Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread

[LTC8K6]

7700K's turbo clocks are as follows:

1 core: 4.5GHz
2 core: 4.4GHz
3 core: 4.4GHz
4 core: 4.4GHz

It runs at 4.5GHz on all cores on most Z270 boards because the mobo makers build in a feature that just runs all of the cores at 4.5GHz -- the top single core turbo speed.

They can get away with this because they know each of the cores is validated to run at 4.5GHz, so there is no stability risk.

I don't think all that matters because the 91W TDP is at the base clock. So if we are talking about / guessing the TDP of the 6C chip, it will be taken from the base clock as well.

If a 4C 14nm+ chip with a base clock of 4.2 has a TDP of 91W, then I think it's certainly possible that a 6C 14nm++ chip might have a similar base clock at a little higher TDP, say 95W.

But again, I don't expect Intel to deliver such a chip. I expect them to get close, though.

We do have KL-X at 112W TDP with the same base clock, but I'm not sure that matters.

 

[mikk]

I looked around and most people seem to report the 7700K staying at 4.5 on all cores when gaming on a Z board. What does a 7700K do at stock/on a non-Z board?

Keep in mind that TDP is determined at the base frequency.

At stock it's running with 4.4 Ghz as I said, unless Turbo is disabled.

 

[Bouowmx]

I created my speculation from the Core i7-7700, which has 4 cores running 4.0 GHz Turbo, rated at 65 W. 150% the cores, same frequency, and 150% the power for the 8700, not counting any process improvements.

 

[LTC8K6]

At stock it's running with 4.4 Ghz as I said, unless Turbo is disabled.

Well, it "can" run at 4.4ghz if conditions permit. Presumably this will not be continuously?

https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...gy.html?iid=tech_arch_nextgen+body_turboboost

 

[Arachnotronic]

Well, it "can" run at 4.4ghz if conditions permit. Presumably this will not be continuously?

https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...gy.html?iid=tech_arch_nextgen+body_turboboost

It's continuous on desktop with decent cooling.

 

[LTC8K6]

I created my speculation from the Core i7-7700, which has 4 cores running 4.0 GHz Turbo, rated at 65 W. 150% the cores, same frequency, and 150% the power for the 8700, not counting any process improvements.

Except that the 65W figure is at the 3.6 base clock...

 

[LTC8K6]

It's continuous on desktop with decent cooling.

With a non-Z board?

There's also the fact that Intel provides a stock cooler for some chips, a cooler which does not reach the "decent" level. The 7700, for example. What speeds does it do with the provided cooler?

 

[Arachnotronic]

With a non-Z board?

Yes.

 

[coercitiv]

Well, it "can" run at 4.4ghz if conditions permit. Presumably this will not be continuously?

For all our intents and purposes it's continuous. As you well know base clocks take GPU power consumption into account, and most of us use these chips without heavy loads on their GPU (if any).

Even standard mobile quads @ 45W TDP can sustain full turbo speeds indefinitely as long as GPU activity is minimal. (AVX loads go a bit lower)

 

[LTC8K6]

For all our intents and purposes it's continuous. As you well know base clocks take GPU power consumption into account, and most of us use these chips without heavy loads on their GPU (if any).

Even standard mobile quads @ 45W TDP can sustain full turbo speeds indefinitely as long as GPU activity is minimal. (AVX loads go a bit lower)

It might be interesting to look at the Xeon equivalent TDP numbers.

 

[Bouowmx]

I have a daily-use Intel Core i7-2600 with stock-like cooler (aluminum, radial fins, top-down fan): runs at 3.5 GHz at worst-case Prime95 small FFT. The lofty TDP rating helps.

I tested a Intel Core i7-7700 in ASRock H110M-STX with stock cooler in Prime95 small FFT. At stock power limit (which is equal to TDP, 65 W), frequency ran between 3.6 (base) and 4.0 (Turbo) GHz. I then set power limit to 120 W (yes, I can do that on H110) and ran the test again: frequency is stable at 4.0 GHz, and package power is ~72 W. No temperature issues.

I also ran FurMark, and GPU power is ~30 W. You can combine the two for ~100 W and temperature issues.

 

[ndtech]

I created my speculation from the Core i7-7700, which has 4 cores running 4.0 GHz Turbo, rated at 65 W. 150% the cores, same frequency, and 150% the power for the 8700, not counting any process improvements.

Note:
14++ is 10% faster for single core
14++ power of one core is 70-80% of 14+ power for same frequency:
80% - for mid frequency
70% - for high frequency

i7-8700 can't be 95W.
It must be 65W.

