Intel to launch 6 core Coffee Lake-S CPUs & Z370 chipset 5 October 2017

[Panos]

That chart shows a 1700 not 1800X.

A 1700 runs at 3.2/3.75 with XFR whilst an 1800X runs at 3.7/4.1 with XFR.

That is about 15% faster for multithread and 10% for single thread. So just scale up the numbers in the chart to get 1800X.

If the 8700K comes out at $400, then AMD will likely have to officially cut the price of the 1800X to the same.

Also no RAM on the 1700. Is could be 2133 so seriously gimped performance

 

[rtho782]

Also no RAM on the 1700. Is could be 2133 so seriously gimped performance

Which brings up another point, the Ryzens need expensive memory to be competitive, whereas the 7700k certainly doesn't, so if the 8700k does come at $400 it could seriously undercut the 1800x in platform costs.

 

[Panos]

Which brings up another point, the Ryzens need expensive memory to be competitive, whereas the 7700k certainly doesn't, so if the 8700k does come at $400 it could seriously undercut the 1800x in platform costs.

You do need at least 3600mhz ram for the Intel CPUs also.

 

[Journey]

Which brings up another point, the Ryzens need expensive memory to be competitive, whereas the 7700k certainly doesn't, so if the 8700k does come at $400 it could seriously undercut the 1800x in platform costs.

I mean of you are gonna say something, at least back it up, the difference in price for the faster RAM is almost insignificant, 2x 8GB DDR4 Corsair LPX 2400MHz - £124, same but 3000MHz £134, and if you want to go to 3200Mhz it's still only £148.

The biggest difference is 2133/2400, moving to 2933 with tight timings, and 3200MHz, so in total £24, from 'cheap' RAM.

Also who the hell compares the 1800X to the 8700K? All of the R5's, and R7's are unlocked, and can be used in cheap as chips boards, with pretty much zero loss pf performance, only features. So platform costs are going to be lower with the Ryzen option, unless Intel start knocking the 8700(K) for under £275, which is not gonna happen.

 

[gavinh87]

Well, destiny 2 has just confirmed my decision to go with coffeelake.
Running a ryzen 1700 @ 3.9/3466 CL14 ram and a gtx 1070 at 2560x1080 ultrawide.
Its actually bottlenecking a 1070. I wouldn't consider a 1070 a particularly hard GPU to push.
The game is actually using 8 threads quite evenly so its a decent engine. The screenshots below are using high settings and not in taxing scenes ,things get much worse in action.
The only way to get 100% utilisation was to completely max out everything resulting in 45-50fps.

Spoiler: Screenshots

 

[Journey]

Is Destiny 2 out, thought it wasn't due till sometime in Sept? Or are you playing a beta or something?

If the game is not performing well, you should see how it is working for those folk with a 7700K at 4.7GHz plus before basing an entire platform change on a beta game.

 

[gavinh87]

Is Destiny 2 out, thought it wasn't due till sometime in Sept? Or are you playing a beta or something?

If the game is not performing well, you should see how it is working for those folk with a 7700K at 4.7GHz plus before basing an entire platform change on a beta game.

The beta, the full game is out next month so nothing will drastically change. Funny you should say that as a friend I was playing with earlier has a 7700k and a 1080ti and had no such issue.
Its not only that, im sick of the quirks now that nobody seems to be fixing.

 

[Journey]

The beta, the full game is out next month so nothing will drastically change. Funny you should say that as a friend I was playing with earlier has a 7700k and a 1080ti and had no such issue.
Its not only that, im sick of the quirks now that nobody seems to be fixing.

Nothing? I could be a graphics driver issue causing the problem, but I guess if you are fed up then you should just change it.

It's very frustrating if you can't enjoy using your computer, especially if it's for leisure purposes, and you spend more time tweaking it than actually playing games etc. I'm not really a massive gamer, all of the high end gear I use is for making a living, so much so that my gaming graphics card is an RX 480, and the compute cards are GTX 1080's, on 10 core CPU's. I spend half my life designing and building systems to then figure out quirks, and make it work best, so my day to day PC is always a couple of generations old, and very stable.

 

[Dr_Watson]

Looking forward to the 8700k when it's released, the games I play love Mhz so there is no second choice for me. If I did have some doubt, looking at the Ryzen owners thread puts me off, it's a long time since release and the majority of posts are people trying to get some sort of stable overclock, normally 3.9Ghz. Even the 8-pack stuff seems to need many tweaks to get it stable as advertised. So I am hoping the 8700k is much more plug n play as I want to get straight into gaming soon after the build.

