<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:dc="https://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
     xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
     xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
     xmlns:cf="https://www.futureplc.com/rss/content-flags"
>
    <channel>
                    <atom:link href="https://www.tomshardware.com/feeds/tag/intel-core-i5-7600k" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
                            <title><![CDATA[ Latest from Tom's Hardware in Intel-core-i5-7600k ]]></title>
                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/tag/intel-core-i5-7600k</link>
        <description><![CDATA[ All the latest intel-core-i5-7600k content from the Tom's Hardware team ]]></description>
                                    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Nov 2023 13:25:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
                            <language>en</language>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ CPU Benchmarks and Hierarchy 2026: CPU Rankings ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ All of today's desktop CPU benchmarks compared, including Intel's 13th-Gen Core series and AMD's Ryzen Zen 4 and Threadripper. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">V7teKs7ev9p3jsgMmVR9A</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7FRLCpVusR9om4FiGDuPyG-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sat, 18 Nov 2023 13:25:13 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Mon, 29 Jun 2026 14:25:49 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jake Roach ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/h6PRM8bTimCTnNfoAYfjAi.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jake Roach has been bending pins and busting solder joints since the mid-2000s. From trying to run scratched CDs of &lt;em&gt;Delta Force &lt;/em&gt;and &lt;em&gt;Unreal Tournament &lt;/em&gt;to spitting out virtual machines on a Threadripper, Jake has been on the hunt for the latest hardware and highest performance for decades. That eventually spun up a career, with Jake serving as Lead Reporter at Digital Trends, as well as contributing to outlets like XDA, PC Invasion, Business Insider, and WIRED. At Tom’s Hardware, Jake is focused on consumer and workstation CPUs. Outside working hours, you’ll find him knee-deep in the latest roguelite taking over Steam, spending way too much money on &lt;em&gt;Magic: The Gathering, &lt;/em&gt;or forcing his lazy corgi onto walks.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                        <dc:contributor><![CDATA[ Paul Alcorn ]]></dc:contributor>
                                                                    <cf:isSponsored>false</cf:isSponsored>
                <cf:hasAffiliateLinks>false</cf:hasAffiliateLinks>
                <cf:isPaid>false</cf:isPaid>
                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7FRLCpVusR9om4FiGDuPyG-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Tom&#039;s Hardware]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[CPUs laying out.]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[CPUs laying out.]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[CPUs laying out.]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7FRLCpVusR9om4FiGDuPyG-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">More CPU content:</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text"><ul><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html" target="_blank">The Best CPU for Gaming</a></li><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-vs-intel-cpus" target="_blank">Intel vs AMD</a></li><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-buying-guide,5643.html" target="_blank">CPU Buying Guide</a></li><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/best-cpu-deals" target="_blank">Best CPU Deals</a></li><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-9-285k-vs-amd-ryzen-7-9800x3d-faceoff-battle-of-the-gaming-flagships" target="_blank">AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Faceoff</a></li><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html" target="_blank">The Best GPU for Gaming</a></li><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus" target="_blank">All CPU Content</a></li></ul></p></div></div><p>Our CPU benchmark hierarchy provides a broad view of relative performance for the latest Intel and AMD processors. Over the last 30 years, Tom’s Hardware has been benchmarking CPUs, and we use the rankings here as the basis of our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html"><u>best CPUs for gaming</u></a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cheap-cpus,5668.html"><u>best budget CPU</u></a> rankings. We run over 200 individual tests for each CPU we look at, and that comprehensive performance is condensed here for a high-level view of how CPUs compare across gaming, single-threaded, and multithreaded performance. </p><p>Each of our CPU benchmarks helps expose different aspects of performance, from heavily-threaded code compilation and data science workloads to lightly-threaded web apps and audio encoding. We’re currently in the process of the biggest refresh to our CPU benchmarks hierarchy ever, spanning over a decade of processor releases. The results here provide the first half of that testing, focusing on DDR5 platforms that span the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-vs-intel-cpus"><u>AMD vs Intel</u></a> product lineups. As we fill out our legacy benchmarks, you’ll see more CPUs added to our rankings. If you want to check the performance of older CPUs now, you can use the second page of this article to see our legacy benchmarks. </p><p>In games, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-7-9850x3d-review"><u>AMD’s Ryzen 7 9850X3D</u></a> is the fastest CPU on the market, though other Zen 5 X3D offerings like the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-9-9950x3d-review"><u>Ryzen 9 9950X3D</u></a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-7-9800x3d-review-devastating-gaming-performance"><u>Ryzen 7 9800X3D </u></a>aren’t far behind. X3D chips dominate the charts for gaming at 1080p, with the other exception being the relatively unpopular (and expensive) Ryzen 9 7900X3D. Otherwise, Intel’s last-gen Core i9-14900K is the fastest offering from Team Blue, with the new Core Ultra 7 270K Plus coming in slightly behind <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intels-binary-optimization-tool-tested-and-explained-how-the-ibot-translation-delivers-up-to-18-percent-faster-gaming-performance-8-percent-on-average"><u>with Intel’s new iBOT feature</u></a>. </p><p>Intel pulls out strong positions in applications; however, with the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-7-270k-plus-review/"><u>Core Ultra 7 270K Plus </u></a>topping the charts in single-threaded performance and coming in third in multi-threaded rankings. It’s only beaten by the Ryzen 9 9950X and its X3D variant, and only by a hair. Further, both of those CPUs cost about twice as much. AMD's recent <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-9-9950x3d2-review">Ryzen 9 9950X3D2</a> claims the top slot in overall performance, but at $900, it's too expensive for most buyers. </p><p>In each section below, we’ll show you the rankings for each CPU, as well as reveal what tests went into creating the rankings. We’ll also give you some pointers for benchmarking your own CPU to see how much performance an upgrade or overclock netted you, along with some common, easy-to-run benchmarks you can perform yourself. </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-cpu-benchmarks-rankings-2026"><span>CPU Benchmarks Rankings 2026</span></h3><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DDw3RLrourqMvUZa2Ugp9f.png" alt="CPU Benchmark Rankings" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jBp8pv3MTsgV9U2yXWjp9f.png" alt="CPU Benchmark Rankings" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/inLKtbMy7MiHA6ZRPj8nAf.png" alt="CPU Benchmark Rankings" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SmDdzbKGWsiS2fFtifxNCf.png" alt="CPU Benchmark Rankings" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>In the album above, you can see our master charts for gaming, single-threaded, and multi-threaded performance for CPUs. For games, all of our testing was done with an Nvidia RTX 5090 FE, and for applications, our testing was done with an Nvidia RTX 2080 Ti FE. For applications, no compute is actively running on the GPU; it’s a glorified display output that shares a driver with our gaming GPU. You can find a full breakdown of the test benches we used at the end of this article. </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-gaming-cpu-benchmarks-rankings-2026"><span>Gaming CPU Benchmarks Rankings 2026</span></h3><div ><table><caption> Gaming CPU Benchmarks Rankings 2026</caption><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>CPU / (MSRP)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>Street Price</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>1080p Gaming Score</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>Architecture</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>Cores/Threads (P+E)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>Base/Boost Clock (GHz)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>TDP / Maximum Power</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 7 9850X3D ($500)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-RyzenTM-9850X3D-Desktop-Processor/dp/B0G8JMLXNQ/"><u>$499</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>100%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>4.7 / 5.6</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 7 9800X3D ($480)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-9800X3D-16-Thread-Desktop-Processor/dp/B0DKFMSMYK/"><u>$464</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>97%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>4.7 / 5.2 </p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 9950X3D ($700)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-9950X3D-16-Core-Processor/dp/B0DVZSG8D5/"><u>$676</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>95.7%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>4.3 / 5.7</p></td><td  ><p>170W / 230W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 9900X3D ($600)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-9900X3D-12-Core-Processor/dp/B0DWGWN8GY/"><u>$530</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>86.9%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>4.4 / 5.5</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 230W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 7 7800X3D ($450)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-7800X3D-16-Thread-Processor/dp/B0BTZB7F88/"><u>$399</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>85.6%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / 5</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 7950X3D ($700)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-7950X3D-Hexadeca-core-Processor/dp/B0BTRH9MNS/"><u>$650</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>83.9%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / 5.7</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 5 7600X3D ($300)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-7600X3D-Raphael-4-1GHz-Processor/dp/B0F9XH8DBP/"><u>$246</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>80.6%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>4.1 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>65W / 88W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i9-14900K ($550)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/i9-14900K-Desktop-Processor-Integrated-Graphics/dp/B0CGJDKLB8/"><u>$469</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>78.2%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake Refresh</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 32 (8+16)</p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / 6</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 253W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 7 270K Plus ($300)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-ultra-7-270k-plus-core-ultra-7-series-2-arrow-lake-refresh-lga-1851-desktop-cpu-processor/p/N82E16819118628"><u>$350</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>77.5%</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake Refresh</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 24 (8+16)</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 5.5</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 250W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 7 7900X3D ($600)</p></td><td  ><p>Out of Stock</p></td><td  ><p>77.1%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>4.4 / 5.6</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 9950X ($650)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-RyzenTM-9950X-32-Thread-Processor/dp/B0D6NNRBGP/"><u>$520</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>76.9%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>4.7 / 5/7</p></td><td  ><p>170W / 230W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i9-13900K ($590)</p></td><td  ><p>Out of Stock</p></td><td  ><p>76.8%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 32 (8+16)</p></td><td  ><p>3 / 5.8</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 253W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i7-14700K ($410)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/i7-14700K-Desktop-Processor-Integrated-Graphics/dp/B0CGJ41C9W/"><u>$340</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>76.4%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake Refresh</p></td><td  ><p>20 / 28 (8+12)</p></td><td  ><p>3.4 / 5.6</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 253W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i7-13700K ($410)</p></td><td  ><p>Out of Stock</p></td><td  ><p>75.8%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 24 (8+8)</p></td><td  ><p>3.4 / 5.4</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 253W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 9900X ($500)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-RyzenTM-9900X-24-Thread-Processor/dp/B0D6NN87T8/"><u>$439</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>73.9%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>4.4 / 5.6</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 5 250K Plus ($200)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-ultra-5-250k-plus-core-ultra-5-series-2-arrow-lake-refresh-lga-1851-desktop-cpu-processor/p/N82E16819118629"><u>$220</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>73.3%</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake Refresh</p></td><td  ><p>18 / 18 (6+12)</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / 5.3</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 159W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i5-14600K ($320)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/i5-14600K-Desktop-Processor-Integrated-Graphics/dp/B0CGJ9STNF/"><u>$300</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>72.8%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake Refresh</p></td><td  ><p>14 / 20 (6+8)</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 5.3</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 181W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 5 9600X ($280)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-RyzenTM-9600X-12-Thread-Processor/dp/B0D6NN6TM7/"><u>$188</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>72.6%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 5.4</p></td><td  ><p>65W / 88W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 9 285K ($590)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Core-Ultra-Processor-285K/dp/B0DFKC99VL/"><u>$557</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>71.8%</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 24 (8+16)</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 5.7</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 250W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 7950X ($700)</p></td><td  ><p>Out of Stock</p></td><td  ><p>71%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>4.5 / 5.7</p></td><td  ><p>170W / 230W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i5-13600K ($320)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i5-13600K-Desktop-Processor-P-cores/dp/B0BCDR9M33/"><u>$319</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>70.9%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake</p></td><td  ><p>14 / 20 (6+8)</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 5.1</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 181W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 7 7700X ($400)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-7700X-16-Thread-Unlocked-Processor/dp/B0BBHHT8LY/"><u>$249</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>70.6%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>4.5 / 5.4</p></td><td  ><p>105W / 142W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 7 265K ($400)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Core-Ultra-Processor-265K/dp/B0DFK2MH2D/"><u>$284</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>70.3%</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake</p></td><td  ><p>20 / 20 (8+12)</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 5.5</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 250W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 7900X ($550)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-7900X-24-Thread-Unlocked-Processor/dp/B0BBJ59WJ4/"><u>$299</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>69.2%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>4.7 / 5.6</p></td><td  ><p>170W / 230W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 5 7600X ($300)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-7600X-12-Thread-Unlocked-Processor/dp/B0BBJDS62N/"><u>$180</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>67.3%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>4.7 / 5.3</p></td><td  ><p>105W / 142W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 5 245K ($320)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Core-Ultra-Processor-245K/dp/B0DFK2P311/"><u>$202</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>67.1%</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake</p></td><td  ><p>14 / 14 (6+8)</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / 5.2</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 159W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i7-12700K ($410)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i7-12700K-Desktop-Processor-Unlocked/dp/B09FXNVDBJ/"><u>$285</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>65.8%</p></td><td  ><p>Alder Lake</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 20 (8+4)</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 5</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 190W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 5 225 ($183)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel%C2%AE-CoreTM-Desktop-Processor-P-cores/dp/B0DT7DXXJT/"><u>$180</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>62.5%</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake</p></td><td  ><p>10 / 10 (6+4)</p></td><td  ><p>3.3 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>65W / 121W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i5-12600K ($290)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i5-12600K-Desktop-Processor-Unlocked/dp/B09FX4D72T/"><u>$185</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>60.8%</p></td><td  ><p>Alder Lake</p></td><td  ><p>10 / 16 (6+4)</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 150W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i5-14400 ($220)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i5-14400-Desktop-Processor-P-cores/dp/B0CQ1M1YXM/"><u>$250</u></a></p></td><td  ><p>58%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake</p></td><td  ><p>10 / 16 (6+4)</p></td><td  ><p>2.5 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>65W / 154W</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>You can see the relative score for AMD and Intel CPUs above, measured against the Ryzen 7 9850X3D, which is the fastest gaming CPU on the market, per our testing. So, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D offers 97.04% of the performance of the Ryzen 7 9850X3D, while the Ryzen 9 7900X offers 69.28% of the performance. You can set any CPU as a baseline for comparison with Bench, which is available in <em>Tom’s Hardware Premium. </em></p><p>All of our gaming tests were run with the RTX 5090 FE at 1080p with a mixture of High and Ultra settings. We run each test multiple times — usually between three and five — and pick the median result. In other words, the results we use are real, recorded runs, not an average of several different runs. This is important as some games, such as <em>Far Cry 6, </em>show great CPU scaling but are otherwise inconsistent run-to-run. </p><p>In addition to consistent hardware (test benches at the end of this article), we use a consistent test image between platforms. That means the same GPU driver, the same Windows install, the game version, etc. We also tested with Virtualization-Based Security (VBS) turned off, Resizable BAR turned on, and automatic overclocking features disabled. That includes the Intel Extreme power profile and AMD’s PBO, both of which aren’t covered under standard warranty. </p><p>For this refresh, we tested 17 games and then calculated a geometric mean of the results. A simple average would provide skewed results with such a large test pool. A geomean provides a more realistic view of how each CPU compares to the others.</p><p>Here are the games that we used for testing: </p><ul><li><em>Counter-Strike 2</em></li><li><em>The Last of Us Part One</em></li><li><em>Cyberpunk 2077</em></li><li><em>Starfield</em></li><li><em>A Plague Tale: Requiem</em></li><li><em>Hogwarts Legacy</em></li><li><em>F1 24</em></li><li><em>Marvel’s Spider-Man 2</em></li><li><em>Baldur’s Gate 3</em></li><li><em>Monster Hunter: Wilds</em></li><li><em>Final Fantasy XIV</em></li><li><em>Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024</em></li><li><em>Doom: The Dark Ages</em></li><li><em>Oblivion Remastered</em></li><li><em>Far Cry 6</em></li><li><em>Hitman 3</em></li><li><em>Minecraft RTX</em></li></ul><p>We’re constantly evaluating new games to include in our test suite — see our recent stories on <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/testing-cpu-scaling-in-resident-evil-requiem-and-why-we-werent-able-to-finish-the-job"><u><em>Resident Evil Requiem </em></u><u>CPU scaling</u></a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/testing-cpu-scaling-in-crimson-desert-x3d-wins-but-not-by-much-and-raptor-lake-shines"><u><em>Crimson Desert </em></u><u>CPU scaling</u></a> — but we maintain a list of tried-and-true benchmarks for our hierarchy rankings. We want to avoid including brand-new titles, which may see many updates, to keep our rankings as true to reality as possible. If you want more about the rationale behind our game choices, see our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/behind-the-scenes-of-our-massive-cpu-retest-for-bench-testing-at-1080p-choosing-new-apps-and-gathering-data-for-a-decade-of-cpus"><u>behind the scenes look at our CPU hierarchy</u></a> testing. </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-single-threaded-cpu-benchmarks-rankings-2026"><span>Single-Threaded CPU Benchmarks Rankings 2026</span></h3><div ><table><caption>2026 Single-Threaded CPU Benchmarks</caption><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p><strong>Single-Threaded App Score</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>Architecture</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>Cores/Threads (P+E)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>Base/Boost Clock (GHz)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>TDP / Maximum Power</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 7 270K Plus</p></td><td  ><p>100%</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake Refresh</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 24 (8+16)</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 5.5</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 250W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 9 285K</p></td><td  ><p>98.5%</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 24 (8+16)</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 5.7</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 250W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 7 265K</p></td><td  ><p>96.8%</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake</p></td><td  ><p>20 / 20 (8+12)</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 5.5</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 250W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i9-14900K</p></td><td  ><p>95.4%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake Refresh</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 32 (8+16)</p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / 6</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 253W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 5 250K Plus</p></td><td  ><p>94%</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake Refresh</p></td><td  ><p>18 / 18 (6+12)</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / 5.3</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 159W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 9950X</p></td><td  ><p>93.3%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>4.7 / 5/7</p></td><td  ><p>170W / 230W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 7 9850X3D</p></td><td  ><p>93.2%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>4.7 / 5.6</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 9950X3D</p></td><td  ><p>92.8%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>4.3 / 5.7</p></td><td  ><p>170W / 230W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 5 245K</p></td><td  ><p>92.5%</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake</p></td><td  ><p>14 / 14 (6+8)</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / 5.2</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 159W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i9-13900K</p></td><td  ><p>92.4%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 32 (8+16)</p></td><td  ><p>3 / 5.8</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 253W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 9900X</p></td><td  ><p>92.2%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>4.4 / 5.6</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 9900X3D</p></td><td  ><p>90.8%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>4.4 / 5.5</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 230W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 9700X / 105W TDP</p></td><td  ><p>90.6% / 90.5%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5</p></td><td  ><p>8 /16</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 5.5</p></td><td  ><p>65W / 88W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i7-14700K</p></td><td  ><p>90.1%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake Refresh</p></td><td  ><p>20 / 28 (8+12)</p></td><td  ><p>3.4 / 5.6</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 253W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 5 9600X / 105W TDP</p></td><td  ><p>89% / 88.9%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 5.4</p></td><td  ><p>65W / 88W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 7 9800X3D</p></td><td  ><p>87.6%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>4.7 / 5.2 </p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 5 225</p></td><td  ><p>87.3%</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake</p></td><td  ><p>10 / 10 (6+4)</p></td><td  ><p>3.3 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>65W / 121W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i7-13700K</p></td><td  ><p>86.7%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 24 (8+8)</p></td><td  ><p>3.4 / 5.4</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 253W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i5-14600K</p></td><td  ><p>85.8%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake Refresh</p></td><td  ><p>14 / 20 (6+8)</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 5.3</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 181W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 7950X3D</p></td><td  ><p>85.4%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / 5.7</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 7950X</p></td><td  ><p>85.2%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>4.5 / 5.7</p></td><td  ><p>170W / 230W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 7900X3D</p></td><td  ><p>84%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>4.4 / 5.6</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 7 7700X</p></td><td  ><p>84%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>4.5 / 5.4</p></td><td  ><p>105W / 142W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i5-13600K</p></td><td  ><p>82.4%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake</p></td><td  ><p>14 / 20 (6+8)</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 5.1</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 181W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i7-12700K</p></td><td  ><p>79.7%</p></td><td  ><p>Alder Lake</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 20 (8+4)</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 5</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 190W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i5-12600K</p></td><td  ><p>78.6%</p></td><td  ><p>Alder Lake</p></td><td  ><p>10 / 16 (6+4)</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 150W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 7 7800X3D</p></td><td  ><p>77.3%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / 5</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i5-14400</p></td><td  ><p>75.4%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake</p></td><td  ><p>10 / 16 (6+4)</p></td><td  ><p>2.5 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>65W / 154W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 5 7600X3D</p></td><td  ><p>73.2%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>4.1 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>65W / 88W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 5 7600X</p></td><td  ><p>71.5%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>4.7 / 5.3</p></td><td  ><p>105W / 142W</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>We run hundreds of tests for each CPU, but only a small subset of those tests factor into our single-threaded rankings. We use the mp3 encoder LAME with a single thread (both standard and extended), Cinebench 2026 and 2024’s single-threaded test, the ray-traced renderer POV-ray, and WebXRT4, which runs a series of browser-based applications written in various languages. </p><p>The fastest chip in the pool here is the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, which scores 100%, with every other chip scored relative to it. The Core i9-14900K offers 95.4% of the single-threaded performance of the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, the Ryzen 5 9600X offers 89% of the performance, and so on. </p><p>Most real-world workloads aren’t strictly single-threaded, which is why we include it on a subset of the total tests we run. The goal is to see what relative performance looks like in lightly-threaded applications, as well as look into the overall architecture of different CPUs. Single-threaded performance exposes a lot about the architecture in a way that heavily-threaded applications tend to mask. </p><p>We’re, of course, looking at performance on a single core, favoring high clock speeds and IPC (instructions per cycle). However, single-threaded performance also says a lot about what’s going on elsewhere inside the CPU, from the speed of the IMC (integrated memory controller) to the fabric/ring speed. That’s why we see things like the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus outperforming the Core Ultra 9 285K, despite the latter sporting higher clock speeds. </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-multi-threaded-cpu-benchmarks-rankings-2026"><span>Multi-Threaded CPU Benchmarks Rankings 2026</span></h3><div ><table><caption>2026 Multi-Threaded CPU Benchmarks</caption><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p><strong>Single-Threaded App Score</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>Architecture</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>Cores/Threads (P+E)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>Base/Boost Clock (GHz)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>TDP / Maximum Power</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 9950X3D</p></td><td  ><p>100%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>4.3 / 5.7</p></td><td  ><p>170W / 230W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 9950X</p></td><td  ><p>96.8%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>4.7 / 5/7</p></td><td  ><p>170W / 230W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 7 270K Plus</p></td><td  ><p>95.6%</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake Refresh</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 24 (8+16)</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 5.5</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 250W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 9 285K</p></td><td  ><p>88.7%</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 24 (8+16)</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 5.7</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 250W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 7950X</p></td><td  ><p>88%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>4.5 / 5.7</p></td><td  ><p>170W / 230W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 7950X3D</p></td><td  ><p>84.4%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / 5.7</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i9-14900K</p></td><td  ><p>83.9%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake Refresh</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 32 (8+16)</p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / 6</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 253W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i9-13900K</p></td><td  ><p>81%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 32 (8+16)</p></td><td  ><p>3 / 5.8</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 253W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 7 265K</p></td><td  ><p>78.9%</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake</p></td><td  ><p>20 / 20 (8+12)</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 5.5</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 250W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 9900X3D</p></td><td  ><p>77%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>4.4 / 5.5</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 230W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 9900X</p></td><td  ><p>76.7%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>4.4 / 5.6</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i7-14700K</p></td><td  ><p>75.1%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake Refresh</p></td><td  ><p>20 / 28 (8+12)</p></td><td  ><p>3.4 / 5.6</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 253W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 5 250K Plus</p></td><td  ><p>70.9%</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake Refresh</p></td><td  ><p>18 / 18 (6+12)</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / 5.3</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 159W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i7-13700K</p></td><td  ><p>67.1%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 24 (8+8)</p></td><td  ><p>3.4 / 5.4</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 253W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 7900X3D</p></td><td  ><p>63.9%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>4.4 / 5.6</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 7 9850X3D</p></td><td  ><p>57%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>4.7 / 5.6</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 7 9800X3D</p></td><td  ><p>56.9%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>4.7 / 5.2 </p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 5 245K</p></td><td  ><p>55.8%</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake</p></td><td  ><p>14 / 14 (6+8)</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / 5.2</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 159W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i5-14600K</p></td><td  ><p>53.9%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake Refresh</p></td><td  ><p>14 / 20 (6+8)</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 5.3</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 181W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i7-12700K</p></td><td  ><p>51.9%</p></td><td  ><p>Alder Lake</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 20 (8+4)</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 5</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 190W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i5-13600K</p></td><td  ><p>50.3%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake</p></td><td  ><p>14 / 20 (6+8)</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 5.1</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 181W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 7 9700X / 105W TDP</p></td><td  ><p>47.2% / 53.2%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5</p></td><td  ><p>8 /16</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 5.5</p></td><td  ><p>65W / 88W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 7 7700X</p></td><td  ><p>46.8%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>4.5 / 5.4</p></td><td  ><p>105W / 142W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 7 7800X3D</p></td><td  ><p>44.5%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / 5</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 5 9600X / 105W TDP</p></td><td  ><p>39.7% / 41.7%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 5.4</p></td><td  ><p>65W / 88W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i5-12600K</p></td><td  ><p>39.5%</p></td><td  ><p>Alder Lake</p></td><td  ><p>10 / 16 (6+4)</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 150W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 5 225</p></td><td  ><p>38.5%</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake</p></td><td  ><p>10 / 10 (6+4)</p></td><td  ><p>3.3 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>65W / 121W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 5 7600X3D</p></td><td  ><p>33.1%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>4.1 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>65W / 88W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i5-14400</p></td><td  ><p>32.7%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake</p></td><td  ><p>10 / 16 (6+4)</p></td><td  ><p>2.5 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>65W / 154W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 5 7600X</p></td><td  ><p>31.3%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>4.7 / 5.3</p></td><td  ><p>105W / 142W</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Similar to single-threaded rankings, we use a subset of the total tests we run for CPU reviews in ranking multithreaded performance. Cinebench and POV-ray show up here again, this time using as many threads as possible, alongside VRay, four Blender tests, and Handbrake using various codecs. Although most applications will leverage multiple threads these days, we’re specifically looking at applications that will take as many threads as possible to maximize compute. </p><p>Compared to single-threaded workloads, heavily-threaded tasks are less concerned with clock speed and put a greater emphasis on interconnects and core-to-core latency. Core count is obviously important, as well, though it’s been somewhat undermined by Intel’s hybrid architectures over the last several generations. </p><p>Given that we’re spanning multiple nodes, core count alone isn’t indicative of higher multithreaded performance. Yes, higher core counts within the same generation will usually provide higher multithreaded performance, but a slew of other factors can increase performance, as well, from all-core and uncore frequencies to higher transistor density. Because of the wide swath of factors, you can see much more aggressive scaling with our multithreaded rankings compared to single-threaded rankings.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-integrated-gpu-gaming-cpu-benchmarks-rankings-2026"><span>Integrated GPU Gaming CPU Benchmarks Rankings 2026</span></h3><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/foCxx4vhCPeaBJafxHACia.png" alt="CPU integrated GPU Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fsJpoB2CKJPPggf9PGCnoP.png" alt="CPU Benchmark Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6tMHFEAseZKBWuTNERSPtP.png" alt="CPU Benchmark Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ohj5E7FwgV5SZZkYhqqida.png" alt="CPU integrated GPU Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EwPnsnPmSVV7tLHaXQE4Ra.png" alt="CPU integrated GPU Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/b9LXLSTXohcBV4Sb8ja45Q.png" alt="CPU Benchmark Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2iwg9upZXomq58VMFW3KXa.png" alt="CPU integrated GPU Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/usbGTexQEpAtyjFyhcpzxP.png" alt="CPU Benchmark Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><div ><table><caption>iGPU Performance relative to Ryzen 7 5700G</caption><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p> </p></td><td  ><p>1280x720</p></td><td  ><p>1920x1080</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Ryzen 7 5700G B550-E </strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>100%</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>100%</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Ryzen 5 5600G</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>96.3%</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>96%</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 7 4750G</p></td><td  ><p>92.9%</p></td><td  ><p>94.1%</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 3 5300G</p></td><td  ><p>85.8%</p></td><td  ><p>87.2%</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 5 3400G</p></td><td  ><p>83.5%</p></td><td  ><p>84.1%</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 3 3200G</p></td><td  ><p>77.1%</p></td><td  ><p>78.1%</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel UHD Graphics 750 32 EU (11600K, 11700K)</p></td><td  ><p>58.3%</p></td><td  ><p>~48.9%</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel UHD Graphics 730 24 EU (i5-11400)</p></td><td  ><p>51.7%</p></td><td  ><p>42.9%</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel UHD Graphics 630 24 EU (10600K)</p></td><td  ><p>36.0%</p></td><td  ><p>34.4%</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Here's our list of gaming performance with integrated graphics on several of the leading APUs available. We've split this into two different price ranges, so be sure to flip through all of the performance charts. For a bit of commentary and analysis of these results, head to our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amds-ryzen-cezanne-apus-coming-to-retail-for-desktop-pcs">Ryzen 7 5700G</a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-5600g-review">Ryzen 5 5600G</a>, and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-3-5300g-review">Ryzen 3 5300G</a> reviews. The most powerful chip gets a 100, and all others are scored relative to it.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-how-to-benchmark-your-cpu"><span>How to Benchmark your CPU</span></h3><p>It’s important to know how to benchmark your CPU. It gives you a way to compare performance <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/how-to-overclock-a-cpu"><u>after an overclock</u></a> or a CPU upgrade, and it allows you to check if you’re getting the full performance out of your system. Maybe a poor CPU cooler mount is limiting your performance, or maybe your BIOS settings aren’t optimal. Using benchmarks to compare your results lets you see where your rig stacks up, not only for leaderboard purposes, but also basic troubleshooting. </p><p>The key to benchmarking your CPU is consistency. The only variable that should change is your CPU, be it a new CPU or an overclock/undervolt. Before starting, make sure to close any applications running in the background. That’s not only to net peak performance, but also to avoid any inconsistencies between runs. Background apps can gobble up threads inconsistently, making it difficult to compare your results from run to run. </p><p>If you want more consistency, you can optionally run the following command before benchmarking in an elevated command prompt: </p><p><em>Rundll32.exe advapi32.dll,ProcessIdleTasks</em></p><p>This will force Windows to perform the background tasks it normally does when your PC is idle. It’s not essential, but it’s a good sanity check to make sure there’s nothing interfering with your results. </p><p>For applications, you want to test the apps you actually use. If you use the Adobe suite, for example, you can download and use PugetBench for free and compare your results with Puget’s database. A lot of apps don’t have these easy-to-use benchmarking tools and databases, so you need to find a proxy. For instance, Procyon Office measures Microsoft Office performance, but a license costs nearly $1,600 per year. PCMark 10 Basic, which is free, measures open-source office applications. Below, we have some of our favorite free benchmarks for comparing CPU performance. </p><p>In games, you can take two approaches: manual or automated. Some modern games include built-in benchmarking tools, such as <em>Cyberpunk 2077 </em>and <em>Doom: The Dark Ages, </em>and although they aren’t perfect, they’re easy to run and highly repeatable. The best way to measure CPU gaming performance, however, is manual benchmarking. </p><p>That involves finding a scene where you can go over a specific path repeatedly. That could be starting from a specific checkpoint that you can reload or resorting to a manual save where you start from the exact same position. Regardless, it’s important to avoid randomness in your testing. Keep the path consistent — for example, a walking path through a town — and try not to swing the camera around. </p><p>For measuring performance in games, you’ll need a performance monitoring tool. There are simple apps like <a href="https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/technologies/frameview/"><u>Nvidia’s FrameView</u></a>, which logs a ton of information but is a little cumbersome to deal with; it exports data to spreadsheets. <a href="https://www.capframex.com/"><u>CapFrameX</u></a> is a good alternative, which uses the same backend as FrameView (Intel’s PresentMon), but comes with a user-friendly GUI and extra features like the ability to generate charts right in the app. </p><p>After you run your benchmarks, you need a comparison point. Databases like Puget are your best resources on that front. If you’re comparing results to reviews, forum threads, or other systems, keep in mind the variables that can influence performance. It’s not a good idea to compare performance with uncontrolled variables unless you have a wide swath of comparison points. </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-best-cpu-benchmarks-you-can-run"><span>Best CPU Benchmarks You Can Run</span></h3><ul><li><a href="https://www.maxon.net/en/downloads/cinebench-downloads"><u>Cinebench 2026</u></a> – Cinebench is the quintessential CPU benchmark, used almost universally in reviews, and it’s completely free to download and use.</li><li><a href="https://www.geekbench.com/"><u>Geekbench 6</u></a> – Geekbench has a number of issues, but it offers a massive database for comparing your system against other similar systems. And it’s free to download and run.</li><li><a href="https://opendata.blender.org/"><u>Blender</u></a> – Blender has a benchmarking utility with a GUI that’s free to download, as well as a large database of results.</li><li><a href="https://store.steampowered.com/app/524390/PCMark_10/"><u>PCMark 10 Basic</u></a> – The main PCMark 10 benchmark is free to use with the Basic edition, allowing you to test productivity performance with open-source office apps, as well as compare your scores with UL’s database.</li><li><a href="https://handbrake.fr/"><u>Handbrake</u></a> – Handbrake is a powerful, free, and open-source video transcoding tool, and it’s easy to run benchmarks with. Use any video file, make sure your settings are the same, and start a stopwatch to measure the time encoding takes. Lower is better.</li><li><a href="https://www.principledtechnologies.com/benchmarkxprt/webxprt/"><u>WebXPRT 5</u></a> – WebXPRT runs a variety of web applications directly in your browser, for free, and with a database to compare results to. It takes a while to run, however.</li><li><a href="https://browserbench.org/JetStream2.0/"><u>JetStream 2</u></a> – JetStream is a faster browser-based benchmark, though it doesn’t have a database of results.</li><li><a href="https://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html"><u>CPU-Z</u></a> – CPU-Z isn’t a reliable benchmark for real-world performance, but it includes single- and multithreaded tests, it’s easy to run, and you’ll find results online almost as commonly as Cinebench results.</li><li><a href="https://www.numberworld.org/y-cruncher/"><u>Y-cruncher</u></a> – This test calculates Pi with digit extraction, and it’s accelerated with SIMD instructions like AVX. You can only run it from a command line, but it’s relatively straightforward.</li><li><a href="https://www.pugetsystems.com/pugetbench/creators/"><u>PugetBench</u></a> – Puget includes benchmarks for the biggest apps in the Adobe suite, as well as DaVinci Resolve. The benchmark itself is free, and Puget maintains a large database. You’ll need a license for the applications it tests, however.</li></ul><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-2026-cpu-benchmarks-test-system-and-configuration"><span>2026 CPU Benchmarks Test System and Configuration</span></h3><div ><table><caption>2026 CPU Benchmarks Hierarchy Test Setup</caption><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Intel LGA 1851 (Arrow Lake and Refresh)</strong></p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Motherboard</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/asrock-z890-taichi-atx-motherboard-intel-z890-lga-1851/p/N82E16813162169"><u>ASRock Z890 Taichi</u></a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>RAM</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-trident-z5-rgb-series-32gb-ddr5-7200-cas-latency-cl34-desktop-memory-black/p/N82E16820374436"><u>2x16GB G.Skill Trident Z Neo RGB DDR5-7200</u></a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Intel LGA 1700 (Raptor Lake, Alder Lake)</strong></p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Motherboard</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/msi-mpg-z790-carbon-wifi-atx-motherboard-intel-z790-lga-1700/p/N82E16813144563"><u>MSI MPG Z790 Carbon Wi-Fi</u></a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>RAM </p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-trident-z5-rgb-series-32gb-ddr5-7200-cas-latency-cl34-desktop-memory-black/p/N82E16820374436"><u>2x16GB G.Skill Trident Z Neo RGB DDR5-7200</u></a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>AMD AM5 (Zen 5, Zen 4)</strong></p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Motherboard</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/msi-mpg-x870e-carbon-wifi-atx-motherboard-amd-x870e-am5/p/N82E16813144666"><u>MSI MPG X870E Carbon Wi-Fi</u></a>, <a href="https://www.newegg.com/gigabyte-x870e-aorus-elite-x3d-ice-atx-motherboard-amd-x870e-am5/p/N82E16813145595"><u>Gigabyte Aorus X870E Elite X3D ICE</u></a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>RAM</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/G-Skill-Trident-288-Pin-CL30-38-38-96-F5-6000J3038F16GX2-TZ5NR/dp/B0BF8FVLSL/"><u>2x16GB G.Skill Trident Z Neo RGB DDR5-6000</u></a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>All Systems</strong></p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Gaming CPU</p></td><td  ><p>Nvidia GeForce RTX 5090 Founder’s Edition</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Application GPU</p></td><td  ><p>Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti Founder’s Edition</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Cooler</p></td><td  ><p>Corsair iCue Link H150i RGB</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Storage</p></td><td  ><p>2TB Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>PSU</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/msi-atx12v-1000-w-up-to-90-power-supplies-black-mpg-a1000gs-pcie5/p/N82E16817701030"><u>MSI MPG A1000GS</u></a>, <a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16817233053"><u>Gigabyte UD1000GM PG5 V2</u></a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Other</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/ARCTIC-MX-4-2019-Performance-Durability/dp/B07LDK4F5R/"><u>Arctic MX-4 TIM</u></a>, Windows 11 Pro, Alamengda open test bench</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><ul><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-7-7800x3d-vs-intel-core-i9-13900k-vs-intel-core-7-13700K">AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D vs Intel Core i9-13900K vs Core i7-13700K: Big Gaming Punch, Smaller Price Tag</a></li><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-9-7950x3d-vs-intel-core-i9-13900k-faceoff">AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D vs Intel Core i9-13900K Faceoff: Battle of the Gaming Flagships</a></li><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i5-13600k-vs-amd-ryzen-7-7700x-and-ryzen-5-7600x-face-off">Intel Core i5-13600K vs AMD Ryzen 7 7700X and Ryzen 5 7600X Face Off</a></li><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-9-7950x-vs-intel-core-i9-13900k">AMD Ryzen 9 7950X vs Intel Core i9-13900K Face Off</a></li><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/ryzen-7-5800x3d-vs-core-i7-12700k-and-core-i9-12900k-face-off-the-rise-of-3d-v-cache">Ryzen 7 5800X3D vs Core i7-12700K and Core i9-12900K Face-Off: The Rise of 3D V-Cache</a></li><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-12900k-vs-ryzen-9-5900x-5950x">Intel Core i9-12900K vs Ryzen 9 5900X and 5950X: Alder Lake and Ryzen 5000 Face Off</a></li><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i5-12600k-vs-amd-ryzen-5-5600x-ryzen-7-5800x-cpu-face-off">Intel Core i5-12600K vs AMD Ryzen 5 5600X and 5800X Face Off: Ryzen Has Fallen</a></li><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i7-12700k-vs-amd-ryzen-9-5900x-and-5800x-face-off-intel-rising">Intel Core i7-12700K vs AMD Ryzen 9 5900X and 5800X Face Off: Intel Rising</a></li><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i5-12400-vs-amd-ryzen-5-5600x-ryzen-5-5600g-cpu-face-off">Intel Core i5-12400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 5600X Face-Off: The Gaming Value Showdown</a></li></ul><ul><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html"><strong>Best CPUs for Gaming</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-vs-intel-cpus"><strong>AMD vs Intel</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-13th-gen-raptor-lake-release-date-specifications-pricing-benchmarks-all-we-know-specs"><strong>13th-Gen Raptor Lake</strong></a><strong> All We Know</strong></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-zen-4-ryzen-7000-release-date-specifications-pricing-benchmarks-all-we-know-specs"><strong>Zen 4 Ryzen 7000</strong></a><strong> All We Know</strong></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/how-to-overclock-a-cpu"><strong>How to Overclock a CPU</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/how-to-check-cpu-temp-temperature"><strong>How to check CPU Temperature</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus"><strong>All CPUs Content</strong></a></li></ul><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/dBMx1ASv.html" id="dBMx1ASv" title="How to Choose a CPU" width="960" height="540" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe><h2 id="2020-2022-cpu-benchmarks-hierarchy">2020 - 2022 CPU Benchmarks Hierarchy</h2><p>You can find our rankings of the most current-gen systems on the previous page. The results below are from our legacy benchmarks, using a different GPU and test systems than our current CPU benchmark rankings. However, this provides great historical context and also includes other previous-gen CPUs not included in our new test suite. You'll also find our even older legacy rankings further below. These date back over the last decade. </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-legacy-2020-2022-cpu-benchmarks-rankings-windows-10-and-11"><span>Legacy: 2020 - 2022 CPU Benchmarks Rankings - Windows 10 and 11</span></h3><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/W3GU8Pq99LYcsUEy2S4VDU.png" alt="AMD vs Intel" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8zpwaQ5zkgAcSqUiGV6WHU.png" alt="AMD vs Intel" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CSLXSfQjq2bTunXW2UkAKe.png" alt="ADM vs Intel" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6MzkyuxZSyNt83WsyTv3Pe.png" alt="ADM vs Intel" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TtBSDqmGUKepDNWDbbXuAX.png" alt="Ryzen 9 7900X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PbB2zxcydzbPBQeDyBPd7X.png" alt="Ryzen 9 7900X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4Uo9Th9CnSTFd5yNUiN4JX.png" alt="Ryzen 9 7900X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WGeGcXEDvTRFZD5YPatCFX.png" alt="Ryzen 9 7900X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3xYB9Tgp4kjiSdweatEzDf.png" alt="CPU Benchmark" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nWEViwJ93FJJRpazc8eFu9.png" alt="Ryzen 7 5800X3D" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hXCZtqtAcLQUqXUDFCADm9.png" alt="Ryzen 7 5800X3D" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LBommkJKQ2nZNaM9v6tMg9.png" alt="Ryzen 7 5800X3D" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/F8LbVqh2HanAaMDUKLVFZi.png" alt="CPU Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SAXoWK6BiNQ6mAMLbEALVi.png" alt="CPU Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XUq9Uh9x2UTT97fTGZMbci.png" alt="CPU Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P8r3x46ksaXGfFN5Uxvmgi.png" alt="CPU Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bXyPwEFZ44q8ofZTc4drMi.png" alt="CPU Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tmxXxdMiJ5cbd6qepgJyRi.png" alt="CPU Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-legacy-2020-2022-gaming-cpu-benchmarks-ranking"><span>Legacy: 2020 - 2022 Gaming CPU Benchmarks Ranking</span></h3><div ><table><caption>Legacy: Gaming CPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2020 - 2022 - Windows 11</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p> </p></th><th  ><p>1080p Gaming Score</p></th><th  ><p>1440p Gaming Score</p></th><th  ><p>Architecture</p></th><th  ><p>Cores/Threads (P+E)</p></th><th  ><p>Base/Boost GHz</p></th><th  ><p>TDP - MTP</p></th><th  ><p>Buy</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>$589 - Core i9-13900K</p></td><td  ><p>100.00%</p></td><td  ><p>100.00%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 32 (8+16)</p></td><td  ><p>3.0 / 5.8</p></td><td  ><p>125 / 253W</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>$409 - Core i7-13700K</p></td><td  ><p>96.09%</p></td><td  ><p>97.09%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 24 (8+8)</p></td><td  ><p>3.4 / 5.4</p></td><td  ><p>125 / 253W</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>$365 - Ryzen 7 5800X3D</p></td><td  ><p>94.42%</p></td><td  ><p>97.45%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.4 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>$319 - Core i5-13600K</p></td><td  ><p>90.03%</p></td><td  ><p>92.94%</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake</p></td><td  ><p>14 / 20 (6+8)</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 5.1</p></td><td  ><p>125 / 181W</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>$474 - Ryzen 9 7900X</p></td><td  ><p>87.40%</p></td><td  ><p>90.52%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>4.7 / 5.6</p></td><td  ><p>170 / 230W</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>$569 - Ryzen 9 7950X</p></td><td  ><p>87.25%</p></td><td  ><p>90.27%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>4.5 / 5.7</p></td><td  ><p>170 / 230W</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>$349 - Ryzen 7 7700X</p></td><td  ><p>87.13%</p></td><td  ><p>91.55%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4</p></td><td  ><p>8 /16</p></td><td  ><p>4.5 / 5.4</p></td><td  ><p>105 / 142W</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>$329 - Ryzen 7 7700</p></td><td  ><p>86.19%</p></td><td  ><p>88.88%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 5.3</p></td><td  ><p>65 / 88W</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>$429 - Ryzen 9 7900</p></td><td  ><p>84.75%</p></td><td  ><p>88.46%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>4.7 / 5.6</p></td><td  ><p>170 / 230W</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>$249 - Ryzen 5 7600X</p></td><td  ><p>83.62%</p></td><td  ><p>88.44%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>4.7 / 5.3</p></td><td  ><p>105 / 142W</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>$229 - Ryzen 5 7600</p></td><td  ><p>79.74%</p></td><td  ><p>85.97%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 5.1</p></td><td  ><p>65 / 88W</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>$550 - Ryzen 9 5950X</p></td><td  ><p>72.04%</p></td><td  ><p>77.51%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>3.4 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>$350 - Ryzen 9 5900X</p></td><td  ><p>71.69%</p></td><td  ><p>78.95%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.8</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>$235 - Ryzen 7 5800X</p></td><td  ><p>70.90%</p></td><td  ><p>78.19%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>$210 - Ryzen 7 5700X</p></td><td  ><p>69.50%</p></td><td  ><p>76.65%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.4 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>$165 - Ryzen 5 5600X</p></td><td  ><p>67.52%</p></td><td  ><p>74.68%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>$189 - Core i5-12400</p></td><td  ><p>66.62%</p></td><td  ><p>73.53%</p></td><td  ><p>Alder Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12 (6+0)</p></td><td  ><p>2.5 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>65 / 117W</p></td><td  ></td></tr></tbody></table></div><div ><table><caption>Legacy: Gaming CPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2020 - 2022 - Windows 10</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p> </p></th><th  ><p><strong>1080p Gaming Score</strong></p></th><th  ><p><strong>1440p Gaming Score</strong></p></th><th  ><p><strong>CPU</strong></p></th><th  ><p><strong>Cores/Threads</strong></p></th><th  ><p><strong>Base/Boost GHz</strong></p></th><th  ><p><strong>TDP</strong></p></th><th  ><p><strong>Buy</strong></p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-12900K DDR4 / DDR5</p></td><td  ><p>100% / 93.51%</p></td><td  ><p>100% / 95.86%</p></td><td  ><p>Alder Lake</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 24 (8P+8E) </p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / 5.2 </p></td><td  ><p>125 / 241W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i9-12900k-core-i9-12th-gen/p/N82E16819118339?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i9-12900K </a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-11900K</p></td><td  ><p>92.48%</p></td><td  ><p>97.26%</p></td><td  ><p>Rocket Lake</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 5.3</p></td><td  ><p>125W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i9-11900k-core-i9-11th-gen/p/N82E16819118231?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i9-11900K</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-12700K DDR4 / DDR5</p></td><td  ><p>97.71% / 91.23%</p></td><td  ><p>99.8% / 97.30%</p></td><td  ><p>Alder Lake</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 20 (8P+4E)</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>125 / 190W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i7-12700k-core-i7-12th-gen/p/N82E16819118343?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i7-12700K </a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 9 5900X</p></td><td  ><p>90.98%</p></td><td  ><p>93.18%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.8</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-5900X-24-Thread-Processor/dp/B08164VTWH?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Ryzen 9 5900X</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-12600K DDR4 / DDR5</p></td><td  ><p>90.89% / 84.32%</p></td><td  ><p>96.94% / 92.33%</p></td><td  ><p>Alder Lake</p></td><td  ><p>10 / 16 (6P+4E)</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>125 / 150W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i5-12600k-core-i5-12th-gen/p/N82E16819118347?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i5-12600K </a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 9 5950X</p></td><td  ><p>90.22%</p></td><td  ><p>95.32%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>3.4 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-9-5950x/p/N82E16819113663?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Ryzen 9 5950X</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper Pro 5975WX</p></td><td  ><p>88.71%</p></td><td  ><p>89.71%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>32 / 64</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-ThreadripperTM-PRO-5975WX-64-Thread/dp/B0B5VH1WPC">Threadripper Pro 5975WX</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 5600X</p></td><td  ><p>88.51%</p></td><td  ><p>91.79%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.bestbuy.com/site/amd-ryzen-5-5600x-4th-gen-6-core-12-threads-unlocked-desktop-processor-with-wraith-stealth-cooler/6438943.p?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Ryzen 5 5600X</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 5800X</p></td><td  ><p>86.85%</p></td><td  ><p>91.72%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.bestbuy.com/site/amd-ryzen-7-5800x-4th-gen-8-core-16-threads-unlocked-desktop-processor-without-cooler/6439000.p?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Ryzen 7 5800X</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-11700K</p></td><td  ><p>86.3%</p></td><td  ><p>92.0%</p></td><td  ><p>Rocket Lake</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 5.0</p></td><td  ><p>125W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i7-11700k-core-i7-11th-gen/p/N82E16819118233?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i7-11700K</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper Pro 5995WX</p></td><td  ><p>86.12%</p></td><td  ><p>84.79%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>64 / 128</p></td><td  ><p>2.7 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-ThreadripperTM-5995WX-128-Thread-Processor/dp/B0B5VLPVL5">Threadripper Pro 5995WX</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-10900K</p></td><td  ><p>85.01%</p></td><td  ><p>91.5%</p></td><td  ><p>Comet Lake</p></td><td  ><p>10 / 20</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 5.3</p></td><td  ><p>125W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.bestbuy.com/site/intel-core-i9-10900k-10th-generation-10-core-20-thread-3-7-ghz-5-3-ghz-turbo-socket-lga1200-unlocked-desktop-processor/6411492.p?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i9-9900K</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-10850K</p></td><td  ><p>84.6%</p></td><td  ><p>91.07%</p></td><td  ><p>Comet Lake</p></td><td  ><p>10 / 20</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 5.2</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i9-10850k-core-i9-10th-gen/p/N82E16819118175?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i9-10850K</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-11600K</p></td><td  ><p>84.06%</p></td><td  ><p>90.43%</p></td><td  ><p>Rocket Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>125W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i5-11600k-core-i5-11th-gen/p/N82E16819118235?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i5-11600K</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-11400</p></td><td  ><p>80.98%</p></td><td  ><p>87.77%</p></td><td  ><p>Rocket Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>2.6 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i5-11400-Desktop-Processor-LGA1200/dp/B08X6JPK4K?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i5-11400</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-10700K</p></td><td  ><p>80.66%</p></td><td  ><p>87.88%</p></td><td  ><p>Comet Lake</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 5.1</p></td><td  ><p>125W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i7-10700k-core-i7-10th-gen/p/N82E16819118123?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i7-10700K</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-10980XE</p></td><td  ><p>78.04%</p></td><td  ><p>84.04%</p></td><td  ><p>Cascade Lake-X</p></td><td  ><p>18 / 36</p></td><td  ><p>3.0 / 4.8</p></td><td  ><p>165W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1507537-REG/intel_bx8069510980xe_core_i9_10980xe_3_0_ghz.html?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i9-10980XE</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel W-3175X</p></td><td  ><p>76.93%</p></td><td  ><p>82.58%</p></td><td  ><p>Skylake</p></td><td  ><p>28 / 56</p></td><td  ><p>3.1 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>225W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16819118010">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 7 5700G*</p></td><td  ><p>76.61%</p></td><td  ><p>83.1%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p>N/A</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-9900KS</p></td><td  ><p>76.12%</p></td><td  ><p>84.85%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake-R</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>4.0 / 5.0</p></td><td  ><p>127W </p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i9-9900KS-Processor-All-Core-Unlocked/dp/B07YP3J7ZM">Intel Core i9-9900KS</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-10700/F</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Comet Lake</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>2.9 / 4.8</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.bestbuy.com/site/intel-core-i7-10700-10th-generation-8-core-16-thread-2-9-ghz-4-8-ghz-turbo-socket-lga1200-locked-desktop-processor/6411495.p?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Intel Core i7-10700</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-10600K</p></td><td  ><p>75.42%</p></td><td  ><p>82.57%</p></td><td  ><p>Comet Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>4.1 / 4.8</p></td><td  ><p>125W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i5-10600k-core-i5-10th-gen/p/N82E16819118124">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-9700K</p></td><td  ><p>73.62%</p></td><td  ><p>81.12%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake-R</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i7-9700K-Desktop-Processor-Unlocked/dp/B07HHN6KBZ">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-9900K / F</p></td><td  ><p>73.41%</p></td><td  ><p>84.85%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake-R</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 5.0</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/2MN-0004-00828?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i9-9900K</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 9 3950X</p></td><td  ><p>72.63%</p></td><td  ><p>78.58%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-3950X-32-Thread-Processor/dp/B07ZTYKLZW">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 3970X</p></td><td  ><p>72.44%</p></td><td  ><p>77.99%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>32 / 64</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-Threadripper-3970X-64-Thread/dp/B0815JJQQ8">AMD Threadripper 3970X</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 3960X</p></td><td  ><p>72.07%</p></td><td  ><p>77.12%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 48</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-Threadripper-3960X-48-Thread/dp/B0815JGCXP">AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 5600G</p></td><td  ><p>71.99%</p></td><td  ><p>76.76%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-5-5600g-ryzen-5-5000-g-series/p/N82E16819113683?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Ryzen 5 5600G </a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT</p></td><td  ><p>71.78%</p></td><td  ><p>79.28%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-7-3800xt-ryzen-7-3rd-gen/p/N82E16819113652">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 3990X</p></td><td  ><p>71.68%</p></td><td  ><p>77.94%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>64 / 128</p></td><td  ><p>2.9 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-Threadripper-3990X-128-Thread/dp/B0815SBQ9W">AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT</p></td><td  ><p>71.67%</p></td><td  ><p>78.55%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-3900XT-24-Threads-Processor/dp/B089WD454D?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Ryzen 9 3900XT</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 9 3900X</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-3900X-24-Thread-Processor/dp/B07SXMZLP9">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-9980XE </p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Skylake</p></td><td  ><p>18 / 36</p></td><td  ><p>4.4 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>165W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1438940-REG/intel_bx80673i99980x_core_i9_9980xe_extreme_edition.html">@B&HPhoto</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 9 3900</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>3.1 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td><td  ><p>OEM only</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 3700X</p></td><td  ><p>71.43%</p></td><td  ><p>79.08%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-3700X-16-Thread-Processor/dp/B07SXMZLPK?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Ryzen 7 3700X </a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 3800X</p></td><td  ><p>71.3%</p></td><td  ><p>78.67%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-3800X-16-Thread-Processor/dp/B07SXMZLP?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Ryzen 7 3800X </a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT</p></td><td  ><p>70.62%</p></td><td  ><p>77.75%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-5-3600xt-ryzen-5-3rd-gen/p/N82E16819113653">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 3600</p></td><td  ><p>68.63%</p></td><td  ><p>75.59%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-3600-12-Thread-Processor/dp/B07STGGQ18">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-7960X</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Skylake</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>2.8 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>165W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?item=9SIA25V6K29201">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-8700K</p></td><td  ><p>68.47%</p></td><td  ><p>76.41%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80684I78700K-Core-i7-8700K-Processor/dp/B07598VZR8">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 3600X</p></td><td  ><p>68.41%</p></td><td  ><p>75.60%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-5-3600x/p/N82E16819113568">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper Pro 3975WX</p></td><td  ><p>67.63%</p></td><td  ><p>74.42%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>32 / 64</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-Threadripper-PRO-3975WX/dp/B08V5H7GPM">Threadripper Pro 3975WX</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 3 3300X</p></td><td  ><p>67.49%</p></td><td  ><p>74.6%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-3-3300x-ryzen-3-3rd-gen/p/N82E16819113648">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-9600K</p></td><td  ><p>67.06%</p></td><td  ><p>75.11%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake-R</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 6</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/core-i5-9th-gen-intel-core-i5-9600k/p/N82E16819117959">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper Pro 3995WX</p></td><td  ><p>66.18%</p></td><td  ><p>69.28%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>64 / 128</p></td><td  ><p>2.7 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-threadripper-pro-3995wx/p/N82E16819113675?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Threadripper Pro 3995WX</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-8600K</p></td><td  ><p>65.84%</p></td><td  ><p>73.4%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 6</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i5-8th-gen-core-i5-8600k/p/N82E16819117825">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-8700</p></td><td  ><p>65.57%</p></td><td  ><p>73.66%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/core-i7-8th-gen-intel-core-i7-8700/p/N82E16819117826?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i7-8700</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-8086K</p></td><td  ><p>65.05%</p></td><td  ><p>73.5%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>4.0 / 5.0</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://starmicroinc.net/intel-core-i7-8086k-4-0ghz-socket-1151-6-core-coffee-lake-s-desktop-boxed-cpu-srcx5-bx80684i78086k?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i7-8086K</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-9400 / i5-9400F</p></td><td  ><p>64.85%</p></td><td  ><p>72.08%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 6</p></td><td  ><p>2.9 / 4.1</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i5-9400F-Desktop-Processor-Graphics/dp/B07MRCGQQ4">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-8400</p></td><td  ><p>63.96%</p></td><td  ><p>71.2%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 6</p></td><td  ><p>2.8 / 4.0</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/core-i5-8th-gen-intel-core-i5-8400/p/N82E16819117824">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD  Ryzen 5 3500X</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 6</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.1</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-5-3500x/p/274-000M-001B6">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i3-10100</p></td><td  ><p>61.88%</p></td><td  ><p>69.08%</p></td><td  ><p>Comet Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i3-10100-Desktop-Processor-LGA1200/dp/B086MMRW87?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i3-10100</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 2700X</p></td><td  ><p>59.19%</p></td><td  ><p>66.55%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen+</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-7-2700x/p/N82E16819113499">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 7 4750G*</p></td><td  ><p>58.43%</p></td><td  ><p>66.46%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Ryzen-4750G-Processor-3-6Ghz-Threads/dp/B08XYTM5QS?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Ryzen 7 4750G</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 3 3100</p></td><td  ><p>57.75%</p></td><td  ><p>64.21%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 3.9</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-3-3100-ryzen-3-3rd-gen/p/N82E16819113649">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-7980XE</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Skylake</p></td><td  ><p>18 / 36</p></td><td  ><p>2.6 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>165W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Core-i9-7980XE-Processors-BX80673I97980X/dp/B075XRYMDR">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-7900X</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Skylake</p></td><td  ><p>10 / 20</p></td><td  ><p>3.3 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>140W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i9-x-series-i9-7900x/p/N82E16819117795">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 2600X</p></td><td  ><p>57.55%</p></td><td  ><p>65.33%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen+</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-Processor-Wraith-Cooler/dp/B07B428V2L">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-7700K</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Kaby Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>91W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Desktop-Processor-i7-7700K-BX80677I77700K/dp/B01MXSI216">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 2990WX (GM)</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen+</p></td><td  ><p>32 / 64</p></td><td  ><p>3.0 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>250W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-threadripper-2990wx/p/N82E16819113541">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-7820X</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Skylake</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>140W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80673I77820X-Core-i7-7820X-Processor/dp/B072NF4BY3">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 2950X (GM)</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen +</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>180W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-Threadripper-Processor-YD295XA8AFWOF/dp/B07GFN6CVF">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 2970WX</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen +</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 48</p></td><td  ><p>3.0 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>250W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Threadripper-2990WX-Processor-YD299XAZAFWOF/dp/B07G25SD1P">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 2700</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen+</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / 4.1</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-Processor-Wraith-Cooler/dp/B07B41717Z">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 1900X (GM)</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.0</p></td><td  ><p>180W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Threadripper-16-thread-Processor-YD190XA8AEWOF/dp/B0754JNQBP">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-7700</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Kaby Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80677I77700-Processor-Frequency-Generation/dp/B01N0L41N7">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 2600</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen+</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.4 / 3.9</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-5-2600/p/N82E16819113496">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-7800X</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Skylake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 4.0</p></td><td  ><p>140W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i7-x-series-i7-7800x/p/N82E16819117793">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-7600K</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Kaby Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>91W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i5-7600K-Desktop-Processors-BX80677I57600K/dp/B01MRRPPQS">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 1950X (GM)</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>3.4 / 4.0</p></td><td  ><p>180W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-threadripper-1950x/p/N82E16819113447">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 1920X (GM)</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 4.0</p></td><td  ><p>180W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Threadripper-24-thread-Processor-YD192XA8AEWOF/dp/B074CBJHCT">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-9350KF</p></td><td  ><p>56.42%</p></td><td  ><p>65.19%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>4.0 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>91W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07NC419VF">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 3 5300G</p></td><td  ><p>55.54%</p></td><td  ><p>62.68%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>4.0 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p>OEM Only</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 1800X</p></td><td  ><p>53.86%</p></td><td  ><p>60.83%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.0</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16819113430">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-7600</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Kaby Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 4.1</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80677I57600-Core-Desktop-Processors/dp/B01MYTYSMK">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-8100</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / -</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i3-8100-Desktop-Processor-Unlocked/dp/B0759FTRZL">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-7500</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Kaby Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.4 / 3.8</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i5-7500-Desktop-Processor-BX80677I57500/dp/B01MZZJ1P0">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-7400</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Kaby Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.0 / 3.5</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i5-9400-Processor-Processors-984507/dp/B07MGZ9FJZ">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 1700X</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 3.9</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-1700X-Processor-YD170XBCAEWOF/dp/B06X3W9NGG">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 1600AF</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen +</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / 3.6</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Processor-Wraith-Cooler-YD1600BBAEBOX/dp/B06XNRQHG4">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 1700</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.0 / 3.8</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700/p/N82E16819113428">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-8350K</p></td><td  ><p>53.84%</p></td><td  ><p>61.82%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>4.0 / -</p></td><td  ><p>91W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/core-i3-8th-gen-intel-core-i3-8350k/p/274-000A-003A2?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i3 i3-8350K</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-9100</p></td><td  ><p>51.96%</p></td><td  ><p>60.1%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake-R</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i3-9th-gen-core-i3-9100/p/N82E16819118022">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 1600X</p></td><td  ><p>49.99%</p></td><td  ><p>57.28%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.0</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-1600X-Processor-YD160XBCAEWOF/dp/B06XKWT7GD">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 1600</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / 3.6</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Processor-Wraith-Cooler-YD1600BBAEBOX/dp/B06XNRQHG4">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 3400G</p></td><td  ><p>48.81%</p></td><td  ><p>55.73%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen +</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-3400G-8-Thread-Processor/dp/B07SXNDKNM">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-7400</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Kaby Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4 </p></td><td  ><p>3.0 / 3.5</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/core-i5-7th-gen-intel-core-i5-7400/p/N82E16819117731">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-8100</p></td><td  ><p>48.43%</p></td><td  ><p>59.7%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / -</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i3-8100-Desktop-Processor-Unlocked/dp/B0759FTRZL">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 3 3200G</p></td><td  ><p>45.96%</p></td><td  ><p>52.98%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen +</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.0</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-3200G-Unlocked-Processor/dp/B07STGHZK8">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 2400G</p></td><td  ><p>44.84%</p></td><td  ><p>50.67%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen+</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 3.9</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-5-2400g/p/N82E16819113480">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 1500X</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 3.7</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-5-1500x/p/N82E16819113436">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-7350K</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Kaby Lake</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / -</p></td><td  ><p>60W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/core-i3-7th-gen-intel-core-i3-7350k/p/N82E16819117772">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G5600</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / -</p></td><td  ><p>54W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-pentium-gold-g5600/p/N82E16819117879">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 3 2200G</p></td><td  ><p>42.16%</p></td><td  ><p>48.56%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen+</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 3.7</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-3200G-Unlocked-Processor/dp/B07STGHZK8">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 3 1300X</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 3.7</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Desktop-Processor-Stealth-YD130XBBAEBOX/dp/B0741DLVL7">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-7300</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Kaby Lake</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>4.0 / -</p></td><td  ><p>51W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1304302-REG/intel_bx80677i37300_core_i3_7300_4_0_ghz.html">@BH&Photo</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G5600</p></td><td  ><p>37.52%</p></td><td  ><p>44.7%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / -</p></td><td  ><p>54W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/129945/intel-pentium-gold-g5600-processor-4m-cache-3-90-ghz.html">@Intel</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G5400</p></td><td  ><p>36.57%</p></td><td  ><p>43.31%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / -</p></td><td  ><p>54W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Pentium-Desktop-Processor-BX80684G5400/dp/B0793BQS3R">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-7100</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Kaby Lake</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / -</p></td><td  ><p>51W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i3-7100-Desktop-Processor-BX80677I37100/dp/B01NCESRJX">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 1400</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / 3.4</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Processor-Wraith-Stealth-YD1400BBAEBOX/dp/B06XKWT8J4">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G4620</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Kaby Lake</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / -</p></td><td  ><p>54W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-pentium-g4620/p/N82E16819117736">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G4560</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Kaby Lake</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / -</p></td><td  ><p>54W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-pentium-g4560/p/N82E16819117743">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Athlon 3000G</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen+</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / -</p></td><td  ><p>35W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-4-Thread-Unlocked-Processor-Graphics/dp/B0815JGFQ8">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Athlon 240GE</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / -</p></td><td  ><p>35W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Athlon-Radeon-Graphics-Processor/dp/B07L9V9F6H">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Athlon 220GE</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.4 / -</p></td><td  ><p>35W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Athlon-Radeon-Graphics-Processor/dp/B07L9Q7DLQ">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Athlon 200GE</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / -</p></td><td  ><p>35W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-4-Thread-Processor-Graphics-YD200GC6FBBOX/dp/B07HJWVJDN">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 3 1200</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.1 / 3.2</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Desktop-Processor-Stealth-YD1200BBAEBOX/dp/B0741DN383">@Amazon</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Zhaoxin KaiXian KX-U6780A</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>LuJiaZui </p></td><td  ><p>8 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>2.7 / -</p></td><td  ><p>70W</p></td><td  ><p>N/A</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD A10-9700</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Bristol Ridge</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 3.8</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-a10-7th-gen-a10-9700/p/N82E16819113451">@Newegg</a></p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>These tests are from our 2022 test bench. We measured performance for the 1080p CPU gaming benchmarks with a geometric mean of <em>Borderlands 3</em>, <em>Hitman 2</em>, <em>Far Cry 5</em>, <em>Project CARS 3</em>, <em>Red Dead Redemption 2</em>, and <em>Shadow of the Tomb Raider</em>. We measured performance for the 1440p CPU gaming benchmarks with a geometric mean of <em>Borderlands 3</em>, <em>Project CARS 3</em>, <em>Far Cry 5</em>, <em>Red Dead Redemption 2</em>, and <em>Shadow of the Tomb Raider</em>. We conducted these tests in Windows 10.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-legacy-2020-2022-single-threaded-cpu-benchmarks-rankings"><span>Legacy: 2020 - 2022 Single-Threaded CPU Benchmarks Rankings</span></h3><div ><table><caption>Legacy: 2020 - 2022 Single-Threaded CPU Benchmarks Hierarchy - Windows 10</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p> </p></th><th  ><p>Single-Threaded App Score</p></th><th  ><p>Architecture</p></th><th  ><p>Cores/Threads</p></th><th  ><p>Base/Boost GHz</p></th><th  ><p>TDP</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-11900K (ABT off/on)</p></td><td  ><p>100% / 99.57%</p></td><td  ><p>Rocket Lake</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 5.3</p></td><td  ><p>125W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 9 5950X</p></td><td  ><p>95.31%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>3.4 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i9-12900K DDR5 / DDR4</p></td><td  ><p>95.16% / 94.64%</p></td><td  ><p>Alder Lake</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 24 (8P+8E)</p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / 5.2</p></td><td  ><p>125 / 241W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i7-11700K</p></td><td  ><p>94.29%</p></td><td  ><p>Rocket Lake</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 5.0</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 9 5900X</p></td><td  ><p>93.69%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.8</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 5800X</p></td><td  ><p>92.84%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-11600K</p></td><td  ><p>92.56% / 89.67%</p></td><td  ><p>Rocket Lake</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>125W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-12700K DDR5 / DDR4</p></td><td  ><p>91.60%</p></td><td  ><p>Alder Lake</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 20 (8P+4E)</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 190W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper Pro 5975WX</p></td><td  ><p>89.25%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>64 / 128</p></td><td  ><p>2.7 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 5600X</p></td><td  ><p>89.19%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 7 5700G</p></td><td  ><p>88.92%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper Pro 5995WX</p></td><td  ><p>88.48%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>64 / 128</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i5-12600K DDR4 / DDR5</p></td><td  ><p>87.85% / 87.82%</p></td><td  ><p>Alder Lake</p></td><td  ><p>10 / 16 (6P+4E)</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>125 / 150W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-10900K</p></td><td  ><p>86.68%</p></td><td  ><p>Comet Lake</p></td><td  ><p>10 / 20</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 5.3</p></td><td  ><p>125W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 5600G</p></td><td  ><p>85.75%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-10850K</p></td><td  ><p>84.87%</p></td><td  ><p>Comet Lake</p></td><td  ><p>10 / 20</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 5.2</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-9900KS</p></td><td  ><p>83.13%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake-R</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>4.0 / 5.0</p></td><td  ><p>127W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-11400</p></td><td  ><p>83.09%</p></td><td  ><p>Rocket Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>2.6 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-9900K</p></td><td  ><p>82.63%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake-R</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 5.0</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-10700K</p></td><td  ><p>82.31%</p></td><td  ><p>Comet Lake</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 5.1</p></td><td  ><p>125W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 3 5300G</p></td><td  ><p>81.51%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8 </p></td><td  ><p>4.0 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-9700K</p></td><td  ><p>80.36%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake-R</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT</p></td><td  ><p>79.75%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT</p></td><td  ><p>79.11%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT</p></td><td  ><p>78.86%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-10600K</p></td><td  ><p>78.79%</p></td><td  ><p>Comet Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>4.1 / 4.