Overclock.net banner

Thinking about the 8600K

5K views 48 replies 14 participants last post by  QuadDamage 
#1 ·
The 8700K won't be a huge difference for gaming/streaming, right? So what will be the big benefit of having real cores over HT cores? Noticeable? Because 4/8 when compared to the 7700K vs 6/6 of the 8600K is only the real cores. Will that be noticeable? Or should I spring for the 8700K?
 
#2 ·
It depends on price and need. Assuming the i5-8600K will be priced around $250, you might be better off going Ryzen if you're trying to stream on a budget. We won't actually know until we see benchmarks next month. As for how much the extra threads will matter, quite a bit. Quite simply your system will have more resources available and more resources is rarely a bad thing.

I suspect the i7-8700K will be a better streaming CPU than the R7 lineup due to an IPC advantage. I think the i5-8600K will be a better gaming CPU than the R5 1600 or 1600X, but the Ryzen offerings should be better streaming CPUs since they have double the threads.
 
#4 ·
If you are going to stream the 8700k will be a huge upgrade from what you have now. The extra 2 cores should help you game and stream at the same time but if you want something bullet proof and don't want a 2ed streaming PC. Get a nice capture card Aver media gave me about an extra 10 to 20 fps in games when i streamed over without it
 
#5 ·
A capture card won't do anything for you if you're streaming PC games from a single computer. You need one for a two-PC streaming setup or streaming console.
 
#6 ·
A capture card won't do anything for you if you're streaming PC games from a single computer

This is incorrect

^^ I use to live stream for 4 years on both twitch and youtube and something like this
https://www.amazon.com/AVerMedia-Streaming-Definition-Hardware-C985/dp/B007UXJ6LE

IS HUGE for a single PC setup; I free'ed up a ton of cpu load by streaming off the capture card over a gaming capture or windows capture I had before and that gave me more fps in game as it wasn't being used as a single streaming setup

If you are not a huge streamer and doing it for fun the 8700k will be more then enough to game capture and game at the same time with a program like obs
 
#7 ·
I can't imagine a scenario where a capture card will help you on a single-PC streaming setup. It isn't capturing anything. Your CPU or GPU is still doing the encoding.
 
#8 ·
I imagine ryzen will still have a better lead for streaming vrs the 8600k due to the extra physical cores. However the 8600/8700k will be a good well rounded choice for both gaming/streaming due to its higher ipc.
It makes at least for a more sensible argument vrs ryzen for streaming

However If your very serious about streaming then the 1700 at its price will still be the better value for streaming.
 
#10 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horsemama1956 View Post

Pretty sure the capture card does the encoding, unless you have a crappy one. That's what they do, capture and encode.
But on a single-PC streaming setup, the capture card isn't capturing anything ...
 
#11 ·
If leaks are true, then I don't see the 8700K beating fair square the R7 1700 at anything that is not cherry picked. I mean, that would be only possible if Intel somehow managed to get over 17%+ ipc, which is very unlikely.

The 7700K has a 30%ish single core clock advantage over the R7 1700, but only manages to get 33% higher score with single core on Cinebench R15.

i7 8700K totals 25.2GHz at stock

R7 1700 totals 28.8GHz at stock

Also, the R7's do scale well in most MT applications.

Anyways, If Intel somehow manages to get that a 15% IPC increment then some Core I7 7800X and 7820X owners would be very, very upset.
 
#12 ·
Have you checked gaming+streaming benchmarks of ryzen vs intel? Ryzen loses less fps from streaming even compared to 8 core intel.
In case of 8700k vs r7, i think intel will do better in gaming but streaming ryzen may win, or maybe it depends on games you stream.
8600k vs r5 i think ryzen will be winner for streaming.
 
#13 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by virpz View Post

i7 8700K totals 25.2GHz at stock

R7 1700 totals 28.8GHz at stock
What?
 
#15 ·
I'm still confused on how a CPU totals that clock speed. You don't add the clock speed of the individual cores. That isn't how processing works.
 
#16 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by chessmyantidrug View Post

I'm still confused on how a CPU totals that clock speed. You don't add the clock speed of the individual cores. That isn't how processing works.
While that's not exactly how MT scales you can paint a good picture about the future.
Coffee Lake ? 5+ IPC at best, and I'm not talking about the kind of 5% that sums to 50% after ten generations if you know what I mean.
 
#17 ·
I don't know what you mean. You pulled random numbers out of this air to illustrate a point that's still vague.

The great thing about Coffee Lake has nothing to do with IPC gain. That will be negligible as it's just further optimized Skylake. The great thing is more cores across the entire lineup and better multi-threaded performance.
 
