8 core version of 8700k is coming this Fall!

[jpiniero]

I think you are going to be very disappointed in the gaming perf difference between it and the 8700K. Maybe there is something Intel can do to spice things up but don't count on it.

 

[epsilon84]

I think you are going to be very disappointed in the gaming perf difference between it and the 8700K. Maybe there is something Intel can do to spice things up but don't count on it.

Assuming this will be a Coffee Lake chip based on the ringbus interconnect, how is the gaming performance going to be very disappointing?

Only way that could be the case is if this is a Skylake X based chip, which seems unlikely.

 

[arandomguy]

Assuming this will be a Coffee Lake chip based on the ringbus interconnect, how is the gaming performance going to be very disappointing?

Only way that could be the case is if this is a Skylake X based chip, which seems unlikely.

Gains over the 8700k in pure gaming likely won't be significant as the work load simply doesn't scale that well as we reach higher into the core count. Just look at 2700x vs 2600x numbers.

Even the 8700k vs 7700k had pretty limited gains relative to how much more hardware resources was added and that was going from 4 - 8 cores with in theory 50% more total throughput. 6 - 8 would be further up into the diminishing returns scale and only 33% more.

 

[CakeMonster]

Is there reason to expect different IPC at all?

What I would want to know is whether it can do 5GHz easily, because my 8700K at 5GHz is preferable if it can't.

 

[StinkyPinky]

Gains over the 8700k in pure gaming likely won't be significant as the work load simply doesn't scale that well as we reach higher into the core count. Just look at 2700x vs 2600x numbers.

Even the 8700k vs 7700k had pretty limited gains relative to how much more hardware resources was added and that was going from 4 - 8 cores with in theory 50% more total throughput. 6 - 8 would be further up into the diminishing returns scale and only 33% more.

Some games had definite gains rom the 7700k to 8700k though. Witcher 3 being one.

Anyway, the real benefit of the 8 core intel part is it should maintain the gaming strength of the 8700k and probably better the 2700x in multi tasking performance.

 

[moinmoin]

What if the Sceptre/Meltdown fix means a gimped performance?

It already means that. And Intel will want to avoid the situation that the hardware fix has a higher performance penalty than the software fix.

 

[VirtualLarry]

What I would want to know is whether it can do 5GHz easily, because my 8700K at 5GHz is preferable if it can't.

That's a really good point. What will Intel and their customers do, if the 8700K and 8086K can clock to 5.0Ghz+ (all-core, six cores), and a theoretical 8-core 9700K only can clock to 4.7Ghz all-core?

At that point, it would be quite a decision for some people.

 

[moonbogg]

That's a really good point. What will Intel and their customers do, if the 8700K and 8086K can clock to 5.0Ghz+ (all-core, six cores), and a theoretical 8-core 9700K only can clock to 4.7Ghz all-core?

At that point, it would be quite a decision for some people.

I'd go with the 8 core in that case A few hundred Mhz doesn't mean squat, but 2 more cores I can't use means a legit forum sig = win (no punctuation 'cause I'm a rebel)

 

[StinkyPinky]

You can probably tweak the bios settings to have it turbo 6 cores to 5Ghz anyway, and then drop 8 to 4.7. Most bios' support that.

 

[SPBHM]

more cores, 2015 IPC...
times have changed!

Some games had definite gains rom the 7700k to 8700k though. Witcher 3 being one.

Anyway, the real benefit of the 8 core intel part is it should maintain the gaming strength of the 8700k and probably better the 2700x in multi tasking performance.

witcher 3 runs extremely well on the 7700K, like well over 100FPS on the worst spots
with realistic settings most people will be GPU limited way before that.

but yes, 8 cores "8700k" achieves beating the 2700x in everything, which is probably what they want.

 

[scannall]

more cores, 2015 IPC...
times have changed!



witcher 3 runs extremely well on the 7700K, like well over 100FPS on the worst spots
with realistic settings most people will be GPU limited way before that.

but yes, 8 cores "8700k" achieves beating the 2700x in everything, which is probably what they want.

Everything except price that is. ;-) It won't be cheap.

 

[epsilon84]

Gains over the 8700k in pure gaming likely won't be significant as the work load simply doesn't scale that well as we reach higher into the core count. Just look at 2700x vs 2600x numbers.

Even the 8700k vs 7700k had pretty limited gains relative to how much more hardware resources was added and that was going from 4 - 8 cores with in theory 50% more total throughput. 6 - 8 would be further up into the diminishing returns scale and only 33% more.

I never asked about gains, I was asking how it would be 'very disappointing' against the 8700K. On that basis the 8700K gaming is 'disappointing' too if you compare it to a 7700K. On average the gains are less than 5% going from 4C/8T to 6C/12T. Lack of scaling in gaming between 6 to 8 cores is the expectation, as you said yourself, look at a 2600X vs 2700X, so unless there is serious performance degradation, which would only really be possible if this was a SKL-X derivative, I don't see how gaming could be considered a disappointment on a '9700K'. It would match or slightly exceed a 8700K at the same clocks, which would, in essence, make it the 'fastest gaming CPU' purely from the handful of games that actually show scaling between 6 and 8 cores.

