Reported Intel i7-8700K Coffee Lake 6-Core Lineup Leaked

[cryohellinc]

Intel is reacting, not panicking. Why would they drop prices when they're selling their product hand over fist? Remember that in a capitalist environment pricing is ALWAYS set by the buyer. If they have market share and they're basically printing money it would be stupid for them to drop prices.

You can call them the bad guy all you want, but AMD is no different. When they could, just over ten years ago, they were also selling $ 999 processors.

Agreed, however in this case neither is Good or Bad, both of them are Ugly (if you get the reference ) This is a normal competition which is finally back, however I have to say that looking on recent actions by Intel + all the rumors that float around, I do think they are hastily trying to close the gaps in their product portfolio to counter AMD. That can be seen in both themselves, and their partners. Sudden release of massive amount of new CPU's, which are all in all, a shrinked version of Xeon's + hastily made Mobo's + major overheating issues e.t.c.

 

[noname00]

Turbo has never maxed out all cores out of the box :/ Sure, you can overclock all four cores on a 7700K to 4.5 GHz, and the same is true here (more in fact, it overclocks nicely).

My 6700k, with a -0.1V voltage offset, runs Prime95 at 4.2 on all cores with everything else on auto. I don't understand how Turbo Boost actually works on a single core

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

Actually the 6-core part from intel was already "confirmed" long time ago

https://www.extremetech.com/computi...s-to-mainstream-pcs-with-upcoming-coffee-lake

Look at the date, but the only thing Intel is probably doing is releasing before the date, usually mainstream cpus launching at january.

I'm sure that Intel knew a decent amount about Ryzen before it was announced. If nothing else, they likely knew AMD was going to offer more (true) cores than 4.

 

[TheLostSwede]

My 6700k, with a -0.1V voltage offset, runs Prime95 at 4.2 on all cores with everything else on auto. I don't understand how Turbo Boost actually works on a single core

It's for programs that only use one or two cores, so there's a potential that the turbo boost will go above that of four (or in this case, six) cores.

 

[[XC] Oj101]

Agreed, however in this case neither is Good or Bad, both of them are Ugly (if you get the reference ) This is a normal competition which is finally back, however I have to say that looking on recent actions by Intel + all the rumors that float around, I do think they are hastily trying to close the gaps in their product portfolio to counter AMD. That can be seen in both themselves, and their partners. Sudden release of massive amount of new CPU's, which are all in all, a shrinked version of Xeon's + hastily made Mobo's + major overheating issues e.t.c.

Core CPUs have been Xeons with certain communication channels and ECC Reg memory support disabled for a very long time. New generations always bring a large number of new CPUs. The new CPUs don't have overheating issues, the VRMs do when there isn't enough airflow (and there are certain boards not affected by this ). The VRM cooling isn't even Intel's design, so you can't blame them for that directly. I say not directly as you can blame them for it indirectly, as the launch being moved forwards combined with vendors working on FOUR platforms simultaneously means that the vendors haven't been able to commit 100 % to X299.

There is a hell of a lot that you can blame Intel for with X299, but address those points directly instead of scraping together wishy washy points that don't account for anything. Blame them for something tangible, such as the lack of PCI-E lanes.

I don't understand how a hundred people who have not seen, never mind used, Threadripper have such deeply seated opinions on the matter.

I get that it's trendy to hate on Intel at the moment, but for crying out loud please have valid reason for hating on them!

My 6700k, with a -0.1V voltage offset, runs Prime95 at 4.2 on all cores with everything else on auto. I don't understand how Turbo Boost actually works on a single core

I have no idea what you'r trying to say

 

[EarthDog]

Some boards default to using all cores at turbo boost.

 

[[XC] Oj101]

Some boards default to using all cores at turbo boost.

That doesn't really matter, as it is not Intel's spec (which is what he's complaining about - the spec is for only two cores boosting to the maximum frequency).

 

[EarthDog]

I get that. Was just adding a point for clarity as to why he may be seeing the behavior he is seeing. Is that ok, lol???

Feels like he understood how turbo works, but is wondering why p95 runs all cores at 4.2...thelostswede answered that.

Rgardless, my post was a value add for clarity...mmmk?

 

[[XC] Oj101]

I get that. Was just adding a point for clarity as to why he may be seeing the behavior he is seeing. Is that ok, lol???

Of course It doesn't, however, add validity to his complaint.

As I said, hate on Intel all you want, but please know why you hate them and let it be a valid reason xD

 

[EarthDog]

That was his (noname) only post in this thread and he didnt hate on intel...

I digress...not worth it.

 

[[XC] Oj101]

That was his (noname) only post in this thread and he didnt hate on intel...

I digress...not worth it.

You're 100 % correct - I mixed him up with the person who said it's a quad core with a dual core glued on (cryohellinc). I blame posting from my phone My bad

 

[cdawall]

I'm just trying to figure out work load a home user would prefer 8 slow Ryzen cores. A workstation is one thing and I do want to give threadripper a go, but if the goal is games AMD is at a loss, these 6 core chips will probably extend that lead even more and quite honestly make the kaby lake quads on x299 even more confusing.

