Jump to content

Intel Coffee Lake Review Thread

Mr_Troll
34 minutes ago, Majestic said:

"zealot"

Wow.

So you don't want 6 cores for the price of 4? OK, fine. But I do.

Maybe Intel really was sandbagging because the competition was non-existent. Ryzen gave Intel the much-needed kick in the butt.

If I were a zealot 9_99_99_9 I'd be calling Ryzen useless or something.

However, if you insist on calling people names because they disagree with you I've got a gem for you:

Quote

It is quite pleasing to see Intel grovel.

Zealot much?

 

Spoiler

CPU:Intel Xeon X5660 @ 4.2 GHz RAM:6x2 GB 1600MHz DDR3 MB:Asus P6T Deluxe GPU:Asus GTX 660 TI OC Cooler:Akasa Nero 3


SSD:OCZ Vertex 3 120 GB HDD:2x640 GB WD Black Fans:2xCorsair AF 120 PSU:Seasonic 450 W 80+ Case:Thermaltake Xaser VI MX OS:Windows 10
Speakers:Altec Lansing MX5021 Keyboard:Razer Blackwidow 2013 Mouse:Logitech MX Master Monitor:Dell U2412M Headphones: Logitech G430

Big thanks to Damikiller37 for making me an awesome Intel 4004 out of trixels!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

It is a valid point. Why the hell would you upgrade after 8 months of use?

 

People are hitting 5.0ghz no problem, so it seems to be doing fine. If you want to go higher then delid it. Why should intel have to cater to OCers just so they can go outside of intels operational ranges?

 

For the most part its running pretty cool

The fact is that it's just kabylake, so why didn't they make it run on 270. They either expected it to release much later, or this is just utter shenanigans. 8months to replace a platform is ridiculous.

 

What operational ranges?

 

That is a pretty hefty cooling solution though, with a chip that is not really that power hungry. It will not be as favorable on 120mm aircoolers at reasonable fanlevels.

X62 with fans at full blast is not something you run 24/7.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, juretrn said:

So you don't want 6 cores for the price of 4? OK, fine. But I do.

 

Maybe Intel really was sandbagging because the competition was non-existent. Ryzen gave Intel the much-needed kick in the butt.

 

If I were a zealot I'd be calling Ryzen useless or something.

I wanted them years ago. Like everyone else. And again, i'm not saying it's a poor chip or horrible value (without platform costs). I'm saying it's BORING. And i'm fucking allowed to call something boring if I feel it is...boring.

 

Oh they were sandbagging. Hence people were still rocking 2500K's.

 

No you'd make every excuse under the sun to justify anti-consumer practices.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Majestic said:

The fact is that it's just kabylake, so why didn't they make it run on 270. They either expected it to release much later, or this is just utter shenanigans. 8months to replace a platform is ridiculous.

I dont know, maybe you know the 30 or so extra used pins that are not used on 270 boards. More cores=more power requirements. People bitch about intel not keeping up against ryzen and demand CL come out ASAP then bitch that CL came out too soon and their new systems are out dated. 

 

Seriously people here just like to bitch most the time as if their current machine are unusable all of a sudden. 

2 minutes ago, Majestic said:

What operational ranges?

Stock speeds. Intel just has to make sure under load its CPUs maintain a decent temp under stock which their TIM does just fine, even under OC to 5ghz. But people still complain because its not good enough for OCing where thats not part of intel's responsibility. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Majestic said:

I wanted them years ago. Like everyone else. And again, i'm not saying it's a poor chip or horrible value (without platform costs). I'm saying it's BORING. And i'm fucking allowed to call something boring if I feel it is...boring.

 

Oh they were sandbagging. Hence people were still rocking 2500K's.

 

No you'd make every excuse under the sun to justify anti-consumer practices.

 

 

First of all, I wasn't justifying anything. 

Second, I very much disagree with your "boring" assessment, and let's leave it at that.

 

Spoiler

CPU:Intel Xeon X5660 @ 4.2 GHz RAM:6x2 GB 1600MHz DDR3 MB:Asus P6T Deluxe GPU:Asus GTX 660 TI OC Cooler:Akasa Nero 3


SSD:OCZ Vertex 3 120 GB HDD:2x640 GB WD Black Fans:2xCorsair AF 120 PSU:Seasonic 450 W 80+ Case:Thermaltake Xaser VI MX OS:Windows 10
Speakers:Altec Lansing MX5021 Keyboard:Razer Blackwidow 2013 Mouse:Logitech MX Master Monitor:Dell U2412M Headphones: Logitech G430

Big thanks to Damikiller37 for making me an awesome Intel 4004 out of trixels!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

I dont know, maybe you know the 30 or so extra used pins that are not used on 270 boards. More cores=more power requirements. People bitch about intel not keeping up against ryzen and demand CL come out ASAP then bitch that CL came out too soon and their new systems are out dated. 

