Competitive ... In a way. But they also didn't put a GPU on Ryzen... Which enabled them to add the extra cores and still keep yields up and costs down. Intel needs to remove the GPU from their consumer desktop devices to level the playing field again. And never give AMD such a cheap shot again.
I'd be totally fine trading the GPU for 2 cores without an increase in price on my desktop chips as I don't need the Intel GPU when I'll be installing a PCIe GPU anyways. The K series in particular could easily drop the GPU.
i find the igpu to be extremely useful when troubleshooting a video card. I use it, not often but i can totally see why some folks even on a high end machine would want it. I do agree though I think there should be skus with and without the igpu , but that may just complicate things, increase costs etc.
Oh but then how will intel shove its close to useless gpus down people's throats. 90% of the people would prefer 50% extra cores, and most would agree that integrated graphics only makes sense in low end and lower mid range products, but nontheless intel would rather sell you useless silicon than maximize the value. And sure, there exist intel chips without graphics, but at a considerable platform premium.
I'm one of the few who uses the iGPU along with my dGPUs. I run three monitors and having two of them on the iGPU allows me to avoid an nVidia power management issue, make GPU driver issues far less annoying, and not have to use adapters for my Vive.
Actually I kind of like the intel approach. The i7-8700 is cheap ($300 ish), very fast single thread (best for some workloads), and is pretty good at parallel workloads. Given the current GPU pricing is crazy expensive, go ahead and try to buy a gtx 1070 at MSRP of $349 it's pretty nice to be able to buy an intel system today and buy a GPU later.
Sure the Ryzen 8 core/16 thread CPU will win on some parallel benchmarks, but not buy enough for me to not consider 6 faster cores.
Sadly neither the i7 or Ryzen officially support ECC, so I might try to hold off for the next Xeon E3.
Creating a new CPU takes multiple years. While increased competition probably had something to do with the exact product stack and pricing (Core i5 having 6 cores, rather than reserving it for Core i7, for example,) this 6-core high-volume consumer die was well in development long before Rizen was public.
Obviously they had the design at the ready. intel has loads of R&D at the ready, even with multiple year schedules, they have huge resources. That doesn't mean it would have been brought to market without competitive pressure.
Last time I bought AMD was 1997. Current Intel release is nothing but panicked Intel BS propaganda out of damage control! Being a tech fan of some brand is so childish and stupid that it is beyond any imagination!
wow are u serious? 271 sounds awful :). Z370 sounds MUCH BETTER, or maybe Z4K...they have to use 4k going forwards, its the only way ill buy into their marketing BS.
So, basically, the 8700K is the 7800X but in a smaller socket. Yeah yeah there's platform changes, but they're both essentially the same amount of cores of the same architecture, with "7 herbs and spices" thrown in of course. It would be interesting to see them go head to head, clock for clock.
Just to be clear here, they're completely different dies. 7800X is a Skylake-X LCC die with 6 cores enabled, no iGPU, and SKL-X's typical 4 memory channels. 8700K is a Coffee Lake die with 6 cores enabled, a GT2 GPU, and SKL/KBL/CFL's typical 2 memory channels.
We also don't know anything about how the cores are arranged on CFL. If they're using a mesh like SKL-X, or a set of rings like previous hex-core CPUs.
Wouldn't it be more likely that it's a typical ring bus like seen in previous mainstream CPUs? Granted, the mesh would be the uncore, but I'd still consider a move to a mesh on mainstream to be something worthy and notable; it certainly wouldn't be essentially the same architecture.
I'm personally excited about Coffee Lake. Kaby Lake might have been listed at $305 for whatever reason, but the ark.intel tray pricing indicates $339, and a quick glance at PCPartPicker says it had launch prices of right around $350. The ark.intel price on the 8700k is $359, so I would expect it to stand similarly, with retail pricing going at about $370. Amazon has the 7700k for $299 right now, but with a list price of $350, so I don't know that the 8700k is that much higher in terms of list price. Of course, real prices right now will be higher, but it'll likely come down in the next few months.
Fair enough. I look forward to any coverage you get to give. I'd love to see more information on 14nm++ too if y'all can get it, although Intel is typically cagey about that.
Prices are actually really good compared to last gen, not increase. The i3-8350K ($168) is essentially a i5 7600k. The i5 8600k has 2 extra physical cores, i'm sure it will give hyperthreading a run for its money at $257 and with more l3 cache to boot. I skipped Kaby Lake and went with a Ryzen, but look like I gotta try a Coffee Lake.
7800X also has 4 times the L2 cache, less L3 cache, and a quite different cache hierarchy. My guess is that CFL has a ring bus as well. Why switch to mesh in an older design (with 6 cores tops only) and keep everything else identical?
Btw, changing the cache structure in this way also makes certain types of snoop attack based on cache flush meddling much more difficult. Handy side effect.
Right, but to be fair, the individual CPU dies themselves are still Skylake-based and, given this fact, we should not expect too many miracles, correct? In other words, there is no free lunch when the TDP collector comes to collect his due in heat and power from the added dies, correct?
