8-core Coffee Lake CPUs Are Surfacing in SiSoftware Database

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, May 22, 2018.

  1. SaLaDiN666

    SaLaDiN666 Member

    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    3
    GPU:
    1080 GTX

    I do not recall saying how much exactly it would help. I said that I didn't have any problems with cooling my 7820x on air @4.7ghz so we could expect the same with the mainstream 8 core. You can compare 7800x vs 8700k. Both are hexa cores. 8700k is clocked higher, running all core turbo boost @ 4.3ghz, 7800x @ 4ghz. 7800x runs hotter, worse overclocker, at stock consumes more power up to 50w, the power consumption skyrockets when OC-ed. We see the same thing happening with 7740x which is just 7700k put on a different socket, consuming more power again, up to 30w more than 7700k. So that gives you pretty much the idea what you can expect. It can't get worse.


    Ad 8700k vs 2600x, in the vast majority of clock to clock tasks, the i7 will win. Haven't seen any single threaded bechmarks where the Intel lost and in games, pretty clear, 8700k will simply always perform faster... 2600x is able to compete occasionally in heavily multithreaded scenarios. But that is easily skewed in favour of Intel by using highly clocked rams which Ryzen wouldn't handle.
     
  2. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    10,051
    Likes Received:
    2,348
    GPU:
    5700XT+AW@240Hz
    People compare 2600X with 8700K? There's no reason. With similar IPC and same number of cores/threads, 8700K holds clock advantage and OC advantage.
    Want to compare? Bang for Buck, that's only sensible way to compare those two as price difference is quite big.
     
  3. rhysiam

    rhysiam Member

    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    7950
    Actually the difference is nowhere near as big as you think. Steve from Hardware Unboxed recently did an IPC comparison between the 8700K and 2600X (both with all cores locked to 4Ghz). In productivity workloads the CPUs trade blows:
    Obviously Intel pulls ahead in games by a substantial margin. Of course, right now it's a fairly meaningless comparison because the Intel CPUs clock so much higher.

    Speculating about the future though: Despite the 2600X being just a slightly refined first gen Zen architecture, AMD were still able to eek out modest but measurable IPC gains. That's with just surface level changes. The proper next-gen Zen 2 (Ryzen 3xxx) chips could well have substantial IPC improvements as it's AMD first real iteration on the Zen architecture. Intel's next gen, Cannon Lake, on the other hand is just a die-shrink of Kaby/Coffee Lake, so minimal IPC uptick if any.
    Gaming is likely to continue to favour Intel because the increased core-to-core latency when traversing CCX modules is at the heart of the Zen architecture. Having said that, I wouldn't be surprised to see Ryzen IPC overtake Intel in productivity workloads in the next generation. I'm speculating and may be wrong, of course, but it'll be interesting to see.
     
  4. ubercake

    ubercake Master Guru

    Messages:
    214
    Likes Received:
    44
    GPU:
    EVGA 2080 Ti XC Blk
    You can compare the clock-for-clock maths all day long, but the 8700K beats the 2700x in about half of the multi-threaded synthetics out there on any review site with two less cores (wtff??). And with toothpaste!??

    In addition, the 8700K is a better gamer for most games even at higher than 1080p resolutions.

    The fact that one processor is clocked higher than another out of the box is because it CAN be.

    I am seriously impressed with what AMD has to offer these days. I'm also happy AMD forced Intel to play their hand. The 2700x brought me into the CPU-buying market for the first time in 6 years. The 8700K was probably meant to be the next $600 enthusiast 6-core, but they had to do something better than that because of AMD.
    I wanted to buy a 2700x and if AMD would have released a faster processor out of the box (most reviews say one of the cores hits 4.3, but most stay under 4GHz) - equal to or faster than the 8700K - I would have purchased the AMD. I may have made a mistake, but - unless Intel or AMD really change the face of computing sooner - five or six years from now I'll make up for it with my next CPU.

    I should also add that at my local Micro Center, the 8700K is $299.

    I think both companies now make great products, but you just have to go with what works for you.
     

  5. alanm

    alanm Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,218
    Likes Received:
    1,505
    GPU:
    Asus 2080 Dual OC
    Not sure if JayZ included long term tests, but thats what separates true TIMs from other compounds. You dont want it to degrade or dry out over time.
     

Share This Page