Intels Skylake-X and Coffee Lake CPUs Discussion

[Life-Binder]

I was very much on topic

[Diaspar]

no and I dont care

I want you either gone or staying on-topic

And I'd wish the mods would just ban you since your rudeness, hostility and overall insulting behaviour towards anyone who doesn't lick your behind are destroying any opportunity for discussion and comparisons, not only to AMD offers, but to intel's offers as well.

[Deleted]

And I'd wish the mods would just ban you since your rudeness, hostility and overall insulting behaviour towards anyone who doesn't lick your behind are destroying any opportunity for discussion and comparisons, not only to AMD offers, but to intel's offers as well.

Whats fun for me is, hes calling me a Ryzen fanboy and toxic to anything thats non AMD, to someone that owns a Intel 5820K.

[Life-Binder]

And I'd wish the mods would just ban you since your rudeness, hostility and overall insulting behaviour towards anyone who doesn't lick your behind are destroying any opportunity for discussion and comparisons, not only to AMD offers, but to intel's offers as well.

you mean like your post is ?

stop talking out of your ass maybe and then you'd see that there is plenty of discussion in post #710


but instead we have a salty 5820K owner here derailing

[Amalaric]

So if I got this right... 8700 / 8700K will be hexa-core?

Will 8600 / 8600K be hexa-core as well?

And the L3 cache is still tiny at 2MB per core when it should be 64MB or even 128MB (total) but I guess that's Intel's way of throtteling performance so that every new generation is guaranteed to be an improvement over the previous one.

And 4-way L2 cache? Intel is really going backwards. /shakes head

[moremana]

So if I got this right... 8700 / 8700K will be hexa-core?

Will 8600 / 8600K be hexa-core as well?

Yes without Hyperthreading.

[Amalaric]

Yes without Hyperthreading.

That's nice.

[moremana]

I do think Intel is going to have to lower pricing on Coffee though.

Im excited to see the 8700k benchmarks when released, but if they dont plain kick AMDs ass with the R5 1600, then they will have to price it accordingly. And the 8600k will have to be sub $199 as there is no HT on it while AMDs all have SMT.

Personally, I think the 8600 should replace the 4c/4t 7700k chips and be priced somewhere in the $219 range, while the 8700K at $269 but Intel most likely will not go that low on the flagship consumer chip.

[Remilia]

So if I got this right... 8700 / 8700K will be hexa-core?

Will 8600 / 8600K be hexa-core as well?

And the L3 cache is still tiny at 2MB per core when it should be 64MB or even 128MB (total) but I guess that's Intel's way of throtteling performance so that every new generation is guaranteed to be an improvement over the previous one.

And 4-way L2 cache? Intel is really going backwards. /shakes head

Not really sure if you're just looking at it and think it's automatically bad or something. In fact everything you just mentioned is what they have right now for their i7 Skylake/Kabylake chips. So it's not moving backwards. It's just being the same.

What you're asking for is impossible. At 64/128MB it'd be gigantic for an L3$ and increased complexity.

[Evildeffy]

I do think Intel is going to have to lower pricing on Coffee though.

Im excited to see the 8700k benchmarks when released, but if they dont plain kick AMDs ass with the R5 1600, then they will have to price it accordingly. And the 8600k will have to be sub $199 as there is no HT on it while AMDs all have SMT.

Personally, I think the 8600 should replace the 4c/4t 7700k chips and be priced somewhere in the $219 range, while the 8700K at $269 but Intel most likely will not go that low on the flagship consumer chip.

As far as pricing goes, it's highly likely they'll price it the same if not ~30 USD higher than the 7700K.

And to be fair it's clear the 7700K does have the edge in games compared to both Ryzen and Skylake-X.
In fact Skylake-X and Ryzen are pretty damn identical in gaming performance for the most part in games.

If anything you should expect an 8700K to be like a 7700K just slower clocked.
(And coincidentally exactly specced like I said it would be but no... I "move goalposts and don't know WTF I'm talking about" right? (not aimed at you))

By all indications however Intel did "develop" LGA1151-v2 ... but due to Ryzen's success they may have pulled the whole v2 crap and allow backwards compatibility since they have actual competition now.
So yeah it could at least be a step in the right direction ... even if it's a forced one.

