NEW 4K Ultra HD support: Provides stunning display resolutions,8 now up to 4096 x 2304 pixels, and supports performance across three independent displays with audio.
Intel Advanced Vector Extensions 2 (Intel AVX2): Provides optimized instructions to deliver enhanced performance on floating point-intensive
PLEASE NOTE: For any technical assistance Customer care number 01793404925
The item comes with 2 years warranty
Manufacturer warranty will not apply
All comments (98)
powerbrick
28 Sep 17#1
excellent cpu blows Ryzen out of the water if you're a gamer.
Aretak to powerbrick
28 Sep 17#6
There are very few games where it "blows Ryzen out of the water". Titles like Far Cry: Primal are the exception, rather than the rule. You can also buy a 1600 for £100 less than this and get 90% of the gaming performance, and pair it with a sub-£100 motherboard. Not to mention that it's all entirely irrelevant anyway unless you have a 144Hz+ monitor.
Buying one of these things now, with even Intel releasing six core chips in a few weeks and eight core chips next year, is a very poor investment, even if you want to buy Intel. The i3-8350K is an unlocked quad core and has a $168 RRP, so should be about £150 here. And you'll be able to buy a six core i5-8600K or i7-8700 for the same money as this "deal".
Kaby Lake is irrelevant at this point, now that it's confirmed there's no compatibility between Z270 and Z370 boards, unless you're getting a really amazing deal.
Nate1492 to Aretak
28 Sep 17#18
Who upgrades CPUs that frequently? If you buy this i7 7700k, you are happy to wait a few years surely.
powerbrick to Aretak
28 Sep 17#28
Crank it up the 5ghz and I'll think you are wrong.
MRP to powerbrick
28 Sep 17#12
A Ryzen 7 has almost double the total processing power compared to this.
Cold as while the 7700k might end up faster on single core than coffee Lake it’s a bad purchase in this day and age for that very reason. Aim for more cores.
Nate1492 to MRP
28 Sep 17#19
This is terrible advice, you need to understand each person's use case first.
MRP to Nate1492
28 Sep 17#22
To follow your laughable advice for an expensive quad core in 2017. From someone who seems to be a paid poster
Nate1492 to MRP
28 Sep 17#38
Where did I suggest to buy this CPU so close to the 8700k launch? Pretty sure I just shot down your 'more cores is better' garbage.
powerbrick to MRP
28 Sep 17#27
Utter rubbish, clock speed is still king in gaming.
By your logic we should all be getting 22 core Xeons :blush:
Smells like a paid for poster :raised_hand:
nevergofull
28 Sep 17#2
For a casual gamer would an I5-7500 do the job, or wait for Coffeelake?
pidgin to nevergofull
28 Sep 17#26
any cpu does the job really. I'd pick up i5-8400, only a week or two away
nevergofull to pidgin
28 Sep 17#40
Thanks, with a 1070 I assume Id be able to run PUBG? and the i5-8400
Looking4Glitches
28 Sep 17#3
I currently have an i5 4670k + gtx 1070 sc and when playing BF1 I get 100% cpu usage spikes regular, my cousin only has an Amd fx 6350 and he gets no problems.
adamspencer95 to Looking4Glitches
28 Sep 17#4
but what GPU is he using?
Joshimitsu91 to Looking4Glitches
28 Sep 17#8
100% CPU usage isn't a problem when running a game. Most likely the game does not utilise all the AMD's cores so it never hits 100% load across the whole CPU. That or it is being GPU limited.
Crustybeaver to Looking4Glitches
28 Sep 17#37
What is his and your gaming resolutions?
CHAOSEN3
28 Sep 17#5
Bought mine for £320 in January.
If you're looking for a great CPU for gaming then you'll find none better than this until the 8700K is released. Although it may be worth waiting for that if you're going to purchase a new CPU anyway.
I own one that's OC'd to 5.1GHz, but runs a tad bit hot. I've also delidded the CPU which has dropped the temps by around 20C at full load.
airdam
28 Sep 17#7
Isn't the new i7 7800 pit oon the 5th October? That might have an affect on the price of this model.
