i9 8950hk beats the desktop i7 8700k (cpu-monkey.com) posts benchmarks! i7 8850h just near to it!

Allright, its happening!
Cpu monkey posted some benchmarks of i9 and i7 8thgen mobile processors. We were anticipating them to be "2.0 ghz cpus with 45w tdp". Well guess not.
https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-intel_core_i9_8950hk-851-vs-intel_core_i7_8700k-763
It legitly hits 4.8 ghz at single core(same as the desktop variant). Not only it is rated lower power then 8700k, but it trails behind the desktop king only a littlebit (1% to be exact)! (Thing to be noted it is OCable and is trailing due to 100mhz low clock speed then the desktop one)

So not only this, but the non OCable i7 8850h is just *somewhat* behind the 8700k
https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-intel_core_i7_8850h-850-vs-intel_core_i7_8700k-763




So, is this "death" of desktop cpus?( putting aside the upgradeability factor)

@Vasudev @Papusan @Falkentyne

 

Edit, title error(duh)

 

Huh? Didn't @Mr. Fox, @Johnksss, @jaybee83, @ole!!!, @Scerate, @GTVEVO, @ssj92, @Trafficante, @bloodhawk, @ajc9988, and the others hit 5GHz or more on multiple cores on their CPUs?

 

u said it urself: the i9-8950HK is lower-rated concerning power, specifically at a measly 65W compared to the 95W of the 8700K. unless laptop manufacturers and/or intel allow the user to unlock the power envelope and raise the TDP limits, any OC would be completely useless and it wouldnt even come close to the 8700K in all core performance... plus the BGA form factor, so yeah.... i think desktop cpus are safe for now

 

I didnt said i was talking about over clocks. I was talking about "stock" turbo clocks.

Well, i just wanted to say that the bgas are getting near to lgas now, with those *little* power differences.
Talking with the stock clocks, these cpus are like soooo near to the lga variants, which was my concern for the post, to let ya know that our anticipation of the 6core bga being more turdier is instead, more tougher.

 

Even I bought 6700HQ thinking it was equal to 6700 Desktop chip and I needed heavy tuning the hell out of my HQ chip.

 

IMHO, the problem with BGA was always the problem that if I wanted to switch CPU for another one, for whatever reason, things are difficult with a BGA board vs. LGA and just changing the chip.

 

Never trust something like CPU Monkey, CPU Boss or GPU Boss. They are not reliable sources of information, especially where measuring performance is concerned.

BGA should never get near LGA performance because they are inferior products by design. They are poorly binned, lack adequate TDP, require more voltage and, as a natural consequence, they run hotter and suck at overclocking. On top of their current inferiority, smart people that know what is best for the world do not want to see BGA products achieve any level of success. That would be like hoping that your sworn enemy finds peace and happiness. We hope and pray for its eternal failure because it is worthless garbage that is worthy of rejection and death.

 

With that type of term, BGA CPU's are already "close" to their LGA versions, IF the laptop ODM's allow you to unlock the power limits.
I can game at 4.8 ghz (even run 8 thread stockfish engine stable) at 4.8 ghz @ 1.31v on a BGA. But BGA are "low tier" LGA's that failed binning and thus have lower maximum limits. my BGA chip is "king of the turds" if that makes sense. If i had a 7700K of "similar" quality as my 7820HK, I would be running at 5.2 ghz @ 1.40v on it, rather than 4.8 ghz @ 1.31v.

 

With Intel asking customers to buy new boards every generation similar to BGA they make quite a profit for minimal increase in PCIe Lanes.

 

ha! wanna bet that even at stock clocks (i.e. 4.3 Ghz all cores) continuous load would surpass those 65W and thus stock clocks would actually be lower than on LGA?

 

Could someone post the voltages and clockspeed of their i7 8700k at STOCK? For example, according to this, most i7 8700k's run at 4.3 GHz on all cores at stock settings (95W TDP), so what is the lowest voltage that the i7 8700k can take when all cores are running at 4.3GHz? If you are going to post overclocked results, please post the all core clock speed, voltage and power consumption figure.

 

Yea i never trust cpu boss, they show standard spec info which is on cpu manufacturer site, but don't show how they came to the conclusion of how one is better than another, other than clock speed and core count.

But other than that, I'm not surprise that its right behind the 8700k, the only difference is that the 8700k has better head room, which is the main point of desktops system compared to laptops. More airspace, more power, more upgradeability, less efficient.

