Intel's Rumored 40th Anniversary Core i7-8086K Listed With A 5GHz Boost Frequency

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.


The article claims that the boost frequency is 5.0GHz. That's pretty quick but not unreasonable. Plenty of 8700Ks have seen 5.0GHz before. Whatever is used to cool those would be equally effective on this chip.
 
Well, either a beastly air cooler that has a 250W TDP rating or water cooling. Personally, if I were getting one I'd go for a custom water loop with a huge radiator and RGB lighting up the wazoo... everything that the original 8086 wasn't. Realistically speaking though, a 240 rad AIO would probably be sufficient.
 
Hopefully this finally includes Intel's hardware fixes for Meltdown/Spectre.. but I would rather they just fix their current product line before launching what is essentially a collector's item.
 


I was able to push my i5 4670k to 5GHz with ~1.5V (can't remember the exact number but it was really close to that, maybe even 1.55V) with an old Thermaltake Frio. It was close to thermal throttling when running benchmarks, but not quite. Yes, this one (8086) has more cores, but it's also not running at 1.5V that's for sure.

If you need to ask, I did it for the lulz while having a pissing contest with friends.
 
Will likely be delivered with the same toothpaste tim AND even worse a new pending release CPU that likely wont even have proper hardware fixes for the already known meltdown/spectre speculative execution that opens up a host of memory extraction problems since its lazy made IE don't have proper security checks before allowing the code to fill the extractable space. At the rate that those are discovered and have to be software mitigated is troublesome and makes my RoI toward and CPU even longer.


A true testament to what happened at intel from the good old x86 days where the product really mattered to them. Today its shortcuts to save money for the share holders and reinvest even less in the r&d towards desktop cpu's.
 
Hotaru251: If it's soldered cooling is no problem. It's no problem to cool the delided chips.

An 8700K at 5 GHz is great competition against the 2700X and I'd say the better deal in performance.
However at $480 if that would be the case rather than at ~the same price point as the 8700K it's uninteresting for me because you could almost just as well get an 8700K and just OC it to 4.9 GHz without delid and be done with it.

An 8 core version would had been very nice if it had about the same price as the 8700K or just above but it would unlikely get that now considering the rest of the processors and this price if that was true. And if it come close to the end of the year then it's so far off anyway.
 
@GIRORO: I don't think it will include any hardware fixes for Meltdown and Spectre. Cascade Lake-X is supposed to have some but that's end of the year stuff. Maybe if the main-stream platform get a new update in say October or so it may contain it but I'd assume it's too early for something like this now.

@RANTOC: 5.0 GHz with a decent air-cooler on the better of the 8700K chips is doable so that's possible. But up in the post here by Tom´s hardware they seem to speculate if it's soldered. Time will tell. To redesign the CPU take some time so not it will likely not contain the hardware fixes. Plus I don't even know if they cover all the defects and is without performance punishment either. I'd assume they may lower performance but maybe they make the CPUs immune of all the attacks.
Since AMD isn't uneffected either it is what it is currently. "Hard to exploit" isn't the same as "impossible to do" and usually when it comes to software at-least not enough to prevent an attack and hence need to be patched.

Intels R&D budget is likely pretty great. Likely larger than AMDs. I don't know if we look at CPUs only but maybe it's larger then too. They definitely can afford to spend more there at-least and would likely do so if necessary.
 


I know its almost as if this is what they produce.... weird.

Next thing you know Chevy and Ford will produce another passenger vehicle.



Even less R&D spending? In 2016 Intel spent $12.74 Billion, yes Billion, on R&D, the next closest was Qualcomm with $5.109 Billion. That's 36% of the top 10 in tech R&D and 23% of worldwide R&D spending.

In 2017 they spent $13.1 Billion in R&D and Qualcomm dropped to $3.45 Billion.

Just to do an even comparison, AMD spent 1.160 $billion in 2017, Intel spent nearly 13x that of AMD. To be fair AMD no longer has FABs but they still have to do R&D on CPUs and GPUs. I am willing to bet Intel still spent more on CPU R&D than AMDs overall R&D.

I think Intel spent plenty on R&D. No tech company out spends them nor do I think any of them will in the near future.
 
@jimmysmitty

Just because Intel is investing a lot in R&D, doesn't mean much of that that is going to consumer PCs. Their CPUs have changed so little in the past 5 years that people are no longer upgrading for a faster CPU, but because they want a modern chipset.
 


The Mesh Core to Core communication design in Skylake X begs to differ. It is vastly different than QPI or DMI and that's a CPU from the last 5 years.

Sure they are not investing all that $13 billion into CPUs but they still invest a lot into it. Remember this includes servers and data centers which they provide CPUs in and those new innovations eventually trickle down to consumers.
 
I know what you mean. One of my 1st computer jobs I would take IBM PCs with the 4.77 Mhz CPU and remove the 10MB Mini-scribe HDD and replace them with 60MB model from a San Diego company called Emerald. They also supplied a new chip for the IBM PC I could pull out the 4.77 and pop in a 8Mhz model and speed the PC. Later IBM started soldering those chips in so we couldn't replace them any more. Ah those were the days, 20MB hard drives were $500.

I still can't believe the IBM PC killed the Victor 9000, which had a 8086 CPU, 2x 1.2MB Floppies, 128KB RAM with MS DOS, UNIX, CPM86, and Basic support. It looked nice all black it was a very cool machine in the day. Way better than IBMs 1st offering which everyone agreed was a huge step backwards. The Victor 9000 was around $4K and it took IBM 2 generations just to put out a model to equal it, go figure.

 

Perhaps they could set the base clock at 4.77 GHz. Then, it'll probably need a LGA 2066 socket, and we all remember how beloved Kaby Lake-X was...

The problem with 4.77 GHz turbo is that it's barely higher than i7-8700K's 4.7 GHz turbo.
 
This could be an interesting chip, if it's the got the following characteristics. It's highly binned(top 15% or so of 8700K capable chips). It's TIM is solder. It has a turbo speed of 5+ ghz. Take away any of those characteristics and you're best off buying a stock 8700k and hoping you get a good one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom