F1 2020: PC graphics performance benchmark review
Intel Core i7-10700K processor review
Deepcool Gamerstorm Castle 280EX liquid cooler review
AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT review
AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT review
AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT review
Crucial P2 500 GB NVMe M2 SSD review
ASUS STRIX B550-I Gaming review
Kioxia Exceria 1TB M.2 NVMe SSD review
Samsung 870 QVO 2TB SSD review
Intel 8th Gen Coffee Lake Processors Will Be Hard To Get - Availability Dramatic
Intel yesterday released their Coffee Lake generation processors. The Z370 motherboards are available alright, the processors however now. We did some rounds here in the Netherlands and availability is dramatic. Intel supplied a dozen or two of the high-end specced processors to distributors, and that's it.
Meanwhile checking some price engines, the stock availability in Europe has run dry. In the USA the 8700k is also out of stock, I did notice the 8600k on Newegg though.
In the UK some shops are hugely milking the procs they can actually sell. One of the bigger etailer for example decided to test and bin the procs they had, and have pre-binned 5Ghz versions for £500, 5.1Ghz for £600 or 5.2Ghz for £800 in-stock.
A normal 8700k should cost £360, but, that one of course is not available and on pre-order only. Considering most if not all stock 8700K procs will already do 5.1 GHz that's really taking an advantage of your customers - guys, £800 is like 899 euros / 1050 USD (!).
As to why the availability is this low, nobody really knows and certainly not something we have seen or is expected often from Intel. Production is the same 14nm fab node one as Kaby Lake uses. Intel certainly will not shed any light on this. We have however heard rumors that there is lots of Kaby lake stock (processors and chipsets) left, perhaps they will be waiting to clear that stock fist before making Coffee Lake available in good volume, that however remains speculation of course.
It once again feels like rushed launch, a paper launch mostly with incredibly low stock available.
Intel 8th gen Core Announcements - Mobile First Desktops later - 08/21/2017 09:16 AM
Intel today announces its 8th generation Core processors mobile procs first, but desktop CPU later. Intel launches U model processors for laptops, in quad-core models. A total of four Core i5 and Cor...
Canadian etailer publishes Intel 8th Gen Desktop CPU prices - 08/20/2017 03:56 PM
If all pre-announcements and rumors have been right, tomorrow Intel will announce their 8th gen Core desktop processors. In Canada at an etailer called PC Canada, the prices have leaked....
xIcarus
Senior Member
Posts: 945
Joined: 2010-08-24
Senior Member
Posts: 945
Joined: 2010-08-24
#5479039 Posted on: 10/06/2017 12:34 PM
that's one way to kill a machine XD
I'm still rocking a 2700k at 4.6ghz, sadly my chip wasn't the best with 1.32v it was too instable at 4.7... 4.6 is fine though :p not much difference between 4.6 and 4.8ghz
Yeah I know what you mean, it's not always worth the risk if you're looking for a 24/7 overclock.
I wasn't keeping it at 4.9 all the time either as it required quite a bit of voltage at 1.35V. I felt much safer with 4.6 at 1.3V. Pretty crazy how it required so much voltage after that point.
that's one way to kill a machine XD
I'm still rocking a 2700k at 4.6ghz, sadly my chip wasn't the best with 1.32v it was too instable at 4.7... 4.6 is fine though :p not much difference between 4.6 and 4.8ghz
Yeah I know what you mean, it's not always worth the risk if you're looking for a 24/7 overclock.
I wasn't keeping it at 4.9 all the time either as it required quite a bit of voltage at 1.35V. I felt much safer with 4.6 at 1.3V. Pretty crazy how it required so much voltage after that point.
Ricepudding
Senior Member
Posts: 614
Joined: 2017-02-17
Senior Member
Posts: 614
Joined: 2017-02-17
#5479041 Posted on: 10/06/2017 12:38 PM
Yeah I know what you mean, it's not always worth the risk if you're looking for a 24/7 overclock.
I wasn't keeping it at 4.9 all the time either as it required quite a bit of voltage at 1.35V. I felt much safer with 4.6 at 1.3V. Pretty crazy how it required so much voltage after that point.
Yeah, if CPU's were seeing massive increases over the years i might have risked it to keep up performance, but at the time i was running the thing 24/7 (half due to slow HDD's back then) But being at 1.32 i do feel is the nice sweet number for me, i reckon with tweeks i could have pushed it down to 1.31, but i could never be bothered to play with it too much after i got the damn thing stable :p i've seen ton of people pushing 1.48v just to get 5ghz~
8700k might end up being my next processor of choice, gotta say it does not need that much more voltage to clock higher which is nice... 1.385v for 5.2ghz all cores is amazing considering i'm doing 4.6ghz all cores at 1.32
Yeah I know what you mean, it's not always worth the risk if you're looking for a 24/7 overclock.
