WoW, i doubt ill buy a binned chip as silicon lottery places a pretty hefty premium on those. What i would do tho is buy a delidded chip from them without the binning process, unless they change their prices when stock comes in they are still listed at 359.00


----------



## BackwoodsNC

I am not believing those temps. With custom loop at 5ghz 1.344v last night "rough" i was getting 70ish temps. Will test more this weekend..


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lass3*
> 
> You would probably get same result with a i5-8400


No way...especially with highly OCed 1080ti....it's hardly CPU bottlenecked in Valley ExtremeHD preset...each Mhz is rising the score even after 5Ghz and highest IPC CPU's for the moment...


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BackwoodsNC*
> 
> I am not believing those temps. With custom loop at 5ghz 1.344v last night "rough" i was getting 70ish temps. Will test more this weekend..


with intel's the pigeon poop approach it's really hit or miss. I can attest to that with my 3770k. I had a friend who bought the same cpu and his temps were 15+ degrees average better than mine which was crazy. he can even overclock with the crappy stock cooler and still had better temps than me. with all the intel cpus I've had post sandy bridge I had to delid all of them. temps were so bad whatever cooling you put on it doesn't matter


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BackwoodsNC*
> 
> I am not believing those temps. With custom loop at 5ghz 1.344v last night "rough" i was getting 70ish temps. Will test more this weekend..


Do you mean, you have high temperatures, or low temperatures?


----------



## BackwoodsNC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> with intel's the pigeon poop approach it's really hit or miss. I can attest to that with my 3770k. I had a friend who bought the same cpu and his temps were 15+ degrees average better than mine which was crazy. he can even overclock with the crappy stock cooler and still had better temps than me. with all the intel cpus I've had post sandy bridge I had to delid all of them. temps were so bad whatever cooling you put on it doesn't matter


temps are inline with what i got out of my 7700k before i delidded that. Just find it strange that someone can push a full mv more into a chip on a AIO and get temps at 80c. Maybe i'm failing at comprehending this.


----------



## QuadDamage

Amazon wait day 15 still nothing trying to find if newegg will go back in stock


----------



## evensen007

Back on stock again at newegg.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> Amazon wait day 15 still nothing trying to find if newegg will go back in stock


Just set up an alert from nowinstock.net. I've been getting alerts for 8700k's at Newegg on and off for the last 24 hours although I have resisted.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Back on stock again at newegg.


wait what?


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> wait what?


Yes, they've been in and out of stock 3 times since early yesterday afternoon and I posted immediately. Set up nowinstock.net for amazon and newegg and you'll know before anyone else that you have about a 5 minute window to BUY BUY BUY!


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> Yes, they've been in and out of stock 3 times since early yesterday afternoon and I posted immediately. Set up nowinstock.net for amazon and newegg and you'll know before anyone else that you have about a 5 minute window to BUY BUY BUY!


more like a 5 second window.


----------



## DStealth

Gonna trow this 8700k out and leave 7800x...
While loosing in Geekbench hardly and Wildlands now with +130mhz losing in even more limited CPU Monster bench









Seems like a descend gaming CPU arghh ...
Did I mentioned the memory controller hardly pushing 3800 c15 1T with only 2 dimms and no boot with 4ghz...where 7800x has up to 4200Mhz c15 1T with 4 modules


----------



## BackwoodsNC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Gonna trow this 8700k out and leave 7800x...
> While loosing in Geekbench hardly and Wildlands now with +130mhz losing in even more limited CPU Monster bench
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems like a descend gaming CPU arghh ...
> Did I mentioned the memory controller hardly pushing 3800 c15 1T with only 2 dimms and no boot with 4ghz...where 7800x has up to 4200Mhz c15 1T with 4 modules


could the quad memory be the diff? score wise.

My xmp based 4000mhz cant do 4000mhz either. could on 7700k cpu


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BackwoodsNC*
> 
> could the quad memory be the diff?


Could...but i suspect 4times more L2 cache and mesh in multi Geekbench scaling is huge on 7800x...in some test like Face detection it's twice faster than +160Mhz higher overclocked 8700k...Here're my results:
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/4296636?baseline=4537375

Some other benches ahead of 7800x




Also discovered with LLC 1 Asrock is pushing way lower voltage than the set one in BIOS here...


----------



## grss1982

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> Too early to say but ASUS has served me well in recent years. They have the best X370, I had no issues with the Maximus VIII Hero Z170 and neither have two friends of mine who used that board. I would put the most faith in ASUS, ASRock, and perhaps MSI right now (I say perhaps since I have no experience with MSI personally). *Stay the hell away from Gigabyte if you want an enjoyable life!*


I thought they were the go to brand at one point with the Ultra Durable series? Have they really dropped in quality from those days?


----------



## DStealth

Another 3D where 8700k struggles FPS wise to 7800x with almost 200Mhz advantage...But this Combined score looks out of order beating even 4.5Ghz 6950x with comparable Video








https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/13732460/fs/13910395#


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Another 3D where 8700k struggles FPS wise to 7800x with almost 200Mhz advantage...But this Combined score looks out of order beating even 4.5Ghz 6950x with comparable Video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/13732460/fs/13910395#


just synthethic


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Another 3D where 8700k struggles FPS wise to 7800x with almost 200Mhz advantage...But this Combined score looks out of order beating even 4.5Ghz 6950x with comparable Video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/13732460/fs/13910395#


The combined test is the true test for CPUs. Ryzen and Skylake-X do not do as well here.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *grss1982*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> Too early to say but ASUS has served me well in recent years. They have the best X370, I had no issues with the Maximus VIII Hero Z170 and neither have two friends of mine who used that board. I would put the most faith in ASUS, ASRock, and perhaps MSI right now (I say perhaps since I have no experience with MSI personally). *Stay the hell away from Gigabyte if you want an enjoyable life!*
> 
> 
> 
> I thought they were the go to brand at one point with the Ultra Durable series? Have they really dropped in quality from those days?
Click to expand...

No my Gigabyte Z170 Works great and easy to use.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *grss1982*
> 
> I thought they were the go to brand at one point with the Ultra Durable series? Have they really dropped in quality from those days?


The G1 and Aorus series boards seem pretty decent, but the UD series has had more woes than successes on both sides of the CPU DMZ. AMD chipset UD series have a history of larger than average problems with V drop and some issues with poor Mosfet and VRM cooling solutions, on the FX-UD3s especially. For Intel UD3s, not much physical issues with the boards, some models had V drop issues, mostly I have head of issues related to little nagging problems with BIOS. I'll admit I'm less familiar with the Intel UD series, but given the headaches I've seen in the AMD line of UD boards over the years, and the headache I know Gigabyte support and BIOS flashing can be. I learn towards agreeing that I too would go with ASRock and ASUS first, and I think MSI should be alright mid range and up. I've never experienced issues with MSI boards, but I haven't personally used one in about 5 years, so I couldn't say about recent years either. I've not heard complaints from my friends using them though.


----------



## BackwoodsNC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> The G1 and Aorus series boards seem pretty decent, but the UD series has had more woes than successes on both sides of the CPU DMZ. AMD chipset UD series have a history of larger than average problems with V drop and some issues with poor Mosfet and VRM cooling solutions, on the FX-UD3s especially. For Intel UD3s, not much physical issues with the boards, some models had V drop issues, mostly I have head of issues related to little nagging problems with BIOS. I'll admit I'm less familiar with the Intel UD series, but given the headaches I've seen in the AMD line of UD boards over the years, and the headache I know Gigabyte support and BIOS flashing can be. I learn towards agreeing that I too would go with ASRock and ASUS first, and I think MSI should be alright mid range and up. I've never experienced issues with MSI boards, but I haven't personally used one in about 5 years, so I couldn't say about recent years either. I've not heard complaints from my friends using them though.


i had no issues with my fx890 ud7 or was it ud5 not sure. my z270 k7 was rock solid and the z370 7 booted right no issues yesterday.


----------



## kd5151




----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Another 3D where 8700k struggles FPS wise to 7800x with almost 200Mhz advantage...But this Combined score looks out of order beating even 4.5Ghz 6950x with comparable Video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/13732460/fs/13910395#


I can't tell if this is sarcasm or not.


----------



## OutlawII

Thats impressive 2 more cores than Intel and it almost wins lol


----------



## kd5151

https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8378/msi-z370-godlike-gaming-motherboard-review/index.html

MSi


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> I can't tell if this is sarcasm or not.


Nope, seriously have both platforms and cannot take the decision which one to sell right now...
x299 [email protected] gaming quad channel 4040 16-16-16-30-300 1T with RTL 58/61
z370 [email protected] gaming dual 3770 15-15-15-30-300 1T RTLs in 63/65

The first is winning many tests despite lower CPU frequencies, has future upgrade paths(7800x lowest SL-X CPU), much i mean much better BIOS options and tuning instruments and overclock 4 dimm modules better








The second is winning in some tests ...although losing in many even GPU related ones..the platform will be EOL probably next year and the CPU is the best that could be put on it. On the other hand it struggles with memory controller even with 2 dimms...just scared to put next 2 to see what happens ..but if this will be a trade of 2T...will help me to take my decision easier







BIOS is like a child's toy compared to x299 platform and huge advantage on the memory have to be done...so waiting for BIOS or miracle for the memory OC. No Windows tool(F/A Tuning) also available now for it also...each even minor change should boot into UEFI...


----------



## Triniboi82

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Nope, seriously have both platforms and cannot take the decision which one to sell right now...
> x299 [email protected] gaming quad channel 4040 16-16-16-30-300 1T with RTL 58/61
> z370 [email protected] gaming dual 3770 15-15-15-30-300 1T RTLs in 63/65
> 
> The first is winning many tests despite lower CPU frequencies, has future upgrade paths(7800x lowest SL-X CPU), much i mean much better BIOS options and tuning instruments and overclock 4 dimm modules better
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The second is winning in some tests ...although losing in many even GPU related ones..the platform will be EOL probably next year and the CPU is the best that could be put on it. On the other hand it struggles with memory controller even with 2 dimms...just scared to put next 2 to see what happens ..but if this will be a trade of 2T...will help me to take my decision easier
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BIOS is like a child's toy compared to x299 platform and huge advantage on the memory have to be done...so waiting for BIOS or miracle for the memory OC. No Windows tool(F/A Tuning) also available now for it also...each even minor change should boot into UEFI...


I'd keep the first setup because you have so many more options in terms of upgrade path and overall general usage.

You'd make a nice profit if you sell the coffeelake system now I'm sure.


----------



## DStealth

Found a document explaining Firestrike combined test here - http://s3.amazonaws.com/download-aws.futuremark.com/3DMark_Technical_Guide.pdf
Quote:


> Combined test
> 3DMark Fire Strike Combined test stresses both the GPU and CPU
> simultaneously. The GPU load combines elements from Graphics test 1 and 2
> using tessellation, volumetric illumination, fluid simulation, particle simulation,
> FFT based bloom and depth of field.
> The CPU load comes from the rigid body physics of the breaking statues in the
> background. There are 32 simulation worlds running in separate threads each
> containing one statue decomposing into 113 parts. Additionally there are 16
> invisible rigid bodies in each world except the one closest to camera to push
> the decomposed elements apart. The simulations run on one thread per
> available CPU core.


This could explain this huge advantage on [email protected]+ as single core performance is right there...









Reducing the Vcore to find stability for this 8700k get's me in 1.38v BIOS set 5225 and temp during CB15 in 70's again...seems EK360 is not that bad w/o delid...
For some reason the score is higher than 5260 run yesterday with higher Vcore 1.42 set in BIOS


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Could...but i suspect 4times more L2 cache and mesh in multi Geekbench scaling is huge on 7800x...in some test like Face detection it's twice faster than +160Mhz higher overclocked 8700k...Here're my results:
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/4296636?baseline=4537375
> 
> Some other benches ahead of 7800x
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also discovered with LLC 1 Asrock is pushing way lower voltage than the set one in BIOS here...


After looking at your Geeekbench results of your 8700K at 5.26ghz and from your other screenshots of your memory running at 3750mhz 15-15-15-30-300-1T, it appeared to be a low multi core score.
So I set my 8700K at 5.20ghz at 1.34 volts, not delidded and memory at 3733mhz 17-17-17-37-535-1T, so both the cpu and memory are running slower than what you were.

I then ran Geekbench 4 and I scored a lot higher Multi-Core score than you have. And if were to set my memory timings to the same c15 as yours I would then score a lot higher single core and multcore again.

So i'd say that your Geeekbench 4 results of comparing the 7800x to the 8700K are not accurate as your 8700K Multi Core scores are lower than mine and you are at higher frequencies.

Geekbench 8700K 5.2ghz - 3733 C17-17-17-37-535


----------



## DStealth

Intresting will rebench it...maybe the Board is playing games on me this was the second result obtained and was higher ...So I took it as legit.

Lol while updating Windows started Wprime1024 and returned in top 20 result judging from HWBOT between all LN2 CPU's in minute and 20 seconds range







)


----------



## czin125

Only 4400 on the NB for 8700K? Try 5.2/5.0 instead of 5.2/4.4 if you can


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lisanderus*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Mampus*
> 
> buy i5 8400...then after 4-5 years
Click to expand...

The setup in the Video is GPU limited, I achieve the same FPS range with my i5 7600k, GTX 1070 on the same map.


----------



## DStealth

After installing creators update and lowered Vcore the Geekbench is intact
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/4550216?baseline=4550216

If the NB quote is for me...I have over 5Ghz NB frequency









Edit: Creator's update upped the performance or i was throttled with 50Mhz higher previously


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> Only 4400 on the NB for 8700K? Try 5.2/5.0 instead of 5.2/4.4 if you can


I had left my cache on auto and only increased cpu frequency for the purpose of the test.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> After installing creators update and lowered Vcore the Geekbench is intact
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/4550216?baseline=4550216
> 
> If the NB quote is for me...I have over 5Ghz NB frequency


Yeah that score looks much better now.


----------



## DStealth

Seems the update and reduced Voltage helped for this bench...
[email protected] 1.36v
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/4550540
Single-Core Score 7018
Multi-Core Score 31480

Assume that found the limit of this CPU finally @ third run of blender test with BIOS @1.36v(real much lower)[email protected] gives me BSOD
Gonna push the next one









Managed to reduce the RTLs to 55/57 using IOLs memory started to show some numbers...



https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/4550694
Over 31500 Multi-Core


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Nope, seriously have both platforms and cannot take the decision which one to sell right now...
> x299 [email protected] gaming quad channel 4040 16-16-16-30-300 1T with RTL 58/61
> z370 [email protected] gaming dual 3770 15-15-15-30-300 1T RTLs in 63/65
> 
> The first is winning many tests despite lower CPU frequencies, has future upgrade paths(7800x lowest SL-X CPU), much i mean much better BIOS options and tuning instruments and overclock 4 dimm modules better
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The second is winning in some tests ...although losing in many even GPU related ones..the platform will be EOL probably next year and the CPU is the best that could be put on it. On the other hand it struggles with memory controller even with 2 dimms...just scared to put next 2 to see what happens ..but if this will be a trade of 2T...will help me to take my decision easier
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BIOS is like a child's toy compared to x299 platform and huge advantage on the memory have to be done...so waiting for BIOS or miracle for the memory OC. No Windows tool(F/A Tuning) also available now for it also...each even minor change should boot into UEFI...


Have you heard of "margin of error?" "Losing" by half a percent isn't even worth mentioning, especially in those graphics tests which put almost no load on the CPU. Pascal is also incredibly picky and might lose a few MHz at load for any reason you can think of.

Either way, it's obvious which one you want to keep. Keep the 7800X.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Have you heard of "margin of error?" "Losing" by half a percent isn't even worth mentioning, especially in those graphics tests which put almost no load on the CPU. Pascal is also incredibly picky and might lose a few MHz at load for any reason you can think of.
> 
> Either way, it's obvious which one you want to keep. Keep the 7800X.


I have a second 8700k gonna test for the moment some of the memory issues are almost fixed...just need to test 4 modules.
65 Pentium [email protected]










27k This thing is really pushing...https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/22804284


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> I have a second 8700k gonna test for the moment some of the memory issues are almost fixed...just need to test 4 modules.
> 65 Pentium [email protected]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 27k This thing is really pushing...https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/22804284


I suppose that I should also note this odd behavior I've seen in a lot of benchmarking videos where faster CPUs get lower 3DMark and Geekbench graphics scores. This never translates over to games though.


----------



## kd5151

Dreaming 8700K's where in stock.


----------



## DStealth

Two of them near me


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dreaming 8700K's where in stock.


They are in stock at my local Microcenter. Available for pickup right now.

But the pricing is a total rip-off. Microcenter has clearly recognized the lack of supply and capitalized on it. Yes, the CPU is in stock, but the price is $500.

I've got one on preorder for $390 including shipping with an expected ship date of 10/26, I can wait the 5 days to save $110 compared to Microcenter's price.


----------



## Scotty99

My MC had like 5 8700k's on the 5th and they all sold out instantly, havent seen any come back in since. Same 500 dollar tag.


----------



## DStealth

Ok just tested the second 8700k seems worst much worst. CPU alone can run CB15 with +10* hotter @5250 but stability(throttling like mad) or memory over 3500 or NB over 4800 are no go...








Hoped for a better one...but looks just worst maybe after delid will have same capabilities but don't have such time to delid them both and test.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Ok just tested the second 8700k seems worst much worst. CPU alone can run CB15 with +10* hotter @5250 but stability(throttling like mad) or memory over 3500 or NB over 4800 are no go...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hoped for a better one...but looks just worst maybe after delid will have same capabilities but don't have such time to delid them both and test.


What are the voltage levels like compared to the other one ?


----------



## DStealth

The same


----------



## looniam

Analyzing Z370 for Intel's 8th Generation Coffee Lake: A Quick Look at 50+ Motherboards


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero
> ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero (with WiFi)
> ASUS ROG Maximus X Apex
> ASUS Strix Z370-E Gaming
> ASUS Strix Z370-F Gaming
> ASUS Strix Z370-G Gaming
> *ASUS Strix Z370-H Gaming
> ASUS Strix Z370-I Gaming
> ASUS TUF Z370-Pro Gaming
> ASUS TUF Z370-Plus Gaming
> ASUS Prime Z370-A
> ASUS Prime Z370-P
> 
> GIGABYTE Z370 Gaming 7
> GIGABYTE Z370 Gaming 5
> GIGABYTE Z370 Gaming 3
> GIGABYTE Z370 Gaming K3
> GIGABYTE Z370 Gaming WiFi
> GIGABYTE Z370 Ultra Gaming
> GIGABYTE Z370XP SLI
> GIGABYTE Z370 HD3P
> GIGABYTE Z370 HD3
> *GIGABYTE Z370N WiFi
> 
> ECS Z370 Lightsaber
> 
> MSI Z370 Godlike Gaming
> MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon
> MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC
> *MSI Z370I Gaming Pro Carbon AC
> MSI Z370 Gaming M5
> MSI Z370 Gaming Plus
> MSI Z370 Krait Gaming
> MSI Z370 Tomahawk
> MSI Z370M Mortar
> MSI Z370 SLI Plus
> MSI Z370 PC Pro
> MSI Z370 A Pro
> 
> ASRock Z370 Professional Gaming i7
> ASRock Z370 Gaming K6
> ASRock Z370 Extreme 4
> ASRock Z370 Killer SLI
> ASRock Z370 Killer SLI AC
> ASRock Z370 Pro4
> ASRock Z370 Taichi
> ASRock Z370M Pro4
> ASRock Z370M-ITX/ac
> ASRock Z370 Gaming-ITX/ac
> 
> EVGA Z370 Classified
> EVGA Z370 FTW
> EVGA Z370 Micro
> 
> BIOSTAR Z370GT7
> BIOSTAR Z370GT6
> 
> *Colorful iGame Vulkan X





Quote:


> This Overview, and Why It Took Four Editors
> Much like our previous motherboard overviews, the goal here is to go through each motherboard that we know about and do a visual inspection: tell you what goes where, if there's something new, or if there's an odd layout that doesn't make sense.
> 
> I (Ian) have to give big thanks to our motherboard review team who worked on this project, especially to Joe Shields who wrote up most of them, and to Gavin Bonshor for taking a day out to travel to ASUS UK and get some hands-on before the launch. Anton applied his usual excellence in his Price Overview.
> 
> Introduction and editing by Ian Cutress
> GIGABYTE, ECS, MSI, ASRock, EVGA and BIOSTAR by Joe Shields
> ASUS by Gavin Bonshor
> Pricing by Anton Shilov
> 
> With any luck, we will be firing up our full Z370 motherboard review engine over the next few weeks. If you see a motherboard in this list that tickles your fancy, let us know in the comments.


----------



## PontiacGTX

..


----------



## BackwoodsNC

I missed the latest bios update for the Aorus 7 that's why originally my 4000mhz ram was not working. Now XMP profile works flawless at rated speed of 4000Mhz ddr4.

Settled on 5.1/4.9 with avx offset. I did delid the process and got temps down from 80c to 59-66c on non *avx* workloads. I really never paid attention to avx temps on my 7700k and wow this puppy really heats up even on a 360 rad custom loop.

memory was a little dodgy at 1.35 volts, up that to gain more stability since these shots. Lowered cache to 4.4 also.

Those 7700k scores on cinebench were done at 5 and 5.1. Got a nice gain, really liking this chip.


----------



## kd5151




----------



## Unsaid90

Is scalping this cpu really worth it ? (8700k) I'm planning to overclock it with Noctua n-dh14. I'm planning to pay someone a little to do this whole thing ... ;]


----------



## TMatzelle60

i would wait it might be a while or you might get lucky.


----------



## tw2

Unless you preorder for $699 here there is little chance of getting one until January. Even with preorder now it looks like mid december delivery. Otherwise it looks like the regular price will be $590. By that time ryzen refresh will be a few weeks away or at least there will be some info on performance to know whether it is worth looking at or not. Oh well 4c4t has got me this far


----------



## TMatzelle60

Id still wait. Why spend so much. If you dont want to wait might as well get a 7700k better choice then spend 600+ to get one from someone who sells it off ebay.

There will be chips coming in and out. But hey if u want to pay that much be my guest,


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Id still wait. Why spend so much. If you dont want to wait might as well get a 7700k better choice then spend 600+ to get one from someone who sells it off ebay.
> 
> There will be chips coming in and out. But hey if u want to pay that much be my guest,


Not sure if you are replying to me but I am not in the US, NZ$699 is about US$486, and hopefully the usual price is going to be about US$410 or less, things are usually relatively more expensive over here. I am waiting, it is just frustrating.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> Unless you preorder for $699 here there is little chance of getting one until January. Even with preorder now it looks like mid december delivery. Otherwise it looks like the regular price will be $590. By that time ryzen refresh will be a few weeks away or at least there will be some info on performance to know whether it is worth looking at or not. Oh well 4c4t has got me this far


got this crazy idea. Buy ryzen 1600. there i said it. it's the best bang for buck and upgrade path. There was a 1600x with x370 asrock mobo the other day on newegg for $260.

7700K + Z270 = $450
8600k + z370 = $450
8700k + z370 = $550.
1700x + x370 = $450.

I got a lot to think about.


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> got this crazy idea. Buy ryzen 1600. there i said it. it's the best bang for buck and upgrade path. There was a 1600x with x370 asrock mobo the other day on newegg for $260.
> 
> 7700K + Z270 = $450
> 8600k + z370 = $450
> 8700k + z370 = $550.
> 1700x + x370 = $450.
> 
> I got a lot to think about.


I had thought that a decent motherboard with a 1600 or 1600x might be worth it until the refresh comes out. But with prices here I don't think it would be worth it for just 3-4 months and then if the refresh fails to deliver I would be wishing I got the 8700K or perhaps even want to just go for the 1700 that was available all along. Unfortunately waiting is the smart plan by a long shot.

All prices concerted to US$
1600 is $220, 1600x $250, 1700 $326
Gigabyte ax370 gaming 5, $201
Gigabyte z370 gaming 5, $262


----------



## TMatzelle60

TW2 sorry about that didnt realize.

i would love to go ryzen but im concerned i wont be happy

Like a Ryzen 7 1800x and Vega 64


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unsaid90*
> 
> Is scalping this cpu really worth it ? (8700k) I'm planning to overclock it with Noctua n-dh14. I'm planning to pay someone a little to do this whole thing ... ;]


It depends on how much you're willing to pay, but its the best 1080p gaming chip right now.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> I had thought that a decent motherboard with a 1600 or 1600x might be worth it until the refresh comes out. But with prices here I don't think it would be worth it for just 3-4 months and then if the refresh fails to deliver I would be wishing I got the 8700K or perhaps even want to just go for the 1700 that was available all along. Unfortunately waiting is the smart plan by a long shot.
> 
> All prices concerted to US$
> 1600 is $220, 1600x $250, 1700 $326
> Gigabyte ax370 gaming 5, $201
> Gigabyte z370 gaming 5, $262


aX370 gaming 5 is not a big step up from Asus x370 prime pro. If you go with Ryzen , the X370 prime pro is usually reasonably priced.


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> got this crazy idea. *Buy ryzen 1600. there i said it.* it's the best bang for buck and upgrade path. There was a 1600x with x370 asrock mobo the other day on newegg for $260.
> 
> 7700K + Z270 = $450
> 8600k + z370 = $450
> 8700k + z370 = $550.
> 1700x + x370 = $450.
> 
> I got a lot to think about.


Heh, you say that like it's an inherently bad thing, when the truth of the matter is, it's the straight up truth.


----------



## DStealth

Ok 4 dimms are not going with 1T on my Asrock board...
Just managed to run them one strap higher with 2t instead the result is the same...Aida64 Copy exceeded 60gb/s while 37ns latency remained...Gonna live with it...Was not used 2T since DDR1 times...


Edit: OMG Geekbench went mad with 4 modules...
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/4561902


Edit2: After reapplying LM temps dropped during CB15 max temp right now is 74* and the differences between cores are gone











Edit3: Some updates to 3dmark








https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/22827122


----------



## osb40000

My 8700k should be here on Monday. I'm using an Asrock Z370 Gaming K6, Noctua U-14S (hoping for around 4.8 ghz with decent temps) with GSKILL 4133 19-19-19-39 Model F4-4133C19D-16GTZKWC DDR4.

I accidentally ordered the GTZKWC kit thinking it was on the QVL list when in fact the GTZKW was the one listed. From what I can tell the difference is just the GTZKW has 19-21-21-41 timings @ 4133.

In case I have problems with the kit, does anyone have a good DDR4 guide on memory overlocking and tweaking? I'm assuming that Z370 is similar if not identical to Z270?


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> aX370 gaming 5 is not a big step up from Asus x370 prime pro. If you go with Ryzen , the X370 prime pro is usually reasonably priced.


it's on sale right now.







gonna post this in the online deals section.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813132964


----------



## DStealth

@osb40000
Highly doubt you'll able to achieve the rated speeds. My board z370 k6 with two different 8700k cannot boot higher than 3800-3900 1t 2 dimms and 2t 4 dimms
Tried two official BIOSes and now on beta 1.11 acting the same.
QVL is for people not knowing...all B-die memories 3400+ are the same so...doesn't matter


----------



## osb40000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> @osb40000
> Highly doubt you'll able to achieve the rated speeds. My board z370 k6 with two different 8700k cannot boot higher than 3800-3900 1t 2 dimms and 2t 4 dimms
> Tried two official BIOSes and now on beta 1.11 acting the same.
> QVL is for people not knowing...all B-die memories 3400+ are the same so...doesn't matter


Bummer. Hopefully they release a new bios ASAP since they list so many 4000mhz modules. Once I get the mobo I'll have to hit you up for memory timings, etc. I'm solid on CPU OC back to the Q6600 days but I'm a novice with memory overclocking. I appreciate it!


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> got this crazy idea. Buy ryzen 1600. there i said it. it's the best bang for buck and upgrade path. There was a 1600x with x370 asrock mobo the other day on newegg for $260.
> 
> 7700K + Z270 = $450
> 8600k + z370 = $450
> 8700k + z370 = $550.
> 1700x + x370 = $450.
> 
> I got a lot to think about.


Why do you list the prices based on the cheapest AMD motherboard you can possibly buy and then compare it to one of the more expensive Z370 motherboards?

The cheapest X370 on Newegg is $110. The cheapest Z370 on Newegg is $120, or just $110 after the $10 rebate.

Ryzen X1700X is $360
I7 8700k is $400

So if you're doing an apples to apples comparison it's closer to this:

1700X + X370 = $470
8700K + Z370 = $510

Only a $40 price difference, not the $100 difference you claim.

And while we're at it, the 8600K + Z370 is only $410. $60 cheaper than the 1700X option.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> Why do you list the prices based on the cheapest AMD motherboard you can possibly buy and then compare it to one of the more expensive Z370 motherboards?
> 
> The cheapest X370 on Newegg is $110. The cheapest Z370 on Newegg is $120, or just $110 after the $10 rebate.
> 
> Ryzen X1700X is $360
> I7 8700k is $400
> 
> So if you're doing an apples to apples comparison it's closer to this:
> 
> 1700X + X370 = $470
> 8700K + Z370 = $510
> 
> Only a $40 price difference, not the $100 difference you claim.
> 
> And while we're at it, the 8600K + Z370 is only $410. $60 cheaper than the 1700X option.


The ryzen is on sale while the intel is not,yes. The prices above are just a average ball park figure. Let see if I can break it down better.

If I had to go ryzen right now based off of whats out there,it would look something like this. 1700/1700x from refurb4less guy off of ebay. yes hes legit. $280 for the 1700 and $315 for 1700x. Plus the ASUS prime pro mobo. $115 off of newegg right now .second time i have seen it this low. So $115 + $315 = $430. better than the $450 i quoted and $50 bucks less than you. refurb4less and microcenter have the deals on ryzen! and sometimes newegg. anyways...

8700 is $400 but MSRP is $360 so $360 for the 8700k and $150 for the asrock extreme 4. as of right now. once again. $360 + $150 = $510 or $550 because the 8700k is not on sale atm.

$510 at best vs $430 or $395 for the 1700 and asus x370.







no wonder why I'm koo koo.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> it's on sale right now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gonna post this in the online deals section.
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813132964


He's in New Zealand
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> Why do you list the prices based on the cheapest AMD motherboard you can possibly buy and then compare it to one of the more expensive Z370 motherboards?
> 
> The cheapest X370 on Newegg is $110. The cheapest Z370 on Newegg is $120, or just $110 after the $10 rebate.
> 
> Ryzen X1700X is $360
> I7 8700k is $400
> 
> So if you're doing an apples to apples comparison it's closer to this:
> 
> 1700X + X370 = $470
> 8700K + Z370 = $510
> 
> Only a $40 price difference, not the $100 difference you claim.
> 
> And while we're at it, the 8600K + Z370 is only $410. $60 cheaper than the 1700X option.


The guy is in New Zealand.

He's not going to be getting i7-8700k any time soon for close to retail.

Ryzen 7 1700 or 1700X + ASUS x370 PRIME PRO *vs* i7-8700k + ASUS Z370-A PRIME is the most direct comparison

or Gigabyte X370 Gaming K7 vs Gigabyte Z370 Gaming 7
or Asus Crosshair VI Hero vs Asus Maximus X Hero
or Asrock X370 Taichi vs Asrock Z370 Taichi
or MSI X370 SLI PLUS vs MSI Z370 SLI PLUS (same for M5 , Pro Carbon)

Buying a severely cut down board on either platform isn't smart , but it's _even worse for AM4_ since we know the socket lasts for until 2020 instead of til end of 2018


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> it's on sale right now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gonna post this in the online deals section.
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813132964
> 
> 
> 
> He's in New Zealand
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> Why do you list the prices based on the cheapest AMD motherboard you can possibly buy and then compare it to one of the more expensive Z370 motherboards?
> 
> The cheapest X370 on Newegg is $110. The cheapest Z370 on Newegg is $120, or just $110 after the $10 rebate.
> 
> Ryzen X1700X is $360
> I7 8700k is $400
> 
> So if you're doing an apples to apples comparison it's closer to this:
> 
> 1700X + X370 = $470
> 8700K + Z370 = $510
> 
> Only a $40 price difference, not the $100 difference you claim.
> 
> And while we're at it, the 8600K + Z370 is only $410. $60 cheaper than the 1700X option.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The guy is in New Zealand.
> 
> He's not going to be getting i7-8700k any time soon for close to retail.
> 
> Ryzen 7 1700 or 1700X + ASUS x370 PRIME PRO *vs* i7-8700k + ASUS Z370-A PRIME is the most direct comparison
> 
> or Gigabyte X370 Gaming K7 vs Gigabyte Z370 Gaming 7
> or Asus Crosshair VI Hero vs Asus Maximus X Hero
> or Asrock X370 Taichi vs Asrock Z370 Taichi
> or MSI X370 SLI PLUS vs MSI Z370 SLI PLUS (same for M5 , Pro Carbon)
> 
> Buying a severely cut down board on either platform isn't smart , but it's _even worse for AM4_ since we know the socket lasts for until 2020 instead of til end of 2018
Click to expand...

What is not smart about buying a budget Z370. My Gigabyte Z170 HD3 works great.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> My Gigabyte Z170 HD3 overclocks the i5 7600k to 4.8GHz on air with ease.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> When I get the i5 8600k it should do 5.0GHz with the Gigabyte Z370 HD3 with ease.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> No my Gigabyte Z170 Works great and easy to use.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What is not smart about buying a budget Z370. My Gigabyte Z170 HD3 works great.


Wow how many times are you going to say effectively the same thing?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> My Gigabyte Z170 HD3 overclocks the i5 7600k to 4.8GHz on air with ease.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> When I get the i5 8600k it should do 5.0GHz with the Gigabyte Z370 HD3 with ease.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> No my Gigabyte Z170 Works great and easy to use.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What is not smart about buying a budget Z370. My Gigabyte Z170 HD3 works great.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Wow how many times are you going to say effectively the same thing?
Click to expand...

While I have a Voice. I live in a country with freedom of speech go USA.


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Buying a severely cut down board on either platform isn't smart , but it's _even worse for AM4_ since we know the socket lasts for until 2020 instead of til end of 2018


This is the exact reason why I decided to go big with my AM4 board and got the Crosshair VI Hero. Barring any...unforeseen circumstances, it should likely last me quite a few years.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What is not smart about buying a budget Z370. My Gigabyte Z170 HD3 works great.


I assume you missed all the LLC complaints on lower Z370 boards with poor VRM. Asus isn't fixing STRIX-H and TUF series.

Also if you aren't using AVX and are running an i5 , the load is vastly different from i7-8700k with AVX2.

Another fact is some lower boards are missing I/O such as USB 3.1 gen 2 or Thunderbolt add-in card headers.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What is not smart about buying a budget Z370. My Gigabyte Z170 HD3 works great.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I assume you missed all the LLC complaints on lower Z370 boards with poor VRM. Asus isn't fixing STRIX-H and TUF series.
> 
> Also if you aren't using AVX and are running an i5 , the load is vastly different from i7-8700k with AVX2.
> 
> Another fact is some lower boards are missing I/O such as USB 3.1 gen 2 or Thunderbolt add-in card headers.
Click to expand...

Yes I did miss those problems that are going to be fixed with a Bios update. Gigabyte uses the same VRM on the mid range boards as the lowest cost on the Z370.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> While I have a Voice. I live in a country with freedom of speech go USA.


There are smarter and more informed forum members here than me, but at the risk of repeating myself dont be surprised if we see an 8 core 16 thread CPU that will be compatible with Z370, Intel changed the CPU power delivery for a reason and we already know that it wasn't to accommodate 8700K and I doubt it would have been to encourage enthusiasts to upgrade from Z270 given the flack they have already endured from previous releases. Lets not forget Intel would not have spent money to make these changes unless there was a good reason, cheaper board usually compromise on the VRM's and features.How many enthusiasts would be miffed if Z370 only supported one generation when in the past they have always supported 2?


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gmr Chick*
> 
> This is the exact reason why I decided to go big with my AM4 board and got the Crosshair VI Hero. Barring any...unforeseen circumstances, it should likely last me quite a few years.


I would like the x370 taichi but that asus for $115 is a good deal. Same thing for intel. I would like the taichi but the k6 or maybe the prime/strix is the way to go for me depending on price.

I thing I do like about ryzen is the upgrade path. I just don't know If I see myself taking advantage of it. I say that now but who knows.If I buy ryzen/ryzen+ now I could be like this when ryzen 2/3 comes out.









or I could be like this when Intel drops what ever.


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> I would like the x370 taichi but that asus for $115 is a good deal. Same thing for intel. I would like the taichi but the k6 or maybe the prime/strix is the way to go for me depending on price.
> 
> I thing I do like about ryzen is the upgrade path. I just don't know If I see myself taking advantage of it. I say that now but who knows.If I buy ryzen/ryzen+ now I could be like this when ryzen 2/3 comes out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or I could be like this when Intel drops what ever.


Well, whatever you decide to do, it's important that you're happy and it meets your needs


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> While I have a Voice. I live in a country with freedom of speech go USA.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are smarter and more informed forum members here than me, but at the risk of repeating myself dont be surprised if we see an 8 core 16 thread CPU that will be compatible with Z370, Intel changed the CPU power delivery for a reason and we already know that it wasn't to accommodate 8700K and I doubt it would have been to encourage enthusiasts to upgrade from Z270 given the flack they have already endured from previous releases. Lets not forget Intel would not have spent money to make these changes unless there was a good reason, cheaper board usually compromise on the VRM's and features.How many enthusiasts would be miffed if Z370 only supported one generation when in the past they have always supported 2?
Click to expand...

In the past starting with sandy bridge through coffee lake I have not seen any problems with throttling or VRM failures with the lowest cost Intel Z motherboards and I have been in the forums every day. If anything changes in the future like all the problems with x299 motherboards VRMs I will let you know instead of speculating.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> In the past starting with sandy bridge through coffee lake I have
> not seen any problems with throttling or VRM failures with the lowest cost Intel Z motherboards and I have been in the forums every day. If anything changes in the future like all the problems with x299 motherboards VRMs I will let you know instead of speculating.


In the past we only had 4 cores 8 threads, not 6 cores 12 threads or potentially 8 cores 16 threads on intel mainstream platform, changes made to CPU power delivery for a reason.


----------



## kd5151

Z390?









edit:


----------



## DStealth

Not bad on HT core...no optimizations and w10...

Still not enough to catch 7800x Quad memory with 130Mhz less...


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> There are smarter and more informed forum members here than me, but at the risk of repeating myself dont be surprised if we see an 8 core 16 thread CPU that will be compatible with Z370, Intel changed the CPU power delivery for a reason and we already know that it wasn't to accommodate 8700K and I doubt it would have been to encourage enthusiasts to upgrade from Z270 given the flack they have already endured from previous releases. Lets not forget Intel would not have spent money to make these changes unless there was a good reason, cheaper board usually compromise on the VRM's and features.How many enthusiasts would be miffed if Z370 only supported one generation when in the past they have always supported 2?


That looks like quite bogus reason. Intel would likely not give a damn about low end MBs, it's problem of manufacturers to provide list of supported CPUs. Intel just needs to put warning to CPU box that users should check a compatibility of MB on MB manufacturer's website.

It's that simple, some manufacturers are (correctly) skipping Z370, thus some backward compatibility would be nice, especially when CPUs are not listed as 127W TDP. Any MB like Asus Z170 Ranger and better should support 8 core CPU, when MB manufacturer didn't skimp on power delivery and heatsinks, which would be bit absurd with board designed for OC and reliability.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I've had a 1700 and it was terrible in gaming compared to my 7800X.


----------



## mjheikki

Mmh, no point buying a 1700 if all you do is game, a 1600 gives you the same gaming performance at 2/3 the price. For high refresh rate gamers, it's Intel all the way though, no point buying anything but a 8700K at this point.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I've had a 1700 and it was terrible in gaming compared to my 7800X.




Been using my 1700x @ 3.9GHz @ 3333MHz Cas16 memory for a few days now with my 1080 Ti. (all my plans were ruined because of the stupid 8700k shortage) PUBG performance was surprisingly bad. I haven't really played with for for an extended period with a 144hz monitor and now I'm seeing all the weaknesses of the playform. it does a lot better with some multithreadded workloads by a significant amount compared to my 7700k but in gaming it's not terrible like bulldozer/piledriver but still losing to intel by a huge margin


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Been using my 1700x @ 3.9GHz @ 3333MHz Cas16 memory for a few days now with my 1080 Ti. (all my plans were ruined because of the stupid 8700k shortage) PUBG performance was surprisingly bad. I haven't really played with for for an extended period with a 144hz monitor and now I'm seeing all the weaknesses of the playform. it does a lot better with some multithreadded workloads by a significant amount compared to my 7700k but in gaming it's not terrible like bulldozer/piledriver but still losing to intel by a huge margin


I would not recommend ryzen for purely 1080p gaming unless they were on a tight budget and wanted the most bang per buck build. PUBG seems to only use 6 cores as of right now. Apparently bluehole may optimize it further ( i havent heard anything more though). They've been cancelling moar and moar of their updates, so im not sure whats going on with that game. I'm damn sure the xbox development has had some impact on the pc version, whether they say so or not its very obvious. Nice ryzen rig btw. No red accents?!


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> I would not recommend ryzen for purely 1080p gaming unless they were on a tight budget and wanted the most bang per buck build. PUBG seems to only use 6 cores as of right now. Apparently bluehole may optimize it further ( i havent heard anything more though). They've been cancelling moar and moar of their updates, so im not sure whats going on with that game. I'm damn sure the xbox development has had some impact on the pc version, whether they say so or not its very obvious. Nice ryzen rig btw. No red accents?!


I'd recommend Ryzen for like a [email protected] monitor. anything that is high refresh rate it will struggle even with 3333MHz it's still struggling although performance is a lot better than it used to ( i was stuck at 2400mhz for like 3 months)


It was orange before







bought a new case for my main pc. I decided to use my s340 instead. the orange looks good but doesn't really fit my living room. I use this pc for VR/htpc and the s340 blends more in the background



I didn't want to build it yet but the 8700k shortage sucks. I wanted to install my z370 aorus gaming 7 on the news case but with the shortage I don't think I can get the cpu in atleast a month from now.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I'd recommend Ryzen for like a [email protected] monitor. anything that is high refresh rate it will struggle even with 3333MHz it's still struggling although performance is a lot better than it used to ( i was stuck at 2400mhz for like 3 months)
> 
> 
> It was orange before
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bought a new case for my main pc. I decided to use my s340 instead. the orange looks good but doesn't really fit my living room. I use this pc for VR/htpc and the s340 blends more in the background
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't want to build it yet but the 8700k shortage sucks. I wanted to install my z370 aorus gaming 7 on the news case but with the shortage I don't think I can get the cpu in atleast a month from now.


Isn't PUBG an outlier?


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> got this crazy idea. Buy ryzen 1600. there i said it. it's the best bang for buck and upgrade path. There was a 1600x with x370 asrock mobo the other day on newegg for $260.
> 
> 7700K + Z270 = $450
> 8600k + z370 = $450
> 8700k + z370 = $550.
> 1700x + *x370* = $450.
> 
> I got a lot to think about.


You could just go with a B350 board and a 1700(non-X) or 1600 (non-X)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Buying a severely cut down board on either platform isn't smart , but it's _even worse for AM4_ since we know the socket lasts for until 2020 instead of til end of 2018


Truth be told, there isnt much of a difference between the two AM4 chipsets. Board choice really just comes down to good VRMs and fluff features....


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Not bad on HT core...no optimizations and w10...
> 
> Still not enough to catch 7800x Quad memory with 130Mhz less...


Does it make much of a diff if you tested 4133C16 CR2 on the 8700K vs 3800C15 CR1?


----------



## CallsignVega

Has this been the worst fail/paper launch in Intel history?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CallsignVega*
> 
> Has this been the worst fail/paper launch in Intel history?


Yes because Intel has been on of those companies where they would stock up month before release to have enough products at launch.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> Does it make much of a diff if you tested 4133C16 CR2 on the 8700K vs 3800C15 CR1?


3800 cr1 was slower than 3940 cr2 tested...Aida and Spi32m. Higher is not possible on this BIOS and board(Z370) maybe IMC.
On the other hand i have a screenshot with 38xx 1T on 7800x platform and HT on ...was worst in 6.15 range...
Anyway 1T with 4 dimms was also not possible at the moment on z370 tried as low as 3Ghz....


----------



## bl4ckdot

A bit of topic, I got these (https://gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c16q-32gtzkk) for not that much.
Thing is, no motherboards even the Formula has them in their QVL. They only have the 16-18-18-38. Mine are 16-16-16-36 (I guess B Die 100%, right ?).
Now I know that I should not worry to much about QVL because manual settings FTW. I'm just wondering if they will be fine.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> A bit of topic, I got these (https://gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c16q-32gtzkk) for not that much.
> Thing is, no motherboards even the Formula has them in their QVL. They only have the 16-18-18-38. Mine are 16-16-16-36 (I guess B Die 100%, right ?).
> Now I know that I should not worry to much about QVL because manual settings FTW. I'm just wondering if they will be fine.


Should be fine at rated speeds.


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Isn't PUBG an outlier?


PUBG runs pretty badly in every system. It might run even worse on Zen (I wouldn't know), but the game is pretty stuttery with Intel as well.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> PUBG runs pretty badly in every system. It might run even worse on Zen (I wouldn't know), but the game is pretty stuttery with Intel as well.


I am sure in least optimized games a CPU with 5GHz clock speed and higher IPC will be noticeably faster.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> PUBG runs pretty badly in every system. It might run even worse on Zen (I wouldn't know), but the game is pretty stuttery with Intel as well.


It is Unreal Engine 4 which hates Ryzen (compiling, opening, and packaging projects is even fastest on 7700k/7740x overall and slowest on Ryzen usually), but the game deviates so far from core UE4 so who knows.


----------



## mjheikki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I am sure in least optimized games a CPU with 5GHz clock speed and higher IPC will be noticeably faster.


At least for now. While DX11 supports multi-threaded rendering via deferred context, it doesn't yield much gains AFAIK (no experience on the subject, though). The new low-overhead 3D API's should in theory make multi-threaded rendering more efficient. And even then you need to have lots of draw calls to see any real savings. But I digress.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> You could just go with a B350 board and a 1700(non-X) or 1600 (non-X)


^ this. I have a cheap matx b350 motherboard. vrms/mosfets don't even have heatsinks. 3.9GHz all cores. 3333MHz cas16 memory (3200 kit). it has all the high end features just minue SLI. can't say the same with cheaper intel motherboards. no overclocking, can't even support fast memory kits








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> PUBG runs pretty badly in every system. It might run even worse on Zen (I wouldn't know), but the game is pretty stuttery with Intel as well.


yep it was horrible even with 3333MHz memory. my 7700k @ 5GHz is a lot better but still far from ideal I do get low fps on some areas but no stuttering. I do get stuttering with my 1700x in some areas though pubg is a mess lol


----------



## keikei

God damn. Any takers? https://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Core-i7-8700K-Coffee-Lake-6-core-/122768142507?hash=item1c958d30ab:g:viMAAOSwe51Z7Ltl


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> God damn. Any takers? https://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Core-i7-8700K-Coffee-Lake-6-core-/122768142507?hash=item1c958d30ab:g:viMAAOSwe51Z7Ltl


hell no


----------



## AlphaC

Spoiler: slight offtopic



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> You could just go with a B350 board and a 1700(non-X) or 1600 (non-X)
> Truth be told, there isnt much of a difference between the two AM4 chipsets. Board choice really just comes down to good VRMs and fluff features....


While you posted the AMD official table, B350 has been artificially segmented. If buying a B350 board, most times it's better with a Ryzen 5 quadcore or hexcore if you're overclocking
Midrange X370 boards with better VRM are overall superior choice to provide headroom for overclocking & future Ryzen refresh upgrades.

For example, the artificial segmentation is not just the VRM
* want USB 3.1 gen 2 type C? Only the B350 Pro Carbon from MSI has it (as well as B350 Krait and the new Tomahawk Plus).
* want ALC1220? The only B350 board that has it and a decent VRM is the B350 Pro Carbon from MSI . The Asus B350-F STRIX has ALC1220 and so does the Gigabyte B350 Gaming 3.
* want an Intel LAN? Very few B350 boards have it , it's only B350 Pro Carbon + Asus B350-F STRIX if I'm not mistaken

Ryzen 7 uses roughly the same power regardless of whether you get the X versions or not, once overclocked.



Intel 8700K Boxed Processor Delidded (ETA October 31st) https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/products/8700k
Intel 8600K Boxed Processor Delidded (ETA November 3rd) https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/products/8600k

Patience, people.


----------



## erocker

Is anyone else needing a bit too much VCCIO and VCCSA voltage while running faster DDR4 on z370? Nvm, on that, fixed it.


----------



## Ascii Aficionado

Think this is the best place to ask since not many of us have these chips yet.

In regards to an 8600k, I disabled MCE, changed the multiplier to 47, set it to All Core and couldn't get into Windows.

Do I just slightly increase the vcore now ?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> Think this is the best place to ask since not many of us have these chips yet.
> 
> In regards to an 8600k, I disabled MCE, changed the multiplier to 47, set it to All Core and couldn't get into Windows.
> 
> Do I just slightly increase the vcore now ?


Yeah.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> PUBG runs pretty badly in every system. It might run even worse on Zen (I wouldn't know), but the game is pretty stuttery with Intel as well.


Don't have any real problems with 1700x @ 1440p/144Hz with Freesync, but, as you say, nobody's running this game perfectly. 7700k/8700k at 5GHz is better I'm sure, but it's not like anybody's running CS:GO frames on this pre-pre-Alpha.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Don't have any real problems with 1700x @ 1440p/144Hz, but, as you say, nobody's running this game perfectly. 7700k/8700k at 5GHz is _better_ I'm sure, but it's not like anybody's running CS:GO frames on this pre-pre-Alpha.


did you see the most recent. techyescity video? the 8700k was getting twice the amount of frames on cs:go oppose to the 8600k.










edit: 481 avg vs 674. okay maybe not twice as much.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> did you see the most recent. techyescity video? the 8700k was getting twice the amount of frames on cs:go oppose to the 8600k.


I did not, but that's interesting. Either way, CSGO runs on a graphing calculator so anything modern is fine as long as you're not a Twitch Faze clan semipro.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I did not, but that's interesting. Either way, CSGO runs on a graphing calculator so anything modern is fine as long as you're not a Twitch Faze clan semipro.


he also test pubg on overclocked ryzen and coffee lake platform with a 1080ti.


----------



## erocker

I'm trying to figure out why my CPU doesn't go into idle voltage at idle. 8700k, basically running stock but all cores are set to 4.7 turbo clocks (MCE is disabled). The chip will downclock under idle, but voltage will not go down from where I set it at 1.22v.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> That looks like quite bogus reason. Intel would likely not give a damn about low end MBs, it's problem of manufacturers to provide list of supported CPUs. Intel just needs to put warning to CPU box that users should check a compatibility of MB on MB manufacturer's website.
> 
> It's that simple, some manufacturers are (correctly) skipping Z370, thus some backward compatibility would be nice, especially when CPUs are not listed as 127W TDP. *Any MB like Asus Z170 Ranger and better should support 8 core CPU, when MB manufacturer didn't skimp on power delivery and heatsinks, which would be bit absurd with board designed for OC and reliability.*


So basically what you are saying is that the 20 something extra power pins on 1151V2 are not needed for the extra current that an 8 core CPU would draw even when overclocked?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *erocker*
> 
> I'm trying to figure out why my CPU doesn't go into idle voltage at idle. 8700k, basically running stock but all cores are set to 4.7 turbo clocks (MCE is disabled). The chip will downclock under idle, but voltage will not go down from where I set it at 1.22v.


Did you sett 1.22v as Fixed Voltage or did you use off-set voltage?


----------



## CallsignVega

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> PUBG runs pretty badly in every system. It might run even worse on Zen (I wouldn't know), but the game is pretty stuttery with Intel as well.


PUB has to be the worst designed game I've ever played. It is so bad, they have an option to turn off your character model in the inventory screen. A stupid crappy 3D model of yourself halves your FPS.







That PU guy got so lucky designing a piece of garbage and now is rich.


----------



## erocker

Pub is an early access game that is months old, uses a bunch of outdated Unreal assets and engine tools and manages to get 100 players in a MP server. It's awful and kind of amazing at the same time. I'll save judgment for when "PC 1.0" is out by the end of the year.

I play at 1440p,, Everything at ultra low except draw distance and textures on Ultra and average over 100fps.


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> 
> 
> Been using my 1700x @ 3.9GHz @ 3333MHz Cas16 memory for a few days now with my 1080 Ti. (all my plans were ruined because of the stupid 8700k shortage) PUBG performance was surprisingly bad. I haven't really played with for for an extended period with a 144hz monitor and now I'm seeing all the weaknesses of the playform. it does a lot better with some multithreadded workloads by a significant amount compared to my 7700k but in gaming it's not terrible like bulldozer/piledriver but still losing to intel by a huge margin


Do you have any other gaming experiences to share in regards to the ryzen system? Sounds like PUBG isn't an ideal title to get an overview of the ryzen with higher ram speeds. Was that at 1080p?


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> Do you have any other gaming experiences to share in regards to the ryzen system? Sounds like PUBG isn't an ideal title to get an overview of the ryzen with higher ram speeds. Was that at 1080p?


You may want to inquire here or here instead.


----------



## kd5151

you guys got me looking up micro-atx build options.









fractal design define mini c TG!


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *erocker*
> 
> I'm trying to figure out why my CPU doesn't go into idle voltage at idle. 8700k, basically running stock but all cores are set to 4.7 turbo clocks (MCE is disabled). The chip will downclock under idle, but voltage will not go down from where I set it at 1.22v.


Do you have DVID set for Vcore voltage or is it fixed?


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> PUBG runs pretty badly in every system. It might run even worse on Zen (I wouldn't know), but the game is pretty stuttery with Intel as well.


I was going to say. I've heard horror stories about that game being poorly optimized that I would think it runs crappy on both Ryzen and Intel systems.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CallsignVega*
> 
> PUB has to be the worst designed game I've ever played. *It is so bad, they have an option to turn off your character model in the inventory screen. A stupid crappy 3D model of yourself halves your FPS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> * That PU guy got so lucky designing a piece of garbage and now is rich.


Seriously? For some reason, I couldn't stop laughing when I read this, lol.









Somebody remind me again why this game is so popular.


----------



## SuperZan

It's an adrenaline rush.


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Is that all? I can get an adrenaline rush by playing games that aren't a stuttery mess though, lol.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gmr Chick*
> 
> I was going to say. I've heard horror stories about that game being poorly optimized that I would think it runs crappy on both Ryzen and Intel systems.
> 
> Seriously? For some reason, I couldn't stop laughing when I read this, lol.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Somebody remind me again why this game is so popular.


People like the team survival aspect. The game mode is implemented well, if it wasn't a technical mess then the game would be fine.


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gmr Chick*
> 
> Is that all? I can get an adrenaline rush by playing games that aren't a stuttery mess though, lol.


To be fair, it got much better recently, but it still has other issues (network related).

It's popular in spite of. I guess it speaks volumes about how badly people wanted a BR game done in the way PUBG was.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> People like the team survival aspect. The game mode is implemented well, if it wasn't a technical mess then the game would be fine.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> To be fair, it got much better recently, but it still has other issues (network related).
> 
> It's popular in spite of. I guess it speaks volumes about how badly people wanted a BR game done in the way PUBG was.


Yes and yes.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gmr Chick*
> 
> Is that all? I can get an adrenaline rush by playing games that aren't a stuttery mess though, lol.


It's a good time in a group, though. The buggy nature can be annoying, but it can also be a lot of fun. It's enjoyable to stream because of the random hilarity and goofiness. Also, most of the PvP games with good followings these days are not my jam (don't really care for MOBA's, some Smite or LoL once in a while), I don't COD, Battlefield/ARMA are more intricate than I want at a team level, and Starcraft II is a little too rote for my liking. I can't stand stuff like Paladins or Overwatch (FPS with gimmickry). It sort of ticks all my boxes while being downright hilarious at times.


----------



## kd5151

Socom 2 > pubg

No stock.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> 
> 
> Been using my 1700x @ 3.9GHz @ 3333MHz Cas16 memory for a few days now with my 1080 Ti. (all my plans were ruined because of the stupid 8700k shortage) PUBG performance was surprisingly bad. I haven't really played with for for an extended period with a 144hz monitor and now I'm seeing all the weaknesses of the playform. it does a lot better with some multithreadded workloads by a significant amount compared to my 7700k but in gaming it's not terrible like bulldozer/piledriver but still losing to intel by a huge margin


PUBG ran like crap on 7800X, so not surprising it's bad on Ryzen as well since both of Skylake X and Ryzen have higher memory latency.

Upgrading from 4790K @ 4.8GHz to 8700 @ 5.0 GHz gave me about 20 more FPS in the worst case (lobby, plane, polyana, pochinki, etc). Outside of the large towns I'm seeing tearing because it's locked at 144 FPS and the tear line keeps showing up on the same place. First world problems...

On the GPU side, even at 1440p @ 100% scale I'm _still_ CPU bottlenecked all the way up to 144FPS. They really need to work on getting the # of draw calls down on the asset store models.


----------



## DStealth

Bang at this combined score








https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13935312

29th global result with only six core CPU








https://www.3dmark.com/hall-of-fame-2/fire+strike+3dmark+score+performance+preset/version+1.1/1+gpu


----------



## Arturo.Zise

I'm thinking maybe an i5-8400 would do the job in my 4K ITX system i'm planning. Any idea on when B and H ITX boards are coming?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

PUBG runs like a beauty on my 7800X system. Butter smooth. Can't say the same about the Ryzen one..


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> Do you have any other gaming experiences to share in regards to the ryzen system? Sounds like PUBG isn't an ideal title to get an overview of the ryzen with higher ram speeds. Was that at 1080p?


It's ok with other games. I can hit 144fps with overwatch without breaking a sweat but there are games that it sucks like Dota 2. again it's hit or miss. that's why 8700k is so appealing to me. it's an all rounder. good for games(esp lightly threadded games) AND multithreadded workload

edit:

where are you guys getting your 8700k's? I check stocks every freakin day and I'm not seeing anything


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> PUBG runs like a beauty on my 7800X system. Butter smooth. Can't say the same about the Ryzen one..


Maybe recent updates fixed it. I played with a 7800X system in July and there were a bunch of performance regression vs my old 4790K.


----------



## DStealth

Repeating again and again. Mesh CPUs need fast memory ~4ghz low trfc and Mesh overclock to become comparable.If you try 3ghz[email protected] timings and no mesh OC latency is awful. This is all needed to compensate slow mem latency and the lack of L3 cache and speed.


----------



## Scotty99

Welp finally settled on a motherboard, got asus strix-f. After all the discounts/combos were tallied up got my board for 39.98







Thanks american express.

Now we just need eh.....oh ya CPU's.


----------



## Starbuck5000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Repeating again and again. Mesh CPUs need fast memory ~4ghz low trfc and Mesh overclock to become comparable.If you try [email protected] timings and no mesh OC latency is awful. This is all needed to compensate slow mem latency and the lack of L3 cache and speed.


Do you know if anyone's published results and comparisons testing this anywhere. Skylake-X is still on my radar as an upgrade path so I'd love to see that data.


----------



## DStealth

I tested it myself [email protected] with 2666 cl16 XMP mem and 2400Mhz Mesh (stock) in Valley pushed in low 150FPS extremeHD preset. and Aida ~60-70mb/s with 70-80ns
With just memory @4000 16-16-16-30-300 1T and [email protected]/3300 Valley went to 171-2 (20fps difference) while the same CPU/GPU speed was maintained and Aida64 to 105mb/s with less than 50ns
It's quite a huge difference like night and day and as many reviews are showing results with stock values people are claimg Sl-X as non-gaming CPU which from my experience is totally wrong....I have both 7800x and 8700k while maximum optimized both are acting pretty similar there are situations where x4 L2 cache is helping 7800x +quad channel, there are some where +Mhz on 8700k are in favor...
Here's a third party comparison take a look at 3dmark draw calls deeply -


http://imgur.com/XU6na


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Yeah I just want an official answer. No big deal


Have you received an official answer yet ?

I just noticed that Caseking has edited the page of your product to mention 1.42v instead of 1.4...

It looks like what I assumed is true. They can't get it stable under 1.42 and edit the product page after the sale


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> Have you received an official answer yet ?
> 
> I just noticed that Caseking has edited the page of your product to mention 1.42v instead of 1.4...
> 
> It looks like what I assumed is true. They can't get it stable under 1.42 and edit the product page after the sale


Official response (der8auer actually responded to my caseking's email) is : 1.42V is fine, there was no error.
The page was a copy-paste of the 7700K Ultra edition and that was where the 1.4V come from. That was a mistake.

So yeah, all in all nothing much to say. They test the CPU before swaping the HIS (and maybe before delid, not sure about that) and I maybe won't need to go that high. Der8auer was told by Intel that 1.52V is the limit.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> 3800 cr1 was slower than 3940 cr2 tested...Aida and Spi32m. Higher is not possible on this BIOS and board(Z370) maybe IMC.
> On the other hand i have a screenshot with 38xx 1T on 7800x platform and HT on ...was worst in 6.15 range...
> Anyway 1T with 4 dimms was also not possible at the moment on z370 tried as low as 3Ghz....


