[SOLVED] i5 8400 vs i5 8600k

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
P

Pradeesh87

Distinguished
Jan 28, 2011
37
0
18,530
Does the Base clock really matter.?

i5 8400(2.8Ghz) vs i5 8600k(3.6Ghz)

Because the Turbo clock frequency is almost near 8400(4Ghz) and 8600K(4.3Ghz).

Dose the Base Clock difference of 1Ghz really matters.?
 
Solution
theonerm2
I guess what this really hinges on is whether or not you want to overclock. The base clocks don't really matter because they turbo to whatever the turbo speed is anyway when doing work. When looking at the turbo speeds there is a 300MHz difference between the 2 processors. That's not very significant so the 2 should perform similarly in games. It's only when you start to overclock the 8600K that the 2 processors start to really differ from each other. Really when overclocked the Core i5 8600K shouldn't be much different than the Core i7 8700K in gaming.

If it were me and I wanted to save some money I'd go ahead and get the Core i5 8400. If money was no object well then I wouldn't even consider the 8600K. I'd go ahead and get the...
Sort by date Sort by votes
P

Pradeesh87

Distinguished
Jan 28, 2011
37
0
18,530

So whats the verdict.?? i5 8400 or 8600k for gaming.??
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
madmatt30

madmatt30

Titan
Ambassador
Jan 1, 2013
24,574
650
91,240
The 8600k IS better.

Its just not even close to $120 better though - which is what it costs extra as you need an aftermarket cooler

Compared to the 8400 it looks horrendously overpriced IMO


I'd you're not running a 100htz + screen there is no benefit at all.


I think Intel set the 8400 base clock intentionally low so as to make the 8600k look exponentially better & justify the price.

The 8400 has been seen to boost to 3.5/3.6GHz on all 6 cores so the base clock is fairly irrelevant
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
theonerm2

theonerm2

Splendid
Dec 28, 2009
4,113
81
25,140
I guess what this really hinges on is whether or not you want to overclock. The base clocks don't really matter because they turbo to whatever the turbo speed is anyway when doing work. When looking at the turbo speeds there is a 300MHz difference between the 2 processors. That's not very significant so the 2 should perform similarly in games. It's only when you start to overclock the 8600K that the 2 processors start to really differ from each other. Really when overclocked the Core i5 8600K shouldn't be much different than the Core i7 8700K in gaming.

If it were me and I wanted to save some money I'd go ahead and get the Core i5 8400. If money was no object well then I wouldn't even consider the 8600K. I'd go ahead and get the 8700K. The 8600K should only be considered if you plan to overclock and can't afford the 8700K. The thing is... I can't decide for you. You have to make the decision but hopefully I have given you enough information to make it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
rgd1101

rgd1101

Don't
Moderator
Nov 7, 2011
73,304
3,853
176,290
Upvote 0 Downvote
Q

quad2012

Reputable
May 10, 2014
19
0
4,520
I was kind of in the same situation. I think it really depends on lots of things. In my case the main consideration for me where the future, I think we will see quite a jump in CPU performance with AMD coming back and some other factors making for higher demand in terms of CPU power. ¨

So I plan to sell the thing after two years max. when we see mature Ryzen or Intel chips with new architecture. Now for a range of 2 years an i5 is more than enough, I'm not going to need the extra threads for gaming until then.

In terms of whether to go for 8400 or 8600k I think it's really a question of Overclocking, as far as I've seen the 8600k OCs quite nicely, matching the performance of a 8700k in gaming, which for me was the nobrainer argument. So if you don't plan to OC don't go with the 8600k, if you do I think it's a great deal.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom