6 hours ago, vortex681 said:

But for single threaded performance, which is what counts at present for the current batch of flight sims, there's not much difference when compared to the earlier generation CPUs. On page 7 in the link, there's minimal difference between the single-thread IPC of the 6700k and the 8700k (and it's identical to the 7600k). What's more disappointing is that the single core CPU-Z benchmark score for the 8700k is no better than the old 4790k! Admittedly the multi-core performance of the 8700k is much more impressive but that's not going to make much difference for flight sims.

And, you just effectively killed all the business Intel was about to make with us flight simmers. lol

But, that's really messed-up.. Why in the world they keep adding so many cores? Why not make them with a higher speed? When are we going to see a native 5Ghz, 6, or 7 Ghz? 

Well, with its single core performance and overclocked at 5Ghz (which seems to not be a problem) I think 8700K will perform in P3D pretty well, this is what I am thinking.

18 minutes ago, Vali said:

Well, with its single core performance and overclocked at 5Ghz (which seems to not be a problem) I think 8700K will perform in P3D pretty well, this is what I am thinking.

Exactly. Especially of it is easy to achieve overclocks higher than 5 GHz, which seems to be the case. 

12 hours ago, vortex681 said:

But for single threaded performance, which is what counts at present for the current batch of flight sims, there's not much difference when compared to the earlier generation CPUs. On page 7 in the link, there's minimal difference between the single-thread IPC of the 6700k and the 8700k (and it's identical to the 7600k). What's more disappointing is that the single core CPU-Z benchmark score for the 8700k is no better than the old 4790k! Admittedly the multi-core performance of the 8700k is much more impressive but that's not going to make much difference for flight sims.

 

Was just looking at it thanks page 8 I believe.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/intel-core-i7-8700k-processor-review,8.html

Intel have caught us again. I recall the same conversation when the 7700K was introduced. The best ever! So i "went for it". The "best" motherboards (Z270). In the meantime, the "best" was already on the backfoot. How can you explain such rapid product enhancements? So now we know the 8700K can not be used with the "greatest" Z270 series MB's. I'm in my late 50's now and this appears to me as a money making scheme...and this is to me false advertising. So my advice is: Don't go for the "best", the greatest", 8700k! Behind the scenes they are working on the next iteration of the best! 9700k...and working very hard to ensure the"best' MB's you purchase now will be totally incompatible with the next upgrade...Rather wait for 9700K, Z470 MB's....money making in the extreme....

You mean we still cannot sell our Pentium 4s yet?  :)

gb.

Cache size...should make the difference then, and we'll see the comparisons very soon  ))

On 10/5/2017 at 11:38 AM, vortex681 said:

But for single threaded performance, which is what counts at present for the current batch of flight sims, there's not much difference when compared to the earlier generation CPUs.

You may very well be correct... time and more testing (especially from flight simmers) will tell.  A poster at TechPowerUp, DJ-ElectriC, has posted a CPU-Z screenshot of an 8700K @ 4800 MHz: https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/share-your-cpuz-benchmarks.216765/page-41

I just tested my 4790K, which I run at 4800 MHz, and got this:

Don't know how he has his system configured, but I certainly was hoping to see more of a performance differential out of the gate.  Again, we need to see more results from more testers.

Greg

IF I were to build a system today, It would be with the 8700K And yes, next year we would get the next Gen CPU. If I can wait... (I have the skylake 6700K) I am going to wait for the next year or the year after that.

I get pretty good responce with my Skylake i7 6700K for now. 

 

More than spedning money, I don;t want to spend time reinstalling everything  andn getting my home cockpiut to work. The time I have to spend to get it all working is my issue that I do not want to change things less than in 2 years.. 3 years is ok to spend time reinstalling. 

 

I wish I could simply remove the CPU and drop the greatest and latest cpu without touching anything, Then I would uograde my CPU every 6 months. :)

8 hours ago, Manny said:

I get pretty good responce with my Skylake i7 6700K for now. 

If you compare the single-threaded performance/IPC of the 6700k, 7700k and the 8700k, there's very little difference between them. Unless you need the extra cores of the 8700k there's no compelling case to upgrade from the 6700k. There's been a lot of talk about overclocking the 8700k above 5GHz but that doesn't seem to be particularly straightforward. This from ARS Technica:

"The problem isn't so much that the 8700K won't reach high clock speeds, but that it requires so much power to do so that it's difficult to cool without resorting to custom liquid cooling loops or delidding...

