Intel Coffee Lake event photo confirms leaked specs

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Aug 17, 2017.

  1. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    29,842
    Likes Received:
    133
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
    There have been a number of leaks on Coffee Lake already, most of them true. Intel Coffee Lake event photo confirms leaked specs of Intels upcoming 8th Generation Core processors, including 6-core mo...

    Intel Coffee Lake event photo confirms leaked specs
     
  2. buhehe

    buhehe Active Member

    Messages:
    94
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    R9 290 Tri-X Vapor-X
    i5 still stuck on 6 threads when Ryzen 5 has up to 12? :bang:
     
  3. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,540
    Likes Received:
    74
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    The non-K SKU's look to be 65W not 95W but can't confirm. That picture was taken with a potato.
     
  4. ezodagrom

    ezodagrom Master Guru

    Messages:
    518
    Likes Received:
    13
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 1060 6GB
    Looking at the Kaby Lake clocks in the photo, the clocks are listed in this order:
    Base clock / Max turbo (1-core turbo) / All cores turbo
    7700K - 4.2 /4.5 / 4.4
    7700 - 3.6 / 4.2 / 4

    So the turbo clocks in the article's chart for Coffee Lake are incorrect.

    Let's see (base/max turbo/all core turbo):
    8700K - 3.8 / 4.? /4.3 (95W)
    8700 - 3.2 / 4.4 / 4.2 (65W)
    8600K - 3.8 / 4.4 / 4.2 (95W)
    8400 - 2.8 / 3.8 / 3.5 (65W)
    8350K - 4.0 (95W)
    8100 - 3.6 (65W)

    I just can't make out what's the max turbo for the 8700K, maybe 4.5?
     
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2017

  5. Ryu5uzaku

    Ryu5uzaku Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,659
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    980ti gaming 1490/7700
    I think it was already mentioned somewhere it's 4.7 for single core. All core turbos are then 4.3, 4.2, 4.2 an 3.5 it seems?
     
  6. ezodagrom

    ezodagrom Master Guru

    Messages:
    518
    Likes Received:
    13
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 1060 6GB
    Possibly, either 4.5 or 4.7 could fit there, but it's hard to tell with how blurry it is.

    And yeah, looks like those are the all core turbos, unless my eyes are playing tricks on me.
     
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2017
  7. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    29,842
    Likes Received:
    133
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
    Yeah actually I had just corrected that table, matching your assesment as well. I just pulled some ninja like photoshop tricks, I think I can read 4.7 Turbo 3.0 for 8700K Btw.
     
  8. ezodagrom

    ezodagrom Master Guru

    Messages:
    518
    Likes Received:
    13
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 1060 6GB
    Alright. ^^

    Hmm, one interesting thing to note, the photo has incorrect TDP values for the Kaby Lake i3 CPUs, they're being listed as 95W and 65W parts despite actually being 60W and 51W parts.
    Same for the 7600K and 7700K, they're 91W parts and not 95W.
     
  9. bero

    bero New Member

    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    ATI radeon 4770
    I don't know Chinese but the horizontal lines look to me like performance comparison to kaby lake in single- and multi-thread.
     
  10. Ryu5uzaku

    Ryu5uzaku Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,659
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    980ti gaming 1490/7700
    Will be interesting to see what they compare and to what on that % and where. For sure multi-thread is easily better.

    But single the clock difference is 4.5% so there could be 6.5% improvement in IPC in some cases maybe possibly.
     

  11. dunadan101

    dunadan101 Member

    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 770 OC 4GB
    I'm going to order a whole new comp in the next couple of weeks, it's mostly for gaming. I was considering a Ryzen 1600X but that i5-8600K might be the better choice... Hope they'll price it competitively.
     
  12. Webhiker

    Webhiker Master Guru

    Messages:
    257
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    EVGA GTX 1080i SC2
    In this day and age what's the point of a 6C/6T CPU ?
    How is it going to compete against say i7 7700K 4C/8T ?
     
  13. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,540
    Likes Received:
    74
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    If we are to believe the claimed percentage increases then the 6c/6t i5 will be faster in multi-threaded apps than the 7700K in fact it will be very close to the R5 1600/x while decimating both the 7700k and 1600x in single thread. Of course this needs a grain of salt.

