Intel Core i7-8700K 3.7 GHz

[Kanan]

lol the guy who has been reviewing CPUs for one of the top tech sites on the internet is clueless but me the clueless fanboy knows exactly what he is talking about. Consoles used a glorified tablet CPU (AMD jaguar) that's reused from their previous units launched in 2013. Sony/MS gave it a small OC, around 25%, but the chip was intended for tablets and notebooks. You can continue on your immature hissy fit and rants but no one is taking you seriously.

I didn't say he is clueless, but he isn't always right either. You're offended and behaving like a little child that got his lolly stolen from him. Face it: games are using many cores since years, consoles played a integral part in fastening the advancement of 4+ Core support in games, it's a fact. I can see it in reviews, I can see it on my own machine. And your table doesn't mean anything, I don't think anything what you just said makes any sense, sorry.

So roughly 4-5% slower at same clock wich seems to be 2,8Ghz on both (they problably had to go that low because there are older processor in the test that may not do 4Ghz).
Oddly Broadwell-E was the fastest there in games wich i can't really explain vs 7700K. Quad-channe RAM, eDRAM helping maybe?

Broadwell-E has no eDram, that was the original Broadwell, eg. i7 5775C processor. Quad Channel is unlikely to be the culprit, it doesn't really make a difference in games unless the other CPU had very slow Ram in comparison. Also only a few games are very bandwidth hungry, like BF series (BF4, BF1).

 

[EarthDog]

Games are using many cores since years.... is that so? The truth of the matter is, very few games can use more than 4 threads. Tbe sweetspot for gaming now is 4c/8t. Very few games show improvements with more threads. Now, 3 hears from now... with you.

 

[_Flare]

4.6GHz 5775C in Games still blows everything out of the water.

 

[Agony]

Thermals ??? My 7700K with XMP enable gets 85C on stress test. wonder what happens to that 8700k

 

[dj-electric]

8700K has larger area to dissipate its heat, and supposedly a better quality TIM.

 

[EarthDog]

Thermals ??? My 7700K with XMP enable gets 85C on stress test. wonder what happens to that 8700k

read some reviews and see... 5 ghz with all 12t... doesnt seem to be a problem.

 

[kiss4luna]

well, i bet 2600K will make this table much more ugly!

 

[Kanan]

Games are using many cores since years.... is that so? The truth of the matter is, very few games can use more than 4 threads. Tbe sweetspot for gaming now is 4c/8t. Very few games show improvements with more threads. Now, 3 hears from now... with you.

In the end you're trying to say I'm wrong but then again you say I'm right. Sweetspot is 4/8? Maybe so. It also means those games can utilize more than four threads (or four cores). See where I'm going with this? Fact is 6 true full power threads give you more performance than 4 real ones and 4 "fake" ones. But they only do, if the power is needed. Atm only a handful of games are that CPU heavy. But this will change soon enough anyway. I think 6 cores or more are a great thing to have now and for the future. Anyway, this is probably strictly highend/enthusiast gamer relevant. I doubt average gamers need a 7700K let alone a 8700K, they are good with normal 4 cores CPU's like R5 1400 or i5 6600K.

 

[eidairaman1]

Intel had a panic attack so they pushed this. Sucks that another mobo has to be used though...

 

[dirtyferret]

Games are using many cores since years.... is that so? The truth of the matter is, very few games can use more than 4 threads. Tbe sweetspot for gaming now is 4c/8t. Very few games show improvements with more threads. Now, 3 hears from now... with you.

Earthdog is correct but I believe the timeline is even further out the 3 years.

The Q6600 & Phenom I came out around 2006-2007 (I'm too lazy to look up exact dates). It only took ten years for dual cores to go by the way of the Dodo for gaming PCs (and 2c/4t is still a viable option today). Way too many obstacles for the gaming industry to move that fast forward;

May 2017 is the first time in Steam's Hardware Survey that quad cores outpaced dual core CPUs (currently 59 to 36% in Sept 2017). Prior to May they were dead even. Six core + CPUs barely break 2%. That is a lot of new CPU hardware that the average PC gamer is not about to give up on.

Laptops still outsell desktops two to one and most laptops use dual cores CPUs or 2c/4t.

Improving CPU performance doesn't sell games. No one posts pictures of great looking AI on their web sites for games. Graphics sells games and graphic cards are much easier to upgrade for the average PC gamer.

The PS4 Pro and Xbox One X - (the former launched in late 2016 with the latter launching next month) both are re-using their jaguar CPU (glorified tablet CPU) just with an OC. The AAA titles are all driven by the consoles so they can't push CPU demands to current desktop performance levels with a CPU made for 2012 consoles. New consoles won't launch until holiday season of 2020 (maybe even 2021).

Unless 120 & 144hz monitors just take off as opposed to 2k monitors (or combined with), you are going to see a similar adoption rate of five years for the mainstream PC gamers to adopt six core CPUs and ten for quads to be avoided for new builds.

 

[Vayra86]

4.6GHz 5775C in Games still blows everything out of the water.

Actually seriously considered that chip not too long ago because its just Core in its best form IMO... but performance wise and older platform, meh, couldn't justify.

 

[Xzibit]

Thermals ??? My 7700K with XMP enable gets 85C on stress test. wonder what happens to that 8700k

It throttles.

In daily use of the system for a week, the system was overclocked to 5 GHz and stable without any halts or errors noticed on Windows. But a quick look at HWInfo indicated a few notes of concern, and for those who have been following the thermal challenges of the i7-7700K it should not be a surprise that thermals are a very real concern when overclocking. The MasterLiquid Pro 240 easily keeps the processor in the mid-30s Celcius when at idle. As soon as the i7-8700K is placed under a full CPU load it shoots to the mid-80s within seconds, even if the cooling fans are manually set to their full speed.

