8700k benchmarks leaked.

[ravenshrike]

Thanks to WCCFTech we have leaked benchmarks for the 8700k. Specifically Fritz Chess, wPrime 2.10@32m, and Cinebench R11.5 and R15. Given single threaded performance, it's pretty damned clear this is nothing more than Kaby Lake with 6 cores and a higher base JEDEC clock. There is no IPC increase whatsoever.

 

 

http://wccftech.com/intel-core-i7-8700k-cpu-benchmarks-leak-faster-than-8-core-ryzen/

[PCGuy_5960]

Impressive chip! I really hope that they get the pricing right

[DrMacintosh]

at this point Intel's IPC is useless unless they can price it right and I don't think they can. 

[wolfsbane3083]

Hmm, still no need to upgrade from 4790k then.

[jnkokseby]

Pretty impressive in my opinion. 2 cores and 4 threads more and only 4W TDP increase, hope they fixed the thermal issues from the kaby lake series (you're nearly forced to delid it if you want fair temps)

[Lurick]

10 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Impressive chip! I really hope that they get the pricing right

 

7 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

at this point Intel's IPC is useless unless they can price it right and I don't think they can. 

 

Well at these benchmarks it's clearly worth at least $700 per chip, wouldn't want people to get them at a reasonable price or anything now would we  

[knightslugger]

3 minutes ago, wolfsbane3083 said:

Hmm, still no need to upgrade from 4790k then.

preeetty much

 

[yian88]

at least its not the idiotic 5% year on year anymore, thats the "AMD effect"

if 8700k is going for 350$ on shelves then we are in for some great competition ahead

 

im really hyper about ryzen+ hopefully next year release with at least 10% IPC improvement and all the quirks worked out that current ryzen had, and better silicon to reach 4.5ghz then AMD will truly be neck and neck with intel's offerings

[DocSwag]

8 minutes ago, yian88 said:

im really hyper about ryzen+ hopefully next year release with at least 10% IPC improvement and all the quirks worked out that current ryzen had, and better silicon to reach 4.5ghz then AMD will truly be neck and neck with intel's offerings

I'm hopeful about zen+, I recall hearing amd engineers have lots of small things they wanted to tweak with Ryzen but just couldn't that can be done then. Plus 7nm is gonna mean smaller dies and so lower prices/moar cores and maybe higher clock speeds.

 

It's just like the original Athlon and (sort of) phenom. The first gen product was GOOD, but not amazing. It was the second gen product (Athlon 64) that really destroyed Intel and prompted quite a bit of innovation in the form of Core 2. 

 

Regardless, it'll be interesting to see how the CPU market turns out in the next few years. We've had amd putting out dumb CPUs for too long and now finally something exciting is happening.

 

It's funny how roles have reversed, past few years it was amd giving Nvidia a hard time in GPUs and now it feel so like amd is giving Intel a hard time and struggling with GPUs.

[WereCat]

Meh. I was hoping for at least 200 points in R15 at stock speeds for a single core but it is even lower than 7700k. Looks like my 4770k will stay another year if these rumors are true.

[Prysin]

15 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

at this point Intel's IPC is useless unless they can price it right and I don't think they can. 

At this point, we know how screwed AMD is if "Zen2" isnt a big leap forward in performance.

 

sure, the 1700X is A LOT slower then the 8700k... but 9700k will be a die shrink, along with a totally rebuilt core. Intel already showed some of the cache changes they did in their Xeons to match what AMD did with their cache system. The result was a pretty solid performance increase across the board. Now, 10nm is supposed to be the end of the "core" architecture. Whatever Intel has in the works could sink AMD if they arent extremely aggressive on price.

[PCGuy_5960]

16 minutes ago, yian88 said:

at least 10% IPC improvement and all the quirks worked out that current ryzen had

I don't think that we will get an IPC improvement TBH, it will probably be Ryzen with higher overclocks (and hopefully, a better IMC), which is also very nice

[DrMacintosh]

1 minute ago, Prysin said:

sure, the 1700X is A LOT slower then the 8700k.

Based on what and in what workloads exactly? All we have is a few leaked benchmarks. 

[DocSwag]

3 minutes ago, Prysin said:

Now, 10nm is supposed to be the end of the "core" architecture.

It is? I was always under the impression that Intel was planning for MCM with 10nm, with that being the main innovation.

[ravenshrike]

Just now, DrMacintosh said:

Based on what and in what workloads exactly? All we have is a few leaked benchmarks. 