So basically +140mhz with the same cas latency and CR2 is enough to more than offset CR1 as long as you equalize the trfc?
Neat.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> I tested it myself [email protected] with 2666 cl16 XMP mem and 2400Mhz Mesh (stock) in Valley pushed in low 150FPS extremeHD preset. and Aida ~60-70mb/s with 70-80ns
> With just memory @4000 16-16-16-30-300 1T and [email protected]/3300 Valley went to 171-2 (20fps difference) while the same CPU/GPU speed was maintained and Aida64 to 105mb/s with less than 50ns
> It's quite a huge difference like night and day and as many reviews are showing results with stock values people are claimg Sl-X as non-gaming CPU which from my experience is totally wrong....I have both 7800x and 8700k while maximum optimized both are acting pretty similar there are situations where x4 L2 cache is helping 7800x +quad channel, there are some where +Mhz on 8700k are in favor...
> Here's a third party comparison take a look at 3dmark draw calls deeply -
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/XU6na


There's a guy with 4x8GB 4200CL16 and 3400 NB clock with 46.4ns. Some cpus can get up to 3500-3600 NB on ambient cooling.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Official response (der8auer actually responded to my caseking's email) is : 1.42V is fine, there was no error.
> The page was a copy-paste of the 7700K Ultra edition and that was where the 1.4V come from. That was a mistake.
> 
> So yeah, all in all nothing much to say. They test the CPU before swaping the HIS (and maybe before delid, not sure about that) and I maybe won't need to go that high. Der8auer was told by Intel that 1.52V is the limit.


How much did you pay?


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> How much did you pay?


https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-core-i7-8700k-5-1-ghz-ultra-edition-cpbu-161.html


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-core-i7-8700k-5-1-ghz-ultra-edition-cpbu-161.html


That does seem like a lot for 1.42v. Dont all 8700K can do 5.0GHz?


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> That does seem like a lot for 1.42v. Dont all 8700K can do 5.0GHz?


I most probably won't need that much voltage as he said. Can't test for now, still waiting for the Formula ^^


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Official response (der8auer actually responded to my caseking's email) is : 1.42V is fine, there was no error.
> The page was a copy-paste of the 7700K Ultra edition and that was where the 1.4V come from. That was a mistake.
> 
> So yeah, all in all nothing much to say. They test the CPU before swaping the HIS (and maybe before delid, not sure about that) and I maybe won't need to go that high. Der8auer was told by Intel that 1.52V is the limit.


Thx for the update. Fair enough, I assume the page with the product that I ordered ("Pro" edition) will updated too when I launch an inquiry so I won't bother. I'll just take it as it is but it's just that the cpu would have been a bit more exclusive at 1.4v than at 1.42v

I was hoping for e.g an easy 5.2Ghz @ 1.38v which could even be squeezed to [email protected] but now I know I can let go of those hopes









anyway no update on my order status yet so it looks like I might be waiting long for my cpu to arrive. You probably lucked out getting ours out of the first batch. Let's hope the cpu doesn't arrive later than the motherboard in my case...


----------



## stefxyz

Havent seen a 5300 8700k stable in the wild yet. I have installed my 5200 Ultra now and it works with the 1.38 volts on the cpu. I have to input 1.4 in the Bios and with LL calibration of 5 in Prime 29.3 (Custom run no AVX) it logs in 1.376 Volts were it runs fine for an hour. Also passed Asus Realbench (with AVX offset of 3) even with XMP on with my 3466 MHZ memory on 5200 and Cache OC to 4600. Temps are 74 max on monoblock and custom EK colling solution with 560mm radiator in push pull.

Less volts system boots but stability tests start to fail so I work on the max there. Cinebench Multi core score of 1724 and single core 227. So I am super happy with my CPU.


----------



## profundido

thx, that's useful information for me to compare. I believe user TKnight got his stable to 5.3Ghz. In your case I would expect you can still up your NB beyond 4600Mhz and reach 230-235 singlethread scores


----------



## Scotty99

So many varying reports on stock lol. Just opened a chat with B+H and they said end of november....silicon lottery still says 10/31, and i think newegg was saying beginning of november-ish.

As an aside, you guys think 5.0ghz is possible without a delid on a be quiet dark rock pro 3?


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> So many varying reports on stock lol. Just opened a chat with B+H and they said end of november....silicon lottery still says 10/31, and i think newegg was saying beginning of november-ish.
> 
> As an aside, you guys think 5.0ghz is possible without a delid on a be quiet dark rock pro 3?


not likely. my 7700k's max oc without delid was 4.9ghz and it was hitting 90+ degrees on aida64 for the first couple of minutes so I can't really call it stable. (with a 280mm rad aio h115i gtx) after delid my 5GHz temps never hits 70's after overnight stress testing lol


----------



## Scotty99

Ya know its weird cause there are wildly varying reports on what you can do on a non delidded chip. Gamers nexus says you can do 5.0ghz without a delid, so does tech deals, but overclockers/uk say you need a delid (they also sell delidded chips tho.....).

Guess i can only wait and see lol.


----------



## QuadDamage

Did anyone get there amazon order for the i7 8700k yet reddit says they are getting there shipped
I'm still stuck waiting ordered on the 5th about 8:40 pst about 10 mins after going live


----------



## Kosmic79

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> Did anyone get there amazon order for the i7 8700k yet reddit says they are getting there shipped
> I'm still stuck waiting ordered on the 5th about 8:40 pst about 10 mins after going live


yeah mine says shipped and should arrive tomorrow.


----------



## QuadDamage

So lucky I'm stuck here at pending feels bad 18 days in


----------



## funkyslayer

Finally time to get up and running. But no chassi yet so will be running ghetto style on box this month


----------



## wickedld9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya know its weird cause there are wildly varying reports on what you can do on a non delidded chip. Gamers nexus says you can do 5.0ghz without a delid, so does tech deals, but overclockers/uk say you need a delid (they also sell delidded chips tho.....).
> 
> Guess i can only wait and see lol.


It really depends on what your definition of stable is. I spent the weekend gaming on mine at 4.9/1.25v. Temps never went over 65c on an 120MM AIO with two Noctua NF-12 fans. This was on an MMO that seems to be happiest at 6 cores (Testing shows ~80% CPU use with 6c/6t). No crashes/bluescreens/etc. Also blitzed through a couple rounds of PUBG. Is it Prime 95 stable? Probably not. Do I care? Not in the least. If I start having problems, I'll investigate more.

Stepping up to 5.0 requires 1.3v for Cinebench to run, I didn't bother game testing it as I wanted to enjoy the little bit of time that I had to myself this weekend rather than trying to make a 100MHz gain stable.

Hoping I get some free time in the next week or so to get it under the custom loop and really dig into tinkering.


----------



## SavantStrike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wickedld9*
> 
> It really depends on what your definition of stable is. I spent the weekend gaming on mine at 4.9/1.25v. Temps never went over 65c on an 120MM AIO with two Noctua NF-12 fans. This was on an MMO that seems to be happiest at 6 cores (Testing shows ~80% CPU use with 6c/6t). No crashes/bluescreens/etc. Also blitzed through a couple rounds of PUBG. Is it Prime 95 stable? Probably not. Do I care? Not in the least. If I start having problems, I'll investigate more.
> 
> Stepping up to 5.0 requires 1.3v for Cinebench to run, I didn't bother game testing it as I wanted to enjoy the little bit of time that I had to myself this weekend rather than trying to make a 100MHz gain stable.
> 
> Hoping I get some free time in the next week or so to get it under the custom loop and really dig into tinkering.


There really is only one kind of stable. Any other kind can result in corrupted data.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> While you posted the AMD official table, B350 has been artificially segmented. If buying a B350 board, most times it's better with a Ryzen 5 quadcore or hexcore if you're overclocking
> Midrange X370 boards with better VRM are overall superior choice to provide headroom for overclocking & future Ryzen refresh upgrades.
> 
> For example, the artificial segmentation is not just the VRM
> * want USB 3.1 gen 2 type C? Only the B350 Pro Carbon from MSI has it (as well as B350 Krait and the new Tomahawk Plus).
> * want ALC1220? The only B350 board that has it and a decent VRM is the B350 Pro Carbon from MSI . The Asus B350-F STRIX has ALC1220 and so does the Gigabyte B350 Gaming 3.
> * want an Intel LAN? Very few B350 boards have it , it's only B350 Pro Carbon + Asus B350-F STRIX if I'm not mistaken
> 
> Ryzen 7 uses roughly the same power regardless of whether you get the X versions or not, once overclocked.


USB 3.1 Gen 2 would be the main example of artificial segmentation. I never understood the logic behind USB-IFs decision to rename USB 3.0 to USB 3.1 gen 1. The new USB 3.1 classifications are horrid, just causes confusion at the consumer level. Manufacturers are taking advantage of this by declaring USB 3.1 but only having Gen 1 which should have remained USB 3.0... Or call Gen 2 USB 3.2 or something else...



Also, the current generation of Ryzen chips have a frequency ceiling of around 4.1 GHz. Even the most basic of B350 boards are capable of overclocking an R7 to 3.9 to 4.0 GHz.


----------



## SavantStrike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> USB 3.1 Gen 2 would be the main example of artificial segmentation. I never understood the logic behind USB-IFs decision to rename USB 3.0 to USB 3.1 gen 1. The new USB 3.1 classifications are horrid, just causes confusion at the consumer level. Manufacturers are taking advantage of this by declaring USB 3.1 but only having Gen 1 which should have remained USB 3.0... Or call Gen 2 USB 3.2 or something else...
> 
> 
> 
> Also, the current generation of Ryzen chips have a frequency ceiling of around 4.1 GHz. Even the most basic of B350 boards are capable of overclocking an R7 to 3.9 to 4.0 GHz.


If you look back in time a similar situation happened with USB 2.0 to 3.0, it's just even more confusing this time around.


----------



## NorcalTRD

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=6045406

IN STOCK
GO GO GO!

$430ish with tax


----------



## kd5151

Type in Newegg.com
Type in 8700k
Look for 8700K
Found 8700K
Click on 8700K.
Add to cart.......


----------



## QuadDamage

I just canceled my amazon order got the tiger direct with 1 day shipping going to cost me 50 bucks more but a Big F u to amazon


----------



## NorcalTRD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> I just canceled my amazon order got the tiger direct with 1 day shipping going to cost me 50 bucks more but a Big F u to amazon












I did the same with my BLT preorder. They moved expected date from today to fricken JANUARY


----------



## QuadDamage

Tiger has them in STOCK right now if u want to pay for the 1 day shipping if u pay via paypal u can get 20 bucks off the whole order
Mine is already in the warehouse getting ready to ship out processed ect

Way better then my 5th 8:30 Am amazon order with pending for 18 days with NOTHING


----------



## NorcalTRD

I almost bought the limit of 9 to resell on ebay but decided to post here instead and let everyone have a go at it


----------



## SavantStrike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> I almost bought the limit of 9 to resell on ebay but decided to post here instead and let everyone have a go at it


Scalpers are disgusting human beings. You made the right call.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

My order at TigerDirect from 30mins ago now says "pending review". I think a cancellation is imminent.


----------



## sKorcheDeArtH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=6045406
> 
> IN STOCK
> GO GO GO!
> 
> $430ish with tax


Limit of 8 Per Customer


----------



## kd5151

it was in stock at newegg. but now its gone.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> I tested it myself [email protected] with 2666 cl16 XMP mem and 2400Mhz Mesh (stock) in Valley pushed in low 150FPS extremeHD preset. and Aida ~60-70mb/s with 70-80ns
> With just memory @4000 16-16-16-30-300 1T and [email protected]/3300 Valley went to 171-2 (20fps difference) while the same CPU/GPU speed was maintained and Aida64 to 105mb/s with less than 50ns
> It's quite a huge difference like night and day and as many reviews are showing results with stock values people are claimg Sl-X as non-gaming CPU which from my experience is totally wrong....I have both 7800x and 8700k while maximum optimized both are acting pretty similar there are situations where x4 L2 cache is helping 7800x +quad channel, there are some where +Mhz on 8700k are in favor...
> Here's a third party comparison take a look at 3dmark draw calls deeply -
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/XU6na


Do you have some benchmarks to show improvement with quad channel?


----------



## DStealth

Improvement from what. If you're asking about stock Aida64 results no, i don't have just OC ones.

If you're asking in regards to dual channel 8700k on z370 one-two pages previous you can see my SuperPI32m where +130Mhz are not enough to catch. Of course the benefit from dual to quad channel is not marginal in real world performance but in some synthetics measuring bandwidth it's almost twice.




At the end if i can take 8700k on x299 platform with quad channel ...this would be the combo of the decade...


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> My order at TigerDirect from 30mins ago now says "pending review". I think a cancellation is imminent.


Regarding this, it wasn't cancelled, but apparently "in stock" means "on backorder".

Looking back, it probably didn't say "in stock"; the add to cart button seems available regardless.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Improvement from what. If you're asking about stock Aida64 results no, i don't have just OC ones.
> 
> If you're asking in regards to dual channel 8700k on z370 one-two pages previous you can see my SuperPI32m where +130Mhz are not enough to catch. Of course the benefit from dual to quad channel is not marginal in real world performance but in some synthetics measuring bandwidth it's almost twice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At the end if i can take 8700k on x299 platform with quad channel ...this would be the combo of the decade...


I was just wondering if you had a Benchmark or link with real world performance increase comparing the same setup with dual channel then quad channel memory?


----------



## CallsignVega

I just happened to refresh the 8700K on Newegg and snagged one. Should be here before the weekend. Hopefully I don't get a dud!


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I was just wondering if you had a Benchmark or link with real world performance increase comparing the same setup with dual channel then quad channel memory?


Nope, never did such thing like disabling quad channel for comparison.
But someone like @GreedyMuffin still has the configuration and if has time can do some screenshots with quad and dual maybe ?


----------



## Neo_Morpheus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-core-i7-8700k-5-1-ghz-ultra-edition-cpbu-161.html
> 
> 
> 
> That does seem like a lot for 1.42v. Dont all 8700K can do 5.0GHz?
Click to expand...

or if your enthusiastic enough you could buy a few and bin the chips yourself. Then send it in for a delidding.


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Neo_Morpheus*
> 
> or if your enthusiastic enough you could buy a few and bin the chips yourself. Then send it in for a delidding.


Why would you send it in to somewhere else to have delidding done when you can do it yourself in less than half an hour for just a few dollars.

Delidding isn't hard, nor expensive. It's like shipping your car back to the factory to get an oil change done.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asmodian*
> 
> Nothing, and it pretty much always over clocks worse.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> USB 3.1 Gen 2 would be the main example of artificial segmentation. I never understood the logic behind USB-IFs decision to rename USB 3.0 to USB 3.1 gen 1. The new USB 3.1 classifications are horrid, just causes confusion at the consumer level. Manufacturers are taking advantage of this by declaring USB 3.1 but only having Gen 1 which should have remained USB 3.0... Or call Gen 2 USB 3.2 or something else...
> 
> 
> 
> Also, the current generation of Ryzen chips have a frequency ceiling of around 4.1 GHz. Even the most basic of B350 boards are capable of overclocking an R7 to 3.9 to 4.0 GHz.


I didn't know that USB 3.1 Gen1 is the new name of USB 3.0. All along, I thought it's a newer version of USB 3.0. So does that mean that the USB 3.0 devices and new USB Type-C devices have the same theoretical 5Gbps speed?

@All

How do you get a discount in TigerDirect when paying via PayPal?


----------



## DStealth

Some old-school benchmarking...This CPU is processing everything thrown to it


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Improvement from what. If you're asking about stock Aida64 results no, i don't have just OC ones.
> 
> If you're asking in regards to dual channel 8700k on z370 one-two pages previous you can see my SuperPI32m where +130Mhz are not enough to catch. Of course the benefit from dual to quad channel is not marginal in real world performance but in some synthetics measuring bandwidth it's almost twice.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At the end if i can take 8700k on x299 platform with quad channel ...this would be the combo of the decade...


That 37ns latency is insane for DDR4. Even DDR3 can barely hit that without the best chips. Gonna see some SuperPi 32M runs with that.


----------



## DStealth

I posted already @5300 CPU go back and see post #5114
With some optimizations should get into 5mins I assume.
Actually searching my submissions from the early 2011 2600k with the same clocks is barely slower ~20sec

Edit: In fact even a 6/12 CPU in the beginning of 2012 was relatively close in 32m SuperPI


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Asmodian*
> 
> Nothing, and it pretty much always over clocks worse.
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> USB 3.1 Gen 2 would be the main example of artificial segmentation. I never understood the logic behind USB-IFs decision to rename USB 3.0 to USB 3.1 gen 1. The new USB 3.1 classifications are horrid, just causes confusion at the consumer level. Manufacturers are taking advantage of this by declaring USB 3.1 but only having Gen 1 which should have remained USB 3.0... Or call Gen 2 USB 3.2 or something else...
> 
> 
> 
> Also, the current generation of Ryzen chips have a frequency ceiling of around 4.1 GHz. Even the most basic of B350 boards are capable of overclocking an R7 to 3.9 to 4.0 GHz.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I didn't know that USB 3.1 Gen1 is the new name of USB 3.0. All along, I thought it's a newer version of USB 3.0. So does that mean that the USB 3.0 devices and new USB Type-C devices have the same theoretical 5Gbps speed?
> 
> @All
> 
> How do you get a discount in TigerDirect when paying via PayPal?
Click to expand...

Yes USB 3.1 gen 1 has 5Gb/s speed.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Improvement from what. If you're asking about stock Aida64 results no, i don't have just OC ones.
> 
> If you're asking in regards to dual channel 8700k on z370 one-two pages previous you can see my SuperPI32m where +130Mhz are not enough to catch. Of course the benefit from dual to quad channel is not marginal in real world performance but in some synthetics measuring bandwidth it's almost twice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At the end if i can take 8700k on x299 platform with quad channel ...this would be the combo of the decade...


Can you run Intel MLC on both machines?

https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intelr-memory-latency-checker

You'll need to run as admin since it needs to disable prefetching.


----------



## Scotty99

Man how do i always miss out on stock lol. Ive had newegg email me updates that 8700k was in, asleep all 3 times.


----------



## Cpt Phasma

^ Better whip up a pot of coffee then!


----------



## Brutuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> In the past we only had 4 cores 8 threads, not 6 cores 12 threads or potentially 8 cores 16 threads on intel mainstream platform, changes made to CPU power delivery for a reason.


Considering that thanks to the changes in 14nm++, an 8700k at stock is at a similar power consumption to a stock 7700k and that the socket is actually vastly over-rated for what these CPUs will ever hope to use, that reason was "to force people to buy a new motherboard for this CPU" more than anything. Even with the changes, there's no reason for the incompatibility...Look at AM3/AM3+; the difference is in the power delivery because FX was so power hungry compared to FX. Yet the socket handled it fine. If there's still a legitimate technical reason for it then it makes me of think that PGA is better than LGA because AM3+s only issues with power hungry CPUs was cheap MSI and Gigabyte boards. (iirc at least some ASUS/ASRock implemented a throttle to the CPU clock based on VRM temps which prevented it from blowing those up)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> Why would you send it in to somewhere else to have delidding done when you can do it yourself in less than half an hour for just a few dollars.
> 
> Delidding isn't hard, nor expensive. It's like shipping your car back to the factory to get an oil change done.


Because there's always that chance that delidding will kill your CPU. I was using the razor method and killed my 3570k last week. (Got a 3770k in the mail already, tho)
And yes, the "foolproof" der8auer method can still result in a dead CPU, it's just much less likely than the razor method. (That said, out of 30+ delids, this is the first one I took seriously and still had hardware death occur.)


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Some old-school benchmarking...This CPU is processing everything thrown to it


Do you have a aida64 version of the 3930-3940 15-15-15-30 300 CR2? The 3770 15-15-15-30 300 CR1 is around 37.3ns.

http://cdn.overclock.net/6/69/6977da4c_6700k204.7-4.2cache20spd-2133c15.jpeg
This one is 56.5ns with an NB clock of 4200 ( 2133C15 )
http://cdn.overclock.net/d/df/dfc867a5_6700k204.720spd-2133c15.jpeg
54.7ns with an NB clock of 4700 ( 2133C15 )

http://cdn.overclock.net/2/29/290a5b22_6700k204.7204000c17.jpeg
This one is 37.3ns with an NB clock of 4700 ( 4000C17 CR2 )


----------



## DStealth

I have at home will upload in a couple of hours but it's pretty similar from what i remember just write is higher as copy with a couple of MB/s 58/55 something and latency remains in 37.xxns range.









Edit: Here's how I use it now with less voltage 1.42v for 2T

My CPU is unreal overclocking synchronous CPU and Cache both on 52 multi








Edit: Just disabled HT for benching


----------



## evensen007

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117825&ignorebbr=1

8600k's in stock at NewEgg.


----------



## Scotty99

For 300 that is the worst purchase ever. That is 120 dollars more than the locked i5 lol.


----------



## jellybeans69

Lol that's even worse price i bought mine and that was with 23% VAT we have in EU


----------



## evensen007

Well hey, when you're desperate you're desperate!









Just passing it on!


----------



## mdd1986

is an 8700k at $399 even a good buy?


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> is an 8700k at $399 even a good buy?


I'd buy it for 399 right now(but I won't go above 400). so tired of waiting


----------



## DStealth

With just HT off
Single core is 3-4 points higher:


----------



## Scotty99

Im not gonna pay 400, 380 id do tho.


----------



## mdd1986

yea I agree $380 would be my max. There were plenty of chances to buy it at $399+ just doesn't seem worth it to me.


----------



## Scotty99

Destiny 2 is live for PC, im getting same FPS as beta so SMT is definitely not fixed yet.


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> yea I agree $380 would be my max. There were plenty of chances to buy it at $399+ just doesn't seem worth it to me.


I look at the total package.

I found the RAM I want on sale. (GSkill Trident Z 3600 CL16 for $185) Saved $30
I got my motherboard on sale. (Gigabyte Z370 Aorus Gaming 7 for $199) Saved $50

So I'm willing to spend a little extra on the CPU. Even at $400 I'm still $40 ahead on the whole package.

Now, if you want to choke on an outrageous price, take a look at what Micro Center is wanting...

http://www.microcenter.com/product/486088/core_i7-8700k_coffee_lake_37_ghz_lga_1151_boxed_processor

That's outrageous.

*EDIT* I posted that and then noticed that it's actually in stock at my local store. Wonder how long it will take for someone to buy it at that price.


----------



## Scotty99

lol ya i should probably be a little less stingy, i paid 39.98 for my motherboard...

I cant wait til we get stock, destiny 2 hates ryzen.


----------



## mdd1986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> I look at the total package.
> 
> I found the RAM I want on sale. (GSkill Trident Z 3600 CL16 for $185) Saved $30
> I got my motherboard on sale. (Gigabyte Z370 Aorus Gaming 7 for $199) Saved $50
> 
> So I'm willing to spend a little extra on the CPU. Even at $400 I'm still $40 ahead on the whole package.
> 
> Now, if you want to choke on an outrageous price, take a look at what Micro Center is wanting...
> 
> http://www.microcenter.com/product/486088/core_i7-8700k_coffee_lake_37_ghz_lga_1151_boxed_processor
> 
> That's outrageous.
> 
> *EDIT* I posted that and then noticed that it's actually in stock at my local store. Wonder how long it will take for someone to buy it at that price.


I wasn't planning to spend more than $200 on memory and $160 on a motherboard so thats not real savings to be honest. It will also feel bad in a month or two when they are selling for $370-$380.


----------



## evensen007

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117827&ignorebbr=1

8700k in stock!


----------



## Hattifnatten

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117827&ignorebbr=1
> 
> 8700k in stock!


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hattifnatten*


They were gone before he posted that they were in stock.


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> I wasn't planning to spend more than $200 on memory and $160 on a motherboard so thats not real savings to be honest. It will also feel bad in a month or two when they are selling for $370-$380.


$160 wouldn't buy a motherboard that I can use without having to spend another $50+ on additional peripheral. And an extra $20 wouldn't bother me a bit. $120 more would bother me, but an extra $20 to get the CPU now rather than praying I could find one before Christmas... well worth it.


----------



## osb40000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> I have at home will upload in a couple of hours but it's pretty similar from what i remember just write is higher as copy with a couple of MB/s 58/55 something and latency remains in 37.xxns range.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: Here's how I use it now with less voltage 1.42v for 2T
> 
> My CPU is unreal overclocking synchronous CPU and Cache both on 52 multi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: Just disabled HT for benching


Are you using the beta bios? Did you change secondary memory timings? What settings did you use for VCCIO and System Agent?

I can't get just about anything to post right now. I just threw it together and need to play with the memory (I'm a novice).


----------



## Seyumi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *osb40000*
> 
> Are you using the beta bios? Did you change secondary memory timings? What settings did you use for VCCIO and System Agent?
> 
> I can't get just about anything to post right now. I just threw it together and need to play with the memory (I'm a novice).


Saw your previous posts and noticed you bought 4133mhz ram. I wouldn't hold your breath on BIOS fixes to fix your stability issues. Most memory cannot go higher than 3600mhz if you have an overclocked CPU. More of less the higher your overclock the less ram speed you can achieve. I've noticed this behavior on previous generations such as Z270, Z170, x99, etc. This is mostly with XMP profile. People have gotten higher if they spend weeks tweaking all the #'s and voltages ever so perfectly but I can't be bothered. If your still in the return window, I'd return your 4133 and get something cheaper like 3600. Obviously you want a higher clocked CPU vs RAM.

I'm curious what the top XMP stability speeds are with a significantly overclocked 8700k on the Z370 series. It might be slightly higher like 3733 or maybe even 3866.


----------



## mdd1986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> $160 wouldn't buy a motherboard that I can use without having to spend another $50+ on additional peripheral. And an extra $20 wouldn't bother me a bit. $120 more would bother me, but an extra $20 to get the CPU now rather than praying I could find one before Christmas... well worth it.


Sure if you think you need to spend $200 on a mobo have fun. Ill happily wait until Q1 2018 to get one for the right price.


----------



## QuadDamage

My buddy was able to snag a newegg motherboard and cpu deal on the 18th and his pre order from the 5th

He is sending me his pre order from the 5th I'll have my cpu on Friday I also got a gtx 1080 ftw to replace my 1070

I'm just not sure if I want to part my sandy system or sell it for cheap to a friend. I might just sell my 1070 and 800D both are still great items


----------



## kd5151




----------



## NorcalTRD

The tigerdirect 8700k I ordered yesterday, remained "in stock" for another hour after I placed.
Then they change order from processed to, all backordered, now it says pending review.
I call and ask *** is going on, guy says he thinks its all on backorder. I say cancel, he then tells me well they would be drop shipped so he needs to make sure it hasnt shipped. Then he apparently cant figure out if it has or not and wont cancel the order.
Right after this, my distill alarm goes off so i start refreshing newegg. Finally see it say in stock, click add to cart and the cart page loads only to say item removed due to insufficient availability. this happens three times and returns to Out Of Stock.
I also cancelled my blt preorder because they pushed back their expected stock arrival to January 2018.

Im so over this bull**** release.


----------



## QuadDamage

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> The tigerdirect 8700k I ordered yesterday, remained "in stock" for another hour after I placed.
> Then they change order from processed to, all backordered, now it says pending review.
> I call and ask *** is going on, guy says he thinks its all on backorder. I say cancel, he then tells me well they would be drop shipped so he needs to make sure it hasnt shipped. Then he apparently cant figure out if it has or not and wont cancel the order.
> Right after this, my distill alarm goes off so i start refreshing newegg. Finally see it say in stock, click add to cart and the cart page loads only to say item removed due to insufficient availability. this happens three times and returns to Out Of Stock.
> I also cancelled my blt preorder because they pushed back their expected stock arrival to January 2018.
> 
> Im so over this bull**** release.


%100 full ur pain had the same issue with tiger direct last night. They lost a customer for life. I had to deal with the same bull****
I cancled my amazon order so I was really f'ed but I was lucky enought to have a gaming buddy will to reship his newegg order to me

I was one of the Amazon 5th 8 AM order btw STILL NOT SHIPPED out. My same buddy has his order stuck he is going to cancel today so that's 2 more cancels


----------



## TMatzelle60

Microcenter is crap. i have stopped shopping there after i saw them take boards that customers said were bad and resell them.

Im kinda tempted on going ryzen now with a AMD Vega 64


----------



## NeoandGeo

In stock at Newegg...Wait, no it's not. :|


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NeoandGeo*
> 
> In stock at Newegg...Wait, no it's not. :|


----------



## Raghar

In this thread... Some people are acting like spoiled brats. I have money and I want it now.

I'm pretty sure Intel is manufacturing them as fast as they can, to not lose any profits before Xmas. And up to two month wait is occasionally normal in PC HW, as long as there is competition. Companies doesn't dare to pre-stock, and let competition to get more market share because of delay.


----------



## CallsignVega

Just bought my 4th 8700K from Newegg, so they do keep popping up just one and two at a time.


----------



## NeoandGeo

Why, hello Intel employee, hello there guy that I hope is buying them to help out others at cost.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NeoandGeo*
> 
> Why, hello Intel employee, hello there guy that I hope is buying them to help out others at cost.


The people who sell them for $600 i hope they get stuck with them and lose the whatever they spent on them


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Im kinda tempted on going ryzen now *with a AMD Vega 64*


Why punish yourself like that?









On a side note while Vega 64 and the i7-8700K are both suffering from being in short supply and there's some unseemly profit-taking going on in the market, at least the 8700K's situation can be _somewhat_ justified by being best in its class. That's far more than can be said for Vega...


----------



## Xeio

Got my 8700k today from B&H Photo, now I just have to wait for the MOBO/RAM that should be delivered tomorrow...


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> In this thread... Some people are acting like spoiled brats. I have money and I want it now.


No offense guys, but I have to agree with @Raghar on this one. People losing their F'ing minds over what, a slight bump in performance over 7th gen i5's and i7's and two additional cores. Relax people. Your precious 8700K's will be in full supply eventually. I bet most of you here in this thread don't even really need the damn thing besides. People still on Ivy, maybe even Sandy, Haswell, or on the AMD side Phenoms and FX's I can see upgrading. But people on Skylake or Kaby? Not so much. Especially given that the "new" Z370 chipset is already probably obsolete. I wouldn't be surprised if they make people buy yet ANOTHER new board for whatever "Lake" is after Coffee.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> The people who sell them for $600 i hope they get stuck with them and lose the whatever they spent on them


https://www.ebay.com/sch/CPUs-Processors/164/i.html?_from=R40&_nkw=8700k&LH_Complete=1&LH_Sold=1&rt=nc&_trksid=p2045573.m1684


----------



## WexleySnoops

I really don't understand the desperation of some people...

Do you NEED to be paying 2x MSRP to get this damn thing?

Sheesh...


----------



## NorcalTRD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WexleySnoops*
> 
> I really don't understand the desperation of some people...
> 
> Do you NEED to be paying 2x MSRP to get this damn thing?
> 
> Sheesh...


More than a few people have $2k+ in computer parts sitting on a counter waiting for their CPU.

Intel should have been much more prepared for a launch.
This is the equivalent of Ford releasing a 2018 Mustang and you preorder it, then you dont get it until 2019 models are about to come out lol.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> Intel should have been much more prepared for a launch.


Coffee Lake was never planned for this year. Just another needed reactionary response to Ryzen.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> More than a few people have $2k+ in computer parts sitting on a counter waiting for their CPU.
> 
> Intel should have been much more prepared for a launch.
> This is the equivalent of Ford releasing a 2018 Mustang and you preorder it, then you dont get it until 2019 models are about to come out lol.


This!!!

All my parts are sitting here with for months now.


----------



## Rei86

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> More than a few people have $2k+ in computer parts sitting on a counter waiting for their CPU.
> 
> Intel should have been much more prepared for a launch.
> This is the equivalent of Ford releasing a 2018 Mustang and you preorder it, then you dont get it until 2019 models are about to come out lol.


Yeah and than the dealer sells you a 2019 MY in late 2018.... This is kind of normal in the car world if you want that hot new IT thing.

Also these products + the ones above 7900X are all Intel reacting to AMD.


----------



## BackwoodsNC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gmr Chick*
> 
> No offense guys, but I have to agree with @Raghar on this one. People losing their F'ing minds over what, a slight bump in performance over 7th gen i5's and i7's and two additional cores. Relax people. Your precious 8700K's will be in full supply eventually. I bet most of you here in this thread don't even really need the damn thing besides. People still on Ivy, maybe even Sandy, Haswell, or on the AMD side Phenoms and FX's I can see upgrading. But people on Skylake or Kaby? Not so much. Especially given that the "new" Z370 chipset is already probably obsolete. I wouldn't be surprised if they make people buy yet ANOTHER new board for whatever "Lake" is after Coffee.


Completely agree on that first part. I had a 7700k and was not happy going from a 5820k to a 7700k. I run a fourth monitor for the niche game i play and the cpu was maxing out most of the time even at 5ghz. Musta got lucky to get my 8700k when they went back in stock at egg!


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> Intel should have been much more prepared for a launch.
> 
> 
> 
> Coffee Lake was never planned for this year. Just another needed reactionary response to Ryzen.
Click to expand...

The release date of the Z370 was planed in 2016.

Intel 2016 road map.


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> Sure if you think you need to spend $200 on a mobo have fun. Ill happily wait until Q1 2018 to get one for the right price.


Well, if all I did with my PC was play a few old, low spec games then I'm sure I could wait too. But my PC gets used for professional purposes, so my requirements and hardware needs are just a bit higher than an old i5 2500k can provide.


----------



## SavantStrike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The release date of the Z370 was planed in 2016.
> 
> Intel 2016 road map.


It looks like it was really targeted at q1 2018 for any real volume. This would explain the shortage right now.

Honestly people should be more upset about z370 than anything else. It's going to be a very short lived chipset that is really just z270, which itself is really just a refreshed z170.


----------



## mdd1986

as others have mentioned in this thread amazing what lengths people will go through to have the latest and greatest. My 2500K has lasted my 5 years and runs pretty much all the games I play reasonably well. I Can wait another few months so I don't have to break the bank to have it now. Better yet people try to justify buying it now for a higher price by "saving" on other parts. Give me a break. Even Motherboard prices seem high right now.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> as others have mentioned in this thread amazing what lengths people will go through to have the latest and greatest. My 2500K has lasted my 5 years and runs pretty much all the games I play reasonably well. I Can wait another few months so I don't have to break the bank to have it now. Better yet people try to justify buying it now for a higher price by "saving" on other parts. Give me a break. Even Motherboard prices seem high right now.


You are playing at 4K (if we can trust people signature), so yeah, your CPU won't matter much.


----------



## mdd1986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> You are playing at 4K (if we can trust people signature), so yeah, your CPU won't matter much.


I game at 1080 or 1440p. My GPU is more of a bottleneck than my CPU right now. But like I said I'm not one of those people that has to have latest and greatest right now even if I need top FPS all the time.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SavantStrike*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The release date of the Z370 was planed in 2016.
> 
> Intel 2016 road map.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It looks like it was really targeted at q1 2018 for any real volume. This would explain the shortage right now.
> 
> Honestly people should be more upset about z370 than anything else. It's going to be a very short lived chipset that is really just z270, which itself is really just a refreshed z170.
Click to expand...

What target are seeing in the graph Q1 2018?


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> You are playing at 4K (if we can trust people signature), so yeah, your CPU won't matter much.


With only 4 cores, I'd be looking to upgrade if possible (even @ 4k). Its choking the hell out of the Ti here and the stutter is very apparent:


----------



## SavantStrike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What target are seeing in the graph Q1 2018?


I said it looks like q1 was when it would have started shipping in volume, which is exactly what's happening right now. Paper launch with limited volume. Yes, it came out in q4 '17, no it really available in volume. This happens all the time.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

If people are worried about Z370 just get the cheap stuff in $150 price range. You can sell it after.


----------



## SavantStrike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> If people are worried about Z370 just get the cheap stuff in $150 price range. You can sell it after.


Previous gen gear is pretty attractive right now.


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The release date of the Z370 was planed in 2016.
> 
> Intel 2016 road map.


Are you trolling? Intel wouldn't release Z390 at all when Z370 wouldn't be just a quick response.

And that image is dated mid this year. KKnews had it in August. They are using previous year just for continuity reasons. They are using it to show previous chipsets, to ensure the roadmap would be viewed in context.


----------



## MaKeN

Just came back from local microcenter... the have 6 cpu left at 429$ still big price considering taxes


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SavantStrike*
> 
> It looks like it was really targeted at q1 2018 for any real volume. This would explain the shortage right now.
> 
> Honestly people should be more upset about z370 than anything else. It's going to be a very short lived chipset that is really just z270, which itself is really just a refreshed z170.


...which itself is really just a refreshed Z97, which itself is really just a refreshed Z87, which itself is really just a refreshed Z77, which itself is really just a refreshed Z68, ...

Intel could have gone with 8 cores and put a nail in the AMD coffin but why, they will rather milk some years more with just 6 cores and smaller silicon. They will keep refreshing until they can no longer afford to do it due to competition.


----------



## DStealth

Upping


----------



## SavantStrike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> ...which itself is really just a refreshed Z97, which itself is really just a refreshed Z87, which itself is really just a refreshed Z77, which itself is really just a refreshed Z68, ...
> 
> Intel could have gone with 8 cores and put a nail in the AMD coffin but why, they will rather milk some years more with just 6 cores and smaller silicon. They will keep refreshing until they can no longer afford to do it due to competition.


Z170 is a bit more than refreshed z97, but I agree with you for the most part. Intel is milking this. They have no need to compete with their own products, so when AMD can't deliver, the market stagnates.


----------



## kd5151

Kaby lake is a lake filled with milk.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SavantStrike*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The release date of the Z370 was planed in 2016.
> 
> Intel 2016 road map.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It looks like it was really targeted at q1 2018 for any real volume. This would explain the shortage right now.
> 
> Honestly people should be more upset about z370 than anything else. It's going to be a very short lived chipset that is really just z270, which itself is really just a refreshed z170.
Click to expand...

i don't know about that. from the looks of that road map the z370 has the usual 4 quarters but the z270 is 3.

if anything the 270 looks temporary for intel to market optane.


----------



## stangflyer

I have made the decision to wait for Ice Lake and 390.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The release date of the Z370 was planed in 2016.
> 
> Intel 2016 road map.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you trolling? Intel wouldn't release Z390 at all when Z370 wouldn't be just a quick response.
> 
> And that image is dated mid this year. KKnews had it in August. They are using previous year just for continuity reasons. They are using it to show previous chipsets, to ensure the roadmap would be viewed in context.
Click to expand...

I think your the one that is trolling because Intel decides what there going to do years before product launches. There is no proof that the road map was not created in 2016 by Intel, how did you come up with your 'forum-level' conjecture?


----------



## QuadDamage

I'm getting my CPU on Friday I'll post pics ect


----------



## RXWX

Interesting to see the 8 Core 16 Thread CFL or CNL?? chips next year on the Z390


----------



## NorcalTRD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> I'm getting my CPU on Friday I'll post pics ect


Im jealous


----------



## QuadDamage

Well like I said my Amazon 5th pre order was canceled I don't feel bad and most people still have not gotten anything shipped. I had to deal with that whole tiger direct bull. I was lucky enough for a gaming buddy to get 2 and sell me one at cos. There are a few good people left online. It also helps if u play games with them







He is one of the guys I play PUBG with we tend to get 20 + kills together so it's a good time


----------



## NorcalTRD

Even with web monitors I cant get through neweggs checkout successfully.
I click add to cart and it goes to the next page only to say removed from cart due to insufficient stock.
Repeat this for 4 minutes until page says out of stock again.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RXWX*
> 
> Interesting to see the 8 Core 16 Thread CFL or CNL?? chips next year on the Z390


8700K > 7800x. 8790K > 7820x. Sorry didn't take my crazy pills today.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> 8700K > 7800x. 8790K > 7820x. Sorry didn't take my crazy pills today.


Only reason to deliver an 8 core product on the mainstream platform is if 6 cores are not competive with 8 core Ryzen 12 nm refresh that is due out in Q1 2018......


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> 8700K > 7800x. 8790K > 7820x. Sorry didn't take my crazy pills today.


The more cores, the worse off ring bus architecture is and better off mesh architecture is.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Only reason to deliver an 8 core product on the mainstream platform is if 6 cores are not competive with 8 core Ryzen 12 nm refresh that is due out in Q1 2018......


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> The more cores, the worse off ring bus architecture is and better off mesh architecture is.


6 core was easy to figure out. the 8 core not so much. always in motion the future is.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> The more cores, the worse off ring bus architecture is and better off mesh architecture is.


Intel has already moved to mesh architecture on Xeon and HEDT CPUs this year(Skylake), mainstream should follow suit...


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Only reason to deliver an 8 core product on the mainstream platform is if 6 cores are not competive with 8 core Ryzen 12 nm refresh that is due out in Q1 2018......


That doesn't matter. Intel can't really shift plans on the fly. If an 8-core is planned for 9th gen, that's what we'll get. If it's not planned, then we won't get it. It's that simple. The only things AMD will influence are pricing, tiering, launch timing, and maybe products 2-3 years down the road.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> That doesn't matter. Intel can't really shift plans on the fly. If an 8-core is planned for 9th gen, that's what we'll get. If it's not planned, then we won't get it. It's that simple. The only things AMD will influence are pricing, tiering, launch timing, and maybe products 2-3 years down the road.


Intel plans on milking the consumer as much as Intel can get away with. It is no surprise why we have been on 4 cores for the last 11 years and all of a sudden there is competition and we are jumping to 8 cores within 18 months.

Hell, this roadmap everyone keeps referring to was just "leaked" a month ago...


----------



## DStealth

Found very odd behavior from my Asrock board...according XTU CPU voltage was set to adaptive instead of fixed. Just fixed it to 1.42v and boom 1800 CB15 score










Edit: wowz


----------



## Ultracarpet

You guys and your overclockin... I'm over here undervolting my locked i5. Went from 1.15v under load at stock to 1.01v. So you know, I'm cool too.


----------



## kd5151

can i overclock the stock? i think we need to speed up the process.


----------



## tiefox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Found very odd behavior from my Asrock board...according XTU CPU voltage was set to adaptive instead of fixed. Just fixed it to 1.42v and boom 1800 CB15 score
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: wowz


Which memory kit are you using?


----------



## tashcz

That memory... that's just nasty. I think you surpass most of 5.5GHz overclocks (if any stable ones exist) that use mid-ranged 3200MHz with those timings and clock. One sick machine you got there.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tiefox*
> 
> Which memory kit are you using?


You can see them on CB15 screenshot - Corair 4*8gb 3400 c16 ....not shining on this platform thru...on x299 did 4200 15-14-14-28-280-1t in quad channel fo benching with less than 1.5v
On this platform 1T is doable with only two of the modules up to 3900Mhz so does with 4 but 2T is needed.


----------



## kd5151

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-core-i5-8400-cpu,5281.html

i5-8400 review from toms hardware.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Intel plans on milking the consumer as much as Intel can get away with. It is no surprise why we have been on 4 cores for the last 11 years and all of a sudden there is competition and we are jumping to 8 cores within 18 months.
> 
> Hell, this roadmap everyone keeps referring to was just "leaked" a month ago...


Coffee Lake obviously wasn't a response to Ryzen (other than the paper launch), and it takes time to develop a die, so it's not likely that the 8-core is a response either. 18 months is maybe just barely enough time to make the die, but closer to two years is more likely. The thing is that it can't be a response to Ryzen sales since that reduces the window to 12-15 months, which definitely isn't enough. My guess, based on everything I've seen and heard, is that the original plan was for Kaby Lake to launch last year, followed by Cannonlake on desktop this year with up to 8 cores. This could be a response to the rumors and leaks about Zen, but it more likely would have just been a way to finally get Sandy Bridge users to finally upgrade. Either way, we were moving on from 4 cores in 8th gen even if Ryzen flopped.


----------



## kd5151

Core Wars : The last quad core.


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Core Wars : The last quad core.


Feels that way, doesn't it?









In all seriousness, this new core war kind of remindes me of the horsepower war of the 60's and very early 70's, something every muscle car enthusiast should know about regardless if they were around back then or not. The "Big 3" were all trying to outdo each other when it came to power...until the gas crisis hit and basically ended the "Pony Car Wars". Although nowdays, especially in recent years, the war has seen a return to form, a race if you will to see who can make the most power.

I'm wondering though when it comes to Intel's long standing Core architecture -- namely, has it reached its peak performance? I mean, how much more can they possibly squeeze out of it?


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Found very odd behavior from my Asrock board...according XTU CPU voltage was set to adaptive instead of fixed. Just fixed it to 1.42v and boom 1800 CB15 score
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: wowz


sooo....which plaftorm (the 7800vs8700) do you intend on keeping NOW ?


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> sooo....which plaftorm (the 7800vs8700) do you intend on keeping NOW ?


Already sold x299+7800x as for benching 8700k is stronger, lets see how long will be.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Coffee Lake obviously wasn't a response to Ryzen (other than the paper launch), and it takes time to develop a die, so it's not likely that the 8-core is a response either. 18 months is maybe just barely enough time to make the die, but closer to two years is more likely. The thing is that it can't be a response to Ryzen sales since that reduces the window to 12-15 months, which definitely isn't enough. My guess, based on everything I've seen and heard, is that the original plan was for Kaby Lake to launch last year, followed by Cannonlake on desktop this year with up to 8 cores. This could be a response to the rumors and leaks about Zen, but it more likely would have just been a way to finally get Sandy Bridge users to finally upgrade. Either way, we were moving on from 4 cores in 8th gen even if Ryzen flopped.


You do realize that Intel has had 6 to 24 core variants in their product stack for years now... If you think Intel can't adapt their product lineup within 6 to 9 of competitive product launches then let me refer you to the X299 platform. Specifically the 12 to 18 core variants that were hastely added to tbe lineup after Threadripper was announced...


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Core Wars : The last quad core.


wake me up when it's IPC Wars


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> That doesn't matter. Intel can't really shift plans on the fly. If an 8-core is planned for 9th gen, that's what we'll get. If it's not planned, then we won't get it. It's that simple. The only things AMD will influence are pricing, tiering, launch timing, and maybe products 2-3 years down the road.
> 
> 
> 
> Intel plans on milking the consumer as much as Intel can get away with. It is no surprise why we have been on 4 cores for the last 11 years and all of a sudden there is competition and we are jumping to 8 cores within 18 months.
> 
> Hell, this roadmap everyone keeps referring to was just "leaked" a month ago...
Click to expand...

That was leaked by Intel, however you don't know how long Intel had that road map internally. Intel does not compete with AMD in there advertising only with them selves. The main reason Intel went with a six core is after kaby lake clock increase in speed there was nothing else to do but increase cores for increased performance. Intel can't produce the same chip as kaby lake and call it coffee lake.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Coffee Lake obviously wasn't a response to Ryzen (other than the paper launch), and it takes time to develop a die, so it's not likely that the 8-core is a response either. 18 months is maybe just barely enough time to make the die, but closer to two years is more likely. The thing is that it can't be a response to Ryzen sales since that reduces the window to 12-15 months, which definitely isn't enough. My guess, based on everything I've seen and heard, is that the original plan was for Kaby Lake to launch last year, followed by Cannonlake on desktop this year with up to 8 cores. This could be a response to the rumors and leaks about Zen, but it more likely would have just been a way to finally get Sandy Bridge users to finally upgrade. Either way, we were moving on from 4 cores in 8th gen even if Ryzen flopped.
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that Intel has had 6 to 24 core variants in their product stack for years now... If you think Intel can't adapt their product lineup within 6 to 9 of competitive product launches then let me refer you to the X299 platform. Specifically the 12 to 18 core variants that were hastely added to tbe lineup after Threadripper was announced...
Click to expand...

That is not true Intel had the hole road map planed with sky lake X. The motherboards are specified for i9 7980XE by Intel.


----------



## SavantStrike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That was leaked by Intel, however you don't know how long Intel had that road map internally. Intel does not compete with AMD in there advertising only with them selves. The main reason Intel went with a six core is after kaby lake clock increase in speed there was nothing else to do but increase cores for increased performance. Intel can't produce the same chip as kaby lake and call it coffee lake.


Why can't they. They did it with skylake to kaby lake.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Already sold x299+7800x as for benching 8700k is stronger, lets see how long will be.


haha I knew it









Well gratz because that's 1 dream machine you got there


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> You do realize that Intel has had 6 to 24 core variants in their product stack for years now... If you think Intel can't adapt their product lineup within 6 to 9 of competitive product launches then let me refer you to the X299 platform. Specifically the 12 to 18 core variants that were hastely added to tbe lineup after Threadripper was announced...


They were able to adapt because the die already existed. They literally just had to take an existing Xeon die and adapt it to X299. Making a whole new die, however, takes time and money. They can't throw together a new die in a few months, even with an existing architecture.


----------



## keikei

What is expected after coffee lake? This upgrade bug is infectious....


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> They were able to adapt because the die already existed. *They literally just had to take an existing Xeon die and adapt it to X299.* Making a whole new die, however, takes time and money. They can't throw together a new die in a few months, even with an existing architecture.


But it is unimaginable that a 6 or 8 core HEDT chip can be adapted to a mainstream platform?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That is not true Intel had the hole road map planed with sky lake X. The motherboards are specified for i9 7980XE by Intel.


Facts have an annoying tendency to contridict preception and propaganda...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That was leaked by Intel, however you don't know how long Intel had that road map internally. Intel does not compete with AMD in there advertising only with them selves. The main reason Intel went with a six core is after kaby lake clock increase in speed there was nothing else to do but increase cores for increased performance. Intel can't produce the same chip as kaby lake and call it coffee lake.


Did you know that Kaby Lake was a recent addition to the roadmap?


----------



## QuadDamage

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NorcalTRD*
> 
> Even with web monitors I cant get through neweggs checkout successfully.
> I click add to cart and it goes to the next page only to say removed from cart due to insufficient stock.
> Repeat this for 4 minutes until page says out of stock again.


My buddy still has his Amazon 5th Pre order nothing shipped still so the wait is still ongoing


----------



## DStealth

Latency is strong with this one









Archiving also










Eghhh forgot the tRAS&tRFC ...so close to 35ns


----------



## QuadDamage

^^ What our your temps on that?


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gmr Chick*
> 
> Feels that way, doesn't it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm wondering though when it comes to Intel's long standing Core architecture -- namely, has it reached its peak performance? I mean, how much more can they possibly squeeze out of it?


That's a good question.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Latency is strong with this one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Archiving also
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Eghhh forgot the tRAS&tRFC ...so close to 35ns


That looks very nice for 4x8GB


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> The more cores, the worse off ring bus architecture is and better off mesh architecture is.


6900k is outperforming 7820x at leats in games unless they start patching games to properly use mesh cache the ring bus based CPU will keep outperforming them


----------



## kd5151

it's small.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it's small.












why would you build around an i5 if your focus was video editing?


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> why would you build around an i5 if your focus was video editing?


he spend all his money on ddr4 memory.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> why would you build around an i5 if your focus was video editing?


He just wanted to use Z370 ITX MB but yeah a 1700 or 1600 would have been better. He liked 8400 because Abode does not scale as well with core. Another thing to note is no IGPU with Ryzen.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> he spend all his money on ddr4 memory.


Can probably get better performance out of the new Kaby Lake laptops with a dedicated GPU or Raven Ridge APUs for a lower price point.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Can probably get better performance out of the new Kaby Lake laptops with a dedicated GPU or Raven Ridge APUs for a lower price point.


AMD's new APU would be ideal. I have a trinity apu laptop. Would be nice upgrade maybe down the road. I also have 2 sandy i3 laptops. All showing their age.

ZealotKi11er is also right. Case also comes with 150w power supply. 65w tdp parts should be okay.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> But it is unimaginable that a 6 or 8 core HEDT chip can be adapted to a mainstream platform?


Yes, it is. The HEDT platform has always used Xeon dies, so they didn't need to do anything special to force compatibility. On top of that, the mainstream dies need to have graphics and need to be compatible with mobile. That last part is a big part of why it takes a long time to make a mainstream die; they're made for laptops first, and desktops second. In theory they could force an HEDT chip on the mainstream platform if the die is small enough, but they'd need to be in an extremely desperate position to do so (since it would be the first desktop-only mainstream chip since the Pentium D) and it would still take a while to do it if Intel didn't already have that as a backup plan. Ryzen isn't nearly threatening enough for that to even cross Intel's minds.


----------



## jellybeans69

Best i could do, not really a win in silicon lottery this time


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SavantStrike*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That was leaked by Intel, however you don't know how long Intel had that road map internally. Intel does not compete with AMD in there advertising only with them selves. The main reason Intel went with a six core is after kaby lake clock increase in speed there was nothing else to do but increase cores for increased performance. Intel can't produce the same chip as kaby lake and call it coffee lake.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why can't they. They did it with skylake to kaby lake.
Click to expand...

Going with a higher clock speed increases the heat in a smaller area to cool. Folks are complaining still to this day kaby lake runs hot compared to sky lake. They don't want to go any further with four core clock speed do to heat.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Double post


----------



## mdd1986

wow $526!!!! no end in sight.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA7HN6HF3460&Tpk=8700k

EDIT nvm. not sold by newegg. Some reason it changed to that link automatically.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Newegg shows in stock 8600K just snagged one


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> wow $526!!!! no end in sight.
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA7HN6HF3460&Tpk=8700k


thats from hippo not newegg. its a 3rd party seller


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Did you know that Kaby Lake was a recent addition to the roadmap?


What do you really know besides when Intel decides to leak information when they feel like it. How do you know Kaby lake was a recent addition, do you work for Intel or is it pure 'forum-level' conjecture?

I worked at a company and they will fire you if leak information that is not allowed.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Fianlly got a 8600K







so happy now i have to wait a couple of weeks before i get other stuff to save up for.. Shift x build should be done by Jan

Edit: PACKAGING !!!!


----------



## kd5151

yeah, i see 8600k in stock at newegg.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Yes, it is. The HEDT platform has always used Xeon dies, so they didn't need to do anything special to force compatibility. On top of that, *the mainstream dies need to have graphics and need to be compatible with mobile.* That last part is a big part of why it takes a long time to make a mainstream die; they're made for laptops first, and desktops second. In theory they could force an HEDT chip on the mainstream platform if the die is small enough, but they'd need to be in an extremely desperate position to do so (since it would be the first desktop-only mainstream chip since the Pentium D) and it would still take a while to do it if Intel didn't already have that as a backup plan. Ryzen isn't nearly threatening enough for that to even cross Intel's minds.


You do realize that the iGPU in Coffee Lake is identical to the iGPU in Kaby Lake? Also, Coffee lake mobile parts won't hit the matket for another year as Kaby Lake mobile just launched in August...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What do you really know besides when Intel decides to leak information when they feel like it. How do you know Kaby lake was a recent addition, do you work for Intel or is it pure 'forum-level' conjecture?


Just based on earlier roadmaps from Intel... Is it conjecture if it does not align with your views and fact if it does?


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> You do realize that the iGPU in Coffee Lake is identical to the iGPU in Kaby Lake? Also, Coffee lake mobile parts won't hit the matket for another year as Kaby Lake mobile just launched in August...


Yes, and the cores are the same too. It doesn't make a difference however because it's still a different die. If they could just slap on more cores without any effort, the 8700K would be an 8-core in order to wipe out Ryzen completely. Also, you're wrong. Kaby Lake *R*-U launched in August. Low-power mobile Kaby Lake-Y and -U launched over a year ago, and high-power Kaby Lake-H launched early this year. Coffee Lake-H is coming in Q1 2018, much like Coffee Lake-S would have if not for AMD becoming competitive. If they could just slap on cores the way you believe they can, it would have made more sense to make Coffee Lake an 8-core and keep the Q1 2018 launch, don't you think?


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Yes, and the cores are the same too. It doesn't make a difference however because it's still a different die. If they could just slap on more cores without any effort.










no one said it didn't take effort. Hence why it took 6 months for the paper launch and why 2 different generations were launched within the same year...

There is no arguing with your logic, best of luck


----------



## evensen007

The 8700k DID go up again (sold by newegg). Its now at 409.99. Yea, how about no.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Yes, it is. The HEDT platform has always used Xeon dies, so they didn't need to do anything special to force compatibility. On top of that, *the mainstream dies need to have graphics and need to be compatible with mobile.* That last part is a big part of why it takes a long time to make a mainstream die; they're made for laptops first, and desktops second. In theory they could force an HEDT chip on the mainstream platform if the die is small enough, but they'd need to be in an extremely desperate position to do so (since it would be the first desktop-only mainstream chip since the Pentium D) and it would still take a while to do it if Intel didn't already have that as a backup plan. Ryzen isn't nearly threatening enough for that to even cross Intel's minds.
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that the iGPU in Coffee Lake is identical to the iGPU in Kaby Lake? Also, Coffee lake mobile parts won't hit the matket for another year as Kaby Lake mobile just launched in August...
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What do you really know besides when Intel decides to leak information when they feel like it. How do you know Kaby lake was a recent addition, do you work for Intel or is it pure 'forum-level' conjecture?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just based on earlier roadmaps from Intel... Is it conjecture if it does not align with your views and fact if it does?
Click to expand...

Do you have a link to the earlier intel roadmaps?


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no one said it didn't take effort. Hence why it took 6 months for the paper launch and why 2 different generations were launched within the same year...
> 
> There is no arguing with your logic, best of luck


That sounds more applicable to you. You know that Coffee Lake leaks started popping up last year, right? It wasn't thrown together in 6 months. Your logic is wrong here, especially if you think an HEDT die can be slapped onto the mainstream platform.

Wait. I was looking for a source and Coffee Lake showed up on roadmaps even sooner than that: http://wccftech.com/intel-kaby-lake-refresh-coffee-lake-cfl-u-h-s-x/ And yes, I know it's mistakenly called 10nm here, but the point it that it's there, it says 6 cores, and this roadmap shows mobile CPUs.



Now obviously this is outdated, but it's also from December 2016. I'm sorry, and I know that it's a truth that you really don't want to face, but the only effect that Ryzen had on Coffee Lake was causing Intel to paper launch it 3 months early. Ryzen's success played no part in Intel increasing core counts.

Edit: Wait, I just realized that said 2016, not 2015. Whoops. I had it sorted by date too... So here's July instead: http://wccftech.com/intel-14nm-coffee-lake-10nm-cannonlake-2018/


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> That sounds more applicable to you. *You know that Coffee Lake leaks started popping up last year, right?* It wasn't thrown together in 6 months. Your logic is wrong here, especially if you think an HEDT die can be slapped onto the mainstream platform.
> 
> Wait. I was looking for a source and Coffee Lake showed up on roadmaps even sooner than that: http://wccftech.com/intel-kaby-lake-refresh-coffee-lake-cfl-u-h-s-x/ And yes, I know it's mistakenly called 10nm here, but the point it that it's there, it says 6 cores, and this roadmap shows mobile CPUs.
> 
> 
> 
> Now obviously this is outdated, but it's also from December 2016. I'm sorry, and I know that it's a truth that you really don't want to face, but the only effect that Ryzen had on Coffee Lake was causing Intel to paper launch it 3 months early. Ryzen's success played no part in Intel increasing core counts.
> 
> Edit: Wait, I just realized that said 2016, not 2015. Whoops. I had it sorted by date too... So here's July instead: http://wccftech.com/intel-14nm-coffee-lake-10nm-cannonlake-2018/


Yes, last year... Zen has been in production for 4+years with plenty of performance leaks during these leaks. Yes, the 6 month timeframe is an exaguration...

Coffee Lake cores are identical to Skylake-X and the iGPU is identical to Kaby Lake... Just about every 8700K review mentions this... There is no IPC improvement over the last generation. The only advantage over the 7700K are the 2 cores and the refined node which allows for higher frequencies...


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> The 8700k DID go up again (sold by newegg). Its now at 409.99. Yea, how about no.


8600K is "still" in stock. It's $299.


----------



## SavantStrike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> The 8700k DID go up again (sold by newegg). Its now at 409.99. Yea, how about no.


Screw that noise. Those are Skylake X prices.


----------



## boredgunner

If y'all wanted the 8700k so badly, you should have bought it when it was on backorder a few weeks ago. I did that and got my 8700k on Tuesday, for the MSRP.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> 6900k is outperforming 7820x at leats in games unless they start patching games to properly use mesh cache the ring bus based CPU will keep outperforming them


Games don't define a CPU's performance potential. They won't be patching games much for that, but obviously the games will change with the hardware, like how modern games do really well with Ryzen while older games don't (unless we're talking DX12 games with an NVIDIA GPU).

It seems mesh will be Intel's standard design, while AMD will be using CCX. Games are changing in alignment with this.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Yes, for mobile...
> 
> Coffee Lake cores are identical to Skylake-X and the iGPU is identical to Kaby Lake... Just about every 8700K review mentions this... There is no IPC improvement over the last generation. The only advantage over the 7700K are the 2 cores and the refined node which allows for higher frequencies...


Please don't put words into my my mouth. I said nothing about Coffee Lake being a new architecture or having IPC improvements. When people put words in my mouth, I unintentionally get extremely nasty after a while.

