Contribute
Register

Coffee Lake i7-8700K Compatibility

Status
Not open for further replies.
3 short days till the highly caffeinated Coffee Lake chips hit the store shelves ! If I needed a new build I would take a chance on an I7-8700K. Can't justify the 900 dollar + investment for one of these Z370 systems. There may be some really good Black Friday deals on CPU/Mobo bundles in latter November here in the U.S. If you are making the leap to a 6 core Coffee Lake build, go with Z370 for your board. I wouldn't even attempt using Z270 if it's not officially supported. Also don't forget a high quality liquid cooler as the K chips require one. (or at least a high end Noctua air cooler)
 
Launch of the Intel 17-8700K at Newegg
​
This is similar to the iPhone 10 launch last month. The price has gone up, every one still wants one yet they are not available for a number of weeks. I'm sure that once production ramps up and the supply increases, some online resellers will be offering them at around $369 or slightly higher. The i3-8100 quad core is available now for $119 at Newegg if you're interested in that.

Screen Shot 7.jpg
 
nobhobbor said:
i do not know if this relates to this conversation. isn't this build with faster newer better components? i ask because i don't know https://www.tonymacx86.com/threads/...-i9-7900x-x299-ga-aorus-9-radeon-vega.229006/

edit: i see the 9i is 4.3 GHz, it is not as fast as the 7i at 4.7 GHz
Click to expand...

faster - for sure - at least in heavily multi-threaded programs eg for video editing or 3d rendering. for everyday use and graphics work etc the coffee lake processer will be faster.. not to forget the slight difference in system price ;)
 
Last edited:
i want to assemble a computer for music production, which must be less CPU intensive than video and 3D rendering. music rendering has not been an issue, but latency while recording tracks has, but that is probably because i starting recording onto my start up drive which has the music program on it. people use host and satellite computers for producing music in order to spread the CPU load which seems to indicate a lack of computing power which this might address. ill post the examples of host/satellite here too:

https://www.waves.com/hardware/soundgrid-server-one
https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/UAD2SUOUlt5
https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=370180
 
nobhobbor said:
i want to assemble a computer for music production, which must be less CPU intensive than video and 3D rendering. music rendering has not been an issue, but latency while recording tracks has, but that is probably because i starting recording onto my start up drive which has the music program on it.
Click to expand...

recording latency doesn't have (much) to do with cpu or gpu at all. it's all about your audio interface. most of the better interfaces offer latency free recording/playback - many with onboard dsp effects.
so make sure you have the right settings chosen in your device settings (for the audio interface) in your daw.
i'm still working on my 2008 mac pro for audio production and i have no latency issues at all.
 
i was under the impression that the onboard effects were on a satellite computer like in the links i posted, or if in the interface, in a computer there. would a Customac Pro build with 32 GB RAM not perform better than a lesser machine and be a waste of money for a music production computer? i'd like to have 100 or more track capability for orchestra and movie soundtracks.

are the graphics not demanding for music production? now that i think about it, what about if video is edited for music videos? i'm probably going down the video editing road, in order to get the music out there, so since that requires more resources, i guess i should have been focusing on that instead of music.

are your projects in music production recorded onto an external hard drive? i think that is why i have latency on my late 2013 i mac 27 OS X 10.9.5 3.2 GHz i5 core 16 GB RAM 16 MHz DDR3 3 TB Hard Drive. but effects and digital work stations are only going to get more CPU intense over time. what are/would you build for music with a video minor?
 
hi nobhobbor,
don't worry too much about audio - most computers will be able to deal with it without issues. latency is not a hard drive issue, but as i already said all about your audio interface and to a lesser degree your cpu (though a 7700k will do just fine for that - no need for workstation grade cpus).
do you have such a huge studio at home that you yourself can record 100+ tracks/that many musicians at a time? ;).. if so.. get professional studio hardware and stop wasting your time here ;)
if you book time in a recording hall, they have all the equipment there.. however - even 100 tracks at a time shouldn't be a huge issue for any modern higher-end computer.
if you have the money, go all ssd instead of mechanical hard drives.
for video production higher core count (to a certain extent.. maybe up to 10, more counts will only help you with encoding as far as i can tell) and graphics cards are important.. here again it depends on which programs you'll work with.. go with compatible amd cards for final cut x (rx 580 or vega 56/64) or nvidia cards for the rest..
 
thanks for you insights. :)
here are some statements that i assume are true, correct me if not, that is why i am here. pro recording studios have computers, computers have more headroom and a quieter noise floor than tape, so if for nothing else, computers such as Customac Pros could be a substitute for multitrack tape recorders. i can use 60 tracks working on a pop song, but half of the tracks will be muted, stuff tried and at least temporarily discarded plus multi takes of audio. Customac Pros are superior to apple products and belong at the heart of pro studio and would, in the real world, serve as way more than just substitutes for multitrack tape recorders. most pro recording studios are analog/digital hybrids. :geek:
i will prepare for final cut pro ... X? thanks for the tip :)
 
yes to most things - however - if you work professionally and need to relay on your hardware you should'd experiment with a hackintosh - you should go for a proper workstation.
hackintoshes - especially when working with configurations not x times tested here - always hold a risk of being more unstable and causing problems.. if you have the money go for a real mac. there are plenty of apple computers available that would suit your needs..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Copyright © 2010 - 2024 tonymacx86 LLC
Back
Top