Coffee Lake is built on their 14++ process, which should help to reduce heat in comparison to Skylake and Kabylake, which were on 14 and 14+ respectively.
You are not making any sense. How is 14++ better than 14++? You now habe 6 cores vs 4 cores in a tiny amount of space. Still glued with that horrible goo underneath. Thermal fail.
I wouldn't really call it a minor node revision tbh. 14nm++ offers more performance at the same power level as original 14nm and 14nm+ designs. I think I read some estimates saying it was ~23% more drive current for the transistors. That will improve performance per watt in its own way. If everything was kept the same, I could see them getting by with just the slight TDP increase - better perf/w than 14nm+ (and better absolute perf than 10nm) coupled with slightly lowering the base and boost frequencies (which will have exponential effects if voltage is dropped) can get you pretty close to compensating without really sacrificing too much. Put in overclocking and Coffee Lake will really run, I think.
Yeah but those CPUs had 3 modules with 2 cores in each module. Each 2 cores in the module shared the same resources which means they're not true hexacore CPUs. AMD never released a native 6-core CPU for mainstream desktop until Ryzen 5.
Trouble is, at the time it just wasn't that great anyway, check the reviews. It's why Intel locked off 2 cores on the SB-E die, they just didn't need to release an 8c back then, AMD couldn't even beat SB. And I own a 1090T btw.
I don't think they'll need to drop prices, but I also don't think Ryzen would be an instant recommendation anymore. 6C/12T Ryzen will probably match up about evenly (probably with a slight lead) to 6C/6T i5's, especially with the frequency lead that they have. Overclock both, and I think Coffee Lake will pull even on multithreading while having a big ST lead.
The 1600X might need a price cut. It's $234 on Amazon right now; overclock both it and a $260 8600k and the 8600k probably has a bigger lead than the price differential, especially in games. I think the 1600 might stick around. If it can beat a i5-7500 for gaming recommendations, it should handle the i3-8300.
After going over the source of those numbers (those were the original numbers Intel gave us for the KBL launch), we've opted to update the article with the later prices. Thanks for the feedback, gang.
The KBL prices Intel sent you might be discounted "street" pricing since they announced 8th gen. I certainly didn't get my 7th gen CPU for as low a price as indicated in this piece.
Also, you didn't mention the socket incompatibility between 7th and 8th gen that's been rumored/leaked.
I'll take that i7-8700 over any current AMD offering for a single reason... the iGPU.
All I do doesn't require a dedicated GPU. Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, Dreamweaver are perfectly fine with the iGPU, as is SketchUp and Blender if you don't render anything. The additional 2 cores and 4 threads will come in handy when firing up Reason or CuBase, where i don't need any graphics-power either.
With this CPU I can build a decent workstation in a tiny 7" x 7" x 3" package, and AMD has nothing to offer for me in that area, as I'd allways need that pesky dedicated GPU.
I don't do anything else for some 6-8 hours per day then to use the Adobe Suite for work and I do it perfectly fine on my iGPU. And I use Photoshop for the last 20 years allready. None of the things you do on a daily basis in Photoshop uses the GPU for anything really, neither does SketchUp or Blender in edit-mode.
The better AMD iGPU is of no interest, when the intel iGPU is working just fine. In this case it comes down to CPU-power alone, and the old AMD APUs are not even worth mentioning. The new Raven Ridge APUs will only have 4 Cores, so I don't expect much from them either.
You listed a bunch of tasks that benefit from GPU power and do not benefit from a thermally constrained CPU, then waxed lyrical about taking that power and putting it in a box that will mean you cannot get anything like its full potential out of it.
But that's cool, as it's your opinion it can't be wrong per-se... just daft.
None of the software I use and listed does benefit from GPU-power. Photoshop only uses the GPU for scrolling, resizing, panning etc, and the intel iGPU does work just fine for this. In SketchUp and Blender edit-mode the intel iGPU is under no stress aswell. I do not render images, I just do the 3d-drawings for furniture manufacturing or 3d-printing. No GPU-power needed for that.
And thermal constraint? I have no problem running my current i7-5775C in a small box like that on full throttle.
"Adobe Photoshop CC takes advantage of the innovative Mercury Graphics Engine for NVIDIA GPUs to create a smooth and intuitive design experience. New GPU-accelerated features include an expanded Blur Gallery, adding even more options for stylish image blurring; Focus Mask for automatically selecting the in-focus area of a photo; and upsampling, which enables high-quality up-scaling of images like those extracted from video frames. Other key GPU features include Smart Sharpen, Liquify, and more than 30 others."
So, if you aren't using an nVidia GPU, you may only be using the GPU for scrolling and panning, but Photoshop is willing to use the GPU for more than that. I believe Photoshop also supports AMD GPUs for accelerating various tasks, and they _technically_ support some of the high-end Iris Intel GPUs, I think, but obviously a more powerful GPU will do tasks faster than a slower GPU, just like how a faster CPU is obviously faster than a slower CPU. That is how it works.
