Intel Skylake / Kaby Lake

[Arachnotronic]

So by adding a bunch of complexity, it saves them a bunch of money? Err.

It's total bunk. Just because Intel is prioritizing data center first doesn't mean that they're going to not build targeted products for the notebook/mainstream desktop market.

Notebook + mainstream desktop CPU market is still way larger and more profitable than data center CPU market.

 

[Torn Mind]

i3 boxes can finally be considered powerful for general purpose computing.

 

[coffeeblues]

Wait, I thought all Skylake-X dies used mesh. Interesting and odd. Do you have a link? Can't find anything proper.

Skylake-X shares design with Skylake server Xeons, that means they share mesh and cache properties, "the client parts" meant mainstream desktop chips (igpu, dual channel, etc).

 

[Arachnotronic]

In terms of gaming, TahoeDust's 7820 has gone up against a few 7700s here with the same clock and in general, stays with them. I think your guess of 10% lead for the 8700K in gaming is probably a pretty accurate estimate.

You'll have to forgive me - even though logic says the 8700K is the way to go, my heart still wants to go HEDT.

Just do it. It's your money and your life, so you should buy what you want, if you know you want it

 

[coffeeblues]

You'll have to forgive me - even though logic says the 8700K is the way to go, my heart still wants to go HEDT.

I feel the same way.

Just do it. It's your money and your life, so you should buy what you want, if you know you want it

msi x299 xpower would be a badass board to build a system with, even if I don't have a reason to build hedt at the moment. Maybe someday.

 

[TahoeDust]

You'll have to forgive me - even though logic says the 8700K is the way to go, my heart still wants to go HEDT.

The heart wants what the heart wants.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

The heart wants what the heart wants.

I'm going on vacation in about a month, so I'll decide when I get back and probably start building. If the September release rumors are true for the 8700K, plenty of AT members should have them tested by the time I get back.

 

[Arachnotronic]

I feel the same way.



msi x299 xpower would be a badass board to build a system with, even if I don't have a reason to build hedt at the moment. Maybe someday.

HEDT just feels like a proper enthusiast desktop platform (this applies to both TR and Core X), mainstream feels like a glorified laptop platform (because it basically is).

 

[crashtech]

HEDT just feels like a proper enthusiast desktop platform (this applies to both TR and Core X), mainstream feels like a glorified laptop platform (because it basically is).

Hmm, a glorified laptop platform sporting a hexacore with possibly the highest ST performance in history? Who cares from what it's derived, I'll take (at least) one, please.

 

[SPBHM]

HEDT just feels like a proper enthusiast desktop platform (this applies to both TR and Core X), mainstream feels like a glorified laptop platform (because it basically is).

HEDT is server/workstation first, it's very clear with the performance regression for gaming with Skylake-X and massive waste with AVX, 8700K is likely going to be the clear king for enthusiasts, with 6c/12t and the other characteristics of a 7700k (hopefully) they made sure of that.

 

[Markfw]

Agreed, except that "many use cases" part. I've said this before: this forum has way higher % of people who do DC, video encoding, VM farming etc. Reality is that main use cases of "fast" CPU for masses is web browsing and gaming. And that is where Intel has huge advantage.

Markfw: think about it from this angle, in these very forums there are people who upgraded C2Q->Nehalem->SB->Ivy->Hsw->Skl even if some of those upgrades were 5% ST improvement at best. And now You are trying to "sell" them a system that is missing 35% ST Cinebench score versus 8700K ( talking about those stock clocks Ryzen 167 vs 2XX score leaks here).

I am not trying to "sell" anybody anything. But to say "I would be very reluctant to buy any cpu that is lucky to hit 4 ghz, no matter how many cores it has.". So that means that EPYC, Threadripper, and a lot of Ryzens are all excluded INCLUDING SOME INTEL just because they won't hit 4 ghz ? Thats over the top. THATS my point.

Hey, if you are a gamer, and thats it, AND YOU CAN AFFORD IT, the 8700K sounds like it might be the chip for you. But maybe the 1500x or the 1600 or 1600x is your chip. But there are more people in this world other than gamers. In fact I would bet statistically, they are a minority of all computer users.

 

[jpiniero]

Hey, if you are a gamer, and thats it, the 8700K sounds like it might be the chip for you. But there are more people in this world other than gamers. In fact I would bet statistically, they are a minority of all computer users.

True, but surely a majority of the people on this forum only really use their PC's power for gaming. Otherwise they'd be better off with an old PC or something low power like Core M or even ARM.

 

[DooKey]

I am not trying to "sell" anybody anything. But to say "I would be very reluctant to buy any cpu that is lucky to hit 4 ghz, no matter how many cores it has.". So that means that EPYC, Threadripper, and a lot of Ryzens are all excluded INCLUDING SOME INTEL just because they won't hit 4 ghz ? Thats over the top. THATS my point.

Hey, if you are a gamer, and thats it, AND YOU CAN AFFORD IT, the 8700K sounds like it might be the chip for you. But maybe the 1500x or the 1600 or 1600x is your chip. But there are more people in this world other than gamers. In fact I would bet statistically, they are a minority of all computer users.

I hear ya, but most folks that post on these kinds of boards are gamers. Why else are we screaming for ST performance? For you (and me sometimes) lots of cores are great. However, those of us that game don't care for moar cores and instead go for top end video cards and ST top performance multi-core cpus. You know that, but have bought into the $/perf crap so many spew around here. How about letting the pure gamers talk about what we want and you stick to your DC and $/perf junk?

