Quick News

AlienALX said:
My issue is not with the specs. I think you miss my point. My issue is that none of the spec is being openly discussed and pointed out by the "reviewing" industry (AKA advertising).

If Linus, Jay and etc (not Tom, not bringing him into this) all explained it and pointed it out we'd be much better off. Fact is you would be better off with a Ryzen 1700 based rig, as it would not drop below 3ghz and therefore if you are going bone stock it would be the much better choice.

But we're not, are we? no. Instead we are not being told this and to that ends some poor sod is going to end up with a rig that he thought could do 140 FPS in Crysis 3 only to find it does about half of that.
Click to expand...
That's fair enough then, I also agree that reviewers should be more open, though I should watch Linus' and Jay's review on the lower end chips to be certain. If they leave motherboard's overclock in, they should clearly state so.

But 1700 is such a poor example, since the base clock for it is 3.0GHz, which makes it perform worse for gaming than Coffee Lake at 2.8... But like 1600X? Yeah, why not. But 1700 and 8700 both are poor choices for a gaming only rig.
 
I think the i7-8700 or R7 1700 are perfectly fine for gaming only. The 8600K and 1600X would be better value for money, but I wouldn't consider them poor choices for strictly gaming.
 
looz said:
That's fair enough then, I also agree that reviewers should be more open, though I should watch Linus' and Jay's review on the lower end chips to be certain. If they leave motherboard's overclock in, they should clearly state so.

But 1700 is such a poor example, since the base clock for it is 3.0GHz, which makes it perform worse for gaming than Coffee Lake at 2.8... But like 1600X? Yeah, why not. But 1700 and 8700 both are poor choices for a gaming only rig.
Click to expand...

How do you know that Coffee Lake performs better at 2.8ghz than Ryzen @ 3? have you seen this benchmarked? have you got the results?

I would strongly imagine that Ryzen would easily surpass the 8700 at those speeds where anything remotely threaded is involved. Problem is I don't have those benchmarks and I don't have the results because there are none.

With Ryzen we got the stock and overclocked results. With the 8700? all I have seen are best case scenarios. Not a single "stock" result.

This goes all the way back to the Core 2 Duo. I read a review, and it clearly stated that "it's so easy to make a 1.8ghz CPU run at 3ghz. All you do is up the FSB to 333mhz and there you are, 80% overclock !!!11oneone".

So I thought "S**t man, I am having me some of that !" and ordered the same board they used with the same CPU. However, what they were not forthcoming about is that you needed 1066 DDR2 in order to perform this overclock, and by the time you had bought and paid for that you could have bought a 3ghz model, that would run faster because of course it will OC too.

So I ended up at 2.5ghz max. I wasn't best pleased.

So this crap has been going on for years and years. IE - making things look much better than they really are. But at least with AMD we know what we are getting and what you need to get the best performance. Otherwise? look elsewhere.
 
Locked to not go higher than 46 multiplier. You can certainly ensure it stays at 4.6 with all cores, and maybe even up the base clock.

And yeah, 1700 is fine for gaming if you overclock it. But we were discussing clueless customers who'd buy a market PC ;)
 
NeverBackDown said:
You can still adjust base clock iirc.

Either way it's irrelevant. It has no bearing on anything and it's still the fastest chip out there for gaming.
Click to expand...

Watch the video.

It wouldn't be so fast at 3.6ghz for example. Or 2.8 worst case scenario. It sounds like you've fallen for the trick. It's only the fastest gaming CPU at 4.6ghz.

For those that fancy jumping in before they watch the video. Firstly all of the facts come from Intel themselves, they are all in the small print.

Fact - they will only guarantee the base clock of 2.8ghz. This way they can sell s**t silicon to OEMs and only have to worry about the base clock.

Fact - there are, from what I understand, four different levels of boost depending on the motherboard, phases, power supply and etc. This means that you basically have four DIFFERENT CPUs at the very least, depending upon where they reside.

Fact - it is only the fastest gaming CPU at the clocks it was reviewed at on Youtube. Drop those down by up to 2ghz? it would be a hunk of trash.

The problem here is not the CPU or the specs. It is the fact that we are not being told about it by reviewers, who just so happen to have them in top end expensive motherboards that boost to the full and even add artificial boosts to those boosts to make them look far better than they are.

IE - if you bought a rig with a 8700 in it it could range from total s**t to exceptional, but it will literally perform completely differently depending on where it is. And this is a HUGE con.
 