As someone who professionally works with Photoshop for the last 20 years let me tell you, that all these fancy blur filters, focus masks and whatnot are not used by most professionals. 99% of the time you really do very simple tasks in Photoshop that don't need a powerful PC to begin with. I could probably do 90% of my work on a MacBookAir just fine.
Stop reading advertising-material and go to an advertising-agency for example and actually look what people are doing the whole day in Photoshop.
Still sounds like an edge case. First time I've heard of someone who didn't gain from a discrete GPU for Adobe apps, and didn't render in Blender. If this is your workflow, that's fine, but you're talking about it as if your setup is typical, yet it's really not.
As someone who is working as a graphics designer in advertising agencies for the last 20 years, I can tell you that this is pretty much the workflow of the whole business. We make collages from stock-images to present ideas to the customers, and then we go on to shoot the actual images for the ideas that passed or use the stock-photos. After that we retouch and clean up the images before sending them to InDesign where the final product is composed.
Seriously, go to an actual advertising agency and talk to the graphic designers there. Collages, retouching, cleaning up... the whole day long.
The iGPU is an advantage for those that do not need fancy graphic cards for games. However, I feel the cost of a i7 chip with a "new" Z370 motherboard will clearly cost more or equate to buying an additional low end graphic card such as a GT 1030. Also, you will need to watch the thermals with a small build since Intel chips run hot because of the toothpaste TIM they use between the chip and heat spread.
You do know that when you deduct from your taxes you're not actually saving the whole amount right? If I say I paid $2000 for hardware to run the business, that just reduces the tax liability by $2000, not the amount of taxes I pay.
Yes, all business-expenses work that way here in Finland. They get substracted from the business-gains, and the end-sum is to be taxed. So if I would have as much expenses as gains, I don't pay any taxes at all.
Still, with taxes as high as in Finland, an intel i7-8700 is not that much more expensive from a business-perspective as an AMD 1600 in the end.
A larger die would only be a good reason if previous generations in the same product stack saw movements in price relative to die size. From memory Sandy Bridge was twice the size of Skylake, but Skylake wasn't half the price.
I'd be surprised if Coffee Lake is larger than Sandy, or even Ivy at the same places in the product stack.
I was wondering that. The article links ref'd a China conference where someone posted a snap of a presentation slide showing some details, though I see the pic on the Chinese web site has gone now.
Videocardz posted something yesterday, before Intel moved the embargo. I'm not sure if they were following suit or if they were the first people to do it, though.
I think the overclocking models are definitely not worth the extra money. With existing overclocked Kaby Lake chips, we are already seeing some noise about overheating. It seems like Intel is pushing the chips pretty much as high as they can go, so I feel there is little leg room in terms of thermal and clockspeed limit that you can go with the 6 core 8600/8700K chips.
The other weird thing is, if the better TB function means CFL can do 4.7 all-core anyway, where's the fun for the oc'ing enthusiast? It's almost as if, to keep up or stay ahead of AMD, Intel is internally unleashing in a stock manner some of the oc headroom their chips have always been able to do, but what's left for the casual oc'er? I don't mean the types who go even custom loop, just the vast majority who buy big air coolers or AIOs. The thermals on these latest releases make me think it's the definite end of seeing forum posts where people sing continued praise for the venerable NH-D15.
This is pretty amazing at the low end. The i3-8100 is superior in every way to an i5-6500, for $75 less!
I wonder what the maximum 6-core boost you can get on an i5-8400 is? Could you actually - with sufficient power and cooling of course - "throw TDP limits into the wind, turning on a motherboard's multi-core enhancement", and get 4 GHz x 6 cores continuously?
My ASUS X99 Deluxe Motherboard has suffered yet another BIOS corruption and was sent in for some RMA work. To get by .. I dug my old DELL Precision T3400 out of storage with it's 2.4GHz Q6600 processor. I installed Windows 10 on a Samsung 850 PRO SSD plugged into a SATA-2 port. The experience isn't as bad as I feared it would be. In fact ... this system is usable. I don't think I have ever had such a good experience with a decade old computer.
All that being said ... If my X99 Deluxe motherboard can't be fixed. I might consider replacing it with the 8700K on a Z370 motherboard. However there are still lots of X99 motherboards on Amazon, and the cheapest route would be to buy only a new Motherboard.
I've been doing old+new tech tests like that for a while, the results can be surprising. SSDs make a huge difference, and note that in some cases you could also use PCIe SSDs, eg. the 950 Pro has its own boot ROM, ditto some Intel models. Even as data drives, I get 2GB/sec from an SM951 on a P55 board. Not yet tested S775 and AM2, looking forward to that.
On Intel, HT is useless (and sometimes worse than useless), and combined with the higher base clock, everybody should prefer i5-8600K over i7-8700, and invest the $50 into a faster SSD or memory.
What's your evidence that it's useless? Can you cite performance data where results are better with HT off? This was true back in the days of the P4, HT was bad back then, but it's been well worthwhile ever since X58/Nehalem.
