• 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

Associate
Joined
27 Sep 2010
Posts
149
Given that memory is the topic here, for someone that games at 144hz and mainly plays PUBG with a 1080ti and planning to get a 8700k - what would net me the most performance:

3200mhz at CA14
3600mhz at CA16
3866MHz CA18-19-19-39

Looking at the above, it seems that they are all fairly close. I saw some tests that seemed to indicate that PUBG gets some small advantages for speed (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQ3neH6XCds) however I don't know the timings involved - seems like he scaled down the RAM speed from a 4266mhz kit.
 
Associate
Joined
8 May 2017
Posts
148
This review has a few more ram speed benchmarks results for coffee lake and they are simular to what we know already
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.eu...el-coffee-lake-s-core-i5-8400-i5-8600k-review

Both Core i5 8400 and i5 8600K at stock frequencies are tested below, and there are two takeaways. Firstly, running a Coffee Lake-S i5 with 2133MHz is not recommended - there is performance boost ranging from eight to 12 per cent in opting for 2666MHz RAM instead. However, the jump from 2666MHz memory to 3000MHz memory is much lower - generally just three per cent or thereabouts.
 
Soldato
Joined
24 Feb 2013
Posts
4,134
Location
East Midlands
Given that memory is the topic here, for someone that games at 144hz and mainly plays PUBG with a 1080ti and planning to get a 8700k - what would net me the most performance:

3200mhz at CA14
3600mhz at CA16
3866MHz CA18-19-19-39

Looking at the above, it seems that they are all fairly close. I saw some tests that seemed to indicate that PUBG gets some small advantages for speed (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQ3neH6XCds) however I don't know the timings involved - seems like he scaled down the RAM speed from a 4266mhz kit.

I would like to know if anything better than 3200 c14 is worthwhile as well. I'd imagine 3600 c16 is virtually identical in most scenarios just you pay more.
 
Permabanned
Joined
24 Jul 2016
Posts
7,412
Location
South West
I would like to know if anything better than 3200 c14 is worthwhile as well. I'd imagine 3600 c16 is virtually identical in most scenarios just you pay more.

Given that memory is the topic here, for someone that games at 144hz and mainly plays PUBG with a 1080ti and planning to get a 8700k - what would net me the most performance:

3200mhz at CA14
3600mhz at CA16
3866MHz CA18-19-19-39

Looking at the above, it seems that they are all fairly close. I saw some tests that seemed to indicate that PUBG gets some small advantages for speed (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQ3neH6XCds) however I don't know the timings involved - seems like he scaled down the RAM speed from a 4266mhz kit.

I was the one who told you about the latency being an issue holding back ryzen because of the Fabric running at Ram frequency. It was very funny, I was trying to spread that message at Overclock.net and was being told I was an Idiot 3 months ago. I am laughing down my sleeve now as everyone is talking about latency and timings.

The extra bandwidth in GB/s above 3200 doesn't really help that much for extra performance. Kits that are rated at higher frequencies and can be used as you have to keep latencies low by dropping the kit to run slower but tighter. 4000mhz kits are not worth spending the money on unless you can turn the binning to your advantage, running the ram at lower frequencies but with much tighter timings, given that 4000mhz kits are rated at CL18 and CL19 they are not actually that fast to start with compared to the 3200c14, 3600cl15 or CL16 kits making the slower kits a much better buy. When 4500 becomes an available product then the ultra high kits will give Ryzen better performance as their native latency will be around 8ns but they will initially be cost prohibitive.

One thing that you didnt mention is that all ram has a native latency that you can calculate from the timings and it can be helpful in deciding what direction to take in setting up you system memory. The formula is (CAS setting/Kit MTs rating) x 2000 or you can use (CAS/actual frequency Mhz) x 1000 ad the DDR4 kits are double data rate kits. The actual frequency that the Infinity Fabric is using is half of what the kit states. the 2000 takes this into account so you don need to remember to divide the kit speed in two.

18/4000 x 2000 = 9 ns
16/3600 x 2000 = 8.89ns
14/3466 x 2000 = 8.08ns
14/3200 x 2000 = 8.75ns
12/3200 x 2000 = 7.5ns

You can see that your kit at 3466 is better than the kit at 3600c16 or 4000c18. If you can get your system to boot and run with your Ram kit set at 3200 CL12 settings, you should find even more performance in gaming.

