Coffee Lake Desktop Processors

The final part of the launch is focused around filling out the processor line-up for the desktop. Intel launched six Coffee Lake-based desktop processors back in October, so we have had almost a five month wait for the rest of the line to see the light of day. In this batch of processors we see the regular and low powered processors that normally sit in Intel’s strategy, as well as a number of Pentium and Celeron parts.

AnandTech Cores TDP Freq L3 vPro DRAM
DDR4
iGPU iGPU
Turbo
Core i7-8700K $359 6 / 12 95 W 3.7 / 4.7 12 MB No 2666 24 EUs 1200
Core i7-8700 $303 6 / 12 65 W 3.2 / 4.6 12 MB Yes 2666 24 EUs 1200
Core i7-8700T* $303 6 / 12 35 W 2.4 / 4.0 12 MB Yes 2666 24 EUs 1200

For the Core i7 family, the new entrant is the Core i7-8700T. This will be the only six-core processor, with hyperthreading, to fall into the 35W bracket. It features the full L3 cache support, dual channel memory up to DDR4-2666, and is eligible for vPro support. It is worth noting that the 35W TDP value is only valid when the CPU is at its base frequency, which in this case is 2.4 GHz. At the peak turbo of 4.0 GHz, or for all-cores somewhere in the middle (again, Intel won’t specify), the power will obviously be higher.

AnandTech Cores TDP Freq L3 vPro DRAM
DDR4
iGPU iGPU
Turbo
Core i5-8600K $257 6 / 6 95 W 3.6 / 4.3 9 MB No 2666 24 EUs 1150
Core i5-8600* $213 6 / 6 65 W 3.1 / 4.3 9 MB Yes 2666 24 EUs 1150
Core i5-8600T* $213 6 / 6 35 W 2.3 / 3.7 9 MB Yes 2666 24 EUs 1150
Core i5-8500* $192 6 / 6 65 W 3.0 / 4.1 9 MB Yes 2666 24 EUs 1100
Core i5-8500T* $192 6 / 6 35 W 2.1 / 3.5 9 MB Yes 2666 24 EUs 1100
Core i5-8400 $182 6 / 6 65 W 2.8 / 4.0 9 MB No 2666 24 EUs 1050
Core i5-8400T* $192 6 / 6 35 W 1.7 / 3.3 9 MB No 2666 24 EUs 1050

In the Core i5, most of the parts are new. As with the Core i5 desktop parts that are already launched, these have six-cores but do not have multithreading. They have a reduced L3 cache per core compared to the Core i7, and it is worth noting that the base frequency for the processors does not actually get that high – only 3.1 GHz for the Core i5-8600. All of the parts support dual channel DDR4-2666, and all but one processor supports vPro.

AnandTech Cores TDP Freq L3 vPro DRAM
DDR4
iGPU iGPU
Turbo
Core i3-8350K $168 4 / 4 91 W 4.0 8 MB No 2400 23 EUs 1150
Core i3-8300* $138 4 / 4 65 W 3.7 8 MB No 2400 23 EUs 1150
Core i3-8300T* $138 4 / 4 35 W 3.2 8 MB No 2400 23 EUs 1100
Core i3-8100 $117 4 / 4 65 W 3.6 6 MB No 2400 23 EUs 1100
Core i3-8100T* $117 4 / 4 35 W 3.1 6 MB No 2400 23 EUs  1100

There are only three new members of the Core i3 section, all of which are quad-core processors. The two Core i3-8300/T parts have the peak 2MB L3 per core, while the Core i3-8100T only has 1.5 MB L3 per core. These parts are all reduced in memory frequency as well, supporting dual-channel DDR4-2400. Intel has no vPro parts in the Core i3 line, but all the Core i3 SKUs will support Optane.

AnandTech Cores TDP Freq L3 DRAM
DDR4
iGPU iGPU
Turbo
Pentium Gold G5600 $86 2 / 4 54 W 3.9 4 MB 2400 UHD 630 350 / 1100
Pentium Gold G5500 $75 2 / 4 54 W 3.8 4 MB 2400 UHD 630 350 / 1100
Pentium Gold G5500T $75 2 / 4 35 W 3.2 4 MB 2400 UHD 630 350 / 1100
Pentium Gold G5400 $64 2 / 4 54 W 3.7 4 MB 2400 UHD 630 350 / 1050
Pentium Gold G5400T $64 2 / 4 35 W 3.1 4 MB 2400 UHD 630 350 / 1050

The Pentium Gold processors fit in where the older Core i3 processors once stood: dual core with hyperthreading. Intel rates the ‘full speed’ models at 54W, while the lower-power T-models are at 35W. One of the bigger disadvantages of these parts is the lack of Optane support, plus also the DDR4-2400 memory support, however they do fill up the lower cost market. Intel differentiates the Pentium Gold as having the latest Core microarchitecture compared to Pentium Silver which uses the Atom core design.