I hope they debugged the hell out of them, since reactionary releases could be really bad for Intel. Their 7700K hyperthreading bug isn’t fixed yet to my knowledge.
forcing people to change the motherboard for nothing , I dont see anything new in the 370 chipset ... and it still connects to the CPU using the same stupid DMI3.0
how about increasing the lanes in DMI 3.0 and making them 8 lanes intel ? oh I know you want stupid people to buy another motherboard for nothing ... Threadripper at least offers 60 lanes and does not need much the DMI ...
All what AMD needs to do to crush you intel is selling their thread ripper 8 cores CPU for $400 and introduce 6 and 4 cores threadrippers as well.
The i5 8400 seems like a big winner in that segment. All other segments, AMD has the better bargain, unless single thread performance is the ONLY metric you care about.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
108 Comments
Back to Article
Slaveguy - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Eight generations of being a little bitch. What a legacy!ddriver - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
After over 10 years of being stuck at 4 cores in the mainstream, intel finally has 6 and they plan on having 8 next year.I love how fangirls say this has nothing to do with amd being competitive, and is just intel's typical same old strive for innovation.
TEAMSWITCHER - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Competitive ... In a way. But they also didn't put a GPU on Ryzen... Which enabled them to add the extra cores and still keep yields up and costs down. Intel needs to remove the GPU from their consumer desktop devices to level the playing field again. And never give AMD such a cheap shot again.Morawka - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
This + 1000. Had it not been for 1 man, Kellar, we would still be looking at the same ol AMD shenanigans.peterfares - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
I'd be totally fine trading the GPU for 2 cores without an increase in price on my desktop chips as I don't need the Intel GPU when I'll be installing a PCIe GPU anyways. The K series in particular could easily drop the GPU.Hxx - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link
i find the igpu to be extremely useful when troubleshooting a video card. I use it, not often but i can totally see why some folks even on a high end machine would want it. I do agree though I think there should be skus with and without the igpu , but that may just complicate things, increase costs etc.ddriver - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Oh but then how will intel shove its close to useless gpus down people's throats. 90% of the people would prefer 50% extra cores, and most would agree that integrated graphics only makes sense in low end and lower mid range products, but nontheless intel would rather sell you useless silicon than maximize the value. And sure, there exist intel chips without graphics, but at a considerable platform premium.lefty2 - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link
They need that iGPU though, because they use the same die for laptops, SFF, etc.SharpEars - Wednesday, September 27, 2017 - link
So turn it off, for the rest of the CPUs.wolrah - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link
I'm one of the few who uses the iGPU along with my dGPUs. I run three monitors and having two of them on the iGPU allows me to avoid an nVidia power management issue, make GPU driver issues far less annoying, and not have to use adapters for my Vive.spikebike - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link
Actually I kind of like the intel approach. The i7-8700 is cheap ($300 ish), very fast single thread (best for some workloads), and is pretty good at parallel workloads. Given the current GPU pricing is crazy expensive, go ahead and try to buy a gtx 1070 at MSRP of $349 it's pretty nice to be able to buy an intel system today and buy a GPU later.Sure the Ryzen 8 core/16 thread CPU will win on some parallel benchmarks, but not buy enough for me to not consider 6 faster cores.
Sadly neither the i7 or Ryzen officially support ECC, so I might try to hold off for the next Xeon E3.
samer1970 - Wednesday, September 27, 2017 - link
@teamswitcheradding a GPU to 18 cores CPU is possible. your theory of adding more cores by removing GPU is false.
AMD did not put GPU inside their Ryzen because they are working on their new APU using Ryzen Technology and the Vega , and it is coming soon.
CharonPDX - Thursday, September 28, 2017 - link
Creating a new CPU takes multiple years. While increased competition probably had something to do with the exact product stack and pricing (Core i5 having 6 cores, rather than reserving it for Core i7, for example,) this 6-core high-volume consumer die was well in development long before Rizen was public.Hixbot - Monday, October 2, 2017 - link
Obviously they had the design at the ready. intel has loads of R&D at the ready, even with multiple year schedules, they have huge resources.That doesn't mean it would have been brought to market without competitive pressure.
Zingam - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link
Last time I bought AMD was 1997. Current Intel release is nothing but panicked Intel BS propaganda out of damage control!Being a tech fan of some brand is so childish and stupid that it is beyond any imagination!
Chriz - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Nothing else new with the Z370 chipset? They should have just called it the Z271.Hurr Durr - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
New features are supposed to come out with updated 370 sometime in 1Q 2018, along with low-power CPU variants. Weird, yes.Hxx - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link
wow are u serious? 271 sounds awful :). Z370 sounds MUCH BETTER, or maybe Z4K...they have to use 4k going forwards, its the only way ill buy into their marketing BS.Almighty_Tallest_Blue - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
So, basically, the 8700K is the 7800X but in a smaller socket. Yeah yeah there's platform changes, but they're both essentially the same amount of cores of the same architecture, with "7 herbs and spices" thrown in of course. It would be interesting to see them go head to head, clock for clock.Ryan Smith - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Just to be clear here, they're completely different dies. 7800X is a Skylake-X LCC die with 6 cores enabled, no iGPU, and SKL-X's typical 4 memory channels. 8700K is a Coffee Lake die with 6 cores enabled, a GT2 GPU, and SKL/KBL/CFL's typical 2 memory channels.We also don't know anything about how the cores are arranged on CFL. If they're using a mesh like SKL-X, or a set of rings like previous hex-core CPUs.