I wasn't keeping it at 4.9 all the time either as it required quite a bit of voltage at 1.35V. I felt much safer with 4.6 at 1.3V. Pretty crazy how it required so much voltage after that point.
Yeah, if CPU's were seeing massive increases over the years i might have risked it to keep up performance, but at the time i was running the thing 24/7 (half due to slow HDD's back then) But being at 1.32 i do feel is the nice sweet number for me, i reckon with tweeks i could have pushed it down to 1.31, but i could never be bothered to play with it too much after i got the damn thing stable :p i've seen ton of people pushing 1.48v just to get 5ghz~
8700k might end up being my next processor of choice, gotta say it does not need that much more voltage to clock higher which is nice... 1.385v for 5.2ghz all cores is amazing considering i'm doing 4.6ghz all cores at 1.32
xIcarus
Senior Member
Posts: 945
Joined: 2010-08-24
Senior Member
Posts: 945
Joined: 2010-08-24
#5479043 Posted on: 10/06/2017 12:56 PM
Yeah, if CPU's were seeing massive increases over the years i might have risked it to keep up performance, but at the time i was running the thing 24/7 (half due to slow HDD's back then) But being at 1.32 i do feel is the nice sweet number for me, i reckon with tweeks i could have pushed it down to 1.31, but i could never be bothered to play with it too much after i got the damn thing stable :p i've seen ton of people pushing 1.48v just to get 5ghz~
8700k might end up being my next processor of choice, gotta say it does not need that much more voltage to clock higher which is nice... 1.385v for 5.2ghz all cores is amazing considering i'm doing 4.6ghz all cores at 1.32
The 8700k is definitely a tempting processor, if I were building a rig right now I would actually trade some multicore performance for some single-core performance as I'm currently gaming at 1080p 144Hz. Been meaning to get a 1440p 144Hz monitor soon.
The 1600X is still a strong contender though, it beats the shit out of both the 8700k and the 1700X in price/performance. You can't ask for more in 60Hz gaming.
Yeah, if CPU's were seeing massive increases over the years i might have risked it to keep up performance, but at the time i was running the thing 24/7 (half due to slow HDD's back then) But being at 1.32 i do feel is the nice sweet number for me, i reckon with tweeks i could have pushed it down to 1.31, but i could never be bothered to play with it too much after i got the damn thing stable :p i've seen ton of people pushing 1.48v just to get 5ghz~
8700k might end up being my next processor of choice, gotta say it does not need that much more voltage to clock higher which is nice... 1.385v for 5.2ghz all cores is amazing considering i'm doing 4.6ghz all cores at 1.32
The 8700k is definitely a tempting processor, if I were building a rig right now I would actually trade some multicore performance for some single-core performance as I'm currently gaming at 1080p 144Hz. Been meaning to get a 1440p 144Hz monitor soon.
The 1600X is still a strong contender though, it beats the shit out of both the 8700k and the 1700X in price/performance. You can't ask for more in 60Hz gaming.
Ricepudding
Senior Member
Posts: 614
Joined: 2017-02-17
Senior Member
Posts: 614
Joined: 2017-02-17
#5479046 Posted on: 10/06/2017 01:03 PM
The 8700k is definitely a tempting processor, if I were building a rig right now I would actually trade some multicore performance for some single-core performance as I'm currently gaming at 1080p 144Hz. Been meaning to get a 1440p 144Hz monitor soon.
The 1600X is still a strong contender though, it beats the crap out of both the 8700k and the 1700X in price/performance. You can't ask for more in 60Hz gaming.
i game at 165hz 1440p, so single core performance often is king on that front... though 1600x is performance king that much is true. just a shame it basically has no overclocking room... maybe the 2600x when it comes out next year might improve on this, sadly i don't know if i could wait any longer than i already have for a PC XD
The 8700k is definitely a tempting processor, if I were building a rig right now I would actually trade some multicore performance for some single-core performance as I'm currently gaming at 1080p 144Hz. Been meaning to get a 1440p 144Hz monitor soon.
The 1600X is still a strong contender though, it beats the crap out of both the 8700k and the 1700X in price/performance. You can't ask for more in 60Hz gaming.
i game at 165hz 1440p, so single core performance often is king on that front... though 1600x is performance king that much is true. just a shame it basically has no overclocking room... maybe the 2600x when it comes out next year might improve on this, sadly i don't know if i could wait any longer than i already have for a PC XD
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 614
Joined: 2017-02-17
that's one way to kill a machine XD
I'm still rocking a 2700k at 4.6ghz, sadly my chip wasn't the best with 1.32v it was too instable at 4.7... 4.6 is fine though