And no, it's Skylake/Kaby Lake with two more cores, not the 7800X with an IGP. Did you forget about this little thing called the mesh architecture on Skylake-X? Not to mention the fact that the 7800X has a larger die than Coffee Lake. As for your "yes for mobile" argument, you think that Intel planned to move to 6 cores on mobile and stick with 4 on desktop!? I'm meant to humor such a ridiculous thought!? The reason that the roadmaps are mobile is that Intel's mainstream chips are made with mobile in mind and are scaled up. That's why the H chips usually launch alongside the desktop chips. There's an exception this time because Intel moved the launch up to hurt Ryzen sales this holiday, but it's a paper launch because it was too late to really push the production schedule up.

You really have no idea what you're talking about here. Look, I'm not saying that Ryzen is having no effect on Intel; however, it's not the reason for them increasing core counts on the mainstream platform. Maybe there's a slight chance that Ryzen is the reason 8 core chips are planned for next year, but even then I heard rumors about 10nm 8-cores from back when Intel still thought Cannonlake would make it to desktop. It's possible that those rumors were wrong, and I know how you'll respond to them, so I won't mention it; however, this paper launch makes it rather clear that Intel needs 3 months just to produce launch quantities normally. Then it's probably 3 months for them to decide if it's worth it push out a response to Ryzen like that. So, maybe 9 months of R&D + testing + ramp-up + working with motherboard makers? You're really underestimating the amount of work involved in all of this. Why do you think AMD only made one Ryzen die for the entire product stack from Ryzen 3 all the way up to EPYC? It's because making a die takes time and money. That's also why Intel uses the same dies for both mainstream desktops and mobile.


----------



## TMatzelle60

I didnt mind the extra $50 for the 8600K

Now gotta wait a couple of weeks since im leaving for japan for work to order rest


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Please don't put words into my my mouth. I said nothing about Coffee Lake being a new architecture or having IPC improvements. When people put words in my mouth, I unintentionally get extremely nasty after a while.


Oh the irony... Strawman much?

I was referring to reviewers and not once stated that you said those things. You did say they were the same cores and GPU and I did acknowledge that statement.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> You really have no idea what you're talking about here.


I have expressed an opinion based on the fact that mainstream maintained 4 cores for 11 years and competion is bringing about changes for both Intel mainstream and HEDT product lineup. You are welcome to express your own opinion. Which is all that you have expressed. You have not brought any facts to the table yet insist that your view is valid and I am clueless.

I am the fool for carrying on this conversation. Good day.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Oh the irony... Strawman much?
> 
> I was referring to reviewers and not once stated that you said those things. You did say they were the same cores and GPU and I did acknowledge that statement.
> I have expressed an opinion based on the fact that mainstream maintained 4 cores for 11 years and competion is bringing about changes for both Intel mainstream and HEDT product lineup. You are welcome to express your own opinion. Which is all that you have expressed. You have not brought any facts to the table yet insist that your view is valid and I am clueless.
> 
> I am the fool for carrying on this conversation. Good day.


... Roadmaps aren't facts?


----------



## kd5151

8600k. and it's gone.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> ... Roadmaps aren't facts?


----------



## wingman99

false


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> That sounds more applicable to you. *You know that Coffee Lake leaks started popping up last year, right?* It wasn't thrown together in 6 months. Your logic is wrong here, especially if you think an HEDT die can be slapped onto the mainstream platform.
> 
> Wait. I was looking for a source and Coffee Lake showed up on roadmaps even sooner than that: http://wccftech.com/intel-kaby-lake-refresh-coffee-lake-cfl-u-h-s-x/ And yes, I know it's mistakenly called 10nm here, but the point it that it's there, it says 6 cores, and this roadmap shows mobile CPUs.
> 
> 
> 
> Now obviously this is outdated, but it's also from December 2016. I'm sorry, and I know that it's a truth that you really don't want to face, but the only effect that Ryzen had on Coffee Lake was causing Intel to paper launch it 3 months early. Ryzen's success played no part in Intel increasing core counts.
> 
> Edit: Wait, I just realized that said 2016, not 2015. Whoops. I had it sorted by date too... So here's July instead: http://wccftech.com/intel-14nm-coffee-lake-10nm-cannonlake-2018/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, last year... Zen has been in production for 4+years with plenty of performance leaks during these leaks. Yes, the 6 month timeframe is an exaguration...
> 
> Coffee Lake cores are identical to Skylake-X and the iGPU is identical to Kaby Lake... Just about every 8700K review mentions this... There is no IPC improvement over the last generation. The only advantage over the 7700K are the 2 cores and the refined node which allows for higher frequencies...
Click to expand...

Here is a leaked road map from launched Haswell showing dates up to coffee lake. Chew on this for a while.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Here is a leaked road map from launched Haswell showing dates up to coffee lake. Chew on this for a while.


That actually corroborates what he's saying. You'll notice that their chart has AMD's Zen planned for 2018. Given what AMD tried with the construction cores, it was all but a certainty that Zen wouldn't be limited to quad-cores. Coffee, which was still in the 'planning stage' at that point, was clearly positioned to be the competitor to Zen. Ryzen came earlier than expected, and so Coffee Lake was also moved forward, hence the supply issues. This is not complicated.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Here is a leaked road map from launched Haswell showing dates up to coffee lake. Chew on this for a while.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That actually corroborates what he's saying. You'll notice that their chart has AMD's Zen planned for 2018. Given what AMD tried with the construction cores, it was all but a certainty that Zen wouldn't be limited to quad-cores. Coffee, which was still in the 'planning stage' at that point, was clearly positioned to be the competitor to Zen. Ryzen came earlier than expected, and so Coffee Lake was also moved forward, hence the supply issues. This is not complicated.
Click to expand...

That is not what the discussion is about, I said Intel plans 3 years ahead. From Haswell to now instead of 2018 coffee lake is only 3 months off scheduled.


----------



## kd5151

Good pic.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That is not what the discussion is about, I said Intel plans 3 years ahead. From Haswell to now instead of 2018 coffee lake is only 3 months off scheduled.


I'm responding to the part of your discussion wherein it was said that Ryzen had no effect on Coffee. We can't say anything with certainty, but your picture in no way disproves the notion. And yeah, it's only a few months, but that was clearly enough for their to be obvious supply constraints which is typically a clear sign of shifting a schedule forward.


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I'm responding to the part of your discussion wherein it was said that Ryzen had no effect on Coffee. We can't say anything with certainty, but your picture in no way disproves the notion. And yeah, it's only a few months, but that was clearly enough for their to be obvious supply constraintswhich is typically a clear sign of shifting a schedule forward.


Who actually cares? This is a side-topic that literally 3 people care about.


----------



## mdd1986

yea I hate how everyone in this thread starts talking about side topics. Take it elsewhere.

Is the 8600k worth it vs Ryzen 1700 at that same price?


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> Is the 8600k worth it vs Ryzen 1700 at that same price?


Now you are wanting to start a side topic. This thread is for coffee lake availability and benchmarks only


----------



## nanotm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> yea I hate how everyone in this thread starts talking about side topics. Take it elsewhere.
> 
> Is the 8600k worth it vs Ryzen 1700 at that same price?


I would say neither of them is worth it right now, one is a first of its line underperforming chip that's going to get bettered in a refresh in less than 6 months and the other is an end of life chip that's about to get replaced by a totally new chip set in roughly the same time period....

the best time to buy into a new cpu is when your current one dies or is no longer capable of doing the job, so unless one or both of those things is true there is zero point in rushing to buy a new cpu, if the i5/i7 is your thing wait until the next generation comes out at the same price and this lot gets price dropped if red is more your colour then again buy a mobo if its cheap and wait until the next batch of cpu's gets dropped before you jump on the train, unless your desperate..... and if your desperate then it might just be better to get a lower end am4 chip today (like the r3) and replace it in a few months with something capable of clocking higher than 4GHz..... if your into intel then its probably more advisable to just get a second hand mobo+ cpu off ebay on the cheap and wait to see what the next generation pricing looks like, along with the cheaper mobo's for the 8 series chips when the manufacturers finally get round to releasing them ...

because neither of them is worth the price there currently listed at /


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> yea I hate how everyone in this thread starts talking about side topics. Take it elsewhere.
> 
> Is the 8600k worth it vs Ryzen 1700 at that same price?


Depends on what you're doing and future upgrade paths.


----------



## mdd1986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> Depends on what you're doing and future upgrade paths.


I would be using it strictly for gaming only. upgrade path means nothing as well as I would plan to not upgrade for 3-4 years.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> yea I hate how everyone in this thread starts talking about side topics. Take it elsewhere.
> 
> Is the 8600k worth it vs Ryzen 1700 at that same price?


just a thought:

this thread is 3 months old; considering how threads can get derailed in 3 hours, _this one is going pretty good._


----------



## mdd1986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> just a thought:
> 
> this thread is 3 months old; considering how threads can get derailed in 3 hours, _this one is going pretty good._


it hasn't been the worst but it can certainly be better. For example its more interesting to find out why someone chose to go with an 8600K instead of an 8700k rather than argue about some road map released like 6 months ago.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> just a thought:
> 
> this thread is 3 months old; considering how threads can get derailed in 3 hours, _this one is going pretty good._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it hasn't been the worst but it can certainly be better. For example its *more interesting to find out why someone chose to go with an 8600K instead of an 8700k* rather than argue about some road map released like 6 months ago.
Click to expand...

13 pages back! (50posts p/page)


----------



## jprovido

So..I've had this Gaming 7 motherboard for 3 weeks now. come on Intel it's almost November


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> So..I've had this Gaming 7 motherboard for 3 weeks now. come on Intel it's almost November


I have seen 8700K on sale many times. You just have to play over MSRP.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I have seen 8700K on sale many times. You just have to play over MSRP.


I haven't seen it on stock at all I check it here https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/processors/intel/ I check every night when I get home from work. I won't go above 400USD though not that I can't afford it I just don't want to feel like I got screwed lol


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I haven't seen it on stock at all I check it here https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/processors/intel/ I check every night when I get home from work


I has been in stock at newegg.com for $400 in the past week on and off.


----------



## HeliXpc

Ive heard rumors Intel ran out of cheap thermal paste, thats why there is not stock available


----------



## mdd1986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> 13 pages back! (50posts p/page)


are you actually planning to buy one of these or are you just hear to bust balls as usual and call people out?


----------



## HeliXpc

I finally got my 8700K, I can do 4.7ghz with 1.25V, stable, safe temps, max is 82C with prime95 small ffts, 5ghz requires 1.35V so without deliding this isnt happening, this is all with the deepcool captain 240 AIO. Delid is a must IMO if you are going to hit 5ghz, unless you get a chip that does 5ghz with 1.3v then you might be able to stay under 90c.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> 13 pages back! (50posts p/page)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> are you actually planning to buy one of these or are you just hear to bust balls as usual and call people out?
Click to expand...

oh yeah, looking to see if a new 6c/6t would beat an old 4c/8t and by how much, i was definitely thinking of buying one.


----------



## kd5151

Trick or Treat, Smell my feet, give me 8700k.


----------



## jellybeans69

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> oh yeah, looking to see if a new 6c/6t would beat an old 4c/8t and by how much, i was definitely thinking of buying one.


Well as i've posted few times it gave me close to 100% fps increase in some emulator games going from 3970x to 8600k.


----------



## DStealth

Just to share ...
These 8700k are really pushing 1080ti's to new heights 24th world score single card
With cheapo Z370+non delided CPU on AIO and stock air Palit Gamerock with XOC [email protected]
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13973532


----------



## NorcalTRD

Finally got my 8700k from Newegg today, of course on the day they bump the price up another $10.
Whatever, Im just glad to have the final piece of my build on its way.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That is not what the discussion is about, I said Intel plans 3 years ahead. From Haswell to now instead of 2018 coffee lake is only 3 months off scheduled.


So, you're supporting my argument that this was all planned from the start? (Other than the paper launch)


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That is not what the discussion is about, I said Intel plans 3 years ahead. From Haswell to now instead of 2018 coffee lake is only 3 months off scheduled.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, you're supporting my argument that this was all planned from the start? (Other than the paper launch)
Click to expand...

Yes.


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Yes.


Okay, just checking.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I have seen 8700K on sale many times. You just have to play over MSRP.


Or just buy the very first batch like I did, or wait until the shortage ends.


----------



## Robilar

I snagged one today at a retail store. Checked their site a few times a day and got lucky.


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> *For example its more interesting to find out why someone chose to go with an 8600K instead of an 8700k* rather than argue about some road map released like 6 months ago.


Well, obviously, money has a lot to do with it - and I'm talking about average people here who, for whatever reason, are adamant about buying only Intel. Also, needs are a key factor as well. Not everyone needs an i7 to have an enjoyable experience. For many, i3's and i5's are perfectly capable enough for whatever they plan on doing with their PCs.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gmr Chick*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> *For example its more interesting to find out why someone chose to go with an 8600K instead of an 8700k* rather than argue about some road map released like 6 months ago.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, obviously, money has a lot to do with it - and I'm talking about average people here who, for whatever reason, are adamant about buying only Intel. Also, needs are a key factor as well. Not everyone needs an i7 to have an enjoyable experience. For many, i3's and i5's are perfectly capable enough for whatever they plan on doing with their PCs.
Click to expand...

I'm doing sweet gaming with my i5 7600k. I will upgrade when the i5 8600k is on sale from the MSRP.


----------



## kd5151

QUAD CORES?


----------



## HeliXpc

Finally delided my cpu and WOW! dropped 20C under load, before with this much voltage I was in the mid 90s fast, now it does not pass 80c, deliding is a MUST for anyone looking to get 5GHZ under control. Used some COOL Lab liquid metal, relided with some permatex ultra black rtv silicon, this is the perfect cpu once delided and liquid metaled, I am in love with this setup


----------



## kd5151




----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HeliXpc*
> 
> Finally delided my cpu and WOW! dropped 20C under load, before with this much voltage I was in the mid 90s fast, now it does not pass 80c, deliding is a MUST for anyone looking to get 5GHZ under control. Used some COOL Lab liquid metal, relided with some permatex ultra black rtv silicon, this is the perfect cpu once delided and liquid metaled, I am in love with this setup


Great what tool did you use?
Also what's your cooling and can you show please XTU benchmark max package temp. Mine exceeds 90s with less than 1.4v but a couple of Megahertz higher ...
Aida64 stress is a joke for stability.


----------



## HeliXpc

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Great what tool did you use?
> Also what's your cooling and can you show please XTU benchmark max package temp. Mine exceeds 90s with less than 1.4v but a couple of Megahertz higher ...
> Aida64 stress is a joke for stability.


I used a razor, yup scary but I did it lol, temps are the same with prime95 small ffts, Aida has gotten better, it does put a lot of pressure on the system, Ill test with XTU and let you know soon.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Anyone else looking forward to the Xbox One X?


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone else looking forward to the Xbox One X?


No because I don't like to waste my money especially on worthless garbage.


----------



## Charcharo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone else looking forward to the Xbox One X?


Not really. Its worthless. Sure the Mid range PC market is damaged ATM and Covfefe lake is a paper launch, but no console can even come close to offering PC Gamings legacy - several decades of PC Games, 6+ generations of consoles emulated, decades of modding, exclusive genres...

It was never even a fight, but a slaughter.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone else looking forward to the Xbox One X?


what is the xbox one for anyway? all xbox exclusives can be played on the windows store. I have a PS4 Pro, Nintendo Switch and PC there's basically zero reason to get an xbox. I say PC+PS4 is the best. PS4 exclusives and Xbox exclusives via Windows Store


----------



## HeliXpc

why are we talking about an xbox lol cmon guys, stay on topic.....lets see some more 8700k overclocks.


----------



## Robilar

I just got mine built and running. Starting to tweak today


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> No because *I don't like to waste my money* especially on worthless garbage.


Were you aiming for irony or are you just a hypocrite?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Charcharo*
> 
> Not really. Its worthless. Sure the Mid range PC market is damaged ATM and Covfefe lake is a paper launch, but no console can even come close to offering PC Gamings legacy - several decades of PC Games, 6+ generations of consoles emulated, decades of modding, exclusive genres...
> 
> It was never even a fight, but a slaughter.


You realize you can own both?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> what is the xbox one for anyway? all xbox exclusives can be played on the windows store. I have a PS4 Pro, Nintendo Switch and PC there's basically zero reason to get an xbox. I say PC+PS4 is the best. PS4 exclusives and Xbox exclusives via Windows Store


I already own a PC + PS4 Pro + PS4. Will be replacing the non-Pro PS4.

I have been wanting to pickup a 4K HDR blu-ray player so why not pickup one with graphics performance between a GTX 1070 and a 6GB GTX 1060?









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HeliXpc*
> 
> why are we talking about an xbox lol cmon guys, stay on topic.....lets see some more 8700k overclocks.


Someone start a coffee lake owners club. I am curious to see the overclock stastics


----------



## looniam

it's like watching guppies swim up for food . . .


----------



## kd5151

no stock. about ready to pre order xbox one x.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Were you aiming for irony or are you just a hypocrite?


Nothing ironic or hypocritical about not spending money on an obsolete system that has no use. Doing so is a waste.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> Nothing ironic or hypocritical about not spending money on an obsolete system that has no use. Doing so is a waste.


For one, you are generalizing. Two, same can be said for our system builds. Three, objectivity is lacking from your "argument"


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> it hasn't been the worst but it can certainly be better. For example its more interesting to find out why someone chose to go with an 8600K instead of an 8700k rather than argue about some road map released like 6 months ago.


i5 costs less money, and produces less heat. Considering both have L3 cache above 8 MB, other differences are negligible.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HeliXpc*
> 
> why are we talking about an xbox lol cmon guys, stay on topic.....lets see some more 8700k overclocks.


can't even get my hands on one







I'm so tired of waiting. people told me it was in and out of stock on newegg. missed them all


----------



## mdd1986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> i5 costs less money, and produces less heat. Considering both have L3 cache above 8 MB, other differences are negligible.


Thanks. I always had I5s for gaming purposes. But now it seems that I7s are the better gaming CPU. I guess my question is from a gaming point of view does it really make sense to spend the extra money on the 8700k when I mostly game at [email protected]?

Also, one of the things that really frustrates me with PC gaming lately is the amount of hacking and cheating. When I play consoles games this almost a non issue. I think this is a big deal when comparing the two.


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mdd1986*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> i5 costs less money, and produces less heat. Considering both have L3 cache above 8 MB, other differences are negligible.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks. I always had I5s for gaming purposes. But now it seems that I7s are the better gaming CPU. I guess my question is from a gaming point of view does it really make sense to spend the extra money on the 8700k when I mostly game at [email protected]?
> 
> Also, one of the things that really frustrates me with PC gaming lately is the amount of hacking and cheating. When I play consoles games this almost a non issue. I think this is a big deal when comparing the two.
Click to expand...

Even assuming the 8700k is available, @ around $400, may as well get a 1800X. If you dont wanna spend $400, get the1700 ($300) and you'll get the exact same experience @1440p. You may even get more frames in multi-threaded games due to having moar cores.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> Even assuming the 8700k is available, @ around $400, may as well get a 1800X. If you dont wanna spend $400, get the1700 ($300) and you'll get the exact same experience @1440p. You may even get more frames in multi-threaded games due to having moar cores.


If more and more games use multi core then yea. But i dont need to many games being multi core for at least 3-5 years.


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> Even assuming the 8700k is available, @ around $400, may as well get a 1800X. If you dont wanna spend $400, get the1700 ($300) and you'll get the exact same experience @1440p. You may even get more frames in multi-threaded games due to having moar cores.
> 
> 
> 
> If more and more games use multi core then yea. But i dont need to many games being multi core for at least 3-5 years.
Click to expand...

From my experience i've seeing more and more games being released are mult--threaded. The biggest game right now PUBG uses 6 cores. Wolfenstein 2 is mult-threaded. You can count anything developed on cryengine or frostbyte. Playing at higher res, the IPC speed is really irrelevant to an extent. It just has to be high enough not to bottleneck.


----------



## navjack27

Ur lying to yourself if you don't think IPC counts. I just sold my Ryzen 1800x on eBay and am just waiting for the 8700k to be in stock. Perfect upgrade from my 5820k


----------



## NYU87

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> Even assuming the 8700k is available, @ around $400, may as well get a 1800X. If you dont wanna spend $400, get the1700 ($300) and you'll get the exact same experience @1440p. You may even get more frames in multi-threaded games due to having moar cores.


What's the point of getting an inferior product for the same price? Not to mention 8700Ks can get to 4.7-5GHz while Ryzens you're lucky to get past 3.9GHz. Even with two more cores at this point it will be slower in highly multi threaded scenarios.


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *navjack27*
> 
> Ur lying to yourself if you don't think IPC counts. I just sold my Ryzen 1800x on eBay and am just waiting for the 8700k to be in stock. Perfect upgrade from my 5820k


Not in this case. See spoiler tag.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NYU87*
> 
> What's the point of getting an inferior product for the same price? Not to mention 8700Ks can get to 4.7-5GHz while Ryzens you're lucky to get past 3.9GHz. Even with two more cores at this point it will be slower in highly multi threaded scenarios.


mdd1986 only games @ 1440p , 60hz. Those are his/her only requirements, unless there are others not mentioned. I didnt say he needs to spend $400, just a cpu that wont bottleneck @1440p, which is arguably any modern chip.



Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## navjack27

Nice. I'll be getting a higher minimum and maybe be able to hit the 120hz of my monitor. More reason to buy the 8700k


----------



## Triniboi82

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NYU87*
> 
> *What's the point of getting an inferior product for the same price*? Not to mention 8700Ks can get to 4.7-5GHz while Ryzens you're lucky to get past 3.9GHz. Even with two more cores at this point it will be slower in highly multi threaded scenarios.


You seriously calling an 1800X an inferior product


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Triniboi82*
> 
> You seriously calling an 1800X an inferior product


It is outperformed by the 8700k in probably 99% of applications, so that's not a crazy thing to say.


----------



## navjack27

I'll totally call my old 1800x an inferior product


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *navjack27*
> 
> I'll totally call my old 1800x an inferior product


And I'm ready to call my 1700X inferior if the 8700k lives up to my expectations. That is a bit of a skewed view though since I've been using my 1700X with a NVIDIA GPU, so there are some consequences there due to NVIDIA.


----------



## Triniboi82

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> It is outperformed by the 8700k in probably 99% of applications, so that's not a crazy thing to say.


Are the performance margins that great tho to call it an inferior product....anyways I forgot what thread I'm in so never mind carry on....


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Triniboi82*
> 
> Are the performance margins that great tho to call it an inferior product....anyways I forgot what thread I'm in so never mind carry on....


I would assume yes. Better in the vast majority of things = superior, worse in the vast majority of things = inferior. That simple, right?


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone else looking forward to the Xbox One X?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Charcharo*
> 
> Not really. Its worthless. Sure the Mid range PC market is damaged ATM and Covfefe lake is a paper launch, *but no console can even come close to offering PC Gamings legacy* - several decades of PC Games, 6+ generations of consoles emulated, decades of modding, exclusive genres...
> 
> It was never even a fight, but a slaughter.


LOL @ covfefe lake









But seriously, have you ever bothered to think that maybe not every gamer has the desire to play their games exclusively on a PC? Maybe they don't know/ care to build their own, or even buy a pre-built one + monitor. At least with consoles, this way they are able to at least enjoy gaming. And for them, that's enough. Besides, compred to console gaming, PC gaming is still a niche market, even with the rise of "esports". It's always been niche as far back as I can remember. I don't see that changing anytime soon. For the majority of gamers, consoles are just more accesible.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NYU87*
> 
> *What's the point of getting an inferior product for the same price? Not to mention 8700Ks can get to 4.7-5GHz while Ryzens you're lucky to get past 3.9GHz*. Even with two more cores at this point it will be slower in highly multi threaded scenarios.


I would hardly call the 1800X (or any of the Ryzens, really) "inferior" products -- they sure as hell made Intel crap their collective pants, didn't they? That's why Covfefe Lake was bumped up, to try and stop Ryzen's momentum over the big holiday season. But what good is that strategy when you can't even buy the damn things? That will just make people end up buying Ryzens instead if you ask me.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Triniboi82*
> 
> *Are the performance margins that great tho to call it an inferior product...*.anyways I forgot what thread I'm in so never mind carry on....


Right, exactly. Nothing more to say.


----------



## mjheikki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Triniboi82*
> 
> Are the performance margins that great tho to call it an inferior product....anyways I forgot what thread I'm in so never mind carry on....


This forum is likely 99% gamers, so take that into consideration. That being said, the 8700(K) kind of ate R7's lunch, though, as it's equal or faster in multithreaded applications, and is much faster in single-threaded applications and games (mainly because of 3D API rendering bottleneck, though).

The 1700 is still great value for productivity use - especially if you like your data and use ECC RAM. New workstations at the office are all AMD - no point buying low-end Xeons anymore.


----------



## navjack27

I rarely game. I mess around with video editing. 3D rendering. Benchmarking.... I'm lucky if I actually end up on my computer to "enjoy" a night of gaming. Usually it's some of the other stuff I'll get distracted by.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *navjack27*
> 
> *Ur lying to yourself if you don't think IPC counts.* I just sold my Ryzen 1800x on eBay and am just waiting for the 8700k to be in stock. Perfect upgrade from my 5820k


IPC deltas are 8% between Coffee Lake and Ryzen...

Now max frequencies between the two can differ by 17 to 26%

Seems you have IPC and max frequency confused...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *navjack27*
> 
> I rarely game. I mess around with video editing. 3D rendering.


I am curious to know where you are seeing massive gains for 3d rendering and video editing between your 1800X and 8700K builds...


----------



## navjack27

Listen, I did clock to clock tests between my Ryzen and current CPU and the 5775c and 4790s. Yes, if Ryzen could clock I'd like it. It is faster then everything I've owned single core clock for clock. I'm not running it at stock, I won't, I never do, maybe just for baselines. I can run the 8700k at a lower voltage for 4.6ghz then my 5820k. I can have the Intel single core performance and cache/uncore, not have to deal with infinity fabric.
EDIT : RE: gains in 3d stuff and all that:
i'm not seeing any, ryzen is faster... the ideal computer for me is a computer that could run both an 1800x and a 5820k in one system so i could have the cores and the freq/gaming performance in older titles that i might play.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gmr Chick*
> 
> LOL @ covfefe lake


He stole that from me.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *navjack27*
> 
> I rarely game. I mess around with video editing. 3D rendering. Benchmarking.... I'm lucky if I actually end up on my computer to "enjoy" a night of gaming. Usually it's some of the other stuff I'll get distracted by.


And the i7 8700k still beats all of the Ryzens in all of those areas, right? Especially once overclocked. I edit video on my PC as well (Adobe Premiere Pro), the 1700X was a very nice improvement over my previous 6700k there but the 8700k at 5 GHz is just going to clobber my 1700X everywhere.

I hope NVIDIA fixes their issues with AMD CPUs though, the future of Zen is so promising.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *navjack27*
> 
> Listen, I did clock to clock tests between my Ryzen and current CPU and the 5775c and 4790s. *Yes, if Ryzen could clock I'd like it. It is faster then everything I've owned single core clock for clock.* I'm not running it at stock, I won't, I never do, maybe just for baselines. I can run the 8700k at a lower voltage for 4.6ghz then my 5820k. I can have the Intel single core performance and cache/uncore, not have to deal with infinity fabric.
> EDIT : RE: gains in 3d stuff and all that:
> *i'm not seeing any, ryzen is faster*... the ideal computer for my is a computer that could run both an 1800x and a 5820k in one system so i could have the cores and the freq/gaming performance in older titles that i might play.


Contradict yourself much?


----------



## navjack27

its not contradictory if its totally different metrics of performance

can a ryzen clock to anything above 4ghz on all cores?


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gmr Chick*
> 
> But what good is that strategy when you can't even buy the damn things? That will just make people end up buying Ryzens instead if you ask me.


A portion of the potential buyers will wait for stock because they know the 8700K exists, and the benchmarks put it ahead of any Ryzen CPU in gaming. Anyone "tired of 4 cores" now knows they don't have to switch brands to chase metrics. It's got to hamper sales for AMD, and I'm sure that was Intel's plan. Had they waited, probably more people would have just purchased Ryzen CPU's over the holidays.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *navjack27*
> 
> its not contradictory if its totally different metrics of performance


You brought up poor IPC, then concluded Ryzen IPC being higher than your 5775c and 4790.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *navjack27*
> 
> I'll totally call my old 1800x an inferior product


You also said the above but just said that Ryzen is faster for your productivity tasks. Earlier you stated that you game very rarely on your productivity machine...

Get back to me when you have your story straight


----------



## navjack27

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> A portion of the potential buyers will wait for stock because they know the 8700K exists, and the benchmarks put it ahead of any Ryzen CPU in gaming. Anyone "tired of 4 cores" now knows they don't have to switch brands to chase metrics. It's got to hamper sales for AMD, and I'm sure that was Intel's plan. Had they waited, probably more people would have just purchased Ryzen CPU's over the holidays.


lol or like me people might sell their ryzen so they could buy this cpu
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> You brought up poor IPC, then concluded Ryzen IPC being higher than your 5775c and 4790.
> You also said the above but just said that Ryzen is faster for your productivity tasks. Earlier you stated that you game very rarely on your productivity machine...


again, you can't clock a ryzen as high as even a haswell-e... its not faster at that point. clock for clock comparisons fall apart once you face that fact.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *navjack27*
> 
> can a ryzen clock to anything above 4ghz on all cores?


Almost no chance in hell unless you have a Threadripper.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> Almost no chance in hell unless you have a Threadripper.


Stastics from Silicon Lottery

Quote:


> Ryzen 7 1700
> 93% reach 3.8GHz @ 1.376V
> 70% reach 3.9GHz @ 1.408V
> 20% reach 4.0GHz @ 1.440V
> 
> Ryzen 7 1700X
> 100% reach 3.8GHz @ 1.360V
> 77% reach 3.9GHz @ 1.392V
> 33% reach 4.0GHz @ 1.424V
> 
> Ryzen 7 1800X
> 100% reach 3.8GHz (assumed)
> 97% reach 3.9GHz @ 1.376V
> 67% reach 4.0GHz @ 1.408V
> 20% reach 4.1GHz @ 1.440V


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Stastics from Silicon Lottery


So 20% of 1800X's, and the other Ryzen 7s not measured since > 4 GHz is too rare on them. How about Ryzen 5 1600 and 1600X?

Funny thing is, my 1700X can't do 3.8 GHz, not with my RAM at least (pretty sure I could if I lowered my RAM speed, took out two sticks, or used different RAM altogether).


----------



## mjheikki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *navjack27*
> 
> its not contradictory if its totally different metrics of performance
> 
> can a ryzen clock to anything above 4ghz on all cores?


Yes, with good enough cooling







. But it's kind of pointless to OC a Ryzen that high since that voltage scaling gets terribad after 3.8 or so, and the chip is most efficient below 3.5 anyway (I run mine at stock, heavily undervolted, needs next to no airflow to cool).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> A portion of the potential buyers will wait for stock because they know the 8700K exists, and the benchmarks put it ahead of any Ryzen CPU in gaming. Anyone "tired of 4 cores" now knows they don't have to switch brands to chase metrics. It's got to hamper sales for AMD, and I'm sure that was Intel's plan. Had they waited, probably more people would have just purchased Ryzen CPU's over the holidays.


Yup, it was a marketing launch. And boy did it work well. I'm a bit puzzled about all the stock complaints, though. Unless your PC literally just exploded, might as well go on with your life for couple weeks and buy the chip at MSRP or below once there's sufficient stock.


----------



## navjack27

I had mine running at 3.975ghz stable for [email protected] and cinema4d at 1.425v. I didn't have the best RAM because while I know of the RAM speed things with ryzen I don't totally believe that I should go out and spend a bunch on faster ram to get the best performance outta my CPU. I should just be able to overclock the cache to compensate for the RAM being slow... but noooooo I can't directly touch the infinity fabric.

the highest i got it to was 4.1ghz but just to get a cpu-z screenshot. any real load on the cpu would lock up.


----------



## mjheikki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *navjack27*
> 
> I had mine running at 3.975ghz stable for [email protected] and cinema4d at 1.425v. I didn't have the best RAM because while I know of the RAM speed things with ryzen I don't totally believe that I should go out and spend a bunch on faster ram to get the best performance outta my CPU. I should just be able to overclock the cache to compensate for the RAM being slow... but noooooo I can't directly touch the infinity fabric.


Not nearly all workloads are sensitive to interconnect/RAM latency, though, so the need for fast RAM needs to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The difference is most obvious in gaming since low latency = higher FPS, and Intel CPUs are simply better at that. That's a reason why I tend to universally recommend Intel for DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) use, though.


----------



## navjack27

yup. agree with that entirely.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Ryzen 7 1700
> 93% reach 3.8GHz @ 1.376V
> 70% reach 3.9GHz @ 1.408V
> 20% reach 4.0GHz @ 1.440V
> 
> Ryzen 7 1700X
> 100% reach 3.8GHz @ 1.360V
> 77% reach 3.9GHz @ 1.392V
> 33% reach 4.0GHz @ 1.424V
> 
> Ryzen 7 1800X
> 100% reach 3.8GHz (assumed)
> 97% reach 3.9GHz @ 1.376V
> 67% reach 4.0GHz @ 1.408V
> 20% reach 4.1GHz @ 1.440V


My 1700x overclocks to 3.9GHz albeit on a cheap matx b350 motherboard and a measly Corsair H60 v2.







would probably do 4GHz with better motherboard/cooling


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> He stole that from me.


My apologies. You, my friend, deserve the credit then. Seriously, I'm going to start calling it "Covfefe Lake" now lol









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *navjack27*
> 
> its not
> 
> can a ryzen clock to anything above 4ghz on all cores?


What difference does it make if it can or not? And no I'm not just using this as a copout -- I can read benchmark graphs and I'll admit, Covefe Lake (kudos @ boredgunner) closed the gap on Ryzen, but you know what? I could care less and I'm OK with that. I don't pay attention to most of them anyway. But back to my point. Just because Ryzen's can't get up to 9000GHz or something, what, that makes them completely useless and/inferior? People seem to forget just how massive an improvement Ryzen has been over previous architectures, yet all people do is *****.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mjheikki*
> 
> Yup, it was a marketing launch. And boy did it work well. I'm a bit puzzled about all the stock complaints, though. Unless your PC literally just exploded, might as well go on with your life for couple weeks and buy the chip at MSRP or below once there's sufficient stock.


Exactly. People should just try to remain calm and avoid doing something they'll regret later...like spending double MSRP for a CPU lol.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> Even assuming the 8700k is available, @ around $400, may as well get a 1800X. If you dont wanna spend $400, get the1700 ($300) and you'll get the exact same experience @1440p. You may even get more frames in multi-threaded games due to having moar cores.
> 
> 
> 
> If more and more games use multi core then yea. But i dont need to many games being multi core for at least 3-5 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> From my experience i've seeing more and more games being released are mult--threaded. The biggest game right now PUBG uses 6 cores. Wolfenstein 2 is mult-threaded. You can count anything developed on cryengine or frostbyte. Playing at higher res, the IPC speed is really irrelevant to an extent. It just has to be high enough not to bottleneck.
Click to expand...

Do you have a benchmark link with the i7 7700k VS i7 8700k in PUBG?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Gmr Chick*
> 
> But what good is that strategy when you can't even buy the damn things? That will just make people end up buying Ryzens instead if you ask me.
> 
> 
> 
> A portion of the potential buyers will wait for stock because they know the 8700K exists, and the benchmarks put it ahead of any Ryzen CPU in gaming. Anyone "tired of 4 cores" now knows they don't have to switch brands to chase metrics. It's got to hamper sales for AMD, and I'm sure that was Intel's plan. Had they waited, probably more people would have just purchased Ryzen CPU's over the holidays.
Click to expand...

The i7 7700k is better in gaming compared to Ryzen. I can't find any games that do better with the i7 8700k compared to the i7 7700k.


----------



## kd5151

Make Intel's stock on newegg great again!


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> Even assuming the 8700k is available, @ around $400, may as well get a 1800X. If you dont wanna spend $400, get the1700 ($300) and you'll get the exact same experience @1440p. You may even get more frames in multi-threaded games due to having moar cores.
> 
> 
> 
> If more and more games use multi core then yea. But i dont need to many games being multi core for at least 3-5 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> From my experience i've seeing more and more games being released are mult--threaded. The biggest game right now PUBG uses 6 cores. Wolfenstein 2 is mult-threaded. You can count anything developed on cryengine or frostbyte. Playing at higher res, the IPC speed is really irrelevant to an extent. It just has to be high enough not to bottleneck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have a benchmark link with the i7 7700k VS i7 8700k in PUBG?
Click to expand...

if there are any benches with that game, it'll be obsolete with its next patch. There is still too much frame fluctuation to really gauge any meaningful numbers. You can get frame drops of 20 or more depending where you are going. Its targeted for and end of the year release (hah), so i'd expect PUGB to be a staple bench once its finished.


----------



## AlphaC

Please stop bickering, back on topic.

quasarzone.co.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=qc_qsz&wr_id=102002&sca=CPU



vs other CPUs
http://quasarzone.co.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=qc_qsz&wr_id=102004&sca=CPU


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The i7 7700k is better in gaming compared to Ryzen. I can't find any games that do better with the i7 8700k compared to the i7 7700k.


That's why I alluded to people "tired of 4 cores".


----------



## czin125

At 5.2, the 8700K needs less volts than the 8600K from those pictures.

1.44v vs 1.48v
1.36v vs 1.36v at 5.1ghz

The full chip seems to be superior to the partially disabled one in OCing above 5.1 ( 3MB of cache gone and HT too )


----------



## Robilar

This processor is pretty amazing thus far....

I finished a run at 4.7 (as a baseline, eventual goal will be higher). Only requires 1.2 vcore for stability. I bet I can get it even lower today.

By contrast my 6800k needed 1.3 vcore for 4ghz stability with the same temps.


----------



## AlphaC

I think there's going to be more stock next week. I saw a link on sohu that had sales in Asia on November 2.






https://www.sohu.com/a/200970039_161623

edit: same for japan

https://akiba-pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/news/1088388.html


----------



## QuadDamage

Anyone have a ASrock Z370 Gaming @ 5gzh if so what settings did you use?
I saw there was an overclocking guide I didn't see anything for the ASrock? Can someone link me please
I'm at 4.8 @ 60 c max right now I want to push it more.


----------



## osb40000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The i7 7700k is better in gaming compared to Ryzen. I can't find any games that do better with the i7 8700k compared to the i7 7700k.


Witcher 3 does significantly better with 8700k than 7700k and most games have much better frame times with 8700k over 7700k.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *osb40000*
> 
> Witcher 3 does significantly better with 8700k than 7700k and most games have much better frame times with 8700k over 7700k.


I think most do better with the 8700k...

I'm curious to see which one wins in older games, though I only benchmarked two older games plus one modern UE3 game with my 6700k, and one of those older games is actually L3 cache heavy and so is the modern UE3 game I'll wager (XCOM 2). So... not much data to collect lol.


----------



## CallsignVega

8700K is the bee's knees! Approaching 5.3 GHz on air without de-lid.


----------



## Rei86

The 8700K is the 3930K that I wanted so badly back in the day but couldn't justify the price...

I want to jump in on this so bad but with Z390 on its way with 8c16t CPU on the way I'm gonna wait.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> I think there's going to be more stock next week. I saw a link on sohu that had sales in Asia on November 2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.sohu.com/a/200970039_161623
> 
> edit: same for japan
> 
> https://akiba-pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/news/1088388.html


Nice 444 bucks (if straight currency conversion) for that 8700K.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CallsignVega*
> 
> 8700K is the bee's knees! Approaching 5.3 GHz on air without de-lid.


Getting my hopes up there. Mine is getting delidded soon, though I'm still waiting on a motherboard (Maximus X Code or Extreme). I'll remain pessimistic though and expect no greater than 5.2 GHz, but I want to be pleasantly surprised.

Hopefully the Maximus X Core/Formula release and/or Extreme coincides with the release of the EK MLC coolers, since I'll be using a 360mm version of that.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuadDamage*
> 
> 
> Anyone have a ASrock Z370 Gaming @ 5gzh if so what settings did you use?
> I saw there was an overclocking guide I didn't see anything for the ASrock? Can someone link me please
> I'm at 4.8 @ 60 c max right now I want to push it more.


I'd imagine it is like any Kaby Lake CPU.

8pack short guide:
https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/8packs-no-bs-testing-intel-8700k-and-z370-with-delid-5ghz-and-above-available-from-ocuk.18795256/
Quote:


> Overclocking in general
> Core - In my testing of many retail CPUs I have found 8700K core OC to be very similar to 7700K OC on the same cooling. If its better its only 100mhz absolute tops better.
> 
> Cache- In my testing Cache is better on the 8700K compared to 7700K by at least two ratio. When you can use higher voltages with delid of 1.35v+ then Cache on these CPU can go 4.8-5ghz which improves the efficiency in many tasks equivalent to upto 200mhz CPU clocks. Most 7700K with similar voltages and stress testing liked cache a good 400mhz less.
> 
> Memory- Memory OC is very much the same as Z370. 4 Dimm boards are topping out 3866-4000mhz. Good Samsung IC on certain boards doing a little better with good IMC on an Individual CPU. 2 DIMM boards can hit 4266mhz stable without issue but this was the same on Z370. I recommend 8Pack Team Group range as they are all Samsung based IC and can clock very high at tight timings. With even 3200mhz Bin being able to do 3866mhz- 4K C18-C19 in many cases.
> 
> Many vendors have SA and IO voltages set too high for compatability with the worsed IMC's this adds to temperatures and is unnecessary. I suggest 1.05-1.125v for 3200mhz , 1.10-1.15 for 3600mhz and upto 1.2v for 4000mhz. Of Course some IMC need higher for stability but this will cost 3-6C in Core temps. So pay attention to these voltages and tune accordingly.


8 packs tests with Prime non AVX 30-45 min / real bench

For hero + 5.2GHz binned CPU
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/posts/31235282*
> 
> So f5 and F10 then enter to reset bios. Reboot back into bios.
> 
> Xmp
> Avx offset 3
> All core ratio 52
> Digi power llc level 6, could current cap 140%
> Cache ratio min 44
> Cache ratio max 44
> 
> Core voltage 1.4
> Dram voltage 1.4
> Vccio 1.1
> Vccsa1.1
> Cpu standby volts 1.1
> 
> Save and exit.. Test.


5Ghz binned CPU + hero
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/posts/31254888*
> Vcore 1.35
> Dram voltage 1.375
> Io 1.2
> Sa 1.22
> Cpu standby 1.2
> Xmp
> Avx offset 2
> Load line level 5-6
> Current cap 140%


For Gigabyte Gaming 7 + 5 GHz binned CPU
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/posts/31216758*
> Get 3600Mhz set xmp.
> 
> Insert cpu and add your cooling.
> 50 multi
> 4.4 cache
> 
> 1.35vcore -1.4vcore
> 1.1io
> 1.1Sa
> 
> Done......


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *osb40000*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The i7 7700k is better in gaming compared to Ryzen. I can't find any games that do better with the i7 8700k compared to the i7 7700k.
> 
> 
> 
> Witcher 3 does significantly better with 8700k than 7700k and most games have much better frame times with 8700k over 7700k.
Click to expand...

Do you have some links to the benchmarks your speaking about?


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The i7 7700k is better in gaming compared to Ryzen. I can't find any games that do better with the i7 8700k compared to the i7 7700k.


I consider myself a hardcore gamer, but even I'm getting tired of all this "X is better than Y for gaming" crap. People do more on their rigs than just play games. Gaming performance isn't the end all metric for a CPUs performance and it shouldn't be the sole determining factor in determining if X is ultimately better than Y. Sure it's understandable that gamers would pay more attention to X or Y's gaming capabilities, but they should look at its performance with a wider lense. I mean, let's look at an example: X could be a boss at gaming, but suck at everything else AND cost more than Y, while Y isn't quite as much of a boss (but damn close) at gaming, but great everywhere else AND cheaper than X -- doesn't matter how boss X is at gaming, if it doesn't perform well at everything else AND is more expensive than Y, the choice (at least for me) is clear: Y wins hands down.


----------



## Redeemer

Finally got my CPU, now I am looking for a motherboard with Intel GbE and Realtek ALC1220. I might go MATX this time around, smaller builds are pretty nifty


----------



## kd5151

https://us.hardware.info/reviews/7605/intel-z370-motherboards-round-up-17-times-coffee-lake

best motherboards for coffee lake ? you decide!


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Redeemer*
> 
> Finally got my CPU, now I am looking for a motherboard with Intel GbE and Realtek ALC1220. I might go MATX this time around, smaller builds are pretty nifty


Are you crazy, posting a pic of your new shiny 8600K? People won't be able to stop salivating lol


----------



## Redeemer

Ha, well my current 2500K 4.8Ghz has served me well for years. I will still hold on to my 780 TI for a little while longer though, still need RAM, motherboard and a cooler for the new build but I will take my time


----------



## Redeemer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> https://us.hardware.info/reviews/7605/intel-z370-motherboards-round-up-17-times-coffee-lake
> 
> best motherboards for coffee lake ? you decide!


awesome, thanks


----------



## osb40000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Do you have some links to the benchmarks your speaking about?


Here are two examples off the top of my head. 8700k simply does better than 7700k in every scenario and especially in frame times and lows. I sold my 7700k box to my brother as soon as 8700k was released and for anyone rocking a 1080ti and 144hz monitor I'd suggest they do the same.






http://techreport.com/review/32642/intel-core-i7-8700k-cpu-reviewed/7


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gmr Chick*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The i7 7700k is better in gaming compared to Ryzen. I can't find any games that do better with the i7 8700k compared to the i7 7700k.
> 
> 
> 
> I consider myself a hardcore gamer, but even I'm getting tired of all this "X is better than Y for gaming" crap. People do more on their rigs than just play games. Gaming performance isn't the end all metric for a CPUs performance and it shouldn't be the sole determining factor in determining if X is ultimately better than Y. Sure it's understandable that gamers would pay more attention to X or Y's gaming capabilities, but they should look at its performance with a wider lense. I mean, let's look at an example: X could be a boss at gaming, but suck at everything else AND cost more than Y, while Y isn't quite as much of a boss (but damn close) at gaming, but great everywhere else AND cheaper than X -- doesn't matter how boss X is at gaming, if it doesn't perform well at everything else AND is more expensive than Y, the choice (at least for me) is clear: Y wins hands down.
Click to expand...

Well gaming is my main concern, everything else can be done on a dual core celeron just as fast.


----------



## CallsignVega

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> https://us.hardware.info/reviews/7605/intel-z370-motherboards-round-up-17-times-coffee-lake
> 
> best motherboards for coffee lake ? you decide!


I've got the ASUS ROG Strix Z370-I Gaming. Sweet little mini-ITX board that overclocks my 8700K and RAM like a beast. Since we are in the era of single GPU dominance, I'll probably stick with mini-ITX in the future.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gmr Chick*
> 
> Are you crazy, posting a pic of your new shiny 8600K? People won't be able to stop salivating lol












Unbiased statement: gonna be a slaughter.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CallsignVega*
> 
> I've got the ASUS ROG Strix Z370-I Gaming. Sweet little mini-ITX board that overclocks my 8700K and RAM like a beast. Since we are in the era of single GPU dominance, I'll probably stick with mini-ITX in the future.


I wish I could. I'd use the Fractal Design Node 202 since it's just so damn small. I'd prefer a PC that takes up no space at the cost of 32GB RAM limitation, which is what I have now anyway and I don't need more.

But I can't since I play a lot of games that support hardware accelerated sound, and it's too damn good to pass up. Need an X-Fi sound card for it (all internal except maybe one) and only one has Win10 drivers (and it's internal).


----------



## CallsignVega

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unbiased statement: gonna be a slaughter.
> I wish I could. I'd use the Fractal Design Node 202 since it's just so damn small. I'd prefer a PC that takes up no space at the cost of 32GB RAM limitation, which is what I have now anyway and I don't need more.
> 
> But I can't since I play a lot of games that support hardware accelerated sound, and it's too damn good to pass up. Need an X-Fi sound card for it (all internal except maybe one) and only one has Win10 drivers (and it's internal).


Could you elaborate on the hardware accelerated sound? I haven't been keeping up with dedicated sound cards as I thought on-board sound has gotten good enough to make them moot these days. And surely sound takes up a miniscule amount of cpu cycles, especially on 6+ cores.


----------



## HeliXpc

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CallsignVega*
> 
> Could you elaborate on the hardware accelerated sound? I haven't been keeping up with dedicated sound cards as I thought on-board sound has gotten good enough to make them moot these days. And surely sound takes up a miniscule amount of cpu cycles, especially on 6+ cores.


Anyone serious about High end audio wouldnt be using onboard sound, if youre using high end speakers, or headphones, you will need something more powerful to run and power them, onboard is garbage to me, ive been using sound cards since sound blaster live days of the 90s, I have never built a PC without a sound card, but I also use $500 studio monitors as speakers.


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*


That reminds me...my R5 1600 is supposed to arrive Tuesday. Can't wait. No more dual cores for me!


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HeliXpc*
> 
> Anyone serious about High end audio wouldnt be using onboard sound, if youre using high end speakers, or headphones, you will need something more powerful to run and power them, onboard is garbage to me, ive been using sound cards since sound blaster live days of the 90s, I have never built a PC without a sound card, but I also use $500 studio monitors as speakers.


I disagree, i mean audiophiles will be audiophiles but for 99.99% of people onboard audio is adequate. If the onboard audio doesn't have the capacity to push a high impedence headphone or speaker then just get an amp. or a dac/amp combo to improve the sound. I went with a pair of Fidelio X2s because of how easy it is to drive them being only 32 ohms and i have no complaints with from my z270 maximus' onboard audio driving them.


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HeliXpc*
> 
> Anyone serious about High end audio wouldnt be using onboard sound, if youre using high end speakers, or headphones, you will need something more powerful to run and power them, onboard is garbage to me, ive been using sound cards since sound blaster live days of the 90s, I have never built a PC without a sound card, but I also use $500 studio monitors as speakers.


I have wondered about this too. I have an audioengine DAC with fibre optic connection straight from the motherboard going to a marantz amp and floorstanders but the DAC's and other stuff they seem to be putting into motherboards lately looks like it should be pretty good no?


----------



## kd5151

dun dun duuuun!


----------



## nanotm

yeah if sound is your thing then pump it through a sound system via a toslink cable and don't waste the money on a crappy soundcard that just increases the latency through cyclic suppression causes by emi inside the case ....

also who can be an audiophile when playing games, gunshots and explosions are gunshots and explosions, turn the sound up too much and your getting a headache no matter how good your setup is/


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HeliXpc*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *CallsignVega*
> 
> Could you elaborate on the hardware accelerated sound? I haven't been keeping up with dedicated sound cards as I thought on-board sound has gotten good enough to make them moot these days. And surely sound takes up a miniscule amount of cpu cycles, especially on 6+ cores.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone serious about High end audio wouldnt be using onboard sound, if youre using high end speakers, or headphones, you will need something more powerful to run and power them, onboard is garbage to me, ive been using sound cards since sound blaster live days of the 90s, I have never built a PC without a sound card, but I also use $500 studio monitors as speakers.
Click to expand...

You can get the same or better sound quality from an external DAC with a built-in amp at a lower price point.


----------



## Tojara

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> You can get the same or better sound quality from an external DAC with a built-in amp at a lower price point.


You can, as long as you don't get interference from the motherboard. The necessity of that is a bit arguable when most boards past $100 have reasonably good audio built in, that usually takes $50+ equipment to match. Good on-board implementations are good enough for 95%+ of people.


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tojara*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> You can get the same or better sound quality from an external DAC with a built-in amp at a lower price point.
> 
> 
> 
> You can, as long as you don't get interference from the motherboard. The necessity of that is a bit arguable when most boards past $100 have reasonably good audio built in, that usually takes $50+ equipment to match. Good on-board implementations are good enough for 95%+ of people.
Click to expand...

If you use a digital connection to the external DAC, there's absolutely no motherboard interference. Usually, that's what can happen with soundcard solutions.


----------



## Scotty99

My strix-f showed up yesterday, am i part of the lonely motherboard club now?


----------



## lutjens

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Redeemer*
> 
> Finally got my CPU, now I am looking for a motherboard with Intel GbE and Realtek ALC1220. I might go MATX this time around, smaller builds are pretty nifty


I raise you one i9-7980XE, one Threadripper 1950X and one i7-8700K...


----------



## kd5151

rep!


----------



## SavantStrike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rei86*
> 
> The 8700K is the 3930K that I wanted so badly back in the day but couldn't justify the price...
> 
> I want to jump in on this so bad but with Z390 on its way with 8c16t CPU on the way I'm gonna wait.
> Nice 444 bucks (if straight currency conversion) for that 8700K.


I'm interested to see how the 8 core products on z390 do. From what I understand it's a mesh arch so it's possible the 8700K might be faster than the 9700K in some workloads. Won't know for anther year though.


----------



## CallsignVega

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nanotm*
> 
> yeah if sound is your thing then pump it through a sound system via a toslink cable and don't waste the money on a crappy soundcard that just increases the latency through cyclic suppression causes by emi inside the case ....
> 
> also who can be an audiophile when playing games, gunshots and explosions are gunshots and explosions, turn the sound up too much and your getting a headache no matter how good your setup is/


Right now my high end receiver is plugged into the on-board sound TOSLINK output. Does that bypass the on-board sound/DAC completely? Maybe I have everything set up as best as it can be and don't realize it.


----------



## nanotm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CallsignVega*
> 
> Right now my high end receiver is plugged into the on-board sound TOSLINK output. Does that bypass the on-board sound/DAC completely? Maybe I have everything set up as best as it can be and don't realize it.


it depends on the mobo to be sure but yeah normally the toslink output bypasses the on board or discrete sound cards, and since its the puire digital output to make the waveform for the lights its not using the dac at all

if you had a soundcard with a toslink output it would be adding a 15 ms delay to the output sound.....

when your using the toslink the built in audio system should theoretically be disabled (although some don't do that) which has the side benefit of reducing onboard EMI and thus decreasing overall system latency which means higher FPS in games where that matters....


----------



## CallsignVega

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nanotm*
> 
> it depends on the mobo to be sure but yeah normally the toslink output bypasses the on board or discrete sound cards, and since its the puire digital output to make the waveform for the lights its not using the dac at all
> 
> if you had a soundcard with a toslink output it would be adding a 15 ms delay to the output sound.....
> 
> when your using the toslink the built in audio system should theoretically be disabled (although some don't do that) which has the side benefit of reducing onboard EMI and thus decreasing overall system latency which means higher FPS in games where that matters....


Interesting. I wonder if I go into my BIOS and disable "on-board sound" if the TOSLINK port will still work.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> dun dun duuuun!


8400 won by like 11% at 720p which is nothing.


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CallsignVega*
> 
> Interesting. I wonder if I go into my BIOS and disable "on-board sound" if the TOSLINK port will still work.


Considering it's a digital connection, I see no reason why it wouldn't. I always disable on-board DAC ability of my motherboards and output digital to external DAC exclusively.
Only caveat is that you'd need an external ADC for input.


----------



## ls1088

Experienced instability on my 8700k running cinebench 15 @4.7GHz all cores on 1.250V
Did I lose the silicon lottery


----------



## Rei86

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SavantStrike*
> 
> I'm interested to see how the 8 core products on z390 do. From what I understand it's a mesh arch so it's possible the 8700K might be faster than the 9700K in some workloads. Won't know for anther year though.


Oh








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ls1088*
> 
> Experienced instability on my 8700k running cinebench 15 @4.7GHz all cores on 1.250V
> Did I lose the silicon lottery


Isn't that pretty good on all cores? Not just a single core run.


----------



## lolredy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CallsignVega*
> 
> 8700K is the bee's knees! Approaching 5.3 GHz on air without de-lid.


which cpu cooler you have?


----------



## CallsignVega

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolredy*
> 
> which cpu cooler you have?


Noctua NH-D15 with two up-rated fans. Cools just as well or better than most AIO's.


----------



## Raghar

Temperatures should be reported with fans running at 800 RPM. That way we would know how well it would work in low noise condition. Virtually silent gaming is the best.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unbiased statement: gonna be a slaughter.
> I wish I could. I'd use the Fractal Design Node 202 since it's just so damn small. I'd prefer a PC that takes up no space at the cost of 32GB RAM limitation, which is what I have now anyway and I don't need more.
> 
> But I can't since I play a lot of games that support hardware accelerated sound, and it's too damn good to pass up. Need an X-Fi sound card for it (all internal except maybe one) and only one has Win10 drivers (and it's internal).




I've already played around with 7700k vs. 1700x and it was a slaughter (in gaming). comparing it to the 8700k is too much


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CallsignVega*
> 
> Noctua NH-D15 with two up-rated fans. Cools just as well or better than most AIO's.


Yeah, until you get to the expandable AIO's (which are just small loops), the D15 is on the level. More specifically, it's as good as or better than most any CLC.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> 
> 
> I've already played around with 7700k vs. 1700x and it was a slaughter (in gaming). comparing it to the 8700k is too much


Really? That bad? They recently just tested 1600X vs 7700K vs 8400 and it did not look like a slaughter to me. I mean if one CPU get 200 fps and the other get 160 fps it does not matter much. Only if you are in 60 fps range where the slaughtering happens and that is not common for either CPU.


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Really? That bad? They recently just tested 1600X vs 7700K vs 8400 and it did not look like a slaughter to me. I mean if one CPU get 200 fps and the other get 160 fps it does not matter much. Only if you are in 60 fps range where the slaughtering happens and that is not common for either CPU.


For like 90% of people, anything with sandybridge or better IPC is still perfectly usable today for gaming. The only things that need considering are core/thread count, platform features, and price. The 10% are people that may be able to make an argument as to why they need the highest clocking highest IPC part are people trying to push high refresh rates.


----------



## Scotty99

Ive not owned an AIO, but comparing my temps (be quiet dark rock pro 3) to others in the ryzen 7 thread mine were lower. 1.38v max temps in aida is 68c with 1200 rpm fans.

Noctuas are even a couple degrees lower, but i went for looks on this one.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Really? That bad? They recently just tested 1600X vs 7700K vs 8400 and it did not look like a slaughter to me. I mean if one CPU get 200 fps and the other get 160 fps it does not matter much. Only if you are in 60 fps range where the slaughtering happens and that is not common for either CPU.


60hz monitors there would be virtually no difference I think. I tested it with my 1440p 144hz monitor. Ryzen's IPC even at 3.9GHz 3333MHz cas16 is not enough to maintain 144hz. versus the 7700k @ 5GHz on the other hand have no problems keeping it at 144fps+ the only problem is the CPU usage is so high in some games like Battlefield 1 it feels like the cpu is being pushed to the limit. the Ryzen cpu is performing less but cpu load is waaaay low lol. the 8700k fixes this that's why I'm so excited lol


----------



## jprovido

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117827&ignorebbr=1

in stock right now. I said I wouldn't pull the trigger any higher than 400USD but I couldn't resist smh. paid for the fastest shipping too I'm such a sucker


----------



## Scotty99

Enjoy, but im a cheapskate and im gonna wait lol.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Enjoy, but im a cheapskate and im gonna wait lol.


if all goes well I will get it tomorrow morning. I'm usually a cheapskate too I don't like getting screwed over but I've had the motherboard for almost a month now I see it everyday under my table lol. I just couldn't resist


----------



## jprovido

anddddd it's gone... I'm happy I was able to get one








https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117827&ignorebbr=1


----------



## Scotty99

I dont blame you, if it was 380 i think thats fair due to shortage, but 50 over msrp is just ugh lol.

lul that was quick, what are they getting these in 2 at a time?


----------



## CallsignVega

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117827&ignorebbr=1
> 
> in stock right now. I said I wouldn't pull the trigger any higher than 400USD but I couldn't resist smh. paid for the fastest shipping too I'm such a sucker


lol I like how Newegg keeps slowly raising the price.


----------



## Redeemer

So what z370 boards are you guys looking at for your unlocked CPUs?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Redeemer*
> 
> So what z370 boards are you guys looking at for your unlocked CPUs?


Aside from being cheap i am also shallow, asus strix-f.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Redeemer*
> 
> So what z370 boards are you guys looking at for your unlocked CPUs?


I got the Aorus Gaming 7 this time. didn't like my Maximux IX Hero that much(my current pc) not to mention it boots sooo slow even with the latest bios.



I guess I really got one. it says "Packaging" now. It's real boizzzzzzz


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Redeemer*
> 
> So what z370 boards are you guys looking at for your unlocked CPUs?


Waiting for the ROG Formula. Rumors say that there will be an Asrock OC Formula too.


----------



## CallsignVega

Finally settled on my overclock. Just ran an hour of Prime95 with Noctua ND15 max temp mid 80's and no de-lid. Over 5 GHz cache. This CPU is a beast.


----------



## Scotty99

Is overclocking the cache necessary/give boosts? Not something im used to fiddling with.

