1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Review: Intel Core i7 8700K processor

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Oct 5, 2017.

  1. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,017
    Likes Received:
    472
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    I too want to wait and see retail versions as well. I mean it's not like my 2600k is a bad CPU even now.
     
  2. sverek

    sverek Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,390
    Likes Received:
    1,001
    GPU:
    NOVIDIA -0.5GB
    I am not sure if "working for intel" gives any leverage. Unless he is really in manager position and can freely acquire any sample.
    99+% of Intel workers probably don't have access to their products. They just consumers, like us.
     
  3. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    33,924
    Likes Received:
    2,924
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
    No it isn't. The guy is a conspiracy theorist and gaining popularity and views by just that, feeding off a bit of confusion and throwing in many arguments for confusion, and all of the sudden narrowing that down to an answer that sounds plausible. He's doing it in an intelligent way I'll give him that. The scores aren't because of the proc sample, trust me all procs are the same aside for asic quality vs tweaking. Nope, it's simply because of the motherboard firmware. We had access to Coffee Lake 3 weeks prior to the launch, over the course of two weeks our loaner sample saw multiple new mobo BIOSes released gradually increasing performance on most motherboards. If you check the reference review and compare it to the later MSI review for example, what do you notice?

    Check here:
    http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_z370_godlike_gaming_review,10.html

    Same processor. It's the mobo manufacturers who tweak performance by fiddling with the Turbo bins. ASUS for example has a feature that 'optimizes' performance and enables it by default. Great stuff for the novice user, but not representable for stock reference proc results as they set the turbo bin to 4.7 GHz on all cores for the 8700k. The problem is that most reviewers do not even look at such settings to disable them (which I did for the reference proc review). Basically my 8700k results are spot on as to what the 8700k really is. We did update to 1400CB after some BIOS updates though. The rest of the performance differential is the result of motherboard manufacturers tweaking for best performance and best results as all motherboard manufacturers want to show that their board is the fastest in the reviews and thus enable that stuff as they do not want to be slower than the competition. It is as simple as that and has nothing to do with the procs, these are all the same including ES samples.

    Just because Adored is talking and taking causality for granted doesn't mean it's right. Again, he is a conspiracy theorist, and while there's nothing wrong with that or him (love it how he pronounces Guru3D), it aint the facts, that's for sure.
     
    lucidus, Noisiv, yasamoka and 3 others like this.
  4. alanm

    alanm Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,176
    Likes Received:
    680
    GPU:
    1070 AMP!
    ^ heh heh.. that was about as refreshing a takedown of Adored's 'investigative' journalism as I've seen. :D
     
    Loophole35 likes this.

  5. D3M1G0D

    D3M1G0D Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,300
    Likes Received:
    663
    GPU:
    2 x GeForce 1080 Ti
    Yes, I think that was covered as well in the Adored video. Jay redid his tests in light of this to correct for this difference (). He said he also contacted Asus, who denied that MCE was on by default - so either Asus doesn't know how their own motherboards are configured or they are hiding the fact that their boards overclock out of the box.

    You may not be a fan of Adored but he was right in pointing out the differences in scores (at least partially). He even got one of the reviewers to recognize their mistake and fix it in a subsequent review. I know that he speculates quite a bit and may come off as a bit of a kook but he actually got results here.
     
    Adored likes this.
  6. -Tj-

    -Tj- Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    15,750
    Likes Received:
    1,087
    GPU:
    Zotac GTX980Ti OC
    Yeah muticore enhancement is set to auto/enabled by default. Was the same with my asus z87 & haswell chip. Think its no different now.
     
  7. Noisiv

    Noisiv Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,488
    Likes Received:
    395
    GPU:
    R9 290 AC 1150/1500
    The truth. Mixed with misinformations, half truths and cherry picked facts. Is the basic principle of unloading propaganda. Because only the most gullible and those who are already followers would trust 20 minutes of pure insanity, downright lies and speculations. Hence one needs to mix; see bellow:


    Whats there to be a fan of? The guy is the raving AMD fan with a gift of speech and lots of time on his hands. That fact alone should by default make anyone with half a brain doubtful about anything he says on the matter.
     
    sverek and Loophole35 like this.
  8. Adored

    Adored New Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Vega 64 Liquid
    Still smarting at being called out on your GTX 1060 Doom benchmark using OpenGL numbers Hilbert? ;)

    You are correct in your case - obviously - as you have the CPU on hand you know what results you are getting. You should be aware however that I base my analysis on what you say. For example at the end of your 8700K review you stated...

    So I simply have to go on that. I didn't know that you had used the worst results from the Aorus and that you had different results on the Godlike. It's not possible to check every single article, I only have time to check the main reviews when researching 10+ of them for a video.