MysticalUndies
28 Sep 17#9
The price of this wont drop a huge amount as you can't put coffee lake in a z170 or z270 mobo. This leaves the 7700k and 6700k as the only upgrade options unless you buy a new z370 mobo. I paid 280 for this 3 months ago and if it were to drop I'd have expected it to have already happened. Coffee lake is released on Wednesday. If you need a new mobo then don't buy this and wait a few days!
Gormond
28 Sep 17#10
Seems silly buying this now when the new chips are out in a week.
vulcanproject
28 Sep 17#11
8700k is less than two weeks away. No point buying this. 8700K will beat up a Ryzen 1700 across the board for not much more money including destroying it in games and overclocking, so don't be buying an old generation now
adam0812 to vulcanproject
28 Sep 17#14
Going from a 4790k w ddr3 to a 8700k with ddr4 do you think I would see much performance gains? I'm fairly knowledgeable about GPU's but never really paid much attention to CPU's (due to not needing to be honest given what I've got already). I'm running a 1080ti and do like the occasional game of battlefield. My PC is also connected to my 4k tv and I have a 4k monitor also and I understand the 7XXX+ CPU's is the only way to get 4k netflix playback.
vulcanproject to adam0812
28 Sep 17#16
Performance gain will be highly dependent on application. I assume however you mean in games? In that case, you wouldn't see much gain in most games at all, only in games that are better threaded to use more than 4 cores, which in truth isn't many.
In future there will be obvious gains but some ways away for most titles I suspect. As for other applications, there would be big gains since you're adding two more cores to the mix. For example 8700K would be a great deal faster in transcoding tasks.
Scottc123 to adam0812
28 Sep 17#17
I have a 4790k and will be waiting for several more generations before even thinking about upgrading. The most CPU demanding things I do are Cemu emulation and some quantum chemical calculations, where single thread performance is key. There just aren't many situations for me where I need to utilse 12 concurrent threads. Given that you don't follow CPU technology closely, then I suspect neither do you have such needs.
CHAOSEN3 to Scottc123
28 Sep 17#29
Single thread performance on the 7700K is amazing, and from the leaked 8700K benchmarks there looks to be a 10%~ improvement on IPC over the 7700K.
This is a great price for the 7700K but it's not worth buying brand new as Coffeelake should be dropping in 2 weeks or so.
wonkothesane
28 Sep 17#13
I wouldn't buy Ryzen now either, AMD just announced that Ryzen will die-shrink from 14nm to 12nm in February 2018, giving another 10% performance boost (allegedly).
The new CPUs are codenamed "Pinnacle". The current 300-series motherboards will probably require a BIOS/UEFI update to utilise them. New "400-series" motherboards purpose designed for it are due out in March.
Scottc123 to wonkothesane
28 Sep 17#15
If you have this approach to PC hardware, you'll never buy anything!
MRP to wonkothesane
28 Sep 17#20
With that attitude you will keep waiting forever. Those are 6 months away for day 1 purchasers. For a minor refresh most likely.
Most people will want a good value high performance cpu with better energy saving now. The fact the current Ryzen outdo intel in all areas besides highest single core(but still excellent), Makes them bargains. It could be that prices could increase at some point.
wonkothesane to MRP
28 Sep 17#25
Strangely, my wallet is currently OK with waiting for "Pinnacle" or even Zen2. I'm still on Haswell & DDR3, so whatever I decide will also require new motherboard & RAM anyway.
frish to wonkothesane
28 Sep 17#32
If you can wait, sure. But with that attitude you can keep on waiting forever on stuff coming out. I wouldn't expect that much performance increase from AMD, but for intel, you'll be getting extra cores (over the intel architecture it's replacing) which will help.
Gort1951
28 Sep 17#21
I'm still using an I7 920.
