AMD Ryzen 5 3600 review
AMD Ryzen 5 3600X review
Promo: URCDKey Summer Sale Windows 10 Pro for $11
Team Group T-Force 4133 MHz 16GB DDR4 review
ASUS ROG Crosshair VIII HERO (Wi-fi) review
MSI MEG X570 Godlike review
Corsair NightSword RGB gaming mouse review
Corsair MP600 PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSD review
Palit GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER JetStream review
MSI GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER Gaming X TRIO review
Intel Coffee Lake event photo confirms leaked specs
There have been a number of leaks on Coffee Lake already, most of them true. Intel Coffee Lake event photo confirms leaked specs of Intels upcoming 8th Generation Core processors, including four 6-core models, two with hyper-threading.
The photo originates from chiphell, one of the attendees of an Intel event leaked a photo. That photo however is very blurry photo, but does reveal the entire lineup and confirmes the core configurations. Coffee Lake (8th gen) six-core processors are based on the LGA1151 socket, but will require a new motherboard chipset. They have a TDP of either 65 or 95W. Currently the release lineup looks like this:
| Processor | Cores / Threads | Clock speed | Turbo 2.0 | 1-core Turbo 3.0 | L3 | TDP |
| Core i7-8700K | 6/12 | 3.8 GHz | 4.3 GHz | 4.5 or 4.7 GHz | 12MB | 95W |
| Core i7-8700 | 6/12 | 3.2 GHz | 4.2 GHz | 4.4 GHz | 12MB | 65W |
| Core i5-8600K | 6/6 | 3.8 GHz | 4.2 GHz | 4.4 GHz | 9MB | 95W |
| Core i5-8400 | 6/6 | 2.8 GHz | 3.5 GHz | 3.8 GHz | 9MB | 65W |
| Core i3-8350 | 4/4 | 4.0 GHz | na | na | 8MB | 95W |
| Core i3-8100 | 4/4 | 3.6 GHz | na | na | 6MB | 65W |
As you can see there will be be two 6 cores models with HT (12MB L3), an two without HT (9MB L3). The four core models (8MB L3) will not get hyper-threading, which confirms earlier rumors. Unfortunately I cannot precisely readout the clocks as the image quality is too fuzzy, so that remains to be a bit of speculation but these frequencies as listed should be pretty close.
Thanks SH SOTN for the news spot/submit.
Intel Core i9 7980 XE Available Starting September 25th - 08/09/2017 04:08 PM
Yesterday Intel released the last specs for their Core X-series Processor Family Specs 14- to 18-Core. Earlier indication for the Core i9-7980XE would be a release in October. It now seems that the ...
Intel Coffee Lake i3 8350K & 8100 specs leak - 08/08/2017 05:18 PM
Last week we already posted some screenshots of a new Coffee lake Core i3 series core processor showing four cores. See, AMD is stirring up the market on every segment with a processor. The recent Ryz...
Intel Coffee Lake 6-core CPU-Z screenshot Surfaces - 07/22/2017 09:27 AM
Leave it to Asia bsaed websites to leak stuff, a fist CPU-Z screenshot of an Intel Coffee Lake six-core processor just surfaced on the web and looking at the hardware registers, it shows is indeed is ...
12-core Intel Core i9 7920X will get a 400 MHz slower base-clock - 07/19/2017 04:35 PM
And I do need to add more text to that title line, as that is the base-clock compared to the 10-core Core i9 7900X. In late August you should be able to pickup the 12 core Core i9 7920X. And that mak...
Review: Intel Core i9 7900X processor - 06/19/2017 03:00 PM
Join us as we take the hottest processor of this moment for a test-spin. yes, the 10-core Core i9 7900X. Despite many announcements this is the most versitile (in cores) processor has got to offer for...
Loophole35
Senior Member
Posts: 9234
Joined: 2011-09-21
Senior Member
Posts: 9234
Joined: 2011-09-21
#5463985 Posted on: 08/17/2017 01:58 PM
The non-K SKU's look to be 65W not 95W but can't confirm. That picture was taken with a potato.
