-
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
probably because apart from a bios flash they probably are but "intel" hence if the rumours are true about that 8 core/16 thread coffeelake 14nm you need another new motherboard because reasons.
Is that good?
I am not commenting how good or bad it is. I'm just providing what I have.
Its 50% more than the 7700K.
Which would make sense, it has 50% more threads, which also means its boosting to at least 4.5Ghz on all cores, maybe even a bit higher.
I just had a look, the 7700K boosts on all cores to 4.5Ghz and scores around 980 so 1500 would be a bit more than 50%, also i don't think core scale that perfectly so at 1500 or a little more? its probably running more like 4.7Ghz on all cores if that score is not an overclocked score.
I'm not expecting much overclocking headroom.
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
Ryzen 1700x at stock is 1527 so it's not amazing.
That's the 3.0Ghz 65 watt SKU.
I would say its pretty good actually but by the looks of it very high clocks out of the box, if it overclocks to 5Ghz then it has maybe 6 or 7% headroom for overclocking, much like nVidia's Pascal cards.
It looks like Intel clocked it up to edge out the 1700 but couldn't quite manage it for the higher end Ryzen 7's.
The 1700 has about 30% headroom.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 5,849
Over the past few days, you have made quite a few posts with dubious looking screenshots and made some bold comments on its performance... your post count shows your fairly new too, pardon me for being skeptical and not believing much of what you say.
If you are merely relaying info you have heard elsewhere then thats cool and all, maybe your just making stuff up out of your imagination, dunno... but if you actually have the chip or access to it, a simple photo of the chip with a piece of paper with your forum name next to it will add a ton more credibility to your claims
Nothing new, expected perf as it has 50% more cores. The point it at what speed. If is 4.3 on all cores stock, and overclocks to 5ghz, going be very close to 6950X @4.3perf. which is something expected also, if you add 50% on the 7700K 5.0ghz perf.
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2015
- Posts
- 18,512
Few changes of the pins path way or what ever you call it - part of me thinks this is down to Intel always getting full product launches with vendors as they are always know they make money every other launch , were as amd like to run a few generations which doesn't generate board vendors as much income
where is the fun in that?Over the past few days, you have made quite a few posts with dubious looking screenshots and made some bold comments on its performance... your post count shows your fairly new too, pardon me for being skeptical and not believing much of what you say.
If you are merely relaying info you have heard elsewhere then thats cool and all, maybe your just making stuff up out of your imagination, dunno... but if you actually have the chip or access to it, a simple photo of the chip with a piece of paper with your forum name next to it will add a ton more credibility to your claims
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 5,849
So basically your trolling then....
i7-8600k? bios screen shows i5-8600k.
6C/12T scoring similar to an 8C/16T is pretty amazing, though not unexpected.
Don't forget to come back here when the official NDA ends.
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
Not so amazing when it's 100 quid more expensive though.
Thats at 4.5Ghz or more tho, the 1700 is only running at 3.0Ghz, a 6 core CPU running at 4.5Ghz matching an 8 core running at 3.0Ghz is expected but its not amazing, its not even that good, its not bad.
The 1700 still has 30% or more clocks left in the tank, and the power consumption is probably about half that of the 8700K which also costs a lot more, its not that great....
Its saying something when its amazing that a new Intel CPU can match an older AMD CPU in performance.
Last edited:
Isn't the 8700k stock only 4.3GHz at all core boost? Also I think the chap was comparing to the 1700x "Ryzen 1700x at stock is 1527 so it's not amazing." which is 3.4GHz base.
So rough calculations give it a 26% clock speed advantage (4.3/3.4) compared to the 33% core advantage of the 1700x (8/6). A matching cinebench score shows Intel still has the IPC edge which I think was pretty widely known anyway so that rumoured score seems pretty much in line.