Intel kicks off eighth-gen Core with four cores and eight threads in 15W

Intel is kicking off its eighth generation of Core processors this morning. Contrary to recent buzz, however, the four chips the company is debuting today aren’t Coffee Lake CPUs, or even desktop parts. In fact, the eighth generation of Core CPUs won’t refer to a single internal code name, or even a single process generation.

Instead, this generation of chips marks the first where Intel is defining a generational leap by the potential performance increase delivered at  a given power level. To get there, Intel might use 10-nm process technology in some chips and refined 14-nm technology in others. We might even see different core architectures to go with those different processes. This will surely be a headache to keep track of, but Intel figures customers won’t care where the performance increases come from so long as there is a performance increase, watt-for-watt.

  Base

clock

speed

Maximum

Turbo

speed

Cores/threads Cache size Memory

channels

Memory

type

Onboard

graphics

processor

Max

graphics

frequency

Core i7-8650U 1.9 GHz 4.2 GHz 4/8 8MB 2 DDR4-2400

or

LPDDR3-2133

Intel UHD

Graphics 620

Up to 1150 MHz
Core i7-8550U 1.8 GHz 4.0 GHz
Core i5-8350U 1.7 GHz 3.6 GHz 6MB Up to 1100 MHz
Core i5-8250U 1.6 GHz 3.4 GHz

With all that out of the way, we can talk about the four CPUs Intel is unveiling today. These are 15W U-series parts using cores that Intel calls “Kaby Lake refresh.” As that name would suggest, very little has changed in the architecture of these chip. Much as it did in the transition from Skylake to Kaby Lake, the company has further refined its “14-nm plus” process node to extract more performance within a given power envelope.

The Kaby Lake refresh die. Source: Intel

Even if the functional units of the Kaby Lake refresh chips are largely similar to those of their predecessors, Intel is also using its refinements to cram more of them onto a chip. As you can see in the die shot above, those refinements have made it possible for Intel to squeeze four cores and eight threads into 15W Core i5s and Core i7s. That’s a mind-blowing development when you think about it. Even in the seventh generation of Core CPUs, 15W bought you at most two cores and four threads of processing power. To have four cores and eight threads on Core i5 and Core i7 U-series chips alike is a major step forward for the lightweight 2-in-1s and ultrabooks that will likely serve as hosts for these parts.

The key figure you’ll hear Intel hammering home with these chips is a performance improvement of up to 40% over Kaby Lake U-series CPUs. The majority of that increase comes from the two extra cores the company is packing into 15W, but design and process refinements purportedly let the company extract another 15% more performance for the 40% total. Depending on how much stock you put in Sysmark, the Core i7-8550U could deliver as much as a 100% performance increase over the five-year-old Core i5-3317U.

The claimed performance gains don’t stop there, of course. The company says the QuickSync encoder in the i7-8550U can export a 4K HEVC video in just three minutes using Cyberlink PowerDirector, compared to the whopping 45 minutes required for a CPU encode on that same i5-3317U. Intel also says the i7-8550U knocks out its internal Adobe Lightroom export benchmark 2.3 times faster than the i5-3317U and 28% faster than an i7-7500U. Those sound like formidable performance improvements for ultrabook-class machines.

The cost of four cores in such a slim power budget are the low base frequencies of these chips. Last generation’s Core i7-7600U boasted a lower peak Turbo speed than the i7-8650U at 3.9 GHz, but its 2.8 GHz base speed is a whopping 900 MHz higher than the eighth-gen chip’s. Just how pessimistic that figure is will likely depend on manufacturers’ cooling implementations.

Still, four cores and eight threads running at 33% or lower base clock speeds than last generation’s dual-core chips could still provide a favorable performance increase in the heavily-threaded tasks likely to push clocks toward Intel’s base figures. They could also bode well for powering demanding workloads like gaming on an external graphics card, a use case that’s becoming more popular by the day.

Most critically, Intel claims that the added hardware doesn’t hurt battery life. Eighth-gen U-series Core chips will purportedly deliver the same 10 hours of battery life in notebooks that Kaby Lake CPUs could.

