Core i7 7700k benchmark

[Bouzoo]

I knew Tweaktown had some silly articles, but this tops all of them. 

 

"Performance wise, the new Kaby Lake-based Core i7-7700K had a single-core score of 6131 on Geekbench 4, while the multi-threaded score was 20,243 - this is a 42% increase over the current Skylake-based Core i7-6700K, which scores just 4300 points or so in the single-core test. The multi-core result is just as interesting, with a 20% increase in performance over the 6700K and its 16,756 score."

 

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10155308337589942&id=49650744941

[TheRandomness]

2 minutes ago, Bouzoo said:

I knew Tweaktown had some silly articles, but this tops all of them. 

 

"Performance wise, the new Kaby Lake-based Core i7-7700K had a single-core score of 6131 on Geekbench 4, while the multi-threaded score was 20,243 - this is a 42% increase over the current Skylake-based Core i7-6700K, which scores just 4300 points or so in the single-core test. The multi-core result is just as interesting, with a 20% increase in performance over the 6700K and its 16,756 score."

 

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10155308337589942&id=49650744941

Wat. 

Just... Wat?

Anyway, Zen now has a new piece of shit for the price to beat. 

[Morgan MLGman]

4 hours ago, Enderman said:

Seems about the same as the difference between the 4790k and 6700k.

So that is a lot more than "just a refresh" level of improvement...

i7 6700k: 19437

i7 7700k: 20243

Did you read it? Multi core is basically the same, 7700K has just higher stock clock speed...

[sof006]

Might upgrade from the 4790K although I might wait to see how AMD's new processors fair vs Intel.

[TheRandomness]

8 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

i7 6700k: 19437

i7 7700k: 20243

Did you read it? Multi core is basically the same, 7700K has just higher stock clock speed...

Intel:

This year, we're struggling to find a way to increase performance... Let's rename Skylake to Kaby lake, bin it more and bump up the clocks!

[patrickjp93]

9 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

Intel:

This year, we're struggling to find a way to increase performance... Let's rename Skylake to Kaby lake, bin it more and bump up the clocks!

Don't forget change to a new iGPU architecture on a further optimized 14nm process that allows much higher clocks at lower power. Not every improvement covers every segment equally.

[Morgan MLGman]

11 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

Intel:

This year, we're struggling to find a way to increase performance... Let's rename Skylake to Kaby lake, bin it more and bump up the clocks!

 

1 minute ago, patrickjp93 said:

Don't forget change to a new iGPU architecture on a further optimized 14nm process that allows much higher clocks at lower power. Not every improvement covers every segment equally.

Yeah, but it was to be expected, Intel said from the start that they're going to focus on efficiency with Kaby Lake, not on performance IIRC.

[Thony]

Booooring Intel.  At this point I would preffer if they released a CPU every 2-3 years so we get a decent performance increase and they dont waste money on CPUs just for sake of having something "new" every year.

[patrickjp93]

21 minutes ago, Thony said:

Booooring Intel.  At this point I would preffer if they released a CPU every 2-3 years so we get a decent performance increase and they dont waste money on CPUs just for sake of having something "new" every year.

They'll do that as soon as the market as a whole changes. There's no point in belly-aching over it. Vote with your wallet and keep quiet about it otherwise.

[VerticalDiscussions]

Cool cpu obviously! Nuff said.

[Enderman]

3 hours ago, Morgan MLGman said:

i7 6700k: 19437

i7 7700k: 20243

Did you read it? Multi core is basically the same, 7700K has just higher stock clock speed...

19437-18262 = 1175

20243-19437 = 806

That's more than 2/3 difference.

 

Also

5822-5681 = 141

6131-5822 = 309

That's 2x the difference.

[Crosseyed Sniper]

Anyone know the possible release date for these new CPUs?

[belfouf]

who cares about stock perf of K processors anyway ?  

[kelvinhall05]

9 hours ago, sazrocks said:

4.2 GHz clock speed, cool

 

 

i hope its stock

[Morgan MLGman]

1 hour ago, Enderman said:

20243-19437 = 806

This difference is nearly non-existant, considering higher clocks of the 7700K. There was a post with leaked specs, and it had higher stock clocks than the 6700K.

[Enderman]

32 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

This difference is nearly non-existant, considering higher clocks of the 7700K. There was a post with leaked specs, and it had higher stock clocks than the 6700K.

So you're telling me the improvement from haswell to skylake can be matched by overclocking a 4790k by 200MHz?

Lol, sure, whatever you say man.

[Morgan MLGman]

Just now, Enderman said:

So you're telling me the improvement from haswell to skylake can be matched by overclocking a 4790k by 200MHz?

Lol, sure, whatever you say man.

I'm not talking about Haswell, you're the one who keeps bringing it up for some reason.

 

I'm talking about the fact, that performance improvement with 7700K over the 6700K is nearly non-existant.

[Enderman]

1 minute ago, Morgan MLGman said:

I'm not talking about Haswell, you're the one who keeps bringing it up for some reason.

 

I'm talking about the fact, that performance improvement with 7700K over the 6700K is nearly non-existant.

The performance difference between the 4790k and 6700k was huge.

This benchmark shows the difference between the 6700k and 7700k is on average just as large, which would mean that it is far more than "non-existent".

[patrickjp93]

1 minute ago, Morgan MLGman said:

I'm not talking about Haswell, you're the one who keeps bringing it up for some reason.

 

I'm talking about the fact, that performance improvement with 7700K over the 6700K is nearly non-existant.

For one workload. There are plenty more to test.

[Morgan MLGman]

1 minute ago, Enderman said:

The performance difference between the 4790k and 6700k was huge.

This benchmark shows the difference between the 6700k and 7700k is on average just as large, which would mean that it is far more than "non-existent".

Didn't you just calculate that it's actually 2/3rd the difference between the 4790K and 6700K? How is that "just as large" That's 33% lower.

 

1 minute ago, patrickjp93 said:

For one workload. There are plenty more to test.

Though I'm almost certain that for gaming it's irrelevant, and the little difference seems accurate with what Intel said about Kaby Lake and what they aimed for with that architecture.

[Remixt]

10 hours ago, Imakuni said:

Most (if not all) of it probably comes from the clock bump, though. +200mhz on 8 threads is sure to push stuff up. And if we assume a single core can boost to 4.5 rather than 4.4, it would explain the single core difference pretty well.

This, so basically unless the OC threshold on the 7700k is 200 mhz higher (IE ~5 to 5.2GHZ) then there won't be much a performance jump for overclockers. IMO

[VagabondWraith]

Damn I need to get this. My 6700K is starting to become too slow and outdated.

[Misanthrope]

Personally I am interested in a bump down in price for Skylake and Haswell even if slight it should help.

[Mr.Meerkat]

22 minutes ago, VagabondWraith said:

Damn I need to get this. My 6700K is starting to become too slow and outdated.

I think a nice skylake-E CPU should do the trick  

[Sauron]

10 hours ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

Same IPC. Its the exact same cpu as the 6700k only the gpu and other parts have changed.

also die shrink