All this talk about i7-8086k vs i7-9700k and there's also the i7-8700k is giving me the itch to upgrade my DAW. Question: is the embedded Intel GPU UHD 630 good enough for multi-display DAW work?
 
Thanks!

If you're looking at the new 8-core Coffee Lake CPUs, I'd choose the i9-9900k vs. the i7-9700k.

• 9900k has 8-cores with 16 processing threads (clock speed of 5GHz)
• 9700k has 8-cores with 8 processing threads (clock-speed of 4.9GHz)

 
The UHD-630 graphics are just fine for running a pair of 1080p monitors for DAW purposes.
If you're doing any kind of video editing/rendering... or running 4k monitors, that's when you'd want a GTX video card.

I'm counting on that to be the case.  The problem is available motherboards that provide what is wanted...a DVI and a VGA port, with support of up to three monitors. 
 
The only one I could find that is compatible with the i7 8700k is the
AsRock Z370 EXTREME4
 

Quality Z370 motherboards typically provide three digital video outputs

• Display Port
• HDMI
• DVI-D

Unless you've got an older monitor (VGA only), you can easily convert any of the digital formats with simple/inexpensive adapters. 
If you need to convert say DVI-D>VGA, the active adapters still aren't terribly expensive (under $30).

Jim Roseberry
If you're looking at the new 8-core Coffee Lake CPUs, I'd choose the i9-9900k vs. the i7-9700k.

• 9900k has 8-cores with 16 processing threads (clock speed of 5GHz)
• 9700k has 8-cores with 8 processing threads (clock-speed of 4.9GHz)

It's a matter of price for me (today's Newegg price shown below):
 
CPU - Coffee Lake  Cores/threads  Base/Turbo (1 core) Clock Rate  Price
i9-9900k                    8/16                   3.6/5.0                                        $549
i7-9700k                    8/8                     3.6/4.9                                        $419
i7-8086k                    6/12                   4.0/5.0                                        $478
i7-8700k                    6/12                   3.74.7                                         $369
 
These are all considered 95W devices and include the UHD630 embedded GPU. Price seems to scale (mostly) with Turbo Clock rate. One advantage of the 9xxx processors is they have built-in protection against those recent CPU vulnerabilities.
 
If clock rate is the most important, why focus on the max turbo rate. What not the Base Clock Rate?

fret_man
If clock rate is the most important, why focus on the max turbo rate. What not the Base Clock Rate?

Simple...
When we configure a DAW using the i9-9900k, we lock all cores at 5GHz.
Zero performance throttling; You've got maximum performance at all times.
With proper cooling, it's 100% stable... and near dead-silent.
There's no downside to doing so...
 
FWIW, I'd choose the 8086k (12 processing threads at 5GHz) over the 9700k (8 processing threads at 4.9GHz)

Jim will hate me stepping in here, but I've been wrestling with my duel GPU laptop graphics...the Intel GPU is fine and can output duel 4k monitors. I usually have my 4k lg monitor connected to the NVIDA GPU, but in my quest to get the 10bit colour depth to work, I changed over to the displayport output on the Thunderbolt port, which worked fine...so your Intel GPU can output 2 4k monitors easily. I will say though, that this would be at the expense of plugin processing power. The other is Windows is currently working on a fix, to allow full 10 bit color depth to 10bit 4k monitors, which is what uhd actually stands for. And Jim is right about rendering...if you were to do hardcore video rendering, then you would need a stand alone GPU. Personally, if you're going to get a desktop upgrade...Jim knows I'm against desktops, but if you're going to upgrade...NVIDA have plenty of good graphics cards at the 200 bucks Oz that will do the job...but you might want somthing higher for video rendering. And Windows latest update...when they've fixed the bug will apparently fix the uhd problem too. I would steer clear of AMD graphics, Jim might disagree...but from my understanding of the graphics GPU architecture - Open GL inst as well supported as CUDA or AMD vs CUDA. This is more to do with video editing rather than audio.

Sorry Jim...I have been working on graphics and getting my head around what's going on in GPU land for a few weeks now. I'm not trying to tread on your toes, and please correct me if I've got anything wrong.

Ben

Thedoccal,
I'm running 3 monitors (dvi or vga on these, no hdmi or DP).
Jim added the GTX-1050 video card to my rig.
I run one monitor from the on board dvi port, one dvi on the GTX and a DP to dvi (cable here $8) from the GTX.
Works like a charm!
The whole rig is dead silent.
When I have Ozone 8 and a bunch of plugs running (mixing/mastering),
I do sometimes increase latency to 128 samples...
(that was 2048 on my old rig)
HTH
T

Hey Ben,
 
Please comment when/where you feel compelled to do so.
The subject of DAWs (especially performance related) is an area where I have a lot of knowledge/experience.
Most of my adult life has been spec'ing, building, testing, and supporting DAWs.
 
From Intel's website:
Max Resolution (HDMI 1.4) 4096x2304@24Hz
Max Resolution (DP) 4096x2304@60Hz
 
So yes, you can run a single 4k monitor from the UHD-630 graphics... if you use the Display Port (60Hz refresh rate).
What you don't want to do is run a second 4k monitor using the HDMI port (24Hz refresh rate). 
That'll give you eye-strain headaches and mouse movement will be jerky.
DVI-D doesn't have enough resolution to run 4k.
 
If you want to run 4k monitors (plural), you want a GTX video card.  
That was my statement in the previous post.