Observant readers will also note that Intel is now branding its onboard graphics processors as “Intel UHD graphics.” This feature doesn’t reflect any new capabilities in the graphics processor itself—this is still the same Gen9 IGP present in today’s Kaby Lake chips. “UHD graphics” is a branding exercise meant to get across the idea that eighth-generation Core CPUs are ready for 4K and HDR video streaming from services like Netflix, Sony Ultra, Funbox UHD, and iQiyi. Amazon Prime Video and Vudu will soon add support for Intel integrated graphics processors, as well. These IGPs can even run Microsoft’s entry-level Windows Mixed Reality VR headsets, too.

Contrary to many rumors, Intel didn’t discuss upcoming changes in its desktop processor lineup or set new desktop products for launch today. The company says those products are coming “this fall,” but more precise details remain evasive. We should expect higher-TDP and business-ready product lines to arrive on that timeline, as well.

Intel expects that over 145 notebook designs using eighth-gen Core U-series chips will eventually make their way into market, and 80 of those should be in the market by the holiday season. Those products will begin rolling out next month. Stay tuned for more coverage as we see how manufacturers choose to implement these faster and wider CPUs soon.

Comments closed
    • BIF
    • 2 years ago

    I’m not sure I understand if this “really” fits in the product line.

    If it’s not for business laptops and it’s not for gaming laptops, then why would anybody buy a laptop with one of these inside?s

      • BIF
      • 2 years ago

      I can accept downvotes, but why? Please help me understand where you think I’m wrong, and why I deserved a downvote. I genuinely want to know because downvotes without a supporting reason are like flipping the bird in traffic at somebody who has no idea why you’re angry with him. Did I cut you off? Was I driving slow in the passing lane? Or did your morning oatmeal give you gas?

      Okay, that last one was a joke. 🙂

      • HERETIC
      • 2 years ago

      It’s for people who don’t understand that “ULTRA” means less,
      and want to be able to cut cheese with their lappies……………….

      • tipoo
      • 2 years ago

      The same 15-28W 13″ ultrabooks, with a good deal more multithreaded performance.

      What’s not to like? I’ve wanted this for a long time, a 13″ rMBP with a quad core in particular, being already paired with full speed Thunderbolt 3, would be sweet.

    • freebird
    • 2 years ago

    Maybe Intel should ask AMD if they can borrow some Infinity Fabric tape and “tape” four of these cores together… 16 cores and 32 thread for 60 watts… the base clock is low, but lots of thermal room for OCing maybe.

      • Mr Bill
      • 2 years ago

      Coming soon in an episode of Scorpion.

    • ptsant
    • 2 years ago

    For what it’s worth, the 1800X can do Cinebench R15 800+ when capped at 30W. So, a single module (on Raven Ridge, for example) is, without any particular mobile tuning, pretty competitive with the 7600U in that specific benchmark.

    That doesn’t include the power budget of the GPU portion. I still expect Intel to win this round in mobile. But the fight is not going to be easy.

      • smilingcrow
      • 2 years ago

      In what way was it capped? I’m not familiar with Ryzen.
      You also have to include the power budget for the uncore when making calculations.
      Then comparing TDPs across manufacturers is a crap-shoot.
      So not easy to estimate and who knows maybe RR will really Rock ‘n’ Roll all over Core i Gen 8.
      Let the Good Times Roll – [url<]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdqQt0b9SGI[/url<]

      • Rza79
      • 2 years ago

      I see more opportunity for Raven Ridge on mobile than on desktop, especially now that Intel’s 8th gen i3 will be a quad core part. The Zen core really excels at lower clocks.

    • shank15217
    • 2 years ago

    Intel needs the help, AMD Raven Ridge is coming..

      • tipoo
      • 2 years ago

      Their dies were shrinking for years. Consumer cost was not. Surely the timing of us getting more cores is purely coincidental, lol.

        • Klimax
        • 2 years ago

        Frankly, yes it is fairly coincidental. Bit too soon. It takes quite a while to get such chips ready. And these mobile chips were quite bit more dependent on process and its quality/tuning. And there are not that many ways to improve performance to get people upgrade…

          • NTMBK
          • 2 years ago

          This is literally the same 4+2 die that was used for quad core laptop parts and desktop parts, just running at lower clocks and voltages. It doesn’t take that long to roll out a lower clocked SKU.

          • tipoo
          • 2 years ago

          I mean, all the generations of shrinking dies and no change or increases to consumer end price, and then when AMD has near-enough performing cores, and more cores in each package ready, we suddenly get more cores in each wattage bracket from Intel.

