Jump to content

Coffee Lake


17 replies to this topic

#1 ninjitsu

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 402 posts

Posted 05 October 2017 - 08:44 PM

The new Coffe Lake processors are out from Intel. What do you guys think of them? They're a pretty big departure from Intel's historic pricing scheme per core count.

#2 NARC BAIT

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 499 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 05 October 2017 - 10:55 PM

the stats seem good, other than its basically what they were already putting out, just with less limits ... at least they will do something in the hex core scene, and the cpu clock certainly seems higher than what a ryzen can push out ... whats the wattage going to be like I wonder ... but still, initial stats and numbers seem fairly good ... other than its going to be another one of intels microscopic details require a new motherboard .... has one been delidded yet ... they will know more once someone decides its time to throw a few away ...

#3 Flapdrol

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 1,986 posts

Posted 06 October 2017 - 12:01 AM

Sixcore i5 should perform great in games. Still affordable.

#4 xWiredx

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 1,805 posts

Posted 06 October 2017 - 11:48 AM

They could be worthwhile for people on older Sandy Bridge/Ivy Bridge systems (or any non-Ryzen AMD systems). The i5 8600K looks like it would be an excellent value, even compared to its Ryzen counterpart. A lot of people are saying you can get 5.0-5.2GhZ out of them with AIOs, and the IPC gains from those older architectures make it pretty worthwhile (the same is true for Skylake and Kaby Lake, though).

It looks like without excellent cooling, the 8700K isn't quite as fortunate, but in most tests it either meets or exceeds the Ryzen 8-cores' performance. The clock advantage these chips have over Ryzen make them punch above their weight pretty effectively.

Overall, they really just perform like 6-core Skylake chips. There is a minimal (VERY MINIMAL, 1% AT BEST) IPC improvement. Their real value is the additional 2 cores at similar TDPs, so as games ever so slowly begin to adopt higher core counts, they will finally start to diverge from their Kaby Lake siblings.

The other thing to consider is that it seems like DDR4-3200+ is very easily usable with these chips so any overclocking that you want to do on the bclk/gear ratio should be better (though I'm not sure if that's even required with Coffee Lake).

Unfortunately for me personally, so far it is hard to tell just how much of an improvement an 8700K would be over my 5820K. It's looking like best case scenario, clock for clock it offers about 5% better IPC, and worst-case scenario they're dead even. Since my X99 system has been kind of unstable the entire 3 years I've had it, though, and absolutely will not for any reason touch above 4.3GhZ, the minimum improvement would still be an additional 400MhZ while using something like 40W less.

#5 ninjitsu

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 402 posts

Posted 06 October 2017 - 11:53 AM

View PostxWiredx, on 06 October 2017 - 11:48 AM, said:

They could be worthwhile for people on older Sandy Bridge/Ivy Bridge systems (or any non-Ryzen AMD systems). The i5 8600K looks like it would be an excellent value, even compared to its Ryzen counterpart. A lot of people are saying you can get 5.0-5.2GhZ out of them with AIOs, and the IPC gains from those older architectures make it pretty worthwhile (the same is true for Skylake and Kaby Lake, though).

It looks like without excellent cooling, the 8700K isn't quite as fortunate, but in most tests it either meets or exceeds the Ryzen 8-cores' performance. The clock advantage these chips have over Ryzen make them punch above their weight pretty effectively.

Overall, they really just perform like 6-core Skylake chips. There is a minimal (VERY MINIMAL, 1% AT BEST) IPC improvement. Their real value is the additional 2 cores at similar TDPs, so as games ever so slowly begin to adopt higher core counts, they will finally start to diverge from their Kaby Lake siblings.

The other thing to consider is that it seems like DDR4-3200+ is very easily usable with these chips so any overclocking that you want to do on the bclk/gear ratio should be better (though I'm not sure if that's even required with Coffee Lake).

Unfortunately for me personally, so far it is hard to tell just how much of an improvement an 8700K would be over my 5820K. It's looking like best case scenario, clock for clock it offers about 5% better IPC, and worst-case scenario they're dead even. Since my X99 system has been kind of unstable the entire 3 years I've had it, though, and absolutely will not for any reason touch above 4.3GhZ, the minimum improvement would still be an additional 400MhZ while using something like 40W less.


Coffe Lake does have fewer PCI express lanes than X99. I've been reading that 5ghz isn't guaranteed with these new chips either. Still, the 8600K looks pretty great.

#6 Bill Lumbar

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • 2,073 posts

Posted 06 October 2017 - 04:59 PM

Man....idk, I am on the bench and running a Ryzen 1700Posted Image

#7 ninjitsu

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 402 posts

Posted 06 October 2017 - 05:52 PM

View PostBill Lumbar, on 06 October 2017 - 04:59 PM, said:

Man....idk, I am on the bench and running a Ryzen 1700Posted Image


I'm running a 1700 as well. I really have no need to upgrade, but I want the shiny!

#8 LT. HARDCASE

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Spear
  • The Spear
  • 2,614 posts
  • LocationDark Space

Posted 06 October 2017 - 05:57 PM

The 8700K is the new gaming god.

Digital Foundry's review lays it out pretty well.

#9 NARC BAIT

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 499 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 06 October 2017 - 06:05 PM

pretty sure the coffee lake was the sky lake, just, edgier ... is that even a word ? ... imagine the headache for the marketing guys if they had called it the chai latte relaxo lake .... or skinny soy lake .... skyhigh might have been a reasonable progression ... but oh well ...

part of intels real problem is the lack of long term support for motherboard/cpu's .... its the old obsolete the second you walked out of the shop scenario ....

wouldn't watch that review, youtube wanted me to watch 4 ads in a row .... ahhh no ...

Edited by NARC BAIT, 06 October 2017 - 06:43 PM.


#10 xWiredx

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 1,805 posts

Posted 06 October 2017 - 07:00 PM

View PostLT. HARDCASE, on 06 October 2017 - 05:57 PM, said:

The 8700K is the new gaming god.

Digital Foundry's review lays it out pretty well.

Well, yeah, it's a 7700K with two extra cores and a small clock bump. That should have been obvious from the get-go.

View Postninjitsu, on 06 October 2017 - 11:53 AM, said:


Coffe Lake does have fewer PCI express lanes than X99. I've been reading that 5ghz isn't guaranteed with these new chips either. Still, the 8600K looks pretty great.

Yeah, but you know how many times I've put those PCIe lanes to use? Only long enough to transition from 660Ti SLI to a new 980. SLI and Crossfire support is on its way out, and I don't plan on putting anything else in those other slots.

A lot of people that went with the 5820K did so because it was the "cheap" way to 6 cores/12 threads and it was also the first way to get quad-channel DDR4 from a consumer point of view. Anybody who actually wanted to use PCIe lanes went with a 5930K instead. I mean, that's the reason I went that route, too. My tower isn't just a gaming machine, it's also a studio audio machine that needs to handle a lot of sound processing without budging. It's been a small disaster with its increasingly weird activity the past 6 months or so, though, and hasn't exactly been a gem from the start, either.

#11 GweNTLeR

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • IS Exemplar
  • IS Exemplar
  • 325 posts

Posted 06 October 2017 - 08:54 PM

I'd say hexa-core I5 is best, but... As far as I recall, for some reason MWO was suffering stuttering on hexa-thread CPU's. I wonder if this problem still exist...

#12 The Mysterious Fox

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Altruist
  • The Altruist
  • 349 posts
  • LocationUsing your bathroom

Posted 06 October 2017 - 08:57 PM

its cool only if you need to upgrade the entire system, but definitely not for a 4 year old thing like MWO. You'd get better feedback putting your money into a high end graphics card and a 4k monitor. MWO actually looks really nice on 4k.

#13 Sephrus Shanadar

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 125 posts

Posted 06 October 2017 - 09:31 PM

The 8600k is where its at for gaming and streaming. The 8700k is at most 5% faster in games but it cost 50% more. Plus good luck on getting an 8700k before next year, this was a paper launch most likely wont see any real stock til 1q18 if the reports are right. As fof hex cores in MWO my 6850k tears mwo a new piehole, avg almost 200 fps and dips down to 90ish under super heavy combat. Same gpu and my 1700 OC to 4.0 only got about 150 max and dips to 40 fps.

#14 Bill Lumbar

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • 2,073 posts

Posted 07 October 2017 - 03:32 PM

View PostSephrus Shanadar, on 06 October 2017 - 09:31 PM, said:

The 8600k is where its at for gaming and streaming. The 8700k is at most 5% faster in games but it cost 50% more. Plus good luck on getting an 8700k before next year, this was a paper launch most likely wont see any real stock til 1q18 if the reports are right. As fof hex cores in MWO my 6850k tears mwo a new piehole, avg almost 200 fps and dips down to 90ish under super heavy combat. Same gpu and my 1700 OC to 4.0 only got about 150 max and dips to 40 fps.

