Intel Core i7-8700K 3.7 GHz

[erocker]

where are the temps?

will a cryorig H7 be sufficient (without overclocking)????

Without a doubt, the H7 will be more than sufficient.

 

[Xzibit]

 

[noname00]

I don't understand anyone who is disappointed about the 8700k performance. The chip is basically a 7700k with two extra cores and a small frequency bump. It's basically a 7700k with the multithread performance of the 1700x or 1800x, depending on the use case.

Same thing happened 7 months ago, with Ryzen. People were disappointed that 1800x did not beat the 7700k in every possible workload. Even AMD, indirectly, said that gaming performance will be worst with ryzen compared to 7700k (remember they only talked about gaming while streaming? )

That 1700x is looking more attractive with 2 extra cores and 4 extra threads.

Did you even look at the benchmark results?

it just smells of "quickly get something out to compete!!!!" coming from Intel.
Well too little too late imo, I would recommend going for Ryzen over this.

Someone already said something similar before me - It took AMD at least 5 years to develop Ryzen to a stage it can sell it to the Beta testers (aka early adopters). Do you really think they did not have 6c/12t planned before? I'm not saying this is not an answer to Ryzen, but it wasn't a rushed job. They knew AMD will release a CPU this year, and it was fair to assume it will be quite fast at least compared to the FX lineup. What Intel might not have expected is Threadripper.
If you add the fact that people are still rocking 2500k, 2600k and newer CPUs, because there is no real reason to upgrade, Intel had to do something to compete with their 5 year old products.

PS: 1700x and 1800x prices just hit a record low. I wonder why.
Edit: I hope AMD will not become, again, the "value option", as they were for the past 6-7 years.

 

[efikkan]

1080p and 1440p tests seem to be more GPU than CPU limited. Perhaps test with 1080Ti instead of 1080 in the future?

They should, there is a large gap between the two, and using GTX 1080 Ti will be a better representation of what to expect going forward with Volta.

it just smells of "quickly get something out to compete!!!!" coming from Intel.

As many have mentioned already, this chip has been known to the public for years, and planned for even longer. The release of this chip has nothing to do with Ryzen. It's also impossible for Intel to have developed this since February.

Well too little too late imo, I would recommend going for Ryzen over this.

Why? i7-8700K is clearly better and cheaper than Ryzen 7 1800X. What is the rational argument for choosing an inferior product?

 

[Folterknecht]

will a cryorig H7 be sufficient (without overclocking)????

Yes

If not (looking at GB from past experience), go into the BIOS and fix the AUTO voltage setting for VCore. Some manufacturers tend to overdo it in that department.

 

[Aquinus]

@W1zzard, did you happen to gather any CPU power consumption numbers when you overclocked it? It appears to me that at stock, consumption is similar to Ryzen but, I'm sure it eats more power when you're overclocking it. It's worthwhile to understand how much more that is because even if it's faster than AMD's option, it doesn't seem to have the power consumption advantage to achieve similar performance in the non-single threaded measures.

 

[Xzibit]

@W1zzard, did you happen to gather any CPU power consumption numbers when you overclocked it? It appears to me that at stock, consumption is similar to Ryzen but, I'm sure it eats more power when you're overclocking it. It's worthwhile to understand how much more that is because even if it's faster than AMD's option, it doesn't seem to have the power consumption advantage to achieve similar performance in the non-single threaded measures.

 

[Melvis]

It is indeed a fast gaming CPU but over all its about on par with the Ryzen 1700X (out of the box) and here in Australia you can get the Ryzen 1700X for $60 cheaper then the 8700K which is priced at $550 Aus.

 

[Mistral]

So, is this real a real or a paper launch? I keep hearing that stock is close to non-existent at the moment and is only expected to fully improve H1 next year.

 

[Prima.Vera]

Pfff.... zero increase of performance in ALL games at 2K or bigger resolutions...
No upgrade for me this year. Waiting for the 8 Core one which also will require a new mobo again. So this CPU will be probably the shortest live one from Intel's history.

 

[R0H1T]

So, is this real a real or a paper launch? I keep hearing that stock is close to non-existent at the moment and is only expected to fully improve H1 next year.

At this point in time it looks like a paper launch, but it could also be Intel helping retailers clear their KBL stock, with questionable CFL supplies. The problem is it'll only get worse in the short to medium term as RR is confirmed to debut before the year ends, then PR is likely Q1 next year.