I plan to upgrade but not sure when, maybe next year or wait for Zen 2.
vulcanproject to Gort1951
28 Sep 17#24
I had an i7 920 in one machine for 8 years before the board died. Probably ranks as one of the best CPUs ever, alongside the 2500k. It's only about as fast as a Pentium G4560 today though in games assuming it is overclocked, so you will get a good upgrade when you buy something now
Nate1492 to Gort1951
28 Sep 17#39
I'm on the same i7. My plan, atm, is to jump on board the 8700k 6 core bandwagon. Seems like a sweet CPU so far (benchmarks pending).
Oneday77
28 Sep 17#23
I love CPU threads on here. It's like ePeen joisting at dawn.
Intel sheep lovers hate competition and AMD hill billys like to share their inbred mutated multi-cores.
Being on the AMD bandwagon myself these days. Intel is a silly purchase right now until Coffeelake or is it FrapucuniomochlatteLake never can remember, is released. Even then you have to be brave to join the Intel, lets see how short this socket will last, motherboard cruise.
While the 7700K is Gaming king for now, does it actually matter unless you have a GTX 1080 Ti. The 2500k, 5 year old now is only starting to struggle. Ryzen 5 1600 will cope fine for now for £100 less.
Uncommon.Sense
28 Sep 17#30
I'm not voting either way, but it should be cold as you can get the same CPU for £271.60 from Amazon.it - yes it is only £2.10, just saying really. That and if you are buying other parts to go with this, it may be cheaper to get them at the same time.
RedRain
28 Sep 17#31
Would this give me better frame rates then a 6600k paired with a 1080 ti
MysticalUndies to RedRain
28 Sep 17#33
Depends on the resolution you are playing at and also the game. The answer isn't a simple yes or no unfortunately.
RedRain to MysticalUndies
28 Sep 17#34
Sorry i thought i added 1440p my mistake
MysticalUndies to RedRain
28 Sep 17#35
At 1440p I don't think it is worth the upgrade. I have a 7700k and I game with friends who have the same setup as you and so far only Ashes of singularity has favoured my cpu by a decent margin. There aren't many games that use more than 4 cores.
Here's a ryzen review but it nicely has the 6600k and 7700k in it. As you can see at 1440 in most games there is hardly any difference. 1080 is a different story.
But the 77 can easily do 5ghz which that review dies not show. Who gets a k moniker processor and leaves it stock?
TehJumpingJawa
28 Sep 17#41
For gaming; unless you're pairing this 7700k with a 1080 or better, and a 120/144Hz monitor, you're better off getting an R5 or R3 + B350 and investing the difference in a better GPU.
7700k is almost identical to the the several years older 4790K single threaded. My 4790k runs at 4.8 GHz, but I expect a 7700k could reach 5.0 Ghz most of the time.
Scottc123
28 Sep 17#44
No, and nor would it improve your spelling of than :o)
pidgin
28 Sep 17#45
Absolutely
The_Hoff
28 Sep 17#46
"For not much more money [than the Ryzen1700]", please feel free to tell us the price. We'll ignore the new motherboard requirement for now.
MysticalUndies
28 Sep 17#47
Your logic is completely random. The 6600k is also going to be overclocked by the owner. The review shows a nice baseline between the two processors. It is proven if you run a 6th gen processor at the same speed as 7th gen they provide exactly the same results. So if anything the 6600k will be closer when both clocked at the same speed. I own the 7700k and run it at 5ghz but I find it hard to recommend to someone with a 6600k unless they require more cores.
vulcanproject
28 Sep 17#48
The exact pricing in the UK will not be known when it launches. At the moment the early benchmarks we have seen show that it is faster than a 1700, and also faster than a 1700X in several benchmarks. Not just gaming ones..... So even if it is £60 more expensive than a 1700, it appears that it will be plenty faster to justify that price and go against 1700X pricing.
It looks like it'll be comfortably the best mainstream high end consumer CPU balancing single threaded performance, gaming and multi thread with reported excellent overclocking, 5GHz+.
The 7700K will pull away very slightly overclock versus overclock, but that's it. Assuming, of course, that you have the mammoth amount of cooling needed to sustain 5GHz on a 7700K. And needless to say the difference is even less, or nothing, when you start bringing higher resolutions into it, where your GPU is far more likely to be the limiting factor to performance.