Drumsticks - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Wouldn't it be more likely that it's a typical ring bus like seen in previous mainstream CPUs? Granted, the mesh would be the uncore, but I'd still consider a move to a mesh on mainstream to be something worthy and notable; it certainly wouldn't be essentially the same architecture.I'm personally excited about Coffee Lake. Kaby Lake might have been listed at $305 for whatever reason, but the ark.intel tray pricing indicates $339, and a quick glance at PCPartPicker says it had launch prices of right around $350. The ark.intel price on the 8700k is $359, so I would expect it to stand similarly, with retail pricing going at about $370. Amazon has the 7700k for $299 right now, but with a list price of $350, so I don't know that the 8700k is that much higher in terms of list price. Of course, real prices right now will be higher, but it'll likely come down in the next few months.
Ryan Smith - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
"Wouldn't it be more likely that it's a typical ring bus like seen in previous mainstream CPUs?"It's very likely. We just don't know for sure right now.
mapesdhs - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Why would Intel be so cagey about this aspect of CFL?Drumsticks - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link
Fair enough. I look forward to any coverage you get to give. I'd love to see more information on 14nm++ too if y'all can get it, although Intel is typically cagey about that.SharpEars - Wednesday, September 27, 2017 - link
Looks like a mesh from the die picture, as far as I can tell.Byte - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Prices are actually really good compared to last gen, not increase. The i3-8350K($168) is essentially a i5 7600k. The i5 8600k has 2 extra physical cores, i'm sure it will give hyperthreading a run for its money at $257 and with more l3 cache to boot. I skipped Kaby Lake and went with a Ryzen, but look like I gotta try a Coffee Lake.
lefty2 - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link
Those are bulk prices though. The i5 8600k is $270 retail.lefty2 - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link
The 8700k is $400 retail: https://www.anandtech.com/show/11843/prices-of-int...Santoval - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
7800X also has 4 times the L2 cache, less L3 cache, and a quite different cache hierarchy. My guess is that CFL has a ring bus as well. Why switch to mesh in an older design (with 6 cores tops only) and keep everything else identical?mapesdhs - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Btw, changing the cache structure in this way also makes certain types of snoop attack based on cache flush meddling much more difficult. Handy side effect.[email protected] - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Right, but to be fair, the individual CPU dies themselves are still Skylake-based and, given this fact, we should not expect too many miracles, correct? In other words, there is no free lunch when the TDP collector comes to collect his due in heat and power from the added dies, correct?nevcairiel - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Coffee Lake is built on their 14++ process, which should help to reduce heat in comparison to Skylake and Kabylake, which were on 14 and 14+ respectively.xchaotic - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
You are not making any sense. How is 14++ better than 14++? You now habe 6 cores vs 4 cores in a tiny amount of space. Still glued with that horrible goo underneath. Thermal fail.Lord-Bryan - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
A minor node revision will never be enough to counter the power consumption/thermals of two extra coreswillis936 - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
But a little tin might do the trick ;)Drumsticks - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link
I wouldn't really call it a minor node revision tbh. 14nm++ offers more performance at the same power level as original 14nm and 14nm+ designs. I think I read some estimates saying it was ~23% more drive current for the transistors. That will improve performance per watt in its own way. If everything was kept the same, I could see them getting by with just the slight TDP increase - better perf/w than 14nm+ (and better absolute perf than 10nm) coupled with slightly lowering the base and boost frequencies (which will have exponential effects if voltage is dropped) can get you pretty close to compensating without really sacrificing too much. Put in overclocking and Coffee Lake will really run, I think.Faker - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
The brand new 8700K is built to be more energy efficient thoughStevoLincolnite - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Should have happened years ago.AMD has been offering 6+ cores in the mainstream for 7 years now, starting with the Phenom 2 x6.
Faker - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Yeah but those CPUs had 3 modules with 2 cores in each module. Each 2 cores in the module shared the same resources which means they're not true hexacore CPUs. AMD never released a native 6-core CPU for mainstream desktop until Ryzen 5.jimjamjamie - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Phenom II X6 had 6 full-fat cores. You are talking about the Bulldozer family.mapesdhs - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Trouble is, at the time it just wasn't that great anyway, check the reviews. It's why Intel locked off 2 cores on the SB-E die, they just didn't need to release an 8c back then, AMD couldn't even beat SB. And I own a 1090T btw.Spunjji - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
This comment is just plain wrong, sonrealistz - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Ryzen pricedrop incoming. AMD in panic mode! Zero performance lead in all of their markets excluding consoles.lioncat55 - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Why do they need a performance lead?WhoopsieLand - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Why would AMD be forced to drop prices? Intel kinda raised the prices with higher core counts, at least in the $200-$400 segment.A 6C/12T Ryzen 1600 chip is listed on Amazon at $209. If wholesale pricing is factored out, then a 6C/12T 8700K should cost around $350.
