Coffee Lake desktop benchmarks leaked online

By midian182 ยท 23 replies
Sep 12, 2017
Post New Reply
  1. Last month Intel unveiled the first of its eighth generation Core CPUs. Many expected the company to reveal the hotly anticipated Coffee Lake, but the first chips of this generation turned out to be a Kaby Lake refresh: four 15W U-series mobile CPUs built on a refined version of the 14 nm+ process.

    It seems Intel fans waiting for Coffee Lake, which uses a further refined 14 nm++ process, can expect to get their hands on them as soon as next month, with October 5th being the rumored launch date. Alleged leaked benchmarks for the desktop processors have already hit the web.

    Montreal-based tech YouTuber Karl Morin gave us the Coffee Lake scores when he ran across an HP Omen PC sporting an Intel Core-i7 8700K at the HWBot event. It didn’t have an attached monitor, so Morin grabbed one and ran Cinebench. He also ran some CPU-Z multi- and single-threaded tests.

    Intel’s six core/12 thread CPU scored 1230 points in the Cinebench R15 multi-threaded test and 196 points for single-core performance. In our own Cinebench benchmarks, that places the 8700K above the four core/eight thread Core-i7 7700K (941) but just below AMD’s six core/12 thread Ryzen 5 1600X (1260) for multi-threaded performance. That single-thread score, meanwhile, is also an improvement over Kaby Lake.

    In the CPU-Z tests, the Core-i7 8700K scored 13,680 points for multi-thread performance and 2345 in the single thread results.

    Another leak comes courtesy of the Geekbench database. It paired EVGA’s upcoming Z370 motherboard with an 8700K to come up with a single-core score of 5773 and a multi-core score of 24,620. This puts it ahead of the both the Core i7-7700K (5725 single, 18,800 multi) and the Ryzen 5 1600X (4180 single, 18,650 multi). Even the Ryzen 7 1800X only manages a 4240 single-threaded score and 21,800 with all 16 threads in use.

    As usual you can expect TechSpot's full review with tons of benchmarks, productivity and gaming comparison tests when time comes.

    Permalink to story.

     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 12, 2017
  2. Manuel Diego

    Manuel Diego TS Member Posts: 21   +13

    "In the CPU-Z tests, the Core-i7 8700K scored 13,680 points for multi-thread performance and 2345 in the single thread results."

    What test is that? If I open CPU-z and go to the Bench tab, my scores (with a Ryzen 1700 @ stock) are 360 in single threaded and 3862 in multithreaded, that's an order of magnitude less than these reported scores, that doesn't sound right to me...
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2017
    H3llion likes this.
  3. R00sT3R

    R00sT3R TS Member Posts: 24   +20

    You need to use an earlier version of CPU-Z, they changed it to take account of differences between Intel & Ryzen architecture.

    My i5 4690K (4.6Ghz) gets 508 & 2016 in the newer version.
     
    Reehahs likes this.
  4. Manuel Diego

    Manuel Diego TS Member Posts: 21   +13

    I'm using the latest version, 1.80.2.x64, what version should I use to get comparable results to the scores mentioned in the article?
     
  5. Manuel Diego

    Manuel Diego TS Member Posts: 21   +13

    I'm also trying to get the source of this news, but the link under the name "Karl Morin" is the same as the previous one in the article and leads to a Techspost article, not the youtuber.
     
  6. CaptainTom

    CaptainTom TS Maniac Posts: 282   +121

    Unless it is priced below $300, this is a pathetic Cpu.

    It only matches the 7700K in single core by utilizing a higher single core boost speed. I wonder if it will even really be better at gaming than the 7700K, and if it is by like what - 5%?
     
  7. OcelotRex

    OcelotRex TS Maniac Posts: 460   +239

    Sure it will - it's got "moar" cores. Those cores are faster than Ryzen cores so it will be the best.
     
  8. Manuel Diego

    Manuel Diego TS Member Posts: 21   +13

    Do you think the new 8700K, single threaded, will be more than 4 times faster than your i5, 2345 vs 508? The CPU-Z scores in the article cannot possibly be correct.
     
  9. dirtyferret

    dirtyferret TS Guru Posts: 322   +337

    I wouldn't call it pathetic but I would say if priced at $300, most gamers with a modern high end CPU (Intel i5/i7 or Ryzen 1600+) would be better served spending their $300 on a video card. I also doubt it will offer any gaming improvement for 1080p 60hz gamers compared to the intel i7-6700/7700 since CPU demands in practically all games don't call for more then four cores regardless of what some gamers want to believe and hope for...
     
  10. Kotters

    Kotters TS Maniac Posts: 257   +168

    If it has lower clock speeds and IPC than the 7700k (and thus, weaker single core), the 7700k will continue to be the absolute best in gaming.

