Intel to launch 6 core Coffee Lake-S CPUs & Z370 chipset 5 October 2017

gavinh87 · 22 Aug 2017 at 19:55

jigger said:
How slightly worse? 6 threads vs 12 and dual memory vs quad.

Ah I got mixed up, I thought we were talking about the 8700k.

Doobedoo · 22 Aug 2017 at 19:55

Jono8 said:
No, the i5 8400 is listed as the same price as the i3 8350k. It can't be correct as why would you get the i3 when you can have 2 more cores for the same money?

For the old generation the similar price perhaps made a bit of sense as there were the same amount of threads. For coffeelake it doesn't seem to make sense, especially as the 8400 boosts to 3.8ghz all core or 4.0ghz single core. Why would anyone by the 8350k?

No I understood what you meant after I typed it. Still not quite apples to apples as one is a unlocked cpu and the other a locked. Really you should be comparing it to the i3 8100 which is $119.

muon · 22 Aug 2017 at 20:13

Doobedoo said:
Not if all you do is game at 1080p it isn't, it'll be the best 1080p cpu in the known universe

Only also if you like using a 1080Ti at 1080p to pointlessly achieve 150+fps.

gavinh87 · 22 Aug 2017 at 20:27

muon said:
Only also if you like using a 1080Ti at 1080p to pointlessly achieve 150+fps.

Not pointless if at 144hz+ though.

jigger · 22 Aug 2017 at 20:30

1920x1080 is pretty pointless.

gavinh87 · 22 Aug 2017 at 20:33

jigger said:
1920x1080 is pretty pointless.

I think you'd be surprised at the amount of 1080p 144hz gamers.

Doobedoo · 22 Aug 2017 at 20:37

gavinh87 said:
Not pointless if at 144hz+ though.

Quite right if that's what you need it for then by all means that's what you should get, if not then you have more choice at a better price point.

Nether the less 1080p is like 4 cores.... It's yesterday's technology.

gavinh87 · 22 Aug 2017 at 20:40

Doobedoo said:
Quite right if that's what you need it for then by all means that's what you should get, if not then you have more choice at a better price point.

Nether the less 1080p is like 4 cores.... It's yesterday's technology.

Whilst I agree, 4k 144hz isn't viable atm. I'd bet the majority would take 1080 144hz over 4k 60hz.
1440p is just an interim resolution imo.

Doobedoo · 22 Aug 2017 at 20:48

I understand I just would have thought those who want the cutting edge would also have moved on from 1080p. How long has 1440p been out now plus all those that like their ultra widescreens.

Anyway although popular 1080p is on it's way out.

smilingcrow · 22 Aug 2017 at 20:49

Is it still possible to get Intel boards to run all cores at the max single core turbo boost speed for non-K chips?
If so, the i5-8400 would give 6 cores at 4GHz for ~£185 which seems good value for Intel. In contrast the i3-8100 is 4 cores for ~£120 at 3.8GHz so slightly worse value.
I’m interested because benchmarks show that all the Zeppelin based AMD chips struggle with low latency DAW benchmarks probably due to poor internal latency.
I don’t require a dGPU either so the i5-8400 would be better value than a Ryzen 5 1600 build and for DAW usage more consistent.
We aren’t all obsessed with games!

gavinh87 · 22 Aug 2017 at 20:53

Doobedoo said:
I understand I just would have thought those who want the cutting edge would also have moved on from 1080p. How long has 1440p been out now plus all those that like their ultra widescreens.

Anyway although popular 1080p is on it's way out.

It is, but no matter how you look at it, at 144hz you need every bit of power you can get. Even if this is only 10fps difference for an extra £100 or whatever people will want it.

smilingcrow · 22 Aug 2017 at 20:55

gavinh87 said:
1440p is just an interim resolution imo.

Does that really mean anything worthwhile?
If higher resolutions are worthwhile then why stick with 1080P until you can run 4K with the same settings/frame rates?
Wouldn't that be a wasted opportunity?
It's like saying 6 core is interim, wait for 8 cores.
If you can benefit from more cores why wait!

gavinh87 · 22 Aug 2017 at 20:57

smilingcrow said:
Does that really mean anything worthwhile?
If higher resolutions are worthwhile then why stick with 1080P until you can run 4K with the same settings/frame rates?
Wouldn't that be a wasted opportunity?
It's like saying 6 core is interim, wait for 8 cores.
If you can benefit from more cores why wait!

Spec me a pc that can run at 4k 144hz please. IN fact I'm not aware of any 4k 144hz panels.
Who said i have 1080p anyway?

Doobedoo · 22 Aug 2017 at 21:00

gavinh87 said:
It is, but no matter how you look at it, at 144hz you need every bit of power you can get. Even if this is only 10fps difference for an extra £100 or whatever people will want it.

No I get that their are some who need to run at 144hz or above that's completely up to them, but as we know that is quite a small minority who are willing to spend top dollar on the very best, including £500+ on a g-sync monitor.

Doobedoo · 22 Aug 2017 at 21:02

gavinh87 said:
Spec me a pc that can run at 4k 144hz please. IN fact I'm not aware of any 4k 144hz panels.

It's not that far away though is it? It's obviously the next step which those that absolutely need to have the very best will be upgrading too.

gavinh87 · 22 Aug 2017 at 21:04

Doobedoo said:
No I get that their are some who need to run at 144hz or above that's completely up to them, but as we know that is quite a small minority who are willing to spend top dollar on the very best, including £500+ on a g-sync monitor.

I must be in the minority lol.
It's not far away, granted but as I said every little helps at higher Hz.

Doobedoo · 22 Aug 2017 at 21:10

gavinh87 said:
I must be in the minority lol.
It's not far away, granted but as I said every little helps at higher Hz.

Yeah but you only have a ryzen so your out side of the minority

. Let's be honest about it 144hz+ gamers are certainly a minority, although a little more prevalent on here, yet still very much a minority.

Perfect_Chaos · 22 Aug 2017 at 21:32

Doobedoo said:
Yeah but you only have a ryzen so your out side of the minority . Let's be honest about it 144hz+ gamers are certainly a minority, although a little more prevalent on here, yet still very much a minority.

That's probably because they have not tried it, or it's costly to them. But even if you're not a competitive player i think it's fairly easy to see the difference in smoothness over 60hz. At least up to 120 or so anyway. I think 1440p is a nice middle ground for another couple of years until 4k 120/144hz is doable on a single high end GPU.

Doobedoo · 22 Aug 2017 at 21:37

Perfect_Chaos said:
That's probably because they have not tried it, or it's costly to them. But even if you're not a competitive player i think it's fairly easy to see the difference in smoothness over 60hz. At least up to 120 or so anyway. I think 1440p is a nice middle ground for another couple of years until 4k 120/144hz is doable on a single high end GPU.

Yeah I would have thought cost has a lot to do with it. G-sync monitors are crazy money though on top of a £500+ gpu. Would love to try it myself I just can't justify it. Maybe one day.

gavinh87 · 22 Aug 2017 at 21:46

Doobedoo said:
Yeah I would have thought cost has a lot to do with it. G-sync monitors are crazy money though on top of a £500+ gpu. Would love to try it myself I just can't justify it. Maybe one day.

I urge you to try a 144hz if you can. Resolution won't mean as much to you then. Even if your not a gamer the difference can be felt on the desktop.