 

[efikkan]

It's interesting for a change seeing Intel responding to AMD offerings. We've been used to reverse for too long.

The upcoming 6-core has been known since before the launch of Ryzen.

Instead we have a quad core CPU, with Dual core Cpu glued on top of it, which clocks higher.

No, it's a 6-core design.

How is this a new and innovative product? Honestly?

And how is this a bad thing?

The only way I see this competing against say Ryzen 1700 is if it will have fantastic value price.

Recently built a workstation for job, with Ryzen 1800x, fantastic CPU, all cores clocked to 4.0, works flawlessly.

Seems my next home / gaming build will be 1700 unless something changes.

This CPU beats Ryzen 1800X in overall performance.

The 8700k might literally just be a 7800x.

No, i7-8700K is based on Kaby-Lake, not on the more advanced Skylake-X. i7-7800K offers slightly higher IPC, higher memory bandwidth, AVX-512 and various chipset features, if any of these are relevant, it's worth considering. Otherwise i7-8700K will surely offer better value.

If intel sticks with 14nm too long AMD has got them beat. All AMD then has to do is improve zen and maybe even switch to 7nm for zen2 to get more cores in the same die space and zen is apparently also very cheap to produce, unlike Intel's competition, so AMD could just drop the prices 20-30% and keep the budget crown.

Intel 14nm is much denser than Samsung 14nm, so for a fair comparison Samsung will be "~20nm". Intel is planning to release the "lower end" Cannonlake on 10nm later this year, with it's next new architecture Icelake on 10nm around end of next year.

I'm just trying to figure out work load a home user would prefer 8 slow Ryzen cores.

You know, synthetic benchmarks to demonstrate its "superiority".

 

[cdawall]

You know, synthetic benchmarks to demonstrate its "superiority".

It isn't even great there. I swear if I see one more cinebench says its best post I'll blow my brains out.

 

[Rahmat Sofyan]

After 7 Years... Nice..

But I will wait for Vodka Lake, Coke Lake, Cappucino Lake, Sake Lake, etc...

 

[[XC] Oj101]

The 8700k might literally just be a 7800x. If intel sticks with 14nm too long AMD has got them beat. All AMD then has to do is improve zen and maybe even switch to 7nm for zen2 to get more cores in the same die space and zen is apparently also very cheap to produce, unlike Intel's competition, so AMD could just drop the prices 20-30% and keep the budget crown.

So let's hope Intel isn't just stretching skylake's lifespan as much as possible with minor upgrades (really minor since you need a good-great cooler to really make use of extra stock clocks and overclockability) and they're finally dropping down to a 10nm or even a 7nm proces node.

Um, since when have TSMC or Samsung been better at manufacturing than Intel? You can bet your bottom dollar that Intel will retain their lead for the foreseeable future.

 

[mcraygsx]

I am all for 8700K if it Overclock anything like my 7700K which is 5.1+ Ghz anytime, any day with minimal effort.

It's interesting for a change seeing Intel responding to AMD offerings. We've been used to reverse for too long.

I am more interested in weather INTEL will solder die & HS or utilize cheap glue once more. I hope they have learned their lesson from past and if not INTEL should get ready to issue another statement to advise consumers not to OC their K series chip. But things do not look very promising since their HEDT now even use Thermal paste.

Some boards default to using all cores at turbo boost.

In ASUS motherboard's BIOS, you can simply select SYNC ALL CORES and you have all cores running at max speed e.g. 4.5Ghz in 7700k regardless of the load type. Easy Overclocking for you.

Depending on the BIOS, once you enable X.M.P profile, it auto enables SYNC all cores.

 

[RejZoR]

Um, since when have TSMC or Samsung been better at manufacturing than Intel? You can bet your bottom dollar that Intel will retain their lead for the foreseeable future.

I'd say TSMC is on the same level as Intel and they have proven their worth many times with advanced and reliable processes. You have to understand that TSMC is a fabricator for 3rd parties. When they come to their engineers and tell what they want fabed, they are probably best at what they do. You can't take Intel product and Intel fabs where engineers of both work together since initial plans and compare that with TSMC where 3rd parties come to them with already planned stuff and they have to make it. Sure they are in touch from day one most likely, but they can't ever have same communication as when it's everything inside of the same company.

Btw, MSI board that I have also has an All Core turbo option. And I'm pretty sure Ryzen boards have similar option.

 

[Prima.Vera]

No, i7-8700K is based on Kaby-Lake, not on the more advanced Skylake-X. i7-7800K offers slightly higher IPC, higher memory bandwidth, AVX-512 and various chipset features, if any of these are relevant, it's worth considering. Otherwise i7-8700K will surely offer better value.

Those perf increase are only on paper. In real word scenarios, eg: games, the 7700K uttery smoked the 7800X.

 

[Averletum]

New leaks

https://hardforum.com/threads/coffe...-in-august-specifications-out.1930226/page-17

http://i.imgur.com/5QpkNjW.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/65l33o8.jpg

 

[THU31]

Really curious about the price of the i5. Six highly clocked cores is exactly what I want.