</p></td><td  ><p>125W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 3800X</p></td><td  ><p>78.37%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 9 3950X</p></td><td  ><p>78.18%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 9 3900X</p></td><td  ><p>77.68%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-10700/F</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Comet Lake</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>2.9 / 4.8</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 7 4750G</p></td><td  ><p>77.2%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen  3</p></td><td  ><p>8 /16</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 3970X</p></td><td  ><p>76.52%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>32 / 64</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 3960X</p></td><td  ><p>76.42%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 48</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper Pro 3975WX</p></td><td  ><p>76.36%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>32 / 64</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-8700K</p></td><td  ><p>76.32%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 3700X</p></td><td  ><p>76.29%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-8086K</p></td><td  ><p>76.21%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>4.0 / 5.0</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 3600X</p></td><td  ><p>75.85%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-9350KF</p></td><td  ><p>75.72%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>4.0 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>91W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 3 3300X</p></td><td  ><p>75.62%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-9600K</p></td><td  ><p>75.41%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake-R</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 6</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-10980XE</p></td><td  ><p>75.24%</p></td><td  ><p>Cascade Lake-X</p></td><td  ><p>18 / 36</p></td><td  ><p>3.0 / 4.8</p></td><td  ><p>165W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 3990X</p></td><td  ><p>75.10%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>64 / 128</p></td><td  ><p>2.9 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-8700</p></td><td  ><p>74.66%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper Pro 3995WX</p></td><td  ><p>74.20%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>64 / 128</p></td><td  ><p>2.7 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 3600</p></td><td  ><p>73.02%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-9980XE</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Skylake</p></td><td  ><p>18 / 36</p></td><td  ><p>4.4 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>165W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-7700K</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Kaby Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>91W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-8600K</p></td><td  ><p>71.08%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 6</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i3-10100</p></td><td  ><p>70.80%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 2700X</p></td><td  ><p>69.53%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen+</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-9100</p></td><td  ><p>69.20%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake-R</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 3 3100</p></td><td  ><p>67.74%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 3.9</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-9400 / -9400F</p></td><td  ><p>67.67%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 6</p></td><td  ><p>2.9 / 4.1</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Xeon W-3175X</p></td><td  ><p>67.51%</p></td><td  ><p>Skylake</p></td><td  ><p>28 / 56</p></td><td  ><p>3.1 / 3.8</p></td><td  ><p>225W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 2600X</p></td><td  ><p>66.78%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen+</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-8350K / -8350KF</p></td><td  ><p>66.71%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>4.0 / -</p></td><td  ><p>91W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-8400</p></td><td  ><p>66.03%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 6</p></td><td  ><p>2.8 / 4.0</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 3500X</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 6</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.1</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 9 3900</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>3.1 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-7100</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Kaby Lake</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / -</p></td><td  ><p>51W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 2950X</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen +</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>180W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 2990WX</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen+</p></td><td  ><p>32 / 64</p></td><td  ><p>3.0 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>250W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 2970WX</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen +</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 48</p></td><td  ><p>3.0 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>250W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 3400G</p></td><td  ><p>64.86%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen +</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 1600X</p></td><td  ><p>63.62%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.0</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 1800X</p></td><td  ><p>61.99%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.0</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-7400</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Kaby Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4 </p></td><td  ><p>3.0 / 3.5</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 3 3200G</p></td><td  ><p>60.90%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen +</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.0</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 2400G</p></td><td  ><p>60.79%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen+</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 3.9</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 3 1300X</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 3.7</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 1600AF</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / 3.6</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G5600</p></td><td  ><p>60.13%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / -</p></td><td  ><p>54W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-8100</p></td><td  ><p>60.12%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / -</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 3 2200G</p></td><td  ><p>57.09%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 3.7</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G5400</p></td><td  ><p>56.79%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / -</p></td><td  ><p>54W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Athlon 3000G</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen+</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / -</p></td><td  ><p>35W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Athlon 220GE</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.4 / -</p></td><td  ><p>35W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G4560</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Kaby Lake</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / -</p></td><td  ><p>54W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Athlon 200GE</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / -</p></td><td  ><p>35W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD A10-9700</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Bristol Ridge</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 3.8</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Zhaoxin KaiXian KX-U6780A</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>LuJiaZui </p></td><td  ><p>8 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>2.7 / -</p></td><td  ><p>70W</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>These results are from our 2022 test bench. We calculate the above single-threaded CPU benchmark rankings based on a geometric mean of the Cinebench, POV-Ray, and LAME CPU benchmarks. The most powerful chip gets a 100, and all others are scored relative to it. We conducted these tests in Windows 10.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-legacy-2020-2022-multi-threaded-cpu-benchmarks-rankings"><span>Legacy: 2020 - 2022 Multi-Threaded CPU Benchmarks Rankings</span></h3><div ><table><caption>Legacy: Multi-Threaded CPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2020 - 2022 - Windows 10</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p> </p></th><th  ><p>Multi-Threaded App Score</p></th><th  ><p>Architecture</p></th><th  ><p>Cores/Threads</p></th><th  ><p>Base/Boost GHz</p></th><th  ><p>TDP</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper Pro 5995WX</p></td><td  ><p>112.53%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>64 / 128</p></td><td  ><p>2.7 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 3990X</p></td><td  ><p>100.0%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>64 / 128</p></td><td  ><p>2.9 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper Pro 3995WX</p></td><td  ><p>97.59%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>64 / 128</p></td><td  ><p>2.7 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper Pro 5975WX</p></td><td  ><p>93.14%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>32 / 64</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper Pro 3975WX</p></td><td  ><p>82.59%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>32 / 64</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 3970X</p></td><td  ><p>75.74%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>32 / 64</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 3960X</p></td><td  ><p>64.76%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 48</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Xeon W-3175X</p></td><td  ><p>59.95%</p></td><td  ><p>Skylake</p></td><td  ><p>28 / 56</p></td><td  ><p>3.1 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>225W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 9 5950X</p></td><td  ><p>53.58%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>3.4 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 9 3950X</p></td><td  ><p>47.32%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 9 5900X</p></td><td  ><p>45.89%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.8</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-10980XE</p></td><td  ><p>43.06%</p></td><td  ><p>Cascade Lake-X</p></td><td  ><p>18 / 36</p></td><td  ><p>3.0 / 4.8</p></td><td  ><p>165W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-9980XE</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Skylake</p></td><td  ><p>18 / 36</p></td><td  ><p>4.4 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>165W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 2990WX</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen+</p></td><td  ><p>32 / 64</p></td><td  ><p>3.0 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>250W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 9 3900X</p></td><td  ><p>38.69%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT</p></td><td  ><p>38.66%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i9-12900K DDR4 / DDR5</p></td><td  ><p>38.39% / 38.11%</p></td><td  ><p>Alder Lake</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 24 (8P+8E)</p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / 5.2</p></td><td  ><p>125 / 241W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-11900K (ABT off/on)</p></td><td  ><p>36.01% / 37.07%</p></td><td  ><p>Rocket Lake</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 5.3</p></td><td  ><p>125W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 2970WX</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen +</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 48</p></td><td  ><p>3.0 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>250W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i7-11700K</p></td><td  ><p>34.26%</p></td><td  ><p>Rocket Lake</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 5.0</p></td><td  ><p>125W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-10900K</p></td><td  ><p>33.79%</p></td><td  ><p>Comet Lake</p></td><td  ><p>10 / 20</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 5.3</p></td><td  ><p>125W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 5800X</p></td><td  ><p>33.48%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-10850K</p></td><td  ><p>33.38%</p></td><td  ><p>Comet Lake</p></td><td  ><p>10 / 20</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 5.2</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Threadripper 2950X</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen +</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>180W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 9 3900</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>3.1 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 7 5700G</p></td><td  ><p>29.73%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-9900KS</p></td><td  ><p>29.11%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake-R</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>4.0 / 5.0</p></td><td  ><p>127W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i7-12700K DDR5 / DDR4</p></td><td  ><p>28.77% / 28.77%</p></td><td  ><p>Alder Lake</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 20 (8P+4E)</p></td><td  ><p>2.7 / 3.8</p></td><td  ><p>125 / 190W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT</p></td><td  ><p>28.49%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 3800X</p></td><td  ><p>28.25%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-10700K</p></td><td  ><p>28.17%</p></td><td  ><p>Comet Lake</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 5.1</p></td><td  ><p>125W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-9900K</p></td><td  ><p>27.78%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake-R</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 5.0</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 3700X</p></td><td  ><p>27.47%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-11600K</p></td><td  ><p>26.79%</p></td><td  ><p>Rocket Lake</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>125W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 5600X</p></td><td  ><p>26.15%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 4750G</p></td><td  ><p>26.06%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-10700/F</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Comet Lake</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>2.9 / 4.8</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-11400</p></td><td  ><p>24.46%</p></td><td  ><p>Rocket Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>2.6 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 5600G</p></td><td  ><p>23.33%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i5-12600K DDR4 / DDR5</p></td><td  ><p>2308% / 23.07%</p></td><td  ><p>Alder Lake</p></td><td  ><p>10 / 16 (6P+4E)</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>125 / 150W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-9700K</p></td><td  ><p>22.81%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake-R</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.9</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT</p></td><td  ><p>22.28%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 3600X</p></td><td  ><p>21.76%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 3600</p></td><td  ><p>21.41%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 2700X</p></td><td  ><p>21.59%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen+</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>105W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-10600K</p></td><td  ><p>20.83%</p></td><td  ><p>Comet Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>4.1 / 4.8</p></td><td  ><p>125W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-8700K</p></td><td  ><p>20.23%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.7</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i7-8700</p></td><td  ><p>20.04%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i7-8086K</p></td><td  ><p>19.30%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>4.0 / 5.0</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 1800X</p></td><td  ><p>19.17%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.0</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 2600X</p></td><td  ><p>16.96%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen+</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-9600K</p></td><td  ><p>16.60%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake-R</p></td><td  ><p>6  / 6</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 3500X</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 6</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.1</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-7700K</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Kaby Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / 4.5</p></td><td  ><p>91W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-8600K</p></td><td  ><p>15.93%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 6</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 3 5300G</p></td><td  ><p>15.83%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 3</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>4.0 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 3 3300X</p></td><td  ><p>15.55%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 1600AF</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / 3.6</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 1600X</p></td><td  ><p>15.16%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.0</p></td><td  ><p>95W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-9400 / -9400F</p></td><td  ><p>15.04%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 6</p></td><td  ><p>2.9 / 4.1</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-8400</p></td><td  ><p>14.76%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 6</p></td><td  ><p>2.8 / 4.0</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 3 3100</p></td><td  ><p>14.17%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 2</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 3.9</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i3-10100</p></td><td  ><p>13.37%</p></td><td  ><p>Rocket Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-9350KF</p></td><td  ><p>11.76%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>4.0/4.6</p></td><td  ><p>91W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 3400G</p></td><td  ><p>11.31%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen +</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-8350K</p></td><td  ><p>10.74%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>4.0 / -</p></td><td  ><p>91W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-9100</p></td><td  ><p>10.70%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake-R</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.2</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 2400G</p></td><td  ><p>10.56%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen+</p></td><td  ><p>4  / 8</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 3.9</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-8100</p></td><td  ><p>9.61%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / -</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-7400</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Kaby Lake</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4 </p></td><td  ><p>3.0 / 3.5</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 3 3200G</p></td><td  ><p>8.66%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen +</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.0</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 3 1300X</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 3.7</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-7100</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Kaby Lake</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / -</p></td><td  ><p>51W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Ryzen 3 2200G</p></td><td  ><p>7.99%</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 3.7</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G5600</p></td><td  ><p>5.43%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / -</p></td><td  ><p>54W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Athlon 3000G</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen+</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / -</p></td><td  ><p>35W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Athlon 220GE</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.4 / -</p></td><td  ><p>35W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G5400</p></td><td  ><p>5.13%</p></td><td  ><p>Coffee Lake</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / -</p></td><td  ><p>54W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Athlon 200GE</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Zen</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / -</p></td><td  ><p>35W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G4560</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Kaby Lake</p></td><td  ><p>2 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / -</p></td><td  ><p>54W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD A10-9700</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>Bristol Ridge</p></td><td  ><p>4 / 4</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 3.8</p></td><td  ><p>65W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Zhaoxin KaiXian KX-U6780A</p></td><td  ><p>~</p></td><td  ><p>LuJiaZui </p></td><td  ><p>8 / 8</p></td><td  ><p>2.7 / -</p></td><td  ><p>70W</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>These tests are from our 2022 test bench. The multi-threaded workload column is based on CPU benchmarks performance in Cinebench, POV-ray, vray, Blender (four tests - Koro, Barcellona, Classroom, bmw27), y-cruncher, and Handbrake x264 and x265 workloads. These CPU benchmarks represent performance in productivity-focused applications that tend to require more compute horsepower. The most powerful chip gets a 100, and all others are scored relative to it. We conducted these benchmarks in Windows 10. </p><div ><table><caption>Legacy 2023 CPU Benchmarks Hierarchy Test Setup</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p>Hardware</p></th><th  ></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>AMD Socket AM4 (400- 500-Series)</strong></p></td><td  ><p>AMD Ryzen 2000- 3000- 5000- series processors</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p> </p></td><td  ><p>MSI MEG X570 Godlike</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p> </p></td><td  ><p>2x 8GB Trident Z Royal DDR4-3600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z490)</strong></p></td><td  ><p>Intel Comet Lake processors</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p> </p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/MSI-Z370-PRO-AC-Motherboard/dp/B07SNSXHN1"></a><a href="null"></a>MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p> </p></td><td  ><p>2x 8GB Trident Z Royal DDR4-3600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>AMD Socket AM4 (300-Series)</strong></p></td><td  ><p>Ryzen 1000-series processors</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p> </p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/MSI-X370-XPOWER-Titanium-Motherboard/dp/B06WLNZ1JH"></a><a href="null"></a>MSI X370 Xpower Gaming Titanium</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p> </p></td><td  ><p>2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2667</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z270)</strong></p></td><td  ><p>Intel Coffee Lake, Kaby Lake processors</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p> </p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/MSI-Enthusiastic-Z270-Motherboard-GAMING/dp/B01N6O4YHD"></a><a href="null"></a>MSI Z270 Gaming M7</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p> </p></td><td  ><p>2x 8GB Trident Z Royal DDR4-3600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Intel LGA 2066</strong></p></td><td  ><p>Intel Skylake processors</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p> </p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/MSI-Performance-X299-Motherboard-PRO/dp/B072JWYHVX"></a><a href="null"></a>MSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p> </p></td><td  ><p>2x 8GB Trident Z Royal DDR4-3600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>All</strong></p></td><td  ><p>Gigabyte GeForce RTX 3090 Eagle</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p> </p></td><td  ><p>2TB Intel DC4510 SSD</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p> </p></td><td  ><p>EVGA Supernova 1600 T2, 1600W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p> </p></td><td  ><p>Windows 10 Pro version 2004 (build 19041.450)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Cooling</strong></p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Radiator-Advanced-Lighting-Software-compatible/dp/B077G3C6HH"></a><a href="null"></a>Corsair H115i</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-legacy-pre-2018-desktop-cpu-benchmarks"><span>Legacy: Pre-2018 Desktop CPU Benchmarks</span></h3><p>Recognizing that a lot of older platforms are going to be paired with graphics subsystems multiple generations old, we wanted to define the top of our range to encourage balance between host processing and complementary GPUs. At this point, anyone with a Sandy Bridge-based Core i7 would realize a gain from stepping up to <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-ryzen-2,5615.html">Coffee Lake</a> or <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i7-7740x-kaby-lake-x-cpu,5107.html">Kaby Lake</a>, for example. And putting AMD's top FX CPUs next to a handful of Core i7s and those older Core i5s represents an upgrade to their status.</p><p>Currently, our hierarchy consists of 13 total tiers. The bottom half of the chart is largely outdated; you'll notice those CPUs dragging down performance in the latest games, whether you have one of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">best graphics cards</a> or not. If you own a CPU in that range, an upgrade could really take your experience to another level.</p><p>Really, it's the top five tiers or so that remain viable. And in that top half of the chart, an upgrade is typically worthwhile if it's a least a couple of tiers higher. Otherwise, there's just not enough improvement to warrant the expense of a fresh CPU, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-motherboards,3984.html">motherboard </a>and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-ram,4057.html">RAM</a><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ram-random-access-memory-definition,5757.html"> </a>(not to mention the graphics card and storage solution you'd be considering as well). </p><div ><table><caption>Legacy: Pre-2018 Desktop CPU Benchmarks Hierarchy</caption><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Intel CPUs</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>AMD CPUs and APUs</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-8700K </p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-7900X</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-7960X</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i9-7980XE</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-8700K</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-7740X</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-7700K</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-7820X</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-7700</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-8400</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 1800X</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-7800X</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-7700T</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 1700X</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-6950X</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Ryzen 7 1700</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-6900K</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 1600X</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-6850K</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 1600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-6800K</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 1500X</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-6700K</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Ryzen 5 1400</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7 6700</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Ryzen 3 1300X</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-5960X</p></td><td  ><p>Ryzen 5 2400G</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-5930K</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-5820K</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-5775C</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel i7-4960X</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-4930K</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-4820K</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-4790K</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-4770K</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-4790</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-4771</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-4770</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-3970X</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-3960X</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-3930K</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-3820</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-3770K</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-3770</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-7640X</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-7600K</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-7600</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-7500</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-7400</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5 6600K</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-6600</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-6500</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5 6402P</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-6400</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-5675C</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-4690K</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-4670K</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-4590</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-4670</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-4570</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel BX80646I54460</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-4440</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-4430</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-3570K</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-3570</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-3550</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Intel CPUs</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>AMD CPUs and APUs</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-990X Extreme</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-980X Extreme</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-975 Extreme</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-2600K</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-2600</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-965</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-3470</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-3450P</p></td><td  ><p>Intel Core i7-7700</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-3450</p></td><td  ><p>AMD FX-9370</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-3350P</p></td><td  ><p>AMD FX-8370</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-3330</p></td><td  ><p>AMD FX-8350 w/Wraith</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-2550K</p></td><td  ><p>AMD FX-8320</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-2500K</p></td><td  ><p>AMD FX-8300</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-2500</p></td><td  ><p>AMD FX-8150</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-2450P</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-2400</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-2380P</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-2320</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-2310</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-2300</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-7350K</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-7320</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-7300</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-7100</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Intel CPUs</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>AMD CPUs and APUs</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-980</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-970</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-960</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-875K</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-870</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3 6320</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3 6300</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-6100</p></td><td  ><p>AMD FX-6350</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3 6100T</p></td><td  ><p>AMD FX-4350</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-6098P</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-4360</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-4350</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X4 Black Edition 980</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-4340</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X4 Black Edition 975</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-4170</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-4160</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-4150</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-4130</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-3250</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-3245</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-3240</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-3225</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-3220</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-3210</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-2130</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-2025</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-2120</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-2105</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-2100</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G4620</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G4600</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G4560</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G4500</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G4400</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Intel CPUs</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>AMD CPUs and APUs</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD FX-8370E</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD FX-8320</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD FX-8120</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD FX-6300</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD FX-6200</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD FX-4300</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD FX-4170</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X6 1075T</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-950</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X4 970 Black Edition</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-940</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X4 965</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-930</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X4 955</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-920</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A10-7890K APU</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i7-860</p></td><td  ><p>Intel A10-7870K</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-3220T</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A10-7860K</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-2405S</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A10-7850K</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-2400S</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A10-7800</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-760</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A10-7700K</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-750</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A10-6800K</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A10-6790K</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A10-6700</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A10-5800K</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A10-5700</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>Intel A8-7650K</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD A8-7600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD A8-6600K</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD A8-5600K</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD A8-3870K</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD A8-3870</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD A8-3850</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X4 880K</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>Intel Athlon X4 870K)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>Intel A10-7870K</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X4 750K</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X4 740</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X4 651K</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X4 645</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X4 641</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X4 640</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Intel CPUs</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>AMD CPUs and APUs</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD FX-6100</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD FX-4130</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD FX-4100</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X6 1055T</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6800</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X6 1045T</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X4 945</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X4 940</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Quad Q9400</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X4 920</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-680</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X3 740</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-670</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-661</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A8-6500</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-660</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A8-5500</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-655K</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A6</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i5-650</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A6</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-2120T</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A6-3670K</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-2100T</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A6-3650</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon II X4 635</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon II X4 630</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Intel CPUs</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>AMD CPUs and APUs</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Quad Q8300</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E8600</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E8500</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X4 910</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E8400</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X4 910e</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E7600</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X4 810</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-550</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon II X4 631</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-540</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon II X4 620</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core i3-530</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon II X3 460</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G3470</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G3460</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G3450</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G3440</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G3430</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G3420</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G3260</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G3258</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G3250</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G3220</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G2130</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G2120</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G2020</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G2010</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G870</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G860</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G850</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G840</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G645</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G640</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G630</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Intel CPUs</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>AMD CPUs and APUs</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E8300</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X4 905e</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E8200</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X4 805</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E8190</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X3 710</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E7500</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X3 705e</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E7400</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X2 565 Black Edition</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E6850</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X2 560 Black Edition</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E6750</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X2 555 Black Edition</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G620</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X2 550 Black Edition</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Celeron G1630</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom II X2 545</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Celeron G1620</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom X4 9950</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Celeron G1610</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon II X3 455</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Celeron G555</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon II X3 450</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Celeron G550</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon II X3 445</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Celeron G540</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon II X3 440</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Celeron G530</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon II X3 435</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Celeron G3950</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon II X3 425</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Celeron G3930</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Celeron G3930</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Celeron G3900</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Intel CPUs</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>AMD CPUs and APUs</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom X4 9850</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom X4 9750</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom X4 9650</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E7300</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom X4 9600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E7200</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom X3 8850</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E6700</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom X3 8750</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E6550</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon II X2 370K</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E6540</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon II X2 265</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium Dual-Core E6700</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon II X2 260</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium Dual-Core E6600</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon II X2 255</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium Dual-Core E650</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A6-5500K</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium Dual-Core E6300</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A6</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium Dual-Core E5800</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A4-7300</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium Dual-Core E5700</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A4-6400K</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium G9650</p></td><td  ><p>AMD A4-6300</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD A4-5400K</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD A4-5300</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD A4-4400</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD A4-4000</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD A4-3400</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD A4-3300</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Sempron 2650</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon 64 X2 6400+</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Intel CPUs</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>AMD CPUs and APUs</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom X4 9550</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom X4 9500</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom X4 9450e</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E6600</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom X4 9350e</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E6420</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom X3 8650</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E4700</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom X3 8600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E4600</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom X3 8550</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E4500</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom X3 8450e</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium Dual-Core E5400</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom X3 8450</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium Dual-Core E5300</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom X3 8400</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium Dual-Core E5200</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom X3 8250e</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium Dual-Core G620T</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon II X2 250</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon II X2 245</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon II X2 240</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X2 7850</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X2 7750</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon 64 X2 5600+</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Intel CPUs</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>AMD CPUs and APUs</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom X4 9150e</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Phenom X4 9100e</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E6400</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X2 7550</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E6320</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X2 7450</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E4400</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X2 5050e</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E4300</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X2 4850e/b</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Celeron E3300</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon 64 X2 5400+</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon 64 X2 5200+</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Intel CPUs</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>AMD CPUs and APUs</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E6300</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X2 6550</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Core 2 Duo E5500</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X2 6500</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium Dual-Core E2220</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X2 4450e/b</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium Dual-Core E2200</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X2 4600+</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium Dual-Core E2210</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X2 4400+</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Celeron E3200</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X2 4200+</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X2 BE-2400</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Intel CPUs</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>AMD CPUs and APUs</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium Dual-Core E2180</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon 64 X2 4000+</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Celeron 1600</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Celeron G440</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X2 4050e</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>AMD Athlon X2 2300 Black Edition</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Intel CPUs</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>AMD CPUs and APUs</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium Dual-Core E2160</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Pentium Dual-Core E2140</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Celeron E1500</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Celeron E1400</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Intel Celeron E1200</p></td><td  ></td></tr></tbody></table></div><ul><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-7-7800x3d-vs-intel-core-i9-13900k-vs-intel-core-7-13700K">AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D vs Intel Core i9-13900K vs Core i7-13700K: Big Gaming Punch, Smaller Price Tag</a></li><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-9-7950x3d-vs-intel-core-i9-13900k-faceoff">AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D vs Intel Core i9-13900K Faceoff: Battle of the Gaming Flagships</a></li><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i5-13600k-vs-amd-ryzen-7-7700x-and-ryzen-5-7600x-face-off">Intel Core i5-13600K vs AMD Ryzen 7 7700X and Ryzen 5 7600X Face Off</a></li><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-9-7950x-vs-intel-core-i9-13900k">AMD Ryzen 9 7950X vs Intel Core i9-13900K Face Off</a></li><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/ryzen-7-5800x3d-vs-core-i7-12700k-and-core-i9-12900k-face-off-the-rise-of-3d-v-cache">Ryzen 7 5800X3D vs Core i7-12700K and Core i9-12900K Face-Off: The Rise of 3D V-Cache</a></li><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-12900k-vs-ryzen-9-5900x-5950x">Intel Core i9-12900K vs Ryzen 9 5900X and 5950X: Alder Lake and Ryzen 5000 Face Off</a></li><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i5-12600k-vs-amd-ryzen-5-5600x-ryzen-7-5800x-cpu-face-off">Intel Core i5-12600K vs AMD Ryzen 5 5600X and 5800X Face Off: Ryzen Has Fallen</a></li><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i7-12700k-vs-amd-ryzen-9-5900x-and-5800x-face-off-intel-rising">Intel Core i7-12700K vs AMD Ryzen 9 5900X and 5800X Face Off: Intel Rising</a></li><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i5-12400-vs-amd-ryzen-5-5600x-ryzen-5-5600g-cpu-face-off">Intel Core i5-12400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 5600X Face-Off: The Gaming Value Showdown</a></li></ul><ul><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html"><strong>Best CPUs for Gaming</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-vs-intel-cpus"><strong>AMD vs Intel</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-13th-gen-raptor-lake-release-date-specifications-pricing-benchmarks-all-we-know-specs"><strong>13th-Gen Raptor Lake</strong></a><strong> All We Know</strong></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-zen-4-ryzen-7000-release-date-specifications-pricing-benchmarks-all-we-know-specs"><strong>Zen 4 Ryzen 7000</strong></a><strong> All We Know</strong></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/how-to-overclock-a-cpu"><strong>How to Overclock a CPU</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/how-to-check-cpu-temp-temperature"><strong>How to check CPU Temperature</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus"><strong>All CPUs Content</strong></a></li></ul><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/dBMx1ASv.html" id="dBMx1ASv" title="How to Choose a CPU" width="960" height="540" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel NUC 8 VR (NUC8i7HVK) Review: Core i7, AMD Vega Meet in Hades Canyon ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-hades-canyon-nuc-vr,5536.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Mix equal parts Intel Kaby Lake and AMD Vega, stir in 4GB of HBM2, and cram it all into a 1.2-liter form factor. Can the resulting Next Unit of Computing match up to mainstream gaming PCs using unlocked multipliers and enthusiast-friendly aesthetics? ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">5GMoLjg4WPbUFSeR9y2LQW</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JLsr3v3SNv4G6qRak2fm6e-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2018 17:00:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:31:10 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Mini PCs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Desktops]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ palcorn@outlook.com (Paul Alcorn) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Paul Alcorn ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RZRmFeQfPy3etHjBQitbGW.jpeg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;As a teenager, Paul scraped up enough money to buy a 486-powered PC with a turbo button (yes, a turbo button). Back when floppies were still popular he was already chasing after the fastest spinners for his personal computer, which led him down the long and winding storage road, covering enterprise storage. His current focus is on consumer processors, though he still keeps a close eye on the latest storage news. In his spare time, you’ll find Paul hanging out with his kids or indulging his love of the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                <cf:isSponsored>false</cf:isSponsored>
                <cf:hasAffiliateLinks>false</cf:hasAffiliateLinks>
                <cf:isPaid>false</cf:isPaid>
                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JLsr3v3SNv4G6qRak2fm6e-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JLsr3v3SNv4G6qRak2fm6e-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="splashing-into-kaby-lake-g">Splashing Into Kaby Lake-G </h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:97.58%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GYtvpuKda5QWjpmMM3nQHn.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GYtvpuKda5QWjpmMM3nQHn.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1280" height="1249" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GYtvpuKda5QWjpmMM3nQHn.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We usually hear rumors of new processor launches months before they happen, so truly earth-shaking announcements are rare. But AMD’s disclosure last year that it was creating a semi-custom GPU for its bitter rival Intel was genuinely surprising.</p><p>As a result, though, Intel's eighth-gen mobile Core processor rides on the same package as an AMD Radeon RX Vega graphics chip, complemented by 4GB of HBM2. This configuration is meant to address the shortcomings of Intel's own HD Graphics engine, allowing mini-PCs, thin-and-lights, and notebooks to deliver a smoother gaming experience. Intel claims its new chips should serve up similar graphics performance as Nvidia's GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q.</p><p>The processors are also fast enough to drive larger devices like the overclockable 100W Hades Canyon NUC we're testing today. A graphics card shortage continues to confound gamers, so this launch couldn't come at a better time for Intel. Can a marriage of two unlikely bedfellows capture the hearts of enthusiasts, though?</p><h2 id="intel-nuc-8-vr">Intel NUC 8 VR </h2><p>Intel crams as much performance as possible into its Hades Canyon NUCs. The overclockable $1000 NUC8i7HVK "NUC 8 VR" is based on a 100W Core i7-8809G, while the $800 NUC8i7HNK dials back to a 65W Core i7-8705G. Both are barebones platforms though, meaning you'll need to spend even more on memory, storage, and an operating system. At least the two NUCs are loaded with connectivity options. You get support for up to six 4K displays, Thunderbolt 3, and 7.1-channel audio.</p>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="e40339a3-c195-46f5-9cd3-3f2e4be3303c">            <a href="https://www.simplynuc.com/hades-canyon/" data-model-name="Intel NUC8i7HVK" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:97.58%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GYtvpuKda5QWjpmMM3nQHn.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Intel NUC8i7HVK</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="96d4a75c-6a4b-48ff-a69f-fdab79010ab7">            <a href="https://www.simplynuc.com/hades-canyon/" data-model-name="Intel NUC8i7HNK" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:97.58%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GYtvpuKda5QWjpmMM3nQHn.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Intel NUC8i7HNK</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><p>The VR NUC specifically includes provisions for overclocking the CPU, GPU, HBM2, and system memory. Clearly, Intel designed the NUC8i7HVK with enthusiasts in mind. After all, its case features Intel's Skulltrail logo up top, illuminated by LEDs, while the power button sports lighting that you can adjust.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:43.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CRn2c2WRZJSfoefDm4nrjY.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CRn2c2WRZJSfoefDm4nrjY.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1280" height="562" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CRn2c2WRZJSfoefDm4nrjY.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>These NUCs occupy 1.2L enclosures, which are slightly larger than the previous-gen Skull Canyon model. They accommodate up to 32GB (2 x 16GB) of DDR4-2400 memory in SO-DIMMs running at 1.2V, though you can overclock beyond DDR4-3466 with a capable kit. You're also able to install a pair of M.2 SSDs in either SATA or NVMe flavors. Naturally, the 100-series chipset supports Intel's <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-optane-ssd-900p-3d-xpoint,5292.html">blistering-fast Optane drives</a>, too.</p><p>Intel covers its NUC with a three-year warranty, though that doesn't include damage incurred by overclocking. Whereas Intel will sell you a policy to protect its K-series CPUs, there is no option to purchase overclocking coverage for the NUC.</p><h2 id="intel-kaby-lake-g-mcm">Intel Kaby Lake-G MCM</h2><p>Intel officially calls its new hybrid CPU/GPU packages eighth-gen Core mobile processors with Radeon RX Vega M graphics. We prefer the Kaby Lake-G code name, though, so we're sticking with that. The company doesn't license AMD's technology for these multi-chip modules. Instead, Intel buys them just like AMD's other customers, then integrates them onto MCMs.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v86mjFRvYe7QGC7NP6gPLm.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5Hd4zpDFEkftzMEPoMmF99.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8RHXSnZBY8Zjvh8vzTPeuY.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/y3y8rMjRgDiJ8hD326woUR.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Cqhf8QvkAC9x6sHChgeeCm.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The new design combines a CPU (right), Vega graphics (middle), and HBM2 memory (left) onto one package. Like all Intel processors of this class, Kaby Lake-G comes equipped with 20 third-gen PCIe lanes, eight of which are monopolized by the GPU. The package also connects to a PCH across a four-lane DMI 3.0 link.</p><p>Kaby Lake-G features one small HBM2 stack connected to AMD's GPU through <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-emib-interconnect-fpga-chiplet,35316.html">EMIB (Embedded Multi-Die Interconnect Bridge)</a> technology. In a nutshell, the EMIB interconnect is a packaging capability that ties discrete chips together via silicon bridges. It eliminates interposers, thereby reducing package thickness to 1.7mm. The interconnect also consumes less power than interposer designs, and allows Intel to place the HBM2 and GPU closer together. This minimizes physical dimensions, improves bandwidth, and reduces latency.</p><p>As an example of what this form factor enables, Kaby Lake-G processors can fit into 16mm-thick devices like the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/dell-xps-15-cooling-intel-kaby-lake-g-vega-amd,36334.html">Dell XPS 15 2-in-1 we recently examined</a>. That's much thinner than the ~26mm z-height typical of notebooks with discrete GPUs.</p><h2 id="intel-core-i7-8809g">Intel Core i7-8809G </h2><p>Intel carves its mobile processors into the U-series for mainstream mobility, the G-series for thin-and-lights with integrated graphics, and H-series processors for the high-performance segment. Kaby Lake-G packages use H-series CPUs.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Intel Processors</strong></td><td  ><strong>Core i7-8809G    </strong></td><td  ><strong>Core i7-8709G</strong></td><td  ><strong>Core i7-8706G</strong></td><td  ><strong>Core i7-8705G</strong></td><td  ><strong>Core i5-8350G</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>TDP / SDP</strong></td><td  >100W</td><td  >100W</td><td  >65W</td><td  >65W</td><td  >65W</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Core/Threads</strong></td><td  >4 / 8</td><td  >4 / 8</td><td  >4 / 8</td><td  >4 / 8</td><td  >4 / 8</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Base Frequency (GHz)</strong></td><td  >3.1</td><td  >3.1</td><td  >3.1</td><td  >3.1</td><td  >2.8</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Boost Frequency (GHz)</strong></td><td  >4.2</td><td  >4.1</td><td  >4.1</td><td  >4.1</td><td  >3.8</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>L3 Cache (MB)</strong></td><td  >8</td><td  >8</td><td  >8</td><td  >8</td><td  >6</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Memory Channels</strong></td><td  >Dual-Channel</td><td  >Dual-Channel</td><td  >Dual-Channel</td><td  >Dual-Channel</td><td  >Dual-Channel</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Memory Speed </strong></td><td  >DDR4-2400</td><td  >DDR4-2400</td><td  >DDR4-2400</td><td  >DDR4-2400</td><td  >DDR4-2400</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Unlocked CPU, GPU, HBM2</strong></td><td  >Yes</td><td  >No</td><td  >No</td><td  >No</td><td  >No</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Discrete Graphics</strong></td><td  >Radeon RX Vega M GH</td><td  >Radeon RX Vega M GH</td><td  >Radeon RX Vega M GL</td><td  >Radeon RX Vega M GL</td><td  >Radeon RX Vega M GL</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Intel HD Graphics</strong></td><td  >630</td><td  >630</td><td  >630</td><td  >630</td><td  >630</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Graphics Boost Frequency (MHz)</strong></td><td  >up to 1100</td><td  >up to 1100</td><td  >up to 1100</td><td  >up to 1100</td><td  >up to 1100</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Intel vPro Technology</strong></td><td  >No</td><td  >No</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >No</td><td  >No</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Intel only uses the Core i7-8809G and -8705G in its NUCs; other Kaby Lake-G models will find homes in mobility-focused devices. The 14nm+ CPU dies are paired with either Radeon RX Vega M <strong>GH</strong> or Radeon RX Vega M <strong>GL</strong> GPUs. The GH cleverly stands for "Graphics High," while GL means (you guessed it) "Graphics Low." The GH models have a 100W TDP, whereas the GL models are rated at 65W.</p><p>The flagship Core i7-8809G features four Hyper-Threaded cores and 8MB of L3 cache. It accelerates up to 4.2 GHz via Turbo Boost, but has a base clock rate of 3.1 GHz.</p><p>All Kaby Lake-Gs support dual-channel DDR4-2400 (no ECC) memory. You'll notice that they also sport HD Graphics 630 and AMD's discrete GPU, too. Intel doesn't use its integrated engine for either NUC's display outputs. Instead, that hardware remains available for OpenCL-based compute workloads and QuickSync-accelerated software.</p><p>Some Kaby Lake-G products <em>will </em>use HD Graphics 630 for driving up to three 4K monitors. In those cases, the processor will power gate (turn off) the Vega GPU and its HBM2 during light graphics workloads.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Processors</strong></td><td  ><strong>Core i7-8809G, i7-8709G</strong></td><td  ><strong>Core i7-8706G, i7-8705G, i5-8305G</strong></td><td  ><strong>Ryzen 2400G</strong></td><td  ><strong>Ryzen 2200G</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Graphics Version</strong></td><td  >Radeon RX Vega M GH</td><td  >Radeon RX Vega M GL</td><td  >-</td><td  >-</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Architecture</strong></td><td  >Vega M</td><td  >Vega M</td><td  >Vega</td><td  >Vega</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Compute Units</strong></td><td  >24</td><td  >20</td><td  >11</td><td  >8</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Stream Processors</strong></td><td  >1536</td><td  >1280</td><td  >704</td><td  >512</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Base GPU Clock (MHz)</strong></td><td  >1063</td><td  >931</td><td  >?</td><td  >?</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Boost GPU Clock (MHz)</strong></td><td  >1190</td><td  >1011</td><td  >1250</td><td  >1100</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Memory Bandwidth (GB/s)</strong></td><td  >204.8</td><td  >179.2</td><td  >-</td><td  >-</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Peak Power Consumption</strong></td><td  >130W</td><td  >?</td><td  >-</td><td  >-</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Peak SP Performance (TFLOPS)</strong></td><td  >up to 3.7</td><td  >up to 2.6</td><td  >up to 1.76</td><td  >up to 1.126</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Texture Units</strong></td><td  >96</td><td  >80</td><td  >44</td><td  >32</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>ROP Pixels/clk</strong></td><td  >64</td><td  >32</td><td  >16</td><td  >16</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Memory Bus</strong></td><td  >1024-bit</td><td  >1024-bit</td><td  >-</td><td  >-</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>High Bandwidth Cache</strong></td><td  >4GB HBM2</td><td  >4GB HBM2</td><td  >-</td><td  >-</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>The Radeon RX Vega M GH sports 24 CUs, totaling 1536 Stream processors. It features a base clock rate of 1063 MHz that stretches up to 1190 MHz. Four gigabytes (4-hi stack) of HBM2 run at 800 MHz and provide up to 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth, or half of Radeon RX Vega 56's 410 GB/s with two 4-hi stacks (8GB) of HBM2. Of course, performance isn't comparable: the GH provides up to 3.7 TFLOPS of peak SP performance, while Vega 56 is theoretically capable of 10.5 TFLOPS.</p><p>Radeon RX Vega M GL employs 20 CUs, and offers lower base/boost frequencies of 931 and 1011 MHz, respectively. Its HBM2 operates at 700 MHz and pushes up to 179.2 GB/s of bandwidth. Single-precision compute is rated at up to 2.6 TFLOPS.</p><p>Comparisons to AMD's Ryzen 5 2400G and 2200G are inevitable, but misguided. The Raven Ridge processors are a single-die implementation with far fewer CUs and no local memory. Instead, it relies on system memory. <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/raven-ridge-memory-scaling-benchmarks,5489.html">We've shown that this limits the architecture's performance</a>, ultimately forcing both models into a lower tier.</p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-pc-builds,4390.html">Best PC Builds</a></strong></p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-to-build-a-pc,5867.html">How To Build A PC</a></strong></p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/builds">All PC Builds Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="connectivity-amp-teardown">Connectivity & Teardown</h2><p>Intel sent over a NUC VR outfitted with its 118GB Optane SSD 800P, a 512GB 545s SSD, and 2 x 8GB Kingston HyperX DDR4-3200 SO-DIMMs. There's a bundled VESA mount for hanging the NUC off the back of a monitor, too, but we think that's a waste of Intel's attractive design. The NUC8i7HVK comes with a 230W external power supply, stepping up big time from its predecessor's 120W PSU. Our understanding is that the power supply is so much larger in order to facilitate overclocking. The power supply is one of the NUC's three protective layers, so it has an integrated breaker that shuts everything down if you exceed the 230W limit.</p><p>As far as connectivity goes, you get three USB 3.1 (Gen2) Type-C ports (one front, two rear), two of which support Thunderbolt 3. The rear panel also sports two mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. AMD's Vega GPU can drive up to six independent 4K displays (five of them at 60 Hz) simultaneously. Naturally, FreeSync is supported, along with driver-based features like Radeon Chill and WattMan.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:57.97%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uSnWXEYp4sTUACLGZ39G3L.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uSnWXEYp4sTUACLGZ39G3L.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1280" height="742" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uSnWXEYp4sTUACLGZ39G3L.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The NUC also supports PlayReady 3.0 and will play back Ultra HD Blu-rays with HDR. A front-facing HDMI 2.0a port may come in handy for connecting a VR headset, while a second HDMI port on the back is better suited for HTPC duties. Along those lines, 7.1-channel audio is supported over the optical, HDMI, and DisplayPort interfaces. In a first for Intel's NUC family, the flagship comes with two LAN ports (powered by an Intel i219-LM and i210-AT NIC), too. As if that wasn't enough I/O, you also get a USB 3.1 Gen2 connector up front and four USB 3.0 ports on the back. Intel integrates a quad-microphone array and an infrared sensor for remote control. Plus, the design includes an SDXC slot that supports UHS-I.</p><p>Internally, the NUC has three M.2 slots. One is dedicated to an Intel Wireless-AC 8265 card that supports 802.11ax 2x2 and Bluetooth v4.2, while the other two accommodate SSDs (one 2280 and one 2242) in either SATA or NVMe flavors. We also spot two USB 2.0 headers.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GYtvpuKda5QWjpmMM3nQHn.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PugtezRjLokgTt5eaCmjyQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hhswneojdoJMzCfn7c9GRM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BPEQ3nqZXBKLCidNsTNbTf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/n77J3eeNTKRPKQs8bFPAFi.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uEoYRyYat4LJd52kE82jgR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/svYNgVunEmVBnBvgiF8ePY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MGGMqhxjxPtfxeuWaBvXzB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pobeAwGvRcK7oVCd4gDuuc.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Hades Canyon NUC has a nice smooth plastic exterior and a satisfying heft to it. Underneath, there's a metal shroud secured with a single fastener. Removing the shroud reveals the 100-series motherboard and two angled SO-DIMMs. We also spot the two SSDs, plus the motherboard's poorly-placed BIOS reset jumper. You'll have to disassemble Intel's platform to reset its BIOS if you somehow end up stuck.</p><p>Next, we removed four screws in the corners and slid off the plastic outer ring. Then we removed four screws on the cooling retention bracket in the motherboard's center. After extricating a few more fasteners, we popped the motherboard free of the thermal solution. Intel's board utilizes a five-phase power subsystem that flanks the MCM. An HM175 platform controller hub is visible over to the right side in our pictures; it isn't cooled by a heat sink.</p><p>Kaby Lake-G package is soldered down, so there's no way to drop this MCM into a socketed motherboard. The exposed dies make direct contact with a large, copper sink connected to a T-shaped fin stack. Unfortunately, the thermal paste that Intel uses isn't particularly good; we'd recommend replacing it with a higher-quality compound. Two fans pull air in from under the NUC, blow it through the fin stack, and exhaust it out the chassis.</p><h2 id="power-management">Power Management</h2><p>The small Kaby Lake-G package is perfect for thin and light form factors. However, it still presents thermal challenges, given a 100W rating. Intel measures power between the CPU and GPU during normal workloads, claiming one subsystem or the other is rarely loaded down exclusively. The company describes this measurement as its System Design Point. Consequently, peak TDP could be higher than 100W, even at stock settings.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Cqhf8QvkAC9x6sHChgeeCm.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VH9pds6s5m5pJHeSWoYWXm.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Reducing the amount of power a device consumes helps mitigate heat output. Intel's previous-gen processors featured two power rails, one dedicated to the CPU and another for the GPU. But Kaby Lake-G uses a single rail for both components to enable power sharing. This allows the SoC to dedicate more current to heavily-utilized resources, boosting instantaneous performance and saving power over time.</p><p>The HBM2 also falls under the same power management policies. A unique set of software drivers and interfaces process telemetry data from the three units (CPU, GPU, HBM2) so the processor can manage heat, power delivery, and performance in real time.</p><p>Intel says its new dynamic tuning system delivers the same performance (measured as frames per watt) while consuming 18% less power.</p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="overclocking-amp-test-setup">Overclocking & Test Setup </h2><h2 id="overclocking">Overclocking </h2><p>Thermal boundaries limit the NUC VR's performance. Thus, we kicked the fans up to 100% for all of our overclocking experiments, even though that resulted in much more noise than the pleasant-sounding Balanced profile.</p><p>A 230W limit is enforced by the power supply, though Intel's NUC also throttles performance in response to over-temperature conditions on the motherboard's voltage regulation circuitry or the Kaby Lake-G package itself. This throttling behavior stopped us well short of ever approaching the 230W barrier. In fact, we topped out at 197W with our Kill-A-Watt during our overclocking attempts.</p><p>Well-supported utilities like HWiNFO and AIDA do not report the package power consumption and temperatures of the Hades Canyon components correctly, making it difficult to log thermal data accurately. We will follow up with this data once the developers update their tools. We also monitored CPU and GPU frequencies during our testing to detect throttling.</p><p>Overclocking the NUC is all about balance, so Intel suggests tuning it based on your workload. While you can overclock the CPU, GPU, and HBM2, limited cooling capacity prevents you from tuning all three components to their maximum potential at the same time. You can focus on ultimate CPU performance or optimized GPU performance, but not both.</p><p>We used AMD's WattMan pane to overclock the GPU and HBM2. Interestingly, Intel's management utility looks remarkably like AMD's Radeon Settings window outfitted with Intel's logo and blue trim (hint: it is).</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>NUC 8 VR NUC8i7HVK</strong></td><td  ><strong>NUC 8 VR Stock</strong></td><td  ><strong>GPU 1350 MHz (HBM 800)</strong></td><td  ><strong>GPU 1350 MHz (HBM 900)</strong></td><td  ><strong>CPU 4.2 GHz (GPU Stock)</strong></td><td  ><strong>CPU 4.2 GHz (1250/900)</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Core i7-8809G</strong></td><td  >Stock</td><td  >Stock</td><td  >Stock</td><td  >4.2 GHz All-Core (1.05V)</td><td  >4.2 GHz All-Core (1.05V)</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Vega Graphics</strong></td><td  >Stock</td><td  >1350 MHZ (1.1V)</td><td  >1350 MHz (1.1V)</td><td  >Stock</td><td  >1250 MHz (1V)</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>HBM2</strong></td><td  >Stock</td><td  >800 MHz (1.1V)</td><td  >900 MHz (1.1V)</td><td  >Stock</td><td  >900 MHz (1V)</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>System Memory</strong></td><td  >Stock</td><td  >Stock</td><td  >Stock</td><td  >DDR4-3200</td><td  >DDR4-3200</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>We began by overclocking the GPU to 1350 MHz. Those settings are listed as <strong>GPU 1350 MHz (HBM 800)</strong> in the table above. This proved stable, and provided a solid boost to gaming performance. Then, we added HBM2 overclocking to the mix, listed as <strong>GPU 1350 MHz (HBM 900)</strong>. Again, this gave us a few extra frames per second in our gaming benchmarks.</p><p>With solid graphics performance established, we decided to add increased CPU performance to the mix. To start, we overclocked the CPU with AMD's Vega GPU and HBM2 at stock settings. This gave us a 4.5 GHz ceiling at 1.05V with memory at DDR4-3200. Initially, we observed stable operation through our application suite (minus AVX-optimized tests). But even with the GPU in its default state, gaming workloads caused the platform to blue-screen.</p><p>At the point where we stopped seeing crashes, our CPU was running an all-core 4.2 GHz CPU overclock, listed as <strong>CPU 4.2 GHz (GPU Stock)</strong>. Intel's Core i7-8809G already sports a single-core 4.2 GHz Turbo Boost frequency, but forcing all four cores to that clock rate yielded impressive results in our threaded application benchmarks. We also found that we couldn't drop the CPU voltage below 1.05V and still POST.</p><p>Finally, we slowly bumped our GPU and HBM2 frequencies up until all three overclockable components were running stably. This is listed as <strong>CPU 4.2 GHz (1250/900)</strong>. As you can see in the table, we weren't able to apply as much voltage to the GPU and HBM2 with an overclocked CPU, so we settled for a slightly lower 1250 MHz GPU overclock.</p><p>You'll find all four configurations in our game testing to illustrate the software's response to various hardware settings. We also include the 4.5 GHz CPU results in our application testing, if only to highlight peak performance with a tuned host processor. We doubt that enthusiasts interested in overclocking would kick game performance to the curb in favor of slightly faster desktop apps.</p><p>Intel's AVX offset reduces frequency and voltage when it detects an AVX-optimized workload. We use this helpful feature to attain higher effective CPU overclocks on our desktops. But it's an even more important capability in a small form factor platform. For now, the NUC's AVX offset doesn't appear to be working correctly, which we reported to Intel. As a result, we do not include any AVX-based testing with HandBrake or y-cruncher for our overclocked configurations.</p><p>The BIOS' overclocking options are fairly Spartan. A few staples of modern tuning, such as Load Line Calibration control, are missing. This is likely due to Kaby Lake-G's power balancing capabilities. Intel expects enthusiasts to overclock primarily through its XTU, though we didn't see any equivalent controls in the software. Hopefully Intel refines its firmware to expose more knobs and dials. The NUC also needs an exterior BIOS reset button. There were several occasions during testing when holding down the power button did not work. Each time we had to remove the enclosure's cover and a secondary panel inside the NUC to access the BIOS reset jumper. </p><h2 id="test-setup">Test Setup</h2><p>Kaby Lake-G is truly unique, so it's hard to find configurations to benchmark against. In this first round of testing, we're looking to determine whether the NUC 8 VR can replace low-end desktops as we weather a debilitating shortage of add-in graphics cards. As such, it goes up against several PCs featuring an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060. On paper, that puts Intel's NUC at a theoretical disadvantage. But it also gives us some context. Meanwhile, we're amassing comparable small form factor systems with MXM-based 1060s for follow-up testing.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  colspan="2"><strong>Test System & Configuration</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Hardware</strong></td><td  ><strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z370)</strong><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Core i3-8350K" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80684I38350K-Core-i3-8350K-Processor/dp/B0759FWJDK/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i3-8350K</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Core i5-8600K" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117825">Core i5-8600K</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/MSI-Z370-GAMING-PRO-CARBON/dp/B075GYKNQY/?&tag=bom-tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232217">G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)</a></span> @ 2666/2400<strong>AMD Socket AM4</strong><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Ryzen 3 1300X" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Desktop-Processor-Stealth-YD130XBBAEBOX/dp/B0741DLVL7/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Ryzen 3 1300X</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Ryzen 5 1600X" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113434">Ryzen 5 1600X</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="X370 XPower Gaming Titanium" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/MSI-X370-XPOWER-GAMING-TITANIUM/dp/B06WLNZ1JH/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">X370 XPower Gaming Titanium</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232217">G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)</a></span> @ 2667 <strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z270)</strong><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Core i3-7350K" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Generation-FCLGA1151-Processor-BX80677I37350K/dp/B01NCEJN24/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i3-7350K</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Core i5-7600K" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MRRPPQS/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i5-7600K</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Pentium G4620" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N59LP5Z/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Pentium G4620</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Intel Pentium G4560" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-pentium-g4560/p/N82E16819117743">Intel Pentium G4560</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="MSI Z270 Gaming M7" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130969">MSI Z270 Gaming M7</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232217">G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)</a></span> <strong>Common To All</strong>Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1060 G1 Gaming 6G <span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Samsung PM863 (960GB)" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-PM863-MZ-7LM960Z-960GB-SATA3/dp/B011E7JV7A/?&tag=bom-tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Samsung PM863 (960GB)</a></span> 1TB <span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="SilverStone ST1500-TI" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817256196">SilverStone ST1500-TI</a></span> 1500W<span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Hydro H115i" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Corsair-CW-9060027-WW-Extreme-Performance-Liquid/dp/B019955RNQ/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Hydro H115i</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Windows 10 Pro 64-bit" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832588491">Windows 10 Pro 64-bit</a></span> (Creators Update Version 1703)</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">Best Graphics Cards</a></strong></p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html">Desktop GPU Performance Hierarchy Table</a></strong></p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/graphics">All Graphics Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="aots-escalation-civilization-vi-dawn-of-war-iii">AotS: Escalation, Civilization VI, Dawn Of War III</h2><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>NUC 8 VR NUC8i7HVK</strong></td><td  ><strong>NUC 8 VR Stock</strong></td><td  ><strong>GPU 1350 MHz (HBM 800)</strong></td><td  ><strong>GPU 1350 MHz (HBM 900)</strong></td><td  ><strong>CPU 4.2 GHz (GPU Stock)</strong></td><td  ><strong>CPU 4.2 GHz (1250/900)</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Core i7-8809G</strong></td><td  >Stock</td><td  >Stock</td><td  >Stock</td><td  >4.2 GHz All-Core (1.05V)</td><td  >4.2 GHz All-Core (1.05V)</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Vega Graphics</strong></td><td  >Stock</td><td  >1350 MHZ (1.1V)</td><td  >1350 MHz (1.1V)</td><td  >Stock</td><td  >1250 MHz (1V)</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>HBM2</strong></td><td  >Stock</td><td  >800 MHz (1.1V)</td><td  >900 MHz (1.1V)</td><td  >Stock</td><td  >900 MHz (1V)</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>System Memory</strong></td><td  >Stock</td><td  >Stock</td><td  >Stock</td><td  >DDR4-3200</td><td  >DDR4-3200</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>The NUC 8 VR offers a wealth of tunable parameters, including CPU, GPU, HBM2, and system memory overclocking. Our stable configurations were detailed on the previous page; this table simply serves as a reminder as you peruse our results. If you aren't interested in overclocked performance, simply focus on the "VR NUC Stock" entry.</p><h2 id="ashes-of-the-singularity-escalation">Ashes Of The Singularity: Escalation</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hPChbEqnRUFy4wn6fXEXKU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mYzC28eW4zPQHoomnZvta6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HK6mtCrsa2QhgUstebvNcB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hVbDa2foJTrFNNaaxidUuG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ytDEcCBUZEViXmdYrKjQnB.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</em> isn't very popular with gamers anymore, yet it is still widely used as a benchmark. That's because it relies heavily on host processing and still taxes the graphics subsystem. It serves as a solid example of the RTS genre, making it a great test for our NUC 8 VR overclocking experiments.</p><p>The 4C/8T stock NUC unsurprisingly jumps ahead of the 2C/4T Pentiums paired with GeForce GTX 1060 add-in cards. Tuning the NUC's GPU yields the largest speed-up in <em>Ashes</em>, even though we're looking at fairly small jumps overall. Granted, we're testing with maxed-out detail settings.</p><p>You'd probably want to play the game with its quality preset dialed back a couple of notches anyway. Notice that the NUC has a lower minimum frame rate than the competing setups. Although minimums only reflect the single lowest performance point, our frame time variance results confirm that Kaby Lake-G encounters more turbulence through our benchmark than the full-size desktops.</p><h2 id="civilization-vi-graphics">Civilization VI Graphics</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Nbr8mDFPsHPJSfxZmZb4GU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DReEK4ksFyHYFVzLfX4c93.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KFc2uA6SoK5at3CMrne53B.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/N7YGzvmxAhHLP7oEwx39fa.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6YmrF9yBmRN5RoXy5aZCCM.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Civilization </em>exposes more separation between mobile- and desktop-class host processors than <em>Ashes </em>did. And yet, the biggest gains in this benchmark come from overclocking the NUC's graphics processor and HBM2. Tuning the CPU's four cores up to 4.2 GHz does very little to help.</p><h2 id="dawn-of-war-iii">Dawn Of War III</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wHHwpoBpYNrcNXMw5LUnc4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/c3YAiFPFUqXbXNPM7nLVCX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QDmLqz8NWWhC4dzEZ8oYVo.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UoViMb24bH7Ch6aVYurnk6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/J7FTwoX5pQmSM87e6hviNW.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Each game behaves differently, depending on its bottleneck. In general, though, higher GPU frequencies and more memory bandwidth improve performance in most games played at 1920x1080 or higher. On its own, an overclocked host processor just doesn't move the bar in <em>Dawn of War III</em>.</p><p>It is impressive to see Intel's NUC 8 VR at least approach the level of a desktop CPU and add-in mainstream graphics card. Then again, the GeForce GTX 1060 clearly has room to stretch when it's paired up with more capable host processors (as evidenced by the difference between our Pentium G4560 and Core i3-8350K frame rates). </p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-pc-builds,4390.html">Best PC Builds</a></strong></p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-to-build-a-pc,5867.html">How To Build A PC</a></strong></p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/builds">All PC Builds Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="far-cry-primal-gta-v-hitman">Far Cry Primal, GTA: V, Hitman</h2><h2 id="far-cry-primal">Far Cry Primal</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eGBPLwCFYzYd9ew92qrZog.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9WAiH3wBQpdRnFCFVn8UWN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XHX3L65kvhrDohTVxGHyAe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5XNqNpYJPKEozLq4Ng6JEU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/R5JcPmFf3GM2e7evsZ33sk.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Far Cry Primal</em> is more graphics-intensive. As a result, we see a big gulf form between the NUC 8 VR and our desktop configurations.</p><p>Again, simply overclocking the GPU and HBM2 provides the best results. Intel's NUC is smooth enough to consider playable by our subjective measure, and the frame time variance measurements are encouraging. Nvidia's GeForce GTX 1060, not bottlenecked by CPU performance, is just quite a bit faster.</p><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v">Grand Theft Auto V</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fwDgyReKpCUGQDDyuo429a.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RCsiD4iSGfWTxQ7UnqNiaK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qxKNMXKL8G6Cscbq4BCg9X.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mQvR2LQxedTGnqfGxhNkYU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/y5YKPxvishkQBpCaaR9Y3T.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Grand Theft Auto V </em>responds best to GPU overclocking, unsurprisingly. But even the stock configuration is surprisingly capable under the game's Ultra preset.</p><p>Nvidia's GeForce GTX 1060 continues to scale as we swap out for faster CPUs. However, we only average one frame per second higher after overclocking the NUC's Core i7-8809G. Graphics still looks like this platform's bottleneck.</p><h2 id="hitman">Hitman</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P5huuozWFY9Zutm8y9D96B.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3xSHbSTiiungtUUJwgQCZR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/W2rVPfhPZh2AjcfjZwXssX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RhC4maGeSCvxfWKsisRUkW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LeGWgmpebtZE32YsvuHtZU.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The NUC also fares surprisingly well in <em>Hitman</em>. Intel's little powerhouse may disappoint some enthusiasts for its tendency to show up at the bottom of our charts. But in light of the hardware we're using to compare, it's impressive that Intel has a small form factor system able to hang in the same conversation.</p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="shadow-of-war-project-cars-2">Shadow Of War, Project CARS 2</h2><h2 id="middle-earth-shadow-of-war">Middle-earth: Shadow Of War</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZeuySsTBoZQphB4BiHffhf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dHJnZhZUsE8TYxxWaBDbkk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HQwraeTyunnHwKDkbEaLzL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/R9eUjhV8qHxqfuoDgdbCiC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4FNanhAGYoG8iWDjALmBkY.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>As we observed in <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/game-performance-bottleneck-cpu-gpu,5503-8.html">How to Choose the Right CPU for 1080p Gaming</a>, <em>Middle-Earth: Shadow of War</em> doesn't scale very well with host processing performance, and the gap between CPUs shrinks as we move downstream to less-capable GPUs. As such, this title responds best to increased graphics performance.</p><p>Intel's NUC8i7HVK may show up at the bottom of our charts, but it still provides a satisfying gaming experience for such a compact system.</p><h2 id="project-cars-2">Project CARS 2</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ab2tK7KdEX9MSULD6UHC8k.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RuJEPgGjMWdGNSWfskTJs5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v3w7Tat3tfGHUD76Dy8STQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NwJKtY3aNHeHRWVaUZyrTN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FaBGSPWK3gXDH8Zz2tcNZ5.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Finally, we work our way down to <em>Project CARS 2</em>, which scales fairly well with increased processing power. Again, the NUC plays fairly smoothly even though its results don't necessarily impress. Dropping to a lower quality preset would undoubtedly help improve those average frame rates.</p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">Best Graphics Cards</a></strong></p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html">Desktop GPU Performance Hierarchy Table</a></strong></p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/graphics">All Graphics Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="office-amp-productivity">Office & Productivity</h2><h2 id="test-setup-2">Test Setup</h2><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>NUC 8 VRNUC8i7HVK</strong></td><td  ><strong>NUC 8 VRStock</strong></td><td  ><strong>CPU 4.2 GHz (1250/900)</strong></td><td  ><strong>CPU 4.5 GHz</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Core i7-8809G</strong></td><td  >Stock</td><td  >4.2 GHz All-Core (1.05V)</td><td  >4.5 GHz All-Core (1.05V)</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Vega Graphics</strong></td><td  >Stock</td><td  >1250 MHz (1V)</td><td  >Stock</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>HBM2</strong></td><td  >Stock</td><td  >900 MHz (1V)</td><td  >Stock</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>System Memory</strong></td><td  >Stock</td><td  >DDR4-3200</td><td  >DDR4-3200</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>We include our stock and tuned CPU/GPU/HBM2 results in this round of benchmarks, along with data from our 4.5 GHz run. That overclocked setting turned out to be stable during all CPU stress tests and our application suite, but proved flaky through our game benchmarks (even with the Vega GPU at stock settings). Still, we include it as a demonstration of peak application performance if you optimize the NUC specifically for these workloads. </p><h2 id="adobe-creative-cloud">Adobe Creative Cloud</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PCLjskeKKLpfbD6bkgXUEX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V4nrEQiq5XLYTewh7c8nMN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dNUUK92bzZs8mEE7VEmJ85.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YxTMZyW4K2Ywg8RQSPiAg8.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qhuUFFsjAd4fDxsdz6Zq7a.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/48GMvZbbAuYtpHJFpmTJVC.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The NUC 8 VR lands in the middle of our expanded line-up for Adobe's Creative Cloud aggregate score. The 4C/8T CPU provides a nice balance between lightly- and heavily-threaded tasks. As expected, overclocking helps substantially, though the jump from 4.2 GHz to 4.5 GHz is smaller than we expected.</p><h2 id="web-browser">Web Browser</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rRNwRwVqkNxa9tCWiEMBWG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FpUZ4qt24eJJhpovZSgiWo.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2nJqZzLLaiZmWj9JkFtLd4.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Krakken suite tests JavaScript performance using several workloads, including audio, imaging, and cryptography. Intel's NUC 8 VR is competitive throughout, placing third at its stock settings. Overclocked to 4.5 GHz, it leads the field.</p><p>The MotionMark benchmarks, which emphasize graphics performance (rather than JavaScript), are also sensitive to CPU clock rates. Whereas a moderate CPU/GPU overclock helps improve performance a little bit, the 4.5 GHz setup lands in first place, reminding us that host processing resources still play a large role in driving the graphics subsystem.</p><h2 id="productivity">Productivity</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WVoDmpSE9aRADAoXvnsY2G.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/U8maAtKoDqXhsTDJEQq2jd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qayFmcZtUqM2bU3jDbQg48.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JtHGtWY3Kxx8gkTxqnpg2Q.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HbfuFT2U4i5odCdDx3feBV.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The application start-up metric measures load time snappiness in word processors, GIMP, and Web browsers under warm- and cold-start conditions. Naturally, that's particularly relevant to what we all do with our PCs every day. The test benefits from a refined storage subsystem and higher clock rates, affording the 4.5 GHz configuration an easy win. Even at stock settings, the NUC 8 VR matches Intel's quad-core Core i3-8100.</p><p>Video conferencing measures performance in single- and multi-user applications that utilize the Windows Media Foundation for video playback and encoding. It also performs facial detection during the workload to model real-world usage. The stock NUC fares even better in this test, rivaling Intel's Core i5-8600K.</p><p>The photo editing benchmark measures performance with Futuremark's binaries that use the ImageMagick library. Common photo processing workloads also tend to be parallelized, so we see many of the same behaviors, albeit with less performance uplift from our balanced CPU/GPU overclock.</p><p>Spreadsheet-heavy tests emphasize clock rates even more, so it's no surprise that the agile 4.5 GHz configuration takes the lead over competing stock processors.</p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-pc-builds,4390.html">Best PC Builds</a></strong></p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-to-build-a-pc,5867.html">How To Build A PC</a></strong></p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/builds">All PC Builds Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="rendering-encoding-amp-compression">Rendering, Encoding & Compression</h2><h2 id="rendering">Rendering</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sZy4J43rSWJva8DhYm9MuR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5zpKMQEKUS4djGVEAigi2i.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aVvtZAcKz5wsoFCEP2XBEh.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NVTNgPLfspRqLiK5Z46zbi.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CZEfCLBxTbyFZJPCwuPP4i.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CQoDxjNVUiVnHp77emqtp6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YNzsKw7S8tAmqwt45j7M5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hXv4V3LoCu6Qqy5G4L6SxL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nnkjjWytgdefuRPAPAMpj9.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Tuning the Kaby Lake-G processor to 4.5 GHz yields a first-place finish in the single-core Cinebench test by virtue of its frequency advantage. But even the fact that a stock NUC 8 VR nearly matches the Core i3-7350K impresses us.</p><p>Moving over to the multi-core test finds the NUC losing ground. After all, desktop-oriented CPUs tend to have more cores, larger power budgets, and beefier coolers. But the stock NUC8i7HVK still proves agile, besting AMD's Ryzen 5 1500X.</p><p>Kaby Lake-G doesn't look as hot in the single-core POV-Ray benchmark, and the CPUs with higher core/thread counts kick on their afterburners in the multi-core metric.</p><p>PCMark 10's Video Editing test finds the NUC 8 VR with an astonishing lead over a number of desktop CPUs. We re-ran it on each configuration, verifying the results and settings alike. In contrast, the NUC8i7HVK isn't as compelling in the Rendering and Visualization workload.</p><h2 id="encoding-amp-compression">Encoding & Compression</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/trqnrX2uEx6nUm9jCRu4YY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uodVigZ3oKyfx28ebGb8PY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/W5LvUeUCoZEyZfxawyBGRP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jpvBGCbThw2TUNFBu6T7eB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/r7BVqyMDapHQGUUhUgMrYb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tErdSns42fzkLcEy89K66a.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ygrGdVBh96Gw6LrfU36PRh.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>LAME is the quintessential example of a single-threaded workload, so we fully expected the 4.5 GHz configuration to carve out a lead. Again, the NUC 8 VR is very competitive in light productivity tasks thanks to a snappy architecture and its ability to boost beyond 4 GHz and spin back down before crossing any thermal boundaries.</p><p>Our threaded compression and decompression tests adsorb data directly from system memory, thus removing storage from the performance equation. Both overclocked NUC configurations benefit from tuned memory that feeds the greedy cores with plenty of throughput. But AMD's Ryzen 5 1600X serves as a prime example of how parallelization helps improve performance in threaded applications.</p><p>Notice that the overclocked NUC configurations aren't in the HandBrake and y-cruncher charts. This is due to an apparent bug in Intel's AVX offset that affects clock rates in every workload (even idle) during an overclock, not just AVX-optimized software.</p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="final-thoughts">Final Thoughts</h2><p>Our first experience with Intel's NUC8i7HVK leaves us impressed. The company crams an amazing amount of functionality into a very compact form factor. As we've come to expect from fast PCs in small cases, you'll have to pay a premium for such an uncommon combination. And even after spending $1000 on the barebones platform, memory, storage, and an OS still need to be added.</p><p>Given the lack of affordable graphics cards right now, we set out to determine whether this system is a suitable substitute for building a gaming box at marked-up prices. For comparison, we paired a number of inexpensive CPUs with Nvidia's GeForce GTX 1060 6GB (currently starting around $350). In some games, entry-level processors hold the GeForce back. And in those situations, Intel's NUC shows that it can compete. Other titles are inherently more graphics-bound, allowing Nvidia's card to walk away from the Vega GPU. Your experience will depend on what you're playing.</p><p>To show what all of that looks like in chart form, check out the geometric mean of 99th percentile frame times (representing smoothness) converted into a frames-per-second measurement.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:709px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.89%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fnx23urcq4D4StSZzFUCej.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fnx23urcq4D4StSZzFUCej.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="709" height="531" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fnx23urcq4D4StSZzFUCej.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Intel aims its NUC8i7HVK at enthusiasts with unlocked CPU, GPU, and HBM2 ratio multipliers. We observed solid stock performance from the svelte little system, and even managed to overclock effectively. But thermal constraints kept us from truly tapping into the maximum potential of every component. For gaming, the best results came from tuning the GPU and HBM2, while productivity-oriented apps responded best to higher CPU frequencies.</p><p>It's fair to say that the NUC8i7HVK is fast enough to deliver smooth frame rates at 1080p using high-quality settings in most games. If you want to run at a higher resolution or know your favorite games are more demanding than the ones we tested, then you may have to hold out for a return to normalcy with graphics card pricing. Otherwise, The NUC 8 VR's AMD Vega-based GPU comes close to an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 in some of the platform-bound situations we discovered (and after overclocking).</p><p>Support may prove to be an interesting challenge for Intel, and we'll have to keep an eye on how the company handles driver updates. We're told that day-zero game drivers will become a thing, but they'll naturally need to originate from AMD. Whether Intel spends time validating that software before pushing it live remains to be seen. Enthusiasts will expect nothing less than timely optimizations for new titles, along with stability on par with Radeon RX Vega add-in cards.</p><p>Intel and AMD's competition with Nvidia in their respective fields may have been the impetus for a truly surprising cooperative effort. But the end result is an incredibly powerful solution packed into a very small form factor. While we wouldn't suggest that enthusiasts try replacing their gaming rigs altogether with Intel's NUC8i7HV, this compact platform makes for an interesting alternative to mainstream machines with mid-range GPUs currently selling at inflated prices.</p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">Best Graphics Cards</a></strong></p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html">Desktop GPU Performance Hierarchy Table</a></strong></p><p><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/graphics">All Graphics Content</a></strong></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ How to Choose the Right CPU for 1080p Gaming: 14 Processors Compared ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/game-performance-bottleneck-cpu-gpu,5503.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ We set out on a mission with 14 CPUs and three GeForce graphics cards to find the most performance- and cost-efficient combinations in nine popular games. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">WuDhAaLfJ6oqbMLrPxoqdR</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/evZzGqFizdVCT5imr3cSgD-1280-80.png" type="image/png" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2018 18:30:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:53:36 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ palcorn@outlook.com (Paul Alcorn) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Paul Alcorn ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RZRmFeQfPy3etHjBQitbGW.jpeg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;As a teenager, Paul scraped up enough money to buy a 486-powered PC with a turbo button (yes, a turbo button). Back when floppies were still popular he was already chasing after the fastest spinners for his personal computer, which led him down the long and winding storage road, covering enterprise storage. His current focus is on consumer processors, though he still keeps a close eye on the latest storage news. In his spare time, you’ll find Paul hanging out with his kids or indulging his love of the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                <cf:isSponsored>false</cf:isSponsored>
