TONS of iMac Coffee Lake 8700k Geekbench scores - from yesterday

[Kidniki100]

My Understanding is that the Coffee Lake CPU's use a different pin configuration for the CPU socket, so these shouldn't be upgrades, right? Looks nice and fast and if the price point stays similar to what an i7 27" iMac costs, this will be the perfect alternative to the iMac Pro 10 core machine at twice the price. Very curious as to what the GPU would be.....

Benchmarks are here, the single core and multi core scores look great!! Supposedly these run hot so it'll be interesting to see what Apple does with the thermal solution. Whether or not they down clock or use theimac Pro internals, which I doubt

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?utf8=✓&q=8700k
[doublepost=1514894691][/doublepost]Maybe they are all Hackintosh benchmarks!

 

[Synchro3]

Yes, they are. With macOS 10.13.2 Coffee Lake CPU's are fully supported. ^^

 

[BlueTide]

It actually could get even better in actual use given extra optimizations in the CPUs (a la QuickSync).

 

[danielwsmithee]

Maybe they are all Hackintosh benchmarks!

Yes these are all Hackintosh builds.

I'm really excited to see what Apple decides to do with the next standard iMac. An iMac with an 8700k, with the cooling system of the iMac Pro would be sweet (very fast, cool and quite). I'd even give up user upgrade-able RAM to get it.

With the current iMac design the i7-8700 would be a great fit, with a 65W TDP and nearly the performance of the 8700k.

 

[Florida Gator]

I know Apple releases things when they want, usually in annual cycles, but if they wanted to release Coffee Lake iMacs, when is the soonest they could based on Intel's production?

 

[rubenalf]

this is the only upgrade for the iMac 27" 5k 2017

 

[sputnikBA]

Not only were they all hackintoshes, the scores imply they were probably overclocked as well. A stock 8700k performs roughly about the same (or slightly less) as an 7700k in single core (around 5.1-5.5k), while its multi should be about 23-26k.

So those 6.5-6.9k single cores / 30-32k multicore "iMac18,3" (which is actually a 2017 iMac btw) should definitely be taken with a grain of salt.

Hopefully no one is getting their hopes up for an official 8700k iMac to bring in those numbers.

 

[danielwsmithee]

Not only were they all hackintoshes, the scores imply they were probably overclocked as well. A stock 8700k performs roughly about the same (or slightly less) as an 7700k in single core (around 5.1-5.5k), while its multi should be about 23-26k.

So those 6.5-6.9k single cores / 30-32k multicore "iMac18,3" (which is actually a 2017 iMac btw) should definitely be taken with a grain of salt.

Hopefully no one is getting their hopes up for an official 8700k iMac to bring in those numbers.

Good point, and if you look through the score there seem to be two groupings.

5501 24096 -> I'm guessing the stock performance of the 8700k
6539 30590 -> Is likely overclocked to 5+GHz.

 

[sputnikBA]

I know Apple releases things when they want, usually in annual cycles, but if they wanted to release Coffee Lake iMacs, when is the soonest they could based on Intel's production?

8700k's have been "available" (i use the term loosely) since October last year. Stocks were pretty limited everywhere though for end-user and seemed to only get better last month. I'm sure OEM's like Apple get preferential access though so they could launch whenever they feel like it. I suspect they will probably wait until new AMD GPUs are available to pair them with though but I don't know when that will be.

My gut says either March/April (whenever their spring even is), or June for WWDC but not later than that.

Good point, and if you look through the score there seem to be two groupings.

5501 24096 -> I'm guessing the stock performance of the 8700k
6539 30590 -> Is likely overclocked to 5+GHz.

Yeh that was the conclusion I came to as well. A respectable score but still with enough of a gap between it and the iMac Pros. I'd be really interested in some actual app benchmarks between the two though — because performance can vary wildly based on exact app and task. I'm looking for new hardware to replace a 3,1 MP 2008 and still don't know what route to take.

EDIT: that said though, I think you are on the right track with them using the 8700 instead of the 8700k for thermal reasons.

 

[jon08]

So from the latest news it seems MBPs won't be seeing major upgrades this year.. do you think the same could apply to iMac as well?

 

[sputnikBA]

depends on what those reports would consider "major upgrades", and what you would consider to be major/minor.