i7-8700K...

Notice: Page may contain affiliate links for which we may earn a small commission through services like Amazon Affiliates or Skimlinks.

wildpig1234

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2016
2,198
443
83
49
so what does everyone think about this part? on one hand, it forced amd to drop their ryzen 7 1800 down to $400... on the other hand e5-2696 v2 is still very competitive in term of strictly multicore performance as well as much cheaper ram support and cheaper MB as well as ability to add 2nd cpu...

wonder if we will get to that day where xeon 2nd hand won't be a bargain anymore...
 

wildpig1234

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2016
2,198
443
83
49
if the price is lower to closer to $300, I think the argument for getting i7-8700k and ryzen 1800 compared to e5-2696 v2 would be a lot stronger if you are putting together a single cpu WS.

The problem of limited memory support as well as high memory price remains even if you lower the price to $300 and only putting together a single cpu WS..
 

msg7086

Active Member
May 2, 2017
423
148
43
36
so what does everyone think about this part?
This should have happened 2-3 years ago.

From 2600k to 7700k, 6 years and a freaking 50% performance increase, I felt so pissed off.

(And 7700k to 8700k is also ~50% performance increase.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Patrick

amalurk

Active Member
Dec 16, 2016
311
116
43
102
This should have happened 2-3 years ago.

From 2600k to 7700k, 6 years and a freaking 50% performance increase, I felt so pissed off.

(And 7700k to 8700k is also ~50% performance increase.)
Right, with how fast Intel got the 8xxx series out in response to competition, it shows Intel has been holding back for years and we all could have had a lot more if there had been actual competition in years past.
 

msg7086

Active Member
May 2, 2017
423
148
43
36
Right, with how fast Intel got the 8xxx series out in response to competition, it shows Intel has been holding back for years and we all could have had a lot more if there had been actual competition in years past.
Exactly. I mean, it's just adding 2 cores to the die, and how can it be easier.

By the way, E5 line is a whole different story. In used market it's pretty cost effective, although AVX2 performance can be a bottleneck. That means x265 performance could hit hard.
 

wildpig1234

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2016
2,198
443
83
49
that's why I am still using my i7-2600k...lol... it doesn't really do me any good to upgrade from i7-2600k though since I ve already got a bunch of xeon ws... but yeah, 8700k should've happened a lot sooner...
 

T_Minus

Build. Break. Fix. Repeat
Feb 15, 2015
7,625
2,043
113
that's why I am still using my i7-2600k...lol... it doesn't really do me any good to upgrade from i7-2600k though since I ve already got a bunch of xeon ws... but yeah, 8700k should've happened a lot sooner...
Really?

No point in upgrading from a i7-2600k...
Right...

Looking at an i7-7700k not even latest, or expensive...
Double ram, more memory bandwidth, avx2, and more...
 

wildpig1234

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2016
2,198
443
83
49
Really?

No point in upgrading from a i7-2600k...
Right...

Looking at an i7-7700k not even latest, or expensive...
Double ram, more memory bandwidth, avx2, and more...
upgrading from 2600k to 7700 or 8700 would requires new MB and rams. $350 for cpu +$200 for MB + $200 for 32GB DDR4 = $750.... just feel like it's so expensive for a single cpu setup that's not even that fast at multithread
 

T_Minus

Build. Break. Fix. Repeat
Feb 15, 2015
7,625
2,043
113
upgrading from 2600k to 7700 or 8700 would requires new MB and rams. $350 for cpu +$200 for MB + $200 for 32GB DDR4 = $750.... just feel like it's so expensive for a single cpu setup that's not even that fast at multithread
I don't even know how to reply to this... but I'll try.

You haven't upgraded since 2600 (year 2011), so obviously you need a new motherboard, ram, etc... and since you haven't updated to each generation you have saved a boat load of $ over the years to spend on your next system that you will keep another 7 years. (Did I really just say that? Wow...)

You are now complaining that it's not fast multi-threaded, well, no kidding it's a (low core) 4 core high frequency CPU not a 2 Processor Xeon with 20+ cores... if you need lots of threads spend money on xeons.