Enjoy justifying that purchase though.
The_Hoff
28 Sep 17#50
That's my point. You don't know the pricing, so whilst it looks promising (I agree) you're speculating based on leaks and guesstimates. It will be expensive, I'm going to guess at £400.
vulcanproject
28 Sep 17#51
Not speculating on leaks. Educated approximation at worst. $359 U.S announced. Which should work out roughly £330 maybe in the U.K, precise as I said will just have to be confirmed. But as always there could be all sorts of deals around.
Your point isn't very good, I didn't claim to know the precise price.
MysticalUndies
28 Sep 17#52
In this review it consistently states the ryzen has poor 1% min fps. This is not good for smooth gaming. Min fps is just as, if not more important than average. You need to look at the bigger picture.
The_Hoff
28 Sep 17#53
You claim was that it "would beat Ryzen 1700 across the board, for not much more money" and then can't quantify the price, lol.
Same socket but not backwards compatible, ludicrous.
8700K - £353 (let's use their pricing) R1700 - £260
So, a nice 30% price difference "not much more money"
Nice job :popcorn:
RedRain
28 Sep 17#54
Thanks
vulcanproject
28 Sep 17#55
It will beat 1700 across the board and 'for not much more money' is pretty obviously not a claim of a specific price. I don't know what part of that a reasonable person couldn't possibly understand.
The_Hoff
28 Sep 17#56
No, it's no claim at all. A completely worthless empty baseless comment.
You're totally right.
vulcanproject
28 Sep 17#57
You're using prices estimated before they were officially announced, the article is over a week old now.
8700K there is $400 but it's been confirmed just this week as $359 per 1000 units. At retail it'll likely work out then well under $400 and in the U.K we shall just have to wait for precise pricing.
Yeah, nice job there using old info and outdated guesses while accusing me of estimating based on newer information. Sling your hook.
Looking4Glitches
28 Sep 17#58
Radeon 7950
The_Hoff
28 Sep 17#59
Who mentioned $?
Last I checked we deal in £ and you know perfectly well it'll be a 1:1 conversion as has always been the case. Are you suggesting different?
"Not much more" - Vulcanproject
You're smarter than this, I have no idea why you make sure moronic posts, over and over.
"The 8350K is the first i3 processor to feature four cores (previous generations of i3s had two cores and four threads)."
"Near equivalence between the outgoing i5-7600K and the new i3-8350K. Although the price points of Coffee Lake are not yet known, if Intel keep them roughly in line with the previous generations (i3 ~= $140) this will represent the best improvement in value for money since Sandy Bridge as the 8350K at $140 would be 34.8% cheaper than a 7600K at $215"
I'm going to wait to see how these turn out for gaming. Just wanted to share.
vulcanproject
28 Sep 17#61
I don't claim a precise price at first: You complain about it I then explicity state we don't know a precise price and only have estimates: You complain more I provide an estimate, strongly emphasising it is only an estimate: You complain and provide your own estimate
I have to point out your estimate is based on older information, making you hypocritical, while being a pedantic ass.
You can leave now.
dan_lesser
28 Sep 17#62
This should be compared to the Ryzen 1700x not the Ryzen 1700. The 1700 stock has a very low click speed, hence the relatively low gaming FPS. At this price it matches the price of the 1700x - ref current Amazon price (ignoring the high cost of intel motherboards) so it would be horses for courses between the two for gaming - Intel at 1080p and Ryzen for 1440/4K. Although there is very little in it either way.
I guess the 8700k will be more in the ball park of the cost of 1800/1800x (Amazon 1800x @ £399). so probably needs to be compared to them.
We don't know the benchmarks or price yet so all speculation.
powerbrick
28 Sep 17#63
mamouth cooling, nope. 7700K is the superior gaming CPU, live with it.
The_Hoff
28 Sep 17#64
I was actually trying to help you prove your point, working with the crumbs in your posts, but you're not helping me.
Just to be clear, just how much more is the 8700k going to cost? A man of your means should be able to make "educated approximations" based on the wealth of reports you've read (links?) about $ pricing and the historical conversions across the past generation or two at launch.
