My 4930k is faster then a 8700k @ 3700Mhz.

[Turtle Rig]

This is weird.  Im a 2012 cpu and by ocing I beat a stock 3700 8700k   wtf ?

[Jurrunio]

not surprising tbh. My 2600k can catch up to the 6700 after my overclock.

[SoreRaito]

If you overclock it no wonder, you can push it really high.

 

but then again the 8700k speeds are shown as 3700Mhz that is as far as i know the baseclock of the 8700k mine boosts up to 4.3-4.6 ghz and i can oc it to 4.9 ghz stable, with good temps.

 

 

its the same thing that ppl say get a 1070ti when you oc it you can get a 1080 or a little better, but when you get the 1080 and oc it you easily beat the 1070ti.

[Coolsawk]

That's single core and the I7 8700k hasn't OC yet too. Might not make sense to compare a OC to a non OC.

[Jurrunio]

17 minutes ago, Coolsawk said:

That's single core and the I7 8700k hasn't OC yet too. Might not make sense to compare a OC to a non OC.

In that case might as well say it doesnt make sense to compare old stuff to new stuff   not really the point here.

[Turtle Rig]

1 hour ago, Coolsawk said:

That's single core and the I7 8700k hasn't OC yet too. Might not make sense to compare a OC to a non OC.

Yeah I know, but its just weird how apparently its a Mhz game now for couple gens.

 

Now that I look at it a 8700k OCed to 4.6Ghz will give it 100k points, thus trashing everything except a xeon and the threadripper 64 threads of joy

 

Man the Threadsripper torches the competition.  Instel has no answer to it yet.  Except for a foolish 28 core that does 5Ghz sighs,THey should have put some 7980XE scores up there.

[aezakmi]

3 minutes ago, Turtle Rig said:

Man the Threadsripper torches the competition.  Instel has no answer to it yet.  Except for a foolish 28 core that does 5Ghz sighs,THey should have put some 7980XE scores up there.

still the 8700k is better in games than a TR

 

even a 2600k is still relevant today for games if you overclock it a bit.

[xg32]

1 hour ago, Turtle Rig said:

.

nothing weird about it, the ipc gains since sandy bridge has been...meh, thats why the 2600k is still viable short of a 1080 ti.

 

and the 3930k/4930k would be 6-7 years old by now and still be like a 8700, I still remember trying to justify the r5 1600 over the 2600k oc'd for gaming, and i couldn't.

[dgsddfgdfhgs]

this is just how far intel has come

very disappointing improvements over the years.... toothpaste....

[Turtle Rig]

Yes man I hear you.  Also the 8700k wins in other tests but I believe its the CPU Queen test that gives the overall single core score I think.

[Arika]

ok? OC vs Stock is not an accurate comparison, either run them both at stock or both OCd.

[Turtle Rig]

True, plus the 8700k is faster in other tests.  So I guess its that queen test that is a little suspect.  Yes if the 8700k was OCed it would win by a land slide.

[d3adc3II]

Compare the cpu by its single core performance is so year 2000, 8700 > 4930k because (Yes, I take 8700 non K to compare with Oced 4930k) :

 

- 8700 utilize DDR4 while 4930k can't, so real life perm will be very different

- Multicore/thread perf >>> single core ( most application/games utilize 4 cores by today standard)

- Byu the way, that result is only for reference. In real life, 8700 run @ 4.7 Ghz turbo boost. 3.7 Ghz is only when cpu in ... idle mode lol

[Turtle Rig]

Yes d3adc3ll you are right.  Also the other tests the 8700k comes out way on top.  I have no idea what this queen test is about.  It does it really fast to.  Its not relevant compared to other tests which the 8700k beats me in a land slide.

 

[d3adc3II]

Hi Turtle Rig, yes, I think testing 8700k@3.7GHz is not practical, simply because there is no way 8700k will run at that speed unless you underclock it.

 

How's about you use Cinebench to bench ur 4930k single core perf and post the score here? I don't have 8700k , but I can bench with my 8600k@5GHz 

 

I'm curious to see the difference those two.

[Turtle Rig]

Will do my friend.