CPU/Mobo Intel Coffeelake Discussion Thread

[Hades.]

Those are finland prices so they probably will have 25% vat. The prices will be same as 7700k/7600k/7350k.

Even with VAT included, the price of the processors is still looking on the higher side.

I have a gut feeling that Intel may not give 50% better performance for free. They may charge a premium for that.[DOUBLEPOST=1505066572][/DOUBLEPOST]https://videocardz.com/72448/asrock-confirms-coffee-lake-s-on-1151-socket

ASRock once again confirms Coffelake-S processors backward compatibility with Z170/Z270 motherboards.

 

[Hades.]

https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&s...sg=AFQjCNEwONdwJEeVD1vZI7Q6LlqhIsfPlA&ampcf=1

So my gut feeling was right. Intel is gonna price the 8600k at $299.

 

[Lord Nemesis]

Core2Duo didnt do much damage, the thing that did the most damage was Intel's bad tactics. They started providing huge discounts to corporate companies to use their processors instead of AMD's which almost made AMD go bankrupt. FTC intervened, AMD went to the court and won the battle and they were awarded a billion dollar as damages. But by the time they were awarded a billion dollar, the damage was already done. Intel had a huge market share and had become a huge company.

Core Architecture was technologically superior to every thing available at the time and AMD could not close the gap in performance for years to come.

As I said before in another thread, most of AMD's failures were due to their own laziness and poor business sense. Intel was always a leader in their own segment (x86 CPUs) and not because they unfairly destroyed AMD. Companies like AMD and a couple of dozen others built their business on making clones/fakes of Intel Processors some with licenses and without. This all changed after Pentium came into the picture and most of the other companies making Intel clones had to stop. AMD managed to survive in the market by implementing their own chips instead of just reverse engineering and cloning Intel chips. In the late 90's and early 2000's, AMD chips were used by assemblers to defraud customers by charging for Original Intel chips and installing AMD Cyrix chips instead. From that stage, they reached their peak with the Athlon 64 architecture which sold very well. But in next 2 years they started taking advantage of their dominant position and over priced their subsequent generations of chips till the Core 2 architecture caught them completely off guard and has since not been able to compete toe to toe till Ryzen.

As for the discount fiasco, nobody was stopping AMD from doing the same, but because AMD was an underdog and Intel was at the top of the market, they utilized the Anti-monopoly laws to prevent Intel from selling their CPU's at a lower cost than them. If AMD were doing the same thing (predatory pricing and massive discounts), nobody would have given it a second look. Its just the law punishing Intel for not giving a handicap to the underdog.

 

[Hades.]

Core Architecture was technologically superior to every thing available at the time and AMD could not close the gap in performance for years to come.

As I said before in another thread, most of AMD's failures were due to their own laziness and poor business sense. Intel was always a leader in their own segment (x86 CPUs) and not because they unfairly destroyed AMD. Companies like AMD and a couple of dozen others built their business on making clones/fakes of Intel Processors some with licenses and without. This all changed after Pentium came into the picture and most of the other companies making Intel clones had to stop. AMD managed to survive in the market by implementing their own chips instead of just reverse engineering and cloning Intel chips. In the late 90's and early 2000's, AMD chips were used by assemblers to defraud customers by charging for Original Intel chips and installing AMD Cyrix chips instead. From that stage, they reached their peak with the Athlon 64 architecture which sold very well. But in next 2 years they started taking advantage of their dominant position and over priced their subsequent generations of chips till the Core 2 architecture caught them completely off guard and has since not been able to compete toe to toe till Ryzen.

As for the discount fiasco, nobody was stopping AMD from doing the same, but because AMD was an underdog and Intel was at the top of the market, they utilized the Anti-monopoly laws to prevent Intel from selling their CPU's at a lower cost than them. If AMD were doing the same thing (predatory pricing and massive discounts), nobody would have given it a second look. Its just the law punishing Intel for not giving a handicap to the underdog.

I agree to most of the points you mentioned but not all.

AMD was the one who brought 64bit instruction set to the consumer market which first Intel cloned and later cross licensed.

AMD was the the first processor manufacturing company which brought dualcore processor first to the consumer market which later intel copied and launched the Core 2 Duo series.

So saying that AMD always copied Intel and didnt invent anything is wrong.

And in the past every processor manufacturing company was copying each other, later on when they start suing each other, they started cross licensing technologies.

If AMD wouldnt have been there in the market, we would have been paying exorbitant prices for the Intel CPUs (which we are already paying for Intel CPUs IMO) and Nvidia GPUs which people enjoy having in their rigs these days.

Just imagine a market without competition.

People who criticize AMD wouldnt have been criticizing them, if Intel processors had starting prices of $1000 or so, they forget that AMD is the only competitor which is keeping Intel in check.

