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
Benchmarking Performance: CPU Office Tests
The office programs we use for benchmarking aren't specific programs per-se, but industry standard tests that hold weight with professionals. The goal of these tests is to use an array of software and techniques that a typical office user might encounter, such as video conferencing, document editing, architectural modelling, and so on and so forth.
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
Chromium Compile (v56)
Our new compilation test uses Windows 10 Pro, VS Community 2015.3 with the Win10 SDK to combile a nightly build of Chromium. We've fixed the test for a build in late March 2017, and we run a fresh full compile in our test. Compilation is the typical example given of a variable threaded workload - some of the compile and linking is linear, whereas other parts are multithreaded.
This is another case where I think our improvised testbed is playing a bigger part, and I'd like to eventually re-run this on my standard testbed. Especially as compiling heavily hits more than just the CPU.
GeekBench4: link
Due to numerous requests, GeekBench 4 is now part of our suite. GB4 is a synthetic test using algorithms often seen in high-performance workloads along with a series of memory focused tests. GB4’s biggest asset is a single-number output which its users seem to love, although it is not always easy to translate that number into real-world performance comparisons.
Like CineBench, the Core i7-8086K does will on the synthetic single threaded test.
PCMark8: link
Despite originally coming out in 2008/2009, Futuremark has maintained PCMark8 to remain relevant in 2017. On the scale of complicated tasks, PCMark focuses more on the low-to-mid range of professional workloads, making it a good indicator for what people consider 'office' work. We run the benchmark from the commandline in 'conventional' mode, meaning C++ over OpenCL, to remove the graphics card from the equation and focus purely on the CPU. PCMark8 offers Home, Work and Creative workloads, with some software tests shared and others unique to each benchmark set.
Here the 8086K does eek out a win over the 8700K, although just barely.
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.