Intel will discontinue its 8th-gen Coffee Lake CPU line-up this year

Polycount

Posts: 2,439   +549
Staff member

The discontinuation notices went out yesterday, but the actual end-of-life date for all affected products won't come until mid-December. Beyond that point, distributors will no longer be able to place orders for new 8th-gen parts. The range of discontinued products includes everything from the Intel Celeron G4900 to the enthusiast-grade i7 8700K.

While there could be any number of reasons that Intel has chosen now to begin discontinuing these processors, their age is likely the most prominent reason. 9th-gen Intel CPUs have been around for quite some time now, and the company has already begun to ship out select 10th-gen products, such as the i9-10900K, to early adopters and reviewers.

If you don't have the inclination to snag some of these newer chips, don't fret about this news too much. As we said, retailers have until December to order 8th-gen CPUs, and it will likely be quite some time before those stocks are fully depleted. Further, as Tech Radar points out, we might see some 9th-gen chips get price reductions in the near future, as Intel streamlines its manufacturing processes and drops aging products from its catalog.

Tom's Hardware has helpfully compiled a full list of soon-to-be-discontinued products, which you can see below:

  • Intel® Celeron® G4900 Processor
  • Intel® Celeron® Processor G4900T
  • Boxed Intel® Celeron® Processor G4900
  • Boxed Intel® Celeron® Processor G4920
  • Boxed Intel® Core™ i3-8100 Processor
  • Boxed Intel® Core™ i3-8300 Processor
  • Boxed Intel® Core™ i3-8350K Processor
  • Boxed Intel® Core™ i5-8400 Processor
  • Boxed Intel® Core™ i5-8500 Processor
  • Boxed Intel® Core™ i5-8600 Processor
  • Boxed Intel® Core™ i5-8600K Processor
  • Boxed Intel® Core™ i7-8086K Processor
  • Boxed Intel® Core™ i7-8700 Processor
  • Boxed Intel® Core™ i7-8700K Processor
  • Boxed Intel® Pentium® Gold G5400 Processor
  • Intel® Pentium® Gold G5400 Processor
  • Intel® Pentium® Gold G5400T Processor
  • Intel® Pentium® Gold G5500 Processor
  • Intel® Pentium® Gold G5500T Processor
  • Intel® Pentium® Gold G5600 Processor
  • Intel® Pentium® Gold G5600F Processor
  • Intel® Pentium® Gold G5600T Processor
  • Boxed Intel® Pentium® Gold G5500 Processor
  • Boxed Intel® Pentium® Gold G5600 Processor
  • Boxed Intel® Pentium® Gold G5600F Processor
  • Intel® Celeron® Processor G4920
  • Intel® Core™ i3-8100 Processor
  • Intel® Core™ i3-8100B Processor
  • Intel® Core™ i3-8100T Processor
  • Intel® Core™ i3-8300 Processor
  • Intel® Core™ i3-8300T Processor
  • Intel® Core™ i3-8350K Processor
  • Intel® Core™ i5-8400 Processor
  • Intel® Core™ i5-8400T Processor
  • Intel® Core™ i5-8500 Processor
  • Intel® Core™ i5-8500B Processor
  • Intel® Core™ i5-8500T Processor
  • Intel® Core™ i5-8600 Processor
  • Intel® Core™ i5-8600K Processor
  • Intel® Core™ i5-8600T Processor
  • Intel® Core™ i7-8700 Processor
  • Intel® Core™ i7-8700T Processor
  • Intel® Core™ i7-8700B Processor
  • Intel® Core™ i7-8700K Processor

As the outlet points out, some duplicates are to be expected, since Intel differentiates between "boxed and tray chips" (chips designed for solo builders and OEMs, respectively).

If you're in the market for a new CPU following this news, now might be the time to take a gander at our reviews for the i9-10900K and the i7-10700K. If the Red Team is more your speed, we were impressed with how well AMD's Ryzen 7 3700X stacks up against some of Intel's latest silicon across both gaming and productivity use cases.

Permalink to story.

 

QuantumPhysics

Posts: 2,870   +2,594
I just find it so amazing how many CPU have been produced so quickly and how little you actually need for gaming and light editing.


Games don't demand much for 1080p or 1440p gaming and 4K editing doesn't require very much either.
 

Skjorn

Posts: 554   +408
I just find it so amazing how many CPU have been produced so quickly and how little you actually need for gaming and light editing.


Games don't demand much for 1080p or 1440p gaming and 4K editing doesn't require very much either.
I think a 240Hz display would disagree
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reehahs

Squid Surprise

Posts: 3,148   +2,056
I think a 240Hz display would disagree
The GPU matters for that... but you can get by with just about any CPU if all you're interested in is gaming.

I'm using a 5960 right now on my main rig... 5 years old, yet plenty of horsepower for even heavy editing - let alone gaming.

Even Sandy Bridge processors are still fairly decent for gaming at 1080p now... and anything in the 8th, 9th or 10th gen Intel lineup is good enough.