 

Seriously people here just like to bitch most the time as if their current machine are unusable all of a sudden. 

Stock speeds. Intel just has to make sure under load its CPUs maintain a decent temp under stock which their TIM does just fine, even under OC to 5ghz. But people still complain because its not good enough for OCing where thats not part of intel's responsibility. 

Like I have said in the past, it's quite funny how upset people get about technology moving forward at "x" speed (whether slow or fast). When the rapid increases made in the 90s actually made your computer unusable if you upgraded as most software and hardware was not easily interchangable, especially gen to gen. 

 

People are going to complain even if Intel is able to over clock their chips to 6ghz with TIM, because "well if Intel had used solder I could've clocked it higher and had better temps".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, juretrn said:

First of all, I wasn't justifying anything. 

Second, I very much disagree with your "boring" assessment, and let's leave it at that.

Fair enough. To me this is just Kaby Lake +2. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IAmAndre said:

Guys can we expect a price drop from AMD after the release of Coffee Lake?

Though i'd love to see another 20-30 bucks chopped off I'm not so sure it'll happen, as we've already seen 2(?) cuts already. I think the 1800x still has its place as it still gives the 8700k a run for its money in 4k/1440p and production but if you can end up getting a 8400 for 190 bucks the 1600x is going to need a bit of a cut to be competitive. That said i can buy a 1600x and a motherboard and OC it to 3.9~4.0 on the stock fan and spend less than i would on an 8400 + dumb expensive z370 motherboards so idk.

CPU: Intel i5 4690k W/Noctua nh-d15 GPU: Gigabyte G1 980 TI MOBO: MSI Z97 Gaming 5 RAM: 16Gig Corsair Vengance Boot-Drive: 500gb Samsung Evo Storage: 2x 500g WD Blue, 1x 2tb WD Black 1x4tb WD Red

 

 

 

 

"Whatever AMD is losing in suddenly becomes the most important thing ever." - Glenwing, 1/13/2015

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

yeah, but that is commending some major changes to the zen architecture at it's core, cause clearly this thing has a hard time to reach even 4.0ghz on most chips...this is not a manufacturing defect, this is a core architecture issue that would likely command major investment in engeniering and time and effort to get ''fixed''...what i mean by that is that zen will not magically ''fix'' itself and suddently accept high clockspeed.

I meant the same thing, i know that Ryzen not going above 4Ghz is not a "manufacturing defect".

They said that they are working on ZEN2 or ZEN+ or whatever they might end up calling it and that means improving IPC and clocks which is a good thing especially considering that intel coffee lake IPC is the same as sky lake so they are not that back behind and they don't need to design everything from 0 . They just need to improve what they have which is what intel done with kaby lake and coffee lake and that's not something that needs another 5 more years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Brainless906 said:

Though i'd love to see another 20-30 bucks chopped off I'm not so sure it'll happen, as we've already seen 2(?) cuts already. I think the 1800x still has its place as it still gives the 8700k a run for its money in 4k/1440p and production but if you can end up getting a 8400 for 190 bucks the 1600x is going to need a bit of a cut to be competitive. That said i can buy a 1600x and a motherboard and OC it to 3.9~4.0 on the stock fan and spend less than i would on an 8400 + dumb expensive z370 motherboards so idk.

That's exactly why I'm going AMD all the way. The cheapest motherboards cost around $50 vs $130 on the Intel side. I think they deserve my money more for they disrupted the market.

I think the 1600 is actually the real 8400 competitor though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, IAmAndre said:

Guys can we expect a price drop from AMD after the release of Coffee Lake?

Expect more sales, but most of the lower SKUs are probably at their proper prices. The i5-8400 is really the only one that's going to matter to much to AMD. The 1800X is already something of a questionable buy in most cases (and it seems to be their lowest selling SKU of late, possibly below TR).  If AMD feels it's going to effect sales too much, we could see them compress the mid-range.

 

https://www.3dcenter.org/news/coffee-lake-launchreviews-die-testresultate-zur-anwendungs-performance-im-ueberblick

 

It's in German, but the graph make sense. In most productivity, everything from the 1700X down seems to be safe. (The Ryzen 5 1600 & 1600X seem to be the biggest sellers for AMD, btw.) Gaming is where things get wonky, but there's also "total cost" considerations. Only Z370 boards available right now. 

