Intels Skylake-X and Coffee Lake CPUs Discussion

[mojo6912]

the 281W is for the 7820X, its 8 cores

1600X is 6 cores

plus higher clocks vs lower clocks


why dont you try comparing apples to apples

You pulled a switcheroo on me. We were talking about the 6 cores. And I liked it earlier. 79W for 1600x vs 146W for 7800x.

281 vs 156 is less then 2x

but double the cores

I said "about" double. Again, you switched cpu's we were talking about the 6 cores.

Either way I still wouldn't call it "great".

[Life-Binder]

You pulled a switcheroo on me

you were the one who cited 281W for the 8 core

79W for 1600x vs 146W for 7800x.

I already explained to you what AVX workloads are

gj stonewalling that




your precious Ryzen does have impressive power efficiency at the cost of not going over 4.0 GHz (under regular overclocking)

happy now ?

[mojo6912]

happy now ?

Only if you call it "great".

[Gray_Matter]

yes, overclocking consumes power

overclocking high core chips to 4.6-5.0 consumes even more, shocker !


dunno about you, but Id rather have a hungrier chip that can clock that high, than a less hungry chip that cannot

imagine if 8600K/8700K (and its successors) came out and was super ultra eco-friendly efficient, but wasnt clocking above 4.0 (and IPC also didnt change much to make up for the low speed)

that would be horrible as far as Im concerned, Id never buy that for my system (unless there was no faster/better performing (in OC) alternative)




and I bet if you were inclined to do so and measured that 7820X @ 4.0 all-core @ 1V - it would be under 300W and beating the 1800X in efficiency when both are at 4.0 Ghz

each of the CPUs has their own optimal speed spots in the freq/power curve

Based on their benchmarks, its a 15% perf boost in Cinebench and a 2.9% boost in gaming that bumps watts by 40%.

Stop comparing it to Ryzen. It's completely irrelevant what the 1800X does. They are in different price brackets and there is no reason for a person to even look at the 1800X if they are considering the 7820X.

Oh, and 393W is not ok-ish. It's massive.

[Life-Binder]

its a 15% perf boost in Cinebench and a 2.9% boost in gaming that bumps watts by 40%.

I already stated its gaming perf atm is underwhelming clock for clock (but even so its clearly more then 2.9% if you bother to read a review with a decent suite of games tested and not 2 or 3)

but surprisingly there are many many other useful apps that CPUs can run that arent Cinebench or gaming

Stop comparing it to Ryzen. It's completely irrelevant what the 1800X does.

lol maybe if the Ryzen fanboys stopped coming in here bringing it up every time then I would

Oh, and 393W is not ok-ish.

its total system power draw for a system running 8 cores at 4.8 Ghz

relax, your case wont explode

and you can always, you know, not overclock to 4.8 if you dont want to or think its dangerous .. you have options like 4.1-4.7

[Gray_Matter]

I already stated its gaming perf atm is underwhelming clock for clock

and its not 40% either in non-AVX workloads

but surprisingly there are many many other useful apps that CPUs can run that arent Cinebench or gaming



lol maybe if the Ryzen fanboys stopped coming in here brining it up every time then I would



its total system power draw for a system running 8 cores at 4.8 Ghz

relax, your case wont explode

and you can always, you know, not overclock to 4.8 if you dont want to or think its dangerous .. you have options like 4.1-4.7

If it's the total system draw then that is even worse because the bump in power draw would be much higher as a percentage of the CPU's original power draw.

Also, this has nothing to do with AVX. It's the power draw of the CPU under load. All of the CPU's in the table are in the same boat.

The competition for 7820X will be a 7700K if you are gaming and a threadripper if you are looking at the CPU for serious SMT work. It's unlikely that people doing serious work will overclock the CPU so that leaves gaming which puts it's competition as the 7700K.

[Life-Binder]

plenty of people dont fall into the exact categories you briefly outlined there

neither do CPU tasks for that matter


Threadripper lacks ST perf, 7700K lacks MT perf

but if you're certain noone on the planet needs a combination of those (as well as wanting to OC) then good for you

[mojo6912]

Let's change the subject. How different do you guys think the coffee lake unlocked i7 will be from the 7800x?

[Gray_Matter]

plenty of people dont fall into the exact categories you briefly outlined there

neither do CPU tasks for that matter

Threadripper lacks ST perf, 7700K lacks MT perf

but if you're certain noone on the planet needs a combination of those (as well as wanting to OC) then good for you

The things is this, if the software that a person is using supports multiple cores then more will generally be better. IPC is important but only as a factor for multiple cores. That and the people who use this type of software are extremely unlikely to OC. I have yet to see one example of something that needs high IPC and lots of cores other than games. I am relatively certain that there is someone on the planet that needs that combination and also wants to OC but I have yet to see any evidence of it.

- - - Updated - - -

Let's change the subject. How different do you guys think the coffee lake unlocked i7 will be from the 7800x?

It will be cheaper which is a good start.

[Enfilade]

Let's change the subject. How different do you guys think the coffee lake unlocked i7 will be from the 7800x?

I remember reading somewhere that Coffee Lake is expected to have between a 15 and 30% performance increase over Kaby Lake. Here's to hoping they keep to their word. I'm holding out for Coffee Lake and the next iteration of Nvidia's GPUs.

[Denpepe]

I remember reading somewhere that Coffee Lake is expected to have between a 15 and 30% performance increase over Kaby Lake. Here's to hoping they keep to their word. I'm holding out for Coffee Lake and the next iteration of Nvidia's GPUs.

prepare to be dissapointed, that performance increase was on low powered CPU's and was due to more cores and higher frequency, not better IPC. Though if you can use the cores it will obviously perform better then the quad cores.

I just hope it performs better then the skylake 6 core tested on techspot, that one is a dissapointement.

[Sorshen]

Welp, Threadripper 1920X (12C/24T 3.5/4.0GHz) seems to be 12% better in CB15 while being 200$ cheaper than i9-7900X. What have you done Intel...

[Life-Binder]

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/int...-i5-8600k.html

We've been talking and debating intel Coffee Lake for some time now. new information surfaced on the web, including SKU names and base clock frequencies. The big daddy proc would be the Core i7 8700K with a 3.7 Ghz base-clock in a 6c/12t configuration.

Actually Intel would be planning to release four six-core models, two of them get hyper-threading, two will not (Core i5 versus i7). Coffee Lake processors will be fabbed at a 14nm node and would be available on LGA1151 within months. French magazine Canard PC is basing the new information up-on reports that the first samples have been supplied to customers. The top model Core i7-8700K would get a 3.7 base clock (turbo's are not yet known). A non-K model would get a lower 3.2 GHz base clock.

The Core i5-8600K however would be getting a 3.6 GHz base clock and is an unlocked model. Intel supposedly also will release a Core i5 series with the Core i5-8400 would run at a base of 2.8 Ghz, and is locked. Coffee Lake should be released together with the Z370 / H370 chipsets and logic assumes a release later this year in the Q3 region. Intel 300 series desktop processor motherboard would be based on the current LGA 1151 socket, the SiSoft results already have shown Platform entries.

https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cpu..._six_core_i5/1

Coffee Lake info leaks - a six core i5?

At the time of writing Intel are rumoured to be releasing their next-generation mainstream series of CPUs within the next few months under the codename "Coffee Lake", offering up to 6 cores in a desktop-grade platform and without some of the features of Intel's new X299 CPUs (like AVX-512 support).


A report from CPCHardware has leaked some new information about Intel's upcoming Coffee Lake series CPUs, including clock speeds TDPs and core counts for both i7 and i5 series CPUs.

In the high-end Intel will be releasing an i7 8700K CPU, though the name of this product could be changed before launch. This CPU will feature six cores with a base clock of 3.7GHz and Hyper-Threading for 12 total threads. This chip is said to have 12MB of L3 cache and a TDP of 95W. A lower end variant, the i7 8700 is also said to come with a 3.2GHz base clock, which is a huge drop when compared to its K-series variant.

One of the most interesting pieces of information in this report is the existence of a 6-core i5 series CPU, which is set to come with the i5 8600K name and lack Hyper-Threading and come with only 9MB of L3 Cache while maintaining the same 95W TDP. This CPU is said to release with a base clock speed of 3.6GHz and with an unknown boost clock. It also looks like there will be a lower clocked i5 8600 model which will feature a base clock of 2.8GHz, which again is a huge drop when compared to the similarly named K-series model.



One important aspect of Intel's new Coffee Lake CPUs will be their core-to-core interconnection method, as their new Mesh architecture (that is used in Skylake-X) can sometimes limit performance in gaming applications. Will Intel be using a traditional ring bus architecture like their desktop Kaby Lake parts?

Right now, we expect Intel to keep using their Rung Bus architecture with this release, as Mesh is primarily designed for CPUs with higher core counts, specifically for their high core count Xeon CPUs. At this time the move to Mesh is not required for mainstream CPUs, especially given the new architecture's latency at lower core counts.

nice to see that the i5 is a 6c/6t rather then a 4c/8t

[mrgreenthump]

nice to see that the i5 is a 6c/6t rather then a 4c/8t

Is it though? They are artificially creating the i5s, by locking HT them, just to create another pricing segment.

[Life-Binder]

gfor games, 2 physical cores > 4 logical threads

They are artificially creating the i5s, by locking HT them, just to create another pricing segment.

lol

[Kagthul]

Is it though? They are artificially creating the i5s, by locking HT them, just to create another pricing segment.

You mean like.. AMD artificially disabling cores on the Ryzen silicon to create R5 and R3 chips? (This is not a dig at AMD here, this is how it is done... everywhere)

[Life-Binder]

https://twitter.com/CPCHardware/stat...13513079353344

LGA1151 and 200-series chipset (will probably also work with some 100-series motherboards).

[Gray_Matter]

You mean like.. AMD artificially disabling cores on the Ryzen silicon to create R5 and R3 chips? (This is not a dig at AMD here, this is how it is done... everywhere)

Exactly like that. I don't like the behavior from either of them. They should segment the market differently based on something that effects yield.

[Sorshen]

So 8700K might actually be a downgrade for gaming unless there are some notable IPC gains.

[Life-Binder]

at same ipc 8700k will be >= 7700k today and > 7700k later on


in oc vs oc scenario