8-core Coffee Lake CPUs Are Surfacing in SiSoftware Database
Click here to post a comment for 8-core Coffee Lake CPUs Are Surfacing in SiSoftware Database on our message forum
wavetrex
Most likely still using toothpaste between the die and heat-spreader.
/thread
cryohellinc
Let's see what Intel will come up with. As wavetrex mentioned, most likely toothpaste again and new socket in classic Intel style..... .
So far my bet goes for Zen 2, but hey, maybe there will be surprises
Fox2232
^/^^
I do not think that regular toothpaste will do on this chip. They'll use some better TIM this time around. I am not betting on it having soldered IHS, but one never knows.
Moonbogg
I was looking forward to this chip, but I honestly expect toothpaste as well. I don't want a chip with paste under the die. With how good the R7 2700X ended up, my current bet is to see what Ryzen 2 has to offer. I'm thinking it will be pretty damn impressive.
Irenicus
There's actually nothing wrong with the stock TIM. However, JayZTwoCents actually did a test with toothpaste for thermal paste and it worked quite well LOL
Backstabak
I think that Intel will use the toothpaste and I also think that the toothpaste will not do. If I remember correctly, they already had massive issues with thermals for their x299 platform, albeit with 10 cores. It's just probably, they will not be able to offer anything in mass consumer price range with soldering (if at all), but maybe they'll at least use better TIM. Also, I'm really interested in the pricing, it can't be that cheap to produce them, as the monolithic 8 core CPU would probably have relatively high failure rates, as opposed to glued together Ryzens.
wavetrex
Standard Ryzen die is 8-cores. Yes, there's two clusters of 4 in it, but it's still a single die with everything on it... 8 cores + L1/2 cache, L3 cache (a lot of it), memory controller, bus interface, etc. It doesn't get more monolithic than that.
What it doesn't have is a shitty iGPU in it which (almost) nobody uses.
cryohellinc
There were rumours some time ago about ~5ghz clock rates. I'm a bit sceptical about that, but it will be 7nm after all + newer architecture. 2700x can be pushed to 4.4 with some a lot of OC, however its solid at 4.3. If Zen 2 can reach 4.6-4.8 area that will be very impressive. Slap on top of it AMD"s better PPC and we have a CPU that won't have any issues even at 1080p on very high frame rates.
warlord
2 glued and customized 8350Ks. Should be an interesting combination.
Well it seems exactly like dual i3 8350K to me 😛 Impressive power here.
Easily it could be the strongest CPU for 2018 for every task out there. 😉
coth
There is actually no word on whatever it's CFL or CNL.
nz3777
Yeah but what will they do about price since the 8700k is $300 Amd is already in the Lead with the 2700x (price wise) no way in heck they sell this for under $400 and even then people will turn to Amd in my opinion unless of course they have that magic 5ghz clockspeed.
warlord
As it is exactly or almost like two i3 8350k specs wise, make the calculations of cost. Plus 50%.
It will cost from 399 € up to 449 euros maximum not more than this because of more expensive z390 mobos.
And you will get Intel under the hood, meaning fastest cpu overall than any ryzen setup.
ruthan
Why to wait for new 8 core cpu which needs new MB, if you can now buy 8 core for Socket v2066?
wavetrex
Or you can buy Ryzen 2700X for half the price of that sk 2066 monster and get a properly indium-soldered CPU that doesn't suffer from 10000000 vulnerabilities.
Fox2232
In theory or after delid. Because Ryzens are outperforming intel's server CPUs with 10C/20T for a while due to TDP as toothpaste is limiting factor.
Then there is question of Dual channel memory with intel chip. I did calculate approximate projections on required bandwidth for workloads in Geekbench.
It was based on very good data delivered by one of our members. And even 6C/12T is already starved by fast ram in certain workloads. In some workloads it would not be bandwidth starved even with slow ram.
But there is no memory allowing 8C/16T to scale properly in those affected workloads on dual channel.
schmidtbag
I thought Intel used "toothpaste" on their 2066 i9s? If this is true, I highly doubt this 1151 8-core will get special treatment.
You're right - they won't sell this for under $400. I'm betting this will cost somewhere between $400-550. The 8700K wins in enough benchmarks to convince people it is the best of its class (which I wouldn't wholly agree with) and is worth the price. If this 8-core ends up reaching the same clock speeds, its performance level will be the best in its class, and so the price will remain high.
Besides, considering the following scenarios:
* Despite Coffee Lake effectively obsoleting Kaby Lake, KL's prices barely moved at all.
* Intel's 16 core chip is about $900 more expensive than AMD's without being much better.
So, I think it's pretty clear Intel will be keeping prices high for this product. Remember, part of what you're paying for is the name, and Intel's name carries a lot of prestige (frankly, a lot more than it should).
SaLaDiN666
Sorry to be a party pooper, I run 7820x @4.7ghz with Noctua NHD15, mesh @ 3200mhz.
Given the thing the mainstream 8core will be a smaller chip on more advanced process /14nm++/, there will be no problem with cooling and OC at the aforementioned frequency while using the old TIM.
Intel is faster clock to clock, and well, just compare 2600x vs 8700k performance wise. Woah.
schmidtbag
The die shrink isn't going to help as much as you think it will. It will help a little bit with efficiency (which means less heat output), but a smaller die size means less surface area. Less surface area limits how quickly you can dissipate heat. So, that means cooling capacity is disproportionate. Note, I'm not suggesting it will get hotter, I'm just saying the die shrink isn't going to help with thermals all that much, especially considering we're only talking a shrinkage up to 4nm; that's not much. I bet using the indium TIM makes a greater difference than a die shrink.
Uh... you do realize the 8700K is clocked much higher, right? In many cases (but not all) Intel most certainly is not faster clock-per-clock. Where Intel really blasts ahead clock-per-clock is anything AVX2 related, but that's not so commonly used.
BReal85
Yeah, for what price... 🙂
SaLaDiN666
I do not recall saying how much exactly it would help. I said that I didn't have any problems with cooling my 7820x on air @4.7ghz so we could expect the same with the mainstream 8 core. You can compare 7800x vs 8700k. Both are hexa cores. 8700k is clocked higher, running all core turbo boost @ 4.3ghz, 7800x @ 4ghz. 7800x runs hotter, worse overclocker, at stock consumes more power up to 50w, the power consumption skyrockets when OC-ed. We see the same thing happening with 7740x which is just 7700k put on a different socket, consuming more power again, up to 30w more than 7700k. So that gives you pretty much the idea what you can expect. It can't get worse.
Ad 8700k vs 2600x, in the vast majority of clock to clock tasks, the i7 will win. Haven't seen any single threaded bechmarks where the Intel lost and in games, pretty clear, 8700k will simply always perform faster... 2600x is able to compete occasionally in heavily multithreaded scenarios. But that is easily skewed in favour of Intel by using highly clocked rams which Ryzen wouldn't handle.
