Intel Core-X Series: Full Specs Revealed

[Bananasplit_00]

Just now, lots of unexplainable lag said:

These clock speeds though...

 

How's that monolithic die working out for ya Intel?

id say thats a pretty HOT topic...

[tom_w141]

Just now, lots of unexplainable lag said:

These clock speeds though...

 

How's that monolithic die working out for ya Intel?

That's more on the lack of solder than the faults of the die design...

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

29 minutes ago, Fonzie92 said:

Who gives a shit about the x299 disaster. CoffeeLake is coming to finally put Ryzen out of its misery 

^ lol

 

This dude walks in here and just pisses off all camps

[Fonzie92]

1 minute ago, Pohernori said:

^ lol

 

This dude walks in here and just pisses off all camps

Intel just needs to price their CoffeeLake chips appropriately and R3 will become / transcend into a still birth

[Bananasplit_00]

1 minute ago, tom_w141 said:

That's more on the lack of solder than the faults of the die design...

i honestly think that AMD might be able to keep higher clocks becuse they are splitting up the die, i think its helping and that its going to be the way forward for high core count CPUs at high frequency

 

Just now, Fonzie92 said:

Intel just needs to price their CoffeeLake chips appropriately and R3 will become / transcend into a still birth

from what i have seen benchmark wise the 6c I7 was preforming around an R5 1600x while running a higher frequency, which would indicate that it has a step back in instructions per clock lol. i dont think Coffee lake is smokeing anyone

[Fonzie92]

1 minute ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

i honestly think that AMD might be able to keep higher clocks becuse they are splitting up the die, i think its helping and that its going to be the way forward for high core count CPUs at high frequency

 

from what i have seen benchmark wise the 6c I7 was preforming around an R5 1600x while running a higher frequency, which would indicate that it has a step back in instructions per clock lol. i dont think Coffee lake is smokeing anyone

The CoffeeLake 6c has a turbo boost of 4.7GHz my friend (stock). Were you looking at the right benchmarks?

[MageTank]

1 minute ago, lots of unexplainable lag said:

These clock speeds though...

 

How's that monolithic die working out for ya Intel?

The monolithic die isn't hurting clocks, it's the heat transfer. Monolithic dies might have poorer yields compared to using multiple smaller dies, but that's about it from what we've seen historically. AMD is able to get away with higher clock speeds for multiple reasons:

• Lack of AVX512 entirely
• Crippled AVX2 (half the bit-ops/clock of Intel's consumer lineup)
• Soldered dies (better heat transfer between the dies and IHS, preventing that heat transfer from being the cooling bottleneck)

The MCM design is great and all, as it allows AMD to potentially have all of their cores run at 3.8-4.1ghz assuming they are kept cool (due to the high yields of those smaller dies, less chance that one of the cores can't handle the clocks compared to a large monolithic dies that may require special binning), but I wouldn't blame the die being monolithic on it's poor clock speeds. If anything, I'd blame the extreme AVX performance difference and lack of solder. Remember, if they allowed high base clocks on these high core count chips, and some poor unfortunate soul decided to run an AVX application with less than ideal cooling (yes, even on the enthusiast platform), the blue smoke would find them, lol. Even with the most powerful custom loops, people need to use negative AVX offsets with these CPU's, because being able to do two times the amount of AVX2 instructions as the previous architectures, they get really hot, really fast. 

[Bananasplit_00]

2 minutes ago, Fonzie92 said:

The CoffeeLake 6c has a turbo boost of 4.7GHz my friend (stock). Were you looking at the right benchmarks?

havent seen any leaks with that turbo, not much about coffee lake at all to be honest. but if it has that turbo, and is preforming like the R5 1600x ITS EVEN WORSE IPC LOLOLOLOL

[Fonzie92]

Just now, Bananasplit_00 said:

havent seen any leaks with that turbo, not much about coffee lake at all to be honest. but if it has that turbo, and is preforming like the R5 1600x ITS EVEN WORSE IPC LOLOLOLOL

LOL not happening, sir. You just wait little muffin. Next month am saving this post.

[TidaLWaveZ]

Sorry to break up the arguments but I doubt this is real unless intel published a document that misspelled frequency in one column after spelling it correctly in the adjacent column.

 

[Bananasplit_00]

3 minutes ago, Fonzie92 said:

LOL not happening, sir. You just wait little muffin. Next month am saving this post.

who knows? i doubt its going to be a better gameing chip then the I7 7700K and i have done so since i first heard it was a 6 core lol. but you realize that if its preforming like the R5 1600x and is running much faster then it, its a much worse chip clock for clock right? it might be better preformance over all still but i would find it hilarius if Intel went backwards with their per clock preformance.