    In the case of your main review, it appeared that you tested multiple mobos and got the same (low Cinebench R15) result in each. That's what your conclusion looks like to anyone who reads it.

    With that said, looking at your MSI Godlike review it's pretty clear that what I said about mobo quality being a factor in performance is true?

    [​IMG]

    Yeah you're getting more perf out of the Godlike, but the power is up over 20% just to reach those "middle 1400ish" Cinebench R15 numbers that most got. No free lunch here, nobody should expect to see those numbers on cheaper mobos. Which is basically, what I said.
     
  9. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    33,924
    Likes Received:
    2,924
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
    I'm afraid you're giving yourself a little too much credit in the post above.

    Still smarting at being called out on your GTX 1060 Doom benchmark using OpenGL numbers Hilbert?

    Could not care less about it, and still don't. But it is a good example where you hype up an AMD fanbase and create a momentum in what becomes a witch hunt with your videos just for kicks and views. OpenGL is the wider adopted API still used. However when a comment is fair enough (from any of our readers) we'll always listen and adapt if there is a certain demand for a feature to be tested, we did and started including Vulkan result sets in our reviews. So in the end a comment like that becomes a win for the quality of our content right? But you, by implication quite subtle positioned this website as having an NVIDIA bias, which is just not right -- any reader here on the website and forums will confirm that. And it's that kind of nonsense and subtle accusations where you get your kicks and popularity from.

    You are correct in your case - obviously - as you have the CPU on hand you know what results you are getting. You should be aware however that I base my analysis on what you say. For example at the end of your 8700K review you stated.

    "We tested multiple Z370 motherboards all with the latest BIOS."

    Correct, as all reviewers should do - use the latest BIOS available and update results if needed. They however do need to check and disable 3rd party tweaks AIBs make default for a proc review, for mobo reviews that's different though. So yes, let's call that what it is me being spot on in my testing procedure.

    Yeah you're getting more perf out of the Godlike, but the power is up over 20% just to reach those "middle 1400ish" Cinebench R15 numbers that most got. No free lunch here, nobody should expect to see those numbers on cheaper mobos. Which is basically, what I said.​

    Again you assume a bit too much just to claim you are right - without looking at the entire picture. That assumption isn't 100% correct as this behavior is not based on just higher turbo bins. Once the proc stresses, other parts in the eco system jump out of low p-states. The enthusiast class boards have all kinds of extra core logic on-board. I can see the triple KillerNIC and AC WIFI easily eat 15 maybe even 20 watts alone, ergo it is the sum of all parts on a mobo that define total power consumption under system stress. The higher turbo bins can be achieved fairly easily without extra voltage offsets, the extra clocks freq will eat away a bit more power, but not that much. What was the video called? "The great con CF job" with a huge Intel logo slapped on it? Trust me when I say that I have little respect for Intel lately and neither do I feel a need to defend them, but they had nothing to do with the results overall. Neither are the proc samples differing from the baseline results. It's the board partners in a race to be the fastest in the charts, plain and simple.

    I'll repeat what I stated, you are a conspiracy theorist and I do not even mean what with disrespect, you thrive and feed off property that you copy and use (without legal consent which I like to mention for once) to create a bit of confusion for kicks, giggles and clicks. Everything should and can have its place on the web or YT, that means you as well so I respect that for what it is, but do leave it at that.

    Edit: btw reading this back it reads a little harsh - It is not intended that way as I do not have a personal thing against you or anything, contrary I could see myself having a good chat with you in a pub enjoying a nice pint. It's just that overall I do not agree with what you do or are trying to accomplish with your conclusions on many levels.
     
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2017
    alanm, yasamoka and Noisiv like this.
  10. Aura89

    Aura89 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,863
    Likes Received:
    273
    GPU:
    -
    It would be fact, if it were real.

    As i stated, and will continue to state since i have an FPS counter that is enabled in all games that allow, Ryzen processor + 1440p + 144hz + 1080 ti = 144fps+ in the majority of games that a 1080 ti would be capable of getting 144fps, and the games that it doesn't, intel generally doesn't get 144fps either since it's the GPU, because they are either too demanding even for a 1080 ti at the highest settings (or unoptimized), or they have an FPS cap on them and at that point, it really doesn't matter.

    I'm not saying that that intel doesn't get better FPS in some games, that is fact, but it's by no means the majority, it's only in some (@1440p, 144hz, 1080 ti, highest settings possible, etc.), and most of the time when that happens, it's a very small difference, or its above 144fps either way, so who cares.

    The only people who refute this are elitist intel fanboys that will hold onto one, two, MAYBE three benchmarks showing that their lord and savior performs better as to why "you'd get a better experience with Intel vs AMD at 1440p" as if somehow those 1, 2 or 3 benchmarks = all of gaming.