Basically extend the performance difference of the 7700k vs the 1500X across the board. Course, that still requires you to jump in bed with Intel and its pretty clear that the only reason for Kaby Lake was so they could justify Skylake X.

[AshleyAshes]

34 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

at this point Intel's IPC is useless unless they can price it right and I don't think they can. 

I gotta side with this.  At this point the price point is ALL that mattes.  Ever since Sandy Bridge each generation has just been 'A little bit faster and a little bit more power efficient'. This is the first generation since Sandy Bridge where we Intel might have is going 'Wow, all that for only that much money?  Ooo.' which only AMD has is saying now.

[themctipers]

in canada:

$480 for 7700k, will be $480 for 8700k assuming no MSRP change

$380 for ryzen 1700, only slightly less IPC and 2 more cores. 

[wolfsbane3083]

Another point is, is it really worthwhile to do a full system upgrade to this platform when cannonlake will probably require yet another new motherboard.

[bowrilla]

3 minutes ago, wolfsbane3083 said:

Another point is, is it really worthwhile to do a full system upgrade to this platform when cannonlake will probably require yet another new motherboard.

Short answer: no!

Slightly longer answer: no, unless your system is broken and you really need a system right now! (Still, Ryzen is probably a better call)

[Misanthrope]

EDIT: I got my numbers all wrong n/m

[Terryv]

Are these are all stock clocks on those benches? I assume so.

[MageTank]

Maybe now the forum will finally believe me. Been saying there was going to be no IPC increase with CFL, and people kept throwing out "7% higher IPC" just because Intel said it was "7% faster". Intel also said Kaby was 13% faster than Skylake, lol.

 

I see Intel did pull the 8700k's base clock back by 100mhz (initial info was 3.8ghz base), they might have had a difficult time hitting TDP ratings otherwise. Either that, or this ES is 100mhz slower than what will launch, but it doesn't matter. I completely expect 4.8-5ghz to be possible with these chips due to the slightly larger die making heat transfer easier (assuming your cooling is not the bottleneck).

 

As I said before, if you already own a 6700k or 7700k, and are not in need of additional threads, you have no need to worry about upgrading to CFL. Your CPU will be plenty fast for gaming, and you didn't make a terrible purchase decision just because Intel came out with more cores later. As long as you feel you got your money's worth, then that's all that matters. 

[bowrilla]

7 minutes ago, MageTank said:

As I said before, if you already own a 6700k or 7700k, and are not in need of additional threads, you have no need to worry about upgrading to CFL. Your CPU will be plenty fast for gaming, and you didn't make a terrible purchase decision just because Intel came out with more cores later. As long as you feel you got your money's worth, then that's all that matters. 

Just 6700k and 7700k? I don't see any reason to retire my 4790k. It's about 10–15% slower compared to a 7700k. So how much faster is a 8700k (allegedly)? Another 5-10% maybe depending on the application (if not slower in some single core cases)? Well, thanks, but no thanks. Switching from older systems means basically getting an enitrely new core system: board, cpu and ram. That's about 650-700$? For 15–20% you most likely don't miss since gaming performance won't differ as much as synthetic benchmark loads? I call that a horrible deal.

If you need additional cores and threads: go Ryzen 7 since it's a better deal. If you need even more than that: go Threadripper since X299 is a stupid plattform as it seems. If your system gets the job done as of now: don't do anything about it and 4th generation i7s still work like a charm.

[Taf the Ghost]

1 hour ago, jnkokseby said:

Pretty impressive in my opinion. 2 cores and 4 threads more and only 4W TDP increase, hope they fixed the thermal issues from the kaby lake series (you're nearly forced to delid it if you want fair temps)

Eh, this is going to use around 45% more power than the 7700k, unless the 14nm++ node has seen a massive power reduction, which is unlikely.

 

Still, this is going to be around 375USD tray, so probably around 400USD consumer. Delid it, toss an AIO on and clock it to 5 Ghz. You won't need to upgrade your gaming PC for the next 5 years.

[Sauron]

1 hour ago, yian88 said:

at least its not the idiotic 5% year on year anymore, thats the "AMD effect"

if 8700k is going for 350$ on shelves then we are in for some great competition ahead

 

im really hyper about ryzen+ hopefully next year release with at least 10% IPC improvement and all the quirks worked out that current ryzen had, and better silicon to reach 4.5ghz then AMD will truly be neck and neck with intel's offerings

Unfortunately rumour has it it will be 400$, and given that the 300$ 1700 beats it in cinebench I think the 350$ 1700x will be a better value overall.