Come on now, this is getting ridiculous. You're comparing apples to oranges, and complaining about prices upgrading from a year 2011 system to one in (year) 2017 / nearly 2018...

I didn't even mention IPC improvements from yours to current, but they're substantial over that period...

You sound like you're never happy and complain, but maybe that's simply because you still run a 2600 based system ??? Who knows.

Good luck whatever you end up going with.
 

wildpig1234

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2016
2,198
443
83
49
lol... T_minus... i have actually gone thr a lot of xeon since that natex deal on 2670 combo at the end of 2016..i have been like completely addicted to the xeon bug since then .... lol . Since then I have gone to getting dual 2696 v2 when that deal was still good for less than $300 per cpu. while at the same time took a dip also into the 2011 v3 with still insane price for DDR4 ECC compared to DDR3.

Currently running a dual 2696 v2 in the same case that used to run the s2600 natex deal board. had to replace s2600 with z9pe-d16 because s2600 wouldn't run oem cpu.

Also running outside of the case a 2011 v3 with dual 2696 v3... So I have gone thr a lot of hardware lately...

which is why for me it just seems like the upgrade from a 2600k is not that worth it since I already have the xeon WS and also seeing how the xeon 2nd hand market is still giving a very good bargain.....

given that the 8700k price as well as ryzen 1800 is still relatively high being closer to $400, even one single 2696 v2 cpu (if you can get one in a good price) configuration still is very competitive... if you can forgive the significantly slower single core speed as well as some of the ipc... in exchange for going with 2696 v2 you get much cheaper ram as well as if you spend a little more you can get like a dual cpu MB with much more ram slots than either 8700 or 1800 would ever support. Which is why I am not completely sold on them given what I've seen with xeon 2nd hand....lol...
 

T_Minus

Build. Break. Fix. Repeat
Feb 15, 2015
7,625
2,043
113
I still don't see any valid reason comparing a high frequency 4 core cpu to a xeon system with 12+ cores that turbos lower than the 4C base.

Obviously people buy them for different work loads and you can have all those xeons you want but in your desktop you stated you still run the 2600, and with that statement and not seeing any improvements to newer gens is plain silly...

Either you're not using the CPU for what they're intended or you just don't know because you haven't used a newer-generation 4C with a base of 4Ghz re: your statement of not upgrading the 2600.
 

msg7086

Active Member
May 2, 2017
423
148
43
36
I'd say I won't choose to upgrade anything from 2600 until 8700 is out. Actually I'm on a 4770 non-K doing x265 encoding job everyday, and upgrading to 7700 was never worth the cost. Gen 8 is the first thing in so many years that might worth upgrading to.

That being said, AMD's 1700 seems to be more competitive to me. 8700k is probably better for gamers (or even 7700k or a 8350k).
 

wildpig1234

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2016
2,198
443
83
49
was just running a rough price check for a trade in. Can probably get $200-230 on ebay for selling my i7-2600k with p8z68 deluxe and 32GB DDR3.

That would barely pay for 32GB of DDR4 desktop ram... lol... that's what I call murder overpricing... I think when I was putting together the 2600k back in 2012 I only paid $140 for 32GB DDR3...

The MB is like the most reasonably price between $120 to $200 for low to mid range...

8700k seems way overpriced right now above retail due to shortage. It will be a while before this part will be in more supply as well as amd releasing the next batch of ryzen so that we can get 8700k more avail at msrp of $359....

Found my receipt from newegg and newegg business from 2011 and 2012:
i7-2600k for $250, p8z68 deluxe for $205, 32GB DDR3 for $140 = $595 rounding to $600....

