The Intel Core i7-8086K Review
by Ian Cutress on June 11, 2018 8:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
- Intel
- Core i7
- Anniversary
- Coffee Lake
- i7-8086K
- 5 GHz
- 8086K
- 5.0 GHz
Grand Theft Auto V
The highly anticipated iteration of the Grand Theft Auto franchise hit the shelves on April 14th 2015, with both AMD and NVIDIA in tow to help optimize the title. GTA doesn’t provide graphical presets, but opens up the options to users and extends the boundaries by pushing even the hardest systems to the limit using Rockstar’s Advanced Game Engine under DirectX 11. Whether the user is flying high in the mountains with long draw distances or dealing with assorted trash in the city, when cranked up to maximum it creates stunning visuals but hard work for both the CPU and the GPU.
For our test we have scripted a version of the in-game benchmark. The in-game benchmark consists of five scenarios: four short panning shots with varying lighting and weather effects, and a fifth action sequence that lasts around 90 seconds. We use only the final part of the benchmark, which combines a flight scene in a jet followed by an inner city drive-by through several intersections followed by ramming a tanker that explodes, causing other cars to explode as well. This is a mix of distance rendering followed by a detailed near-rendering action sequence, and the title thankfully spits out frame time data.
There are no presets for the graphics options on GTA, allowing the user to adjust options such as population density and distance scaling on sliders, but others such as texture/shadow/shader/water quality from Low to Very High. Other options include MSAA, soft shadows, post effects, shadow resolution and extended draw distance options. There is a handy option at the top which shows how much video memory the options are expected to consume, with obvious repercussions if a user requests more video memory than is present on the card (although there’s no obvious indication if you have a low end GPU with lots of GPU memory, like an R7 240 4GB).
To that end, we run the benchmark at 1920x1080 using an average of Very High on the settings, and also at 4K using High on most of them. We take the average results of four runs, reporting frame rate averages, 99th percentiles, and our time under analysis.
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
ASRock RX 580 Performance
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
111 Comments
View All Comments
peevee - Monday, June 11, 2018 - link
8086 being slower than 8700 just indicates an error in your methodology.For example, one has updated microcode for exploits and another does not.
TheinsanegamerN - Monday, June 18, 2018 - link
OOORrrrr....its a different motherboard, not the usual test bed. The motherboard used for this is an asrock board, which explains the difference in performance.Memo.Ray - Monday, June 11, 2018 - link
As I mentioned in my comment in the other article a couple of days ago:Intel managed to give away 8086 "binned" 8700K (AKA 8086K) and still make some money on top of it. win-win situation :D
https://www.anandtech.com/comments/12940/intels-co...
Xenphor - Monday, June 11, 2018 - link
How did they get such a lower score on the Dolphin benchmark with a 5ghz overclock on the 8086k? Isn't the benchmark single core only and considering the 8086 already turbos to 5ghz on a single core, why would there be that much of a difference? I tried it on my 8700k at 5ghz and only get a score of about 265-270 with 2666mhz ram.Ian Cutress - Monday, June 11, 2018 - link
The 5.0 GHz turbo, at stock, doesn't kick in that often. Depends on how the software sets its own affinity, and most do not. This is the danger with only single core turbo - with all the modern software in the background, even with Windows and scheduling, you rarely hit single core Turbo.Xenphor - Monday, June 11, 2018 - link
I suppose but even on the Dolphin forums spreadsheet the highest score is a 249 which is a 7700k at 5.2ghz.Ian Cutress - Tuesday, June 12, 2018 - link
I'll retest when I'm back home at the end of the week and recovered from jet lagXenphor - Tuesday, June 12, 2018 - link
Well don't feel like you have to. Just thought it was weird.Vatharian - Monday, June 11, 2018 - link
7 years ago, first batches of Core i7-2600K (like mine) were able to reach stable 5.0-5.2 GHz on water, on all 4 cores. Given 7 years difference and 32 vs 14 nm, I am maybe not disappointed (there are +2 cores, half a CPU more), but rather not amused. IPC is higher, that's one, DDR4 can reach 3 times higher frequencies than DDR3, that's two, so there are improvements, but given the bovine excrement that goes on chipset side and PCI-Express connectivity it's clear to see the stagnation.SanX - Monday, June 11, 2018 - link
Total flop. The processor in your phone is probably more hi-tech, has more transistors, more cores, and was made on more advances factories with 10nm litho being all sold below $25.