The AnandTech Coffee Lake Review: Initial Numbers on the Core i7-8700K and Core i5-8400
by Ian Cutress on October 5, 2017 9:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
- Intel
- Core i5
- Core i7
- Core i3
- 14nm
- Coffee Lake
- 14++
- Hex-Core
- Hyperthreading
Benchmarking Performance: CPU Legacy Tests
Our legacy tests represent benchmarks that were once at the height of their time. Some of these are industry standard synthetics, and we have data going back over 10 years. All of the data here has been rerun on Windows 10, and we plan to go back several generations of components to see how performance has evolved.
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
3D Particle Movement v1
3DPM is a self-penned benchmark, taking basic 3D movement algorithms used in Brownian Motion simulations and testing them for speed. High floating point performance, MHz and IPC wins in the single thread version, whereas the multithread version has to handle the threads and loves more cores. This is the original version, written in the style of a typical non-computer science student coding up an algorithm for their theoretical problem, and comes without any non-obvious optimizations not already performed by the compiler, such as false sharing.
CineBench 11.5 and 10
Cinebench is a widely known benchmarking tool for measuring performance relative to MAXON's animation software Cinema 4D. Cinebench has been optimized over a decade and focuses on purely CPU horsepower, meaning if there is a discrepancy in pure throughput characteristics, Cinebench is likely to show that discrepancy. Arguably other software doesn't make use of all the tools available, so the real world relevance might purely be academic, but given our large database of data for Cinebench it seems difficult to ignore a small five minute test. We run the modern version 15 in this test, as well as the older 11.5 and 10 due to our back data.
x264 HD 3.0
Similarly, the x264 HD 3.0 package we use here is also kept for historic regressional data. The latest version is 5.0.1, and encodes a 1080p video clip into a high quality x264 file. Version 3.0 only performs the same test on a 720p file, and in most circumstances the software performance hits its limit on high end processors, but still works well for mainstream and low-end. Also, this version only takes a few minutes, whereas the latest can take over 90 minutes to run.
222 Comments
View All Comments
mapesdhs - Friday, October 6, 2017 - link
It depends on the commenter. :D Sites get accused of being everything week to week.Dr. Swag - Friday, October 6, 2017 - link
Fanboys gonna fanboyGastec - Saturday, October 14, 2017 - link
You mean "orthodox"? :)prisonerX - Thursday, October 5, 2017 - link
The only time we're going to get a fair review of an Intel product is when they no longer dominate the market.It's just the reality of how things work.
Ranger1065 - Friday, October 6, 2017 - link
+1rtho782 - Friday, October 6, 2017 - link
Eh, as 8700k is currently unobtainium, it doesn't really matter, as I'm sure the review will be finished by the time it's possible to buy!!Zingam - Saturday, October 7, 2017 - link
The only problem you don't have a coffee this morning and the coffee shops are closed. You are feeling the smell but it is only in your imagination.watzupken - Thursday, October 5, 2017 - link
Not sure why there is no R5 1600 in the test though. It will be good to see how the 6 cores solution compete.Ian Cutress - Thursday, October 5, 2017 - link
We chose a dozen processors we thought would be best for the review graphs.As mentioned on every results page, you can find the other data in our Benchmark database, Bench.
https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2024?vs=20...
yeeeeman - Thursday, October 5, 2017 - link
Well, you either have bad inspiration or you chose the CPUs from AMD that most people won't buy.You are missing R7 1700 and R5 1600 which are ~ same as new Intel offerings in computing tasks but they cost less. So...