 

[TheF34RChannel]

Note:
14++ is 10% faster for single core
14++ power of one core is 70-80% of 14+ power for same frequency:
80% - for mid frequency
70% - for high frequency

i7-8700 can't be 95W.
It must be 65W.

And it most likely is. The K is 95W.

 

[Ajay]

Note:
14++ is 10% faster for single core
14++ power of one core is 70-80% of 14+ power for same frequency:
80% - for mid frequency
70% - for high frequency***

i7-8700 can't be 95W.
It must be 65W.

*** Where are you getting these numbers? I haven't seen details of Intel's 14nm++ electrostatics yet.

 

[beginner99]

7700K's turbo clocks are as follows:

1 core: 4.5GHz
2 core: 4.4GHz
3 core: 4.4GHz
4 core: 4.4GHz

So the 6-core could equal this and add "bins" for 5 and 6 core turbo (4.3, 4.2 Ghz) or similar and that would ensure that it's not slower than a 7700k in gaming at stock! settings.

Still even if it OCs less than a 7700k or 7740x and is slightly slower therefore in ST, it's worth the trade-off because you loose maybe 5% ST performance but gain 50% on MT.

 

[mikk]

Who cares about a 5% loss for 4C apps when there is a massive MT speedup due to 50% more cores. I don't expect 4.2-4.3 Ghz 6C Turbo though. Coffeelake 6/12 also features 50% more L3 cache which might result in a few percent better gaming IPC compared to Kabylake 4/8, because games tend to be more cache sensitive.

 

[JoeRambo]

New Who cares about a 5% loss for 4C apps when there is a massive MT speedup due to 50% more cores. I don't expect 4.2-4.3 Ghz 6C Turbo though. Coffeelake 6/12 also features 50% more L3 cache which might result in a few percent better gaming IPC compared to Kabylake 4/8, because games tend to be more cache sensitive.

Yeah, i would not underestimate impact of extra 4MB of L3. Sub 10ns, over 250GB/s read (probably even more due to 6 cores design having more slices and more % utilization ) and inclusive is good for games, where game graphics thread produces stuff for driver thread running on other cores. Could be best overall CPU for desktop for years to come.

 

[LTC8K6]

Since the 7700K is 91W, it seems like there is room for a 6 core to have a little higher TDP and stay within the limits of 1151 boards.

 

[LTC8K6]

*** Where are you getting these numbers? I haven't seen details of Intel's 14nm++ electrostatics yet.

All I have seen is from Intel:

https://newsroom.intel.com/newsroom...es/11/2017/03/14-nm-technology-fact-sheet.pdf

 

[witeken]

*** Where are you getting these numbers? I haven't seen details of Intel's 14nm++ electrostatics yet.

http://intelstudios.edgesuite.net/170328_itmd/pdf/2017_TMD_RuthBrain__FINAL.pdf

around 19

 

[Eddward]

I'm hoping as a worst case scenario 4.0Ghz base for all cores and 4.2Ghz for a single core. Just like Skylake 6700K.
And with an average overclocking potential up to 4.5-4.6Ghz for all cores.
I'm planning to replace 4.6Ghz 6700K so this is my goal to not have single thread downgraded

 

[mikk]

Singlethread and all core turbo difference should be higher, doesn't make sense that there is only a 200 Mhz gap on a 6C CPU.

 

[TheGiant]

Realistic case is IMO

base- 3.8GHz
all core turbo- 4.2GHz
single core turbo- 4.7GHz

not because the process can not handle it but because there is a 7800X which costs 390USD and if the new 6C CFL has 4.0 GHz base and 4.4GHz all core turbo it will wipe the floor with 7800X- and with the MB price difference and power consumption difference, the 7800X will become obsolete

I wonder how Intel handles the 7800X vs 6C CFL situation

 

[mikk]

There is a new Z370 entry with Coffeelake on Sisoft.


http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_r...d4ecdde9dee9d9ff8db080a6c3a69bab8dfec3fb&l=en
SuperMicro C7Z370-CG-L
Genuine Intel(R) CPU 0000 @ 3.20GHz (6C 12T 3.59GHz, 3.3GHz IMC, 6x 256kB L2, 12MB L3)


Pretty low clock speed but still listed with a generic Intel 0000 CPU ID, so not really meaningful.

 

[beginner99]

I wonder how Intel handles the 7800X vs 6C CFL situation

For sure interesting. My bet is the hike up the price for 6c CFL compared to 7700k. So it will be $390 at least my guess, probably more like $419.