                <cf:hasAffiliateLinks>false</cf:hasAffiliateLinks>
                <cf:isPaid>false</cf:isPaid>
                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/png" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/evZzGqFizdVCT5imr3cSgD-1280-80.png">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/evZzGqFizdVCT5imr3cSgD-1280-80.png" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="introduction">Introduction</h2><p>Last year, we saw innovation from AMD and Intel that we hadn't experienced in a long, long time. The Zen architecture made AMD competitive in segments of the CPU market it previously couldn't touch, and Intel moved as quickly as possible to defend its incumbent position. We thoroughly enjoyed the back-and-forth as both companies jockeyed for enthusiasts' adoration.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1281px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:66.20%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/evZzGqFizdVCT5imr3cSgD.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/evZzGqFizdVCT5imr3cSgD.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1281" height="848" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/evZzGqFizdVCT5imr3cSgD.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>But even as new platforms were springing up with more PCIe connectivity than ever before, graphics-card availability dried up. Cryptocurrency miners bought up everything they could find to capitalize on rising valuations. Even today, you can't find modern models anywhere near their suggested retail pricing. We've resorted to buying pre-built systems and scouring the forums for previous-generation cards, trying to score a bargain.</p><p>The best spread of CPU technology in ages, paired with sky-high GPU prices, is a recipe for confusion for PC builders. For the same amount of money, enthusiasts can afford <em>less </em>graphics performance than they could not long ago. That makes it easy to overspend on host processing, since balance is thrown out of whack. But you can also get a lot more CPU for your dollar than this time a year ago. How do you make sure you're getting the most for your budget?</p><p>Well, we set out on a mission with 14 CPUs and three different GPUs to find the best combination in nine popular games.</p><h2 id="moving-the-goalposts">Moving The Goalposts</h2><p>For the last 11 years, Core i7 and Core i5 CPUs featured four cores. Coffee Lake changed this. Now, Core i3s sport four cores, Core i5s include six cores, and Core i7s boast six Hyper-Threaded cores. Intel also gave its low- and high-end models a makeover: Skylake-X stretches up to 18 cores/32 threads for high-end desktops, while Pentium processors have now gained Hyper-Threading technology.</p><p>Of course, AMD introduced its line-up of Ryzen 7, 5, and 3 models with copious core counts. Moreover, the Ryzen Threadripper series landed with up to 16 cores/32 threads and such friendly prices that Intel was forced to make its Skylake-X chips more affordable.</p><h2 id="the-contenders">The Contenders</h2><p>As you might imagine, the old rules of picking a CPU family to go with certain graphics cards changed as a result of these new processors. Thus, we decided to investigate using the best performers from each CPU class.</p><p>Representing AMD, we have the Ryzen 7, 5, and 3 models. We didn't bother testing last-generation Bulldozer-based CPUs, but we did throw in the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X for good measure.</p><h2 id=""></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1048px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:44.37%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VZ2kscDfRRN8qDrkLycQpW.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VZ2kscDfRRN8qDrkLycQpW.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1048" height="465" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VZ2kscDfRRN8qDrkLycQpW.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>For Intel, we have K-series Core i7, i5, and i3 CPUs from the Coffee Lake and Kaby Lake generations. We also added the Core i9-7900X and Core i9-7980XE to cover high-end desktops. Out of curiosity (or because we're gluttons for benchmarking punishment?), we couldn't help but include two of the latest Pentium processors, too. </p><p>That gives us 14 processors spread across five test platforms. We paired these with the GeForce GTX 1080, GTX 1070, and GTX 1060 (6GB) graphics cards. Although the GTX 1080 is considered an extravagance these days, we have to imagine it'll come down in price someday.</p><p>Finally, we selected nine games for testing. Some of the titles are new, while others are older. We <em>did </em>weigh the suite, though, more toward modern games. Some of them are CPU-dependent, others are decidedly graphics-bound, and a few are actually pretty well split down the middle. This allows us to explore bottlenecks from different angles.</p><p>Today's tests are all run at 1920x1080. (We have more data coming at 2560x1440 and 3840x2160, too, so expect a follow-up story or stories to present our findings there.) To best represent the experience we'd want to have, all benchmarks were run with the highest graphics settings possible.</p><h2 id="test-systems">Test Systems </h2><p>To avoid variance from GPU Boost as our GeForce GTX graphics cards heat up, we use multiple runs from each benchmark in quick succession. We select the median value from the last recordings.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  colspan="2"><strong>Test System & Configuration</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Hardware</strong></td><td  ><strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z370)</strong><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Core i3-8350K" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80684I38350K-Core-i3-8350K-Processor/dp/B0759FWJDK/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i3-8350K</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Core i5-8600K" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16819117825">Core i5-8600K</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Intel Core i7-8700K" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117827">Intel Core i7-8700K</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/MSI-Z370-GAMING-PRO-CARBON/dp/B075GYKNQY/?&tag=bom-tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16820232217">G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)</a></span> @ 2666/2400<strong>AMD Socket AM4</strong><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Ryzen 3 1300X" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Desktop-Processor-Stealth-YD130XBBAEBOX/dp/B0741DLVL7/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Ryzen 3 1300X</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Ryzen 5 1600X" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16819113434">Ryzen 5 1600X</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Ryzen 7 1800X" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-1800X-Processor-YD180XBCAEWOF/dp/B06W9JXK4G?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware-deal&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Ryzen 7 1800X</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="X370 XPower Gaming Titanium" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/MSI-X370-XPOWER-GAMING-TITANIUM/dp/B06WLNZ1JH/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">X370 XPower Gaming Titanium</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16820232217">G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)</a></span> @ 2667 <strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z270)</strong><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Core i3-7350K" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Generation-FCLGA1151-Processor-BX80677I37350K/dp/B01NCEJN24/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i3-7350K</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Core i5-7600K" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MRRPPQS/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i5-7600K</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Core i7-7700K" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Desktop-Processor-i7-7700K-BX80677I77700K/dp/B01MXSI216/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i7-7700K</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Pentium G4620" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N59LP5Z/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Pentium G4620</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Intel Pentium G4560" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-pentium-g4560/p/N82E16819117743">Intel Pentium G4560</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="MSI Z270 Gaming M7" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130969">MSI Z270 Gaming M7</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16820232217">G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)</a></span> @ 2400<strong>AMD Socket SP3 (TR4)</strong><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Ryzen Threadripper 1950X" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16819113447">Ryzen Threadripper 1950X</a></span> (In Game Mode)<span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Asus ROG Zenith Extreme X399" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/ASUS-ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-Threadripper/dp/B0748K1F99?ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Asus ROG Zenith Extreme X399</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16820232217">G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)</a></span> @ 2667 <strong>Intel LGA 2066</strong><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Core i9-7900X" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16819117795">Core i9-7900X</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Core i9-7980XE" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Core-i9-7980XE-Processors-BX80673I97980X/dp/B075XRYMDR/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i9-7980XE</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="MSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16813144053">MSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16820232217">G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)</a></span> @ 2666 <strong>Common To All</strong><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="EVGA GTX 1080" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/EVGA-GeForce-Founders-Graphics-08G-P4-6180-KR/dp/B01FWI6F08?ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">EVGA GTX 1080</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="EVGA GeForce GTX 1070 SC2 Gaming iCX 8GB GDDR5" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487320&Tpk=N82E16814487320">EVGA GeForce GTX 1070 SC2 Gaming iCX 8GB GDDR5</a></span>Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1060 G1 Gaming 6G <span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Samsung PM863 (960GB)" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-PM863-MZ-7LM960Z-960GB-SATA3/dp/B011E7JV7A/?&tag=bom-tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Samsung PM863 (960GB)</a></span> 1TB <span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="SilverStone ST1500-TI" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16817256196">SilverStone ST1500-TI</a></span> 1500W<span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Hydro H115i" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Corsair-CW-9060027-WW-Extreme-Performance-Liquid/dp/B019955RNQ/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Hydro H115i</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Windows 10 Pro 64-bit" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16832588491">Windows 10 Pro 64-bit</a></span> (Creators Update Version 1703)</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="ashes-of-the-singularity-escalation-2">Ashes Of The Singularity: Escalation </h2><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SxQ8k7zJjCk4H27fKedppX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hdty4hXN9gm6CPQrB4XBiF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/262R5Fb6HXYvqDrexnZKq6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/d6FGJZ3i4WoGRnDZhHEaAX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qXaJbF2cja47kxPfeg5A99.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Ashes of the Singularity</em> was one of the first titles to receive a Ryzen-optimized patch. And it appears that host processing is always going to be your bottleneck if you're using a GeForce GTX 1080 at 1920x1080. As we can see, the 18-core/36-thread Core i9-7980XE takes a healthy lead over the rest of the field, while the 10C/20T Core i9-7900X captures second place.</p><p>This benchmark scales well with increased core counts, highlighting some of the generational transitions in Intel's line-up. The 6-core/12-thread Core i7-8700K illustrates a big jump over Intel's previous-gen 4-core/8-thread Core i7-7700K, which basically ties the Core i5-8600K.</p><p>The Core i3-7350K (and every CPU below it in our chart) struggles mightily during the benchmark.</p><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qrpoGuLN7SBcP3HmdRsgyY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LDUjoTymBndjXuwe8dDFhN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5GD7y4dc9qQqLY49zWeKXn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wJZJvLSneVpFB8Aph2yNLj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qkuZ7vGvjJWnpQo9QqYxS3.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Stepping down a notch to the GeForce GTX 1070 finds Intel's Core i9-7980XE and Core i9-7900X providing nearly identical performance, while the rest of the field scales down as we'd expect.</p><p>Really, the Core i7-7700K and most processors under it offer nearly the same performance as they did paired up to a GeForce GTX 1080. We do measure a 2.3 FPS delta between the i5-8600K with both graphics cards, but that appears to be an exception. Such small variances hardly make it worth stepping up to the GeForce GTX 1080 in this title at this resolution.  </p><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TefVaRRWLRA8X9VhSw38TN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fxpepWtv6tihqwmYVyWUUP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fViw5ceqYBqAKtafNR4Dyj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eqPcAKjsJUx6hcuhGX7gs6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nWYYJ42hc59kusuar56Dzk.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The limitations of a GeForce GTX 1060 become clear, even in this CPU-bound test, though Intel's Core i9-7980XE still maintains a healthy lead over the rest of the field.</p><p>At this point, a graphics bottleneck is emerging, pushing the GTX 1060 to its limit. As a result, the Core i9-7900X and Core i7-8700K fall a few positions. It's possible that a lighter workload isn't pushing the execution cores hard enough for them to maintain their highest Turbo Boost bins. If true, the uncore frequency drops as well, slowing the cache and ring bus frequencies, reducing performance throughout. We'll see this phenomenon in other titles, too.</p><p>Compared to our GeForce GTX 1080 results, we see similar performance from every CPU beneath the Core i5-8600K, showing that lower-end processors are still the bottleneck.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="civilization-vi-graphics-2">Civilization VI Graphics </h2><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-2">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hV2dNJvVwEvsLPXWz9K87J.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xvPsPTeheCSv9rWSsPXFHD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qkw3UPGUvdDfdjTSK6GJ5f.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Bw9ngHJJV6BfkimoCDQ6xG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BvBBoQYCfWZygBUby3kXJc.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Intel's Core i9-7900X leads this benchmark with an impressive 106.6 FPS. The remainder of the results are uneventful, generally following trends we've observed through past CPU reviews. The Core i7-7700K averages 102.8 FPS, and the nearest mainstream Ryzen competitor achieves 80.1 FPS.</p><p>We tested the Threadripper 1950X in Game Mode simply because there wasn't enough room in our charts for the many combinations that AMD enables. Head over to our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-threadripper-1950x-game-performance,5207.html">Threadripper 1950X Game Mode, Benchmarked</a> article if you're interested in the impact of the various modes on Threadripper's performance. Just be aware that the processor behaves differently in many games, depending on the settings you choose.</p><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-2">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ep8P4yPR5QBtAc5ZJyDDP6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WGN53rYfXLhq4nmaT8n2Ed.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8hiPtjNHoA4uL9GSPrqUk5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VdbFd8oQV3oejBqW2cnWyK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NkFvZjvzaXddETsg6zcjuA.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Stepping down to the GeForce GTX 1070 exposes a graphics bottleneck with some of our faster CPUs. Intel's Core i9 models push the limits at around 94 FPS, landing within the range we'd expect for a graphics-bound situation. The rest of the field falls into line based on host processing power, though some CPUs fare worse than others.</p><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-2">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yWWWzAK54xtPwCsNE2tYrA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5X6r9V2Zc4Y6Yo7z43EW24.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/b2mcP5vAmtE8HJEkzo8A2B.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Mx3UHC67AVsz2yoBCxm4hW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AXwx8MWuDCuLBBqfWDXihf.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>A more definite GPU limitation irons out some of the variance between CPUs. Worthwhile scaling is no longer observable. Case in point: There is only a 6.4% delta between the Ryzen 5 1600X and Threadripper 1950X, showing how a midrange graphics card can neutralize the benefit of a high-end processor if you aren't careful to maintain balance.</p><p>Fortunately, this also means you can snag an affordable Ryzen 3 or Core i3 and enjoy almost the same performance as you would with a much more expensive model.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="dawn-of-war-iii-2">Dawn Of War III</h2><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UBB4ayZmjeUutpQqUvNBU5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/neMghsg94qWvSsxwtfLM2G.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Mmtw5HKKnaQ4RXowBuq5wC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yjtsLP9SKqY7urbP5D49ZQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/guXAbXBkUcuXSzYEevrrTU.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Dawn of War III</em> scales well with increased execution resources. As we can see from the fastest CPUs, though, it also favors high clock rates.</p><p>Intel's Core i7-8700K reaches up to 113.6 FPS. However, its 1.5 FPS advantage over the Core i7-7700K isn't very impressive considering the Core i7-8700K boasts 50% more Hyper-Threaded cores.</p><p>Meanwhile, the $1000 Core i9-7900X doesn't offer as much performance as a $175 Core i3-8350K. This is why we don't recommend HEDT processors for purpose-built gaming rigs.</p><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-3">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nkRDQi4p5TXU8tLXZn953.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HHCucEqKEqPtmLmNQMquSH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zWtUvYkHr9JnVdf5Y7qqHG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xnsZa4QSF3P2mdc82QFhie.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gTLfhkksRUjE25WzKGR3UW.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The same general scaling trends persist with the GeForce GTX 1070, albeit at a lower performance level. Intel's Core i3-8350K continues behaving like older Core i5 CPUs, while the Core i5-8600K really hits a price/performance sweet spot with this pairing.</p><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-3">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nJoV7ctitgSDBieQRjZSPf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oUmV6mxyPc8964j7rau5iB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4MQrYBWM66dvBqcR7BmffE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PtrAt4oj8pwwRCGjptprbD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jxfwYGUqjfc5RM7UHcGd3S.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Again, some of the highest-end processors drop a few places because they aren't utilized fully. There's only a 3.3 FPS (4%) delta between the Core i9-7980XE and the first-place finisher...but that chart-topper is a Core i5!</p><p>Again: Striking the right balance is important. Not only is it a waste to buy too much CPU if you don't need the processing power for other workloads, but you can even handicap it with a graphics card incapable of keeping it busy.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="far-cry-primal-2">Far Cry Primal </h2><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-4">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xBoVtQZ2gNEAKqubwmKTw4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MAbTUTcBkPrdMSeAzLttsB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TusxmpfnE8UD3TCdDY7ikU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XJut7MwrJLXDeNYzQFSK4Z.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ei3XhiB2sTmyW7CLd3QdMa.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Far Cry Primal's</em> Dunia Engine 2 responds well to high clock rates and IPC throughput. However, it also benefits when we turn off simultaneous multi-threading. As a result, you'll notice that the Core i5s are very competitive.</p><p>An increasing number of games are being tuned for quad-core CPUs, and this one is no exception. We think it'll take some time before chips with more cores start distinguishing themselves, though Coffee Lake fares well enough.</p><p>Although AMD doesn't do as well in our average measurements, its Ryzen 5 1600X and Ryzen 7 1800X processors demonstrate the least amount of frame-time variance. Rest assured that they offer a smooth gaming experience.</p><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-4">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hVNfyE3qdRaWA5z4mg6jwA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hqiqCGF2KFKGgzuhXFxZDj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aWo7d4Jdnz4QNWgtEnPaH4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/L6uXLHr5kHbYeM36RcEogj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Wuh96PwHZZjGccP6NXXJNL.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>We observe much less variance between CPUs as we step down to a less powerful GeForce GTX 1070. The 6-core/12-thread Ryzen 5 1600X continues outmaneuvering the 8-core/16-thread Ryzen 7 1800X, while the Threadripper 1950X inexplicably jumps higher in the rankings.</p><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-4">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cdq7f7XsLvUeLtVVzpS3Lm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iBDgzE78DxEVBKLbUZTbRe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v97TUfkrchiKyCToL3BmnX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JEg7iRRzvDQVToxJAW3M3E.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NEbuQSx4wnxPpAsr9ftxsf.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>We enter graphics-bound territory with the GeForce GTX 1060, which mixes up the finishing order. Notably, even though they don't lead when it comes to average frame rate, Intel's Core i7-8700K and i5-8600K provide the smoothest performance with the least frame-time variance. The Pentium models also respond well to this pairing.</p><p>AMD's Threadripper 1950X is the only processor that lands below our expectations. Then again, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-threadripper-1950x-game-performance,5207-7.html">we've proven that Game Mode isn't the best option for this title</a>. A bit of tuning might rectify the issue.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-2">Grand Theft Auto V </h2><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-5">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fRuPT2xeycakpiHYsB4AGc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7k6pXwPrf72R7KtF8YdCNZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZQhSKQ8F8eZGsVajm9c26Y.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gbC9w8Yp8xgCXivb4BhKd5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RqUBwpiJA7xbNARJQsdniB.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Grand Theft Auto V</em> favors Intel architectures and, more generally, multi-core designs with high clock rates. It may seem odd that the Core i5-8600K beats Intel's Core i7-8700K, but we've observed this tendency on other occasions.</p><p>Did you notice that Core i3-8350K out there in front of the quad-core Core i5-7600K? Clearly, Coffee Lake propels the Core i3 family to new performance heights.</p><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-5">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QLdzX45yqpLvemE2MNEPzk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kfjwrcJFGT58PgZKSzHJ5F.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/86vGXBHMRAt8Ub3VxmW667.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v9CmkxYrFye6GAVkLrbuWS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/daMPs3N2SKvUzzsDUDHpj8.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The finishing order remains intact as we test with Nvidia's GeForce GTX 1070, though average frame rates fall a bit. Still, many of the slower models land within 1 FPS of what we saw from the GTX 1080, suggesting that we're not seeing a graphics-bound workload. Host processing appears to be the limiting factor.</p><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-5">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jUQ9k5LVmxV6zBdKnMNFge.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dCKrUwQqrfUBEMGSZSMuxG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hf5P22wKB2wsy5ZMjEgYm6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sDBhFNQe7fsHDC4SrmZDiH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FHSAxmS2NK3fnSYwgV5GEF.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Plain and simple: Nvidia's GeForce GTX 1060 restricts performance at this point.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="hitman-2">Hitman</h2><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-6">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SDbFLeva7poRkoCtvkMwa.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BCPMkj4BJYS8uZqhhwwbya.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FuU2QzKLNp9ypw9VTqTDRL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XrxVoRnc8H4UMJFpbE8e5Q.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XaGCTvYD8xZjwTnViJYyjY.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>We began our testing with the Pentium CPUs and worked our way up, benchmarking all nine games for each processor before moving on to the next. So, you can imagine how thrilled we were when we discovered that IO Interactive implemented a 90 FPS frame cap at some point through a patch. Soldiering on anyway, we observed little scaling above the Core i9-7900X.</p><p>Intel's Pentium processors average a solid 60+ FPS, though we could see quite a bit of hitching during the test sequence. The Ryzen 3 1300X and the Core i3-7350K fare better, but you want a Ryzen 5 or a Kaby Lake-based Core i5, at the least, for smooth performance in this title.</p><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-6">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wJneVF8XKXMMzZcoN6Lf7Q.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kYLVv4LProUKzBz56bEHBE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xgWoHH9WTGsCAK6EU88QkK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tze6CCTn956Z9LaSLmvy6Q.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/am6PiUNHLSqRmLQTYMVRfC.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The frame cap continues to be a killjoy, but at least a GeForce GTX 1070 and a reasonably-priced Core i5-8600K push <em>Hitman</em>'s limits at 1920x1080. There is a bit of unevenness to report from the Ryzen 3 1300X and Pentium models, which manifests in our frame-time variance chart. </p><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-6">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4HbeTwvMjGmd9YhyVNZsSR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9ejN3rtUGzitXihLazFBcd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FdZCAesnXxTP6yFqrh3ZGb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xBXF9TFRNo4ZCDNjaCje2d.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/b4GpwQRkN79JtG38NpUd9L.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>We finally duck under the frame cap, but only because Nvidia's GeForce GTX 1060 isn't fast enough.</p><p>There's only a 3% delta between the quad-core Core i3-8350K and first-place finisher. This is definitely a graphics-bound workload that only breaks apart a bit when we drop to the lowest-end CPUs.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="shadow-of-war">Shadow Of War</h2><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-7">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bCgWq2SpCvrp6Aj66MD9jJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uwN2Cq4cwNRbBi2nS8avcA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RgYcKjAQRQ4midb9ojwWmf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/khBbgYRokfchoDoGdCxSTb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8a3RmaHrfq2YsFNvvN7465.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Middle-earth: Shadow of War</em> doesn't scale as dramatically as some of our other benchmarks, and it certainly isn't as sensitive to IPC throughput and frequency as <em>Shadow of Mordor</em>. CPU reviews tend to focus on games that scale well with certain host processing specifications, such as core count, clock rate, cache size, or memory bandwidth. But some games just can't get enough graphics performance.</p><p>This title exhibits a 12.6 FPS (~16%) gap between the fastest and slowest processors in our pool, but every system surpasses the 70 FPS mark easily. There is a difference in smoothness between the Pentium and Ryzen 3 1300X processors, but it isn't extreme.</p><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-7">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3EuWmHnDksFsXQDdLRC73T.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CLqoLscr9aL2qJM48iY8TT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z7GvFy2mxRKycTofsab96a.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eYJgU6bL84XVRhnSspAz9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mXYvbuqckQvRUArUE24Txe.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Naturally, a GeForce GTX 1070 is even more tied up, tightening the delta from top to bottom to just 3.3 FPS.</p><p>The Pentium processors still struggle a bit with hitching.</p><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-7">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/X9vWwqpS7wdeYGA5G3DFm9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/M8CEnsYdgAo7gKUR3PjeTB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZxYo4J9BG36GRkwCfXo2D5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aZWYDzKyDYe6tNCRBLRwmm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rgw6qdjZA36GUA9597K7XG.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>A GeForce GTX 1060 puts all of these CPUs on an even footing. Subjectively, there is no difference between the processors, even though our data suggests that the Core i7-8700K lags behind.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="project-cars-2-2">Project CARS 2</h2><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-8">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GKQnfVJLjKXUXftY2puYog.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/64A9LsUPPCEEu28WRUXnRe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5vrZRWNZbtKgFTvCtxzpNc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rNqSe2a6w5Tz4mnnHDZFAS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Yn9yZ8yzr9KwLbqMMxW8pA.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Project CARS 2</em> is purportedly optimized for threading, and it seems to scale well with increased host-processing resources. After all, we see a 41 FPS delta between the fastest and slowest processors in our test pool. The Core i5-8600K leads, and it is followed closely by Intel's Core i7-7700K.</p><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-8">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/U9x6kgj55frVEyanhAMvXe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HbLKbRs8hVf66xo5GZUCtJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/auKpV3oAQzSK2h2j8FgtEj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DT2okMT8DVwJTiy5y5Ue64.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VJhhbSFNfsBDT5BzpJEuHg.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Core i3-8350K shows that it's a surprisingly capable quad-core CPU, besting AMD's entire line-up. With that said, the Ryzen 5 1600X specifically offers most of what higher-end models can do, but at a much lower price.</p><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-8">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MFWXdtaTLo8qAuLMMkBouk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dUGN2iVy2aMZA23iBZ2YnS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/d6av4RUdJTMCWAZqWvUNRo.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nUyiKQkjGXTXWmWQ3JuoWM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2GGMyP5yCSs3niWpo8DvF4.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The GeForce GTX 1060 limits performance at 1920x1080. AMD's Ryzen 3 1300X is the only processor to exhibit a marked amount of hitching during our recording.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="playerunknown-s-battlegrounds-pubg">PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds (PUBG)</h2><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-9">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rCxw3tAGXu4RfTMr84zSE3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/etd6BXDED6vtU3t8scnNiR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zH3ZTpnodMzEY8WVShDP87.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wZL4VKMfEZZRRtbhPfi7aA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DzJVfiWq5A7WbbMFtpkVV5.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds</em> can be a frustrating title to benchmark. Its constant cadence of updates seems to introduce more problems than are solved, and we've seen visible hitching from even the fastest CPUs and GPUs.</p><p>Aside from the Pentiums, scaling in <em>PUBG </em>is fairly meager. AMD's Ryzen 3 1300X suffers the most jarring stuttering during playback of our recorded game.</p><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-9">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ETYgRhs6K9kTbuGG2kSwH9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dRWTrmc6oHzcekJGukhHii.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jt4dBs2ZMyP3MRSQURY3DY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fb2aXe27MkEbityVmU3BKo.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yvNcSvUbVdc32Dtt36xJZX.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Stepping down to a GeForce GTX 1070 confirms that we're decidedly graphics-bound. Not that this game is particularly detailed; it may just be poorly optimized. Either way, there's no real meaningful conclusion we can draw from such an outcome.</p><h2 id="nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-9">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ojYZ7WSLEEYNLDv8EWhApc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uYyX5xhBYD6ELtxA3fBdGj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yC9zEushSGWd63ssPssxnb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v2Y7Sn53FfnZVRonqN4PvN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GBkYwWCstXS3mCQBLkW3ND.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Our final test leaves little to explain: There are no meaningful differences between CPUs when you're constrained by a GeForce GTX 1060.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="the-best-combinations-of-cpu-and-gpu-at-1080p">The Best Combinations of CPU and GPU at 1080p</h2><p>Boiling our testing down into one general recommendation is almost impossible, especially given the pricing of graphics cards right now. But we can identify some of the more obvious trends.</p><p>Fast-paced first-person shooters tend to prefer high clock rates and fast graphics cards. Nimble CPUs like the Intel Core i5 and i7, and AMD's Ryzen 5 and 7, fare best in our performance measurements. Some titles are easily graphics-bound, though that could be due to poor optimizations or minimal effort to parallelize the game engine. <em>PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds</em> is the perfect example. It doesn't respond at all to faster processors. It's far better to buy a higher-end graphics card if that game is your main squeeze.</p><p>Real-time strategy titles seem to respond more favorably to CPUs with lots of cores; so do many turn-based games. Of course, that genre isn't as sensitive to graphics performance because it doesn't require quick response times. But a fluid experience in RTS games is a must. Often, host processing is the bottleneck, so dialing back your GPU investment and buying a better CPU yields the best performance possible.</p><h2 id="charting-out-the-trends-the-best-pairings">Charting Out The Trends: The Best Pairings</h2><p>We typically plot our test results on a scatter chart with price and performance on two axes, but we aren't even going to take a stab at graphics pricing during these tumultuous times. Instead, we're providing a geometric mean of the 99th percentile frame times, representing smoothness, converted into an FPS measurement for each class of graphics card. Each game factors into this calculation except for the artificially hamstrung<em> Hitman</em>.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pmEhK7Wq7D74oPsjyd3EaK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dDS4pkpEXCAgP9cj2Mgu3R.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hcYzphrMzDmqpdx68TvEEG.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Balance is the goal here. Intel's Core i7-8700K is the first chip we think of when it comes to top-of-the-line for gaming PCs. But it doesn't <em>always </em>lead in our benchmarks. It would likely fare better with more heavily threaded titles tested. Otherwise, the Core i5-8600K seems to be a better value pairing for Nvidia's GeForce GTX 1080.</p><p>The GeForce GTX 1070 pairs well with either a Core i5-8600K or Ryzen 7 1800X, though the latter notably offers additional performance in other enthusiast-oriented desktop apps. We've also found that <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/game-streaming-encoding-coffee-lake-ryzen,5326.html">the Ryzen 7 1800X is a great chip for game streaming</a>, so give it serious consideration for more taxing workloads. If you're looking to go Intel, aren't interested in overclocking, and want to save a few dollars, the Core i5-8400 complements a GeForce GTX 1070 well, too.</p><p>On the value scale, Core i3-8350K and Ryzen 5 1600X both pair well with a GeForce GTX 1060. If you're willing to do a bit of overclocking, though, a Ryzen 5 1600 looks even better.</p><p>Speaking of overclocking, most of the CPUs we tested can operate at even higher frequencies. AMD has a much friendlier policy here; all of its chips are unlocked. Meanwhile, Intel charges a premium for its unlocked K-series SKUs. If you want to know more about available headroom, we have plenty of test results with every processor overclocked in their individual reviews, so head to those for an idea of potential gains.</p><p>Of course, our findings would be all the more interesting if we could run out and build a well-balanced machine with affordable hardware. Here's hoping the availability of graphics cards improves sometime soon!</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Do The Meltdown and Spectre Patches Affect PC Gaming Performance? 10 CPUs Tested ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-performance-meltdown-spectre-intel-amd,5457.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ We test the latest patches on Intel and AMD platforms to see if they have a significant impact on your gaming experience. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">tieaLKG3JEdrkDxBxWPAYT</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7BCVhF26XYALb2RSK7Jub7-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2018 14:00:01 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:44:21 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Software]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ palcorn@outlook.com (Paul Alcorn) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Paul Alcorn ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RZRmFeQfPy3etHjBQitbGW.jpeg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;As a teenager, Paul scraped up enough money to buy a 486-powered PC with a turbo button (yes, a turbo button). Back when floppies were still popular he was already chasing after the fastest spinners for his personal computer, which led him down the long and winding storage road, covering enterprise storage. His current focus is on consumer processors, though he still keeps a close eye on the latest storage news. In his spare time, you’ll find Paul hanging out with his kids or indulging his love of the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                <cf:isSponsored>false</cf:isSponsored>
                <cf:hasAffiliateLinks>false</cf:hasAffiliateLinks>
                <cf:isPaid>false</cf:isPaid>
                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7BCVhF26XYALb2RSK7Jub7-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7BCVhF26XYALb2RSK7Jub7-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="gaming-with-meltdown-and-spectre">Gaming With Meltdown And Spectre</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1246px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:67.26%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2Cxa9PPLQepcLb29K5uAnc.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2Cxa9PPLQepcLb29K5uAnc.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1246" height="838" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2Cxa9PPLQepcLb29K5uAnc.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Imagine that nearly every PC, server, and mobile phone on the planet was suddenly vulnerable to data theft at the hands of nefarious actors. Then, imagine the exploit responsible for this vulnerability couldn't be detected by antivirus software because it merely took advantage of normal CPU operations.</p><p>Although this sounds like a bad movie script, it unfortunately became a known truth during the first few days of 2018.</p><p>On January 2nd, <a href="https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/">The Register exposed Intel's then-secret Meltdown and Spectre vulnerabilities</a> through investigative journalism. But unbeknown to most of the world, Google’s Project Zero researchers, along with two other independent teams, discovered the vulnerabilities 200 days earlier. As a courtesy, the researchers gave Intel, AMD, IBM, Qualcomm, and ARM a grace period to develop mitigations before making their findings public. Those companies, along with developers contributing to Windows and Linux, worked together behind a veil of secrecy for months.</p><p>Perhaps understandably, the initial response to The Register's report was chaotic because it preempted that planned group disclosure. What happened after, though, appeared to be a comedy of errors, especially given the amount of time affected companies had to prepare.</p><p>Then again, the firms were trying to plug holes that were baked into hardware and software for more than a decade. In fact, nearly every Intel processor since 1995 was found to be vulnerable, so fixing the issues without breaking compatibility proved to be a mind-boggling challenge.</p><p>The patches supposedly have performance implications. So now that the industry is a month into cleaning up its mess, we're ready to start assessing the damage. First up: game performance.</p><h2 id="the-land-of-patch-confusion">The Land Of Patch Confusion</h2><p>There are two general vulnerabilities in play here, and they're broken up into three categories. Variants 1 and 2 are what we've come to know as Spectre, while Variant 3 is Meltdown. Intel, ARM, and Qualcomm are susceptible to all three, while AMD is only affected by Spectre.</p><p>As we can see, Variant 1 and 3 can be patched in the operating system, while the most nefarious bug, Variant 2, requires both motherboard firmware/microcode and operating system patches.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1051px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:31.78%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FAvSkiut8Q5SDKPphUj5DV.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FAvSkiut8Q5SDKPphUj5DV.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1051" height="334" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FAvSkiut8Q5SDKPphUj5DV.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The initial industry scramble resulted in a flurry of immature and buggy updates. Because the patches weren't distributed as drivers, processor vendors couldn't push them out directly. Instead, they filtered out through Microsoft, Linux-based operating systems, OEMs, and motherboard manufacturers. A rapid sequence of patches, re-patches, and un-patches confused enthusiasts in the know. Everyone else had to have been completely lost.</p><p>This is how bad it got: Intel released a motherboard firmware/CPU microcode patch that could cause reboots, system instability, and potential data loss/corruption. Its partners pulled the update. Microsoft published a patch of its own for AMD systems that left some of them unbootable. It, too, had to reverse course, blaming improper documentation from AMD. A fix was released several weeks later.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:554px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:90.79%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7BCVhF26XYALb2RSK7Jub7.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7BCVhF26XYALb2RSK7Jub7.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="554" height="503" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7BCVhF26XYALb2RSK7Jub7.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>For now, Intel doesn't have an operating system or microcode patch for Spectre Variant 2. AMD has an OS patch for it, but the company does not have a microcode update to offer. And because microcode patches will have the biggest impact on system performance, today's benchmark results are subject to change.</p><p>Intel says it will provide patches for CPUs dating back five years and then move on to older models. Many folks speculate that we may never see patches for those legacy products, though. Both Intel and AMD claim they will have silicon-based mitigations in their next-gen processors. Of course, it remains to be seen how each company works around their security holes without compromising performance.</p><p>For now, one thing is for sure: today's patches, particularly those for Spectre Variant 2, affect performance in some workloads. Older CPUs are said to be hit the worst. Microsoft predicts that "some" users with Windows 10 on pre-Broadwell architectures will suffer noticeable slow-downs, while "most" users on Windows 7 and 8.1 on comparable systems will notice a decrease in performance.</p><p>Measuring the impact hasn’t been an easy task in our labs. The changing nature of these patches complicates matters: we’ve begun testing several times only to have a patch altered or removed. We’re diligently working on the next round of application benchmarks, and are expanding our scope to include older CPUs. For now, let's focus on gaming with a good selection of recent Ryzen, Kaby Lake-, and Coffee Lake-based processors.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/cpu-security-flaw-everything-spectre-meltdown,36237.html">CPU Security Flaw: All You Need To Know About Spectre</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best Gaming CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><h2 id="exploiting-the-unexploitable">Exploiting The Unexploitable</h2><p>Meltdown and Spectre are vulnerabilities exploited through side-channel attacks, which are incredibly difficult to block. These occur when an attacker observes the traits of a computer, be it the timing of certain operations or even noise and light patterns, and uses that information to compromise security.</p><p>It all starts with data, of course. A CPU loads information from main memory into its registers by requesting the contents of a virtual address, which is in turn mapped to a physical address. While fulfilling this request, the CPU verifies the address' permission bits, indicating whether the process has permission to access the memory address, or if only the kernel can access it. The system approves or denies access accordingly. The industry assumed this technique securely bifurcated memory into protected regions, so operating systems automatically map the entire kernel into the user space memory map's virtual address space. That means the CPU can attempt to access all of the virtual addresses if needed, but it also exposes the entire virtual address map to the user space. </p><p>The problem has to do with speculative execution, which is part of out-of-order processing. Pipelined CPU cores process instructions in stages, such as instruction fetch, instruction decode, execute, memory access, and register write-back. Today’s processors break each of these fundamental stages down further, sometimes into 20 or more stages. This helps facilitate higher clock rates.</p><p>CPUs employ multiple pipelines to allow for parallelized instruction processing. That's why, in the image below, we see four different colors passing simultaneously through the four stages. Instruction branches can cause the pipeline to switch to another instruction sequence, creating a stall. That means the pipeline doesn’t process data for several clock cycles while it waits for inputs from memory.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:956px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:93.20%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3yFFvmpSAHiKZcFiHRHJeK.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3yFFvmpSAHiKZcFiHRHJeK.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="956" height="891" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3yFFvmpSAHiKZcFiHRHJeK.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>To help avoid this, when the processor encounters a branch, its prediction unit tries to guess which instruction sequence the processor will need next. But it makes that determination<em> before</em> processing the instruction. The processor then fetches the predicted branch's instruction and speculatively executes it. This avoids the latency normally incurred if the pipeline stalls (due to the branch), and then fetching the next instruction from memory.</p><p>Depending on the address location (L1, L2, L3, RAM), fetching data from memory requires 10s to 100s of nanoseconds. That's slow compared to the sub-nanosecond latency of processor cycles, so having the instruction already in-flight speeds operation tremendously. Most operations are committed because branch predictors often have a 90%+ success rate. The processor simply discards the instruction and flushes its pipeline if the instruction isn't needed (misprediction).</p><p>Google's researchers found a sliver of opportunity in how the system handles cached memory access during speculative executions. Normal security checks that keep the user space and kernel memory separate don't happen fast enough during speculative executions that access cached memory. As a result, the processor can <em>momentarily </em>speculatively fetch and execute data from cached memory that it shouldn't be able to access. The system eventually <em>does </em>deny access and the data is discarded, but again, because this doesn't happen fast enough, a window of opportunity for an exploit is opened. Meltdown exploits the branch predictor to run code against the cache, all the while timing this process. That allows it to determine what data is held in the memory, as seen in the short video below.</p><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="high" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/L1N1P2zxaZE" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div><p>In the case of Meltdown, an attacker can read passwords, encryption keys, or other data from protected memory. That data could also be used to assume control of the system, rendering all other forms of protection useless. The biggest concern for data centers is that the exploit also allows an application resident in one virtual machine to access the memory of another virtual machine. This means an attacker could rent an instance on a public cloud and collect information from other VMs on the same server.</p><p>Attackers can exploit this vulnerability with JavaScript, so you could expose your system simply by visiting a nefarious web site. Browser developers have updated their products to reduce timing granularity. But attackers can also just use normal code delivered via malware or other avenues to execute an attack.</p><p>For now, the Meltdown operating system patch involves adding another layer of security checks during memory address accesses. That hampers the latency of system calls, thus slowing performance when applications issue kernel calls. Applications that tend to remain in the user space are less impacted. Intel's post-Broadwell processors have a PCID (Post-Context Identifiers) feature that speeds the process, so they don't experience as much of a slowdown as older models.</p><p>The Spectre exploit is much more nefarious because it can exploit a wider range of the speculative execution engine's capabilities to access kernel memory or data from other applications. Some researchers claim that fixing this exploit fully could require a fundamental re-tooling of all processor architectures, so it's possible we'll live with some form of this vulnerability for the foreseeable future. Fortunately, the exploit is extremely hard to pull off, requiring an elevated level of knowledge of the target processor and application. Intel and others have come up with patches for the current Spectre variants, but it is possible that vendors will play whack-a-mole as new Spectre derivatives arrive in the future.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/cpu-security-flaw-everything-spectre-meltdown,36237.html">CPU Security Flaw: All You Need To Know About Spectre</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best Gaming CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><h2 id="test-setup-3">Test Setup</h2><p>Our methodology for this story is fairly simple in practice. First, we performed a round of benchmarks on our Windows 10-based systems. Then, we applied the relevant patch and repeated the tests. Although the Variant 2 operating system patch we're using was deactivated via Windows, it should represent worst-case performance for now. We did not use a BIOS with Spectre mitigations because none are currently available (they were pulled). We'll follow up with more comparative testing as firmware updates arrive.</p><p>We tested each processor at its stock settings, including representatives from the Core i3, Ryzen 3, Core i5, Ryzen 5, Core i7, Ryzen 7, and Pentium line-ups. Naturally, overclocked systems will fare better. And as always, we disable Enhanced Multi-Core Turbo on our test systems.</p><p>In order to avoid variance from GPU Boost as our GeForce GTX 1080 heats up, we use multiple runs from each benchmark in quick succession. We select the median value from the last recordings, so, in many cases, the patched/unpatched results could land higher or lower than each other due to the tight variances you'll see today.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  colspan="2"><strong>Test System & Configuration</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Hardware</strong></td><td  ><strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z370)</strong><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Core i3-8350K" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80684I38350K-Core-i3-8350K-Processor/dp/B0759FWJDK/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i3-8350K</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Core i5-8600K" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16819117825">Core i5-8600K</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Intel Core i7-8700K" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117827">Intel Core i7-8700K</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/MSI-Z370-GAMING-PRO-CARBON/dp/B075GYKNQY/?&tag=bom-tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16820232217">G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)</a></span> @ 2666<strong>AMD Socket AM4</strong><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Ryzen 3 1300X" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Desktop-Processor-Stealth-YD130XBBAEBOX/dp/B0741DLVL7/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Ryzen 3 1300X</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Ryzen 5 1600X" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16819113434">Ryzen 5 1600X</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Ryzen 7 1800X" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-1800X-Processor-YD180XBCAEWOF/dp/B06W9JXK4G?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware-deal&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Ryzen 7 1800X</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="X370 XPower Gaming Titanium" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/MSI-X370-XPOWER-GAMING-TITANIUM/dp/B06WLNZ1JH/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">X370 XPower Gaming Titanium</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16820232217">G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)</a></span> @ 2667 <strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z270)</strong><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Core i3-7350K" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Generation-FCLGA1151-Processor-BX80677I37350K/dp/B01NCEJN24/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i3-7350K</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Core i5-7600K" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MRRPPQS/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i5-7600K</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Core i7-7700K" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Desktop-Processor-i7-7700K-BX80677I77700K/dp/B01MXSI216/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i7-7700K</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Pentium G4620" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N59LP5Z/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Pentium G4620</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="MSI Z270 Gaming M7" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130969">MSI Z270 Gaming M7</a></span><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16820232217">G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 (2x 8GB)</a></span> @ 2666 <strong>All</strong><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="EVGA GTX 1080" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/EVGA-GeForce-Founders-Graphics-08G-P4-6180-KR/dp/B01FWI6F08?ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">EVGA GTX 1080</a></span> <span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Samsung PM863 (960GB)" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-PM863-MZ-7LM960Z-960GB-SATA3/dp/B011E7JV7A/?&tag=bom-tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Samsung PM863 (960GB)</a></span> 1TB <span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="SilverStone ST1500-TI" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16817256196">SilverStone ST1500-TI</a></span> 1500W<span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Hydro H115i" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Corsair-CW-9060027-WW-Extreme-Performance-Liquid/dp/B019955RNQ/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Hydro H115i</a></span>Windows 10 Creators Update Version 1703, pre- and post-patch</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/cpu-security-flaw-everything-spectre-meltdown,36237.html">CPU Security Flaw: All You Need To Know About Spectre</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best Gaming CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><h2 id="vrmark-3dmark-amp-aots-escalation">VRMark, 3DMark & AotS: Escalation</h2><h2 id="comparison-cpus">Comparison CPUs</h2>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="fcdb1d5e-dba8-4f41-9778-587db37d0fd7">            <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-1800X-Processor-YD180XBCAEWOF/dp/B06W9JXK4G?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware-deal&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Ryzen 7 1800X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:100.00%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DryrsSjyiFKtB6LHs6agEc.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 7 1800X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="836fcd89-3cb4-4a1e-953b-6cfbb6d996a1">            <a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16819113434" data-model-name="Ryzen 5 1600X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:75.00%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cnR74jNTGXP9TR45Swwx8j.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 5 1600X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="22935d98-7afd-4741-9834-1650aa4be0f8">            <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Desktop-Processor-Stealth-YD130XBBAEBOX/dp/B0741DLVL7/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Ryzen 3 1300X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:74.96%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/a2fUAMCzfcx7bPMQJvSgC3.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 3 1300X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><h2 id="vrmark-amp-3dmark">VRMark & 3DMark</h2><p>We aren't big fans of using synthetic benchmarks to represent real-world game performance, but 3DMark's DX11 and DX12 CPU tests provide useful insight into the amount of horsepower available to game engines.</p><p>Futuremark's VRMark test lets you gauge your system's suitability for use with the HTC Vive or Oculus Rift, even if you don't currently own an HMD. The Orange Room test is based on the suggested system requirements for current-generation HTC Vive and Oculus Rift HMDs. Futuremark defines a passing score as anything above 109 FPS.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wRbF8Urdz34TXoGZy6ifLR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/b7YSDdU7BJuWa932EW8CHj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zUYH2q96GWvwnuBRn5Z6E6.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Futuremark specifies a 3% maximum variance between runs if we adhere to normal testing best practices, such as ensuring similar configurations and drivers between systems, allowing the PC to enter an idle state, and conducting tests with the same environmental factors. Of course, there are sub-tests in suites like PCMark 10 that can fall outside the 3% window, at which point we rely upon averages. We didn't encounter those issue with these gaming-focused tests, though.</p><p>VRMark reflects a negligible impact from the patches across our entire field of CPUs. At times, the patched operating systems are slightly faster, but these values land within the 3% margin of error. That means those higher results are merely a byproduct of normal run-to-run variability.</p><p>The DX11 and DX12 CPU benchmarks respond to core counts and increased parallelism. Frankly, these tests don't show us much of interest. There is some jockeying between patched and unpatched configurations, but the results are uneventful overall.</p><h2 id="ashes-of-the-singularity-escalation-3">Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/T9pGZiHU793iyj7sQASGsZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V9cDSezxQaExqHiVoMvyWZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PRvEcjRfayhdtQmHyMU74F.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NGgZofwN6aySPCKArHRBZa.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rMn3bNqQkEjQBR2M4GNF48.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6qUZ29VkZXs8d9kEcirEeR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ax3qqSLDiREk2cEqZZsGce.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yu3rUyT3d3YK48P7ZHNQYc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bhTazaM42sn8skMyzRQtLm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ar7Ei4LBY6QxLGkTHrxWon.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation </em>scales nicely with the addition of computational horsepower, so graphics aren't limiting us.</p><p>We observe minor variations between the patched and unpatched systems. For instance, a patched Core i7-8700K outpaces the vulnerable configuration. But a 1.6% delta is still within our expectations of normal run-to-run variance. We also don't record any extreme changes to the frame time or frame time variance metrics.</p><p>Notice that we split our results into two classes due to the sheer number of tests we ran. Be sure to scroll across the album for our comparison of Core i3, Ryzen 3, and Pentium processors.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/cpu-security-flaw-everything-spectre-meltdown,36237.html">CPU Security Flaw: All You Need To Know About Spectre</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best Gaming CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><h2 id="civilization-vi-graphics-amp-ai-amp-dawn-of-war-iii">Civilization VI Graphics & AI, & Dawn of War III</h2><h2 id="civilization-vi-ai-test">Civilization VI AI Test</h2><h2 id="2"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.00%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yr9zk89iU7gsM55XayDiQ3.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yr9zk89iU7gsM55XayDiQ3.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="834" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yr9zk89iU7gsM55XayDiQ3.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The <em>Civilization VI</em> AI test measures CPU performance in a turn-based strategy game, and tends to favor a mixture of physical cores, clock rate, and IPC throughput.</p><p>Our results are a mixed bag; half of the processors are slower after the patch, but five turn out to be faster. Our largest variance is 0.15 seconds, though, so its hard to ascribe any significance to the outcome.</p><h2 id="civilization-vi-graphics-test">Civilization VI Graphics Test</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rkjpmtBPFwenyMN5fbt6fk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uKk9entyhWkDScCS7FBFxg.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eRFMH2km7Mc2n27GsGojwT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kVFTRrTjGzQdUMKW6FKyJf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V9EhAKYD46Sn2FFWo3Wyp5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oePi7pbk2bxsdqVFBLjeBE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MFHH8wUc3yXsaYBNef25K3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KRPdBk6ueyEzeYzrP3GXL4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/szoBN5CrzJs9SQSQ86WPY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9BSdJgoTwxor3Jd92jerek.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The results of our <em>Civilization VI</em> graphics test aren't any more surprising than what we saw in <em>Ashes of the Singularity</em>. There's little to no observable impact from the patches, and both configurations take turns in the lead. Ryzen 7 1800X encounters the most variance, and that's a mere .8 FPS on average (less than 1%). Even the 99th percentile metrics bounce back and forth between the patched and unpatched configurations.</p><h2 id="warhammer-40-000-dawn-of-war-iii">Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War III</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eDZipiGycfD9trijYEj255.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eba9idLS2cJnqk6GXzWfeL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Lm6abbxJznnvCUZXCnH8Uf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BHwWX7fMbFvcm668oEaEmZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wkSC5kUPyNwrKaC2LtsfxG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pmkKbiGhrP6DzbNqeaQBjB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DcdMThKNQKty5TFLgaicFo.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/f7qoPb7Fi2vcWvj52nLx3L.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2QjjcQbixYkmeEB3iN8CvL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3EWxEhXtKDAXHecNG2eqnZ.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Dawn of War</em> doesn't seem to be hampered by the patches either, although we do see our first result exceeding a 1 FPS delta. The patched Ryzen 7 1800X falls behind by 1.1 FPS, yielding a mere 1.2% difference. Again, it's a relatively mundane outcome.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/cpu-security-flaw-everything-spectre-meltdown,36237.html">CPU Security Flaw: All You Need To Know About Spectre</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best Gaming CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><h2 id="far-cry-primal-grand-theft-auto-v-amp-hitman">Far Cry Primal, Grand Theft Auto V & Hitman </h2><h2 id="far-cry-primal-3">Far Cry Primal</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/j8ZWSnL429h6hFYaYBQVgB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ePSWY3qSE974WemSW5XNh7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/p6sbxGVviHr2L4AXk45yZR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ySQaZsX26bLqpeFhZZXVFf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UqQLuihYpqE3c9KbSzDWyC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/U57TWotRa72UiDYjQWjMNW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yPHtoCMPtR5DQLWEu622J4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xbTsq4kM5HatDQbVAvTp75.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FDVTejgmwVbvV5FiyJeHRc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JazWUJXTEp3bGcnVBXBBzM.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Far Cry Primal's</em> Dunia Engine 2 responds well to high clock rates and IPC throughput. However, it also seems to prefer when we turn off simultaneous multi-threading, so you'll notice the Core i5 processors are very competitive.</p><p>We do see a bit more frame time variance between certain models, but the lead again shuffles back and forth between patched and unpatched configurations. That means we can chalk these differences up to expected variances.</p><p>Typically, our reviews include similarly-priced models, so the floors and ceilings aren't so pronounced. Today's exploration gives us a good opportunity to see how different CPU classes scale. For instance, the average frame rate delta between Intel's Pentium G4560 and Core i7-7700K is 27 FPS.</p><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-3">Grand Theft Auto V</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Nh5uhVDGjELiSwvM4X9xfD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/N2498UwkNJWCsFGRBcNLa4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MyFk2MgFWsahics4D6aGWK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qDhXBLeSWHLWejrNdiRGFc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nHtzokrZKp89sxgtvhcra.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BsN7ChdW2z6jDNmZLsgBBE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kSZiusqjQMz5KBWdtfwetJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kTynfv6sHMWzjG6fAVjVK5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/J6YXtKiadpTZBsiF6E72P5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mZvgVWXPNLudsnXqWS2m8M.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The <em>Grand Theft Auto V</em> benchmark again reveals little variance between configurations, and a negligible impact on frame times.</p><p>We do spot several notable outliers from Intel's Core i3-8350K, but those occur whether the CPU is patched or not. We also record a 42 FPS 99th percentile measurement with the patched Core i3-7350K compared to the unpatched configuration's 47 FPS. That's one of the largest deltas reported in today's data.</p><h2 id="hitman-2016">Hitman (2016)</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wgJuQDWAfD8Cs2mzB9M35N.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fFJHFp3NdjkMejshTq4j7S.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XGb5eQKLSLU5oq8X4y8KKd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/B7pU86omBcWuS8L3WbKicQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nXdQWuH47w3HWEvCfMvgLP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MZZCpvwZ8A84s8g2kLYxs9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LpqUvmweRQ9caBd5bTLMaX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7xpxdsi6TvWLQo7H9CtbQA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dGybDk6eDYt8ewJBzkDhk5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Y6mGZV6JjmL4uHBM4kbdJF.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>We're graphics-bound in our <em>Hitman </em>test, so there is little to no variation between the Core i7 and i5 processors.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/cpu-security-flaw-everything-spectre-meltdown,36237.html">CPU Security Flaw: All You Need To Know About Spectre</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best Gaming CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><h2 id="shadow-of-war-project-cars-2-amp-pubg">Shadow of War, Project CARS 2 & PUBG </h2><h2 id="middle-earth-shadow-of-war-2">Middle-earth: Shadow of War</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aQBLzMCNnf8RxwMPeWipuh.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ngt4PHaGSJSSjmvAgQpofJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UwyVo8tz4EeFLxXUwzdA2A.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/m6YJu7QxpdPKogowmUmo8G.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nhmess9WbSH23BEB3JpsVH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zVebwYARYDXNWB3u3KkKJE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v2NnUskVZZoV9LinFVMYhR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ftvVFpfg7otY6QjG7ACmLH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/s6WeFCwnEkEKd9V9UUeXBF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4rY4xYy9J7dvS48yHzLyuh.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>We swapped out the aging <em>Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor</em> for <em>Shadow of War</em> during this round of tests. We like that its built-in benchmark is very consistent.</p><p><em>Shadow of War</em> isn't as sensitive to clock rate and IPC throughput as its predecessor. We don't see much variance between the Core i5 and i7 models, which are largely graphics-bound. There is, however, more distance between the lower-end models. But there is only a 13.2 FPS delta between the Core i7-8600K and Pentium G4620.</p><h2 id="project-cars-2-3">Project CARS 2</h2><p>We're also swapping out <em>Project CARS</em> for<em> Project CARS 2</em>.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YxVWbNuPrY3DvLMFf4dHKj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3AG83mTLAbruC7UAyedpc8.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wCK9bdisL8cm7jxegGLMdn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PY3fpxno8p2DsLxkbc4jkP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iucADKfAtP3MYhj4mf3ZvZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YMc4jYNWyZRp5RR4kja4ZT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/boLX2dc7nbH6M5xbGjidTg.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RfUtZythkjugXKELeR5GdB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/G85RpZfCTSCLRuP9CmBS9T.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Mgr89uEYsxcaXkYbNfcBZB.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>There's a bit more scaling to observe in this title, with the slowest processor lagging the leader by 41 FPS. Regardless, though, there isn't any significant variance attributable to security patches (aside from a 1.7 FPS delta between the Core i3-8350K results).</p><h2 id="playerunknown-39-s-battlegrounds-pubg">PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG)</h2><p>This is also our first outing with <em>PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds</em>.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z3XWmwJJSivmJBAh9vxDVf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uvzr7tCQEnXzV8AWZoPrUY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hAzXT65k5pGwjTQNd2w8rW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MALxk8DoCuQDV8um9F9fwC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jBBPFqwjKXwbEqBbQM9k5S.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KMDh9nvXHMmKYHQ9st6tqe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hqsf4PycrNgEz3BQkisvGg.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zu4BuD3npL2ENDJa2yWT4Z.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QdF26eSeJRawSRjX7i4WSJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uEmpLHQTNrhKoTn58YMVe9.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Although we're using a saved game sequence to ensure repeatability, we recently learned that <em>PUBG </em>recordings can lag in-game multiplayer performance by ~4-8 FPS. This is an odd tendency because recorded game sequences usually run <em>faster </em>than actual multiplayer matches. Nevertheless, we recorded a few sessions with our tool and then compared them to in-game results using the same path. Sure enough, the FPS line charts didn't overlap, even though the results indicate similar peaks and valleys. That means the recording is an accurate representation of trends, albeit with slower frame rates. </p><p>That doesn't mean the results are any more interesting than they have been, though. The game engine simply doesn't scale well; we only recorded a 5.9 FPS delta between the fastest and slowest processors in our test pool. We probably could amplify this difference by reducing graphics quality. However, we prefer setting the eye candy to maximum for a more enjoyable experience, rather than deliberately creating a synthetic metric.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/cpu-security-flaw-everything-spectre-meltdown,36237.html">CPU Security Flaw: All You Need To Know About Spectre</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best Gaming CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><h2 id="game-on-for-now">Game On...For Now</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:188.34%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3yneKWLCrtBEC27tmxQB4d.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3yneKWLCrtBEC27tmxQB4d.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="2844" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3yneKWLCrtBEC27tmxQB4d.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>This first round of Meltdown and Spectre patch testing proved fairly uneventful. There really wasn't much to report across our suite of game benchmarks. But that's partly because the status of patches keeps changing. We originally planned to test with both the operating system and microcode updates for Spectre Variant 2, which are expected to impose a significant performance overhead.</p><p>Unfortunately, Intel and its partners pulled the microcode patch during our testing, and AMD still doesn't have a fix of its own. We've been told that Intel's updated update is undergoing rigorous validation, but we don't have a time frame for its release. The same goes for AMD's Variant 2 microcode. Of course, we'll add test results with the new patches once they are available. </p><p>For newer processors, it looks like the operating system patch won't affect gaming workloads much, if at all. Most games are confined to the user space and don't make frequent kernel calls, so it's possible that the impact on older CPUs could be minor as well (game testing on those is in-progress).</p><p>The current patch does have an impact on storage performance, at least when it's measured with synthetic benchmarks. A laggy hard drive would obviously affect level loading times and the storage subsystem's ability to feed the game engine, possibly resulting in choppy scene transitions. We scrutinized our load times and cut scenes closely, and while entry-level CPUs did take longer and were less smooth, it's hard to chalk that up to a security patch because slower processors are, well, slower. We didn't notice any dramatic changes in performance consistency or frame time variance, so any minor impact would likely be limited to storage-imposed symptoms, at least with the patches as they sit currently.</p><p>Most of the vulnerability-oriented storage testing we've seen is happening at high queue depths, or using pure read or write workloads that aren't the best indicator of operating system performance. Most real-world accesses occur at lower queue depths, and radical changes in SSD performance, either for better or worse, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/microsoft-meltdown-patch-storage-performance,36236.html">don't correspond linearly to application performance</a>. </p><p>The Spectre Variant 2 patches still loom large for Intel and AMD. Hopefully, both companies can deliver solid updates with minimal impact. We've heard that some applications can be optimized to minimize overhead. And Intel has mentioned that existing patches will mature into more efficient implementations.</p><p>For now we remain vulnerable to Spectre Variant 2, and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/meltdown-spectre-malware-found-fortinet,36439.html">proof-of-concept code is already popping up in the wild</a>, unfortunately. That leaves us exposed while we wait on Intel and AMD, not to mention the rest of the industry, to correctly patch what could be the greatest vulnerability of our time. At least we can enjoy some gaming while we wait. </p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/cpu-security-flaw-everything-spectre-meltdown,36237.html">CPU Security Flaw: All You Need To Know About Spectre</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best Gaming CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Gaming And Streaming: Which CPU Is Best For Both? ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/game-streaming-encoding-coffee-lake-ryzen,5326.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ We've gathered up a pile of Kaby Lake, Coffee Lake, Skylake-X, and Ryzen processors to test the most prominent enthusiast CPUs while streaming. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">7936qnhThS5jkTo3YPyXED</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FgjHyEevWCK5MZagGaDt3D-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2018 14:00:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:42:50 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ palcorn@outlook.com (Paul Alcorn) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Paul Alcorn ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RZRmFeQfPy3etHjBQitbGW.jpeg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;As a teenager, Paul scraped up enough money to buy a 486-powered PC with a turbo button (yes, a turbo button). Back when floppies were still popular he was already chasing after the fastest spinners for his personal computer, which led him down the long and winding storage road, covering enterprise storage. His current focus is on consumer processors, though he still keeps a close eye on the latest storage news. In his spare time, you’ll find Paul hanging out with his kids or indulging his love of the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                <cf:isSponsored>false</cf:isSponsored>
                <cf:hasAffiliateLinks>false</cf:hasAffiliateLinks>
                <cf:isPaid>false</cf:isPaid>