So even if the ASP might be going up, informed buyers could simply hold their purchases, hurting Intel even more.

 

[Vario]

Looks amazing to me. 6C/12T without the single thread speed penalty of the old 2011 platform. Should be future proof for years to come. If only it also had a Crystalwell style L4 cache too .

 

[XiGMAKiD]

Solid product, now I just need to see the street price of the CPU and MB

 

[StrayKAT]

Solid product, now I just need to see the street price of the CPU and MB

At least $500 or a little more for both... if you can find the CPU.

 

[Kanan]

This line by wizard from the i5-8400 review is what sticks out to me about all these coffee lake chips.

For gaming, things are different. Here, the i5-8400 breezes past all AMD Ryzens thanks to its high per-thread performance and the boost clock of 4.0 GHz. I find it surprising that there is very little difference between the i5-8400, i5-8600K, and i7-8700K in gaming, even at the highly CPU-limited scenario of 720p. This suggests that today's games see limited gains from more than four cores. It is good news for gamers on a budget because a Core i5-8400 will be completely sufficient to not bottleneck even the fastest graphics cards.

That's pretty much a wrong conclusion then, because if the i5 8400 which only has 6 low clocked cores can match the 8700K which has 6 very high clocked cores, it essentially means, most games are indeed using 6 cores today. It also makes sense because consoles use over 6 cores too, and most games are ports anyway.

So many falsehoods from blind AMD fanboys it's just staggering.

1) No, Intel couldn't have released these 6 core parts several years ago. They absolutely needed a new refined 14nm process, because you can easily see that 8700(K) is a lot more power efficient than 7800X. Most users will never want 140W TDP in their desktop computers (6 core SkyLake-X CPUs).

And you're the Intel fanboy coming to attack those AMD fanboys / defend Intel, huh? Pretty obvious. 8700K is more efficient because it's still on ring bus and not on mesh - mesh is basically not efficient, hence the reason why X299 CPUs suck. There's also more lanes and quad channel - your comparison basically just sucks. There's no comparing MSDT with HEDT, you're making no sense here.

2) 6 core Coffee Lake parts were on Intel roadmaps way before AMD released Zen.

Still AMD forced Intel to pull it to 2017 instead of releasing it 2018. That's a fact, go and check old marketing stuff of Intel. So Ryzen helped indeed. I also bet 8700K would've cost more without Ryzen, maybe 500 bucks - no competition sucks.

3) For games Coffee Lake CPUs are unconditionally better than any Zen based CPUs because even in 2017 most games are bottlenecked by single core CPU performance where Intel is unrivaled due to higher performance per clock (IPC) and also higher attainable frequencies.

Better yes, but just by small, largely irrelevant amounts. We're talking about 8% in 1080p and basically 0% in 1440p and higher here. Obvious Intel fanboy comment btw. and simply debunked too. Ryzen is great for gaming, you can repeat that Intel superiority crap all day, it doesn't change the fact, that AMD is a great alternative and Intel isn't a "must" for gaming anymore. Ryzen changed everything. And for work Ryzen is even better.

There's only thing I don't like about Coffee Lake CPUs: Intel is mum about the 300 series chipset compatibility with Cannonlake and Ice Lake CPUs. I've never actually upgraded CPUs but it's important for many other users.

Only one thing? So you don't care Intel is milking its customers because of some shady difference between sockets to release a guaranteed new chipset every year? The difference between doing what AMD is doing and Intel, is, Intel is milking their buyers who switch from gen to gen (1 gen at a time), while AMD is not doing that. Both earn money on chipset sales, while Intel earns extra money on chipset sales on buyers who already own a CPU from them, eg 7700K or 6700K. It's simply capitalism at the extremes and anti-consumer.

Thanks to the cheap glue Intel is using, the temps are terrible once again and pretty much a hindrance for OC. Not a big one, but still.

As many have mentioned already, this chip has been known to the public for years, and planned for even longer. The release of this chip has nothing to do with Ryzen. It's also impossible for Intel to have developed this since February.

Pretty much wrong. 6 core Intel CPUs were planned for 2018 still and not 2017, go and check the facts, there's PR stuff from Intel, roadmaps, that say otherwise. Ryzen changed that, so it has a lot to do with Ryzen. The pricing of 8700K as well - I bet it would've been around 500 bucks without AMD having released very competitive Ryzen CPUs.

And my own opinion: nice CPU, but nothing special. It's basically 7700K + 2 cores, old trusty ring bus and cache hierarchy etc. IPC gain 0%, overclocks are a tad better vs 7700K and 6700K, thats it. Prices are also higher so you pay for it. Thanks to AMD the prices are still in check though, I bet without Ryzen Intel would've released it mid 2018 at 500$.

 

[Mech0z]

Paper launch one of the biggest stores in Denmark

https://www.komplett.dk/product/950...er/processorer/intel-core-i7-8700k-processor#
"Ikke på lager. 100+ stk. på vej ind d. 2.dec.2017."

Not in stock, 100+ arriving on december 2.....

 

[Prima.Vera]

If you add the fact that people are still rocking 2500k, 2600k and newer CPUs, because there is no real reason to upgrade, Intel had to do something to compete with their 5 year old products.

Well, considering the gaming performance equal to ZERO on higher resolutions, yeah, I still thing there is absolutely no reason at all to upgrade for gaming purposes only right now.

 

[Kanan]

Well, considering the gaming performance equal to ZERO on higher resolutions, yeah, I still thing there is absolutely no reason at all to upgrade for gaming purposes only right now.

Especially because it's expensive. Almost 400 bucks isn't cheap. I think the 6 core Ryzen's are a great great bargain now, and their performance is just going up over time as well, because games/apps are still not all optimized for Ryzen but soon will be, especially new ones.

 

[BorisDG]

Looks amazing to me. 6C/12T without the single thread speed penalty of the old 2011 platform. Should be future proof for years to come. If only it also had a Crystalwell style L4 cache too .

I'm pretty tempted to see 8700K vs 5775C. They will be pretty close now in gaming.

 

[RejZoR]

Pfff.... zero increase of performance in ALL games at 2K or bigger resolutions...
No upgrade for me this year. Waiting for the 8 Core one which also will require a new mobo again. So this CPU will be probably the shortest live one from Intel's history.

That's because CPU is not a bottleneck, but a graphic card. The current reality is, for gaming, you're fine with bottom most CPU that can be clocked as high as it can go. That includes even Core i3's with 2c/4t. If you can push them up to 4.5 GHz or even beyond, it'll run any game with almost max frames and will only lose a bit in few multithread aware games which you can count them all on a one hand of a very clumsy carpenter. Things will change a bit in near future since AMD pushed the whole MOAR CORES seriously this time, but it'll still take few years. If you're a gamer, graphic card is still what you want to spend the most money on as you'll benefit the most from it in either case.

 

[noname00]

So, is this real a real or a paper launch? I keep hearing that stock is close to non-existent at the moment and is only expected to fully improve H1 next year.

In Romania you can already preorder a 8600k or a 8700k and it will be delivered on Monday or Tuesday. Non k CPUs you can personally pick them up on the spot from the store - https://www.pcgarage.ro/procesoare/filtre/general-socket-1151-v2/

 

[phill]

I'm a little uninterested with the latest offerings from Intel and even gaming with my 920 D0, 2600k and such if I do anything else, I can just simply wait a few seconds till something is done that the newer CPU's do faster... I think they need to bring a little more to the table.. I understand power consumption is important to quite a few people so the drop in consumption from my 920 to my 2600k is very impressive, but from the 2600k to my 4770k there's not masses in it and as I run overclocked on every system I have, power consumption for me, is one thing I'm not so worried about

 

[Rahmat Sofyan]

Mehhh, my i7 2600 just perfectly find . .

I wonder, will Z370 mobos support at least for next tealake/cokelake/xxxlake CPU ?

or after this, Z470 coming out for intel core 9 generation ?

 

[Komshija]

This CPU arrived some 4 years too late. Let's not forget if AMD didn't release Ryzen's, we would still have few more years of "Intel's traditional" 4C/8T i7's and 4C/4T i5's with ~5% performance increase per generation.

As expected, i7 8700K runs way too hot for my taste and it's not compatible with older 100 and 200-series motherboards.

 

[EarthDog]

You act like the majority need more than 4c/8t...

...and 4 years ago?!!! No.