Intel Coffee Lake (8th & 9th Gen Core CPUs) + Skylake-X Refresh & W-3175X MegaThread! FAQ and Resources

[-Fran-]

I have to disagree a bit there. I will give Intel the benefit of the doubt here, since there are 2 important things going on at the same time:

1.- First mainstream 6-core parts at old (or close-ish to) price points.
2.- People that was basically on the edge of upgrading to Zen was waiting to see what Intel would do. Intel gave them the little push they needed.

I will give Intel the benefit of the doubt, because they played it "by the book" in the good sense in this case. Although they have tried, we can't blame them for not trying to put Covfefe Lake ahead of time and actually succeeding (cut me some slack on this, lol) in doing it.

Cheers!

 

[manleysteele]

Coffee Lake 8700k's are in stock at Newegg right now.

 

[DRagor]

I think, without knowing how many 8th gen CPUs have been sold, we can't determine if stock shortages are caused by demand higher then usual or supply lower then usual (or both).

 

[juanrga]

Intel already was using a primary assembly line for the CFL series. The new assembly line is devoted to only some models, not to all. So it seems that Intel is increasing production of those CFL models that have higher demand than expected.

 

[goldstone77]

Intel Core i7-8700 Coffee Lake 6-Core 3.2 GHz (4.6 GHz Turbo) LGA 1151 (300 Series) 65W BX80684I78700 Desktop Processor Intel UHD Graphics 630
$359.99

Locked CPU, but not far off from the unlocked K models. Price is a bargain compared to the what they charged for the Kabey Lake quad cores.

 

[vMax]

So I have the 8600K and it is a great CPU for the money running cool (albeit on a 360 AIO) at 4.8GHz @1.278v in th mid to high 20's C idle and 60 degrees C load on all the usual stress test P95 v26.6, RealBench and Intel XTU. The positive is that it was super easy to setup with absolutly no problems running 4.8 out of the box with XMP running. 5GHz was easy to but required 1.348v which I dont want to live with 24/7.

Those for AMD and those for Intel should all be happy...AMD in Ryzen have finally brought a CPU to the market that actually does a great job..It may not have the IPC of Intel but thats not the point, it strenghts lie in the productivity arena and it will happily game with the best...It was not Intel's fault that AMD did not have a good CPU to challenge Intel for many years, now that they have, it has pushed Intel to realease Coffee Lake which can only be a good thing as we are now finally getting real compition. With Ryzen 2, intel will launch there next CPU's..we the consumer win....nuff said!

 

[YoAndy]

Spoiler

$190 for a quad core (unlocked or not) in 2017 is absolutely awful value for money , oh yeah + another $30 for a cooler

So you are saying that the Core i3 8350K @$190 is awful value for money when is actually on average 31% faster than the Ryzen 5 1500X @$170, and overclocked at single core is actually on average 38% faster than the Ryzen 5 1500X.

If we talk more about gaming and the actual raw quad core performance that the i3 is offering, the i3 is the way to go for the ones that can spend a bit more for the extra performance.

I think you have to consider the cost to cool the i3-8350K($190) to reach 5GHz ~$100, and the price of the motherboards that support it the value proposition drops off. Better off getting the i5-8400($199) from a value point of view right now as well as future proofing just looking at it from the Intel side of things. But value wise that's a lot of money to invest in a world that is increasingly more multi-threaded. It really depends on what you are trying to accomplish when building a PC as too what you want to spend your money on. Are you using a 60HZ monitor? More than stable 60FPS becomes purely academic. Are you using a 1060 video card? If so you will be hard pressed to see a major change in FPS that will change the gaming experience compared to other CPU's this same price segment. On the other side of the fence you have 1600($199) and 1700($299) both comes with a coolers, and cheaper motherboard options. I can't see the i3-8350K beating the i5-8400, 1600, or 1700 when it comes to best bang for your buck considering the extra cost for cooling.

A really big percent of people buying new CPU's are actually upgrading, meaning they already have coolers.First of all the K series of processors are aimed to overclockers same with the X for Ryzen. People that argue about having to spend money on a cooler on a K rated processors make no sense to me( is like complaining that Ferrari needs premium gas) I personally have a handful of coolers laying around including liquid coolers, sometimes I give them to friends for free. Same with all the enthusiasts that I know, they all have coolers laying around. When we get together and talk about CPU's I HAVE NEVER HEARD ANYONE COMPLAINING THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO GET A CPU THEY LIKE BECAUSE IT NEEDS A $20 COOLER. I mostly hear these complains from people in forums and reviewers.