                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FgjHyEevWCK5MZagGaDt3D-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[N/A]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Live Stream]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Live Stream]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Live Stream]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FgjHyEevWCK5MZagGaDt3D-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="introduction-2">Introduction</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:66.62%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5KvxrQsz7oVqiS6DjPtjWJ.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5KvxrQsz7oVqiS6DjPtjWJ.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="1006" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5KvxrQsz7oVqiS6DjPtjWJ.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Game streaming is immensely popular right now. And with more than 2 million broadcasters serving approximately 100 million viewers a month, Twitch is unquestionably the leading platform for gamers looking to show off their skills.</p><p>Streaming is pretty easy to set up once you decide what you'll use to encode your content. There are several options, each with its own strengths and weaknesses. Hardware-accelerated encoders, powered by Nvidia's NVEnc, AMD's Video Coding Engine, and Intel's QuickSync, all promise to wrap your gaming experience up in a good-looking and easy-to-stream package without hammering your CPU. But it's generally agreed that these encoders sacrifice quality and flexibility compared to software-based alternatives.</p><p>Conversely, software encoding with the x264 library is easy alongside utilities like Open Broadcaster Software (OBS) and XSplit. It offers better stream quality than GPU-driven approaches, but at similar bit rates. That's important for services with defined bit rate limitations (like Twitch). Streaming can also chip away at bandwidth caps. Just one hour of streaming at 10 Mb/s equals 4.5GB of data, so you want the most efficient encoder possible.</p><p>A host processing-based approach offers more flexible configuration options. Better quality comes at a price, though. Software encoding is a CPU-intensive process, which obviously tugs the other way against our usual aim of running games at the highest frame rates possible.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1388px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:34.87%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JppWLMtCR8XNLcFLDVNmFR.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JppWLMtCR8XNLcFLDVNmFR.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1388" height="484" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JppWLMtCR8XNLcFLDVNmFR.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Hitching, stuttering, lag, and generally bad performance curse gamers who try doing too much with limited software encoding resources. Thus, it's often recommended to use a secondary system for high-quality streaming. In fact, that's the best way to achieve an unencumbered gaming experience while also providing your audience a crisp video stream. That requires attaching your gaming rig to another computer via capture card or local area network to offload the encoding workload, though. Many casual gamers simply don't have the money for such a configuration.</p><p>Software encoding can have a huge impact on gaming performance. Until recently, if you wanted to stream and game using the highest-quality solutions on one PC, you almost assuredly had to buy a pricey CPU with lots of threads to throw at the problem. But now those high-end desktop processors are more accessible than ever. AMD's Ryzen 7 chips lowered the bar for getting lots of cores into affordable platforms, and most games can't fully utilize them. That leaves lots of horsepower leftover for streaming at a reasonable price.</p><p>Intel's Coffee Lake processors recently debuted with more cores as well, giving those Ryzen CPUs a run for their money in multi-tasked, multi-threaded workloads. Good thing, too. As we'll see, the previous-gen Kaby Lake architecture simply cannot compete against like-priced AMD alternatives. Today's story compares a number of different host processors in combined gaming/streaming workloads. Along the way, we developed test methodology you'll see used in our future CPU reviews.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="test-setup-4">Test Setup </h2><h2 id="how-we-tested">How We Tested</h2><p>Repeatability is one of the most important components of any useful benchmark methodology. All tests have some degree of uncertainty, but we're looking for a minimal and consistent amount of variability. Results plagued by wild swings in performance from one run to the next aren't usable as accurate benchmarks.</p><p>As an example, we've yet to develop any reliable multi-tasking benchmarks. In response to reader requests, we have worked diligently to create a series of tests that measure gaming performance with background applications like Web browsers, email clients, media players, Discord, and Skype open. Windows' prioritization appears to be based on fickle and unexplained factors. The operating system suspends various background processes unpredictably during one scripted sequence, then leaves them fully active during the next (even when the test environment hasn't changed). This unpredictability becomes more, well, unpredictable, as the number of open applications increases. Switching Windows into Game Mode only complicates matters further. So far, we have no solution. Our multi-tasking experiments yield deltas from 5 to 15 FPS between successive runs, which means they land nowhere near our expectations for a reliable benchmark.</p><p>Luckily, game streaming is much easier to control. Encoding is a CPU-intensive task that chews up plenty of cycles, so Windows doesn't suspend or otherwise interfere with it. This allows us to create repeatable benchmarks without extreme outliers.</p><h2 id="what-we-39-re-measuring">What We're Measuring</h2><p>Evaluating game streaming performance works across two axes: game quality and stream quality. Of course, we'll measure average, minimum, and 99th percentile frame rates with and without streaming in the background. We'll also include our usual frame time and variance results, which become more important once we start streaming.</p><p>We also need to account for stream quality. That means recording the percentage of frames encoded. Each processor pushes different frame rates, so each run correspondingly generates a different number of frames. As such, we measure the percentage of frames successfully encoded as "% of Frames Delivered." In the test below, a Threadripper 1950X CPU encoded 98.9% of the frames generated by our gaming session, meaning it skipped 1.1% of the frames due to encoding lag.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:989px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.92%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Crvwh3FmbyB4Ebn7VBCcsM.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Crvwh3FmbyB4Ebn7VBCcsM.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="989" height="741" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Crvwh3FmbyB4Ebn7VBCcsM.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We're streaming at 60 FPS, so we also measure stream quality by listing the percentage of frames encoded within the desirable 16.667ms (60 FPS) threshold. We also include the percentage of frames that land above and below the 60 FPS threshold, which helps quantify the hitching and stuttering a viewer would see on the stream. Subjective visual measurements are still important, so we'll call out tests that generate a bad-looking stream.</p><h2 id="open-broadcaster-system">Open Broadcaster System</h2><p>There are several software encoding applications, but we chose Open Broadcasting System (OBS) due to its flexible tuning options, detailed output logs, and broad compatibility with streaming services. We're using the x264 software encoder, along with YouTube Gaming for our streaming service. Any run that reports frames dropped due to networking interference is discarded.</p><p>Our ultimate goal is to develop a test that measures CPU performance, so we select parameters that remove the most obvious bottlenecks. Gaming at 1920x1080 with an EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FE side-steps a GPU limitation (as much as possible). Encoding overhead isn't as high with lesser video cards that generate fewer frames per second. We also test with a 10 Mb/s upload rate, though you can stream at 6 Mb/s or less. Our Internet connection would accommodate up to 35 Mb/s uploads. To vary game selection, we chose <em>Grand Theft Auto V</em>, <em>Middle-earth: Shadow of War</em>, and <em>Battlefield 1</em> for our tests.</p><p>There are several other scenarios we could have added to increase the complexity of our testing, such as a simultaneous video stream from a webcam, recording the game to the host system, or streaming to multiple services at once. We went with just one service to reduce the number of variables...at least for now.</p><p>Finding the best streaming options requires some tuning for every game and hardware configuration. There is a delicate balance between game performance on the host system and stream quality for the remote viewer, so fine-tuning is needed to yield the best mix. We picked somewhat general settings that offered a good range of performance by our subjective measure. We also stuck with options that'd establish a level playing field for a wide range of test systems. Just be aware that there are plenty of knobs to turn, some of which could offer better performance than the ones we use (lowering the stream to 30 FPS, for instance, cuts encoding overhead significantly)</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GgLgrjKcWqjjLbH9CNAfNP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FHvK8VCRmfKpt4zBmJYj9o.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hkG7bgMqJi6o3TLJTXofoY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9zX2RLVUHGFYLDefZVDDS.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Tuning the encoding presets is one of the most direct ways to adjust streaming performance and quality for your system's capabilities. Slower encoding increases compression efficiency, which provides better output quality and reduces compression artifacts. OBS has 10 presets ranging from "ultrafast" (the lowest-quality setting with the least computational overhead) to "placebo" (offering the best streaming quality and consuming the most host processing resources). The placebo setting is aptly named; there is certainly a rapidly diminishing rate of return on stream quality after passing the "slower" preset (two ticks before placebo). More strenuous settings can quickly cripple even powerful processors, particularly if you are streaming from a single host system. Placebo with care. </p><p>We split our test groups into three different classes. After evaluating a few Core i3- and Ryzen 3-class processors and determining that they can't stream effectively at our settings, we chose Ryzen 5 and Core i5 models for our entry-level systems. We used the "veryfast" encoding setting for this class of CPU. Naturally, higher-end processors, such as our Ryzen 7/Core i7 and Threadripper/Core i9 chips, offer more performance, so we use the "faster" and "fast" settings, respectively, for brawnier CPUs.</p><p>Because we're testing with different encoding presets, you cannot compare test results for the different classes directly.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  colspan="2"><strong>Test System & Configuration</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Hardware</strong></td><td  ><strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z370)</strong>Intel Core i5-8600K, Core i7-8700KMSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC2x 8GB G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 @ 2666 and 3200 MT/s<strong>AMD Socket AM4</strong>AMD Ryzen 5 1600X, Ryzen 7 1800XMSI Z370 Xpower Gaming Titanium2x 8GB G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 @ 2667 and 3200 MT/s<strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z270)</strong>Intel Core i5-7600K, Core i7-7700K MSI Z270 Gaming M72x 8GB G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 @ 2666 and 3200 MT/s<strong>AMD Socket SP3 (TR4)</strong>AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950XAsus X399 ROG Zenith Extreme4x 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3200 @ 2666 and 3200 MT/s<strong>Intel LGA 2066</strong>Intel Core i9-7900X, Core i9-7980XEMSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC4x 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3200 @ 2666 and 3200 MT/s<strong>All</strong> EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FE 1TB Samsung PM863 SilverStone ST1500-TI, 1500W Windows 10 Creators Update Version 1703Corsair H115i</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="intel-core-i5-amp-amd-ryzen-5">Intel Core i5 & AMD Ryzen 5</h2><p>We generated our stream using the "veryfast" encoder preset for this class of processors.</p>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="aa9c815f-399c-44cb-bbc7-6f507a39c5e1">            <a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16819113434" data-model-name="Ryzen 5 1600X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:75.00%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cnR74jNTGXP9TR45Swwx8j.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 5 1600X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="805b0a80-f332-45da-af3a-70c1cca947af">            <a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16819117825" data-model-name="Core i5-8600K" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:120.30%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ovaurhrrbXkvAC9XyKvdJU.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Intel Core i5-8600K</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="1bf4aa1e-e57b-4ead-95fc-4c564771a9e7">            <div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:75.00%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TWGp6N6D6SQ4jXXCD7ct4H.jpg" alt=""></p></div>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Intel Core i5-7600K</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><h2 id="battlefield-1">Battlefield 1</h2><p>First, we run a set of baseline tests to gauge performance without an active YouTube stream. Intel's Core i5-8600K fares best, but the Core i5-7600K and Ryzen 5 1600X aren't far behind.</p><p>The story changes when we add streaming to the mix. All three CPUs lose varying amounts of performance, with Ryzen 5 1600X ending up on top (though not by much).</p><p>We have two entries in our charts for the Kaby Lake-based Core i5-7600K: normal and high-priority. First, let's talk about the normal results. Intel's 4C/4T architecture hamstrings the Core i5-7600K, and it loses nearly half of its average frame rate. Unsurprisingly, this has an impact on in-game frame time variance and unevenness measurements. Those numbers don't tell the entire story, though. <em>Battlefield 1</em> is basically unplayable due to hitching and stuttering during our stream.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ovga3xcnp5DJyK6kL6ZtsD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eeuwhApHSSSKk4F5qo925g.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pNnq9g2zKKCpfTnpq6jufC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/q8oGgkP2AVYUGQygjSMdST.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5D9kamYGQQNfJSCfvWiFHV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Zmkn2WUkprSD5X4AbhRzHM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vpJZQkfX5jztikpFBETzb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Y7D9johYVB3HS2AynqefEV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ugXGpWAijKnLaG49oZ725G.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7A7BUQFEBMuGKUbg53nD4U.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The stream quality chart shows that Core i5-7600K only delivers 23.6% of its frames during the test, which means it drops an astounding 76.4% of the frames. This also results in a completely unwatchable stream. Flip over to the CPU utilization charts; they tell a profound story. In short, Core i5-7600K doesn't have any headroom available to handle the parallelized encoding workload throughout most of our benchmark.</p><p>The OBS software has several different settings to optimize performance, and adjusting process priority is a common tactic to improve streaming on Kaby Lake-based processors. So, we selected the high-priority setting (marked HP Stream in the charts). Effectively, this allows the encoder to steal cycles from the game engine, resulting in lower frame rates. But the encoder successfully processes 100% of the frames. Our Core i5-7600K fell to 51.6 FPS, and its 99th percentile measurements nosedived. On the flip side, less performance means fewer frames to encode per second, which in turn boosts encoding efficiency. Surprisingly, 91.05% of the frames landed within the desirable 16.667ms range.</p><p>We could always dial-back the encoder preset to accommodate Intel's lackluster -7600K, but similarly-priced processors in the test pool handle these quality settings adeptly. While streaming, Core i5-8600K provides nearly the same in-game average frame rate as AMD's Ryzen 5 1600X and it encodes 100% of the frames. The -8600K's streaming quality isn't as impressive as Ryzen's: 89.44% of frames land within the desirable range and ~10% of frames fall either above or below the threshold. In our opinion, the stream looked fine, but wasn't as smooth as the Ryzen 5 1600X's output.</p><p>A glance at the 99th percentile FPS chart tells us that Ryzen 5 1600X delivers the smoothest gaming experience during our streaming session. It also has plenty of reserves left in the tank, even during the streaming workload. In other words, you could probably increase the encoding preset to a higher level than the competing processors.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rjoKmJqqzTSYf3RKt3bsSV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6fSbfHDXbbTLnRg7g9PHiL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fL9vhSc723gAwFBd3kgeyM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Jx9AUNGQAue4gyhVseEbhC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NCDdxxTPdWXToMqUBgk9jC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yXtvXUgWBsZP587haN2M7U.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9frXx4koehPz8dv36jVzKo.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cxoD3uEuSqm2jYwp6atfaX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KZJgf6UK2g9qN9nq9Bfdci.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>AMD's Ryzen CPUs don't overclock as well as Core processors, though. We tuned each model to see if the Intel's available headroom turned the tables. The x264 encoder uses AVX instructions extensively, so it serves as a nice stress test for overclocking stability. No doubt, Coffee Lake's AVX offset could come in handy, though it might also result in lower frequencies during streaming if you activate the feature (or leave it on Auto in the UEFI).</p><p>Overclocking nudges the Core i5-7600K ahead of Ryzen 5 1600X during our baseline gaming test, but it does little to rectify the issues encountered during our streaming workload. Four threads just can't hack it. Streaming suffers even <em>after </em>adjusting the priority status. The -7600K does serve up a higher percentage of frames with the overclocked settings and normal prioritization, but it still costs the chip game performance. Priority adjustments have little bearing on gaming smoothness: the -7600K's 99th percentile measurements are terrible with both settings.</p><p>A 4.9 GHz overclock does boost the Coffee Lake-based Core i5-8600K's 99th percentile measurements. However, it still trails Ryzen 5 1600X. The tuned -8600K is certainly competitive thanks to a compelling gaming experience, but it can't match the Ryzen 5 1600X's streaming performance. It's apparent the encoder appreciates lots of threads, so Ryzen's 12 are a big advantage.</p><p>The frame time chart summarizes in-game performance well. Kaby Lake-based processors scribble their way across with extreme variance. The Core i5-8600K is also easy to spot during our streaming workload. Meanwhile, Ryzen 5 1600X provides a much more consistent in-game experience.</p><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-4">Grand Theft Auto V</h2><p><em>Grand Theft Auto V</em> scales well with additional host processing resources and tends to favor Intel architectures. It isn't surprising to see the Core CPUs lead during our baseline tests. But we weren't expecting the Core i5-8600K to maintain its advantage over the competition while streaming.</p><p>The Core i5-8600K delivers 100% of its frames during the test, though only 89.71% fall into the perfect 60 FPS bucket. We see a nearly even split of 5% above and below that mark. Visually, the stream looks fine. The -8600K takes more of a hit in the 99th percentile measurements, though it still leads the rest of our contenders.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zViZYroJVV6PZQULMcu4TR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qCniYsNnNbYqmLtYDRqTod.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/R252KNGMyucm9WERVtbAaL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wotEh4QaYfuRF4c2qftY3M.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4cgwFtwZbcfVPCukzQjvKL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8V7jFXu4HutHGQStaVYPUF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Y7D9johYVB3HS2AynqefEV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6p5tYaBrdGPqNiQsZo63CD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HJGvjgAPQVJAWwbPotwuhE.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>AMD's Ryzen 5 1600X starts out with the lowest average frame rate during our baseline and falls to 60.7 FPS during the stream. It doesn't suffer too badly in 99th percentile measurements. Meanwhile, the chip provides stellar streaming performance, dropping no frames and almost landing at a smooth 60 FPS.</p><p>The Core i5-7600K provides a decent gaming experience during normal streaming, churning out 79.2 FPS. That's because it really isn't encoding frames, though—it drops 84.9% of them. The stream is unwatchable by any measurement. Again, we can boost the -7600K's encoding performance to 100% by specifying high priority, but then the gaming experience is terrible. In fact, large portions of the scene simply do not render correctly.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xCbryK5Gy3o5HrNgeQma8k.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WFdU2LPHK6qwmzREr7rpz8.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xFVxByhDLuWXzCbFDWjcdd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ryjxDhyEFANuopwXmM6kPA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QMsBMjJT4fHUuwaVqUTL9j.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4q88y28FYDVCUHEahQzjac.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wvbJg2EGkuZX8Pm3Yhx5c4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fBaZ4DuZYtvzwzNDH3reHo.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/D96ReHAHZWNrF4Zk7qt5LE.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Overclocking the Core i5-7600K doesn't help; it's still entirely saturated during the streaming test. But tuning does benefit Intel's Core i5-8600K, which leads the pack in both average and 99th percentile metrics. Its streaming quality is decent as well.</p><p>The Ryzen 5 1600X's performance improves after overclocking, too. It doesn't provide the absolute best frame rate while streaming, but it is perfectly playable. Also, Ryzen 5 1600X still offers the smoothest stream, if only just barely.</p><h2 id="middle-earth-shadow-of-war-3">Middle-earth: Shadow of War</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xSvAsbjMcxZ5JhUsoZAN6C.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oYv9WjihuXn4TBcigp9QAc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jbxe8FWrUJDneWu7MTFufS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FchWq8jMkC78oDkFoyZvQC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rATQPNJzdX4X96bM5wzXbY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8t69tp3yrSqWMteCaqKb6k.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uUHKkazKr9gurDWJGLUZwB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pCsgT8Vjf3QpnwRBwYRgdZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WLUPhmkv6ACPrucmWJsYij.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Intel's Core i5-7600K continues to disappoint. It serves up an average of 51.4 FPS while streaming (using the high priority setting) and encoding 100% of the frames. Unfortunately, game smoothness goes out the window again. The 15.9 FPS 99th percentile measurement tells us everything we need to know.</p><p>The Ryzen 5 1600X offers decent gaming performance while streaming, but that Coffee Lake-based -8600K continues leading.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bU4ZZRhoFMzuQVwYdXJobf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NNniarsBtTB8spq5ZLc8j4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8cVvbUzAiBYAasdJswB88i.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rPeimXqrgqE8TWBGpzEyTd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/b6FTCyBk7Lk7kBvgB8MK4N.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wAmB2BoG3brkNDfvHMXfhB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/h5YtBJRxBNJtq4mZ6Ywb75.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6vAcBTSDMkwWs3JSqHLKba.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jZnNvhu3qmCydP9Y5vsMdf.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>AMD's Ryzen 5 1600X offers the best of both worlds, though Core i5-8600K is also very capable. Perhaps tuning the encode could get more performance from the Intel chip. Then again, you could say the same thing about Ryzen 5, which offers the best mix of streaming and frame rates in its class. It's obvious from these results that a Kaby Lake-based Core i5 owner needs to dial back streaming settings dramatically or turn to faster hardware.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="amd-ryzen-7-amp-intel-core-i7">AMD Ryzen 7 & Intel Core i7</h2><p>Paying more for a processor should also get you more performance, right? With that in mind, we're stepping up to the "faster" encoder preset for this CPU class.</p>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="63a85629-d577-491b-a6a0-14310e2aa1ab">            <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-1800X-Processor-YD180XBCAEWOF/dp/B06W9JXK4G?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware-deal&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Ryzen 7 1800X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:100.00%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DryrsSjyiFKtB6LHs6agEc.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 7 1800X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="fc36fed5-1e86-43a1-a15f-16ae7aaf1a3f">            <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80684I78700K-Core-i7-8700K-Processor/dp/B07598VZR8/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Core i7-8700K" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:122.29%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/j7KjsgaP5iuRZ7RRqGYQTc.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Intel Core i7-8700K</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="385e74ba-92a8-4e40-b900-d45bfcee0dbe">            <a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16819117726" data-model-name="Core i7-7700K" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:75.00%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QWuGde6q26sBZmuq6QdiSD.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Intel Core i7-7700K (Kaby Lake)</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><h2 id="battlefield-1-2">Battlefield 1</h2><p>The Core i5-7600K disappointed us in the previous round of tests, and Core i7-7700K picks up where the i5 left off. This chip just isn't well-equipped for streaming, despite the additional four threads enabled by Hyper-Threading. The -7700K dropped 94.3% of our frames using the normal settings, which comes as a side effect of excessive CPU utilization. We triggered the high priority setting to try rectifying this situation, but were presented the same bipolar behavior as Intel's Core i5-7600K. There just isn't a straightforward way around saturated CPU cores. You can either stream well or game well, but you can't do both with Kaby Lake-based processors and OBS streaming at 1920x1080/60FPS.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7kPstuJs3gMxfxpqRrXXPD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/w4eyaX7qY6VuujCr5fqPvT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/t7emJ53oYnkvE95Q9ubSzA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8McyxFcCY38LVAL7hG6koT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/z4kPcPZn8QyphGJUrYH2UV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/s7pyXGL94988EfwrTgtCym.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YZhaUB7DZY6nMsCALm6ppT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/22wnLQFJ9p5c9Md3cQ6exZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/z6oBtsEFFSvNYcnGZmHnP6.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Ryzen 7 1800X bears down with eight cores and 16 threads to provide solid streaming and gaming performance.</p><p>Core i7-8700K, which brings Coffee Lake up to a Hyper-Threaded six-core design, also performs well in this test. Overall, it offers the best gaming performance while streaming, 99th percentiles included. It even ekes past Ryzen 7 1800X with 100% of frames encoded to the stream. AMD's Ryzen 7 delivers 99.9% of the frames, and dropping 0.1% doesn't concern us. The stream is still smooth.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/j9j7tsx2h3JuP4PZGxDx3b.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2nBCezqDCXEyPBdMazQinR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vCZ2AkCCehcQgCHXC43fy7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yziX8oVnazXo3nPBwPRi9K.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8sYbUPeGfhWENdwfcbJFZ4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LGy35Uztrpm63MERyr5UL9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rfHTv5pXxDMeY5a3ghqXmM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nwQ3ZDga7k2ozUQVu5vErR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/drcrVqywVwo2QMAnELfs5H.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Overclocked, Ryzen 7 1800X delivers an ever-so-slightly better stream. But the Core i7-8700K leads in overall gaming performance. Of course, the 1800X's 117.8 FPS average, while streaming, is plenty impressive. Both processors prove up to this task.</p><p>Our encoding workload pegs the -7700K's cores at 100%, while the high priority settings help bring down CPU utilization. Simply, that's because the CPU has fewer frames to encode as a result of lower gaming performance.</p><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-5">Grand Theft Auto V</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mUM4PD4DnMbZtjNMrWeZiW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rZj2w3xFX59vsydRhxfKQZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cX4VaTS4DHYinjSdMJku2f.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2ks62fmkAdGe5oNVtS2fW9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LupFyRJaFdFNGM3Fb2udhd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MsvhJfjNXd3p9BCjMYjADa.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2koEgr4MxF8oKUvek267Mg.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tLM9YwWmq6EUPs7KkwK7sd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dLDbTnPRHGaioV2rF9GKGc.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Core i7-8700K takes a healthy lead during the baseline and streaming tests. It even provides more in-game performance while streaming than an unencumbered Ryzen 7 1800X.</p><p>Ryzen 7 1800X again achieves lower gaming performance, but a slightly superior stream than Intel's -8700K. The differences are pretty much imperceptible, though. Kaby Lake, on the other hand, simply can't compete.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/maazxnCM6nh8CzUJSxEaZA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ycMRh4K8hBrwWAYUqnsim5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xsb9tDyfnJjWRrYRja4sJC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/w2maCP4LoprXHRv7cZzXJX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4cTm5u9xAM3fbLsmmCTn8U.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZJbXyuHNHR3od3QdYYd9XV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EcW5LkkDmvaJaSCszMFKob.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nt8jNjQ3PXfgFPmKhGBcQd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dYqdYC8aBd9JrZFAn7opUK.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Turning up the clocks benefits Coffee Lake greatly. Core i7-8700K offers the best overall performance, while Ryzen 7 1800X is competitive.</p><h2 id="middle-earth-shadow-of-war-4">Middle-earth: Shadow of War</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XUAmo9uWtVYQPm35EXTdJL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eF5AFikKAjFFsbSrVLsxAE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DJigmLFLRivU44LwUKc3k8.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/x88vp2QekCvqokdFxPh6aL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bRmcQumWgxuqgmsRfwnRWA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YzRw94tJd2rtW2keyKXx5G.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aEH4Q8QdhTY9hLwD7yALML.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aAPCSE8dTiRoSYppiLT6gX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tWYErk2VqYmGvcyHDX3YjT.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Coffee Lake continues to impress with strong in-game and streaming performance. The Ryzen 7 1800X does encode a higher percentage of frames than -8700K within the desirable 16.667ms range, but it also generates fewer frames. AMD's Ryzen does have more headroom to spare during our streaming workload though, so it'd likely accommodate more taxing encode presets.</p><p>We find that the stream frame time variance isn't very noticeable unless the 16.667ms percentage drops below a 90% threshold, such as what we see from Intel's Core i7-7700K. The -7700K does serve up better frame rates while it's streaming, even besting AMD's Ryzen 7 1800X. But that goes to show why we need to keep an eye on performance from every angle. Core i7-7700K drops 40% of its frames during this test! That makes any gaming performance advantage meaningless.</p><p>Ryzen 7 1800X musters a solid 75.4 FPS during the streaming test and provides a crisp stream to YouTube, as well.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Q647WCXiQiqc5nVANvegBQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7sCS7ciDrVijFTZSbNdBjh.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oFBLxkHuknHWGMytLNpuTN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/may6UhWDdBS3DqW7gg9asW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2D4rDuA5zAt9iQ7paBVFyC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GQtrD5P7uYh68pcSU4okrh.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HeJYQmu4fCSYtfb9M4AFZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gC4CXVxYvZSKtfD4z2GcnU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/b8PyQ9p8vsAQ7DBtkkqrEB.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Overclocking amplifies the trends we've been talking about. The same inherent strengths and weaknesses are still apparent. Ryzen 7 1800X and Core i7-8700K are both solid choices for streaming.</p><p>The Core i7-7700K demonstrates lower CPU utilization than usual during this test. Surprisingly, that doesn't equate to a usable combination of in-game and streaming performance, though, suggesting other architectural influences may be affecting our numbers.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="amd-threadripper-amp-intel-skylake-x-i9">AMD Threadripper & Intel Skylake-X i9</h2><p>You expect the best when you drop $1000+ on a CPU for gaming and streaming simultaneously. So, we shifted to the "fast" setting for this round of tests.</p>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="e60459da-6b62-4bb4-957f-39c60cfd2fc3">            <a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16819113447" data-model-name="Ryzen Threadripper 1950X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:117.59%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xkDqtUHi3GRxqU9bPUAxwb.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="9f38998d-0627-446e-b114-b3febf641cdf">            <a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16819117795" data-model-name="Core i9-7900X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:84.60%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3KrAk3j8hitzRpnQZruTQj.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Intel Core i9-7900X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="080fda41-af9b-46ac-bdeb-46924572bf57">            <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Core-i9-7980XE-Processors-BX80673I97980X/dp/B075XRYMDR/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Core i9-7980XE" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:100.00%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NWdfN834WGqoTDkWrMi2aN.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Intel Core i9-7980XE</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><h2 id="battlefield-1-3">Battlefield 1</h2><p>AMD didn’t design Threadripper for "just" gaming, particularly at lower resolutions. But an intense streaming workload might expose more of the architecture's benefits.</p><p>Threadripper does have several configurable modes to tailor to its response to various tasks, as we outlined in our <strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-threadripper-1950x-game-performance,5207.html">AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X Game Mode, Benchmarked</a></strong> article. Game Mode and Creator Mode both impact various titles differently, and we expect those same trends to carry over to our streaming benchmark. As such, we tested the Threadripper 1950X both ways.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2f4W34wvGYaCHtgRE8eaFN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mGQ6NBEhKxjjLfxKKUZGcP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sfBEDo8TDST9HBZSTBxKv.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7wSiu9wdMwNDpZaVty7aqM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PtfNenNzQbXjhEvTwtZ6yd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JtrWhavqNxyFVr9uRRKSgU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gDW2q9EvNHUcV69kv8vDoE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nSTYiDQcHKMvYXQztZdu98.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HpwCWWKkSNru3ZMQbUGaHF.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Threadripper 1950X pulls into range of Intel's Skylake-X models during our baseline tests. Creator Mode (CM) exposes all 32 of the 1950X's available threads, yielding more potential horsepower than Game Mode (GM). The 1950X's Creator Mode also makes it possible to encode 100% of the test run's frames, while Game Mode drops 1.6% of them. That isn't a huge sacrifice, but Game Mode also causes Threadripper to average 26 FPS fewer. That means it isn't encoding as many frames, either. We would have expected higher frame rates from a lighter encoding workload, but disabling half of the 1950X's threads in pursuit of higher game performance doesn't always work well when you're streaming, too.</p><p>The 18C/36T Core i9-7980XE doesn't perform as well as the 10C/20T Core i9-7900X during the streaming tests. Rather, the -7980XE stumbles in the smoothness department as its 99th percentile frame rates fall below the Threadripper 1950X, despite a lead in average frame rates.</p><p>Aside from Threadripper 1950X in Game Mode, all of these processors encode 100% of the frames.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GyQFdqHzAMwHA8s4YNHZig.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qJPKXWJU7B7EwKCdy4dRxG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fRDra24sNmJNr6wcdWQrDm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8A67SxB8m7d5zYeNVTgBZn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2PzpBVayW7X3CAGGwtfhgA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pc6dg95mgMVEi2XoWBFqCB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nkNoNtPqLCR5U9x4cXXKg9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rgdn7Hqf7PGyqBiTmQEEpQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4ppDEGbF4tCb3kETqZoy9J.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Core i9-7980XE's game performance is higher than the Threadripper models during our streaming test after bumping up clock rates. It also delivers a much better 99th percentile measurement.</p><p>AMD's Threadripper configurations fare better after tuning, too. Both encode 99.9% of the frames we send their way, which is adequate for a quality stream.</p><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-6">Grand Theft Auto V</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Dt3YRcGTab5swx7mqx7Pge.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mArgBKW4BwrEtuVq2hFT7C.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/n4gSh2YVfd6ETqmjXsHtJD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mQLGpdn5ZHgemA26CPoBrN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9QbFBnvNcQfx7XzqLWkfKe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/het2Wr47BxCi2mCRxAQU7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MBQxYCSBk76wa89bQVsznV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9Zi8PYkEDhwUsSZaWxg95m.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mJoqrnQFX7gnaVRM6sqaNP.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Grand Theft Auto V</em>'s in-game performance goes Intel's way during the baseline benchmarks. Moreover, Core i9-7980XE redeems itself when it comes time to stream. That chip does command quite a premium though, so its advantage doesn't necessarily represent the best value.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Dpst7rrwjEaYQLMpVJiiHV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tbdyea66uf2NqoBnWC4gbE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dFZujhQWHLSYEB3abdVM5i.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3Weoby3XXvY6VGKK66vxJ7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HV2gRXKUeDzuNMMt2ZLrgF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xBD8EWxJvWYyQrao7fPioW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XaNwJFKFNjmhXY2Gbgb8ia.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SK3E2AqhEVBZuxaB38PTK6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gjdcNoGMqiUBprL4fQXqmk.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Again, Threadripper's Game Mode just doesn't appear to be ideal for streaming. Game Mode provides better baseline frame rates in this title, but it falls to the bottom of our chart once we start encoding video.</p><h2 id="middle-earth-shadow-of-war-5">Middle-earth: Shadow of War</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sNn3jVJYrFc62RsLkfLGdG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/C55HuohyZsCHeNXe5zAT6m.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Crvwh3FmbyB4Ebn7VBCcsM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QPCLyNo2Aqb9vANk9ExicM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xa4V866ob2JGBuEnDGS6y5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/S4fCJRwfR8CNTKafsQxsEi.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/h9ciCXB2cM6WSw9aAF3Uf7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/64XxeHqnhSDNfRpw5wUmAe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5ZfdKioGbrWJNMVDgiTRgM.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Once again, Intel's processors offer the best in-game and streaming performance. This isn't entirely surprising; Threadripper may even be overkill for this type of enthusiast workload. We'd expect the architecture to handle workstation-class production workflows more adeptly.</p><p>Core i9-7900X does encounter a hiccup as its 99th percentile scores fall below Threadripper 1950X's during the streaming workload. The 1950X in Creator Mode also experiences some variance, with 20.38% of its frames falling below the 16.667ms threshold.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dfTz93y8kmr6K8XJyySyXL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/F32ra9KzvnUVYuULTUNYRa.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ou6wzhrXFjHbFy9FgZpraV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/upEQTY5wtaGW6DDL6ryYga.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ff3YyMrrH6bxazdzcCBz89.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/y7T9PSDyRSAWhCztTjbbmH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/p4oz95XNvtiuR4JX4sSXuK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fLYejjgesXSaZPeNaiDuNM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/onD3ZPv3hwfd8DSGo8XsFY.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Even after a bit of tuning, Core i9-7900X provides a higher average frame rate than the 1950X in Creator Mode during our streaming benchmark, but can't match AMD's 99th percentile performance.</p><p>The Threadripper 1950X's difficulty in Creator Mode while streaming <em>Middle-earth</em> is even more pronounced. Some aspect of OBS doesn't agree with Creator Mode and this one game. We ran the tests several times to ensure it was a repeatable phenomenon.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="final-analysis">Final Analysis</h2><p>AMD democratized access to high core counts with an attractively-priced Ryzen portfolio. In a way, we can thank the company for Intel's newfound interest in competing on a $/core basis. Just look at the difference in our results from Kaby Lake to Coffee Lake. As a result, high-quality software encoding on a gaming PC is becoming more realistic to mainstream gamers.</p><p>Our testing is indicative of general performance trends. Given enough time and energy, you could almost certainly improve upon our results. Part of that is by design: we're using these settings to compare large groups of processors against one another on a level playing field, as opposed to wringing the most performance out of any one processor. While we can't use our benchmarks to make definitive statements about the possibilities with each chip, we can draw some fair conclusions about how certain architectures behave.</p><p>Encoding is a parallelizable workload. If software encoding is your primary goal, you'll definitely want to seek out CPUs with lots of cores and simultaneous multi-threading capabilities. Intel's quad-core Kaby Lake models illustrate how chips that once offered class-leading gaming performance can fall apart during streaming. You can boost their performance by using less intensive quality presets, lowering the streaming frame rate, or sacrificing some quality with GPU acceleration. However, competing processors offer much more performance than Kaby Lake at the same presets and roughly the same price.</p><p>Many streamers place video quality over maximizing the frame rate of whatever game they're playing, so your own priorities will largely dictate how you tune your system. In fact, turning on v-sync may be a good way to balance streaming and gaming performance.<strong>If you seek the highest in-game performance while you stream, Intel's Coffee Lake-based Core i7-8700K is a good fit</strong>. <strong>The Ryzen 7 1800X is also competitive and tends to offer better streaming performance</strong>. Using our settings, the 1800X also had more CPU headroom leftover for more taxing encode settings, if desired. Granted, some of that extra horsepower is due to the 1800X's lower gaming performance, which means there are fewer frames to encode.</p><p>Two extra cores on the Coffee Lake-based Core i5 certainly help its standing, but the lack of Hyper-Threading has a definite impact on streaming performance. <strong>In the end, a six-core Core i5-8600K is forced to battle the 12-thread Ryzen 5 1600X, which offers a more balanced profile</strong>. Overclocking does help Intel somewhat. It can't overcome the advantage AMD gets from a more thread-heavy architecture, but it shrinks the gap somewhat in streaming workloads.</p><p>If you're really serious about streaming and gaming at the same time, the highest-end desktop CPUs are an option. Just expect to pay dearly for them. Most enthusiasts are better served by mainstream processors. Intel's Core i9 models generally provide better performance than the Threadripper 1950X, but they cost more, too. The 1950X is a solid value choice that also offers a diverse range of capabilities.</p><p>There are plenty of other solid options for gaming/streaming, and this introductory round of tests only focused on high-end models from each family. We'll expand our testing to locked SKUs as we work through coming CPU reviews.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core i5-8400 Review: Six Cores On A Budget ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-core-i5-8400-cpu,5281.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Intel's Core i5-8400 is the cheapest modern six-core CPU out there. Can Coffee Lake on a budget hold its own against the mighty Ryzen 5? ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">vHZmh5Gpm2ukDbgA5Rzyq3</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XdMbWrzTiXab2hPt2y7gFQ-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 25 Oct 2017 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:27:19 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ palcorn@outlook.com (Paul Alcorn) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Paul Alcorn ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RZRmFeQfPy3etHjBQitbGW.jpeg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;As a teenager, Paul scraped up enough money to buy a 486-powered PC with a turbo button (yes, a turbo button). Back when floppies were still popular he was already chasing after the fastest spinners for his personal computer, which led him down the long and winding storage road, covering enterprise storage. His current focus is on consumer processors, though he still keeps a close eye on the latest storage news. In his spare time, you’ll find Paul hanging out with his kids or indulging his love of the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                <cf:isSponsored>false</cf:isSponsored>
                <cf:hasAffiliateLinks>false</cf:hasAffiliateLinks>
                <cf:isPaid>false</cf:isPaid>
                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XdMbWrzTiXab2hPt2y7gFQ-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XdMbWrzTiXab2hPt2y7gFQ-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="meet-intel-39-s-core-i5-8400">Meet Intel's Core i5-8400</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1414px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:108.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Mbp7fKeJrnqTAagSTBP399.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Mbp7fKeJrnqTAagSTBP399.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1414" height="1540" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Mbp7fKeJrnqTAagSTBP399.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>There's no doubt that AMD's Ryzen processors challenged Intel's position in the desktop PC market this summer. Seemingly in response (though we all know this stuff is planned way in advance), the Coffee Lake-based Core i7 and i5 CPUs landed with six cores each. That was a first for Intel's mainstream platform.</p><p>The Core i5 series typically offers enthusiasts the best performance for their dollar. But with those two extra cores, Intel's highest-end Core i5 is now faster than Core i7-7700K in most games, and even in some applications. This means the Coffee Lake Core i5s basically replace last generation's Core i7s. Talk about a huge step forward. Now the mid-range chips can backstop top-end GPUs without becoming bottlenecks.</p><p>For more information on Coffee Lake's impact in the mainstream space, check out our <strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-core-i5-8600k-cpu,5264.html">Intel Core i5-8600K Review</a></strong>. Today, though, we're focusing on the less expensive, but multiplier-locked, Core i5-8400.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Active Cores</strong></td><td  >Base Frequency</td><td  ><strong>1</strong></td><td  ><strong>2</strong></td><td  ><strong>4</strong></td><td  ><strong>6</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Intel Core i5-8600K </strong></td><td  >3.6 GHz</td><td  >4.3 GHz</td><td  >4.2 GHz</td><td  >4.2 GHz</td><td  >4.1 GHz</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Intel Core i5-8400</strong></td><td  >2.8 GHz</td><td  >4.0 GHz</td><td  >3.9 GHz</td><td  >3.9 GHz</td><td  >3.8 GHz</td></tr><tr><td  >Intel Core i5-7400</td><td  >3.0 GHz</td><td  >3.5 GHz</td><td  >3.4 GHz</td><td  >3.3 GHz</td><td  >-</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Like the more expensive Core i5-8600K, Intel&apos;s -8400 features six cores without Hyper-Threading. Aside from its locked multiplier, the key differences boil down to clock rates, thermal design power, and price. A 2.8 GHz base frequency is the lowest of all Coffee Lake-based processors, including Intel&apos;s Core i3 models. That&apos;s because the company had to squeeze into the -8400&apos;s 65W TDP, while Core i5-8600K gets a 95W rating, allowing the same silicon to accommodate a 3.6 GHz base.</p><p>On the surface, a lower clock rate looks bad for performance. But remember that Intel&apos;s Turbo Boost technology accelerates frequencies within certain parameters. This allows the -8400 to go quite a bit faster in workloads that don&apos;t tax all of the -8400&apos;s cores. As you can see in the table above, the 8400&apos;s multi-core Turbo Boost bins get a lot more aggressive than Core i5-7400&apos;s. And they only trail the -8600K by 300 MHz.</p><p>Core i5-8400 drops into a LGA 1551 interface, but as we know from our previous Coffee Lake reviews, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-coffee-lake-z270-z370-motherboard,35554.html">it isn&apos;t backward compatible with 200-series motherboards</a>. That means you&apos;ll have to step up to a 300-series motherboard, even though that means getting no new features in the process. Worse, a rushed launch means the Z370 chipset is your only option for now. Cheaper B- and H-series motherboards, which will cost a lot less, arrive at the beginning of next year. The Core i5-8400 is a locked processor anyway, so the reason most enthusiasts would have had for spending extra (overclocking) doesn&apos;t apply here.</p><p>Intel cites a $182 recommended customer price, which is the same as its Kaby Lake-based Core i5-7400. That&apos;d be a great value for 50% more cores. However, poor supply means that the -8400 is popping in and out of stock, selling for as little as $200 when the big shops receive a shipment. When they run out, smaller vendors run the price up closer to $260. That&apos;s Ryzen 5 1600X territory. AMD also has an advantage in that you can plug its Ryzen chips into B350-based motherboards selling for as little as $80. At least the competing models both include bundled coolers; we don&apos;t always get such a luxury in the high-end space, where you&apos;re often expected to supply your own thermal solution.</p><p><br><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html"><strong>Best CPUs</strong></a></p><p><br><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html"><strong>Intel & AMD Processor Benchmark Comparisons</strong></a></p><p><br><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus"><strong>All CPUs Content</strong></a></p><h2 id="how-we-test">How We Test</h2><h2 id="test-notes">Test Notes</h2><p>MSI motherboards, like many others, feature a default Enhanced Turbo feature that allows the processor to run at its maximum Turbo Boost bin on all cores, at all times. For all practical purposes, this is the same as overclocking. The feature only applies to K-series processors, though, so it isn't a factor in our Core i5-8400 testing.</p><p>We paired our sample with a Z370-based motherboard, which does support faster memory. Sticking with Intel's official specification, we used DDR4-2666 modules to represent the data rates you'll have access to once B- and H-series motherboards surface.</p><p>As far as we can tell on our MSI motherboard, Intel isn't allowing BCLK adjustments. That means the Core i5-8400 locks us down to stock settings.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:916px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:70.85%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sn4DwyvW2g9Eta2A8WNsMR.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sn4DwyvW2g9Eta2A8WNsMR.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="916" height="649" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sn4DwyvW2g9Eta2A8WNsMR.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="comparison-products">Comparison Products</h2>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="b99cbcf5-6911-49dd-87c8-cc5c950319d4">            <a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113434" data-model-name="Ryzen 5 1600X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:75.00%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cnR74jNTGXP9TR45Swwx8j.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 5 1600X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="bd9017e9-4d12-4014-b0c9-955b49b10368">            <a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113436" data-model-name="Ryzen 5 1500X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:85.95%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ehESbYmVU3NPHD7zSz44mR.png" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 5 1500X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="0fd50c07-97ab-45ac-a14c-0cd7bc7e55bf">            <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Processor-Wraith-Stealth-YD1400BBAEBOX/dp/B06XKWT8J4?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware-deal&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Ryzen 5 1400" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:85.95%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ehESbYmVU3NPHD7zSz44mR.png" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 5 1400</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><h2 id="test-systems-2">Test Systems</h2><p>We introduced our new test system and methodology in <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-we-test-graphics-cards,4912.html"><strong>How We Test Graphics Cards</strong></a>. If you'd like more detail about our general approach, check that piece out.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3840px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:66.74%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TnvGnyBUzq8wQvNcYSXJbd.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TnvGnyBUzq8wQvNcYSXJbd.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="3840" height="2563" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TnvGnyBUzq8wQvNcYSXJbd.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Only our CPU, memory, motherboard, and cooling subsystem are different. The table below summarizes the hardware we used to generate our data.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  colspan="2"><strong>Test System & Configuration</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Hardware</strong></td><td  ><strong><strong><strong>Germany </strong></strong></strong><strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z370):</strong>Intel Core i5-8600K, Core i5-8400MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC2x 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4-3200 @ 2666<strong>AMD Socket </strong><strong>AM4 Workstation</strong>AMD Ryzen 5 1500X, Ryzen 5 1600X, Ryzen 5 1400MSI X370 Tomahawk4x 8GB G.Skill TridentZ DDR4-3200 @ 2667 and 3200 <strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z270)</strong>Intel Core i5-7600K, Core i5-7400MSI Z270 Gaming 72x 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4-3200 @ 2400 and 3200<strong>All Systems</strong>GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition (Gaming)Nvidia Quadro P6000 (Workstation)1x 1TB Toshiba OCZ RD400 (M.2, System)2x 960GB Toshiba OCZ TR150 (Storage, Images)be quiet! Dark Power Pro 11, 850W Power SupplyWindows 10 Pro (Creators Update)<strong><strong>U.S.</strong></strong><strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z370):</strong>Intel Core i5-8600K, Core i5-8400MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC4x 8GB G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 @ 2666 and 3200 <strong>AMD Socket AM4 </strong>AMD Ryzen 5 1500X, Ryzen 5 1600X, Ryzen 5 1400MSI X370 Xpower Gaming Titanium2x 8GB G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 @ 2667 and 3200 <strong><span>Intel LGA 1151 (Z270)</span></strong>Intel Core i5-7600K, Core i5-7400 MSI Z270 Gaming M72x 8GB G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 @ 2666 and 3200 <strong>All</strong> EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FE 1TB Samsung PM863 SilverStone ST1500-TI, 1500W Windows 10 Creators Update Version 1703</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cooling</strong></td><td  ><strong>Germany</strong>Alphacool Eiszeit 2000 ChillerAlphacool Eisblock XPXThermal Grizzly Kryonaut (For Cooler Switch)</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Monitor</strong></td><td  >Eizo EV3237-BK</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>PC Case</strong></td><td  >Lian Li PC-T70 with Extension Kit and Mods Configurations: Open Benchtable, Closed Case</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Power Consumption Measurement</strong></td><td  >Contact-free DC Measurement at PCIe Slot (Using a Riser Card) Contact-free DC Measurement at External Auxiliary Power Supply Cable Direct Voltage Measurement at Power Supply 2x Rohde & Schwarz HMO 3054, 500 MHz Digital Multi-Channel Oscilloscope with Storage Function4x Rohde & Schwarz HZO50 Current Probe (1mA - 30A, 100 kHz, DC) 4x Rohde & Schwarz HZ355 (10:1 Probes, 500 MHz) 1x Rohde & Schwarz HMC 8012 Digital Multimeter with Storage Function</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Thermal Measurement</strong></td><td  >1x Optris PI640 80 Hz Infrared Camera + PI Connect Real-Time Infrared Monitoring and Recording</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Acoustic Measurement</strong></td><td  >NTI Audio M2211 (with Calibration File, Low Cut at 50Hz) Steinberg UR12 (with Phantom Power for Microphones)Creative X7, Smaart v.7 Custom-Made Proprietary Measurement Chamber, 3.5 x 1.8 x 2.2m (L x D x H) Perpendicular to Center of Noise Source(s), Measurement Distance of 50cm Noise Level in dB(A) (Slow), Real-time Frequency Analyzer (RTA) Graphical Frequency Spectrum of Noise</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="vrmark-3dmark-amp-aots-escalation-2">VRMark, 3DMark & AotS: Escalation</h2><h2 id="vrmark-amp-3dmark-2">VRMark & 3DMark</h2><p>We aren't big fans of using synthetic benchmarks to measure game performance, but 3DMark's DX11 and DX12 CPU tests provide useful insight into the amount of horsepower available to game engines.</p><p>Futuremark's VRMark test lets you gauge your system's suitability for use with the HTC Vive or Oculus Rift, even if you don't currently own an HMD. The Orange Room test is based on the suggested system requirements for current-generation HTC Vive and Oculus Rift HMDs. Futuremark defines a passing score as anything above 109 FPS.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GRQwzL3H5ryGrmTZKJp5H7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yMePmwWwyA3YFcS8JeJud6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hfbPFuj5LGQ3gVKJrN2n7a.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hqyYWXnhS7gmxbt7CMLTqT.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Core i5-8400 performs well in VRMark, even besting overclocked Ryzen 5 CPUs. Intel's previous-gen Core i5-7400 trails quite a ways back, helping illustrate the -8400's Turbo Boost binning and core count advantage. The -8400 also competes well against the pricier Core i5-8600K, particularly in light of its substantial base frequency deficit. Then again, the -8600K isn't overclocked, and that's what it was designed for.</p><p>The -8400 also challenges Core i5-8600K in the DX11 and DX12 CPU tests. Not surprisingly, it easily trounces the Core i5-7400 with up to 60% more performance. More interesting, perhaps, is that Core i5-8400 beats the Core i5-7600K by a fair margin. </p><h2 id="ashes-of-the-singularity-escalation-4">Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</h2><p><em>Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</em> also scales well with core count. Although many enthusiasts associate this game with AMD (Mantle, anyone?), remember that it didn't run well on Ryzen processors at first. A series of patches subsequently rectified the most glaring issues we identified in our early reviews.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KRjoC3v8jMhx74pE762DCN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/H2kUNoKYPBGxeo9Ak7KJ45.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uhaNNDAdPz4V93VZB9u7hL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DSZ6TRotpV5EvhxqPjpwV6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VZEKwztU4uhBGGa65GhGcj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iztrLmE3gdYhgKnZSE5aeb.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Given the strong performance of AMD's Ryzen 5 1600X, we might surmise that it's AMD's simultaneous multi-threading technology allowing the chip to shine.</p><p>Again, Core i5-8400 is within striking range of its more expensive K-series counterpart, and it easily outmaneuvers its predecessor.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="civilization-vi-battlefield-1-amp-dawn-of-war-iii">Civilization VI, Battlefield 1 & Dawn of War III </h2><h2 id="civilization-vi-ai-test-2">Civilization VI AI Test</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.00%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BayExi9sfE3JrjXrP3MJsA.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BayExi9sfE3JrjXrP3MJsA.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="834" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BayExi9sfE3JrjXrP3MJsA.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The <em>Civilization VI</em> AI test tends to favor a mixture of physical cores, clock rate, and IPC throughput.</p><p>Core i5-8400 essentially ties the Kaby Lake-based -7600K and easily rocks the Core i5-7400. AMD's Ryzen processors trail due to their lower frequencies.</p><h2 id="civilization-vi-graphics-test-2">Civilization VI Graphics Test</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KRjoC3v8jMhx74pE762DCN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/H2kUNoKYPBGxeo9Ak7KJ45.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uhaNNDAdPz4V93VZB9u7hL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DSZ6TRotpV5EvhxqPjpwV6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iztrLmE3gdYhgKnZSE5aeb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VZEKwztU4uhBGGa65GhGcj.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>AMD's unlocked ratio multipliers bring great value to the desktop. The 4C/8T Ryzen 5 1500X trails the -8400 by quite a ways in stock form. However, overclocking makes it competitive. The 6C/12T Ryzen 5 1600X fares much better out of the box, and then jumps into a commanding lead after some tuning.</p><p>This workload again demonstrates the -8400's generational improvement over Kaby Lake-based chips with fewer cores at lower clock rates.</p><h2 id="battlefield-1-dx11">Battlefield 1 (DX11)</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QK93393VicoH7ptAraYvc4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KAiQrNkaTAfBLcEb787une.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VwYbqxGonnM4VUmgVVRnD3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DnD7qBoDX6ysnd3bNuiUUB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vdGGt9uDUv6UpSDSeyqc9B.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZczR8r5mHP9gDiLjxMX6AA.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Both the Core i5-8600K and -8400 appear graphics-bound in our 1920x1080 benchmark. There's more of a delta between the other contenders, though.</p><p>Core i5-8400 offers 17% more performance than the -7400. That's a significant outcome, given the two chips' similar price points.</p><h2 id="warhammer-40-000-dawn-of-war-iii-2">Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War III</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/G9cuJKTUM6EKCBN6c9oNjm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gYHwuuADaev2E9koQMwofN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cT8Gq8ngfua2gy8zY6PHf3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VEFxYwjuERzmsaQyRDrjBU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jPJp2P8zxHmh5m8itmDztX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8tmDmJrcWaqDGWLvNDBUaG.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The <em>Warhammer 40,000: DoW III</em> benchmark scales well with increased execution resources, but aggressive clock rates also provide a big benefit.</p><p>Strangely, Core i5-8400 beats the more expensive Core i5-8600K. This outcome doesn't make much sense, given the specifications in front of us. Clock rates and dissimilar TDPs are the only differences between them, and Core i5-8600K has the advantage in both.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-hitman-amp-shadow-of-mordor">Grand Theft Auto V, Hitman & Shadow of Mordor</h2><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-7">Grand Theft Auto V</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aPRhBPBoTEFWxoqdReNeEW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yEtZHM9ncknWkKHJck7gtc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uQfrPbjFQG8wgifjJ6gDBb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DGQH2y8LLfsDnyrwjWynrF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ahUKgZjYkT3fk7HGVEukj9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LRsQWXwF83yVCuWzjgmHoF.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Core i5-8400 averages 17%-higher frame rates compared to Core i5-7600K. That's a solid jump, but it pales in comparison to the 26% lead over Core i5-7400.</p><p>AMD isn't quite as competitive in this title, though we still think overclocked Ryzen 5 1600X and 1500X CPUs are good complements to the mid-range graphics cards most enthusiasts will pair with them.</p><h2 id="hitman-2016-2">Hitman (2016)</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wxgDdPvcRB3hThAMJLu8eC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Xir3rugX9e59iHRWxiWmP4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DfiqKkKiQnyPjyaqV6mUtF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vekPQDZXT695PjpdoQJ6oA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kdqRYnmNqLT8w2bheLie3W.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cRVz7AayAtAqPnJBeP52kT.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Hitman </em>finds the Core i5-8400 ahead of everything except for Intel's higher-end Core i5-8600K.</p><p>We don't need to break out the percentages to illustrate Coffee Lake's improvements (but we will anyway). Core i5-8400 jumps ahead of the -7600K by 40%, and it beats the -7400 by an astounding 54%.</p><h2 id="middle-earth-shadow-of-mordor">Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KuUW3WEVTCpuiaJXkoEWeb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FL6YwZVPFx2Js53wSyqSAC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9f3c3yjYGWygHdC2YdHxxe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bPzvjj8f4FhRWaP9difbph.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eXVSp2JruqZQtkajBmWpZU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GP5hBHzRodtszySdG6XKrY.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The -7600K and -7400 feature higher base frequencies than their Coffee Lake-based counterparts, and that's an advantage in games that don't benefit much from Turbo Boost. <em>Shadow of Mordor</em> falls into that category, so the Kaby Lake models take small leads over the newer Core i5-8600K and -8400.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="project-cars-far-cry-primal-amp-rise-of-the-tomb-raider">Project CARS, Far Cry Primal & Rise of the Tomb Raider</h2><h2 id="project-cars">Project CARS</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8WPUqJbnV9jGSfrQJ5yLdK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8xfK96YAtMaKiSCazKfFvK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/X4JyE34GmnaVvti43YEure.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4f3doaNPmusW2QhJzSB5cT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wVDt4sRj4x3y2JwbNS4K5U.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KwdrmVYgXYQS9HNHyaam6V.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Given the results we've seen in other threaded titles, our results in <em>Project CARS</em> aren't surprising. Intel's Coffee Lake models establish a quantifiable lead over Kaby Lake-based chips.</p><p>An overclocked Ryzen 5 1600X is also competitive, though it's a lot more expensive than Core i5-8400. Of course, you could always go for the Ryzen 5 1600, which offers similar performance as the 1600X after overclocking. But it'd still trail the Core i5-8400. </p><h2 id="far-cry-primal-4">Far Cry Primal</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/F6PtqsNRDZZFE4UQabu5Gn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fkCzSeUKKzmofbL3mJ3jg7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DQQ4ijXM6QMLXVWehMp8mh.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wDKyuMtd4yNebfXe7QjkTR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iYbvDcakPqPJ8BYEDEf9nb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/734Hb9SY5fPmYS4pJJFH3D.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Far Cry Primal's</em> Dunia Engine 2 responds well to high clock rates and IPC throughput. However, it also seems to like when we turn off simultaneous multi-threading.</p><p>Both Coffee Lake-based Core i5s are tied, likely due to a graphics-imposed bottleneck.</p><p>The overclocked Ryzen 5 1600X and 1500X beat Intel's Kaby Lake processors. Then again, the -7600K is overclockable itself, so it'd offer additional performance if we pushed beyond stock settings. </p><h2 id="rise-of-the-tomb-raider">Rise of the Tomb Raider</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Sz9DvzceT4asewW3hJ8ULE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PCkddap2uXfpDKGhWJYkgV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zmYJLxgaorbMU5daDRHm4n.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QknFsBGBVyUk9FJjfn2RBT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hQV9WwvRoLPu5YdxUq4E8a.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6JsAzL5rgQuBXU6NY43E2K.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Rise of the Tomb Raider</em> shows three Core i5s essentially tied for first place, likely due to a graphics bottleneck.</p><p>The Core i5-7400 shows us its less attractive side, kicking out several disturbing frame time outliers that manifest as visible stuttering.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="dtp-office-amp-multimedia-performance">DTP, Office & Multimedia Performance</h2><h2 id="dtp-and-presentation">DTP and Presentation</h2><p>Adobe’s Creative Cloud gives us a look at real-world single- and multi-threaded performance. As such, it's more interesting to us than synthetic benchmarks for productivity testing.</p><p>After Effects CC is the classic example of a workload that prizes parallelism, so core count trumps clock rates.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SoBpUoXxtacbG79KEdhczP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cpfETTHAGXUYJfWY8i9g9g.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4JqdbQMPkahW2oPXMjfn89.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BedLt4fzW5kfqtCBvYLMym.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>As long as some cores go underutilized, though, Coffee Lake usually wins thanks to its higher frequencies.</p><p>Strangely, under InDesign CC, the Core i5-8400 repeatedly falls behind Intel's Core i5-7400. The same happens when we test the K-series SKUs. This is likely a result of lower Turbo Boost frequencies, handing the advantage over to Kaby Lake's higher base clock rates.</p><h2 id="encoding-and-multimedia">Encoding and Multimedia</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BRshk2p2hCusGxyJK5kBuc.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BRshk2p2hCusGxyJK5kBuc.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BRshk2p2hCusGxyJK5kBuc.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The new Core i5-8400 keeps up with other processors in its class. However, the pricier Ryzen 5 1600X takes the lead once we overclock it.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/w5pxJR3EbnRNResogmrarW.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/w5pxJR3EbnRNResogmrarW.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/w5pxJR3EbnRNResogmrarW.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Taxing high-quality settings allow AMD to close the gap, and Ryzen 5 1600X now beats the Core i5-8400 in stock form. Again, though, it's also more expensive. The difference, of course, is that AMD gives you freedom to overclock. A tuned 1600X better-justifies the price premium.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="2d-amp-3d-workstation-performance">2D & 3D Workstation Performance</h2><h2 id="2d-performance">2D Performance</h2><p>Our GDI/GDI+ tests are used to test two different output methods that can be found in older applications and printing tasks. Today, they (or at least a modified version of them) are commonly used to display the graphical user interface). Theses are also great benchmarks for direct device write throughput and memory performance when handling gigantic device-independent bitmap files.</p><h2 id="synthetic-2d-benchmarks">Synthetic 2D Benchmarks</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8kzdVG4nBHtEkKDv2yj7c9.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8kzdVG4nBHtEkKDv2yj7c9.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8kzdVG4nBHtEkKDv2yj7c9.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We take a look at direct device write throughput first. The graphics driver makes heavy use of CPU cycles for this task, but doesn’t spawn many threads. As a result, high clock rates and IPC throughput are favored, both of which are strengths of Intel's Coffee Lake design. </p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KtDFNutB4c4EdkuPtxwGMX.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KtDFNutB4c4EdkuPtxwGMX.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KtDFNutB4c4EdkuPtxwGMX.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We up the ante by introducing memory to the mix. This is done with the help of the only remaining 2D hardware function: generating the graphics output in memory and then copying it to the output device all at once. The benchmark’s the same as before. We just plot a bitmap in memory, as opposed to sending the information directly to the monitor. This pushes the CPUs, since they’re no longer platform-bound.</p><p>The results prove interesting: frequency still rules, but AMD is more competitive. An overclocked Ryzen 5 1600X takes the lead over Core i5-8400, and the -7600K beats Intel's -8600K.</p><h2 id="autocad-2016-2d">AutoCAD 2016 (2D)</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gNUkUJuWmvQ8XxWTDvFHuN.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gNUkUJuWmvQ8XxWTDvFHuN.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gNUkUJuWmvQ8XxWTDvFHuN.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Even though AutoCAD does use DirectX, ultimately it just duplicates every single draw function in software. The software d<span class="notranslate">oesn't scale well over additional cores though, so IPC throughput is usually more important. That makes Core i5-8400's lead over the -7400 more impressive, showing just much higher Turbo Boost frequencies in lightly threaded workloads can improve performance. <br/></span></p><h2 id="3d-performance">3D Performance</h2><p>Most professional development applications have been optimized and compiled with Intel CPUs in mind. This is reflected in their performance numbers. Still, we include them in order to motivate developers to focus their efforts on AMD’s Ryzen processors as well. This would give users more than one choice. The same goes for an emphasis on multi-core processors, at least where that’s feasible and makes sense.</p><h2 id="autocad-2016-3d">AutoCAD 2016 (3D)</h2><p>Clock rate trumps core count. Intel’s Kaby Lake and Coffee Lake land fairly close to each other, with clock rate determining the winner. AutoCAD’s performance turns out to be close to that of older games, since it uses DirectX and isn’t really optimized to take advantage of multiple cores.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Amqxs8EWaZ2hPj8JLZ9y9J.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Amqxs8EWaZ2hPj8JLZ9y9J.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Amqxs8EWaZ2hPj8JLZ9y9J.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Performance scales enormously with frequency because the graphics card finally gets used properly.</p><h2 id="cinebench-r15-opengl">Cinebench R15 OpenGL</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3a3CpkXp9v9N4QHAJizVbU.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3a3CpkXp9v9N4QHAJizVbU.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3a3CpkXp9v9N4QHAJizVbU.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Frequency is (almost) everything in the Cinebench R15 OpenGL benchmark. Intel's Core i5-8400 is on similar footing with the older four-core Core i5-7600K.</p><h2 id="solidworks-2015">SolidWorks 2015</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xkvav7Cif2S9ZcMSQkERCj.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xkvav7Cif2S9ZcMSQkERCj.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xkvav7Cif2S9ZcMSQkERCj.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>SolidWorks 2015 also emphasizes clock rate, and it typically doesn't utilize more than four cores.</p><h2 id="creo-3-0">Creo 3.0 </h2><h2 id="3"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vEvJNgtUvX2Eixh6XJ2KxM.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vEvJNgtUvX2Eixh6XJ2KxM.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vEvJNgtUvX2Eixh6XJ2KxM.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Creo 3.0 paints the same picture: lots of cores don't improve performance when it comes to drafting using real-time 3D graphics output. The Core i5-8400 continues to beat the previous-generation -7600K, wrecking Intel's Core i5-7400 in the process.</p><h2 id="blender-and-3ds-max-real-time-3d-preview">Blender and 3ds Max (Real-Time 3D Preview)</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VZyB4cGk3Cf9YJHT9P5pCB.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VZyB4cGk3Cf9YJHT9P5pCB.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VZyB4cGk3Cf9YJHT9P5pCB.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The Blender and 3ds Max real-time 3D previews yield similar results. Mainly, frequency is everything.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2woddEvj3Whgp34SqFaGjE.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2woddEvj3Whgp34SqFaGjE.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2woddEvj3Whgp34SqFaGjE.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The 3ds Max results aren’t based on time to completion. Rather, this benchmark generates a composite index based on CPU performance during a set time period.</p><h2 id="catia-v6-r2012">Catia V6 R2012</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5yyggfpoqzC59j7xBwUQkm.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5yyggfpoqzC59j7xBwUQkm.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5yyggfpoqzC59j7xBwUQkm.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>This is one of the graphics benchmarks that has been optimized time and again (it’s part of the free SPECviewperf 12 suite). However, it still provides a fairly good measure of CPU performance, with an emphasis on clock rate.</p><h2 id="maya-2013">Maya 2013</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gCNhoy9TXEoNunnHKiccFB.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gCNhoy9TXEoNunnHKiccFB.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gCNhoy9TXEoNunnHKiccFB.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>At the risk of beating a dead horse, our chart paints a picture we've seen several times already. The real-time 3D output numbers don’t tell the entire story, though, as we'll see during final rendering.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="cpu-computing-amp-rendering-performance">CPU Computing & Rendering Performance</h2><h2 id="cpu-performance-workstation">CPU Performance: Workstation</h2><p>Many modern suites include modules that are based exclusively on computing and simulations. This means we need to go beyond just 3D workstation performance. However, software packages like SolidWorks don’t scale perfectly based on core/thread count. Consequently, even quad-core processors keep up if they run at high-enough frequencies and support SMT.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sEgQWNjj5jSkksVMSrsrWT.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sEgQWNjj5jSkksVMSrsrWT.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sEgQWNjj5jSkksVMSrsrWT.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>This is also seen in a direct comparison between the Core i5-7600K and Core i5-8400. The latter does not benefit much from its extra cores and larger aggregate cache.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vEvJNgtUvX2Eixh6XJ2KxM.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vEvJNgtUvX2Eixh6XJ2KxM.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vEvJNgtUvX2Eixh6XJ2KxM.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Frequency is all that counts in Creo 3.0. Compared to Intel's Core i5-7600K, the company's -8400 only derives small advantages from its two additional cores.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eHi2qHe5yoweBKCTcjKmUD.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eHi2qHe5yoweBKCTcjKmUD.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eHi2qHe5yoweBKCTcjKmUD.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Clock rate and core count both matter in 3ds Max 2015, so the Core i5-8400 lands slightly behind Intel's Core i5-8600K.</p><p>Though an overclocked Ryzen 5 1600X is close on Coffee Lake's heels, the -8400 costs less and facilitates higher performance.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7TXp54jJ4TCRswEqgyyQcY.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7TXp54jJ4TCRswEqgyyQcY.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7TXp54jJ4TCRswEqgyyQcY.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The CPU Composite benchmark makes extensive use of rendering, though, so AMD's Ryzen 5 appears much stronger. Now it's an overclocked 1500X going up against (and beating) Core i5-8400. A lack of Hyper-Threading support likely hurts Intel here.</p><h2 id="cpu-performance-photorealistic-rendering">CPU Performance: Photorealistic rendering</h2><p>Final rendering doesn’t require a CPU that's good at everything. Rather, this task wants efficiency and fast parallel computation.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sCGYHxDWQZPupbMGkHe8jU.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sCGYHxDWQZPupbMGkHe8jU.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sCGYHxDWQZPupbMGkHe8jU.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>When it comes to pure rendering, the Core i5-8400 offers best-in-class performance. It is only challenged by AMD's pricier Ryzen 5 1600X.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5UpLmxbHq3euaziv8iwHPk.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5UpLmxbHq3euaziv8iwHPk.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5UpLmxbHq3euaziv8iwHPk.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The console variant of LuxRender confirms that none of Intel's Core i5s can compete with the Ryzen 5 1600X, stock or overclocked.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vdN7wwQ9ZthmdgKoZmRtsX.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vdN7wwQ9ZthmdgKoZmRtsX.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vdN7wwQ9ZthmdgKoZmRtsX.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Last, but not least, we take a look at Blender in several different workloads.</p><p>The first one, with a sample size of 200 pixels, confirms what we saw in the preceding benchmarks: Core i5-8400 trails the Ryzen 5 1600X by a big margin. In fact, a stock 1600X has little trouble beating the Core i5-8600K by more than 20%.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1113px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.93%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Fs2sz6xh8SjQMKQQzhXddc.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Fs2sz6xh8SjQMKQQzhXddc.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1113" height="834" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Fs2sz6xh8SjQMKQQzhXddc.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The results obtained from SPECwpc’s Blender loop look similar, even though this benchmark presents a somewhat different task consisting of more than just rendering. Ryzen 5 takes a big lead over Core i5.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aG4QD8jnBoxeJkqQWX9vbM.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aG4QD8jnBoxeJkqQWX9vbM.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aG4QD8jnBoxeJkqQWX9vbM.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The Core i5-8600K pushes upwards as the amount of pure rendering decreases. The rest of the results look similar, though, and Core i5-8400 suffers from its lack of Hyper-Threading.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9rihLSWwK77VPzn5yvxxeY.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9rihLSWwK77VPzn5yvxxeY.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9rihLSWwK77VPzn5yvxxeY.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>This trend intensifies as our benchmark incorporates tasks other than photorealistic rendering. Core count isn't the sole determiner of performance; IPC throughput factors in as well. The Core i5-8600K even leads, followed by Intel's Core i5-8400.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Wu36zbKfUtbZib38RZo3if.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Wu36zbKfUtbZib38RZo3if.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Wu36zbKfUtbZib38RZo3if.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Ryzen 5 1600X jumps to the front once again. Core count matters, of course, but operating frequency is also a critical variable.</p><p>Intel’s Core i5-8400 offers acceptable performance in semi-professional applications, so it's more than just a gaming CPU. However, the Core i5 series lacks Hyper-Threading support, which is apparent in highly parallelized workloads. Those tasks tend to favor AMD's Ryzen chips.</p><p>Then again, this throws the potent six-core chips right where Intel wants them. If they fared <em>too </em>well, Core i5 would cannibalize sales of the pricier Core i7s.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="cooling-amp-temperature">Cooling & Temperature</h2><h2 id="power-consumption-in-detail">Power Consumption In Detail</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZXwMVCRWnnJLtHBZBvvxXJ.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZXwMVCRWnnJLtHBZBvvxXJ.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZXwMVCRWnnJLtHBZBvvxXJ.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>At idle, the differences in power consumption between Intel's CPUs are fairly marginal. All of them end up just about where we'd expect.</p><p>AMD's Ryzen processors draw significantly more power because their idle clock rates are higher.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2Ur5gBYdKd5TGScQu6Yyji.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2Ur5gBYdKd5TGScQu6Yyji.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2Ur5gBYdKd5TGScQu6Yyji.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Core i5-8400's average power consumption in applications that combine 2D and 3D loads (like AutoCAD) is in line with the performance we observed.</p><p>Gaming paints a more balanced, but very similar picture.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XaWBQTmZq8HwoauPMk4YpV.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XaWBQTmZq8HwoauPMk4YpV.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XaWBQTmZq8HwoauPMk4YpV.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Intel's Core i5-8400 falls squarely within its TDP class.</p><p>The finishing order changes dramatically once we fire up an AVX-heavy stress test with all cores running at their top Turbo Boost bins.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/n35eYXxDf3Gnv6SbhjR7aA.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/n35eYXxDf3Gnv6SbhjR7aA.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/n35eYXxDf3Gnv6SbhjR7aA.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>This benchmark breaks Intel's rated TDP if the motherboard doesn't quickly rein in power consumption. Otherwise, Core i5-8400 hits values ​​well above its thermal design power, as illustrated in our chart.</p><h2 id="temperatures">Temperatures</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/F5b8scdAiqELxv9zkmhxvg.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/F5b8scdAiqELxv9zkmhxvg.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="535" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/F5b8scdAiqELxv9zkmhxvg.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Core i5-8400 can easily be cooled by a heat sink/fan or compact closed-loop liquid cooler, despite Intel's continued use of thermal paste between the die and heat spreader.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mDDDXcZoZovx4ozSxa6Y9G.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mDDDXcZoZovx4ozSxa6Y9G.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mDDDXcZoZovx4ozSxa6Y9G.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Pricier thermal solutions offer little advantage in cooling Core i5-8400. This is illustrated by the high delta between Intel's die and IHS, which results from that thermal paste the company uses.</p><p>The Core i5-8400 is relatively easy to cool, even with a standard heat sink and fan.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="final-analysis-2">Final Analysis</h2><p>Intel's Core i5-8400 is the cheapest modern six-core CPU, if you believe the company's recommended customer price. That's quite the feat, given AMD's competitive Ryzen 5 family. Although the -8400 ships with the Coffee Lake line-up's lowest base clock rate, that frequency is offset by more aggressive Turbo Boost bins. As such, lightly-threaded apps spin up nicely, while parallelized workloads benefit from six physical cores working together.</p><p>Given Core i5-8400's pedigree, most of us are probably here to learn more about the chip's gaming alacrity. We plotted its performance using average frame rates and a geometric mean of the 99<sup>th</sup> percentile frame times (a good indicator of smoothness), which we convert into an FPS measurement.</p><p>Newer titles are often optimized to extract more performance from CPUs with more than four cores. Our suite includes six games released in 2016 and five older titles that launched in 2014/2015. So, curious whether the latest Intel and AMD many-core processors contribute affect frame rates in a positive way, we're including a chart that breaks out the newer games on their own.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KHvzHtZpbfZsVNZkF4FKYZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TVNiiAiUJgpAyTwgiZGTqb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8Z3dFMBXgDgPDv7Va9nKeZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TxVn7t7XdnVtTVGbXNUPod.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KkzfSFzcwJYGx3Mq2TpK7P.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Q4UMUWNCY7ohTPoPz5KXki.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/epf4bfGUpcpweR3aiQ95Yb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AaHonYsX77M3S4hg9eYC7e.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>CPUs below the $200 threshold are our key focus, and in its price class, Intel's Core i5-8400 provides the best gaming performance in spite of its locked multiplier. Even when we include a stock ~$215 Ryzen 5 1600, the Core i5-8400 holds its lead. It's only after shining a spotlight on the newer games using an overclocked 1600 that AMD carves out an advantage. Then again, processors in this price range are typically paired to mid-range graphics cards (rather than GeForce GTX 1080s), so you might not see much difference between the comparable AMD and Intel chips.</p><p>More important, Core i5-8400 wrecks the Core i5-7400. It's also faster than a stock Core i5-7600K. It can't quite match a Core i7-7700K, like the -8600K, but you're still getting a ton of value, given the similar price point as Core i5-7400.</p><p>Moving on to the application charts, Core i5-8400 distances itself from other processors in its price class, beating the previous-gen -7600K in threaded workloads as well. That's downright compelling progress from one generation to the next. Of course, stepping up ~$30 and overclocking a Ryzen 5 1600 should get you similar performance as a Ryzen 5 1600X. And in that case, you'll definitely outperform the Core i5 in heavily-threaded workloads. The compromise is lower performance in lightly-threaded apps and a higher price tag.</p><p>Intel's hasty launch means we're stuck pairing mainstream CPUs to higher-end Z370 motherboards until early next year. That's not a great option when you're dealing with a multiplier-locked CPU. Fortunately, the least-expensive Z370-based platforms sell for a reasonable $120. We're far less enthused about Coffee Lake supply issues causing prices on Core i5-8400 and other models to soar through the roof. Many retailers are selling the -8400 for $200 and higher. Hopefully, Intel can address this issue sooner than later. At least you get a bundled heat sink and fan as a consolation prize.</p><p>Overall, the Core i5-8400 offers incredible value to gamers on a budget, providing you can find the chip selling for Intel's recommended customer price. As supply stabilizes, you should be able to get your hands on an affordable hexa-core CPU that frees up funds for a faster graphics card than you would have purchased before. Balance is a beautiful thing to PC builders, and Coffee Lake delivers in spades.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core i5-8600K Review: Coffee Lake's Jolting Value ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-core-i5-8600k-cpu,5264.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Intel's Core i5-8600K races to market with 50% more cores and impressive performance. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">8GhTmimACdYjJAEukBpAr4</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7rH9dNkWhqRWXpJZzGs5wn-1280-80.png" type="image/png" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 17 Oct 2017 13:00:01 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:26:58 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ palcorn@outlook.com (Paul Alcorn) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Paul Alcorn ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RZRmFeQfPy3etHjBQitbGW.jpeg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;As a teenager, Paul scraped up enough money to buy a 486-powered PC with a turbo button (yes, a turbo button). Back when floppies were still popular he was already chasing after the fastest spinners for his personal computer, which led him down the long and winding storage road, covering enterprise storage. His current focus is on consumer processors, though he still keeps a close eye on the latest storage news. In his spare time, you’ll find Paul hanging out with his kids or indulging his love of the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                <cf:isSponsored>false</cf:isSponsored>
                <cf:hasAffiliateLinks>false</cf:hasAffiliateLinks>
                <cf:isPaid>false</cf:isPaid>