In some instances we even noticed the throttle sensors being triggered. The times that it was throttled were limited exclusively to when the processor was overclocked and under full CPU load. In addition the throttling was not observed to remain for a long period of time. Based on the stability within Windows we attempted to test within Ubuntu at the same 5 GHz speed. Unfortunately the rapid increase in temperature was too much and came too quickly for Ubuntu to be able to do the same throttling, causing the system to freeze instead. A decrease in the multiplier down to 4.9 GHz corrected the issue and so we used this as our overclocking results for both Phoronix and LineageOS build times.

Long story short, overclocking the Core i7-8700K will need to dissipate the heat as much as possible to overcome the thermal barriers it introduces. A 240mm cooler appears to handle this for the most part, and we are considering a future delid test of this CPU to see if the temperatures keep it under throttling levels. So long as the temperatures are managed the 6-core, 12-threaded headliner really does beat out even its larger LGA2011 predecessors significantly.

Looking at our power consumption and performance graph, we see a bend at ~4.8 GHz. Power use continues increasing with higher clock rates, but the Cinebench score levels off. A failure to continue scaling at 5.0 GHz is a good indicator that our CPU is throttling

AVX without offset pushes the result as high as 170W. The Core i7-8700K at 4.9 GHz even throttles due to its package temperature. And that's in spite of our compressor cooler's efforts! Thermal paste under the IHS does us no favors.

While we're only measuring an average of 170W, thermal throttling keeps the 180W+ peaks from becoming our average power consumption result. At that point, even the most powerful coolers have to throw in the towel.

It looks like you need a AIO for the rapid thermal increases.

 

[StrayKAT]

This is a very old argument, but I think dogging the PS4/X1 merely on hardware is unfair. Developers leave nothing to waste on any console...and even find more to squeeze out at the end of it's lifecycle (that was especially the case with the PS3 and it's Cell arch).

And you especially won't find a tablet that offered as much. They're reduced to playing Windows 8 era webstore games.

 

[Shatun_Bear]

RLTTP on this review but just finished reading it all...

9.8 score!!?? Why?

It's $180 more expensive than a Ryzen 1600 (and total platform cost will also be much higher than this new Intel platform) yet gaming performance is only 3% faster on average at 1440p resolution and 7.8% faster @ 1080p resolution.

CPU tests it's a lot faster than the Ryzen but TPU's 'CPU tests' are still laughably frequency biased. So the actual difference across proper comprehensive and representative CPU tests would be much, much smaller.

 

[Vayra86]

RLTTP on this review but just finished reading it all...

9.8 score!!?? Why?

It's $180 more expensive than a Ryzen 1600 (and total platform cost will also be much higher than this new Intel platform) yet gaming performance is only 3% faster on average at 1440p resolution and 7.8% faster @ 1080p resolution.

CPU tests it's a lot faster than the Ryzen but TPU's 'CPU tests' are still laughably frequency biased. So the actual difference across proper comprehensive and representative CPU tests would be much, much smaller.

Read more TPU reviews and you can see that the score given is quite irrelevant, and for good reason, because it never tells you jack shit.

But yeah, then there is the i5 8600k. Looks to be a much bigger winner for a much larger target audience. You lose the HT... and you also lose these horrible temps.

 

[Octopuss]

and supposedly a better quality TIM.

Says who?

 

[dirtyferret]

RLTTP on this review but just finished reading it all...

9.8 score!!?? Why?

It's $180 more expensive than a Ryzen 1600 (and total platform cost will also be much higher than this new Intel platform) yet gaming performance is only 3% faster on average at 1440p resolution and 7.8% faster @ 1080p resolution.

CPU tests it's a lot faster than the Ryzen but TPU's 'CPU tests' are still laughably frequency biased. So the actual difference across proper comprehensive and representative CPU tests would be much, much smaller.

Lol fan boy much? TPU tests show similar results as other professional tech review sites.

 

[Octopuss]

I'd like to see a comparison with 3770K. Perhaps it's time to upgrade, but I'd like to see some real numbers first.

 

[wzrd]

130+fps on Pentium G4560? tested idiot.
where here 100+ fps?

 

[W1zzard]

Video is with Gtx 1070 only

 

[Dan848]

Thank you for taking the time to write this up.
At 5.0GHz you got a good one; I doubt most people will hit 5.0GHz unless they delid it. Did you purchase the CPU, get it on loan to test or given to you by Intel?

 

[mouacyk]

Broadwell-E has no eDram, that was the original Broadwell, eg. i7 5775C processor. Quad Channel is unlikely to be the culprit, it doesn't really make a difference in games unless the other CPU had very slow Ram in comparison. Also only a few games are very bandwidth hungry, like BF series (BF4, BF1).

BF1 has an appetite for more cores, on top of its bandwidth hunger. On 5775C at 4.3GHz, 2200MHz eDRAM, 16GB 2400MHz Dual-channel RAM, while fps was smooth at 1440p Ultra with 1080Ti, it was hardly able to keep the GPU full -- usage was jumping from 80-99%, usually hanging at 90%.

8700K at 5GHz running 6 game threads increased the minimum fps as well as tightened the GPU usage to 97-99%.

Then again, how many games out there are like this. Basically, none. At the end of it all, 8700K doesn't offer much over a decent quad, unless you're chasing a stable 120fps+.

4.6GHz 5775C in Games still blows everything out of the water.

You'd be lucky to get a 5775C to 4.4Ghz at absurd voltages for 24/7. Under 1.4v, the best you'll see is 4.3GHz with maybe some extra from BCLK.