    The 8700k according to this will match the 1700x in multi-threaded as well.
     
  14. JamesSneed

    JamesSneed Member Guru

    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    4
    GPU:
    GTX 1070
    The 8700K on paper looks like it will be the new gaming machine CPU to replace the 7700K's spot. I don't wee anything not to like with the 8700K.
     
  15. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,010
    Likes Received:
    19
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    To my understanding, the performance increase is compared to the i5 7600K. It has 50% more cores and the turbo is about 5% higher. I'm assuming the "19%/55%" represents "single/multi". In terms of multi-threading, the IPC of the 8600K is going to be roughly 0% over the 7600K. For single-threaded, I'm not sure - 19% sounds way too high for an architectural refresh.

    So yeah, when you account for Hz, I'm sure the 8700K is going to be competitive. But, if AMD can figure out how to get beyond 4GHz without LN, I don't think Coffee Lake is going to be a resounding win. That's a real big "if" though.

    Price may be something to concern about.
     

  16. nevcairiel

    nevcairiel Member Guru

    Messages:
    133
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    MSI 1080 Gaming X
    HT doesn't add 100% extra performance, optimistically its maybe 30% at best (and often less). The cores are busy already, HT just uses performance that would otherwise be unused, but there isn't twice the hardware or anything like that.

    2 cores more is a 50% increase.

    So a 6/6 should be faster in MT workloads then an 4/8. Of course a 6/12 would be even better.
     
  17. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,540
    Likes Received:
    74
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    Single core turbo is higher on the 8600k over the 7600k but the cashe difference may be the boost.

    If we assume Intel will keep it's pricing structure in place it will not be more than $350. Likely an MSRP of $335.
     
  18. Yxskaft

    Yxskaft Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,057
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    GTX Titan Sli
    Hyperthreading can make a huge difference depending on the game. It's more evident if we look at dual core CPUs with HT since almost all games nowadays benefit from four cores/threads.

    These tests on Anandtech are a bit old now, but show how poorly the Pentium 3258 compares to the i3 4330 in well threaded games.
    The minimum FPS in Battlefield 4 almost double on the i3, and the Pentium can't even come close even when running at 4.7 ghz.
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/8232/...y-edition-review-the-intel-pentium-g3258-ae/4
     
  19. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,010
    Likes Received:
    19
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    To my understanding, the single-core turbo is what's only 5% higher. That's not much. You have a good point about the cache though - that's almost doubled. I still don't think that would make up for the remaining 14% of performance. Interestingly, it seems the cache doesn't contribute to the multi-threaded performance. I wonder if perhaps the 7600K is starved for more L3?

    As another thought, maybe the first number is actually IGP performance, not single-threaded performance. I could definitely believe Intel accomplishing a 19% improvement there.

    It is important to keep in mind that the i5 is meant to be a mainstream product. Assuming it manages to handily outperform the 7700K or 1600X, that doesn't warrant a nearly $100 price increase. At $335, the 8600K would be priced against Ryzen 7. In Intel's eyes, it looks great that their mainstream competes with AMD's high-end, but I'm not sure most consumers are going to look at it the same way. $300+ is not a mainstream price point for just a CPU.


    To my understanding, HT is great when you've got something designed with it in mind. Since HT basically uses any spare processing power in a CPU core, I'm assuming it uses the same L1 and L2 cache. If both threads are processing roughly the same information and are not supposed to complete in-parallel, then I figure HT could theoretically offer a near-100% performance improvement. Games that do things like post-processing would likely benefit from this.
    What HT is especially bad at is parallelization. The threads are run one after the other so it is impossible for them to finish simultaneously, and this is why some tasks actually lose performance with HT enabled.
    Otherwise, HT is especially useful for multi-tasking, where background tasks only need a small amount of attention.
     
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2017
  20. ezodagrom

    ezodagrom Master Guru

    Messages:
    518
    Likes Received:
    13
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 1060 6GB
    When comparing CPUs with the same number of cores, yeah, hyperthreading can make quite a difference, but, when comparing 4 cores with hyperthreading to 6 cores without hyperthreading, I doubt 4c/8t can beat 6c/6t.
     

Share This Page