                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/png" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7rH9dNkWhqRWXpJZzGs5wn-1280-80.png">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7rH9dNkWhqRWXpJZzGs5wn-1280-80.png" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="meet-intel-39-s-first-six-core-core-i5">Meet Intel's First Six-Core Core i5</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:253px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:105.93%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FphZMuAbjM8fr4eai2JfW.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FphZMuAbjM8fr4eai2JfW.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="253" height="268" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FphZMuAbjM8fr4eai2JfW.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>For years, Intel dominated the high-end CPU market. As a result, enthusiasts had to pay a premium for its best processors. But AMD's four-, six-, and eight-core Ryzen models forced Intel to reconsider its value story. Our recent <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-cpu,5252.html">Core i7-8700K review</a> showed that the company is serious about defending its turf. The six-core Coffee Lake-based flagship maintained the architecture's strength in lightly-threaded tasks, while extra Hyper-Threaded cores improved its performance in the heavy workloads AMD is doing so well in.</p><p>A $390 price tag is painfully expensive for most power users, though. That's why Tom's Hardware historically recommended Intel's unlocked Core i5 models to gamers. So how does the new Core i5-8600K fare against Core i7-8700K and, perhaps more important, AMD's Ryzen 7 and 5 CPUs?</p><h2 id="intel-core-i5-8600k">Intel Core i5-8600K </h2><p>Like the Core i7-8700K, Core i5-8600K sports six physical cores based on Intel's Skylake architecture. Hyper-Threading is disabled, similar to previous-generation Core i5 models. However, we still expect significant speed-ups across our benchmark suite thanks to higher clock rates and core count. Core i5-8600K features a similar graphics engine as its predecessor (never mind the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-cpu,5252-2.html">UHD Graphics 630</a> branding), though it does benefit from a 50 MHz boost to 1150 MHz.</p><p>At the heart of Coffee Lake is Intel's 14nm++ manufacturing process. Delaying 10nm transistors forced the company to further refine its 14nm node. Attractive power optimizations, such as 52%-lower leakage than the original 14nm process, play a key role in enabling higher core counts within the same TDP envelope. Improved manufacturing yields higher performance as well; despite Core i5-8600K's more complex die, its 4.3 GHz peak Turbo Boost frequency is still higher than Core i5-7600K's 4.2 GHz ceiling.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ></td><td  ><strong>14nm Broadwell (2014)</strong></td><td  ><strong>14nm Skylake (2015)</strong></td><td  ><strong>14nm+ Kaby Lake (2017)</strong></td><td  ><strong>14nm++ Coffee Lake (2017)</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Maximum Turbo Frequency (GHz - Core i7 family)</strong></td><td  >3.8</td><td  >4.3</td><td  >4.5</td><td  >4.7</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Estimated Maximum Overclock Frequency (GHz - Conventional Cooling)</strong></td><td  >4.1</td><td  >4.6</td><td  >5.0</td><td  >5.2</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Of course, incrementally-higher peak clock rates are great. But adding 50% more cores promises to have a much more significant impact on the threaded benchmarks in our suite. Those workloads are the ones that AMD currently dominates. Intel did have to sacrifice base frequency in order to wedge six cores into a 95W TDP, though. Whereas the -7600K guaranteed 3.8 GHz across four cores, Core i5-8600K's base rate is 3.6 GHz. Consider this, though. With Turbo Boost enabled and four cores active, the -7600K hits 4 GHz. Core i5-8600K can take four cores up to 4.2 GHz, while its six-core bin maxes out at 4.1 GHz.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Active Cores</strong></td><td  ><strong>1</strong></td><td  ><strong>2</strong></td><td  ><strong>4</strong></td><td  ><strong>6</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Intel Core i5-8600K </strong></td><td  >4.3 GHz</td><td  >4.2 GHz</td><td  >4.2 GHz</td><td  >4.1 GHz</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Intel Core i5-7600K </strong></td><td  >4.2 GHz</td><td  >4.1 GHz</td><td  >4.0 GHz</td><td  >-</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>We also get a few extra cache slices as a byproduct of the additional cores, so the -8600K features 9MB of L3, compared to -7600K&apos;s 6MB. Memory improvements play a role in Coffee Lake&apos;s higher performance, too. The -8600K supports up to DDR4-2666, moving up to 42.7 GB/s across two 64-bit channels, versus DDR4-2400&apos;s 38.4 GB/s.</p><p>As we discussed in <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-cpu,5252.html"><strong>Core i7-8700K Review: Coffee Lake Brews A Great Gaming CPU</strong></a>, Intel improved the trace layout on Z370 motherboards to support the increased memory transfer rate. It also revised the power alignment inside the LGA 1151 interface to better accommodate the new six-core CPUs. This means <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-cpu,5252-2.html">you can&apos;t drop Coffee Lake-based processors into Z270 or Z170 motherboards</a>. The requirement is a technical one, though that obviously doesn&apos;t make enthusiasts who recently purchased Z270 platforms feel any better.</p><p>Core i5-8600K&apos;s unlocked multiplier fits well with the Z-series boards, which are needed in order to manipulate its ratio. Intel also added a few new overclocking knobs and dials, such as per-core overclocking support, live memory timing adjustments, and memory multipliers up to 8400 MT/s. Like all of Intel&apos;s K-series processors, you&apos;re on the hook for a thermal solution; Core i5-8600K doesn&apos;t come with an air- or closed-loop liquid cooler.</p><p>Beyond the price of a heat sink or all-in-one, you&apos;re also looking at a steep premium over Core i5-7600K. Street pricing on the -8600K is currently $280, while the -7600K sells for $240. AMD&apos;s Ryzen 5 1600X is also available at $240, and the recently price-reduced Ryzen 7 1700 sits right around $300. Going the Ryzen route gives you the option of a lower-cost B350-based motherboard. And as if AMD&apos;s story needed strengthening, a bundled Wraith Spire cooler all but guarantees you could have an 8C/16T platform for less money than Intel&apos;s 6C/6T alternative. As always, we&apos;ll have to rely on the benchmarks to guide our recommendations.</p><p><br><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html"><strong>Best CPUs</strong></a></p><p><br><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html"><strong>Intel & AMD Processor Benchmark Hierarchy</strong></a></p><p><br><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus"><strong>All CPUs Content</strong></a></p><h2 id="how-we-test-2">How We Test</h2><h2 id="the-msi-z370-gaming-pro-carbon-ac">The MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC</h2><p>MSI continues its Z-series Gaming Pro motherboards, giving the latest implementation similar features as previous models. Pricing should also end up similar. The exact board details and specifications can be found on the <a href="https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/Z370-GAMING-PRO-CARBON-AC">manufacturer's website</a>.</p><h2 id="a-note-on-multi-core-enhancement-mce">A Note On Multi-Core Enhancement (MCE)</h2><p>MSI motherboards feature a default Enhanced Turbo feature that allows the processor to run at its maximum Turbo Boost bin on all cores, at all times. This setting modifies the CPU's clock rate and voltage to deliver higher performance, which is basically factory-sanctioned overclocking. Again, MSI turns this on by default in its BIOS, similar to most of its competition. Performance, power consumption, and heat are all affected, naturally. We manually disable this feature for our stock CPU testing to best reflect Intel's specifications.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:916px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:70.85%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sn4DwyvW2g9Eta2A8WNsMR.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sn4DwyvW2g9Eta2A8WNsMR.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="916" height="649" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sn4DwyvW2g9Eta2A8WNsMR.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="comparison-products-2">Comparison Products</h2>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="35e08dd8-fc04-45e5-a459-5e412e4bcbc7">            <a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113428" data-model-name="Ryzen 7 1700" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:81.42%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BDs5RHihvWFSdmfNJzpQrY.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Ryzen 7 1700</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="80204c6d-6ded-409b-a523-eb5c128e303c">            <a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113434" data-model-name="Ryzen 5 1600X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:75.00%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cnR74jNTGXP9TR45Swwx8j.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 5 1600X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="5745961d-75d3-4d13-b56b-1acbdc47aa57">            <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80684I78700K-Core-i7-8700K-Processor/dp/B07598VZR8/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Core i7-8700K" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:122.29%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/j7KjsgaP5iuRZ7RRqGYQTc.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Intel Core i7-8700K</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><h2 id="test-systems-3">Test Systems</h2><p>We introduced our new test system and methodology in <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-we-test-graphics-cards,4912.html"><strong>How We Test Graphics Cards</strong></a>. If you'd like more detail about our general approach, check that piece out.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3840px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:66.74%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TnvGnyBUzq8wQvNcYSXJbd.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TnvGnyBUzq8wQvNcYSXJbd.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="3840" height="2563" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TnvGnyBUzq8wQvNcYSXJbd.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>In this case, only the hardware configuration with CPU, RAM, mainboard, as well as the new cooling system are different, so the summary in table form gives a quick overview of the systems used:</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  colspan="2"><strong>Test System & Configuration</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Hardware</strong></td><td  ><strong><strong><strong>Germany </strong></strong></strong><strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z370):</strong>Intel Core i5-8600K, i7-8700KMSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC2x 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4-3200 @ 2666<strong>AMD Socket </strong><strong>AM4 Workstation</strong>AMD Ryzen 7 1700, Ryzen 5 1600XMSI X370 Tomahawk4x 8GB G.Skill TridentZ DDR4-3200 @ 2667 and 3200 <strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z270)</strong>Intel Core i5-7600KMSI Z270 Gaming 72x 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4-3200 @ 2400 and 3200<strong>All Systems</strong>GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition (Gaming)Nvidia Quadro P6000 (Workstation)1x 1TB Toshiba OCZ RD400 (M.2, System)2x 960GB Toshiba OCZ TR150 (Storage, Images)be quiet! Dark Power Pro 11, 850W Power SupplyWindows 10 Pro (Creators Update)<strong><strong>U.S.</strong></strong><strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z370):</strong>Intel Core i5-8600K, i7-8700KMSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC4x 8GB G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 @ 2666 and 3200 <strong>AMD Socket AM4 </strong>AMD Ryzen 7 1700, Ryzen 5 1600XMSI X370 Xpower Gaming Titanium2x 8GB G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 @ 2667 and 3200 <strong><span>Intel LGA 1151 (Z270)</span></strong> Intel Core i5-7600K MSI Z270 Gaming M72x 8GB G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 @ 2666 and 3200 <strong>All</strong> EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FE 1TB Samsung PM863 SilverStone ST1500, 1500W Windows 10 Creators Update Version 1703</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cooling</strong></td><td  ><strong>Germany</strong>Alphacool Eiszeit 2000 ChillerAlphacool Eisblock XPXThermal Grizzly Kryonaut (For Cooler Switch)</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Monitor</strong></td><td  >Eizo EV3237-BK</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>PC Case</strong></td><td  >Lian Li PC-T70 with Extension Kit and Mods Configurations: Open Benchtable, Closed Case</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Power Consumption Measurement</strong></td><td  >Contact-free DC Measurement at PCIe Slot (Using a Riser Card) Contact-free DC Measurement at External Auxiliary Power Supply Cable Direct Voltage Measurement at Power Supply 2x Rohde & Schwarz HMO 3054, 500MHz Digital Multi-Channel Oscilloscope with Storage Function4x Rohde & Schwarz HZO50 Current Probe (1mA - 30A, 100kHz, DC) 4x Rohde & Schwarz HZ355 (10:1 Probes, 500MHz) 1x Rohde & Schwarz HMC 8012 Digital Multimeter with Storage Function</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Thermal Measurement</strong></td><td  >1x Optris PI640 80Hz Infrared Camera + PI Connect Real-Time Infrared Monitoring and Recording</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Acoustic Measurement</strong></td><td  >NTI Audio M2211 (with Calibration File, Low Cut at 50Hz) Steinberg UR12 (with Phantom Power for Microphones)Creative X7, Smaart v.7 Custom-Made Proprietary Measurement Chamber, 3.5 x 1.8 x 2.2m (L x D x H) Perpendicular to Center of Noise Source(s), Measurement Distance of 50cm Noise Level in dB(A) (Slow), Real-time Frequency Analyzer (RTA) Graphical Frequency Spectrum of Noise</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="vrmark-3dmark-amp-aots-escalation-3">VRMark, 3DMark & AotS: Escalation</h2><h2 id="vrmark-amp-3dmark-3">VRMark & 3DMark</h2><p>We aren't big fans of using synthetic benchmarks to measure game performance, but 3DMark's DX11 and DX12 CPU tests provide useful insight into the amount of horsepower available to game engines.</p><p>Futuremark's VRMark test lets you gauge your system's suitability for use with the HTC Vive or Oculus Rift, even if you don't currently own an HMD. The Orange Room test is based on the suggested system requirements for current-generation HTC Vive and Oculus Rift HMDs. Futuremark defines a passing score as anything above 109 FPS.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3duoaB2MDnjoNRNrq8doHc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V2pgFvESVFzY2JUatD6Y9X.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/r9E4kpAJz9DX6vwS3oHCDn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vTibCr4WRWMkAbSfwFejgd.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The stock Core i5 models score well in VRMark, with Coffee Lake enjoying a quantifiable advantage over its predecessor. Both CPUs trail the beefy Core i7-8700K, though. Tuning naturally improves performance, with Core i5-8600K taking a lead after overclocking.</p><p>AMD's Ryzen processors operate at lower base frequencies and aren't as fast per clock cycle, so they occupy the bottom of our chart at stock settings. Specifically, Ryzen 7 1700 employs the lowest base clock rates in our test pool and starts in last place. Clearly, though, overclocking helps it quite a bit.</p><p>The DX11 and DX12 tests want as many threads as they can get, pushing the previous-generation Core i5 to the bottom of both charts. Intel's six-core -8600K does benefit from its higher core count. But it cannot catch the Ryzen CPUs during the DX11 benchmark. It fares better under DX12, and tuning even boosts it past the competitive Ryzen 5 1600X. </p><h2 id="ashes-of-the-singularity-escalation-5">Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</h2><p><em>Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</em> also scales well with thread count. Although many enthusiasts associate this game with AMD (Mantle, anyone?), remember that it didn't run well on Ryzen processors at first. A series of patches subsequently rectified the most glaring issues on Ryzen platforms.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iMd2GnvUyHmeKecfc3WEMg.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7k7NNDCrauAq9TdXkToxAg.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TrArZgtYWZrtPBNTo5DEFc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5kxS5A3dXQwDjJSJiE7zTB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZWiSMv2DX8i9SQKJ9eyUTS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HqUNRKQ34uD4HScCtLWehC.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Ryzen 7 1700 carves out a win against the -8600K at stock frequencies. Tuning the Coffee Lake-based Core i5 yields a 14.5% speed-up, which is solid scaling considering the 19.5% clock rate increase (from 4.1 GHz). That technically pushes it up over Ryzen 7 1700, though they're tied for all practical purposes.</p><p>Comparing Core i5-8600K to the previous-gen -7600K illustrates the significance of more cores in a game optimized for parallelization.</p><p>Ryzen 5 1600X also gains quite a bit of performance from overclocking, proving its relevance to this comparison. Remember that we're looking at a much cheaper processor/motherboard combo, after all.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="civilization-vi-battlefield-1-amp-dawn-of-war-iii-2">Civilization VI, Battlefield 1 & Dawn of War III </h2><h2 id="civilization-vi-ai-test-3">Civilization VI AI Test</h2><h2 id="4"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.00%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wHSp7SScYsvnLxeAQHKxoL.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wHSp7SScYsvnLxeAQHKxoL.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="834" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wHSp7SScYsvnLxeAQHKxoL.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Core i5-8600K claims a lead over the rest of our stock-clocked field, and tuning yields solid performance gains.</p><p>AMD's Ryzen 7 1700 lags the field considerably at its default settings, largely due to its 3 GHz base and 3.7 GHz Precision Boost frequencies. This is a tale of two faces, though. AMD slows down the 1700's base clock rate considerably compared to other Ryzen 7 models. However, overclocking pushes the chip to 1800X-class performance. This makes Ryzen 7 1700 a potentially great value for tuners.</p><h2 id="civilization-vi-graphics-test-3">Civilization VI Graphics Test</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EtLri7xey7so2WorM7CZeP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2TxHjEuna8FbMT873yPPKR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bBEsHeBod653KrLche67N4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Kry3pNkfLSj6aNGg9XZ8BV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/e5jMi36b5mJwsTqDQc77kn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7YLRUY4rHnS5jD2s9MbDAC.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Core i5-8600K is also nimble during our <em>Civilization VI</em> graphics test, taking the top spot. The -7600K suffers in stock form due to its four cores. But, like the Ryzen 7 1700, it responds well to overclocking.</p><h2 id="battlefield-1-dx11-2">Battlefield 1 (DX11)</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TfY4yDFqebfgRTZRSNSTWn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5jHh6ryQW7sPCK7ExoQzDj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FVNj6nawMz69t7cBF4ZDvZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rkuDzZCqVaEYXJo6fFHZVd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MRNpTKPMYJQwVdVMohbRJ3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PDchLxSp2Hw3BpstCQRm9d.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>We're graphics-bound at the top end of this chart, where Core i5-8600K makes its appearance. Meanwhile, the Core i5-7600K starts lower on our hierarchy and has to be overclocked in order to catch up. </p><h2 id="warhammer-40-000-dawn-of-war-iii-3">Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War III</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vUKg9hCM8fhrn4ZRBQJrdm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/L8yJQqiHBkWaYYG9jJfnjL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hgjZB9dTCZMWykiUBcF7A3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UhrJENgDBgDhkT9oAdg8on.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yeRTB5wiipoPpXU7EpW4eV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iabqC7G5hVQmNtGevugocD.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The <em>Warhammer 40,000: DoW III</em> benchmark scales wonderfully with increased execution resources, but speedy clock rates also provide a big benefit. Intel's Core i5-8600K takes an easy lead over less expensive chips in both stock and overclocked configurations.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-hitman-amp-shadow-of-mordor-2">Grand Theft Auto V, Hitman & Shadow of Mordor</h2><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-8">Grand Theft Auto V</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wYNNjD79qgS4qDUN2DbJyR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/padXnxoVoC3wuk7Vf3quxf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8ETGWgpYaScMon545U3XjH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UDPkTMoCsMpxtRAWYPzQua.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/U7uxNMmEFou3vRvcZnKMna.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AifFKqpwhiYjXrrrBC2V77.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Grand Theft Auto V</em> is one of several benchmarks in which a stock Core i5-8600K outperforms the pricier Core i7-8700K. To be fair, we did record a few odd performance results from the -8700K. But after benchmarking two different samples and confirming our findings with motherboard vendors, we're confident that they're correct.</p><p>Some games respond better to physical cores than logical ones, leading to Core i5s beating i7s in situations where Hyper-Threading is a liability. But the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-cpu,5252-6.html">previous-generation Core i5-7600K trails the i7-7700K by a substantial margin</a>, so Hyper-Threading doesn't seem to be the answer in this case. Other outlets corroborate our results, so perhaps an issue with early firmware/microcode is to blame.</p><p>In any case, the Core i5-8600K offers chart-topping performance, and we can see the clear advantage of its extra cores and cache compared to Core i5-7600K.</p><p>This title also illustrates the big gains available if you're willing to overclock AMD's Ryzen 7 1700 (though it still falls far behind a stock Core i5-8600K).</p><h2 id="hitman-2016-3">Hitman (2016)</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/T3eSiqwQEfRxCL2soGMJwm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Et7Y8kENJ6Z2fGMzwcRszR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eE3gCVAbmXcxB6wFNzqtaa.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sxGHpAGCEgdbYwYdkiXHo6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XvMe6h7tsfYvANoVjKdprj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VvZgttuDwf8LJT3iSnM8NL.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Core i5-8600K proves to be an exceptionally good value (assuming that our Core i7-8700K samples are actually working correctly); it beats the flagship Coffee Lake model at stock clock rates.</p><p>Even overclocking isn't enough to push the Core i5-7600K up to the same level as Intel's stock -8600K.</p><p>AMD's Ryzen processors trail the Coffee Lake CPUs. Ryzen 7 1700 at 3.9 GHz does notably compete against Core i5-7600K overclocked to 5 GHz, at least.</p><h2 id="middle-earth-shadow-of-mordor-2">Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hzHYU3fXEBnjjdtPymNXA5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mvQK5jZgLvvD82Pwzp3Gei.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CWKAEGnutDPzdZF9TYsbVe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YkYzaegpZD8TdErj6tbCT9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/i4Kxu6DKEfuWfGkyfKpENU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/27dMsRai5NBPkHvEpiaHeX.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Unexpectedly, the Core i5-7600K lands ahead of Core i5-8600K in our default and overclocked comparisons.</p><p>We did characterize stock performance during this test, and observed both CPUs falling short of their peak Turbo Boost frequencies. This gives the -7600K an advantage due to its higher base clock rate. Kaby Lake also enjoys a slight advantage due to the more aggressive overclock available for a quad-core processor (compared to Coffee Lake's six cores).</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="project-cars-far-cry-primal-amp-rise-of-the-tomb">Project CARS, Far Cry Primal & Rise of the Tomb </h2><h2 id="project-cars-2">Project CARS</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fW7DSqZvQZdcm9bbpoqFxk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cp8Nh2yexAnBpJfFktWCJB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HW2Nmh4Wg6MjQgyzCCUCZF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/L8LPvHLCZFCS2ZUpYuJm3d.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5NWPCEnwxVvPtEHTCHfKpB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eu3xCUMaPxHeRqHvVkSg5W.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Core i5-8600K handily dispatches its predecessor in <em>Project CARS</em>, while Core i7-8700K performs as-expected at stock settings.</p><p>Our overclocked Ryzen processors struggle to keep up with Core i5-7600K during the test, which is surprising since they offer a higher core/thread count in a game purportedly optimized for parallelization. We'll be curious to compare <em>Project CARS 2</em>.</p><h2 id="far-cry-primal-5">Far Cry Primal</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4pFJYAgiUTUgQK5dE2ZxAm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/T3L9vk498VVfGAv7hRZcbc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cehZGvbUQVhJeuXU4eT34C.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aisV2HQQM6vfFqGU9Dq69X.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Hn3uX88cAmWYBG6vvywQ2k.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Tj6gJZZCNnsh7wvYdLseqP.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Far Cry Primal's</em> Dunia Engine 2 responds well to high clock rates and IPC throughput, but it also seems to like it when we turn off simultaneous multi-threading. That means Core i5s enjoy an advantage over Core i7 and Ryzen processors. Core i5-7600K trails the -8600K by a large margin. However, it does beat an overclocked Ryzen 7 1700.</p><h2 id="rise-of-the-tomb-raider-2">Rise of the Tomb Raider</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/k2EjQ4XRRBd4NtztdhLBCA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JqcVLWq8jqcxGPbQjCVWtG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/H4C2EdJJfyUQ52pafXiYZn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uMq7paw7pEZzMxeP5ir4ec.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RYRAiABvg6tK5KRWivUZ5Q.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4WuiJMLZdeGYwg7DSsidQW.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The -8600K's extra cores don't give us much over the -7600K in <em>Rise of the Tomb Raider</em>; the two processors tie each other at stock and overclocked frequencies.</p><p>Once again, there's a night-and-day difference between a stock Ryzen 7 1700 and the same CPU overclocked.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="dtp-office-multimedia-amp-compression">DTP, Office, Multimedia & Compression</h2><p><span class="notranslate">We ran the older Core i5-7600K through our application test suite at 4.9 GHz, while the U.S. lab was able to maintain 5 GHz for the game testing. This boils down to a difference in sample quality between our offices, reminding us that maximum overclock frequencies aren't guaranteed. </span></p><h2 id="dtp-and-presentation-2">DTP and Presentation</h2><p>Adobe’s Creative Cloud gives us a look at real-world single- and multi-threaded performance. As such, it beats synthetic benchmarks as a productivity test. <span class="notranslate">After Effects CC is the classic example of a workload that prizes parallelism, so core count trumps clock frequencies.</span></p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FDVMFzQfc8ctL2gHWrW36d.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nU4tFreLSo9dLfiYsjScnn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7DBQYLepEe2RMa9wbkvJfn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Pt72WafrWZBXUbkDYYp9cM.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><span class="notranslate">Overclocking helps propel Core i5-8600K out in front of the stock Core i7-8700K, though.</span></p><p><span class="notranslate">Meanwhile, in A</span><span class="notranslate">dobe's InDesign CC, both Coffee Lake-based CPUs fall behind a stock Core i5-7600K. Presumably, this is another instance where higher clock rates in lightly-threaded tasks reign.</span></p><h2 id="encoding-and-multimedia-2">Encoding and Multimedia</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V5kqskKvJgBJ8WUmvKpTKg.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V5kqskKvJgBJ8WUmvKpTKg.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V5kqskKvJgBJ8WUmvKpTKg.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p><span class="notranslate">The stock Core i5-8600K dominates every other CPU except for Intel's Core i7-8700K at default settings during SPECwpc's default HandBrake test. <br/></span></p><p><span class="notranslate">Overclocking naturally changes the landscape quite a bit, helping a couple of Ryzen CPUs compete more aggressively. Then again, at 4.9 GHz, the -8600K lands in first place ahead of those tuned Ryzens.<br/></span></p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7vu2jgtdjMGEfXFBHnXLwN.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7vu2jgtdjMGEfXFBHnXLwN.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7vu2jgtdjMGEfXFBHnXLwN.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p><span class="notranslate">The more taxing high-quality benchmark asks more from the field, allowing AMD's overclocked </span><span class="notranslate">Ryzen 7 1700 to slide in ahead of Core i5-8600K at 4.9 GHz. </span></p><p>Core i7-8700K doesn't need overclocking to achieve compelling performance. It's flying high on Hyper-Threading. Just imagine that processor running at the same 4.9 GHz we used <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-cpu,5252.html">in our review</a>.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="workstation-2d-amp-3d-performance">Workstation 2D & 3D Performance</h2><h2 id="2d-workstation-performance">2D Workstation Performance</h2><p>Our GDI/GDI+ tests are used to test two different output methods that can be found in older applications and printing tasks. Today, they, or at least a modified version of them, are commonly used to display the graphical user interface (GUI). They are also great benchmarks for direct device write throughput and memory performance when handling gigantic device-independent bitmap (DIB) files.</p><h2 id="synthetic-2d-benchmarks-2">Synthetic 2D Benchmarks</h2><p>We take a look at direct device write throughput first. The graphics driver uses the CPU heavily for this task, but doesn’t employ many threads.</p><p>The Intel processors are the fastest in this test, particularly after tuning.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/b6VpbFJVT4nAqwuc8fRtfF.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/b6VpbFJVT4nAqwuc8fRtfF.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/b6VpbFJVT4nAqwuc8fRtfF.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We up the ante by introducing memory to the mix. This is done with the help of the only remaining 2D hardware function: generating the graphics output in memory and then copying it to the output device all at once. The benchmark’s the same as before. We just plot a bitmap in memory, as opposed to sending the information directly to the monitor. The bitmap’s copied to it only once it’s complete. This pushes the CPUs, since they’re no longer platform-bound. The results prove interesting: frequency rules, but AMD can keep up.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LsHVTVZkKaY7AYvGURu8VF.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LsHVTVZkKaY7AYvGURu8VF.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LsHVTVZkKaY7AYvGURu8VF.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="autocad-2016-2d-2">AutoCAD 2016 (2D)</h2><p>Even though AutoCAD does use DirectX, ultimately it just duplicates every single draw function in software. The results are exactly as expected, and IPC throughput is emphasized due to AutoCAD’s limited scaling with additional cores.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oDGjw7fNFhtJAMBvrMzG8R.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oDGjw7fNFhtJAMBvrMzG8R.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oDGjw7fNFhtJAMBvrMzG8R.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="3d-performance-2">3D Performance</h2><p>Most professional development applications have been optimized and compiled with Intel CPUs in mind. This is reflected in their performance numbers. Still, we include them in order to motivate developers to focus their efforts on AMD’s Ryzen processors as well. This would give users more than one choice. The same goes for an emphasis on multi-core processors, at least where that’s feasible and makes sense.</p><h2 id="autocad-2016-3d-2">AutoCAD 2016 (3D)</h2><p>Clock rate trumps core count. Intel’s Kaby Lake and Coffee Lake land fairly close to each other, with clock rate determining the winner. AutoCAD’s performance turns out to be close to that of older games, since it uses DirectX and isn’t really optimized to take advantage of multiple cores.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ShyWyVnz565tiuftU8kkcK.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ShyWyVnz565tiuftU8kkcK.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ShyWyVnz565tiuftU8kkcK.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="cinebench-r15-opengl-2">Cinebench R15 OpenGL</h2><p><span class="notranslate">Frequency is (almost) everything in the Cinebench R15 OpenGL benchmark, as the Core i5-8600K achieves near-parity with Intel's quad-core -7600K at its stock settings.</span></p><p>Given that <span class="notranslate">Ryzen 7 1700 is slower than Ryzen 5 1600X operating 100 MHz higher, we can safely conclude </span>that Cinebench doesn't scale well across multiple cores during the OpenGL benchmark.</p><p><span class="notranslate"></span></p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dr9jNR7RAxvsT5HSjSmPAg.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dr9jNR7RAxvsT5HSjSmPAg.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dr9jNR7RAxvsT5HSjSmPAg.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="solidworks-2015-2">SolidWorks 2015</h2><p>SolidWorks 2015 also emphasizes clock rate. At the same frequency, Coffee Lake and its predecessor end up in the same place. This doesn’t come as a surprise though, since SolidWorks 2015 typically doesn’t use more than four cores.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/d5sr5a2ZN6H5xBjNfWwjXa.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/d5sr5a2ZN6H5xBjNfWwjXa.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/d5sr5a2ZN6H5xBjNfWwjXa.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="creo-3-0-2">Creo 3.0</h2><p>Creo 3.0 paints a similar picture; a high core count just doesn’t provide any benefits when it comes to drafting using real-time 3D graphics output.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Xngg8dHveNr8GyYP2y7gbk.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Xngg8dHveNr8GyYP2y7gbk.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Xngg8dHveNr8GyYP2y7gbk.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="blender-and-3ds-max-real-time-3d-preview-2">Blender and 3ds Max (Real-Time 3D Preview)</h2><p>The Blender and 3ds Max real-time 3D previews yield similar results: frequency is everything. Of course, final rendering is a different story, and we'll get to that shortly.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KJQ68p5uQBwJdTDbctsfy8.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KJQ68p5uQBwJdTDbctsfy8.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KJQ68p5uQBwJdTDbctsfy8.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The 3ds Max results aren’t based on time to completion. Rather, this benchmark generates a composite index based on CPU performance during a set time period. The Core i5-8600K leverages its two extra cores to carve out a lead over Core i5-7600K in stock and overclocked trim.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BaKsUTe6Z5rkZ4agruhU9a.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BaKsUTe6Z5rkZ4agruhU9a.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BaKsUTe6Z5rkZ4agruhU9a.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="catia-v6-r2012-2">Catia V6 R2012</h2><p>This is one of the graphics benchmarks that has been optimized time and again (it’s part of the free SPECviewperf 12 suite). However, it still provides a fairly good measure of CPU performance, with an emphasis on clock rate.</p><p>As expected, Hyper-Threading does little for the Core i7, while overclocking nudges Core i5-8600K into a narrow lead.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ag5jVaoJidahzxC58annCX.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ag5jVaoJidahzxC58annCX.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ag5jVaoJidahzxC58annCX.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="maya-2013-2">Maya 2013</h2><p>At the risk of beating a dead horse, our chart paints a picture we've seen several times already. The real-time 3D output numbers don’t tell a complete story, though. As we're about to see, core count reigns supreme when it comes to final rendering.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yeND8x3yxwUMUzqqeXCRxg.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yeND8x3yxwUMUzqqeXCRxg.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yeND8x3yxwUMUzqqeXCRxg.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="cpu-computing-amp-rendering-performance-2">CPU Computing & Rendering Performance</h2><h2 id="cpu-performance-workstation-2">CPU Performance: Workstation</h2><p>Many modern suites include modules that are based exclusively on computing and simulations. This means we need to go beyond just 3D workstation performance to form our opinion of these high-end CPUs. However, software packages like SolidWorks don’t scale perfectly based on core/thread count. Consequently, even quad-core processors keep up if they run at high-enough frequencies and support SMT. We'll illustrate this by comparing <span class="notranslate">Core i5-7600K to the newer -8600K, which benefits from more cores and cache.</span></p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LaWe9Prdxu2V5wZPYyv6wM.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LaWe9Prdxu2V5wZPYyv6wM.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LaWe9Prdxu2V5wZPYyv6wM.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Frequency is all that counts in Creo 3.0. Intel's Core i5-8600K can't do anything with its two extra cores; the -7600K is right behind on our chart. Cranking the clock rate up to 4.9 GHz, on the other hand...</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WZdeeaKmcQomMSSvaHNDAD.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WZdeeaKmcQomMSSvaHNDAD.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WZdeeaKmcQomMSSvaHNDAD.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Clock rate and core count both matter in 3ds Max 2015, allowing Intel’s Core i5-8600K to pull ahead of the -7600K by a larger margin.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RwT2gF2MpeZh3zm6MQaXgM.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RwT2gF2MpeZh3zm6MQaXgM.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RwT2gF2MpeZh3zm6MQaXgM.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The CPU composite score includes rendering, which is broken out into its own section below. There, AMD's Ryzen 7 does well, becoming the value champion to beat.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YcFW2vZjVtiEoxXT98PcDa.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YcFW2vZjVtiEoxXT98PcDa.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YcFW2vZjVtiEoxXT98PcDa.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="cpu-performance-photorealistic-rendering-2">CPU Performance: Photorealistic Rendering</h2><p>Final rendering doesn’t require a CPU that's good at everything. Rather, this task wants efficiency and fast parallel computation.</p><p><span class="notranslate">In pure rendering, Core i5-8600K is at the top of its class. However, you can see how AMD's Ryzen 7 1700 benefits a ton when its eight cores are overclocked. Thread count takes precedence over frequency, but performance does scale beautifully with the latter.</span></p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/m49RWyXQpz2goYsdpggxqc.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/m49RWyXQpz2goYsdpggxqc.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/m49RWyXQpz2goYsdpggxqc.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Core i7-8700K bests Ryzen 7 1700 at stock clock rates. Overclocking shoots AMD's affordable 8C/16T solution up to the front of our chart, though.</p><p>Intel's new Core i5 suffers somewhat due to its lack of Hyper-Threading. However, a 4.9 GHz clock rate certainly helps the six-core CPU compensate.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EfKPE9qwxv9raZrLWq4C3k.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EfKPE9qwxv9raZrLWq4C3k.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EfKPE9qwxv9raZrLWq4C3k.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Last, but not least, we take a look at Blender. The usual workload (with a sample size of 200 pixels) confirms what we saw in the preceding benchmarks: Core i5-8600K trails the notably less expensive <span class="notranslate">Ryzen 5 1600X.</span></p><p><span class="notranslate"></span></p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KxPQ87Vh9mo9tKa3bxx3vd.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KxPQ87Vh9mo9tKa3bxx3vd.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KxPQ87Vh9mo9tKa3bxx3vd.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The results obtained from SPECwpc’s Blender loop look similar, even though this benchmark presents a somewhat different task consisting of more than just rendering.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6F5fbJRVapMP23gKwdkGEi.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6F5fbJRVapMP23gKwdkGEi.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6F5fbJRVapMP23gKwdkGEi.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>With the workload's rendering portion easing up, a stock Core i7-8700K suddenly becomes more competitive.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/B3AGakNNSAchmwwkLmcG5i.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/B3AGakNNSAchmwwkLmcG5i.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/B3AGakNNSAchmwwkLmcG5i.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>This trend intensifies as our benchmark begins incorporating tasks other than photorealistic rendering. Core count isn't the sole determiner of performance; IPC throughput factors in as well. That's why you see older quad-core models with SMT rise through the ranks.<span class="notranslate"> The tuned Core i5-8600K even takes the top spot.</span></p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2573tSPUuMidVzGhdhNPbU.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2573tSPUuMidVzGhdhNPbU.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2573tSPUuMidVzGhdhNPbU.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p><span class="notranslate">In this test, the new Core i7-8700K and overclocked Ryzen 7 1700 lead. Core count matters, of course, but operating frequency is also a critical variable.<br/></span></p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xFKFsdV5TboUB9dFXBaiGS.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xFKFsdV5TboUB9dFXBaiGS.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xFKFsdV5TboUB9dFXBaiGS.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Intel’s Core i5-8600K offers acceptable performance in semi-professional applications; it's not just a gaming CPU. It's lack of Hyper-Threading support does show in threaded workloads, though. <span class="notranslate">This keeps the Core i5 from dating above its league. If the chip performed <em>too </em>well, it'd cannibalize sales of pricier Core i7 models.<br/></span></p><p><span class="notranslate">Going up against AMD isn't easy, though. The Ryzen processors fare well in stock form, and then respond readily to our overclocking efforts.</span></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="scientific-amp-engineering-computations-hpc-performance">Scientific & Engineering Computations, HPC Performance</h2><p>For these tests, we’re using the SPECwpc benchmark suite for workstations with its wide variety of tasks. It measures a number of very different mathematical computations optimized for parallelization. They typically make heavy use of available memory bandwidth and cache, plus expose issues with latency.</p><h2 id="rodinia">Rodinia</h2><p>The pre-Euler3D CFD test (Computational Fluid Dynamics benchmark) runs very well on AMD's CPUs, suggesting scaling based predominantly on core count. <span class="notranslate">It is interesting, however, that the overclocked Intel CPUs don't seem to benefit as much from higher operating frequencies.<br/></span></p><h2 id="5"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/un2pAuM8rmMaDUyZnMSQkn.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/un2pAuM8rmMaDUyZnMSQkn.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/un2pAuM8rmMaDUyZnMSQkn.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="convolution">Convolution</h2><p>In this benchmark, a mathematical operation is performed on two functions (convolution), which results in a third function. Performance scales according to core count. Clock rate has far less impact, which gives AMD the <span class="notranslate">advantage.</span></p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jfSCXxicJVzvjsiqkfYRi8.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jfSCXxicJVzvjsiqkfYRi8.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jfSCXxicJVzvjsiqkfYRi8.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="calculix">CalculiX</h2><p>This test is based on the finite element method for three-dimensional structural computations. Intel’s higher frequencies help Core i7-8700K secure the win. Meanwhile, a lack of <span class="notranslate">Hyper-Threading punishes Core i5.<br/></span></p><p><span class="notranslate"></span></p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TdWGH2ESgs9KyPZHrYskEa.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TdWGH2ESgs9KyPZHrYskEa.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TdWGH2ESgs9KyPZHrYskEa.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="poisson-39-s-equation">Poisson's Equation</h2><p>Poisson's Equation is a second-order partial differential equation widely used in physics for boundary value problems.</p><p><span class="notranslate">Both of Intel's new six-core models serve up compelling performance, though overclocking doesn't yield explosive gains. What's more, the -8600K cannot catch Ryzen 7 1700. On paper, AMD's chip is more expensive. But when you factor in a cheaper motherboard and bundled cooler, it'd actually save you money.</span></p><p><span class="notranslate"></span></p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Zx4QFhwDFEmX3gi9PUPrjk.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Zx4QFhwDFEmX3gi9PUPrjk.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Zx4QFhwDFEmX3gi9PUPrjk.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="sequential-reweighted-message-passing-srmp">Sequential Reweighted Message Passing (SRMP)</h2><p>These are algorithms for discrete energy minimization. The workload benefits from core count, clock rate, and architectural improvements, it appears. For some reason, though, AMD's Ryzen 7 and 5 just don't show well, even though our logs show them to be fully utilized.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/o5MQWK8wukRE3T5mRUisdg.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/o5MQWK8wukRE3T5mRUisdg.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/o5MQWK8wukRE3T5mRUisdg.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="kirchhoff-migration">Kirchhoff Migration</h2><p>The earth’s subsurface structure can be determined via seismic processing. One of the four basic steps in this process is the Kirchhoff Migration, which is used to generate an image based on the available data using mathematical operations.</p><p>This benchmark and its underlying computations turn out to be a great fit for AMD, particularly when the Ryzen 7 1700 is overclocked.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HncShQYFdcPYdFj95KyyMS.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HncShQYFdcPYdFj95KyyMS.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HncShQYFdcPYdFj95KyyMS.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The Core i5-8600K struggles in many of these tests due to its lack of Hyper-Threading. If it had simultaneous multi-threading, however, it'd basically be as fast as Core i7-8700K. If you run a lot of professional software, take the step up and go for Core i7 or one of the higher-end Ryzen chips. Core i5-8600K is serviceable in workstation apps, but it's really meant for gaming and desktop productivity.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="overclocking-power-consumption-amp-temperatures">Overclocking, Power Consumption & Temperatures</h2><h2 id="overclocking-2">Overclocking</h2><p>Our overclocking efforts started at an easy 5 GHz. Pushing up to 5.2 GHz, Windows would boot and most games still ran. However, Cinebench crashed on us. Then LuxRender started having stability issues at 5.1 GHz. In the end, Creo 3.0, SolidWorks, and some of the HPC applications also cratered at 5 GHz. So, we dropped to a completely stable 4.9 GHz.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:77.36%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8RkFdhdfUr4RyaTN8pivHG.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8RkFdhdfUr4RyaTN8pivHG.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="550" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8RkFdhdfUr4RyaTN8pivHG.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Surprisingly, the power consumption and performance curves are nearly superimposed, while the Core i7-8700K showed a flatter performance curve after 4.8 GHz. Without Hyper-Threading, the -8600K's memory bandwidth is obviously sufficient for perfect scaling (even if the absolute performance results are lower).</p><h2 id="power-consumption">Power Consumption</h2><p>At idle, the differences in power consumption are fairly marginal. All of the processors end up just about where we'd expect based on previous reviews. AMD's Ryzen processors draw significantly more power than the Intel competition because their idle clock rate is a bit too high.</p><p>Chalk up the differences within 1W to a margin of error, even though we're measuring over a 30-minute period. The overclocked Core i5-8600K sees sporadic and unavoidable load peaks that mess with its average.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Rdqrfpyike4h8sB93bk9na.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Rdqrfpyike4h8sB93bk9na.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Rdqrfpyike4h8sB93bk9na.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The new Intel CPU’s average power consumption in applications that combine 2D and 3D loads (like AutoCAD) is in line with the performance we observed.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zZHtZZJbAQiDA6r8YwMzBQ.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zZHtZZJbAQiDA6r8YwMzBQ.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zZHtZZJbAQiDA6r8YwMzBQ.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Gaming paints a more balanced, but very similar picture.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oP79rQMNsGaCnAybCjHBH8.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oP79rQMNsGaCnAybCjHBH8.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oP79rQMNsGaCnAybCjHBH8.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The finishing order changes dramatically once we fire up an AVX stress test with all cores running at their top Turbo Boost bins. During rendering, we were seeing the -8600K's stock power consumption at 78W, climbing to 103W under a 5 GHz overclock.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MePG6kHziDR3gDK3kLdiHe.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MePG6kHziDR3gDK3kLdiHe.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MePG6kHziDR3gDK3kLdiHe.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>AVX without offset pushes the result as high as 163W. The Core i5-8600K at 4.9 GHz even throttles due to its package temperature. And that's in spite of our compressor cooler's efforts! Thermal paste under the IHS does us no favors.</p><h2 id="temperatures-2">Temperatures</h2><p>Here’s the good news: unless you render or run Prime95 for hours on end, a good air cooler can theoretically handle 4.9 GHz in a well-ventilated case. Intel’s thermal interface material isn't desirable, but it shouldn't stop you from achieving a decent overclock.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZtpxRyagdtAtQP7uovEyP3.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZtpxRyagdtAtQP7uovEyP3.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZtpxRyagdtAtQP7uovEyP3.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The above graph shows that a closed-loop liquid cooler is able to keep an overclocked Core i5-8600K from throttling after 20 minutes of warming up. A good heat sink and fan combination should perform almost as well, again, given ample airflow.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fA4WDhiZE3tcqzibYYDKDn.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fA4WDhiZE3tcqzibYYDKDn.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fA4WDhiZE3tcqzibYYDKDn.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="conclusion">Conclusion</h2><p>Intel's Core processors were long overdue for an infusion of extra execution resources. Two more cores help the Core i5-8600K put serious distance between Kaby Lake in threaded workloads, while aggressive Turbo Boost binning ensures you don't lose performance at any given utilization level. In fact, the six-core -8600K generally offers higher clocks than the -7600K in real-world tasks, despite Intel's lower base frequency specification.</p><p>The Core i5-8600K benefits gaming performance in a quantifiable way. We use a geometric mean of 99th percentile frame times, a good indicator of smoothness, converted into an FPS measurement. Five of the games we test were released in 2016, and five are older (2014/2015). Extra cores could enable more performance as software evolves, so we also include a chart with newer games that thoroughly utilize available host processing resources. We also have price-to-performance charts that include extra platform costs. For the models that don't come with a bundled cooler, we add an extra $25 for a basic heat sink. We also add $20 if overclocking requires a more expensive motherboard (as is the case for Z370).</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kmvRJoXC6ntcwKPrAjtdVn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/x9sqYYXAZdvxSjBSmDfFa7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hJZ6WoRQXhNyumQuZGnh6o.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P8XQdFbmqfLdNgsqriWxTa.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Officially, Core i5-8600K sells for $15 more than its Kaby Lake predecessor (though street pricing currently has it +$40). The -8600K does, however, deliver more performance in most games. It even matches the Core i7-7700K, typically. AMD's Ryzen 5 1600X offers solid performance for enthusiasts on a budget, but it tends to trail the stock Core i5. And that's after overclocking.</p><p>Ryzen 7 1700 might be a more compelling option thanks to its eight cores and 16 threads, particularly if you run a lot of rendering/encoding tasks. A price point around $300 comes awful close to Core i5-8600K's current $280. And when you factor in lower-cost AMD motherboards and a bundled Wraith Spire heat sink/fan, an unlocked Coffee Lake chip quickly becomes more expensive. After all, it doesn't include cooling at all, while overclocking necessitates a premium Z370-based platform.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v2NhFJv3MVFdZg3vqb5FiY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eJGzcodwz9uicfmwoppKYT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RuGJ66LSpwVtvGFJSJpfe5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GyXha9fCuvGvYWyEtt7P7n.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Overall, Intel's Core i5-8600K offers balanced performance in a wide range of workloads. Right now, availability is an issue. Provided you can find one, though, the -8600K delivers an unmatched gaming experience at its price.</p><p>For a bit of perspective, Core i5-8600K often provides similar gaming frame rates as the previous-gen Core i7-7700K, and it's incredibly competitive in productivity workloads. However, you can buy it for $60 less. That's an incredible jump. We stop short of saying Core i5-8600K represents the best gaming value because we haven't reviewed the multiplier-locked models yet. But -8600K certainly provides the best gaming value of the processors we've tested so far. That means you can build a gaming PC with GeForce GTX 1080 Ti or Radeon RX Vega 64 and not worry about host processing bottlenecks.</p><p>The Core i5-8600K also wields more horsepower for heavy-lifting, improving the results you'll see in demanding productivity workloads. AMD does well in that category as well though, so keep your eyes out for deals!</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Core i7-8700K Review: Coffee Lake Brews A Great Gaming CPU ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-cpu,5252.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Intel's Core i7-8700K sports the same high frequencies as previous-gen mainstream flagships, but incorporates two more cores to challenge AMD's Ryzen CPUs. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">ch9HVpTjR62DQA4JjFeBYn</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5kVXKPXsy7nEWDk4KTr3Nc-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 05 Oct 2017 13:01:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:27:10 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ palcorn@outlook.com (Paul Alcorn) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Paul Alcorn ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RZRmFeQfPy3etHjBQitbGW.jpeg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;As a teenager, Paul scraped up enough money to buy a 486-powered PC with a turbo button (yes, a turbo button). Back when floppies were still popular he was already chasing after the fastest spinners for his personal computer, which led him down the long and winding storage road, covering enterprise storage. His current focus is on consumer processors, though he still keeps a close eye on the latest storage news. In his spare time, you’ll find Paul hanging out with his kids or indulging his love of the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                <cf:isSponsored>false</cf:isSponsored>
                <cf:hasAffiliateLinks>false</cf:hasAffiliateLinks>
                <cf:isPaid>false</cf:isPaid>
                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5kVXKPXsy7nEWDk4KTr3Nc-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5kVXKPXsy7nEWDk4KTr3Nc-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="intel-brings-more-cores">Intel Brings More Cores </h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:67.27%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JqL8ix5Y6T5mrCVxcSBUCB.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JqL8ix5Y6T5mrCVxcSBUCB.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1280" height="861" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JqL8ix5Y6T5mrCVxcSBUCB.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Intel’s Core 2 Quad processors debuted with four cores in 2006. Although six-core models landed four years later in the high-end desktop space, the company’s most accessible chips topped out in quad-core configurations for more than a decade. The Coffee Lake era begins with Intel upending its mainstream line-up by adding two more cores to Core i7, i5, and i3 families. Call this a much-needed improvement, cleverly timed to stave off AMD's core-laden Ryzen assault.</p><p>Of course, while Intel's accelerated Coffee Lake-S launch makes it look today's unveiling is a direct response to heated competition, in reality, the long incubation period for new processors means it’s more likely the result of 10nm manufacturing delays.</p><p>Just last year, Intel announced a new process-architecture-optimize cadence designed to deliver smaller transistors every third generation. That's a profound departure from the glory days of Intel’s tick-tock model. The latest 14nm++ process is the fourth outing of the 14nm node, which originally debuted with Broadwell back in 2014. So, it appears that PAO is already falling by the wayside. In the days of tick-tock, we'd also be talking about a new architecture right now. But Coffee Lake employs the same Skylake design as Kaby Lake before it. We also get the same fundamental integrated graphics engine found in the previous generation. To be sure, Coffee Lake is another iterative update.</p><p>But there’s nothing mundane about adding more cores. Intel claims Coffee Lake offers up to 25% more gaming performance and up to 45% more “mega-tasking” performance. Given similar price points versus Kaby Lake, we're almost certainly looking at a huge step forward in value.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:54.69%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KAcW7PRzEVZBSbsZ3zUYrP.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KAcW7PRzEVZBSbsZ3zUYrP.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1280" height="700" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KAcW7PRzEVZBSbsZ3zUYrP.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>This is obviously a busy year for Intel. But as if the company's product stack wasn't already confusing, its eighth-generation portfolio draws from three separate architectures, including 14nm+ Kaby Lake-R (refresh), 14nm++ Coffee Lake, and 10nm Cannon Lake, which should land next year.</p><h2 id="intel-core-i7-8700k">Intel Core i7-8700K </h2><p>Core i7-8700K serves as this generation's flagship, sporting six Hyper-Threaded cores. Already, that's a big increase from Kaby Lake's 4C/8T maximum. It features the company's highest clock rates, accelerating up to 4.7 GHz via Turbo Boost. The -8700K does sacrifice some base frequency in exchange for a higher core count, though. Its 3.7 GHz specification is 500 MHz lower than the -7700K, offsetting the increased power consumption and heat generated by a 6C/12T configuration.</p><p>The -8700K's Coffee Lake design utilizes a 14nm++ process, which Intel claims offers 26% more performance and 52% less leakage power than first-generation 14nm manufacturing. Those advances enable the higher Turbo Boost bins and reduce consumption enough to carve out room for extra cores. A more complex die does necessitate a TDP rating of up to 95W. But that's only 4% higher than Core i7-7700K. And as we've seen before, Turbo Boost allows the CPU to operate beyond its rated TDP as long as current, power, and temperature fall below specified limits. As you might imagine, then, the impact of two additional cores is felt under load.</p><p>The top 4.7 GHz Turbo Boost bin should help improve performance in lightly-threaded applications. But Core i7-8700K also includes aggressive multi-core bins to help chew through threaded workloads. Because these CPUs employ Intel's Skylake architecture, we aren't expecting any speed-ups attributable to IPC throughput. All gains come from core count and clock rate alone. Intel isn't officially disclosing a die size or transistor count, but early delidding efforts indicate a ~151mm<sup>2</sup> area. That's naturally larger than Kaby Lake's ~122mm<sup>2</sup>, reflecting the additional execution and cache resources. Intel confirms that Coffee Lake continues to employ its ring bus, rather than Skylake-X's mesh topology.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Active Cores</strong></td><td  ><strong>1</strong></td><td  ><strong>2</strong></td><td  ><strong>4</strong></td><td  ><strong>6</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Intel Core i7-8700K</strong></td><td  >4.7 GHz</td><td  >4.6 GHz</td><td  >4.4 GHz</td><td  >4.3 GHz</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Intel Core i7-7700K </strong></td><td  >4.5 GHz</td><td  >4.4 GHz</td><td  >4.4 GHz</td><td  >-</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Intel also adds 50% more cores to its Core i5 family, and doubles Core i3's core count. But it pulls Hyper-Threading support from Core i3 in the process. Nevertheless, we expect gamers to realize palpable gains moving from dual-core Hyper-Threaded platforms to inexpensive quad-core setups.</p><p>Core i5 and i7 also support speedier DDR4-2666 transfer rates, up from Kaby Lake's DDR4-2400 spec. Core i3 remains limited to DDR4-2400, though. This could just be Intel's attempt to segment its line-up, or perhaps the Core i3s are really just quad-core Kaby Lake designs transplanted onto a 14nm++ process. </p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  ></th><th  ><strong>Intel Corei7-8700K</strong></th><th  ><strong>Intel Corei7-8700</strong></th><th  >Intel Core i5-8600K</th><th  >Intel Core i5-8400</th><th  >Intel Core i3-8350K</th><th  >Intel Core i3-8100</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  ><strong>Socket</strong></th><td  >LGA 1151</td><td  >LGA 1151</td><td  >LGA 1151</td><td  >LGA 1151</td><td  >LGA 1151</td><td  >LGA 1151</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Cores/Threads</strong></th><td  >6 / 12</td><td  >6 / 12</td><td  >6 / 6</td><td  >6 / 6</td><td  >4 / 4</td><td  >4 / 4</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Base Frequency</strong></th><td  >3.7 GHz</td><td  >3.2 GHz</td><td  >3.6 GHz</td><td  >2.8 GHz</td><td  >4.0 GHz</td><td  >3.6 GHz</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Boost Frequency</strong></th><td  >4.7 GHz</td><td  >4.6 GHz</td><td  >4.3 GHz</td><td  >4.0 GHz</td><td  >N/A</td><td  >N/A</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Memory Speed</strong></th><td  >DDR4-2666</td><td  >DDR4-2666</td><td  >DDR4-2666</td><td  >DDR4-2666</td><td  >DDR4-2400</td><td  >DDR4-2400</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Memory Controller</strong></th><td  >Dual-Channel</td><td  >Dual-Channel</td><td  >Dual-Channel</td><td  >Dual-Channel</td><td  >Dual-Channel</td><td  >Dual-Channel</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Unlocked Multiplier</strong></th><td  >Yes</td><td  >No</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >No</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >No</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>PCIe Lanes</strong></th><td  >x16 Gen3</td><td  >x16 Gen3</td><td  >x16 Gen3</td><td  >x16 Gen3</td><td  >x16 Gen3</td><td  >x16 Gen3</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Integrated Graphics</strong></th><td  >Intel UHD Graphics 630 (up to 1200 MHz)</td><td  >Intel UHD Graphics 630 (up to 1200 MHz)</td><td  >Intel UHD Graphics 630 (up to 1150 MHz)</td><td  >Intel UHD Graphics 630 (up to 1150 MHz)</td><td  >Intel UHD Graphics 630 (up to 1150 MHz)</td><td  >Intel UHD Graphics 630 (up to 1150 MHz)</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Cache (L2+L3)</strong></th><td  >13.5MB</td><td  >13.5MB</td><td  >10.5MB</td><td  >10.5MB</td><td  >9MB</td><td  >7MB</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Architecture</strong></th><td  >Coffee Lake</td><td  >Coffee Lake</td><td  >Coffee Lake</td><td  >Coffee Lake</td><td  >Coffee Lake</td><td  >Coffee Lake</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Process</strong></th><td  >14nm++</td><td  >14nm++</td><td  >14nm++</td><td  >14nm++</td><td  >14nm++</td><td  >14nm++</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>TDP</strong></th><td  >95W</td><td  >65W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >65W</td><td  >91W</td><td  >65W</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Price (per 1K Unit)</strong></th><td  >$359</td><td  >$303</td><td  >$257</td><td  >$182</td><td  >$168</td><td  >$117</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Unfortunately, Intel still doesn't enable Turbo Boost on its Core i3 CPUs. So, we could see a performance dip in lightly threaded workloads due to Coffee Lake's lower base frequencies. You do get 100% more cores in exchange, though. Physical cores are always preferable to logical ones, so the new implementation of Core i3 should come out ahead in most of our benchmarks.</p><p>As expected, most models continue to wield 2MB of L3 and 256KB of L2 cache per core. As a side effect of its higher core counts, then, Coffee Lake processors enjoy the benefits of more cache. Core i3-8100 is the lone exception with only 6MB of L3 cache.</p><p>PCIe connectivity remains unchanged; you get 16 lanes of third-gen PCIe from the CPU's controller. Intel reminds us, though, that it offers up to 40 lanes when we add the platform controller hub's 24.</p><p>You'll need a Z370-based motherboard for Coffee Lake processors. The 200-series chipsets are not compatible. And in a clear indication that Intel really hurried its launch schedule, less expensive B- or H-series chipsets won't be ready until next year. Paying a premium for Z-class core logic isn't much of a surprise for enthusiasts, who need the higher-end chipset to support unlocked multipliers. But it's a little bit overkill for everyone else.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  ><strong>Coffee Lake</strong></th><th  ><strong>Intel Corei7-8700K</strong></th><th  ><strong>Intel Corei7-8700</strong></th><th  ><strong>Intel Core i5-8600K</strong></th><th  ><strong>Intel Core i5-8400</strong></th><th  ><strong>Intel Core i3-8350K</strong></th><th  ><strong>Intel Core i3-8100</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  >Cost Per Core/Thread</th><td  >$59.83 / $29.92</td><td  >$50.50 / $25.25</td><td  >$42.83 / $42.83</td><td  >$30.33 / $30.33</td><td  >$42 / $42</td><td  >$29.95 / $29.95</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Kaby Lake</strong></th><td  ><strong>Intel Core i7-7700K</strong></td><td  ><strong>Intel Core i7-7700</strong></td><td  ><strong>Intel Core i5-7600K</strong></td><td  ><strong>Intel Core i5-7400</strong></td><td  ><strong>Intel i3-7350K</strong></td><td  ><strong>Intel i3-7100</strong></td></tr><tr><th  >Cost Per Core/Thread</th><td  >$84.75 / $42.38</td><td  >$75.75 / $37.88</td><td  >$60.50 / $60.50</td><td  >$45.50 / $45.50</td><td  >$84 / $42</td><td  >$58.50 / $29.95</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Ryzen</strong></th><td  ><strong>Ryzen 71700X</strong></td><td  ><strong>Ryzen 71700</strong></td><td  ><strong>Ryzen 51600X</strong></td><td  ><strong>Ryzen 51500X</strong></td><td  ><strong>Ryzen 51400</strong></td><td  ><strong>Ryzen 31300X</strong></td></tr><tr><th  >Cost Per Core/Thread</th><td  >$49.88 / $24.94</td><td  >$41.13 / $20.56</td><td  >$41.50 / $20.75</td><td  >$47.50 / $23.75</td><td  >$42.25 / $21.12</td><td  >$32.50 / $32.50</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>We&apos;re using Intel&apos;s 1K unit pricing for comparisons to the Kaby Lake models and AMD&apos;s MSRP for price-equivalent Ryzen chips. We may see higher prices on Intel&apos;s CPUs at retail, while AMD models routinely sell below MSRP.</p><p>Intel adds a ~$20 premium to its K-series SKUs compared to their Kaby Lake equivalents. Overall, though, you pay less per core. Again, Intel removed Hyper-Threading from its Core i3s, so their price per thread remains unchanged. With the exception of Ryzen 3, AMD maintains a price advantage across its portfolio, due in part to SMT on the Ryzen 5 family. The benchmarks will give us a better idea of performance-per-dollar compared to Kaby Lake and Ryzen, though.    </p><p>Overclocking headroom was one of Kaby Lake&apos;s biggest advantages due to Ryzen&apos;s limited scaling. Intel adds per-core overclocking support to this generation, but doesn&apos;t provide per-core voltage and P-state controls. It also enables live memory timing adjustments (without rebooting), along with memory multipliers up to 8400 MT/s, so you don&apos;t have to adjust the BCLK frequency to chase bleeding-edge transfer rates. Finally, enhanced GT and Ring PLL Trim controls add more granular control.</p><p>Intel makes some power optimizations to its interface that promise to extend the advantage while overclocking. However, the company continues to insist on using thermal paste between its die and IHS, rather than solder. Like all unlocked Intel models, the Core i7-8700K doesn&apos;t include a stock cooler.</p><p>Nevertheless, we have to give the big company credit for staying on its toes this year. It already introduced Kaby Lake, Skylake-X, and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-8th-generation-kaby-lake-refresh,35267.html">Kaby Lake-Refresh</a>. Next year, we&apos;ll have new Pentium and Celeron line-ups headed our way. But for now, we&apos;re looking forward to testing what Intel claims is its best gaming chip yet.</p><p><br><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html"><strong>Best CPUs</strong></a></p><p><br><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html"><strong>Intel & AMD CPU Comparison Hierarchy</strong></a></p><p><br><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus"><strong>All CPUs Content</strong></a></p><h2 id="the-z370-chipset-amp-graphics">The Z370 Chipset & Graphics</h2><h2 id="the-z370-chipset">The Z370 Chipset</h2><p>Much to the dismay of enthusiasts everywhere, you can't buy a Coffee Lake-based CPU and drop it into the fancy Z270 motherboard you may have purchased a few months ago. Instead, you'll have to pony up for a 300-series motherboard. You also can't bring your Skylake or Kaby Lake processor over to a Z370-based platform, even though both sides employ LGA 1151 interfaces.</p><p>Intel makes more money selling CPUs than chipsets, so creating an upgrade path would have made sense. But the company tells us that it needed optimized memory trace routing to support DDR4-2666, and it also improved power delivery to support six-core models. It also beefed up package power delivery for overclocking.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:52.32%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zJ8Yj67hLszmSAypVcTbbB.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zJ8Yj67hLszmSAypVcTbbB.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="790" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zJ8Yj67hLszmSAypVcTbbB.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>According to Intel's specification sheet, the increased package power delivery consists of 18 pins repurposed to VCC (previously designated as reserve pins). There are also changes to the socket that reassign behaviors to some pins, such as swapping Normal Open (NO) and Normal Closed (NC) settings. Intel also improved power delivery to the graphics engine, and although the specific changes there remain undefined, that might improve HD Graphics overclocking.</p><p>The changes mean upgrading to Z370 is a technical necessity, rather than planned obsolescence. Regardless, though, AMD's planned support for Socket AM4 through 2020 makes Intel's Z370 chipset requirement appear all the more painful.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XGs4spMpq7AM2gzUCNbq8P.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dAStHgsZzr4kAq3vMMpn59.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>CPU-based I/O remains unchanged from Kaby Lake; you still get 16 lanes of PCIe 3.0. Again, though, the whole platform supports up to 40 lanes. The extra 24 originate from the PCH, stuck behind a four-lane DMI 3.0 connection that links the core logic and CPU. As you might imagine, this PCIe-like interconnect can become a bottleneck if enough devices (like M.2 SSDs) are working behind it.</p><p>The 22nm Z370 chipset is rated at 6W, and is mostly identical to Z270. It offers up to 10 USB 2.0, 14 USB 3.0, and six SATA 6Gb/s ports. Intel added support for Thunderbolt 3, but hasn't provided much detail on the implementation. Z370 also retains support for Intel Optane Memory. Even the ME version 11 is listed similarly on Intel's ARK, though we do know that Z370's Management Engine doesn't allow Kaby Lake processors to boot on the platform. Two memory channels support up to two DIMMs per channel and a maximum of 64GB. Intel does not support ECC on any of its models (compared to AMD, which does allow motherboard vendors to enable ECC support).</p><p>Intel offers a few unique benefits to enthusiasts, such as the XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility) and support for XMP 2.0. The Performance Tuning Protection Plan is also available, which covers damage from overclocking. The price for the warranty plan varies per SKU, and Intel hasn't provided a detailed breakdown for Coffee Lake yet. We aren't aware of any AMD-equivalent coverage.</p><h2 id="intel-uhd-graphics-630">Intel UHD Graphics 630</h2><p>Intel will have an optimized graphics driver soon after launch, but we don't see any significant improvements (beyond <a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/11738/intel-launches-8th-generation-cpus-starting-with-kaby-lake-refresh-for-15w-mobile">HDCP 2.2 support for DP 1.2a</a>) to the Gen 9 LP (Low Power) engine. We still get subslices with eight EUs each (totaling 24 EUs in a GT2 configuration), accelerated slightly by a 50 MHz maximum frequency increase across the board.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Uk9TurqaJWvbaShxpRzbjZ.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9FnERXw54ynPBvWPhjqnhS.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The biggest change comes from Intel's marketing department, which "upgraded" the High Definition (HD) Graphics 630 brand to Ultra High Definition (UHD) Graphics 630. Apparently, that means the company supports the same legacy VP8 and AVC codecs, HEVC 10-bit decode/encode, VP9 8/10-bit decode, VP9 8-bit encode (no support for VP9 10-bit encode), HDR, and Wide Color Gamut features. The processors now come in 6+2 (i5 and i7) and 4+2 (i3) configurations.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="how-we-test-3">How We Test</h2><h2 id="the-msi-z370-gaming-pro-carbon-ac-2">The MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC</h2><p>MSI continues its Z-series Gaming Pro motherboards, giving the latest implementation similar features as previous models. Pricing should also end up similar. The exact board details and specifications can be found on the <a href="https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/Z370-GAMING-PRO-CARBON-AC">manufacturer's website</a>.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:916px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:70.85%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sn4DwyvW2g9Eta2A8WNsMR.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sn4DwyvW2g9Eta2A8WNsMR.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="916" height="649" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sn4DwyvW2g9Eta2A8WNsMR.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="comparison-products-3">Comparison Products</h2>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="1615651f-84ed-4037-a48b-f1c1edb75e4a">            <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-1800X-Processor-YD180XBCAEWOF/dp/B06W9JXK4G?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware-deal&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Ryzen 7 1800X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:100.00%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DryrsSjyiFKtB6LHs6agEc.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 7 1800X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="0db82d8e-d4fb-4fc9-a438-83453c843f83">            <a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113434" data-model-name="Ryzen 5 1600X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:75.00%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cnR74jNTGXP9TR45Swwx8j.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 5 1600X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="cb21ba4e-468e-4934-907b-004139f1bb60">            <a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i7-x-series-i7-7800x/p/N82E16819117793" data-model-name="Intel Core i7-7800X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:100.00%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZgWPD73Es95kFGg7w2ULM7.png" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Intel Core i7-7800X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><h2 id="test-systems-4">Test Systems</h2><p>We introduced our new test system and methodology in <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-we-test-graphics-cards,4912.html"><strong>How We Test Graphics Cards</strong></a>. If you'd like more detail about our general approach, check that piece out.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3840px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:66.74%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TnvGnyBUzq8wQvNcYSXJbd.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TnvGnyBUzq8wQvNcYSXJbd.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="3840" height="2563" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TnvGnyBUzq8wQvNcYSXJbd.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>In this case, only the hardware configuration with CPU, RAM, mainboard, as well as the new cooling system are different, so the summary in table form gives a quick overview of the systems used:</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  colspan="2"><strong>Test System and Configuration</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Hardware</strong></td><td  ><strong><strong><strong>Germany </strong></strong></strong><strong>Intel Socket 1151 (Z370):</strong>Intel Core i7-8700KMSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC2x 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4-3200 @ 2666<strong><strong>Intel LGA 2066</strong></strong>Intel Core i7-7800XMSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC4x 4GB G.Skill RipJaws IV DDR4-2600<strong>AMD Socket </strong><strong>AM4 Workstation</strong>AMD Ryzen 7 1800X, Ryzen 5 1600XMSI X370 Tomahawk4x 8GB G.Skill TridentZ DDR4-3200 @ 2667 and 3200 <strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z270)</strong>Intel Core i7-7700K, Core i5-7600KMSI Z270 Gaming 72x 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4-3200 @ 2400 and 3200<strong>All Systems</strong>GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition (Gaming)Nvidia Quadro P6000 (Workstation)1x 1TB Toshiba OCZ RD400 (M.2, System)2x 960GB Toshiba OCZ TR150 (Storage, Images)be quiet! Dark Power Pro 11, 850W Power SupplyWindows 10 Pro (Creators Update)<strong><strong>US</strong></strong><strong>Intel Socket 1151 (Z370):</strong>Intel Core i7-8700KMSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC4x 8GB G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 @ 2666 and 3200 <strong><strong>Intel LGA 2066</strong></strong>Intel Core i7-7800XMSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC4x 8GB G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 @ 2666 and 3200 <strong>AMD Socket AM4 </strong>AMD Ryzen 7 1800X, Ryzen 5 1600XMSI X370 Xpower Gaming Titanium2x 8GB G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 @ 2667 and 3200 <strong><span>Intel LGA 1151 (Z270)</span></strong> Intel Core i7-7700K, Core i5-7600K MSI Z270 Gaming M72x 8GB G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 @ 2666 and 3200 <strong>All</strong> EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FE 1TB Samsung PM863 SilverStone ST1500, 1500W Windows 10 Creators Update Version 1703</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cooling</strong></td><td  ><strong>Germany</strong>Alphacool Eiszeit 2000 ChillerAlphacool Eisblock XPXThermal Grizzly Kryonaut (For Cooler Switch)</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Monitor</strong></td><td  >Eizo EV3237-BK</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>PC Case</strong></td><td  >Lian Li PC-T70 with Extension Kit and Mods Configurations: Open Benchtable, Closed Case</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Power Consumption Measurement</strong></td><td  >Contact-free DC Measurement at PCIe Slot (Using a Riser Card) Contact-free DC Measurement at External Auxiliary Power Supply Cable Direct Voltage Measurement at Power Supply 2x Rohde & Schwarz HMO 3054, 500MHz Digital Multi-Channel Oscilloscope with Storage Function4x Rohde & Schwarz HZO50 Current Probe (1mA - 30A, 100kHz, DC) 4x Rohde & Schwarz HZ355 (10:1 Probes, 500MHz) 1x Rohde & Schwarz HMC 8012 Digital Multimeter with Storage Function</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Thermal Measurement</strong></td><td  >1x Optris PI640 80Hz Infrared Camera + PI Connect Real-Time Infrared Monitoring and Recording</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Acoustic Measurement</strong></td><td  >NTI Audio M2211 (with Calibration File, Low Cut at 50Hz) Steinberg UR12 (with Phantom Power for Microphones)Creative X7, Smaart v.7 Custom-Made Proprietary Measurement Chamber, 3.5 x 1.8 x 2.2m (L x D x H) Perpendicular to Center of Noise Source(s), Measurement Distance of 50cm Noise Level in dB(A) (Slow), Real-time Frequency Analyzer (RTA) Graphical Frequency Spectrum of Noise</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="vrmark-3dmark-amp-aots-escalation-4">VRMark, 3DMark & AotS: Escalation</h2><h2 id="test-notes-2">Test Notes</h2><p>We generated some odd performance results with Intel's Core i7-8700. Despite more conservative specifications and a lower price, it outperformed the flagship Core i7-8700K in some of our gaming benchmarks. We verified our numbers on motherboards from different vendors, and those vendors confirmed that they're seeing what we see.</p><p>Initially, our attention turned to Turbo Boost, based on observations from Core i9-7980XE and its unpredictable behavior. But after careful analysis with multiple utilities, we believe the Turbo Boost algorithms are working correctly for both processors.</p><p>After recording higher package and core power consumption on the 65W Core i7-8700 compared to Intel's 95W -8700K in certain situations, we also reached out to Intel for comment. Once we have some answers, you can be sure we'll post our findings.</p><h2 id="vrmark-amp-3dmark-4">VRMark & 3DMark</h2><p>We aren't big fans of using synthetic benchmarks to measure game performance, but 3DMark's DX11 and DX12 CPU tests provide useful insight into the amount of horsepower available to game engines.</p><p>Futuremark's VRMark test lets you gauge your system's suitability for use with the HTC Vive or Oculus Rift, even if you don't currently own an HMD. The Orange Room test is based on the suggested system requirements for current-generation HTC Vive and Oculus Rift HMDs. Futuremark defines a passing score as anything above 109 FPS.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PHzzpssCxSt2qhYqdcpdxC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ncw8VmGQ2g426XyRfjHQcA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mTexW3GLzMjZeHZriZbRwS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NAzeuDp4FFPgpxYuvjUWS5.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>VRMark</em> plays well to Intel's frequency and IPC throughput advantages, and despite Core i7-8700K's lower base clock rate, its higher Turbo Boost frequency helps secure a victory over Core i7-7700K. Locking both processors to the same overclocked settings yields a practical tie.</p><p>Synthetics that favor more cores, such as the DX12 Time Spy and DX11 Fire Strike benchmarks, highlight the possibly explosive performance gains we could see from Intel's six-core Coffee Lake models in heavily-threaded games. The -8700K handily dispatches its predecessor. It even beats the high-end Core i7-7800X on an expensive X299 motherboard.</p><p>The eight-core Ryzen 7 1800X proves to be a formidable match. Still, we record a smaller delta between the tuned Coffee Lake and Ryzen processors than expected, given AMD's two-core advantage. It looks like Intel's higher clock rates and superior per-clock performance help in this case.</p><p>The impressive Ryzen 5 1600X easily beats Intel's Core i5-7600K, which languishes at the bottom of the chart due to its now-stingy quad-core design. The new Coffee Lake-based i5s, wielding 50% more cores, should make that price point more interesting.</p><h2 id="ashes-of-the-singularity-escalation-6">Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uzrgjJ8xyQPmWE7MyWhXab.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DTyGgHNLHdKQocAkGSSmoc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MDPFJwQizYhXjeUuF7hQAN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sKLqr27apVPqEJuCTS3eMn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DqnHYGrPs3g6ZqbkAh66rc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yrQQpGZVWfF5RLVETKu96P.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Ashes of the Singularity</em> is a heavily-threaded title that favors the Core i7-8700K's extra cores compared to Core i7-7700K.</p><p>Intel's latest outstrips the competition at both stock and overclocked settings, beating Core i7-7700K by a considerable margin in both configurations. Unfortunately, performance in most games doesn't scale linearly, so the -8700K's 50%-higher core count only adds up to a 14% lead out of the box. Nevertheless, that jump is enough for Core i7-8700K to snatch the lead away from Ryzen 7 1800X.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="civilization-vi-battlefield-1-amp-dawn-of-war-iii-3">Civilization VI, Battlefield 1 & Dawn of War III </h2><h2 id="civilization-vi-ai-test-4">Civilization VI AI Test</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.00%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BepXLWZQQayamCx6vqcdc8.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BepXLWZQQayamCx6vqcdc8.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="834" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BepXLWZQQayamCx6vqcdc8.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Our C<em>ivilization VI</em> AI test measures performance in a turn-based strategy game, and it tends to favor high frequencies and physical cores.</p><p>The -8700K's Turbo Boost frequencies yield surprisingly good results. At stock settings, the processor essentially ties Core i7-7700K, but leads a little more definitively after tuning.</p><p>Core i5-7600K fares respectably in <em>Civilization VI</em> at its stock settings. But after a 5 GHz overclock, it yields a 15.1-second result (not pictured) that even beats Intel's fastest CPUs.</p><h2 id="civilization-vi-graphics-test-4">Civilization VI Graphics Test</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/B2okzEHC6HVwLPFXQBKoS5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Dkj6SnDJHoc2oBqdoALj4U.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2PxNn6iXKhHzN2bTuEQU2C.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/m3dQ42CG3M7dzKACWsQHGk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/He9FNSnoTHJv8DHUsPEh9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XxRGWJaZovQhqMAKzeSKF.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Ryzen processors are much more competitive during <em>Civilization VI's </em>graphics test, but Intel's overclocking headroom proves insurmountable. Compared to Core i7-7700K, the -8700K offers 3.9% more performance in stock form, and a 3% advantage after tuning. Those slim leads mean there is still good value in a Kaby Lake-based platform, particularly in light of the higher price on Coffee Lake K-series SKUs.</p><h2 id="battlefield-1-dx11-3">Battlefield 1 (DX11)</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CPLiSq6npUNRmjTmnkXSJ3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tRSCMxEQ93mnT2FfnnyzxL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7mHfvmRTGftXSFXZeLEgT5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fZrUbwNdDqCAzfzSyz2Dub.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/32o5yfDvykCqc6ehtTZJWd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/N7SBmTmcrYG5m3JzJw6Yyk.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>A graphics bottleneck limits the frame rates of our <em>Battlefield 1</em> benchmark, so with the exception of Ryzen 5 1600X and Core i5-7600K, the differences between models are slight.</p><p>Intel's Core i7 processors lead. More specifically, though, the -8700K does beat its predecessor.</p><p>It’s easy to see the workload's more threaded nature during its opening phase, where a quad-core Core i5-7600K trails the test pool.  </p><h2 id="warhammer-40-000-dawn-of-war-iii-4">Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War III</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SLrkEgRV5DErZup3pa2w2Q.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/T9yNp5nabhKiBxUh8nWmHU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SdUtzebWScTiKG9ErqyVaB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yt7cPUisvs3YEg7no7UF8F.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/inLpfsVRevmu2QoeN2eFWe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QEviTz3tLx6JwjMS65sHPc.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Dawn of War III</em> scales well on CPUs with more execution resources. Naturally, then, the Core i7-8700K dominates in stock and overclocked trim.</p><p>The Core i7-7800X posts another surprisingly low score. Considering the costs associated with Intel's premium X299 platform, Skylake-X generally doesn't make much sense for gaming.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-hitman-amp-shadow-of-mordor-3">Grand Theft Auto V,  Hitman & Shadow of Mordor</h2><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-9">Grand Theft Auto V</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gT5xgzM9iEnpEg27nXRZbV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gmTTCZX93TcmQBGZxQKTZ7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FQNodyAfx9a7oxg5hAgP3V.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/A6gfGA2bkoLqH8emwjNwvX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XT6ZoE9sBs5wWVwM9bvqhY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FA2koUMUTbhAux4xA6EmEf.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Grand Theft Auto V</em> continues to favor Intel architectures and, more generally, multi-core designs. The Core i7-8700K offers 7.6% more performance than the -7700K at stock settings. This grows to a 11.5% lead after some tuning.</p><p>Kaby Lake- and Coffee Lake-based Core i7 processors set themselves apart from the pack during our benchmark, specifically offering a 16-25% performance advantage over the Ryzen models at stock settings.</p><h2 id="hitman-2016-4">Hitman (2016)</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/d9kh6KEPJRfmKDCcaD2KMe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/92cSxQSJ3KZm9L9SBVNRTj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vHdrobWRvU8kQStg2TCzdQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/riDLG9YWN2xSPEGAjDHYBQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YLPHLLmFW8UYydJk9RJxym.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cRDDf6kQYJwqrzmJb7CBAC.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Core i7-7800X finally shows up in the top half of our chart thanks to its effective architecture and 6C/12T configuration. It's still no match for the -8700K, though, probably due to its more conservative 4 GHz Turbo Boost ceiling.</p><p>The new -8700K offers the best performance in stock form, demonstrating a 9 FPS advantage over its nearest competitor. Meanwhile, Core i7-7700K turns the tables with a slight lead after overclocking. Given their similar architectures and manually-defined frequencies, a little variance there is expected. Consider the chips to be tied after tuning.</p><h2 id="middle-earth-shadow-of-mordor-3">Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YMQzqh8cvbePCVEKBHgNMQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pJtPQXBS3YXkuqpuuepyoH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aWgcnMGnAjbdffh9R6ngFk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3LsHnPS9vGDKrpcZvedCP7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/midHW6333SdsWmuCRXoW4N.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8BHx3uNoMQW4EgRwxGmgu6.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Core i7-8700K surprisingly falls behind its predecessor at stock settings. We examined each chip's Turbo Boost behavior and discovered that the -8700K ran through at a higher frequency. But, like the -7700K, it doesn’t reach peak frequencies. Rather, it drops to lower clock rates throughout our run.</p><p>As mentioned at the outset of our performance testing, we saw higher benchmark numbers from the lower-end Core i7-8700 in several games. Coffee Lake and its Z370 platform are new, so perhaps firmware tuning will iron out some of these issues over time.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="project-cars-far-cry-primal-amp-rise-of-the-tomb-raider-2">Project CARS, Far Cry Primal & Rise of the Tomb Raider</h2><h2 id="project-cars-3">Project CARS</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fw4pYuV3SrWorfY7syBGtd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gU4Fxca2fyNUBcdiFDNpn6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/x7gWt8FCZNQKww7et6rPpD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EJNryxsY4Azn3oCLQvAeTT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2NYetTDfBUWegtVRvdYNKM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4cWGKW9RGpSy6nT67X2PoN.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>There's a solid scaling trend from Intel's disappointing Core i7-7800X up through its impressive -8700K.</p><p>Core i7-8700K does offer better performance than -7700K out of the box, but as you get more graphics-bound, the two increasingly converge. That means enthusiasts specifically focused on gaming will see little benefit from upgrading, particularly if they own lower-end graphics cards.</p><h2 id="far-cry-primal-6">Far Cry Primal</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PGXWYnDferKSUmqnEFa5wD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GC9dr7pJwhWy5oUnBvCPth.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TuYnHqG9LhcP5zJtzYYDtC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5vo5vnsRk6RdchmZ2xyhUD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8HyERH7c8FbQtMbCpQ9qYe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mzmLbjKBf3vZdvEsb9UbKQ.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Far Cry Primal</em> is another title that doesn't respond as well to Core i7-8700K as we would expect. Again, lower performance than the -7700K at stock settings implies that we just aren't getting the full benefit of Coffee Lake yet. It does gain some ground when we lock both CPUs at 4.9 GHz, but -8700K fails to completely overtake Kaby Lake.</p><p>The Ryzen processors obviously trail Intel's offerings in this game and many others. But they're still solid value plays benefiting from lower prices and more affordable platforms. One of Ryzen's greatest advantages is higher performance in threaded workloads like rendering. Coffee Lake challenges this with more cores, so our content creation benchmarks could upset the narrative we've been telling since Ryzen's launch.</p><h2 id="rise-of-the-tomb-raider-3">Rise of the Tomb Raider</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nfJ5nsucbxytW9MUPTmSsc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/C3dFj8KYV7hsfBcHPimfBL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fhAfkDC5iSHgDtR3kFbBUE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MLPt7Zh3nXSXhq9Xchaije.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qsYAKnf9s3rKcao9iv62Kg.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UKwgSeRBsy9UaBfjM6rC3h.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Core i7-7700K and -8700K offer strong, but similar performance in <em>Rise of the Tomb Raider</em>. The Core i5-7600K bests them both at stock settings, though. </p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="dtp-office-multimedia-amp-compression-performance">DTP, Office, Multimedia & Compression Performance</h2><p>Although we usually don’t run our application benchmarks on overclocked processors, we're including the two Coffee Lake CPUs at stock and overclocked frequencies this time, since we wanted to know how Intel's architecture scales in different scenarios.