• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

Core i7-8700K Reviewed by Lab501

cadaveca said:
That has nothing to do with the thermal interface material used. That's the CPUs not being of exactly equal quality, which has been some that most enthusiasts have exploited for OC'ing for as long as you've been able to OC.


Like, you've simply explained what anyone with access to many CPUs sees within one SKU... even soldered ones.
Click to expand...

Intels indium solder thermal conductivity is 80 w/mk. Intels polymer "paste" thermal interface material thermal conductivity is 3.5 w/mk, both specs available in intel whitepapers. Every PTIM cpu I have delided the temps drop by 20C which allows more overclocking headroom. Others results are same and expected given stim and ptim thermal spec difference. And the quality of intels polymer application, along with every other mass produced paste/polymer tim application is variable. Intel, per their own marketing person, came out in a youtube video which multiple forum posts have referenced, clearly stating cost was the reason for no longer using solder, not that it was ever a debatable point. Indium cost has increased and the use of stim requires an extra step/expense of metalizing the die surface for solder adhesion.

Granted, at stock, intels cpus dont require solder so overstating solder as necessary for anything but overclocking is a reach. But denying solders benefits of maintaining thermal headroom while overclocking is equally silly.
 
FYFI13 said:
Probably not, but as a 4790k owner I’m really looking forward to get a 8700k.
Click to expand...

I'm with you, as a owner of a 4770k it's time to upgrade to the 8700k.
 
EarthDog said:
I agree..

If people can stop being overdramatic about it, perhaps it wouldn't warrant a response and the inevitable digression into the TPU abyss. The real problem is its being skewered and shat on as if it did "SUCK". People like me have to Hoover out a more tempered, and accurate response..... and then get labeled as the 'bad guy' for "griping" about those details...

There's a 'lot of ya' that need a people's elbow to the dome to snap out of it. :p :laugh: :D :lovetpu:
Click to expand...

But an elbow drop is one of the worst "finishing" moves in the history of wrestling (excluding Macho's of course). It is only like 1 step higher than the lamest of all finishers, the Leg Drop... and that's only because the elbow is pointy.... But I do agree with all of your other prior assessments in this here thread. Was actually contemplating dropping some sort of Trump reference to make sure we officially bring this comment section down to /closethread status

Oh, but a quick on topic... I happen to find this CPU as pretty badass all things considered.
 
EarthDog said:
No. I water cool because it's quieter. :)

That is cools better is icing on the cake.
Click to expand...

NONESENSE!

tlcm.jpg
 
Now, that said, when I was actively into overclocking at HWbot, it had a different primary need...where at that point, Being a competative overclocker looking to get the last 100-200 Mhz out of my CPU is actually worth it, as a daily driver... not so much to me. As of now, one fan spins at less than 1K RPM on the rad. Three spinup when temps hit 55C (gaming).
 
I wish every intel cpu thread wouldn't degenerate into yet another tim paste vs solder wasteland ...

Tempting to upgrade this 4790K box, but I'm not going to notice any difference realistically. So I upgraded my Oct 2014 bios to Mar 2017 version, that's my upgrade for now. :oops:
 
Personally don't care for the graph style used, also not expecting much outside of multi-threaded performance with Coffee Lake, next year should be more interesting.

goodeedidid said:
I said this in previous post, Intel doesn't like you to overclock, and you do this on your own risk, and Intel doesn't have to pay for your overclocking adventures.
Click to expand...

And yet they use overclocking as an argument to explain why you need a Z370 board.
 
I think hardware improvements in the past 10 years have really left software behind. We need software to be able to take advantage of all the threads, the GPU, RAM properly.
Creating poorly optimized applications and games and calling them demanding is just not acceptable. Current CPUs and GPUs are WAY more powerful than what majority of us need.

I work in the software industry and 90% of the code developers write is trash. I very frequently have to optimize code that takes millions of CPU seconds, and I have been able to bring it down to under 5 digits almost all of the times.
 
What's the big deal with the TIM? We know Intel is not going to change it anytime soon, if ever. And delidding takes a whopping 5 minutes max, and even a clumsy imbecile like me can do it, so... let's get that drama out of the doors.

I might consider Intel for the next upgrade some time next year. I want to see what the improved Zen will perform first though. But honestly, six cores with high per core performance is just what I need.
 
opt33 said:
Granted, at stock, intels cpus dont require solder so overstating solder as necessary for anything but overclocking is a reach. But denying solders benefits of maintaining thermal headroom while overclocking is equally silly.
Click to expand...

I've never denied that indium transfers heat better, or that it can increase an OC a little bit. I deny that not having indium makes it a bad CPU, which is the only complaint anyone has about Intel CPUs. It's funny that this is the only thing, other than pricing, that people can complain about, to be honest.
 
I'll stick to what I have in my laptop for now.
 
metalfiber said:
I'm with you, as a owner of a 4770k it's time to upgrade to the 8700k.
Click to expand...
I also have a 4770K and am considering the 8700K as an upgrade. Some folks may not think this is a great upgrade, but I think it will be worth it.
 
consumes a lot ....

With that price on DDR4 (because I use 2133Mhz DDR3), I'll wait for Zen 2.
 
skates said:
I also have a 4770K and am considering the 8700K as an upgrade. Some folks may not think this is a great upgrade, but I think it will be worth it.
Click to expand...
As an owner of a 3770K, I am waiting for the 8 Core 9700K CPU next year ;) Since a new mobo will also be again required.... Jeeezzz..
 
jagjitnatt said:
That is not accurate. You are trying to label it as silicon lottery. Sure, all CPUs are not equal. But when two dies are capable of similar speeds......
Click to expand...

You do know that all these chips reach the advertised/guaranteed speeds.
Over clocking is never guaranteed to reach certain speeds.

Like with cars.... just because one engine was able to take x amount of "boost" does not mean all those same engines can take the same level of "boost"
 
opt33 said:
Intels indium solder thermal conductivity is 80 w/mk. Intels polymer "paste" thermal interface material thermal conductivity is 3.5 w/mk, both specs available in intel whitepapers. Every PTIM cpu I have delided the temps drop by 20C which allows more overclocking headroom. Others results are same and expected given stim and ptim thermal spec difference. And the quality of intels polymer application, along with every other mass produced paste/polymer tim application is variable. Intel, per their own marketing person, came out in a youtube video which multiple forum posts have referenced, clearly stating cost was the reason for no longer using solder, not that it was ever a debatable point. Indium cost has increased and the use of stim requires an extra step/expense of metalizing the die surface for solder adhesion.

Granted, at stock, intels cpus dont require solder so overstating solder as necessary for anything but overclocking is a reach. But denying solders benefits of maintaining thermal headroom while overclocking is equally silly.
Click to expand...

I remember someone else in another thread wished Intel would sell a special, OC-optimized version of their unlocked mainstream CPUs, perhaps with solder, or maybe with naked die, but binned and guaranteed to hit certain clocks. Convenient, but sort of taking the fun out of it - you'd never get the thrill of winning the silicon lottery, when a random retail chip hits 400-500 MHz higher than most others. Just a thought, and possibly relevant to the paste vs solder argument (more room for variation with paste, less so with solder, as with Ryzen). But quality variations in the dies plays a large part, as does the distance between die and heat spreader among the pasted CPUs. Lots of variables. Silicon Lottery.com sells binned, delidded Kaby Lake CPUs for the same price as Intel, or a slight premium for hot sellers, guaranteed to hit 5.0 or 5.1, Also binned Ryzen CPUs for same as retail.
 
I will wait for official reviews on the 5th as some of these results dont add up, but it does look to be a quick CPU.
 
las said:
10 fps? 8700K got 30 fps higher minimum than 1800X in Far Cry Primal here.
Stuff like this matters for 100+ Hz gamers, alot.
Click to expand...

Ubisoft is all you need to know. They're clowns. I played that trash for 20 mins and deleted it.
 
Last edited:
Seems like you should have picked a more CPU dependent game like RE7 JC3 Hitman or Prey since you are looking at CPU's here. Sorry if this has already been disucssed
 
You guys always said "My 2600K OC is faster than this new CPU" and didn't replace your CPUs, and INTEL has stopped soldering since then. In a new process, it's really difficult to hit 4GHz, and if you hit 5GHz on your older CPU, it's practically impossible to beat it with a new CPU. So INTEL can't afford to give the unlimited overclockability with soldering.
AMD uses soldering but their CPU can't overclock much, so they have no problem about it.
 
papupepo said:
You guys always said "My 2600K OC is faster than this new CPU" and didn't replace your CPUs, and INTEL has stopped soldering since then. In a new process, it's really difficult to hit 4GHz, and if you hit 5GHz on your older CPU, it's practically impossible to beat it with a new CPU. So INTEL can't afford to give the unlimited overclockability with soldering.
AMD uses soldering but their CPU can't overclock much, so they have no problem about it.
Click to expand...

That could be one reason Intel stopped using solder, but the headroom is still there, needing only delid/liquid metal TIM/relid to enable it. With AMD, their inferior process cripples high clocks, so it's not that "They don't have a problem with soldering", it's that they need the solder, because maybe with paste Ryzen would only clock to 3.5 or thereabout. So, do you prefer Intel, or AMD, and if it's Intel, are you upset about paste, or are you okay with delidding? Either way, you made a good point, which has me wondering what's the real story behind Intel's recent trend of pasted CPUs.
 
Hood said:
which has me wondering what's the real story behind Intel's recent trend of pasted CPUs.
Click to expand...
Using solder would allow user to push CPU hard enough that it would die. Using paste makes CPU overheat before this is possible. It saves them RMA hassles from users that do not know how to OC properly.

In past thread I linked a video with Intel staff saying they needed a way to make CPU fail testing, but not damage itself, so they could examine those failures and figure out how to overcome them. I believe that using this paste is how they do so, as CPU will overheat faster. Temperatures do not kill CPUs anyway. Current does. So they make CPU overheat BEFORE current reaches dangerous levels, using traditional cooling methods. The paste is like a rev limiter.

And if an enthusiast wants to push harder, delid is pretty easy, especially if you have one of the many tools on the market for this.
 
cadaveca said:
Using solder would allow user to push CPU hard enough that it would die. Using paste makes CPU overheat before this is possible. It saves them RMA hassles from users that do not know how to OC properly.

In past thread I linked a video with Intel staff saying they needed a way to make CPU fail testing, but not damage itself, so they could examine those failures and figure out how to overcome them. I believe that using this paste is how they do so, as CPU will overheat faster. Temperatures do not kill CPUs anyway. Current does. So they make CPU overheat BEFORE current reaches dangerous levels, using traditional cooling methods. The paste is like a rev limiter.

And if an enthusiast wants to push harder, delid is pretty easy, especially if you have one of the many tools on the market for this.
Click to expand...

So you are saying that Intel sells unlocked processors and Z series chipsets (both at a premium) advertising how they support overclocking, and then cripple their processors so that we cannot overclock and risk killing our processors?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top