It looks like both AMD and Intel are positioned to target different segments of the market, with AMD looking like a better perf/$ alternative.
Drumsticks - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link
I don't think they'll need to drop prices, but I also don't think Ryzen would be an instant recommendation anymore. 6C/12T Ryzen will probably match up about evenly (probably with a slight lead) to 6C/6T i5's, especially with the frequency lead that they have. Overclock both, and I think Coffee Lake will pull even on multithreading while having a big ST lead.The 1600X might need a price cut. It's $234 on Amazon right now; overclock both it and a $260 8600k and the 8600k probably has a bigger lead than the price differential, especially in games. I think the 1600 might stick around. If it can beat a i5-7500 for gaming recommendations, it should handle the i3-8300.
[email protected] - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Settle down. Last I checked, this is not WCCFTech.Dark_Complex - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Where are you getting $303 for the 7700K, Ark has $339 - $350?Ryan Smith - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Those are pulled from the figures Intel gave us for the Kaby Lake launch earlier this year. Like-for-like numbers, as least as much as possible.eddman - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
I don't know what intel gave you, but those prices are CLEARLY wrong. Maybe they weren't the final, correct prices?8700K is just $20 more and 8600K $15. The rest of the CFL are exactly the same price as their KBL counterparts.
edzieba - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Yup, those numbers match neither the MSRP's you gave in your 'price estimation' article (https://www.anandtech.com/show/11843/prices-of-int... nor the OEM cost from previous reviews (e.g. https://www.anandtech.com/show/11083/the-intel-cor...Ryan Smith - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
After going over the source of those numbers (those were the original numbers Intel gave us for the KBL launch), we've opted to update the article with the later prices. Thanks for the feedback, gang.jtd871 - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
The KBL prices Intel sent you might be discounted "street" pricing since they announced 8th gen. I certainly didn't get my 7th gen CPU for as low a price as indicated in this piece.Also, you didn't mention the socket incompatibility between 7th and 8th gen that's been rumored/leaked.
Stochastic - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
The prices really put a damper on this. Hopefully we'll get a price war between AMD and Intel.ET - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
4 core Intel CPU for $117. Thanks, AMD!milkywayer - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
And a $1700 CPU reduced to $1000. Again, Thanks AMD. Intel was being greedy, now finally they're back in their place somewhat.UtilityMax - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
That's why we need AMD to succeed.mapesdhs - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Yup, so thanks is fine, but people still need to buy them for AMD to keep going.jjj - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
And retail is when?jjj - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
nm, it's Oct 5.jrs77 - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
I'll take that i7-8700 over any current AMD offering for a single reason... the iGPU.All I do doesn't require a dedicated GPU. Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, Dreamweaver are perfectly fine with the iGPU, as is SketchUp and Blender if you don't render anything. The additional 2 cores and 4 threads will come in handy when firing up Reason or CuBase, where i don't need any graphics-power either.
With this CPU I can build a decent workstation in a tiny 7" x 7" x 3" package, and AMD has nothing to offer for me in that area, as I'd allways need that pesky dedicated GPU.
wolfemane - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
You must not do a whole lot of anything in photoshop, or don't mind (or even realize) the length of time to accomplish anything beyond basic tasks.jrs77 - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
I don't do anything else for some 6-8 hours per day then to use the Adobe Suite for work and I do it perfectly fine on my iGPU. And I use Photoshop for the last 20 years allready.None of the things you do on a daily basis in Photoshop uses the GPU for anything really, neither does SketchUp or Blender in edit-mode.
Ro_Ja - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
AMD still has the better onboard GPU in the long shot.I am just hoping they dont bottleneck their onboadd GPU like what Bristol Ridge did LOL
jrs77 - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
The better AMD iGPU is of no interest, when the intel iGPU is working just fine. In this case it comes down to CPU-power alone, and the old AMD APUs are not even worth mentioning.The new Raven Ridge APUs will only have 4 Cores, so I don't expect much from them either.
Spunjji - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
You listed a bunch of tasks that benefit from GPU power and do not benefit from a thermally constrained CPU, then waxed lyrical about taking that power and putting it in a box that will mean you cannot get anything like its full potential out of it.But that's cool, as it's your opinion it can't be wrong per-se... just daft.
jrs77 - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
None of the software I use and listed does benefit from GPU-power. Photoshop only uses the GPU for scrolling, resizing, panning etc, and the intel iGPU does work just fine for this.In SketchUp and Blender edit-mode the intel iGPU is under no stress aswell. I do not render images, I just do the 3d-drawings for furniture manufacturing or 3d-printing. No GPU-power needed for that.