I personally never hear people complain about getting something better for cheaper! If you have the i5-8400($200) running circles around 8350K(190), and it can do this running on a $30 cooler why would you ever buy the 8350K and a ~$100 cooler? Not everyone has access to your cooler farm(I don't own a single liquid cooler), so it absolutely has to be calculated in the total cost of ownership.

Few Correct things, Few wrong things. but wait a min for gaming the i5 8400 is not running circles around the i3 8350k and at 5GHz is 24% faster(single core speed), the i3 is a beast of a quad core , but the 8350k is not aimed at value, is not a value CPU, and prize wise AMD doesn't offer anything better than Intel at 200. But yes at 200 the 6 core i5 is a good value CPU

 

[Olle P]

Dual-core i3 (Kabylake) is above quad-core RyZen 3 and RyZen 5 models and close to some six-core RyZen as the R5 1600...

... as long as you pair them with a very high end video card and run it with low end settings.
Using a video card half the price while turning up the image settings will even things out quite a bit...

 

[Hellfire13]

I think the 8100 is the best value quad core right now. And the next best value would be 8400 hexa core. If it comes down to clock speed, the 8350k is indeed pretty good but it basically replaces the 7600k with just a different naming convention.
Paired with a b360 board, the 8100 will be real winner replacing the Ryzen 3 lineup in the budget segment.

 

[urbancamper]

Sounds about right. Stores here sell out of them within a couple of hours at most, and they're not selling golden chips.

I think I may have gotten a golden chip. I am running at 5ghz on 1.35 vcore. LLC pushs it upwards a bit on load to 1.36. I am sure if I had better cooling I could do 5.2ghz. But my h100i 2.0 was pushing close to the 90s on prime 95 and it was making me nervous that it was. This is at load while playing BF1.

 

[vMax]

I think you might be right...what a great vcore!!!

 

[goldstone77]

CPU of the Year: Intel Core i5-8400
By Jarred Walton, PC Gamer 2 days ago
2017 was the year of the CPU, but when the dust settles, this is our favorite.

More cores is the easy way to improve performance, and Intel gives us exactly that with its 8th Generation Coffee Lake processors—50 percent more cores than the previous generation, to be precise. But it's not just about cores, because clockspeed and per-core performance still matter, especially for games. While the Core i5-8400 has a base clockspeed that's relatively low (2.8GHz), on all the Z370 boards I've tried the chip runs at 3.8GHz when fully loaded, and up to 4.0GHz on two cores. Even better, it costs less than $200 and doesn't need any exotic cooling.
In performance tests, the i5-8400 basically matches the previous generation i7-7700K (running stock) in games and applications. It's clocked a bit lower, but the extra cores make up the difference. The only reason to go beyond the i5-8400 for a gaming PC is if you're thinking of running multiple GPUs, something we don't generally recommend, or if you like overclocking. For that, the Core i7-8700K is the way to go, but at double the price it's not something generally needed (and you'll still need to bring your own cooling solution).
Of course we have to give an honorable mention to AMD's Ryzen and Threadripper processors, without which we likely wouldn't have Intel's Coffee Lake or Core i9. Intel is still the best CPU choice for gaming, but the Zen architecture is a huge leap forward in AMD processor performance. 2017 was the year of the CPU, with five new platform launches and over 40 new individual CPU models—and that's not even counting mobile and specialized chips. It's the most excitement we've seen since the heady days of the race to 1GHz in 1999.

What does 2018 hold for us? There are rumors of an improved Ryzen architecture, 8-core Intel parts for the 300-series platform, and even processors with greatly improved integrated graphics. I'm not sure it can top 2017, but next year's CPUs should continue to bring more excitement to your PC's core component.

 

[goldstone77]

I just wanted to post some comparison benchmarks of the i5-8400 and Ryzen. Some will have the 2600K.
Note Ryzen with 3200MHz RAM as well.

Spoiler

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3157-intel-i5-8600k-review-overclocking-vs-8700k-8400/page-2
https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/2875-amd-r5-1600x-1500x-review-fading-i5-argument/page-4

Edit: Edit: this is not an apples to apples comparison 1 is using a 1080Ti vs. 1080.

 

[juanrga]

I just wanted to post some comparison benchmarks of the i5-8400 and Ryzen.

You can find a resume here

Note they are geometric means, which reduces the gaps.

 

[goldstone77]

I just wanted to post some comparison benchmarks of the i5-8400 and Ryzen.

Spoiler

You can find a resume here

Note they are geometric means, which reduces the gaps.