#18 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by virpz View Post

If leaks are true, then I don't see the 8700K beating fair square the R7 1700 at anything that is not cherry picked. I mean, that would be only possible if Intel somehow managed to get over 17%+ ipc, which is very unlikely.

The 7700K has a 30%ish single core clock advantage over the R7 1700, but only manages to get 33% higher score with single core on Cinebench R15.

i7 8700K totals 25.2GHz at stock

R7 1700 totals 28.8GHz at stock

Also, the R7's do scale well in most MT applications.

Anyways, If Intel somehow manages to get that a 15% IPC increment then some Core I7 7800X and 7820X owners would be very, very upset.
I feel the i7-8700K will just be i7-7800x with 4.7GHz all core on average (maybe with delid?), dual channel RAM, and none of the mesh architecture (so a i7-6700K with 2 extra cores).
The major advantage to the i7-8700K will be much cheaper motherboards.

Also the older Noctua NH-U14S & NH-D14 fit on the Asrock Z370 Taichi , Z370 Extreme4 , ASRock Z370M-ITX/ac .

edit: However, it remains to be seen how many boards will come with Thunderbolt rather than Thudnerbolt boards as an add-on. Asus Z270-A was a better deal because of it.
 
#19 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by chessmyantidrug View Post

I don't know what you mean. You pulled random numbers out of this air to illustrate a point that's still vague.

The great thing about Coffee Lake has nothing to do with IPC gain. That will be negligible as it's just further optimized Skylake. The great thing is more cores across the entire lineup and better multi-threaded performance.
Wait for the launch and official benchmarks, you may figure it out.
 
#20 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaC View Post

I feel the i7-8700K will just be i7-7800x with 4.7GHz all core on average (maybe with delid?), dual channel RAM, and none of the mesh architecture (so a i7-6700K with 2 extra cores).
The major advantage to the i7-8700K will be much cheaper motherboards.
I don't know bro, the 8600K is a hard beat... I think the 8700K is going to be what Intel should do instead of what Intel can do. People claiming 10, 20 , 25% IPC increase LOL. I think that saying it will beat clock for clock the R7 1700 at everything is...well, unlikely to say at least.
 
#21 ·
8600K is the obvious choice for gaming, 8700K will be interesting if you game + do more at the same time (like streaming with software encoding), and for heavy MT work.
for pure gaming it's probably not worth the extra cost, unless maybe if you are going to keep the CPU for a long time.
 
#22 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by virpz View Post

Wait for the launch and official benchmarks, you may figure it out.
Benchmarks don't change the stock clock, which appears to be 3.7 GHz. You pulled numbers randomly out of thin air. This is why I'm confused and you've done nothing explain. You don't multiply clock speed by the number of cores or threads. That isn't how it works.
 
#23 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by chessmyantidrug View Post

Benchmarks don't change the stock clock, which appears to be 3.7 GHz. You pulled numbers randomly out of thin air. This is why I'm confused and you've done nothing explain. You don't multiply clock speed by the number of cores or threads. That isn't how it works.
Ok.
I'm not really in the mood to explain anything. You can assume that what you said is what I said and you are right.
 
#24 ·
I'm merely asking you to explain your claims. It's pretty clear it's not a matter of you not wanting to explain, but rather an inability to explain because what you said makes no sense. If you're going to attempt to be informative, at least be correct. Spouting out incorrect information helps no one.
 
#25 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by virpz View Post

I don't know bro, the 8600K is a hard beat... I think the 8700K is going to be what Intel should do instead of what Intel can do. People claiming 10, 20 , 25% IPC increase LOL. I think that saying it will beat clock for clock the R7 1700 at everything is...well, unlikely to say at least.
4.3GHz all core should get at least 1200 Cinebench R15 multicore.

https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/intel-core-i7-8700k-benchmarks.html

https://elchapuzasinformatico.com/2017/09/core-i7-8700k-core-i5-8600k-3dmark-vs-ryzen-7/


https://videocardz.com/72471/first-intel-core-i7-8700k-benchmarks-leaked

Comparing the geekbench to 4GHz Ryzen 7 1800X:
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/2191993?baseline=3928583
The only decisive win for the overclocked Ryzen chip is AES encryption and memory copy for single core performance
Multicore numbers , the only major lead Intel's Coffee Lake has is in LLVM

4GHz R7 1700 on CH VI Hero https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/2558757?baseline=3928583
It seems Ryzen 7 1700 @ 4GHz has a fighting chance if tuned

https://www.3dcenter.org/news/weitere-vorab-benchmarks-zum-core-i7-8700k-aufgetaucht


The issue is in non-parallelized when a main thread holds up the other threads.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top