If you divide the result by the cas setting, it will tell you how many nanoseconds each cycle tales. The infinity fabric transfers data between CCX modules, memory controllers and PCIe controllers at the rate of 32 bytes per cycle. Remember that if you want to convert everything to nanoseconds to investigate the component parts of system latency, Cache memory on Ryzen is running at CPU frequency and not ram frequency so the number of cycles cache memory takes to get a 4ns L2 cache latency is different from the number of cycles it takes for the system RAM to do something in 4ns. When you measure system latency the path is L1+L2_L3 cache then the time it tales the system ram for do its stuff based on these timings.

You may find though that as latency decreases with really tight timings, there is a cross over point where multithreaded performance multiplier efficiency over single core performance starts to drop off. The key is to find the best compromise between latency and multi thread performance. The idle period of time where the CPU primary thread on a core is queued up waiting for memory access because of latency gives the secondary SMT thread access to CPU time to do its process work. That is why the Ryzen chips mutlithreaded performance tends to scale better over their single core scores than Intel chips do. Intel hyper thread efficiency is about 25% vs Ryzen getting almost 50%. You can check the multiplier using the single and multi core scores in cinebench.

BTW for Witcher 3 and Watchdogs 2, you might like to try setting the CPU affinity for the game processes to just use CPU8-CPU16 and see how that performs compared to the 7700K. you should see a boost in performance
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Nov 2009
Posts
13,252
Location
Under the hot sun.
An interesting video comparing 8700K to 2600K in gaming with a reasonably priced card aka GTX1070.


To sum up, if you have 2600K, overclock it, and save money to buy GTX1080 instead of changing your CPU.
 
Associate
Joined
1 Jul 2016
Posts
2,225
An interesting video comparing 8700K to 2600K in gaming with a reasonably priced card aka GTX1070.


To sum up, if you have 2600K, overclock it, and save money to buy GTX1080 instead of changing your CPU.
A shame to see such little progress in the CPU world for games from i7 to i7 after such a long time
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
14,150
Location
West Midlands
Worth noting the gpu is a 1070. Both a maxing it out, with future generations and faster gpus I expect the 8700k to come into it's own.

That may be the case, but I guess it still proves if you are running a 2600K, and an older GPU, just buy a new graphics card and you are sorted for a good while, maybe until Z390 and 8c chips. :)
 

ljt

ljt

Soldato
Joined
28 Dec 2002
Posts
4,540
Location
West Midlands, UK
It is me or the price just magically went from £359 to £379 here on Overclockers for the Core i7-8700K from a day to another?

Yup. It happens a lot on here, its very hard to plan a build on a set budget when the prices here literally change by the day. The 8600k has now shot up to £300

It's the same with their GPU range, you budget for something then half the parts change price (generally up) the next day.
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Nov 2009
Posts
13,252
Location
Under the hot sun.
A shame to see such little progress in the CPU world for games from i7 to i7 after such a long time

Yeah. It takes a GTX1080Ti at 1080p to show difference between the 8700K @5.1ghz and the rest of the CPUs.
Anything less than that, and is false economy. (or higher resolution)

Worth noting the gpu is a 1070. Both a maxing it out, with future generations and faster gpus I expect the 8700k to come into it's own.

Before "future generations and faster gpus" comes out (AMD Navi August, NV Pascal refresh Q2/3 2018 Volta if ever 2019), the Z370 & 8700K will be dead for quite some time, and replaced with Intel 8 core Z390 platform (April-May), and challenged by Zen+ (February).
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Jan 2015
Posts
4,904
Location
West Midlands
Yeah. It takes a GTX1080Ti at 1080p to show difference between the 8700K @5.1ghz and the rest of the CPUs.
Anything less than that, and is false economy. (or higher resolution)



Before "future generations and faster gpus" comes out (AMD Navi August, NV Pascal refresh Q2/3 2018 Volta if ever 2019), the Z370 & 8700K will be dead for quite some time, and replaced with Intel 8 core Z390 platform (April-May), and challenged by Zen+ (February).

False economy would be buying a ryzen cpu on release only to upgrade the cpu in 12 months time just to hope that its faster than what we already have now, no?
Wouldn't the best value come from buying the best you can get now and not change a CPU at all? I mean the 2600k is still going strong.....

I think saying that zen+ will be challenging the z390 is a little ambitious. But we shall see soon enough.

Bookmark this reply and see how things are looking when volta comes :)
 
Back
Top Bottom