Or, was your initial comment and those since based entirely on thin air?
You're certainly a special case on here.
adamspencer95
28 Sep 17#65
yeah, BF1 is better on AMD hardware. i also guess his overall frame rate was lower though
also the 6350 is unlikely to bottleneck the 7950 so the GPU might end up being the bottleneck. although i think the first explanation is the more likely one
Looking4Glitches
28 Sep 17#66
Both 1080p but I use a 144mz monitor he uses a 60, my problem is with the cpu... His cpu usage is between 60-70% where as mine will spike at a 100% mostly on 64 man, each match will always start with a long spike and it's like very bad lag(my ping is around 20 when i check)... I also get very bad fps drops the same time, when the cpu has calmed down i get between 85-120.
Looking4Glitches
28 Sep 17#67
I don't get why why min requirements is i5 6600k or F6350 on benchmarks the 6600k is way more powerfull.
vulcanproject
28 Sep 17#68
Everything you asked has been answered prior to this post, if you have an elementary ability to read. Trot off and help yourself. The only special thing about this discussion are your needs, as it has become increasingly apparent.
Nate1492
28 Sep 17#69
Actually, if you are going down that route, get the G4560 for 50-55 quid. It handles 1080p far better than the R5 or R3 Ryzen.
Heck, the R3 Ryzen are pretty well considered the worst of the line for price-to-performance in games.
BobKelso
28 Sep 17#70
ryzen 1700 is £266 at amazon.
Lucifer_UK
28 Sep 17#71
I too have the 15 4670k no oc 3.4ghz.... and i have the palit 1070... i have no issues at all with bf1. What ran and hdd u have? Are u closing ALL background programs whilst playing bf1? U checked fr hardware conflicts? Bf1 shud nt cause ur i5 issues
abdi12346
28 Sep 17#72
The_Hoff
28 Sep 17#73
Empty post.
stuartc74
29 Sep 17#74
Is this better than my Pentium 90? I mainly use it to look at naked ladies on the internet.
adam0812
29 Sep 17#75
Thanks, I suspected that was the case. Like you I dabble with Cemu but to be honest even brute forcing performance still doesn't seem ideal and simply waiting for development to come along seems the more sensible option given how flawlessly I can run most Wii games on dolphin.
Ryzen 7 Pinnacle Ridge on X470 is laning in February 2018. That would be the way to go if you're considering a full platform upgrade.
Looking4Glitches
29 Sep 17#78
I have mine oc at 4.5gz as for background programes I try to close down as much as possible other than nortons and the ones i am unsure about. Do you cap your fps?.
ns6437
29 Sep 17#79
Thoughts on the 15 7600k vs the new 8600k everyone? There is about a £60 price difference between the two and I just ordered a 7600k, i'm a bit out of date with PC hardware so not sure if the wait and cost difference is justified? Could always send back my 7600k if there is some substantial evidence that on the base clock speeds performance is better for gaming? I always assumed clock speed was the deciding factor and games utilise single cores only?
Any tips ?
MRP
29 Sep 17#80
The new one is better. I would not go 4 core at all in 2017.
Looking4Glitches
29 Sep 17#81
I always thought clock speeds were the main factor, but I am noticing the newer cpu's seem to be dropping... For example look at the Intel Xeon E5-2679 v4 @ 2.50GHz scores 25236 Passmark where my I5 4670k @ 4.5GHz scores 7822. It confuses me.
MysticalUndies
29 Sep 17#82
Send it back if you can send the mobo back as well. The 8th gen i3 will be the equivalent of this processor which costs less and the new version i5 will be quicker than the 7th gen i7 and i5 with it having 6 real cores and faster single core speed. I've only had a 7700k for 3 months and wish I had the opportunity to buy the 8th gen at the time. Unfortunately they didn't exist and Ryzen suffered issues with a number of games I really enjoy playing.
Lucifer_UK
29 Sep 17#83
I run a 2560x1440p monitor and hit a solid 60fps throughout gaming, it could be there are issues with ur overclock with possible over heating. have you done a thermal scan to see how it reacts under load? I used to have a 4,2ghz oc on my cpu but for the sake of longevity I got rid of it to default. Oh I also have 16xgb 2400 ddr3. Try running cpu z and seeing what temps u are hitting, you can also stress test ur cpu to see if its got any errors.
Truth is its hard to pinpoint a computer issues with looking at a whole host of information, altho ur cpu is topping out it can be because of various issues unrelated to your cpu.
have you ruled out malware running in the background?
ns6437
29 Sep 17#84
How will the new Gen i3 be quicker? As a single core I was under the assumption the i5 7600k will still be much faster?Just interested to understand....Also thought the 7600k is 3.8GHz by default where as the i3 8k is sitting at like 3.2?
Looking4Glitches
29 Sep 17#85
I got a Cooler Master Hyper 212 few months back and since then it runs between 47-52c at full load
Looking4Glitches
29 Sep 17#86
BF1 is the only game that doesn't run great to be fair... I thought it may of had something to do with multi thread, as mine is only 4 core 4 thread. It doesn't matter if i put it on low settings and when CPU isn't full load I get great fps.
Lucifer_UK
29 Sep 17#87
Yea sorry ur nt avin a great experience with it on maxed setts. Weve gt similar systems so it should be good. You could try and cycle the cpu core priority and force it to run on single core to see if its one particular core thats givin u issues as an experiment
Gort1951 to Lucifer_UK
29 Sep 17#89
I don't know about 5GHz, you'd some very serious cooling and noise. If heat was not a problem, we'd be running 20GHz chips by now, that is why we have multicores and parallel processing.
Perhaps they'd work on Mars or they could use light.
Looking4Glitches to Gort1951
30 Sep 17#91
Yeah I will give that a shot cheers. I can't afford another cpu since I only bought the 1070 card a couple of months back not thinking that the game would demand so much from the cpu.
dan_lesser to Looking4Glitches
1 Oct 17#92
The G4560 is certainly a great chip for the price, but it is approx. equal to the R3 1200 (some benches higher and some lower), so correct, the G4560 is better value. The R5 is quicker in almost any game even in 1080p. The better value is still debatable as it would be good value against any chip £ per fps. The main thing to watch is future proofing with some extra cores now that Intel are on board. It may be a short term view to assume that gaming will remain strong on 2 cores /4 threads.
Considerably less on scan for pre order, not some dodgy website you pick out because it's the most expensive. Try again :grin:
You don't need a crystal ball you just need a bib to stop you foaming at the mouth when you're slapped down.
8700k is also seemingly even faster than leaks predicted. It beats up the 1700X in most productivity tasks and blowing it away in single threaded and gaming. It's the fastest mainstream chip around.
£343.98 here. Who knows if it can get even lower when the channel fills up with stock, usually the price does indeed drop when that happens.
Now leave. Honestly don't reply to me again. You're nearly always wrong
The_Hoff to The_Hoff
5 Oct 17#98
That's not a bad price at all. Box are having a laugh indeed!
Still, equal conversion $-£ so it's still "a little more" than the R1700.
:party:
MysticalUndies
29 Sep 17#88
Because you can overclock them. The 8th gen is a refined 14nm process so will clock faster than 7th gen the same way 7th gen clocked better than 6th gen. I had a sandybridge 2500k up until this year that had a base speed of 3.3ghz yet I ran it at 4.8ghz for 5 years. As I said I'm annoyed I bought a 7th gen i7 3 months ago. I''d be pissed if I bought an i5 and if I'd litterally just bought an i5 then I'd be pretty stupid. There are already leaked benchmarks showing the overclocked i3 performamce almost matching the 7th gen i7 for 4 core performance.
MysticalUndies
30 Sep 17#90
I have an Nzxt x62 that runs pretty much silent. This allows me to hit 5ghz in the silent mode with this chip running 1.40v. Even my 5 year old air cooler allowed me to hit 4.9 although was slightly louder.
Nate1492 to MysticalUndies
1 Oct 17#93
Stop talking about future proofing. It is *never* the right budget choice.