If you are under 90c with those volts thats pretty dam good for an air cooler, hope i get similar results


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CallsignVega*
> 
> Finally settled on my overclock. Just ran an hour of Prime95 with Noctua ND15 max temp mid 80's and no de-lid. Over 5 GHz cache. This CPU is a beast.


that's a crazy overclock! 5.1GHz delidded I'd already be pretty stoked







man I hope the cpu I get isn't a dud. I've been lucky for the past few years now. i5 3570k to 5GHz, i7 5820k to 4.7ghz now 7700k to 5.1GHz. as long as I can get it to 5GHz all cores after delid I'm happy


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CallsignVega*
> 
> Finally settled on my overclock. Just ran an hour of Prime95 with Noctua ND15 max temp mid 80's and no de-lid. Over 5 GHz cache. This CPU is a beast.


Turn hyperthreading back on so you are running the full 12 threads of the 8700k and then see if it will pass Prime95 for an hour at 5.2ghz core and 5ghz cache at the same volts.


----------



## mdd1986

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> if all goes well I will get it tomorrow morning. I'm usually a cheapskate too I don't like getting screwed over but I've had the motherboard for almost a month now I see it everyday under my table lol. I just couldn't resist


Good luck. I'm also very cheap and not willing to give into the hype. Ill wait for the market to settle down a bit. Probably have to wait until after the holidays. While everyone is paying off their credit card bills I'll be buying computer parts lol.


----------



## QuadDamage

My temps are preety good for 5ghz I think i can even turn down my volts one of my programs are reading crazy hight
30 mins prime test at 5ghz

This is the AIO alpha cool 360 cooler with MX 5 paste I don't hit much over 63 c @ 5ghz
Any changes
I did 50 all cores
1.365 volts
1.2
1.1

Nothing else major I started from the Asrock 4.7ghz platform and just been changing stuff up.

Just a screen shot with the other hardware tool. the hwinfo64 is crashing my pc anytime i run it everything else is golden.


Should i be worried about my core temps reading such insane volts when it's set in bios?
My temps look pretty good to me this is a un died I have not tired anything over 5 yet

This was a blend test when I do the high CPU test I'm getting near 77 c and my vids are 1.46 insane I know i can turn in down?

Anyone running a Asrock Z370 have some setting I could try mine are way overkill right now.


----------



## QuadDamage

Here are some 5ghz intel burn test i set it to level 4 from 5 and turned the volts from 1.380 to 1.360
I know i can run prime ect later just showing this
My Volts in test are still 1.44 @ 5ghz that's crays high




Should I keep on dropping my default volts to all the core; or is there a setting i have messed up
temps high around 77 pretty toasty


----------



## kd5151

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117825&cm_re=8600k-_-19-117-825-_-Product

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117826&cm_re=coffee_lake-_-19-117-826-_-Product










edit:8600k is in stock and it's gone.


----------



## tw2

Stupid question- do these cpu's downclock at light loads like previous generations. My devils canyon will run 800mhz up to my overclock in a few steps depending on load. Or does all core overclock prevent this?


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CallsignVega*
> 
> Finally settled on my overclock. Just ran an hour of Prime95 with Noctua ND15 max temp mid 80's and no de-lid. Over 5 GHz cache. This CPU is a beast.


No offense, but if you were going to pay over $100 extra for effectively an i5 with a slightly better bin, why didn't you just buy an actual pre-binned chip? I just don't see the point in this at all.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Tojara*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> You can get the same or better sound quality from an external DAC with a built-in amp at a lower price point.
> 
> 
> 
> You can, as long as you don't get interference from the motherboard. The necessity of that is a bit arguable when most boards past $100 have reasonably good audio built in, that usually takes $50+ equipment to match. Good on-board implementations are good enough for 95%+ of people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If you use a digital connection to the external DAC, there's absolutely no motherboard interference. Usually, that's what can happen with soundcard solutions.
Click to expand...

How can you get a digital connection to a PC?


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> How can you get a digital connection to a PC?


Toslink cable. I assume most motherboards support this. It is usually with the 3.5mm jacks.


----------



## Redeemer

What about the MSI Z370 GAMING PRO CARBON vs ASUS ROG Strix Z370-E GAMING?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Redeemer*
> 
> What about the MSI Z370 GAMING PRO CARBON vs ASUS ROG Strix Z370-E GAMING?


Have you looked at the asrock extreme 4 or gaming k6? Really are the best boards for the money.


----------



## CallsignVega

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Turn hyperthreading back on so you are running the full 12 threads of the 8700k and then see if it will pass Prime95 for an hour at 5.2ghz core and 5ghz cache at the same volts.


Hyper-threading is garbage. I never run that on gaming PC's. Real cores > fake cores.

In all of my tests it hurts performance in games. His testing too:

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/gaming-benchmarks-core-i7-6700k-hyperthreading-test.219417/

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> No offense, but if you were going to pay over $100 extra for effectively an i5 with a slightly better bin, why didn't you just buy an actual pre-binned chip? I just don't see the point in this at all.


8700K has more cache.


----------



## Scotty99

That's only going to be true for a short period of time, with the vast number of ryzen 5's amd is selling hyperthreading is going to make a difference, and already is on 4c chips (7700k holds massive advantages over 7600k in quite a few titles).


----------



## QuadDamage

Here is my Asus Rock Fatality 5ghz auto Settings
Pretty happy with board but can someone tell me how to turn off all the RED lights; I sleep in the room with my pc and it drives me nuts
I know how to turn off the RGB lighting but where is the setting to turn off the stand by lights?

I7 8700k @ 5ghz Intel burn test 73 C with a Alpha cooler 360 AIO
I bet I can do 5.2 on this easy but i'm happy with 5


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> Stupid question- do these cpu's downclock at light loads like previous generations. My devils canyon will run 800mhz up to my overclock in a few steps depending on load. Or does all core overclock prevent this?


Yes 8700K will downclock in the same way your Devils Canyon does under a light load/idle


----------



## czin125

https://i.imgur.com/sL5dq6f.jpg
There's a 5.5/5.1 7740X at ~1.355-1.370v ( pic from a finnish site ).


----------



## kd5151

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3106-intel-i3-8350k-review-overclocking-vs-i5-8400-r5-1600x

8350K @ 4.8ghz vs stock i5-8400. Ryzen 5 1600 can come to.


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lutjens*
> 
> I raise you one i9-7980XE, one Threadripper 1950X and one i7-8700K...


The epeen is strong with this one









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CallsignVega*
> 
> lol I like how Newegg keeps slowly raising the price.


Wha...? $419 now? I checked for ****s and giggles a day or so ago, and it was $409. Crazy.

BTW, not that it matters to me (I'm taking the red pill lol) but I just checked Newegg - the time for me is 5:41 PM -- and both the i7 8700 and the i5 8600K are in stock:

https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&IsNodeId=1&N=100007671%20601301611%20601301612


----------



## GunfighterAK

What's the verdict on the 8600k vs 8700k for gaming? It seems the 8700k is a bit of waste of money. Also, planning to overclock the hell out of one of them.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I've already played around with 7700k vs. 1700x and it was a slaughter (in gaming). comparing it to the 8700k is too much


Yup, I had a 6700k before the 1700X. With only minimal overclocks, the 6700k was around 30% faster in all Unreal Engine games (sometimes more, definitely more in Unreal Engine 4 for some reason), Source engine games, Crysis, and a bunch of other games here and there. Just the way the games were coded and issues with communication between cores and Infinity Fabric holding things up I guess. That and issues with my NVIDIA GPU.

Granted, most very recent AAA games are not much worse on Ryzen 5 (hex core) or 7, compared to the 6700k/7700k at least.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CallsignVega*
> 
> *Hyper-threading is garbage*. I never run that on gaming PC's. Real cores > fake cores.
> 
> In all of my tests it hurts performance in games. His testing too:
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/gaming-benchmarks-core-i7-6700k-hyperthreading-test.219417/
> 8700K has more cache.


It's 2017. hyperthreading is the only thing that's making the 7700k competitive with Ryzen on both multithreadded workloads AND gaming. even the i5's can't compete with Ryzen even with their massive clock speed and IPC advantage. I remember with my i7 950 back in the day I did get performance loss in some games with hyperthreading but that's a long time ago


----------



## Techhog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CallsignVega*
> 
> Hyper-threading is garbage. I never run that on gaming PC's. Real cores > fake cores.
> 
> In all of my tests it hurts performance in games. His testing too:
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/gaming-benchmarks-core-i7-6700k-hyperthreading-test.219417/
> 8700K has more cache.


Is there testing to prove that the extra cache makes a difference worth paying $100+ more for?


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Is there testing to prove that the extra cache makes a difference worth paying $100+ more for?


I don't think anyone would claim it is "worth" $100. Some just want the best, even if that extra cache only improves FPS in 1% of games by 1%.


----------



## Kana Chan

Z370 boards have dram options up to 8533 MT/s. 4800 on heavily OC'd 20nm DDR4 ( air )

https://i.imgur.com/MJQiCWH.png
It looks like Intel is going to start producing DDR4 5333 MT/s modules on the 10nm process. That's at stock settings.


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Techhog*
> 
> Is there testing to prove that the extra cache makes a difference worth paying $100+ more for?


I'm willing to bet that the 3MB of extra cache makes less difference than the hyperthreading.

And I wouldn't base my opinion of hyperthreading on a nearly 2 year old forum post where the poster tested a bunch of 4+ year old games. I think the newest game that was tested was The Witcher 3, which was from mid-2015.

I know in Project Cars 2 having hyperthreading enabled can double your frame rate on an i3. On a 7700k having it on is about a 10% performance gain.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> I'm willing to bet that the 3MB of extra cache makes less difference than the hyperthreading.
> 
> And I wouldn't base my opinion of hyperthreading on a nearly 2 year old forum post where the poster tested a bunch of 4+ year old games. I think the newest game that was tested was The Witcher 3, which was from mid-2015.
> 
> I know in Project Cars 2 having hyperthreading enabled can double your frame rate on an i3. On a 7700k having it on is about a 10% performance gain.


HT makes a considerable difference on a 4 core CPU. 4 threads just doesn't cut it for higher graphics presets in modern games, when things get intense. Hardware Unboxed and similar video reviews do a good job demonstrating this and I've seen it first hand.

Now with 6 core CPUs, the difference is much smaller in games, seeing as how the i5 8400 beats any overclocked Ryzen 5, and the 8600k comes pretty close to the 8700k.


----------



## tashcz

Anyone got some info on RAM speed impact on Coffee lake? Do we get major differences between 2400MHz vs 3200MHz vs 3600 etc? Wondering whether I should spend 150 or 250 EUR on DDR4.


----------



## kd5151

http://www.memory4less.com/intel-3-70ghz-core-i7-desktop-processor-i7-8700k

Good deal!


----------



## osb40000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tashcz*
> 
> Anyone got some info on RAM speed impact on Coffee lake? Do we get major differences between 2400MHz vs 3200MHz vs 3600 etc? Wondering whether I should spend 150 or 250 EUR on DDR4.


3200mhz 14-14-14-34 is the sweet spot, you really won't see much if any performance gain past that. As long as you are running at least 2666mhz with decent timings the performance delta between "fast" memory and "slow" memory isn't huge unless you're running a 1080ti. Really no GPU below that can push the CPU enough to need faster memory.


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> I'm willing to bet that the 3MB of extra cache makes less difference than the hyperthreading.
> 
> And I wouldn't base my opinion of hyperthreading on a nearly 2 year old forum post where the poster tested a bunch of 4+ year old games. I think the newest game that was tested was The Witcher 3, which was from mid-2015.
> 
> I know in Project Cars 2 having hyperthreading enabled can double your frame rate on an i3. On a 7700k having it on is about a 10% performance gain.


When a game is designed for 4 cores, and user runs it on 2 cores, it depends on windows scheduler, and how efficient is in preemptive multithreading. Considering windows scheduler is cheating, and it prefers high efficiency over low latency, up to 8 way HT helps immensely (but only because user can't set latency of scheduler). Considering in games there are situation when game basically just wait and does nothing, but take CPU time. It can easily sit on virtual core and do nothing on virtual core. Thus you can see doubling FPS in a simple game which was designed for 4 cores.

Current consoles are basically 6-cores (2 from 8 are reserved for OS and DRM). Thus I guess a 8 core i5 would be just fine.

When I tested some of my experimental stuff I wrote (games), these that needed cores scaled exactly the same as Linpack. More virtual cores saturate memory bandwidth and claims HT allows to wait for resource and allows execution of other thread are failing on a simple fact, when memory is saturated and cache is small, the other thread is waiting as well.

From what I remember from years ago when everything was overclockable, doubling cache that's closest to RAM basically increases speed as if CPU was 100 MHz faster (or was it 200 MHz?). Increase cache by 1/3 doesn't help that much, but it helps. (But considering that i5 K is nearly half price of i7 K, it doesn't help your money bag. AT ALL.)


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> http://www.memory4less.com/intel-3-70ghz-core-i7-desktop-processor-i7-8700k
> 
> Good deal!












That price deserves one of these too









...And why the hell does it say refurbished at the very bottom of the page under "General Information"?

"i7-8700K Intel Core i7 6-Core 3.70GHz 12MB L3 Cache Socket 1151 Processor Refurbished"


----------



## oced

8700k in stock at newegg for $420 for those who are interested.

Edit: Gone


----------



## evensen007

This is insane. Up to 420 dollar now? I know amazon plays with pricing based on demand, but newegg? We're now at 50 dollars OVER MSRP and climbing. Pathetic. Glad I don't have a huge bug to grab it now.


----------



## QuadDamage

With most of them clocking at 5ghz with ease; and the lack of cpu's it's price vs demand and the demand is high. Go look on craigslist I see them 500 to 600 and people buying them


----------



## CallsignVega

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> http://www.memory4less.com/intel-3-70ghz-core-i7-desktop-processor-i7-8700k
> 
> Good deal!


Good thing you posted that! I just took advantage of those Halloween saving!


----------



## Yetyhunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> http://www.memory4less.com/intel-3-70ghz-core-i7-desktop-processor-i7-8700k
> 
> Good deal!


Might as well use that cash to smash myself into an alcohol coma every day of the month to forget i spent that money.


----------



## tashcz

You're complaining about 420$... If I saw one for 420$ I'd just pull them out of my pocket and get it asap. Here it's 570$ currently. The non-k is 420$.


----------



## tw2

What sort of ram do you guys recommend for these? I wanted Gskill rgb trident X 3200 cl14 but it is discontinued here except for the ryzen flareX. Gskill rgb 3600 cl16 be fine? Doesn't seem to much to gain over this?

Still no 8700k availability here except pre-order with 4-6 weeks wait.


----------



## boredgunner

$420 for an i7 8700k is a much better value than the Ryzen 7 1800X ever was.

Bit of a side note but I just tried to play Rising Storm 2 on my sig rig (Unreal Engine 3 game), and it was running at least 100% worse than my 6700k. Some Unreal Engine games just absolutely HATE Ryzen.


----------



## jpm888

8700k or 7800x? They almost cost the same if youre going for a baller z370 and mid range x299


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jpm888*
> 
> 8700k or 7800x? They almost cost the same if youre going for a baller z370 and mid range x299


7800X is pretty terrible for the price. It loses to the Ryzen 5 1600 and 1600X once overclocked. I guess Intel's mesh architecture doesn't scale down to 6 cores very well?


----------



## jprovido

Delid Successful! just tried it out to see if it's working(delidded it right away without testing)




48 degrees full load without ac at stock settings. I'd call that a successful delid







I'm going to finish putting everything back


----------



## tashcz

Damn nice man.

What did you use for delidding? What will you use to glue it back?


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tashcz*
> 
> Damn nice man.
> 
> What did you use for delidding? What will you use to glue it back?


I never relid my cpus. I just use the retention arm on the motherboard to hold it in place. I used the rockit delid tool and thermalgrizzly conductonaut and kryonaut for die and ihs


----------



## jprovido

just messing around no stability tests yet etc. it's hitting 5.2GHz with ease all cores. definitely overclocks a lot better than my 7700k. temps are great after the delid barely hits 70's and the AC in my room isn't even on


----------



## DStealth

Good temps, what was prior the delid with such conditions ?
Also is there any particular reason to use two different types of paste, while the only advantage of the first(kryonaut) is getting sub zero where in 0+ is worst having 12,5 W/mk vs 73 W/mk compared to conductonaut


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Good temps, what was prior the delid with such conditions ?
> Also is there any particular reason to use two different types of paste, while the only advantage of the first(kryonaut) is getting sub zero where in 0+ is worst having 12,5 W/mk vs 73 W/mk compared to conductonaut


I have no idea what the temps are before the delid never even tried booting with it.

I always use liquid metal with die>IHS then use normal TIM wit IHS to CPU Cooler. it just so happened I have two thermalgrizzly tims


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> This is insane. Up to 420 dollar now? I know amazon plays with pricing based on demand, but newegg? We're now at 50 dollars OVER MSRP and climbing. Pathetic. Glad I don't have a huge bug to grab it now.


They have done it with GPUs at every mining demand cycle, what made you think CPUs would be exempt when under supply strains?


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> http://www.memory4less.com/intel-3-70ghz-core-i7-desktop-processor-i7-8700k
> 
> Good deal!


Don't do that man! I got excited for a bit before clicking the link. After clicking it, I went all swearing mode!


----------



## jprovido

I had trouble getting 5.2ghz stable with reasonable voltage when I started doing stress tests. I’m at 5.1ghz @ 1.344v atm and it’s rock solid.


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evensen007*
> 
> This is insane. Up to 420 dollar now? I know amazon plays with pricing based on demand, but newegg? We're now at 50 dollars OVER MSRP and climbing. Pathetic. Glad I don't have a huge bug to grab it now.


I remember right wing MP in post-socialistic countries were saying marked economy would solve stuff better. Supply and demand would set prices, and that would be...
Now we are seeing market economy in motion. Companies setting prices 100 $ higher and enjoying profits.


----------



## TheWizardMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> I remember right wing MP in post-socialistic countries were saying marked economy would solve stuff better. Supply and demand would set prices, and that would be...
> Now we are seeing market economy in motion. Companies setting prices 100 $ higher and enjoying profits.


What is wrong with that? If you want it bad enough you will pay for it?


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> I remember right wing MP in post-socialistic countries were saying marked economy would solve stuff better. Supply and demand would set prices, and that would be...
> Now we are seeing market economy in motion. Companies setting prices 100 $ higher and enjoying profits.


Would you prefer the government dictating how much you could earn and thus, limiting how much money you had to spend on luxuries which is what happens in Socialist countries? Sure, they can restrict prices, but they can also restrict your income since they control your employer.


----------



## moustang

For those still looking, in stock at Newegg. Grab them while they last.

---- And they're gone.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> https://us.hardware.info/reviews/7605/intel-z370-motherboards-round-up-17-times-coffee-lake
> 
> best motherboards for coffee lake ? you decide!


then the asus strix z370'3-f are the best performance wise?


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> then the asus strix z370'3-f are the best performance wise?


Nope...just the most aggressive noobish one using auto and XMP profile settings...all are pretty similar in terms of performance knowing what you do


----------



## jprovido

1.370v on bios (with extreme LCC) 1.38v-1.39v on cpu-z at 5.2GHz HT On 5GHz uncore (for some reason it shows 4.9ghz on cpu-z). still stress testing atm.

1.33v for 5.1GHz. such a big bump in voltage just for the extra 100mhz but still pretty happy. even my 7700k would crash instantly @5.2ghz doesn't matter what voltage you put in. pretty happy with my cpu tbh


----------



## Scotty99

Very nice


----------



## sblantipodi

is there someone who (side-up)graded from a 5930K or 5820K to a 8700K and can tell us some impression?


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> is there someone who (side-up)graded from a 5930K or 5820K to a 8700K and can tell us some impression?




check out this screenshot. I have cinebench on my Onedrive so results are saved from my different cpus. intel cpus aren't reporting correct clock speeds though

8700k = 5.2GHz
Ryzen 7 1700x = correct clockspeed reported
7700k = 5.1GHz
5820k =4.7GHz

surprisingly even on cinebench my 8700k beat my Ryzen 7 1700x @ 3.9GHz. pretty impressive









the difference between 8700k @ 5.2GHz and 5820k @ 4.7ghz is huge considering both are 6c/12t cpus. 1736cb vs. 1326cb


----------



## DStealth

Yes, side-graded from [email protected] to [email protected] to [email protected]+ and then after to [email protected]+
If there were a mere difference from the first two of them and last ones...the jump in the middle is huge, in terms of platform, clocks and performance combined.


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Yes, side-graded from [email protected] to [email protected] to [email protected]+ and then after to [email protected]+
> If there were a mere difference from the first two of them and last ones...the jump in the middle is huge, in terms of platform, clocks and performance combined.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Yes, side-graded from [email protected] to [email protected] to [email protected]+ and then after to [email protected]+
> If there were a mere difference from the first two of them and last ones...the jump in the middle is huge, in terms of platform, clocks and performance combined.


have you got some tests on the huge jumps that shows that difference?


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Yes, side-graded from [email protected] to [email protected] to [email protected]+ and then after to [email protected]+
> If there were a mere difference from the first two of them and last ones...the jump in the middle is huge, in terms of platform, clocks and performance combined.


How do you feel about difference between dual-channel and quad-channel? I liked quad channel because it allows high speeds at relatively low voltages. Thus gaming at 38C is without restriction even with low speed fans and silent case.


----------



## DStealth

Depends what test are you interesting of...but as all are 6/12 CPUs even prior 3xxx/4xxx 6/12 gen's DDR3 were not that far max OCed...the difference between 5/6th and 7/8th gen was huge.
Imagine CB15 jump from 13xx to 17xx and 18xx on the last ones.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> just messing around no stability tests yet etc. it's hitting 5.2GHz with ease all cores. definitely overclocks a lot better than my 7700k. temps are great after the delid barely hits 70's and the AC in my room isn't even on


A lot better is right. 4c/8t vs 6c/12t over 5GHz!


----------



## GreedyMuffin

My old 5820K at 4750mhz got 1436/190 points in Cinebench.. Not 13xx. And that was with some bad mem..

https://www.diskusjon.no/uploads/monthly_12_2014/post-319721-0-92257400-1419691785.png


----------



## DStealth

NB(uncore) in CPUz 4500 and +50Mhz more, yes could get 1400+ as hard as 7800x 1700+ but could...as does 190 vs 220+ Single scores easier between them both


----------



## GreedyMuffin

That was my 24/7 OC at that time. I can max get 4900 with this 7800X. I can bench at 5100 with 1.4V++.


----------



## Raghar

Only 24/7 OC should matter. Practically every CPU does fast score... ONCE.


----------



## robinaish

So you don't get your expectations too high reading the thread...

My 8700k
I tried to stabilize 4.9 Ghz... (and failed)

Asrock z370 extreme4, thermalright macho120 rev.a, ram kfa2 3600 c17

I test with prime95 28.10 custom FFT 256K for 15 minutes

Last setting that i tried before temp went too high:
ring/[email protected], [email protected]
1.320 volt, LLC maxed (level 1) --> Failed worker 7,8

Voltage reading cpu-z: 1.312 -1.328, max cpu package power: 160W

edit:
bios: latest beta 1.11
unkletom suggested i up vccpll to 1.25v --> worker 7,8 failed


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *robinaish*
> 
> So you don't get your expectations too high reading the thread...
> 
> My 8700k
> I tried to stabilize 4.9 Ghz... (and failed)
> 
> Asrock z370 extreme4, thermalright macho120 rev.a, ram kfa2 3600 c17
> 
> I test with prime95 28.10 custom FFT 256K for 15 minutes
> 
> Last setting that i tried before temp went too high:
> ring/[email protected], [email protected]
> 1.320 volt, LLC maxed (level 1) --> Failed worker 7,8
> 
> Voltage reading cpu-z: 1.312 -1.328, max cpu package power: 160W


Did you update your BIOS?

https://www.asrock.com/MB/Intel/Z370%20Extreme4/index.asp#BIOS
1.10 2017/10/16 12.07MB Fix the Vcore drop issue with load-line calibration setting.
Beta 1.11 2017/10/19 12.05MB Improve CPU Vcore voltage and cache ratio setting


----------



## FlyingSolo

For 4k gaming 60Hz. What CPU will be the best to get if your buying now. All will be in a small ITX case. Cant decide if i should go for the i7 8700k or Ryzen 1700


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> For 4k gaming 60Hz. What CPU will be the best to get if your buying now. All will be in a small ITX case. Cant decide if i should go for the i7 8700k or Ryzen 1700


8400 or 1600.


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> 8400 or 1600.


Thanks. Was thinking of getting a i7 7700k at one point. Probably gonna get the DAN A4 v2 case or S4 Mini case. If only they made a GTX 1080 Ti as small as the Gigabyte GTX 1080 Mini.


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> Thanks. Was thinking of getting a i7 7700k at one point. Probably gonna get the DAN A4 v2 case or S4 Mini case. If only they made a GTX 1080 Ti as small as the Gigabyte GTX 1080 Mini.


I dunno how small that gigabyte card is but the zotac 1080ti mini is pretty small. Also, my 2c on the sff is to just go Intel. The motherboards are not as good on the AMD side.


----------



## nyk20z3

I like how i get a notification the 8700K is in stock at newegg then its sold out like 5 minutes later, are people really sitting there hitting F5 all day waiting to buy these ?. I am not even in a rush to buy one since i have a 7600K and 7700K sitting here but i didn't think it would be this bad.


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> I dunno how small that gigabyte card is but the zotac 1080ti mini is pretty small. Also, my 2c on the sff is to just go Intel. The motherboards are not as good on the AMD side.


Yeah AMD boards are not as good as Intel for ITX. Will go with Intel. The zotac 1080ti mini is small but if i decide to go with S4 Mini case that wont fit in that case. So might have to go with DAN A4 case which can fit normal size cards. Only wished they had a white case.


----------



## mouacyk

Anyone been able to saturate a 1080ti in bf1 at [email protected]? I'm getting bottlenecked with my 4790K at 4.7Ghz, and GPU usage hangs around 90%.


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> Yeah AMD boards are not as good as Intel for ITX. Will go with Intel. The zotac 1080ti mini is small but if i decide to go with S4 Mini case that wont fit in that case. So might have to go with DAN A4 case which can fit normal size cards. Only wished they had a white case.


TBH dude, i think that 1080ti might be pushing it for a dc-dc psu anyways


----------



## jprovido

My overclocking settings atm. 5.2GHz, 5GHz uncore(dunno why it shows as 4.9ghz on cpuz the multiplier in the bios is 50x) 1.375v with Extreme LLC cpu-z voltage goes upto 1.39v when full load ran aida64 for about 4 hours before stopping the stress test. didn't want to leave it running when I went to work. boots at 5.3GHz but fails instantly with any heavy load lol. temps were great after delid. highest I saw was in the low 70's.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> 
> 
> My overclocking settings atm. 5.2GHz, 5GHz uncore(dunno why it shows as 4.9ghz on cpuz the multiplier in the bios is 50x) 1.375v with Extreme LLC cpu-z voltage goes upto 1.39v when full load ran aida64 for about 4 hours before stopping the stress test. didn't want to leave it running when I went to work. boots at 5.3GHz but fails instantly with any heavy load lol. temps were great after delid. highest I saw was in the low 70's.


Is 5 Ghz uncore doing much? You can test it by running MLC with admin mode using this command:

https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intelr-memory-latency-checker

mlc.exe --c2c_latency


----------



## robinaish

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Did you update your BIOS?
> 
> https://www.asrock.com/MB/Intel/Z370%20Extreme4/index.asp#BIOS
> 1.10 2017/10/16 12.07MB Fix the Vcore drop issue with load-line calibration setting.
> Beta 1.11 2017/10/19 12.05MB Improve CPU Vcore voltage and cache ratio setting


Yes, it was with latest beta bios 1.11.

Thanks for the reply


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

I got a 8700k yesterday from memoryexpress for $490 cad before tax. Just deciding on the Maximus X Hero or wait for the Apex X to be in stock.


----------



## DStealth

Get X ...Apex is only to squeeze all from the Memory in terms of OC(4200+), latency, sub-timings, RTLs and ect. For normal usage you wont notice any difference...also if no LN2 is used also you'll just get 2 memory slots less


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> Is 5 Ghz uncore doing much? You can test it by running MLC with admin mode using this command:
> 
> https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intelr-memory-latency-checker
> 
> mlc.exe --c2c_latency


dunno about memory latency but cinebench scores went up by atleast 50 pts because of the uncore overclock. suddenly shot upwards of 1700cb when I overclocked the uncore


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Get X ...Apex is only to squeeze all from the Memory in terms of OC(4200+), latency, sub-timings, RTLs and ect. For normal usage you wont notice any difference...also if no LN2 is used also you'll just get 2 memory slots less


Thanks.

And thanks for all the benches you posted lately with your 8700k, helped me sway my decision to pick one up.


----------



## DStealth

I have 1800 on non delided with ~5200 cache ...so yes it has effect even on CB15 where memory is not so important...









Edit: MrTOOSHORT you welcome mate


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nyk20z3*
> 
> I like how i get a notification the 8700K is in stock at newegg then its sold out like 5 minutes later, are people really sitting there hitting F5 all day waiting to buy these ?. I am not even in a rush to buy one since i have a 7600K and 7700K sitting here but i didn't think it would be this bad.


Probably more like seconds later. Indeed, by the time you get notified from newegg, dat chip is already soldout. Pressing F5 is a lot quicker. Good times. Hopefully we get moar in stock. This is becoming Vega bad (heyo)!


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nyk20z3*
> 
> I like how i get a notification the 8700K is in stock at newegg then its sold out like 5 minutes later, are people really sitting there hitting F5 all day waiting to buy these ?. I am not even in a rush to buy one since i have a 7600K and 7700K sitting here but i didn't think it would be this bad.


I've got one arriving today and two more on preorder. I was going to cancel the preorders, but after seeing the prices they are selling for on Ebay I may go ahead and see if they ship before Christmas. If they do then I'm really tempted to capitalize on the Christmas rush, limited supply, and demand, and see if I can get $700+ each for them.

It's stupid, but if someone is willing to pay that much for one then selling two would just about pay for my entire upgrade.


----------



## Scotty99

I might end up switching my build over to itx, would a 600w sfx unit be enough for a 8700k at 5ghz and a 1080ti hybrid? Prices skyrocket past 600w in sfx.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> I have 1800 on non delided with ~5200 cache ...so yes it has effect even on CB15 where memory is not so important...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: MrTOOSHORT you welcome mate


Are you comfortable with that overclock for 24/7 use? Mine is currently at 5.2GHz but voltage goes up to 1.4v on cpuz when at load (1.38v in the bios with Extreme
LLC) do you think this is okay for everday use?


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I might end up switching my build over to itx, would a 600w sfx unit be enough for a 8700k at 5ghz and a 1080ti hybrid? Prices skyrocket past 600w in sfx.


I don't think you have much room at all. I have a 4790K at 4.7GHz (1.31v) and testing my GPU at 2100MHz+ (1.2v) shuts down my computer on a Seasonic 660W Platinum. I no longer have the shutdowns now that I swapped to an 850W Gold.

In your case, you'll likely pull 220W for CPU and up to 350W for GPU without any overclocking, and then may be 50-75W for rest of system.


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> In your case, you'll likely pull 220W for CPU and up to 350W for GPU *without any overclocking*


That cannot be right, as that would far exceed the power draw specified in both product sheets.

Addendum: according to this review, 8700K+1080 only draw around 270W when gaming.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/intel-core-i7-8700k-processor-review,5.html


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> Are you comfortable with that overclock for 24/7 use? Mine is currently at 5.2GHz but voltage goes up to 1.4v on cpuz when at load (1.38v in the bios with Extreme
> LLC) do you think this is okay for everday use?


Nope just benching w/o delid it overheat quite fast with heavy loads.
If you can keep it w/o throttle while stress testing you should be fine with your clock.









I take the razor blade this evening to see what more is left in my chip







)


----------



## fisher6

So the 8700k is in stock where I live, kinda tempted to upgrade. Is it worth it for gaming at 3440x1440 with a 1080Ti? Using a 4790k at 4.7 now. Also, what's the best ROG board for OC'ing and decent vrms, possibly one that will get a monoblock.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fisher6*
> 
> So the 8700k is in stock where I live, kinda tempted to upgrade. Is it worth it for gaming at 3440x1440 with a 1080Ti? Using a 4790k at 4.7 now. Also, what's the best ROG board for OC'ing and decent vrms, possibly one that will get a monoblock.


Worth upgrading purely for [email protected],probably not. Apex or Hero would be the best ROG boards for overclocking, Hero always seems to get a monoblock from EK each generation however the Formula board will be available in the next couple of weeks which means you wouldn't need a monoblock,something to consider


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fisher6*
> 
> So the 8700k is in stock where I live, kinda tempted to upgrade. Is it worth it for gaming at 3440x1440 with a 1080Ti? Using a 4790k at 4.7 now. Also, what's the best ROG board for OC'ing and decent vrms, possibly one that will get a monoblock.


Are you experiencing high cpu usage during game? If so, I would look into upgrading. You don't want to hold dat Ti back now.


----------



## jprovido

why does my uncore don't go above 4.9ghz? I just tried upping the multiplier 52x but it won't go up.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> I got a 8700k yesterday from memoryexpress for $490 cad before tax. Just deciding on the Maximus X Hero or wait for the Apex X to be in stock.


Hey mate,

if I remember correctly you are running a full custom loop. In that case I don't know how much patience you got but I would highly consider the Rog Maximus Formula X which comes out this month (it has integrated vrm waterloop and more...)

I'm waiting on that one to redo my loop when installing the new cpu


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fisher6*
> 
> So the 8700k is in stock where I live, kinda tempted to upgrade. Is it worth it for gaming at 3440x1440 with a 1080Ti? Using a 4790k at 4.7 now. Also, what's the best ROG board for OC'ing and decent vrms, possibly one that will get a monoblock.


I've got a 4970k at 4.6GHZ right now, and if it weren't for motherboard problems caused by a close proximity lightning strike I wouldn't upgrade. I would wait for Ice Lake next year.

But in my case I do have a damaged motherboard, so a replacement is required. If I'm replacing the motherboard I may as well just upgrade everything and be done with it. Doesn't make sense buying a new out of production motherboard at this point.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> 
> 
> why does my uncore don't go above 4.9ghz? I just tried upping the multiplier 52x but it won't go up.


uncore never goes up to the full speed of the core. Generally speaking, getting it 200-300Mhz below core is actually already very good (if you can get it stable). 5Ghz uncore would be amazing


----------



## DStealth

What's you MB. It could be just misread from CPUz. Can you try latest Aida64 bench and see the results with 49 50 51 52 they should defer...or test with Winrar buildin benchmark there's a huge jump even with 100Mhz increments you'll measure with a couple of hundreds kb/s jump . Try your board windows OC tool and up from there also it must read most accurate this setting than any other tool up to date


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> uncore never goes up to the full speed of the core. Generally speaking, getting it 200-300Mhz below core is actually already very good (if you can get it stable). 5Ghz uncore would be amazing


wasn't really able to hit this high with my 7700k so this is uncharted territory for me. so let me get this straight. even if I up the uncore multiplier to whatever it will be stuck to 4.9ghz? so I'm guessing I should just go back to the bios and set it 49x correct?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> What's you MB. It could be just misread from CPUz. Can you try latest Aida64 bench and see the results with 49 50 51 52 the should defer...or test Winrar there's a huge jump even with 100Mhz increments you'll meassure with a couple of hundrets kb/s jump . Try your board windows OC tool and up from there also it must read most accurate this setting than any other tool up to date


I will try other cpu monitoring softwares brb. I have the Aorus gaming 7


----------



## jprovido

seems like all of them reports 4.9GHz but it's 52x in the multiplier on the bios. my kit is still at default xmp settings. I do have a manual overclock for my ram but will apply it later when I get everything sorted out


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> 
> 
> seems like all of them reports 4.9GHz but it's 52x in the multiplier on the bios. my kit is still at default xmp settings. I do have a manual overclock for my ram but will apply it later when I get everything sorted out


Those Cache speed are insane. I wonder if the "IPC" comes from just Cache being better than older Core CPUs.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> wasn't really able to hit this high with my 7700k so this is uncharted territory for me. so let me get this straight. even if I up the uncore multiplier to whatever it will be stuck to 4.9ghz? so I'm guessing I should just go back to the bios and set it 49x correct?
> I will try other cpu monitoring softwares brb. I have the Aorus gaming 7


no, just like with the core you keep upping the uncore speed until you find that point where it's no longer stable. Except that typically and by design, the stability point of the uncore will always be a few 100Mhz or more behind the core's max stable clock speed. That's perfectly normal. So first you find max stable core, then uncore, then memory, then back and forth between uncore and memory since the ring speed affects memory overclock and vice versa. 4.9Ghz uncore is very good in this case imho. I believe Dstealth got 5.0 which is amazing


----------



## stangflyer

I think I would be more interested in the 8700 non k than the 8600K. I would rather have all the threads and 4.7
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fisher6*
> 
> So the 8700k is in stock where I live, kinda tempted to upgrade. Is it worth it for gaming at 3440x1440 with a 1080Ti? Using a 4790k at 4.7 now. Also, what's the best ROG board for OC'ing and decent vrms, possibly one that will get a monoblock.


For gaming only I do not think you would even notice a difference. You might see some minimum framerate increases of about 5%. But I think you would be very disappointed in the real world differences.

I only have a 3570 non k at 4.2 and I am waiting for Ice Lake. I play at 7680x1440 or 2560x1440 depending if game supports surround or not. I have looked at lots of benches in the past 2-3 weeks and I do not see enough of a difference to drop another $800 or more on a new chip, mobo, ram. IMO of course.


----------



## bern43

NewEgg has them again. Just bought one. Not happy at the 420 price, but figure I have until the end of January to return it if prices come down. Now I need ASUS to release the APEX!


----------



## DStealth

I have synchronous CPU and Uncore up to 5300...yes it's amazing , just fighting with razor blade atm ...hope for better OCing headroom








Wish me luck not to kill this chip seems over the average ones


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> I have synchronous CPU and Uncore up to 5300...yes it's amazing , just fighting with razor blade atm ...hope for better OCing headroom
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wish me luck not to kill this chip seems over the average ones


I remember in post 5064 you got it up to 5ghz but this Sir is....SICK !! Congratz !


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> I remember in post 5064 you got it up to 5ghz but this Sir is....SICK !! Congratz !


Correct but was prior learning the platform and settings see post #5593 where I repeat my result from behind synced CPU+Uncore got me this result in Winrar 
And 1 multi offset close to 35ns Latency


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> no, just like with the core you keep upping the uncore speed until you find that point where it's no longer stable. Except that typically and by design, the stability point of the uncore will always be a few 100Mhz or more behind the core's max stable clock speed. That's perfectly normal. So first you find max stable core, then uncore, then memory, then back and forth between uncore and memory since the ring speed affects memory overclock and vice versa. 4.9Ghz uncore is very good in this case imho. I believe Dstealth got 5.0 which is amazing


like what I said mine won't go above 4.9ghz. I already set the bios to MORE THAN 49x but it won't budge for some reason. I have it now at 52x but it's still at 4900MHz. should I update the bios or something?

edit:


just came back to the bios and set the uncore ratio to 50. for some reason it's still at 4.9ghz lol. this is weird


----------



## DStealth

If you have newer BIOS for sure ...seems like odd bug to me or you throttle of some kind what are your limits set ?

Edit: From this screen all limits are set to AUTO







Just very interesting how you hit 5.2 with them


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> If you have newer BIOS for sure ...seems like odd bug to me or you throttle of some kind what are your limits set ?
> 
> Edit: From this screen all limits are set to AUTO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just very interesting how you hit 5.2 with them


just bumped the multiplier for the core and uncore then set both the LLC to Extreme then that's it lol. so easy to overclock like my 7700k. I had A LOTT of headaches with my i7 5820k lol


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> like what I said mine won't go above 4.9ghz. I already set the bios to MORE THAN 49x but it won't budge for some reason. I have it now at 52x but it's still at 4900MHz. should I update the bios or something?
> 
> edit:
> 
> 
> just came back to the bios and set the uncore ratio to 50. for some reason it's still at 4.9ghz lol. this is weird


There's an uncore down-bin option to keep the uncore ratio always 3x below core ratio. Try disabling that.

Also, what does the 8792E sensor say for Vcore while loaded?


----------



## Exilon

I did some experiments with Intel MLC and uncore ratios.



Increase in uncore gives 1GB/s extra read bandwidth, ~3.6ns inter-core latency reduction (18 core cycles), and ~2.1ns RAM latency reduction (10 core cycles).

Note that idle RAM latency doesn't linearly decrease, it skips down in chunks as uncore frequency increases.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> There's an uncore down-bin option to keep the uncore ratio always 3x below core ratio. Try disabling that.
> 
> Also, what does the 8792E sensor say for Vcore while loaded?




thanks! found the ratio offset thingy in the bios and it was hard to spot.

I had to settle for 5.1GHz 1.345v. my 5.2GHz overclock needs 1.41v to get it stable on realbench. even with delidded the temps are getting to the mid 80's which is something I'm not comfortable with.


----------



## DStealth

I have 1 resistor less after the delid








Cannot imagine how strong my fingers could be ...while holding the CPU it went off accedantly...
Of course i lost it and could not find it. Next week gonna measure the other ones and try to resolder it. The board would't fire w/o it just 00 error...Hope will bring it back to life...was very nice CPU








This one bottom left


If someone could measure the resistance of it and compare it to the other right bottom and right upper ends if they're similar I would be grateful







.


----------



## Yetyhunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> I have 1 resistor less after the delid
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cannot imagine how strong my fingers could be ...while holding the CPU it went off accedantly...
> Of course i lost it and could not find it. Next week gonna measure the other ones and try to resolder it. The board would't fire w/o it just 00 error...Hope will bring it back to life...was very nice CPU
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This one bottom left
> 
> 
> If someone could measure the resistance of it and compare it to the other right bottom and right upper ends if they're similar I would be grateful
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


What method did you use to dellid ?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> I have 1 resistor less after the delid
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cannot imagine how strong my fingers could be ...while holding the CPU it went off accedantly...
> Of course i lost it and could not find it. Next week gonna measure the other ones and try to resolder it. The board would't fire w/o it just 00 error...Hope will bring it back to life...was very nice CPU
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This one bottom left
> 
> 
> If someone could measure the resistance of it and compare it to the other right bottom and right upper ends if they're similar I would be grateful
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Damn man! I would cry


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> I have 1 resistor less after the delid
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cannot imagine how strong my fingers could be ...while holding the CPU it went off accedantly...
> Of course i lost it and could not find it. Next week gonna measure the other ones and try to resolder it. The board would't fire w/o it just 00 error...Hope will bring it back to life...was very nice CPU
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This one bottom left.
> 
> If someone could measure the resistance of it and compare it to the other right bottom and right upper ends if they're similar I would be grateful
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


It's a shame that you didn't notice it until after the delid. If it had happened before you took the IHS off you could have at least returned it as a defect.


----------



## czin125

Why the razor method if there's a huge risk to this compared to just putting it into a tool to twist/push the IHS off? It's not like you couldn't use a card to remove the glue afterwards?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> It's a shame that you didn't notice it until after the delid. If it had happened before you took the IHS off you could have at least returned it as a defect.


Your recent post of scalping, now fraud.


----------



## keikei

Regarding delidding, aren't there ppl paid to do this for you? You paid them a fee and you get a working chip instead of dyi and potentially smashing your head in afterwards. Or is it the thrill of the process? A mess up is a $400+ boo boo.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> Regarding delidding, aren't there ppl paid to do this for you? You paid them a fee and you get a working chip instead of dyi and potentially smashing your head in afterwards. Or is it the thrill of the process? A mess up is a $400+ boo boo.




you just need the right tools for the right job. this is like 30 bucks and I have delidded like 6 cpus (delidded my friend's cpu as well). it's easy AND safe


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Your recent post of scalping, now fraud.












Are you always such a baby?

And what fraud? Did it occur to you that the reason it fell off was because it wasn't properly attached in the first place?


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> Regarding delidding, aren't there ppl paid to do this for you? You paid them a fee and you get a working chip instead of dyi and potentially smashing your head in afterwards. Or is it the thrill of the process? A mess up is a $400+ boo boo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you just need the right tools for the right job. this is like 30 bucks and I have delidded like 6 cpus (delidded my friend's cpu as well). it's easy AND safe
Click to expand...

Knowing me, I would need something fool proof. I'm not Mr. Steady Hands for sure!


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> Knowing me, I would need something fool proof. I'm not Mr. Steady Hands for sure!


If you're somewhat careful at the very least and take it slow the first time, the common delidding tools such as from Der8auer and others are really foolproof.

If you still don't trust your own hands you can buy pre-delidded (this process includes the relidding part) cpu's from Silicon Lottery in the US or Caseking (=Der8auer) in Europe and I believe there's one in the UK too but can't recall the name


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> If you're somewhat careful at the very least and take it slow the first time, the common delidding tools such as from Der8auer and others are really foolproof.
> 
> If you still don't trust your own hands you can buy pre-delidded (this process includes the relidding part) cpu's from Silicon Lottery in the US or Caseking (=Der8auer) in Europe and I believe there's one in the UK too but can't recall the name


What if the transistor that felt was poor soldered from factory and it would fell down in one of the SL employees hands?








Would they send you back a 5.3 /5.1 uncore chip?


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> I have 1 resistor less after the delid
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cannot imagine how strong my fingers could be ...while holding the CPU it went off accedantly...
> Of course i lost it and could not find it. Next week gonna measure the other ones and try to resolder it. The board would't fire w/o it just 00 error...Hope will bring it back to life...was very nice CPU
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This one bottom left
> 
> 
> If someone could measure the resistance of it and compare it to the other right bottom and right upper ends if they're similar I would be grateful
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


aaaawwww my heart bleeds when reading this...your setup really was the holy grail. I hope you can get it repaired because that would be a waste.

As for me, I'm expecting my cpu in about 2 weeks from now and mobo around the same time. All the recent first hand experience posts in this thread have made me restless....


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> Knowing me, I would need something fool proof. I'm not Mr. Steady Hands for sure!







It's incredibly simple with the right tool.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> What if the transistor that felt was poor soldered from factory and it would fell down in one of the SL employees hands?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would they send you back a 5.3 /5.1 uncore chip?


Based on the many solid experiences from other people I've read about SL, anything detected during their testings after delid would result in putting that defective cpu aside and sending you a completely different cpu that passes the checks. Dunno how far they push the uncore but if a transistor went missing I don't think they wouldn't send you that cpu


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> Knowing me, I would need something fool proof. I'm not Mr. Steady Hands for sure!


I'm a clumsy fool too trust me the delid tool is so easy. The hardest part is cleaning off the black silicon glue. The actual delidding is just a few turns with the allan wrench. I have delidded even with the vice + hammer method. Just not really comfortable with the razer blade method


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> Based on the many solid experiences from other people I've read about SL, anything detected during their testings after delid would result in putting that defective cpu aside and sending you a completely different cpu that passes the checks. *Dunno how far they push the uncore* but if a transistor went missing I don't think they wouldn't send you that cpu


They dont overclock the cache at all, they leave it at stock


----------



## stangflyer

I did my Ivy Bridge with a razor blade. I thought the process was very easy. I do work with my hands a lot though.

Would a 8700k be any different than an Ivy? Might have SL do it if I decide to get one. Leaning towards keeping my Ivy till Ice Lake.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I'm a clumsy fool too trust me the delid tool is so easy. The hardest part is cleaning off the black silicon glue. The actual delidding is just a few turns with the allan wrench. I have delidded even with the vice + hammer method. Just not really comfortable with the razer blade method


I've used the vice-only method on multiple CPUs now. It's super easy with the right vice (no teeth).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> I have 1 resistor less after the delid
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cannot imagine how strong my fingers could be ...while holding the CPU it went off accedantly...
> Of course i lost it and could not find it. Next week gonna measure the other ones and try to resolder it. The board would't fire w/o it just 00 error...Hope will bring it back to life...was very nice CPU
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This one bottom left
> 
> If someone could measure the resistance of it and compare it to the other right bottom and right upper ends if they're similar I would be grateful
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Those look like capacitors.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> Those look like capacitors.


Correct my bad will measure them next week as with DMM is not possible


----------



## Mrip541

Here we are a month later and I still can't buy one. Sigh.


----------



## royalkilla408

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mrip541*
> 
> Here we are a month later and I still can't buy one. Sigh.


Seriously, just got my board and 8700k is nowhere to be found. In top of that, when it is available the price is way above MSRP. Crazy. Never seen that before for a CPU personally. Too many weird "shortages" in the PC industry lately.


----------



## wickedld9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mrip541*
> 
> Here we are a month later and I still can't buy one. Sigh.


Maybe I'm just looking at the right times but there have been multiple instances where I have seen CPU's available from Newegg. They are not readily available, but they are coming in short waves. I could easily have purchased 6 8700K's by now if I were inclined. i7-8700 non K was available for a good 12 hours straight earlier this week.


----------



## evensen007

nvm


----------



## Mrip541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wickedld9*
> 
> Maybe I'm just looking at the right times but there have been multiple instances where I have seen CPU's available from Newegg. They are not readily available, but they are coming in short waves. I could easily have purchased 6 8700K's by now if I were inclined. i7-8700 non K was available for a good 12 hours straight earlier this week.


Hu... I set it to auto notify weeks ago and haven't gotten a notification yet.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wickedld9*
> 
> Maybe I'm just looking at the right times but there have been multiple instances where I have seen CPU's available from Newegg. They are not readily available, but they are coming in short waves. I could easily have purchased 6 8700K's by now if I were inclined. i7-8700 non K was available for a good 12 hours straight earlier this week.


The one and only time I am positively aware of (saw in stock with my own eyes) they've had them since launch day, they had some that they were selling in bundle deals... TBH, I think it's pretty shady that they were selling bundles to make more money before honoring and shipping to all their pre-orders.


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mrip541*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wickedld9*
> 
> Maybe I'm just looking at the right times but there have been multiple instances where I have seen CPU's available from Newegg. They are not readily available, but they are coming in short waves. I could easily have purchased 6 8700K's by now if I were inclined. i7-8700 non K was available for a good 12 hours straight earlier this week.
> 
> 
> 
> Hu... I set it to auto notify weeks ago and haven't gotten a notification yet.
Click to expand...

I've gotten a few auto notifies come in, but by the time i actually go to purchase one its out of stock. You are competing with ppl F5in all day long. Considering how in demand this chip is, im guessing a 2018 date for wide availability? Who knows.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> I've gotten a few auto notifies come in, but by the time i actually go to purchase one its out of stock. You are competing with ppl F5in all day long. Considering how in demand this chip is, im guessing a 2018 date for wide availability? Who knows.


F5 is outdated.

Distill @ 5s/refresh + SMS notification is the new hotness apparently.


----------



## Scotty99

Ive only had one auto notify but i have seen it in stock a few times, holding out for real stock to come in tho. Also kinda waiting on SL to see what they price theirs at.


----------



## nanotm

more likely this chip will remain in low stock until after the next generation chips are released at which point demand will subside and it will become available for anyone that doesn't need the latest greatest chipset and chip....


----------



## TheWizardMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nanotm*
> 
> more likely this chip will remain in low stock until after the next generation chips are released at which point demand will subside and it will become available for anyone that doesn't need the latest greatest chipset and chip....


uh huh...My guess is by December supply will be ok.


----------



## chaosblade02

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Why are people willing to spend $700 on a GPU which will last 2 years but not $700 on monitor which will last longer?


There is an extremely massive price discrepancy between 1080p monitors vs higher, when the higher resolution monitors should have gradually gotten cheaper, they haven't. It's like the price is fixated at 1080p, and anything higher is super-premium with super-premium price. Decent 1440p monitors are essentially the same price as they were 5-6 years ago. I'm not seeing a 'mid range' price for monitors. Something higher than 1080p in the $300 range for example.

I've decided I'm just gonna settle on a 38-42 inch 4k TV, and use that as a monitor. I'll be able to get something like that for $300 or less on Black Friday. I'm not all that concerned about response time, because I don't do competitive gaming, anyway.


----------



## Scotty99

Huh? I paid 250 dollars for my 165hz 1440p gsync panel.

People truly have no idea how to spend their money, monitor should be the first place you spend it.


----------



## chaosblade02

Where did you get that deal? Did you buy a used/refurbished monitor? I would have bought a 1440p/165hz monitor for the price you paid. There is only so much searching I'm willing to do on the internet before determining if something is out of my price range. I might not be the best at finding deals on the internet.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chaosblade02*
> 
> Where did you get that deal? Did you buy a used/refurbished monitor? I would have bought a 1440p/165hz monitor for the price you paid. There is only so much searching I'm willing to do on the internet before determining if something is out of my price range. I might not be the best at finding deals on the internet.


It regularly goes on sale for 399 with 100 dollar rebate from dell making it effectively 299, slickdeals also regularly has a 50 dollar visa card to combo with that deal. Register with slickdeals, you will get notifications when things go on sale.


----------



## kd5151

RiP F5


----------



## Xeio

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mrip541*
> 
> Here we are a month later and I still can't buy one. Sigh.


Well Amazon has Nov 9th stock available for a few hours now... but they raised their price to $420 which is probably why...


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mrip541*
> 
> Hu... I set it to auto notify weeks ago and haven't gotten a notification yet.


www.nowinstock.net

I got their alerts within a minute or two of the CPU going on sale. The only reason I had any trouble getting one is because the CPUs kept going on sale while I was driving home from work, and I couldn't just stop my car on the highway to place an order. But I got alerts every time, and even with my bad timing it took less than a week for me to get my 8700K which I am installing tonight.


----------



## jprovido

I got lucky with mine. It was ny day off and first thing I did when I turned on my pc is to check nowinstock.com lo and behold I was able to get one before it was out again after a few minutes.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I got lucky with mine. It was ny day off and first thing I did when I turned on my pc is to check nowinstock.com lo and behold I was able to get one before it was out again after a few minutes.


Looking back i shoulda prob grabbed it for 399 when i coulda lol. Oh well i still havent decided on itx or atx build.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Looking back i shoulda prob grabbed it for 399 when i coulda lol. Oh well i still havent decided on itx or atx build.


I'm pretty happy with the silicon I got too. I think 4.2ghz HT on is above average even for a delidded cpu.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I'm pretty happy with the silicon I got too. I think 4.2ghz HT on is above average even for a delidded cpu.


Is that a typo?

4.2GHz seems low

4.7GHz would be Multicore enhancement on.

edit:
http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/core_i7_8700k/
4955MHz average on air
5047MHz average on water
http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/core_i5_8600k/
5081MHz average on air


----------



## Scotty99

He meant 5.2









You guys decide for me:

Corsair 460x with a thermaltake floe 360 aio in the front

OR

Ncase m1 for the small compact desk PC look (with underglow lighting)

Id like the small case, but im not sure what kind of temps i could achieve with a delidded 8700k at 5ghz in something that small.


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> He meant 5.2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You guys decide for me:
> 
> Corsair 460x with a thermaltake floe 360 aio in the front
> 
> OR
> 
> Ncase m1 for the small compact desk PC look (with underglow lighting)
> 
> Id like the small case, but im not sure what kind of temps i could achieve with a delidded 8700k at 5ghz in something that small.


Depends entirely on the cooling you have.

With a delidded 8700k with just a basic overclock (literally less than 2 minutes in to the process) I'm hitting 5GHZ with max temps of 61C. I'm using a 280mm AIO (Corsair H115i V2 with Noctua NF-A14 Chromax fans)

If you've got a really good cooler and decent airflow there is no reason you can't hit 5+ GHZ and stay under 70C, no matter how small your case is.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> tbh all these chips will overclock the same no matter what motherboard you get. it's been like this since Sandy Bridge. the motherboard doesn't matter as much unlike before. I wouldn't be surprised if the most expensive Z370 motherboard overclocks exactly the same compared to a much cheaper boards with lesser components. Coffee Lake doesn't consume that much power.
> 
> If you really want to get good overclocks you have to delid your cpu. even with getting the most high end motherboard and the most expensive custom watercooling it won't do anything because temps wil alwaysl be your limiting factor.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arturo.Zise*
> 
> Will I see any difference between an 8350k, 8400, 8600 or 8700k when gaming at 4k? Thinking of pairing one of these chips with a 1080 in an ITX build for Xmas.


At [email protected] I'd build a Ryzen PC instead there's a lot of very good and cheap B350 ITX boards out there right now. zero difference in gaming since it's just 60hz and Ryzen has more cores/threads for cheap it's only get better in the future.
edit: I'm talking about the Ryzen 5 1600 btw


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Ringbus overclocking does not add much to gaming FPS.


That's not true. More specific: In extreme (singlethread cpu limited) scenario's it can give huge increases. For example my min fps in the games "The Elder scrolls online" and "Stacraft II" litterally *gains over 20%* by changing only that 1 value in the bios (ring speed) while keeping the core speed and all other parameters identical.

I must note that you'll only see such huge gains in very specific limited scenario's, depending on the cpu, the memory speed and the specific application/game. Recent games (created in the last 3 years) that are typically programmed to use multiple threads if possible will indeed generally not show much increase since they don't depend on that bottleneck. That much I agree with


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> That's not true. More specific: In extreme (singlethread cpu limited) scenario's it can give huge increases. For example my min fps in the games "The Elder scrolls online" and "Stacraft II" litterally *gains over 20%* by changing only that 1 value in the bios (ring speed) while keeping the core speed and all other parameters identical.
> 
> I must note that you'll only see such huge gains in very specific limited scenario's, depending on the cpu, the memory speed and the specific application/game. Recent games (created in the last 3 years) that are typically programmed to use multiple threads if possible will indeed generally not show much increase since they don't depend on that bottleneck. That much I agree with


+1. Saying somethime flat out that "It doesn't help with games" is wrong. Bumping ring bus gives you more IPC. people overestimate the 8700k/7700k to much even at 5GHz+ there are still some games that needs more mostly because they're coded to run on only 2 threads. Dota 2 immediately pops to my head because it's one of the games I play. even at 5.2GHz 5GHz uncore I still get dips below 144fps (my monitor is 144hz) when in big team fights. dunno you guys do emualtion but it would appreciate more IPC if possible.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ascii Aficionado*
> 
> The vcore keeps switching between 1.280/1.296/1.312 mid-load, usually just between 1.296/1.312, is that bad ?
> 
> I have the LL at level 2 and Offset at 20mV


vcore is generally (by the OC community) considered safe all the way up to 1.4 for everyday use. No cpu should break immediately at 1.4 but may show faster degradation in performance or eventually even stop working completely after longer periods of daily usage (weeks,months,years...) so it is not recommended to go above that value. In other words your voltages are very safe for daily usage, nothing to worry about

to give you a broader perspective on what is critical core voltage: For extreme (Liquid nitrogen etc) testing, overlocking and benchmarking Intel tells professional overclockers such as e.g Der8auer that the cpu will not 'break' until 1.5. As further proof, the binned cpu's that are sold as 'certified for 5.2Ghz' are typically guaranteed under 1.4 or 1.42v which means you're supposed to run it at that voltage. No one will guarantee anything beyond that critical threshold...


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Most boards will overclock pretty much the same, Apex is "THE" overclocking board to have particularly if you are a "bencher" and like playing with memory overclocks and timings or if you are into LN2 for example. From memory you were going to run a custom water loop with your build? which is why i suggested the Formula board given the built in VRM water block, given the heat VRM's are producing with this generation water cooling them is not a bad thing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In terms of just overclocking the CPU the Formula wont be any better than most other mid/high end boards.


You're right, I will run a custom water loop. It's just that I don't think the premium that the Formula adds is worth it but I get your point why you're recommending the board. I mean, if money was no object I will not think twice in getting it  But unfortunately, the cost of the whole build is already too high and I'm trying to minimize the cost without affecting performance. So if I can get away with a Code, then I'm all for that.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> tbh all these chips will overclock the same no matter what motherboard you get. it's been like this since Sandy Bridge. the motherboard doesn't matter as much unlike before. I wouldn't be surprised if the most expensive Z370 motherboard overclocks exactly the same compared to a much cheaper boards with lesser components. Coffee Lake doesn't consume that much power.
> 
> If you really want to get good overclocks you have to delid your cpu. even with getting the most high end motherboard and the most expensive custom watercooling it won't do anything because temps wil alwaysl be your limiting factor.


I agree. I guess I just want some of the features and looks of the Code over the Hero. The Hero is too bare for me. And I know you hate Hero or Asus boards in general because of past experiences









I already have a delid kit, no worries. I have all components on hand (water cooling plus delid kit plus LED strips, etc.) except for the freakin' CPU and mobo, lol.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> You're right, I will run a custom water loop. It's just that I don't think the premium that the Formula adds is worth it but I get your point why you're recommending the board. I mean, if money was no object I will not think twice in getting it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But unfortunately, the cost of the whole build is already too high and I'm trying to minimize the cost without affecting performance. So if I can get away with a Code, then I'm all for that.
> 
> I agree. I guess I just want some of the features and looks of the Code over the Hero. The Hero is too bare for me. And I know you hate Hero or Asus boards in general because of past experiences
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I already have a delid kit, no worries. I have all components on hand (water cooling plus delid kit plus LED strips, etc.) except for the freakin' CPU and mobo, lol.


If you are trying to reduce costs apart from RGB what does the code offer over a Taichi?


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arturo.Zise*
> 
> Will I see any difference between an 8350k, 8400, 8600 or 8700k when gaming at 4k? Thinking of pairing one of these chips with a 1080 in an ITX build for Xmas.