And thermal constraint? I have no problem running my current i7-5775C in a small box like that on full throttle.
coder543 - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
That's not true. Photoshop uses GPU-acceleration for other tasks, when an appropriate GPU is available.Here's an article: http://www.nvidia.com/object/adobe-photoshop-cc.ht...
and the relevant quote:
"Adobe Photoshop CC takes advantage of the innovative Mercury Graphics Engine for NVIDIA GPUs to create a smooth and intuitive design experience. New GPU-accelerated features include an expanded Blur Gallery, adding even more options for stylish image blurring; Focus Mask for automatically selecting the in-focus area of a photo; and upsampling, which enables high-quality up-scaling of images like those extracted from video frames. Other key GPU features include Smart Sharpen, Liquify, and more than 30 others."
So, if you aren't using an nVidia GPU, you may only be using the GPU for scrolling and panning, but Photoshop is willing to use the GPU for more than that. I believe Photoshop also supports AMD GPUs for accelerating various tasks, and they _technically_ support some of the high-end Iris Intel GPUs, I think, but obviously a more powerful GPU will do tasks faster than a slower GPU, just like how a faster CPU is obviously faster than a slower CPU. That is how it works.
jrs77 - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
As someone who professionally works with Photoshop for the last 20 years let me tell you, that all these fancy blur filters, focus masks and whatnot are not used by most professionals.99% of the time you really do very simple tasks in Photoshop that don't need a powerful PC to begin with. I could probably do 90% of my work on a MacBookAir just fine.
Stop reading advertising-material and go to an advertising-agency for example and actually look what people are doing the whole day in Photoshop.
mapesdhs - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Still sounds like an edge case. First time I've heard of someone who didn't gain from a discrete GPU for Adobe apps, and didn't render in Blender. If this is your workflow, that's fine, but you're talking about it as if your setup is typical, yet it's really not.jrs77 - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link
As someone who is working as a graphics designer in advertising agencies for the last 20 years, I can tell you that this is pretty much the workflow of the whole business.We make collages from stock-images to present ideas to the customers, and then we go on to shoot the actual images for the ideas that passed or use the stock-photos. After that we retouch and clean up the images before sending them to InDesign where the final product is composed.
Seriously, go to an actual advertising agency and talk to the graphic designers there. Collages, retouching, cleaning up... the whole day long.
watzupken - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
The iGPU is an advantage for those that do not need fancy graphic cards for games. However, I feel the cost of a i7 chip with a "new" Z370 motherboard will clearly cost more or equate to buying an additional low end graphic card such as a GT 1030. Also, you will need to watch the thermals with a small build since Intel chips run hot because of the toothpaste TIM they use between the chip and heat spread.jrs77 - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Ofc you could be more economical with other hardware, but money is no problem, if you can deduct your PC-hardware from your business-taxes.For me the size and the power-efficiency is more relevant than the price.
peterfares - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
You do know that when you deduct from your taxes you're not actually saving the whole amount right? If I say I paid $2000 for hardware to run the business, that just reduces the tax liability by $2000, not the amount of taxes I pay.jrs77 - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Yes, all business-expenses work that way here in Finland. They get substracted from the business-gains, and the end-sum is to be taxed.So if I would have as much expenses as gains, I don't pay any taxes at all.
Still, with taxes as high as in Finland, an intel i7-8700 is not that much more expensive from a business-perspective as an AMD 1600 in the end.
giogi - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
no laptop CPUs?Danvelopment - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Disappointed in the price increase.A larger die would only be a good reason if previous generations in the same product stack saw movements in price relative to die size. From memory Sandy Bridge was twice the size of Skylake, but Skylake wasn't half the price.
I'd be surprised if Coffee Lake is larger than Sandy, or even Ivy at the same places in the product stack.
Danvelopment - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Picked up an 8 core Sandy-E (E5-2670) recently with new motherboard and 32GB RAM for around $300USD. Intel makes it hard to want to upgrade.mapesdhs - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
I know, I bagged a 3930K for 82 UKP, also two R4Es, 16GB/2400 RAM and 120mm AIO for 225 (one of the R4Es was boxed/new).r3loaded - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Given those prices, Intel clearly thinks its customer base are mugs.Spunjji - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
By and large they are!e36Jeff - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
so....who broke embargo?mapesdhs - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
I was wondering that. The article links ref'd a China conference where someone posted a snap of a presentation slide showing some details, though I see the pic on the Chinese web site has gone now.Drumsticks - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link
Videocardz posted something yesterday, before Intel moved the embargo. I'm not sure if they were following suit or if they were the first people to do it, though.watzupken - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
I think the overclocking models are definitely not worth the extra money. With existing overclocked Kaby Lake chips, we are already seeing some noise about overheating. It seems like Intel is pushing the chips pretty much as high as they can go, so I feel there is little leg room in terms of thermal and clockspeed limit that you can go with the 6 core 8600/8700K chips.mapesdhs - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
The other weird thing is, if the better TB function means CFL can do 4.7 all-core anyway, where's the fun for the oc'ing enthusiast? It's almost as if, to keep up or stay ahead of AMD, Intel is internally unleashing in a stock manner some of the oc headroom their chips have always been able to do, but what's left for the casual oc'er? I don't mean the types who go even custom loop, just the vast majority who buy big air coolers or AIOs. The thermals on these latest releases make me think it's the definite end of seeing forum posts where people sing continued praise for the venerable NH-D15.Ken_g6 - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
This is pretty amazing at the low end. The i3-8100 is superior in every way to an i5-6500, for $75 less!I wonder what the maximum 6-core boost you can get on an i5-8400 is? Could you actually - with sufficient power and cooling of course - "throw TDP limits into the wind, turning on a motherboard's multi-core enhancement", and get 4 GHz x 6 cores continuously?