 

[gavinh87]

Nothing? I could be a graphics driver issue causing the problem, but I guess if you are fed up then you should just change it.

It's very frustrating if you can't enjoy using your computer, especially if it's for leisure purposes, and you spend more time tweaking it than actually playing games etc. I'm not really a massive gamer, all of the high end gear I use is for making a living, so much so that my gaming graphics card is an RX 480, and the compute cards are GTX 1080's, on 10 core CPU's. I spend half my life designing and building systems to then figure out quirks, and make it work best, so my day to day PC is always a couple of generations old, and very stable.

Yep, very annoying. I'd understand if things were being ironed out but I see no evidence of this, not in my case anyway.
This may very well be nothing but 3 of us were in game, 2 of us crashed and got booted out and 1 remained.
The 2 of us that got booted were using a 1700 and a 1600. The guy remaining had an i7.
This may very well be a coincidence but add this to the other quirks ive been experiencing and meh, not worth the hassle.

 

[sadbuttrue]

The beta, the full game is out next month so nothing will drastically change. Funny you should say that as a friend I was playing with earlier has a 7700k and a 1080ti and had no such issue.
Its not only that, im sick of the quirks now that nobody seems to be fixing.

It's a console port so not designed for more than 60fps. I'm guessing the game is highly threaded but each thread is waiting on another before continuing execution. This would result in wasted CPU cycles and prevent full utilisation of the GPU.

Since the game is only using 25% of your Ryzen 1700 there's plenty of room to squeeze all those threads into a 7700K. At the same time each thread is going to benefit from the 20% higher single-thread performance.

 

[DragonQ]

Which brings up another point, the Ryzens need expensive memory to be competitive, whereas the 7700k certainly doesn't, so if the 8700k does come at $400 it could seriously undercut the 1800x in platform costs.

The 1800X isn't exactly the go-to gaming chip though. That'd be the 1600, 1600X, or 1700.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I would never ever judge hardware purchases on an Alpha or Beta - its in the name,and Blizzard Activision have a history of optimising first for Intel and Nvidia setups,and then using Beta testing to gain feedback on bugs. I mean look at the PTR for games Diablo3,Overwatch,etc.

 

[BriT]

http://hexus.net/tech/news/cpu/109487-intel-core-i7-8700k-sisoft-sandra-benchmark-results-spotted/

 

[gavinh87]

I would never ever judge hardware purchases on an Alpha or Beta - its in the name,and Blizzard Activision have a history of optimising first for Intel and Nvidia setups,and then using Beta testing to gain feedback on bugs. I mean look at the PTR for games Diablo3,Overwatch,etc.

I agree on that, however that was just an example. WoW ,warframe, BDO all suffer from lack of IPC it seems.
In quite a few games I see that even at 3.9 my 1700 struggles to push a 1070 to 100% usage on 165hz 2560x1080

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I agree on that, however that was just an example. WoW ,warframe, BDO all suffer from lack of IPC it seems.
In quite a few games I see that even at 3.9 my 1700 struggles to push a 1070 to 100% usage on 165hz 2560x1080

There is no guarantee even a faster CPU won't do the same though?? I play FO4 and PS2,and even an overclocked Core i7 7700K with faster RAM has performance dips in those games. I mean I was looking a HardOCP review.and a 5GHZ Core i7 7700K with fast RAM and a GTX1080 at qHD couldn't even maintain 50FPS minimums in a largish settlement,so you can imagine what happens if you use mods,or build the really complex ones like what I have especially with a 500 hours playthrough. PS2 even on newer CPUs can have performance drops. I mean even WoW can have the same issue - FFS even Diablo3!!! I remember,a couple of us playing D3 a while back,and I had an IB Core i7,another mate a Haswell Core i7 and another mate an overclocked FX6300. When rifts came out,performance even tanked on the Haswell setup and even people here noticed the same thing.

 

[gavinh87]

There is no guarantee even a faster CPU won't do the same though?? I play FO4 and PS2,and even an overclocked Core i7 7700K with faster RAM has performance dips in those games. I mean I was looking a HardOCP review.and a 5GHZ Core i7 7700K with fast RAM and a GTX1080 at qHD couldn't even maintain 50FPS minimums in a largish settlement,so you can imagine what happens if you use mods,or build the really complex ones like what I have especially with a 500 hours playthrough. PS2 even on newer CPUs can have performance drops. I mean even WoW can have the same issue - FFS even Diablo3!!! I remember,a couple of us playing D3 a while back,and I had an IB Core i7,another mate a Haswell Core i7 and another mate an overclocked FX6300. When rifts came out,performance even tanked on the Haswell setup and even people here noticed the same thing.

