-
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.
Intel to launch 6 core Coffee Lake-S CPUs & Z370 chipset 5 October 2017
- Thread starter AthlonXP1800
- Start date
Depends on the end user. This is kabylake plus 2 cores nothing new really.
Some of the metrics are still relevant from the ryzen/kabylake debate, as in price, lack of solder and platform longevity. It is still going to be quite a bit more expensive than the 1700 and what if Zen 2 turns out to be nigh on, on par with coffee lake for single thread and clockspeed?
Without doubt it will cost more. What I've learned over the past 6 months is that ryzens performance is very hit and miss. In some games its up there with the i7, in others its nowhere near.
People can say it requires optimising, but realistically how many devs will do this? In the games that have had ryzen patches it is still losing to the i7's.
Ryzen is a very good CPU choice for the majority, however for people like me with high refresh rate monitors then intel is the better choice.
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 966
Lovely to read all your asides.
What I'm saying is that AMD are ahead of the curve in terms of offering so much CPU performance per buck, regardless of core count, so it will take the game developers a while before they catch up and start coding for the new paradigm.
I don't think that will happen in a major way until we see Zen 2 (or whatever) cores in consoles.
By the time that happens AMD will either be on Zen 2 for PCs or Zen 3 on AM5 and Intel will have burnt through another 3 sockets.
Can't argue with that, Ryzen is in it's infancy but will only get better from here on, it's why I decided to wait the the next iteration. It's a shame Intel feel the need to price their cpu's so high but in truth it's probably better for AMD in the short term, until they are truly on a level playing field.
I still feel that those that buy Intel for what they charge and the resources they have available to them should expect more. But that's just my opinion.
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 966
You aren't buying fruit and veg by the pound, you are buying on performance. Based on price per core Bulldozer was a kilo of rotten tomatoes.
Ryzen 7 will stick look good post CL just not as good as it did before.
Last edited:
Bulldozer is in the past now mate time to move on. Those that have gone for ryzen will do alright and if they need a performance bump they can sell their cpu and buy zen 2, those that haven't will likely see a drop in prices.
It's all good.
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 966
You are still missing the key point which is it's about overall gaming performance which clearly isn't tied to core count otherwise an i5-K with 4/4 C/T would be dominated by a Ryzen 7 8/16 C/T.
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 966
You've missed the point mate as I was explaining that core count isn't the defining metric, keep up.
No but it's the way the market is going. Bulldozer is a bad example to be using we know it was below par. Ryzen isn't and Intel are also showing that more cores is the way forward.
Software and game developers will catch up you just can't click your fingers and expect to happen just like that.
People can stick to 4 cores if they want but It doesn't look like AMD and Intel will for too much longer.
No it's you thats missing the point. Games are using the cores now. The days of single cores performance are in the past.
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 966
All the data I've seen shows that the majority of the time even with twice the core/threads Ryzen 7 lags behind an i7.
Now that may well change in 2, 3 or 4 years time but not now.
That means AM4 is likely a better long term bet than KL but it's impossible to say whether the last chip for AM4 will be better than CL for gaming.
It may well be a 12/24 C/T monster that will annihilate CL if it is stuck on 6 core for video encoding and the like and I have a feeling that AM4 will make all the arguments moot with Zen 2.
So unless Intel have a good 10nm design they will have little to shout about.
Is it that Intel are flogging a dead horse in coffee lake, kabylake x is the way forward and the 8700k should have really been the 7740x.
Regardless now is the time to start the transition you can't expect developers to code for multicore until multicore becomes mainstream, we are now beginning to see multicore become mainstream.
No need to stand still when everything is starting to move around you.
Regardless now is the time to start the transition you can't expect developers to code for multicore until multicore becomes mainstream, we are now beginning to see multicore become mainstream.
No need to stand still when everything is starting to move around you.
Agreed, quad is going the way dual went, still around but not for anything more than entry level. It'll be interesting if AMD will start with announcing Zen+2 when Coffee hits, I also wonder about a nice pricedrop for Ryzen, £140 for the 1600 and £220 for the 1700.
Exactly!
It would make a lot of sense if AMD drop prices to counter coffee lake (with zen 2 still being a little way off), they should still be able to make money at the lower prices whilst gaining a bit more market share. Haven't even released raven ridge yet. https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cp...500u_has_appeared_on_the_geekbench_database/1
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 966
By multi-core I presume you mean octo-core and assuming that's what you mean that's exactly what I've been saying to jigger; it takes time for the software to address the new paradigm which is only just starting to emerge anyway. Early days.
According to the Steam hardware survey, 6 cores and up only amounts to <3% of the market, there's really no incentive for any developer to cater to that base when <4 cores is >97%, with quads at 58% share and growing fast.
Additionally, even with the current low level apis, single core performance is still fairly important, here's one of AMD's own sliders from not long ago that should give you a good visual representation:
That right there is the reason why the 7700K is still usually the fastest gaming CPU even in DX12/Vulkan games, even though the performance delta between CPUs decreases.
Additionally, even with the current low level apis, single core performance is still fairly important, here's one of AMD's own sliders from not long ago that should give you a good visual representation:
That right there is the reason why the 7700K is still usually the fastest gaming CPU even in DX12/Vulkan games, even though the performance delta between CPUs decreases.
And their you go. Command Buffer Behavior in Direct 12
ALL 8 CORES UTILIZED
WORK DISTRIBUTED ACROSS ALL CORES.
As we've been saying it's already begun, so yes single thread is still important and 4 cores is more popular, but that will now begin to change. That 4 core that has been Intels staple for the last ten years with the i5's and i7's is no more, it's now 6 core. Does that still not mean anything to you? Like I said keep your 4 core for as long as you want, my next cpu will likely have 8 and I'm quite sure that most people on here will now go 6+ when they finally upgrade.
ALL 8 CORES UTILIZED
WORK DISTRIBUTED ACROSS ALL CORES.
As we've been saying it's already begun, so yes single thread is still important and 4 cores is more popular, but that will now begin to change. That 4 core that has been Intels staple for the last ten years with the i5's and i7's is no more, it's now 6 core. Does that still not mean anything to you? Like I said keep your 4 core for as long as you want, my next cpu will likely have 8 and I'm quite sure that most people on here will now go 6+ when they finally upgrade.