[MageTank]

2 minutes ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

havent seen any leaks with that turbo, not much about coffee lake at all to be honest. but if it has that turbo, and is preforming like the R5 1600x ITS EVEN WORSE IPC LOLOLOLOL

The 8700k's boost table is as follows:

• 1 core: 4.7
• 2 core: 4.6
• 4 core: 4.4
• 6 core: 4.3

So technically, only a single core will boost to 4.7. However, it's yet to be seen if advanced turbo features will override the table, and push for an all-core boost of 4.7 like it does on basically every Z series platform with advanced turbo enabled. As for IPC, it's exactly the same as Skylake/Kaby. Literally nothing changed architecturally, and the Z300 series chipset only added native wifi and more native USB features. Still limited to AVX 2, still a dual channel memory controller, nothing new.

 

Rumors has it's overclocking to be roughly 5ghz, which isn't bad given the 50% increase in cores, but still not the 5.2ghz that a lot of people with the 7700k were able to achieve. That will put the 8700k in a good spot as the "be all, end all" gaming CPU with the best core:clock ratio. The only problem is, it requires a completely new platform to use it (socket pinout is incompatible with every current Z170/Z270 board, despite being 1151 socket) which puts it in a very awkward spot. Do you upgrade from a Skylake/Kaby i7, which will have very similar clock speeds, and identical IPC, just for those extra cores? Or do you invest in the X299 platform, which has a superior core-count upgrade path, at a much higher entry cost due to thermal requirements (AIO at minimum, custom loop preferred, perhaps even a risky delid to tame thermals)? 

 

I just don't see many people upgrading platforms for an "in-between" platform. I could be wrong though. 

[Bananasplit_00]

1 minute ago, MageTank said:

The 8700k's boost table is as follows:

• 1 core: 4.7
• 2 core: 4.6
• 4 core: 4.4
• 6 core: 4.3

So technically, only a single core will boost to 4.7. However, it's yet to be seen if advanced turbo features will override the table, and push for an all-core boost of 4.7 like it does on basically every Z series platform with advanced turbo enabled. As for IPC, it's exactly the same as Skylake/Kaby. Literally nothing changed architecturally, and the Z300 series chipset only added native wifi and more native USB features. Still limited to AVX 2, still a dual channel memory controller, nothing new.

 

Rumors has it's overclocking to be roughly 5ghz, which isn't bad given the 50% increase in cores, but still not the 5.2ghz that a lot of people with the 7700k were able to achieve. That will put the 8700k in a good spot as the "be all, end all" gaming CPU with the best core:clock ratio. The only problem is, it requires a completely new platform to use it (socket pinout is incompatible with every current Z170/Z270 board, despite being 1151 socket) which puts it in a very awkward spot. Do you upgrade from a Skylake/Kaby i7, which will have very similar clock speeds, and identical IPC, just for those extra cores? Or do you invest in the X299 platform, which has a superior core-count upgrade path, at a much higher entry cost due to thermal requirements (AIO at minimum, custom loop preferred, perhaps even a risky delid to tame thermals)? 

 

I just don't see many people upgrading platforms for an "in-between" platform. I could be wrong though. 

see the IPC being the same as Skylake dosent match the benchmarks i have seen seeing as its been basically tied with am R5 1600x and running at a higher clock speed. so either they are too Close to tell for the benchmark(cant actiually recall which one was use, it was a synthetic CPU one) or the leak was fabricated OR Intel went backwards in instructions per clock

[PCGuy_5960]

1 hour ago, tom_w141 said:

EDIT: Hold on a base clock hike on the 14 core making it higher than the 12 core? What?... Something seems off.

Nope. It simply looks like the 12 core won't be soldered and the 14 core will be 

59 minutes ago, Fonzie92 said:

Some areas?

 

The 7640x?

 

And this:

 

More like every single area, LOL.

 

Edit: LMFAO @ Zen2 competitor. No it wouldn't. It'd compete DIRECTLY with Ryzen. It's launching next month.

 

LMAO, burnt GROUND pins is Steve's fault, not Intel's

[MageTank]

3 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Nope. It simply looks like the 12 core won't be soldered and the 14 core will be 

LMAO, burned GROUND pins is Steve's fault, not Intel's

Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but none of the X299 chips are soldered. They are already through the production cycles, and even the 7980X was not soldered. I wish I was wrong, but that's the reality of it x.x

[The Benjamins]

4 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Nope. It simply looks like the 12 core won't be soldered and the 14 core will be 

LMAO, burned GROUND pins is Steve's fault, not Intel's

How do you know it is ground?

[PCGuy_5960]

2 minutes ago, MageTank said:

Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but none of the X299 chips are soldered. They are already through the production cycles, and even the 7980X was not soldered. I wish I was wrong, but that's the reality of it x.x

Source? I believe that Intel is not THAT dumb, they will solder the 14+ core i9s. 

[PCGuy_5960]

3 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

How do you know it is ground?

Can't really tell you, but I confirmed it with @done12many2. Steve damaged 2 ground pins.

[MageTank]

4 minutes ago, Fonzie92 said:

I'm not talking out of my ass. Go watch Gamer's Nexus` video on the R3. He specifically said the cooler is absolute dogshit and recommends an aftermarket one for OCing it. Linus said the same exact thing.

 

4 minutes ago, Leshya said:

The R3 1300X is an overclocked R3 1200, don't be naive, that's like saying the 1600X costs more vs 1600 just to support your argument.

40-50 cooler? the evo 212 does just fine, can you show me these $40-$50 recommended coolers?

Hate to butt in, given it's not my fight, but I did see the GN video, and there is a clear difference in the coolers used:

The Stealth is used on the R3 lineup, and it is significantly smaller than the ones used on the 1600+ coolers. It's also pure aluminum, with no copper base compared to the Spire. Here is a link to AMD's cooling solutions page: http://www.amd.com/en/technologies/cpu-cooler-solution

 

I can say, there appears to be a significant difference in surface area, and the lack of a copper base might cause a negative impact as well. I am sure someone somewhere will do a video comparing the two though.

 

Just now, PCGuy_5960 said:

Source? I believe that Intel is not THAT dumb, they will solder the 14+ core i9s. 

This is the hard part. I can't name the source, as I do not want to get the person in trouble. I hate to be the "anonymous source" guy, as I absolutely hate when other people do it, but i genuinely can't name them. If anything, I recommend just waiting until they come out (or for Der8auer to inevitably review it). 

[leadeater]

Don't be surprised when we see the i9-7940X beating the two SKUs above it in a few if not more tests, this will likely end up being the most popular one of the higher end offerings.

[MageTank]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

Don't be surprised when we see the i9-7940X beating the two SKUs above it in a few if not more tests, this will likely end up being the most popular one of the higher end offerings.

It certainly has the most features, with the least amount of compromises. 

 

Just now, Fonzie92 said:

Dude.. You don't need an aftermarket cooler for the G4560 when it cannot be overclocked. The stock one works fine.. 

Pentiums also completely lack AVX, and it's almost impossible to make them run hot, short of removing all cooling entirely, lol. I should go delid my pentium, just to see if I can get it to run ambient under load, lol. 

[tom_w141]

32 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

soldered and the 14 core will be 

Core clocks too low across the range. Whilst you may have a point I doubt it. 16 and 18 both sub 3GHz and soldered?

[Flavio hc 16]

Guys look at it better: the 14 core has higher base clock than the 12 core ones because there is a tdp jump from 140 to 165w

[TacoSenpai]

1 hour ago, Pohernori said:

^ lol

 

This dude walks in here and just pisses off all camps

Hey what can you say he's an equal opportunist

2 hours ago, Fonzie92 said:

 

And this:

 

More like every single area, LOL.

 

Guess you can say he got...burned...

59 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Source? I believe that Intel is not THAT dumb, they will solder the 14+ core i9s. 

Please for the love of God Intel solder it.  My body is not ready to see 14+ core CPUs go up in flames...

[Jito463]

2 hours ago, tom_w141 said:

EDIT: Hold on a base clock hike on the 14 core making it higher than the 12 core? What?... Something seems off.

I'm thinking they accidentally mixed up the base clocks for the 7920x and 7940x.  If you flip them, then everything scales correctly.

2 hours ago, tom_w141 said:

I couldn't think of one, will five be ok?

 

AVX512

Multicore Performance without sacrificing on single core

Quad Channel

CPU Raid

Overclocking headroom for enthusiasts

I get what you were saying, but if we're comparing it to TR, then the only two major selling points they have over it is AVX512f and better OCing.  Both have good multi-core, both have quad-channel and CPU RAID requires a stupid key to unlock (anywhere from $99 to $399, if I recall correctly), and can only do RAID 0 out of the box.