There is no guarantee, no. But friends I have played with have a much better experience than me in the above titles. Destiny 2 was another to the list.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

There is no guarantee, no. But friends I have played with have a much better experience than me in the above titles. Destiny 2 was another to the list.

You see the issue is like with the D3 rifts,the Intel setups did have higher fps - unless you really were fps watching,all of us had performance crashes at the same time. At times I just feel enthusiasts like throwing hardware at problems and TBH if I had a Ryzen 7 right now I wouldn't bother spending £100s more just to get a bit better performance in a game.

In fact is if I was on the Core i7 4770k you had before I probably would not have bothered even upgrading to Ryzen.

I have a locked Xeon E3 1230 V2 with a gtx1080 at qHD and 1600mhz DDR3 and Ryzen 7 would be quicker than that.

I mean I have been going on for months about how Intel performs better on FO4 but the problem is at some point do I want to throw more money at one game(I even bought an SSD just for the game too). That is the game I play the most outside Overwatch.

Going to a faster CPU would gain me more FPS in Overwatch but I am more limited by my skills than any lack of FPS.

PS2 has server issues - remember one poster here saying how they upgraded from an a SB Core i7 to a SKL Core i7 and performance was still meh during large battles.

Maybe as I get older I am just getting more jaded by these penny pinching devs who are more concerned about flogging an old donkey of an engine instead of spending some real dosh,and then we all have to compensate by spending £100s more on hardware.

Then the consoles with worse hardware seem to do relatively better considering their lower grunt. I mean even look at SKL X - known cores and just because they changed parts of the uncore suddenly issues.

 

[gavinh87]

You see the issue is like with the D3 rifts,the Intel setups did have higher fps - unless you really were fps watching,all of us had performance crashes at the same time. At times I just feel enthusiasts like throwing hardware at problems and TBH if I have a Ryzen 7 right now I wouldn't bother spending £100s more just to get a bit better performance in a game.

In fact if I was on the Core i7 4770k you had before I probably would not have bothered even upgrading to Ryzen.

I mean I have a locked Xeon E3 1230 V2 with a gtx1080 at qHD and 1600mhz DDR3 and Ryzen 7 would be quicker than that.

I mean I have been going on for months about how Intel performs better on FO4 but the problem is at some point so I want to throw more money at one game. PS2 also has server issues - remember one poster here saying how they upgraded from an a SB Core i7 to a SKL Core i7 and performance was still meh during large battles.

I see what you mean, but I dont mind spending extra to get better performance, that said there is a limit I'm willing to go to.
Going to ryzen from 4770 showed no improvement to nothing but mins. 8700k can give me the best of both worlds if leaks are to be believed.
I dont think benchmarks like cinebench etc are showing the full picture, like x299 there is a penalty for jumping across cores.
Games that can take advantage of more cores aren't running optimally because of the latency between cores and games that run on 1/2 cores dont run optimally because the clockspeed isn't there. Hopefully ryzen 2 can sort this.
This is my own footage taken yesterday, my 1070 is performing more like a 1060 due it being starved, destiny 2 beta is just an example of this. My advice to anyone on haswell and wants to upgrade is get coffee or wait for zen 2.
I spent a fair amount on ryzen getting the best board and the best RAM but the performance I got wasn't worth it.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I see what you mean, but I dont mind spending extra to get better performance, that said there is a limit I'm willing to go to.
Going to ryzen from 4770 showed no improvement to nothing but mins. 8700k can give me the best of both worlds if leaks are to be believed.
I dont think benchmarks like cinebench etc are showing the full picture, like x299 there is a penalty for jumping across cores.
Games that can take advantage of more cores aren't running optimally because of the latency between cores and games that run on 1/2 cores dont run optimally because the clockspeed isn't there. Hopefully ryzen 2 can sort this.
This is my own footage taken yesterday, my 1070 is performing more like a 1060 due it being starved, destiny 2 beta is just an example of this. My advice to anyone on haswell and wants to upgrade is get coffee or wait for zen 2.
I spent a fair amount on ryzen getting the best board and the best RAM but the performance I got wasn't worth it.

If I had a Haswell CPU I wouldn't have bothered anyway. I wouldn't even bother changing over a Skylake Core i7 and I think if you have something like a Core i7 4790k I would even skip Coffeelake. Once Intel and AMD move to new nodes they can spend more transistors on the cores and making the caches bigger.

But the issue is I told people here anything over a Ryzen 5 1600 isn't worth it for pure gaming. I would even say that 6C/6T Core i5 will probably have almost all of the performance of the Core i7 in games.