In general one would for sure see difference in some games when trying out all games in a test with all those processors, so yes in that regard. But will *you* specifically see a difference for the applications/games that *you* use ? Totally depends on a number of factors. Not enough data to answer that correctly.

If you could list up what you intend to use or do exactly we might be able to answer your question better.


----------



## Arturo.Zise

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> In general one would for sure see difference in some games when trying out all games in a test with all those processors, so yes in that regard. But will *you* specifically see a difference for the applications/games that *you* use ? Totally depends on a number of factors. Not enough data to answer that correctly.
> 
> If you could list up what you intend to use or do exactly we might be able to answer your question better.


Strictly 4K gaming at 60hz. Med/high settings. Most games are from the last 5 years. No multiplayer stuff. From what ive seen in most 4k gaming benchmarks, all tests are gpu limited. Cpu's seem to be within a few % of each other.

I can get a 8400 or R5 1600 + itx mobo for the same price as an 8700. Can add 8gb 3000mhz ddr4 and be within $50 of an 8700k.


----------



## Kommanche

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arturo.Zise*
> 
> Strictly 4K gaming at 60hz. Med/high settings. Most games are from the last 5 years. No multiplayer stuff. From what ive seen in most 4k gaming benchmarks, all tests are gpu limited. Cpu's seem to be within a few % of each other.
> 
> I can get a 8400 or R5 1600 + itx mobo for the same price as an 8700. Can add 8gb 3000mhz ddr4 and be within $50 of an 8700k.


Personally, I'd go for an i5 8400 and be done with it.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kommanche*
> 
> Personally, I'd go for an i5 8400 and be done with it.


Yeah for ITX build and only GTX 1080 getting 8400 is a no brainier. The problem is 8400 is overpriced right now. That being the case getting 1600X is not a bad idea.


----------



## Scotty99

Im still debating returning my strix-f for a strix-i, you guys think a delidded 8700k can hit 5.0ghz on a corsair h75?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Im still debating returning my strix-f for a strix-i, you guys think a delidded 8700k can hit 5.0ghz on a corsair h75?


Will probably be loud lol


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Will probably be loud lol


Well id definitely change the fan, is the pump loud on that cooler? Its just the most common i see used in the ncase m1.

My other option would be strix 1080ti and a 240 aio, but i think strix would get louder than msi hydro.


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Kommanche*
> 
> Personally, I'd go for an i5 8400 and be done with it.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah for ITX build and only GTX 1080 getting 8400 is a no brainier. The problem is 8400 is overpriced right now. That being the case getting 1600X is not a bad BETTER idea.
Click to expand...

FTFY.







Also, may as well go Ti route. @ 4k, its about 35% better than normal 1080.


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arturo.Zise*
> 
> *Strictly 4K gaming at 60hz*. Med/high settings. Most games are from the last 5 years. No multiplayer stuff. From what ive seen in most 4k gaming benchmarks, all tests are gpu limited. Cpu's seem to be within a few % of each other.


I'd grab 8600K and avoid ITX like plague. In fact I would get 8700K just to be sure this setup will not have problems few years later.


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> I'd grab 8600K and *avoid ITX like plague*. In fact I would get 8700K just to be sure this setup will not have problems few years later.


PFFF all the cool kids are into the small stuff.


----------



## tashcz

Could someone please point me on what uncore does and how it affects performance? Can't find as much info as I'd like.


----------



## jprovido

Reality is a b. really wanted that 5.2GHz overclock so bad. it was "semi" stable. never crashed in games and can survive aida64 and prime95 for a few hours but flatout fails on Realbench around 1 hour 30 minute mark whatever I did I can't get it to get past even just 2 hours in realbench. and it took a lot more voltage than I thought it would to get 5.1GHz stable on realbench. but I manage to get it stable at 1.36v(extreme LLC). that's A LOT more voltage than I thought it would take but alas. rock solid stability. at 5.1GHz 5GHz NB. not bad I guess. it hurt a little bit that 5.2GHz wasn't possible with full stability but at least it overclocked to 5.1GHz with less voltage compared to my 7700k


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> 
> Reality is a b. really wanted that 5.2GHz overclock so bad. it was "semi" stable. never crashed in games and can survive aida64 and prime95 for a few hours but flatout fails on Realbench around 1 hour 30 minute mark whatever I did I can't get it to get past even just 2 hours in realbench. and it took a lot more voltage than I thought it would to get 5.1GHz stable on realbench. but I manage to get it stable at 1.36v(extreme LLC). that's A LOT more voltage than I thought it would take but alas. rock solid stability. at 5.1GHz 5GHz NB. not bad I guess. it hurt a little bit that 5.2GHz wasn't possible with full stability but at least it overclocked to 5.1GHz with less voltage compared to my 7700k


What voltage did it take you to get semi stable at 5.2?

To me, if you can pass all those tests and an hour and 29 minutes of realbench, that's stable enough if all you do is game. but that's just me


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> 
> Reality is a b. really wanted that 5.2GHz overclock so bad. it was "semi" stable. never crashed in games and can survive aida64 and prime95 for a few hours but flatout fails on Realbench around 1 hour 30 minute mark whatever I did I can't get it to get past even just 2 hours in realbench. and it took a lot more voltage than I thought it would to get 5.1GHz stable on realbench. but I manage to get it stable at 1.36v(extreme LLC). that's A LOT more voltage than I thought it would take but alas. rock solid stability. at 5.1GHz 5GHz NB. not bad I guess. it hurt a little bit that 5.2GHz wasn't possible with full stability but at least it overclocked to 5.1GHz with less voltage compared to my 7700k


You could try dropping uncore a bit and see if that lets you hit 5.2


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> You could try dropping uncore a bit and see if that lets you hit 5.2


I actually overclock with stock uncore at first. doesn't make a difference still fails on realbench.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> What voltage did it take you to get semi stable at 5.2?
> 
> To me, if you can pass all those tests and an hour and 29 minutes of realbench, that's stable enough if all you do is game. but that's just me


I dunno man. I just can't live with it knowing it's not fully stable. one ramdon crash and I immediately think it must've been the cpu. even though I just do gaming I want to be confident when something fails it's just a software issue not my overclock lmao

edit:

oh yea voltage was 1.385v (with LLC) it goes upto 1.41v on cpuz when llc kicks in. tried bumping up the voltage more. temps were still in control because it was delidded but still won't pass realbench


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I actually overclock with stock uncore at first. doesn't make a difference still fails on realbench.
> I dunno man. I just can't live with it knowing it's not fully stable. one ramdon crash and I immediately think it must've been the cpu. even though I just do gaming I want to be confident when something fails it's just a software issue not my overclock lmao
> 
> edit:
> 
> oh yea voltage was 1.385v (with LLC) it goes upto 1.41v on cpuz when llc kicks in. tried bumping up the voltage more. temps were still in control because it was delidded but still won't pass realbench


Yeah same here. I cant go on knowing the CPU is not fully stable. Sometime it can be the memory too that is failing. My CPU became unstable when running certain memory. Also 8700K is not really pushed in games very hard. You would need faster GPU than 1080 Ti to push it. My 3770K was "stable"with slower cards in games but as soon as I got 1080 Ti I was crashing in games where CPU usage was 80%+


----------



## Rei86

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Yeah same here. I cant go on knowing the CPU is not fully stable. Sometime it can be the memory too that is failing. My CPU became unstable when running certain memory. Also 8700K is not really pushed in games very hard. You would need faster GPU than 1080 Ti to push it. My 3770K was "stable"with slower cards in games but as soon as I got 1080 Ti I was crashing in games where CPU usage was 80%+


What games is that?
I've been playing casual like games so none of my hardware is being pushed, but I'm always curious what would.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tashcz*
> 
> Could someone please point me on what uncore does and how it affects performance? Can't find as much info as I'd like.


Uncore frequency is the frequency of the non-core parts of the CPU, ie cache, memory controller, etc. It's also known as ringbus frequency. It doesn't really have a huge effect on real world performance but does make a small difference on some benchmarks. There is no point in clocking the uncore higher than the core for obvious reasons and often setting the uncore multiplier too high can result in an unstable overclock. With coffee lake a good CPU should be able to achieve an uncore frequency roughly 200Mhz below core speed or even achieve a one to one ratio.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rei86*
> 
> What games is that?
> I've been playing casual like games so none of my hardware is being pushed, but I'm always curious what would.


I've seen battlefield 1 crush my 7700k. I see the cpu usage from 70-90%


----------



## tashcz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Uncore frequency is the frequency of the non-core parts of the CPU, ie cache, memory controller, etc. It's also known as ringbus frequency. It doesn't really have a huge effect on real world performance but does make a small difference on some benchmarks. There is no point in clocking the uncore higher than the core for obvious reasons and often setting the uncore multiplier too high can result in an unstable overclock. With coffee lake a good CPU should be able to achieve an uncore frequency roughly 200Mhz below core speed or even achieve a one to one ratio.


Thanks friend. Seems like it has the same usage as northbridge frequency on AMD systems. Will check it out once I get the hardware. Thanks again


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I've seen battlefield 1 crush my 7700k. I see the cpu usage from 70-90%


Same here.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Rei86*
> 
> What games is that?
> I've been playing casual like games so none of my hardware is being pushed, but I'm always curious what would.
> 
> 
> 
> I've seen battlefield 1 crush my 7700k. I see the cpu usage from 70-90%
Click to expand...

Utilization should not be confused as usage. The software dictates utilization, that is why when gaming the CPU runs much cooler than other tasks.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Utilization should not be confused as usage. The software dictates utilization, that is why when gaming the CPU runs much cooler than other tasks.


just gave an example. that's the only game that taxed my 7700k that much. not saying the performance was bad. I had no problem maintaining 144fps when I was still playing the game (I had a 1080 SLI setup before "downgrading" to a single gpu).


----------



## stefxyz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> 
> Reality is a b. really wanted that 5.2GHz overclock so bad. it was "semi" stable. never crashed in games and can survive aida64 and prime95 for a few hours but flatout fails on Realbench around 1 hour 30 minute mark whatever I did I can't get it to get past even just 2 hours in realbench. and it took a lot more voltage than I thought it would to get 5.1GHz stable on realbench. but I manage to get it stable at 1.36v(extreme LLC). that's A LOT more voltage than I thought it would take but alas. rock solid stability. at 5.1GHz 5GHz NB. not bad I guess. it hurt a little bit that 5.2GHz wasn't possible with full stability but at least it overclocked to 5.1GHz with less voltage compared to my 7700k


Do you run MSI afterburner? I had same issue in Realbench and turned out it was either the GPU OC or realbanehc had issues with afterburner or statistics server. Did run it 8 hours without and had no issues.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> If you are trying to reduce costs apart from RGB what does the code offer over a Taichi?


I'm not looking at other brands mainly because of the good UEFI and fan control of high-end ASUS boards. I think we all can agree that ASUS has the best UEFI and Gigabyte has the worst. I know ASRock has a decent UEFI but I'd rather take ASUS.


----------



## DStealth

https://communities.intel.com/thread/119293
Opened a topic in Intel forums for my element ...this was the stupidest answer the capacity of this capacitor is confidential..








Tomorrow as i have many capacitors in this form factor will start trying some experiments to boot the CPU...the problem is in this form factor there are from pico to nano farad capacities...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> I'm not looking at other brands mainly because of the good UEFI and fan control of high-end ASUS boards. I think we all can agree that ASUS has the best UEFI and Gigabyte has the worst. I know ASRock has a decent UEFI but I'd rather take ASUS.


Yeah I agree with what you are saying regarding UEFI, though Asrocks UEFI is pretty good but not as full featured as high end ROG boards


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> https://communities.intel.com/thread/119293
> Opened a topic in Intel forums for my element ...this was the stupidest answer the capacity of this capacitor is confidential..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tomorrow as i have many capacitors in this form factor will start trying some experiments to boot the CPU...the problem is in this form factor there are from pico to nano farad capacities...


And you really even got mad? If I was Intel, why would I give my customer information that is top secret? I know what happened to you sucks but t hst doesn't excuse you for behaving that way against them.

And btw, it's capacitance not capacity!


----------



## DStealth

I'm not against them it's simple element put on a wrong place. I can measure if I buy other CPU nothing confidential ...just a simple element i lost due to my mistake.
" capacitance not capacity" Thanks not my native language in mine we measure the capacitor farads as capacity really not "capacitance " but thanks for your note


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Utilization should not be confused as usage. The software dictates utilization, that is why when gaming the CPU runs much cooler than other tasks.
> 
> 
> 
> just gave an example. that's the only game that taxed my 7700k that much. not saying the performance was bad. I had no problem maintaining 144fps when I was still playing the game (I had a 1080 SLI setup before "downgrading" to a single gpu).
Click to expand...

Do you remember what the single gpu usage was?


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> And you really even got mad? If I was Intel, why would I give my customer information that is top secret? I know what happened to you sucks but t hst doesn't excuse you for behaving that way against them.
> 
> And btw, it's capacitance not capacity!


It's not like he can't measure the capacitance when he finds the capacitor, and/or if he has a spare CPU. I think the capacitor might be bit harder to come by, and soldering it back might require quite high manual dexterity, but he might make a nice "build" report on this forum, and tell us how it went, along with all capacitance of all capacitors on that CPU.When Intell didn't tell him, it's his moral right to not only discover it himself, but also snitch on Intel and show facts to the whole world.

Someone should tell him the device used for measuring is typically called by strange abbreviation LCR meter. And some multimeters can measure capacitance as well. (And that these types of capacitors are really fragile and he should be careful.)

BTW whet did you mean by customer information? He didn't ask about information about people who bough stuff from Intel.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arturo.Zise*
> 
> Strictly 4K gaming at 60hz. Med/high settings. Most games are from the last 5 years. No multiplayer stuff. From what ive seen in most 4k gaming benchmarks, all tests are gpu limited. Cpu's seem to be within a few % of each other.
> 
> I can get a 8400 or R5 1600 + itx mobo for the same price as an 8700. Can add 8gb 3000mhz ddr4 and be within $50 of an 8700k.


No singlethread cpu bottlenecks to be expected anywhere in general, only gpu limited. That means that the only thing that could bottleneck you is the max all-threads-loaded performance in multithread-optimized apps and games. In that regards the 1600x with it's 12threads would be the logical choice I would say since the 8400K has only 6 threads


----------



## Triniboi82

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> And you really even got mad? If I was Intel, why would I give my customer information that is top secret? I know what happened to you sucks but t hst doesn't excuse you for behaving that way against them.
> 
> And btw, it's capacitance not capacity!


Also agree, you were asking intel to disclose engineering information on their flagship product, ofc they weren't going to accommodate your request. Have no idea why you expected otherwise









Also why not just claim through warranty instead of trying to fix it, know you are at fault but still. Unless $400 US means nothing to you...


----------



## SavantStrike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> It's not like he can't measure the capacitance when he finds the capacitor, and/or if he has a spare CPU. I think the capacitor might be bit harder to come by, and soldering it back might require quite high manual dexterity, but he might make a nice "build" report on this forum, and tell us how it went, along with all capacitance of all capacitors on that CPU.When Intell didn't tell him, it's his moral right to not only discover it himself, but also snitch on Intel and show facts to the whole world.


Your concept of a moral right sounds dangerously close to something that could result in a cease and desist letter.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> If you are trying to reduce costs apart from RGB what does the code offer over a Taichi?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not looking at other brands mainly because of the good UEFI and fan control of high-end ASUS boards. I think we all can agree that ASUS has the best UEFI and Gigabyte has the worst. I know ASRock has a decent UEFI but I'd rather take ASUS.
Click to expand...

My Gigabyte motherboard has a great UEFI and has all the useful necessary features.


----------



## Xeio

Got my RockIt Cool today. Gonna delid after work probably.

Currently only running at 4.8 @ 1.23V because 5.0 was a bit of a wall that needed at least 1.3V and I kept hitting power and thermal limits which I didn't like.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Triniboi82*
> 
> ...disclose engineering information on their flagship product, ofc they weren't going to accommodate your request.


Engineering information a snagged capacitor everyone can measure if has the product in front of him...right
Been Intel user since 286 CPU was quite disappointing receiving such a stupid excuse.
I want to repair my CPU not exchange it . There's no way to buy new and measure as there are zero supply even a month ahead to my country...so yes not gonna import CPU rare as gem just to measure a capacitor ...simple capacitor.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> It's not like he can't measure the capacitance when he finds the capacitor, and/or if he has a spare CPU. I think the capacitor might be bit harder to come by, and soldering it back might require quite high manual dexterity, but he might make a nice "build" report on this forum, and tell us how it went, along with all capacitance of all capacitors on that CPU.When Intell didn't tell him, it's his moral right to not only discover it himself, but also snitch on Intel and show facts to the whole world.
> 
> Someone should tell him the device used for measuring is typically called by strange abbreviation LCR meter. And some multimeters can measure capacitance as well. (And that these types of capacitors are really fragile and he should be careful.)
> 
> BTW whet did you mean by customer information? He didn't ask about information about people who bough stuff from Intel.


What I mean is "why would I give my customer ...pause... information that is top secret". I didn't mean information about a customer.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> My Gigabyte motherboard has a great UEFI and has all the useful necessary features.


Alright. I don't want to spark any Gigabyte vs. ASUS UEFI flame war


----------



## DStealth

Ok just discovered the top secret information feels like Edward Snowden








10 microfarad 0306 SMD capacitor ... what a rocket science gonna share to the world.

Away from the jokes I don't have such tomorrow gonna buy one and solder it back...wish me luck, gonna share the result...


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Ok just discovered the top secret information feels like Edward Snowden
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 10 microfarad 0306 SMD capacitor ... what a rocket science gonna share to the world.
> 
> Away from the jokes I don't have such tomorrow gonna buy one and solder it back...wish me luck, gonna share the result...


Good for you mean! Mind telling us how you got that though?


----------



## DStealth

Have to kill you after unleaving you such secret


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Have to kill you after unleaving you such secret


Really? You wanna go that route? Nevermind the sarcasm, I don't need the information anyway.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Really? You wanna go that route? Nevermind the sarcasm, I don't need the information anyway.


He was kidding









DStealth I hope you get it fixed man


----------



## Koniakki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> ..... .....
> 
> Away from the jokes I don't have such tomorrow gonna buy one and solder it back...wish me luck, gonna share the result...


Good luck DS! Bring that little beast back.


----------



## Triniboi82

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Engineering information a snagged capacitor everyone can measure if has the product in front of him...right
> Been Intel user since 286 CPU was quite disappointing receiving such a stupid excuse.
> I want to repair my CPU not exchange it . There's no way to buy new and measure as there are zero supply even a month ahead to my country...so yes not gonna import CPU rare as gem just to measure a capacitor ...simple capacitor.


Well it's one thing being able to decipher yourself and asking the company to disclose it to you, pretty sure it's against company protocol to divulge information like that.

And yes I completely understand your point of view with regards to exchanging it, at least you have the info in hand now, kudos to you if you are able to bring it back to life. GL


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> He was kidding
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DStealth I hope you get it fixed man


Right, hence why I said "sarcasm" in the end


----------



## nyk20z3

Newegg had stock again today for about 5 secs


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Ok just discovered the top secret information feels like Edward Snowden
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 10 microfarad 0306 SMD capacitor ... what a rocket science gonna share to the world.
> 
> Away from the jokes I don't have such tomorrow gonna buy one and solder it back...wish me luck, gonna share the result...


And that, ladies and gentlemen is the last that was ever heard from our dear and late forum user DStealth. A memorial service will be held at....Intel Headquarters. We're still looking for a room with enough.....*capacity* !
















disclaimer: this was intended as a joke. The author cannot be held responsible for any misinterpretation


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> And that, ladies and gentlemen is the last that was ever heard from our dear and late forum user DStealth. A memorial service will be held at....Intel Headquarters. We're still looking for a room with enough.....*capacity* !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> disclaimer: this was intended as a joke. The author cannot be held responsible for any misinterpretation


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nyk20z3*
> 
> Newegg had stock again today for about 5 secs


newegg has 8700k stock.


----------



## Scotty99

I suggest people wait a bit, silicon lottery should have delidded chips for around same price newegg is asking for 8700k's.


----------



## evensen007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I suggest people wait a bit, silicon lottery should have delidded chips for around same price newegg is asking for 8700k's.


Agree. Don't reward Newegg for price gouging ~ 60 dollars over retail MSRP.


----------



## tashcz

What I'm scared of getting only a delidded chip from SL is getting the one that's binned and doesn't perform well, while just getting a delidded one.


----------



## Scotty99

If you already have a delid kit and conductonaut ya buy one from newegg, but for me it would be 80 dollars+ on top of a chip, thats 500 bucks lol.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tashcz*
> 
> What I'm scared of getting only a delidded chip from SL is getting the one that's binned and doesn't perform well, while just getting a delidded one.


Elaborate doesn't perform well, please.


----------



## tashcz

They do binning, so if one chip doesn't get to 5GHz under 1.4V or whatever is considered "long term safe" they sell it as a delidded one.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tashcz*
> 
> They do binning, so if one chip doesn't get to 5GHz under 1.4V or whatever is considered "long term safe" they sell it as a delidded one.


Everything will be bracketed and priced accordingly around the average bins, probably 4.8GHz (these are hexacores). Silicon Lottery has now switched to testing just a single voltage, so your luck with it at any given speed is a voltage lottery on its own. The variation in this voltage doesn't affect the chips operating performance, only thermal. So depending on your luck, you may need more or less cooling capacity.

I'm guessing 4.8GHz will be priced at MSRP, with 4.7GHz slightly below and any (unlikely to be any) 4.6GHz significantly below. Binning at such a high voltage, we should expect rare top bins near 5.3 - 5.4GHz...


----------



## Mrip541

Newegg 8700k in stock right now. $499. Yeah sorry no.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mrip541*
> 
> Newegg 8700k in stock right now. $499. Yeah sorry no.


Huh, seeing $420... still quite a bit more than MSRP but no where near $499. If you have $499, might as well get 7820X for 33% more cores and threads.


----------



## Mrip541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Huh, seeing $420... still quite a bit more than MSRP but no where near $499. If you have $499, might as well get 7820X for 33% more cores and threads.


Whoops. I was looking at the Canadian site.


----------



## tw2

Yay they are in stock at a dozen shops here now, should be permanently available. Hmm new dishwasher or 8700k, mobo and ram...


----------



## NorcalTRD

Just performed my delid last night. Unbelievable improvements!
Used rockitcool88, Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut, permatex black gasket maker to reseal, and some blue painters tape to mask off while applying LM.
Using Thermaltake Water 3.0 360 AIO cooler.
I overclocked to 5.0Ghz pre-delid on 1.33v, ran games and prime95 blend fine low to mid 50c but I couldnt run small fft's without prime95 giving me an error or immediately being in the low 90c's and stopping less than 30s in.

After delid, system seemed faster and stabilized.
Ran small fft's and reached 80C package max. All cores now within 1-2c of each other regardless of load level, previously was within 6-8c of each other sporadically.
Ran cinebench and score was improved 20-30 with no changes other than delid.

I believe I could probably run less voltage now at the same clock.
Feel this will give me the headroom for 5.2Ghz









Process: popped lid with rockitcool, wiped intel pigeon poop away with paper towels and 97% isopropyl, used bamboo tool to rub away all previous gasket from both IHS and board, wiped down all with paper towel and isopropyl again, leaving the die in tool i taped off the silicone, applied pin head drop to die, spread over about 5-10 minutes working it in, used excess to tin the bottom of the IHS, removed tape, used flat side of bamboo tool to scrape small amounts of permatex and apply to edges of IHS leaving the air gap in same location top right, clamped and let sit 16 hours. Used regular thermal paste on the AIO cooler to cpu.


----------



## kd5151

8600k and 8700k in stock on newegg. price is high but not selling out!


----------



## mouacyk

yeah, cuz everyone's waiting for SL launch on Saturday


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Everything will be bracketed and priced accordingly around the average bins, probably 4.8GHz (these are hexacores). Silicon Lottery has now switched to testing just a single voltage, so your luck with it at any given speed is a voltage lottery on its own. The variation in this voltage doesn't affect the chips operating performance, only thermal. So depending on your luck, you may need more or less cooling capacity.
> 
> I'm guessing 4.8GHz will be priced at MSRP, with 4.7GHz slightly below and any (unlikely to be any) 4.6GHz significantly below. Binning at such a high voltage, we should expect rare top bins near 5.3 - 5.4GHz...


Does that mean SL will sell lower than average bins at MSRP? Wouldn't it be better to take the risk with an unopened one and probably be lucky and have a top bin chip?


----------



## Twilex

Hey guys!

Just finished my build yesterday after a week of headaches (long story







). Anyway, stuck her at 5Ghz and have been running just a few benchies. Thought I'd share.

System Specs:
i7-8700K @ 5Ghz Delid
Asus Strix Z370I mobo
Asus Strix 1080Ti OC
Corsair RGB 16GB 3466 Ram
Corsair SF600 Psu
Corsair H100i V2 Push/Pull

Also, my memory specs are crap. Especially after looking at DStealths lol. Anyone got any memory OCing pointers. Always been a noob when it comes to overclocking memory. Usually just XMP and walk away. Thanks guys and enjoy.


----------



## nyk20z3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mrip541*
> 
> Newegg 8700k in stock right now. $499. Yeah sorry no.


sold out


----------



## Gohan_Nightwing

Why the frick did the price go up so much?! Stinkin Linkin Logs!


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nyk20z3*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Mrip541*
> 
> Newegg 8700k in stock right now. $499. Yeah sorry no.
> 
> 
> 
> sold out
Click to expand...

In stock for $420.00


----------



## royalkilla408

Newegg stock keeps coming back and sold out right away. I think this coming week stores will get a lot more stock and should drive the price down soon.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *royalkilla408*
> 
> Newegg stock keeps coming back and sold out right away. I think this coming week stores will get a lot more stock and should drive the price down soon.


The i7 8700k is still in stock for $420.00


----------



## Mrip541

I replied earlier that i mistakenly was looking at the Canadian site for the 499 price. My bad.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> DStealth I hope you get it fixed man


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Koniakki*
> 
> Good luck DS! Bring that little beast back.


Thanks for the kind words guys but seems I have to wait and buy a new CPU...if anything with the board went off is my last hope still getting 00 even after putting the right capacitor back on place...


----------



## Koniakki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Thanks for the kind words guys but seems I have to wait and buy a new CPU...if anything with the board went off is my last hope still getting 00 even after putting the right capacitor back on place...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Don't write it off or lose hope yet bro.

Maybe you overlooked or missed something?

Is that the same capacitor that came off or did you source one from elsewhere? If its the same maybe try another one?

If it was giving 00 code when the cap was off and still does when on, maybe it wasn't soldered "properly"?

Just brainstorming here.


----------



## kd5151

Newegg posted black friday deals. Gigabyte gaming 7 will be on sale.











edit: added pic.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

How would 4x4GB work on these chips? I want to sell my 7800X and get a 5200mhz++ 8700K.









But I'd need to spend 2-300 USD in between.. Anyway.. I've got this set of Ripjaws V 3600 Cl17 that is clocked to 4000 17-19-19-36-1t-300 at 1.4V. Would that be possible with the dual channel system on CF-L?


----------



## DStealth

Worst ..
My 4*8gb working from x299 to 4200 15-15-15-30-300 1T
Went to ~3900 1T with just two of them and same but 2T with 4 dimms...

Good news I'm on the way to take 3 new chips and test them today









Edit:
Seems newer batches are worse the first one L733C391 is at least 50Mhz worst same conditions even more Vcore

The second one is better not by far benches 5100+ cache and 5220-30 left him over here but still worst than my dead buddy








The third one is awful L733C403 not even booting in Windows with the upper settings..


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

I have L730C306, close to your old one DStealth. Might be over a week for some apex boards to come in stock locally here.


----------



## Raghar

Is that capacitor correctly oriented? And what's number of that second CPU? L733C391 and L733C403 should be quite close on wafer. That would suggest 14 nm has large variability per wafer, and Intel is sending everything on the market, not only best pieces.


----------



## DStealth

First two are L733C391 and the third was L733C403 There are many batches and S/N inside each 33 week. Don't know if they're close on the wafer but the quality varies a lot.
Edit: Ceramic SMDs don't have orientation works both ways. Have a theory after the weekend will try deeply to reverse the issue the resistance from the pads was way too different from the other ones....but will measure the new one when get home after the weekend and conclude what would be wrong...


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> First two are L733C391 and the third was L733C403 There are many batches and S/N inside each 33 week. Don't know if they're close on the wafer but the quality varies a lot.
> Edit: Ceramic SMDs don't have orientation works both ways. Have a theory after the weekend will try deeply to reverse the issue the resistance from the pads was way too different from the other ones....but will measure the new one when get home after the weekend and conclude what would be wrong...


Mine is L730C348 and overclocks pretty good. 5.2GHz 5GHz uncore atm


----------



## jprovido

uncore frequency DOES affect cinebench score. upped uncore from 4900 to 5000 and cinebench score immediately went up.


----------



## nyk20z3

Back in stock at newegg.


----------



## nyk20z3

I broke down and ordered one and a Asus Strix Z370-I Gaming


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nyk20z3*
> 
> I broke down and ordered one and a Asus Strix Z370-I Gaming


That's a nice little board. I've been looking at that one since it's taking too long for the apex to become available here.

crap thing is, I can't use my Intel 750 drive, so need a new m.2 drive.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nyk20z3*
> 
> Back in stock at newegg.


Wow there both in stock now, I'm just waiting until the i5 8600k drops to MSRP or under.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Newegg posted black friday deals. Gigabyte gaming 7 will be on sale.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3148994/width/500/height/1000
> 
> edit: added pic.


I wonder how much Gigabyte is making on the Gaming 7. It's selling ridiculously cheap for a board using ~$70 in mosfets and $20 in "server level" chokes , plus that's not counting the WIMA caps.

Z370 Gaming wifi dropped to $130 as well as X299 UD4 and Gaming 3 below $210. https://promotions.newegg.com/gigabyte/17-7620/index.html


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Newegg posted black friday deals. Gigabyte gaming 7 will be on sale.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3148994/width/500/height/1000
> 
> edit: added pic.
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder how much Gigabyte is making on the Gaming 7. It's selling ridiculously cheap for a board using ~$70 in mosfets and $20 in "server level" chokes , plus that's not counting the WIMA caps.
> 
> Z370 Gaming wifi dropped to $130 as well as X299 UD4 and Gaming 3 below $210. https://promotions.newegg.com/gigabyte/17-7620/index.html
Click to expand...

I'm looking at the Gigabyte Z370 HD3 and the price dropped to $114.99 at newegg.


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I wonder how much Gigabyte is making on the Gaming 7. It's selling ridiculously cheap for a board using ~$70 in mosfets and $20 in "server level" chokes , plus that's not counting the WIMA caps.
> 
> Z370 Gaming wifi dropped to $130 as well as X299 UD4 and Gaming 3 below $210. https://promotions.newegg.com/gigabyte/17-7620/index.html


Not to mention you can find it on sale for under $200 in several locations. I bought mine for $199 and I've seen them as low as $179. At that price Gigabyte can't be making much, if anything, in the way of profit.


----------



## DStealth

Yes, seems earlier batches are better OCing wise
As for the cache speed and efficiency @5200+5100 1750 points CB15 are doable. I have [email protected] and [email protected] with ~5200 cache speeds...


----------



## moustang

BTW, for those that are still looking, I cancelled my preorder for ShopBLT, but I got an email from them saying that they're received confirmation from Intel for a large shipment to arrive next week. 11/13/17 was the arrival date for the processors, and according to their current preorder status they have a couple of thousand still available.

Price is $388. Above MSRP but a lot cheaper than the likes of Newegg.


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Yes, seems earlier batches are better OCing wise
> As for the cache speed and efficiency @5200+5100 1750 points CB15 are doable. I have [email protected] and [email protected] with ~5200 cache speeds...


I can hit 5.2 with mine, but I don't like the temps or voltage required to hit that speed. I'm looking for a 24/7 overclock and want the CPU to last at least 3 years, and the temps and voltage to hit 5.2 was a bit too high for my liking.

I've got mine set with what I would call a conservative 5GHZ overclock. 1.34VCore and temps under load right around 55C. Easy and reliable. 1600CB with little more than a few memory tweaks at that setting.

But what really impresses me is the Uncore on this processor. At 5GHZ I'm able to run the Uncore at 5GHZ, for a 1:1 Core to Uncore speed. That's almost unheard of in previous generations.


----------



## kd5151




----------



## nyk20z3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> That's a nice little board. I've been looking at that one since it's taking too long for the apex to become available here.
> 
> crap thing is, I can't use my Intel 750 drive, so need a new m.2 drive.


You can use a M.2 to U.2 adapter i also have a Intel 750 drive but don't use it anymore.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nyk20z3*
> 
> You can use a M.2 to U.2 adapter i also have a Intel 750 drive but don't use it anymore.


I have a pci-E 750 drive.

I ordered the Apex X this morning, So now I can just use my old 750.

Goodluck on your set up, hope you win the silicon lottery.


----------



## nyk20z3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> I have a pci-E 750 drive.
> 
> I ordered the Apex X this morning, So now I can just use my old 750.
> 
> Goodluck on your set up, hope you win the silicon lottery.


Thanks Brother same to you, i have a Apex Z270 board and they are just Sick in every aspect


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> I have a pci-E 750 drive.
> 
> I ordered the Apex X this morning, So now I can just use my old 750.
> 
> Goodluck on your set up, hope you win the silicon lottery.


May I ask where did you find the Apex in stock?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

overclockers.co.uk/

1 was in stock. I just happened to look and there it was. Someone mentioned that they ordered a RVIE from there instead of waiting for US stock. First time ordering there, DHL is the shipper.

$472 CAD, but we'll see what duty is.


----------



## nyk20z3

8700K still in stock at newegg so it looks like they received a big shipment.


----------



## Scotty99

Sorry i know not coffee lake releated, good sale on gsync 1440p panel:
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=0JC-0004-00551&cm_re=s2417dg-_-0JC-0004-00551-_-Product


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *erocker*
> 
> So, you don't post it here, you find a thread about monitors and post it there.


Eh normally id do just that, but i know that at least 2 people had asked about my monitor and how i got it so cheap in here. Now we have 3 posts about the monitor instead of one because of you lol.

Anywho, SL has 8700k's for 419.00 and 8600k's for 279.00, they release for sale at 7pm cst. Im curious what the worst of the worst 8700k's are, 4.7?


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nyk20z3*
> 
> 8700K still in stock at newegg so it looks like they received a big shipment.


Or people chilled when they seen the price, and decided to wait.


----------



## nyk20z3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> Or people chilled when they seen the price, and decided to wait.


They are like $50 or so over msrp which is not bad at all for what your getting. They have been selling out with in a few minutes so you could be right who knows but me personally i just didn't want to wait anymore. I live right next to Micro Center and they are marking them up as well so it makes sense just to buy now.


----------



## Scotty99

In 4 hours you can buy a delidded chip from SL for same price as newegg is selling them, just fyi. I think that pretty dam fair even if they arent the best performing 8700k's, a delid kit liquid metal and silicon to put lid back on add up to at least 80 bucks.


----------



## nyk20z3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> In 4 hours you can buy a delidded chip from SL for same price as newegg is selling them, just fyi. I think that pretty dam fair even if they arent the best performing 8700k's, a delid kit liquid metal and silicon to put lid back on add up to at least 80 bucks.


That is a nice deal and was not aware of it. I was thinking of sending them the 8700K to be delided anyway so i will just have to cough up another $50.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nyk20z3*
> 
> That is a nice deal and was not aware of it. I was thinking of sending them the 8700K to be delided anyway so i will just have to cough up another $50.


Well SL did just post now those are placeholders, i actually have no idea what the bins or prices are sorry lol.

But even at like 450 for a 5.0ghz cpu id still do it over buying from newegg.


----------



## DStealth

Ok my saga continuous








Old CPU is dead unsoldered the capacitor from the new one and soldered it on the old...still 00 eror code and no boot...
Anyway delided the new one and put the SMD back on place this little sucker is cold very cold mid 60's in CB15 ...
Just managed to push close to 5300 run on it w/o optimizations on memory or OS...impressive while much higher Vcore it scales pretty impressive








Ambients are much higher thru.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Ok my saga continuous
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Old CPU is dead unsoldered the capacitor from the new one and soldered it on the old...still 00 eror code and no boot...
> Anyway delided the new one and put the SMD back on place this little sucker is cold very cold mid 60's in CB15 ...
> Just managed to push close to 5300 run on it w/o optimizations on memory or OS...impressive while much higher Vcore it scales pretty impressive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ambients are much higher thru.


Damn bro , delliding was a scary thing for me, but unsoldering and soldering capacitors on a chip its mind blowing thing you specialize in that stuff?

So you unsoldered the capacitor out of new one and soldered it back and it works?


----------



## Raghar

And you soldered it back to the original CPU and it worked? Well, that means it was probably killed by the test if you can boot it without the capacitor.


----------



## czin125

No 8740X in the near future? Seems like an interesting idea to reduce volts.

from a diff site and measured at 1.5v
https://i.imgur.com/gMHlJWO.jpg 6049 at 1.50v ( 1.52 cpu-z ) 7740X manages to be about 64mv lower with 14+ ( socket 2066 )

https://d1ebmxcfh8bf9c.cloudfront.net/u60895/image_id_1934763.png 6018 at ( 1.584 cpu-z )8700K / 14++ ) from
http://hwbot.org/submission/3706640_electron_libre_cinebench___r15_core_i7_8700k_1989_cb


----------



## DStealth

Wow the new CPU scales ...


----------



## Koniakki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Wow the new CPU scales ...


Glad all turn out well!









Not jealous at all! 5.3G's!









Here I'm still trying to decide between 8600k vs 8700k( €300 vs €430) and see if the €130 premium its worth paying.


----------



## DStealth

Well, well not very well as from two CPUs have only one working...but yes after the delid this one turns to be competitive








Edit:








https://valid.x86.fr/75pp9d



]


----------



## MercurySteam

Took way longer than expected to get my hands on one (8700Ks are nigh impossible to find in Aus, no surprise) but finally got it. Keen to start building.


----------



## nyk20z3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MercurySteam*
> 
> Took way longer than expected to get my hands on one (8700Ks are nigh impossible to find in Aus, no surprise) but finally got it. Keen to start building.


That's quite a sexy set up my 8700K and Strix Mini arrive Friday so i am just as excited as you are at the moment


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MercurySteam*
> 
> Took way longer than expected to get my hands on one (8700Ks are nigh impossible to find in Aus, no surprise) but finally got it. Keen to start building.


Nice, I am still trying to decide between strix e/f and the aorus gaming 5. We seem to have a good supply of 8700k in New Zealand but not 8700 for some reason.


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> overclockers.co.uk/
> 
> 1 was in stock. I just happened to look and there it was. Someone mentioned that they ordered a RVIE from there instead of waiting for US stock. First time ordering there, DHL is the shipper.
> 
> $472 CAD, but we'll see what duty is.


Early adopters fee sucks lol. I just ordered one from BH Photo this afternoon. Hopefully their eta of this Thursday is accurate.

Now to find a suitable test bench and some new rads


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> Early adopters fee sucks lol. I just ordered one from BH Photo this afternoon. Hopefully their eta of this Thursday is accurate.
> 
> Now to find a suitable test bench and some new rads


Wednesday by the end of the day from DHL. So this weekend I'll get er up.


----------



## ChiTownButcher

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Koniakki*
> 
> Glad all turn out well!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not jealous at all! 5.3G's!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here I'm still trying to decide between 8600k vs 8700k( €300 vs €430) and see if the €130 premium its worth paying.


My 2cents is for gaming get as many threads as you can SO LONG AS you don't loose any clock speed. As time goes by it will always be worth it


----------



## jprovido

this chips are so fun to play with. 39-40 degrees full load @ 4ghz 0.995v 4ghz uncore


----------



## wingman99

The i7 8700k and i5 8600k is in stock at Newegg.


----------



## kd5151

price is to damn high. Ryzen way or the highway!


----------



## nyk20z3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> price is to damn high. Ryzen way or the highway!


What do you think a 6 core that can do 5GHz is supposed to cost ? Because the 8700K even smokes the 1800X in almost every benchmark. I don't see the price coming down any time soon.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> price is to damn high. Ryzen way or the highway!


Price is indeed too damn high, for that I just say patience. I really wish Ryzen was for me, but it wasn't. It is good for my video editing work, but in the games I play I lose 30-50% performance on average. The real issue is the games, but still.


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> Price is indeed too damn high, for that I just say patience. I really wish Ryzen was for me, but it wasn't. It is good for my video editing work, but in the games I play I lose 30-50% performance on average. The real issue is the games, but still.


Exact same. I wish ryzen was the best choice for me but it's not, even at 1440p.


----------



## Scotty99

My pc runs great have not had one problem with it, but ryzen isnt even an upgrade from my 2500k in 2/3 games i play. This isnt amd's fault, its that the market is geared around 4c CPU's, in time you will see how good ryzen is. In the meantime, im waiting for coffee to drop in price lol.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> My pc runs great have not had one problem with it, but ryzen isnt even an upgrade from my 2500k in 2/3 games i play. This isnt amd's fault, its that the market is geared around 4c CPU's, in time you will see how good ryzen is. In the meantime, im waiting for coffee to drop in price lol.


Yup, it is impressive to play an older game and then a very recent well optimized one on Ryzen. Granted, LOTS of games will perform much better on an i7 2600k than the i5 2500k (particularly once the rendering gets really heavy), but comparing my 1700X to my previous i7 6700k, in an older game I will often see a 30-50% performance drop for the 1700X as I said earlier. But then I'll fire up a modern well optimized game like The Talos Principle which does not even fully saturate 8 cores or 16 threads, and it runs the same on both.

Games are getting there... slowly. Too bad older games, which means the vast majority of the best games in every genre, are... older and no longer supported so they will always prefer great IPC, ring bus architecture, L2 cache, no more than 4 cores, and sometimes no HT/SMT as well.


----------



## scracy

I copped a lot of criticism on this thread regarding my thoughts that in my opinion Intel changed the LGA1151 socket for a reason, being 8 core Coffee lake CPU's coming








http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/intel-z390-motherboard-spotted-in-sosoft-database.html
https://videocardz.com/73974/first-intel-z390-motherboard-spotted


----------



## wingman99

The i7-8700K is out of stock at Newegg.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> price is to damn high. Ryzen way or the highway!


I have a Ryzen 7 1700x @ 3.9GHz and 3333MHz ram. trust me my 8700k is better in everything. not saying it's a bad cpu just not a match for Coffee Lake. before you had to choose with Ryzen and Kaby Lake. if you want great gaming performance "okay" with everything else or good gaming performance+great in everything else. with the 8700k there's no compromise. it's great for both work and play


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Have the Apex, the 8700k, and the 4400Mhz ram. Now waiting for the weekend to get on it.









EDIT for pics:


----------



## profundido

just got order status update that my 5.2Ghz cpu has been shipped. Now only to wait for the Asus Formula X to become available for purchase and I finally can get to work too...


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> just got order status update that my 5.2Ghz cpu has been shipped. Now only to wait for the Asus Formula X to become available for purchase and I finally can get to work too...


https://www.caseking.de/asus-maximus-x-formula-intel-z370-mainboard-rog-sockel-1151-mbas-360.html

*soon*


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> https://www.caseking.de/asus-maximus-x-formula-intel-z370-mainboard-rog-sockel-1151-mbas-360.html
> 
> *soon*


ah thanks for posting. I had looked for it already but couldn't find it. Glad to see it's listed already !


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> ah thanks for posting. I had looked for it already but couldn't find it. Glad to see it's listed already !


You're welcome. I'm waiting the end of this month to finish my build and the Formula most definitely is part of it


----------



## cbarros82

ryzen was designed to compete with kaby lake not coffee lake correct ? . kaby released jan17 and ryzen feb 17. which caused intel to release coffee the same year .


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The i7-8700K is out of stock at Newegg.


back in stock again.


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Have the Apex, the 8700k, and the 4400Mhz ram. Now waiting for the weekend to get on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT for pics:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Looking good mate, how much did the customs/duty set you back? I'm waiting for my BH order to come in









Edit - 8700K + Maximus X Apex scheduled for delivery today, whoo hoo.


----------



## AlphaC

MCE may be semi-working on locked CPUs : they get higher scores with MCE on

http://quasarzone.co.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=qc_qsz&wr_id=113469
*Firestrike*
i7-8700k , MCE = 21.3K
i7-8700, MCE = 20.9K
i7-8700k, MCE off = 19.5K
i7-8700, MCE off = 18.2K

*Timespy*
i7-8700k, MCE = 9.6K
i7-8700, MCE = 8.67K
i7-8700k, MCE off = 8.2K
i7-8700, MCE off = 6.9K


----------



## rafiinf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> https://www.caseking.de/asus-maximus-x-formula-intel-z370-mainboard-rog-sockel-1151-mbas-360.html
> 
> *soon*


What is the difference between rog hero/ rog code / rog formula? except code and formula have ugly plastic


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rafiinf*
> 
> What is the difference between rog hero/ rog code / rog formula? except code and formula have ugly plastic


http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/z370-motherboard-guide-coffee-lake/

More USB, better cooling ... this link should give you what you are looking for


----------



## votum

FYI.

Wal-mart appears to have plenty of 8700k in stock.


----------



## rafiinf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/z370-motherboard-guide-coffee-lake/
> 
> More USB, better cooling ... this link should give you what you are looking for


ok they have better cooling, but is this cooling give you any advantage over rog hero? especially when all 3 mobos have only 8pin eps? its still nearly 200euros for some plastic and cooling, which maybe is not even usefull for achieving better performance. Are Code and Formula have better vrms, audio or something else really usefull over hero? i want to buy coffelake thx for any usefull info about (especially) code. I really wonder is there any good reason to pay extra over extreme4/taichi/hero.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rafiinf*
> 
> ok they have better cooling, but is this cooling give you any advantage over rog hero? especially when all 3 mobos have only 8pin eps? its still nearly 200euros for some plastic and cooling, which maybe is not even usefull for achieving better performance. Are Code and Formula have better vrms, audio or something else really usefull over hero? i want to buy coffelake thx for any usefull info about (especially) code. I really wonder is there any good reason to pay extra over extreme4/taichi/hero.


They are not worth at this price for most people imo. I chose the Formula for the I/O, look, brand loyalty and for the VRM cooling. This is more of a "pleasure" purchase


----------



## rafiinf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> They are not worth at this price for most people imo. I chose the Formula for the I/O, look, brand loyalty and for the VRM cooling. This is more of a "pleasure" purchase


just as i expected


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rafiinf*
> 
> just as i expected


Yeah. Hero and Taichi are really solid choices.


----------



## rafiinf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Yeah. Hero and Taichi are really solid choices.


yea you're probably right, at some point you just pay mostly for higher price tag


----------



## jprovido

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?sdtid=10825639&SID=f2c36678cb0b11e79b2a82142f90b8d80INT&AID=10446076&PID=1225267&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-Slickdeals%20LLC-_-na-_-na-_-na&Item=13-119-041D&cm_sp=

ASUS TUF Z370 Pro Gaming at 99.99 on newegg after promocode. that's crazy


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> price is to damn high. Ryzen way or the highway!


The price between the 8700k and the 1700x is virtually nothing. Motherboards and RAM cost the same for both, and there is only a $20 difference in processor price.

So you can have the best overall processor, or settle and save enough money to buy a cheap bottle of booze to help you forget that you don't.


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Yeah. Hero and Taichi are really solid choices.


Don't forget the Gaming 7 as well. Matches the Hero and can often be found at a significantly better price. Some of the best VRM on the market, and one of the best overclocking motherboards out there.


----------



## erocker

but i know that at least 2 people had asked about my monitor
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> Don't forget the Gaming 7 as well. Matches the Hero and can often be found at a significantly better price. Some of the best VRM on the market, and one of the best overclocking motherboards out there.


...and a horrendous bios and software to go with it. Haven't tried the latest one though. I have this board and would never recommend it to anyone.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> Don't forget the Gaming 7 as well. Matches the Hero and can often be found at a significantly better price. Some of the best VRM on the market, and one of the best overclocking motherboards out there.


I didn't mention it because of the hot VRM "issue". Good board, but I would go for a Hero or Taichi in the price range.


----------



## kd5151

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> The price between the 8700k and the 1700x is virtually nothing. Motherboards and RAM cost the same for both, and there is only a $20 difference in processor price.
> 
> So you can have the best overall processor, or settle and save enough money to buy a cheap bottle of booze to help you forget that you don't.


The going rate of the 1700x can be had for a lot less than the 8700K. Newegg on black friday will have them for $270 while the 8700K is at $420. If I lived next to a microcenter, I wouldn't even have to wait for black friday. They have the 1700x for $260 with $30 off a mobo.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *erocker*
> 
> but i know that at least 2 people had asked about my monitor
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> Don't forget the Gaming 7 as well. Matches the Hero and can often be found at a significantly better price. Some of the best VRM on the market, and one of the best overclocking motherboards out there.
> 
> 
> 
> ...and a horrendous bios and software to go with it. Haven't tried the latest one though. I have this board and would never recommend it to anyone.
Click to expand...

What is horrendous with the Bios? My gigabyte motherboard BIOS works great.


----------



## Scotty99

What to do boys, wait for silicon lottery pricing to come down or grab a 8700k from newegg mobile (398 with promo code) and buy a delid kit and liquid metal and do delid myself?


----------



## nyk20z3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> What to do boys, wait for silicon lottery pricing to come down or grab a 8700k from newegg mobile (398 with promo code) and buy a delid kit and liquid metal and do delid myself?


I don't see the prices coming down. Buy one now and enjoy it, if you don't feel comfortable def have it done by the experts.


----------



## SavantStrike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> The price between the 8700k and the 1700x is virtually nothing. Motherboards and RAM cost the same for both, and there is only a $20 difference in processor price.
> 
> So you can have the best overall processor, or settle and save enough money to buy a cheap bottle of booze to help you forget that you don't.


Isn't the booze to drown your sorrows over the z370 chipset?

Best is subjective. The peasant sized cache of Intel's non HEDT chips and the low 6 core count are still issues that some can't overcome until they reach parity.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SavantStrike*
> 
> Best is subjective. The peasant sized cache of Intel's non HEDT chips and the low 6 core count are still issues that some can't overcome until they reach parity.


The i7 8700k still thrashes any of the Ryzen 7's despite those differences.


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?sdtid=10825639&SID=f2c36678cb0b11e79b2a82142f90b8d80INT&AID=10446076&PID=1225267&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-Slickdeals%20LLC-_-na-_-na-_-na&Item=13-119-041D&cm_sp=
> 
> ASUS TUF Z370 Pro Gaming at 99.99 on newegg after promocode. that's crazy


4+2 phase? They can keep it.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?sdtid=10825639&SID=f2c36678cb0b11e79b2a82142f90b8d80INT&AID=10446076&PID=1225267&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-Slickdeals%20LLC-_-na-_-na-_-na&Item=13-119-041D&cm_sp=
> 
> ASUS TUF Z370 Pro Gaming at 99.99 on newegg after promocode. that's crazy


It has ALC887 , a crap VRM (worse than the Gigabyte HD3 , Asrock Pro4)

It should have never been more than $110 anyway


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sheyster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?sdtid=10825639&SID=f2c36678cb0b11e79b2a82142f90b8d80INT&AID=10446076&PID=1225267&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-Slickdeals%20LLC-_-na-_-na-_-na&Item=13-119-041D&cm_sp=
> 
> ASUS TUF Z370 Pro Gaming at 99.99 on newegg after promocode. that's crazy
> 
> 
> 
> 4+2 phase? They can keep it.
Click to expand...

I wonder if a 5.3GHz overclock is achievable on the ASUS TUF Z370 Pro Gaming with Silicon Lottery i7 8700k?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?sdtid=10825639&SID=f2c36678cb0b11e79b2a82142f90b8d80INT&AID=10446076&PID=1225267&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-Slickdeals%20LLC-_-na-_-na-_-na&Item=13-119-041D&cm_sp=
> 
> ASUS TUF Z370 Pro Gaming at 99.99 on newegg after promocode. that's crazy
> 
> 
> 
> It has ALC887 , a crap VRM (worse than the Gigabyte HD3 , Asrock Pro4)
> 
> It should have never been more than $110 anyway
Click to expand...

What is the phase setup on the Gigabute Z370 HD3, I'm thinking of purchasing it.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What is the phase setup on the Gigabyte Z370 HD3, I'm thinking of purchasing it.


It's also pretty bad , but it has 2 high side fets per phase (4 phases). If you intend to utilize any sort of AvX instructionsets I'd go with at least an Asrock Extreme4 / Asus Z370-A / Gigabyte Gaming 5 / MSI SLI PLUS or Pro Carbon , whatever is available in your region.

All those boards should be around $140-150, don't listen to MSRP.

Extreme4 = $155 (~$140 with review program) https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157789 --- silicon lottery approved
---> EUROPE https://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/ASRock-Z370-Extreme-4-Intel-Z370-So-1151-Dual-Channel-DDR4-ATX-Retail_1199128.html
K6 = $160 (~$140 with review program) https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157788 ---- silicon lottery approved
Gaming 5 = $150 https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813145035

SLI PLUS (with airflow) = $140 https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813144111
---> EUROPE https://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/MSI-Z370-SLI-PLUS-Intel-Z370-So-1151-Dual-Channel-DDR4-ATX-Retail_1199124.html

Z370 Pro Carbon EUROPE https://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/MSI-Z370-GAMING-PRO-CARBON-Intel-Z370-So-1151-Dual-Channel-DDR-ATX-Reta_1199121.html , https://www.mix-computer.de/mix/detail.xhtml?articleId=1397260


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> MCE may be semi-working on locked CPUs : they get higher scores with MCE on
> 
> http://quasarzone.co.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=qc_qsz&wr_id=113469
> *Firestrike*
> i7-8700k , MCE = 21.3K
> i7-8700, MCE = 20.9K
> i7-8700k, MCE off = 19.5K
> i7-8700, MCE off = 18.2K
> 
> *Timespy*
> i7-8700k, MCE = 9.6K
> i7-8700, MCE = 8.67K
> i7-8700k, MCE off = 8.2K
> i7-8700, MCE off = 6.9K


Have 24340 FS CPU when OCed so where's much room for improvement over MCE...for K CPUs at least









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Have the Apex, the 8700k, and the 4400Mhz ram. Now waiting for the weekend to get on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT for pics:


Pure porn dude...post some results when all ready...









Delid and cold CPU are great combo 66* Max during XTU Benchmark...


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What is the phase setup on the Gigabyte Z370 HD3, I'm thinking of purchasing it.
> 
> 
> 
> It's also pretty bad , but it has 2 high side fets per phase (4 phases). If you intend to utilize any sort of AvX instructionsets I'd go with at least an Asrock Extreme4 / Asus Z370-A / Gigabyte Gaming 5 / MSI SLI PLUS or Pro Carbon , whatever is available in your region.
> 
> All those boards should be around $140-150, don't listen to MSRP.
> 
> Extreme4 = $155 (~$140 with review program) https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157789 --- silicon lottery approved
> K6 = $160 (~$140 with review program) https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157788 ---- silicon lottery approved
> Gaming 5 = $150 https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813145035
> SLI PLUS (with airflow) = $140 https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813144111
Click to expand...

I like the $114.99 price of the Gigabyte Z370 HD3. Does the HD3 Z370 have more core phases than the ASUS TUF Z370 Pro Gaming since it is a seven phase?

How many core phases does my Z170 HD3 have out of six phases?


----------



## Scotty99

Im digging i went with asus, only m.2 heatshield that actually works:


----------



## sorance2000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> The price between the 8700k and the 1700x is virtually nothing. Motherboards and RAM cost the same for both, and there is only a $20 difference in processor price.
> 
> So you can have the best overall processor, or settle and save enough money to buy a cheap bottle of booze to help you forget that you don't.


This: https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80684I78700K-Core-i7-8700K-Processor/dp/B07598VZR8/ref=sr_1_1?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1510901314&sr=1-1&keywords=intel+8700k
and this : https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-1700X-Processor-YD170XBCAEWOF/dp/B06X3W9NGG/ref=sr_1_4?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1510901338&sr=1-4&keywords=amd+ryzen+7+1700x
I see more than 20 $ difference.


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SavantStrike*
> 
> *Isn't the booze to drown your sorrows over the z370 chipset?*
> 
> Best is subjective. The peasant sized cache of Intel's non HEDT chips and the low 6 core count are still issues that some can't overcome until they reach parity.


LOL, and then later on...the Z390









Given Intel's recent history, you can just feel yet ANOTHER mobo purchase coming once the Z390 chipset is released...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *erocker*
> 
> but i know that at least 2 people had asked about my monitor
> ...and a horrendous bios and software to go with it. Haven't tried the latest one though. I have this board and would never recommend it to anyone.


So Gigabyte UEFI is still horen
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cpt Phasma*
> 
> LOL, and then later on...the Z390
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Given Intel's recent history, you can just feel yet ANOTHER mobo purchase coming once the Z390 chipset is released...


Based on what we know so far Z390 wont offer much over and above Z370, there will be a Coffee lake 8 core CPU coming next year and Im pretty sure Z370 will be compatible with the new 8 core CPU's since the current six cores are compatible with Z390 the socket wont change, explains why intel changed the pin arrangement for Z370 even though Asus more or less stated that technically they didn't have to for the current six cores.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cpt Phasma*
> 
> LOL, and then later on...the Z390
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Given Intel's recent history, you can just feel yet ANOTHER mobo purchase coming once the Z390 chipset is released...


Based on what we know so far Z390 wont offer much over and above Z370, there will be a Coffee lake 8 core CPU coming next year and Im pretty sure Z370 will be compatible with the new 8 core CPU's since the current six cores are compatible with Z390 the socket wont change, explains why intel changed the pin arrangement for Z370 even though Asus more or less stated that technically they didn't have to for the current six cores.


----------



## SavantStrike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> The i7 8700k still thrashes any of the Ryzen 7's despite those differences.


I'm not sure I'd call this a thrashing.










The 8700K only wins in multi threaded applications when they have Intel optimized code. Even then it doesn't usually win by very much if at all.










That isn't an architectural advantage, it's teething on a new platform (Ryzen) combined with lazy devs and earlier anti trust practices.

The 8700K is nice, but it's not unequivocally better except in single threaded applications. If it had been compatible with Z270 it would have been amazing. As it stands it's on a stop gap chipset that will not see the support that Z390 will see. In a year when Ice Lake launches and is actually a new architecture, then maybe people should get excited. In the meanwhile it looks like this is just an attempt to maintain market share.


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SavantStrike*
> 
> I'm not sure I'd call this a thrashing.


I'm not sure I would dispute an overall assessment using a single benchmark from an application that 99.9% of the population never uses.

For the overwhelming number of users using the overwhelming most commonly used software Coffee Lake is virtually always better, sometimes significantly better. Yes, there are a handful of cases where it's not, but for every example you can give where it's not someone can give 10 examples where it is.


----------



## stefxyz

edit


----------



## WexleySnoops

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SavantStrike*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure I'd call this a thrashing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 8700K only wins in multi threaded applications when they have Intel optimized code. Even then it doesn't usually win by very much if at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That isn't an architectural advantage, it's teething on a new platform (Ryzen) combined with lazy devs and earlier anti trust practices.
> 
> The 8700K is nice, but it's not unequivocally better except in single threaded applications. If it had been compatible with Z270 it would have been amazing. As it stands it's on a stop gap chipset that will not see the support that Z390 will see. In a year when Ice Lake launches and is actually a new architecture, then maybe people should get excited. In the meanwhile it looks like this is just an attempt to maintain market share.


Something something cherry picking something something.

I'll agree the stop-gap platform is a PITA.


----------



## SavantStrike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WexleySnoops*
> 
> Something something cherry picking something something.
> 
> I'll agree the stop-gap platform is a PITA.


I stated the 8700K was unequivocally better in single threaded applications. That's not cherry picking, it's high praise.

When Ice lake comes out and core counts are both 8v8, then Intel gets the "better in every way" title. I don't think zen+ is going to break 4.5ghz so AMD won't have another shot at the performance crown till zen 2 at that point. They will have compelling budget workstation option status though (which is a marked improvement over the FX series)

The stop gap chipset was a foolish decision. At least the z170 to z270 refresh yielded 20 percent more PCIe lanes. Z370 is z270 refreshed to keep existing boards incompatible while z390 wasn't ready.

Intel could've just updated the IME for z270 and left it up to board partners to decide whether to provide support to old motherboards. The chipset wouldn't be "new", but it would have given them more flexibility with z390 (no need to support 8th gen chips at all). They either chose not to do this because of time and resources, or because they felt the need to maintain the two revisions per socket rule.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> I'm not sure I would dispute an overall assessment using a single benchmark from an application that 99.9% of the population never uses.
> 
> For the overwhelming number of users using the overwhelming most commonly used software Coffee Lake is virtually always better, sometimes significantly better. Yes, there are a handful of cases where it's not, but for every example you can give where it's not someone can give 10 examples where it is.


See above. The victory takes place in single threaded applications and some multi threaded applications. It's not a sweeping victory and that's an important distinction. Those who can take advantage of Ryzen should do so - it costs less and helps bolster competition. Those who want or need single threaded performance should buy the Intel platform.


