Clevo + Coffee Lake: Status?

Discussion in 'Sager and Clevo' started by thegh0sts, Aug 12, 2017.

  1. Mr. Fox

    Mr. Fox Undefiled BGA-Hating Elitist

    Reputations:
    18,885
    Messages:
    29,455
    Likes Received:
    35,606
    Trophy Points:
    931
    I think it is still too early to get excited about anything at this point. Excitement about 50% more cores and threads in a laptop is understandable, but at this point it is really not a big deal for a desktop. With both AMD and Intel HEDT CPUs pushing double or more than 6C/12T it makes the thought of having "only" a hexacore CPU in a desktop now seem pretty ordinary and boring... like comparing a 6700K to a 6950X.

    And, in terms of going to a hexacore in a laptop, it's going to be fun for benching on AC if the firmware isn't severely botched up. If the P570WM handled 4930K and 4960X with its abortion heat sink using AC cooling, the new P870 will probably do just fine on AC. We have no idea what kind of volcanic mess it is going to be without AC cooling or how buggered up the stock firmware is going to be. The P870DM-G, P870DM3 and P870KM1 are products I would never have an interest in owning without @Prema firmware. Let me qualify that by going a step further by saying there is no laptop of any brand or model that I want to own without @Prema firmware to keep things in perspective. But, there are a whole bunch of unknowns about how well Clevo is (or is not) going to execute on it. The idea of putting a hexacore CPU in a P7 chassis seems absolutely ludicrous considering it is thermonuclear with a 6700K or 7700K running undervolted with stock clocks and throttles like there is no tomorrow. Unless they do some really insane magic with the thermal management of that one it's going to be a nightmare. Same for the 16L13. There is no way what they have under the hood right now is going to manage an 8700K unless you run it on AC cooling 24/7. And, MSI castrated its power handling already with some kind of hardware limitation. It runs flawlessly and overclocks like a dream until you go a little past stock TDP, then everything goes to hell in a handbasket. If MSI doesn't remove that demonic feature, it will likely not hold overclocks at all because MSI has decided to play the role of TDP Nazis.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2017
  2. Papusan

    Papusan BGA Filthy = That sucks!! STAHP! Dont buy FILTH...

    Reputations:
    6,041
    Messages:
    14,397
    Likes Received:
    19,068
    Trophy Points:
    931
    I'm sure if you do your math... And know the IPC, core counts vs. Kaby/Skylake. You will find correct scores. My math work very well:oops: But thats me:)
     
  3. hmscott

    hmscott Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    3,483
    Messages:
    13,089
    Likes Received:
    15,170
    Trophy Points:
    931
    There is Zero IPC gain between 7700k and 8700k:
    no ipc gain between 7700k and 8700k #1.jpg no ipc gain between 7700k and 8700k.jpg
    So, then what is that CB score at stock settings and stock boost that you have calculated in your head? :)

    You do realize that so far the variance of 1200cb - 1400cb blows under that score, rather than over it due to failure to hold Turbo Boost?
     
  4. Papusan

    Papusan BGA Filthy = That sucks!! STAHP! Dont buy FILTH...

    Reputations:
    6,041
    Messages:
    14,397
    Likes Received:
    19,068
    Trophy Points:
    931
    Failure to hold Turbo... You mean 8700K can't hold stock Turbo boost. What if you OC?:rolleyes: Will it fail in this task as well?
     
  5. hmscott

    hmscott Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    3,483
    Messages:
    13,089
    Likes Received:
    15,170
    Trophy Points:
    931
    It would draw more power, run hotter, maybe not OC as high on poor silicon, I think you know the results of bad silicon, right?

    The "Maximum" Turbo boost for the 8th generation as quoted from Intel isn't guaranteed and it's not declared as before, you need to infer it yourself, as per the AdoredTV video details.

    The poor silicon gives less than the "Maximum" boost.

    “Intel will no longer provide this information”

    "We are only including processor frequencies for base and single-core Turbo in our materials going forward - the reasoning is that turbo frequencies are opportunistic given their dependency on system configuration and workloads"
    https://www.anandtech.com/show/11859/the-anandtech-coffee-lake-review-8700k-and-8400-initial-numbers

    "Nonetheless, we were able to obtain the per-core turbo ratios for each of the new processors for our motherboard. Given Intel's statement above, it seems to suggest that each motherboard might have different values for these, with no Intel guidelines given."
    cfl_turbo_v2.png
    So, you can't count on the Max Turbo at all...it will vary by CPU and motherboard.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2017
    Donald@HIDevolution likes this.
  6. Papusan

    Papusan BGA Filthy = That sucks!! STAHP! Dont buy FILTH...

    Reputations:
    6,041
    Messages:
    14,397
    Likes Received:
    19,068
    Trophy Points:
    931
    A bad silicon(8700K) will most likely do 4.3GHz on all 6 cores?:rolleyes: Btw. Changes in performance with different memory speeds-timings on Coffee.
    [​IMG]

    What would be written on the web if a lot of Intel's 8700K can't do more than 4.3-4.5GHz ? Would Intel sell a lot of them?
     
    Donald@HIDevolution likes this.
  7. ole!!!

    ole!!! Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    1,042
    Messages:
    4,010
    Likes Received:
    1,873
    Trophy Points:
    231
    theres nothing to miss, i watched adoredtv's video i know what he talked about. but you misunderstood what i said which is what you quoted.

    to simplify, 7700k gives score A, 8700k gives score B, if B > A result in a % increase over ~50% then B score is incorrect, that idea is false because score A could also be incorrect. this is basically what i was trying to tell u.
     
    hmscott and Mr. Fox like this.
  8. hmscott

    hmscott Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    3,483
    Messages:
    13,089
    Likes Received:
    15,170
    Trophy Points:
    931
    His premise of 8700K CB of 45% greater due to 2c/4t increase vs 7700k, but 0% IPC increase difference between 7700K and 8700K is correct.

    The 7700k scores were invariant - stable across all the reviewers results within the measurement error/variance, while the 8700k results are over a wide range of variance - too large to be explained by test variance.
    comparing the wide range of 8700k cb scores.jpg
    Notice the relatively straight line graph for the 7700k results, vs. the wide range of the 8700k results. Even taking off the top 4 scores due to "accidental" 4 core Turbo boost of 4.7ghz, you still have a variance of 1200cb - 1400cb, that's where the "bad" silicon comes in to play, at the lower scores the CPU's can't hold Turbo boost Maximum - or never make it at all.
     
  9. ole!!!

    ole!!! Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    1,042
    Messages:
    4,010
    Likes Received:
    1,873
    Trophy Points:
    231
    this also gets into a grey area and how one would identify as "IPC" increase. since cache/IMC and rest of uncore are part of CPU, increasing those would result general* IPC increase, where as default CORE architecture remains unchanged.

    reason i say general IPC increase is because if a software that doesn't use the faster IMC or the increased cache, then you see no changes in IPC.

    in our example better to explain as, 8700k 12MB cache which has 4MB or L3 cache than 7700k and a faster IMC, however if a software store its needed files in less than 8MB of L3 cache, we will never have the need for that last 4MB of cache, thus increasing in cache doesn't increase the speed. once 8MB of cache is exceeded, then we start to see benefit, because L3 cache is much faster than memory, which if info is drawn from memory, the faster IMC in 8700k will also benefit towards IPC. this is just comparing two things aside from the core itself, there are obviously other parts of CPU that may contribute to IPC but most remains unchanged from 7700k.
     
    hmscott likes this.
  10. ole!!!

    ole!!! Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    1,042
    Messages:
    4,010
    Likes Received:
    1,873
    Trophy Points:
    231
    thats why i said in the review scenario 8700k were most likely wrong, go back a few post man..
     
    hmscott likes this.
Loading...

Share This Page