    So my point still stands as to my reply: I don't know where this "bottom line" is that typhon6657 speaks of, since it doesn't exist.
     
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2017

  11. Adored

    Adored New Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Vega 64 Liquid
    Yes while I made that claim in the video (due to not having the entire facts of your CPU at hand), that's not what I claimed in my post.

    While running Cinebench? What's it doing, installing drivers? :D Come on you don't believe that for a second Hilbert. The maximum extra will be the difference between idle on both mobos, which still leaves a lot of extra power for that minor increase in performance.

    What is Intel doing to prevent this? Nothing obviously. I know the mobo guys are all trying to beat each other. I also know Intel encourages reviewers to bench with MCE on. We both know that you've been asked to do certain things in the past that didn't sit well with you. Not just from Intel obviously, but from Nvidia and AMD too.

    I don't need legal consent to use work from other websites. I'm creating original work using small pieces of work created by others, which has been established practice for millenia. It's all within reason obviously, it's not like I rip off your numbers and present them as my own. In fact I always cite my sources as my own work *actually* gets ripped off, sometimes in it's entirety. There is nothing more annoying than that.

    Other example of dodgy behaviour could be taking content from other guys and removing their logos while presenting it as your own work.

    That's fine, disagreement is always gonna happen. It's clear to me that you got your pants in a knot because I called you out over benching Doom on OpenGL. Sure maybe I was a bit hasty and since that point I've understood the whole reviewing process a bit more, but you're being hasty in your assumptions here.

    And let's be honest, you should have benched Doom on Vulkan. Back then my concern was the gap we were seeing between the 480 and 1060 and Doom on OpenGL was a large part of the problem. As we saw in the end, there really wasn't any difference between those cards, the launch difference was down to some poor reviewer choices i.e. Project Cars, the aforementioned Doom on Vulkan etc. 3 months later and the cards were basically tied, which is what I said would happen.

    That makes me a "conspiracy theorist" but when you have a success rate on "conspiracies" like I do, you earn the right to be at least known as a conspiracy..factist?

    Note - I'm mostly just pulling your leg Hilbert, in no way do I consider you to be one of the worst out there. Far from it in fact, at least you know what you're doing unlike most of the rest.
     
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2017
  12. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    33,924
    Likes Received:
    2,924
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
    Good to hear that, moving on and take care ... what's your real name anyway?
     
  13. Adored

    Adored New Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Vega 64 Liquid
    Jim. ;)
     
  14. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    33,924
    Likes Received:
    2,924
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
    Alright, Jim it is. Points noted Jim and take care.
     
  15. Adored

    Adored New Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Vega 64 Liquid
    Cheers Hilbert, you know you can always drop me an email if you have an issue with something I've said or done.

    I promise you this - I'm not out to make your lives harder and I know that some AMD fanboys are ridiculous in how far they take things. I do try to reel them in, but I can't control them any more than you guys can control the idiots from the "other side" that plague my channel. You only need to read some comments in this thread to understand the crap I get every day. ;)

    And you're right, I'm a lot newer at this than most of you and it's still a learning process.
     

  16. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    33,924
    Likes Received:
    2,924
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
    Hey, I find that to be a very fair remark from you to make. Will do, appreciated and let me extend that courtesy likewise Jim.
     
    Adored likes this.
  17. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    33,924
    Likes Received:
    2,924
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
    Right back on topic.

    To those that have requested 720p game intra-platform benchies, you can find the first results in the 8600k review from today. The new result set will need to build up a little with other procs, but from here onward we'll include at least a handful of games to address the requests made on this.

    I'm thinking about overhauling the entire result-set scaling from 720p upwards to 1080p, 1440p and 2160p. However, not all procs are available to me so that would result into only recent processors included in these result sets (e.g. limited procs included / smaller data-sets).

    Let me know what you guys would prefer.
     
    yasamoka likes this.
  18. Embra

    Embra Master Guru

    Messages:
    723
    Likes Received:
    105
    GPU:
    Vega 64 Nitro+LE
    I think 720p results are a lot of work for little added information. Perhaps on a for cpu views for those wanting to know. I really like the way your views are ran presently. I find them to be very relevant in actual gaming, which I think everyone really wants most.
     
  19. FranciscoCL

    FranciscoCL Member Guru

    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    6
    GPU:
    GTX 1080 AMP Ext/CLoop
    I would prefer minimun fps information in the current tested resolutions (or just 1080p) instead of 720p results.
     
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2017
  20. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,017
    Likes Received:
    472
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    More info is never a bad thing.

    Pure minimum is not a good indication as it can falsely flag a runt frame as a minimum. 99 percentile should be used.
     

Share This Page