----------



## jprovido

It boggles me how someone can still argue that Ryzen 7 > 8700k. to achieve almost the same multithreadded performance whilst having 2 fewer cores seals the deal. doesn't matter if Ryzen 7 is faster by a little bit. Why would you want something that's only good with one thing and "okay' in another workload? Coffee Lake is pretty much a 7700k/Ryzen 7 Hybrid. and this is coming from a guy who has owned a 1700x since day 1 of Ryzen release. I like my 1700x I think it's a beast but its' no 8700k, not even close tbh. for me it's 5.2GHz 6c/12t vs. 3.9GHz 8c/16t with slightly slower IPC. everyone knows which one is the superior platform


----------



## loader963

Delete


----------



## kd5151

Based on prices this holiday season the 1700x is out to kill the 8600K.


----------



## nyk20z3

8700K finally came in, time to finish up this Shift X build.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *erocker*
> 
> but i know that at least 2 people had asked about my monitor
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> Don't forget the Gaming 7 as well. Matches the Hero and can often be found at a significantly better price. Some of the best VRM on the market, and one of the best overclocking motherboards out there.
> 
> 
> 
> ...and a horrendous bios and software to go with it. Haven't tried the latest one though. I have this board and would never recommend it to anyone.
Click to expand...

What problems are you having with the Gigabyte motherboard?


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SavantStrike*
> 
> .
> See above. The victory takes place in single threaded applications and some multi threaded applications.


Which is the overwhelming majority of the software that exists today.

I'll bet money that outside of benchmarks, you can't name 50 different software programs that are used by millions that run better on Ryzen. And that's out of the tens of thousands of different software programs on the market.
Quote:


> It's not a sweeping victory and that's an important distinction.


It's a sweeping victory and you're in denial if you think otherwise. It's not an absolute, 100% total victory in every form of software on the market, but it's a 99.999% victory, and you can't name enough software where Ryzen dominates to prove otherwise.
Quote:


> Those who can take advantage of Ryzen should do so - it costs less and helps bolster competition.


RYZEN DOES NOT COST LESS.

Get that silly nonsense out of your head. A 1700X is only $20 cheaper than an 8700k as far as the processor goes. The motherboard and RAM are for all intents and purposes equal in cost.

BUT.......

To get the most out of Ryzen you need very high speed RAM. You can get GSkill DDR4 2666 speed RAM for the 8700k for just $178, but if you want to make Ryzen shine you'll need a MINIMUM of 3200 speed Samsung B-die RAM which is going to run you $200 or more. Want to really push that speed then going for 3866 or faster RAM can get cost over $250, about $70 more in RAM than the 8700K will cost you.

So much for that $20 in savings. In fact you now could afford to put a 140mm AIO on that 8700K and do some overclocking while still staying under the cost of Ryzen.

And speaking of overclocking, the 8700K is a beast. Check some of the threads here. 5.1GHZ is not at all unusual, and some people are hitting 5.3GHZ without needing any exotic cooling. My 8700K is humming along at a nice 5.1GHZ with just 1.31V and only hitting 65C under full load during stress testing using a $90 AIO for cooling.

And since you like those Anand benchmarks so much, what's the score of the $450 1800X Ryzen CPU here:



Compared to my (overpriced) $380 8700K here:


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Based on prices this holiday season the 1700x is out to kill the 8600K.


For gaming though, the 8600k decimates any Ryzen 99% of the time.


----------



## Scotty99

To be fair some games just love intel for whatever reason. Ive seen games where ivy bridge is beating a 1800x, talking like a 3570 not even an OC'able chip. Ryzen needs time is all, in time its going to be trumping 5.0ghz 7700k's.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> To be fair some games just love intel for whatever reason. Ive seen games where ivy bridge is beating a 1800x, talking like a 3570 not even an OC'able chip. Ryzen needs time is all, in time its going to be trumping 5.0ghz 7700k's.


The main issues are that most games are too stupid to work well with CCX, and issues with NVIDIA cards and Ryzen. In games like Crysis 3, Ryzen 7 trumps a 5 GHz 7700k, but in the games where the 7700k trumps any Ryzen that will never change (which is 99% of games from the dawn of time to 2017).

Once Zen gets infinity fabric running 1:1 with RAM speed along with 4000 MHz RAM, it'll do much better in those games that hate CCX thanks to brute force. Also, if NVIDIA cleans up their act and/or if you use AMD GPUs then the penalties will continue to shrink as Zen advances yeah.


----------



## Scotty99

Oh for sure, im talking new titles that can actually take advantage of more>8 threads. Only reason im going back to intel is ill be playing WoW for the forseeable future that they announced classic servers lol.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Oh for sure, im talking new titles that can actually take advantage of more>8 threads. Only reason im going back to intel is ill be playing WoW for the forseeable future that they announced classic servers lol.


Same here essentially, not WoW specifically but older games since unfortunately that's where the quality is in most genres. For now I am stuck with Intel. I am dependent on NVIDIA getting their crap together and general Zen advancements which AMD already has planned (infinity fabric speeds, RAM speeds, core speeds).


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Oh for sure, im talking new titles that can actually take advantage of more>8 threads. Only reason im going back to intel is ill be playing WoW for the forseeable future that they announced classic servers lol.


Ummm, yeah. And when frogs learn to fly they'll quit bumping their butts when they jump.

How many years did it take between the time the Core 2 Duo was released and the time games actually made use of 2 cores? How many years did it take between the time Core 2 Quad was released and the time games actually made use of 4 cores?

Fact is, Core 2 Quad was released in 2008, and games didn't really start making use of 4 cores until just 2 years ago. Roughly 6 years.

6+ core CPUs weren't released to the mainstream until this year, you're not going to see a large amount of consumer-level software take full advantage of more than 4 cores for the next 4-6 years. Until then you're going to see Intel continue to dominate the market, and by then you'll be dealing with a FAR improved Intel architecture that will absolutely destroy any AMD chip made today. The CPUs released today can be seen as one of two things. You can either view them as the best chip for the software out right now, or stop-gaps to fill the space while the market waits for software to catch up to the hardware. Either way, no chip on the market today will be fully utilized until every chip on the market today is obsolete. So you can eithe buy the CPU that best supports current and near future software, or you can buy into the idea that your CPU will one day be the ideal architecture, but with the understanding that by the time it is the CPU you buy today will also be obsolete.

Software developers aren't going to invest large amounts of money supporting a new architecture until that architecture is adopted by a large enough portion of the market to justify the expense. Fact is it's going to take YEARS before 6+ core CPUs make up enough of the market to justify the expense of supporting them for most software developers. Until then, you're better off with the most widely supported CPU architecture, which is Intel's single-core architecture with 4-6 cores for multicore support.


----------



## Scotty99

Eh there are already games that play better on 6c chips, what are you on about? I can easily see ryzen 7 being an overall better gaming CPU to the 7700k in 3 years time, despite its clockspeed deficiencies. In some games core count matters so much that ive seen fx chips surpassing overclocked sandy bridge i5's, something i would never have predicted in 2011......yet it happened.


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> To get the most out of Ryzen you need very high speed RAM. You can get GSkill DDR4 2666 speed RAM for the 8700k for just $178, but if you want to make Ryzen shine you'll need a MINIMUM of 3200 speed Samsung B-die RAM which is going to run you $200 or more.


To be fair, you don't NEED 3200+ speed RAM. Running higher speed RAM is not MANDATORY with Ryzen. Besides, anything higher than 3200 speed the gains are minimal at best, and certainly not enough to warrant the higher price tag. Don't get me wrong, various reviews have pointed out that Ryzen does show FPS gains in some games, but not all and I think that's another thing to consider. Just because you pop in 3200 Samsung B-die RAM doesn't automatically mean you're going to see gains across the entirety of your game library. The gains are subjective. So while the 3200+ speed RAM is nice to have for Ryzen, it is not required.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Got it up and running:



Looks like an average chip. Still happy with the switch from x79. Will try my luck later on with another 8700k.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cpt Phasma*
> 
> To be fair, you don't NEED 3200+ speed RAM. Running higher speed RAM is not MANDATORY with Ryzen. Besides, anything higher than 3200 speed the gains are minimal at best, and certainly not enough to warrant the higher price tag. Don't get me wrong, various reviews have pointed out that Ryzen does show FPS gains in some games, but not all and I think that's another thing to consider. Just because you pop in 3200 Samsung B-die RAM doesn't automatically mean you're going to see gains across the entirety of your game library. The gains are subjective. So while the 3200+ speed RAM is nice to have for Ryzen, it is not required.


Well you kinda do if you want it to be competitive. I waited for 4-5 months before Agesa 1.0.0.6 was available on my motherboard so my 3200MHz Trident Z kit was stuck at 2400MHz the whole time. Performance was far from desirable my 1700x really strugged with games like Dota 2 even with VR games I was noticing a lot of frame drops fortunately once the first Agesa 1.0.0.6 was available it worked at 3066MHz right away and the performance difference was huge! in Dota 2 I think it was at least 20fps gain in minimum fps. now I have it at 3333MHz (the same kit) performance is a lot better than it used to be but still nowhere near Intel performance in gaming. don't get me wrong I'm only talking about gaming. pretty much anything else aside from gaming it rekt my 7700k but now my 8700k is faster in everything.


----------



## nanotm

thats kinda the point though isn't it, the ryzen was designed to be competitive against the 7th gen chips not the 8th gen, which were released 7 months early due to intel losing the top spot (ignoring ryzens first generation problems like inability to get to 5GHz on water)

the theory is that with a 5 year chipset the second generation is that it will do 5GHz on later generations and outstrip intel cpu's (but likely wont beat them in intel based programming like the majority of games or common software) where ryzen outperformed was that it beat a stock intel without being overclocked in multitasking like playing games and streaming whilst listening to music and maybe running a browser tab or 20 (pretty much like the way fx always did 5 years ago) but pure single task stuff intel has never been beaten on performance....

time will tell how things pan out but it seems like intel/amd collaboration is starting so chances are in another decade they will be a single entity....


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Eh there are already games that play better on 6c chips, what are you on about? I can easily see ryzen 7 being an overall better gaming CPU to the 7700k in 3 years time, despite its clockspeed deficiencies. In some games core count matters so much that ive seen fx chips surpassing overclocked sandy bridge i5's, something i would never have predicted in 2011......yet it happened.


Name all the games that a 6 core runs better on?


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Name all the games that a 6 core runs better on?


Shouldn't be hard to find out. Look up Ryzen 5 1500X vs 1600 performance results. The only differences are 4c/8t vs 6c/12t, and the 1500X actually has a clock speed advantage.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Name all the games that a 6 core runs better on?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shouldn't be hard to find out. Look up Ryzen 5 1500X vs 1600 performance results. The only differences are 4c/8t vs 6c/12t, and the 1500X actually has a clock speed advantage.
Click to expand...

I looked it up and the 4 core i7 7700k does better than the 6 core Ryzen.


----------



## tashcz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Got it up and running:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like an average chip. Still happy with the switch from x79. Will try my luck later on with another 8700k.


What did you get? Nice matte black, me likes it.

Btw, is that a JetFlo over the HDDs?


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I looked it up and the 4 core i7 7700k does better than the 6 core Ryzen.


There is a reason I said Ryzen 5 1500X vs 1600. Are you that naive? The question was 4 cores vs 6 cores, or more specifically games' ability to benefit from 6 cores over 4. Comparing the i7 7700k to Ryzen 5 has too many other factors such as completely different architecture, cache, and frequency range. You will probably then think to compare the i7 7700k to the 8700k but even that does not satisfy the question since the 8700k has more cache, and modern games like that added L3 cache.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tashcz*
> 
> What did you get? Nice matte black, me likes it.
> 
> Btw, is that a JetFlo over the HDDs?


8700k, Apex mobo and some new ram. Came from an x79 set up.

That's an intel 750 NVMe with an EK block.


----------



## DStealth

So, what does your average chip show ? 5.1..5.2+ benchable ?
Edit: Just pushed my 4*8gb memories to 14-13-13 with 1.45v


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Hasn't been delided yet, but needs quite a bit of voltage for 5.1Ghz and so fourth. So I guess it's a 5Ghz 24/7 chip, when delidded.


----------



## DStealth

Hmm this is not good...
I think mine becomes better everyday








Now can trow all into it @5340Mhz


----------



## Koniakki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Hmm this is not good...
> I think mine becomes better everyday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now can trow all into it @5340Mhz


So... A wild guess, that this chip ended up been better than the previous one?(you know which one)









Or... Not yet...


----------



## vMax65

I am using the new Antc Mercury M360 AIO on my 8600K, thought I would try it as it was cost effective and a tripple rad AOI. Works absolutly perfectly keeping my 8600K overclocked at 4.8GHz with mid 20's Degrees C at idle and max 60 degrees C at load with Prime 95 v26.6, RealBench and Intel XTU...Quiet surprised at how well it performs though I did change the fans to the Corsair HD RGB fans..Very quiet even at load.

Have to admit, very impressed with the 8600K, it just works fast out of the box and does not require to much vcore, currently maxes out at 1.279v for the 4.8Ghz overclock...The 8600K is running with 16GB of Corsair Vengeance 3000Mhz Ram on a Gigabyte Ultra Gaming..and with regards to the Ultra Gaming VRM's, I have had no problems on VRM temps as they max out in gaming mid to high 60's and P95 v26.6 at 70 to 80 degrees


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

The 8700k is very impressive. The chip matches or beats my 1680 V2 8 core, while only being 6 cores In many applications. The overall system feels snappier like some have said. My NVMe 750 Intel is faster, my TX P is faster at the same clocks. 1680 v2 just feels slow now(4.5GHz), I'll still have a soft spot for it though.









Very happy with my purchase even though I only have an average clocker. When supplies replenish, I'll buy another 8700k and try my luck with the silicon lottery. I do have an x299 board and quad 3200MHz ram just sitting, so I might just hand this z370 platform to my son and move x299(7980XE).


----------



## vMax65

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> The 8700k is very impressive. The chip matches or beats my 1680 V2 8 core, while only being 6 cores In many applications. The overall system feels snappier like some have said. My NVMe 750 Intel is faster, my TX P is faster at the same clocks. 1680 v2 just feels slow now(4.5GHz), I'll still have a soft spot for it though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Very happy with my purchase even though I only have an average clocker. When supplies replenish, I'll buy another 8700k and try my luck with the silicon lottery. I do have an x299 board and quad 3200MHz ram just sitting, so I might just hand this z370 platform to my son and move x299(7980XE).


Your son is going to be very happy!!!!


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Koniakki*
> 
> So... A wild guess, that this chip ended up been better than the previous one?(you know which one)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or... Not yet...


This is something I could not say...the previous one needs 1.38v to bench near 5300 w/o delid....with delid would be probably ends being faster.
But for the moment the new one is pushing good very cold [email protected] XTU and RB2.56 are in mid 60's











Lol 5360Mhz 3dmark just finished ...GPU not good but this combined and CPU scores are ridiculous for 6 core CPU
Physics Score 24 485
Combined Score 13 311
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/23405840


----------



## Koniakki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> This is something I could not say...the previous one needs 1.38v to bench near 5300 w/o delid....with delid would be probably ends being faster.
> But for the moment the new one is pushing good very cold [email protected] XTU and RB2.56 are in mid 60's
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lol 5360Mhz 3dmark just finished ...GPU not good but this combined and CPU scores are ridiculous for 6 core CPU
> Physics Score 24 485
> Combined Score 13 311
> https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/23405840


DS every other day, I see a new post that you went even higher! I'm sure next week we will see 5.5GHz!









Glad you are having fun and even if its not "as" good, it's a hell of a chip! Enjoy!









P.S: Can't wait for mine to arrive after seeing all the fun you guys are having!


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> The 8700k is very impressive. The chip matches or beats my 1680 V2 8 core, while only being 6 cores In many applications. The overall system feels snappier like some have said. My NVMe 750 Intel is faster, my TX P is faster at the same clocks. 1680 v2 just feels slow now(4.5GHz), I'll still have a soft spot for it though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Very happy with my purchase even though I only have an average clocker. When supplies replenish, I'll buy another 8700k and try my luck with the silicon lottery. I do have an x299 board and quad 3200MHz ram just sitting, so I might just hand this z370 platform to my son and move x299(7980XE).


I think what I'd do is buy 3 CPUs from 3 different retailers keep the best overclocker sell the remaining 2









im tempted with the 8700k too but ive got a decent setup with the 6700k still, if they had a better ITX board id consider it ... as much as I like the APEX I think if I went back to normal ATX / EATX it would probably be x299


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I looked it up and the 4 core i7 7700k does better than the 6 core Ryzen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is a reason I said Ryzen 5 1500X vs 1600. Are you that naive? The question was 4 cores vs 6 cores, or more specifically games' ability to benefit from 6 cores over 4. Comparing the i7 7700k to Ryzen 5 has too many other factors such as completely different architecture, cache, and frequency range. You will probably then think to compare the i7 7700k to the 8700k but even that does not satisfy the question since the 8700k has more cache, and modern games like that added L3 cache.
Click to expand...

My original question was what games benefit with 6 cores compared to i7 7700K, get it strait.


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> To be fair some games just love intel for whatever reason. Ive seen games where ivy bridge is beating a 1800x, talking like a 3570 not even an OC'able chip. Ryzen needs time is all, in time its going to be trumping 5.0ghz 7700k's.


Yeah, like a year after Ice Lake is on the market.

Ryzen may do this in the future, Ryzen may do that in the future, but not any Ryzen you can buy now and not any Ryzen you can say for certain is coming out in the near future. Maybe Ryzen will eventually hit 5GHZ, and maybe by the time they do Intel will have a 6-7GHZ 8 core i7 for under $400 out that absolutely destroys it.


----------



## Charcharo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> Yeah, like a year after Ice Lake is on the market.
> 
> Ryzen may do this in the future, Ryzen may do that in the future, but not any Ryzen you can buy now and not any Ryzen you can say for certain is coming out in the near future. Maybe Ryzen will eventually hit 5GHZ, and maybe by the time they do Intel will have a 6-7GHZ 8 core i7 for under $400 out that absolutely destroys it.


That isnt how technology works...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> My original question was what games benefit with 6 cores compared to i7 7700K, get it strait.


Assassins Creed Origins
Witcher 3 Novigrad
Crysis 3


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Charcharo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> Yeah, like a year after Ice Lake is on the market.
> 
> Ryzen may do this in the future, Ryzen may do that in the future, but not any Ryzen you can buy now and not any Ryzen you can say for certain is coming out in the near future. Maybe Ryzen will eventually hit 5GHZ, and maybe by the time they do Intel will have a 6-7GHZ 8 core i7 for under $400 out that absolutely destroys it.
> 
> 
> 
> That isnt how technology works...
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> My original question was what games benefit with 6 cores compared to i7 7700K, get it strait.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Assassins Creed Origins
> Witcher 3 Novigrad
> Crysis 3
Click to expand...

Are there anymore games than the three of them?


----------



## Charcharo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> My original question was what games benefit with 6 cores compared to i7 7700K, get it strait.


Assassins Creed Origins
Witcher 3 Novigrad
Crysis 3
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Are there anymore games than the three of them?


Yes.
Unity, GTA V (in the city and depending on what is happening on screen), Ashes of the singularity, the new Tomb Raider game, Metro Redux if you use an AMD card + PhysX, etc. There are many more but these I know for sure, like 6c over 4c.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Battlefield is another example.

A 7700K @5 ghz bottlenecked my 1080Ti. My 7800X and 7820X is fine without any issues.


----------



## SavantStrike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> Yeah, like a year after Ice Lake is on the market.
> 
> Ryzen may do this in the future, Ryzen may do that in the future, but not any Ryzen you can buy now and not any Ryzen you can say for certain is coming out in the near future. Maybe Ryzen will eventually hit 5GHZ, and maybe by the time they do Intel will have a 6-7GHZ 8 core i7 for under $400 out that absolutely destroys it.


Unless Intel can break the laws of physics, they aren't going to release any 6 or 7ghz parts that hit that mark without destroying power efficiency or requiring phase change (or both).

Ice lake with 2 additional cores on a smaller node is going to be harder to clock as high as coffee lake. Density is higher, which drives up temperatures, and smaller nodes handle less voltage due to electromigration.

Power consumption also increases with frequency, so relying on sky high clock speeds is not a good strategy for an architecture. Bulldozer/piledriver and netburst are excellent examples of where this has failed.

In short - don't expect 6ghz CPUs anytime soon.


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SavantStrike*
> 
> Ice lake with 2 additional cores on a smaller node is going to be harder to clock as high as coffee lake. Density is higher, which drives up temperatures,


That's what I was saying for 2 years already. We kinda lucked out when Intel managed to make 14 nm node better than 22 nm. Still, temperatures per area are bad.

Quote:


> Power consumption also increases with frequency, so relying on sky high clock speeds is not a good strategy for an architecture. Bulldozer/piledriver and netburst are excellent examples of where this has failed.
> 
> In short - don't expect 6ghz CPUs anytime soon.


Power consumption = A + frequency*B*k^voltage
A little increase from 4 GHz to 6 will not hurt that much, but the voltage increase required to reach 6 GHz even on highly agile node would hurt A LOT.

Isn't electromigration more of a function of temperature than voltage?


----------



## DStealth

Pushed the memory this Asrock board is not that bad after all...
Managed to run 4*8gb 4+Ghz but the results are terrible RTLs are in 60 +
While 54-56-57-58 just did sub 35ns Aida64


----------



## SavantStrike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> That's what I was saying for 2 years already. We kinda lucked out when Intel managed to make 14 nm node better than 22 nm. Still, temperatures per area are bad.
> Power consumption = A + frequency*B*k^voltage
> A little increase from 4 GHz to 6 will not hurt that much, but the voltage increase required to reach 6 GHz even on highly agile node would hurt A LOT.
> 
> Isn't electromigration more of a function of temperature than voltage?


From what I understand, both temperature and voltage play a part in electromigration, with temperature being more detrimental a lot more quickly. I should've probably phrased that as "excessively over spec" voltage. Even cool running chips can degrade at high voltage, but whenever I've seen that happen it's some enthusiast that's dumped 30-40 percent more voltage into the chip (or more in some cases).


----------



## czin125

Not possible to do 4133 17-17-17-37 280 CR2? How different would the results be vs 4040 16-15-15-35 400 CR2?


----------



## DStealth

Nope the board is on his knees ..
@MrTOOSHORT Could tell what RTL's are with the Apex and even 2 modules @4133Mhz

I have no gains after 3750-3800 as the IOLs and RTLs are tightened by far...
Anyway the CB15 Single core raised the result


----------



## Koniakki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Nope the board is on his knees ..
> @MrTOOSHORT Could tell what RTL's are with the Apex and even 2 modules @4133Mhz
> 
> I have no gains after 3750-3800 as the IOLs and RTLs are tightened by far...
> Anyway the CB15 Single core raised the result


I knew it. You went even higher..









Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Koniakki*
> 
> DS every other day, I see a new post that you went even higher! *I'm sure next week we will see 5.5GHz!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Glad you are having fun and even if its not "as" good, it's a hell of a chip! Enjoy!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P.S: Can't wait for mine to arrive after seeing all the fun you guys are having!






Sweet setup! Can I haz dat?


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SavantStrike*
> 
> Unless Intel can break the laws of physics, they aren't going to release any 6 or 7ghz parts that hit that mark without destroying power efficiency or requiring phase change (or both).
> 
> Ice lake with 2 additional cores on a smaller node is going to be harder to clock as high as coffee lake. Density is higher, which drives up temperatures, and smaller nodes handle less voltage due to electromigration.
> 
> Power consumption also increases with frequency, so relying on sky high clock speeds is not a good strategy for an architecture. Bulldozer/piledriver and netburst are excellent examples of where this has failed.
> 
> In short - don't expect 6ghz CPUs anytime soon.


Trust me, I'm not expecting a 6GHZ Intel CPU anytime soon.

But I'm not expecting a 5GHZ Ryzen anytime soon either. With the current Ryzen not even hitting 4GHZ reliably it's going to take a major core design change to suddenly increase that CPU speed by another 1GHZ.


----------



## HeliXpc

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malinkadink*
> 
> I disagree, i mean audiophiles will be audiophiles but for 99.99% of people onboard audio is adequate. If the onboard audio doesn't have the capacity to push a high impedence headphone or speaker then just get an amp. or a dac/amp combo to improve the sound. I went with a pair of Fidelio X2s because of how easy it is to drive them being only 32 ohms and i have no complaints with from my z270 maximus' onboard audio driving them.


The audio coming through a sound card is much more cleaner then onboard audio, as far as frequencies go.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HeliXpc*
> 
> The audio coming through a sound card is much more cleaner then onboard audio, as far as frequencies go.


Not to mention signal to noise ratio and is a lot better too







not a fan of onboard audio, for some reason mobo manufacturers always put the audio stuff on a board nearest where the PSU would be in most cases which is the worst place.


----------



## Scotty99

Would you guys do this build any different? I decided to just build a whole new pc and sell my old one or give it to my cousin. My goal with this is the smallest atx build to go on my desk while having RGB lighting that all can be controlled with asus aura:

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/H3HkFd

Anything you guys would switch up? Meshify seems to be the smallest (in depth) full size atx case out there.

For motherboard i already have the asus strix-f.


----------



## vMax65

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Not to mention signal to noise ratio and is a lot better too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> not a fan of onboard audio, for some reason mobo manufacturers always put the audio stuff on a board nearest where the PSU would be in most cases which is the worst place.


Hmmm, never thought of that, but you are so right...


----------



## vMax65

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Would you guys do this build any different? I decided to just build a whole new pc and sell my old one or give it to my cousin. My goal with this is the smallest atx build to go on my desk while having RGB lighting that all can be controlled with asus aura:
> 
> https://pcpartpicker.com/list/H3HkFd
> 
> Anything you guys would switch up? Meshify seems to be the smallest (in depth) full size atx case out there.
> 
> For motherboard i already have the asus strix-f.


That seems like a great parts list!!! The Meshify seems like a good case with great reviews so I do not think you can go wrong there..plenty of airflow. The Ram @3200MHZ will suit the 8700K perfectly, wish I had the Trident RGB, they look so good.


----------



## Scotty99

Ya its only cas 16 memory, but the same gskill kit of cas 14 is nearly 100 dollars more, no thanks lol.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya its only cas 16 memory, but the same gskill kit of cas 14 is nearly 100 dollars more, no thanks lol.


There's is a reason for this difference the cl14 uses B-die chips where c16 Hynix(or older 25nm D-dies) and the first can OC 1Ghz while the second will hit a hard wall max 100 further..not even to mention the difference between 3700-800 cl 14(13)-14-14-28 with 3200-3300 max cl 16-17-17-36+

Edit: and the difference is probably 50usd(not 100) from your link the price is 175 here for less than 225 modules with the right chips
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232205
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232217


----------



## Scotty99

Id never OC memory, half of the appeal of intel platform is set and forget xmp profiles lol. I like to tweak a bit, but memory is just too much tweaking for my tastes.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Id never OC memory, half of the appeal of intel platform is set and forget xmp profiles lol. I like to tweak a bit, but memory is just too much tweaking for my tastes.


For the time and effort spent tweaking memory not worth it for the small gains IMO


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Id never OC memory, half of the appeal of intel platform is set and forget xmp profiles lol. I like to tweak a bit, but memory is just too much tweaking for my tastes.


It's good for benchmarks but in practical use terms you'll never notice the difference. There's never going to be a situation where you're sitting there screaming "I should have tweaked my RAM settings more".


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moustang*
> 
> It's good for benchmarks but in practical use terms you'll never notice the difference. There's never going to be a situation where you're sitting there screaming "I should have tweaked my RAM settings more".


I'm still waiting for proof and or sources for being able to use a lower vcore when you have cstates disabled.


----------



## yoyo711

I'm very happy from 1700(3.9) from 8700k (5.2)
but need to sell the AMD CPU and Motherboard tho....


----------



## Matt26LFC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yoyo711*
> 
> I'm very happy from 1700(3.9) from 8700k (5.2)
> but need to sell the AMD CPU and Motherboard tho....


Hi, are you running an 8700K at 5.2Ghz? Whats your core voltage and are you delid? On what cooling? Also whats your batch number

Cheers


----------



## kd5151

newegg has the 8700K on sale for $400 today! what a deal! not


----------



## Scotty99

How much difference does a millimeter make guys lol.

My plan was meshify c+evga 1080ti hybrid ftw 3.

Meshify c GPU clearance statesimensions & Weight
Max GPU Length Allowance
315mm with front fan mounted

EVGA hybrid=288.8mm

288.8+27mm for radiator=*315.8*

Are you kidding me lol, .8 mm is how close this is.

I would get the SC2 version which would for sure fit, but its an inferior card with no rgb lighting.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> How much difference does a millimeter make guys lol.
> 
> My plan was meshify c+evga 1080ti hybrid ftw 3.
> 
> Meshify c GPU clearance statesimensions & Weight
> Max GPU Length Allowance
> 315mm with front fan mounted
> 
> EVGA hybrid=288.8mm
> 
> 288.8+27mm for radiator=*315.8*
> 
> Are you kidding me lol, .8 mm is how close this is.
> 
> I would get the SC2 version which would for sure fit, but its an inferior card with no rgb lighting.


Try to put your finger in a ring that is .8mm too small and you'll know just exactly how much that is ! =P =P


----------



## Scotty99

But can you make meshify .8mm longer?

Thanks


----------



## profundido

I think it could be 'squeezed' in yes but honestly I would never pick a case where the components barely fit in and require squeezing. Don't underestimate the important airflow and cable routing. I would change case or components in order to fit easily


----------



## Scotty99

Debating that atm too, problem is i want this PC on my desk so case length is a consideration.

My other option would be going with a 240 rad instead of 360 and putting it on the top, then i could even fit a asus strix gpu.

Decisions decisions lol.


----------



## yoyo711

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Matt26LFC*
> 
> Hi, are you running an 8700K at 5.2Ghz? Whats your core voltage and are you delid? On what cooling? Also whats your batch number
> 
> Cheers


Hello

I'm running an 8700k 5.2Ghz on gigabit gaming 7 1.395 voltage and I have delid D15 batch # L731C451.
I install other motherboards asrock extreme 4 temp was higher and OC wasn't good so I'll be returning asrock to newegg

Good luck


----------



## xx9e02

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Debating that atm too, problem is i want this PC on my desk so case length is a consideration.
> 
> My other option would be going with a 240 rad instead of 360 and putting it on the top, then i could even fit a asus strix gpu.
> 
> Decisions decisions lol.


Just be aware of ram clearance if you put it up top - my Ryzen board has the ram slots placed a little lower than equivalent Intel boards so I had no issues but something to keep in mind if you put it up top. If you go Define C over Meshify C you can remove the front filter and place the fans in front (then buy individual filters per fan) and that'll give you the extra 25mm inside for longer gpus. I don't think you can do that with the Meshify C though given how the front panel pops out and stuff.


----------



## Scotty99

Hmm good point with the define c, but part of the appeal with the 360 rad was seeing those pretty fans from the front lol. (thermaltake riing plus)

If i do go with a 360 i think id have to go with corsair 460x, that has room for a rad+fans and would fit the longer vid cards.

OR i could go with a ftw 1080 which is 250 bucks less and it is a 10.5" card just like reference, which has rgb lighting lol. 1080 is honestly more than enough for me im on a 1060 right now.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Debating that atm too, problem is i want this PC on my desk so case length is a consideration.
> 
> My other option would be going with a 240 rad instead of 360 and putting it on the top, then i could even fit a asus strix gpu.
> 
> Decisions decisions lol.


tha's another compromise I wouldn't make considering how hot this cpu is when stretched to the max unless you agree to louder noise and/or not pulling full potential. Again I would wonder: wouldn't a big case next to your desk be a better option after all ?

finally, what if within the next 12months suddenly Volta were to come into play and turn out to be the absolute bomb but...due to construction restraints all volta cards are fabricated 30mm longer then the previous generation...


----------



## Scotty99

I mean, if im putting this under the desk why even buy a case with a window, or parts thta look good/match right? Dont get me wrong i totally see your point, still considering corsair 460x which is about 2" longer than meshify.


----------



## profundido

I have the 'big' tt core x71 case (pics in profile) standing on the ground next to my desk. Whenever I get up to hit the fridge,bathroom,anything I can see the pc as it is in the pic across the entire room. When I'm sitting down in front of my computer screen where the action is I personally don't feel the need to be looking elsewhere...=P

But then again I must admit that it depends on where your desk is in the room. If your pc would be squeezed between a wall and the desk then I could understand that the pc window would never be visible at all.

Now that I come to think of it, this X71 full mesh case might actually be something for you too, because this case is higher and broader allowing for amazing watercooling setups but not deep/long which might make it fit on your desk as much as the Fractal case would. Have a look maybe at the exact measurements on the website to see if it could fit your needs ?


----------



## Scotty99

If anyone cares this is build i ended up with, just checked out on the egg:
https://pcpartpicker.com/list/w96DD8

I went back and forth between setups and ended up with this, i gave up hybrid GPU for a full aura sync experience, one touch of a button all the lights will match







Not like a strix is a slouch anyways lol.


----------



## xx9e02

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> If anyone cares this is build i ended up with, just checked out on the egg:
> https://pcpartpicker.com/list/w96DD8
> 
> I went back and forth between setups and ended up with this, i gave up hybrid GPU for a full aura sync experience, one touch of a button all the lights will match
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not like a strix is a slouch anyways lol.


*whistles* sweet build man







- I'm jealous! I'm so tempted to swap Ryzen for 8600K or 8700K but I only play at 75Hz lol


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xx9e02*
> 
> *whistles* sweet build man
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - I'm jealous! I'm so tempted to swap Ryzen for 8600K or 8700K but I only play at 75Hz lol


Ya im on a 1440p 165hz monitor, its not that ryzen cant keep up with that (in most games it can easily with a 1060) its the old games that i need them sweet sweet mhz. 1080ti and the rest of the build was just a future proofing decision, this year has been crazy with computer hardware im ready to just build this thing and be done for 5 years+ lol.

Edit: Yay, an hour after i make my purchase steve declares the strix 1080ti the best overall 1080ti:


----------



## DStealth

There's no best...tested and even burned some 1080TIs... MSI / Asus / GB and Palit it's all about the Silicon Lottery...despite cooling all that matters are GPU and Vmem quality...


----------



## SavantStrike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> How much difference does a millimeter make guys lol.
> 
> My plan was meshify c+evga 1080ti hybrid ftw 3.
> 
> Meshify c GPU clearance statesimensions & Weight
> Max GPU Length Allowance
> 315mm with front fan mounted
> 
> EVGA hybrid=288.8mm
> 
> 288.8+27mm for radiator=*315.8*
> 
> Are you kidding me lol, .8 mm is how close this is.
> 
> I would get the SC2 version which would for sure fit, but its an inferior card with no rgb lighting.


Other than the lack of RGB, the SC2 is still a very good card. I had a pair if them in hybrid form before I went with the Gigabyte Aorus full cover cards. The "better" VRMs made little difference.


----------



## QuadDamage

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> If anyone cares this is build i ended up with, just checked out on the egg:
> https://pcpartpicker.com/list/w96DD8
> 
> I went back and forth between setups and ended up with this, i gave up hybrid GPU for a full aura sync experience, one touch of a button all the lights will match
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not like a strix is a slouch anyways lol.


why not front the cas for ddr 3200mhz? also I like the themertake view 31 over that case + you can go with a 360 aio with the frac ur stuck with a 280 at best

Do u really need the 1tb 960 ? go with the 512 and get a 2ed 512 ssd for games can save u money


----------



## DStealth

[email protected] CB15 1814









[email protected] CB15 1817 single 239


----------



## stjepanj

My i5 [email protected],5ghz

http://valid.x86.fr/4wtkz6


----------



## ghostrider85

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stjepanj*
> 
> My i5 [email protected],5ghz
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/4wtkz6


Only 1.12v? That can't be accurate. Cpuz on mine shows .6v even though im running 1.1v


----------



## ottoore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghostrider85*
> 
> Only 1.12v?


Offset mode, that's not under load.


----------



## scracy

Joining the 8700K club soon, just purchased 8700K from another member here,waiting for Maximus X Formula to become available. Some preliminary results below


----------



## AlphaC

Shortage will be ending soon...



http://www.shopblt.com/item/intel-boxed-8th-gen-core-i7/intel_bx80684i78700k.html


----------



## moustang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Shortage will be ending soon...
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.shopblt.com/item/intel-boxed-8th-gen-core-i7/intel_bx80684i78700k.html


I wouldn't put any faith into anything ShopBLT says. They've been promising delivery of that same shipment of CPUs since October 21. About 3 days before they're supposed to arrive the ship date changes and it's pushed back another 2 weeks. That's happened like 4 times now.


----------



## Malinkadink

Slightly off topic but what is cannonlake going to be bring next year and then ice lake the following year? Im not going to bother replacing my 7700k for a 8700k, its just 2 more cores and 4 more threads and i dont feel like im getting bottle necked in games with a 5ghz 7700k anyways so i'll be looking to upgrade to either cannonlake or ice lake, probably the latter as i see this 7700k pulling me through to 2019 easily before i get the itch, maybe even 2020.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Joining the 8700K club soon, just purchased 8700K from another member here,waiting for Maximus X Formula to become available. Some preliminary results below


Looks perfect congrats...do you have any benchmark results with higher frequencies ?


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malinkadink*
> 
> Slightly off topic but what is cannonlake going to be bring next year and then ice lake the following year? Im not going to bother replacing my 7700k for a 8700k, its just 2 more cores and 4 more threads and i dont feel like im getting bottle necked in games with a 5ghz 7700k anyways so i'll be looking to upgrade to either cannonlake or ice lake, probably the latter as i see this 7700k pulling me through to 2019 easily before i get the itch, maybe even 2020.


The rumors seem to be 8/16 for mid-2018 the soonest or 2019.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Looks perfect congrats...do you have any benchmark results with higher frequencies ?


Nope not yet CPU will be here Wednesday and was supplied by fellow forum member encrypted11 hence the screenshots. Still waiting for Maximus X Formula to become available or I might stick with my 7700K, not sure yet.


----------



## jologskyblues

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malinkadink*
> 
> Slightly off topic but what is cannonlake going to be bring next year and then ice lake the following year? Im not going to bother replacing my 7700k for a 8700k, its just 2 more cores and 4 more threads and i dont feel like im getting bottle necked in games with a 5ghz 7700k anyways so i'll be looking to upgrade to either cannonlake or ice lake, probably the latter as i see this 7700k pulling me through to 2019 easily before i get the itch, maybe even 2020.


AFAIK, Cannonlake is supposed to be a "pipecleaner" for the 10nm process node and is expected to be used for low-power applications like mobile SKUs, embedded SOCs and such. Ice Lake, on the other hand, is going to be a "tock" that brings with it a new microarchitecture.


----------



## kd5151

https://wccftech.com/intel-core-i7-9700k-9th-gen-8-cores-16-threads-rumor/

Wccftech for the win.


----------



## bazh

Hmm, they already announce 8th gen to include CNL, it'll be weird if 9th gen going backward overlap with CFL refresh.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Joining the 8700K club soon, just purchased 8700K from another member here,waiting for Maximus X Formula to become available. Some preliminary results below


another 10 long days of waiting...arrgggh I'll be the last on this forum to get my new setup up and running









https://www.caseking.de/en/asus-maximus-x-formula-intel-z370-mainboard-rog-sockel-1151-mbas-360.html

ps: I received my binned cpu, that's something comforting at least...


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> another 10 long days of waiting...arrgggh I'll be the last on this forum to get my new setup up and running
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.caseking.de/en/asus-maximus-x-formula-intel-z370-mainboard-rog-sockel-1151-mbas-360.html
> 
> ps: I received my binned cpu, that's something comforting at least...


Hoo, they have a date now. At least we know it's coming 









EDIT : You might be second to last, my 900p is set to ship early january lmao.


----------



## profundido

thx, that made me feel better...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> another 10 long days of waiting...arrgggh I'll be the last on this forum to get my new setup up and running
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.caseking.de/en/asus-maximus-x-formula-intel-z370-mainboard-rog-sockel-1151-mbas-360.html
> 
> ps: I received my binned cpu, that's something comforting at least...


Same will get my binned 8700K on Wednesday, may not use it we will see but figured I would get one while I had the opportunity, i would imagine 8700K [email protected] 1.42V AVX=0 would be quite rare and certainly better than what silicon lottery could currently offer


----------



## profundido

I'm already very happy to see a promising 5.2Ghz @ 1.40v etched on the custom IHS, anything more I will consider to be bonus


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> I'm already very happy to see a promising 5.2Ghz @ 1.40v etched on the custom IHS, anything more I will consider to be bonus


5.1 at 1.42V.


----------



## DStealth

What does this Formula board has for almost double the price from Hero except of useless WiFi and EK VRM cooling option ?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> What does this Formula board has for almost double the price from Hero except of useless WiFi and EK VRM cooling option ?


Once you go Formula there is no going back believe me







easily the best board that I have ever owned, I use the Bluetooth, I have the VRM block in the loop which is even more relevant with coffee lake being more cores.


----------



## DStealth

Comparison is not showing anything else then my points...
https://www.asus.com/us/Product-Compare/?products=R8suNyyA4xqZ0dIi,BeYSpTIeDazuxz5A&b=2
Hope to see some improvement on it...but doubt the price is very high for this platform IMO
Maximus X Hero 289euro
Maximus X Formula 469euro


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Comparison is not showing anything else then my points...
> https://www.asus.com/us/Product-Compare/?products=R8suNyyA4xqZ0dIi,BeYSpTIeDazuxz5A&b=2
> Hope to see some improvement on it...but doubt the price is very high for this platform IMO
> Maximus X Hero 289euro
> Maximus X Formula 469euro


I have owned Formula and Hero boards in the past and to be honest both are very good and the differences are becoming less, however Im not going to be comfortable with my VRM's sitting potentially at 100 degrees C when I can avoid it with a VRM block, also previous generations had the chipset lanes configured in a way that was more suited to my needs on the Formula, once you use one and pick one up and feel the quality and weight of a Formula board you might understand why they cost what they do


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> What does this Formula board has for almost double the price from Hero except of useless WiFi and EK VRM cooling option ?


Agreed, the price is kinda ridiculous but since money matters less to me a high price will not stop me from buying it. I like the complete package of both the armor, integrated m.2 ssd cooling and other extra features you mentioned as well but most of all the somewhat later RD/QA release timers as well as better QA in general. Typically when they got their first feedback from the other boards any last minute changes go into this one to provide the best overal experience. Let's hope they don't screw that up in generation X.

that being said the extra features can easily be matched by using custom vrm or full cover blocks and the armor you could do without so yeah...overpriced for sure. 100€ less would have worked too. Just because they can and because people like me who buy it anyway let them get away with it yes I know...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> Agreed, the price is kinda ridiculous but since money matters less to me a high price will not stop me from buying it. I like the complete package of both the armor, integrated m.2 ssd cooling and other extra features you mentioned as well but most of all the somewhat later RD/QA release timers as well as better QA in general. Typically when they got their first feedback from the other boards any last minute changes go into this one to provide the best overal experience. Let's hope they don't screw that up in generation X.
> 
> that being said the extra features can easily be matched by using custom vrm or full cover blocks and the armor you could do without so yeah...overpriced for sure. 100€ less would have worked too. Just because they can and because people like me who buy it anyway let them get away with it yes I know...


Another thing to keep in mind is future CPU upgrades, I have mentioned this in the past and now the rumours are going around that we will see an 8 core 16 thread 9th gen CPU based on 14nm++ which means even more load on the boards VRM's, intel changed the 1151 socket for a reason as i suspected







Also I use the onboard Bluetooth for my desktop speakers which I mainly use to watch TV (yes my gaming rig has a TV card lol).


----------



## bl4ckdot

Code vs Formula ? I was going for the Code (100€ less) but the 'complete package feeling' isn't satisfied


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Code vs Formula ? I was going for the Code (100€ less) but the 'complete package feeling' isn't satisfied


If arent using a custom water loop Formula is wasted


----------



## DStealth

Good arguments guys but common even top record Maximus X Apex is 349euro
Cannot still understand why Formula could cost over 400 not even to mention 470 price tag...


----------



## profundido

@scracy

in regard to that, I believe the latest information and state of rumor combined was that a new motherboard will be needed based on z390 chipset to run those, making it very unlikely that those cpu's would be supported on even the formula X. If that information is anything to go by nowadays...

Anyway I'm not going to spend a minute of thought on the upcoming line of cpu's. Yes our flagship 6core will most likely become an I5 next year and the new one will features 8 cores but most likely won't reach 5.2/5.3Ghz single thread OC's


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> If arent using a custom water loop Formula is wasted


True. Code fits better.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Good arguments guys but common even top record Maximus X Apex is 349euro
> Cannot still understand why Formula could cost over 400 not even to mention 480 price tag...


Apex is an excellent board for those that can fit an E-ATX board in their case (which I cant) and for those who like memory overclocking which I honestly dont have the time for given the small gains you actually get


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> @scracy
> 
> in regard to that, I believe the latest information and state of rumor combined was that a new motherboard will be needed based on z390 chipset to run those, making it very unlikely that those cpu's would be supported on even the formula X. If that information is anything to go by nowadays...
> 
> Anyway I'm not going to spend a minute of thought on the upcoming line of cpu's. Yes our flagship 6core will most likely become an I5 next year and the new one will features 8 cores but most likely won't reach 5.2/5.3Ghz single thread OC's


I suspect if history is anything to go by 9th gen will be compatible with Z370 hence why they changed the socket, but yeah I agree dont expect the 8 cores to clock as high as 8700K


----------



## DStealth

Correct you just told us the board with extra features costing less is a waste. Formula just has VRM block on it from my understating. Let's see what it could do once on the market...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Correct you just told us the board with extra features costing less is a waste. Formula just has VRM block on it from my understating. Let's see what it could do once on the market...


Formula is not for every use case scenario but it suits my needs as seen below


----------



## DStealth

This could also suit you need with 2 tubes less for 83 euros and Hero or any other Z370 Maximus board for ~200euro less price tag.
But if you like formula nothing wrong, just wondering why the price is this high


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> This could also suit you need with 2 tubes less for 83 euros and Hero or any other Z370 Maximus board for ~200euro less price tag.
> But if you like formula nothing wrong, just wondering why the price is this high


oh I just remembered. We totally forgot about the most amazing features: RGB lights !!























and an integrated OLED screen that is actually useful now that I come to think about it


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> This could also suit you need with 2 tubes less for 83 euros and Hero or any other Z370 Maximus board for ~200euro less price tag.
> But if you like formula nothing wrong, just wondering why the price is this high


Probably because they can







If I were using an AIO my choice would be different, I would go with Asrock Taichi as that is an excellent value for money board


----------



## profundido

@scracy

I just saw the picture and allthough a beautiful setup, I was surprised to see (only) an AX860i in there. With my comparable machine I have screenshots of peak wattage close to 900Watts measured on the wall plug. That was my absolute extreme stress test though


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> oh I just remembered. We totally forgot about the most amazing features: RGB lights !!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and an integrated OLED screen that is actually useful now that I come to think about it


lol...yeah Im into the whole Xmas lights thing







seriously though setting the RGB to one static colour to match your build isnt a bad thing. As for the OLED thing Im a bit undecided about that, hopefully the UEFI might allow me to turn it off as I dont really want to use the bottom slot for my sound card.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> @scracy
> 
> I just saw the picture and allthough a beautiful setup, I was surprised to see (only) an AX860i in there. With my comparable machine I have screenshots of peak wattage close to 900Watts measured on the wall plug. That was my absolute extreme stress test though


Under a heavy load I have never exceeded 650 Watts from the wall, plenty of headroom


----------



## profundido

interesting,

the gtx1070's must be using less then. Also the 6950x cpu uses more than the 7700k. But beware, so will the 8700k !


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> interesting,
> 
> the gtx1070's must be using less then. Also the 6950x cpu uses more than the 7700k. But beware, so will the 8700k !


GTX1070's are very power efficient but you are right 8700K will draw quite a bit more than the 7700K but I wouldnt think it would be more than an extra 100W or so.


----------



## Scotty99

You guys think a 8700k would throttle with a stock cooler and stock settings in games? CPU cooler is being delayed about 3 days after rest of my stuff lol.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You guys think a 8700k would throttle with a stock cooler and stock settings in games? CPU cooler is being delayed about 3 days after rest of my stuff lol.


at stock settings, no.

Considering a good air cooler could handle an OC up to 4.8Ghz which is way above stock settings heat production a stock cooler should have no problem with stock settings:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-cpu,5252-12.html


----------



## Scotty99

Cool, im gonna have to use the cooler that came with my g4560 til my deepcool aio comes in. Ill use some cryonaut paste just in case lol.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Guys.. I am wondering if I should sell my X299 setup and get a 8700K setup..

I have a set of 4x4GB G.skill Ripjaws V 3600 CL17 currently running at 4000 19-17-17-36-1t-300 at 1.400V on my X299 setup. Will these bricks be complete ***** on Z370? I got them really, really cheap, and I don't want to get new bricks at the moment.

CPU will be delidded (Best LM?) and will be under water. MO-RA420 LT (3x420 mm rad).


----------



## SavantStrike

Why go from x299 to z370? Performance is higher on x299 aside from a few single threaded apps.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I only play games.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Is the ASUS ROG STRIX Z370-F a decent choice..?


----------



## GunfighterAK

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Is the ASUS ROG STRIX Z370-F a decent choice..?


I have the z370-E which only differs with an addition of wifi. Both motherboards are full of bugs. None stop beta BIOS releases and non-working RGB implementation.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Is the ASUS ROG STRIX Z370-F a decent choice..?


No...had a play with it(Z370-E actually same board different color







) my Asrock K6 is superior in term of OC and stability and is even cheaper..not to mention debug LED/ onboard buttons(reset/power) / VRM heatpipes etc...
I came from x299 and using my 4*8gb modules the only issue is you have to use 2T instead of 1T for 2 dimms only populated for higher frequencies...not a huge sacrifice...one or two mem straps are overcoming it...
For games [email protected]+ is unbeatable x299 is somehow slow....


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Fu**!

Well.. is it really THAT bad?

That's the board that's in stock, every other board, the waiting time is absurd.

EDIT: MSI gaming carbon pro AC is in stock. They don't have ASrock.


----------



## DStealth

Get Maximus X Hero the extra is worth if in stock


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Don't think the extra 100 bucks is worth it.. Hmm

It was in stock. Bought it.


----------



## DStealth

If you're gonna use 4 dimms believe me they worth. If you're fine using [email protected] 3000-3200 get the cheaper one...
80euro difference
https://www.caseking.de/en/asus-strix-z370-f-gaming-intel-z370-mainboard-rog-sockel-1151-mbas-344.html
https://www.caseking.de/en/asus-maximus-x-hero-intel-z370-mainboard-rog-sockel-1151-mbas-343.html#


----------



## GreedyMuffin

It was in stock, so I bought it.

Going to use two dimms.. buying some new ones.

G.Skill Trident Z RGB 4133MHz 16GB is the ones I've been looking on.


----------



## DStealth

In this case you're fine have a good CPU wishing you.









Just checked the prices in your country for the Maximus X hero
2949 kr
2964

Seems like ~70 euros more from 2200-2250 for Z370-F


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Yeah. I bought the Hero instead. The other board was not in stock. Just need to wait two weeks+ for the CPU...


----------



## DStealth

Very good choice you wont regret








In this case you can keep your memories as they're no different from this new ones G.Skill Trident Z RGB 4133MHz 16GB
I remember you're running 4+Ghz cl16/17


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Running 4x4GB 17-19-19-36-1t-300 at 1.400V, but I sold the ram along with my old setup. So yeah. ^^


----------



## webhito

My 8700k should arrive today, picked up an extreme 4 while I wait for the apex to be available in Mexico.

How well are these chips responding to aio at stock? I plan on using an h80i v2 or my swiftech h140x.


----------



## jprovido

Just went to Microcenter yesterday. they got the 8700k for 379.99 each and there's A LOT of them on the shelf. is there really a shortage?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Very good choice you wont regret
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In this case you can keep your memories as they're no different from this new ones G.Skill Trident Z RGB 4133MHz 16GB
> I remember you're running 4+Ghz cl16/17


Okei.. might be forced to go with a cheaper mobo. I can get the ASRock Z370 Extreme 4 for 1600-1700,-, compared to the 2900,- for the Hero.. honestly I don't need a fancy mobo. I'm going to be using two dimms only and one GPU and 1 M2 SSD along with three regular SSDs. That's it!

The HERO price is a bit hard to swallow.. :O


----------



## scracy

Its here yay


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Its here yay


Mine too!



I have two of them. I'll be selling the first one and be keeping the second one. They are from batches L731C437 and L733C391.

If you guys were to pick which one to sell and which one to keep, what would you do? I would, of course want to keep the better-performing CPU  I know it's a stupid question as there are too many variables to consider but if we were to just base it off of the Batch No., what would your decision be? I read something about the earlier batches of CPU's usually performing better. These two batches are very close to each other though. I just want your thoughts


----------



## DStealth

Just keep in mind when binning them the better one could be actually the worst one after the deliding procedure


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Mine too!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have two of them. I'll be selling the first one and be keeping the second one. They are from batches L731C437 and L733C391.
> 
> If you guys were to pick which one to sell and which one to keep, what would you do? I would, of course want to keep the better-performing CPU
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know it's a stupid question as there are too many variables to consider but if we were to just base it off of the Batch No., what would your decision be? I read something about the earlier batches of CPU's usually performing better. These two batches are very close to each other though. I just want your thoughts


Put it too you this way mine is binned @5.3Ghz purchased from another OCN forum member Batch L733C299, so L733C391







but as stated earlier batch number is a rough guide only at best.


----------



## DStealth

Just realized you screenshot..Your processor is binned while 180w power limit activated ? It could reduce performance and this keeps it stable...this process should be done with maximum power limits not restricted ones. If you understand what i mean.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Just realized you screenshot..Your processor is binned while 180w power limit activated ? It could reduce performance and this keeps it stable...this process should be done with maximum power limits not restricted ones. If you understand what i mean.


You would have to ask encrypted11 that question as I dont know, but this is better than silicon lottery can offer so I went with it, as stated this version of OCCT large data sets is incredibly hard to pass


----------



## DStealth

Yes but if you're power restricted performance will drop so it will pass easier.
95W CPU 4300 1.2v has +100w while 5300 1.45v just a rough calculation and exceeding this 180w limit.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Yes but if you're power restricted performance will drop so it will pass easier.
> 95W CPU 4300 1.2v has +100w while 5300 1.45v just a rough calculation and exceeding this 180w limit.


I understand what you are saying and the screenshot tends to imply a 180W limit even though OCCT didn't exceed 138W, in order to stop your CPU from degrading you want to keep power draw below 2 x TDP (its current that kills a CPU) so Im comfortable with 180W limit if thats what he did.


----------



## DStealth

Adding 40W from 1Ghz OC and 250mv is not realistic over the stock 95w...Software could read it wrong. Measure the real consumption...not even mentioning AVX load








Here's a read you can translate it
https://www.io-tech.fi/artikkelit/core-i7-8700k-retail-vs-engineering-sample/
4.8 1.33v real 198w
ES 4.7 1.325v 224w

Not going to insult you don't get me wrong your CPU looks great. Just testing OC stability and limiting consumption IMO is not right


----------



## nyk20z3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> Just went to Microcenter yesterday. they got the 8700k for 379.99 each and there's A LOT of them on the shelf. is there really a shortage?


They have like 15 in stock here in Yonkers NY at $400 each.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Adding 40W from 1Ghz OC and 250mv is not realistic over the stock 95w...Software could read it wrong. Measure the real consumption...not even mentioning AVX load
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a read you can translate it
> https://www.io-tech.fi/artikkelit/core-i7-8700k-retail-vs-engineering-sample/
> 4.8 1.33v real 198w
> ES 4.7 1.325v 224w
> 
> *Not going to insult you don't get me wrong your CPU looks great*. Just testing OC stability and limiting consumption IMO is not right


No offence taken







I simply dont push my CPU's to the point of breaking, never have, I dont want to be the OCN member complaining that my CPU has degraded but each to their own


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Just keep in mind when binning them the better one could be actually the worst one after the deliding procedure


What is the reason behind that?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Put it too you this way mine is binned @5.3Ghz purchased from another OCN forum member Batch L733C299, so L733C391
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but as stated earlier batch number is a rough guide only at best.


What do you mean "Batch L733C299, so L733C391"? Earlier batch number means better (as a rough guide), correct?


----------



## encrypted11

The power draw from transient loads on a Cinebench R15 run hits the 158W CPU package power. I'm not sure if the previous screenshots are in.

I've not seen OCCT Large Data Set power draw levels going close to Cinebench levels.
If I'd rank the power consumption levels beginning with the highest, Prime95 28.9 FMA3 Large FFTs > R15 > OCCT Large Data set and I've not seen otherwise.

Though at a micro environment (and acknowledge that sinusoidal waveform exists), there could be a possibility of busting the 180W for some microseconds and might tank the performance to a small extent. It drew 158W on R15 at the 5.3GHz step.

But the intent of the OCCT 4.5.1 Large run with the 180W TDP cap (roughly under 2X TDP from ASUS Raja's recommendation) was not to cook the chip with a 240mm AIO heat dissipation level though the temperature spikes in the air sink are higher than an AIO that soaks heat through liquid.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> What is the reason behind that?
> 
> What do you mean "Batch L733C299, so L733C391"? Earlier batch number means better (as a rough guide), correct?


No I was actually making reference to the L733 part which means yours was manufactured the same week as mine (week 33), if it were me I would look at the stock VID for each of your CPU's that will give you a better indication of which is the better CPU. For example my stock VID is 1.088V but the one encrypted11 kept had a stock VID of 1.072V, both will do 5.3Ghz but his is 16mV lower at that frequency. Just thinking if the cost of Formula X is too expensive by the time you sold the CPU you didn't want to keep there is half the cost of your board


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> What is the reason behind that?


While after 5Ghz these CPU are quite temperature limited and contact beneath the IHS varies from CPU to CPU...better contact on worst CPU will result in better result and vise versa


----------



## encrypted11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Adding 40W from 1Ghz OC and 250mv is not realistic over the stock 95w...Software could read it wrong. Measure the real consumption...not even mentioning AVX load
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a read you can translate it
> https://www.io-tech.fi/artikkelit/core-i7-8700k-retail-vs-engineering-sample/
> 4.8 1.33v real 198w
> ES 4.7 1.325v 224w
> 
> Not going to insult you don't get me wrong your CPU looks great. Just testing OC stability and limiting consumption IMO is not right


I could have ran the chip with a 4095W TDP cTDP (burst) + sustained but if you had a very decent chip of a similar calibre, 1.43V LLC6 an initial launch BIOS on the equivalent of the Noctua D15 while edging into the 90s with temperature spikes would you have taken the risk?


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> I could have ran the chip with a 4095W TDP cTDP (burst) + sustained but if you had a very decent chip of a similar calibre, 1.43V LLC6 on the equivalent of the Noctua D15 while edging into the 90s with temperature spikes would you have taken the risk?


If you cannot keep temperature while fully loaded in certain stability test while temperature limited cannot call this frequency stable...that's what I mean. You can set 5400 and let 100w running Prime while with more power consumption it overheats...you got my idea.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> If you cannot keep temperature while fully loaded in certain stability test while temperature limited cannot call this frequency stable...that's what I mean. You can set 5400 and let 100w running Prime while with more power consumption it overheats...you got my idea.


Encrypted11 performed all the stress tests that I asked him to do to satisfy only myself. Based on my experience over the years (too many years lol) OCCT combined with Realbench for my purposes is stable. The fact this was done with an air cooler and a 30 degree C ambient makes it even more impressive in my opinion, with my loop I may even manage to get the volts even lower







My other option was to go with silicon lottery again at a higher cost and a higher voltage CPU for the same frequency with an AVX offset of 2, which in my opinion is not a true 5.3Ghz chip. Some of us live in very hot climates, 12.40AM here my ambient is still 30 degrees C


----------



## encrypted11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> If you cannot keep temperature while fully loaded in certain stability test while temperature limited cannot call this frequency stable...that's what I mean. You can set 5400 and let 100w running Prime while with more power consumption it overheats...you got my idea.


Touché. Have you seen the temperature chart from XTU over the 1 hour run? I mean averages versus microspikes.

Also I must say I've not seen OCCT Large Data Set power draw levels going close to Cinebench levels (even with the 158W max example).
If I'd rank the power consumption levels beginning with the highest, Prime95 28.9 FMA3 Large FFTs > R15 > OCCT Large Data set and I've not seen otherwise.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Yeah. CB R15 is insane on power. :O


----------



## DStealth

Ok if you fine with testing this method and stability test consuming less than CB and call the CPU stable fine. Just not right in my opinion specially other binning sites having -avx and using Prime95 to claim stability.
Yes i've seen XTU spikes and know very well how this CPU can consume while properly loaded. Still cannot claim 5.3 stable...But of course this is my point of view


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Ok if you fine with testing this method and stability test consuming less than CB and call the CPU stable fine. Just not right in my opinion specially other binning sites having -avx and using Prime95 to claim stability.
> Yes i've seen XTU spikes and know very well how this CPU can consume while properly loaded. Still cannot claim 5.3 stable...But of course this is my point of view


Caseking bin with non AVX prime, as do Overclockers UK neither offer 5.3Ghz CPU's. Must be nice living in a cold climate







Regardless of power draw have you tried running OCCT large data sets for an hour?