 

[Arachnotronic]

That's a really good point. What will Intel and their customers do, if the 8700K and 8086K can clock to 5.0Ghz+ (all-core, six cores), and a theoretical 8-core 9700K only can clock to 4.7Ghz all-core?

At that point, it would be quite a decision for some people.

This is the same argument people were saying before the 8700K came out. "Oh, it won't clock as well as the 7700K." That turned out to be an unfounded fear.

 

[rbk123]

Everything except price that is. ;-) It won't be cheap.

It might not be horrible, otherwise sales, except from the true diehards, won't be as high due to Ryzen value. Also, if it's not horrible, it should then lead to Ryzen becoming cheaper. Pretty much win-win for both camps.

 

[TheGiant]

I never asked about gains, I was asking how it would be 'very disappointing' against the 8700K. On that basis the 8700K gaming is 'disappointing' too if you compare it to a 7700K. On average the gains are less than 5% going from 4C/8T to 6C/12T. Lack of scaling in gaming between 6 to 8 cores is the expectation, as you said yourself, look at a 2600X vs 2700X, so unless there is serious performance degradation, which would only really be possible if this was a SKL-X derivative, I don't see how gaming could be considered a disappointment on a '9700K'. It would match or slightly exceed a 8700K at the same clocks, which would, in essence, make it the 'fastest gaming CPU' purely from the handful of games that actually show scaling between 6 and 8 cores.

Imo the difference is the low 1% !

I expected from profi HW webs a test of scaling of the absolutely high frametimes /low FPS 0,01%,0,1%,1%,5% and the test of memory frequency and especially latency (we know ryzen is well dependend on latency but CFL ?) and of the CPU frequency scaling

But there comes the smoothness. Even my i5-6600K can be smooth 98% of the time....

 

[Dayman1225]

8 Core Xeon E spotted on Intel's 8th Gen Technical Libraries

and as per PCWatch. 8c CFL comes in the form of Xeon E first in July, consumers later get it in september

Almost confirmedly, the 8 core version "Coffee Lake Refresh" will be launched in September in LGA 1151 for consumer 's main stream.[...] However, this Coffee Lake Refresh is expected to be deployed in the Xeon E series in July before being introduced to consumers

 

[LightningZ71]

I would expect that as Intel continues to work with the 14nm process that they can tweak things to continue to improve their products that are manufactured on it. I won't be surprised if the 8 core CFL can sustain 5Ghz all core turbo with the usual tweaks. What will be something to watch is how much power it's using to get there and how much heat has to be sinked away. As we've seen in the past, so long as it sticks to a single ring, the ring bus doesn't really slow things down much, up to near it's limit of devices. It will likely have a significant performance lead over the 2700x at release, and I'm not so sure that a ZEN2 based third generation Ryzen with 8 cores will be able to match or beat it on per-core performance and total MP throughput (though it may beat it in other metrics).

 

[arandomguy]

I never asked about gains, I was asking how it would be 'very disappointing' against the 8700K. On that basis the 8700K gaming is 'disappointing' too if you compare it to a 7700K. On average the gains are less than 5% going from 4C/8T to 6C/12T. Lack of scaling in gaming between 6 to 8 cores is the expectation, as you said yourself, look at a 2600X vs 2700X, so unless there is serious performance degradation, which would only really be possible if this was a SKL-X derivative, I don't see how gaming could be considered a disappointment on a '9700K'. It would match or slightly exceed a 8700K at the same clocks, which would, in essence, make it the 'fastest gaming CPU' purely from the handful of games that actually show scaling between 6 and 8 cores.

Quote you were originally replying to was specifically in the context of performance difference versus the 8700k, as in disappointed by the performance improvement or lack thereof.

I think you are going to be very disappointed in the gaming perf difference between it and the 8700K. Maybe there is something Intel can do to spice things up but don't count on it.

 

[epsilon84]

Quote you were originally replying to was specifically in the context of performance difference versus the 8700k, as in disappointed by the performance improvement or lack thereof.

Yes indeed, fair point, I was replying on my phone at the time and may have read that in the wrong context

I think anyone who expects 6C to 8C will bring any noticeable gains for gaming will need to temper their expectations, as you said, the 2600X/2700X differences will highlight how little the gains will be, pretty much low single figure %.

Would be a great streaming CPU though, the 2700X is great at that and a 9700K would further improve smoothness in this area I feel.

 

[LTC8K6]

Perhaps the 4mb L3 cache boost will give the 9700K a little edge over the 8700K?

 

[Dayman1225]

https://twitter.com/VideoCardz/status/1009414877067272192?s=19

Apparently here is a Cinebench score (obviously not stock)

 

[coercitiv]

Apparently here is a Cinebench score (obviously not stock)

What turbo bin is 7900X running at for all-core non-avx loads?

 

[LTC8K6]

New 6C and 8C Intel chips...probably those 9000 series chips on Wikichip.

 

[JoeRambo]

5Ghz 8700k scores nearly 1700, so that 2212 is right on money for 8C CFL @ 5Ghz.

 

[moonbogg]

I honestly expect the 8 core chip to clock as well as the 8700K (potentially at least). The thermals are a different matter though. Direct die cooling might really become a thing for these chips. That's what I'd do!