You are suggesting to buy a CPU that is triple the cost 'just in case in a 2 years it gets out of date'.
Why not buy the 50 quid CPU now, and buy another 50 quid CPU in 2 years, rather than buy a 150 CPU now?
You could maybe even sell the G4560 for 20-30 quid in a few years time.
If you game at 1080p and have a budget: spend the 100 quid more into the GFX card.
![Fresh Breakfast Meat Box (Using code) @ Campbells Meat [Haggis / Lorne Sausage / Bacon / Black Pudding & More]](/images/topics/208684_1.jpg)
![[Xbox One] Q. u. b. e: Director's Cut on Deals with Gold](/images/topics/208716_1.jpg)
Opening post
All comments (98)
Buying one of these things now, with even Intel releasing six core chips in a few weeks and eight core chips next year, is a very poor investment, even if you want to buy Intel. The i3-8350K is an unlocked quad core and has a $168 RRP, so should be about £150 here. And you'll be able to buy a six core i5-8600K or i7-8700 for the same money as this "deal".
Kaby Lake is irrelevant at this point, now that it's confirmed there's no compatibility between Z270 and Z370 boards, unless you're getting a really amazing deal.
Cold as while the 7700k might end up faster on single core than coffee Lake it’s a bad purchase in this day and age for that very reason. Aim for more cores.
By your logic we should all be getting 22 core Xeons :blush:
Smells like a paid for poster :raised_hand:
If you're looking for a great CPU for gaming then you'll find none better than this until the 8700K is released. Although it may be worth waiting for that if you're going to purchase a new CPU anyway.
I own one that's OC'd to 5.1GHz, but runs a tad bit hot. I've also delidded the CPU which has dropped the temps by around 20C at full load.
In future there will be obvious gains but some ways away for most titles I suspect. As for other applications, there would be big gains since you're adding two more cores to the mix. For example 8700K would be a great deal faster in transcoding tasks.
This is a great price for the 7700K but it's not worth buying brand new as Coffeelake should be dropping in 2 weeks or so.
The new CPUs are codenamed "Pinnacle". The current 300-series motherboards will probably require a BIOS/UEFI update to utilise them.
New "400-series" motherboards purpose designed for it are due out in March.
guru3d.com/new…tml
Most people will want a good value high performance cpu with better energy saving now. The fact the current Ryzen outdo intel in all areas besides highest single core(but still excellent), Makes them bargains. It could be that prices could increase at some point.
I'm still on Haswell & DDR3, so whatever I decide will also require new motherboard & RAM anyway.
I plan to upgrade but not sure when, maybe next year or wait for Zen 2.
It's like ePeen joisting at dawn.
Intel sheep lovers hate competition and AMD hill billys like to share their inbred mutated multi-cores.
Being on the AMD bandwagon myself these days. Intel is a silly purchase right now until Coffeelake or is it FrapucuniomochlatteLake never can remember, is released.
Even then you have to be brave to join the Intel, lets see how short this socket will last, motherboard cruise.
While the 7700K is Gaming king for now, does it actually matter unless you have a GTX 1080 Ti. The 2500k, 5 year old now is only starting to struggle. Ryzen 5 1600 will cope fine for now for £100 less.
Here's a ryzen review but it nicely has the 6600k and 7700k in it. As you can see at 1440 in most games there is hardly any difference. 1080 is a different story.
Cpu gaming performance 1080 / 1440
7700k is almost identical to the the several years older 4790K single threaded. My 4790k runs at 4.8 GHz, but I expect a 7700k could reach 5.0 Ghz most of the time.
I own the 7700k and run it at 5ghz but I find it hard to recommend to someone with a 6600k unless they require more cores.
It looks like it'll be comfortably the best mainstream high end consumer CPU balancing single threaded performance, gaming and multi thread with reported excellent overclocking, 5GHz+.
techspot.com/rev…tml
The 7700K will pull away very slightly overclock versus overclock, but that's it. Assuming, of course, that you have the mammoth amount of cooling needed to sustain 5GHz on a 7700K. And needless to say the difference is even less, or nothing, when you start bringing higher resolutions into it, where your GPU is far more likely to be the limiting factor to performance.