Just having the presence of AMD in the market is so beneficial for the consumers.

AMD always tried to provide the best value to the consumers for every dollar spent on their products. AMD Ryzen processor still kick (Intel's) a$$ when it comes to price performance ratio.

So no matter how far Intel and Nvidia have brought the processing power of CPUs & GPUs, i would still support the underdog AMD so that we can have processors and GPUs in our rigs at affordable prices.

 

[Emrebel]

I agree to most of the points you mentioned but not all.

AMD was the one who brought 64bit instruction set to the consumer market which first Intel cloned and later cross licensed.

AMD was the the first processor manufacturing company which brought dualcore processor first to the consumer market which later intel copied and launched the Core 2 Duo series.

So saying that AMD always copied Intel and didnt invent anything is wrong.

And in the past every processor manufacturing company was copying each other, later on when they start suing each other, they started cross licensing technologies.

If AMD wouldnt have been there in the market, we would have been paying exorbitant prices for the Intel CPUs (which we are already paying for Intel CPUs IMO) and Nvidia GPUs which people enjoy having in their rigs these days.

Just imagine a market without competition.

People who criticize AMD wouldnt have been criticizing them, if Intel processors had starting prices of $1000 or so, they forget that AMD is the only competitor which is keeping Intel in check.

Just having the presence of AMD in the market is so beneficial for the consumers.

AMD always tried to provide the best value to the consumers for every dollar spent on their products. AMD Ryzen processor still kick (Intel's) a$$ when it comes to price performance ratio.

So no matter how far Intel and Nvidia have brought the processing power of CPUs & GPUs, i would still support the underdog AMD so that we can have processors and GPUs in our rigs at affordable prices.

PS other than 10% improvement over previous gen, I dont get how they can force you to buy a new mb even with same socket!!

 

[Hades.]

PS other than 10% improvement over previous gen, I dont get how they can force you to buy a new mb even with same socket!!

I guess because they want to milk the customers as much as they can before its too late.

The entire PC market is now running because of Gamers and Prosumers.

People dont buy PC anymore to consume media, most people do that either on their cellphone or tablet (another dying product).

Intel knows this and to keep on making profit, they keep on releasing new socket every two year to force buyers to upgrade their motherboard which indirectly is keeping the motherboard manufacturing companies alive aswell.

Though consumers are annoyed coz Intel doesnt bring a drastic performance boost with the next generation processors on the same socket coz of which people dont upgrade their CPUs until the CPU reaches end of life or until Intel comes up with processors worth upgrading to ditch their current combo.

 

[jai1611]

Given that these are on the same architecture as the current Kaby Lake processors, I would worry about heating on the 6-core. Even the current 7700k heats up way too much. The X299 platform processors on that architecture share the same problem as well.

 

[Hades.]

Given that these are on the same architecture as the current Kaby Lake processors, I would worry about heating on the 6-core. Even the current 7700k heats up way too much. The X299 platform processors on that architecture share the same problem as well.

Its because Intel uses cheap TIM under the heatspreader.

Even after overclockers begging and pleading, they simply refuse to use a good TIM.

People who delid their Intel processors and apply a better TIM, they see 10-15 degrees improvement in temperature.

AMD uses Indium Solder for Ryzen processor which is a lot better than the cheap TIM Intel uses for its processor. Its funny to see a company whoz not as big as Intel uses a better TIM and doesnt skimp on such a small thing.

They have been using cheap TIM i guess since Ivybridge, if i am not wrong.

 

[vivek.krishnan]

I guess because they want to milk the customers as much as they can before its too late.

True. AMD went a heterogenous route which will someday be useful, just not today. Ryzen has brought AMD back into focus and Intel can no longer sit tight with just 2C/4T and 10%IPC improvements any longer.

 

[Lord Nemesis]

So saying that AMD always copied Intel and didnt invent anything is wrong.

The sole reason they survived is because they managed to build and push out their own designs. I did say that already. However building new architectures is more tedious than cloning what already exists. That is where AMD has been tardy over the years

AMD always tried to provide the best value to the consumers for every dollar spent on their products. AMD Ryzen processor still kick (Intel's) a$$ when it comes to price performance ratio.

That is all only when they have they don't have the edge. You must have seen their fleecing when they had the edge in 2004-2006. Don't think AMD is somehow ethically any better than Intel.

If AMD wouldnt have been there in the market, we would have been paying exorbitant prices for the Intel CPUs (which we are already paying for Intel CPUs IMO) and Nvidia GPUs which people enjoy having in their rigs these days.

Just imagine a market without competition.

People who criticize AMD wouldnt have been criticizing them, if Intel processors had starting prices of $1000 or so, they forget that AMD is the only competitor which is keeping Intel in check.

Yes, but that does not mean that we should put up with AMD's tardiness and glorify them despite that. They had the talent and resources to compete, but squandered it on poor business decisions. We are in this situation because AMD failed at competing all these years. There is no innovation in the market because AMD failed at competing. Blaming Intel for not being able to complete is just plain silly. Intel cannot afford to increase the gap from AMD all these years even if they wanted because of Anti-monopoly legislation which could force Intel to be broken down. They cannot get far way from the feeble competition that AMD was putting out even if they wanted. The top dog too needs competition for their own survival and AMD failed to give it all these years.

As far as pricing goes, Intel can severely undercut AMD's prices if they wanted, but they cannot afford to because they would be slapped with law suits under the anti-monopoly legislation. Expect Intel prices to be always higher than AMD as long as Intel remains the market leader.

Just having the presence of AMD in the market is so beneficial for the consumers.

Mere presence in the market is not enough. They have to compete and AMD failed at that for all these years. Can you imagine releasing a CPU that actually performs poorer than its predecessor. AMD managed that feat. I blame AMD for the lack of any major innovation in the CPU space for so many years.

So no matter how far Intel and Nvidia have brought the processing power of CPUs & GPUs, i would still support the underdog AMD so that we can have processors and GPUs in our rigs at affordable prices.

And I will continue giving my money to whoever offers me the best value at the time whether its Intel, AMD or nvidia. I still think AMD Ryzen has an edge over the Intel 8th gen mainstream platform and I will buy be buying AMD if that holds true by the time I buy, but I am not going to patronize them even in the wake of a inferior product just to keep them alive. I know there are many people who buy from an underdog even if they can get a better product from the competition for the same price, but that is just the company using you.

 

[Darth Vader]

That is all only when they have they don't have the edge. You must have seen their fleecing when they had the edge in 2004-2006. Don't think AMD is somehow ethically any better than Intel.
And I will continue giving my money to whoever offers me the best value at the time whether its Intel, AMD or nvidia. I still think AMD Ryzen has an edge over the Intel 8th gen mainstream platform and I will buy be buying AMD if that holds true by the time I buy, but I am not going to patronize them even in the wake of a inferior product just to keep them alive. I know there are many people who buy from an underdog even if they can get a better product from the competition for the same price, but that is just the company using you.

THIS.
I never understand the blind sentiment towards AMD by all these so-called financial gurus. It sounds so immature when someone calls Intel as Evil and AMD the most ethical company lol.
Unless you have huge investment in AMD stocks, you as consumer shd worry about your money and choose the best product u can. Let the companies figure out what's best for them and how to compete.

Ryzen indeed has a huge adv over Intel KabyLake and we are waiting to see how it'll turn out after coffeelake release. Buy AMD Ryzen if it suits your needs and not coz of your preconceived notion of being ethical over Intel. It makes ZERO sense.

 

[vivek.krishnan]

THIS.
I never understand the blind sentiment towards AMD by all these so-called financial gurus. It sounds so immature when someone calls Intel as Evil and AMD the most ethical company lol.
Unless you have huge investment in AMD stocks, you as consumer shd worry about your money and choose the best product u can. Let the companies figure out what's best for them and how to compete.

Ryzen indeed has a huge adv over Intel KabyLake and we are waiting to see how it'll turn out after coffeelake release. Buy AMD Ryzen if it suits your needs and not coz of your preconceived notion of being ethical over Intel. It makes ZERO sense.

That, I think is a very small minority. The rest will either buy something which is suggested, or the more VFM, or for the performance enthusiasts, they will go blindly with Intel.

I still buy Intel, because its more VFM, while will go with Ryzen because I need a CPU beast.

 

[Hades.]

THIS.
I never understand the blind sentiment towards AMD by all these so-called financial gurus. It sounds so immature when someone calls Intel as Evil and AMD the most ethical company lol.
Unless you have huge investment in AMD stocks, you as consumer shd worry about your money and choose the best product u can. Let the companies figure out what's best for them and how to compete.

Ryzen indeed has a huge adv over Intel KabyLake and we are waiting to see how it'll turn out after coffeelake release. Buy AMD Ryzen if it suits your needs and not coz of your preconceived notion of being ethical over Intel. It makes ZERO sense.

I never suggested Bulldozer or Kaveri CPUs to anybody because at that time Intel processors were the better options.

And i dont have AMD shares, even if i had AMD shares, i still would have suggested the processors which offered best VFM regardless of the manufacturing company of that processor.

AMD Ryzen processors are 10-15 percent behind in IPC performance as compared to current generation Intel processors. If AMD can close the gap by getting our money then why shouldn't we help the company? Ryzen processors are not bad by any means infact they offer better performance per dollar. So if people go ahead and buy Ryzen processors even though they wont be getting the IPC performance as Intel processors, they are not doing charity, they are making the right decision which would help them in the future.