59 minutes ago, Brainless906 said:

Though i'd love to see another 20-30 bucks chopped off I'm not so sure it'll happen, as we've already seen 2(?) cuts already. I think the 1800x still has its place as it still gives the 8700k a run for its money in 4k/1440p and production but if you can end up getting a 8400 for 190 bucks the 1600x is going to need a bit of a cut to be competitive. That said i can buy a 1600x and a motherboard and OC it to 3.9~4.0 on the stock fan and spend less than i would on an 8400 + dumb expensive z370 motherboards so idk.

A 2600k will run 4K pretty well, still. 1440p there is some difference, but not a lot. (Resolution doesn't scale with load on the GPU & CPU at the same rate.) 1440p seems to saturate around 3.7-3.8 Ghz on a single core, at least with a 1080. Maybe a little more in it with a 1080 Ti, but I can't find great CPU testing at 1440p for whatever reason.

 

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i5_8400/18.html

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, IAmAndre said:

That's exactly why I'm going AMD all the way. The cheapest motherboards cost around $50 vs $130 on the Intel side. I think they deserve my money more for they disrupted the market.

I think the 1600 is actually the real 8400 competitor though.

Sort of. There's the problem of the Z-board premium. The R5 1600 was, when on sale, $25 USD more expensive. And you can get a decent B350 board for $80 USD that'll OC everything but the 8c parts to ~4 Ghz. (That depends on chip.)  But, one might say, aren't the mainstream boards for Intel 300 series out in early 2018?  

 

Yes, they are! Possibly the same week AMD launches the Ryzen refresh. That's really what Intel needed to get ahead of and why this was a low-stock launch. An 8-10% clock boost on Ryzen and it knocks out nearly all of Intel's advantage in everything but the 8700k again.

 

Though I do expect that the R5 1500 might see a life at $199 USD in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Red Hardware said:

I meant the same thing, i know that Ryzen not going above 4Ghz is not a "manufacturing defect".

They said that they are working on ZEN2 or ZEN+ or whatever they might end up calling it and that means improving IPC and clocks which is a good thing especially considering that intel coffee lake IPC is the same as sky lake so they are not that back behind and they don't need to design everything from 0 . They just need to improve what they have which is what intel done with kaby lake and coffee lake and that's not something that needs another 5 more years

Ryzen's mostly hard voltage wall at 3.9 to 4.0 Ghz has to do with the process node. The 14LPP was mostly designed for "low power performance" (i.e. LPP), so they've actually clocked it really high. The sweet spot is around 3.2 Ghz for efficiency. GloFo's 7nm process appears like it'll clock higher, but we'll see when we get there. (Clocks & yields seem to have been an issue for Intel's 10nm, btw.) 

 

Zen+ (Pinnacle Ridge) probably has some tweaks, but it's mostly just a move to a refined process. Think Skylake to Kaby Lake. IPC increases would be only from improved memory subsystems. (Which is an area AMD is quite behind Intel on.) Zen2 on 7nm is either late 2018 or early 2019 and will be uArch changes. And possibly more cores.

 

It's weird for CPUs to be both interesting and rapidly changing again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

Possibly the same week AMD launches the Ryzen refresh. That's really what Intel needed to get ahead of and why this was a low-stock launch. An 8-10% clock boost on Ryzen and it knocks out nearly all of Intel's advantage in everything but the 8700k again.

Really? Has Ryzen Refresh been confirmed? If so I might just wait until next year before upgrading my system. Any idea of the performance boost to expect (Idk, based on AMD history)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, IAmAndre said:

Really? Has Ryzen Refresh been confirmed? If so I might just wait until next year before upgrading my system. Any idea of the performance boost to expect (Idk, based on AMD history)?

https://www.techpowerup.com/237371/amds-pinnacle-ridge-zen-12-nm-cpus-to-launch-on-february-2018

 

Might still slide into March, as we haven't seen any ES crop up yet, to my knowledge. But that's also the range when Intel will release all of their consumer-level boards & parts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/5/2017 at 10:19 AM, Od1sseas said:

On Geekbench

Geekbench?  You'd get more useful numbers from a RNG.

On 10/5/2017 at 11:23 AM, i_build_nanosuits said:

Ryzen had a great run...3 months it was great...now there's this...it's alright, get over it guys...

Anyways there is still threadripper that will sell a few here and there, those still offer better value than intel.

 

Anyways we said it, Ryzen is about as fast as intel's previous generation (haswell), and within a year it will be AMD FX all over again...offering more of them slower cores, for a lower price.

Can you also give me next weeks Lotto numbers?  You know, while you're predicting the future and all.

On 10/5/2017 at 11:51 AM, NvidiaIntelAMDLoveTriangle said:

And Ryzen didn't have this problem?

Oh wait, it did.

Ryzen shortages weren't too bad, actually.  I never had any significant issues finding 1700/1700x/1800x when I was looking to buy mine.  And typically if they were out, it was stocked within a day or two.  Now, finding a good X370 motherboard within the first month on the other hand, that was a bit of a chore.

18 hours ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

yeah, but that is commending some major changes to the zen architecture at it's core, cause clearly this thing has a hard time to reach even 4.0ghz on most chips...this is not a manufacturing defect, this is a core architecture issue that would likely command major investment in engeniering and time and effort to get ''fixed''...what i mean by that is that zen will not magically ''fix'' itself and suddently accept high clockspeed.

No, it's an issue with GloFo's manufacturing process, not a "core architecture issue".  And that's something which can be fixed by switching to a better process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, mynameisjuan said:

I dont know, maybe you know the 30 or so extra used pins that are not used on 270 boards. More cores=more power requirements. People bitch about intel not keeping up against ryzen and demand CL come out ASAP then bitch that CL came out too soon and their new systems are out dated. 

 

Don't go throwing a plausible hypothesis around in here, you know if it turns out there is a legit reason CL can't work in a 270 then half of LTT's heads will explode.

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mr moose said:

Don't go throwing a plausible hypothesis around in here, you know if it turns out there is a legit reason CL can't work in a 270 then half of LTT's heads will explode.

What... You mean like this?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mr moose said:

Don't go throwing a plausible hypothesis around in here, you know if it turns out there is a legit reason CL can't work in a 270 then half of LTT's heads will explode.

Part of the reason why, if it is fake, it is a well done one is that we're pretty sure TR will be 24c with Zen 2 in 2019. We only suspect that from a single AMD slide with 48c/96t Epyc CPUs. We don't know if it's 3 CCX per die or 6c per CCX, but expect 12c Ryzen 7 replacements in 2019.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Taf the Ghost said:

Part of the reason why, if it is fake, it is a well done one is that we're pretty sure TR will be 24c with Zen 2 in 2019. We only suspect that from a single AMD slide with 48c/96t Epyc CPUs. We don't know if it's 3 CCX per die or 6c per CCX, but expect 12c Ryzen 7 replacements in 2019.

I don't understand what you are trying to say here.

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I don't understand what you are trying to say here.

AMD server products roadmap slide leaked from 2015. The second generation of "Zen" servers are supposed to have 48c/96t CPUs. Epyc, as a design, will always be 4 Zen Packages in a 4-package layout. 

 

What this means is for 48 cores to be possible, that's 48 divided by 4, rendering 12 cores per Zen Package. 

 

A Zen package is, currently, 2 CCX. Each CCX has 4 cores, which is why the Ryzen 7s have 8 cores. Only way to get 12 cores on a Zen package is either adding another CCX (so 4c x 3) or increasing the CCX size to 6c (thus 6c x 2). This is why we fully expect 12 cores on the Zen2-based Ryzen 7s. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

AMD server products roadmap slide leaked from 2015. The second generation of "Zen" servers are supposed to have 48c/96t CPUs. Epyc, as a design, will always be 4 Zen Packages in a 4-package layout. 

 

What this means is for 48 cores to be possible, that's 48 divided by 4, rendering 12 cores per Zen Package. 

 

A Zen package is, currently, 2 CCX. Each CCX has 4 cores, which is why the Ryzen 7s have 8 cores. Only way to get 12 cores on a Zen package is either adding another CCX (so 4c x 3) or increasing the CCX size to 6c (thus 6c x 2). This is why we fully expect 12 cores on the Zen2-based Ryzen 7s. 


But AMD haven't actually promised anything with zen2 and people here made assumptions about CL without even a leaked slide.  For all we know AMD might come out with something different to the current zen line up that is still semi-compatible.

 

 

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mr moose said:


But AMD haven't actually promised anything with zen2 and people here made assumptions about CL without even a leaked slide.  For all we know AMD might come out with something different to the current zen line up that is still semi-compatible.

 

 

AMD is committed to "Zen" because of the design direction it leads to. They haven't publicly committed to anything for Zen2 beyond the fact the consumer one will work on AM4, on the assumption it launches by 2020. However, we do get leaked slides that AMD presents to investors, business partners and the like. Roadmaps change, but they do exist and tell us a lot. Especially since CPU design to final launch is upwards of 4 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

First good luck at the 8100, 8350k and with some 8400 results as well. RAM OC doesn't do much of anything until the Games section, where it's worth a bit, which is expected. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×