At stock speeds on auto settings, the 8700K reaches a toasty 90°C under full load when paired with a substantial 280mm liquid cooler (in this case a CoolerMaster MasterLiquid Pro). I had paired the 8700K with a 240mm liquid cooler, but that wasn't enough to keep the temperatures down...

Like Kaby Lake, Coffee Lake doesn't scale so well after 5.0GHz, with voltage requirements going through the roof to keep things stable."

The processor he tested may not have been representative but it is concerning.

22 hours ago, lownslo said:

You may very well be correct... time and more testing (especially from flight simmers) will tell.  A poster at TechPowerUp, DJ-ElectriC, has posted a CPU-Z screenshot of an 8700K @ 4800 MHz: https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/share-your-cpuz-benchmarks.216765/page-41

I just tested my 4790K, which I run at 4800 MHz, and got this:

Don't know how he has his system configured, but I certainly was hoping to see more of a performance differential out of the gate.  Again, we need to see more results from more testers.

Greg

Mine is a 4770K at 4.5 GHz and I got a little bit over 500 running this test. I was thinking about upgrading right away, but being like that I'm now more inclined to wait one more year to see how things evolve.

Starting to get the parts for the new rig, now I'll buy a new quality case (with dust filters and room for a 240 sized water cooler AIO, as mine runs on air) and the water cooler solution. Is this safe to assume that a currently on market water cooler solution will still be compatible with next year CPUs? As long as LGA1151 still remains the standard I'm probably good.

 

I followed up on that poster at TechPowerUp I previously mentioned... his 8700K CPU-Z test used 2666 DDR4 memory and  "a system full of horrible bloat".  So, hopefully we'll see more test results soon.

Greg

On 04/10/2017 at 3:51 PM, lownslo said:

Anybody who overclocks any Intel chip made after Sandy Bridge should delid.  No matter what the cooling solution, no matter what the target CPU speed is, no matter what the computer will be used for.  Given the limited TIM option Intel uses since SB, delidding is just common sense.  And it's the right way to do the job (of drawing heat away from the CPU).

Greg

 

 

Sorry but that's complete nonsense. I have a 6700K running at 4.7 GHz. NOT delidded. Runs nice and cool under load with an NH-D15S. Around mid 70's C I recall. 

As for degradation, CPU lifespan is measured in thousands of hours. Anything up to 85 degrees or so will not degrade the chip enough to shorten it's lifespan below what most enthusiasts would deem aceptable. By the time degradation is an issue, the vast majority of enthusiasts will have changed their CPU's.

I sold a very old i7 920 rig to a friend, years ago, significantly overclocked and air cooled. Has run in the mid 70's beautifully for years.

Built many PC's over the years, overclocked and running up to 80 degrees, never an issue. 

As for Intel somehow ripping us off with TIM between IHS and die, there are economic and technical reasons for doing so. Don't forget, a CPU that IS NOT delidded overclocks well enough and at a temp that's within the CPU's design parameters. That's all Intel are obliged to do. In addition, it's not necessarily that the TIM Intel use is word not allowed, it's reasonable quality Dow Corning TIM, it's the thickness of the TIM layer that's the primary issue, as a result of the the layer of glue holding the IHS in place.

I'm not against delidding, I delidded my daughters 7600K in her Mini ITX rig, just pointing out that to state that it's in some way "common sense" is utterly wrong and a bit of a bizarre comment to make!

Sky, Kaby, CoffeLake have the same IPC if you set up equal frq 4.0 or 4.5ghz , same mem settings.

the CPUZ singletread bench with this CPUS with proper memsetup at 4.8-5.0ghz 570-590 points

my  7700k set up for flightsim is 620 points with the CPUZ single tread.

offtopic the I9 have little better IPC at the same frq and mem settings approx 3%

the 8600k and 8700k is good buys for P3D.

 

1 hour ago, westman said:

the 8600k and 8700k is good buys for P3D.

But only if you don't already have a 6700k or a 7700k or their i5 versions.