$50 is hardly a lot of money at this level of the market, especially if you take into account the cost of the platform. The minimum cost of entry for a 8700K including a Z370 motherboard and 16GB DDR4-3200 would be approximately $650. Realistically, a lot of 8700K users will run higher end Z370 motherboards and expensive DDR4-4000 level RAM. This would push the platform cost out to $800+. $50 at this level hardly makes a big difference. You are essentially paying $50 for the possibility of 5GHz on all cores, compared to the 4.2GHz all core turbo on the 8700 non K.
This doesn't address my last point. Gamers 8600k. All arounders 8700. Gamers who want to spend less 8400. The OC on the 8700k will realistically do nothing for games or applications in 1080p or above(where even slower and less core CPUs already max the GPU by sometimes several magnitudes depending on the game.). Large player count large thread Multiplayer games only need the six cores without HT. Throw in HT and you no longer need the OC. MT tasks that are not massively parallel, and that don't scale well will receive minimal benefit(maybe 5%) over 8700 non-k even with the OC. Thus OC will only help for those massively parallel MT tasks. However, its in these tasks that the 8700k also seems to potentially throttle at the 4.9+ barrier and throw out loads of wattage. Thus, the stock or a mild OC are more appropriate. However, once you do this, the difference between 8700k and 8700 non-k is basically non existent. most likely 5-7% at a mild oc, for extra heat/power you still need to consider.
This also doesn't take into account that many all-arounders are small team (less than 10 people in total. As low as 1) business gamers who either don't OC, or only do mild OCs anyways. Their work machine is also the game machine. And the issue is MT are for work. ST for games. With business money is ALWAYS a consideration. Some are so OCD in their business that $1 can make or break a sale. It just doesn't make sense. 8600k will not lose to the 8700k games. It will not throttle given the lack of HT and will lay waste to every other chip in this metric. $50 is a lot of money for something that gives you minute or no tangible benefit. Thats $50 that could be spent on the GPU, or if the person is well off enough, to just buy themselves a nice expensive dinner.
Also: Spec sheet on anand says 8700 has allcore of 4.3. cores 1 through 5 are all a mere 100mhz less than 8700k. All core for both says 4.3. Not sure if correct, but thats the sheet I'm reading. Thus with no OC the 8700k and 8700 should be identical in MT. If you don't OC(which base assumptions suggest the majority of buyers who purchase K models DO NOT OC, then your wasting $50 for absolutely no reason whatsoever.).
So to state again:
- 8700 non-k for all arounders
- 8600k for Max performance gaming
- 8400 for Great gaming at a tighter budget
If you really want to spend $50 to piss around with the 8700k and deal with any issues that crop up, for no ST benefit (or slightly less benefit) over other chips, and possibly 10%-12.5% in massively MT loads if you get the maximum OC to function without throttling in those specific respective loads be my guest.
However, I am consumer first. Thus, I feel obliged to let others know that they are wasting $50 for no reason, when there are other good chips, a few in the exact same architectural release that are better purchases in their respective workloads.