8086k vs 8700k?

[Prizzo]

Hey everyone I’m was wondering what cpu is better the 8086k or the 8700k I am asking what CPU is better all around I AM NOT ASKING WITCH ONE IS A BETTER MONEY VAULE. I think most people can agree the money value the 8700k but that’s not what I’m asking all I’m wondering is what is better.

[3 Lions]

The 8700K

Edited September 11, 2018 by LinusTechTipsFanFromDarlo

[Vengeance1020]

Just now, LinusTechTipsFanFromDarlo said:

The 8700K since it's a bit cheaper. 

Do you read mate?

[Tibon]

Some suggests that the 8086k cpus are probably cherrypicked, or just binned better.

 

 

[3 Lions]

1 minute ago, Vengeance1020 said:

Do you read mate?

Yep

[jiyeon]

The 8086K is a binned 8700K so it'll be able to perform leaps better than the regular 8700K. The 8086K is essentially a silicon lottery win.

[Prizzo]

8 minutes ago, LinusTechTipsFanFromDarlo said:

The 8700K since it's a bit cheaper. 

Can’t tell if you are trolling or not.

[Vengeance1020]

According to UserBenchmark, the 8086K is just slightly better performing than the 8700K

[3 Lions]

Just now, Prizzo said:

Can’t tell if you are trolling or just braindead.

Edited it... 

[Streetguru]

5 minutes ago, Prizzo said:

 

The better value is the R5 2600 for like 80% of the performance at half the price

 

Wait for the 9th gen CPUs if you're buying intel, at least they're soldered.

[manikyath]

they're essentially the same cpu, except the 8086k comes out the box 300MHz faster, and is supposedly a better bin.

 

it is also *almost* roughly equal "value for money" considering stock clocks, also depending on the specific price you're getting on them.

 

EDIT: in case my statement is unclear: based on the numbers on paper, the 8086k is better.

[Prizzo]

2 minutes ago, Streetguru said:

The better value is the R5 2600 for like 80% of the performance at half the price

 

Wait for the 9th gen CPUs if you're buying intel, at least they're soldered.

Once again wasn’t talking about value was talking about raw performance it’s a hypthetical situation

[Prizzo]

5 minutes ago, Vengeance1020 said:

According to UserBenchmark, the 8086K is just slightly better performing than the 8700K

Ty

[Prizzo]

6 minutes ago, LinusTechTipsFanFromDarlo said:

Edited it... 

Sorry about the flame was just banter anyway ty

[Streetguru]

2 minutes ago, Prizzo said:

Once again wasn’t talking about value was talking about raw performance it’s a hypthetical situation

Then you need a delidded 5.3ghz 8700K/8086K from silicon lottery

[Alex Atkin UK]

I'm confused why you even asked, its kinda obvious which is better seeing as its literally the same CPU clocked higher.

[porina]

17 minutes ago, manikyath said:

they're essentially the same cpu, except the 8086k comes out the box 300MHz faster, and is supposedly a better bin.

 

it is also *almost* roughly equal "value for money" considering stock clocks, also depending on the specific price you're getting on them.

 

EDIT: in case my statement is unclear: based on the numbers on paper, the 8086k is better.

The "problem" with the 8086k is that the higher clock is almost a paper statement, as it only applies when a single core is active. Even for single thread workloads, any background activity will activate a 2nd core, and at 2+ core activity they are the same speeds.

16 minutes ago, Prizzo said:

Once again wasn’t talking about value was talking about raw performance it’s a hypthetical situation

At stock, hardly anything in it. Overclocked, you're more likely to go further past 5 GHz with the 8086k than 8700k. My 8086k does 5.2 on all cores after delid, and reports are some get to 5.3. 8700k on average doesn't get that far as often.

[xg32]

32 minutes ago, Tibon said:

Some suggests that the 8086k cpus are probably cherrypicked, or just binned better.

 

 

it's actually binned better, benchmarks at the same clocks are mostly faster on the 8086k, quite amusing.

[manikyath]

59 minutes ago, porina said:

The "problem" with the 8086k is that the higher clock is almost a paper statement, as it only applies when a single core is active. Even for single thread workloads, any background activity will activate a 2nd core, and at 2+ core activity they are the same speeds.

base clock is still higher too. the "5GHz" is indeed a paper statement, but so is the 4.7GHz of the 8700K.

[Prizzo]

1 hour ago, xg32 said:

it's actually binned better, benchmarks at the same clocks are mostly faster on the 8086k, quite amusing.

 

1 hour ago, porina said:

The "problem" with the 8086k is that the higher clock is almost a paper statement, as it only applies when a single core is active. Even for single thread workloads, any background activity will activate a 2nd core, and at 2+ core activity they are the same speeds.

At stock, hardly anything in it. Overclocked, you're more likely to go further past 5 GHz with the 8086k than 8700k. My 8086k does 5.2 on all cores after delid, and reports are some get to 5.3. 8700k on average doesn't get that far as often.

 

58 minutes ago, manikyath said:

base clock is still higher too. the "5GHz" is indeed a paper statement, but so is the 4.7GHz of the 8700K.

So does the 8086k have 4.0ghz on every core?

[manikyath]

Just now, Prizzo said:

 

 

So does the 8086k have 4.0ghz on every core?

in theory, in just about every load scenario, it should be around 300MHz faster than the 8700k in the same load scenario.

[Prizzo]

2 minutes ago, manikyath said:

in theory, in just about every load scenario, it should be around 300MHz faster than the 8700k in the same load scenario.

Alright ty I’ve just been really curious cus some people say the 8086k is trash but I think they just say that cus of the price

[manikyath]

Just now, Prizzo said:

Alright ty I’ve just been really curious cus some people say the 8086k is trash but I think they just say that cus of the price

trash is probably a bit of an exaggeration.. but it is not what would be expected of a "40 year anniversary extreme edition".

 

pretty much all that changed is the funky name, and the clock speed. if it were maybe with a soldered IHS that has some fancy design engraved on it.. that'd be more an anniversary edition, but intel isnt really agile enough to make that happen unfortunately.

[porina]

3 hours ago, manikyath said:

base clock is still higher too. the "5GHz" is indeed a paper statement, but so is the 4.7GHz of the 8700K.

In practice, you're rarely if ever at base clock. With adequate cooling, you'll always be working in turbo mode. And as before, at 2 or more cores active, they CPUs are effectively the same. You could argue for a benefit for single thread, but even that is marginal.

2 hours ago, manikyath said:

in theory, in just about every load scenario, it should be around 300MHz faster than the 8700k in the same load scenario.

Nope, as above.

 

IMO the main "benefit" of the 8086k is for overclocking. Or if you just want it for the name. 

[Wh0_Am_1]

4 hours ago, Prizzo said:

Hey everyone I’m was wondering what cpu is better the 8086k or the 8700k I am asking what CPU is better all around I AM NOT ASKING WITCH ONE IS A BETTER MONEY VAULE. I think most people can agree the money value the 8700k but that’s not what I’m asking all I’m wondering is what is better.

The 8086k is just cherry picked 8700k, it is faster, but the bigger factor is the bragging rights that you have a high end gaming limited addition CPU.