Last edited:
AlienALX said:
IE - if you bought a rig with a 8700 in it it could range from total s**t to exceptional, but it will literally perform completely differently depending on where it is. And this is a HUGE con.
Click to expand...

You can argue all you want. It doesn't change the fact that gamers will choose to buy the 8700k over the 8700.

For those that don't they still get a great experience. You're basically arguing over the difference between COD games, ie, virtually nothing.
 
NeverBackDown said:
You can argue all you want. It doesn't change the fact that gamers will choose to buy the 8700k over the 8700.

For those that don't they still get a great experience. You're basically arguing over the difference between COD games, ie, virtually nothing.
Click to expand...

Well I just hope people buy the K over the other one. Because if they bought a OEM rig with an 8700 in it thinking they would get the same performance they saw in a review they would be sorely mistaken.
 
NeverBackDown said:
its cheaper and locked. you should know its lower performance
Click to expand...

But you don't. That's the problem. And you don't because no one has explained it to you. All you have seen is the 8700 non K bashing out benchmarks performing better than any AMD CPU so you automatically go and buy one.

I think sometimes you take for granted how much knowledge you have. "Normal" ordinary people don't know as much as we do.

We all knew Ryzen inside out within a week. We knew it didn't work well with certain memory, performed better with faster memory, what its clocks were and etc. And we knew that because the information was forthcoming.
 
Actually, where is this 2.8GHz i7-8700? 2.8GHz is the base of i5-8600, 8700 has a base frequency of 3.2GHz.
 
AlienALX said:
But you don't. That's the problem. And you don't because no one has explained it to you. All you have seen is the 8700 non K bashing out benchmarks performing better than any AMD CPU so you automatically go and buy one.

I think sometimes you take for granted how much knowledge you have. "Normal" ordinary people don't know as much as we do.

We all knew Ryzen inside out within a week. We knew it didn't work well with certain memory, performed better with faster memory, what its clocks were and etc. And we knew that because the information was forthcoming.
Click to expand...

If you don't know it's slower thats on you. Just look at the spec sheet. Not much intelligence needed to read numbers.
 
AlienALX said:
But you don't. That's the problem. And you don't because no one has explained it to you. All you have seen is the 8700 non K bashing out benchmarks performing better than any AMD CPU so you automatically go and buy one.
Click to expand...

I just wasted 20min of my life watching the video.
Went to Youtube, search for "Intel i7 8700"
Scrolled the first couple of hundred hits. 3 videos about 8700 non-k
Where is the "all you have seen"???

I get the point. They should openly tell whats going on.
But it's Aldi that's the problem, not Intel. They make the crappy PC. It's probably because of a underdimensioned VRM design.

If the CPU's were THAT bad, there would be videos or forum post of people complaining.
I agree in AdoredTV has a point, but as i see it, he is trying to make a storm that's not there. But it would be fun to se a test of a 8700 in the most crappy MB out there.
 
Korreborg said:
I just wasted 20min of my life watching the video.
Went to Youtube, search for "Intel i7 8700"
Scrolled the first couple of hundred hits. 3 videos about 8700 non-k
Where is the "all you have seen"???

I get the point. They should openly tell whats going on.
But it's Aldi that's the problem, not Intel. They make the crappy PC. It's probably because of a underdimensioned VRM design.

If the CPU's were THAT bad, there would be videos or forum post of people complaining.
I agree in AdoredTV has a point, but as i see it, he is trying to make a storm that's not there. But it would be fun to se a test of a 8700 in the most crappy MB out there.
Click to expand...

He is trying to make a storm that is there. Only in this day and age people are quite happy to get conned and screwed over without complaining about it.

That's just the way the world is now. Resistance is futile, let's just all be a big bunch of pussies and have done with it.
 
This whole thing makes me laugh.

I normally don't watch the video's by that guy because he is such a blatant AMD fanboy it's just ridiculous.

I mean he is saying Intel are conning people because the CPU's don't maintain a certain speed which they don't advertise it at, but because it's capable of different speeds it has to run at those speed's all the time, regardless of the fact that the motherboard and cooler used are not sufficient to do it, but doesn't call AMD out on the same thing with there XFR tech on the Ryzen CPU's.

If companies such as HP, Asus etc don't put a decent cooler on the CPU then of course the CPU is not going to be able to maintain a certain speed, and it doesn't matter who makes the CPU, that will be the case for all of them, but with a decent cooler they maintain the speed.

