Coffeelake thread, benchmarks, reviews, input, everything.

Page 52 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Lee Saxon

Member
Jan 31, 2010
91
0
61
I can't say I understand the continued enthusiasm and speculation about the remaining Coffee Lake chipsets and processors. I'm out for this generation (hopefully just this one?).

I mean, if your desperation for an upgrade was low enough that you didn't pony up for Z370 instead of waiting for H360, it seems like you can wait for Spectre to be [actually] fixed. I can, and I'm still on Sandy Bridge (2500K)!
 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
25,055
3,408
126
I can't say I understand the continued enthusiasm and speculation about the remaining Coffee Lake chipsets and processors. I'm out for this generation (hopefully just this one?).

I mean, if your desperation for an upgrade was low enough that you didn't pony up for Z370 instead of waiting for H360, it seems like you can wait for Spectre to be [actually] fixed. I can, and I'm still on Sandy Bridge (2500K)!
My need for a new computer is high and I've been on the verge of buying since last fall. I was really wanting an 8600. But it never was released. The 8400 is underwhelming and the 8600K costs 41.2% more (plus an annoyingly higher TDP) for a measly 7.9% turbo speed boost for the vast majority of those of us who don't overclock. Thus, I just can't seem to buy the 8600K out of principle alone. Luckily I was pretty swamped the last few months with holidays, travel, and family so I could wait it out.

Metldown/Spectre are non-issues for me. I have nothing that I am worried about with hackers on my computer (oh no, they might post on Facebook under my name!) and the speed losses are exaggerated. Even if there was a full 30% speed loss on everything, the Coffee Lake processors still run circles around my existing computer.

The probably much cheaper H370, B360, and H310 motherboards will be icing on the cake.
 

Bouowmx

Golden Member
Nov 13, 2016
1,138
550
146
If you are waiting for next generation, it is because it uses new process, new architecture, and has up to 8 cores, not because it "fixes" Spectre lol.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
21,620
10,830
136
I wouldn't expect Icelake to "fix" Spectre or Meltdown. Not really. On the desktop I guess the real fix would be . . . Alder Lake? Since Sapphire Rapids is server-only?
 

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,520
1,575
126
Intel specifically says fixed chips will be out this year, and if they don't deliver, they'll feel my wrath. :D
 

IEC

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Jun 10, 2004
14,330
4,914
136
Playing around with some offset overclocking on the Z370 Taichi.



My 8700K is from Batch# L730C348

I started out at 4700MHz all core/cache at a -50mV offset, with no AVX offset. I am getting 4700MHz full CPU/FPU/cache load at 1.248V. Considering single core turbo is this high at stock I didn't expect any issues, and haven't found any through stress testing yet. Temps are around 81C at full CPU/FPU/cache stress test, however. So I would need to consider water or a delid to push the chip further.
 

psolord

Golden Member
Sep 16, 2009
1,913
1,192
136
How is your system stable with a negative offset? Aren't we supposed to use positive values for overclocking?

I use +30mV for 5GHz which results to 1.32V at load.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,586
1,000
126
My need for a new computer is high and I've been on the verge of buying since last fall. I was really wanting an 8600. But it never was released. The 8400 is underwhelming and the 8600K costs 41.2% more (plus an annoyingly higher TDP) for a measly 7.9% turbo speed boost for the vast majority of those of us who don't overclock. Thus, I just can't seem to buy the 8600K out of principle alone. Luckily I was pretty swamped the last few months with holidays, travel, and family so I could wait it out.
I'm curious what you're planning on doing with it, because out of the current crop of Intel CPUs, the 8400 is my favourite. I don't have high end computing needs though.

Why do I say this? Cuz any of the listed CPU are fine for regular Office type work, but for heavily multithreaded applications that are common to average users such as media encoding, the 8400 competes well against the previously mainstream flagship the 7700K, and often beats it, yet does so with a 65 Watt TDP.

Sure, the 8600K is much faster, but if you don't need it, then it isn't worth spending 40% more. Then again, 40% more isn't that much when compared to the price of the overall build.

In fact, the 8400 was pretty much the holy grail for me, but due to timing I couldn't wait for it. Circumstances forced me to buy last year, so I bought the 7600. In the greater scheme of things, that one is the underwhelming one, but like I said, I don't have heavy computing needs (except the occasional encode) so I'm fine with it. (I had the 7700K briefly, but it ramped up the fan too quickly in my all-in-one, so I returned it.)
 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
25,055
3,408
126
I'm curious what you're planning on doing with it, because out of the current crop of Intel CPUs, the 8400 is my favourite. I don't have high end computing needs though.
I have three active computers that are in use. For this computer, I mostly browse the internet, do some limited online card games, and photo editing. Nothing too CPU intensive. But I also keep my computers around for many years. The 8600 will replace a computer that currently has a Core 2 Quad Q8300 that is barely able to open web pages any more. While I don't need the full power of the 8600 now, I will appreciate the 8600 in the photo editing now and will almost certainly appreciate the speed boost in another ~8 years later when I upgrade again.