Pics or it didn't happen man......

#15 Sephrus Shanadar

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 125 posts

Posted 07 October 2017 - 05:57 PM

View PostBill Lumbar, on 07 October 2017 - 03:32 PM, said:

Pics or it didn't happen man......


I tell you what Bill. This isnt the first time you have called me out on my fps differance I've seen between my 1700 and my 6850k. When I get back from my business trip in a few weeks I will link the test vids using both cpus with the same gpu all drivers up to date. I should also be building my 8600k system so I will throw that test in also.

Edited by Sephrus Shanadar, 07 October 2017 - 05:59 PM.


#16 NARC BAIT

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 499 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 07 October 2017 - 09:28 PM

View PostGweNTLeR, on 06 October 2017 - 08:54 PM, said:

I'd say hexa-core I5 is best, but... As far as I recall, for some reason MWO was suffering stuttering on hexa-thread CPU's. I wonder if this problem still exist...
the underlying engine was originally designed with hex-cores in mind, at that time in cryengine dev, the highest multicore consumer CPU was the AMD 1090T, beyond six cores the game doesn't really have much ability to split the actual workload much further ...

View PostSephrus Shanadar, on 07 October 2017 - 05:57 PM, said:

I will link the test vids using both cpus with the same gpu all drivers up to date
we like graphs ... that also can be linked to vids ... but the graphs tend to be much easier to visually consume than watching over 4 or 5 videos that could be between 5-15 minutes long ....

on a side note, it seems to me that the CPU mapping doesn't work out very well on a ryzen 5/7 ... probably mostly due to what was described as the octocore patch .... which ended up being very hit and miss .... and seeing as PGI are not going to actually test on the platform at all, they aren't likely to improve the situation in much of a hurry ...

View PostNARC BAIT, on 01 October 2017 - 11:04 PM, said:

if you don't mind guinea pigging a bit, you could experiment with these settings

the following is pretty much a quick edit of that TL:DR post ...

sys_job_system_max_worker = 16
sys_main_CPU = 1 
sys_physics_CPU = 2
sys_streaming_CPU = 3
e_ParticlesThread = 4
ca_thread0Affinity = 5
ca_thread1Affinity = 6
r_WaterUpdateThread = 7   
e_StatObjMergeUseThread = 8
sys_TaskThread0_CPU = 9
sys_TaskThread1_CPU = 10
sys_TaskThread2_CPU = 11
sys_TaskThread3_CPU = 12
sys_TaskThread4_CPU = 13
sys_TaskThread5_CPU = 14

or maybe an alternate stepping map will work out better for some people, depending on overall core load usage blah ...
sys_job_system_max_worker = 16
sys_main_CPU = 1 
sys_physics_CPU = 3
sys_streaming_CPU = 5
e_ParticlesThread = 7
ca_thread0Affinity = 9
ca_thread1Affinity = 11
r_WaterUpdateThread = 2   
sys_TaskThread0_CPU = 2
sys_TaskThread1_CPU = 4
sys_TaskThread2_CPU = 6
sys_TaskThread3_CPU = 8
sys_TaskThread4_CPU = 10
sys_TaskThread5_CPU = 12

honestly, right now, I'm not sure the 'proper' way to address the CPU topology from within the game, 0 seems to make threads bounce around, it was suggested to me based on an obscure piece someone else wrote that 0 goes to the core with the least load .... which might result in a direct penalty on a ryzen if the chosen new core for task X is on the other CCX ... setting it either way seemed to give me an improvement to *minimal* frame times over the 'auto' settings ... I'm reworking spreadsheets to figure it out one way or the other ... but life likes getting in the way of calc-foo ...

Edited by NARC BAIT, 07 October 2017 - 09:30 PM.


#17 Internal Obedience XIII-omega

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Decimator
  • The Decimator
  • 230 posts
  • LocationHPG LXXIII-omega

Posted 09 October 2017 - 09:24 PM

The Coffee Lake is on my "Gees i really need to do this build" list... after im done with my X299 Posted Image

#18 Quinn Allard

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 253 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 01 January 2018 - 01:05 PM

Just another rung on a ladder to me. I see no reason to upgrade from my i7 7700k running at 5ghz with a Kraken x52.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users