Intel Core i7-8700K Cinebench CB 15 Benchmarks
Click here to post a comment for Intel Core i7-8700K Cinebench CB 15 Benchmarks on our message forum
cryohellinc
"Coffee Lake offers 50% more performance"
Right, however according to this leak it's not even close to that. Manages to lose to Ryzen 1600 (which is cheaper mind that) in Multi-Threaded, and Single threaded performance is due to 1 core boost.
Plus it's non-soldered. Looking forward to see how tooth paste coupes with temperatures.
slicer
389$ Intel CPU barely beats vanilla AMD R5-1600 with a 220$ price :P
GG Intel!
FranciscoCL
Something isn't rigth with that multithread score.
8700K can go to 4.3GHz (6 cores) with good cooling. Maybe that HP system isn't good at that.
Vananovion
I got my 1600X for about 290EUR.
Then again, this is still just a leak. Until we get the numbers from The Man HH, it's too early to judge.
ezodagrom
I rather wait for proper reviews before judging it, though all I want from the 8700K is gaming performance, don't care if its general multithreading performance is just Ryzen 5 tier.
xIcarus
Do note that while single-threaded performance is very high, games do use more than 1 core. The difference from Ryzen isn't going to be that big.
If this benchmark would be representative of general performance across the board, this processor's price/performance looks absolutely atrocious, even single-threaded where Intel are really pushing the frequency envelope here.
I'm waiting to see how many fanboys gouge up their products because at this point the i7-8700k doesn't seem to make any sense with that price.
Silva
People with this mentality is the reason why Intel was able to do what it did for the past 6 years.
If AMD didn't made Ryzen, these 6 cores would never exist for years!
Something has to be wrong, the MT score should be closer to 1400.
If this is the real score R7 1700 is still the better buy, even after all these months...
Memorian
Weak as hell..
Emille
Wouldn't exist for years?
The 6 core coffee lake was scheduled for the start of next year before ryzen even came out....
schmidtbag
It's actually somehow slower than Kaby Lake (which from what I recall, was slightly slower than Skylake). A 7700K can turbo 1 core to 4.5GHz, but the 8700K turbos to 4.7Ghz, and yet it barely pulls ahead in single-threaded. But, this is also just 1 test. Too soon to draw conclusions.
-Tj-
So by single threaded it gets 196 @ 4.7ghz, ok I guess.
For comparison mine @ 4.7ghz gets ~192cb, no rush then. From what I saw this i7 4770k just started to flex its muscles, not that its obsolete 😀
ezodagrom
How so?
I couldn't care less about fanboyism towards any brand, right now I'm still using an AMD CPU even (Phenom II X4). I buy what fits my needs the most, be it Intel or AMD, it doesn't matter which, as long as it fits my needs.
When I got my Phenom II X4, at the time it was the CPU that fit my needs the most, a cheap quad core CPU. Nowadays the i7 8700K is what is going to fit my needs the most, better single-threading performance and decent multi-threading performance.
If someone wants better multi-threading performance while still having decent single-threading performance, Ryzen is the best pick of course, but that's not what I want.
Either way, gotta wait for proper reviews/benchmarks, gotta take leaked results with a grain of salt.
Kaarme
I think you mean was scheduled for 2020?
Jokes aside, it's not like Ryzen appeared out of nowhere. Having competed for so long with AMD, Intel could sense AMD is finally up to something and dug its more or less existing plans for a mainstream 6-core from the naphthalene, updated them to their latest iteration of the same old, and turned the mills on.
Silva
As if they didn't knew what was coming...AMD had announced Zen months before release, Intel never thought they could leapfrog +40% IPC over last gen.
If they were scheduled for next year, why are we seeing them next month? Rushed much?
We have no idea what the cooling solution or temps are, the MT performance is off imo.
If all you want is single core performance, I agree.
And I agree we need to wait, this isn't final.
schmidtbag
Well, clearly there isn't much of an improvement between Coffee Lake and Kaby Lake (or Skylake), so Intel probably was like "eh screw it, why bother testing? We already know it's good enough". If Coffee Lake actually had something to offer other than more cores (and maybe better efficiency), Intel would probably hold off their release. But from what I recall, there will be 2 release phases for Coffee Lake - one that is mostly based around KL (this upcoming release) and another later one, that will likely be a little different.
Right, like I said, too soon to draw conclusions. But what's wrong with the MT? Aside from the fact it seems to have a 0% improvement over KL, it seems to sit right where it should, when you consider the number of threads and the frequency.
D3M1G0D
I'm guessing that it was running at stock, and it was not able to maintain high clocks with all cores active due to TDP limits (remember that turbo core boost is an upper limit, not a guaranteed speed). The single core number is in line with expectations so no reason to distrust the multi-core score.
Emille
They clearly brought the release forward by a few months, that fact has also been reported on for several months now, I didn't even mention that fact because it was self evident. My response of it being always intended for release at the start of next year was to counter the claim that we wouldn't have seen it for years. It was always in intels schedule as a 6 core i7 in q1 2018, later, they brought it forward by a few months. Hardly an issue, all it says is that the tech was already ready to go....which is the exact opposite of being rushed and releasing unfinished tech.
MK80
My R5 1600 6C/12T sub 200 euros @3.7GHz 1236 pts..... @4.0GHz 1335 pts and single Core 160 pts.....
DDR4 G.Skill F4-3000C15-8GVS @ 2666GHz
Board Gigabyte AX370 K5
And 6C/6T 4.1 GHz 964 pts.....
r3claim3r
Cinebench is only one test. I'm more interested in how it games.
Arbie
You should think more about what your "needs" really are. Do they include having competition in the PC CPU market?
Even if Intel offers more performance per dollar (true only in a few cases now), AMD has amazingly reduced the difference to the point where I can accept it in order to help fuel competition. If the market does not reward AMD for their valiant effort in Zen, the company may be forced to give up. How many times can they come from behind in a high-stakes business like this? Then Intel will again quit trying, and several years from now we'll ALL be worse off than if they were still duking it out.
It *isn't* fanboyism to lean towards AMD now. It's common sense.