I'm just thinking most about value. The 8700 costs about double just to add hyperthreading that in many uses does nothing, certainly nothing worth doubling the price of the CPU. The 7600 was cheaper than 7600K while at a much lower TDP and only 100 MHz turbo speed was lost. I hope the same is true with the 8600 vs the 8600K. My computer is enclosed in a office desk where heat has a hard time getting out and I've noticed that the 95 W Q8300 CPU overheats a lot when doing next to nothing (fans speed up to full speed with just light use and the whole computer desk gets quite hot to the touch). So keeping power down matters. TDP isn't exactly power used, but it is a decent indicator.
 

StinkyPinky

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2002
6,763
783
126
I think it's a bit misleading to say that it does nothing for many uses. Clearly it's not going to be as effective as another physical core, but we can see in more recent gaming benchmarks and rendering benchmarks that the HT does help, sometimes in a significant way. Granted this is more comparing the 4c vs the 4c/8t cpu's, but with programmers getting better with scaling gaming engines (as an example) we may see more of them taxing even a 6c cpu in the future.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,586
1,000
126
I have three active computers that are in use. For this computer, I mostly browse the internet, do some limited online card games, and photo editing. Nothing too CPU intensive. But I also keep my computers around for many years. The 8600 will replace a computer that currently has a Core 2 Quad Q8300 that is barely able to open web pages any more. While I don't need the full power of the 8600 now, I will appreciate the 8600 in the photo editing now and will almost certainly appreciate the speed boost in another ~8 years later when I upgrade again.

I'm just thinking most about value. The 8700 costs about double just to add hyperthreading that in many uses does nothing, certainly nothing worth doubling the price of the CPU. The 7600 was cheaper than 7600K while at a much lower TDP and only 100 MHz turbo speed was lost. I hope the same is true with the 8600 vs the 8600K. My computer is enclosed in a office desk where heat has a hard time getting out and I've noticed that the 95 W Q8300 CPU overheats a lot when doing next to nothing (fans speed up to full speed with just light use and the whole computer desk gets quite hot to the touch). So keeping power down matters. TDP isn't exactly power used, but it is a decent indicator.
It sounds like you have similar needs as I do, and I know what you mean. However...

I know that Passmark isn't a great benchmark, but it does seem a little useful for general back of the napkin type comparisons when talking about surfing and what not. Here's my take on surfing with different CPUs, along with their Passmark scores:

600: Atom 330 <-- Basically unusable
900: Pentium SU4100 <-- Very slow
1550: Core 2 Duo P7550 <-- Feels sluggish, and multimedia heavy websites can be very slow.
2500-2800?: Core M-5Y31 <-- Feels OK but can be sluggish at times
2500: Athlon II X3 435 <-- Feels OK but can be sluggish at times
3000: Core 2 Quad Q8300
3600-3800: Core m3-7Y32 <-- Very good (Note that this CPU performs way better than C2Q Q8300 in Geekbench 4, not too far off the Phenom X6 below.)
5000: Phenom II X6 1055T <-- Very good
5400: Core i7 870 <-- Very good
9000: Core i5-7600 <-- Excellent
12000: Core i5-8400
12000: Core i7-7700K <-- Excellent

It sounds like you are more sensitive to slower speeds than I am, but then again, the i5-8400 has four times the speed as your Core 2 Quad. This is not only reflected in the Passmark score (12000 vs 3000), but also in the Geekbench 4 scores (22500 x 5600).

If you're just talking about relatively light usage, I think the i5-8400 is going to last a good while. It basically equals the 7700K, which was the flagship mainstream CPU last year.
 
Last edited:

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
25,055
3,408
126
I think it's a bit misleading to say that it does nothing for many uses. Clearly it's not going to be as effective as another physical core, but we can see in more recent gaming benchmarks and rendering benchmarks that the HT does help, sometimes in a significant way. Granted this is more comparing the 4c vs the 4c/8t cpu's, but with programmers getting better with scaling gaming engines (as an example) we may see more of them taxing even a 6c cpu in the future.
Considering my most CPU intensive work is photo editing, lets see the comparison:
https://www.pugetsystems.com/pic_disp.php?id=41379&width=800&height=800

The 7700K is 11.7% faster than the 7600K in Photoshop. The CPU differences are that the 7700K has about 10% faster clock speeds and hyperthreading. Thus, I'm attributing the 11.7% Photoshop gain mostly to the clock speed. Hyperthreading does not do much for my purposes.

I can link benchmarks where speeds drop with Hyperthreading too. It has some certain uses where you can get a noticeable speed boost. Maybe 20% here or 30% boost there. But it doesn't justify double the cost to me for my uses.
 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
25,055
3,408
126
If you're just talking about relatively light usage, I think the i5-8400 is going to last a good while. It basically equals the 7700K, which was the flagship mainstream CPU last year.
You are correct. But if the 8600 is likely going to be released soon, and if it gives a ~200 MHz to ~300 MHz speed bump for about the same price as the 8400, then I have no problem waiting a few more weeks. I've waited 8 years already.
 

ZGR

Platinum Member
Oct 26, 2012
2,052
656
136
How is your system stable with a negative offset? Aren't we supposed to use positive values for overclocking?

I use +30mV for 5GHz which results to 1.32V at load.

At 4.7, that seems quite reasonable for a negative offset.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IEC

IEC

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Jun 10, 2004
14,330
4,914
136
How is your system stable with a negative offset? Aren't we supposed to use positive values for overclocking?

I use +30mV for 5GHz which results to 1.32V at load.

Depends entirely on the silicon lottery. It's why some chips can be undervolted despite a mild OC.

On 14nm chips I prefer to optimize around the maximum speed possible at around 1.25V rather than pushing north of 1.30V (unless on water). At my settings for 4700MHz I am already pushing 120W full CPU package power at 1.26V when under 100% CPU/FPU/cache stress test in AIDA64 Extreme. This is nearing the limits of what I can comfortably cool on air without a delid because of the crappy TIM/stock IHS assembly... I may try to push clocks further and add an AVX offset to strike a balance.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,586
1,000
126
You are correct. But if the 8600 is likely going to be released soon, and if it gives a ~200 MHz to ~300 MHz speed bump for about the same price as the 8400, then I have no problem waiting a few more weeks. I've waited 8 years already.
Fair enough. The i5-8600 sounds like a great chip. Hopefully it does actually come out soon. However, the best bang for the buck might actually be the i5-8500 on a tight budget.

As for the i7-8700, yeah it's expensive, but besides the HT it also has a nice advantage for Turbo Boost etc. when you actually want the speed. If I wanted to splurge instead of getting the i5-8400, I'd personally consider the i7-8700 (but not the i7-8700K)... at least if it was a self-build.

Mind you, I was actually contemplating getting something like an i3-8100 before I finally decided to upgrade my old machine to a Phenom II X6 1055T (65 W) to give it a couple more years' life at a reasonable TDP. That cost me all of $59 for the chip from eBay.

The reason I considered the i3 was because for some reason big companies like Dell have drastically reduced the options of late for low end machines with high end chips. For a surfing machine like you describe, these days they just sell lower end CPUs, and you can't upgrade the machine to run say an i7-8700. If you want a higher end chip they'll offer you a 95 W 8600K or 8700K and charge you way more, because they assume you want a gaming machine or something. So in this scenario, self-built makes more sense.
 

Dayman1225

Golden Member
Aug 14, 2017
1,152
974
146
Computerbase.de is saying the 300-series chipset release along with the rest of the Coffeelake CPU line is for early April.

Here is a translated link to the article

They say that they will launch in the first week of April, that includes all the lower end mobos, new Pentium/Core SKUs (Including T procs),Notebook launch is unclear but they said it should also take place in April. Z390 will apparently arrive later in the year.
PWZpoga.png

m36Bm7e.png

1AVyxr6.png
Links to those notebook CPU scores and then some:
Razer Blade with 8750H
Quanta NL5T with 8750H
Quanta NL5T with 8750H(Again)
HP Pavilion Laptop with 8750H
LENOVO 81FW with 8750H


Quanta NL5T with 8300H
Quanta NL5T with 8300H(Again)
HP Pavilion Laptop with 8300H
HP Pavilion Laptop with 8300H(Again)
LENOVO 81FW with 8300H

All Results Found here:

8750H
8300H
 
Last edited:

Glo.

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2015
5,705
4,549
136
I was going to pull the trigger on the 8300T, however... the shipping to Poland is over 50% of the cost of the CPU: 75$. Madness.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,586
1,000
126
So, is this correct?

Y series: No big change any time soon. Staying dual-core for now.
U series: Quad-core, at 15 Watts and 28 Watts.
H series: Hex-core, at 45 Watts, with a new Core i9 option.