</p><p>To be fair, we also added a (reasonably) overclocked AMD Ryzen 7 1800X to our results. This makes for an interesting comparison. We also included Intel’s Core i7-7800X, which represents another 6C/12T contender from Intel using its X299 platform. Skylake-X didn't seem to add anything in our gaming benchmarks; can it beat Coffee Lake in productivity applications?</p><h2 id="dtp-amp-presentation">DTP & Presentation</h2><p>Adobe’s Creative Cloud gives us a look at real-world single- and multi-core performance. As such, it beats synthetic benchmarks as a productivity test.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rXUQ8C5gFCZHijDKEo8qME.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RsbbRHvCxDBzuqCKqkRqpd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/96n46nfSE7VijsjG2AN4G6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RjNY98jTuBYbv3PUUptS5o.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4fGKQjckWpEgq3fww3CQD.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>After Effects CC is a classic when it comes to parallelized tasks, with the number of cores easily being more important than frequency. Core i7-8700K dominates in this one, of course.</p><p>Otherwise, in lightly-threaded benchmarks, Coffee Lake only beats its competition thanks to its slightly higher clock rate.</p><p>Strangely, Intel’s Core i5-7600K reliably beats the stock Core i7 CPUs in Adobe’s InDesign CC. We have no idea why this might be the case.</p><h2 id="encoding-amp-multimedia">Encoding & Multimedia</h2><h2 id="6"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/g47VuCmZSjZ4W5oGoMZoZU.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/g47VuCmZSjZ4W5oGoMZoZU.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/g47VuCmZSjZ4W5oGoMZoZU.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Intel’s new Core i7-8700K dominates our default HandBrake benchmarks. The Core i7-7800X can’t compete.</p><h2 id="7"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vuhAdz3pPwreL7nhwNTcqe.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vuhAdz3pPwreL7nhwNTcqe.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vuhAdz3pPwreL7nhwNTcqe.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The finishing order shifts around a bit under our more demanding high-quality test. Due to its higher core count, AMD’s Ryzen 7 1800X finishes ahead of Core i7-8700K, which, in turn, beats the Skylake-X-based Core i7-7800X.</p><h2 id="compression-amp-decompression">Compression & Decompression</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fz8cp4NkdKrJzwDpdZuh3B.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fz8cp4NkdKrJzwDpdZuh3B.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fz8cp4NkdKrJzwDpdZuh3B.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Core i7-8700K’s six cores, coupled with high clock rates, allow Coffee Lake to leave its competition in the dust. Again, the Core i7-7800X doesn’t even come close.</p><h2 id="8"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eJCMh5FSEcFitU4UZDpupn.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eJCMh5FSEcFitU4UZDpupn.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eJCMh5FSEcFitU4UZDpupn.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Things don’t get any better for the competition once it's compared to Core i7-8700K in our decompression metric. Core i7-7800X fares especially badly, demonstrating that the X299 platform isn't universally better just because it's more expensive.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="2d-amp-3d-workstation-performance-2">2D & 3D Workstation Performance</h2><h2 id="2d-workstation-performance-2">2D Workstation Performance</h2><p>Our GDI/GDI+ tests are used to test two different output methods that can be found in older applications and printing tasks. Today, they, or at least a modified version of them, are commonly used to display the graphical user interface (GUI). They are also great benchmarks for direct device write throughput and memory performance when handling gigantic device-independent bitmap (DIB) files.</p><h2 id="synthetic-2d-benchmarks-3">Synthetic 2D Benchmarks</h2><p>We take a look at direct device write throughput first. The graphics driver uses the CPU heavily for this task, but doesn’t employ many threads.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gbTVD9PNVNVSueEWhPMKHn.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gbTVD9PNVNVSueEWhPMKHn.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gbTVD9PNVNVSueEWhPMKHn.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>There hasn’t been true 2D hardware acceleration since the introduction of the unified shader architecture, after all. Microsoft's Windows driver model provides a huge obstacle for 2D hardware acceleration as well.</p><h2 id="9"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fc8TW7Qo924QxodjjEQwNE.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fc8TW7Qo924QxodjjEQwNE.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fc8TW7Qo924QxodjjEQwNE.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We up the ante by introducing memory to the mix. This is done with the help of the only remaining 2D hardware function: generating the graphics output in memory and then copying it to the output device all at once. The benchmark’s the same as before. We just plot a bitmap in memory, as opposed to sending the information directly to the monitor. The bitmap’s copied to it only once it’s complete. This pushes the CPUs, since they’re no longer platform-bound. The results prove interesting: frequency rules, AMD can keep up, and Skylake-X brings up the rear.</p><h2 id="autocad-2016-2d-3">AutoCAD 2016 (2D)</h2><h2 id="10"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3tEGUysgHo5fkJzpCSJ3N6.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3tEGUysgHo5fkJzpCSJ3N6.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3tEGUysgHo5fkJzpCSJ3N6.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Even though AutoCAD does use DirectX, ultimately it just duplicates every single draw function in software. The results are exactly as expected, and IPC throughput is emphasized due to AutoCAD’s limited scaling with additional cores.</p><h2 id="3d-workstation-performance">3D Workstation Performance</h2><p>Most professional development applications have been optimized and compiled with Intel CPUs in mind. This is reflected in their performance numbers. Still, we include them in order to motivate developers to focus their efforts on AMD’s Ryzen processors as well. This would give users more than one choice. The same goes for an emphasis on multi-core processors, at least where that’s feasible and makes sense.</p><h2 id="autocad-2016-3d-3">AutoCAD 2016 (3D)</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8qSDnhtquKZSMaNAuVc2BP.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8qSDnhtquKZSMaNAuVc2BP.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8qSDnhtquKZSMaNAuVc2BP.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Clock rate trumps core count. Intel’s Kaby Lake and Coffee Lake land fairly close to each other, with clock rate determining the winner. AutoCAD’s performance turns out to be close to that of older games, since it uses DirectX and isn’t really optimized to take advantage of multiple cores.</p><h2 id="cinebench-r15-opengl-3">Cinebench R15 OpenGL</h2><h2 id="11"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/S64BaB2vhrSsLhovar8XEK.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/S64BaB2vhrSsLhovar8XEK.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/S64BaB2vhrSsLhovar8XEK.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Frequency is (almost) everything in the Cinebench R15 OpenGL benchmark. However, Intel’s Core i7-7800X does better than usual.</p><p>Our overclocked Ryzen 7 1800X lands behind the stock configuration, regardless of how many times we re-run the benchmark, and we don't have a good explanation as to why.</p><h2 id="solidworks-2015-3">SolidWorks 2015</h2><h2 id="12"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FJxUMArE93LTkNZRNxgNG6.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FJxUMArE93LTkNZRNxgNG6.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FJxUMArE93LTkNZRNxgNG6.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>SolidWorks 2015 also emphasizes clock rate. At the same frequency, Coffee Lake and its predecessor end up in the same place. This doesn’t come as a surprise though, since SolidWorks 2015 typically doesn’t use more than four cores. The exceptions are a few very specific tasks, which we’ll see tested when we get to the CPU composite score on the next page.</p><h2 id="creo-3-0-3">Creo 3.0</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xu2xknQhSvcwX43B9ThLUe.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xu2xknQhSvcwX43B9ThLUe.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xu2xknQhSvcwX43B9ThLUe.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Creo 3.0 paints a similar picture; a high core count just doesn’t provide any benefits when it comes to drafting using real-time 3D graphics output.</p><h2 id="blender-amp-3ds-max-real-time-3d-preview">Blender & 3ds Max (Real-time 3D Preview)</h2><h2 id="13"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Pwqreib8CbGVPSBbk3Lsnm.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Pwqreib8CbGVPSBbk3Lsnm.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Pwqreib8CbGVPSBbk3Lsnm.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The Blender and 3ds Max real-time 3D previews yield similar results: frequency is everything. Of course, final rendering is a different story, and we'll get to that shortly.</p><h2 id="14"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DApeJyaor3YKah86LJAbUD.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DApeJyaor3YKah86LJAbUD.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DApeJyaor3YKah86LJAbUD.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The 3ds Max results aren’t based on time to completion. Rather, this benchmark generates a composite index based on CPU performance during a set time period.</p><h2 id="catia-v6-r2012-3">Catia V6 R2012</h2><h2 id="15"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ThwiRBnnJP9fECKLmmN8T7.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ThwiRBnnJP9fECKLmmN8T7.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ThwiRBnnJP9fECKLmmN8T7.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>This is one of the graphics benchmarks that has been optimized time and again (it’s part of the free SPECviewperf 12 suite). However, it still provides a fairly good measure of CPU performance, with an emphasis on clock rate. Based on the previous benchmark results, you can guess how this story ends.</p><h2 id="maya-2013-3">Maya 2013</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Y97wfTYxZyASkg4SJxjjT4.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Y97wfTYxZyASkg4SJxjjT4.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Y97wfTYxZyASkg4SJxjjT4.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>At the risk of beating a dead horse, our chart paints a picture we've seen several times already. The real-time 3D output numbers don’t tell a complete story, though. As we're about to see, core count reigns supreme when it comes to final rendering.</p><p>What we can say is that two additional cores don't hurt Intel's Coffee Lake-based flagship. That's good news for a six-core chip trying to prove itself against a smaller quad-core design. The test results should only get better from here.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="cpu-computing-amp-rendering-performance-3">CPU Computing & Rendering Performance</h2><h2 id="cpu-workstation-performance">CPU Workstation Performance</h2><p>The 3D graphics performance we just measured isn’t all that matters to professional rendering software. Applications run many other tasks (like simulations, compute jobs, preview rendering) on the CPU simultaneously. The full picture’s only achievable by looking at both of them together.</p><p>Many modern suites include modules that are based exclusively on computing and simulations. This means we need to go beyond just 3D workstation performance to form our opinion of these high-end CPUs. However, software packages like SolidWorks don’t scale perfectly based on core/thread count. Consequently, even quad-core processors keep up if they run at high-enough frequencies and support SMT. We'll illustrate this by comparing Core i7-8700K to the Core i7-7700K.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pxENuYYQB22ToLAbGqdS85.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pxENuYYQB22ToLAbGqdS85.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pxENuYYQB22ToLAbGqdS85.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Frequency is all that counts in Creo 3.0, so long as you have at least eight threads to throw at the application. As a result, Intel’s new Core i7-8700K doesn't really benefit from its two additional cores.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tajQCdHxM2h9D8JBGpWpHZ.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tajQCdHxM2h9D8JBGpWpHZ.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tajQCdHxM2h9D8JBGpWpHZ.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Clock rate and core count both matter in 3ds Max 2015, allowing Intel’s Core i7-8700K to pull ahead of the -7700K by a larger margin.</p><p>Separately, the Core i7-7800X is beaten soundly due to a combination of older architecture and lower clock rate.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GehwnduZz2Fb47TzZwFGB.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GehwnduZz2Fb47TzZwFGB.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GehwnduZz2Fb47TzZwFGB.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The CPU composite score includes rendering, which is broken out into its own section below. There, AMD's Ryzen 7 1800X does really well. It even beats the overclocked Core i7-8700K in stock form.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pzkkiVuhjb6cSxiD8ARmDU.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pzkkiVuhjb6cSxiD8ARmDU.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pzkkiVuhjb6cSxiD8ARmDU.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="cpu-performance-photorealistic-rendering-3">CPU Performance: Photorealistic Rendering</h2><p>Final rendering doesn’t require a CPU that's good at everything. Rather, this task wants efficiency and fast parallel computation.</p><p>We know big, expensive workstation-class CPUs like Ryzen Threadripper tear these benchmarks to bits. But in the -8700K's more desktop-friendly price range, it goes head-to-head with Ryzen 7 1800X in stock form. Core count matters more than frequency, as you can see comparing -8700K to -7700K.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4BabZCfKLvd3JeQdB33ig.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4BabZCfKLvd3JeQdB33ig.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4BabZCfKLvd3JeQdB33ig.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The console version of LuxRender affirms what we saw in 3ds Max; Core i7-8700K does battle with AMD's Ryzen 7 1800X. Though it trails, remember that we're talking about six cores against eight.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9HiAn4DbEd2TKmXaKdsndc.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9HiAn4DbEd2TKmXaKdsndc.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9HiAn4DbEd2TKmXaKdsndc.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Last, but not least, we take a look at Blender. The usual workload (with a sample size of 200 pixels) confirms what we saw in the preceding benchmarks. Intel’s Core i7-8700K and AMD’s Ryzen 7 1800X finish at the top of our chart. Ultimately, the winner is the CPU with more cores, though Coffee Lake keeps up by virtue of its effective architecture and high clock rate. Meanwhile, our Kaby Lake-based chips trail even the Ryzen 5 sample.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6rokuv6MPHTeHwZ7M5rTs4.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6rokuv6MPHTeHwZ7M5rTs4.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6rokuv6MPHTeHwZ7M5rTs4.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The results obtained from SPECwpc’s Blender loop look similar, even though this benchmark presents a somewhat different task consisting of more than just rendering.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pSoZspc3do3LmKTsopQmA5.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pSoZspc3do3LmKTsopQmA5.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pSoZspc3do3LmKTsopQmA5.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>With the workload's rendering portion easing up, a stock Core i7-8700K suddenly becomes more competitive.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vNyVNkPG6JDDnyWVC6LZye.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vNyVNkPG6JDDnyWVC6LZye.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vNyVNkPG6JDDnyWVC6LZye.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>This trend intensifies as our benchmark begins incorporating tasks other than photorealistic rendering. Core count isn't the sole determiner of performance; IPC throughput factors in as well. That's why you see older quad-core models with SMT rise through the ranks.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4QWHwZqWN3Cqa4GNzaqT8k.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4QWHwZqWN3Cqa4GNzaqT8k.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4QWHwZqWN3Cqa4GNzaqT8k.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Now Coffee Lake enjoys a definite lead. Core count is a factor, to be sure (Ryzen 7 and Skylake-X beat Kaby Lake), but clock rate is also important.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/opwVEnN5AaZ4dMawen7yCm.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/opwVEnN5AaZ4dMawen7yCm.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/opwVEnN5AaZ4dMawen7yCm.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Intel’s Core i7-8700K offers acceptable performance in semi-professional applications; it's not just a gaming CPU. Depending on the application and how it utilizes host processing resources, you'll either get modest results or a stellar experience. There's no such thing as bad.</p><p>We didn't expect such strong numbers from Coffee Lake in these benchmarks, particularly compared to Core i7-7800X. It's hard to imagine why anyone would spend $380 on that CPU and a hefty premium on an X299 motherboard.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="scientific-amp-engineering-computations-amp-hpc-performance">Scientific & Engineering Computations, & HPC Performance</h2><p>For these tests, we’re using the SPECwpc benchmark suite for workstations with its wide variety of tasks. It tests a number of very different mathematical computations optimized for parallelization. They typically make heavy use of available memory bandwidth and cache, plus expose issues with latency.</p><h2 id="rodinia-2">Rodinia</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BWY9z8YjCANsHZoMNydFz5.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BWY9z8YjCANsHZoMNydFz5.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BWY9z8YjCANsHZoMNydFz5.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The pre-Euler3D CFD test (Computational Fluid Dynamics benchmark) runs very well on AMD's CPUs, suggesting scaling based predominantly on core count. Intel's overclocked CPUs do pick up some performance compared to the stock configurations, but they can't keep up with Ryzen 7 1800X.</p><h2 id="convolution-2">Convolution</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VP6qCSLMjFTHGZCsYzZLz7.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VP6qCSLMjFTHGZCsYzZLz7.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VP6qCSLMjFTHGZCsYzZLz7.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>In this benchmark, a mathematical operation is performed on two functions (convolution), which results in a third function. Performance scales according to core count. Clock rate has far less impact.</p><h2 id="calculix-2">CalculiX</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/o883pYec9CCKfvPntJBcPN.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/o883pYec9CCKfvPntJBcPN.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/o883pYec9CCKfvPntJBcPN.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>This test is based on the finite element method for three-dimensional structural computations. Intel’s higher frequencies help Core i7-8700K beat out Ryzen 7 1800X, though core count clearly matters as well.</p><h2 id="poisson-39-s-equation-2">Poisson's Equation</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SYxUmQ5BDwqac2Hb6pBuJX.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SYxUmQ5BDwqac2Hb6pBuJX.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SYxUmQ5BDwqac2Hb6pBuJX.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Poisson's Equation is a second-order partial differential equation widely used in physics for boundary value problems.</p><p>Intel’s new six-core processors fare well. Higher clock rates don't appear to help much, given our overclocked results.</p><h2 id="sequential-reweighted-message-passing-srmp-2">Sequential Reweighted Message Passing (SRMP)</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EMFxta6cMzQKmQUzVrBi46.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EMFxta6cMzQKmQUzVrBi46.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EMFxta6cMzQKmQUzVrBi46.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>These are algorithms for discrete energy minimization. The workload benefits from core count, clock rate, and architectural improvements, it appears. For some reason, though, AMD's Ryzen 7 and 5 just don't show well, even though our logs show them to be fully utilized.</p><h2 id="kirchhoff-migration-2">Kirchhoff Migration</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/y5EpUKJvjnHnXc9FEecQ6G.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/y5EpUKJvjnHnXc9FEecQ6G.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/y5EpUKJvjnHnXc9FEecQ6G.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The earth’s subsurface structure can be determined via seismic processing. One of the four basic steps in this process is the Kirchhoff Migration, which is used to generate an image based on the available data using mathematical operations.</p><p>This benchmark and its underlying computations turn out to be a great fit for AMD. Intel's Core i7-8700K only takes the top spot after aggressive overclocking, and that wouldn't be practical for everyday use. Ultimately, AMD’s Ryzen 7 1800X wins in stock trim.</p><p>In the end, Core i7-8700K performs well in almost every scenario, especially when the workload scales according to core count and clock rate. Higher frequencies help Intel fend off AMD's eight-core competition, though Coffee Lake represents a compromise in certain tasks.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="overclocking-cooling-amp-temperature">Overclocking, Cooling & Temperature</h2><h2 id="overclocking-3">Overclocking</h2><p>First, we established the Core i7-8700K’s limits by cooling the chip's IHS to a constant 20°C, side-stepping potential thermal bottlenecks imposed by Intel's unfortunate use of thermal paste between the die and heat spreader. We made it all the way to 5.0 GHz without any problems. This didn't surprise us, given our experiences with Kaby Lake. At 5.1 GHz, we booted into Windows and ran a couple of games, but the processor called it quits when we tried to run Cinebench.</p><p>We’d like to point out the possibilities enabled by manual load-line calibration. Depending on the motherboard, different levels and presets are available, or the voltages can be manually adjusted for some experimentation. In this way, the core voltage can be reduced significantly without losing a whole lot of performance (so long as your chip plays along). For the motherboard we tested, the effective voltage was between 1.18V and a maximum of 1.28V when running Prime95 at stock frequencies. This lowered the package’s temperature by almost 8°C.</p><p>Unfortunately, many memory kits run into trouble if the load-line calibration is set too low; the result is general instability. CPU quality plays a key role as well. In our particular case, this affected our 5.0 GHz overclock, which didn’t hold up over time. All of the games and some of the workstation applications ran for hours without any problems, but Creo 3.0 and some of the HPC tests crashed after a few minutes.</p><p>The 5+ GHz overclocking stories are exciting, to be sure. But remember that most of them aren't validated for long-term reliability. We'd rather drop the clock rate by 100 MHz and not have to deal with intermittent crashes.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WkRMT3GnisZknqzDCwhKAa.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WkRMT3GnisZknqzDCwhKAa.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WkRMT3GnisZknqzDCwhKAa.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Looking at our power consumption and performance graph, we see a bend at ~4.8 GHz. Power use continues increasing with higher clock rates, but the Cinebench score levels off. A failure to continue scaling at 5.0 GHz is a good indicator that our CPU is throttling. It simply cannot dissipate heat quickly enough.</p><h2 id="power-consumption-2">Power Consumption</h2><p>At idle, the differences in power consumption are fairly marginal. All of the processors end up just about where we'd expect based on previous reviews. AMD's Ryzen processors draw significantly more power than the Intel competition because their idle clock rate is a bit too high.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/25GRkf6iNbFah8nXL8Bmz5.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/25GRkf6iNbFah8nXL8Bmz5.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/25GRkf6iNbFah8nXL8Bmz5.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The new Intel CPU’s average power consumption in applications that combine 2D and 3D loads (like AutoCAD) is in line with the performance we observed.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hFwu6naS2V8Ve2HNpZzEX6.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hFwu6naS2V8Ve2HNpZzEX6.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hFwu6naS2V8Ve2HNpZzEX6.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The processor ends up in almost the same place during our gaming loop.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/w8RcrPxcZnQtCuN3sxJZof.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/w8RcrPxcZnQtCuN3sxJZof.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/w8RcrPxcZnQtCuN3sxJZof.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The finishing order changes dramatically once we fire up an AVX stress test with all cores running at their top Turbo Boost bins. During rendering, we were seeing the -8700K's stock power consumption at 110W, climbing to 133W under a 5 GHz overclock.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pgnaJ8Lqnaqwujwpi7a6ja.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pgnaJ8Lqnaqwujwpi7a6ja.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pgnaJ8Lqnaqwujwpi7a6ja.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>AVX without offset pushes the result as high as 170W. The Core i7-8700K at 4.9 GHz even throttles due to its package temperature. And that's in spite of our compressor cooler's efforts! Thermal paste under the IHS does us no favors.</p><h2 id="temperatures-3">Temperatures</h2><p>Here’s the good news: unless you render or run Prime95 for hours on end, a good air cooler can theoretically handle 4.8 GHz in a well-ventilated case. Intel’s thermal interface material isn't desirable, but it shouldn't stop you from achieving a decent overclock.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:712px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.14%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Bveeizw7ztwcSB5vDQGTUk.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Bveeizw7ztwcSB5vDQGTUk.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="712" height="535" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Bveeizw7ztwcSB5vDQGTUk.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The above graph shows that a closed-loop liquid cooler is able to keep an overclocked Core i7-8700K from throttling after 20 minutes of warming up. A good heat sink and fan combination should perform almost as well, again, given ample airflow.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:712px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.86%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6E4g78D4Z3svaPHGVuNFGL.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6E4g78D4Z3svaPHGVuNFGL.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="712" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6E4g78D4Z3svaPHGVuNFGL.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Under our stress test, the overclocked processor gets uncomfortably hot, even under our compressor cooler.</p><p>While we're only measuring an average of 170W, thermal throttling keeps the 180W+ peaks from becoming our average power consumption result. At that point, even the most powerful coolers have to throw in the towel.</p><p>To be sure, it's surprising just how much power such a tiny processor can consume once it’s pushed to its limits. Nevertheless, Intel’s Core i7-8700K is relatively easy to cool, even on air. You'll just want to stay away from taxing rendering sessions and AVX-optimized workloads. At that point, you're best off with an all-in-one closed-loop liquid cooler.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="conclusion-2">Conclusion</h2><p>AMD’s competitive architecture, disruptive pricing, and class-leading core counts continues to turn heads. Intel responded to the Threadripper family by introducing Skylake-X-based CPUs for less money per core than we've ever seen before. Up until now, though, it showed no interest in affecting that metric with its mainstream desktop chips. This changes with Coffee Lake, which employs the same underlying architecture as Kaby Lake, but adds execution cores and cache. Improved Turbo Boost bins also help maintain performance in lightly-threaded tasks.</p><p>Intel says that its Core i7-8700K is the company's best gaming processor ever. So, we use a geometric mean of 99th percentile frame times, a good indicator of smoothness, converted into an FPS measurement, to gauge the veracity of this bold claim across our suite. Five of the games we test were released in 2016, and five are older (2014/2015). Extra cores could enable more performance as software evolves, so we also include a chart with newer games that thoroughly utilize available host processing resources. We also have price-to-performance charts that get split up to include both the price of the processor and extra platform costs. For the models that don't come with a bundled cooler, we add an extra $25 for a basic heat sink. We also add $20 if overclocking requires a more expensive motherboard (as is the case for Z370).</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/feof6tTVYi98TQrb4pAqXN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8YyAGTqPU9jVZP9EyUmx6N.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/565XnUENSX2cxcErJumPqL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kjHvMiEAtUm8U7zLqqF5yN.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Despite a few missteps, Core i7-8700K lives up to Intel’s claims. While it doesn't beat the -7700K by a massive margin, the Coffee Lake flagship does deliver better performance in stock and overclocked form. Of course, adding a Z370 motherboard and competent cooler knocks you over the $400 mark, so be ready to pay for that privilege.</p><p>Value-seekers have to be asking if Core i7-8700K's price tag is even worth paying, then. After all, you can get Ryzen 7 1800X-class performance out of an overclocked Ryzen 7 1700 for $300 or less. But based on our matrix, Coffee Lake gives you the best performance (furthest to the right) without getting too crazy on price. We're naturally wondering how Core i5-8600K will fare. For now, though, Core i7-8700K is the gaming CPU to own.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EhJVV63SV5jDx5tmgoHEWD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VouGSBqwpsSCXng7pmRqKg.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BwPT92GCyjGwc9kcaRnYjQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v3wXyYevkkhgyahq5yKMKK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gL4DQqJcBTSCcAKWNf6h8j.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xLrac3NopA2NWdwzAokJhC.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Whereas Kaby Lake tends to fall behind Ryzen once we jump out of the games and start looking at rendering/encoding workloads, Coffee Lake's extra cores, higher clock rates, and overclocking headroom help close that gap. Applications previously notorious for going AMD's way are now more hotly contested.</p><p>Unfortunately, you will have to buy a new Z370-based motherboard to support Core i7-8700K. Coffee Lake necessarily breaks compatibility with the not-altogether-old Z270 chipset for higher memory data rates and improved power to the CPU's package. And of course, the Z-series platform controller hub is a requisite if you want access to unlocked ratio multipliers. Lower-end B- and H-series chipsets are coming, but not until next year.</p><p>We're also disappointed that Core i7-8700K still utilizes thermal paste between its die and heat spreader. Whereas this was a significant issue during our Skylake-X evaluation, though, it's not as problematic on a 95W CPU. You can easily stave off throttling with a heat sink and fan, or dial in a respectable overclock under a closed-loop liquid cooler.</p><p>Intel has its 10nm Cannon Lake processors coming in the second half of 2018, and AMD has a Ryzen refresh cycle coming next year. Knowing this, should you upgrade now or wait for the next wave of hardware? Due to the iterative nature of most updates, we rarely recommend jumping forward one, or even two generations. However, if you routinely find yourself running productivity workloads that might be served well by Core i7-8700K's extra cores, we could see replacing a quad-core chip with six cores. Gamers interested in maximum performance or streaming also stand to benefit, though in a world of single-GPU graphics configurations, you'd be hard-pressed to bottleneck an overclocked -7700K with even a GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (particularly at the high resolutions it's meant to drive).</p><p>It's an exciting year to be an enthusiast. Intel obviously planned to beef up its line-up years back, but we can thank AMD for the accelerated timeline and competitive pricing. Competition truly is a wonderful thing.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Steiger Dynamics Era Reference Desktop Review ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/-steiger-dynamics-era-reference-desktop,5168.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ The Steiger Dynamics Era Reference is an ultimate living room gaming PC. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">zJEqCgXYLurMcAkMuyXddW</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/h8p6jQhqVrP4D3hhXeaCWW-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sun, 20 Aug 2017 16:00:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:27:25 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Gaming PCs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Desktops]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Derek Forrest ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                                        <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Derek Forrest was a contributing freelance writer for Tom&#039;s Hardware who specialized in writing about hardware news and reviewing gaming desktops and laptops. He is a lifelong PC enthusiast, former IT administrator, and custom PC builder.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                <cf:isSponsored>false</cf:isSponsored>
                <cf:hasAffiliateLinks>false</cf:hasAffiliateLinks>
                <cf:isPaid>false</cf:isPaid>
                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/h8p6jQhqVrP4D3hhXeaCWW-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/h8p6jQhqVrP4D3hhXeaCWW-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="introduction-amp-product-tour">Introduction & Product Tour</h2><p>Steiger Dynamics is about as customized as a custom shop gets, offering unique chassis designs, sound dampening services, and a plethora of other custom innovations. The company sent us its Era Reference PC, a small form factor (SFF) gaming system meant for the living room, and it's anything but reference. It’s a shining example of all of Steiger’s premium customizations, with an overclocked Core i5 processor and GTX 1080 Ti graphics card.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:36.89%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4JbCvm8EsSzpQrfcGgwny5.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4JbCvm8EsSzpQrfcGgwny5.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="557" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4JbCvm8EsSzpQrfcGgwny5.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Performance-conscious buyers would likely gasp at the asking price of $2,958 for a system with a Core i5 processor, especially when there are plenty of affordable Core i7 options, but as we’re about to find out, customization isn’t cheap. It’s time to see if the Era is worth the moolah.</p><h2 id="specifications">Specifications</h2><h2 id="exterior">Exterior</h2><p>The Steiger Dynamics Era Reference gaming PC resembles large DVD players of olden days (except it’s at least twice as heavy), measuring only 15.4 x 17.1 x 3.25 inches. The hand-brushed aluminum chassis is moderately heavy, but it’s demonstrably one of the most interesting cases we’ve seen in our desktop system reviews. The chassis is custom designed by Steiger, and the MK1 (as Steiger calls it) continually gets tweaked as needed. You certainly won’t find it anywhere else.</p><p>The sleek case has a low profile, making it ripe for the living room as a gaming powerhouse that won’t take up a lot of space. The top of the case features two vents. One is an exhaust for the CPU cooler (we’ll talk more about that later) and the other allows air into the chassis near the GPU (which is a blower-style card). The right side of the case is also ventilated to allow air to enter near the CPU.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qPhnYGqtufL6t26CjVUo33.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FxYu7tc3wGi4g63bDhvcLZ.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SLZ5DLGQf9fp68jTzcnDhX.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6dd9wqnenNbCFcY2q3vsyK.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5oDQzepPWh4mQLbj5tk8MZ.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xPgPD3dfrmEwfvbkoRktnV.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CnoDRprsFZpFT6NZBy4Q9S.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WPw8ApgNRNXBXNMyAMaLxT.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The underside of the Era Reference is similarly plain, with even more ventilation. An air intake (powered by an 80mm fan) resides under the CPU, and an open vent exists directly below the GPU. To get even cooler air flowing to the GPU, there’s another 80mm fan intake near it. The PSU's air intake is also exposed on the underside of the case, with the power supply partially protruding out of the chassis.</p><p>The front of the chassis sports a silver Steiger Dynamics logo, giving it a classy look similar to that of a Mercedes-Benz. Below a slim-profile Blu-ray RW optical drive there's a spring-loaded hinged panel that opens to reveal the front I/O, which consists of two USB 3.0 ports, two 3.5mm jacks (mic-in, headphone out), and an HDMI pass-through port. This makes the Era an ideal choice for a living room VR setup; you can save several inches of precious cable by connecting the HMD to the front of the PC instead of the back. However, the front-panel display connectivity doesn’t come without a price, because Steiger Dynamics charges an extra $49 for this specialized feature.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MiVGBT8RRPRNFfFd7BChbB.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BJuBzZcDrwRfP9R3ih4fuS.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/odVybGxtRpSeRgxXTM9yYQ.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6vudkfqB7cQxf4GmWn89b.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cfKFdRZphApQBek7AQTAQh.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eqmGjceEExRpMuCn6czsi9.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YnTvYb9xdZJVYPyQy7sur4.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TDe9bPXNMc8j8qbSCPacbH.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The rear panel includes four USB 3.0 ports, a PS/2 combo jack, and a USB 3.1 Type-C port capable of 5 Gbps data rates. The motherboard also features dual gigabit Ethernet connectors in addition to 802.11ac Wi-Fi (you can connect the antennas to the rear of the motherboard). The GPU features the standard display outputs for a GTX 1080 Ti: three DisplayPort 1.4 interfaces and an HDMI 2.0 port. The HDMI pass-through cable peeks out of the case near the graphics card so that you can easily connect it.</p><p>We were somewhat disappointed that the EVGA GTX 1080 Ti Founder’s Edition GPU in the Era Reference didn’t have a second HDMI port (if the pass-through uses it, what about my monitor?), but Steiger Dynamics reached out about a week after we started our review process to let us know it was now offering a customized EVGA GTX 1080 Ti blower-style GPU with two HDMI 2.0 ports on it in place of the Founder’s Edition, specifically to address the HDMI pass-through feature. The included DisplayPort-to-DVI adapter that was included with the front panel VR HDMI pass-through (for an extra $49) is useful, but two HDMI ports would be preferable for a living room PC.</p><h2 id="interior">Interior</h2><p>Removing the brushed-aluminum panel on top of the Era Reference reveals a chassis that is both spacious yet constricted. Although there are desktop-sized components in a tiny case, the parts have plenty of breathing room, with the corners of the case mostly bare and open, save for the sound-isolating foam. The foam is a nice touch and should reduce the overall noise, but mods such as this generally aren’t an enthusiast favorite (especially for another $49) and seem more suited for a professional music producer or someone easily enraged by the hum of electronic equipment.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/reynZaysCdDbJj9pM5TfzU.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CrRC5pngjcbHbH5nLbbGbD.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pUbsUk5nNzi6VfqcRa8Dzn.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8TWWPwu7THEjUAjhbnoQom.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TxeQSZ8d5M6aLU44MYtmgM.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YVqaBz8nKaAniufvhMayqm.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The top panel has a slim-profile 140mm fan attached to it directly over the CPU heatsink, so you have to be careful when removing it so that you don’t accidentally rip the fan connector’s pins out of the motherboard. The panel also has sound-isolating foam on it to dampen noise. The CPU heatsink is also manufactured by Thermalright to Steiger Dynamic’s height specifications, and the nickel-plated copper low-profile cooler should be enough to keep the overclocked Intel Core i5-7600K from getting too hot.</p><p>The CPU is mounted on a Gigabyte Z270N-WIFI mini-ITX motherboard, which as the name implies, features a 802.11ac Wi-Fi module near the rear I/O panel. The two memory slots are filled with a 16GB (2x8GB) kit of G.Skill Aegis DDR4-3000, which should offer above-average memory performance with its increased frequency. The only downside to this particular memory kit is that doesn’t have aluminum heatsinks (a trait we find in most of our custom shop review units), but because the top is a solid panel of aluminum, you won’t miss them from an aesthetic standpoint (you can’t see them).</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qZ9fFFyaBNneb6sKDRPoa3.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UsmHUr6gYdmajhb6gFhSCJ.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sBUpp47G2ydrW99v59HoS8.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qUFRuhs2Siypym8hkgB6uS.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Steiger Dynamics Era Reference we have in the lab features an EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti Founder’s Edition graphics card mounted in an angled riser card to orient it horizontally in the chassis. However, the company reached out shortly after we got started to let us know it has switched to an EVGA GTX 1080 Ti blower-style graphics card, with a custom BIOS from EVGA to make it into what would be equivalent of an SC-branded ("super clock") factory overclock. We decided to push ahead with our review as is, especially because the company overclocked the Founder’s Edition GPU by a sizable amount, and it would likely give us an indication of where the factory overclocked GPU with a similar cooler (and from the same company) would perform. As it’s currently configured, we had to add $49 onto the bill for the increased GPU performance tuning, but we image you’d get extremely close performance without that fee with the new GPU.</p><p>The only storage device that you can see is the 3TB Western Digital RED 5,400 RPM HDD, which resides beneath the slim-profile Blueray RW optical drive in the 3.5” bay. This is a decidedly larger capacity secondary storage drive compared what other vendors usually send our way, and it should provide you with plenty of space for all your apps, games, and files. Steiger said that it prefers the slower 5,400 RPM versions of the high-capacity HDD because it is offers “best in class quietness,” but that the company also offers WD Black (7,200 RPM) HDDs, noting that they are substantially louder. It’s easy to see that sound dampening is one of the main appeals of this particular build.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4496px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:66.73%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v2JeQqC9Tt6sZU9t2RPNEV.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v2JeQqC9Tt6sZU9t2RPNEV.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="4496" height="3000" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v2JeQqC9Tt6sZU9t2RPNEV.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The primary storage is a 500GB Samsung 960 EVO M.2 NVMe SSD, which resides in the M.2 slot on the underside of the motherboard. We didn’t want to disassemble the entire PC to get to it (the bottom of the chassis is not easily removed), so forgive us for not featuring a picture. You’ll just have to trust us that it’s there.</p><p>All of these high-end components are given life by a Silverstone SX600-G 600W 80 Plus Gold certified SFX power supply, which resides towards the front of the case. The back of the PSU isn’t mounted with the power connector exposed through a hole in the chassis like traditional power supplies. Rather, it has a neatly laid extension plug that leads to a power plug mounted on the back of the case, next to the motherboard. This 600W PSU meets the needs of the GTX 1080 Ti and an overclocked Core i5 platform, but it doesn’t offer much headroom. However, 80 Plus Gold certification goes a long way when your peak wattage is the minimum recommended power for your graphics setup, and it should provide plenty of juice for the job.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gCyr3BDZnNVMEBk5SQkEXc.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WN9ARQCzLbLwG2JGtgrTEf.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NpNKqMW3UJVYWdoptq62Hh.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The interior chassis of the Steiger Dynamics Era Reference isn’t pretty, but it’s about as neat one can make it with a low-profile chassis and mini-ITX motherboard. It’s a little messy (and not particularly pleasing to look at), but this is also somewhat inconsequential; the case is purpose-built (in this build, for reduced sound) and doesn’t have a windowed panel, so it needs to be functional, not pretty. With everything tied down nice and tight, there should be minimal vibration noise from stray cables.</p><h2 id="software-and-accessories">Software And Accessories</h2><p>The Era Reference came neatly packed with a three-ring binder with all your paperwork, driver disks, and manuals, in addition to a box with all the extra parts from the case, PSU, and motherboard (including the WiFi antennas and extra SATA cables). There’s also a DisplayPort-to-DVI-D adapter, which can free up your HDMI port for the front panel VR pass-through plug. Steiger provides a pair of white cloth gloves so you don’t smudge your hand-brushed aluminum chassis.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iQFQ4k9dPgbwidNcs44Ckb.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HdQFzAJTeMasFo4eTyT6yf.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SVUUN9hQVhEZQJuVxyRAUE.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hBB27fQLf3rMxa7TdnC5dL.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Steiger Dynamics doesn’t burden end users with a boat-load of unnecessary application trials or bloatware; the company simply provides the tools needed for the job and a few useful, full-version media players. The Era Reference comes pre-loaded with MSI Afterburner (which is readied with a beefy GPU overclocking profile), Media Player Classic, and Kodi, a free open-source cross-platform media player you can use to organize and view all your photos, music, movies, and TV shows (it can also enable remote control). Again, we see Steiger providing everything you need to make the Era Reference the only device you need attached to the TV in your living room.</p><p>The company also sent a special accessory with its review sample—a device simply known as the Couchmaster, a lap desk designed by Nerdytec (a company from Germany) that is exclusively distributed in the US by Steiger Dynamics. For some gamers, living room PCs pose a problem with peripheral connectivity, with many usually opting for wireless keyboards and mice on their laps and at their side. For those who need it, the Couchmaster is a masterpiece of a device.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:980px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:61.63%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NG486kQizugzxB5z7LQQFB.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NG486kQizugzxB5z7LQQFB.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="980" height="604" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NG486kQizugzxB5z7LQQFB.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The Couchmaster Cycon is meant to sit with you on the couch (duh), but unlike some other devices of its kind, it comes with two firm arm cushions that also act as supports for the desk component. We gave it a try, and despite the weight of the desk (which was fairly large), the cushions made it quite comfortable, with room for my legs to move freely and ample space for any wired keyboard and mouse you choose. It has pockets on the outside of each faux-leather armrest/support, and there’s 16' of extension cable for its four-port USB 3.0 hub (which doesn’t require an external power source).</p><p>You can get it for $159 (the Couchmaster wasn’t included in the $2,959 total for the Era Reference), and we thought it was a cool accessory offer for those fully committed to the living room gaming PC lifestyle, especially when it’s priced at what some would pay for a high-end mechanical keyboard.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-pc-builds,4390.html">Best PC Builds</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-to-build-a-pc,5867.html">How To Build A PC</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/builds">All PC Builds Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="synthetic-amp-productivity-benchmarks">Synthetic & Productivity Benchmarks</h2><p>We recently built a new Z270 reference system for use in our desktop gaming PC reviews, with an Intel Core i7-7700K (clocked at its stock 4.2 GHz with a 4.5 GHz max turbo frequency in lightly threaded applications) in an ASRock Fatal1ty Z270 Gaming i7 ATX motherboard cooled by a Deepcool Gammaxx 400 heatsink and 120mm blue LED fan. We have a 16GB (2x8GB) kit of Kingston HyperX Savage DDR4-2133 memory running at the standard CAS latency of 15-15-15-36, and EVGA hooked us up with a set of the top-end Founder’s Edition graphics cards (a GTX 1080 Ti, 1080, and 1070) and a 1000W PSU to power it all. We use data from the GTX 1080 Ti and GTX 1080 for this review, and we run the GPUs at their respective default base and boost clock frequencies. You can check out the full specifications of our beastly test rig below.</p><h2 id="comparison-products-4">Comparison Products</h2>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="43cdf105-009b-4314-a79d-b2aed6582d71">            <a href="http://www.steigerdynamics.com/products-era-htpc-configure" data-model-name="Steiger Dynamics Era Reference" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:100.00%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fWuWgU24GWZCPdAwDtjUPW.png" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Steiger Dynamics Era Reference</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="49bbf03e-4aa6-496a-981a-5f365018c3df">            <a href="https://www.xidax.com/desktops/x-6" data-model-name="Xidax X-6" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:100.00%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/J4KUJYqm7Z44pWBmcQYqF5.png" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Xidax X-6</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><h2 id="test-system-configuration">Test System Configuration</h2><p>We also include data from our r<a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/xidax-x-6-desktop,5161.html">ecent review of the Xidax X-6</a>, which comes in about $800 cheaper but has a Core i7 processor and a GTX 1070 GPU under the hood. We don’t expect it to compete with Steiger’s GTX 1080 Ti and Core i5-7600K-powered platform in a framerate contest in our gaming benchmark suite, but it will give us a good indicator of when hyperthreading (the primary difference between a Core i5 and a Core i7 processor) is advantageous in CPU-intensive workloads, with both the Xidax and Steiger’s review samples sporting a CPU overclock of 4.8 GHz.</p><p>The Steiger Dynamics Era Reference features a Core i5-7600K overclocked to an all-core frequency of 4.8 GHz. Its 16GB (2x8GB) kit of DDR4-3000 features a CAS latency of 16-18-18-38, and it should provide above-average memory performance with its higher frequency. The EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti Founder’s Edition’s core clock is boosted by 120 MHz using MSI Afterburner, and the company also pushed the memory clock up by 200 MHz. This gives the GPU inside the Era a boost clock of 1702 MHz and an effective memory data rate of 11.4 Gbps.</p><h2 id="3dmark">3DMark</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/z2UypXFfvBbynDHwV2oAum.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zGWwUpX6zKGQG5QPmTmQLQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Rn3NqAsXyJx7mMM8py5mGX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3SXu3z3sfoFp8WX6mzvH2F.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Steiger Dynamics Era Reference starts our benchmark suite off with a moderate bang in the 3DMark Fire Strike tests. Despite its CPU and GPU overclock, the Era trails our stock-clocked Core i7-7700K/GTX 1080 Ti reference system thanks to a lower Physics score (CPU performance), which is to be expected. However, it still manages to net the highest Combined score in the 1080p synthetic workload by a substantial margin.</p><p>Fire Strike Extreme and Ultra place the Era at the top of the class, maintaining the highest Graphics and Combined scores throughout the tests but also trailing the pack in the Physics portion of the benchmark. Time Spy’s DX12 API repeats these findings, with the Era ahead in the overall Score and Graphics tests, but significantly behind in the CPU test.</p><h2 id="cinebench-r15">Cinebench R15</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:634px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.76%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jEg6Gf36jPN2yygjWTHNER.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jEg6Gf36jPN2yygjWTHNER.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="634" height="474" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jEg6Gf36jPN2yygjWTHNER.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Switching to a CPU-specific benchmark, we aren’t surprised to see the Core i7-7700K-equipped reference system and the Xidax X-6 completely blow away the Core-i5 Steiger offering in multi-threaded rendering performance. The X-6 also manages to edge out the Era Reference in single-threaded rendering and OpenGL shading workloads; its overclocked Core i7-7700K matches the Era’s Core i5-7600K core frequency, but it manages to push ahead by a small margin.</p><h2 id="compubench">CompuBench</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:634px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.92%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vSzSB4PbgrP6wdHY2o77Gi.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vSzSB4PbgrP6wdHY2o77Gi.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="634" height="475" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vSzSB4PbgrP6wdHY2o77Gi.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Compubench shows us that an overclock can go a long way on a GTX 1080 Ti, with the Steiger Dynamics Era Reference leading the field with the highest Video Processing and Bitcoin mining score. An overclock of 120 MHz nets about 85 MH/s compared to our reference rig with a stock-clocked Founder’s Edition, and we also see the Video Processing results improve by roughly 11 FPS.</p><h2 id="storage-test">Storage Test</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GvZB3YtVyExdkzUxPcZ5wn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dNz6YBLudVzjHvpuMA3tZm.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Era’s 500GB Samsung 960 EVO M.2 NVMe SSD is fast, significantly faster than our reference system’s 960GB SATA SSD and the X-6’s 512GB SATA SSD. The 4K read and write IOPs reaches over 100K each, and the 128K sequential performance is downright impressive, with the Era achieving 1893.56 MB/s reads and 1675.01 MB/s writes. SATA storage devices just can’t compete against NVMe drives of this caliber; it’s like bringing a knife to a bazooka fight.</p><h2 id="sandra-memory-bandwidth">Sandra Memory Bandwidth</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HpL4LsX8zhG4tDXjxzxhYc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qdotdopFb5iVjPyEfRfsza.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Steiger Dynamics Era Reference once again predictably tops the chart with its higher memory frequency (3000 MHz), which provides a higher peak memory bandwidth over our test rig’s DDR4-2133 and the X-6’s DDR4-2666.</p><h2 id="pcmark-8">PCMark 8</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:633px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.88%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/h3d8hxCyp2rkNAF6UM2ipH.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/h3d8hxCyp2rkNAF6UM2ipH.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="633" height="474" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/h3d8hxCyp2rkNAF6UM2ipH.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>With its higher memory frequency, overclocked CPU, and speedy storage, the Era Reference achieves an excellent score in the PCMark 8 Adobe application test. However, the Microsoft Office application tests are slightly less receptive to the Era’s Core i5-7600K, which falls behind the Core i7-equipped PCs in the lineup.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-pc-builds,4390.html">Best PC Builds</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-to-build-a-pc,5867.html">How To Build A PC</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/builds">All PC Builds Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="gaming-benchmarks">Gaming Benchmarks </h2><h2 id="alien-isolation">Alien: Isolation</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:633px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.04%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CWHQK8fpnRoAsgFPNLTdnh.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CWHQK8fpnRoAsgFPNLTdnh.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="633" height="475" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CWHQK8fpnRoAsgFPNLTdnh.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The Steiger Dynamics Era Reference gaming PC kicks off the gaming benchmarks with high marks in the <em>Alien: Isolation</em> tests. It maintains a slight lead over our reference-clocked GTX 1080 Ti test rig thanks to its overclocked GPU (the cards are identical otherwise), and it’s clear that the game favors graphics performance. Cranked to the highest settings, <em>Alien</em> isn’t a problem for even GTX 1070 equipped PCs (the Xidax X-6) at 3840 x 2160.</p><h2 id="ashes-of-the-singularity">Ashes of the Singularity</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:633px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.04%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GDxFPzMZRE4rg4xHvJRqW9.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GDxFPzMZRE4rg4xHvJRqW9.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="633" height="475" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GDxFPzMZRE4rg4xHvJRqW9.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The Era Reference again edges out our GTX 1080 Ti test bed in <em>Ashes of the Singularity</em>, however, the difference in performance is minimal, and the overclock nets an extra 2.3 FPS (average) at most, which would be near impossible to see with the naked eye.</p><h2 id="bioshock-infinite">Bioshock Infinite</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/J2MvHJcjrQSEDf8hWXpnya.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Nk55kA3PUtnoty5TxBHkmS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cEqZTQ4rqJRD5c2YxUn6h.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Bioshock Infinite</em> is another game that doesn’t demand much horsepower at high resolutions, so the GTX 1080 Ti-equipped Era Reference easily takes the lead against the other PCs in the field. However, it only bests our reference GTX 1080 Ti by less than 3 FPS at all tested resolutions, and the overclocked components of the Era don’t appear to offer much of a performance gain in this particular game.</p><h2 id="dirt-rally">DiRT Rally</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/d7gZPFtaRxumaRHHbpkEfF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/B6SzEZku2TEFDRZjTLGPQH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/87kuJmSUXLk2ea4DrbfZtE.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Steiger Dynamics Era Reference starts off the <em>DiRT Rally</em> tests with a sizable lead against our GTX 1080 Ti test rig at 1920 x 1080 thanks to its beefy CPU and GPU overclock. However, this game prefers a more well-balanced platform, and pushing the resolution higher with our settings puts more stress on the processor, and hyperthreading quickly becomes an advantage over clock rates at higher resolutions. This forces the Era into a second-place position at 2560 x 1440 and 3840 x 2160, trailing the test rig by no more than 2 FPS.</p><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-10">Grand Theft Auto V</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sJQQfWpoaPiJPKCTkqzDpb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/M4PFHizQoTkDwQAXEYutMU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5QiosjBwzNo7Gb8Ckfy4NT.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Era returns to its usual glory at the top of the chart in <em>GTAV</em>, where it manages to edge out our test rig’s GTX 1080 Ti by less than 1 FPS at 2560 x 1440 and 3840 x 2160. At 1080p, this lead is slightly less than 2 FPS, and it appears overclocking doesn’t provide much of a performance boost. However, a win is a win.</p><h2 id="grid-autosport">GRID Autosport</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uaUDkj4qbVSDTaRhzf8wji.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4BpdkJ6LMXvHqosEGat3v9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9gZ3xVG7dTQa7znmnQMftP.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>At 1920 x 1080, the Era Reference falls noticeably behind the GTX 1070-equipped Xidax X-6. This is because the CPU is the bottleneck at 1080p, and the X-6’s overclocked and hyperthreaded cores provide much higher framerate minumums, resulting in better averages than the Era and our reference-clocked test rig, despite their faster GPUs. However, turning up the resolution restores the proper GPU hierarchy, with the X-6 back on the bottom and the Era Reference back at the top. The performance gap between all of the systems is minimal at 2560 x 1440 (the CPU is still playing a factor with framerates this high), but when we push it up to 4K the graphics card dictates the pecking order.</p><h2 id="hitman-3">Hitman</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/s9eDDpihLtYPCsntYK9Vw5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9pApQjASuGDQt9wsEhEZth.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/b65Be9S58ZPBaWLFdPeXZD.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Using the DX12 API in <em>Hitman</em> shifts the bottleneck to the CPU, evidenced by the Era’s performance at 1920 x 1080. It barely beats out our test rig with a GTX 1080 inside, and it falls significantly behind a Core i7-7700K and GTX 1080 Ti. Increasing the resolution irons out these performance gaps, with the Era increasing its lead against our GTX 1080 test bench and gaining on the GTX 1080 Ti. However, even at 4K, the Era’s Core i5-7600K holds it back from the top of the heap, although it’s by less than 1 FPS.</p><h2 id="metro-last-light-redux">Metro: Last Light Redux</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/S4XYqzDcCCmvJpjmGGXWpm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/k7CmNSYpBPTSAcbHE7wcj4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JwR2PtxX58R2jGhno39MHd.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Switching back to a GPU-intensive workload, the Era Reference makes a comeback and manages to upend our GTX 1080 Ti test rig at all tested resolutions in <em>Metro: Last Light Redux</em>. The overclocking gains aren’t sizable at these settings (SMAA adds a significant performance overhead), and although the Era achieves the best average FPS at all tested resolutions, you can see the Core i5-7600K’s impact on performance with the Era netting the worst minimum FPS in the bunch.</p><h2 id="rise-of-the-tomb-raider-4">Rise of the Tomb Raider</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:633px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.04%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/r2rqrQKChBaA3h7xDhFAHU.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/r2rqrQKChBaA3h7xDhFAHU.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="633" height="475" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/r2rqrQKChBaA3h7xDhFAHU.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The Era’s average framerates in <em>Rise of the Tomb Raider</em> are a reflection of the GPU overclock, which puts it above our GTX 1080 Ti reference system at all tested resolutions. These gains are less than 1 FPS each, with <em>ROTR</em> demanding some serious horsepower at its highest settings (even a GTX 1080 Ti nets a sub-30 FPS average at 4K).</p><h2 id="the-division">The Division</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:633px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.88%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P5cKBZ2XN2pRuZCqTL4xm3.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P5cKBZ2XN2pRuZCqTL4xm3.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="633" height="474" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P5cKBZ2XN2pRuZCqTL4xm3.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Unlike <em>Hitman</em>, <em>The Division</em> and its DX12 benchmark don’t appear to favor hyperthreaded CPUs, with the Era Reference overpowering our GTX 1080 Ti test rig at all tested resolutions. These gains are more pronounced at 1920 x 1080, where the Era leads the Z270 test system by a 12.5 FPS. At 4K, there is only a 5.8 FPS difference in average framerate performance, but that turns out to be a 12% gain over our test rig.</p><h2 id="thief">Thief</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zNFGTNxVr24N7ptd4hrjMf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aaEbRmhrRUWYyPdLYVptwG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AHaJnmoYUnecCybYpETZEi.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Steiger Dynamics Era Reference finishes our benchmark suite at the top of the class, with the best average and minimum framerates at all tested resolutions in <em>Thief</em>. Similar to other older titles, we don’t see hyperthreading play a role in performance, so the Era’s Core i5-7600K excels with its 4.8 GHz CPU and 120 MHz GPU overclocks.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-pc-builds,4390.html">Best PC Builds</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-to-build-a-pc,5867.html">How To Build A PC</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/builds">All PC Builds Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="price-analysis-amp-conclusion">Price Analysis & Conclusion</h2><p>Steiger Dynamics sent us a curve ball with its high-priced Era Reference gaming PC, equipping it with an Intel Core i5-7600K processor and an EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti Founder’s Edition graphics card. Many enthusiasts (and perhaps even uninitiated consumers) would see this combination as a mismatch; when you think of the ultimate in graphics cards, you go for a GTX 1080 Ti, but when you look for the best in CPUs, a Core i5 isn’t usually the first chip that comes to mind, especially at a budget of $2,958.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:39.34%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xE2HXVWkCpXPX8oh4eLpXe.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xE2HXVWkCpXPX8oh4eLpXe.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="594" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xE2HXVWkCpXPX8oh4eLpXe.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>And yet the Core i5-7600K has great value, with the price-to-performance ratio of Intel CPUs plateauing a bit after the $250 mark, unless you are specifically out to gain better multi-core performance. Most games won’t miss the hyperthreading of a Core i7 (especially at higher resolutions), and once you overclock the Core i5, it’s one of the top gaming CPUs on the market. However, if you absolutely must have a Core i7, you can upgrade the Core i5-7600K to an i7-7700 or i7-7700K for an additional $69 or $131, respectively.</p><p>The company reached out shortly after we received our review sample to let us know it had changed its base GeForce GTX 1080 Ti offering from the EVGA Founder’s Edition in our review unit to a blower-style card with a custom BIOS from EVGA that effectively makes it an SC-branded factory overclocked GPU. We don’t have that card in front of us, so we don’t know what kind of performance differences we’d see, but Steiger Dynamics speculated that it would be similar to the performance we’re seeing with the overclocked Founder’s Edition GPU we tested. The primary reason for this change of inventory was to accommodate the front-panel HDMI pass-through; the new GPU offering has two HDMI 2.0 ports, giving you the ability to use the front panel and still connect to an HDMI port on a display.</p><p>Despite this component change, the sample we have in the lab performed at the top of the heap, with the GTX 1080 Ti providing top-tier performance throughout our benchmark testing. The Core i5-7600K fell behind Core i7-7700K equipped systems in apps and games where hyperthreaded cores can have a noticeable impact, but the Era was still competitive when it did lose out to systems with the pricier processor.</p><p>The 16GB (2x8GB) kit of G.Skill Aegis DDR4-3000 memory is more than sufficient for the latest AAA games, and the above-average frequency gives it impressive performance in memory-intensive workloads. The 500GB Samsung 960 EVO M.2 NVMe SSD is impressively fast (check out our Storage Test results), even if we can’t easily get to it, physically (it’s mounted on the underside of the motherboard). A 3TB storage volume is also gratuitous in capacity, but we’re disappointed it’s the 5,400 RPM version of the WD Red HDD. However, Steiger offers this drive for its quiet operation (a recurring theme with this particular build), and you can easily change to a 7,200 RPM WD Black HDD if you intend to load a large game library on your secondary storage.</p><p>We appreciate Steiger’s unique chassis design, which forgoes flashy RGB lighting and offers a more professional look with the hand-brushed aluminum case. The company didn’t shy away from loading our review unit with several add-on components and services, with the aforementioned VR-ready front panel (HDMI pass-through), silencing foam (sound dampening), and CPU and GPU overclocking services each adding $49 to the bill. There’s also a slim-profile Blu-ray RW optical drive, which adds another $117 (for a total of $313).</p><p>The pass-through is considered a premium feature, but we’re disappointed it comes at an added price. However, it is worthwhile for those intending to use the Era Reference as their living room VR machine. The sound-dampening foam indeed reduces noise, and even at full load, the Era Reference is no louder than a tower PC at idle, and it’s worthwhile for someone looking for a powerful system that isn’t as loud as a jet engine. We’re not a fan of Blu-ray players (it’s a decidedly old technology, becoming less relevant with all the streaming platforms available with rich movie libraries), but there are some who would welcome replacing a Blu-ray player with a powerful PC that can play Blu-ray disks, but $117 is a lot of money for this optional optical drive.</p><p>We’re not thrilled that the processor and graphics card each warrant a separate overclocking fee ($98 is a lot of money to OC), and we’d be happier to see both components moderately overclocked for a flat $49. However, the overclock does indeed give a boost in performance, and for average consumers who don’t tend to tinker, it may be a viable option if they want to get the most out of the hardware under the hood.</p><p>Alternatively, you could also go for even more overclocking, with Steiger Dynamics offering an extreme OC service where the company delids and shims your CPU and guarantees up to 5.0 GHz, even on the Core i5-7600K. This unconventional (but really cool) service goes for $199, and Steiger Dynamics surprisingly warranties the CPU, so long as you don’t remove the cooler.</p><p>The add-ons in this configuration of the Era may only have appeal to a handful of customers with specific goals for their system, so you could save some money (and easily upgrade to that Core i7 CPU) if you forego the specialized front panel, Blu-ray drive, sound isolation, and overclocking services. However, we haven’t seen many custom shops offering warrantied delidded overclocking services, and Steiger seems to be extremely flexible with its range of practical optional upgrades, appealing to professionals and enthusiasts alike. And that Couchmaster is pretty sweet, too.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-pc-builds,4390.html">Best PC Builds</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-to-build-a-pc,5867.html">How To Build A PC</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/builds">All PC Builds Content</a></strong></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core i7-7740X Kaby Lake-X Review ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i7-7740x-kaby-lake-x-cpu,5107.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Kaby Lake-X brings Intel's latest microrchitecture to the X299 platform with a very Core i7-7700K-like experience. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">tF7QRq6vj8CTRmZKP5BcBg</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GPLApYsJv4zZZY6cPEhn6h-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 12 Jul 2017 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:26:29 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ palcorn@outlook.com (Paul Alcorn) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Paul Alcorn ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RZRmFeQfPy3etHjBQitbGW.jpeg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;As a teenager, Paul scraped up enough money to buy a 486-powered PC with a turbo button (yes, a turbo button). Back when floppies were still popular he was already chasing after the fastest spinners for his personal computer, which led him down the long and winding storage road, covering enterprise storage. His current focus is on consumer processors, though he still keeps a close eye on the latest storage news. In his spare time, you’ll find Paul hanging out with his kids or indulging his love of the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                <cf:isSponsored>false</cf:isSponsored>
                <cf:hasAffiliateLinks>false</cf:hasAffiliateLinks>
                <cf:isPaid>false</cf:isPaid>
                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GPLApYsJv4zZZY6cPEhn6h-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GPLApYsJv4zZZY6cPEhn6h-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="kaby-lake-paddles-into-hedt">Kaby Lake Paddles Into HEDT </h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:53.71%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jsr57b7GnHiWQpdzUqBroC.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jsr57b7GnHiWQpdzUqBroC.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="811" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jsr57b7GnHiWQpdzUqBroC.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Last month, Intel's Skylake-X processors debuted at lower price points than we might have expected, given the company's previous high-end desktop CPU launches. The new chips also feature hefty core counts, higher Turbo Boost frequencies, a revamped implementation of Turbo Boost Max 3.0, a realigned cache hierarchy, and a new mesh topology. If you haven't read our review yet, check out <strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i9-7900x-skylake-x,5092.html">Intel Core i9-7900X Review: Meet Skylake-X</a></strong>.</p><p>Interestingly, the seven new Skylake-X models are accompanied by two quad-core Kaby Lake-X SKUs. In the past, Intel's entire HEDT portfolio lagged at least a generation behind the mainstream offerings. But Kaby Lake-X puts Intel's most modern architecture in the LGA 2066 interface.</p><p>It's only unfortunate that this attempt at rejuvenating the high-end desktop leads to a confusing mix of features on the X299 platform, many of which Kaby Lake-X simply does not support. Fewer PCIe lanes and a dual-channel memory controller are an obvious mismatch with expensive LGA 2066-equipped motherboards, and that's bound to create a dubious value proposition.</p><h2 id="kaby-lake-x-becomes-core-i7-7740x">Kaby Lake-X Becomes Core i7-7740X</h2><p>There are slight differences between the familiar Core i7-7700K (Kaby Lake-S), which drops into LGA 1151, and the new Core i7-7740X (Kaby Lake-X) designed to complement the X299 chipset.</p><p>Intel increases the -7740X's base frequency by 100 MHz to 4.3 GHz, but leaves the 4.5 GHz Turbo Boost clock rate and 8MB of last-level cache unchanged. The chip's TDP does jump from 91W to 112W, but that's not from any gain in host processing resources: we're still looking at four IA cores and the GT2 configuration of Intel's graphics engine with 24 EUs.</p><p>Although the HD Graphics 630 hardware is physically present, Intel fuses it off. This eliminates many of the multimedia features that benefit the mainstream market. Perhaps they won't be as missed in the enthusiast space, though. You do lose Quick Sync, which is useful for accelerating streaming, along with HEVC encode/decode and PlayReady 3.0 "enhanced content protection" support. On the other hand, X299 enables a more robust power delivery system, so cutting out HD Graphics could prove beneficial to our overclocking efforts. After all, the disabled hardware serves as dark silicon, absorbing waste heat from the active on-die components.</p><p>Purportedly, a larger heat spreader and package add to Core i7-7740X's capacity for dissipating thermal energy. Since CPUs vary in their ability to sustain Turbo Boost clock rates depending on their thermal headroom, the -7740X might also enjoy a larger window of higher frequencies, improving performance in our benchmarks compared to Core i7-7700K. It's too bad that Kaby Lake-X uses the same thermal interface material as the mainstream models, instead of indium solder.</p><p>The -7740X shares a 16-lane PCIe 3.0 controller with Intel's Core i7-7700K, and we'll dive into that liability shortly. DDR4 memory support is officially extended to 2666 MT/s, at least. That's a small improvement over the S-series’ sanctioned 2400 MT/s ceiling. The speed-up isn't related to any architectural enhancement. Rather, Intel tells us it adjusted the dual-channel controller's spec based on “significantly more test and manufacturing data” that suggested an increase was safe.</p><p>Surprisingly, the Core i7-7740X bears the same price as Core i7-7700K. So, in short, it looks like Intel took an existing CPU, tweaked a couple of knobs, and adapted it for the larger LGA 2066 interface with different packaging. The end product does overclock a little better than Core i7-7700K, we've noticed.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:50.93%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rkCVomj9sxngvBn978VGe.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rkCVomj9sxngvBn978VGe.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="769" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rkCVomj9sxngvBn978VGe.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="the-motherboard-land-of-confusion">The Motherboard Land Of Confusion</h2><p>The new X299 chipset, code-named Basin Falls, goes hand-in-hand with the LGA 2066 interface. Intel moved away from its normal tactic of recycling an enterprise-oriented platform controller hub and instead built X299 to be a beefed-up version of the Z270 chipset.</p><p>The Core i7-7740X's 16 lanes of PCIe 3.0 and two memory channels present issues, though. X299 must naturally accommodate Core i9-7900X with its 44 lanes of PCIe 3.0 and quad-channel DDR4 controller, but has to be flexible enough to take the Core i7-7740X, too. That means the lower-end CPU limits you to using four of the eight DIMM slots found on corresponding motherboards. Moreover, some PCIe or M.2 slots might not work when you drop in a -7740X.</p><p>The processor still features a DMI 3.0 link to X299, which is similar to a four-lane PCIe 3.0. The chipset supports a hefty 30 HSIO (High Speed I/O) lane allotment that vendors can carve up for expanded functionality. X99 did not support HSIO lanes, so that's a significant addition.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1139px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:73.22%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RKG3s2qY9iZtcuiSJR3S9j.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RKG3s2qY9iZtcuiSJR3S9j.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1139" height="834" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RKG3s2qY9iZtcuiSJR3S9j.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>With Core i7-7740X, there isn&apos;t a difference between the features you can use on the X299 platform compared to what is already available from the Z270 chipset. X299-based motherboards are undoubtedly high-end parts, and they bear the price premium (~$150) to prove it. That means you&apos;re paying for features that you cannot use, which is never a positive selling point.</p><p>To reduce costs, Intel tells us that motherboard partners can build Kaby Lake-X-specific platforms with only four DIMM slots to accommodate the new processors. We haven&apos;t seen any, though, and we haven&apos;t had a single vendor tell us they&apos;re working on one.</p><p>To make matters worse, none of Skylake-X’s unique features are available from Core i7-7740X, including Turbo Boost Max 3.0, AVX-512 support, the integrated vROC (Virtual RAID on CPU) controller, or Intel&apos;s mesh/cache adjustments.</p><p>All of these factors combine to create a questionable addition to Intel&apos;s high-end desktop portfolio. The company tells us that Kaby Lake-X offers a cheaper way into X299 with an upgrade path for later. We don&apos;t think many enthusiasts are interested in paying more now for the potential to upgrade later, though. Can Intel prove us wrong?</p><p><br><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html"><strong>Best CPUs</strong></a></p><p><br><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html"><strong>Intel & AMD Processor CPU Comparison Hierarchy</strong></a></p><p><br><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus"><strong>All CPUs Content</strong></a></p><h2 id="test-setup-5">Test Setup </h2><h2 id="test-systems-5">Test Systems</h2><p>We're using the MSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC for testing. We disabled the all-core Turbo Boost feature to ensure a level playing field.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2560px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:68.24%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SUmXVXfxXFisAo4nGBGcaY.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SUmXVXfxXFisAo4nGBGcaY.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="2560" height="1747" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SUmXVXfxXFisAo4nGBGcaY.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2560px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:27.30%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/W9hSdwjtrEkZhEDvkWjVd.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/W9hSdwjtrEkZhEDvkWjVd.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="2560" height="699" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/W9hSdwjtrEkZhEDvkWjVd.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>There were several demonstrations of memory overclocking beyond DDR4-4000 with Kaby Lake-X processors at Computex, but we settled on DDR4-3200 for our overclocked config to match the memory data transfer rates of our Ryzen models.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3840px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:66.74%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TnvGnyBUzq8wQvNcYSXJbd.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TnvGnyBUzq8wQvNcYSXJbd.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="3840" height="2563" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TnvGnyBUzq8wQvNcYSXJbd.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We introduced our new test system and methodology in <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-we-test-graphics-cards,4912.html"><strong>How We Test Graphics Cards</strong></a>. If you'd like more detail about our general approach, check that piece out.</p>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="ceee6af3-9513-4a0f-959f-d05fa7e7a26e">            <a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-1600X-Processor-YD160XBCAEWOF/dp/B06XKWT7GD?ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Ryzen 5 1600X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:78.92%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MvSeDWQyuhsbnQcTeiWrjG.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 5 1600X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="0bf08dfd-419a-4875-bfcf-8922686f7c7b">            <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B06X3W9NGG/?ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Ryzen 7 1700X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:79.90%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/awbf6RCN32u8Ssr5Do9srk.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 7 1700X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="6f0b144a-1c6f-4f30-802f-08e2f2e911ac">            <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/dp/B06W9JXK4G/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Ryzen 7 1800X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:74.96%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rnHXwa3cYBob5DkU7MMjEo.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 7 1800X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><p>The only updated components in our German lab are the CPU, system memory, motherboard, and new cooling solution, so we'll just provide a quick overview in the following table:</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  colspan="2"><strong>Test Equipment and Environment</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>System</strong></td><td  ><strong><strong>Germany Intel LGA 2066</strong></strong>Intel Core i9-7900X, i7-7740X Core i7 7740X, Core i5-7640X Core i7 7740X, Core i5-7640XMSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC4x 4GB G.Skill Ripjaws 4 DDR4-2600<strong>AMD </strong><strong><strong>Socket </strong>AM4 Workstation</strong>AMD Ryzen 7 1800X, 1700X, 1600X, 1500XMSI X370 Tomahawk2x 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3200<strong>Intel LGA 2011v3</strong>Intel Core i7-6900KMSI X99S XPower Gaming Titanium4x 4GB Crucial Ballistix DDR4-2400<strong>Intel LGA 1151</strong>Intel Core i7-7700K, i5-7600KMSI Z270 Gaming 72x 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4-3200 @2400 MT/s<strong>All Systems</strong>GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition (Gaming)Nvidia Quadro P6000 (Workstation)1x 1TB Toshiba OCZ RD400 (M.2, System)2x 960GB Toshiba OCZ TR150 (Storage, Images)Be Quiet Dark Power Pro 11, 850W Power Supply Unit (PSU)Windows 10 Pro (All Updates)Be Quiet Dark Power Pro 11, 850W Power Supply Unit (PSU)Windows 10 Pro (Creators Update)<strong><strong>U.S.Intel LGA 2066</strong></strong>Intel Core i9-7900XMSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC4x 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4-2666 @ 2666 and 3200 MT/s<strong>Intel LGA 2011v3</strong>Intel Core i7-6900K, Core i7-6950XASRock X99 Extreme44x 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4-2666 @ 2666 and 3200 MT/s<strong>AMD Socket AM4 Workstation</strong> AMD Ryzen 7 1800X, 5 1600XMSI X370 Xpower Gaming Titanium 2x G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ 2666 (stock), and 3200 MT/s <strong>Intel LGA 1151</strong> Intel Core i5-7600K, i7-7500 MSI Z270 Gaming M7 2x G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ 2400 <strong>All</strong> EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FE 1TB Samsung PM863 SilverStone ST1500, 1500W Windows 10 Creators Update Version 1703</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cooling</strong></td><td  ><strong>Germany</strong>Alphacool Eiszeit 2000 ChillerAlphacool Eisblock XPXThermal Grizzly Kryonaut (For Cooler Switch)<strong>US</strong>Corsair H115iCorsair H100i v2Arctic MX4</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Monitor</strong></td><td  >Eizo EV3237-BK (Workstation, Office, HPC)</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Power Consumption Measurement</strong></td><td  >Contact-free DC Measurement at PCIe Slot (Using a Riser Card) Contact-free DC Measurement at External Auxiliary Power Supply Cable Direct Voltage Measurement at Power Supply 2x Rohde & Schwarz HMO 3054, 500MHz Digital Multi-Channel Oscilloscope with Storage Function4x Rohde & Schwarz HZO50 Current Probe (1mA - 30A, 100kHz, DC) 4x Rohde & Schwarz HZ355 (10:1 Probes, 500MHz) 1x Rohde & Schwarz HMC 8012 Digital Multimeter with Storage Function</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Thermal Measurement</strong></td><td  >1x Optris PI640 80Hz Infrared Camera + PI Connect Real-Time Infrared Monitoring and Recording</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="vrmark-3dmark-amp-aots-escalation-5">VRMark, 3DMark & AotS: Escalation</h2><p>Futuremark's VRMark test lets you gauge your system's suitability for use with the HTC Vive or Oculus Rift, even if you don't currently own an HMD. The Orange Room test is based on the suggested system requirements for current-generation HTC Vive and Oculus Rift HMDs. Futuremark defines a passing score as anything above 109 FPS.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4yubnBcHwcMBw4GzSPX5RG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XpCAXmyCHhk2BqFXxhWYtG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EECj6MhX4qS2sWtxTD5sVe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V2LauWQ9hdPKSxTk5dyrj6.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>As expected, we notice slight variation between the stock Core i7-7700K and its near-identical -7740X counterpart. Testing at each chip's default memory settings (DDR4-2400 for the -7700K and DDR4-2666 for the -7740X) likely contributes some of the difference. And we notice the same behavior with the stock and overclocked settings.</p><p>3DMark's DX11 and DX12 tests follow a similar pattern. The beefier multi-core CPUs leverage their extra threads to take commanding leads in these compute-intensive tests. But tuning brings the -7740X within striking range of the overclocked six-core Ryzen 5 1600X. Intel's Kaby Lake-X model enjoys a greater lead over the -7700K in the DX11 physics test, which we chalk up to an extra 200 MHz of overclocking headroom.</p><p>We encountered some strangeness during the 3DMark API overhead test. Core i7-7740X lags its -7700K sibling by a large margin during the DX12 and Vulkan sequences; overclocking does little to correct the disparity. We suspect that this is a 3DMark-specific issue, since most of our DX12-based gaming benchmarks don't concur with these results. The API test is relatively new and has received a few recent updates. It's possible that we see another patch to address this unexpected measurement.</p><h2 id="ashes-of-the-singularity-escalation-7">Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gR9mT4m4MgtpAeXvZKMuNa.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qgL6m9znQ39AvsUzkTEbRH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4JUmWSiXULZddzRUUJC8qh.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4NWwmusguGCsMdtX5v8yNk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DR4jGQwBHo5vLyacq7j4tj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ffrJaFrma4WWmojjpymq8E.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</em> favors core count over other factors, so we observe the expected variance between 4C/8T Core i7 CPUs and the more well-endowed processors.</p><p>Core i7-7740X exhibits a minor gain compared to the -7700K at both stock and overclocked settings. Interestingly, we encounter less variability and frame time outliers with the -7740X than the -7700K, which could be a result of slightly more aggressive memory settings. The slight bump in overclocked frequency only equates to a 2.34% advantage, though.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="civilization-vi-amp-battlefield-1">Civilization VI & Battlefield 1 </h2><h2 id="civilization-vi-ai-test-5">Civilization VI AI Test</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.00%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hdnjqxE9moarSdgep9VS6j.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hdnjqxE9moarSdgep9VS6j.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="834" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hdnjqxE9moarSdgep9VS6j.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Clock rate and IPC throughput tend to win the day in this test, so it isn't surprising to find both Core i7s vying for supremacy.</p><p>It was less expected to find the 10-core Core i9-7900X mixing it up. Surely, a tuned Core i7-7700K would be faster at 4.9 GHz, right? The new Skylake-X model likely benefits from to its reworked cache hierarchy.</p><p>Again, the differences are slight between Kaby Lake-X and Kaby Lake-S. They're such similar processors, after all.</p><h2 id="civilization-vi-graphics-test-5">Civilization VI Graphics Test</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YNETVgqVuvrPTm6pjEbYnA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qntqB8TUVJHsWZ34fqXGzQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yAn8LqrhipmWr3KWgfi4m3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7mTBmAFKXhejyZBps7ZU6K.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UtBgKfDxcH9S5LzCkdUegV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2VSXccSTFNGTah9YyX2aN.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Speaking of the -7900X's reworked cache hierarchy, as we noticed in our initial review, the processor does suffer from mesh-imposed performance limitations in some titles. That comes into play during this benchmark.</p><p>The 10-core Broadwell-E-based chip leads, but both tuned Core i7s are competitive with the rest of our contenders. The difference between Core i7-7700K and -7440X is negligible at stock settings, and therefore unnoticeable during gameplay. But the -7740X's extra bit of frequency headroom yields a larger delta when we overclock.</p><h2 id="battlefield-1-dx11-4">Battlefield 1 (DX11)</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZeCkGqTJne3cAX7gLU7gKb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nFNRYWVuetQsU5PsLKkH8T.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/S7VqthN4y9NPcRtMZUJJEi.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZiKxHW9LvEFbyRbHdGS2za.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Yk5buoy9tkcFq9qyE9qH25.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ygxhn5DEuDVePe2Fr2K6XB.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Our armor-laden walk through the O La Vittoria scene in <em>Battlefield 1</em> yields <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-1600-cpu,5073-4.html">large performance variations</a> when we test less-powerful processors. The differences shrink as we benchmark higher-end CPUs, mostly because we're graphics-bound.</p><p>We encountered an almost-predictable variance between the two Core i7s in most tests, and that plays out in<em> Battlefield 1 </em>when we measure the stock configurations. A 0.2 FPS delta is simply imperceptible.</p><p>The story changes with the application of a robust overclock, though. Try as we might, we simply could not get Intel's -7740X to match the -7700K in an overclocked state. That's particularly baffling due Kaby Lake-X's higher overclocked frequency. Nevertheless, the results for both overclocked Core i7s are repeatable, so it's possible that BIOS updates or chipset drivers could improve performance down the road.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="gta-v-hitman-amp-shadow-of-mordor">GTA V, Hitman & Shadow of Mordor</h2><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-11">Grand Theft Auto V</h2><p>We measure performance during <em>Grand Theft Auto V</em>'s F-16 flight sequence with the built-in benchmark.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/L68QFdLQaixD9ZrAfmLqTA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KRYUnieRhUqye3omfKE8mn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nDDbzGrEbX7usDjXZEGdCZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3M5znzhKji8ddFPoTm6BLi.