andrewaggb - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
The i3-8100 looks pretty good doesn't it... That's plenty of cpu for most people. Even gamers would be fine.overseer - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link
Yes i3-8100 also beats i5-7400 and is 60$ cheaper.OFelix - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
I'm looking forward to the ASRock Fatal1ty Z370 Gaming-ITX/ac review. :-)TEAMSWITCHER - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
My ASUS X99 Deluxe Motherboard has suffered yet another BIOS corruption and was sent in for some RMA work. To get by .. I dug my old DELL Precision T3400 out of storage with it's 2.4GHz Q6600 processor. I installed Windows 10 on a Samsung 850 PRO SSD plugged into a SATA-2 port. The experience isn't as bad as I feared it would be. In fact ... this system is usable. I don't think I have ever had such a good experience with a decade old computer.All that being said ... If my X99 Deluxe motherboard can't be fixed. I might consider replacing it with the 8700K on a Z370 motherboard. However there are still lots of X99 motherboards on Amazon, and the cheapest route would be to buy only a new Motherboard.
mapesdhs - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
I've been doing old+new tech tests like that for a while, the results can be surprising. SSDs make a huge difference, and note that in some cases you could also use PCIe SSDs, eg. the 950 Pro has its own boot ROM, ditto some Intel models. Even as data drives, I get 2GB/sec from an SM951 on a P55 board. Not yet tested S775 and AM2, looking forward to that.peevee - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
On Intel, HT is useless (and sometimes worse than useless), and combined with the higher base clock, everybody should prefer i5-8600K over i7-8700, and invest the $50 into a faster SSD or memory.mapesdhs - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
What's your evidence that it's useless? Can you cite performance data where results are better with HT off? This was true back in the days of the P4, HT was bad back then, but it's been well worthwhile ever since X58/Nehalem.peevee - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link
Anandtech tests often, you can look it up yourself.HardwareDufus - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
Man, I was really hoping for a GT3+ GPU with the Coffee Lake Desktop. Bummer.m16 - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
I hope they debugged the hell out of them, since reactionary releases could be really bad for Intel. Their 7700K hyperthreading bug isn’t fixed yet to my knowledge.mapesdhs - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link
That slide line about "40 platform PCIe lanes" is disgusting, Intel should not be allowed to get away with that kind of PR spin nonsense.Hxx - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link
upgrading from 40 PCIE lanes on Z270 to 40 PCIE lanes on Z370 makes sense to me.... oh waitSivar - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link
Which publication will no longer be receiving hardware from Intel for review?ScottSoapbox - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link
Can't wait to see your review of this new 6 core i7 and how it stacks up against the 6 and 8 core X299 variants.AlexTi - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link
extra cores on the i7-8700K do push the base frequency down 500 MHz from the Kaby Lake i7-7700Kis'nt 3.8 vs 4.2 = 400 MHz?
AlexTi - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link
I see now - it's 3.7 GHz, not 3.8, error in specifications tablesamer1970 - Wednesday, September 27, 2017 - link
forcing people to change the motherboard for nothing , I dont see anything new in the 370 chipset ... and it still connects to the CPU using the same stupid DMI3.0how about increasing the lanes in DMI 3.0 and making them 8 lanes intel ? oh I know you want stupid people to buy another motherboard for nothing ... Threadripper at least offers 60 lanes and does not need much the DMI ...
All what AMD needs to do to crush you intel is selling their thread ripper 8 cores CPU for $400 and introduce 6 and 4 cores threadrippers as well.
samer1970 - Wednesday, September 27, 2017 - link
the 8th gen and we are still stuck with 16 PCIe lanes ...What Intel ? you only move when AMD moves ? AMD gave us more cores , then you woke up and gave us just 6 cores ..
AMD kept 16 lanes , Intel kept 16 lanes ..
yea right ,
in 2017 , at least 32 lanes is acceptable in CPU (for the possibility of 2x16 cards)
8th generation offering what exactly ? 2 more cores ? ... thats it ?
Meaker10 - Thursday, September 28, 2017 - link
AMD give you 20 lanes.mganai - Friday, September 29, 2017 - link
QX6700 was an HEDT chip priced at $999.Hixbot - Monday, October 2, 2017 - link
The i5 8400 seems like a big winner in that segment. All other segments, AMD has the better bargain, unless single thread performance is the ONLY metric you care about.