• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

40th Anniversary Intel - Core i7-8086K - 5.0GHz+

Aretak said:
As someone who has owned both Coffee Lake and Ryzen, and a 1440p G-Sync monitor, I can't agree with your assertion. Indeed, the reason I still have my "placeholder" 1600 is entirely because I didn't notice this supposed gulf in performance. And indeed even taking subjective and perceived experience out of the equation, my overclocked 1080 Ti taps out long before the CPU does in anything remotely demanding, as measured objectively by MSI Afterburner's OSD. In terms of stuff I have installed right now that can make decent use of a 1080 Ti - Far Cry 5, Assassin's Creed: Origins, Watch Dogs 2, Mirror's Edge: Catalyst, Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, Quantum Break, Mass Effect: Andromeda - my GPU is pegged at 100%, which means I have nothing to gain from throwing more CPU power at it.

Perhaps you could name some games where I'm apparently really missing out. I'll give you World of Warcraft, where a highly-clocked Intel CPU certainly does provide a notable benefit, though I feel that's a poor argument for buying an 8700K when an overclocked G3258 would provide the same benefit.
Click to expand...

Destiny 2, gta5, world of warships, forza were the ones that come to my mind.
 
Next year i might be tempted to upgrade to Zen 2 or Icelake from my 5820k, if i even have any need. But basically clock speed and overall performance as well as game performance is going to be a big factor for me.

I'm not gonna settle for anything less than a good high clocked 8 core though.
 
Aretak said:
As someone who has owned both Coffee Lake and Ryzen, and a 1440p G-Sync monitor, I can't agree with your assertion. Indeed, the reason I still have my "placeholder" 1600 is entirely because I didn't notice this supposed gulf in performance. And indeed even taking subjective and perceived experience out of the equation, my overclocked 1080 Ti taps out long before the CPU does in anything remotely demanding, as measured objectively by MSI Afterburner's OSD. In terms of stuff I have installed right now that can make decent use of a 1080 Ti - Far Cry 5, Assassin's Creed: Origins, Watch Dogs 2, Mirror's Edge: Catalyst, Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, Quantum Break, Mass Effect: Andromeda - my GPU is pegged at 100%, which means I have nothing to gain from throwing more CPU power at it.

Perhaps you could name some games where I'm apparently really missing out. I'll give you World of Warcraft, where a highly-clocked Intel CPU certainly does provide a notable benefit, though I feel that's a poor argument for buying an 8700K when an overclocked G3258 would provide the same benefit.
Click to expand...


Now don't tell me you disagree with Gavin on anything INTEL...he'll have assassination squads after you :p
 
Bumblebox said:
can someone explain what the "turbo 5ghz" and the stock 4ghz means on the 8086k? does the turbo mean the average overclock or something?
Click to expand...

String said:
My understanding is that all cores will hit 4GHz out of the box, and single core will boost to 5GHz out of the box.

It's a pretty big jump, actually.
Click to expand...

The base clock is guaranteed under all loads unless thermals breach throttle limits. So it will never go below 4GHz no matter how hard you load it. 5Ghz is the maximum turbo frequency above this for a single core, the max 6 core turbo will be higher but it's not specced.
 
IT Troll said:
Although there is a slight irony that this Intel 8086 anniversary edition is actually an x64 chip based on AMD technology.
Click to expand...

The 8086 was also made by AMD under licence for IBM, Until Intel illegally reneged on that contract which forced AMD to make their own X86 designs that ended up better than Intel's, that is when Intel lost the plot and really started behaving like ####
 
humbug said:
The 8086 was also made by AMD under licence for IBM, Until Intel illegally reneged on that contract which forced AMD to make their own X86 designs that ended up better than Intel's, that is when Intel lost the plot and really started behaving like ####
Click to expand...

Actually thinking about that for a moment, the 8086 is then also how AMD was born, i mean AMD was a chip designer before then but very small and Intel trying to force AMD out of the market by refusing to honour IBM's 2 source contract is what forced AMD to pull their socks up and get serious, therein becoming the company we know today.

43nXN77.jpg.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom