• 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

Dave2150 said:
Very hard to get excited about Coffelake 6 cores. Exactly the same architecture as my two year old 6700k, just 2 more cores that will go mostly unused, as game developers will keep optimising for dual/quads for many more years to come.

It will take at least 2 years for a significant percentage of the gaming population to own a 6+ core CPU. Until then, expect exactly the same performance in 99% of games, or +/- 1-3% performance difference.

Icelake is the next exciting CPU from Intel, a completely new architecture with IPC increases :)

Note that the above is talking from purely a gaming perspective, which is the most popular use of these CPU's.
Click to expand...

indeed, but some on here will keep saying its all about the cores and not per core performance.

I am waiting for 10ghz processors that will never arrive. Not 100 core cpus where 98 of the cores are idle.

Mainstream is actually 2 core. The majority of the pc gaming market plays on a laptop.
 
doesnt matter if amd have 16 cores if a ten core intel beats it across the board.the cores dont matter if you dont use them.the funny thing is for eg x99 platform is still faster than ryxen in general but everyone on ryzen bus lol.

6x core thats competitive will probably be better on the whole on intel. if they can bring i7 7700k performance with 6 they win its that simple.gaming cpu at the moment is the 7700k .
 
The last two civilization games and destiny 2 use/will use almost available cores, and so are a few others. It won't be at lightning speed, the utilisation of 4+ cores, but there's a slow shift. And even if on the majority of titles there's 2 cores idling, in CFL-S I'll still have the fastest and highest IPC CPU for those games.
 
~>Dg<~ said:
doesnt matter if amd have 16 cores if a ten core intel beats it across the board.the cores dont matter if you dont use them.the funny thing is for eg x99 platform is still faster than ryxen in general but everyone on ryzen bus lol.

6x core thats competitive will probably be better on the whole on intel. if they can bring i7 7700k performance with 6 they win its that simple.gaming cpu at the moment is the 7700k .
Click to expand...

Except we've already seen 7700K doesnt beat the 1700 across the board.

We will see the 7900X get beat by Threadripper.

So I'm not exactly sure what you are getting at.

The X99 platform has not had a competing AMD release until Threadripper. Unless of course you believe sub $500 chips should be compared to chips costing $1000+ with the same difference again in motherboard costs.

Yes the 6900K is certainly something which gives Ryzen a run for its money. But look at the price, the 6900K is at least double the cost.
 
~>Dg<~ said:
doesnt matter if amd have 16 cores if a ten core intel beats it across the board.the cores dont matter if you dont use them.the funny thing is for eg x99 platform is still faster than ryxen in general but everyone on ryzen bus lol.

6x core thats competitive will probably be better on the whole on intel. if they can bring i7 7700k performance with 6 they win its that simple.gaming cpu at the moment is the 7700k .
Click to expand...

Rly? Ryzen doesn't beat X99 all the time but you don't need to look hard to find examples where Ryzen hands X99 its ass...

These are just a few, plenty more where they came from...

85866.png


85879.png


85881.png


85884.png


And for good measure...

6_Ng_AQ08.png
 
Could you please reserve the above for the X299 vs Threadripper thread, and keep this thread for what was meant to be discussed:

"Intel to launch 6 core Coffee Lake-S CPUs & Z370 chipset in August 2017"

- thanks in advance for your consideration.
 
TheF34RChannel said:
Yeah I'm really eager to see the 7800X and 8700K compared! Right now it appears that the former has the advantage in PCI-E lanes, mesh* and cache* (*for workstations) and the former the advantages in frequency and IPC (and L3 cache for games etc.). Both target different segments, but still I'm curious.
Click to expand...

So, as it happens Intel get their beloved product segmentation and this time it's for technical reasons not just blowing some random fuse and disabling stuff!
 
I would love to comment on something good about AMD but I have been reported for trolling, even though I have an intel chip and like what AMD have done.
 
beany_bot said:
If you had asked "why can't we travel by flying" 200 years ago they would have said the same thing. Look at us now....

Physics doesn't stop us getting faster and more IPC. It's just a hurdle needing overcome. We need innovation.
Click to expand...
The lack of understanding of physics was what stopped us from flying 200 years ago. In this case, I think physics has just said "no" to increased GHz.
 
beany_bot said:
Physics doesn't stop us
Click to expand...

Limits of physics is what all drives for speed crash into eventually.

We weren't flying 200 years ago but how much faster do you think planes have been getting of late?

Efficiency becomes garbage at some point so other things are focused on like capacity, reliability, hitting price points.

GHz isn't making much progress so the future is looking multi threaded and being efficient while doing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom