Coffeelake thread, benchmarks, reviews, input, everything.

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

PeterScott

Platinum Member
Jul 7, 2017
2,605
1,540
136
Except that those units are not moving in isolation, they are moving in conjunction with the other units - so they don't pass through each other, squads move together, units do smart stuff. So it's not actually a simple task at all as all the units pathfinding is effected by what the other units pathfinding is doing at exactly the same time. So you can't just parallelize it all. You can parallelize some aspects but ultimately you are not doing 10,000 independent moves, you are doing 1 very big complex move.

I never said pathfinding was a simple task. It's a very complex one, and there are many research papers on it. But typically the game logic does treat this as a series of individual tasks, that can be run fully parallel.

Pathfinding also often appears to be notoriously bad in games because it is a very complex problem when many independent units try cross choke points, which can often choke computer pathfinding to a near halt.

Units are moving in very small segments. Each unit during it's time slice will scan for obstacles in it's path, including other units, which in the simplest case are treated as stationary obstacles, at the next level they can do some simple predictions about where other units are going, and in more advanced algorithms, it can in fact query and exchange route information with other nearby units, to have some kind of cooperative algorithm. But these are still basically a multitude of units behaving individually deciding their path, and can be run as a fully parallel task.
 

elhefegaming

Member
Aug 23, 2017
157
70
101
To be honest I completely forgot about "background stuff"

I guess the sweetspot is probably an 8-12thread CPU? (to have like 8 dedicated to the game, there's a limit to how much you can do parallelism) and 4 dedicated to 'stuff'
 

PeterScott

Platinum Member
Jul 7, 2017
2,605
1,540
136
To be honest I completely forgot about "background stuff"

I guess the sweetspot is probably an 8-12thread CPU? (to have like 8 dedicated to the game, there's a limit to how much you can do parallelism) and 4 dedicated to 'stuff'

No. Background stuff doesn't need 4 dedicated CPU cores, it doesn't need 1. It's a tiny fraction of one modern CPU.
 
Reactions: osgorth and pcp7

TheLycan

Member
Mar 8, 2017
34
11
36
This is a different discussion.
Of course. Its the impact in performance one takes if it uses 4t, instead of 8. Anyway, ive said since ryzen was released: you are foul if you still buy the i5s. Thats obsolete product, at that price.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk
 

eddman

Senior member
Dec 28, 2010
239
87
101
Of course. Its the impact in performance one takes if it uses 4t, instead of 8. Anyway, ive said since ryzen was released: you are foul if you still buy the i5s. Thats obsolete product, at that price.
We are discussing CFL here, and an i3-8100 for $120 would be a great purchase. An i5-7500 (its near equivalent) usually does 80-100 FPS in BF1 64 player maps on ultra at 1080, without dropping below 60 FPS.

Yes, 6 and 8 cores would do better, but that's still a huge value for the price.
 
Last edited:

Glo.

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2015
5,765
4,671
136
We are discussing CFL here, and an i3-8100 for $120 would be a great purchase. An i5-7500 (its near equivalent) does 80-100 FPS in BF1 64 player maps on ultra at 1080, without dropping below 60 FPS.

Yes, 6 and 8 cores would do better, but that's still a huge value for the price.
If I play only in Heroes of the Storm, and Overwatch, and plan to move to 1440p, epic settings 60-75 Hz, will I be fine with 4 cores, or will have to go for 6 cores?

And yes, Im interested only in Intel offering, on this front.
 
Mar 10, 2006
11,715
2,012
126
If I play only in Heroes of the Storm, and Overwatch, and plan to move to 1440p, epic settings 60-75 Hz, will I be fine with 4 cores, or will have to go for 6 cores?

And yes, Im interested only in Intel offering, on this front.

I think you will be fine with four cores. Total overkill actually for Overwatch and HoS.



 
Last edited:
Reactions: Phynaz and Glo.

TheLycan

Member
Mar 8, 2017
34
11
36
If I play only in Heroes of the Storm, and Overwatch, and plan to move to 1440p, epic settings 60-75 Hz, will I be fine with 4 cores, or will have to go for 6 cores?

And yes, Im interested only in Intel offering, on this front.
You are fine, but to pay so much for current i5, is not worth it. Better you wait 1 month for the new generation.

Ps: i removed the signature
 

Glo.

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2015
5,765
4,671
136
You are fine, but to pay so much for current i5, is not worth it. Better you wait 1 month for the new generation.