 
  • Like
Reactions: The Genuine Tric

Puiu

Posts: 3,903   +2,415
The GPU matters for that... but you can get by with just about any CPU if all you're interested in is gaming.

I'm using a 5960 right now on my main rig... 5 years old, yet plenty of horsepower for even heavy editing - let alone gaming.

Even Sandy Bridge processors are still fairly decent for gaming at 1080p now... and anything in the 8th, 9th or 10th gen Intel lineup is good enough.
That's still an 1000$ 8 core CPU. The reason you paid that much is for the ability to do editing even after 5 years. But for gaming it's mostly a sub 144Hz CPU, which is fine for the majority of gamers anyway since the GPU will be the primary bottleneck. For 1080p it is a great CPU.

But after so many years, even the stock R5 3600 is better at both productivity and games. That's a huge drop in price :D
 

Skjorn

Posts: 554   +408
The GPU matters for that... but you can get by with just about any CPU if all you're interested in is gaming.

I'm using a 5960 right now on my main rig... 5 years old, yet plenty of horsepower for even heavy editing - let alone gaming.

Even Sandy Bridge processors are still fairly decent for gaming at 1080p now... and anything in the 8th, 9th or 10th gen Intel lineup is good enough.
I don't think you understand
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 3,148   +2,056
That's still an 1000$ 8 core CPU. The reason you paid that much is for the ability to do editing even after 5 years. But for gaming it's mostly a sub 144Hz CPU, which is fine for the majority of gamers anyway since the GPU will be the primary bottleneck. For 1080p it is a great CPU.

But after so many years, even the stock R5 3600 is better at both productivity and games. That's a huge drop in price :D
Lol, that was my point... cheaper CPUs are better nowadays, as gaming at 1080p can be done with almost ANY CPU.

There’s no need to purchase $1000 CPUs any more... buy a $150 CPU and u can play any game - probably for years if 1080p is your resolution.
I don't think you understand
I understand... I don’t think you do...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Puiu

Puiu

Posts: 3,903   +2,415
Lol, that was my point... cheaper CPUs are better nowadays, as gaming at 1080p can be done with almost ANY CPU.

There’s no need to purchase $1000 CPUs any more... buy a $150 CPU and u can play any game - probably for years if 1080p is your resolution.

I understand... I don’t think you do...
I agree with you. The only reason for me to buy a more expensive CPU than, for example, the 3600x, is only if I need to build a PC that can handle workstation type of workloads. And I will not be using an 1080p monitor, 1440p is the minimum now for work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Squid Surprise

Lew Zealand

Posts: 1,381   +1,353
TechSpot Elite
Assume this means new Mac Mini incoming!
Considering Apple waited from Haswell (4th gen) to Coffee Lake (8th gen) to upgrade the Mini, I wouldn't hold your breath.

OTOH maybe Apple waited until Intel actually had something notably better instead of wasting time with the tiny incremental (excremental?) upgrades Intel doled out to us for 3 more years.
 

p51d007

Posts: 2,417   +1,684
I just find it so amazing how many CPU have been produced so quickly and how little you actually need for gaming and light editing.
You could substitute CPU for SMARTPHONE and have the same thing too :)
Faster & faster phones, that 99% of users, won't even use 1/2 of the processors power.
 

Skjorn

Posts: 554   +408
Lol, that was my point... cheaper CPUs are better nowadays, as gaming at 1080p can be done with almost ANY CPU.

There’s no need to purchase $1000 CPUs any more... buy a $150 CPU and u can play any game - probably for years if 1080p is your resolution.

I understand... I don’t think you do...
GPU can't render frames if the CPU isn't feeding fast enough... yeah you don't get it
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 3,148   +2,056
Haha whatever try finding any CPU to push BFV to 200fps.
Well, since the game is CAPPED at 200fps, that's not exactly a realistic scenario... But provided you don't need ultra settings, most CPUs can easily exceed 160FPS at 1080P if they're paired with a 2080Ti...
 

Skjorn

Posts: 554   +408
Well, since the game is CAPPED at 200fps, that's not exactly a realistic scenario... But provided you don't need ultra settings, most CPUs can easily exceed 160FPS at 1080P if they're paired with a 2080Ti...
Here is a $150 CPU trying to get 200. Can't imagine what the lows are like. battlefield-v-1280-720.png
Now an overpriced i9battlefield-v-1280-720-1.png
Yes 165 is plenty for me. But if you have a 200+Hz screen and want to stay up there a $150 CPU just won't get you there and keep you there. It's great value just it won't maintain the very high refresh rate screens. You don't buy 200Hz screens to dip into the 90s.
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 3,148   +2,056
OK... you clearly didn't get my original point... and your graph aside (as it's capped at 200FPS, not sure how it's registering over that), even the Ryzen 5 2400 gets well over 100FPS...

This is a AAA game that is also known to be a performance hog...

For virtually any other game, you can generally hit 200FPS on $150 CPUs by changing settings / resolution...

Again, unless you absolutely need top-of-the-line, spending north of $1000 (and even $500) on your CPU is unnecessary - spend it on the 2080Ti instead!