Enjoy justifying that purchase though.
Your point isn't very good, I didn't claim to know the precise price.
Same socket but not backwards compatible, ludicrous.
Here's a helping hand:
anandtech.com/sho…00k
8700K - £353 (let's use their pricing)
R1700 - £260
So, a nice 30% price difference "not much more money"
Nice job :popcorn:
You're totally right.
8700K there is $400 but it's been confirmed just this week as $359 per 1000 units. At retail it'll likely work out then well under $400 and in the U.K we shall just have to wait for precise pricing.
Yeah, nice job there using old info and outdated guesses while accusing me of estimating based on newer information. Sling your hook.
Last I checked we deal in £ and you know perfectly well it'll be a 1:1 conversion as has always been the case. Are you suggesting different?
"Not much more" - Vulcanproject
You're smarter than this, I have no idea why you make sure moronic posts, over and over.
:popcorn:
"The 8350K is the first i3 processor to feature four cores (previous generations of i3s had two cores and four threads)."
"Near equivalence between the outgoing i5-7600K and the new i3-8350K. Although the price points of Coffee Lake are not yet known, if Intel keep them roughly in line with the previous generations (i3 ~= $140) this will represent the best improvement in value for money since Sandy Bridge as the 8350K at $140 would be 34.8% cheaper than a 7600K at $215"
I'm going to wait to see how these turn out for gaming. Just wanted to share.
I then explicity state we don't know a precise price and only have estimates: You complain more
I provide an estimate, strongly emphasising it is only an estimate: You complain and provide your own estimate
I have to point out your estimate is based on older information, making you hypocritical, while being a pedantic ass.
You can leave now.
I guess the 8700k will be more in the ball park of the cost of 1800/1800x (Amazon 1800x @ £399). so probably needs to be compared to them.
We don't know the benchmarks or price yet so all speculation.
7700K is the superior gaming CPU, live with it.
Just to be clear, just how much more is the 8700k going to cost? A man of your means should be able to make "educated approximations" based on the wealth of reports you've read (links?) about $ pricing and the historical conversions across the past generation or two at launch.
Or, was your initial comment and those since based entirely on thin air?
You're certainly a special case on here.
also the 6350 is unlikely to bottleneck the 7950 so the GPU might end up being the bottleneck. although i think the first explanation is the more likely one
Heck, the R3 Ryzen are pretty well considered the worst of the line for price-to-performance in games.
pcgamesn.com/pla…ate
I would wait for Coffee Lake.
Any tips ?
Truth is its hard to pinpoint a computer issues with looking at a whole host of information, altho ur cpu is topping out it can be because of various issues unrelated to your cpu.
have you ruled out malware running in the background?
It doesn't matter if i put it on low settings and when CPU isn't full load I get great fps.
If heat was not a problem, we'd be running 20GHz chips by now, that is why we have multicores and parallel processing.
Perhaps they'd work on Mars or they could use light.
£400...
I should get myself a crystal ball:
box.co.uk/Int…tml
:muscle:
You don't need a crystal ball you just need a bib to stop you foaming at the mouth when you're slapped down.
8700k is also seemingly even faster than leaks predicted. It beats up the 1700X in most productivity tasks and blowing it away in single threaded and gaming. It's the fastest mainstream chip around.
£343.98 here. Who knows if it can get even lower when the channel fills up with stock, usually the price does indeed drop when that happens.
Now leave. Honestly don't reply to me again. You're nearly always wrong
Still, equal conversion $-£ so it's still "a little more" than the R1700.
:party:
You are suggesting to buy a CPU that is triple the cost 'just in case in a 2 years it gets out of date'.
Why not buy the 50 quid CPU now, and buy another 50 quid CPU in 2 years, rather than buy a 150 CPU now?
You could maybe even sell the G4560 for 20-30 quid in a few years time.
If you game at 1080p and have a budget: spend the 100 quid more into the GFX card.
box.co.uk/Int…tml