You do know the IPC improvement from Skylake to Kaby Lake was statistically zero, right? That is, indistinguishable from the margin of error from most reviews. The only thing that went up was clock speeds, which brought power consumption up accordingly everywhere except for the mobile chips - were Kaby Lake indeed was somewhat better than Skylake.

Intel hasn't a IPC improvement in the double digits since Sandy Lake or maybe even Nehalem, depending on the application, though there was a jump for certain HPC-specific tasks when AVX-2 came out. Mark my words that you will be massively disappointed, if you expect Coffee Lake to be anything but Skylake at ~20% higher clocks and a power consumption above 100W for the 4-cores.

I agree with haxxiy

I haven't been impressed in years enough to upgrade, why is why my expectations are tamed for Ryzen. My point is Intel has yearly drops that will move the needle in their favor and keep fresh product in the chain at the respective price points.

Good upgrade path for i3 and FX platform folks that could use the FPS delta. I just dont see why anyone with an unlocked i5 or i7 of the last 4 years has any real reason to upgrade in 2017.

As the scores show, AMD’s upcoming $382 processor isn’t too far behind Intel’s two $1,000 chips. Of course, this likely won’t be AMD’s fastest Ryzen chip on the market, as that is expected to be the R7 1800X

But Intel's two $1,000 chips are not the fastest gaming CPU's. Its always the 4core/8thread consumer i7 (6700K,7700K etc...) t

Its great that all these cores and threads pose competition for the Extreme/Professional market chips for the abundance of other uses,  but realitive to US...the gamers....will it offer higher FPS in our games?

That's what i'm waiting to see, and really will be the only factor that matters to me when building the next rig. Also want to see what the power draw, temperatures and performance scaling  are like in an overclocked environment relative to the Intel chips they are positioned against.