The non-K SKU's look to be 65W not 95W but can't confirm. That picture was taken with a potato.
ezodagrom
Senior Member
Posts: 587
Joined: 2006-06-24
Senior Member
Posts: 587
Joined: 2006-06-24
#5463990 Posted on: 08/17/2017 02:13 PM
Looking at the Kaby Lake clocks in the photo, the clocks are listed in this order:
Base clock / Max turbo (1-core turbo) / All cores turbo
7700K - 4.2 /4.5 / 4.4
7700 - 3.6 / 4.2 / 4
So the turbo clocks in the article's chart for Coffee Lake are incorrect.
Let's see (base/max turbo/all core turbo):
8700K - 3.8 / 4.? /4.3 (95W)
8700 - 3.2 / 4.4 / 4.2 (65W)
8600K - 3.8 / 4.4 / 4.2 (95W)
8400 - 2.8 / 3.8 / 3.5 (65W)
8350K - 4.0 (95W)
8100 - 3.6 (65W)
I just can't make out what's the max turbo for the 8700K, maybe 4.5?
Looking at the Kaby Lake clocks in the photo, the clocks are listed in this order:
Base clock / Max turbo (1-core turbo) / All cores turbo
7700K - 4.2 /4.5 / 4.4
7700 - 3.6 / 4.2 / 4
So the turbo clocks in the article's chart for Coffee Lake are incorrect.
Let's see (base/max turbo/all core turbo):
8700K - 3.8 / 4.? /4.3 (95W)
8700 - 3.2 / 4.4 / 4.2 (65W)
8600K - 3.8 / 4.4 / 4.2 (95W)
8400 - 2.8 / 3.8 / 3.5 (65W)
8350K - 4.0 (95W)
8100 - 3.6 (65W)
I just can't make out what's the max turbo for the 8700K, maybe 4.5?
Ryu5uzaku
Senior Member
Posts: 6749
Joined: 2006-09-24
Senior Member
Posts: 6749
Joined: 2006-09-24
#5463996 Posted on: 08/17/2017 02:19 PM
Looking at the Kaby Lake clocks in the photo, the clocks are listed in this order:
Base clock / Max turbo (1-core turbo) / All cores turbo
7700K - 4.2 /4.5 / 4.4
7700 - 3.6 / 4.2 / 4
So the turbo clocks in the article's chart for Coffee Lake are incorrect.
Let's see (base/max turbo/all core turbo):
8700K - 3.8 / 4.? /4.3 (95W)
8700 - 3.2 / 4.4 / 4.2 (65W)
8600K - 3.8 / 4.4 / 4.2 (95W)
8400 - 2.8 / 3.8 / 3.5 (65W)
8350K - 4.0 (95W)
8100 - 3.6 (65W)
I just can't make out what's the max turbo for the 8700K, maybe 4.5?
I think it was already mentioned somewhere it's 4.7 for single core. All core turbos are then 4.3, 4.2, 4.2 an 3.5 it seems?
Looking at the Kaby Lake clocks in the photo, the clocks are listed in this order:
Base clock / Max turbo (1-core turbo) / All cores turbo
7700K - 4.2 /4.5 / 4.4
7700 - 3.6 / 4.2 / 4
So the turbo clocks in the article's chart for Coffee Lake are incorrect.
Let's see (base/max turbo/all core turbo):
8700K - 3.8 / 4.? /4.3 (95W)
8700 - 3.2 / 4.4 / 4.2 (65W)
8600K - 3.8 / 4.4 / 4.2 (95W)
8400 - 2.8 / 3.8 / 3.5 (65W)
8350K - 4.0 (95W)
8100 - 3.6 (65W)
I just can't make out what's the max turbo for the 8700K, maybe 4.5?
I think it was already mentioned somewhere it's 4.7 for single core. All core turbos are then 4.3, 4.2, 4.2 an 3.5 it seems?
ezodagrom
Senior Member
Posts: 587
Joined: 2006-06-24
Senior Member
Posts: 587
Joined: 2006-06-24
#5464000 Posted on: 08/17/2017 02:21 PM
Possibly, either 4.5 or 4.7 could fit there, but it's hard to tell with how blurry it is.
And yeah, looks like those are the all core turbos, unless my eyes are playing tricks on me.
I think it was already mentioned somewhere it's 4.7 for single core. All core turbos are then 4.3, 4.2, 4.2 an 3.5 it seems?
Possibly, either 4.5 or 4.7 could fit there, but it's hard to tell with how blurry it is.
And yeah, looks like those are the all core turbos, unless my eyes are playing tricks on me.