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/B5BeqYSRYLTgvovsqv9XfN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7rSTg2hmjNtGU6sqxByPaQ.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>A now-familiar pattern emerges during the <em>Grand Theft Auto V </em>test sequence. There's a slight difference between the two Core i7s at stock settings, which widens as we dial in the -7740X's higher overclock. We're looking at a 2% advantage favoring Kaby Lake-X; the 2 FPS gain certainly doesn't warrant a step up to the much more expensive X299 platform, though.</p><p>The Core i9-7900X is brutally competitive in this test, which runs counter to our expectations of Intel's massively-parallel HEDT CPUs that historically prioritize core count over clock rate. If the -7900X could consistently deliver this level of performance in all titles, it would be even more impressive.</p><h2 id="hitman-2016-5">Hitman (2016)</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ghPT8QyEocQxrmVZdyPvYY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bzbweC5JBTTPGbKeafdAvL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/52q6MrZXvx5TLiceF8vDGN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/B2zxkE2CwHpR8ELna4QvKS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rvdxE9T2opbv4VKUeD44uF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eeFDxnEzeHdsCZSeTbBSqb.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>A stock Core i7-7740X trails the -7700K, though tuning changes that dynamic. Both Core i7s stand out from the pack at higher frequencies.</p><p>AMD's Ryzen processors lag notably behind their Intel competitors. Still, they average more than 110 FPS.</p><h2 id="middle-earth-shadow-of-mordor-4">Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nkTrUJNi6CSFFN4DjtHSgC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vp6W5UwH2oixNkP4XMhKji.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HKQT4ZeBnMhCzid45EAyci.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EnxnUbcpgxcNFBWTrqjBVd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/H5d8LvrzXP7ZhCY8pntmBa.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dhdsTZrGdh7ZCsUVQrt8dF.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The graphics bottleneck is apparent in <em>Shadow of Mordor</em>. A 1.7 FPS delta between the fastest and slowest processors doesn't give us much to comment on. It's most notable, then, that even an affordable Ryzen 5 1600X can push EVGA's beefy GeForce GTX 1080 FE to its fullest in some games.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="project-cars-amp-rise-of-the-tomb-raider">Project CARS & Rise of the Tomb Raider</h2><h2 id="project-cars-4">Project CARS</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5pRGEN24YW9QFjQVms7PHP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VeKuJPHP5QfvsJBh7g5UfK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2Xs3T2idsmngQ7tpF6sCse.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XpffJ2JMUHCD3XZnUhRbuj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/T9uyi64aZTn4nZ4YBsdnUB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V6EnysmQaJdqpxj8srJmZh.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>We spot a bit more variation between the stock Core i7s, perhaps suggesting some sensitivity to memory frequency. <em>Project CARS</em> scales very well with increased host processing resources, so the brawny Core i9-7900X unperforms our expectations. Again, the -7740X's gain over the -7700K from overclocking is a mere 1.4%.</p><h2 id="rise-of-the-tomb-raider-5">Rise of the Tomb Raider</h2><p><em>Rise of the Tomb Raider</em> recently received a patch that significantly improves Ryzen's DX12 performance, making this one more title optimized for AMD's latest platform. We're still sticking to DX11-based testing, though, to keep the playing field as level as possible.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HatsExLXRFS7mxmYDfnDgc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WFtXvHVWdkGdQRKVxuRYM3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Umb7QGRyUoKs3sqVzQTVxm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oLuovEqENDQc9TPSwRA8EF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BboN23HuxcSH3NEbcJvUML.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ChG66JQaHMbZJNqDeVoFm7.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>A stock Core i7-7740X loses by 1.3% to the -7700K, but a bit of overclocking turns the tables by 1%. That certainly isn't worth the X299's price premium.</p><p>We clearly see the delta between AMD's Ryzen and Intel's Core processors grow at the test sequence's tail end, where it becomes more CPU-intensive. Core i7-7740X encounters a notable frame time outlier towards the end of the test. Meanwhile, the Ryzen 5 1600X briefly spends time under the 90 FPS mark.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="workstation-amp-hpc-performance">Workstation & HPC Performance</h2><h2 id="preamble">Preamble</h2><p>If you want to know more about our HPC benchmarks, check out the <strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-cpu,4951.html">AMD Ryzen 7 1800X CPU Review</a></strong>. We didn't just copy results from that story, though. Rather, after a number of BIOS updates and software configuration changes, we retested everything. This gives us a more up-to-date picture, reflecting improvements of up to 15% that AMD worked hard to enable.</p><p>As we dig through these results, remember that semi-professionals almost never overclock their systems. Also, CPUs like Intel’s Core i9-7900X can be hard to keep cool. Consequently, our CPUs are now running at their stock frequencies.</p><h2 id="2d-benchmarks-directx-amp-gdi-gdi">2D Benchmarks: DirectX & GDI/GDI+</h2><p>Adding Intel’s new CPU to our AutoCAD 2D and GDI/GDI+ graphics benchmarks doesn’t yield any surprises. The newcomer falls into place exactly where you’d expect based on its clock rate.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BbhUdWexWqzVWAiLiiNjn6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5e8ZTG8BnaNhsNX2WMzFTF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fTq7x6ZaLYcjqP4czT9mPJ.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><h2 id="2d-benchmarks-adobe-creative-cloud">2D Benchmarks: Adobe Creative Cloud</h2><p>The outcome depends on frequency again in this next round of benchmarks.</p><p>Interestingly, the Kaby Lake-X CPU lands right behind Core i7-7700K, if only by a hair. This won’t be the last time we see this inexplicable phenomenon.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BzGxfrZ5B6vNss6qdHrya4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/axEWP2DLSMvDepyoYepuHC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Qb728eRjWmfjJDMSEQwNtH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WmPQbFPVgNucVHXbe7GuVm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7WRzcKipXst3qybBBMJdbL.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><h2 id="3d-benchmarks-directx-amp-opengl">3D Benchmarks: DirectX & OpenGL</h2><p>In some instances, Core i7-7740X pulls ahead of the -7700K. In others, it's beaten slightly. Either way, the performance differences are generally very small and within the measurement error range. The only discernible pattern seems to be that Kaby Lake-X leads when compute tasks run in parallel with graphics output. This means the differences could be platform-oriented.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/U2eK825e5NHmGVKpYE4HEa.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4XnrmYvtmboFnT4gfzKXC3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/t6zJqDKr2S4PJvr6Wv5UwA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AXzbHL4dCe8Brtr36Bh9C3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XDQ3PM25VEtM4MxD4iKDT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SppoKJU3MbXuAVczH55PMY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Dkaj6bye5uZeiW8QQvBCgD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NZRvgCjq8zRjgtc6RPhhqh.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><h2 id="cpu-performance-workstation-3">CPU Performance: Workstation</h2><p>The 3D graphics performance we just measured isn’t all that matters to professional rendering titles. Applications run many other tasks (like simulations, compute jobs, preview rendering) on the CPU simultaneously. The full picture’s only achievable by looking at both of them together.</p><p>Intel's Core i7-7740X does well in workloads that emphasize high clock rates over core count.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NXTXNJdvFCEaW5thiLvvQk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mo3oGha87v4jUo2Uhej8yn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xhk6mc7qC3ME6vMw3MaJ2g.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/x5USZfmSSn2HyQSNQXJywj.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><h2 id="cpu-performance-photorealistic-rendering-4">CPU Performance: Photorealistic Rendering</h2><p>Final rendering doesn’t need a jack of all trades. Instead, efficiency and fast parallel computation are key. This is why photorealistic rendering gets its own test section.</p><p>AMD’s Ryzen CPUs do really well, while Kaby Lake-X doesn't. Hyper-Threading keeps Core i7-7740X from losing sight of the field, but we have to wonder whether it deserves a place in Intel’s high-end desktop line-up.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LmWpNTyMZaq9Hqyxn4FkK8.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WojjQy8WCRxzUUVsShFa2P.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wDaChxHvAbgDH3DQ8u9NzL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EA5XYkeFka87iYuVJwqnTd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/riYwijngmmUpQvGAcJFfoL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/C4pCCpzYh7DcP74VEjcWGb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mUjGkn9gjSeKr3HMzscfiY.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><h2 id="cpu-performance-encoding-amp-compression-decompression">CPU Performance: Encoding & Compression/Decompression</h2><p>The Kaby Lake-X-based processor fares reasonably well when asked to perform simple decompression. However, all of the other tasks in this category end in total defeat.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yJSJeuzGEKckkTmxrJY6th.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2fMt6w7gfmq5y8qyzGd8nQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jMYMcfaChsqqxsnyRi6nhL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NeEFLjWEBszQica9gTefBT.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><h2 id="high-performance-computing-hpc">High-Performance Computing (HPC)</h2><p>This final benchmark discipline spells doom for Intel’s Core i7-7740X. Its designation as a high-end desktop part suggests it should do well, but that's just not the case. With four Hyper-Threaded cores, the -7740X carves out a spot in the back of the field.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WBbPqq4vPFcwQfsa39Fq8h.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FHsfr6VvF3c5TvTvE6S7G8.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hE5kQ9PVSgemqGxddsmzec.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WeseQjSvZe5yerBwyth8Zo.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CqbHPyqjXnJNpfcvURqMRR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/d8zLeyQRJmhuqGY98wqYQZ.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Intel’s Core i9 processors might be decent options for the workstation space, but the same cannot be said for Core i7-7740X. This is a consumer CPU that was given the wrong moniker. Despite its lower price point, the expensive X299 platform negates a lot of those savings.</p><p>Furthermore, the new Kaby Lake-X-based model doesn't really outperform the mainstream version. Core i7-7700K is positioned correctly, and its successors should have continued along those lines instead of pretending that they are something they're not. Case in point: the performance differences between -7740X and -7700K in the workstation and HPC space are even smaller than in our gaming benchmarks. So, an expensive platform doesn't get you very far.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="power-consumption-amp-overclocking">Power Consumption & Overclocking</h2><p>Intel isn't using a soldered integrated heat spreader (IHS) for Skylake-X and Kaby Lake-X. Instead of the metallic solder most enthusiasts want to see, heat moves from the die to the IHS through inexpensive thermal interface material, which is just a fancy name for common thermal paste. This decision has implications for both our power consumption measurements and overclocking efforts. Fortunately, in light of the lower amount of waste heat produced by Core i7-7740X compared to Core i9-7900X, this isn't as much of a problem.</p><p>In order to produce comparable results, we used our industrial-grade Alphacool Eiszeit Chiller 2000 cooler that was needed for the Skylake-X review. A decent all-in-one liquid cooler would have been fine, though.</p><p>Power consumption is measured after the voltage converters and CPU, using points on the motherboard. These numbers need to be part of the equation for sizing your PSU. And depending on the motherboard you pick, they can differ by up to 30W. Consequently, our numbers are for the CPU only.</p><h2 id="power-consumption-3">Power Consumption</h2><p>At idle, Intel’s new Kaby Lake-X model does a lot better than -7700K. It also pulls ahead of AMD's Ryzen processors. Most likely, a lot of this is due to the disabled HD Graphics engine.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/C4rXmbG7RZFaafeQZcZQzZ.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/C4rXmbG7RZFaafeQZcZQzZ.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/C4rXmbG7RZFaafeQZcZQzZ.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>AutoCAD 2015 doesn’t stress CPUs all that much, since it can't fully utilize their available resources. Still, Intel’s Core i7-7740X consumes more power than its predecessors. Admittedly, the difference isn't huge. However, it is larger than our measurement error range and completely reproducible.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CSPZVM5mb5N6caHitaU5GH.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CSPZVM5mb5N6caHitaU5GH.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CSPZVM5mb5N6caHitaU5GH.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The situation is similar in our gaming workload. Interestingly, the average frame rates are almost identical as well.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/K654bJ8f9JGftm3hWivG6R.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/K654bJ8f9JGftm3hWivG6R.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/K654bJ8f9JGftm3hWivG6R.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The stress test produces somewhat surprising results. Intel’s Kaby Lake-X model edges out the -7700K. We don't know why the pattern reverses under full load. However, the delta is almost imperceptible in the 2W range.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CdZocCNciqsYjfvM4b4TQb.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CdZocCNciqsYjfvM4b4TQb.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CdZocCNciqsYjfvM4b4TQb.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="overclocking-amp-stability">Overclocking & Stability</h2><p>Does a larger heat spreader and disabled graphics engine yield a meaningful advantage to Core i7-7740X's overclocking headroom? Before we start tweaking, we’d like to provide some background by showing a graph based on a motherboard manufacturer’s binning program. The voltages needed for Core i7-7740X are very informative:</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:867px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.52%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/445MsDo4Vu8kiMy8wKQSCn.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/445MsDo4Vu8kiMy8wKQSCn.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="867" height="490" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/445MsDo4Vu8kiMy8wKQSCn.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The Core i5-7640X we'll be reviewing soon made it all of the way to 5.1 GHz, putting it in the middle of the pack. In other words, we have a thoroughly average sample.</p><p>We tested for stability at every frequency step using Cinebench R15, <em>The Witcher 3</em>, LuxRender, and <em>Battlefield 1</em>. Notice the deliberate exclusion of the AVX-heavy Prime95.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:868px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:61.41%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/akNM4CTjvbhTaer7Dp6u4d.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/akNM4CTjvbhTaer7Dp6u4d.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="868" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/akNM4CTjvbhTaer7Dp6u4d.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The Core i7-7740X's curve stays fairly straight, which means that power consumption doesn’t explode as clock rate goes up. Rather, the CPU chugs along until it just quits all of a sudden.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rYcsZ2V9RRRMkraSSriaTD.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rYcsZ2V9RRRMkraSSriaTD.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rYcsZ2V9RRRMkraSSriaTD.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>A closer look at the performance and power consumption curve shows that performance scales in an almost completely linear fashion with  frequency, whereas power consumption increases faster, but not extremely so. Relating single-core performance to the necessary power yields a very similar picture. The resulting waste heat isn’t as bad as some might have feared. At 5.1 GHz, we’re looking at 90W. A good closed-loop liquid cooler should be able to handle this.</p><p>In spite of our sample being average, it yielded a good overclocking experience, especially since performance gains and power consumption increases never drifted too far apart.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="temperature-curves-amp-delta-values">Temperature Curves & Delta Values</h2><h2 id="cooling-nuclear-option-the-chiller">Cooling Nuclear Option: The Chiller</h2><p>Again, we used our Alphacool Eiszeit Chiller 2000 to produce results that are comparable to those from our Core i9-7900X review. We also used this cooler in all of our AMD Ryzen reviews, which means that those results can be compared as well.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:76.77%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9TPBSDJUzQmosgVTWtHhcd.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9TPBSDJUzQmosgVTWtHhcd.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1920" height="1474" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9TPBSDJUzQmosgVTWtHhcd.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="high-temperature-differences-challenge-cooling-performance">High Temperature Differences Challenge Cooling Performance</h2><p>Kaby Lake-X suffers from Intel's use of thermal paste between the die and heat spreader. Solder would have been the way to go. The difference between the water block’s temperature, which is held at a constant 20°C, and the CPU temperature (according to its sensors) demonstrate this point nicely.</p><p>The curve below shows clearly that waste heat isn't dissipated quickly enough. Just as we did in our AMD Ryzen and Intel Core i9 launch articles, we used a very thin copper plate to measure the heat spreader's temperatures as well.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jW2Fy4aAQVgicBwfWtFGrY.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jW2Fy4aAQVgicBwfWtFGrY.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jW2Fy4aAQVgicBwfWtFGrY.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The next graph represents the temperature difference between the top of the CPU's heat spreader and cores.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rbAkW5ryga4tnokZqLZNx5.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rbAkW5ryga4tnokZqLZNx5.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rbAkW5ryga4tnokZqLZNx5.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Our cooling solution is one of the best you can buy. Nevertheless, we measure a 48°C difference between the top of the Core i7-7740X's heat spreader and its cores. This isn't a horrible result, but it could have been a lot better.</p><h2 id="leakage">Leakage</h2><p>Next, we measured power consumption at an identical load using different cooling solutions. The leakage currents were below our measurement equipment’s accuracy range. For this reason, we didn't bother with a graph. Kaby Lake-X doesn't have a problem with leakage currents that could increase power consumption in a meaningful way.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="final-analysis-3">Final Analysis</h2><p>Superficially, Intel’s idea to transplant Kaby Lake onto its high-end desktop platform seems like it'd make sense. But ultimately, X299's excessive cost hamstrings Kaby Lake-X. In many ways, the Core i7-7740X reminds us of Intel’s Core i3-7350K. It's a great chip forced into a platform that doesn't match up with its price point.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:38.94%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DPWasNrxBiWyd7ijzqZDK4.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DPWasNrxBiWyd7ijzqZDK4.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="588" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DPWasNrxBiWyd7ijzqZDK4.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Core i7-7740X is nearly identical to the existing -7700K; even its price is similar. At stock settings, the -7740X performs a lot like its mainstream counterpart, despite slightly higher base and Turbo Boost frequencies. We noticed the same performance characteristics as -7700K in lightly threaded workloads, such as gaming and most common desktop apps. But the -7740X pales in comparison to the brawnier Skylake-X models in heavy application tests. Lower idle power consumption numbers are likely a result of the -7740X's disabled graphics engine. However, the overall power and thermal measurements come out to be almost the same. Though we still don’t approve of the thermal paste Intel uses between its die and heat spreader, at least closed-loop liquid coolers are fine for this 112W chip.</p><p>The “X” in Kaby Lake-X promises extreme overclocking action, and we did eke out a few hundred megahertz over Core i7-7700K. That extra headroom is nice, but it doesn't translate to large gains in our gaming suite. In fact, at stock settings, the -7700K achieved higher average frame rates, while overclocking gave the -7740X a 1.19% advantage. The 99<sup>th</sup> percentile variances between the chips both fell under 1%, with the advantage going to Core i7-7700K in stock and overclocked configurations. In either case, the difference between these two CPUs is imperceptible, even after overclocking them both. Perhaps that'll improve as X299-based motherboards receive more fine-tuned firmware.</p><p>Intel's Core i7-7700K is one of the fastest gaming processors we've ever tested, so matching it is a good thing. But the -7740X doesn't make sense as an equal when we factor in the X299 platform. You are going to pay an extra ~$150 for an X299 motherboard compared to a more mature Z270-based setup, and gain exactly zero features. In fact, you lose the integrated GPU that could be useful for other tasks, such as Ultra HD Blu-ray playback. Dropping the -7740X into LGA 2066 actually disables motherboard features you're paying for like extra DIMM slots, Skylake-X's more robust power delivery, and hamstrung chipset functionality.</p><p>Our motherboard contacts have expressed a general reluctance to create Kaby Lake-X-specific motherboards, and unless that changes, there is little reason to jump up to the X299 with a Kaby Lake-X chip. Certain enthusiasts will pursue a stouter overclock from the Kaby Lake architecture, and -7740X delivers in that regard. Intel's pitch is that Core i7-7740X serves as an entry point to X299 that paves the way for upgrades to Skylake-X later. We don't believe there's a big market for an expensive path like that, though. For those with the upgrade itch, either stay with the Z270 and spend bigger on a high-end GPU, or splurge on a true HEDT-class processor.</p><p>Intel has its Coffee Lake CPUs coming to market later this year, and we've heard rumors of a six-core model landing on the mainstream desktop. Consider waiting for more information on that prior to going the X299/Kaby Lake-X route, if you're still interested in Core i7-7740X. Also, AMD's Ryzen Threadripper is coming soon. There are just so many reasons <em>not </em>to buy this thing...</p><p>Core i7-7740X doesn’t give you anything new. Yes, it's one of the fastest gaming chips ever made, but you can get similar performance from the mature Z270 platform for significantly less money. We appreciate the higher overclocking ceiling, but that doesn't translate into enough benefit to justify the extra investment.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPUs Content</a></strong></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ AMD's Ryzen 5 1600 Skyrockets To No. 2 On Amazon, Passmark Submissions Increase ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-amazon-cpu-1600,34926.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Over the weekend, AMD's Ryzen 5 1600 rocketed from the #5 spot on Amazon's bestselling CPU list to the second place position, unseating Intel's Core i5-7600K. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">sBXK6y5szPGthmzcxLKBwG</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JZ5i98aRReWRzWsXx6YcbW-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Mon, 03 Jul 2017 18:15:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:43:03 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ palcorn@outlook.com (Paul Alcorn) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Paul Alcorn ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RZRmFeQfPy3etHjBQitbGW.jpeg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;As a teenager, Paul scraped up enough money to buy a 486-powered PC with a turbo button (yes, a turbo button). Back when floppies were still popular he was already chasing after the fastest spinners for his personal computer, which led him down the long and winding storage road, covering enterprise storage. His current focus is on consumer processors, though he still keeps a close eye on the latest storage news. In his spare time, you’ll find Paul hanging out with his kids or indulging his love of the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                <cf:isSponsored>false</cf:isSponsored>
                <cf:hasAffiliateLinks>false</cf:hasAffiliateLinks>
                <cf:isPaid>false</cf:isPaid>
                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JZ5i98aRReWRzWsXx6YcbW-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JZ5i98aRReWRzWsXx6YcbW-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:969px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:108.98%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/E9ciYYSsDHqmp6NVeF8nCT.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/E9ciYYSsDHqmp6NVeF8nCT.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="969" height="1056" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/E9ciYYSsDHqmp6NVeF8nCT.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Just in time for the Fourth of July, AMD's Ryzen 5 1600 rocketed from the No. 5 spot on <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Computers-Accessories-Computer-CPU-Processors/zgbs/pc/229189">Amazon's bestselling CPU list</a> to the second place position over the weekend, unseating Intel's Core i5-7600K. Amazon's best seller list is hardly indicative of overall market share--a multitude of other factors complicate the issue--but it serves as a somewhat decent indicator of the state of the upgrade market.</p><p>First, the caveats. Amazon updates its list of bestselling CPUs hourly, so the results change frequently. We keep an eye on the list and also monitor price changes, and based on our casual observations over the last month (we haven't charted the progress, and we don't have access to historical data) the Ryzen 5 1600 has frequently occupied the 6th place position. That changed recently as the Ryzen 5 1600 moved up to displace the Intel Core i5-7600K, the long-running second-place processor. Intel's Core i7-7700K still enjoys the leading spot.</p><p>That move up is an encouraging sign for the Ryzen lineup. Intel has stood resolute in its current pricing scheme for Kaby Lake processors, but more competition might change the company's calculus.</p><p>Although the Ryzen 5 1600 is obviously enjoying success in the enthusiast/upgrade market, the Amazon list is a poor indicator of overall market share. The majority of processors ship in OEM systems, and those numbers aren't reflected at the retailer.</p><p>AMD's decision to eschew integrated graphics for the Ryzen lineup affords the company the advantage of higher core counts and the ability to offer lower prices than competing Intel models, but it also restricts the addressable market. As horrible as it may be, many OEM systems leverage integrated graphics, so that limits AMD's penetration opportunities. Nevertheless, more OEM Ryzen systems are coming to market and the company's forthcoming APU lineup, which includes integrated graphics, will help broaden its appeal.</p><p>AMD is obviously gaining traction, and it's important to note Intel's Pentium and Celeron processors routinely enjoy the fourth and fifth positions on the chart. These low-cost processors also represent a big chunk of the OEM market, and AMD doesn't have direct competitors for those models yet, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/ryzen-pro-3-series-amd,34907.html">at least until Ryzen 3 comes to market in Q3</a>. Provided the Ryzen 3 processors are competitive with Intel offerings, and initial signs do point in that direction, we could see even more changes to Amazon's best seller list.</p><h2 id="passing-the-mark">Passing The Mark?</h2><p>Passmark posts quarterly updates that outline the number of benchmark submissions the company has received, and AMD submissions have increased. <a href="https://www.cpubenchmark.net/market_share.html">Due to an incredibly misleading chart and article title</a>, many mistake the results as an indicator of AMD's market share. The results do not represent actual sales figures, and certainly do not represent market share.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:764px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:84.29%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fWzKJ9JktdojDLjs8ozDSQ.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fWzKJ9JktdojDLjs8ozDSQ.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="764" height="644" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fWzKJ9JktdojDLjs8ozDSQ.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Passmark's Q2 chart showed that submissions with AMD systems rose from 18.1% the previous quarter to 20.6%. The jump appears more pronounced in the chart above due to the daily update cadence. The rise in submissions may not be indicative of actual market share, but it does indicate that<em> something</em> is happening. We've included a quick breakdown of the numbers behind Passmark's chart at the end of the article.</p><h2 id="it-39-s-getting-steamy-in-here">It's Getting Steamy In Here</h2><p>We headed over to <a href="http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/processormfg/">Steam's hardware survey</a> to see how AMD is doing on the gaming front, at least on the dominant online gaming platform.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  ></th><th  >February</th><th  >March</th><th  >April</th><th  >May</th><th  >June</th><th  >Increase/Decrease</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td  >Genuine Intel</td><td  >78.07%</td><td  >79.53%</td><td  >79.68%</td><td  >80.11%</td><td  >80.92%</td><td  >+0.81%</td></tr><tr><td  >Authentic AMD</td><td  >21.89%</td><td  >20.43%</td><td  >20.28%</td><td  >19.86%</td><td  >19.01%</td><td  >-0.85%</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Admittedly, we didn't expect to see a reduction. According to Steam's hardware survey, AMD systems have declined by 0.85% over the last several months. We dove into Steam's more detailed data, which breaks down the users by frequency range (windows), to attempt to ascertain if the changes just represent old AMD systems that gamers are retiring. Oddly, the reductions seem to be pretty steady across the board. It's certainly conflicting information compared to other indicators, but we have to remember this survey isn't an active tracker.   </p><h2 id="compete">Compete! </h2><p>There's no doubt that AMD's new lineup is changing the status quo for desktop processors, particularly in the pricing department. It isn't surprising to see the Ryzen 5 1600 enjoying success; it has a great price point and solid performance trends that merited its recent inclusion in our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best Gaming CPUs recommendations</a>. AMD's processors might not lead in gaming performance, but the price to performance ratio is impossible to ignore.</p><p>The company has already gained significant traction in the mid-range, but it's only the beginning. AMD has even more models, including <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-threadripper-epyc-pro-vega,34423.html">the highly anticipated ThreadRipper</a>, coming to market later this month. That could change the paradigm on the high-end desktop market while the Ryzen 3 squeezes the low end. Mobile processors also make up roughly two-thirds of the processor pie, and AMD hasn't released its mobile variants yet.</p><p>It appears that Intel has responded, at least partially, by lowering prices for its mid-range Skylake-X models (compared to the previous generation). Unfortunately, the company hasn't changed pricing on its existing mid-range processors. Perhaps we'll see a reaction when Intel releases Cannonlake later this year.</p><p>Here's some more information about the numbers behind Passmark's chart:</p><p>This graph counts the baselines submitted to us during these time period and therefore is representative of CPUs in use rather than CPUs purchased.The Quarters are by the calendar year rather than financial. (i.e. Q1 starts January 1st)Baselines can be submitted from anywhere therefore these are global statistics.We do receive a small number of submissions of CPU types other than AMD and Intel however the percentage is so small as to make it not worth graphing. This combined with rounding off the percentages to 2 decimal places will account for each quarter not always adding up to exactly 100%.This chart only includes x86 processors and does not include other chip architectures these manufacturers may sell.This chart only includes CPUs installed into PCs and does not include game consoles.As the PerformanceTest software only runs on Windows OS and counts on user submitting their benchmarks. This chart may be non reflective of non Windows user base.</p><p><em>Update, 7/3/17, 9pm PT: We originally presented the chart, and the numbers contained therein, that included the first three days of the new quarter. Passmark clarified the chart update cadence, and we have amended the article accordingly.  </em></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ How To Build A $1,250 Gaming PC ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-to-build-a-1250-dollar-gaming-pc,5270.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ We built 7 PCs from the ground up that were designed and spec’d by the Tom’s Hardware community to be the best. Here’s how to assemble the $1,250 build. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">hpqKF5DRK8ZDJ5d4MzmXai</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KMR4pzRYEbKTBWus4H9uD7-1280-80.png" type="image/png" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sun, 02 Jul 2017 14:00:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:50:37 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Gaming PCs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Desktops]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Derek Forrest ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                                        <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Derek Forrest was a contributing freelance writer for Tom&#039;s Hardware who specialized in writing about hardware news and reviewing gaming desktops and laptops. He is a lifelong PC enthusiast, former IT administrator, and custom PC builder.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                <cf:isSponsored>false</cf:isSponsored>
                <cf:hasAffiliateLinks>false</cf:hasAffiliateLinks>
                <cf:isPaid>false</cf:isPaid>
                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/png" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KMR4pzRYEbKTBWus4H9uD7-1280-80.png">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KMR4pzRYEbKTBWus4H9uD7-1280-80.png" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Our $1,250 Best PC Build is an excellent platform for a PC gaming enthusiast with a moderate budget. The Intel Core i5-7600K is a great value option, and the Gigabyte GA-Z270XP SLI motherboard provides a modestly priced Z270 platform with plenty of expansion options (SLI, additional M.2) The Cryorig H5 Universal cooler has no issues keeping CPU temps low. 16GB of memory is quickly becoming a standard, and the G.Skill kit inside the $1,250 Best PC Build has above-average speed at a below-average cost.</p><p>We gave the Asus GTX 1070 Strix graphics card all it could handle by using the same punishing settings from our desktop system reviews. It performed admirably at 2560 x 1440, and there were even some game titles that were playable at the highest detail settings at 4K. There’s even some more headroom to overclock the GPU (we didn’t use the OC preset, just the default Gaming), and the extra scratch for the higher-clocked version of the Asus GTX 1070 Strix is worth it for users not looking to manually overclock.</p><h2 id="specifications-2">Specifications</h2><div ><table><thead><tr><th  colspan="2"><em>"Gamer's Delight"</em> by Shrapnel_Indie</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  >Case</th><td  ><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Cooler Master N400 NSE-400-KKN2" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811119277&Tpk=N82E16811119277">Cooler Master N400 NSE-400-KKN2</a></span></td></tr><tr><th  >Cooling</th><td  ><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Cryorig H5 Ultimate CR-H5B" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0154AXB4C/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Cryorig H5 Ultimate CR-H5B</a></span></td></tr><tr><th  >CPU</th><td  ><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Core i5-7600K" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MRRPPQS/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i5-7600K</a></span></td></tr><tr><th  >Graphics</th><td  ><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Asus GTX 1070" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814126109&Tpk=N82E16814126109">Asus GTX 1070</a></span></td></tr><tr><th  >Memory</th><td  ><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Ripjaws V Series" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231941&Tpk=N82E16820231941">Ripjaws V Series</a></span></td></tr><tr><th  >Motherboard</th><td  ><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="GA-Z270XP-SLI" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N1T2WXL/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">GA-Z270XP-SLI</a></span></td></tr><tr><th  >Power Supply</th><td  ><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="G Series 550W 80 Plus Gold" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817151119&Tpk=N82E16817151119">G Series 550W 80 Plus Gold</a></span></td></tr><tr><th  >Storage</th><td  ><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="MX300 275GB" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820156153&Tpk=N82E16820156153">MX300 275GB</a></span></td></tr><tr><th  >Storage</th><td  ><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5 inch 7200RPM" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822236339&Tpk=N82E16822236339">Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5 inch 7200RPM</a></span></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Now, let’s assemble the $1250 Best PC Build.</p><h2 id="the-case">The Case</h2><p>The $1,250 Gamer’s Delight build doesn’t invest much into case aesthetics. The Cooler Master N400 mid-tower ATX case lacks a windowed side panel. However, the chassis gives you plenty of room to work, and what it lacks in cable management and looks, it makes up for it with practical and easy-to-use features.</p><p>Remove the case from the box and remove both of the side panels. You may have to loosen the thumb screws the first time you open the chassis because the machine-fastened screws are a bit tight. Set the panels aside and remove the hardware bag attached the the frame by a tie wrap. Remove the rear fan’s attached molex adapter and find a home for it (you don’t need it anymore). Do the same with the front fan molex adapter, located behind the right side panel near the radiator mount (you can see all of this in slides 5 - 7 in the album below).</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QWY2mWjoGLryp7cyqrygZK.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xKZhw8dqoogeYNjgmrbSJZ.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GVMMBDqPfGw5RiR9WqLNAd.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JrCwDCX4GdVe8gHNwVp786.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uNGeAfi6m4fEkwNvNaBhcE.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/R99nzRawfVm6NAmmWtCoBb.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JLkRnN9uLfzzCo6GFJbHbX.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9m5QmSe4acuWYbB3XPFBBS.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Qv34xHDdsn9ncuqhVVyrR8.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gB4gz6xv9n4nWZLteuJtpJ.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Take the power supply out of its box. The semi-modular PSU makes running the power cables much easier, and you only have to worry about the 24-pin ATX power and 8-pin (4+4-pin) CPU power cables for the time being. You can leave the attached cables wrapped up as you secure the PSU to the case with the provided screws.</p><p>Untie the case’s internal wiring and locate the front panel I/O cable (see slide 2 in the album below). Reach into the motherboard box and grab the G-Connect module (slide 3 in the album below), in addition to the rear-panel I/O backplate. Match the front panel leads to the proper slots and lock them into place (slide 4). Install the rear panel backplate and make sure the edges are flush with the chassis (slide 5).</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gXha7CrvyNqQSozdMSgdKC.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iV6uUanM5VF6AFqQosUfL.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PkW52hnjphHeC2LMWfbHeM.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LnxTFKuMnhMCAEtS2SHDJQ.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/i9unNCiZZX4C3PEoGPDXoN.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qaEAkpcagx8eJHKpToDmGg.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KdAiFzrc2k8mJZpePSvcrG.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Pvua6H2jFW4VNrAHSWkuX7.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Before we can mount any hardware, we have to install the small, gold-colored motherboard standoff posts that came with the case. Be sure to use the standoff tool (small, silver) to tighten them. Attach the posts to the holes in the case’s motherboard tray marked A, B, D, E, J, and K and tighten them using the tool and a Phillips-head screwdriver. Don’t apply too much pressure, or you could bend the chassis, and make sure the posts thread properly before tightening them all the way.</p><h2 id="the-motherboard">The Motherboard</h2><p>Remove the Gigabyte GA-Z270XP-SLI motherboard from its box and set it on top of its static bag on a flat surface. Expose the CPU socket by lifting the tension arm away from the hook and lifting the clamp. Remove the Intel Core i5-7600K processor from its box and plastic case, match the notches in the chip to the socket, and gently lower the CPU into place (warning: discharge any static buildup or wear a static wristband before doing this). Remove the plastic cover on the clamp, lay it over the processor and under the motherboard’s post, and secure the tension arm to its hook. All of this is depicted in slides 2 - 7 in the album below.</p><p>Remove the motherboard’s M.2 mounting post screw (below the CPU socket) using a small Phillips-head screwdriver. Take the M.2 Crucial MX300 SSD out of its package and insert it into the M.2 slot with the chips facing up (flat side down). Hold down the SSD and secure it to the post by replacing the screw. This is depicted in slides 8 - 11 in the album below.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SXDdBDZEhiQWLKHuQbiw6.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/34BttWLUdAnYjsPoRYcF9R.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gEr2jerJHYs6i2FzcRNMU9.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/x3bBbiT3hz7gUtSuQjcucQ.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dp3HDkWPqSaidNzz5NYKhJ.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HipKddaJmaWFkWoFqWL4am.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/824dZizyqEX4qdhJEcBuSc.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TmPDtsoWHQpQrUVkok4m4W.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dcLgtdQnG5GQKhjbS4tDMB.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Q7TtKc7WuTidM4XpQBbUjF.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZARcEmXAvKhqGE7nXADRcZ.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Take the CPU cooler and its hardware out of its box. The square padding (slide 2 below) can be applied to the inner side of the backplate (this will go under the motherboard) by peeling the tape off and sticking it to the post side of the bracket (slide 3). Set the post positions to B for socket 1151 (slide 4) and line up the backplate with the motherboard holes (slide 5).</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/X6rXK3XqHHbdbjBmNLnvDF.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8CpSqfL4LJ6Tdb2p9eLy4U.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jMAriJBJBzSxjPD4Z7zHaJ.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XbAucd4f35Ug9SXus7FWgX.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fNpCMHRfJxA3iJZXecCXqg.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GqxHaEft788ZVc2AERkDND.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cE8zREHW7HXDYmbcHoVaCU.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AAaGeaXZQVaT96hPzuZMg3.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GLPMhRFtH6XqcfTUC4mm74.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/U4zUwtfdFRZJUMB34P5g4N.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9g8ASuqaLyVHncmBxMwtuX.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/38CrZJhMhgPdm5X8KPECcJ.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Feed the posts into the motherboard holes and use the male-to-female screws (male side up; see slide 8 in the album above) to secure the backplate, making sure everything is tight. Place the mounting bars across the posts number-side up, perpendicular to the memory DIMMs (top and bottom of the CPU socket) so that each bar is curved outward from the CPU socket (see slide 9, above). Use the thumb screw caps to secure the mounting bars (last slide above) to the motherboard and set it aside.</p><h2 id="component-installation">Component Installation</h2><p>Next, we’ll install the motherboard and remaining components. Begin by locating the short Philips-head screws that came with your case. Use the screws with the thicker threads to attach the motherboard to the chassis. You’ll also need the thinner screws later, so set them aside.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vbAA9bQCRNjpsijaxwTGFg.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/h9s3s4XKfo4gAASRJ5wvNR.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2u83KV8C9VVhuSdDR6GoLF.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/y4EobAfq5Jyx3m6KXGLAqk.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/utdv8MFcQ3M9GQCevhTtCk.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gvJPLtSmdRAtmdGkEojuij.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cUsPhjjLf74dS3egDcyCoS.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Lower the motherboard into the chassis and line up the mounting holes with the standoffs. One of the motherboard holes won’t have a post, but that’s okay. Use the thick-thread, fat-head screws to secure the board to the chassis (see the 3rd picture above). Untie the PSU power cables and attach the 24-pin ATX plug to the motherboard. Run the CPU cable along the edge of the board (behind the ATX cable, 5th picture above) and plug in the 8-pin connector. Tuck the cable under the edges of the motherboard to secure it (see slide 7 above).</p><p>Plug in the Audio, USB 2.0, and G-Connect (front panel I/O) to the appropriate ports on the motherboard (see slides 2 - 4 in the album below). You can tie the wires together to make them somewhat neater, but the cable management doesn’t need to be pristine (there’s no window on this case). You’ll also need some slack in the cables later on, so don’t make things too tight.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hvfqJCWv69H8TAqnQo3ppe.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qRcBb8Voppm4DaRaVBKtdR.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aWJpZQHnFJKop87U2BC8hZ.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ge6bqefK2cDiCdVyyS5U6f.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZokoKGQmCszFdbbeMfsvcm.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/R2k5kMdHqR99fkVYMCxiu.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mBSLvDU2ZiJqmDwYUyS2VM.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PYXoX9khuDEWtEght8bucP.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MZcaSFwZdjkP6nXdmRD6am.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Plug in the USB 3.0 cable (slide 6 above). Attach the rear fan cable to the motherboard using the port at the top of the motherboard, near the CPU power port (see slide 7 above). Tuck the excess cable under the fan. Run the front fan cable to the bottom of the motherboard (near the G-Connect port) and plug it into the fan port. You can leave this wire hanging.</p><h2 id="the-cooling-amp-memory">The Cooling & Memory</h2><p>Install the 16GB (2 x 8GB) kit of G.Skill DDR4-3200 using the second and fourth memory slot from the left. Be sure to line up the notches in the modules and the motherboard before applying pressure.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sxk6wrTukeoqPijgMxzTUJ.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5g5yrKREmSbW5dihFu8Zh3.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/W3ZS9ph8dkUmYbDiEKn76D.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CWBFkMGwDcc8kD8XDURTMH.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LK3vCzfqxzyqL9uLG4evN6.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cSyumhaMSHBzYudNE9eiPD.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2FLMKniKZ2ghaSyg9Ph9wE.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/R8QrMtUBKC3N4YBzYRNt3M.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fV92vLa33euZ4b9Jb6r3kh.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Next, take the CPU cooler’s included thermal paste and apply it to the processor (see slide 4 in the album above). Take the CPU heatsink and position it above the processor with the fan facing the memory. Plug in the heatsink’s fan cable to the CPU fan port on the motherboard. Lower the heatsink onto the processor and hold it in position. Most of this is depicted in the 6th slide in the album above.</p><p>Find the Phillips-head tool that came with the cooler and slide it into one of the holes at the top of the heatsink. You may have to shift the sink around to line up the springed screws with the mounting bracket, but once you do, only turn it a little bit. Switch shafts and get the other screw to thread, then tighten each only a little at a time, switching between them to keep pressure on both sides even. Once both sides are tight, tuck the CPU fan cable at the top of the chassis (as seen in the last slide in the album above).</p><h2 id="the-storage">The Storage</h2><p>There’s an endless debate concerning the orientation of 3.5” hard drives in a standard drive cage that faces front to back. Some are adamant that you must insert the HDD ports first so that the drive is flush with the bracket. Others are comfortable installing it the opposite way (with the plugs pointed towards the rear of the chassis), with the drive protruding out of the bay a few inches. This method allows for easy access to the power and data ports, but it can be problematic depending on the build’s other hardware, such as an oversized GPU.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aNnbvmD5fHaCEg5VEtkXWn.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MpDqGw8zsJpGfQi9zG3LUW.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vU2iNp6CpmXeup3MNHWZW6.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YvHnBbdoeQNdgM83GB5WHH.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mTEkemjmiyThYsaXuvRRsX.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dr6JjJPorRYUiARPA66pne.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UyUVDTYtSgPPGVytFvvtBN.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/d3w9T97tVVZ4YQQPFzbT5k.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DDiersjsV4qRn6bkfvhXwh.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>For this system, we decided to go with the latter method. Take the 1TB Western Digital 7,200RPM HDD out of its packaging and slide it into one of the lower bays with the ports exposed in the chassis (not behind the front panel), as seen in slide 2 above. Be sure to place it low if you go with this method, because the graphics card will not fit if you place the HDD near the PCIe slots. Use the case’s mounting brackets to secure the HDD to the chassis on both sides (left and right). You could essentially go either way, but we concluded that putting the HDD in with the ports exposed would make it easier for first-time builders to run the necessary cabling to the drive.</p><p>Take the modular SATA power cable out of the PSU box, and grab a SATA data cable out of the motherboard box. Attach the SATA power cable to one of the PSU’s 6-pin ports and run the wiring directly to the drive cage. Plug in the power, and then plug in the SATA data cable to the HDD. Run the data cable to the motherboard and plug it into the lowest SATA port (so it doesn’t interfere with the M.2 SATA SSD in the SATA Express connector). Tuck the excess SATA power behind the drive cage.</p><h2 id="the-graphics-card">The Graphics Card</h2><p>Take a PCIe power cable out of the power supply package and plug in the 8-pin connector to the PSU (see slide 2 below). Run the wire up along the existing cables and tie it in with the bunch. Leave the PCIe plugs resting in the space above the HDD cage.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8eiSnrcRFakf97Hjd99JR4.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uUEohyA2bpTYk3vFo2z9zi.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ng7vHAArHvG8K2484vJNdA.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/n7E7hDT4EreXWnsNUKfNua.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/N4dibcS4drnj6dTbugyrcK.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QCAnExg9oCnMV3DTYQ7DRF.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/huCriLuMKXxugbtethTpSi.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yEShxkkuXnAjYm3zkymUa7.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UzjRNXkYeRBZXgnvuggMca.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XjPxsCJ6tRhX4iqVDrHgn5.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/f8UMg4NX3hwYKz7NpDYRmB.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Remove the Asus GTX 1070 Strix graphics card from its box. Remove the plastic covers on the GPU and set it aside. Take out the case’s PCIe slot plates (the second and third one down from the rear motherboard I/O panel) by inserting a Phillips screwdriver and wrenching the panel back and forth until it becomes loose enough to finish detaching it with your hands. Be careful, they can be sharp.</p><p>The goal is to make the oversized GPU fit comfortably, and the end location of the cables is not a primary concern, so long as they aren’t falling into the chassis or graphics card fans. Lower the graphics card into the PCIe x16 slot closest to the CPU, making sure to move any previously run cables out of the way. Press down until you hear the PCIe clip snap into place, and secure the GPU to the chassis using two thick-threaded screws from the case hardware bag (slide 9 above). Connect the PCIe power plugs to the GPU (slide 10 above).</p><h2 id="finishing-touches">Finishing Touches</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qbW8sUSVBV5d6PFxr8hXVg.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CMiE4wfG8aeu2maaqMaH6n.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BAxjqZ8bcTZR2JBTZLX7mm.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/W6uXSXbcBPMaZeGp637xjE.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>With all of the components installed, make sure that the cables are plugged in properly and tucked away so that they avoid the oversized GPU. This can be challenging, and it may require you to adjust your cable management. Once everything is situated, replace the side panels and use the thumb screws to secure them in place.</p><p>Find a well-ventilated spot to plug in the power cord, display, and peripherals. Turn on your new $1,250 gaming PC (the Best $1,250 PC Build).</p><p>Make sure you update the BIOS and get all the latest drivers from Gigabyte’s website. This will ensure that you have the latest compatibility and performance updates.</p><p>To update the BIOS, use a different computer to download and unzip the BIOS file and place it on the root directory of a thumb drive. Plug the thumb drive into the new build and boot the machine. Press the End key to access Q-Flash, Gigabyte’s BIOS update and backup utility. Click update, select the thumb drive where the BIOS is located, and run the unzipped BIOS file.</p><p>The Gigabyte GA-Z270XP SLI motherboard features the same easy overclocking functionality as the $750 Best PC Build’s motherboard (the GA-Z270P-D3), and that’s by far the easiest way to get a worry free and stable overclock.</p><p>Enter the BIOS by pressing the Delete key at boot and access the Advanced Frequency Settings in the M.I.T. tab of the BIOS. Click on CPU Upgrade. A list of processor models and target frequencies will appear. The highest possible preset clock rate for the Core i5-7600K is an all-core 4.6GHz, and the Cryorig H5 cooler keeps the temperatures in check. Finish up by turning on the XMP memory profile in the same Advanced Frequency Settings menu (select Profile 1) and press F10 to save and exit the BIOS.</p><h2 id="benchmark-results">Benchmark Results</h2><p>The Intel Core i5-7600K is overclocked to an all-core frequency of 4.6GHz, and the 16GB (2 x 8GB) G.Skill DDR4-3200 memory features a CAS latency of 16-18-18-38. The Asus GeForce GTX 1070 Strix 8GB graphics card is the higher-clocked version of the Strix GTX 1070 cards, with a base clock of 1632 MHz and 1657 MHz in Gaming and OC mode, respectively, with boost frequencies of 1860 MHz and 1835 MHz in Gaming and OC mode, respectively. We left the GPU on its default Gaming mode for our benchmark runs.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mVrJxfzw7AdxsrVRATvtVc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CiBECxurc9KPomnZz2iTA5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qqxhjRAhvhGwGbsqYbhLfk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NPcvnMZh8CdpxutWqUxD7E.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GmnQeLURifuKTyzgUhqydA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ur5BN4tJ4KUVL3RrBtTkin.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The $1,250 Gamer's Delight performs admirably in the productivity and synthetic benchmarks. The overclocked Core i5 processor and factory overclocked GeForce GTX 1070 give it impressive marks in the Fire Strke and even Fire Strike Extreme tests, with strong Physics scores and playable framerates. This drops off at 4K (Fire Strike Ultra), where the system starts to noticeably struggle. However, the Gamer's Delight still puts up a reputable score, especially in this budget range.</p><p>The PCMark 8, Storage, and Sandra Memory Bandwidth tests reveals that the Gamer's Delight has some moderate productivity chops, too. The 16GB kit of G.Skill DDR4-3200 gives the system an above-average memory capacity and total peak bandwidth, and the higher-clocked RAM helps improve the PCMark 8 application benchmark results. Looking at the Cinebench results tells a similar story, with scores that liken the Gamer's Delight to an excellent budget Photoshop and Video Editing rig.</p><p>The 275GB Crucial MX300 SATA M.2 SSD also contributes to the impressive PCMark 8 scores and has adequate capacity to host your OS and a handful of larger applications. Although it may not be the best use of an M.2 slot (an inexpensive NVMe M.2 SSD would improve the sequential performance significantly), it provides a huge performance boost compared to systems with traditional HDDs (see our $500 and $750 Best PC Builds). The extra 1TB HDD provides plenty of space if you run out of room on your primary SSD volume.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DEovziiSfcvXwS6rffMs3b.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GmceSu6ao2ampHYyC9XpuH.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/D3BChaECKCVRBMCQXvTWhW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZqqkdCXSPFrWJMffAiwHLJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QbhoCzNNfbRB8NAxCsTGEa.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Gamer's Delight lives up to its namesake in the gaming benchmarks, providing excellent framerates at 1920 x 1080 and 2560 x 1440 using the same high settings we use in our full desktop review suite. You can even achieve playable framerates at 4K with <em>Bioshock Infinite</em> and <em>DiRT Rall</em>y<em>. </em>However, games like <em>GTAV</em>, <em>Metro: Last Light Redux</em>, and <em>Rise of the Tomb Raider</em> bring the Gamer's Delight to its knees at 3840 x 2160. Lower detail settings will get you in the ballpark of playable framerates at that resolution, but its clear that our $1,250 Best PC Build is best suited for ultimate 1080p and high-quality QHD gaming.</p><h2 id="final-analysis-4">Final Analysis</h2><p>A $1,250 budget is considered moderate in the PC enthusiast world, but it’s a sweet spot for enthusiast-level performance throughout the entire platform. Although it’s possible to cram a Core i5 and GTX 1070 into a less expensive build (see our $1,000 Best PC Build on the previous page), other components would have to take a backseat at that price. However, $1,250 can get you a gratuitous 16GB of memory, a speedy SSD and a 1TB hard drive, and a 550W modular power supply.</p><p>There’s absolutely nothing about the primary components (CPU, motherboard, memory, graphics) that we would change. The motherboard is a great enthusiast-level entry point, with plenty of features and expansion options, and easy-to-use BIOS and overclocking utilities. The memory is speedy and adequate for any AAA game title coming down the pipeline, and the factory-overclocked Asus GTX 1070 Strix graphics card dominates games at their highest settings. It’s a bit oversized, but you’ll be hard pressed to find a cheaper GPU with three fans, a sweet backplate, and clock rates this high out of the box.</p><p>However, AMD's Ryzen offers some alternatives here as well. The Ryzen 5 1600X is the pricing equivalent of the i5-7600K. Alternatively, you could find a B350 motherboard much cheaper (there's a Gigabyte board for $25 less than the one used in this build), and get the Ryzen 5 1600 and save yourself about $30 on the CPU.</p><p>We aren’t thrilled to see yet another build without a windowed side panel, especially since aesthetics can easily start to be a priority at this price point, but we’re satisfied that the GPU fits and the components were easy to install. If you’re at the point in your PC-building adventures where you can start taking cable management and aesthetics to the next level, a case with a windowed side panel and better built-in cable management would be a worthwhile upgrade.</p><p>The Crucial MX300 M.2 SSD is a bit of a curveball. We’re fond of the M.2 form factor, but there aren’t any performance advantages to getting this particular SSD, because it runs with SATA (6Gb/s) protocols. You could just as easily save a few dollars and get a 2.5” SATA SSD (there’s even a tray in the case you could mount it in), but if you want to take full advantage of the capabilities of the M.2 interface, an entry-level NVMe SSD would be a worthwhile stretch of the budget.</p><p>The 550W Seasonic power supply is adequate for the components, and the semi-modular cables make management easy and clean. However, the modularity is almost a waste with this chassis because of the lack of internal cable management and a windowed panel. You may be able to afford some extra juice in the PSU (or just save a few bucks) if you find a model without modular cables, but finding 80 PLUS Gold certification at that price isn’t an easy task.</p><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="f8a30500-c2df-44e3-8b5d-839546d076af" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Gamer's Delight" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-pc-builds,4390.html#p6" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:393px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:123.41%;"><img id="hLZWVDeUSV7KavwZQdWgJU" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hLZWVDeUSV7KavwZQdWgJU.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hLZWVDeUSV7KavwZQdWgJU.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="393" height="485" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Gamer's Delight<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-pc-builds,4390.html#p6" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="f8a30500-c2df-44e3-8b5d-839546d076af" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Gamer's Delight" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-pc-builds,4390.html">Best PC Builds</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-to-build-a-pc,5867.html">How To Build A PC</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/builds">All PC Builds Content</a></strong></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ AMD Ryzen 5 1600 CPU Review ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-1600-cpu,5073.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Ryzen 5 1600 brings six cores and twelve threads to the lowest price point in the desktop market, an example of the inherent value of its unlocked multipliers. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">vnXbU4tEkYdk4h9uqV42BZ</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FNGTX5fC6xYdNAaHGA9g7C-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2017 13:00:01 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:26:23 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ palcorn@outlook.com (Paul Alcorn) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Paul Alcorn ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RZRmFeQfPy3etHjBQitbGW.jpeg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;As a teenager, Paul scraped up enough money to buy a 486-powered PC with a turbo button (yes, a turbo button). Back when floppies were still popular he was already chasing after the fastest spinners for his personal computer, which led him down the long and winding storage road, covering enterprise storage. His current focus is on consumer processors, though he still keeps a close eye on the latest storage news. In his spare time, you’ll find Paul hanging out with his kids or indulging his love of the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                <cf:isSponsored>false</cf:isSponsored>
                <cf:hasAffiliateLinks>false</cf:hasAffiliateLinks>
                <cf:isPaid>false</cf:isPaid>
                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FNGTX5fC6xYdNAaHGA9g7C-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FNGTX5fC6xYdNAaHGA9g7C-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="introduction-3">Introduction</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:66.62%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ks8HgNN2totJYPPjDWm9B7.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ks8HgNN2totJYPPjDWm9B7.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="1006" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ks8HgNN2totJYPPjDWm9B7.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>AMD's Ryzen line-up shook up the CPU market with more cores and threads at lower price points than competing Intel processors. But the series' universally unlocked ratio multipliers are the real key to extracting maximum value from Ryzen.</p><p>The Ryzen 7 family redefined what an 8C/16T CPU cost, and the Ryzen 5s do the same in their segment with a powerful duo of affordable 6C/12T options. AMD's Ryzen 5 series also includes the 4C/8T 1500X and 1400, but we think AMD's $220 Ryzen 5 1600 is much more interesting.</p><p>Like its $250 1600X counterpart, the Ryzen 5 1600 features six cores and 12 threads. AMD bins the 1600X as a 95W part, while the 1600 falls into the 65W TDP range. As expected, the 1600's lower TDP boils down to reduced voltages, imposing lower stock frequencies and thermal output. The Ryzen 5 1600 features a 3.2 GHz base clock rate compared to the "X" model's 3.6 GHz, and it also incurs a similar 400 MHz deficit to the dual-core Precision Boost frequency.</p><p>Ryzen 5 1600 falls neatly into the $40 price gap between Intel's Core i5-7500 and -7600K. Both competitors are quad-core models lacking the benefit of Hyper-Threading. That should make for a lopsided battle favoring AMD in heavily-threaded workloads, such as content creation and rendering. Ryzen processors also provide acceptable performance in lightly-threaded workloads. The Intel CPUs do come with on-die graphics for those who need it, while AMD dedicates all of Ryzen's transistors to host processing. Discrete GPUs are a must-have for enthusiasts anyway, so it makes sense to go the route that AMD chose.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-zen-cpu-microarchitecture,32540.html">Everything Zen: AMD Presents New Microarchitecture At HotChips</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-kaby-lake-core-i7-7700k-i7-7700-i5-7600k-i5-7600,4870.html">Intel Kaby Lake Core i7-7700K, i7-7700, i5-7600K, i5-7600 Review</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i7-broadwell-e-6950x-6900k-6850k-6800k,4587.html">Broadwell-E: Intel Core i7-6950X, 6900K, 6850K & 6800K Review</a></strong></p><p>AMD indicates that its non-X models do not feature XFR (eXtended Frequency Range) functionality, which allows the CPU to dynamically adjust its clock rate (for two cores) above the Precision Boost rating based on available thermal headroom. During a single-core Cinebench test, we recorded frequencies that regularly jumped to 3.7 GHz on two cores, so it appears the Ryzen 5 1600 also features XFR. Many of the architecture's other features remain unchanged, including its spacious 16MB of L3 cache, SenseMI suite, and unlocked multiplier.</p><p>Intel's carefully segmented stack, which relies on locked multipliers to force specific performance profiles, serves as a liability in the face of AMD's unlocked approach. As we've seen from other Ryzen models, the non-X SKUs tend to hit their overclocking ceilings at lower frequencies and offer less consistent memory overclocking. But your access to the platform's many knobs and dials is the same, no matter which Ryzen CPU you purchase. A bit of tuning often pulls the non-X models into range of their more expensive counterparts, also helping close the gap with Intel's mid-range Core CPUs in lightly-threaded apps.</p><p>Much like Intel's K-series CPUs, AMD's X models don't come bundled with thermal solutions. So, their additional frequency headroom is accompanied by a higher platform cost. AMD sweetens the Ryzen 5 1600's value proposition by giving you its 95W Wraith Spire cooler. The 1600, like all other Ryzen chips, drops into Socket AM4. Combining the budget-minded processor with an affordable B350-based motherboard results in a capable 6C/12T rig with plenty of horsepower in reserve for any number of enthusiast workloads.</p><p>A lot has been written about Ryzen's challenges in some games, but improved memory support and a trickle of software patches have addressed the most glaring issues. The Ryzen processors are good enough for gaming. But the question is whether they offer enough performance to unseat Intel's incumbents in the important price-to-performance ratio comparison. Let's see if the 1600 has what it takes to usurp Core i5.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPU Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="overclocking-amp-test-setup-2">Overclocking & Test Setup </h2><h2 id="overclocking-4">Overclocking</h2><p>The Ryzen 5 1600 is based on the same die as Ryzen 5 1600X, albeit with a lower 65W TDP. So, we expect a fairly similar overclocking experience.</p><p>We dialed in a Prime95-stable 3.9 GHz using a 1.425 vCore setting and 1.2V CPU NB voltage (CPU Loadline Calibration set to Auto). We've seen others achieve 4 GHz overclocks with lower voltages, so it's possible that we have a lower-quality sample. We recorded 84°C (per AIDA) with Noctua's NH-U12S SE-AM4 cooler during extended stress tests.</p><p>Our vCore voltage is higher than AMD's recommended limit of 1.35V for long-term overclocks. AMD notes that Ryzen processors can withstand more than 1.45V, though a setting that high may have an impact on longevity. Of course, the warranty doesn't cover damage from overclocking of any sort, so proceed at your own risk.</p><p>We were able to use our G.Skilll FlareX DDR4 memory kit at 2999 MT/s with relaxed 16-16-16-34 timings, but were unable to achieve 3200 MT/s in tandem with our 3.9 GHz overclock. Notably, we ran the Ryzen 5 1600X with the same kit at 3200 MT/s and 14-14-14-34 timings on the same motherboard. As we've seen with other non-X models (and the Ryzen 5 1500X), it's possible that the memory overclocking disparity is attributable to AMD's IMC (Integrated Memory Controller).</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  ><strong>Ryzen Memory Support</strong></th><th  ><strong>MT/s</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Dual-Channel/Dual-Rank/Four-DIMM</strong></td><td  >1866</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Dual-Channel/Single-Rank/Four-DIMM</strong></td><td  >2133</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Dual-Channel/Dual-Rank/Two-DIMM</strong></td><td  >2400</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Dual-Channel/Single-Rank/Two-DIMM</strong></td><td  >2677</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>After experimenting with the recently-exposed ProcODT (on-die termination signal) motherboard firmware setting, we found that it has a profound impact on memory overclocking and compatibility. The 40- to 60-ohm range allows us to use various memory kits with Ryzen processors that were previously unusable.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:14.83%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6MaFtnN7S6oUpi2E2vDK3i.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6MaFtnN7S6oUpi2E2vDK3i.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="224" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6MaFtnN7S6oUpi2E2vDK3i.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>AMD recently released a <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-agesa-firmware-update-motherboard,34525.html">new v1.0.0.6 AGESA update</a>. Motherboard vendors build firmware upon the AGESA bedrock, so improvements to the underlying code allow manufacturers to provide more options through their own BIOS builds. The latest version exposes 26 more settings that should improve memory overclocking, such as allowing either 1T or 2T command rates (previously limited to 1T) and an expanded range of multipliers that allow 4000 MT/s without BCLK overclocking. We will revisit the 1600's memory overclockability when the final firmware revisions become available.</p><h2 id="comparison-processors">Comparison Processors</h2>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="5cef49f9-78c4-4943-ad26-8e79658dbaeb">            <a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117731" data-model-name="Core i5-7400" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:74.96%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Yg7442ZpKkYAjKb4Luv7oH.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Intel Core i5-7400</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="f3c96b35-75e7-4c86-a59b-f0df8bcf63d8">            <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MZZJ1P0/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Core i5-7500" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:111.96%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tUbo2DMefL9UjARztGUwNT.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Intel Core i5-7500</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="19805f86-2f6c-4564-bdb8-9d1985c60be2">            <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MRRPPQS/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Core i5-7600K" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:74.96%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/N484dyTf28AuUqfA3EW5g3.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Intel Core i5-7600K</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><h2 id="test-setup-6">Test Setup</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:55.50%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VxjiGwMW8Q2Ra2jz2MYmQW.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VxjiGwMW8Q2Ra2jz2MYmQW.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="838" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VxjiGwMW8Q2Ra2jz2MYmQW.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We conducted gaming testing with the MSI B350 Tomahawk. To streamline our workflow, we employed Asus' B350-Plus for application testing. The Ryzen gaming story has changed quickly since the launch as a string of motherboard firmware and chipset drivers, along with game updates, have come to fruition. As such, we retested all processors with updated firmware and drivers.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  colspan="2"><strong>Test Systems and Measurement Setups</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Systems</strong></td><td  ><span>AMD</span>Ryzen 5 1600, 1600X, 1500XMSI B350 Tomahawk (games)Asus B350-Plus (applications)2x G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @2666 (stock), 2933 (1600 and 1500X) and 3200 MT/s (1600X)<span>Intel</span>Intel Core i5-7600K, i7-7500MSI Z270 Gaming M72x G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @2400 and 3200 MT/s<span>All</span>EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FE1TB Samsung PM863SilverStone ST1500, 1500WWindows 10 Creators Update Version 1703</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cooling</strong></td><td  >Noctua NH-U12S SE-AM4Arctic MX-4</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPU Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="vrmark-amp-3d-mark">VRMark & 3D Mark </h2><h2 id="vrmark">VRMark</h2><p>Futuremark's new VRMark test lets you gauge your system's suitability for use with the HTC Vive or Oculus Rift, even if you don't currently own an HMD. VRMark features both HMD and Desktop modes. Desktop mode works both with and without an HMD attached. If you do have one connected, software caps the frame rate at the HMD's refresh rate (90Hz for both the Vive and Rift), and Futuremark doesn't recommend wearing the HMD during the test. We conducted our tests in Desktop mode on a standard monitor, outputting the same resolution and view (for each eye) as an HMD, but without the 90 FPS cap.</p><p>The Orange Room test is based on the suggested system requirements for current-generation HTC Vive and Oculus Rift HMDs. Futuremark defines a passing score as anything above 109 FPS (for both tests), so all of these processors paired with a GeForce GTX 1080 are suitable for modern VR experiences.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.00%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KVY8UzrA4fULVAYzJUbBAC.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KVY8UzrA4fULVAYzJUbBAC.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="834" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KVY8UzrA4fULVAYzJUbBAC.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>An overclocked Ryzen 5 1600X outpaces Intel's stock Core i5-7600K, but the overclocked Ryzen 5 1600 lags behind slightly. The Ryzen 5 1600 outpaces its four-core 1500X counterpart, while the Core i5-7500 bests the stock 1500X and 1600.</p><p>The Blue Room metric performs a grueling 5K resolution benchmark that mimics the expected performance requirements for future VR devices. It's clear that we're butting up against a graphics bottleneck during the test.</p><h2 id="3dmark-2">3DMark</h2><p>3DMark's DX11 physics and DX12 CPU tests quantify the amount of processing power available to a game engine.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KCrxdvhziF3WwvKDGFoatM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kdQS8Ur8mCGJ3fXhMXKeMk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8UoH2gn2pHqJwmKDirRzBH.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The stock and overclocked Ryzen 5 1600X configurations unleash beastly performance during the DX12 physics workload. The 1600 also posts strong results that either beat or challenge the overclocked Core i5-7600K.</p><p>AMD's Ryzen processors win the DX11 physics tests. The Intel CPUs fare better during the 3DMark API tests, but Ryzen naturally provides strong threaded DX12 draw call performance.</p><p>As we've come to expect, Intel processors perform well in single-threaded DX11 metrics. Even AMD's overclocked CPUs can't match them there. Strong per-clock performance helps explain Intel's advantage in lightly-threaded benchmarks where Ryzen's core count advantage is neutralized.</p><p>Once again, even after Futuremark's recent API test update, we note a reduction in multi-threaded DX11 draw call performance for the overclocked six-core Ryzen processors compared to their stock configurations.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPU Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="aots-escalation-amp-battlefield-1">AotS: Escalation & Battlefield 1</h2><h2 id="ashes-of-the-singularity-escalation-8">Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</h2><p><em>Ashes of the Singularity</em> was one of the first games to receive a Ryzen-specific patch, so it illustrates what can happen when a developer spends time optimizing for the Zen architecture's intricacies. We recorded <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-game-optimization-aots-escalation,34021.html">impressive performance boosts</a> after the update.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/N2GZYciYp5peawwWoabF6Z.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oVZs3WLwfTxYFsMsSffeff.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/n6okzCYrVPQCghHrGXmSp7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/A5AetDN3iaSvsZj2R8Ph5M.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vZkqRzqkvpCi6QJAR9PBrE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/effAjWkP54uGkrs6a5ZYSc.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</em> scales exceedingly well with more cores/threads, rewarding the six-core Ryzen processors in both stock and overclocked configurations. Intel's Core i5-7600K has much more overclocking headroom, however, allowing it to take the pole position. In its stock configuration, the -7600K falls into the same range as the other four-core processors.</p><p>Notably, AMD's four-core Ryzen 5 1500X bests the Intel Core i5-7500, largely due to improved utilization, which is enabled by its SMT implementation.</p><p>The stock Ryzen 5 1600 experiences the most apparent frame time outliers during the test, but a bit of overclocking provides a drastic improvement.</p><h2 id="battlefield-1-dx12">Battlefield 1 DX12</h2><p>We dialed<em><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Battlefield 1</em><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>up to the Ultra preset and took an armor-laden stroll across the O La Vittoria landscape.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/L4dgg5ZDdXsHUXn2PR2bei.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XFPDsQEsRgE9METuZMtmCU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iatJBjMnusExEGj8hoFH3K.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LTU8LTBWLvQBeeA58NCZPS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tbzK4aNpV5kx5pEMCh9MGK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zYEAxPjsnTgSCR8uLr6wfe.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Ryzen 5 1600 bests a four-core 1500X, but trails the rest of the field. Overclocking helps propel it to similar performance as the overclocked Ryzen 5 1600X.</p><h2 id="battlefield-1-dx11-5">Battlefield 1 DX11</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tSQCvavmyZpKWFTirMKMeQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UFPSrBz3o8Gaw34vrox7i7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DwGEndRNMiM8qgw33hAH8.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HDFP5mmS4GhT6jTuisRAoj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MXdsbHs4RKxE8S9dJvgcs8.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2gPdgjLageKkf6Snz9q66f.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>In <em>Battlefield 1</em>, under the DX11 API, Ryzen processors tend to score better relative to Intel's Core chips. Presenting benchmark results using different settings helps illustrate how even one game can paint different pictures of performance, depending on how it's set up.</p><p>The stock Ryzen 5 1600 beats Intel's Core i5-7500, and overclocking widens the gap. We notice a much larger delta between the overclocked Ryzen 5 1600 and 1600X (3.25%) in this test. Then again, there is a 100 MHz difference in clock rate between the two processors (2.5%). The 1600X's 3200 MT/s memory data rate is also higher than the 1600's 2966 MT/s, and given the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-1600x-cpu-review,5014-2.html">increased performance we find with faster memory</a>, that likely contributes to the disparity. AMD's forthcoming AGESA update might improve memory overclocking with the Ryzen 5 1600, which would help get it closer to the 1600X.</p><p>Those big blue spikes in our frame time over run chart belong to the Ryzen 5 1500X. Not good.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPU Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="civilization-vi-amp-dues-ex-mankind-divided">Civilization VI & Dues Ex: Mankind Divided</h2><h2 id="civilization-vi-ai-test-6">Civilization VI AI Test</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.00%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pijZWDeHs5r6pCHUk5XzXL.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pijZWDeHs5r6pCHUk5XzXL.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="834" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pijZWDeHs5r6pCHUk5XzXL.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p><em>Civilization VI's </em>demanding AI test isolates host processor performance, and historically responds better to high clock rates and IPC throughput than more cores.</p><p>Not surprisingly, then, Intel's Core i5-7600K leads in both its stock and overclocked configurations.</p><p>The overclocked Ryzen 5 1600 nearly matches the more expensive 1600X. However, AMD's 1500X beats the 1600 in a stock configuration due to its higher base and boost clock rates.</p><h2 id="civilization-vi-graphics-test-6">Civilization VI Graphics Test</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pkAW8iBBWyN4haA7iUoKdF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cdt7No8JK54xsEmvH9rx3R.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rqvH4yjVsWFfjeAXg3YL49.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XhzKn7rs86n67h9AK7teHj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JgBbrstTjmz6f7GWqQbUX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qMq6nws2Ckktht6QwfptQA.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The stock Ryzen 5 1600 encounters some frame time turbulence during the graphics test, but once again, tuning helps smooth out the wrinkles.</p><p>Intel's Core i5-7500 falls to the bottom of the group, while its stock Core i5-7600K also struggles. Interestingly, the latter Core i5 still achieves a notably higher minimum frame rate than the stock 1500X and 1600. </p><h2 id="deus-ex-mankind-divided">Deus Ex: Mankind Divided</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/k4aFgRzWJKSPRkwk49W8W9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gQ35n4AeUTep4Vy5MHGLY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cavfw4jjSFGZYvEcpE3iXL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zKhUNZDpSLM84udokuWgX7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WMufYh5T52vEFQYyq2Rjme.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4Cfn6gXhR9JMEcMKoniddX.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Deus Ex</em> continues to favor AMD's Ryzen processors, while the Intel CPUs hit a ceiling of some sort around 58 FPS. The average FPS chart reflects this dichotomy.</p><p>The game also doesn't respond well to overclocked Ryzen processors. Our 1600X and 1600 samples yield the same average FPS and frame time measurements in stock and overclocked configurations.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPU Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-amp-hitman">Grand Theft Auto V & Hitman </h2><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-12">Grand Theft Auto V</h2><p>We measure performance during<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><em>Grand Theft Auto V</em>'s F-16 flight sequence with the built-in benchmark.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/abrsM6DRcsYvGfoa3ap35X.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yRCyRWqbSiWTB4VczibwZ5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uR9nuTcSRdFg6t6mgpxVoX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NWMFoFotFkdSFE9AhrvrgJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oRULGebGYhPYxho6Kfqkme.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tpotge5R34ib4hiSDuuEAD.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Intel's overclocked Core i5-7600K enjoys an undisputed lead over the other processors. Even the stock -7600K beats the rest of our field.</p><p>The overclocked Ryzen 5 1600X and 1600 land one after the other.</p><p>In spite of the overclocked Core i5's commanding win, it continues demonstrating the same disturbing frame time outlier we've seen previously. Curiously, it isn't affected if we leave its stock clock rate alone.</p><h2 id="hitman-4">Hitman</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/86ukV4cpzoHUJSDS4JtU2Y.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iUPCruUguvHyEsRfro3cEL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TyE6JgvX4kKhghvKQfU2Ej.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Wh3ns7PopyRcpRuVqdYwUY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mcoifvPG3MCjAThSxdQ5yB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TXQgooFmcPAXfgRMKJdMSn.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The overclocked Ryzen 5 1600 falls in line beneath the 1600X by nearly the same percentage observed in previous tests. The Core i5-7500 settles in at the bottom of our chart, and Intel's stock Core i5-7600K lands under both six-core Ryzen chips. Overclocking propels the unlocked Kaby Lake-based CPU into a compelling lead, though.</p><p>Separately, the stock Intel processors serve up higher minimum frame rates than AMD's stock Ryzen processors.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPU Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="shadow-of-mordor-amp-project-cars">Shadow of Mordor & Project CARS</h2><h2 id="middle-earth-shadow-of-mordor-5">Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HrxKJz6BihgYk2LNecnKBa.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ig4zwPvmutbfdZfA8bty2P.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ak3eoCTk67hviu9gSphQJe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uPsN59NaKykqDJaUgCTnBP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z3p3sq9hrMyqkUFDCaVyRT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Hs75jqdzgGGuA9ZCLdntoZ.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The value of an unlocked multiplier becomes clear during this benchmark. AMD's stock Ryzen processors land at the bottom of our chart. However, overclocking them adds enough performance to challenge Intel's Core CPUs.</p><p>As expected, the Core i5-7600K leads in this older game. But the overclocked Ryzen 5 1600X isn't far behind. A tuned Ryzen 5 1600 lags behind the 1600X by a mere 1.2 FPS on average. We suspect there'd be little difference between them at 4 GHz, in the event your sample is more flexible than ours. The overclocked quad-core 1500X offers nearly the same performance level, too. A stock Ryzen 5 1500X beats the 1600 during this lightly-threaded benchmark by virtue of its 200 MHz XFR advantage.</p><p>At the end of the day, all of these processors facilitate a smooth experience in <em>Middle-earth</em>, and their performance is quite similar.</p><h2 id="project-cars-5">Project CARS</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ztwUi5VSZCaX4pBKwNsUUD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/33pqKnubn9ckNiyGoWd9wR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KUyTrVV3hKwrefnP6ksAsb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CPtjKZ595PbF4gMiLsXg23.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vjTFyN8kJJRS5bRxPX9EBY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cwe6Qwq2594b3Qc2rfPmRC.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Project CARS</em> responds most readily to high clock rates and IPC throughput. The overclocked Core i5-7600K offers the highest average FPS, but a few frame time outliers crop up during the benchmark. Intel's Core i5-7500 also experiences a few spikes that show up on our chart.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPU Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="rise-of-the-tomb-raider-amp-the-division">Rise of the Tomb Raider & The Division</h2><h2 id="rise-of-the-tomb-raider-6">Rise of the Tomb Raider</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SvG9ZirLNw9N2y4AoYQzWK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FSxqRHskJmqdvXwUjFoWfg.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kxoE8gahRRyNiG7eV2Bk2Z.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/giQK9kgtZGubvMtpEKSTaQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eErhhAc4YoR3bX3S9HP32M.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V6zr7vXbQnkvMrLRazUumS.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Ryzen processors endure a massive performance deficit under <em>Rise of the Tomb Raider</em> and DX12, so we're switching to DX11 to see how the picture changes.</p><p>Intel's processors still enjoy a healthy lead, despite our different API settings. <em>Rise of the Tomb Raider</em> could be a good candidate for a Ryzen-optimized patch. Alternately, if Nvidia's graphics driver is negatively affecting performance under DX12, pairing Ryzen with a capable AMD graphics card (Radeon RX Vega, anyone?) could be what equalizes performance between CPU vendors.</p><h2 id="tom-clancy-39-s-the-division">Tom Clancy's The Division</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RunxL75cys2ACRk5rtXNhG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VHGgwGojYB7UtExugRfjjM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tT8rnJ8bdz8PJtWAmQwtQ6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8PhXfxEma5njs5t5d7dKjg.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2ThqntmVw5disTshJ3wphC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fWMkNdzfjmrMPmYxEy4bP8.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Tom Clancy's The Division </em>is fairly graphics-bound, so, outside of minimum frame rates, it doesn't show much variation between host processors. As we've noted in the past, the Ryzen 5 1500X suffers a distressing drop in performance during the opening section of the scene, which is visible as severe stuttering.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPU Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="application-benchmarks">Application Benchmarks </h2><h2 id="microsoft-excel-2016-word-excel-amp-powerpoint">Microsoft Excel 2016 - Word, Excel & PowerPoint</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZQFPmNq9GhhY8AthdSVNqZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ktrszM367DUsx4DnD6pHHD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nGLM9hLCmXR2tAzZnow7YL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EkDU4VFQxFvzjVyTHdLWse.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Benchmarking Microsoft Office isn't particularly exciting, but it is representative of software many of us use on a daily basis. The Ryzen processors gain a bit of steam during the PowerPoint workload, but Intel's processors enjoy a lead through most of the tests.</p><p>Notably, the overclocked Ryzen 5 1600 and 1600X offer almost identical performance. In either case, aside from the tuned Core i5-7600K, the difference between the various processors is relatively small.</p><h2 id="adobe-creative-cloud-2">Adobe Creative Cloud</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/die6dX7Z53qzYiRjvVe9MX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DdfuNWP5Ls83YobC98tG9m.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PMQjSMpBw3VwrZxhjtSxNA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MChd3M4bCYgUMPk6AmAjMo.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The same trends emerge throughout the Adobe suite, as Intel's Core i5-7600K largely enjoys a lead due to its per-clock performance advantage.</p><p>AMD's overclocked Ryzen 1600X and 1600 achieve a higher cumulative score than the Core i5-7500, and the -7400 falls to the bottom of the chart.  </p><h2 id="rendering-2">Rendering</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ky2tZAE5YohGeBZVVw5ziY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/U4scERgToYNdRsoZZuaqYB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Hm4RcZFuPf6eD9vYccdbZd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zWBo6XgEkyH6Qz2EVbmfhQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ppictUSo6hn45ibph4S3Qi.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/skZ7j38p4myiADRVqzVWWA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/L86VzBwbgp8HD5HbLPjz9M.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nEbVD3D5muhPwX9TU6igxY.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The six-core Ryzen processors shine during heavily-threaded workloads. Ryzen 5 1600X and 1600 establish convincing leads through our suite of rendering tests, while the overclocked Core i5-7600K jostles for position with Ryzen 5 1500X during a few benchmarks.</p><p>The Core i5-7600K, in both stock and overclocked configurations, enjoys a healthy lead in the single-core rendering tests. The tweaked Ryzen CPUs trade blows with the Core i5-7500 in those same metrics, and beat the -7400 during the single-core POV-Ray and Cinebench tests.</p><h2 id="web-browser-2">Web Browser</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nh4xoVNNEAdf8Ty266xWvi.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WguWsRsQMBq7pyNRix6DsH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iK8BuCLY5q6wK8i4itAewA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ya29mo6XFuEhKs2mxaQeEL.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>During the Kraken Javascript benchmark, Intel's Core i5-7600K leads in its stock and overclocked configurations. But the overclocked Ryzen processors make short work of Intel's multiplier-locked models. Ryzen 5 1500X can't quite keep up with Core i5-7500 during the MotionMark browser benchmark, but the overclocked Ryzen 5 1600 and 1600X both provide a benefit over the locked -7500 and -7400.</p><p>SiSoftware's cryptographic test measures performance for both AES-256 and SHA algorithms. Aside from the overclocked Core i5-7600K, Ryzen's hardware AES units provide a tangible performance benefit over the Intel processors in both single-core and multi-core encryption/decryption tasks. The processors also provide faster SHA2-256 AVX hashing performance.</p><h2 id="encoding-amp-compression-2">Encoding & Compression</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HHndNjJDvXYJvRZJqqEumJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/R4bjkAxEQipLKoRFEdXjJF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zteYk8c93TkztSeCGg7Fhm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4GEJetKk8yiyT9vCMPvPFk.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The overclocked Core i5-7600K enjoys a substantial lead in the LAME workload, but the tuned Ryzen 5 1600X and 1600 also provide competitive performance. AMD's six-core Ryzen processors leverage their thread count advantage to great effect during the compression workload. A similar trend emerges during the HandBrake benchmark.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPU Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="final-analysis-5">Final Analysis</h2><p>As we observed with the Ryzen 7 1700X and 1700, AMD’s unlocked multipliers and similar overclocking ceilings are great for enthusiasts on a budget. You're able to buy a cheaper CPU and realize almost the same performance as higher-end models after a bit of tinkering. We couldn't achieve a 4 GHz overclock with Ryzen 5 1600, which would have matched our results with the 1600X. According to other tests we've seen, though, it’s certainly possible to find a sample capable of 4 GHz. We also couldn't match the 1600X's 3200 MT/s memory speed, but that is fairly common from non-X Ryzen CPUs. Motherboard vendors should have a wave of new firmware versions coming soon that might improve memory overclocking.</p><p>We use a geometric mean of average and minimum FPS through our benchmark suite to generate a gaming price efficiency chart. This includes six titles released in 2016 and four older games that launched in 2015.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6ckQLWhYZwW6XWe6tZ27TE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WSbAV22YAgccYPkc7zCsrB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yr5JpHUfQgzw6vBB6Au5tJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/D4oQiCUxxfTcjCSxF8m6Qb.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>In the suite, a stock Ryzen 5 1600 provides nearly the same average frame rate as Intel's Core i5-7500. But a bit of overclocking propels it into the lead. An overclocked 1600 can't quite reach the performance of a tuned Core i5-7600K, but it sells for $20 less and comes awful close paired up to high-end graphics. Most systems in this price bracket utilize less powerful GPUs, and the Ryzen 5 1600 should provide enough horsepower to propel mid-range builds to smooth gameplay.</p><p>The story changes when we remove older games from our calculation. The second average frame rate chart, which only includes modern games that tend to utilize processing resources more efficiently, places the stock Ryzen 5 1600 ahead of Intel's stock Core i5-7600K. That's quite an impressive feat considering the 1600 also has plenty of spare threads available for more taxing productivity applications. Notably, Intel's CPUs continue to enjoy a substantial lead when we look at minimum frame rates in new and old games alike.</p><p>The 1600's low price point is hard to ignore. This CPU features the lowest price-per-core through AMD's Ryzen portfolio, and in light of its solid showing through our application and game suite, it also provides an impressive price-to-performance ratio. The addition of a bundled 95W cooler magnifies the savings relative to Intel's Core i5-7600K and AMD's Ryzen 5 1600X, neither of which include a thermal solution. The Ryzen 5 1600 also provides more performance than Core i5-7500 in a wide range of applications for a little extra money. That should get you thinking about stepping up to AMD's $220 Ryzen instead of buying a locked Intel model.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPU Content</a></strong></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ How To Build A $750 Gaming PC ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-to-build-a-750-dollar-gaming-pc,5268.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ We built 7 PCs from the ground up that were designed and spec’d by the Tom’s Hardware community to be the best. Here’s how to assemble the $750 build. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">7dNtA29naRB2Mc6JhzW66U</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hPGiQwKQa7TeNh9vnpChWn-1280-80.png" type="image/png" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 17 May 2017 02:00:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:42:55 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Gaming PCs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Desktops]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Derek Forrest ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                                        <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Derek Forrest was a contributing freelance writer for Tom&#039;s Hardware who specialized in writing about hardware news and reviewing gaming desktops and laptops. He is a lifelong PC enthusiast, former IT administrator, and custom PC builder.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                <cf:isSponsored>false</cf:isSponsored>