AnandTech Cores TDP Freq L3 DRAM
DDR4
iGPU iGPU
Turbo
Celeron G4920 $52 2 / 2 54 W 3.2 2 MB 2400 UHD 610 350 / 1050
Celeron G4900 $42 2 / 2 54 W 3.1 2 MB 2400 UHD 610 350 / 1050
Celeron G4900T $42 2 / 2 35 W 2.9 2 MB 2400 UHD 610 350 / 1000

No real fancy words for Celeron here: these are Intel’s dual core designs for the cheapest Intel-based PCs. Just pair one up with a H310 motherboard, a single stick of memory, and a cheap HDD, and there’s a PC. What is different is that Intel has dropped the 'G' in the SKU name in the document they gave us (such as G4920). We have seen other documents from Intel that have the G, so we need see why there is a discrepancy.

Update: ARK confirms that all the Celerons have 'G' in the name.

* New Parts

** Blank spots in tables will be filled in as we get information

Per-Core Turbo Ratios

Due to some sleuthing, and despite Intel's insistence these are proprietary information, we have all the official per-core turbo ratios for this processors.

The most interesting element to these values are the 35W low-powered T processors. In each case, the all core turbo is much, much higher than the base frequency. For example, the Core i5-8400T has a base frequency of 1.70 GHz, but the all-core turbo is set at 3.0 GHz - almost double. Given the fact that TDP is defined at the base frequency, it is quite clear that the all-core turbo mode suggested to motherboard manufacturers is going to blow that 35W limit on the i5-8400T.

High-Performance Mobile: Coffee Lake with Iris Plus at 28W New Optane Branding: Core i9+, Core i7+, Core i5+
Comments Locked

123 Comments

View All Comments

  • Ratman6161 - Tuesday, April 3, 2018 - link

    I know all about that. Last year we bought a round of thin and light laptops where the users were stamping their feet and insisting they needed i7's. At first I tried hard to explain to them that in the 7th gen mobile "U" cpu's there was practically no difference (and definitely no difference they would notice) between an i7U and an i5U. We bought the i5's and they were P.O'd but they wouldn't have been happy no matter what we gave them. I was very sorely tempted to order a set of Intel i7 Inside stickers to put on them - you can actually buy them on Amazon:)
  • Icehawk - Thursday, April 5, 2018 - link

    My manager just didn’t understand why I said buying an i7 laptop doesn’t solve our performance problems - we aren’t ordering the 4 core model, not sure why our vendor hasn’t tried to upsell at least. Yes, I want some fries with that dammit.
  • Chaitanya - Tuesday, April 3, 2018 - link

    Stupid marketing of i7+ , what's next brainfart from this marketing team?
  • goatfajitas - Tuesday, April 3, 2018 - link

    Actually the issues were process related and continued delays on 10nm parts... The marketing is a BS reaction to try and sell more parts and "slap some lipstick on that pig". Most of their customers don't know or care about the differences, they just want the current "i5" or "i7" part and buy it.
  • nukunukoo - Tuesday, April 3, 2018 - link

    Here's to hoping for a surprise 6-core, 32GB Macbook Pro this year...
  • damianrobertjones - Tuesday, April 3, 2018 - link

    No, no and no. The value of that machine will fall fast once Apple moves to (Add cpu here) in 2020.
  • goatfajitas - Tuesday, April 3, 2018 - link

    LOL. Keep dreaming. Apple has a tiny marketshare and their media strong CPU's are not and will not be a match for Intel in real computing space.
  • PeachNCream - Tuesday, April 3, 2018 - link

    But there's already a lot of speculation based on a Bloomberg article of a shift starting in 2020 from Intel x86 CPUs to some sort of higher performance ARM processor in order to unify the OS experience across Apple products. Take a look on Google for Kalamata which is the project name. If what looks like leaks are true, there's a change blowing in the wind in Apple's Macintosh product line.
  • Ratman6161 - Tuesday, April 3, 2018 - link

    I doubt it will be a good change if you are a die hard Mac person. As things stand today, no ARM chip is going to match Intel for raw computing power. Power consumption, sure but no where close on raw speed. To me it seems almost like they are getting ready to write off their traditional fan base of graphics people.
  • PeachNCream - Tuesday, April 3, 2018 - link

    I really don't know what to make of this from a performance and compute perspective (or any other perspective for that matter) as I don't own or use a Mac. If its true that Apple is planning to use in-house ARM processors in only a couple of years, then they've probably already been in development for a while and they will need to compete with x86 hardware if they expect to land sales. At this point, I'm just curious about what will happen and how it might or might not shake up the industry.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now