8700K should be, if equally clocked at least, the new top-of-the-line gaming CPU.
Unless they've sacrificed IPC or messed up something in the design of Coffee Lake.

Which is also entirely possible still since they moved the launch of Coffee Lake up 3 quarters and if there's one thing that's deadly with uArchitecture design it's rushing things ... having said that I'm pretty sure Intel had the designs for Coffee Lake ready and waiting to attempt some more artificial milking.

However that said... it won't change much in the overall picture.
If prices will be the same or higher to their equivalent i5/i7 models right now then the 7700K and 8700K will still be the only ones one should buy.
Anything below that is Ryzen territory simply because of price/performance.

[Fascinate]

Im curious if z170 boards will be able to accept coffee lake. In the middle of upgrading my HTPC and there is an open box z170 board at my microcenter for dirt cheap, would be awesome if down the road i could swap a 6 core coffee into it lol.

[Gaidax]

I do think Intel is going to have to lower pricing on Coffee though.

Im excited to see the 8700k benchmarks when released, but if they dont plain kick AMDs ass with the R5 1600, then they will have to price it accordingly. And the 8600k will have to be sub $199 as there is no HT on it while AMDs all have SMT.

Personally, I think the 8600 should replace the 4c/4t 7700k chips and be priced somewhere in the $219 range, while the 8700K at $269 but Intel most likely will not go that low on the flagship consumer chip.

I think you overestimate AMD, they are not big enough for Intel to go crazy about. Price will be on the same level if not more expensive, just like it goes now. If Intel would feel so threatened they'd cut prices now, but they didn't because ultimately AMD simply can't put up the supply to make them more than a nuisance at the moment.

[Amalaric]

Not really sure if you're just looking at it and think it's automatically bad or something. In fact everything you just mentioned is what they have right now for their i7 Skylake/Kabylake chips. So it's not moving backwards. It's just being the same.

What you're asking for is impossible. At 64/128MB it'd be gigantic for an L3$ and increased complexity.

My 3770K has 8-way L2 cache so yes Intel is going backwards and my Core 2 Duo E8400 had 24-way L3 cache.

[Remilia]

My 3770K has 8-way L2 cache so yes Intel is going backwards and my Core 2 Duo E8400 had 24-way L3 cache.

Okay... and...?
You do know that there are pros and cons to having higher or lower right? Power, size, latency, and complexity. Saying it is better cause higher number isn't exactly how it works in reality. Higher way associativity increases all of the aforementioned but it does reduce cache misses. So it's not just so simple as you keep making it seem. Trade offs is pretty much the most essential part of engineering. Don't forget about it...

[Fascinate]

Thats wonderful guys, but does anyone know for sure if coffee will socket into a z170 board?

[Amalaric]

Thats wonderful guys, but does anyone know for sure if coffee will socket into a z170 board?

Intel is weird going from LGA 1160 to LGA 1156 to LGA 1155 to LGA 1150 and finally to LGA 1151 so the next one might be LGA 1152.

[Enfilade]

LGA 1151v2.

[Amalaric]

Okay... and...?
You do know that there are pros and cons to having higher or lower right? Power, size, latency, and complexity. Saying it is better cause higher number isn't exactly how it works in reality. Higher way associativity increases all of the aforementioned but it does reduce cache misses. So it's not just so simple as you keep making it seem. Trade offs is pretty much the most essential part of engineering. Don't forget about it...

No, no, no, no... more ways is always better than less ways and I'm positive that Intel could fit that 64MB L3 cache if they wanted to.

[Thunderball]

Intel is weird going from LGA 1160 to LGA 1156 to LGA 1155 to LGA 1150 and finally to LGA 1151 so the next one might be LGA 1152.

When launching Skylake their said that LGA1151 will accept all mainstream 14nm chips. It could've changed though.

[Karon]

People in this thread call skl-x a disaster while top Overclockers who know what they talk about praise them