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 35496
Joined: 2000-02-22
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 35496
Joined: 2000-02-22
#5464002 Posted on: 08/17/2017 02:26 PM
So the turbo clocks in the article's chart for Coffee Lake are incorrect.
I just can't make out what's the max turbo for the 8700K, maybe 4.5?
Yeah actually I had just corrected that table, matching your assesment as well. I just pulled some ninja like photoshop tricks, I think I can read 4.7 Turbo 3.0 for 8700K Btw.
So the turbo clocks in the article's chart for Coffee Lake are incorrect.
I just can't make out what's the max turbo for the 8700K, maybe 4.5?
Yeah actually I had just corrected that table, matching your assesment as well. I just pulled some ninja like photoshop tricks, I think I can read 4.7 Turbo 3.0 for 8700K Btw.
ezodagrom
Senior Member
Posts: 587
Joined: 2006-06-24
Senior Member
Posts: 587
Joined: 2006-06-24
#5464003 Posted on: 08/17/2017 02:29 PM
Alright. ^^
Hmm, one interesting thing to note, the photo has incorrect TDP values for the Kaby Lake i3 CPUs, they're being listed as 95W and 65W parts despite actually being 60W and 51W parts.
Same for the 7600K and 7700K, they're 91W parts and not 95W.
Yeah actually I had just corrected that table, matching your assesment as well. I just pulled some ninja like photoshop tricks, I think I can read 4.7 Turbo 3.0 for 8700K Btw.
Alright. ^^
Hmm, one interesting thing to note, the photo has incorrect TDP values for the Kaby Lake i3 CPUs, they're being listed as 95W and 65W parts despite actually being 60W and 51W parts.
Same for the 7600K and 7700K, they're 91W parts and not 95W.
bero
Junior Member
Posts: 1
Joined: 2009-10-13
Junior Member
Posts: 1
Joined: 2009-10-13
#5464007 Posted on: 08/17/2017 02:38 PM
I don't know Chinese but the horizontal lines look to me like performance comparison to kaby lake in single- and multi-thread.
I don't know Chinese but the horizontal lines look to me like performance comparison to kaby lake in single- and multi-thread.
Ryu5uzaku
Senior Member
Posts: 6749
Joined: 2006-09-24
Senior Member
Posts: 6749
Joined: 2006-09-24
#5464008 Posted on: 08/17/2017 02:41 PM
Will be interesting to see what they compare and to what on that % and where. For sure multi-thread is easily better.
But single the clock difference is 4.5% so there could be 6.5% improvement in IPC in some cases maybe possibly.
I don't know Chinese but the horizontal lines look to me like performance comparison to kaby lake in single- and multi-thread.
Will be interesting to see what they compare and to what on that % and where. For sure multi-thread is easily better.
But single the clock difference is 4.5% so there could be 6.5% improvement in IPC in some cases maybe possibly.
dunadan101
Member
Posts: 31
Joined: 2016-12-28
Member
Posts: 31
Joined: 2016-12-28
#5464012 Posted on: 08/17/2017 02:47 PM
I'm going to order a whole new comp in the next couple of weeks, it's mostly for gaming. I was considering a Ryzen 1600X but that i5-8600K might be the better choice... Hope they'll price it competitively.
I'm going to order a whole new comp in the next couple of weeks, it's mostly for gaming. I was considering a Ryzen 1600X but that i5-8600K might be the better choice... Hope they'll price it competitively.
Webhiker
Senior Member
Posts: 483
Joined: 2011-03-23
Senior Member
Posts: 483
Joined: 2011-03-23
#5464016 Posted on: 08/17/2017 02:55 PM
In this day and age what's the point of a 6C/6T CPU ?
How is it going to compete against say i7 7700K 4C/8T ?
In this day and age what's the point of a 6C/6T CPU ?
How is it going to compete against say i7 7700K 4C/8T ?
Loophole35
Senior Member
Posts: 9234
Joined: 2011-09-21
Senior Member
Posts: 9234
Joined: 2011-09-21
#5464018 Posted on: 08/17/2017 03:00 PM
In this day and age what's the point of a 6C/6T CPU ?
How is it going to compete against say i7 7700K 4C/8T ?
If we are to believe the claimed percentage increases then the 6c/6t i5 will be faster in multi-threaded apps than the 7700K in fact it will be very close to the R5 1600/x while decimating both the 7700k and 1600x in single thread. Of course this needs a grain of salt.