 

The i7-7820HK scores ~118 GOPs in SiSoft Sandra ( link) and ~775cb in Cinebench R15 ( notebookcheck). The i7-8850H scores 159.21 GOPs in SiSoft Sandra ( link). This makes the i7-8850H 34.9% faster than the i7-7820HK, which means it should score around 1050cb in Cinebench R15. Take this figure with a pinch of salt because I've made a number of assumptions, but it does give us a ballpark figure for how the new 6 core Coffee Lake mobile CPUs should perform.

At stock the i7-8700k scores 1361cb in Cinebench R15 ( anandtech) meaning the i7-8850H is 22.9% slower at less than half the power consumption of the full fat desktop chip. I have a sneaking suspicion that the i7-8850H is running at 3.2GHz on all cores at 45W. Could someone test this with their own i7-8700K?

 

Unless you buy a real desktop replacement, then it's less nonsense than the BGA garbage.
Both of these system have no issues running 5.2GHz stable. You can't do that with the BGA stuff.

 

Or Cool down +206w Cpu heat as you can with the Clevo laptop models I wonder how good a TRIPOD HS design will manage the same task.

 

How in the world do you get it to run so cool 17c wow.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

He lives up in the mountains at the only location on Earth where clean air still exists. @Papusan

 

LOL. Yes, when the ambient temperatures are below 17°C doing that requires minimal effort. The rest of us have to breathe dirty air and use air conditioning.

 

Ambient temp 21.7°C and idle Cpu temp 22°C (0.3°C higher). Aka not as the TRIPOD mess we see nowadays in all sorts of Jokebooks.

'

No need to make special steps if you have a ok cooling in the bottom. Use a mod notebook cooler and fix your thermal paste. Not as Todays flimsy cooling you find in almost all notebooks (gaming or workstation laptops doesn't matter... All is crippled by design). Read more How Dell cripple performance explained by ME And Dell ain't alone with this!!

 

Don't forget, Papusan lives inside a fridge

 

You can of course click on the nice text next to "Location" below my avatar And I'm sure you won't be linked to Sahara

 

So, you do own a bga(that too AW).

And yeah, i believe you must be using your laptops while sitting in the Antarctic ocean with a scuba kit on

 

What have you eaten today? Do your Due Dilligence!!

 

What notebook cooler papusan?

(I really am in need of a cooler like dat)

 

cooler master U3 but with modded fans

ek vardar

I still think gentle typhoons are better though

 

Wow, thats a 110$(shipping to india) cooling pad

 

The Furious Vardar fans kill even Noctua 3000RPM Industrial radiator fans in cooling performance. I don't think the gentle typhoons give better cooling (and not sure if they are produced anymore). Maybe on same level, but not more than this.

But the filters are free My main reason for use of a cooler. NO DUST inside the chassis.

 

I did 5.0Ghz on stock voltage on my i7 7700K. I think it was a good chip. Never tried past 5.1Ghz on it since I didn't have much time.

I like how they branded it i9 but still gave it 6-cores. Would have been interesting if it was 8-cores.

 

I'm pretty sure that you can find it in india locally.

Still produced, still sold.

The vardars are an attempt at copying the GT's success, for the lower RPM ones.

 

Last I checked....You needed to win 4 out of 7 to victorious, not 3 out of 7 my friend. So it lost.

Legit is all 12 threads hitting 4.8, not 1.

I think you also have that backward. the 8700k is 4.7 Ghz while the I9-8950HK is running 4.8 Ghz. So that explains why it even won 3 out of 7.

And that 65W TDP is of course a guideline not a carved in stone fact. So with an unlocked bios it will surely go higher than that.

I can't really get into any more than that since I do not have a machine in my hands for testing.

Also to note, if the review doesn't come from anyone frequenting these forums.....Chances are the numbers will not be the true ones. Since we are kind of the real authority when it comes to this sort of thing. (Not to mention a few names missing off that list.)

It does look promising, but only time will really tell. The same thing was said about the last 3 gens and that has yet to come to pass....

 

"i9 8950hk beats the desktop i7 8700k (cpu-monkey.com) posts benchmarks! i7 8850h just near to it!"
ORLY?


I'd like to dedicate this song to the i9 8950HK BGA turdbook CPU.

 

If you look on the link from Cpu-Monkey you will see they operate with 1447cb for 8700K. This is not the normal score from default i7-8700K and Intel's 2666MHz specs for ram. To get this score you will ned damn fast ram.

And 1426cb like the BGA chips means +-3200MHz ram speed. The true Cinebench R15 score from the BGA will be totally different from what you will see below.

Would be nice if you could run stock 8700K I9-8950HK 4,700 4.800MHz (1 core), 4,600 MHz (2 cores), 4,500 MHz (3 cores), 4,400 MHz (4 cores), 4,400 MHz (5 cores), 4,300 MHz (6 cores) with stock voltage. Then post max Cpu Package Power and score. Almost as Apple vs. Apples.