Then of course we have motherboard manufacturers who put in there own safety limits so as to not burn the board out, or kill the cpu but of course that is Intel's fault not the board manufacturers fault.

When I worked for a certain ISP, I got a call one day and was asked to look at a person's computer for them, because they were saying they could only get 54Mbp/s from there broadband, and they were paying for 100Mbp/s.

I got the pc and looked and sure enough they were only getting a maximum of 54Mbp/s download speeds, now I plugged in the pc directly to the modem and hey presto they got 100Mbp/s no problem.

Now that person accused me of trying to trick him, because apparently I had hacked the Speedtest website to show a different speed, until I told him that the reason that he could only get 54Mbp/s was because he had a 54Mbp/s wireless card so it didn't matter what speed his internet was he would only, ever get a maximum of 54Mbp/s because that is the maximum the card could do, but the broadband could do more.

Now that is not the fault of the ISP's that he couldn't get his full speed with the equipment he wanted to use, it was down to the equipment he wanted to use, but if he changed the wireless card which I told him to do he would get what he was paying for.

It is the same case for that pc, change the cooler and possibly the motherboard and the CPU will do more, but leave it as it is and it will only do what it is currently doing, because that is what it think's is safe to do.
 
Damien c said:
This whole thing makes me laugh.

I normally don't watch the video's by that guy because he is such a blatant AMD fanboy it's just ridiculous.

I mean he is saying Intel are conning people because the CPU's don't maintain a certain speed which they don't advertise it at, but because it's capable of different speeds it has to run at those speed's all the time, regardless of the fact that the motherboard and cooler used are not sufficient to do it, but doesn't call AMD out on the same thing with there XFR tech on the Ryzen CPU's.

If companies such as HP, Asus etc don't put a decent cooler on the CPU then of course the CPU is not going to be able to maintain a certain speed, and it doesn't matter who makes the CPU, that will be the case for all of them, but with a decent cooler they maintain the speed.

Then of course we have motherboard manufacturers who put in there own safety limits so as to not burn the board out, or kill the cpu but of course that is Intel's fault not the board manufacturers fault.

When I worked for a certain ISP, I got a call one day and was asked to look at a person's computer for them, because they were saying they could only get 54Mbp/s from there broadband, and they were paying for 100Mbp/s.

I got the pc and looked and sure enough they were only getting a maximum of 54Mbp/s download speeds, now I plugged in the pc directly to the modem and hey presto they got 100Mbp/s no problem.

Now that person accused me of trying to trick him, because apparently I had hacked the Speedtest website to show a different speed, until I told him that the reason that he could only get 54Mbp/s was because he had a 54Mbp/s wireless card so it didn't matter what speed his internet was he would only, ever get a maximum of 54Mbp/s because that is the maximum the card could do, but the broadband could do more.

Now that is not the fault of the ISP's that he couldn't get his full speed with the equipment he wanted to use, it was down to the equipment he wanted to use, but if he changed the wireless card which I told him to do he would get what he was paying for.

It is the same case for that pc, change the cooler and possibly the motherboard and the CPU will do more, but leave it as it is and it will only do what it is currently doing, because that is what it think's is safe to do.
Click to expand...


Networking is a bad analogy. There are tons of variables. The 8700 is one CPU. And, it should have been designed to boost to the same speed no matter where it is. And it's as simple as that.

Or, it should be explained. Properly.

BTW I want to mention the AMD fanboy comment. You do realise this is the guy who met AMD in Sweden and gave them a hammering, right?

You can't accuse somebody who spends his life posting facts of being a fanboy. Maybe you should digest some of those facts, and see the wood for the trees dude. This is a crap industry. Everything we see is all amazing, the best etc. It's only really GN and Adored that dare to say different.

I've bought so many PC parts and products now that all had no negative comments against them, yet in the cold light of day (literally, without all of the high end cameras making things look better than they do IRL) they were crap.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Is LTT forum is choke full of spooks ?
Replies
5
Views
405
hmmblah
hmmblah
Dawelio
New forum layout
Replies
2
Views
636
Dawelio
Dawelio
WYP
The Noctua Edition Seasonic PRIME TX-1600 PSU has landed, and it is a BEAST
Replies
3
Views
230
Deadtroopers
Deadtroopers
AlienALX
Any one getting Atomfall?
Replies
3
Views
183
AlienALX
AlienALX
Dicehunter
3D Print Request ?
Replies
6
Views
349
Dicehunter
Dicehunter
Back
Top