JMaster299's Avatar

JMaster299 profile

2

JMaster299 has recently been playing 7 Days to Die, Batman™: Arkham Knight and Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon® Wildlands

Currently Playing
7 Days to Die icon

7 Days to Die

9 days 5 hours

Batman: Arkham Knight icon

Batman: Arkham Knight

1 day 12 hours

Most played
PAYDAY 2 icon

PAYDAY 2

14 days 16 hours

Borderlands 2 icon

Borderlands 2

9 days 22 hours

7 Days to Die icon

7 Days to Die

9 days 5 hours


Dave James Avatar
Dave James responded to JMaster299's comment in
2 Months ago
Don't believe the hype, Intel can't release an eight-threaded Ryzen 3 rivalDon't believe the hype, Intel can't release an eight-threaded Ryzen 3 rival
JMaster299 Avatar
I hate sites that spread lies. The 8600K does not top out at 3.4GHz like you claim in your article. It's base clock STARTS at 3.6GHz and boosts to 4.3GHz single core and 4.1GHz on all cores. Which means it has higher out of the box clock speeds than the 8300.

And, being a K branded sku, people will be able to clock it higher than that. While that 8300, even with it's higher logical core count, will be locked to just 4Ghz. And as any reviewer worth their paycheck would know, single core performance is still king when it comes to gaming.

It's why the 7600K and even older i5 chips can beat so many of the different Ryzen chips in different gaming benchmarks. With 6 physical cores that both have a higher boost clock out of the box and can be overclocked higher by the user, the 8600K will easily outperform the 8300.

Especially when other factors are taken into account as far as whatever Intel does to the chip to ensure it performs behind the more expensive chips in the stack. Such as smaller L2 and L3 cache sizes. The 8300 will definitely be a step in the right direction, a step they likely never would have taken without Ryzen on the market, but there are numerous sources confirming it's 4c/8t existence, but the 8600K will still outperform it.Reply
Dave James Avatar

The early rumours pegged the 8600K at just 3.4GHz Boost. It wasn't a case of lying, it was an opinion based on what was expected at the time of writing.


At 4.1GHz all-core though it's six threads may still be slower than an i3 with all eight threads running at 4GHz in multi-threaded tasks.

sign in to comment
JMaster299 Avatar
JMaster299 responded to GTX comment in
2 Months ago
Don't believe the hype, Intel can't release an eight-threaded Ryzen 3 rivalDon't believe the hype, Intel can't release an eight-threaded Ryzen 3 rival
GTX Avatar
"Intel decide to let a Core i3 commit fratricide on the touted six-core Coffee Lake Core i5" They released a 50% cheaper CPU and that has same performance as the i3 Skylake Refresh and yet you think that the cpu with 50% core will have something to compete with an i3 with HT?

I can see this like a huge bias toward AMD thining intel can deliver competition for the Ryzen cpu with 4C+Multithread
JMaster299 Avatar

The person who wrote this article doesn't even get their facts straight. Clock speeds on the 8600K are 3.6GHz base, 4.3GHz single core, 4.2GHz 2-4 core, 4.1GHz all cores. NOT the 3.4GHz max boost clock that the author claims in the article.


Even the non K sku i5 has a higher clock speed than what the author tries to claim, so it's not like they can pretend they were referring to the non K i5. That chip, the i5 8400, has a boost clock of 4.0GHz single core and 3.8GHz on all cores.


But with the larger Cache sizes and the more physical cores instead of logical cores, that i5 8400 should still out perform the 8300 in more scenarios. Or at the very least trade blows. But the two chips will be priced very close to each other. With the 8600K supposedly being priced at the same $249 as the 7600K, the 8400 should be around $199.


https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/intel-skylake-kaby-lake-coffee-lake-thread-coffee-lake-s-specs-out-page-554.2428363/page-554#post-39005848

sign in to comment