Intel Skylake / Kaby Lake

[TheF34RChannel]

Okay I will put my hand up and admit I was wrong about Intel pricing Coffee Lake at effectively Kaby Lake price points, as I thought they would make the i7 8700K be at least $400.

Even though I am not in the market for a new PC/CPU, I still look forward to the benchmarking of these beasts.

The only thing that keeps it under $400 are the leaks from retailer websites and they still have time to set the prices.
Intel released pricing for 1k units, if Kaby 1k-to-retail margins would be applied to Coffee 1k prices the retail would easily reach $400.

Coffee is right, these are 1k units prices, not retail, which will be higher.

 

[eddman]

No it won't. Cause when next gen GPUs arrive, games will be more demanding. And GPU will be bottleneck again. I think for vast majority of gamers, GPU is bottleneck. Therefore, investment in GPU is always better solution.

I never meant not to invest in a good GPU. A fast GPU is still more important, if you can upgrade only one part.

As games' GPU demand start to plateau, thanks to consoles, CPUs will start to play a bigger role. This happened with the last gen too.

P.S. I'm not saying ryzens are bad for games. Quite the opposite, they are more than enough, but intel CPUs simply perform better when the limit is not the GPU.

 

[Dayman1225]

https://videocardz.com/72915/first-review-of-intel-core-i7-8700k-leaks-out

 

[jpiniero]

Locked at 4.5 Ghz (?) the 8700K is 18% faster than the 7700K in the Witcher. It's not a core thing too since the 7800X is slower than the 7700K. Overall though, at stock it's a bit of a wash between it and the 7700K. Which is what you should have expected anyway.

 

[LTC8K6]

Base clock is irrelevant. What I want to know is the all-core turbo, but sadly (and inexplicably) Intel is not publishing that info anymore.

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Core_i5/Intel-Core i5 i5-8400.html

 

[tamz_msc]

https://videocardz.com/72915/first-review-of-intel-core-i7-8700k-leaks-out

Looks like the 1230cb score leak is seemingly legit. Why is it this low?

 

[PhonakV30]

Looks like the 1230cb score leak is seemingly legit. Why is it this low?

with my RX 1600x@3.6Mhz , I got 1243/152 , 8700K should be around 1400~1500.also MT/ST for 7800X is better than CFL.I think it's Bios fault.

 

[Zucker2k]

https://videocardz.com/72915/first-review-of-intel-core-i7-8700k-leaks-out

The RAM speed they tested at is a bit anemic.

 

[JoeRambo]

Looks like the 1230cb score leak is seemingly legit. Why is it this low?

DDR4 2400 C14 is bad for health when you have 12 threads fighting for memory access?

 

[tamz_msc]

DDR4 2400 C14 is bad for health when you have 12 threads fighting for memory access?

Cinebench doesn't care much about RAM. Look at what they get when they clock it at 4.5GHz, much better and in line with what you'd expect with properly functioning turbo. Looks to me like BIOS is not ready.

 

[jpiniero]

Cinebench doesn't care much about RAM. Look at what they get when they clock it at 4.5GHz, much better and in line with what you'd expect with properly functioning turbo. Looks to me like BIOS is not ready.

Clock speed I imagine. Must have been running roughly around 3.9 Ghz.

 

[epsilon84]

At default the R5 1600 has a base clock of 3.2GHz for 12 Threads and 3.6GHz ST turbo. The Gaming performance difference should be very close (5-10%).

Overclocking the R5 1600 to 4GHz all 12 threads will make it 50%+ faster in MT than the 8400. Yes it will consume more but it will make it a lot faster too.

5 - 10% in GPU bound scenarios, perhaps. CPU bound benchmarks will show a far greater difference

I would expect the gaming performance of the stock i5 8400 to at least exceed that of the 6700K, since they are both clocked at 4GHz but the i5 has a slight IPC advantage and 2 more cores (yes I'm aware the 6700K has 2 extra threads due to HT but the 2 extra cores will more than compensate for that)

So we are looking at >20% performance difference in non GPU bound gaming.

I would be staggered if MT performance is anywhere close to 50% better on an overclocked 1600, perhaps in Cinebench but in any real world scenario the difference would be far smaller. Even at clockspeed parity, Ryzen has to overcome an IPC deficit. SMT adds, at most, ~30% of a 'real' core.
Assuming a 10% IPC deficit (I think its greater than that, but lets wait for reviews) that would mean, at clockspeed parity, Ryzen 5 @ 4GHz would be at most, ~20% faster in MT throughput compared to a 6C/6T i5 8400.

The math doesn't add up to a 50% performance differential, not even close.

 

[coffeeblues]

.. MT/ST for 7800X is better than CFL.I think it's Bios fault.

7800x and 8700k seem pretty close with 7800x better in sandra processor multimedia tests and 8700k better in gaming.

 

[tamz_msc]

7800X and 8700K seem pretty close because in Sandra AVX-512 skews the results in favor of the 7800X.

 

[Zucker2k]

7800x and 8700k seem pretty close with 7800x better in sandra processor multimedia tests and 8700k better in gaming.

The 8700k vs 7800x battle is a great case study mostly for memory bandwidth bottlenecks on the former, as well as the changes in the cache structure of the two systems. Very interesting.

 

[eddman]

Looks like the 1230cb score leak is seemingly legit. Why is it this low?

CB seems to be the odd one out. The rest of the synthetic benches show greater than 40% improvements.

 

[epsilon84]

CB seems to be the odd one out. The rest of the synthetic benches show greater than 40% improvements.

Yeah, it almost appears that the 8700K is stuck at base clocks or something, if you compare the 4.5GHz comparisons between the 7700K and 8700K scaling is at ~47%, almost linear.

 

[LTC8K6]

The RAM speed they tested at is a bit anemic.

It's not even the stock speed...

 

[LTC8K6]

POV ray single score flops around at the videocardz link. Overclocked 8700K is slower than 7700K, stock it's the other way around. Probably got the overclocked one backwards.

 

[coffeeblues]

POV ray single score flops around at the videocardz link. Overclocked 8700K is slower than 7700K, stock it's the other way around. Probably got the overclocked one backwards.

Overclocked were all three to 4.5 while stock 8700k does single boost to 4.7 but then it looks like stock 7700k single boost was not working for that POV ray single thread run.

 

[CatMerc]

Locked at 4.5 Ghz (?) the 8700K is 18% faster than the 7700K in the Witcher. It's not a core thing too since the 7800X is slower than the 7700K. Overall though, at stock it's a bit of a wash between it and the 7700K. Which is what you should have expected anyway.

It is a core thing. The 7800X is just worse at games, so the extra cores are only covering a deficiency rather than pushing it higher. Broadwell-E CPU's did much better.

 

[LTC8K6]

Overclocked were all three to 4.5 while stock 8700k does single boost to 4.7 but then it looks like stock 7700k single boost was not working for that POV ray single thread run.

With the overclock, there shouldn't have been any boosting going on. That's typically turned off when overclocking. I think it's most likely an error in the chart.

 

[elhefegaming]

I need a 8600k review now!

 

[CakeMonster]

Everyone keeps repeating that 8700K will beat the HEDT chips with regards to OC. What is the rationale for concluding this? I certainly hope its the case since Intel yet again has failed to appeal to me with their HEDT platform, but I'm surprised that everyone keeps saying that an unreleased chip is going to be a "beast".

 

[dooon]

I need a 8600k review now!

here