          That’s not to say they turned around on a dime, but between AMD roadmaps and contingency plans I do think competition finally forced this. Otherwise we’d just get the same core counts with the same trickling IPC improvements.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 2 years ago

            We’re definitely getting to the point where Intel knew what Zen was going to be 18+ months ago. Contingency plans, like you said, have had plenty of lead time.

    • Hattig
    • 2 years ago

    The proof will be in what clocks these chips can maintain under load, both on all-core and single-core.

    Running quad-core at lower clocks to meet a TDP is not exactly the brainwave of the decade, it’s nice that Intel has deigned to offer a product with these specifications finally (thanks to a real threat from AMD, no doubt).

    However it will put the pressure on Raven Ridge – which surely won’t have the single-threaded turbo to match in a 15W envelope, but may make use of 14LPP’s far better performance at lower clocks/power to compete will in the quad-core aspects.

      • Anonymous Coward
      • 2 years ago

      I saw they also offered a 25W TDP-up setting which allows 2.1ghz on all cores, sounds great. Put that in a laptop designed to cool more like 35W of CPU, and I’m a happy guy.

      • Rza79
      • 2 years ago

      These guys have a preview (Dutch):

      [url<]https://tweakers.net/reviews/5631/4/kaby-lake-refresh-zuinige-quadcores-van-15w-voor-laptops-benchmarks.html[/url<] [url<]https://ic.tweakimg.net/ext/i/2001626163.png[/url<] Basically faster single- and multi-thread performance across the board.

      • Klimax
      • 2 years ago

      It’s unlikely this product stack is response to Ryzen. Still too early for that. (Delta tends to be in 6 to 12 months IIRC at least)

      Much more likely is simpler explanation: People who don’t upgrade don’t give money to Intel. People need reason to upgrade…

        • NTMBK
        • 2 years ago

        Raven Ridge was on publicly leaked roadmaps (with low TDPs and 4C/8T) over a year ago, meaning that Intel probably knew about its existence months beforehand.

          • blastdoor
          • 2 years ago

          It’s kind of funny to imagine the world in which intel first hears about Ryzen on its launch day.

            • tipoo
            • 2 years ago

            “AM…Wait, those clone makers are still a thing?”

    • benedict
    • 2 years ago

    Too late, Intel.
    We bought a bunch of 7500U equipped laptops a month ago and now we’re stuck with 2-core crap for the next 5 years.

      • Anonymous Coward
      • 2 years ago

      The worst part about the 2-core laptops around here is the noise their tiny fans make when the CPU needs to do some work. Quad cores and higher TDP is worth it, if only for a better single-core turbo user experience.

    • short_fuze
    • 2 years ago

    “very little has changed in the architecture of these chip” –

    I’m curious, Jeff, if you have any comment on this article: [url=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4100391-intel-eclipse-competition-monday<]Intel To Eclipse The Competition On Monday[/url<]. I've referenced these articles before, and the latest one indicates a major architectural change from Intel, in the form of modular chip designs, thus explaining some of the murkiness regarding mixed-node chips (14nm and 10nm modules, and more, on the same chip). Does today's announcement, and especially that die shot from Intel, confirm or deny the rollout of this plan, at least on these chips? Also curious about the reference to the mysterious Acer laptop leak, with 20 GB of RAM ... for $750 ...

      • smilingcrow
      • 2 years ago

      I saw that posted a few days ago and read it and he comes across like a complete wack job, a fantasist that extrapolates wildly in the hope of being ahead of the pack.
      If what he suggested had been true it would have been a revelation more dramatic than the eclipse.

    • tipoo
    • 2 years ago

    Frigs sake, Intel. It’s not enough that they bundle both Braswell and Broadwell into Celeron, Core Ms carry Core i* names, now this, 8th gen cores are both 8th gen cores and…7th gen cores. They’re obfuscating what a processor is even more away from the consumer without doing some more digging, and it’s really annoying.

    Ok, so more efficient node and doubling the cores place it well above the rest of Kaby Lake in the same wattage – well then call it something else, like U series quad.

      • tay
      • 2 years ago

      Yeah. Mobile i9 ? Anyway marketing droids gotta market.

        • Anonymous Coward
        • 2 years ago

        I suspect the first 6 core mobile chip from Intel will be labeled i9.

        That said, I’ve started to think the original i3/5/7 split wasn’t something that could last even if it was engineers who ran the marketing department. The number of cores is going to have to change and I don’t know if steadily coming up with larger i-numbers is going to help anything.