Current price for a 8700k or 1800:
$400 for the cpu, $200 for MB (but it probably wont be as nice as the p8z68 deluxe MB), $200 for 32GB DDR4.... and the total is $800....

if the price of the cpu and ram can go down so that we can get closer to $700 or less, then I think I might pull the trigger...
 

msg7086

Active Member
May 2, 2017
423
148
43
36
The memory market is going nuts, the price was at least doubled, if not tripled. It's just not a very good time to buy memory sticks.
 

msg7086

Active Member
May 2, 2017
423
148
43
36
The memory market is going nuts, the price was at least doubled, if not tripled. It's just not a very good time to buy memory sticks.
 

wildpig1234

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2016
2,198
443
83
49
the ultimate multicore bargain is actually the x5650. dual x5650 give almost 1300 cinebench multithread. not very far from one single 8700k... So that's $28 for dual x5650 cpu vs $400 8700k ... yes, single core is twice as fast on 8700k but what a joke regarding multithread.... it again prove how overpriced the latest cpu are....
 

am4593

Active Member
Feb 20, 2017
150
35
28
44
exactly correct. I got a 40 thread 2.2ghz box to run a thousand VMs and a high clock quad core I use in a windows 10 "thin client" because I like the snappiness of a high clock in windows. But 4 cores doesn't get you very far in the virtualization world so they're just different cpus for different purposes.

Also so tired of the x5650-x5690 references. Thoes cpus were great at one time but now in 2017 no pci e 3.0, lacking sata 3.0, crazy high power use, and you can get a v1 E5 2650 for 35-40$. Someone buying an 8700k is obviously not buying it for the same use as an x5650.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T_Minus

T_Minus

Build. Break. Fix. Repeat
Feb 15, 2015
7,625
2,043
113
The memory market is going nuts, the price was at least doubled, if not tripled. It's just not a very good time to buy memory sticks.
Yep, terrible time right now... almost more than I paid 3? years ago for DDR4!

the ultimate multicore bargain is actually the x5650. dual x5650 give almost 1300 cinebench multithread. not very far from one single 8700k... So that's $28 for dual x5650 cpu vs $400 8700k ... yes, single core is twice as fast on 8700k but what a joke regarding multithread.... it again prove how overpriced the latest cpu are....
LOL!! I can't believe you even made that comparison. Ridiculous.

exactly correct. I got a 40 thread 2.2ghz box to run a thousand VMs and a high clock quad core I use in a windows 10 "thin client" because I like the snappiness of a high clock in windows. But 4 cores doesn't get you very far in the virtualization world so they're just different cpus for different purposes.

Also so tired of the x5650-x5690 references. Thoes cpus were great at one time but now in 2017 no pci e 3.0, lacking sata 3.0, crazy high power use, and you can get a v1 E5 2650 for 35-40$. Someone buying an 8700k is obviously not buying it for the same use as an x5650.
DING! DING! DING! Someone who gets it :)

As someone who's actually gone from an Intel x56## based server to a newer gen Intel E3 high frequency server the snappyness is not even comparable to those old dogs... and like you said comparing them to a high freq. 4 core is laughable at best and really shows lack of understanding the real world implications of CPU selection and proper selection for workload.

So much more to the correct CPU than simply 1 stupid benchmark score.
 

i386

Well-Known Member
Mar 18, 2016
4,221
1,540
113
34
Germany
so what does everyone think about this part?
Not enough pcie lanes :(
(Xeons totally spoiled me with that).

Nowaday every workstation I build needs at least one x16 for gpu, x8 for 10+ gbe nic and one or more x8 for pcie ssds (nvme/iodrives).

Clock, # of cores and memory support are enough for my workstation workloads or gaming.
 

msg7086

Active Member
May 2, 2017
423
148
43
36
the ultimate multicore bargain is actually the x5650. dual x5650 give almost 1300 cinebench multithread. not very far from one single 8700k... So that's $28 for dual x5650 cpu vs $400 8700k ... yes, single core is twice as fast on 8700k but what a joke regarding multithread.... it again prove how overpriced the latest cpu are....
It's not, unless you have unlimited free electricity.

We have some dual x5650 servers in our datacenter that idle at 200w each, and max out at, I don't know, 350w?
How about 8700k? idles at 50w and maxes out at 150w or lower.

So 8700k alone saves you $150-$250 per year 24x7 just on power bill and nothing else, compared to dual x5650.

I'm sorry but what did you say is a bargain? Seriously?

Even a pair of E5-2640 is better than the power hogging 5500/5600 series.

Oh also, I hope your application only uses up to SSE4.2 cuz AVX2 is at least 15% faster than SSE family on the same CPU.