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> No I was actually making reference to the L733 part which means yours was manufactured the same week as mine (week 33), if it were me I would look at the stock VID for each of your CPU's that will give you a better indication of which is the better CPU. For example my stock VID is 1.088V but the one encrypted11 kept had a stock VID of 1.072V, both will do 5.3Ghz but his is 16mV lower at that frequency. Just thinking if the cost of Formula X is too expensive by the time you sold the CPU you didn't want to keep there is half the cost of your board


Gotcha. Well, I bought the extra 8700K for the purpose of just really selling it here. So I wouldn't want to open and test both. The other one already has a buyer and I will personally deliver the CPU to him tomorrow, lol. And besides, I don't even have a Z370 board here to test these CPU out.

As for the cost of the Formula, I have the money yes but my expenses these past few months (new PC watercooled build + a new car) are way off the roof. So you can imagine how I'm trying hard to resist and keep future expenses to a minimum 

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> While after 5Ghz these CPU are quite temperature limited and contact beneath the IHS varies from CPU to CPU...better contact on worst CPU will result in better result and vise versa


I see what you mean. I would hope that that would happen in a worse case scenario.


----------



## encrypted11

I don't think stability is just a sole function of power draw and completing the task.

For the matter if I remembered correctly, it takes about a 32mV step overvolt per frequency step on average to turn a "R15" stable overclock to OCCT 1H Large stable. RealBench V2.56 sits somewhere between.

I can understand what you're getting at, but stability testing is such a subjective matter.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Gotcha. Well, I bought the extra 8700K for the purpose of just really selling it here. So I wouldn't want to open and test both. The other one already has a buyer and I will personally deliver the CPU to him tomorrow, lol. And besides, I don't even have a Z370 board here to test these CPU out.
> 
> As for the cost of the Formula, I have the money yes but my expenses these past few months (new PC watercooled build + a new car) are way off the roof. So you can imagine how I'm trying hard to resist and keep future expenses to a minimum
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I see what you mean. I would hope that that would happen in a worse case scenario.


Yeah I hear you buddy, P.C's are an expensive and addictive hobby


----------



## encrypted11

For heat, I'll use an 8 hour OCN X264 encoding benchmark (since my abmients are typically 28-33C).
For power and transients load stability, I personally run FMA3 small FFTs and checking ACPI DPC latency (chip brownout testing, since I use adaptive voltage, all c states and speedshift, overclocked)
For memory stability, GSAT overnight or up to half a day.

It worked well for my use case till this date since the 6700K a year and a half ago and my PC uptime is typically 1-3 weeks with (habitual reboots).








I never found myself needing more rigour with stress testing but its probably easier (CPU testing) than OCCT 1H Large. Those settings may halt midway on a OCCT 1H run overall without hard crashes.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> ... Must be nice living in a cold climate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ..


Very nice 3-4 months a year bringing woods(30-50kg) a couple of floors everyday...feeling like bodybuilder when winter comes


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Very nice 3-4 months a year bringing woods(30-50kg) a couple of floors everyday...feeling like bodybuilder when winter comes


LOL...and here is us Aussies complaining its cold when its 2 degrees C outside


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Very nice 3-4 months a year bringing woods(30-50kg) a couple of floors everyday...feeling like bodybuilder when winter comes


I remember when I played the Witcher 3 max at 4K last winter , I would daily warm my hands above the pc's top grille which produced an amazing amount of heat when the sli of 2 Titan XP's is being stressed


----------



## kmac20

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> I remember when I played the Witcher 3 max at 4K last winter , I would daily warm my hands above the pc's top grille which produced an amazing amount of heat when the sli of 2 Titan XP's is being stressed


I love the fact that in the winter my PC functions as a sort of space heater. Means I can turn down the thermostat a bit save some money on there and still be warm (my rig runs nearly 24/7 as I use it for everything from watching movies to encoding DVDs to normal video files to gaming).


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> I remember when I played the Witcher 3 max at 4K last winter , I would daily warm my hands above the pc's top grille which produced an amazing amount of heat when the sli of 2 Titan XP's is being stressed


Sure but have to push my wife and both kids over the radiator of the PC ...very hard to be taken









Ok Jokes were good...exceeding 180w even SW measured 5.3 CB15


Second run was real-time for CB so reading were not accurate for the temperatures...


----------



## kmac20

Hmm I get around that within 50/100 points give or take (depending on these new services windows added with fall update having impacted my score 100 points ish) with my ryzen 1700 @3.8 so that's actually interesting to me.

Sorry I follow this thread because I like reading about the new Intel CPUs (perhaps next build? I think to myself) so I'm not trying to detail I just find it interesting my CPU gets roughly your score within about 50-100 points (again before FCU I was getting about 1780) despite the cores only running at 3.8

I would though be pretty confident in assuming your single core score smokes mine


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kmac20*
> 
> Hmm I get around that within 50/100 points give or take (depending on these new services windows added with fall update having impacted my score 100 points ish) with my ryzen 1700 @3.8 so that's actually interesting to me.
> 
> Sorry I follow this thread because I like reading about the new Intel CPUs (perhaps next build? I think to myself) so I'm not trying to detail I just find it interesting my CPU gets roughly your score within about 50-100 points (again before FCU I was getting about 1780) despite the cores only running at 3.8
> 
> I would though be pretty confident in assuming your single core score smokes mine


overclock it to 4GHz. my 1700x beats my 8700k in cinebench (albeit not a fully stable 4ghz overclock). and pretty much gets smoked by the 8700k in everything else


----------



## jprovido

double post deleted


----------



## kmac20

Cant get it past 3.8 stable with the mutlibug.

Even 3.9 crashes frequently. Just did not win the silicon lottery on this chip. Oh well it happens. My E6420 and 3570k were HUGE winners (easy 1ghz overclocking no qualms at all) so you gotta lose sometime, and I dont believe it fair to return a chip just because it doesn't overclock as well as you'd like it to.

But yeah I cant even get it to 3.9 stable, even if i up the volts to like 1.45 (max suggested by AMD, although they recommend not even close to that). Yeah. Just not a winning chip. Oh well, it happens.


----------



## Artikbot

I've never gotten 'lucky' with a chip, but never had a dud either.

My Opteron 1214 did 3GHz (from 2.2 base), my 1055T did 4GHz on 1.4V, and my 1700 does 3.97GHz on 1.38V.

Could've gotten better chips for sure, but also could've gotten much worse.


----------



## Scotty99

Even at stock speeds this chip is kicking the crap out of my ryzen, a place where i get say 60 fps on my AMD chip im close to 100 on intel.

Stock cooler from my pentium is actually keeping it under 90c as well lol, but sounds like a train whistle/leaf blower hybrid.


----------



## scracy

For those that have been waiting for the Maximus X Formula and Code they are finally available in my country and at their normal price points







only a $60 difference in cost between them
https://www.pccasegear.com/products/40926/asus-rog-maximus-x-code-motherboard
https://www.pccasegear.com/products/40927/asus-rog-maximus-x-formula-motherboard


----------



## thebski

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> For those that have been waiting for the Maximus X Formula and Code they are finally available in my country and at their normal price points
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> only a $60 difference in cost between them
> https://www.pccasegear.com/products/40926/asus-rog-maximus-x-code-motherboard
> https://www.pccasegear.com/products/40927/asus-rog-maximus-x-formula-motherboard


B&H has them both up on their website in the US showing expected availability on December 15 for $400 and $320.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thebski*
> 
> B&H has them both up on their website in the US showing expected availability on December 15 for $400 and $320.


Placed order for mine today, pick up tomorrow







surprised there is only a $60 price difference between Formula and Code


----------



## thebski

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Placed order for mine today, pick up tomorrow
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> surprised there is only a $60 price difference between Formula and Code


What country are you from?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thebski*
> 
> What country are you from?


I come from the land down under







Australia


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thebski*
> 
> B&H has them both up on their website in the US showing expected availability on December 15 for $400 and $320.


B&H's "expected availability" is typically pretty sketchy based on my personal experience. I don't order anything from there unless it's actually listed as in stock. On a positive note, their California customers don't have to pay 8% sales tax and shipping is free.


----------



## keikei

Looks like newegg's stock is steadily rollin'in. $420 i saw this morning in stock. Dat i7 9700k rumor got me excited though. I'm not paying these price hikes if avoidable.


----------



## kd5151

Not paying $420 unless it's 4/20/2018.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> For those that have been waiting for the Maximus X Formula and Code they are finally available in my country and at their normal price points
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> only a $60 difference in cost between them
> https://www.pccasegear.com/products/40926/asus-rog-maximus-x-code-motherboard
> https://www.pccasegear.com/products/40927/asus-rog-maximus-x-formula-motherboard


ah that's good news. That means we're finally really down to shipping and distribution phase.

In other words we can expect our european sites which list "arrival expected somewhere between 8 and 15 december" to be pretty accurate without further unforeseen huge delays


----------



## Koniakki

So, I wasn't quite "satisfied" with my OC and after reading a few tips here and there, I went back to bios and started from scratch.

1st run: 30mins 1.25v [email protected] Prime 26.6 1344k
2nd run: 30mins 1.30v [email protected] Prime 26.6 1344k

Ram at 2133 and all else on auto (1v IO/ 1.06v SA hwinfo64) and I just quickly tested for 30mins only since I havent enabled xmp or upped the ram clocks yet.













Not calling this stable or anything ofc but after starting again from base I manage to bring my 5.1 vcore from 1.325v down to 1.3v and even a bit lower might be possible(XMP [email protected] C17 ram).

Maybe this might help bringing volts/temps down a bit for the un-dellided of us..


----------



## Foxrun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Koniakki*
> 
> So, I wasn't quite "satisfied" with my OC and after reading a few tips here and there, I went back to bios and started from scratch.
> 
> 1st run: 30mins 1.25v [email protected] Prime 26.6 1344k
> 2nd run: 30mins 1.30v [email protected] Prime 26.6 1344k
> 
> Ram at 2133 and all else on auto (1v IO/ 1.06v SA hwinfo64) and I just quickly tested for 30mins only since I havent enabled xmp or upped the ram clocks yet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not calling this stable or anything ofc but after starting again from base I manage to bring my 5.1 vcore from 1.325v down to 1.3v and even a bit lower might be possible(XMP [email protected] C17 ram).
> 
> Maybe this might help bringing volts/temps down a bit for the un-dellided of us..


What were some of the tips you followed? Im at 5GHz with 1.35 volts fixed to be stable and would definitely like to lower it!


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Hei mates!

Another user from my local forum is selling a kit of 2*8GB 4266MHz C19 Gskill TridentZ RGB for 265$ including shipping and warranty. (About 1/2 of retail here in Norway)

This is going to be installed with a 8700K (If I ever get one, lol







) on a ASUS Z370 HERO X.

What are your thoughs?


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Hei mates!
> 
> Another user from my local forum is selling a kit of 2*8GB 4266MHz C19 Gskill TridentZ RGB for 265$ including shipping and warranty. (About 1/2 of retail here in Norway)
> 
> This is going to be installed with a 8700K (If I ever get one, lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) on a ASUS Z370 HERO X.
> 
> What are your thoughs?


For now, set them to 3600MHz @ 15-15-15-35 @ 1.35v because if you want a chance at hitting 5GHz on all cores with that 8700k you are best keeping those frequencies down on the memory; besides from what I can tell (after seeing many reviews and benchmarks on the subject), above 3600MHz there are diminishing returns (3000-3200MHz seems to be the sweet spot). If you have some disposable money for your build or you can get a good deal on a higher speed kit (as with your case), I would probably stop at about 3600MHz because CAS 15 3600MHz DDR4 is the best balance between speed and timings currently, IMO. Therefore, if I got a 4266MHz kit for a good deal, I would be glad I wouldn't have to buy DDR4 basically ever again and proceed to clock it to 3600MHz @ CAS 15. Then would see if I could get better timings @ 3600MHz (tighter) with higher voltage (probably stopping @ 1.4v).


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Hei mates!
> 
> Another user from my local forum is selling a kit of 2*8GB 4266MHz C19 Gskill TridentZ RGB for 265$ including shipping and warranty. (About 1/2 of retail here in Norway)
> 
> This is going to be installed with a 8700K (If I ever get one, lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) on a ASUS Z370 HERO X.
> 
> What are your thoughs?


I was going to say: good kit, almost as fast as the Gskill's golden standard set which is [email protected] Trident Z but Big Stroonz beat me to it. I completely agree with everything he said.

Rough speed comparison: 3600/15 =240 > 4266/19 = 224


----------



## profundido

W00T W00T Hot flash update for fellow Euro peeps here on Asus Formula X availabity !! The board unexpectedly seems In stock 1 week earlier now in several stores as of just now:

https://www.heise.de/preisvergleich/asus-rog-maximus-x-formula-90mb0vn0-m0eay0-a1725942.html

and even in my own country one distributor has them already:

https://www.centralpoint.be/nl/niet-gecategoriseerd/asus/mb-intel-1151-asus-rog-max-x-formula-atx-d4-3466-usb3-1-sata3-art-90mb0vn0-m0eay0-num-7112895/

GOGOGO


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> W00T W00T Hot flash update for fellow Euro peeps here on Asus Formula X availabity !! The board unexpectedly seems In stock 1 week earlier now in several stores as of just now:
> 
> https://www.heise.de/preisvergleich/asus-rog-maximus-x-formula-90mb0vn0-m0eay0-a1725942.html
> 
> and even in my own country one distributor has them already:
> 
> https://www.centralpoint.be/nl/niet-gecategoriseerd/asus/mb-intel-1151-asus-rog-max-x-formula-atx-d4-3466-usb3-1-sata3-art-90mb0vn0-m0eay0-num-7112895/
> 
> GOGOGO


Ok, this is a good sign of availability


----------



## Mrip541

Anyone else notice Newegg's Black Friday/Cyber Monday 8700k deal? It was $1 off from $414 to $413. Got a nice chuckle out of that one.


----------



## kd5151

asrock extreme 4 is on sale at newegg.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> W00T W00T Hot flash update for fellow Euro peeps here on Asus Formula X availabity !! The board unexpectedly seems In stock 1 week earlier now in several stores as of just now:
> 
> https://www.heise.de/preisvergleich/asus-rog-maximus-x-formula-90mb0vn0-m0eay0-a1725942.html
> 
> and even in my own country one distributor has them already:
> 
> https://www.centralpoint.be/nl/niet-gecategoriseerd/asus/mb-intel-1151-asus-rog-max-x-formula-atx-d4-3466-usb3-1-sata3-art-90mb0vn0-m0eay0-num-7112895/
> 
> GOGOGO


Time for the rebuild


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Time for the rebuild


You better take pics !


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> You better take pics !


A couple more


----------



## Seyumi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> I was going to say: good kit, almost as fast as the Gskill's golden standard set which is [email protected] Trident Z but Big Stroonz beat me to it. I completely agree with everything he said.
> 
> Rough speed comparison: 3600/15 =240 > 4266/19 = 224


Is that math confirmed true? Or has it been proven that 3600/15 is currently the best out there? (I think G skill RGB 3600 only goes to 16 CAS latency so I'm assuming this is manual tweaking) I thought higher mhz ram was always better even with higher CAS latency from all the benchmarks I've seen. I just got a 5.3Ghz 8600k and waiting on the Code/Formula to come out. I'm a bit scared of buying anything higher than 3600mhz ram since I know this was the max (XMP) stability with my 5.2ghz 7700k as well. I wouldn't want to miss out on getting faster ram though if I could but don't know if I want to risk playing the return game. There's basically a negligible difference in price with the 3600-4000 g skill RGB kits these days after the massive memory price hike but I just like to "set it and forget it" for XMP.

Edit: If that math holds true even the 3600/16 kits are indeed the fastest. I was doing math with all the G skill RGB kits from 3000/14 to 4133/19.

Edit 2: Actually 3200/14 seems to be better than 3600/16. Shouldn't I just get those instead if I don't plan on manually tweaking?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seyumi*
> 
> Is that math confirmed true? Or has it been proven that 3600/15 is currently the best out there? (I think G skill RGB 3600 only goes to 16 CAS latency so I'm assuming this is manual tweaking) I thought higher mhz ram was always better even with higher CAS latency from all the benchmarks I've seen. I just got a 5.3Ghz 8600k and waiting on the Code/Formula to come out. I'm a bit scared of buying anything higher than 3600mhz ram since I know this was the max (XMP) stability with my 5.2ghz 7700k as well. I wouldn't want to miss out on getting faster ram though if I could but don't know if I want to risk playing the return game. There's basically a negligible difference in price with the 3600-4000 g skill RGB kits these days after the massive memory price hike but I just like to "set it and forget it" for XMP.
> 
> Edit: If that math holds true even the 3600/16 kits are indeed the fastest. I was doing math with all the G skill RGB kits from 3000/14 to 4133/19.


I run my memory(4400MHz CL19) @4200Mhz CL17:



Get the fastest kit you can afford or want to spend and downclock if you have to with tighter timings.

Even the 3200Mhz CL14 kits can get up there in OC. Not sure about 4200Mhz CL17 with sane voltages though.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seyumi*
> 
> Is that math confirmed true? Or has it been proven that 3600/15 is currently the best out there? (I think G skill RGB 3600 only goes to 16 CAS latency so I'm assuming this is manual tweaking) I thought higher mhz ram was always better even with higher CAS latency from all the benchmarks I've seen. I just got a 5.3Ghz 8600k and waiting on the Code/Formula to come out. I'm a bit scared of buying anything higher than 3600mhz ram since I know this was the max (XMP) stability with my 5.2ghz 7700k as well. I wouldn't want to miss out on getting faster ram though if I could but don't know if I want to risk playing the return game. There's basically a negligible difference in price with the 3600-4000 g skill RGB kits these days after the massive memory price hike but I just like to "set it and forget it" for XMP.
> 
> Edit: If that math holds true even the 3600/16 kits are indeed the fastest. I was doing math with all the G skill RGB kits from 3000/14 to 4133/19.
> 
> Edit 2: Actually 3200/14 seems to be better than 3600/16. Shouldn't I just get those instead if I don't plan on manually tweaking?


yes Seyumi. The easy math version I do for pure numbers comparison is the fast 1/x opposite of calcuting the effective access time speed which would be CL15 divided by max running speed dividing by 2 (for double data rate) but those 0.00XX numbers aren't so convenient to remember.

Gskill has a "normal speed" 3600Mhz kit @CL16 and a fast one @CL15. In fact I'm holding it right here in my hands waiting to make my rebuild. Product code F4-3600C15D-16GTZ

The reasoning behind the math is the same simple one it has always been: it's not the max speed that a train reaches to move his cargo, nor the time to load up it's cargo, but the combination of both that will determine how fast it's able to get a cargo from point A to B. (disclaimer: with the exception of specific operations that move large chunks of data in memory unlike standard OS operation or playing games or using apps etc...)

Just as the max transfer speed of your harddrive is never reached during standard windows OS operation because of the thousands of supersmall files that are being accessed. Therefore access time is crucial, more and more as we progress in time. Even official memory symposiums are slowly maturing up to realize that fact which is known well since long by overclockers.

On top of that as you said there is the stability. It's much easier to get [email protected] stable than an equivalent speed [email protected] with an 8700K processor. In fact that latter speed doesn't exist as a standard guaranteed officially speed tested kit, only as extreme manual OC...


----------



## mndx

I'd like to see if u can get the 3600 kit stable by just activating xmp.

On my hero, I need to step down a notch to 3466Mhz, otherwise prime 26.6 is producing errors, whatever voltages i try.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mndx*
> 
> I'd like to see if u can get the 3600 kit stable by just activating xmp.
> 
> On my hero, I need to step down a notch to 3466Mhz, otherwise prime 26.6 is producing errors, whatever voltages i try.


interesting. If my Formula board arrives by tuesday evening I'll let you know as soon I get it up and running


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Time for the rebuild


Damned, last to receive my cpu and now beaten to be first with this board by an Aussie
















J/K mate, gratz ! I'm happy for you


----------



## bl4ckdot

I was able to get a discount on the Formula. It will be ship on monday !


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> W00T W00T Hot flash update for fellow Euro peeps here on Asus Formula X availabity !! The board unexpectedly seems In stock 1 week earlier now in several stores as of just now:
> 
> https://www.heise.de/preisvergleich/asus-rog-maximus-x-formula-90mb0vn0-m0eay0-a1725942.html
> 
> and even in my own country one distributor has them already:
> 
> https://www.centralpoint.be/nl/niet-gecategoriseerd/asus/mb-intel-1151-asus-rog-max-x-formula-atx-d4-3466-usb3-1-sata3-art-90mb0vn0-m0eay0-num-7112895/
> 
> GOGOGO


Why isn't it in North America yet? B&H has it and the CODE on backorder until the 15th, but I actually NEED to build my Coffee Lake PC before then...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> I was able to get a discount on the Formula. It will be ship on monday !


Changed your mind, congrats








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> Damned, last to receive my cpu and now beaten to be first with this board by an Aussie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> J/K mate, gratz ! I'm happy for you


Cheers


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Time for the rebuild


OH MY LORD!


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> OH MY LORD!


Cant complain $699AU 6 months interest free, by the time I sell Maximus VIII Formula/7700K I will break close to even


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Cant complain $699AU 6 months interest free, by the time I sell Maximus VIII Formula/7700K I will break close to even


Congrats bro! I sure hope the Code and the Formula be available soon in the US.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Congrats bro! I sure hope the Code and the Formula be available soon in the US.


Thanks







hope you get your board soon, you have waited long enough







Which 8700K did you keep in the end?


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hope you get your board soon, you have waited long enough


Yes, this is by far the longest wait I've suffered









Btw, I suppose you don't have a way to check what VRM components are being used in the Formula without disassembling the VRM waterblock, do you?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Yes, this is by far the longest wait I've suffered
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Btw, I suppose you don't have a way to check what VRM components are being used in the Formula without disassembling the VRM waterblock, do you?


No not without pulling the water block off, most likely to be the same as Hero X i suspect







even if it isn't the VRM's on Formula have always been solid.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> No not without pulling the water block off, most likely to be the same as Hero X i suspect
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> even if it isn't the VRM's on Formula have always been solid.


Ok. I guess I have to wait for @AlphaC to do his research magic then


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Ok. I guess I have to wait for @AlphaC to do his research magic then


Yeah or perhaps wait for Sin0822 review on Tweaktown


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> I run my memory(4400MHz CL19) @4200Mhz CL17:
> 
> 
> 
> Get the fastest kit you can afford or want to spend and downclock if you have to with tighter timings.
> 
> Even the 3200Mhz CL14 kits can get up there in OC. Not sure about 4200Mhz CL17 with sane voltages though.


Apex is great(these sub-timings







) ... what RTLs is this frequency at ? And can you run Aida64 memory benchmark as on my Asrock i have speed regression over 3800Mhz with 4 modules thru...but...
See write and copy


----------



## Scotty99

Ok so lol, on my asus strix apparently its going up to 1.392v at stock? This is bios defaults on latest bios with xmp enabled and asus MCE disabled. Shouldnt vcore be far lower?

Im not super worried about this btw as my cpu is staying at 70c with a stock cooler, just thought once you disabled asus MCE vcore should drop down into the 1.2 range.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

@DStealth

@ higher speeds:


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> @DStealth
> 
> @ higher speeds:


Nice, that's 7.9ns pretty solid latency to strive for but if it can do that try for 3600MHz @ CAS 14 that would give you 7.7ns latency; faster, although ever so slightly. Run Cinebench R15 and 11.5 to test which gives the best results though (your current settings vs my recommendation). Also, if you could test some games additionally that would make for some nice conversation if you post the screenshots and FPS numbers alongside the Cinebench runs.


----------



## DStealth

4200 c17 is faster in everything on his board and timings...what are you talking about even 3900c14 is hardly reaching this latency while transfer is ~5gb/s less


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> 4200 c17 is faster in everything on his board and timings...what are you talking about even 3900c14 is hardly reaching this latency while transfer is ~5gb/s less


Really easy formula involved to figure this out:

4266MHz / 2 = 2133MHz

1000 / 2133 x 17 = 7.96ns

3600MHz / 2 = 1800MHz

1000 / 1800 x 14 = 7.77ns

Lower is better.


----------



## DStealth

No, no and no. There are so many subtimings and board variables...If only cas and speed matters than all records should be done on 3000-3200 c10/11 but the aren't


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> No, no and no. There are so many subtimings and board variables...If only cas and speed matters than all records should be done on 3000-3200 c10/11 but the aren't


If you want the best gaming performance and other programs overall best performance, it is a balance between CAS Latency and Frequency. The formula you are provided, gives True Latency, therefore is the best variable to consider for memory overclocking and timing tightening:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAS_latency

Obviously not talking about record breaking, but for everyday stability and daily overclocks.


----------



## DStealth

This article give no idea on different chipsets, boards, XMP profile second, third, fourth sub timings and etc...And is way of the reality.
When i have free time will do some benchmarks all the way from 2133 do 4133 and CL from 10 to 15/16 to see how different straps are affecting performance not only frequency and CAS


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> When i have free time will do some benchmarks all the way from 2133 do 4133 and CL from 10 to 15/16 to see how different straps are affecting performance


Awesome, that's pretty much what I asked MrTOOSHORT to do, look forward to seeing your benches.

You plan on testing any games?


----------



## DStealth

Just to give you an idea how wrong this formula is
From the link
2666 cl12 is 9ns
3733 cl17 is 9.11ns
While lower is better here are some results
2666 c12 all set to Auto


3733c17 some subs optimized


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> *snip*


AIDA64 Memory Benchmark is not exactly a valid means of gauging performance for memory speed and timings as it is mainly a bandwidth test.

If you are using the benchmark as a means to show bandwidth, well I can post a Quad Channel DDR4 2133MHz CAS 14 kit that has equal or better bandwidth numbers than your run @ 3733MHz CAS 17. However, we both know, that if you were to benchmark your rig at those settings in games (3733MHz CAS17). Your rig would definitely show better FPS numbers in games than the Quad Channel DDR4 2133 rig. Meaning, exactly what I'm saying; bandwidth is not important in the instances I'm talking about nor the main determining factor of what are the best memory settings for the best overall performance.

Moving along, if you are using their results for comparing latency as a reason for "proving" your point. Well, then, I have bad news for you, as unfortunately, that program uses a different algorithm for calculating such results. If you actually read the Wiki page I provided you with more thoroughly, you would come to realize that well obviously the AIDA64 memory benchmark latency results shows the 3733MHz CAS 17 with better latency than the 2666 CAS 12. This is because the algorithm in AIDA64 is most likely based on testing some sort of variation of the typical First word formula; as you can see that also is the case with the Fourth word or Eighth word formulas (3733MHz CAS 17 memory having better latency than 2666MHz CAS 12 memory); as there are many different ways to calculate various latency variables (1st-8th). The program more than likely, simply takes an average of probably many different variations of the formula and gives an overall averaged result. However, as you can see, as you deviate from First word, it tends to lean more in favor of memory frequency rather than CAS latency as the determining factor for true CAS latency. However, you must know why the First word formula is the most important out of all of them (and why to disregard the rest for the most part):
Quote:


> *The CAS latency can only accurately measure the time to transfer the first word of memory; the time to transfer all eight words depends on the data transfer rate as well. Fortunately, the processor typically does not need to wait for all eight words; the burst is usually sent in critical word first order, and the first critical word can be used by the microprocessor immediately.*


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAS_latency

The formula is; [Nth word = ( (2×CAS latency) + (N−1) ) × Transfer time]:

*Frequency / CAS | Actual Frequency | 1st word | 4th word | 8th word*

DDR4-2666 CAS12 *|* 1333 MHz *|* 9.00 ns *|* 10.13 ns *|* 11.63 ns

DDR4-3733 CAS17 *|* 1866 MHz *|* 9.11 ns *|* 9.91 ns *|* 10.98 ns

Have a great day, and hope this helps visualize what I'm talking about much better.


----------



## encrypted11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> A couple more


Pretty sure you'll see RGB the moment it touches power.


----------



## vMax65

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> Pretty sure you'll see RGB the moment it touches power.


Boy does that look a great motherboard....Love the active watercooling for the VRM's....


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> Pretty sure you'll see RGB the moment it touches power.


Not touching power yet currently leak testing


----------



## vMax65

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Not touching power yet currently leak testing


Jeez, that looks fantastic..Keep us apprised of temps if you can..


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vMax65*
> 
> Jeez, that looks fantastic..Keep us apprised of temps if you can..


Will do,its kinda nice replacing a board 2 generations newer and not having to change any of the tubes, all fitted perfectly. Pulled blocks apart and cleaned them and they were pretty good no growth just a small amount of flux from the rads.


----------



## AlphaC

Amazon went insane.










It should have been $184.99 I think


----------



## kd5151

does newegg price match?


----------



## nanotm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Amazon went insane.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It should have been $184.99 I think


a common thing sellers do when there out of stock is overprice stuff so folks will still put it in the saved for later list waiting for new stock to come in, or at least thats how they do it on the "marketplace" here in the UK, the ******ed thing is some folks will still buy those goods at that price ....


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nanotm*
> 
> a common thing sellers do when there out of stock is overprice stuff so folks will still put it in the saved for later list waiting for new stock to come in, or at least thats how they do it on the "marketplace" here in the UK, the ******ed thing is some folks will still buy those goods at that price ....


Yep, common (ugly) practice.


----------



## nanotm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Yep, common (ugly) practice.


but good buisness sence if your paying per product listing and your forced to relist each time you run out of stock when your not a prime seller.....
not to mention that it helps to tweak the average sales price upwards especially if other online sellers use your listing as a price check item to make sure there maximising profit margins .....

and yeah the cabal pricing system needs ditching as was proven a few years back when half of amazons adaptive price products ended up being listed for a penny.... a price that had to be honoured and cost some sellers millions


----------



## webhito

So, my extreme4 finally arrived yesterday, had it up and running a few hours later, one thing that kind of has me on edge are the stock voltages I am seeing. @stock and auto its over 1.3v, using offset I can only go up to -50mv or it will blue screen on me, temperature wise it seems quite fine, only under full load will it hit around 70c on demanding games.

This is with a D15s and an rx vega 64, the weird part as well as that my heatsink is getting lukewarm at the most, it definitely does not feel as warm as the ryzen or 5820k it used to be on.

What are the stock voltages you fellas have?


----------



## encrypted11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> So, my extreme4 finally arrived yesterday, had it up and running a few hours later, one thing that kind of has me on edge are the stock voltages I am seeing. @stock and auto its over 1.3v, using offset I can only go up to -50mv or it will blue screen on me, temperature wise it seems quite fine, only under full load will it hit around 70c on demanding games.
> 
> This is with a D15s and an rx vega 64, the weird part as well as that my heatsink is getting lukewarm at the most, it definitely does not feel as warm as the ryzen or 5820k it used to be on.
> 
> What are the stock voltages you fellas have?


Check your BIOS revision and use fixed voltage for your initial runs.

It is important to check the amount of VDroop you're getting with the LLC level you're at. It defaults probably with LLC5 (lowest).
The sweetspot for overclocking seems to be level 1 or 2. Anything lower would most definitely result in extreme VDroop from heavy transient loads (e.g. Cinebench R15) that would kill system stability.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> Check your BIOS revision and use fixed voltage for your initial runs.
> 
> It is important to check the amount of VDroop you're getting with the LLC level you're at. It defaults probably with LLC5 (lowest).
> The sweetspot for overclocking seems to be level 1 or 2. Anything lower would most definitely result in extreme VDroop from heavy transient loads (e.g. Cinebench R15) that would kill system stability.


Bios version Is 1.30, I updated it prior to starting anything, LLC is level 1, at some point it was actually on level 5 but I managed to catch it before even entering windows.

Its not unstable, but there is definitely room for improvement. Adaptive voltage is not even available on this board.


----------



## encrypted11

Speedshift / HWP are available as an option but unfortunately it is not a full implementation with fixed or offset voltages.

There are no equivalents of adaptive voltage (stock frequencies run on default vid, when frequency scales to overclocked levels the offsets are applied) on ASUS BIOSes that undervolt to 0.00V on low use or idle unfortunately. I haven't tested my fatal1ty itx on high power yet (mostly sub 110W).
No idea how it'll handle prime fma or some cpu video encoding while overclocked.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> DDR4-2666 CAS12 *|* 1333 MHz *|* 9.00 ns *|* 10.13 ns *|* 11.63 ns
> DDR4-3733 CAS17 *|* 1866 MHz *|* 9.11 ns *|* 9.91 ns *|* 10.98 ns
> Have a great day, and hope this helps visualize what I'm talking about much better.


There's Winrar benchmark with 25% performance increase...leave alone Aida64 algorithms...and 10ns better access while 15+gb/s transfer. This formula is way off and better not use it and just measure the real world performance rather than saying 4266c17 is slow







)
Quote:


> 4266MHz / 2 = 2133MHz
> 
> 1000 / 2133 x 17 = 7.96ns
> 
> 3600MHz / 2 = 1800MHz
> 
> 1000 / 1800 x 14 = 7.77ns


There's no way 3600 even cl12 to catch 4266 even c19


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> *snip*












I was going to respond to this in an appropriate manner, that addresses your horrible troll strawman argument response piece by piece. That again attempts to educate you further on the subject matter, as detailed as possible; as I have been attempting to do with you these past couple of pages.

However, after this response of yours, it is quite clear that you are incredibly hopeless!









Have a good day!


----------



## DStealth

Please educate me how real this formula is.
I benched both 2666c12 and 3733c17 and Winrar indicates 25% better result. This is what told you formula is totally wrong(maybe fine for older platforms and/or not so many variables) and better use real performance numbers. Archive softwares are very sensitive to memory performance and clearly shows the Aida64 numbers are real.
I benchmarked a lot of combinations of DDR4 (X99/X299/Z370) and if the board and IMC can handle 99% of the time higher frequency is better than lower and tightened timings...end of story.
Edit: And better provide some proof for you thesis/formula/Wiki as i did rather than calling me "Troll" or "hopeless"


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Not touching power yet currently leak testing


That was fast! Are you using a the Phanteks EVOLV ATX case too?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> That was fast! Are you using a the Phanteks EVOLV ATX case too?


Yes using the Evolve, more pics in my Gallery.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Yes using the Evolve, more pics in my Gallery.


Oops, sorry I forgot to check your sig. Cool! I have the same case for my next build and hopefully everything pans out as I imagine it when I start building.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Oops, sorry I forgot to check your sig. Cool! I have the same case for my next build and hopefully everything pans out as I imagine it when I start building.


:




Enjoy


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> :
> 
> 
> 
> Enjoy


It's good stuff. Can't wait to get mine !


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> It's good stuff. Can't wait to get mine !


Make sure when you do that you update the UEFI as the one it comes with is buggy to say the least, RGB headers are unable to display red and adaptive voltage doesn't work correctly. Latest UEFI is not on Asus website but is available, so far so good with new UEFI


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Make sure when you do that you update the UEFI as the one it comes with is buggy to say the least, RGB headers are unable to display red and adaptive voltage doesn't work correctly. Latest UEFI is not on Asus website but is available, so far so good with new UEFI


Gotcha. Thanks for the heads up.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Please educate me how real this formula is.
> I benched both 2666c12 and 3733c17 and Winrar indicates 25% better result. This is what told you formula is totally wrong(maybe fine for older platforms and/or not so many variables) and better use real performance numbers. Archive softwares are very sensitive to memory performance and clearly shows the Aida64 numbers are real.
> I benchmarked a lot of combinations of DDR4 (X99/X299/Z370) and if the board and IMC can handle 99% of the time higher frequency is better than lower and tightened timings...end of story.
> Edit: And better provide some proof for you thesis/formula/Wiki as i did rather than calling me "Troll" or "hopeless"


Case latency does not tell the hole story of data retrieval and send.
Quote:


> Because memory modules have multiple internal banks, and data can be output from one during access latency for another, the output pins can be kept 100% busy regardless of the CAS latency through pipelining; the maximum attainable bandwidth is determined solely by the clock speed. Unfortunately, this maximum bandwidth can only be attained if the address of the data to be read is known long enough in advance; if the address of the data being accessed is not predictable, pipeline stalls can occur, resulting in a loss of bandwidth. For a completely unknown memory access (AKA Random access), the relevant latency is the time to close any open row, plus the time to open the desired row, followed by the CAS latency to read data from it. Due to spatial locality, however, it is common to access several words in the same row. In this case, the CAS latency alone determines the elapsed time.


So CAS latency is hard to bench test.


----------



## Neo_Morpheus

I think in games the FPS is higher with faster ram with respectable timings.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Case latency does not tell the hole story of data retrieval and send.
> So CAS latency is hard to bench test.


Yes this what i think. Using formula to determine performance is useless not mention only CL and frequency are only part of the whole story...If Cas was the holly grail we'll still have to use our Winbounds @600cl1.5 as they have 5ns(1000/300*1.5)...no DDR2/3/4 was needed to be invented








Edit: Hah just remembered ICQ chat with the young Shamino giving me courage to push 4V to them







)


----------



## Scotty99

To give people an idea of just how terrible stock cpu coolers are, during my play session of overwatch at some point my 8700k hit 89c lol. This is with max reported power draw under "cpu package power" in hwinfo a mere max of 64w lol.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> To give people an idea of just how terrible stock cpu coolers are, during my play session of overwatch at some point my 8700k hit 89c lol. This is with max reported power draw under "cpu package power" in hwinfo a mere max of 64w lol.


That is why the i7 8700k does not include a stock CPU cooler.


----------



## Scotty99

I mean i cant see them making stock coolers this bad for much longer, even something like wratih spire would be plenty for stock clocked 8700k but their current lineup im pretty sure i could break in half with my bare hands lol.


----------



## stefxyz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Yes this what i think. Using formula to determine performance is useless not mention only CL and frequency are only part of the whole story...If Cas was the holly grail we'll still have to use our Winbounds @600cl1.5 as they have 5ns(1000/300*1.5)...no DDR2/3/4 was needed to be invented
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: Hah just remembered ICQ chat with the young Shamino giving me courage to push 4V to them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


The AIDA64 Memtest is for me still the best RAM and Cache performance indicator. It shows throughput and latency. Then to what counts more I think is dependent on application and I have never really seen proper testing or evidence what is necessary when. Especially latency effects are probably hard to measure. Personally I always try to get a good combination of low latency and throughput.

One think I did notice is that its easy to screw up the results. You put better values and then get worse results sometimes. Mostly a indicator for weakening stability. I am sure many many gamers have instable ram and will will see strange performance hits when its all to ram not being really stable. Just hitting XMP and it boots is just not good enough. ONly after some proper stresstesting with linpack and memtest86+ or similar you can ensure stability.


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> A couple more


Woo-wee, fine looking piece of hardware you have there, sir. Congrats, it's a beauty!









I'm an AMD fan and I realize I'm probably asking for trouble asking this question but looking at the pictures of scracy's new board got me thinking about something: how come Asus doesn't make something like this for the AM4 platform? I'm asking this because I'm genuinely curious, so please don't give me a smart ass answer.

That armor looks so good...


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cpt Phasma*
> 
> Woo-wee, fine looking piece of hardware you have there, sir. Congrats, it's a beauty!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm an AMD fan and I realize I'm probably asking for trouble asking this question but looking at the pictures of scracy's new board got me thinking about something: how come Asus doesn't make something like this for the AM4 platform? I'm asking this because I'm genuinely curious, so please don't give me a smart ass answer.
> 
> That armor looks so good...


I was wondering the same thing. I was a bit sad when I saw the TR / AM4 lineup. Zenith looks good but they could have done more


----------



## kd5151

Because they beefed up the z370 over the z270 remember?


----------



## Koniakki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Foxrun*
> 
> What were some of the tips you followed? Im at 5GHz with 1.35 volts fixed to be stable and would definitely like to lower it!


I wasn't really looking or followed anything specific tbh. I should had clarified that.

What I meant its that I was just looking for some OC scores to compare with clocks/ram similar to mine when in one of the threads I came across I saw my batch number and that's what got me the idea to re-test my cpu.

I went into bios, saved current profile I had just in case, set the bios default again, after that I adjusted a few usual settings I always apply(disable Vt-d, virtualization, multicore enhancement etc), set voltage to manual/fixed 1.25v, set the multiplier to 50(all cores) then booted and started testing if stable.

*Funny note: All 8700k listings above 5GHz are all delidded.


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> I was wondering the same thing. I was a bit sad when I saw the TR / AM4 lineup. Zenith looks good but they could have done more


Yeah, I agree. The Zenith looks good, but I mean...I guess Asus figures something like a Formula or whatever wouldn't sell as well on the AM4 platform or something? I think it's a bit absurd honestly. It would be cool if they made something like the Formula, with the armor and everything, but for the price of the Crosshair VI Hero, or hell, even make the AM4 edition of the Formula that could be priced between the VI Hero and the VI Extreme, I don't know. It's wishful thinking at any rate.


----------



## Foxrun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Koniakki*
> 
> I wasn't really looking or followed anything specific tbh. I should had clarified that.
> 
> What I meant its that I was just looking for some OC scores to compare with clocks/ram similar to mine when in one of the threads I came across I saw my batch number and that's what got me the idea to re-test my cpu.
> 
> I went into bios, saved current profile I had just in case, set the bios default again, after that I adjusted a few usual settings I always apply(disable Vt-d, virtualization, multicore enhancement etc), set voltage to manual/fixed 1.25v, set the multiplier to 50(all cores) then booted and started testing if stable.
> 
> *Funny note: All 8700k listings above 5GHz are all delidded.


I'm at 5GHz now but with 1.355 fixed voltage and my God does it get hot in some tests


----------



## boredgunner

On the subject of ASUS motherboards, the ASUS Rampage VI Extreme X299 is my favorite looking one and I hope they continue making boards like that (aesthetically) for future flagships, like the Maximus X Extreme.

However, one of the things I'm going to miss when leaving behind Ryzen is the I/O connectivity of the ROG Crosshair VI Hero. I rank this above every other motherboard I/O. 8 USB 3.0 ports, 4 USB 2.0 and 2 USB 3.1... and I actually need all of that (save for the type-C). A bit more convenient than using a powered USB hub which I will have to resort to.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> On the subject of ASUS motherboards, the ASUS Rampage VI Extreme X299 is my favorite looking one and I hope they continue making boards like that (aesthetically) for future flagships, like the Maximus X Extreme.
> 
> However, one of the things I'm going to miss when leaving behind Ryzen is the I/O connectivity of the ROG Crosshair VI Hero. I rank this above every other motherboard I/O. 8 USB 3.0 ports, 4 USB 2.0 and 2 USB 3.1... and I actually need all of that (save for the type-C). A bit more convenient than using a powered USB hub which I will have to resort to.


Guessing you decided to jump ship back to Intel? Any particular reason why other than performance?


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pez*
> 
> Guessing you decided to jump ship back to Intel? Any particular reason why other than performance?


Performance is the main thing Intel offers, so that is my first reason. The second is the RAM pickiness of Ryzen, I don't want to buy special RAM just for it (instead I have to downclock mine). With a 5 GHz 8700k I can get the same or better video editing performance, and way better gaming performance (on average it will be at least 40% better using the games I play as the sample study, based on my previous 6700k performance vs my 1700X). Dropping below 120 FPS occasionally in Source games, bad frame rate in a bunch of Unreal Engine games (from UE2 to UE4), not cool. Granted the engines are to blame but that's not gonna change for old depreciated engines.


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> Performance is the main thing Intel offers, so that is my first reason. The second is the RAM pickiness of Ryzen, I don't want to buy special RAM just for it (instead I have to downclock mine). With a 5 GHz 8700k I can get the same or better video editing performance, and way better gaming performance (on average it will be at least 40% better using the games I play as the sample study, based on my previous 6700k performance vs my 1700X). Dropping below 120 FPS occasionally in Source games, bad frame rate in a bunch of Unreal Engine games (from UE2 to UE4), not cool. Granted the engines are to blame but that's not gonna change for old depreciated engines.


Thanks for the input. I just put an order for the same mobo as you currently have and a R7 1700 so that I could give Ryzen a fair shot. I also purchased an ATX Z270 board as well in the case that Ryzen just won't cut it for me. I know you play quite a few older titles, so I'll have to keep an eye out how things run on my end. I was a little more confident in trying it out since I'm using a midway point between 1440p and 4K.


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> On the subject of ASUS motherboards, the ASUS Rampage VI Extreme X299 is my favorite looking one and I hope they continue making boards like that (aesthetically) for future flagships, like the Maximus X Extreme.
> 
> However, one of the things I'm going to miss when leaving behind Ryzen is the *I/O connectivity of the ROG Crosshair VI Hero. I rank this above every other motherboard I/O. 8 USB 3.0 ports, 4 USB 2.0 and 2 USB 3.1... and I actually need all of that (save for the type-C).* A bit more convenient than using a powered USB hub which I will have to resort to.


This is one of the main reasons I chose to go with the Crosshair VI Hero. All those I/O ports. I use a lot of USB devices and there's just not enough on my current setup. I'm always having to unplug something so I can make room for something else. Plus I love the aesthetics and the overkill nature of all the components. It'll last me a good long time for sure.

I'm sorry Ryzen didn't work out for you though


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Was in the exact same boat as you mate.

Had a 1700, CH6 and some 3200 mhz normal ram. Had it for three months until I got a 7800X instead. A few SK-X CPUs after that and here I am waiting on my 8700K to arrive.

The reason for my switch was that the gaming performance was really poor. The difference from even the 7800X and the 1700 (both overclocked) was 25% in both min and avg. fps in Battlefield 1. PUBG went from stuttering to butter smooth. More FPS in CS:GO and GTA, and so on.


----------



## Doubleugee

Hi, yesterday I installled a 8700k delided fron Der8auer. I have it installed on the MSI Godlike mobo. With just a view bios clicks it oc's to 5.3ghz with the corsair h105 aio water cooler. In bf1, with a 1080 it gives me more than 15% extra fps. With my old platform (5820k on Asus x99 deluxe) i hang around 100 fps. Now it is around 120 with peaks to 140's. For me it was worth the investment.

My Two Cents .


----------



## scracy

Making progress


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Making progress


Looking very nice ! I won't be so patient as you once I have received all my gear

ps: My Board has been shipped but still didn't arrive so far...


----------



## pez

Sorry guys; didn't mean to detract from the thread







. Glad to see you guys are enjoying your new toys, though







. Who knows, I may still yet end up with Intel again once z390 drops







.


----------



## czin125

https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8432/corsair-vengeance-lpx-ddr4-4600-16gb-memory-kit-review/index.html
Someone reviewed those 4600 sticks. The heatsink may be holding it back a bit? Even at stock 6700K it had a D5/360mm for that 4500C16 demonstration.


----------



## Asisvenia

I liked 8600K, it beats R7 1800X on the gaming benchmarks and it is cheaper than 1800X also i5 8600K has good handling on the min. frame rates. Congrats, AMD! You have brought real competition.


----------



## crazyfrog1

Ruddy ell!!! What voltage are you running and cooler?
My 8700k is @ 5.1ghz 1.38v. I've played with getting it past 5.1 but it required 1.44v or more and I'm not sure that was stable.
As I'm finding my 8700k to be really bad at transferring heat even with the deid I'll probably be trying an aftermarket IHS when I see a good one and switching from liquid pro to thermal grizzly.


----------



## chaosblade02

I had a $1350 budget, was originally gonna go with I7 8700k + 1070, and ended up going Ryzen 1600x + 1080ti instead. The 1600x was $200, marked below MSRP, when Coffee Lake I5s were sold out, or $50+ above MSRP. There is a $100+ price difference between the 8600k and 1600x at the moment. AM4 motherboards are also cheaper than their Intel Z370 counterparts. Another reason I preferred Ryzen over the I5 Coffee Lake models, was Ryzen with the extra CPU threads will be better for streaming and recording. If you compare the 1600x, which has the same number of cores and threads as the I7 8700k does, the later chip costs over 2x more. About $414 retail at the moment? More if you want to delid, on top of decent z370 boards being a bit more expensive as well? I'm not seeing the value here, at all. Even for a $1500 budget.

I don't know what benchmarks are claiming that coffee lake beats Ryzen by a considerable amount in gaming, but the ones I checked, most of the popular games are within a few frames of each other, with Coffee beating Ryzen by 10-15% in a few games (none of which I happen to play, anyway). It's pretty much a dead heat in all those popular FPS games where people like 120hz+ monitors in. The only way I could see paying extra for Coffee Lake over Ryzen, is if you're running something like a 1080ti on one of those 1080p/200hz monitors. Most of the benchmarks I saw that have Coffee Lake way ahead are 720p benchmarks, higher than 120hz, and nobody actually games at that resolution anymore. CPU requirements for gaming, if anything, are going to go down, not up. Especially with DX12 and Vulkan games. There were some early bios issues with Ryzen as well, and some of the old benchmarks are no longer valid, and it's actually way closer now.


----------



## Scotty99

Coffee lake is basically for MMO's, makes a real noticeable difference in gameplay. Anything else 99% of people will not tell a difference between coffee and ryzen.


----------



## crazyfrog1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chaosblade02*
> 
> I had a $1350 budget, was originally gonna go with I7 8700k + 1070, and ended up going Ryzen 1600x + 1080ti instead. The 1600x was $200, marked below MSRP, when Coffee Lake I5s were sold out, or $50+ above MSRP. There is a $100+ price difference between the 8600k and 1600x at the moment. AM4 motherboards are also cheaper than their Intel Z370 counterparts. Another reason I preferred Ryzen over the I5 Coffee Lake models, was Ryzen with the extra CPU threads will be better for streaming and recording. If you compare the 1600x, which has the same number of cores and threads as the I7 8700k does, the later chip costs over 2x more. About $414 retail at the moment? More if you want to delid, on top of decent z370 boards being a bit more expensive as well? I'm not seeing the value here, at all. Even for a $1500 budget.
> 
> I don't know what benchmarks are claiming that coffee lake beats Ryzen by a considerable amount in gaming, but the ones I checked, most of the popular games are within a few frames of each other, with Coffee beating Ryzen by 10-15% in a few games (none of which I happen to play, anyway). It's pretty much a dead heat in all those popular FPS games where people like 120hz+ monitors in. The only way I could see paying extra for Coffee Lake over Ryzen, is if you're running something like a 1080ti on one of those 1080p/200hz monitors. Most of the benchmarks I saw that have Coffee Lake way ahead are 720p benchmarks, higher than 120hz, and nobody actually games at that resolution anymore. CPU requirements for gaming, if anything, are going to go down, not up. Especially with DX12 and Vulkan games.


Mate don't leave posts like that on an intel thread we're meant to be in a state of fair competition with the fanboys keeping quiet. We don't need things to go back to AMD fanboys claiming FX cpus are fine for gaming lol
That being said my understanding is that at the same clock speed the Ryzen cpus are slightly better than the intel cpus but intels cores max out at 5ghz vs Ryzen at 4ghz. As AMD next lot of cpus are supposed to be built on a better fab that will manage higher speeds I've heard like 4.5ghz I'd say that's the better value platform long term vs intels 9th gen refresh that's going to be 8 core cpus. Hex to octa fore is a bit meh so I'll be skipping that unless the overclocks are significantly higher.


----------



## chaosblade02

Benchmarks:

https://www.pcgamesn.com/intel-core-i7-8700k-review-benchmarks

https://www.techspot.com/review/1505-intel-core-8th-gen-vs-amd-ryzen/page4.html

Coffee isn't that much better than Ryzen for gaming. I was originally overlooking Ryzen and was nearly 100% decided on getting coffee lake, until I saw the benchmarks and was surprised at how close they are in most games.

The important thing to note on the 2nd link is how the gap diminishes @ higher than 1080p resolution. 1440p/120hz, Ryzen is within a very small % of Coffee Lake on most games. We're talking an irrelevant difference here. Most people who buy 1080tis or other high end GPUs, don't game at 1080p resolution. That's a 4k/60hz, 1440p/120hz GPU.


----------



## mouacyk

Spin your partner round n round. Yeeehaw... Let's do it one more time!


----------



## crazyfrog1

Has anyone else read this yet? I was really excited when an asus product manager confirmed z170 could support coffee lake intel doesnt care about the end user so I'm glad certain manufacturers do.
https://wccftech.com/intel-coffee-lake-100-series-motherboard-support/

I've been hoping for some tools to come out to make custom bios files so we can hack in coffee lake support ourselves. I dont necessarily think its a good idea running a hex core in those older boards but 8350k is awesome and so is 6th and 7th gen cpus in z370 boards.

BTW look at how many phases on the mentioned MSI board :0


----------



## Scotty99

Ya intel a scummy bunch lol.


----------



## MaKeN

@scracy
Ive got almost same setup as yours ( watercooling)
Have some questions:
As i see you run from pump to gpu and cpu and rest?am i right?
The fan on the back as exhaust... did you try it as intake?
My build has similarities to yours , ( i plan hard tubing soon)


----------



## encrypted11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Making progress


Good progress.









Did you use the ASUS CPU installation bracket or did you go with the regular way? I found the fit of the plastic bracket of the VIII + Lotes socket to be better than the new bracket + Foxconn socket on the X.

Might be possible that the mold injection point of my bracket wasn't fully removed I guess and caused some issues with the fitting, nothing major since it is an optional tool







.


----------



## kd5151

8700k is $405 on newegg today.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> Good progress.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you use the ASUS CPU installation bracket or did you go with the regular way? I found the fit of the plastic bracket of the VIII + Lotes socket to be better than the new bracket + Foxconn socket on the X.
> 
> Might be possible that the mold injection point of my bracket wasn't fully removed I guess and caused some issues with the fitting, nothing major since it is an optional tool
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Bracket....no chance done this so many times I find the bracket to be a pain in the....







A little more progress


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crazyfrog1*
> 
> Has anyone else read this yet? I was really excited when an asus product manager confirmed z170 could support coffee lake intel doesnt care about the end user so I'm glad certain manufacturers do.
> https://wccftech.com/intel-coffee-lake-100-series-motherboard-support/
> 
> I've been hoping for some tools to come out to make custom bios files so we can hack in coffee lake support ourselves. I dont necessarily think its a good idea running a hex core in those older boards but 8350k is awesome and so is 6th and 7th gen cpus in z370 boards.
> 
> BTW look at how many phases on the mentioned MSI board :0


Unfortunately Intel will never officially support it and neither will the motherboard manufacturers. Even if someone got it to work in a more complete state, you're at the mercy of their personal support and dedication to the project.

This only further proves that Intel pulled a fast one on us.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> A little more progress


PCMark10 common run CB15 and XTU to get scores


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> PCMark10 common run CB15 and XTU to get scores


So a world record isn't good enough







already did XTU and got 2950 without any tweaks, see previous post.


----------



## DStealth

Missed it sorry 2950 is very very good score actually for just 5300 and your crappy memory...seems formula has performance hidden in the sleeve








WR on Pcmark10...with 22 popularity where 6 and 8 positions are 1600x and 1600(AIO) respectively yes great achievement


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Missed it sorry 2950 is very very good score actually for just 5300 and your crappy memory...seems formula has performance hidden in the sleeve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WR on Pcmark10...with 22 popularity where 6 and 8 positions are 1600x and 1600(AIO) respectively yes great achievement


Crappy memory....wow OK!


----------



## DStealth

I mean crappy setting for the run...don't know what you ram is but 3333 16-18-18-36-434 2T is far from good memory OC for XTU run...
To give you an idea for the board performance here's my best run
http://hwbot.org/submission/3718496_dstealth_xtu_core_i7_8700k_2942_marks
5340Mhz + 5150 Cache + 3900 mem cl14-14-14-28-280 2T and very tight additional sub-timings...Asrock seems bad in terms of efficiency. Tomorrow my Maxumus will be here so hope for improvement...biggrin.gif


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> I mean crappy setting for the run...don't know what you ram is but 3333 16-18-18-36-434 2T is far from good memory OC for XTU run...
> To give you an idea for the board performance here's my best run
> http://hwbot.org/submission/3718496_dstealth_xtu_core_i7_8700k_2942_marks
> 5340Mhz + 5150 Cache + 3900 mem cl14-14-14-28-280 2T and very tight additional sub-timings...Asrock seems bad in terms of efficiency. Tomorrow my Maxumus will be here so hope for improvement...


So your score is lower than mine even though my clock speed is lower and my cache is only at 4.8Ghz even with my crappy memory, lol I think that says a lot about how good the Formula really is.


----------



## kmac20

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Bracket....no chance done this so many times I find the bracket to be a pain in the....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A little more progress


Congrats on the WR.

I cant decide if I like your theme or not btw. I like the colors because it reminds me of Hellboy The Golden Army (Red with gold metal). I think maybe its the way the water in those tubes kinda looks like Jello?









Either way congrats.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kmac20*
> 
> Congrats on the WR.
> 
> I cant decide if I like your theme or not btw. I like the colors because it reminds me of Hellboy The Golden Army (Red with gold metal). I think maybe its the way the water in those tubes kinda looks like Jello?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Either way congrats.


Thanks







I went with red as a ROG "traditional" theme, also decided to use EK blood red Cryofuel this time instead of pastel since the EK pastel (Mayhems) is not easily available in Australia, I considered Primochill Vue but at $160AU delivered to my door I felt it was a bit expensive and I want to see some long term usage reviews from other members. Im happy to report after pulling all the blocks apart there was no growth or corrosion in them only a small amount of flux from the radiators


----------



## kmac20

Jayztwocents just did a video about this new fluid he was using, it looked super cool and comes in a lot of colors and it actually REMOVED residue and such that was left in his loop from a previous fluid that left some behind. He stated that the company said its likely it will do that, but that they dont want to guarantee it'll remove and clean lines as it might not 100% of the time.

But check it out the fluid looked really cool and I think it would actually look super dope in your lines there.

I've never done a custom loop so I dont know a ton about it, but I do know that the stuff he showed LOOKED cool and turned out to be more useful long term than just being non corrosive, but in fact did the opposite and removed residue left form before.

But again congrats on the WR thats great. I'm super proud of my Firestrike Extreme being top 15 on furmark for a 1700/1080 combination, so I'm sure you must be thrilled at a WR on HWBOT.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kmac20*
> 
> Jayztwocents just did a video about this new fluid he was using, it looked super cool and comes in a lot of colors and it actually REMOVED residue and such that was left in his loop from a previous fluid that left some behind. He stated that the company said its likely it will do that, but that they dont want to guarantee it'll remove and clean lines as it might not 100% of the time.
> 
> But check it out the fluid looked really cool and I think it would actually look super dope in your lines there.
> 
> I've never done a custom loop so I dont know a ton about it, but I do know that the stuff he showed LOOKED cool and turned out to be more useful long term than just being non corrosive, but in fact did the opposite and removed residue left form before.
> 
> But again congrats on the WR thats great. I'm super proud of my Firestrike Extreme being top 15 on furmark for a 1700/1080 combination, so I'm sure you must be thrilled at a WR on HWBOT.


That Jayz2cents video is Primochill Vue







yeah looks cool but I know from experience how much a pain in the rear pulling blocks and loops apart is







I will wait and see the long term effects. Congrats on your Firestrike score







yeah it is kinda rewarding setting those sorts of scores though I previously had that record with my 7700K only to be beaten several months later, but I got it back


----------



## Kikkomon

Someone tell me if I have the most cherry picked golden cpu ever. From the looks of it, all cores are running at 4700 MHZ at 1.1vcore. On air, no delid, hyper 212 turbo push pull, well ventilated mid-tower case. All these people complaining about bad temps are all probably using my board and not adjusting the voltages accordingly. Z370-E Strix.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kikkomon*
> 
> Someone tell me if I have the most cherry picked golden cpu ever. From the looks of it, all cores are running at 4700 MHZ at 1.1vcore. On air, no delid, hyper 212 turbo push pull, well ventilated mid-tower case. All these people complaining about bad temps are all probably using my board and not adjusting the voltages accordingly. Z370-E Strix.


I have a strix -f, can you show me your ways lol?


----------



## DStealth

Tomorrow my Maxumus will be here so hope for improvement...










Before getting to sleep a quick run on the Maximus...this thing is real beast just out of the box no optimizations or whatever


----------



## Kikkomon

A bit of researched quickly provided me with the answers I sought. IA DC and IA AC set to .01. I did a -.025 offset Asus Multicore enhancement enabled.. There are a few other settings I set but those two things fixed the insane temps and she seems to be running smooth. I've yet to have any instability albeit I haven't run any super hardcore torture tests.


----------



## Scotty99

I figured you did negative offset, i was told to be careful with that tho as idle stability can be a problem.


----------



## Kikkomon

I haven't noticed any hiccups as of yet, I'm also not a pro overclocker and will take any advice anyone has on this subject. Just noticed it's 65 F in the house. Add a few degrees for my low ambient temps.


----------



## Scotty99

What are your idle volts with that .25 offset, mine appears to be .624 at "stock" meaning asus mce disabled, xmp enabled.


----------



## Kikkomon

.3-.7 Just saw it dip to .2


----------



## Kikkomon

I have that EK custom loop from my 2600k setup. So nice that it should bolt right up no mods required. I gotsa double wide 360 rad and a single depth 360 rad. Can't wait to get to it.