The 8700k according to this will match the 1700x in multi-threaded as well.
In this day and age what's the point of a 6C/6T CPU ?
How is it going to compete against say i7 7700K 4C/8T ?
If we are to believe the claimed percentage increases then the 6c/6t i5 will be faster in multi-threaded apps than the 7700K in fact it will be very close to the R5 1600/x while decimating both the 7700k and 1600x in single thread. Of course this needs a grain of salt.
The 8700k according to this will match the 1700x in multi-threaded as well.
JamesSneed
Senior Member
Posts: 547
Joined: 2017-02-14
Senior Member
Posts: 547
Joined: 2017-02-14
#5464022 Posted on: 08/17/2017 03:09 PM
The 8700K on paper looks like it will be the new gaming machine CPU to replace the 7700K's spot. I don't wee anything not to like with the 8700K.
The 8700K on paper looks like it will be the new gaming machine CPU to replace the 7700K's spot. I don't wee anything not to like with the 8700K.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4139
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4139
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5464024 Posted on: 08/17/2017 03:22 PM
If we are to believe the claimed percentage increases then the 6c/6t i5 will be faster in multi-threaded apps than the 7700K in fact it will be very close to the R5 1600/x while decimating both the 7700k and 1600x in single thread. Of course this needs a grain of salt.
The 8700k according to this will match the 1700x in multi-threaded as well.
To my understanding, the performance increase is compared to the i5 7600K. It has 50% more cores and the turbo is about 5% higher. I'm assuming the "19%/55%" represents "single/multi". In terms of multi-threading, the IPC of the 8600K is going to be roughly 0% over the 7600K. For single-threaded, I'm not sure - 19% sounds way too high for an architectural refresh.
So yeah, when you account for Hz, I'm sure the 8700K is going to be competitive. But, if AMD can figure out how to get beyond 4GHz without LN, I don't think Coffee Lake is going to be a resounding win. That's a real big "if" though.
The 8700K on paper looks like it will be the new gaming machine CPU to replace the 7700K's spot. I don't wee anything not to like with the 8700K.
Price may be something to concern about.
If we are to believe the claimed percentage increases then the 6c/6t i5 will be faster in multi-threaded apps than the 7700K in fact it will be very close to the R5 1600/x while decimating both the 7700k and 1600x in single thread. Of course this needs a grain of salt.
The 8700k according to this will match the 1700x in multi-threaded as well.
To my understanding, the performance increase is compared to the i5 7600K. It has 50% more cores and the turbo is about 5% higher. I'm assuming the "19%/55%" represents "single/multi". In terms of multi-threading, the IPC of the 8600K is going to be roughly 0% over the 7600K. For single-threaded, I'm not sure - 19% sounds way too high for an architectural refresh.
So yeah, when you account for Hz, I'm sure the 8700K is going to be competitive. But, if AMD can figure out how to get beyond 4GHz without LN, I don't think Coffee Lake is going to be a resounding win. That's a real big "if" though.
The 8700K on paper looks like it will be the new gaming machine CPU to replace the 7700K's spot. I don't wee anything not to like with the 8700K.
Price may be something to concern about.
nevcairiel
Senior Member
Posts: 566
Joined: 2015-05-19
Senior Member
Posts: 566
Joined: 2015-05-19
#5464026 Posted on: 08/17/2017 03:30 PM
In this day and age what's the point of a 6C/6T CPU ?
How is it going to compete against say i7 7700K 4C/8T ?
HT doesn't add 100% extra performance, optimistically its maybe 30% at best (and often less). The cores are busy already, HT just uses performance that would otherwise be unused, but there isn't twice the hardware or anything like that.
2 cores more is a 50% increase.
So a 6/6 should be faster in MT workloads then an 4/8. Of course a 6/12 would be even better.
In this day and age what's the point of a 6C/6T CPU ?
How is it going to compete against say i7 7700K 4C/8T ?
HT doesn't add 100% extra performance, optimistically its maybe 30% at best (and often less). The cores are busy already, HT just uses performance that would otherwise be unused, but there isn't twice the hardware or anything like that.
2 cores more is a 50% increase.
So a 6/6 should be faster in MT workloads then an 4/8. Of course a 6/12 would be even better.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 167
Joined: 2016-07-25
i5 still stuck on 6 threads when Ryzen 5 has up to 12?