    Whether 150FPS will be worth it over 140FPS (while running at 1080p and with a Titan XP because testing) to get a 7700k over an 8700k is left as an exercise for the reader.
     
  11. wiyosaya

    wiyosaya TS Evangelist Posts: 1,734   +643

    Was anyone really expecting a greater improvement out of Intel with this rev? Seems like par for Intel's course to me. Perhaps Zen will inspire them to make real improvements in their CPUs going forward.
     
  12. sasat

    sasat TS Member

    I'm using 6 core i7-5820K for 4 years now and Cinebench R15/CPU-Z results are exactly the same as 8700K, 4 years and 0% of improvement? Bravo Intel, applause descendible to plaudits :)
     
  13. CaptainTom

    CaptainTom TS Maniac Posts: 282   +121

    I mean at the very least I was hoping their IPC would scale well across 6 cores. Unfortunately it seems there is a noticeable loss in per-core IPC once more than 4 are used at the same time.

    You have to admit it would be cool if we could get 10% higher performance than a 1600 across 6 total cores - it would have been a gaming monster. Lol I just can't believe how unprepared Intel was (and still is) for Zen.
     
  14. CaptainTom

    CaptainTom TS Maniac Posts: 282   +121

    No they are not. It loses to a 1600X in Multi-threaded apps (and the 1600X is clocked quite a bit lower). It is abundantly clear that Intel is not as efficient as AMD at spreading it's loads across multiple cores.
     
  15. OcelotRex

    OcelotRex TS Maniac Posts: 460   +239

    My response was to your question:
    Then you respond with productivity apps.
    [​IMG]
     
  16. CaptainTom

    CaptainTom TS Maniac Posts: 282   +121

    If it loses in productivity apps in muti-threading, then long term it will NOT be better at gaming genius. It loses to the 7700K in IPC, and it can't beat the 1600X When all cores are loaded up - it will not be the gaming monster everyone was hoping for. We are talking about a 10% jump over the 7700K MAXIMUM.

    Oh and BTW I brought up productivity apps because those are the only leaked benchmarks we have so far Einstein.
     
  17. OcelotRex

    OcelotRex TS Maniac Posts: 460   +239

    Since you know the future do you mind sharing the winning lotto numbers and sports results?

    Let's Recap:
    • You ask a question about gaming
    • Then I sarcastically respond
    • Then out of left field you bring up completely irrelevant, other software to support your position?
    Seems legit...
     
  18. dirtyferret

    dirtyferret TS Guru Posts: 322   +337

    Probably best to wait until reviews are posted rather then looking at one or two leaked tests that may or may not be legit. Plus you should never argue with a genius, especially one named Einstein.
     
    OcelotRex likes this.
  19. CaptainTom

    CaptainTom TS Maniac Posts: 282   +121

    You mean the guy who flamed me with a goal post GIF based on his misunderstanding of a leak is the smart one here? Alright buddy.

    All we have to go off right now are these leaks. IF they are true - everything I stated is correct. IF they are not, then who cares? We were running off of bad information.
     
  20. OcelotRex

    OcelotRex TS Maniac Posts: 460   +239

    You were right - those new spreadsheet simulator productivity app games are gonna run awesome. Between that and the new Cenebench you're choices are going to confirmed so so soon!
     
  21. CaptainTom

    CaptainTom TS Maniac Posts: 282   +121

    It's all just estimates based on the leaks we have buddy. Feel free to screenshot me and say "I told you so" if I am wrong - but I won't be ;).

    At launch the 8700K will be like 10% better than the 7700K at gaming (max), and within 1.5 years the 1600X will be around the same performance.
     
  22. OcelotRex

    OcelotRex TS Maniac Posts: 460   +239

    So you're agreeing with me then? Why were you arguing and throwing out production software red herrings then?

    As to 1.5 years keep beating that drum; it hasn't happened so many times even if you are right it'd be the first time after many years of being wrong.
     
  23. CaptainTom

    CaptainTom TS Maniac Posts: 282   +121

    No I am not lol. A 5-10% increase in CURRENT games means nothing. Once games fully utilize Zen it will just leapfrog right over.

    Those "red herrings" were examples of what happens when a program fully utilizes Ryzen...
     
  24. OcelotRex

    OcelotRex TS Maniac Posts: 460   +239

    That's an opinion. OBJECTIVELY 5-10% is better. Your bias is showing.

    And there it is. It's the same dead horse being beat over and over, and over, and over.....

    This time you (and many others) may be right that Ryzen will be one AMD product to retake the mantle or throne but it's always right around the corner, a few years in the distance. While the optimism is cute I continue to be skeptical until proven wrong. With the resources against AMD from competitors you can expect any victory to be short lived or moral at best.
     

Similar Topics

Add New Comment

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...