        About the only thing that reliably can relate to i3/5/7/9 is price.

          • freebird
          • 2 years ago

          because i9 turned upside down is 6! Right? 😉

      • Klimax
      • 2 years ago

      Not first time. Pentium III and Tualatin. Also IRC Nehalem had some fun cases.

    • NTMBK
    • 2 years ago

    Wait, still no LPDDR4 support? Come on Intel, the ARM competition have been using this since 2015.

      • tipoo
      • 2 years ago

      Still no 32GB if you want to use LPDDR then :/

      • Questar
      • 2 years ago

      As far as I know, there aren’t any LPDDR4 DIMMS yet. Kinda hard to support something that doesn’t exist.

        • NTMBK
        • 2 years ago

        Of course there aren’t, it’s soldered to the motherboard. Just like LPDDR3.

    • JustAnEngineer
    • 2 years ago

    My 5¼ year-old ultrabook is Krogoth due to the slow pace of performance improvements that Intel has dribbled out in five so-called generations of Core processors.
    [url<]http://ark.intel.com/compare/65714,71258,124969,124968[/url<]

      • Anonymous Coward
      • 2 years ago

      Hmm, looks like you gain “Intel Smart Response Technology”.

      I don’t know what it is. Don’t care enough to look it up.

        • Firestarter
        • 2 years ago

        hybrid SSD/HDD storage stuff, for people who like their bits spinning and rusty

          • Anonymous Coward
          • 2 years ago

          Oh actually I’m a big fan of hybrid storage. No TB-scale SSD disks in my personal budget, let me tell you.

        • bhtooefr
        • 2 years ago

        That’s not a new feature, either, it dates back to Z68.

        It’s simply SSD-based caching.

      • derFunkenstein
      • 2 years ago

      The 15W Core i7-7600U would have already clobbered that thing by a landslide, but this really shakes up the game further.

      • tipoo
      • 2 years ago

      That’s not really showing performance though, just a spec sheet. Even at similar base and boost clocks, the 7600u is something around 8-9K geekbench, yours is around 5000. The 8650U I’d expect would be even better, maybe pass 10k.

      The article itself mentions a 2.3x boost in CPU heavy tasks compared to your third gen core.

      • Klimax
      • 2 years ago

      Spec comparisons are invalid when talking about performance…

    • HERETIC
    • 2 years ago

    VERY DISAPPOINTED.
    Was looking forward to Coffee and comparing 8700K to Ryzen 1600.
    From a pure performance perspective can guess the result,
    How much do we have to pay for the extra performance thro?

    And what do we get-my pet hate in CPU’s.Race to sleep jobs.
    The dudes will be happy-in sync with their attention span…………

      • Markopolo
      • 2 years ago

      Not sure why TR has no prices listed, they are up on anandtech. Top of the line is 6$ less than previous gen.

      i7 7660U -> i7 8650U
      415$. 409$.

      This is such a win for consumers I can’t believe anyone is complaining other than AMD

        • blahsaysblah
        • 2 years ago

        You need new chipset for the processors that includes new functionality like integerated wifi, usb 3.2,… you bet there is going to be an overall increase.

        EDIT: i think i missed the /sarcasm 🙂

    • Kougar
    • 2 years ago

    I assume this means we will finally see something other than a dual-core in any of Apple’s Macbooks.

      • Norphy
      • 2 years ago

      Screw the MacBook. What about the Mac Mini? Now there’s a line that’s sorely missing a quad core version.

        • Anonymous Coward
        • 2 years ago

        Apple should skip Intel entirely for the Mini.

          • derFunkenstein
          • 2 years ago

          I think that’s a bad idea unless Apple is going to port its development tools to the (presumably) ARM-based version of the OS. I know we have a handful of Mac minis corporate-wide that are just Xcode build servers for Xamarin mobile apps.

            • NTMBK
            • 2 years ago

            Or, y’know, just use AMD 🙂

            • derFunkenstein
            • 2 years ago

            As fun as that would be it seems very unlikely.

            • Anonymous Coward
            • 2 years ago

            On a wall-tethered mid-range machine, I think AMD offers just what Apple can use. They like the AMD GPU’s, the Zen cores are solid, AMD would offer an excellent price, pretty good thermals.

            Perhaps Apple can also benefit from the credible threat of not using Intel chips.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 2 years ago

            sure, they offer it, but Apple didn’t use AMD CPUs last time they were competitive and I don’t see them doing it now. I’d be glad to be proven wrong.

            • the
            • 2 years ago

            The last time AMD CPU’s reigned supreme, Apple was still using PowerPC. When Apple switched over to x86, their first systems were Core 2 Conroe based. AMD was competitive at that time but I wouldn’t say they were the leading. Combine that with special chips Apple was getting from Intel (Apple had first dibs on quad-core Xeons and the 3.0 Ghz chips), there was little incentive to court AMD. Also at this time, nVidia was on good terms with Apple so even on the GPU side of things AMD had competition.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 2 years ago

            Always happy to be proven wrong, because it’d be better for consumers to get a choice.

            • the
            • 2 years ago

            Apple has reportedly tinkered with AMD chips internally. That is how VLIW4 support made it into the Mac Radeon drivers. The only two chips to use it was Cayman (Radeon 6950/6970) and Trinity based SoC.

        • derFunkenstein
        • 2 years ago

        I hope the 28W versions have higher base clocks and eDRAM.

          • Anonymous Coward
          • 2 years ago

          Mmm, eDRAM.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 2 years ago

            I think that would make the Mac Mini reasonably competent. “Reasonably competence” is probably something Apple would reserve for the more expensive models, but I can live with that.

        • tipoo
        • 2 years ago

        Yeah, a quad core Coffee Lake Mini with TB3 for expandability would be interesting.

        Since they brought dedicated GPUs back into the base 15″, a similar Radeon Pro in there would be nice too.

        • SkyWarrior
        • 2 years ago

        I am looking for one too. Still kicking with a Late ’12 quad.

      • tipoo
      • 2 years ago

      The 15″s come with quad cores as base. The 13″ does have duals though, same as any laptop in its weight bracket that I know of. But yeah, Coffee Lake quads in the 13″ rMBP, along with TB3, would be an interesting combo for me.

        • Kougar
        • 2 years ago

        Do they? I’m looking at the buy page and they are all dual-core.

        Edit: Ah, only the 15″ models have them.

          • tipoo
          • 2 years ago

          The 13″ are all dual core. Shouldn’t surprise anyone for a 3 pound ultrabook though, I don’t know of any quads in there. Every 15″ for years has been a quad though.

            • Kougar
            • 2 years ago

            Stores have sold <3lb 13″ laptops with quadcores for years too, though.

            Dell has a surprisingly decent model 2.7lb 13.3″ laptop for the past two years and those have been shipping with quadcores and Iris Pro graphics.

            • tipoo
            • 2 years ago

            Which model is this?

            • Kougar
            • 2 years ago

            Hm, looks like I got suckered. 🙁 Quad HD+ Core i7 advertising all over it but it’s a dualcore.

            [url<]https://www.costco.com/Dell-XPS-13-Touchscreen-Laptop---Intel-Core-i7---Quad-HD%2B-(3200-x-1800).product.100351324.html[/url<] Twice the RAM, SSD capacity, same Iris Pro enabled processor with a higher base clock and still 200 less than the closest 13" Macbook Pro. They've been selling these for a few CPU generations now.

            • tipoo
            • 2 years ago

            I was going to say, U series is all dual core until now. Similar thing happened with the Surface Pro, some alleged tech sites mistook i7 and four threads in task manager for a quad core and that spread accross the internet, while it was the same dual core as the rMBP 13″ class.

            So I’m pretty sure there’s nothing sub 3 pounds with a quad core and especially with Iris Pro, the wattage is too high on present generations (45+W), the 8th gen branding is where that will happen in 28W.

            (Not me downvoting you btw, that’s unnecessary)

            • Kougar
            • 2 years ago

            The Quad advertising and Core i7 threw me. Intel’s nomenclature seems rather pointless if Core i5 / i7 means dualcore with HT, and after this refresh they both will instead mean quadcore with HT. What are they really differentiating anymore, especially with desktops now going to do the same. Supposedly will be Core i5 hexcores too.

            • tipoo
            • 2 years ago

            For added fun Core M is Core i5 and i7 now…Sigh.

            • Markopolo
            • 2 years ago

            But it has 4 threads, it’s totally the same thing!! /s

    • Anonymous Coward
    • 2 years ago

    I like the combination of high turbo with 4 cores and 8MB L3.

    My “mobile workstation” has 2.6ghz base clock on all 4 cores, but the turbo reaches only 3.4ghz, and really most of the time I would choose more turbo and less base clock.

      • nico1982
      • 2 years ago

      It is nice, but I think the speed under full load is more critical, for a “mobile workstation” at least. My i7-6700HQ “turboes” all the way to 3.5 GHz from 2.6 GHz, but only when a single core is loaded. Otherwise, it sits at 3.1 GHz.
      Current 2C/4T 15W CPUs in the 13″ MBP throttle to about 3 GHz under sustained load. If these new parts can sustain at least 2 GHz, we are going to see quite a decent improvement in performance (> 50%).

    • NTMBK
    • 2 years ago

    Nice to see Intel finally stepping up the core counts! Seems like a pre-emptive strike against Raven Ridge quad core APUs. Hurrah for competition.

      • thx1138r
      • 2 years ago

      Indeed, this does look like a strong pre-emptive jab at the Ryzen APUs. Intel could afford to lose a little ground in the mid-to high-end desktop markets, but it looks like it doesn’t want to concede anything in the larger mobile market.

      • dodozoid
      • 2 years ago

      Raven Ridge will be in much more difficult position now – this stole much of its thunder. AMD will probably have to emphasize its integrated GPU again instead of “Look, we have double the cores and double the threads!”

        • the
        • 2 years ago

        Dunno. That will depend on Raven Ridge’s base clocks, max turbo and how well OEM’s build the cooling system to keep these chips at peak turbo.

          • dodozoid
          • 2 years ago

          That is for tech people.
          For the majority out there it just “have frickin’ quad-core!”

            • tipoo
            • 2 years ago

            The majority out there seem to think 15W i7s were already quad core, le sigh.

            • anubis44
            • 2 years ago

            And Raven Ridge DOES have a quad core, with hyperthreading, plus a Vega GPU. Looks like Intel’s out of luck.

            • dodozoid
            • 2 years ago

            Indeed, but now it ist unique, its just a tie, not an advantage.

    • evilpaul
    • 2 years ago

    Hopefully, the rumors that Coffee Lake is barely any faster than Kaby Lake will prove wrong as well.

      • maroon1
      • 2 years ago

      Which rumor ?!

      THe rumors that I heard is that new desktop i7 and i5 will be over 50% faster in multi-thread and over 10% in single-thread over current CPU

      Thats sound like huge improvement. Biggest improvement we have ever seen in last few years

        • blahsaysblah
        • 2 years ago

        That is due to more cores on the chip, that is not improvement, just using a capability that was always there.

        The single thread again is from more Hertz and not IPC. That Hertz has always been there as if you follow Silicon Lottery, the lower high binned CPUs Skylake,.. have like 80% achievement rate for them.

          • maroon1
          • 2 years ago

          So, your definition of improvement is IPC ?!

          If you get like 20% boost in IPC then it is improvement ?

          But increasing clock speed by 1 million times at same TDP and increasing core count by 1 million times is not improvement if is there is no IPC increase ?

          What if intel makes CPU in the future with 90% boost in IPC, but that CPU is power hugry and can not go past 1GHz ? Thats an improvement according to you ?!

          Sorry but IPC does not matter to me. It is improvement when you have better performance at same TDP and same price. It does not matter if those improvement come from IPC, clock speed or core count. It is still an improvement regardless of how they got these improvements.

      • tipoo
      • 2 years ago

      Per-core I believe it, their trick is bringing more cores to each wattage class, for a good 30-40% boost in MT.

      • ImSpartacus
      • 2 years ago

      I doubt it.

      Despite that one marketing leak claiming 11% ST improvement over 7700K with 8700K, I don’t believe we’ll see any IPC improvement.

      Intel always claims ridiculous performance improvements. They are always in very contrived situations that don’t map well to most use cases.

      But that’s fine. Coffee Lake doesn’t need any IPC improvement. The problem with Kaby Lake is a lack of threads. Coffee Lake adds two cores to basically every desktop part without decreasing turbo clocks (obviously base clocks must decrease, but who cares about that).

      Adding two cores to all existing Kaby Lake desktop processors is literally all that’s needed to make Coffee Lake competitive against Summit Ridge.

      • Freon
      • 2 years ago

      I’m not holding my breath for any real single-thread improvements.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This