The average FPS for the i5-8400 lags behind the 8700K ~10-~22 FPS on average depending on title, which is still very good. It's hard to find in stock, but when available it offers great performance out of the box proving that a low clock CPU with 6 cores 6 threads is very capable of providing 144+FPS in most games when paired with a 1080Ti. It also makes a very good desktop CPU. With a sub $200 price tag it offers amazing performance in gaming when compared to the 8700K. You can buy 2 i5-8400's, and a extra value meal at McDonalds for the price of the 8700K. And that doesn't take into account the ~$100 cooler you would need to cool the 8700K. The 8400 runs cool with a cheap $15-20 cooler. The value of the CPU will grow when cheaper motherboards are available, but for even now with a ~$120 board it is the best buy of the 8th gen line up, and in my opinion deserves the reward with an honorable mention going to the 1600, but the 1600 requires ~3200MHz RAM to be competitive which offsets the motherboard cost of the 8400. The 8400 is the true winner.

 

[YoAndy]

Coffee Lake, Cannon Lake and beyond: Intel's next chips
https://www.cnet.com/news/kaby-lake-coffee-lake-and-beyond-what-we-know-about-the-next-intel-chips/

 

[juanrga]

The empire strikes back: Full Coffee Lake availability catapults Intel back to No 1.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/7n78rw/the_empire_strikes_back_full_coffee_lake/

 

[DRagor]

The empire strikes back: Full Coffee Lake availability catapults Intel back to No 1.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/7n78rw/the_empire_strikes_back_full_coffee_lake/

Interesting that according to that chart, 8600K sells much better then 8400 ...

 

[TechyInAZ]

The empire strikes back: Full Coffee Lake availability catapults Intel back to No 1.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/7n78rw/the_empire_strikes_back_full_coffee_lake/

Interesting that according to that chart, 8600K sells much better then 8400 ...

Typically k sku's always sell better than their non k counterparts.

 

[juanrga]

The empire strikes back: Full Coffee Lake availability catapults Intel back to No 1.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/7n78rw/the_empire_strikes_back_full_coffee_lake/

Interesting that according to that chart, 8600K sells much better then 8400 ...

Amazon best-selling list shows the same. The 8600k is #5. The 8400 is on a much lower position.

 

[juanrga]

8th gen MCM i7 added to Intel database: i7-8809G Processor

3.1GHz 4-core 8-thread Kabylake plus "Radeon RX Vega M GH Graphics" on a 100W Target Package TDP. Dual-channel 2400MHz.

Turbo is not mentioned, but it would be 4.1GHz probably. The CPU alone would be 35--45W leaving 65--55W for the Radeon graphics.

 

[goldstone77]

8th gen MCM i7 added to Intel database: i7-8809G Processor

3.1GHz 4-core 8-thread Kabylake plus "Radeon RX Vega M GH Graphics" on a 100W Target Package TDP. Dual-channel 2400MHz.

Turbo is not mentioned, but it would be 4.1GHz probably. The CPU alone would be 35--45W leaving 65--55W for the Radeon graphics.

This is for a laptop?

 

[-Fran-]

8th gen MCM i7 added to Intel database: i7-8809G Processor

3.1GHz 4-core 8-thread Kabylake plus "Radeon RX Vega M GH Graphics" on a 100W Target Package TDP. Dual-channel 2400MHz.

Turbo is not mentioned, but it would be 4.1GHz probably. The CPU alone would be 35--45W leaving 65--55W for the Radeon graphics.

This is for a laptop?

From the original leak, it makes me think that would be their initial target: a "fat" laptop. If the 100W consumption is to be believed, then dissipating that much will require intricate design for laptops. That being said, nothing prevents Intel from putting this thing into desktop, but I guess it makes less sense? A NUC though, that would be the perfect place to put it.

Happy new year as well everyone.

Cheers!

 

[goldstone77]

8th gen MCM i7 added to Intel database: i7-8809G Processor

3.1GHz 4-core 8-thread Kabylake plus "Radeon RX Vega M GH Graphics" on a 100W Target Package TDP. Dual-channel 2400MHz.

Turbo is not mentioned, but it would be 4.1GHz probably. The CPU alone would be 35--45W leaving 65--55W for the Radeon graphics.

This is for a laptop?

From the original leak, it makes me think that would be their initial target: a "fat" laptop. If the 100W consumption is to be believed, then dissipating that much will require intricate design for laptops. That being said, nothing prevents Intel from putting this thing into desktop, but I guess it makes less sense? A NUC though, that would be the perfect place to put it.

Happy new year as well everyone.

Cheers!

I wouldn't be mad to have this little guy! The smaller the form factor the more I like it!

 

[juanrga]

It is obvious that the 100W chip will be used in desktops. One can also see that the i7-8809G is listed in a table of all the latest unlocked desktop processors from the 91W i3-8350K until the 165W i9-7980XE.