----------



## DStealth

Just before going to sleep CB15 242 single core run...so simple


----------



## scracy

Maximus X Formula build finally complete, enjoy


----------



## kmac20

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kikkomon*
> 
> Someone tell me if I have the most cherry picked golden cpu ever. From the looks of it, all cores are running at 4700 MHZ at 1.1vcore. On air, no delid, hyper 212 turbo push pull, well ventilated mid-tower case. All these people complaining about bad temps are all probably using my board and not adjusting the voltages accordingly. Z370-E Strix.


How long have you ran P95 either in smal FFT or blend?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Maximus X Formula build finally complete, enjoy


Ok, now THAT looks AMAZING!


----------



## Kikkomon

https://www.passmark.com/baselines/V9/display.php?id=93501041646


----------



## Kikkomon

Switched up my memory to cl15 ddr4 3000 by EVGA and nice bump in speed from 2400 MHZ


----------



## kmac20

Once again, in case it got lost in the sauce, how long can you run p95 in small FFT or blend?


----------



## Kikkomon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Maximus X Formula build finally complete, enjoy


SO DAMN PRETTY! Come on, give us the total build cost.


----------



## Kikkomon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kmac20*
> 
> Once again, in case it got lost in the sauce, how long can you run p95 in small FFT or blend?


You must have looked over some earlier posts of mine. I stated I had not torture tested my machine yet. Just gaming and so far not a single blip.

I'll DL p95 now and find out.


----------



## kmac20

Sorry I had gotten blinded by that beautiful build honestly and missed it.

Anyway, I personally wouldn't be calling something a golden chip until I had tortured it. That's just my stance though.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kikkomon*
> 
> SO DAMN PRETTY! Come on, give us the total build cost.


Way more than I care to share







lets just say a lot and a lot of time with a few of the mods







A video from prior to upgrade


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kmac20*
> 
> Sorry I had gotten blinded by that beautiful build honestly and missed it.
> 
> Anyway, I personally wouldn't be calling something a golden chip until I had tortured it. That's just my stance though.


Thanks sorry for blinding you


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Maximus X Formula build finally complete, enjoy


Very nice end result !


----------



## profundido

FINALLY, yesterday evening Saint Nicholas brought me my long awaited toy, the Asus Formula X motherboard







This was the only missing piece to rebuild my pc so like any other boy on Saint Nicholasday I started playing with it immediately. Ideal time to drain loop and replace liquid too. With a quick and dirty [email protected] and XMP [email protected] without problems I installed windows in 5 min and copied back my Elder Scrolls Online folder to start testing game perfomance differences. Only ran a quick Prime 95 to verify it's stable and didn't see any cores go higher than 60'ies so all is looking good. Torture testing will be for the next days. Windows update has all drivers for this board already apparently.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mndx*
> 
> I'd like to see if u can get the 3600 kit stable by just activating xmp.
> 
> On my hero, I need to step down a notch to 3466Mhz, otherwise prime 26.6 is producing errors, whatever voltages i try.


hereby confirmed. I had no problems doing it using latest bios 220 which it came with by default


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> hereby confirmed. I had no problems doing it using latest bios 220 which it came with by default


I had Vcore issues using adaptive with 0220 UEFI try 0802 UEFI its much better


----------



## profundido

ah I set manual so i didn't notice anything but I'll keep that in mind .Thx


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> ah I set manual so i didn't notice anything but I'll keep that in mind .Thx


Had to laugh when you said Saint Nicholas day, reminded me of growing up in Holland







anyway you wont find 0802 on Asus website so here is a link to 0802 if you need it







https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?96800-Maximus-X-series-amp-Strix-Z370-UEFI-updates


----------



## scracy

Not too shabby for a couple of 1070s


----------



## mndx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> hereby confirmed. I had no problems doing it using latest bios 220 which it came with by default


thanks for info, guess i need to wait for a more stable hero bios


----------



## kd5151

https://www.computerbase.de/2017-12/intel-core-i7-8700-turbo-takt-oem-pc/


----------



## AlphaC

https://itc.ua/articles/core-i5-2500k-vs-core-i5-8600k-prishlo-li-vremya-novyih-geroev/
i5-2500k vs i5-8600k


----------



## DStealth

This new Asus board is just ridiculous








Except pushing 4 dimms to 4G 1T it pushed the CPU to absurd levels








CB15 1851 [email protected] 1.42v on AIO cooler


----------



## boredgunner

Gonna be setting up my Coffee Lake build (i7 8700k) on Saturday FINALLY. Gonna bench it against my Ryzen 7 1700X primarily in games. I'll post the results here when I have them.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> This new Asus board is just ridiculous
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except pushing 4 dimms to 4G 1T it pushed the CPU to absurd levels
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CB15 1851 [email protected] 1.42v on AIO cooler


ROG for the Win


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> ROG for the Win


Yes this thing is not kidding
Almost 25k FireStrike Physics








https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14363325


New milestone


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Yes this thing is not kidding
> Almost 25k FireStrike Physics
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14363325
> 
> 
> New milestone


Same old story though, you get what you pay for, bought my first ROG board back in the Z97 days and never looked back since


----------



## DStealth

Gonna leave this here AIO cooled HT on... no Optimizations + W10 24/7 OS sub 6min SuperPI run wow


----------



## Foxrun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Gonna leave this here AIO cooled HT on... no Optimizations + W10 24/7 OS sub 6min SuperPI run wow


Holy crap, congrats man. That has to be the best chip Ive seen.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Gonna leave this here AIO cooled HT on... no Optimizations + W10 24/7 OS sub 6min SuperPI run wow


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Gonna leave this here AIO cooled HT on... no Optimizations + W10 24/7 OS sub 6min SuperPI run wow


Sick result indeed and proves the potential of 8700K with the right platform. I think we can officially say that the boundaries FINALLY really have been pushed with this processor.

I did some gaming last night on the new rig and and exactly as hoped/anticipated I'm seeing a net 20% fps increase in my favorite (singlethread-dependent) games. Couldn't be happier !

on my previous platform there was always some stuttering when launching Starcraft and the animations pop up and upon switching to process explorer you would see 1 thread completely bottlenecked. For the first time in history I can run this game 100% stutter free and when I switch to process explorer I see that same thread just reach the absolute top and then slightly drop which means no more bottleneck


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Yes this thing is not kidding
> Almost 25k FireStrike Physics
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14363325
> 
> 
> New milestone


DAMMMMMMMMMMMMN!

My 5960x @4.7 was not able to pull that much.


----------



## DStealth

This board is really screaming 4 dimms 1T almost 4Ghz...Wow


----------



## anonjoe

DStealth , that is crazy awesome chip you got , can you do some single and multi threaded CINEBENCH tests ?


----------



## DStealth

I did 1851 Multi and 241/2 single


Just testing the memory 4 dimms are very difficult to configure on dual channel platform...anyway just closed 4ghz 15-14-14-30-300 1T and 35ns


----------



## kd5151

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/7idbtm/8700k_in_stock_on_newegg_and_theyre_sending_out/

10% off if you live in PA?


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> DAMMMMMMMMMMMMN!
> 
> My 5960x @4.7 was not able to pull that much.


How about this one


25164 Physics










CB15 carnage








1852 Multi 246 single


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Done two hours of RB 2.56V no AVX offset at 5.2 ghz 1.325V or so.

Max temp was 61'C on the cores. This CPU is so cold. :-D


----------



## crazyfrog1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> https://itc.ua/articles/core-i5-2500k-vs-core-i5-8600k-prishlo-li-vremya-novyih-geroev/
> i5-2500k vs i5-8600k


To be fair on the 2500k I've had about over 10 of these and the worst one would only hit 4.7 so I find it hard to believe they can only get 4,5ghz out of it and they've used 1333mhz memory that they may have been running at 1066mhz.


----------



## Neo_Morpheus

removed


----------



## Scotty99

Welp sending my 8700k off to SL for a delid tomorrow since i had to send my 1080ti back for coil whine to newegg lol. What is the average drop you guys have seen, if i get 10-15c ill be happy.


----------



## tw2

I just got my 8700k yesterday. Using the kraken x61 I get 75 degrees C in prime95 at stock 4.3 all cores. Does this sound about right?


----------



## crazyfrog1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> I just got my 8700k yesterday. Using the kraken x61 I get 75 degrees C in prime95 at stock 4.3 all cores. Does this sound about right?


Thats not good!! Seeing as the stock tdp is 95w you shoukd be able to get away with using a basic intel cooler with a copper slug not a x61.

We can go through your setup just tell us
rough temperature in your room
case model
rpm of intake fans and cpu fans.
some pics with your fan orientations

What paste have you used? Are you sure youve applied it properly and havent been lifting and replacing the cooler on the cpu?


----------



## Scotty99

Eh no a stock cooler would thermal throttle in prime 95 easily, i used stock cooler for a few days and it was hitting nearly 90c just in games at stock settings.


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crazyfrog1*
> 
> Thats not good!! Seeing as the stock tdp is 95w you shoukd be able to get away with using a basic intel cooler with a copper slug not a x61.
> 
> We can go through your setup just tell us
> rough temperature in your room
> case model
> rpm of intake fans and cpu fans.
> some pics with your fan orientations
> 
> What paste have you used? Are you sure youve applied it properly and havent been lifting and replacing the cooler on the cpu?


Thanks, H440 case, kraken x61, aorus gaming 5, noctua fans on the kraken, I had them on silent profile 300rpm I think then tried performance profile which didn't make a difference (2000rpm I think). This makes be believe it is an issue of heat getting through the intel TIM to the cooler. I used arctic silver 5 according to their instructions. I am at work but have a couple of pics saved on my phone. Room was about 25-30 degrees C, case has three fans on the front, one exhaust and the two 140mm on the radiator.


And the pigeon poo (I don't think I am especially skilled at this). No lifting, just placed the cooler, twisted it a few degrees in each direction as arctic recommends and tightened down until screws fully done up.


----------



## crazyfrog1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> Thanks, H440 case, kraken x61, aorus gaming 5, noctua fans on the kraken, I had them on silent profile 300rpm I think then tried performance profile which didn't make a difference (2000rpm I think). This makes be believe it is an issue of heat getting through the intel TIM to the cooler. I used arctic silver 5 according to their instructions. I am at work but have a couple of pics saved on my phone. Room was about 25-30 degrees C, case has three fans on the front, one exhaust and the two 140mm on the radiator.
> 
> And the pigeon poo (I don't think I am especially skilled at this). No lifting, just placed the cooler, twisted it a few degrees in each direction as arctic recommends and tightened down until screws fully done up.


You dont have a very good case for that cooler try running with the top cover off and see if that makes a difference as you have very restrictive airflow. Also update bios theres always the chance you have some weird bios version uses too much voltage.

Also monitor your temperatures with realtemp (the gt version in the folder) and make sure you dont have one cooler thats like 20c cooler than the others, If so get that cpu RMAd or delidded if you cba.

Also check your backplate is screwed in properly just take your back panel off and check it out.


----------



## Scotty99

Again you really cant go by TDP on these chips, different boards will send different amounts of volts at "stock" and that will change again when you enable xmp. You dont need to rma your chip those temps are in line with your hardware especially if you have xmp enabled. If your board is only sending 1.25v or less to your chip during a stress test then ya id say that temp is a tad high, but not concerning enough for an rma...


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Again you really cant go by TDP on these chips, different boards will send different amounts of volts at "stock" and that will change again when you enable xmp. You dont need to rma your chip those temps are in line with your hardware especially if you have xmp enabled. If your board is only sending 1.25v or less to your chip during a stress test then ya id say that temp is a tad high, but not concerning enough for an rma...


Yes I have XMP enabled 3200 CL14, that is the only bios change I have made. I will try the comments above and post core temps and voltage tonight. I just wanted to make sure everything is healthy before overclocking.


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crazyfrog1*
> 
> You dont have a very good case for that cooler try running with the top cover off and see if that makes a difference as you have very restrictive airflow. Also update bios theres always the chance you have some weird bios version uses too much voltage.
> 
> Also monitor your temperatures with realtemp (the gt version in the folder) and make sure you dont have one cooler thats like 20c cooler than the others, If so get that cpu RMAd or delidded if you cba.
> 
> Also check your backplate is screwed in properly just take your back panel off and check it out.


Idle is about 37 degrees C in an approx 30 degree room. I started prime with the side cover off and fans on full, got to 72 degrees max after I put the side cover back on. With the top cover off it hovers around 68 degrees. When I put it back on slowly peaking over 70 again. So case could be responsible for 3-4 degrees. The backplate is nice and even and seated through the motherboard.

The cores fluctuate a little but I would say they are almost 100% identical on average. Usually one will be a few degrees cooler for a second and then another.


----------



## Scotty99

Your board is only putting out 1.104v with xmp enabled? Mine gives nearly 1.3 lol.

Ya thats a bit toasty for those voltages.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *crazyfrog1*
> 
> You dont have a very good case for that cooler try running with the top cover off and see if that makes a difference as you have very restrictive airflow. Also update bios theres always the chance you have some weird bios version uses too much voltage.
> 
> Also monitor your temperatures with realtemp (the gt version in the folder) and make sure you dont have one cooler thats like 20c cooler than the others, If so get that cpu RMAd or delidded if you cba.
> 
> Also check your backplate is screwed in properly just take your back panel off and check it out.
> 
> 
> 
> Idle is about 37 degrees C in an approx 30 degree room. I started prime with the side cover off and fans on full, got to 72 degrees max after I put the side cover back on. With the top cover off it hovers around 68 degrees. When I put it back on slowly peaking over 70 again. So case could be responsible for 3-4 degrees. The backplate is nice and even and seated through the motherboard.
> 
> The cores fluctuate a little but I would say they are almost 100% identical on average. Usually one will be a few degrees cooler for a second and then another.
Click to expand...

That is a good temperature for Prime95 v28.10


----------



## Scotty99

Ya its nothing to worry about, just a bit higher than id expect with those voltage levels.

Side note, asus bios team sucks lol.


----------



## tw2

Great to know thanks everyone, I will soon be following the OC guide, only aiming for 4.8 all cores without roasting on Prime.

I still have the original BIOS for this board, there have been two revisions but to be honest I don't know how to update it yet. I have it downloaded the files from gigabyte.


----------



## crazyfrog1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya its nothing to worry about, just a bit higher than id expect with those voltage levels.
> 
> Side note, asus bios team sucks lol.


At only 4.3ghz and stock volts it's a 95w cpu that's high lol


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crazyfrog1*
> 
> At only 4.3ghz and stock volts it's a 95w cpu that's high lol


Sounds like you dont own a 8700k, these are toasty chips. I also have a ryzen 1700, i can push 1.4v into that and its still 20c cooler than a "stock" 8700k.

Again "stock" in quotes because there is no standard, its going to vary by board manufacturer, bios revision, and xmp settings.


----------



## crazyfrog1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Sounds like you dont own a 8700k, these are toasty chips. I also have a ryzen 1700, i can push 1.4v into that and its still 20c cooler than a "stock" 8700k.
> 
> Again "stock" in quotes because there is no standard, its going to vary by board manufacturer, bios revision, and xmp settings.


Lol I do I do
Mine is at 1.375-1.38v at 5.1ghz delidded with a Corsair h110 and hitting anywhere from 70-82c(as I keep messing with my intake fan speeds) in blender bmw.


----------



## Kikkomon

So I decided to pull my 2600k rig apart and use the case and ek supreme custom loop on my 8700k. Heere it is in all it's glory. Note that I did have this giant radiator in the case with my z68 board but I didnt even try with the Z370-e cuz the fancy rbg lights and heatsinks would be in the way for sure. Outside mounted top rad, and I hung the pump to avoid any noise from getting to the case. Needless to say, hanging the pump made it completely in audible. Now I have to check if it's running by feeling the vibes directly. No delid on these temps. Vcore hits max 1.23v but under stress testing seems to hold right around stock volts with a .015 - offset.


----------



## Scotty99

The guy in questions cpu isnt delidded....


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Sounds like you dont own a 8700k, these are toasty chips. I also have a ryzen 1700, i can push 1.4v into that and its still 20c cooler than a "stock" 8700k.
> 
> Again "stock" in quotes because there is no standard, its going to vary by board manufacturer, bios revision, and xmp settings.


Based on what I have seen 8700K is not as toasty as Kaby and doesn't have the same sort of temperature spikes either


----------



## Scotty99

Wouldnt know, never owned kaby. I do know that at stock (on asus strix-f) it runs hotter than a max overclocked ryzen 1700 lol. Paste application quality from intel also probably varies.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Wouldnt know, never owned kaby. I do know that at stock (on asus strix-f) it runs hotter than a max overclocked ryzen 1700 lol. Paste application quality from intel also probably varies.


Im basing my observations on delided CPU's Coffee seems to have the frequency characteristics of Kaby but temperature characteristics more like Skylake


----------



## crazyfrog1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Sounds like you dont own a 8700k, these are toasty chips. I also have a ryzen 1700, i can push 1.4v into that and its still 20c cooler than a "stock" 8700k.
> 
> Again "stock" in quotes because there is no standard, its going to vary by board manufacturer, bios revision, and xmp settings.


Actually why do you have a ryzen cpu when you're viewing a overclock forum and specifically an intel thread.
All the early ryzen 8 cores are binned about the same and from my research the overclock is more to do with the motherboard as far as hitting 4gigs so it's pretty boring .
Good luck with zen 2 I hear it's going to be better at 4+


----------



## Scotty99

Well of course delidded is a whole other ball game, this convo is specifically about nondelidded chips.

Context boys, context.


----------



## tw2

Scotty has an 8700.

Yes my chip is not delidded. Also I used the small fft setting not blender if that makes a difference.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crazyfrog1*
> 
> Actually why do you have a ryzen cpu when you're viewing a overclock forum and specifically an intel thread.
> All the early ryzen 8 cores are binned about the same and from my research the overclock is more to do with the motherboard as far as hitting 4gigs so it's pretty boring .
> Good luck with zen 2 I hear it's going to be better at 4+


The guy who suggested someone rma his cpu because his temps might be a few degrees hotter than expected does not have the time to check my sig.

Yep, enough overclock.net for me today lol.


----------



## crazyfrog1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> The guy who suggested someone rma his cpu because his temps might be a few degrees hotter than expected does not have the time to check my sig.
> 
> Yep, enough overclock.net for me today lol.


I'm on mobile right now lol

And yeah if there's 20degree difference in core temperatures it should be RMAd or delidded as that means paste isn't covering the cpu properly, it makes your fans run much faster and therefore louder than necessary.


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crazyfrog1*
> 
> Actually why do you have a ryzen cpu when you're viewing a overclock forum and specifically an intel thread.


No offense, but there's nothing that says Ryzen owners can't browse an Intel-related thread, or vice versa. Geez.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cpt Phasma*
> 
> No offense, but there's nothing that says Ryzen owners can't browse an Intel-related thread, or vice versa. Geez.


And there's nothing stopping one from owning both.


----------



## Kikkomon

Finalized my OC. core ratio 49,49,48,47,46,45 adaptive voltage +.5 AC IC .01 LLC 5, xmp enabled, vccio 1.0v System Agent 1.0v. EK custom loop with too big radiator, max temps 68C @ 1.23Vcore, speed step enabled. Max voltage spike 1.26Vcore. Prime 95 stable. Asus Strix Z370-E bios 0402. No delid as of yet. Hope this help others with the strix board. Wish I had the MSI instead. I don't like Asus's bios.


----------



## z0ki

My build finally completed after a long wait to see the Formula hit the shelves. Build Log in my sig


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *z0ki*
> 
> 
> 
> My build finally completed after a long wait to see the Formula hit the shelves. Build Log in my sig


Already did very nice build







congrats from a fellow Aussie, finished my Formula X build last week.


----------



## z0ki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Already did very nice build
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> congrats from a fellow Aussie, finished my Formula X build last week.


Love it mate! Very tidy


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *z0ki*
> 
> Love it mate! Very tidy


Cheers







did you find that you had to remove the EK badge from the VRM block? Didn't allow my fitting to sit flush as it was too close to the G1/4 hole


----------



## z0ki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Cheers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> did you find that you had to remove the EK badge from the VRM block? Didn't allow my fitting to sit flush as it was too close to the G1/4 hole


Surprisingly I didn't run into this issue. I just checked it now and it is pretty much flush with it. 12/16mm fittings also.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *z0ki*
> 
> Surprisingly I didn't run into this issue. I just checked it now and it is pretty much flush with it. 12/16mm fittings also.


Mine had a silver EK badge stuck onto the EK badge on the VRM block


----------



## DStealth

Almost


----------



## z0ki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Mine had a silver EK badge stuck onto the EK badge on the VRM block


This one? Lol



Mine was stuck on the little oled panel haha


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *z0ki*
> 
> This one? Lol
> 
> 
> 
> Mine was stuck on the little oled panel haha


Yes that one







mine was stuck on top of the existing engraved EK badge on the VRM block, maybe they realised the error of their ways lol....


----------



## pez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> And there's nothing stopping one from owning both.


I know you just got your build done this past weekend, but have you done your benchmarks yet? My b-die RAM comes in for Ryzen today and I've been benching a bit on it to see how it's fairing against my 7700K build.


----------



## chibi

Got my 24/7 memory clocks dialed in and tested with 1 hour GSAT. Now to wait for my cpu block before I delid and oc the core/cache


----------



## tw2

I must be doing something wrong, I followed the aorus overclock guide to the letter 1.28V at 4800 instant crash, same at 4700. Oh well maybe I will revisit it some other day. I saved the optimal non-overclocked BIOS profile to easily get back to stable each time.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> Got my 24/7 memory clocks dialed in and tested with 1 hour GSAT. Now to wait for my cpu block before I delid and oc the core/cache


Nice numbers for the core and cache speeds.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Nice numbers for the core and cache speeds.


lol, overclock of the year


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Nice numbers for the core and cache speeds.


Thanks man, this 4400C19 kit sure is amazing. My previous 3600C16 couldn't touch these speeds, let alone anything over 3866


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Almost


So 4 dimms are not this slow after all









AIO cooled CPU


----------



## vMax65

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw2*
> 
> I must be doing something wrong, I followed the aorus overclock guide to the letter 1.28V at 4800 instant crash, same at 4700. Oh well maybe I will revisit it some other day. I saved the optimal non-overclocked BIOS profile to easily get back to stable each time.


Have you tried setting the LLC to 'High'? Also set the vcore to 'normal' instead of auto or fixed and then set the Offset to minus 0.030...if that does not work go down to minus 0.025 etc...


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> So 4 dimms are not this slow after all
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AIO cooled CPU


Did you pop the lid on that cpu?


----------



## DStealth

Of course







Hitting 5600+ with the stock IHS sounds like a science fiction


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Of course
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hitting 5600+ with the stock IHS sounds like a science fiction


Haha, I only asked since mine at 5.0 does not go over 75 under benchmark loads, pretty sure avx will make it suffer though. If I do manage to keep mine for more than 6 months I am sure I will get an itch and pop it, but as of now I don't feel its necessary, heck, at 4.0 its pretty darn fast and barely breaks 50c under load.


----------



## kd5151

Pop Lock & drop it

Pop the lid
Lock down the new paste
& don't drop it?


----------



## tw2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vMax65*
> 
> Have you tried setting the LLC to 'High'? Also set the vcore to 'normal' instead of auto or fixed and then set the Offset to minus 0.030...if that does not work go down to minus 0.025 etc...


Thanks for the advice. My one failed attempt with BSOD has actually corrupted windows which I have never had with a failed overclock before so might be a while before I try this again (with windows imaged onto a spare drive this time). I will reinstall and just enjoy it.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Pop Lock & drop it
> 
> Pop the lid
> Lock down the new paste
> & don't drop it?


Sounds about right. I do add an extra step by putting black poop around the edges though.


----------



## GroinShooter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> Pop Lock & drop it
> 
> Pop the lid
> Lock down the new paste
> & don't drop it?


No. Make it fly, it'll be more cool. When I delidded my 6700K using the hammer & vice method I whacked the crap out of that CPU and it flew a few meters into a wall when it popped off. It also got a nice bend on one corner of the PCB. The cold sweat I endured that very minute... Still works great today though.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GroinShooter*
> 
> No. Make it fly, it'll be more cool. When I delidded my 6700K using the hammer & vice method I whacked the crap out of that CPU and it flew a few meters into a wall when it popped off. It also got a nice bend on one corner of the PCB. The cold sweat I endured that very minute... Still works great today though.


I bent mine to the point that the silicon itself shattered, 350 went down the crapper in a matter of seconds. Never again... Got a rockit delid kit and will never do it any other way.


----------



## encrypted11

Almost done.
Gotta work on the ambient lighting and hopefully @fractal-design brings a tempered glass variant of the chassis to market. I'll be moving the build over when that happens.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> Almost done.
> Gotta work on the ambient lighting and hopefully @fractal-design brings a tempered glass variant of the chassis to market. I'll be moving the build over when that happens.


Nicely done, almost looks like stainless steel tubing =).

Sorry, editing skills are horrid lol.


----------



## encrypted11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Nicely done, almost looks like stainless steel tubing =).
> 
> Sorry, editing skills are horrid lol.


Thank you







They're acrylic tubing and the fittings are bitspower 10/12mm fittings. I went for a pretty industrial looking build because I bought the German made Kryographics Pascal Titan X/1080 Ti waterblock and the full metal CPU block.

It surely isn't as glassy and flashy like EK, Primochill, Bitspower and other vendors with a preference for plexiglass but an industrial looking theme with just about no RGB inbuilt is what I'd take.


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Nicely done, almost looks like stainless steel tubing =).
> 
> Sorry, editing skills are horrid lol.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They're acrylic tubing and the fittings are bitspower 10/12mm fittings. I went for a pretty industrial looking build because I bought the German made Kryographics Pascal Titan X/1080 Ti waterblock and the full metal CPU block.
> 
> It surely isn't as glassy and flashy like EK, Primochill, Bitspower and other vendors with a preference for plexiglass but an industrial looking theme with just about no RGB inbuilt is what I'd take.
Click to expand...

Black/white color schemes are very nice. Don't let anyone else tell you otherwise!


----------



## encrypted11

The 1080 Ti FE with the Kryographics on weighed about 3.23lbs







That's within range of a heavier aftermarket 1080 Ti though I'm at about half or up to third of the thickness.


----------



## z0ki

did you find your fittings scratched the tubing? I have a couple of my PETG tubing in my build that have some surface scratches on them from the EK fittings


----------



## encrypted11

Acrylic is much harder but a more brittle material than PETG. The surfaces of PETG may fog a lot easier. Acrylic still does scratch (including microscratches though less often than PETG) where the fittings close sometimes, mostly when you're placing a fitting pretty close to a bend.

But acrylic's a lot harder to cut, you need a scroll saw, coping saw, minisaw or anything similar with a high TPI (probably above 26 tooths per inch) and a fair bit of sanding on the rough edges.

But PETG vs. acrylic is a subjective matter.


----------



## Kikkomon

Sweet Spot. Low Temps, High Speed in games using 2 or less cores, which is like all my games. 4.9 Ghz in WoW makes your frame rate ridiculous.


----------



## GroinShooter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> I bent mine to the point that the silicon itself shattered, 350 went down the crapper in a matter of seconds. Never again... Got a rockit delid kit and will never do it any other way.


Yeah after such mishaps and my personal experience with "home tool" delidding I'm definitely going to delid my 8700K using the 8bauer tool this time around. Whacking/razoring a 400€+ chip isn't so appealing anymore.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GroinShooter*
> 
> Yeah after such mishaps and my personal experience with "home tool" delidding I'm definitely going to delid my 8700K using the 8bauer tool this time around. Whacking/razoring a 400€+ chip isn't so appealing anymore.


With 8700k it's very easy ...
I have 50% only failure rate


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GroinShooter*
> 
> No. Make it fly, it'll be more cool. When I delidded my 6700K using the hammer & vice method I whacked the crap out of that CPU and it flew a few meters into a wall when it popped off. It also got a nice bend on one corner of the PCB. The cold sweat I endured that very minute... Still works great today though.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> I bent mine to the point that the silicon itself shattered, 350 went down the crapper in a matter of seconds. Never again... Got a rockit delid kit and will never do it any other way.


Wow, whenever I'm in the middle of doing this sort of stuff I always have this feeling of being "too risky and irresponsible" and an elevated heartrate, but when I read some of other forum user's personal experiences here I realize that I in fact always work with a maximum of caution, carefulness and preparation !

Now that I come to think of it -despite my ever feeling of being on the verge of breaking stuff- I never broke or damaged any hardware components in the past 20 years of hardware building and maintenance through manual maloperation. You guys make me feel good lol ! =P


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> Wow, whenever I'm in the middle of doing this sort of stuff I always have this feeling of being "too risky and irresponsible" and an elevated heartrate, but when I read some of other forum user's personal experiences here I realize that I in fact always work with a maximum of caution, carefulness and preparation !
> 
> Now that I come to think of it -despite my ever feeling of being on the verge of breaking stuff- I never broke or damaged any hardware components in the past 20 years of hardware building and maintenance through manual maloperation. You guys make me feel good lol ! =P


Hah!

Well, I ruined 2 perfectly good cpu's, a 4770k with the vice and hammer method, however the vice I was using was trash, a small one that sticks to flat surfaces with a suction cup ( yea, not too smart ), and a 3770k with a razor blade, barely hit the pcb but it would no longer post.

Only until the infamous 7700k hit the market I felt the need to delid as temperatures were just insulting at stock, but this time around I had already heard about delid kits so I picked up one of those 3d printed ones and in less than 30 seconds the agony was over with a big "POP" sound. Since then I have done 3 or 4 with no problems. $350 might not be much for some folks, but if a little luck was on your side you could have spent that on something else.


----------



## Kikkomon

I have the Rockit 88 in my amazon cart right now. Thinking hard about doing it. Can someone answer me a question? What is the stock vcore on the I7-8700k running at stock speeds. I know it'll vary from chip to chip but I'm unable to find any information rummaging through the internet. I'm guessing around 1.2v......


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kikkomon*
> 
> I have the Rockit 88 in my amazon cart right now. Thinking hard about doing it. Can someone answer me a question? What is the stock vcore on the I7-8700k running at stock speeds. I know it'll vary from chip to chip but I'm unable to find any information rummaging through the internet. I'm guessing around 1.2v......


And you are more or less right, except it can spike to around 1.3 since it can boost to 4.7 on one core.


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Kikkomon*
> 
> I have the Rockit 88 in my amazon cart right now. Thinking hard about doing it. Can someone answer me a question? What is the stock vcore on the I7-8700k running at stock speeds. I know it'll vary from chip to chip but I'm unable to find any information rummaging through the internet. I'm guessing around 1.2v......
> 
> 
> 
> And you are more or less right, except it can spike to around 1.3 since it can boost to 4.7 on one core.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure if you use, for example, the Asus 'Sync All Cores' BIOS it'll boost to 1.3v in use and delid is highly recommended as well as at least a decent AIO if not custom water.

Mine (I bought a 8700k and an Asus ROG Strix Z370-F motherboard today, be home from work in a few hours to set it all up), will be delidded, Conductunaut, relidded and on it's own 360 RAD with an EK block.

It's an L731Cxxx chip, they never had a L730Cxxx chip but i hopes after i delid it etc. it performs well.

They have a delidding servce here in Toronto for $40 CAD that does the delid, Conductunaut, relid.

I think I'm going to buy my own delidding, relidding tools though as I'm terrified the delidding peeps are binning the chips and will replace my CPU with a poorly performing chip.


----------



## Kikkomon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> I'm pretty sure if you use, for example, the Asus 'Sync All Cores' BIOS it'll boost to 1.3v in use and delid is highly recommended as well as at least a decent AIO if not custom water.
> 
> Mine (I bought a 8700k and an Asus ROG Strix Z370-F motherboard today, be home from work in a few hours to set it all up), will be delidded, Conductunaut, relidded and on it's own 360 RAD with an EK block.
> 
> It's an L731Cxxx chip, they never had a L730Cxxx chip but i hopes after i delid it etc. it performs well.
> 
> They have a delidding servce here in Toronto for $40 CAD that does the delid, Conductunaut, relid.
> 
> I think I'm going to buy my own delidding, relidding tools though as I'm terrified the delidding peeps are binning the chips and will replace my CPU with a poorly performing chip.


OMG I had the same fear. I have a feeling my chip can do much more than I'm asking of it and if they bin it and see it hits say 6 GHZ you think they'll give it back? Isn't there a serial number right on the chip though?


----------



## Kikkomon

I already ordered the conductuant on Amazon. I used an old bottle of Artic Silver 5 on my EK Block and I think I did a crappy job on it. Did the dice method. BTW, when I had the Hyper 212 Turbo air cooler, I had very good temps at 4.7 GHZ all cores. Low 70s in Prime 95 Max Heat. I know for sure I did a great job on that application of thermal grease. I did the center small pea method the 1st go. When I pulled the cooler off most of the grease was on the heatsink and very uniform in appearance. With that cooler you can actually twist the heatsink a bit while its mounted to more evenly spread the goo. Delid and conductuant and I'm sure it'll be as cool as my 2600k. That thing rarely broke 50c on this loop @4.4 GHZ 1.21v speedstep.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kikkomon*
> 
> OMG I had the same fear. I have a feeling my chip can do much more than I'm asking of it and if they bin it and see it hits say 6 GHZ you think they'll give it back? Isn't there a serial number right on the chip though?


Yea, there is a serial number on top of the ihs but not on the pcb, they can just swap it.

Not sure if they would do that however, its unethical and if they got caught they could lose business I guess.


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Yea, there is a serial number on top of the ihs but not on the pcb, they can just swap it.
> 
> Not sure if they would do that however, its unethical and if they got caught they could lose business I guess.


That's incorrect, there should be a qcode on the cpu substrate which you can use to verify your cpu serial number.

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000021613/processors/intel-core-processors.html


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> That's incorrect, there should be a qcode on the cpu substrate which you can use to verify your cpu serial number.
> 
> https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000021613/processors/intel-core-processors.html


Oh nice! Had no idea it had one.


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Yea, there is a serial number on top of the ihs but not on the pcb, they can just swap it.
> 
> Not sure if they would do that however, its unethical and if they got caught they could lose business I guess.
> 
> 
> 
> That's incorrect, there should be a qcode on the cpu substrate which you can use to verify your cpu serial number.
> 
> https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000021613/processors/intel-core-processors.html
Click to expand...

Only code on mine is s four digit code which can't be unique, don't have a long code like on some CPUs


----------



## tw2

Yeah here is your chip back, sorry it only got to 4.8... better luck next time.


----------



## Kikkomon

Wanted to update you guys on the new bios for the Z370-E. Stock bios settings including MCE enabled on the new bios 0605 no longer over volts your cpu. at 1st bootup with the stock bios I saw 1.4 v+. Just a heads up. I'm using MCE atm and it's working flawlessly. Lower temps with vcore around 1.23v 4.7 across all cores without a hiccup on p95. This is all default bios settings.


----------



## jologskyblues

^

Thanks. That update allows me to now enable SpeedShift on my Z370-F board.


----------



## Kikkomon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kikkomon*
> 
> Wanted to update you guys on the new bios for the Z370-E. Stock bios settings including MCE enabled on the new bios 0605 no longer over volts your cpu. at 1st bootup with the stock bios I saw 1.4 v+. Just a heads up. I'm using MCE atm and it's working flawlessly. Lower temps with vcore around 1.23v 4.7 across all cores without a hiccup on p95. This is all default bios settings.


Actually the VCCIO and System agent could still be lowered a bit depending on your overclock. Atm I'm running 4.9 GHZ on 2 cores, 4.8 on 3, 4.7 on 4, and so on. Auto voltage with the new bios at these settings has my vcore around stock maybe a bit less. I see a few small spikes to 1.29vcore but for the most part sits at 1.2vcore on full blast max heat P95 AVX on. Temps 68C max no delid, on older EK custom loop.


----------



## Kikkomon

I wanted to mentions that games with the 4.9 GHZ on 2 cores is just amazingly smooth. 980 G1 @stock clocks, 1380Mhz core, 3506Mhz ram. GTA V is absolutely insane. I'm assuming all you guys running the magical 5 GHZ clock on all cores are loving life right about now. I'm doing what I did with my 2600k and keeping the vcore as low as possible for longevity but still getting the extra grunt from the higher clocks. The 2600k is still running strong as an office computer. It's really nice having an insanely overpowered comp at the office. Adobe Acrobat DC and MS Word really push the system to it's limits. ;-)


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I know i sound like a broken record, but if you want to see a real CPU bound scenario you have to test MMO's. WoW scales nearly perfectly with clock speed, you just need to know what areas of the game to test in (places where there are no variables, but is still CPU bound). An AMD fx chip can barely play WoW, its a stuttery mess. This is in stark contrast to how well fx has aged in titles that are making use of multi cores cpu's, some games fx has even leap frogged sandy bridge.
> 
> Once i finally get my stuff ill post results at 1440p, it will show a clear CPU bottleneck even at that res. (even 8k res would show a cpu bottleneck in most of the areas of the game)


Especially for you @Scotty I have downloaded and installed WOW on my new setup to see what this "new graphics overhaul" since a the last years actually looks like and how it behaves "loadwise" on my new setup. I made a new char in human zone and flew to stormwind with the gryphon, then ran around there between all those other people in the trade district around the bank (really busy area). Stormwind happened to be under attack by the horde at that time apprently so lots of people around me fighting. The whole journey from character creation to hanging around in Stormwind was reported by MSI afterburner as 1 complete flat line of 100fps with the gpu's constantly loaded between 25-30% and one cpu core up to @ 90-95% load max (in stormwind) but not reaching 100%. No dips in the 100 fps flatline anywhere. The whole experience of running around feels perfect, not 1 tear or fps drop to be felt. I guess this is what console games would ideally play like in...10 years ?







Even frametimes were low and constant in the 10ish. I assume there is a way to increase the default maximum of 100fps ? I selected "144hz" in the interface options but still 100fps seems to be the limit reported by afterburner

Settings used:

8700K @5.2Ghz (1.40v)
Monitor [email protected] with gsync enabled
ultra settings (slider to right side)
anti-aliasing enabled (fxaa)
Fullscreen mode
latest geforce drivers
2*TitanXP SLI profilei enabled


----------



## ChaosAD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> I selected "144hz" in the interface options but still 100fps seems to be the limit reported by afterburner


There are two sliders in the gfx settings, one for min and one for max fps. Adjust from there


----------



## Scotty99

Thats awesome @profundido, on the advanced page is where you can adjust the fps limiter. Wow is noticeably smoother even with a stock 8700k compared to ryzen in busy areas.

Also @kikkomon is that with xmp enabled as well? Before i sent my cpu to SL xmp with either asus mce enabled or disabled shot the volts way too high, ill give that a shot when i get my chip later this week. (SL delidded)


----------



## tw2

I have about double fps on grim dawn now compared to my 4690K (4c4t @ 4.2). In very busy scenes it would get down to 26fps in some cases, now just under 50fps with the 8700K. I would like to think this game isn't taxing my 1080ti too much.


----------



## profundido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Thats awesome @profundido, on the advanced page is where you can adjust the fps limiter. Wow is noticeably smoother even with a stock 8700k compared to ryzen in busy areas.
> 
> Also @kikkomon is that with xmp enabled as well? Before i sent my cpu to SL xmp with either asus mce enabled or disabled shot the volts way too high, ill give that a shot when i get my chip later this week. (SL delidded)


I found the sliders for max fps in foreground and respectively background graphics suggested by ChaosAD and yourself. I moved both up to 144fps and did the trade district test again. This time fps dropped to 70-80 lowest with high peaks up to 120fps and 1 singlethread bottlenecked. I didn't see any real visual differences to be honest between before moving the sliders above 100 or after except that now more drops happened and less consistency. Also frametimes were no longer as consistent and fluent now


----------



## encrypted11

-


----------



## Kikkomon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *profundido*
> 
> I found the sliders for max fps in foreground and respectively background graphics suggested by ChaosAD and yourself. I moved both up to 144fps and did the trade district test again. This time fps dropped to 70-80 lowest with high peaks up to 120fps and 1 singlethread bottlenecked. I didn't see any real visual differences to be honest between before moving the sliders above 100 or after except that now more drops happened and less consistency. Also frametimes were no longer as consistent and fluent now


My frames in Dalaran and Stormwind are well over 100 fps all the time with those sliders off. There aren't any dips below that. I usually see between 150-400 fps all the time. Especially in the old zones and arenas. I have a screen shot of 801 FPS on my OC'ed 2600k and this same vid card 980 G1, in Dalaran sewers starting spot. But WoW definitely scales well with CPU speed directly.


----------



## DStealth

This CPU still scales CB15 AIO cooled 1866


----------



## crazyfrog1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> This CPU still scales CB15 AIO cooled 1866


Show us the result and time of a bmw cpu render in blender it prints on screen in the top left corner and is great for testing stability


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Lol - that's obviously not stable.


----------



## crazyfrog1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Hah!
> 
> Well, I ruined 2 perfectly good cpu's, a 4770k with the vice and hammer method, however the vice I was using was trash, a small one that sticks to flat surfaces with a suction cup ( yea, not too smart ), and a 3770k with a razor blade, barely hit the pcb but it would no longer post.
> 
> Only until the infamous 7700k hit the market I felt the need to delid as temperatures were just insulting at stock, but this time around I had already heard about delid kits so I picked up one of those 3d printed ones and in less than 30 seconds the agony was over with a big "POP" sound. Since then I have done 3 or 4 with no problems. $350 might not be much for some folks, but if a little luck was on your side you could have spent that on something else.


Stupid not to with current prices
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32832017581/32832017581.html


----------



## boredgunner

Additional preliminary 1700X (3.7 GHz, 2933 MHz RAM) vs 8700k (5 GHz, 4.5 GHz cache, 3200 MHz RAM same timings) results. Rest of my system specs are in my signature. Mix of old games and new games, very interesting results.

*Arma 3* - 8700k is a 43% improvement
*Call of Duty: United Offensive* - 8700k is a 65% improvement
*Cryostasis Tech Demo w/ GPU PhysX* - 8700k wins by 39% in average frame rate, and it is noteworthy that it wins by 92-93% in minimum frames
*Crysis* - Compiling my results in the three default benchmarks in the benchmark tool together, the 8700k is a 57% improvement
*Day of Infamy* - 8700k is a 37% improvement
*The Talos Principle - DX11* - 8700k is an 8% improvement
*Unreal Engine 4 Infiltrator Demo - DX11* - 8700k is a 26% improvement

Much more to come including videos of all of this and the rest of the games I am testing. 8700k usually kills the 1700X in minimums too. Frame times seem very similar on both so far.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Lol - that's obviously not stable.











Not home right now but have rendered Blender running on it the image is different however ...1.42v set in BIOS and prior adding the 1080ti in this pure Predator AIO loop


----------



## jologskyblues

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> Additional preliminary 1700X (3.7 GHz, 2933 MHz RAM) vs 8700k (5 GHz, 4.5 GHz cache, 3200 MHz RAM same timings) results. Rest of my system specs are in my signature. Mix of old games and new games, very interesting results.
> 
> *Arma 3* - 8700k is a 43% improvement
> *Call of Duty: United Offensive* - 8700k is a 65% improvement
> *Cryostasis Tech Demo w/ GPU PhysX* - 8700k wins by 39% in average frame rate, and it is noteworthy that it wins by 92-93% in minimum frames
> *Crysis* - Compiling my results in the three default benchmarks in the benchmark tool together, the 8700k is a 57% improvement
> *Day of Infamy* - 8700k is a 37% improvement
> *The Talos Principle - DX11* - 8700k is an 8% improvement
> *Unreal Engine 4 Infiltrator Demo - DX11* - 8700k is a 26% improvement
> 
> Much more to come including videos of all of this and the rest of the games I am testing. 8700k usually kills the 1700X in minimums too. Frame times seem very similar on both so far.


At what resolution did you do the tests?


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jologskyblues*
> 
> At what resolution did you do the tests?


2560 x 1440, sorry. I bet you were thinking 720p based on those numbers lol.


----------



## jologskyblues

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> 2560 x 1440, sorry. I bet you were thinking 720p based on those numbers lol.


I was actually thinking 1080p. lol

Anyway, I had an opportunity to test an i5-8400 vs. an 8700K with a very modest all-core overclock to 4.7Ghz in Valley and Heaven at 3440 x 1440. While average and max FPS largely remained the same, the minimums went up significantly so I guess I'm still seeing some benefits going up to an overclocked 8700K at this resolution.


----------



## boredgunner

^ Not surprising. The i5 8400 is damn good for the price though.

I can't help myself and have to post more 8700k vs 1700X results even though I'll be doing a full review in the near future. Continuing from above...

*F.E.A.R. Extraction Point* - 8700k wins in lows/minimums (its min FPS was 26% higher), average is about the same for both
*Half-Life 2: Episode 2 - Fakefactory Cinematic Mod* - 8700k is 36% faster
*Metro 2033 Redux* (CPU PhysX because it actually performs better on both systems) - 8700k is 15% faster
*Metro: Last Light Redux* (CPU PhysX because it actually performs better on both systems) - 8700k is 7% faster
*Rainbow Six 3 Gold* - 8700k is 101% faster and its average FPS is nearly the same as the 1700X's max FPS (172 FPS average for 8700k vs 181 max FPS for 1700X, while the 8700k would often surpass 200 FPS and its max FPS was 470.2)


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> Additional preliminary 1700X (3.7 GHz, 2933 MHz RAM) vs 8700k (5 GHz, 4.5 GHz cache, 3200 MHz RAM same timings) results. Rest of my system specs are in my signature. Mix of old games and new games, very interesting results.
> 
> *Arma 3* - 8700k is a 43% improvement
> *Call of Duty: United Offensive* - 8700k is a 65% improvement
> *Cryostasis Tech Demo w/ GPU PhysX* - 8700k wins by 39% in average frame rate, and it is noteworthy that it wins by 92-93% in minimum frames
> *Crysis* - Compiling my results in the three default benchmarks in the benchmark tool together, the 8700k is a 57% improvement
> *Day of Infamy* - 8700k is a 37% improvement
> *The Talos Principle - DX11* - 8700k is an 8% improvement
> *Unreal Engine 4 Infiltrator Demo - DX11* - 8700k is a 26% improvement
> 
> Much more to come including videos of all of this and the rest of the games I am testing. 8700k usually kills the 1700X in minimums too. Frame times seem very similar on both so far.


Nothing surprising, especially given the relative overclocks and RAM speeds. Four threads aren't going to make a difference, especially in some of the older games you play.


----------



## svenge

As much as it may be sacrilegious to suggest this on OCN, but I think that an i5-8400 + H370 motherboard + GTX 2060 will be the go-to configuration of choice in mid-2018 _for the purpose of building "plug and play" gaming rigs for end users not interested in tweaking settings_ based on these reasons:



*i5-8400*: 6 cores with excellent IPC and reasonable clock speeds when using its default turbo profile. The MSRP of $185 is actually rather wallet-friendly for what you get.
*H370*: Sufficient for a stock-clocked rig due to native DDR4-2666 support, also no need for having two PCIe x8 slots since only a single GPU would be used (and SLI is mostly dead anyhow).
*GTX-2060*: Assuming current generational trends hold, it should perform on par with a GTX 1070 while costing less; also NVIDIA's GPU Boost makes manually OC'ing much less necessary due to diminishing returns.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> As much as it may be sacrilegious to suggest this on OCN, but I think that an i5-8400 + H370 motherboard + GTX 2060 will be the go-to configuration of choice in mid-2018 _for the purpose of building "plug and play" gaming rigs for end users not interested in tweaking settings_ based on these reasons:
> 
> 
> 
> *i5-8400*: 6 cores with excellent IPC and reasonable clock speeds when using its default turbo profile. The MSRP of $185 is actually rather wallet-friendly for what you get.
> *H370*: Sufficient for a stock-clocked rig due to native DDR4-2666 support, also no need for having two PCIe x8 slots since only a single GPU would be used (and SLI is mostly dead anyhow).
> *GTX-2060*: Assuming current generational trends hold, it should perform on par with a GTX 1070 while costing less; also NVIDIA's GPU Boost makes manually OC'ing much less necessary due to diminishing returns.


The GTX 2060 should match the 1080 like how the 1060 match the 980.

A minimum of 1070 Ti should be expected at least.


----------



## Scotty99

I dont think were gonna have the sort of leap there was with the 10 series, 60 series matching 80 series was the exception not the rule.


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> As much as it may be sacrilegious to suggest this on OCN, but I think that an i5-8400 + H370 motherboard + GTX 2060 will be the go-to configuration of choice in mid-2018 _for the purpose of building "plug and play" gaming rigs for end users not interested in tweaking settings_ based on these reasons:
> 
> 
> 
> *i5-8400*: 6 cores with excellent IPC and reasonable clock speeds when using its default turbo profile. The MSRP of $185 is actually rather wallet-friendly for what you get.
> *H370*: Sufficient for a stock-clocked rig due to native DDR4-2666 support, also no need for having two PCIe x8 slots since only a single GPU would be used (and SLI is mostly dead anyhow).
> *GTX-2060*: Assuming current generational trends hold, it should perform on par with a GTX 1070 while costing less; also NVIDIA's GPU Boost makes manually OC'ing much less necessary due to diminishing returns.


It's a safe bet. I think the GTX 1060 is one of the most popular cards according to the Steam hardware surveys this year (it has held the top spot though now I am seeing GTX 750 Ti lol), so there's a good chance the next gen one will be the same. As of November, Intel is 92-8 over AMD on Steam, which is insane (opposed to 80-20 in July). Lower end Core i5's are always the most used CPUs by Steam users.


----------



## Kikkomon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kikkomon*
> 
> Someone tell me if I have the most cherry picked golden cpu ever. From the looks of it, all cores are running at 4700 MHZ at 1.1vcore. On air, no delid, hyper 212 turbo push pull, well ventilated mid-tower case. All these people complaining about bad temps are all probably using my board and not adjusting the voltages accordingly. Z370-E Strix.


So uh, EK Supremacy Evo water block's flow need to enter through the center port. I had it in reverse. Temps dropped considerably. Didn't think this small change would make such a big difference. Idle temps are down between 6-8C. Load temps are down atleast 8C. Hope someone finds this info useful. I kept thinking my TIM application was suboptimal. I'm now using Cool Labs Liquid Ultra between the IHS and the EK block. I think it's now time to push the system past 5 GHZ. Should be ez mode. 47C with AVX on system fully warmed up. No delid. Now it's back down to my OC'ed 2600k temps. If delid removed 10 C from max i'd be almost at ambient....


----------



## Dragonsyph

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kikkomon*
> 
> So uh, EK Supremacy Evo water block's flow need to enter through the center port. I had it in reverse. Temps dropped considerably. Didn't think this small change would make such a big difference. Idle temps are down between 6-8C. Load temps are down atleast 8C. Hope someone finds this info useful. I kept thinking my TIM application was suboptimal. I'm now using Cool Labs Liquid Ultra between the IHS and the EK block. I think it's now time to push the system past 5 GHZ. Should be ez mode. 47C with AVX on system fully warmed up. No delid. Now it's back down to my OC'ed 2600k temps. If delid removed 10 C from max i'd be almost at ambient....


That's pretty awesome and I bet you're glad you caught that and fixed it. Those temps seem pretty good. Right now just playing Assasins creed Origins my 4790k at 5ghz is at 90-100% CPU usage running at a whopping 70-85C all day HAHAHAHA. I just don't give two craps anymore, let it BURN. I'm surprised I haven't had any BSOD yet. I'm seeing it go up to 1.41V but hay who gives a crap as long as it's not BSOD. Still using an h100i that's so old, got it when they came out.

Saving up right now for an 8700k upgrade. The ddr4 prices are ******ed, same kits u could get for like 90 dollars last year are around 250 right now. LIKE W T F>..

8700k, 16gb 3400, and a 160 dollar motherboard and maybe a new cooler like the 115i or something, im looking at almost 900 dollars.


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> I think the GTX 1060 is one of the most popular cards according to the Steam hardware surveys this year (it has held the top spot though now I am seeing GTX 750 Ti lol), so there's a good chance the next gen one will be the same. As of November, Intel is 92-8 over AMD on Steam, which is insane (opposed to 80-20 in July).


One thing to note about the Steam Survey is that the last 3 months have reflected a major shift in the player pool, in that mainland China has gotten into the PUBG craze in a major way. Seeing that the early access stage of PUBG was only on Steam led to tons of Chinese net cafes who hadn't used Steam before (and thus would go unnoticed in the Hardware Survey) had no choice but to do so in order to meet customers' expectations.

This means that the changes in CPU/GPU percentages shown since August can be explained by these two key points:


NVIDIA's x50 / x50Ti / x60 cards from the last 3 generations (Kepler, Maxwell, and Pascal) are exceedingly popular in China due to their low price, decent 1080p performance, and perhaps most importantly power efficiency. When you're paying power bills for 10+ GPUs, electricity cost is a big deal. AMD's competing cards in that performance range have simply not been able to keep up in that regard for years on end now.
The sharp spike of Intel CPUs in the 3.0 - 3.29 GHz range would indicate that locked i5 chips are also the product of choice in China, which can be explained by their ability to deliver acceptable performance / frame-times for 1080p in conjunction with a x50 / x60 GPU, and also relatively low power consumption. Before 2017's Ryzen all AMD had to offer were their Bulldozer/Piledriver CPUs, which were notorious for abysmal single-threaded performance and exceedingly poor power efficiency, and thus weren't justifiable to purchase instead of i5 CPUs despite a lower up-front purchase price.
Now if you ask me if these changes makes the newer Steam Surveys more accurate or less accurate, I'd say it's more accurate because it reflects part of the world that was previously under-represented and thus becomes closer to the _actual ratio_ of CPU/GPU usage in the entire world as a whole . That said, you really can't compare results from August 2017 and later to the results generated from previous surveys, as the underlying player pool being surveyed has changed much more drastically that what a standard monthly poll aimed at a single static location (city, region, or country) would typically feature.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svenge*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> I think the GTX 1060 is one of the most popular cards according to the Steam hardware surveys this year (it has held the top spot though now I am seeing GTX 750 Ti lol), so there's a good chance the next gen one will be the same. As of November, Intel is 92-8 over AMD on Steam, which is insane (opposed to 80-20 in July).
> 
> 
> 
> One thing to note about the Steam Survey is that the last 3 months have reflected a major shift in the player pool, in that mainland China has gotten into the PUBG craze in a major way. Seeing that the early access stage of PUBG was only on Steam led to tons of Chinese net cafes who hadn't used Steam before (and thus would go unnoticed in the Hardware Survey) had no choice but to do so in order to meet customers' expectations.
> 
> This means that the changes in CPU/GPU percentages shown since August can be explained by these two key points:
> 
> 
> NVIDIA's x50 / x50Ti / x60 cards from the last 3 generations (Kepler, Maxwell, and Pascal) are exceedingly popular in China due to their low price, decent 1080p performance, and perhaps most importantly power efficiency. When you're paying power bills for 10+ GPUs, electricity cost is a big deal. AMD's competing cards in that performance range have simply not been able to keep up in that regard for years on end now.
> The sharp spike of Intel CPUs in the 3.0 - 3.29 GHz range would indicate that locked i5 chips are also the product of choice in China, which can be explained by their ability to deliver acceptable performance / frame-times for 1080p in conjunction with a x50 / x60 GPU, and also relatively low power consumption. Before 2017's Ryzen all AMD had to offer were their Bulldozer/Piledriver CPUs, which were notorious for abysmal single-threaded performance and exceedingly poor power efficiency, and thus weren't justifiable to purchase instead of i5 CPUs despite a lower up-front purchase price.
> Now if you ask me if these changes makes the newer Steam Surveys more accurate or less accurate, I'd say it's more accurate because it reflects part of the world that was previously under-represented and thus becomes closer to the _actual ratio_ of CPU/GPU usage in the entire world as a whole . That said, you really can't compare results from August 2017 and later to the results generated from previous surveys, as the underlying player pool being surveyed has changed much more drastically that what a standard monthly poll aimed at a single static location (city, region, or country) would typically feature.
Click to expand...

Where are you getting the China statistics?


----------



## svenge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Where are you getting the China statistics?


I will readily admit that I have no hard data, only inference and logic. But if you have an alternate explanation as to why Steam's Survey (which previously had very minimal changes from month) has had its population results change so drastically in the last 4 months, I'm all ears.


----------



## DStealth

Just realized my CPU can run 5300+ Cache


----------



## boredgunner

Let's bump this thread with some interesting i7 8700k benchmarks I've made. Rest of the system specs are in my sig rig except 32GB of DDR4 3200 was used (and it was only running at 2933 on Ryzen because Ryzen). Resolution for game tests is 2560 x 1440.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## chispy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> Let's bump this thread with some interesting i7 8700k benchmarks I've made. Rest of the system specs are in my sig rig except 32GB of DDR4 3200 was used (and it was only running at 2933 on Ryzen because Ryzen). Resolution for game tests is 2560 x 1440.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


This benchmarks were done after the Meltdown windows patch and Bios update or before ?


----------



## boredgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chispy*
> 
> This benchmarks were done after the Meltdown windows patch and Bios update or before ?


No BIOS update but Windows 10 meltdown patch was applied only for the 8700k. Except for some of the earlier game tests like Arma 3, Crysis, CoD, and the Source games.


----------



## chispy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> No BIOS update but Windows 10 meltdown patch was applied only for the 8700k. Except for some of the earlier game tests like Arma 3, Crysis, CoD, and the Source games.


Thanks for the update







, great set of benchmarks.


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chispy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *boredgunner*
> 
> Let's bump this thread with some interesting i7 8700k benchmarks I've made. Rest of the system specs are in my sig rig except 32GB of DDR4 3200 was used (and it was only running at 2933 on Ryzen because Ryzen). Resolution for game tests is 2560 x 1440.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This benchmarks were done after the Meltdown windows patch and Bios update or before ?
Click to expand...

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/windows_vulnerability_cpu_meltdown_patch_benchmarked,2.html

Not as bad as they say. 2% reduction in benches.


----------



## nanotm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/windows_vulnerability_cpu_meltdown_patch_benchmarked,2.html
> 
> Not as bad as they say. 2% reduction in benches.


well it will be interesting to see the results once they do them with the meltdown patch bios and microcode updates in place amazing that they pushed those tests out on the 4th of January before either the bios or microcode updates started to get released and yet have failed to produce them again in the days since those updates started to be made available... will be even more fun to see them do the same set of results once they are in receipt of an update for the IME security hole... a hole that intel acknowledged existed publicly (after its 90day period was expired) in july 2017 and still havent pushed out the awaited "fix" for it.....

they need a few more major problems they need to fix as well all of which they are refusing to release because it will literally cripple their cpu's


----------



## sblantipodi

is there a comparison between an 8700K and a 5820K-5930K in gaming at 1080P, 2K and 4K?


----------



## AlphaC

Confirmed:
Core i5-8600
Core i5-8500
Core i3-8300
Pentium Gold G5600
Pentium Gold G5500

https://www.anandtech.com/show/12392/intel-adds-new-cfl-cpus-to-database

It's semi-official: i5 8650k.

i5-8600k better drop in price.


----------



## kd5151

https://www.anandtech.com/show/12392/intel-adds-new-cfl-cpus-to-database


----------



## svenge

I'm interested in seeing what the 8500 and the 8600 (non-K) have in terms of base clock, as the 8400's 2.8GHz is a little pokey. That, and I'd like to see some B- and H-chipset motherboards sometime before the 9th Generation Core chips come out...


----------



## kd5151

sblantipodi said:


> is there a comparison between an 8700K and a 5820K-5930K in gaming at 1080P, 2K and 4K?


https://www.techspot.com/review/1558-core-i7-5820k-test-in-2018/


----------



## wingman99

kd5151 said:


> https://www.techspot.com/review/1558-core-i7-5820k-test-in-2018/


Thanks for the link.


----------



## camry racing

svenge said:


> I'm interested in seeing what the 8500 and the 8600 (non-K) have in terms of base clock, as the 8400's 2.8GHz is a little pokey. That, and I'd like to see some B- and H-chipset motherboards sometime before the 9th Generation Core chips come out...


I'm really more interested in the release of the 8700T that would be great to upgrade my unraidbox low power consumption and good speed


----------



## Scotty99

What is an 8650k lol? Higher clocked 8600k? Or are they pulling a 2550k scenario again, where they pull the internal graphics chip.


----------



## sblantipodi

kd5151 said:


> https://www.techspot.com/review/1558-core-i7-5820k-test-in-2018/


it seems that there is no real sense in upgrading just for gaming


----------



## ViTosS

DStealth said:


> Just realized my CPU can run 5300+ Cache


Do you recommend using the old BIOS instead of 1003 (latest one)?


----------



## DStealth

The post you quoted is from dec 2017 there was no 1003 ...But from my experience with the new one can recommend 0802 over 1003 for better memory OC stability and overall performance


----------



## ViTosS

DStealth said:


> The post you quoted is from dec 2017 there was no 1003 ...But from my experience with the new one can recommend 0802 over 1003 for better memory OC stability and overall performance


Yeah I only noticed that after I posted, but do you think the 1003 is worse than the 0802 because there was a micro-code patch for Intel Spectre and Meltdown in 1003?


----------



## zGunBLADEz

wrong topic the hell happen here


----------