Ps: i removed the signature
Well, Im thinking between 6 core/6t Core i5, that will have 35W TDP, and best performance/price ratio, or 4C/4T 35W TDP best performance/price ratio CPU. Both CPUs will come out early 2018.

Orrr... 4C/8T CPU if Intel is planning to release in Coffee Lake lineup.
 

R0H1T

Platinum Member
Jan 12, 2013
2,582
162
106
Well, Im thinking between 6 core/6t Core i5, that will have 35W TDP, and best performance/price ratio, or 4C/4T 35W TDP best performance/price ratio CPU. Both CPUs will come out early 2018.

Orrr... 4C/8T CPU if Intel is planning to release in Coffee Lake lineup.
Why do you need a 35W 6c/6t, are you gaming on a laptop?
 

R0H1T

Platinum Member
Jan 12, 2013
2,582
162
106
Why does it matter to you? No offence but it is my business why I want low power CPU, instead of higher ones.
It doesn't but 6c/6t at 35W will not clock high enough, so unless the games you run are highly multithreaded something like 65W CPU would be much better, assuming it's meant for a desktop.
 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
25,214
3,632
126
Why do you need a 35W 6c/6t, are you gaming on a laptop?
The 35 W Intel chips are much under appreciated. On average, you lose only about 20% of the speed vs the full powered chips (although the exact difference depends a lot on the particular task and the slowdown can be huge in some applications). It remains to be seen, but if that small performance drop on average holds with Coffee Lake, then a 35 W, 6 core Coffee Lake will perform similar to a 91 W, 4 core Kaby Lake on multi-threaded applications. As long as the i5/i7 Kaby Lake performance is good enough for your needs, then the 35 W chip gives benefits:
  • You could run it without a fan if your cooling system is good enough. Or at least with a very quiet fan. This helps for audiophiles, sound recording, or just people who get annoyed by white noise.
  • Along the same lines, you can run it in an enclosure without adequate cooling (such as inside a closed computer desk, inside industrial equipment, etc.)
  • Assuming typical use, you'd save ~$20/year in electricity. If you live in a hot climate, then you'd also save another ~$20/year on air conditioning.
  • You can fit it into smaller systems far more easily. Less intrusive, more attractive, such as when it is your home theater PC.
  • If you are like me, my office tends to run hot. Just having 56 W less heat being dumped into the room makes using the computers far more pleasant.
  • Cheaper, smaller UPC is needed.
  • Etc.
Low power desktop chips aren't for everyone. But, if you have the money and don't need top speed, they really should be considered more.
 
Reactions: osgorth and whm1974

Glo.

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2015
5,765
4,671
136
Core i7 7700T boosts to 3.6 GHz on ALL cores, and is able to maintain this core speed.

Lets say that 6C/6T on 14 nm+++ is able to maintain 3.5 GHz on all cores, and it still will be a winner, vs 7700T in Multithreaded applications, and will boost to the same speed with just 4 cores, as 7700T.

3.5 GHz is too slow to get 60-75 MHz in 1440p Epic settings in Overwatch?

And yes, this CPU is meant for a desktop.

Also, here is test and comparison of 7700T vs other CPUs: https://www.computerbase.de/2017-01/intel-core-i7-7700t-test-kaby-lake/3/


Even at 1080p, you are not loosing much by going 35W vs 91W.
 

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
9,460
1,570
96
The 35 W Intel chips are much under appreciated. On average, you lose only about 20% of the speed vs the full powered chips (although the exact difference depends a lot on the particular task and the slowdown can be huge in some applications). It remains to be seen, but if that small performance drop on average holds with Coffee Lake, then a 35 W, 6 core Coffee Lake will perform similar to a 91 W, 4 core Kaby Lake on multi-threaded applications. As long as the i5/i7 Kaby Lake performance is good enough for your needs, then the 35 W chip gives benefits:
  • You could run it without a fan if your cooling system is good enough. Or at least with a very quiet fan. This helps for audiophiles, sound recording, or just people who get annoyed by white noise.
  • Along the same lines, you can run it in an enclosure without adequate cooling (such as inside a closed computer desk, inside industrial equipment, etc.)
  • Assuming typical use, you'd save ~$20/year in electricity. If you live in a hot climate, then you'd also save another ~$20/year on air conditioning.
  • You can fit it into smaller systems far more easily. Less intrusive, more attractive, such as when it is your home theater PC.
  • If you are like me, my office tends to run hot. Just having 56 W less heat being dumped into the room makes using the computers far more pleasant.
  • Cheaper, smaller UPC is needed.
  • Etc.
Low power desktop chips aren't for everyone. But, if you have the money and don't need top speed, they really should be considered more.
While I myself would go with a 65W CPU, I can see the benefits of going with a 35W one if you are using a HTPC style SFF case.
 

Glo.

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2015
5,765
4,671
136
Core i7 7700T boosts to 3.6 GHz on ALL cores, and is able to maintain this core speed.

Lets say that 6C/6T on 14 nm+++ is able to maintain 3.5 GHz on all cores, and it still will be a winner, vs 7700T in Multithreaded applications, and will boost to the same speed with just 4 cores, as 7700T.

3.5 GHz is too slow to get 60-75 MHz in 1440p Epic settings in Overwatch?

And yes, this CPU is meant for a desktop.

Also, here is test and comparison of 7700T vs other CPUs: https://www.computerbase.de/2017-01/intel-core-i7-7700t-test-kaby-lake/3/


Even at 1080p, you are not loosing much by going 35W vs 91W.
However, as usual.

Read this excerpt, from this review:
But 35 watts TDP also means absolutely 35 watts of "consumption"? As usual, no, because it only describes how the cooling system has to look. Especially the AVX test in Prime95 leaves Intel processors always run out of the rudder because of increased voltage during consumption, between idle and load the power consumption is then at 75 watts. For real applications from everyday life and the idle, the difference is around 50 watts.

On the other hand, polish site, that is not known to anyone here tested the 7700T, with Voltcraft Energy Logger 4000F, and this is what they have found:

61W difference in power consumption under load, between stock 7700K, and 7700K, which should theoretically be in line with the TDPs of those CPUs.


After thinking about this, I think better way is to go with 8400, buy good MoBo, like ASRock H370 iTX and set the power limit of this CPU to 35W.
 

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,520
1,575
126
However, as usual.

Read this excerpt, from this review:
But 35 watts TDP also means absolutely 35 watts of "consumption"? As usual, no, because it only describes how the cooling system has to look. Especially the AVX test in Prime95 leaves Intel processors always run out of the rudder because of increased voltage during consumption, between idle and load the power consumption is then at 75 watts. For real applications from everyday life and the idle, the difference is around 50 watts.

On the other hand, polish site, that is not known to anyone here tested the 7700T, with Voltcraft Energy Logger 4000F, and this is what they have found:

61W difference in power consumption under load, between stock 7700K, and 7700K, which should theoretically be in line with the TDPs of those CPUs.


After thinking about this, I think better way is to go with 8400, buy good MoBo, like ASRock H370 iTX and set the power limit of this CPU to 35W.
System power consumption is always sketchy when trying to extrapolate CPU power consumption. 27 watts over stock for the 7700K to get to 5ghz looks very good...but is that real?
 

R0H1T

Platinum Member
Jan 12, 2013
2,582
162
106
System power consumption is always sketchy when trying to extrapolate CPU power consumption. 27 watts over stock for the 7700K to get to 5ghz looks very good...but is that real?
I thought he was talking about total system power consumption, was pretty obvious looking at the charts, or did he assume that as just CPU power consumption?

Might be a golden sample, but yes plausible.
 

jpiniero

Lifer
Oct 1, 2010
14,847
5,457
136
Pretty interesting, the latest desktop roadmap shared does have a dual core Coffee Lake model. TBH I would be surprised Intel would do this since it would only be for Pentiums and Celerons. The earlier rumor had them re-releasing more Kaby Lake duals with higher clocks.
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,453
10,121
126
After thinking about this, I think better way is to go with 8400, buy good MoBo, like ASRock H370 iTX and set the power limit of this CPU to 35W.
That sounds ideal for my HTPC CFL build I'm thinking about. (Not "planning", because I don't know when I'll finally have spare money again.)

Is there going to be a "T" or "S" version of the i3-8100 or i3-8400 at release? I'm thinking, I might actually go with a low-power CPU. They weren't common (I think that they were "Tray only"?), but on Skylake's release, they had a number of similarly-numbered SKUs, that were low-power variants. Harder to find though, don't think Newegg carried many or even any of them.
 
Reactions: Drazick

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,453
10,121
126
Pretty interesting, the latest desktop roadmap shared does have a dual core Coffee Lake model.
Roadmap pics? Are they available somewhere, or posted in a thread here? I've been curious if there were any 2C/4T CFL CPUs, especially any that were unlocked.
 
Reactions: Drazick
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |