Intel Core i7-7700K vs 6700K: 22 Games, RX 480 & GTX 1080

[ssdpro]

It is underwhelming but expected. It still decimates anything we have from AMD on the CPU or chipset level. The improvements here are almost zero on the CPU side, pretty darn minor on the chipset side. If running something pre-sandy bridge, it is an upgrade route. I'd wait for Zen reviews and then maybe what Intel does to counter it (assuming it meets performance/value expectations).

 

[hv43082]

Appreciate the review. Still need a reason to upgrade my Intel i5 2500k.

 

[petepete]

That 8 MB of L3 cache sure looks beastly, can't wait to see Ryzen benchmarks over 'Crappy' Lake

 

[BiggieShady]

It could also be as simple as the GTC 1080 was getting slightly warmer due to the increased heat in the area and throttled slightly.

1080 is the only one that has some positive performance increase with higher clocks in DOOM. Two other less powerful cards may be even operating in gpu bottleneck scenario when frame times are this low ... if doom used single rendering thread we would always see some increase, with multithreaded rendering you can run into law of diminishing returns with thread synchronization overhead

 

[Bansaku]

As expected nominal gains over previous generation for PC users.

How is virtually 0% considered nominal?

 

[Ungari]

Appreciate the review. Still need a reason to upgrade my Intel i5 2500k.

Ryzen

 

[hv43082]

Ryzen

I will eager wait for the full review.

 

[BiggieShady]

How is virtually 0% considered nominal?

Instead of zero percent ipc increase I'll think of it as a zero percent ipc decrease ... but the stock clocks are sweet for those who run bios defaults

 

[LDNL]

With no competition Intel has no reason to innovate. Thats why people are still running systems with 2600k / 3770k and with a minimal overclock youll get the same performance compared to what Intel offers as "new" today. What really annoys me is the pricing. Its pretty much the same $h1t in a different package and the price has increased insanely (~33%). And this has gone on for 3 generations now...

 

[Blueberries]

Can someone explain this to me

The performance DECREASES with a higher clock?

Because video games are a moot benchmark for CPU performance?

 

[W1zzard]

Because video games are a moot benchmark for CPU performance?

They are, but in the end the majority of our readers use their CPUs for gaming. Honestly I was curious about the outcome, that's why I spent so much time on this article.

 

[the54thvoid]

They are, but in the end the majority of our readers use their CPUs for gaming. Honestly I was curious about the outcome, that's why I spent so much time on this article.

And I'm glad you did. Now you have done it.... What about a sandy thru Kabylake comparison? I mean, if you can fit an 8th day in your week....

 

[Joss]

I wonder how an FX 8350 would fare in this company... ?
@W1zzard any chance of a small taste of this? Just a mini test for the sake of putting things in context.

 

[nem..]

 

[birdie]

@W1zzard

Please test just one most CPU performance dependent game with these CPUs:

• Intel Core i7 860 (was quite popular in its day)
• Intel Core i5 2500
• Intel Core i5 2600
• Intel Core i5 3570
• Intel Core i7 3770
• Intel Core i5 4570
• Intel Core i5 4770
• Intel Core i5 6500
• Intel Core i5 6700
• and some i3(s) for good measure.

Then retest it with all these CPUs running at the same clock/frequency, say 3.3GHz. I'm not asking for Kaby Lake, because it's basically Sky Lake with higher frequencies and power consumption.

 

[qubit]

@W1zzard wrote:

"And in yet another landmark release, Intel launches the new Kaby Lake CPU range to broad critical acclaim. Feted for its large IPC improvements of 30%, it decimates the AMD competition and significantly improves on previous Intel CPUs, including the previous generation Skylake. On top of this, the large overclocking potential of over 1.5GHz increases this lead substantially. Amazingly, Intel even allows overclocking on certain non-K CPUs, negating the need to buy the expensive high end versions with just a simple overclock. On top of all this, the power consumption has been reduced significantly, allowing the CPUs to run very coolly and with very quiet heatsink fans. Astounding.

Phenomenal performance, phenomenal product, I'd give Kaby Lake 11 / 10 if it were possible! Whatever rig you have, just upgrade it to Kaby Lake as soon as you can - or sooner."

Oh shit, that was in an alternate universe. AMD better clean up with Zen or just give up once and for all.

Great review though W1z, once again giving us accurate benchmarks to help us make informed buying decisions.

 

[jormungand]

AYYYYYYYY lmao .................. NOW IS TIME FOR RYZEN TO SHOW UP or see it going downhill or zendown

 

[EarthDog]

Well, this was another way to to show there wasn't any performamce gains per clock! I like the twist w1z, well done.

 

[eidairaman1]

Snooze cruise.

 

[Fluffmeister]

Now it's just time to play the waiting game and see how Ryzen turns out. I want something that is fast and efficient and I doubt I'd even bother overclocking it. AMD's MOAR cores obsession my swing my vote their way for the rare occasion I'm not playing some dodgy port.

Then I'll be happy and upgrade again in another 8 years.

 

[xkm1948]

Also if possible I wish @W1zzard can change the way the data is represented. For example group different GPU into different charts. The data illustration for this review is one of the most confusing one I have seen.

 

[efikkan]

So the entire take home message of this review are:
1. 7700K underwhelming.
2. AMD GPU performance scale well with CPU performance.

Why is everyone disappointed and blames the CPU for lack of scaling?

First of all, the throughput of the CPUs scale very well, so there is nothing wrong with the CPUs.

Secondly, why is single threaded performance important for gaming in the first place? CPU speed matters because a slow CPU might bottleneck the GPU because it's not fast enough to feed the GPU due to overhead. This means that once a CPU is fast enough for the rendering thread(s) to work unobstructed, increasing the CPU speed further beyond it will give no further gains, because it's no longer a bottleneck. For later Intel CPUs this threshold seems to be around ~4 GHz, meaning that there is no point in overclocking beyond this point for gaming.

Thirdly, this will mean that Zen will also have a similar threshold, it might not be the exact same value, but above a certain limit there will be no more gains. Even if Zen was the most incredible architecture ever, there would be no scaling beyond the point where the CPU is no longer a bottleneck. In fact, a faster CPU will just mean it will hit this threshold at a lower clock.

 

[Beastie]

Thanks W1zz for the review.

I'm not sure if it shows that there are minimal gains with the new chip or if most games are GPU bound rather than CPU bound or both.

 

[ensabrenoir]

and I'm sure a good chunk of users on here and overclock.net will probably upgrade anyway just to have the latest e-peen

THIS^^............

nuff said.....there is no other reason.... ENTHUSIAST 4 LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Antykain]

Welp, I guess the 4790k is sticking around for a while longer. lol.. Really can't wait to see how the Ryzen fares against the Intel latest and "greatest".. If the hype for Ryzen is legit this time around, I'll definitely be picking one up.