Plus i didn't tell people at gunpoint to buy Ryzen processors, people are smart enough to make their own decisions. If they go with Summitridge platform, they would be having a motherboard which would be supported till 2020.

And yes, i told people to buy Ryzen processors for one more reason and thats, i am sick of meager 5-10 percent better performance that we get from Intel every year.

And if Intel was really so ethical, FTC woudn't have slapped them with 1.2bn dollar fine.

And yes, i would go ahead and say that AMD is not as evil as Intel.

 

[Lord Nemesis]

And if Intel was really so ethical, FTC woudn't have slapped them with 1.2bn dollar fine.

That penalty was because they employed aggressive and predatory pricing tactics while being the top dog. If AMD had been doing most of those things, it wouldn't have mattered. This is just like how Microsoft gets punished for bundling a free browser with the OS, but not Apple when they do the same thing with Safari or even when Linux distributions bundle one specific browser. It has more to do with how anti monopoly regulation is laid out.

As far as ethics go, it is sort of funny that you think some things like that exist in business. So far, I haven't seen a single business in my life that really gives a damn about ethics. They only talk about others when its convenient for them.

And yes, i would go ahead and say that AMD is not as evil as Intel.

^^ That is what is called a delusion, my friend.

 

[Hades.]

That penalty was because they employed aggressive and predatory pricing tactics while being the top dog.

That is just half the truth. They tried to kill the competition by using bad business tactics hence they were slapped with 1.2bn dollar fine by FTC.

Athlon X2 processors literally pwned the Pentium CPUs at that time and AMD had started gaining market share. Intel wasn't such a huge player at that time that Intel is now.

If AMD was as big as Intel at that time and if Intel was a small player like AMD, if AMD had used the same bad tactics, and if AMD had become as big as Intel now, FTC would have slapped AMD with 1.2bn dollar fine aswell.

And as you mentioned that Microsoft gets into trouble for bundling IE/Edge browser but Apple can just get away by bundling the Safari browser. You missed one big point.

Apple or Linux OS market share is not as big as Windows's. Windows OS has almost 85-90% market share. So it is quite obvious FTC would come after whom.

Plus you are trying to prove that FTC is un ethical and only tries to come after big players. You are wrong. They are there to maintain level playing field and to keep healthy competition into the market.

^^ That is what is called a delusion, my friend."

There is nothing delusional about what i said. Thats a fact.

People who want to know why i made the above statement can go ahead and read this article :
https://www.pcper.com/news/General-Tech/Intel-still-hasnt-paid-AMD-12-billion-USD-anti-trust-fine

 

[Fenix]

I dont see anything incremental for me. I am still happy running my 2600k @ 4.8Ghz . Wanted to upgrade to Threadripper 19XX or Ryzen but they are not good for gaming. Running Virtual Machines will help for sure, i run a lot of VM due to my office work. Then thought of i9 but its too expensive for me. But i will see how the reviews and thermals turn out for Coffee lake..

 

[Hades.]

Intel Core i7 8700k & i5 8600k review is out. Embargo broken.

http://wccftech.com/intel-core-i7-8700k-review/

Spoiler Alert : i7 8700k runs very hot but manages to beat Ryzen 1800X in every lightly threaded benchmarks and manages to come very close in multi threaded benchmarks.

 

[atiamd]

So, if I got this right, Ryzen 5 is practically no different than i5 8600k in 4k gaming except in AOTS? If so, R5 1600 (x) will retain the price/performance crown in the mainstream gaming segment. In enthusiast also, I see that i7 is not beating R7 by a huge margin. There is only a couple of frames here and there..

All this means that in the near future, if the devs start using the threads in their games, AMD can very nicely beat Intel.
And, man does that i7 run hot!!!!

Win win for the consumers if this is all correct.

Intel Core i7 8700k & i5 8600k review is out. Embargo broken.

http://wccftech.com/intel-core-i7-8700k-review/

Spoiler Alert : i7 8700k runs very hot but manages to beat Ryzen 1800X in every lightly threaded benchmarks and manages to come very close in multi threaded benchmarks.

 

[Hades.]

i5 8600k would be great for gaming but i noticed that in Cinebench R15 multithreaded test, it gets pounded by R5 1600 and R5 1600X as Ryzen 5 CPUs feature SMT while 8600k doesnt (Hyper Threading).

 

[Jasku]

This has been an enthralling discussion between @Hades. and @Lord Nemesis , great points, I would personally go with any product that give me best bang for my buck. Having said that I ordered the R7 1700 yesterday with primary requirement being gaming. Now wait till Oct 5 to see what Coffee Lake does to gaming over Kaby Lake, I dont think it will be significantly differrent. Hopefully the 10nm chips next year maybe a worthy upgrade.