For all the leaked wonky Zen 2 results on pre-release BIOSes, 1usmus has confirmed that those BIOS versions were locked down. You will need AGESA 1.0.0.3AB version BIOSes to fully utilize Zen 2.
I downclocked my 8700K to 3.9 GHz, CB15 multi-cpu was about 1300, CB20 was about 3140. So at least for their multithreadeds test of Cinebench, the 8700K was running at <4 GHz.
Let me add some seasoning to that huge grain of salt.There is no way an 8700K scores only 170 points in CB15 1T, unless Turbo Boost is acting wonky. Take these benchmarks with a huge grain of salt.
I would agree that neither unit was ran at its max potential,The 8700K was locked at 4.3GHz.
The comparison with the 3600 is seriously flawed since it doesn't properly reflect the 8700K's capabilities regardless of which RAM was used.
Neither IMO does it properly represent the 3600; B450 mobo with non-final BIOS.
You're both right. They are listing 9 AM EST (Standard Time, we are currently on Daylight Saving Time in the US) which is 10 AM EDT, so 9 AM CDT.There is conflicting information out there. Some say 9AM CDT +/- a few hours. So don't be suprised if nothing is up at 9AM Eastern.
Perhaps a small number of cores were boosted past the normal 4.2GHz ceiling for a low-threaded usage period and the temperature monitor picked up the highest core temperature? Otherwise, given the relatively low power usage, I don't see how it could jump 10C just like that.I see no indication in the video of how they set up their 8700k. I also see no power numbers for the 8700k. The power numbers for the 3600 are there though . . . and it stays within its rated TDP. Temps are spiky as hell though. Wonder why?
I wouldn't even bother comparing with 8700K perf/watt or perf/dollar anymore.I would take away from this video and confidently state that there is no way the I7-8700K can match the performance per watt or the performance per price of the 3600.
The 8700K was locked at 4.3GHz.
The comparison with the 3600 is seriously flawed since it doesn't properly reflect the 8700K's capabilities regardless of which RAM was used.
Neither IMO does it properly represent the 3600; B450 mobo with non-final BIOS.
Just ignore Intel results for now and wait for results from trusted & established sources. We already know Zen 2 performance looks good on all fronts, further analysis requires the best reviews anyway.That 8700k result is weird, I have to very careful when reading everything about Intel result since specture&meltdown fix is whether taking negative effect or not......
Because they wanted to both stave off AMD and increase ASP, dropping two birds with one stone. 6c/12t on i5 9600K would have beaten 8c/8t on i7 9700K, and 9700K with HT enabled would have made 9900K obsolete from day 1.I'd like to see the 3600 up against the 9600K. Lets not forget that it is Intel's latest 6c CPU. That it lacks HT is neither here nor there; Intel should be the ones explaining why they don't offer HT anymore (except for the 9900K).
I don't see why you would want to upgrade to 3600. CPU's aren't meant to be replaced every couple of years.I have a B450 and a 1600 right now and contemplate swapping for a 3600. Does the PBO work with any chipset or just with newer ones?
a bit behind intels 6/12 in games but memory was 2666Mhz for both (making my point above)
hmm in some test , It's very close to 9900K. dangerous!
You have PBO but not the new PBO that goes a little higher, you need X570 for that.Still, my question remains unanswered. Does PBO works with older chipsets (like my B450), or it is restricted to newer ones?
Since it's on X370 it's still without AGESA 1.0.0.3AB and the final BIOS. Very impressive for a $200 CPU though.