 

@Papusan - yeah, their testing is suspect and the numbers are not accurate. Here are some additional numbers. Stock 8700K means 4.3GHz Turbo on 6 cores, not 4.7GHz Turbo on 6 cores.

• Stock CPU w/ 2400 RAM (stock CPU voltage)
• Stock CPU w/ 3200 RAM (stock CPU voltage)
• 4.7GHz CPU w/ 3200 RAM (stock CPU voltage)
• 4.8GHz CPU w/ 3200 RAM (stock CPU voltage)
• 5.2GHz CPU w/ 3466 RAM (not stock CPU voltage)

 

lol wow! thats a hefty overvolt on the ram right there whats the stock clock of your sticks?

 

105w with stock clocks and voltage. As expected. We will see a hell lot of different crippled results when reviews will come. And none of the reviewers will fiddle with undervolt And not forget bloat running + none optimized OS.

 

The default profile is 2133 @ 1.200V. XMP 1 is 3200 @ 1.350V and XMP2 is 3400 @ 1.450V (XMP2 is my custom profile, not from G.SKILL)

I added more Cinebench examples to the above post. For purposes of illustration, I did not undervolt. I used stock BIOS defaults for voltage on stock, 4.7GHz and 4.8GHz.

 

Thanks.
Rememeber thin and flimsy will run a lot hotter than this. The package Power will follow after. And I expect the OEM's will use 2666MHz as best options for RAM. A few maybe 2800Mhz.

You haven't WinCrap X for testing? I mean for stock.

Btw. If the numbers is about correct. We will see almost $400 more for 8950hk

 

You're mistaken. Intel are idiots for misleading you, the TDP you're seeing refers to the baseclock only. The CPU is the same as the 8700K, a very hot CPU.

And as mr.fox has perfecly demonstrated, BGA chips will never be as good as desktop chips in their desktop enviroment. Desktop chips are way more powerful than you think, sadly some wannabe desktop replacement people showcase their castrated 8700K in notebooks which is underwhelming.

You'll see once the first notebooks are out with the "I9", the throttling will be very real again.

 

Yes, I have WinCrap X. I just chose to use the superior operating system for testing this evening.

The thin and flimsy poopsy-books will have a thermonuclear meltdown with nowhere near as much TDP simply because they are garbage.

It should be interesting to see how the crap-o-rama pans out when they start shipping this filth. 8950HK should be a big hit with the kiddos in all of the trailer parks. They can sell some of their food stamps to pay the price difference for it instead of using them for cigarettes.

 

thats really not too shabby for an overclock @3466 mhz compared with the "stock" XMP of 3200 too bad SODIMMs cant OC like that

@Papusan the added price tag is for the "i9" in the name. one single number makes all the difference

 

The 8950HK, and 8700K are pretty close in performance for the most part.. Much closer than the; 2700X vs 8700K. The 2700X has a 31% lead in R15, includes a cooler, and cost less.

I never thought AMD could do it. But they did.

 

and that 31% is almost perfect scaling at 33% more cores

 

I will say more like 8-15%. The 2700X clocks is already maxed out from AMD's factory. Almost no Overclock headroom. And we talk about a unlocked cpu's here. Bro @Mr. Fox latest Cinebench R15 score.

https://hwbot.org/submission/3839183_mr._fox_cinebench___r15_core_i7_8700k_1817_cb

 

i think he was talking at stock clocks naturally, both cpus to the max should be closer in CB15

 

So your saying I can buy a 8700K? Delid it? Build a $300 custom loop? Complete hours of tweaking? And that score is not daily stable? And a box stock 2700X is still faster? Well damn! What if we do this to the 2700X?

I’m talking about what the average person is gonna get.

All of mr Fox hard work was just surpassed by a cheaper less expensive cpu that requires none of that

 

If we shall talk about stock clocks.... I9-8950Hk have higher single core clocks than i7-8700K but score lower in Single Core in Cinebench R15. As well it has exactly same clock speed for all 6 cores. And there as well.... Lower CBR-15 scores. For your info... Both have exactly same IPC!!

What did you expect with 33% more cores? Rather compare apples vs. apples... 6 core Ryzen 5 2600x

 

The 8700K has a serious contender now!

I’d be more interested if we can drop the 2700X in the Asus Laptop with the R7 1700 in it.

Yes but, the 2700x is direct competition to the 8700K right?

 

Yeah, they say so https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_7_2700X/20.html
And this is compared with a stock clocked 6 core i7-8700K

Won't work. 2700x - 105w TDP

 

ha same IPC, but we both know in that case its got way more to do with TDP envelope, cooling capabilities and bloated OS