 

[TahoeDust]

What are the predictions for Cinebench? Is the 6c/12t 8700k going to our perform the 8c/16t Ryzen chips? Both stock? Both over clocked? I’m talking about multi core, single is pretty much a given.

 

[Bouowmx]

If Intel Core i7-8700K gets ~1500 CB (7700K gets ~1000 CB), that is about AMD Ryzen 7 1700 and 1700X performance (stock).

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Hey, if you are a gamer, and thats it, AND YOU CAN AFFORD IT, the 8700K sounds like it might be the chip for you. But maybe the 1500x or the 1600 or 1600x is your chip. But there are more people in this world other than gamers. In fact I would bet statistically, they are a minority of all computer users.

Right. If you're a gamer on a limited budget, it makes more sense to spend the money on the GPU and not the CPU. The problem for AMD is that the 8700K isn't the only release - the new i5 also has 6 cores but is quite a bit cheaper. It may not have HT but I'd probably trade that for the ST advantage.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

If Intel Core i7-8700K gets ~1500 CB (7700K gets ~1000 CB), that is about AMD Ryzen 7 1700 and 1700X performance (stock).

I could've sworn I saw leaked benchmarks of the 8700K against the 1700 and on MT, they were basically scoring the same. I'll see if I can find those or maybe I am confused with another benchmark.

 

[AdamK47]

I think Cinebench is a bad game to use as a benchmark. The gameplay mechanics are clunky, the story is weak, and the voice acting is just terrible. It's got some pretty good graphics though.

 

[Markfw]

I could've sworn I saw leaked benchmarks of the 8700K against the 1700 and on MT, they were basically scoring the same. I'll see if I can find those or maybe I am confused with another benchmark.

Well, that certainly could be correct. Except the 8700k is $385 and the 1700 is $269 I think.

 

[Markfw]

I hear ya, but most folks that post on these kinds of boards are gamers. Why else are we screaming for ST performance? For you (and me sometimes) lots of cores are great. However, those of us that game don't care for moar cores and instead go for top end video cards and ST top performance multi-core cpus. You know that, but have bought into the $/perf crap so many spew around here. How about letting the pure gamers talk about what we want and you stick to your DC and $/perf junk?

How about I am allowed to talk like everyone else on this forum ? I am sure there are kids making minimum wage, and they love to game, but on their budget $20 or $30 actually makes a difference for them. If they can get what they need for less, we need to tell them what to expect, and not be so blindsided here. And I see you have one machine from each "camp", so why are you on my case ?

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Well, that certainly could be correct. Except the 8700k is $385 and the 1700 is $269 I think.

Right, but the 8700K will be way ahead on ST and for some, that will be worth the premium. I paid $290 for my 1700X and don't regret it, but for my main PC, I want the best combo of ST and MT and am willing to pay a reasonable premium for that. The $100 difference isn't something I worry about. I do understand that there are people on budgets who like to game, and for those folks, I'd probably steer them towards Ryzen and have them put the savings toward a better GPU. The new Coffee Lake i3s and i5s can't be discounted either at this point.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Yeah but the 8700k will probably be faster than anything in that AMD lineup. On top of that ryzen does not come with a gpu which is certainly a factor for non gamers.

Honestly I do not think there will be many 8700k users without some kind of dGPU.

It's got some pretty good graphics though.

Surely you aren't talking about that damned OpenGL test though. That car chase looks so lame by 2017 standards.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Well, that certainly could be correct. Except the 8700k is $385 and the 1700 is $269 I think.

Don't worry, there will be high-clocked 6C/6T CFL chips coming at low price points

 

[MarkPost]

What are the predictions for Cinebench? Is the 6c/12t 8700k going to our perform the 8c/16t Ryzen chips? Both stock? Both over clocked? I’m talking about multi core, single is pretty much a given.

MT, my 1700X at stock is about ~5-6% faster than my 7800X oced at 4.5

 

[VirtualLarry]

Right. If you're a gamer on a limited budget, it makes more sense to spend the money on the GPU and not the CPU. The problem for AMD is that the 8700K isn't the only release - the new i5 also has 6 cores but is quite a bit cheaper. It may not have HT but I'd probably trade that for the ST advantage.

Yeah, if the i5 6C/6T is indeed priced under $200, that's going to be a strong competitor, especially for gaming, with the Ryzen 5 1600/1600X CPUs, especially if it can be clocked above 4Ghz.

I don't hate CoffeeLake, quite the opposite, really. I'm thrilled that Intel is finally upping the core-counts of "mainstream" CPUs. But I do thank AMD for prodding Intel into finally doing so, after all these years, of only quad-core max on mainstream sockets. (Q6600 came out when???)

I might even get an unlocked 6C/6T CoffeeLake to mess with, or use as my "gaming" rig. But I likewise cannot deny the strong value proposition that my Ryzen 5 1600 CPUs have given me. For the same price as a Kaby Lake locked i5 4C/4T CPU, I got an unlocked 6C/12T CPU. Can't really beat that, can you? (Well, not currently.)

Edit: And then, there's this:
https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/incredible-deal-on-ryzen-r7-1800x-mircrocenter-349.2512725/

Ryzen 7 1800X for $349.99 at Microcentr.