The initial reviews are being used as an argument that Skylake-X is unusable
No, they are being used to support the argument that Skylake-X represents a performance regression in games, not that it's "unusable".
so you'll understand my skepticism that the reviewers honestly did their best to evaluate the product.
My understanding is that you're being awfully testy for some reason. Angry that a mainstream Intel product is going to upstage an HEDT Intel product?
Now you want to spread the truth
I always want to spread the truth . . . not just now.
and you want Coffee Lake to be the best cpu
Not really. I just have to accept it as a highly-probable fact, since right now, the best gaming CPU in a lot of games is . . . Kabylake. So take Kabylake, keep clocks the same, give it two more cores and some more L3. BAM! Coffeelake. Which will be the best gaming CPU.
The whole crux of your argument is that you think there's a smear campaign going on in this thread intended to run down Skylake-X. There isn't, or at least there isn't one of which I am aware.
but learn the difference between assumption and conclusion and don't claim to be rational when mistaking one for the other.
You do realize that deductive reasoning actually has meritorious applications, don't you?
We want new products and higher performance, but we don't have information how game engines scale on 8700k vs 7700k (and in some cases it's the drivers that aren't scaling). This thread is not an exception when it comes to flawed logic and arguments.
So you honestly think the 8700k will be SLOWER than the 7700k? Because right now, the 7700k is still the top-dog gaming CPU. Not the 7900X or 7920X or anything else . . . 7700k. You can get a few games faster on Broadwell-E vs Kabylake at stock because of the massive L3, but the 8700k will go a long way towards mitigating that effect.