Intel Coffee Lake event photo confirms leaked specs
Click here to post a comment for Intel Coffee Lake event photo confirms leaked specs on our message forum
MegaFalloutFan
HT is useful in sub 4 core CPUs but if you have more cores, its useless for gaming.
I have mine 5820K with HT disabled as bunch of games and emulators dont like it and run slower.
If that 6/6 i5 has higher overclock than i7 and the less cache has no actual effect on gameplay meaning that for video games i5 with overclock will be better than 8700k with overclock, ill upgrade to i5.
Otherwise i will be getting 8700K, new motherboard and two sticks of 16Gb 3200mnz and selling my quad channel 32gb kit, cpu and mobo
GhostXL
8700K will be my upgrade. It's the only chip worthy. Price and performance will make it so. Great stuff!
This one has me really excited!
Hyperthreading does work as others mentioned. It's nice to have. It can handle background tasks while you game too.
It helps. It wont make or break if you can't afford it. 🙂
ezodagrom
I'm pretty interested in the 8700K, my Phenom II X4 just hasn't been enough for years. xD
But I still gotta save up a bunch more...
i5 wise, I guess I could see 4c/8t happening with lower TDP versions later on, maybe.
schmidtbag
As a suggestion, have you tried setting affinities? I don't know if there's an automated way of doing it (I personally never encountered a situation where HT caused performance problems, but I'm aware they exist), but I think you'd be much better off keeping HT enabled and just set your primary applications to use only the physical cores and none of the logical threads. You'd likely see better responsiveness and then you don't get that crappy feeling of disabling a feature on such an expensive CPU.
IMO, that sounds more like a downgrade. Haswell's performance is still very much modern and relevant. Anything about the architecture that is inferior would be made up for the larger cache and the extra 16GB of memory you have. If you re-enable HT and figure out an affinity config that works for your needs, I think your current rig will have a clear advantage.
Pawel04
To be honest Im actually looking forward to seeing how that i5 8600k performs and how its priced. 100% agree with whats been said lately regarding Intel's pricing strategies/lack of improvement over the generations and because of that my next CPU was going to be an R5 1600 but I'm still on my 2500k which has left a seriously good impression on me. Maybe this was the kick in the ass that was needed to produce another such gem as i believe the 2500k was.
Ricepudding
If the 8700k can boost one core to 4.7ghz with the rest running at 4.3/4.4ghz then this. Ignore be an interesting chip to look at. Though my main concern is with heat, the 7700k runs so hot and this chip will have 2 extra cores... I'm hoping they're going to solder instead of the spread they currently use as it is just terrible.
Beyond that however this might be the series that us sandy bridge users finally change over haha... if the temps are too bad I might wait for zen2 since they should fix the clock speeds by that point least that's the hope
Prince Valiant
The only way i5 higher than 6C/6T is happening is if Ryzen 2 outperforms Intel in everything.
FeDaYin
6C/12T and 16 PCI-E LANES ?
Amazing.
Loophole35
Rumor is 24. However that my include the 4 lanes that feed the chipset so that would leave 20 for GFX and a nvme M.2.
BReal85
Without threads the 8600K will have disadvantage over 1600/1600X or even the 7700K. Even with similar pricing to the 1600X, this may be another lose for Intel after the X CPU-s. Only the 8700/K with correct pricing will do the trick.
Pricing and power consumption (after the X series) will be key points. If it maintains the similar pricing Intel followed (or even increase prices over Kaby Lake), and game performance increases with 1-2% as usual, the 8700K may not be called an ultimate gaming machine CPU. At least considering both companies.
Yxskaft
I too expect 6c/6t to be better.
But even when we're talking about hyperthreading on mainstream i7, the claims about hyperthreading being useless for gaming needed to die out already a few years ago. Sadly there are still users believing that i7 don't matter for gaming.
In Digitalfoundry's test, the i7 7700k at stock outperformed the i5 7600k at 4.8 ghz. Even the i7 3770k (2012 CPU) at 4.5 ghz beat out the i5 in the most threaded games.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-intel-kaby-lake-core-i7-7700k-review
FeDaYin
7700K outperforms 7600K because of cache difference, not so much because of HT.
ezodagrom
It may not have hyperthreading, but it has 2 real cores over the 7700K, and the 8600K's turbo clock isn't far from the 7700K, so I wonder if it'll really have a disadvantage when compared to the 7700K.
schmidtbag
I'm sure the 8600K will have better overall performance than a 4c/8t i7 - physical cores are always better than logical threads. But, I am willing to bet there are some tests a [similarly clocked] 4c/8t i7 will win in.
artk2219
Honestly it would probably depend on the applications use of hyperthreading, since i dont see there being much of an IPC difference. Hyperthreading scales at best around 30% extra performance (more like 20, but whatever), so a 4 core chip with 8 threads is equivalent to roughly (4 x 1.3) physical cores, or 5.2 cores. So the new 6 core chip, with equivalent IPC should perform slightly better than a chip with 4 cores and 8 threads given good scaling, and destroy it with bad scaling. Multicore scaling gets thrown out when IPC is mismatched, as show by AMD's previous Bulldozer attempts, with the 8 physical core FX's doing battle with the 4 physical core I5's due to much better IPC performance by intel (50 - 60% better). Yes, they had 8 dedicated integer units with a shared FPU that can split into two 128 bit FPU's vs hyper threading, but scaling works the same. Although the cores in bulldozer should have offered 80% or better scaling vs 30% in hyperthreading, it would have been nice to see another big core implementation based on Carrizo. They had originally planned to have like 12 core bulldozer dies offering performance probably between Nehalem and Sandy bridge, with multiple dies on the server side making 24 to 48 core chips.
Vipu2
18% more toothpaste
MegaFalloutFan
I know that you can use affinities, there is a paid program on steam that does that for you, sets the cpu priority, changes power plan: a game booster of sorts.
But my CPU is at 4.5Ghz, HT adds to unnecessary heat and i dont use anything that might need more than 4 cores, i mean 7zip and winrar and thats it.
BTW, there are games that just dont like more than 4-8 cores, i noticed that some games when benched on identical clock speed but different core count will perform better on 4,6 and tops 8 core CPU.
It happened with Intel and with Ryzen/TR, say you they bench Intel HEDT CPUs all at same clock 4Ghz or 4.5Ghz and 6 core and 8 core has more FPS than 12 core, the only difference when overclocked is the core count.
If you game the optimal CPU for 2018 and im sure till 2020 is 6/6 and if you need to record live 8/8 is more than enough, no need for HT
Emille
Super excited to get my first 6 core cpu. If the chipset has 24 pci lanes as reported then I should be able to get a board with 3x m.2 slots. Also I can keep my ram for this board so it would only cost me about $900 all up.
Thanks amd for making intel bring this release forward
tsunami231
wouuld love it if i could pop 8700k in to my z170 seeing it same socket, but i wont hold my breath
MegaFalloutFan
The new chipset will have 24 PCIe 3.0 lanes on top of whatever CPU will (usually 16)
So 40 in total is more then enough.