                <cf:hasAffiliateLinks>false</cf:hasAffiliateLinks>
                <cf:isPaid>false</cf:isPaid>
                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/png" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hPGiQwKQa7TeNh9vnpChWn-1280-80.png">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hPGiQwKQa7TeNh9vnpChWn-1280-80.png" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Our $750 Best PC Build provides excellent 1080p gaming and entry-level VR performance for an impressively low price. The Intel Core i5-7600K easily reaches 4.6 GHz with Gigabyte’s built-in CPU overclocking profile on the Z270P-D3 motherboard, and the Gammaxx 200T cooler has no issues dissipating the extra heat. Although the memory capacity is quite standard at 8GB, the speed (2800 MHz) is above average, and the RAM meets the minimum requirements for most VR and AAA games. The MSI RX 480 Armor 8G OC graphics card performs admirably with its 1291 MHz boost clock rate and 8GB of 256-bit GDDR5 clocked at 8000 MHz, according to MSI. It pushes over 60 FPS in some hard-hitting game titles at 1080p. It can even reach respectable framerates at 2560 x 1440, and you can turn down some of the more extreme detail settings or pair it with an AMD FreeSync display to smooth out the gameplay even further. The 520W SeaSonic PSU has no issues feeding the components the power they'll need. Storage is the only part of the build that seems to cut corners, and the choice of the Western Digital RE4 1TB drive (which is an enterprise HDD) was to keep the price under the $750 limit.</p><p>(<em>Editors Note:</em> Pricing listed below reflects current pricing, which may have fluctuated since the time the parts were chosen to fit within the $750 budget.)</p><h2 id="specifications-3">Specifications</h2><div ><table><thead><tr><th  colspan="2">"Lava Stream" by SR-71 Blackbird</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  >Case</th><td  ><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Zalman Z3 ATX Case" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811235058&Tpk=N82E16811235058">Zalman Z3 ATX Case</a></span></td></tr><tr><th  >Cooling</th><td  ><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Deepcool Gammaxx 200T CPU Cooler" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835856049&Tpk=N82E16835856049">Deepcool Gammaxx 200T CPU Cooler</a></span></td></tr><tr><th  >CPU</th><td  ><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Core i5-7600K" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MRRPPQS/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Core i5-7600K</a></span></td></tr><tr><th  >Graphics</th><td  ><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="RX 480 8GB" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814137048&Tpk=N82E16814137048">RX 480 8GB</a></span></td></tr><tr><th  >Memory</th><td  ><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 8GB (2x4GB) F4-2800C15D-8GVRB" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231931&Tpk=N82E16820231931">G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 8GB (2x4GB) F4-2800C15D-8GVRB</a></span></td></tr><tr><th  >Motherboard</th><td  ><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Gigabyte GA-Z270P-D3" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128975&Tpk=N82E16813128975">Gigabyte GA-Z270P-D3</a></span></td></tr><tr><th  >PSU</th><td  ><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="S12II Bronze 520W" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3D9SIA0ZX52Z9448">S12II Bronze 520W</a></span></td></tr><tr><th  >Storage</th><td  ><span class="hawk-widget" data-widget-type="price" data-model-name="Western Digital RE4 1TB WD1003FBYX" data-show-link="0" data-show-reviews="none" data-rows="1"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Western-Digital-Internal-Hard-Drive/dp/B008DJE7HW?ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Western Digital RE4 1TB WD1003FBYX</a></span></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Now, we’ll show you how to assemble the $750 budget build Lava Stream.</p><h2 id="the-case-amp-power-supply">The Case & Power Supply</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ene8nGFtZeT5Hq2iAP83PA.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wHov8CKqidkNBLBvzU82m5.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/puDoqsQ4pnc9LTQsknZhoS.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/C5bxixijPXX8QSD8cYYQvZ.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ykm2SDHCeCHJnYReiGYqG8.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/erKU5ENfT8wG3DPhuzMVvA.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RrTS227RKJmoiHFSyaUJbJ.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qYumuccqBB6GhFZBqFGVBo.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zzGaZvzJbbEpo86GVKTnac.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Zalman Z3 mid tower doesn’t have a windowed side panel, so novice builders are afforded some shortcuts when it comes to cable management. However, we’re going to show you an ideal method of hiding the cables in the tight constraints of the Z3, as though you could see inside. This will ensure that the cables aren’t obstructing air flow (which is particularly important on this build, considering the overclockable CPU and low-cost air cooler) and so that you can easily add onto your system down the road.</p><p>For this step, you’ll need to remove the case and power supply from their packaging. You’ll also need a few of the motherboard’s accessories, so keep the box handy.</p><p>Begin by removing the case’s side panels (both of them) and setting them aside. Untie the boxed hardware kit from the frame, as well as any other attached tie wraps holding back the internal wiring. Save these tie wraps; you’ll need them later. Pull the internal wiring (front panel, USB 2.0, USB 3.0, audio, fan power leads) through the hole that feeds them into the main chamber (it's towards the top of the chassis). They should hang freely behind the sidewall for the time being. Feed the rear fan’s cable through the hole at the very top of the case (see fourth picture in the album above), so that it also hangs loosely behind the main chamber of the case.</p><p>Free the PSU cables from its wrap, and use a pair of cutters to slice the zip tie towards the base of the cables where they feed into the PSU chassis. You’ll need every last inch of slack to be able to comfortably reach the 8-pin CPU power connector on your motherboard, and this should be the first PSU cable you run. Install the power supply by laying it into the bottom of the case, fan down, and with the cables towards the sidewall (see the eighth picture in the album above). Secure it to the case using the provided screws (you may have to adjust the supply to get the holes to line up).</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pZDg9CB5u7qDa7rM2id5KF.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6342WBFr9DPp3njmYajAuQ.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3KaTSCubuAyNjKHW93odBR.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qo7anSn98rDfy7TvaPJd4o.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nwjmzVtxcnsaB6RpFceZCT.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/p8rBmsPpCJzgk4rHsbirkd.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6YcTK3ZvjnFhffaXDUSVBM.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yUmqv7iWn4azXcpDJhxEd4.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Feed the CPU and ATX power plugs through the first hole, directly in front of the PSU, and run the CPU cable up the right side of the rear of the case (leave the 24-pin ATX cable alone for now), towards the hole in the upper right hand corner (third picture above). Feed the plug through it, and fashion the flat part of the cable against the top of the case in the main chamber of the chassis to make room for the motherboard. Use two tie wraps to secure the cable to the two loops in the case that reside just below the hole where the cable is fed (see pictures 5 - 7). You can also use the cutters on the longer tie wraps that come with the case to make more (we recommend one cut, in half, for a decent sized tie wrap). We prefer tie wraps over zip ties because you can always go back and add wires to the existing cable management, or remove components and their cables easier. You can choose a more permanent solution by using the provided zip ties, but if this is your first time building a PC, you’ll likely end up appreciating the proverbial safety net offered by the tie wraps.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/reoz3EtKNKeutj2seQWcF5.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3CL4tPZDNyuKRoybw79iuX.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/otwfLPM4ervFjgdeRrvtDJ.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uYQLEwEVWAguBxTFkmEtu9.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RkpAXxVHsvQsA3PvWpaevf.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>At this point, separate the case’s internal cabling, and run the USB 2.0 and audio wiring down the case and into the same hole you just ran the two power cables through (see pictures 2 and 3 above). The audio cable takes priority, and it will require all of the possible slack you have to reach its connector on the motherboard comfortably (once it’s mounted).</p><p>Feed the USB 3.0 cable into the 5.25” drive bay and keep it tucked away for now (fourth picture). Run the 24-pin ATX power connector alongside the USB 2.0 and Audio cables (fifth picture) and through the hole at the top of the case, next to the 5.25” drive bay (which is unused in this configuration). Tuck the ATX cable into the bay for now, making it flush and taut to the case’s underside.</p><h2 id="wiring">Wiring</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SyJocvY2vT5LFPQsDheRoa.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VF74dsgvnr2EnVzVGMmW9i.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fhdiHYUktq4CHSBqVmwrC4.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rAKuEstHsdd6NkV9UWNUPH.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8rkSUkAKnfRn5GcgUM9ZKm.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/s92nruxqHNcd26zVTGkrjJ.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/28hL3ypSVPWgseAEypFZXN.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AJCbZHPm4iyrUpsbkwcjGU.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Locate the G-Connect front panel I/O connector from the motherboard box and attach the case’s wiring. Make sure that the positive and negative leads are facing the correct way. The HDD LED and Power LED cable are clearly labeled with positive and negative leads. Power and reset switches are floating (not grounded or polarized) and can be flipped either way, but since some cases use a common “negative” pin for both, it’s a good idea to learn to place these with the text facing the same direction as that of the Power and HDD LED. There are also two Power LED ports on the G-Connect module, but it’s easier to use the pins closest to the others.</p><p>Feed the front panel cable (with the attached G Connector) through the same hole near the PSU and into the main chamber of the chassis (approximately where the front I/O panel header will be with the motherboard mounted).</p><p>Connect the rear fan cable (which up to this point has been dangling from where the CPU power cable is fed) to the fan power link (still hanging behind the motherboard tray near the 5.25” bay), as seen in the third picture above. Also attach the top fan’s cable to the other 3-pin connector, which is fed out to where the other cables are (fourth picture).</p><p>Use tie wraps on the corner loop, mid loop, and top loop (next to the drive bay) on the backside of the motherboard tray to secure the cables to the chassis, so that everything is nice and tight.</p><p>Some cases will include fans that have a 3-pin or 4-pin fan connector that can plug into the motherboard for power and speed control. However, some fans sport only a 4-pin molex connector, which is much larger. The included front fan of this case is powered by a molex connection, so coupling it with the 3-pin fan header (which is also fed power by a molex connector from the PSU) will keep all three case fans on the same power feed, with the rear and top fans connected to the speed toggle button on the front panel and the front fan running at a static speed.</p><p>Reach back into the motherboard box and install the rear panel I/O cover, making sure all the edges are firmly in the case and avoiding the existing cables (last photo above). With the primary power, fan, I/O backplate, and front panel cables all run in advance, you can now get ready to mount the motherboard to the case.</p><h2 id="the-motherboard-amp-cpu">The Motherboard & CPU</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yjtDyfzjCuYtHj8f67y8Pk.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HYkVb89YH6U26Zcu7gWAf4.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fVJUJ3G5Li8z8bFobSwzfG.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Remove the motherboard from its packaging and save the anti-static bag. It comes in handy as a coaster if you need to put the board down (and you will). Set it aside and unpack the CPU (in this case, an Intel Core i5-7600K) and Gammaxx 200T cooler.</p><p>The CPU is delicate, so be careful removing it from its plastic prison. Unhook the CPU socket arm on the motherboard and raise the clamp to expose the socket. Line up the processor by locating the notches in the chip and motherboard and gently place it in the socket (see second picture above), taking care not to drop one end into it. You can also use the provided installation tool from the motherboard box.</p><p>It’s also important to discharge any static buildup before handling the processor. This can be accomplished with an anti-static wrist band, or by simply touching a grounded metal object nearby. Remove the plastic cover on the clamp, and lower it into position. Push the arm down and lock it into place. You’ll encounter some resistance, but if you hear any scraping or crunching at this point, you've likely made a dire mistake and rendered your system useless, so be careful and patient.</p><p>We debated whether to pre-install the cooler before mounting the motherboard, because once it’s in the case it’s difficult to attach the retention clips (they face the top and bottom of the case, and there’s not much clearance to reach a hand above the processor inside the chassis). For builders with nimble hands, you could hold off on installing the CPU cooler until the end, but we’d recommend doing it now for the accessibility.</p><h2 id="the-cooler">The Cooler</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rrVwFQAkUQZmRfWzrDYPbg.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MMDxWt7vn36KnaeVFsCugb.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sKgjQ9CwjuLaxruRxSuZDC.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VmFZmHnqTRVdSA5d44b2A7.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PCfWsb6nDez7GYPzxFB6n8.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tHxs9Rwey2FBfU5m5Fmsr.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NeufdX9U5RwQYUPBTTpX.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5vpx8HLEWraUVCfhqGa2iB.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WapF5Dj8HhfeSVDuPzfvEE.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6pjBcu5bZnKtUKnaMsRNXm.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LJSmHPknYPPazx7wfogaH6.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PfRUYcu6u9mdmAqvgw2QjW.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The instructions to install the cooler are on the back of the box, but it leaves out a few important details. The cooler is more convenient for AMD sockets (as evidenced by the retention clip configuration), but the heavy plastic retention ring (see second picture in the album below) has hooks for the clips. The ring features switches (third picture below) on each post that adjust the alignment for specific Intel chipsets. Setting each switch all the way to the right (from the center) is the appropriate configuration for socket 1151.</p><p>The instructions tell you to first place the ring’s posts over the motherboard holes near the processor, followed by putting the pegs in each post and pushing down. We advise you to skip those instructions. First, pressing down locks the ring to the motherboard, which could prevent you from getting the heatsink on properly (the retention clips are difficult to hook without considerable pressure using this method). We found it much easier to attach the heatsink to the plastic retention ring before going anywhere near the motherboard.</p><p>The trick to attaching the Gammaxx 200T is to have everything lined up (retention clips, posts, pegs) before you apply pressure, so once you have the heatsink attached to the ring and all of it lined up with the motherboard, you can simply push down to secure it. The only caveat to this method is that you have to remove the CPU fan in order to be able to push down on the pegs underneath that fan, which should be facing the memory and 5.25” drive bay.</p><p>To remove the fan clips, pull back and lift them at an angle to release the fan from the heatsink (see fifth picture above). This gives you plenty of space to insert the black pegs into the white posts. The cooler’s factory-applied thermal compound allows builders to skip the manual application step. Replace the fan after the heatsink is secure to the motherboard, making sure not to bend any fins on the heatsink when you slide the clip back into place (see tenth picture above). Plug in the heatsink’s fan to the CPU fan port on the motherboard (just next to the memory DIMMs), and tuck the cable around the heatsinks for a clean look (11th picture above). Set the motherboard aside and get ready to install the components in the case.</p><p>With the power cables (mostly) run in advance, the rear I/O panel installed, and the cooler attached to the processor, we can now install the motherboard and remaining components. Locate the short Philips-head screws. Use the screws with the thinner threads. The larger ones appear as if they could fit in the motherboard post’s threads, but they are too large. You’ll also need the thicker-threaded screws later, so set them aside.</p><h2 id="the-motherboard-2">The Motherboard</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dcQ2Chnw2ekdGoqke646w5.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/av4YTdSJTWxi97mR56SbU9.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FfeBLVufXm8xZAvVgudtTe.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wgU2yMDajsEfTCMXqDuSCJ.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Y9C7dxqeQVRhzLamXymGHU.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jTuNbQ8LukXVQgr4WEWD4R.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FmFEQ63tKWQRrf8Ay7FS9D.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/m6kiexrwrJXpFDk9oZsTgm.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xvAvqN4avBmq7uNo3HoXkH.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Lower the motherboard into the chassis and line up the mounting holes to the case. Be sure to align the motherboard’s rear I/O ports to the backplate so that nothing is bending or blocking a port. It’s also important to mind the rear fan wire and the CPU power cable. The case provides just enough clearance for the wiring to sneak around the motherboard, but it may need a little convincing.</p><p>Secure the motherboard with the screws (you may need to just use the screwdriver head to tighten the top screws, there’s not much clearance) and plug in the ATX (picture 5 above) and CPU power cables (picture 6), in addition to the tucked away USB 3.0 plug. You can stuff the access wire of the USB 3.0 cable into the 5.25” bay, along with any ATX power cable slack. Go back to the 7-pin front panel audio cable and plug it into the motherboard, followed by the USB 2.0 plug and the G-Connect plug (with all the front-panel I/O cables attached—ninth picture above).</p><h2 id="the-hard-drive">The Hard Drive</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xxmcEaH7dXAEmJURaT5nG.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MpELfNiSE833QTSJZg5WXg.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZLyYYZ5M29SPULuDaceTV6.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ax3mwcePZUvpASAmwpbPuM.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LMk6gJtqoF9VCX2vDBxj5m.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UQ2bwgA8wtiUkEPoPLHJbF.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aEmS3iCY5GtmBNMgJNK2Xc.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fFSH8xBJbzV2P3kULgEfNd.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PXXJ2aLyP58ohvssagL8nB.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qPTo9iDxHfDpyeN653hLun.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The case comes with rails that can be snapped onto any 3.5” drive so that it can be loaded into the lower drive bay. Each rail is labeled left and right. Simply line up the posts to the side holes on the 1TB HDD and apply pressure (third picture above). Make sure you have the rail with the release on the left side of the drive (with the connectors facing the back of the case). Slide it into the bay.</p><p>Feed the hanging SATA power cable strands into hole farthest from the PSU and into the 3.5” bay (fifth picture above). Connect one of the SATA leads to the HDD and tuck the remaining plugs from this strand under the drive. Locate one of the provided SATA data cables from the motherboard box and connect it to the HDD. Run it through the existing cable management behind the motherboard and up to an available SATA port. Plug it in, and tuck the remaining SATA power plugs into the 3.5” drive bay. Feed the PSU’s molex strand through the same hole as the SATA power plugs and connect it to the coupled fan molex plugs. Tuck the slack into the 3.5” bay and tie it all down with the existing cables to secure the wiring.</p><h2 id="the-graphics-card-2">The Graphics Card</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/i6DQZEN48UxmmmptKJGVqZ.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jTSGFNcNJSgdzL593EBzH3.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/F6prvfMiV7PgWPBHBW3FX7.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RY6ehDKpBfYCo3i2XZ7LGE.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PMKchS5VbeDuPoTW9bamMD.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NjooNwVUGhtPPE69sMRfZG.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Run the PCIe power cable from the PSU along the main cable pipeline and into the center hole in the floor of the case. Tie it down with the other cables with enough slack to reach the graphics card when it’s in its slot. Remove the two PCIe plates corresponding to where the GPU will go by using a screwdriver to twist the panels until they can be torn free of the chassis.</p><p>Grab the MSI RX 480 Armor 8G from its box and remove the plastic caps and covers. Carefully install the card to the main PCIe x16 slot (closest to the CPU) on the motherboard and use the larger Phillips-head screws (the ones we told you not to use on the motherboard) to secure it to the chassis. Plug in the PCIe power cable (last picture in the album above) and tuck the slack (if any) into the 5.25” drive bay.</p><h2 id="the-memory">The Memory</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/axKaGZLU2V3cPNkDMY75Nk.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZwQmCTR3VYDNVt9FdhhKzW.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Finally, install the G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-2800 modules. Both sides of the motherboard’s memory DIMM slots have clips, making installation much easier (than, say, a motherboard with clips on only one side). Line up the notches in the slot and memory module, and apply pressure to slide it into place (it should click and both clips will return to their locked positions). Also make sure the memory is installed in the proper slots (2 and 4, left to right).</p><h2 id="finishing-touches-2">Finishing Touches</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KEhdMQyNkHByYNdkR8b6rJ.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VdDysGm579uCDBnc3nhayR.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tHQDQ5dywbbPuhevGFqMLg.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>With all of the components installed, make any final adjustments to your cable management and reattach the case’s side panels. You may have to apply some moderate pressure to the rear (right) side panel depending on how well you ran cables back there, but the case will close correctly with a little persistence. Use the thumb screws to secure the panels back into place. Make sure to setup your new gaming PC in a well-ventilated area, as the entirety of the system’s cooling will depend on its airflow. Plug in the power supply and turn on the PSU power switch (next to the plug). Boot up your new overclockable budget gaming PC. The Best PC Build for $750.</p><h2 id="setup-amp-overclocking-tips">Setup & Overclocking Tips</h2><p>The best thing you can do before loading an operating system is to update the BIOS and get all the latest drivers from Gigabyte’s website. This will ensure that you have the latest compatibility and performance updates.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kssUmkHMpy5Fdp69jrqDdX.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5JGtSFWezqb2zumuTmHhSX.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>To update the BIOS, use a different computer to download and unzip the BIOS file and place it on the root directory of a thumb drive. Plug the thumb drive into the new build. Boot the machine and press the End key to access Q-Flash, Gigabyte’s BIOS update and backup utility. It’s fairly simple to use; just click update, select the thumb drive where the BIOS is located, select the file (currently called Z270PD3.F3), select the Fast method, and let it do its thing. After the BIOS has updated (after a few reboots, so don’t jump the gun on this next part), enter the BIOS by pressing the Delete key.</p><p>We’d be daft to suggest that anyone building this configuration should skip out on overclocking, especially considering it’s the cornerstone of the build (and a good chunk of the budget that could have been better spent elsewhere if you choose not to overclock). However, we also realize that many readers seeking our how-to guidance likely have no inclination of have to manually overclock a CPU. <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-overclocking-guide,4593.html">We have a guide on the finer points of overclocking</a> if you want to learn the ins and outs, but the Gigabyte Z270P-D3 motherboard has some built-in solutions that makes it really easy. For a quick, worry-free CPU overclock, we used Gigabyte’s built in profiles by accessing the Advanced Frequency Settings in the M.I.T. tab of the BIOS and selecting CPU Upgrade. A list of processor models and target frequencies will appear. We selected the highest possible clock rate for the Core i5-7600K and did some stress testing to see if it would remain stable. The CPU holds a rock-solid, all-core 4.6GHz frequency without any issue, and the Gammaxx 200T keeps it sufficiently cool under load (we observed peaks of 56°C in CPU-intensive tests). Finish up by turning on the XMP memory profile in the same Advanced Frequency Settings menu (select Profile 1) and press F10 to save and exit the BIOS.</p><h2 id="benchmark-results-2">Benchmark Results</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/A2XsHxweVR7rvYKDppw3Re.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9jCLCSDTqutoVSFsPfVyJ7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YLUJf2EdUmrFjVNzgAgRTW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BcBSoK5Uu8QSH6mnw62seU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xg8RBfF8Jc3N2LarufS97R.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5pMrYX2KuZpogDd7yEGECg.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The 3DMark results speak to the $750 Lava Stream’s CPU and graphics horsepower, which is substantial enough to pull out a score of more than 10K points on Fire Strike. It also puts up a decent fight against Fire Strike Extreme, and the results indicate that you will get excellent performance at 1080p and can even dabble at 2560 x 1440 with the low-priced platform.</p><p>The Cinebench and Sandra results follow this trend, with the overclocked Intel Core i5-7600K and the dual-channel DDR4-2800 memory each scoring above average in their respective tests. However, PCMark 8 and our storage tests speak to the one pitfall of the platform: a slow hard drive. Although the sequential read and write speeds are respectable for a HDD, the IOPS leave you staring at load screens for quite some time when using productivity apps such as Adobe Photoshop and Microsoft Word (and, of course, games).</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/54hJz8AHaYt2y2xzfx2ecK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gLuxHVKLsy6yrkZ3gK8PYS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YajSdcrFCmjuj9WvXw7BhV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UurEr4k8SnMqbdHaYHLWnH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uZXcZXNSJaaWvr9xEw7A9o.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>We had to pull back on some detail settings (compared to our full PC review test settings) in a few of the tested games, particularly the Anti-Aliasing options. Instead of maxing out MSAA in <em>GTAV</em>, we turned it off and enabled FXAA. We also set <em>Rise of the Tomb Raider</em> to SMAA (instead of SSAA x4), and we turned off SSAA in the <em>Metro: Last Light Redux</em> benchmark. Otherwise, the detail settings are identical to our PC review suite (completely maxed out).</p><p>Overall, our benchmark results show that the $750 Lava Stream can handle demanding detail settings on some of the most popular titles from our review suite at 1920 x 1080, with the ability to achieve playable framerates at 1440p and 4K on certain games. We wouldn’t recommend 4K gaming with this setup, but the RX 480 and i5-7600K combo makes for an excellent VR-ready 1080p gaming rig.</p><h2 id="final-analysis-6">Final Analysis</h2><p>We honestly wouldn’t change much about SR-17 Blackbird’s $750 Lava Stream build. The choice of CPU, motherboard, cooling, and memory is ideal for someone looking for an Intel platform that meets modern AAA and VR game requirements with an overclockable CPU. Most of all, it doesn't break the bank. The GPU is also a respectable choice for the platform. The motherboard supports AMD Crossfire technology, giving the builder a clear upgrade path if they find themselves wanting more gaming horsepower later on. An argument could be made to substitute the graphics card for a similarly-priced VR-ready Nvidia GTX 1060 GPU, but we’re satisfied with the RX 480’s performance, and you likely won’t see too much of a variance in bottom-line playability if you go with the other team’s applicable GPU. If you can get them, there's also the 500-series GPUs from AMD.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-480-graphics-card-roundup,4962.html">AMD Radeon RX 480 Roundup</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-graphics-card-roundup,4724.html">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 Roundup</a></strong></p><p>The power supply is adequate for the component set, but it won’t support an additional GPU if you decide to add one down the line. The case is easy to work with, and the flat PSU cables give you significant flexibility in your cable management. However, expertly laid wiring goes to waste in this chassis, as there’s no side panel window to peer into and admire the craftsmanship. For a little more money, we'd suggest a windowed case for those who demand more aesthetic value. The storage is the only component we’d highly suggest an upgrade for. The 1TB Western Digital RE4 HDD is loud and not the best match for hosting an operating system, and for just a few dollars more, a 1TB <a href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822236339&Tpk=N82E16822236339">WD Caviar Blue WD10EZEX</a>, which is featured in many of the other Best Builds, would be more suitable as a desktop OS drive. If you can afford it, the move to an SSD (even a cheap, low-capacity SSD) would vastly improve the system’s performance.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-pc-cases,4183.html">Best Cases</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-ssds,3891.html">Best SSDs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-pc-builds,4390.html">Best PC Builds</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-to-build-a-pc,5867.html">How To Build A PC</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/builds">All PC Builds Content</a></strong></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel CPU Price List ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-cpu-prices,4971.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ We list all currently available Intel processors, separated by CPU product line (e.g. Core i5), and divided by generation (e.g. Kaby Lake). ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">BwBQLwSYj8FH2GBy73uQQE</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tmiJyRpniHPoWBu6FEZMVB-1280-80.png" type="image/png" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Mon, 15 May 2017 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:55:31 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Michael Justin Allen Sexton ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                                        <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Michael Justin Allen Sexton (or MJ) is a Contributing Writer for Tom&#039;s Hardware. As a tech enthusiast, MJ enjoys studying and writing about all areas of tech, but specializes in the study of chipsets and microprocessors. In his personal life, MJ spends most of his time gaming, practicing martial arts, studying history, and tinkering with electronics.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Follow Michael Justin Allen Sexton&lt;/em&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/EmperorSunLao&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;@EmperorSunLao&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;em&gt;.&amp;nbsp;Follow us on&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.facebook.com/tomshardware&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Facebook&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;em&gt;,&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://plus.google.com/u/0/+tomshardware/posts&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Google+&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;em&gt;,&amp;nbsp;RSS,&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/tomshardware&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Twitter&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;em&gt;&amp;nbsp;and&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/user/TomsHardware&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;YouTube&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;em&gt;.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                <cf:isSponsored>false</cf:isSponsored>
                <cf:hasAffiliateLinks>false</cf:hasAffiliateLinks>
                <cf:isPaid>false</cf:isPaid>
                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/png" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tmiJyRpniHPoWBu6FEZMVB-1280-80.png">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tmiJyRpniHPoWBu6FEZMVB-1280-80.png" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="intel-cpus">Intel CPUs</h2><p>This article lists all of Intel’s CPUs currently available on the market. These CPUs primarily use either Intel’s Skylake or Kaby lake architecture. They are then subdivided into groups labeled as Celeron, Pentium, Core i3, Core i5, and Core i7.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  >CPU Product Line</th><th  >Core Count</th><th  >Hyper-Threading</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  >Celeron</th><td  >2</td><td  >✗</td></tr><tr><th  >Pentium</th><td  >2</td><td  >✗ (✓ for Kaby Lake)</td></tr><tr><th  >Core i3</th><td  >2</td><td  >✓</td></tr><tr><th  >Core i5</th><td  >4</td><td  >✗</td></tr><tr><th  >Core i7</th><td  >4</td><td  >✓</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/intel-temperature-guide.1488337/">Intel CPU Temperature Guide</a></strong></p><h2 id="celeron">Celeron</h2><h2 id="kaby-lake">Kaby Lake</h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="4e507abe-fc2a-4f9a-8028-dbe64d0f66b5" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Celeron G3930" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MYTY55V/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:974px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:116.63%;"><img id="DxHgRNw3HWdmBYLbFq2KPk" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DxHgRNw3HWdmBYLbFq2KPk.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DxHgRNw3HWdmBYLbFq2KPk.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="974" height="1136" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Celeron G3930<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MYTY55V/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="4e507abe-fc2a-4f9a-8028-dbe64d0f66b5" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Celeron G3930" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="41657386-e186-41a0-90be-d445105478d0" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Celeron G3950" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N59LQGK/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:974px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:116.63%;"><img id="DxHgRNw3HWdmBYLbFq2KPk" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DxHgRNw3HWdmBYLbFq2KPk.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DxHgRNw3HWdmBYLbFq2KPk.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="974" height="1136" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Celeron G3950<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N59LQGK/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="41657386-e186-41a0-90be-d445105478d0" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Celeron G3950" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><h2 id="skylake">Skylake</h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="b121901b-00ac-4df7-b259-4fcb2dc29481" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Celeron G3900" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01B2PJRPA/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:275px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:122.91%;"><img id="RwcN4oKsW5Y5Q53mRnyRjh" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RwcN4oKsW5Y5Q53mRnyRjh.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RwcN4oKsW5Y5Q53mRnyRjh.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="275" height="338" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Celeron G3900<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01B2PJRPA/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="b121901b-00ac-4df7-b259-4fcb2dc29481" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Celeron G3900" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="0eb73d6e-deb8-4680-930b-50205e568d3a" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Celeron G3920" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01B2P8EQI/?tag=extension-kb-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:275px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:122.91%;"><img id="RwcN4oKsW5Y5Q53mRnyRjh" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RwcN4oKsW5Y5Q53mRnyRjh.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RwcN4oKsW5Y5Q53mRnyRjh.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="275" height="338" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Celeron G3920<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01B2P8EQI/?tag=extension-kb-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="0eb73d6e-deb8-4680-930b-50205e568d3a" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Celeron G3920" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><p><strong><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-z270-motherboard-price-list,4882.html">Intel Z270 Motherboard Price List</a></strong></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-z170-motherboard-price-list,4288.html">Intel Z170 Motherboard Price List</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-h170-motherboard-price-list,4310.html">Intel H170 Motherboard Price List</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-h110-motherboard-price-list,4814.html">Intel H110 Motherboard Price List</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-b150-motherboard-price-list,4309.html">Intel B150 Motherboard Price List</a></strong></p><h2 id="pentium">Pentium</h2><h2 id="kaby-lake-2">Kaby Lake </h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="113a870e-eb80-4aef-8190-dfc3d60e42a5" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Pentium G4560" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117743&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:292px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:114.73%;"><img id="BKMJc8xtRhMd9KtYv5qmSR" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BKMJc8xtRhMd9KtYv5qmSR.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BKMJc8xtRhMd9KtYv5qmSR.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="292" height="335" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Pentium G4560<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117743&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="113a870e-eb80-4aef-8190-dfc3d60e42a5" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Pentium G4560" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-pentium-g4620-g4560-cpu,4934.html">Intel Pentium G4560 Review</a></strong></p><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="29cf8344-0df0-44e5-8651-03ee51915b71" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Pentium G4600" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01NADEVZI/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:292px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:114.73%;"><img id="BKMJc8xtRhMd9KtYv5qmSR" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BKMJc8xtRhMd9KtYv5qmSR.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BKMJc8xtRhMd9KtYv5qmSR.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="292" height="335" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Pentium G4600<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01NADEVZI/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="29cf8344-0df0-44e5-8651-03ee51915b71" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Pentium G4600" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="c5d9fa2e-9a2e-49a8-96d5-90b780acf3e9" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Pentium G4620" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N59LP5Z/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:292px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:114.73%;"><img id="BKMJc8xtRhMd9KtYv5qmSR" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BKMJc8xtRhMd9KtYv5qmSR.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BKMJc8xtRhMd9KtYv5qmSR.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="292" height="335" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Pentium G4620<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N59LP5Z/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="c5d9fa2e-9a2e-49a8-96d5-90b780acf3e9" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Pentium G4620" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-pentium-g4620-g4560-cpu,4934.html">Intel Pentium G4620 Review</a></strong></p><h2 id="skylake-2">Skylake</h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="16370295-9b2d-4143-856c-240daad7f0f8" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Pentium G4400" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B015VPX05A/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:292px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:114.73%;"><img id="BKMJc8xtRhMd9KtYv5qmSR" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BKMJc8xtRhMd9KtYv5qmSR.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BKMJc8xtRhMd9KtYv5qmSR.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="292" height="335" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Pentium G4400<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B015VPX05A/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="16370295-9b2d-4143-856c-240daad7f0f8" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Pentium G4400" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="3d6b4748-46b7-4c99-a7f1-b6ae09b2cf9a" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Pentium G4500" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B015VPX190/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:292px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:114.73%;"><img id="BKMJc8xtRhMd9KtYv5qmSR" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BKMJc8xtRhMd9KtYv5qmSR.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BKMJc8xtRhMd9KtYv5qmSR.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="292" height="335" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Pentium G4500<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B015VPX190/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="3d6b4748-46b7-4c99-a7f1-b6ae09b2cf9a" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Pentium G4500" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><h2 id="haswell">Haswell</h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="90fa4b18-cbfd-4953-9446-5e3e72676dd1" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Pentium G3260" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117545&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:240px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:122.50%;"><img id="9W8DW4YPMkU8j35Uz36C7o" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9W8DW4YPMkU8j35Uz36C7o.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9W8DW4YPMkU8j35Uz36C7o.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="240" height="294" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Pentium G3260<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117545&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="90fa4b18-cbfd-4953-9446-5e3e72676dd1" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Pentium G3260" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="77717f1e-b1bc-4a73-b21a-8a028310451a" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Pentium G3258" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117374&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:240px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:122.50%;"><img id="9W8DW4YPMkU8j35Uz36C7o" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9W8DW4YPMkU8j35Uz36C7o.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9W8DW4YPMkU8j35Uz36C7o.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="240" height="294" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Pentium G3258<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117374&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="77717f1e-b1bc-4a73-b21a-8a028310451a" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Pentium G3258" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-pc-builds,4390.html">Best Builds</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-pc-cases,4183.html">Best Cases</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpu-coolers,4181.html">Best Cooling</a></strong></p><h2 id="core-i3">Core i3</h2><h2 id="kaby-lake-3">Kaby Lake</h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="d92edb4d-4771-47c1-a600-23b3ab3f8118" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i3-7100" href="https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1304304-REG/intel_bx80677i37100_core_i3_7100_3_9_ghz.html/BI/8236/KBID/8940/SID/TomsHardware" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="VDrxU8ZkAaDtbEgL3Q6wqT" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VDrxU8ZkAaDtbEgL3Q6wqT.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VDrxU8ZkAaDtbEgL3Q6wqT.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i3-7100<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1304304-REG/intel_bx80677i37100_core_i3_7100_3_9_ghz.html/BI/8236/KBID/8940/SID/TomsHardware" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="d92edb4d-4771-47c1-a600-23b3ab3f8118" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i3-7100" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="7f7ba9a0-6ac5-447b-abdd-2329cdf55146" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i3-7300" href="https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1304302-REG/intel_bx80677i37300_core_i3_7300_4_0_ghz.html/BI/8236/KBID/8940/SID/TomsHardware" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1327px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:113.04%;"><img id="pU7YGSMnQAzLCaQhoBbpYm" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pU7YGSMnQAzLCaQhoBbpYm.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pU7YGSMnQAzLCaQhoBbpYm.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1327" height="1500" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i3-7300<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1304302-REG/intel_bx80677i37300_core_i3_7300_4_0_ghz.html/BI/8236/KBID/8940/SID/TomsHardware" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="7f7ba9a0-6ac5-447b-abdd-2329cdf55146" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i3-7300" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="b4705e81-08ca-48ba-9091-ef1aa66a45b9" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i3-7320" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MSTCUY8/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1327px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:113.04%;"><img id="pU7YGSMnQAzLCaQhoBbpYm" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pU7YGSMnQAzLCaQhoBbpYm.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pU7YGSMnQAzLCaQhoBbpYm.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1327" height="1500" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i3-7320<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MSTCUY8/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="b4705e81-08ca-48ba-9091-ef1aa66a45b9" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i3-7320" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="2b9d3fc6-2dfb-40ba-8a26-d042c7440a0f" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i3-7350K" href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Generation-FCLGA1151-Processor-BX80677I37350K/dp/B01NCEJN24/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1327px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:113.04%;"><img id="pU7YGSMnQAzLCaQhoBbpYm" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pU7YGSMnQAzLCaQhoBbpYm.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pU7YGSMnQAzLCaQhoBbpYm.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1327" height="1500" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i3-7350K<a class="view-deal button" href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Generation-FCLGA1151-Processor-BX80677I37350K/dp/B01NCEJN24/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="2b9d3fc6-2dfb-40ba-8a26-d042c7440a0f" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i3-7350K" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i3-7350k,4932.html">Intel Core i3-7350K Review</a></strong></p><h2 id="skylake-3">Skylake</h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="86f78fd8-ed86-4e08-b092-29fbbf997c9c" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i3-6100" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=2MN-0004-00002&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:396px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:111.87%;"><img id="8grJK22RKGdE33UW2cHpPZ" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8grJK22RKGdE33UW2cHpPZ.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8grJK22RKGdE33UW2cHpPZ.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="396" height="443" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i3-6100<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=2MN-0004-00002&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="86f78fd8-ed86-4e08-b092-29fbbf997c9c" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i3-6100" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="95aaf43f-1ebd-4f3c-b134-6e7f79e2fecb" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i3-6098P" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=274-000A-00075&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:396px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:111.87%;"><img id="8grJK22RKGdE33UW2cHpPZ" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8grJK22RKGdE33UW2cHpPZ.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8grJK22RKGdE33UW2cHpPZ.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="396" height="443" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i3-6098P<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=274-000A-00075&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="95aaf43f-1ebd-4f3c-b134-6e7f79e2fecb" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i3-6098P" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="142b6b39-1faf-4242-8aca-b3965f8fd0ff" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i3-6100T" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B015XEXILK/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:396px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:111.87%;"><img id="8grJK22RKGdE33UW2cHpPZ" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8grJK22RKGdE33UW2cHpPZ.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8grJK22RKGdE33UW2cHpPZ.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="396" height="443" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i3-6100T<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B015XEXILK/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="142b6b39-1faf-4242-8aca-b3965f8fd0ff" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i3-6100T" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="87f7ccf0-fda7-4563-a070-8a2f8913b207" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i3-6300" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B015VPX3G6/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:396px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:111.87%;"><img id="8grJK22RKGdE33UW2cHpPZ" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8grJK22RKGdE33UW2cHpPZ.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8grJK22RKGdE33UW2cHpPZ.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="396" height="443" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i3-6300<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B015VPX3G6/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="87f7ccf0-fda7-4563-a070-8a2f8913b207" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i3-6300" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="86db4e54-a312-4a0e-ac8b-22dcbeae1467" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i3-6320" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B015VPX48I/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:396px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:111.87%;"><img id="8grJK22RKGdE33UW2cHpPZ" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8grJK22RKGdE33UW2cHpPZ.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8grJK22RKGdE33UW2cHpPZ.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="396" height="443" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i3-6320<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B015VPX48I/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="86db4e54-a312-4a0e-ac8b-22dcbeae1467" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i3-6320" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/best-tech-deals,30458.html">Best Deals</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">Best Graphics</a></strong></p><h2 id="core-i5">Core i5</h2><h2 id="kaby-lake-4">Kaby Lake </h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="ed17c31e-5c65-4387-b798-a519742dd874" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-7400" href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16819117731" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="Yg7442ZpKkYAjKb4Luv7oH" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Yg7442ZpKkYAjKb4Luv7oH.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Yg7442ZpKkYAjKb4Luv7oH.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i5-7400<a class="view-deal button" href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16819117731" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="ed17c31e-5c65-4387-b798-a519742dd874" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-7400" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="4892f84a-f6a1-453d-9954-06a84d9e53f6" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-7500" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MZZJ1P0/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1187px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:111.96%;"><img id="tUbo2DMefL9UjARztGUwNT" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tUbo2DMefL9UjARztGUwNT.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tUbo2DMefL9UjARztGUwNT.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1187" height="1329" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i5-7500<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MZZJ1P0/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="4892f84a-f6a1-453d-9954-06a84d9e53f6" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-7500" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="20fbc327-0280-476c-85ed-c237c3ac5844" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-7600" href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80677I57600-Core-Desktop-Processors/dp/B01MYTYSMK?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware-deal&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="Yg7442ZpKkYAjKb4Luv7oH" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Yg7442ZpKkYAjKb4Luv7oH.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Yg7442ZpKkYAjKb4Luv7oH.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i5-7600<a class="view-deal button" href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80677I57600-Core-Desktop-Processors/dp/B01MYTYSMK?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware-deal&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="20fbc327-0280-476c-85ed-c237c3ac5844" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-7600" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="95d1ea72-bdcf-44e1-bd4b-95428ef466d2" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-7600K" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MRRPPQS/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="N484dyTf28AuUqfA3EW5g3" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/N484dyTf28AuUqfA3EW5g3.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/N484dyTf28AuUqfA3EW5g3.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i5-7600K<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MRRPPQS/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="95d1ea72-bdcf-44e1-bd4b-95428ef466d2" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-7600K" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><h2 id="skylake-4">Skylake</h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="1ef4864f-c5e8-4035-b4dd-0a86c414fc92" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-6400" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117564&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:883px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:100.23%;"><img id="SciSWjx7p6Ti4AvUU6pwdc" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SciSWjx7p6Ti4AvUU6pwdc.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SciSWjx7p6Ti4AvUU6pwdc.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="883" height="885" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i5-6400<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117564&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="1ef4864f-c5e8-4035-b4dd-0a86c414fc92" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-6400" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="9eb67b32-d2f9-43ea-a063-8731503bfa6b" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-6402P" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=274-000A-00076&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:883px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:100.23%;"><img id="SciSWjx7p6Ti4AvUU6pwdc" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SciSWjx7p6Ti4AvUU6pwdc.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SciSWjx7p6Ti4AvUU6pwdc.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="883" height="885" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i5-6402P<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=274-000A-00076&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="9eb67b32-d2f9-43ea-a063-8731503bfa6b" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-6402P" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="a4ddf21a-488c-4809-962f-a9377b4aa57d" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-6500" href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Skylake-Desktop-Processor-BX80662I56500/dp/B010T6CWI2/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:883px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:100.23%;"><img id="SciSWjx7p6Ti4AvUU6pwdc" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SciSWjx7p6Ti4AvUU6pwdc.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SciSWjx7p6Ti4AvUU6pwdc.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="883" height="885" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i5-6500<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Skylake-Desktop-Processor-BX80662I56500/dp/B010T6CWI2/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="a4ddf21a-488c-4809-962f-a9377b4aa57d" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-6500" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="0db37558-e892-4eb2-ba8d-260b76444676" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-6600" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0136JONRM/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:883px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:100.23%;"><img id="SciSWjx7p6Ti4AvUU6pwdc" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SciSWjx7p6Ti4AvUU6pwdc.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SciSWjx7p6Ti4AvUU6pwdc.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="883" height="885" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i5-6600<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0136JONRM/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="0db37558-e892-4eb2-ba8d-260b76444676" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-6600" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="4a1e9a63-3bf8-4213-88e5-95d3cb97b7b4" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-6600K" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B012M8M7TY/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:883px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:100.23%;"><img id="SciSWjx7p6Ti4AvUU6pwdc" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SciSWjx7p6Ti4AvUU6pwdc.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SciSWjx7p6Ti4AvUU6pwdc.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="883" height="885" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i5-6600K<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B012M8M7TY/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="4a1e9a63-3bf8-4213-88e5-95d3cb97b7b4" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-6600K" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><h2 id="haswell-2">Haswell</h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="c6ab401a-022b-456a-982e-c68f176751f1" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-4460" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117302&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:281px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:125.98%;"><img id="6VQ6RjVVHF6do3Wh7q6UX5" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6VQ6RjVVHF6do3Wh7q6UX5.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6VQ6RjVVHF6do3Wh7q6UX5.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="281" height="354" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i5-4460<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117302&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="c6ab401a-022b-456a-982e-c68f176751f1" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-4460" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="87925de5-64e1-4b79-8678-09aae11f47d0" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-4690K" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117372&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:281px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:125.98%;"><img id="6VQ6RjVVHF6do3Wh7q6UX5" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6VQ6RjVVHF6do3Wh7q6UX5.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6VQ6RjVVHF6do3Wh7q6UX5.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="281" height="354" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i5-4690K<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117372&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="87925de5-64e1-4b79-8678-09aae11f47d0" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-4690K" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gaming-laptops,4828.html">Best Gaming Laptops</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-ram,4057.html">Best Memory</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gaming-monitors,4533.html">Best Monitors</a></strong></p><h2 id="core-i7">Core i7</h2><h2 id="kaby-lake-5">Kaby Lake </h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="035ef38e-7834-4615-9a22-aef91d938712" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-7700" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N0L41N7/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:729px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:132.92%;"><img id="EJyXkJRMYNSSus8VwZjXYC" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EJyXkJRMYNSSus8VwZjXYC.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EJyXkJRMYNSSus8VwZjXYC.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="729" height="969" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i7-7700<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N0L41N7/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="035ef38e-7834-4615-9a22-aef91d938712" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-7700" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="aa8675aa-b6d0-4324-947e-354abaf016c4" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-7700K" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117726&Tpk=N82E16819117726" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:729px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:132.92%;"><img id="EJyXkJRMYNSSus8VwZjXYC" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EJyXkJRMYNSSus8VwZjXYC.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EJyXkJRMYNSSus8VwZjXYC.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="729" height="969" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i7-7700K<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117726&Tpk=N82E16819117726" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="aa8675aa-b6d0-4324-947e-354abaf016c4" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-7700K" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="60885aca-62ec-4631-90f9-5760aff781a3" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-7700T" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/b01ms73uk2/?tag=extension-kb-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:729px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:132.92%;"><img id="EJyXkJRMYNSSus8VwZjXYC" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EJyXkJRMYNSSus8VwZjXYC.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EJyXkJRMYNSSus8VwZjXYC.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="729" height="969" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i7-7700T<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/b01ms73uk2/?tag=extension-kb-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="60885aca-62ec-4631-90f9-5760aff781a3" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-7700T" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><h2 id="skylake-5">Skylake</h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="752d4b8f-715c-4533-904c-8d9624eab579" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-6700" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0136JONG8/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1221px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:94.43%;"><img id="aV4XWGzZ9SBqtfhd9dehDJ" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aV4XWGzZ9SBqtfhd9dehDJ.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aV4XWGzZ9SBqtfhd9dehDJ.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1221" height="1153" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i7-6700<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0136JONG8/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="752d4b8f-715c-4533-904c-8d9624eab579" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-6700" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="0abef3e2-5f0d-46ae-8b0b-fa70c936e009" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-6700K" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B012M8LXQW/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1221px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:94.43%;"><img id="aV4XWGzZ9SBqtfhd9dehDJ" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aV4XWGzZ9SBqtfhd9dehDJ.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aV4XWGzZ9SBqtfhd9dehDJ.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1221" height="1153" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i7-6700K<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B012M8LXQW/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="0abef3e2-5f0d-46ae-8b0b-fa70c936e009" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-6700K" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><h2 id="broadwell">Broadwell</h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="f9dfb592-300b-49b8-bf21-f5cbcf82ea25" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-5775C" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117553&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:271px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:131.37%;"><img id="kFTjDMqFt8f7nwnpcVP6eR" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kFTjDMqFt8f7nwnpcVP6eR.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kFTjDMqFt8f7nwnpcVP6eR.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="271" height="356" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i7-5775C<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117553&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="f9dfb592-300b-49b8-bf21-f5cbcf82ea25" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-5775C" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="c3e580d2-31e0-4a06-84f3-fdc9e831cfa8" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-6800K" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FJLA8NI/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1221px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:94.43%;"><img id="aV4XWGzZ9SBqtfhd9dehDJ" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aV4XWGzZ9SBqtfhd9dehDJ.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aV4XWGzZ9SBqtfhd9dehDJ.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1221" height="1153" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i7-6800K<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FJLA8NI/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="c3e580d2-31e0-4a06-84f3-fdc9e831cfa8" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-6800K" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="6652f50a-9675-4ba4-8e94-e212e78cfcac" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-6850K" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FJLAITC/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1221px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:94.43%;"><img id="aV4XWGzZ9SBqtfhd9dehDJ" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aV4XWGzZ9SBqtfhd9dehDJ.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aV4XWGzZ9SBqtfhd9dehDJ.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1221" height="1153" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i7-6850K<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FJLAITC/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="6652f50a-9675-4ba4-8e94-e212e78cfcac" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-6850K" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="d960b173-023b-46a0-84b5-43fdd1498703" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-6900K" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FJLAIG0/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1221px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:94.43%;"><img id="aV4XWGzZ9SBqtfhd9dehDJ" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aV4XWGzZ9SBqtfhd9dehDJ.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aV4XWGzZ9SBqtfhd9dehDJ.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1221" height="1153" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i7-6900K<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FJLAIG0/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="d960b173-023b-46a0-84b5-43fdd1498703" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-6900K" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="0173cc03-84c0-4f7d-a5df-bbedc539aed6" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-6950X" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FJLA9IM/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1221px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:94.43%;"><img id="aV4XWGzZ9SBqtfhd9dehDJ" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aV4XWGzZ9SBqtfhd9dehDJ.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aV4XWGzZ9SBqtfhd9dehDJ.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1221" height="1153" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i7-6950X<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FJLA9IM/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="0173cc03-84c0-4f7d-a5df-bbedc539aed6" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-6950X" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><h2 id="haswell-3">Haswell</h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="1fc567f7-c484-46e5-a0c1-c73576354a72" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-5820K" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117402&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:271px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:131.37%;"><img id="kFTjDMqFt8f7nwnpcVP6eR" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kFTjDMqFt8f7nwnpcVP6eR.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kFTjDMqFt8f7nwnpcVP6eR.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="271" height="356" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i7-5820K<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117402&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="1fc567f7-c484-46e5-a0c1-c73576354a72" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-5820K" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="06320c30-6f61-4a02-8de2-a366fe995958" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-5930K" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00MMLXMM8/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:271px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:131.37%;"><img id="kFTjDMqFt8f7nwnpcVP6eR" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kFTjDMqFt8f7nwnpcVP6eR.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kFTjDMqFt8f7nwnpcVP6eR.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="271" height="356" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i7-5930K<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00MMLXMM8/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="06320c30-6f61-4a02-8de2-a366fe995958" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-5930K" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="f99889f3-81a4-416c-86fc-6080e61122dc" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-5960X" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117404&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:271px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:131.37%;"><img id="kFTjDMqFt8f7nwnpcVP6eR" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kFTjDMqFt8f7nwnpcVP6eR.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kFTjDMqFt8f7nwnpcVP6eR.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="271" height="356" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i7-5960X<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117404&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="f99889f3-81a4-416c-86fc-6080e61122dc" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-5960X" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><h2 id="ivy-bridge">Ivy Bridge</h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="6ea6155a-e236-4ed4-a225-707748311578" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-4960X" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116938&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:771px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:116.34%;"><img id="mJXMnbYvSM7Zi4R3SUhar8" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mJXMnbYvSM7Zi4R3SUhar8.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mJXMnbYvSM7Zi4R3SUhar8.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="771" height="897" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i7-4960X<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116938&ignorebbr=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="6ea6155a-e236-4ed4-a225-707748311578" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-4960X" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-motherboards,3984.html">Best Motherboards</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-psus,4229.html">Best Power Supplies</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-ssds,3891.html">Best SSDs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-virtual-reality-headsets,4722.html">Best Virtual Reality Headsets</a></strong></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ AMD Ryzen 5 1600X CPU Review ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-1600x-cpu-review,5014.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ The Ryzen 5 series tackles the gaming market head on with four- and six-core models with SMT technology and low price points. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">tKhnPz9juYGkmrcLzpKq7A</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LCZx6LTGWYWXSwAHBbPkWM-1280-80.png" type="image/png" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 11 Apr 2017 13:00:01 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:33:09 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ palcorn@outlook.com (Paul Alcorn) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Paul Alcorn ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RZRmFeQfPy3etHjBQitbGW.jpeg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;As a teenager, Paul scraped up enough money to buy a 486-powered PC with a turbo button (yes, a turbo button). Back when floppies were still popular he was already chasing after the fastest spinners for his personal computer, which led him down the long and winding storage road, covering enterprise storage. His current focus is on consumer processors, though he still keeps a close eye on the latest storage news. In his spare time, you’ll find Paul hanging out with his kids or indulging his love of the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                <cf:isSponsored>false</cf:isSponsored>
                <cf:hasAffiliateLinks>false</cf:hasAffiliateLinks>
                <cf:isPaid>false</cf:isPaid>
                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/png" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LCZx6LTGWYWXSwAHBbPkWM-1280-80.png">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LCZx6LTGWYWXSwAHBbPkWM-1280-80.png" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="introduction-4">Introduction </h2><p>The Ryzen 5 family shifts focus to enthusiasts and gaming with a quartet of six- and four-core models that line up against Intel's LGA 1151-based incumbents.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1126px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:97.69%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XPARmM3xveesbRzmTQNpai.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XPARmM3xveesbRzmTQNpai.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1126" height="1100" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XPARmM3xveesbRzmTQNpai.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>AMD began its assault on the high-end desktop with Ryzen 7. And while the 7-series introduced disruptive pricing and impressive performance to heavily threaded workstation apps (especially compared to Intel's Broadwell-E-based Core i7s), its 8C/16T configuration isn't fully utilized by most mainstream software, including games. Lower than expected frame rates, especially at lower resolutions, had many in the technology press wondering where the architecture was coming up short. But even if Ryzen 5 has the same issue, lower prices and a persistent core count advantage should set AMD up to battle fiercely on more mainstream platforms.</p><p>Similar to Ryzen 7, the Ryzen 5 processors lack on-die GPUs. This means they're destined to drop into PCs with discrete graphics cards, making them well-suited for the gaming market. AMD devotes all of the die's transistors to cores, cache, connectivity, and communications, allowing Ryzen 5 to tackle Core i5 and Core i7 with more host processing resources.</p><p>The $249 Ryzen 5 1600X is ambitiously aligned with Intel's Core i5-7600K. It comes with six SMT-enabled cores able to operate on as many as 12 threads in parallel. Like the flagship Ryzen 7 1800X, AMD's 95W 1600X features 16MB of L3 cache, a 3.6 GHz base clock rate, and a 4 GHz boost frequency. It includes the same dual-core 4.1 GHz eXtended Frequency Range setting that automatically activates if your thermal solution is beefy enough. And XFR also contributes to an all-core 3.7 GHz boost level for heavily-threaded workloads.</p><p>Intel's 91W Core i5-7600K, which only has four physical cores and 6MB of last-level cache, appears anemic by comparison. However, much of the Kaby Lake architecture's strength comes from excellent per-core performance. This is incredibly important in software that can't fully utilize multi-core configurations. Ryzen’s IPC throughput lags Intel’s by ~10%, even after the massive gains attributable to the Zen design. As a result, Kaby Lake maintains a per-core, per-clock advantage.</p><h2 id="specifications-4">Specifications</h2><p>AMD is also rolling out a $219 six-core Ryzen 5 1600, which drops to a 65W TDP, features a 3.4 GHz base clock rate, and 3.8 GHz boost ceiling. All of its other attributes, including the 100 MHz all-core and dual-core XFR boosts, remain the same as Ryzen 5 1600X.</p><p>The company has quad-core Ryzen 5s too. Its 1500X ($189) and 1400 ($169) both sport 65W TDPs. The former operates at a base clock rate of 3.5 GHz and can boost up to 3.7 GHz. The latter starts at 3.2 GHz, but has a maximum boost frequency of 3.4 GHz. Moreover, the 1500X benefits from a 200 MHz XFR boost setting and 16MB of L3 cache, while the 1400 model tops out with a 50 MHz boost frequency and 8MB of L3 cache. AMD aims its Ryzen 5 1500X at the $200 Core i5-7500, which should make for an interesting battle.</p><p>All of the Ryzen 5 CPUs boast a familiar suite of features introduced with the flagship Ryzen 7s: unlocked ratio multipliers across the model range, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-cpu,4951-2.html">the SenseMI suite</a>, a dual-channel memory controller, and <a href="http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/amd-am4-ryzen-chipsets,news-55015.html">Socket AM4 compatibility</a>. You can overclock any Ryzen 5 on X370- and B350-based motherboards, though we believe most of these cheaper chips will be paired to the less expensive B350 platform.</p><p>Keeping the value theme going, Ryzen 5 1400 comes bundled with AMD's Wraith Stealth cooler, while the 1600 and 1500X include the beefier Wraith Spire. AMD doesn't give you a heat sink/fan with its 1600X, assuming most enthusiasts will use third-party solutions.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:43.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z3Yatgom3U8R3d9GY9DJph.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z3Yatgom3U8R3d9GY9DJph.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="663" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z3Yatgom3U8R3d9GY9DJph.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We covered this design in <strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-zen-cpu-microarchitecture,32540.html">Everything Zen: AMD Presents New Microarchitecture At HotChips</a></strong>. The Ryzen 5 family employs the same die as Ryzen 7, so it's similarly based on the four-core CCX (Core Complex) building block. AMD connects two CCXes using its Infinity Fabric interconnect, which also handles inter-processor communication like PCIe and northbridge traffic.</p><p>At birth, the Ryzen 5 models have eight physical cores. AMD then disables individual cores, either due to manufacturing defects or a need to segment its product stack, resulting in six- and four-core variants. The company indicates that Ryzen 5 processors have a symmetrical core alignment to avoid any odd performance trends that might stem from lopsided allocations. The six-core models have three active cores per CCX (3+3), and the four-core variants feature two cores per CCX (2+2). Each CCX includes 8MB of L3 cache, and AMD surprisingly leaves all of the cache enabled on most models. Only the quad-core Ryzen 5 1400's L3 is trimmed down to 8MB total. </p><p>As a result of their physical similarities, a lot of Ryzen 5's characteristics mirror what we saw from Ryzen 7. For instance, overclocking on Ryzen 5 appears to top out somewhere between 3.9 and 4.1 GHz. That's a notable weakness compared to Intel's K-series Kaby Lake SKUs.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  ><strong>Ryzen Memory Support</strong></th><th  ><strong>MT/s</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Dual-Channel/Dual-Rank/Four-DIMM</strong></td><td  >1866</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Dual-Channel/Single-Rank/Four-DIMM</strong></td><td  >2133</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Dual-Channel/Dual-Rank/Two-DIMM</strong></td><td  >2400</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Dual-Channel/Single-Rank/Two-DIMM</strong></td><td  >2677</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Ryzen 5 processors feature the same stock memory guidelines as Ryzen 7, which vary based on the type of memory and number of modules you plan to install. AMD’s gaming performance is known to scale better with memory bandwidth than Intel&apos;s processors, so good memory is critical to Ryzen 5. We’ve seen motherboard manufacturers send out rapid-fire firmware updates to address issues like overclocked memory support, but the ecosystem continues to evolve. We&apos;re also waiting for certain user experience problems to be solved. As an example, we recorded an average of ~65 seconds from power-up to the Windows desktop on our Ryzen samples, while Intel CPUs only take ~20 seconds.</p><p>Nevertheless, things can only get better for AMD from here, particularly with a new line of CPUs to address an even larger slice of the enthusiast market. Can Ryzen 5 improve upon Ryzen 7&apos;s value proposition, or does the culling of on-die resources step the architecture backwards? Today&apos;s review zeros in on Ryzen 5 1600X. However, the 1500X is right behind (we even have some enlightening thermal results from the 1500X on page eight). Ryzen 5 1600 and 1400 will follow in short order, too.</p><p><br><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html"><strong>Best CPUs</strong></a></p><p><br><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html"><strong>Intel & AMD Processor Benchmark Comparisons </strong></a></p><p><br><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus"><strong>All CPU Content</strong></a></p><h2 id="the-infinity-fabric-a-blessing-and-a-curse">The Infinity Fabric: A Blessing And A Curse</h2><p>There is much speculation (and plenty of proof) that faster memory improves Ryzen's gaming performance. The theory is that the speed of AMD's Infinity Fabric is tied to the memory clock rate, and through a bit of our targeted testing below, it looks like this is true.</p><p>Again, the Zen architecture employs a four-core CCX (CPU Complex) building block. AMD outfits each CCX with a 16-way associative 8MB L3 cache split into four slices; each core in the CCX accesses this L3 with the same average latency. Two CCXes come together to create an eight-core Ryzen 7 die (image below), and they communicate via AMD’s Infinity Fabric interconnect. The CCXes also share the same memory controller. This is basically two quad-core CPUs talking to each other over a dedicated pathway: Infinity Fabric, a 256-bit bi-directional crossbar that also handles northbridge and PCIe traffic. The large amount of data flowing through this pathway requires a lot of scheduling magic to ensure a high quality of service. It's also logical to assume that the six- and four-core models benefit from less cross-CCX traffic compared to the eight-core models.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:43.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z3Yatgom3U8R3d9GY9DJph.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z3Yatgom3U8R3d9GY9DJph.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="663" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z3Yatgom3U8R3d9GY9DJph.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Data that has to move between CCXes incurs higher latency, so it's ideal to avoid the trip altogether if possible. But threads may be forced to migrate between CPU Complexes, thus suffering cache misses on the local CCX's L3. Threads might also depend on data in other threads running on the CCX next door, again adding latency and chipping away at overall performance.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:604px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:142.55%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5yvEqvkb8yfbZjBFsgBBs7.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5yvEqvkb8yfbZjBFsgBBs7.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="604" height="861" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5yvEqvkb8yfbZjBFsgBBs7.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Intel employs a dual ring bus, seen to the right on a Broadwell die and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-xeon-e5-2600-v4-broadwell-ep,4514-2.html">covered in depth here</a>, which serves much the same purpose. However, it doesn't suffer the same latency penalty between cores due to its contiguous design and dual independent rings. Although AMD hasn't confirmed, we suspect that the Infinity Fabric is a single pathway.</p><p>AMD's Infinity Fabric serves a key strategic advantage for the company as it rolls out 32-core Naples processors featuring four CCXes per package. The interconnect is more scalable than Intel's ring bus, which encounters increased latency as more cores are added. But it isn't without weakness (clearly). Intel's design may be more limited in terms of scaling out, but the company already utilizes a mesh topography with its Knight's Landing products (<a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-xeon-phi-knights-landing,32121.html">covered here</a>) to  solve that. We suspect we'll see something similar from Intel's next-gen desktop products.</p><h2 id="putting-numbers-to-theory">Putting Numbers To Theory</h2><p>Accurately measuring bus latency is tricky. Fortunately, SiSoftware recently introduced its Sandra Business Platinum version that includes a novel Processor Multi-Core Efficiency test. It's able to measure inter-core, inter-module, and inter-package latency in a number of different configurations using Multi-Threaded, Multi-Core Only, and Single-Threaded tests. We use the Multi-Threaded metric with the "best pair match" setting (lowest latency) for our purposes.</p><p>First, we measured core-to-core latency on Intel's Hyper-Threaded Core i7-7700K to establish a baseline for AMD's SMT-equipped Ryzen processors. The results from Intel's solution are incredibly consistent between runs. That's in stark contrast to the Ryzen CPUs, which varied from one run to the next.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  >Core i7-7700K Memory Data Rate</td><td  >Inter-Core Latency</td><td  >Core-To-Core Latency</td><td  >Core-To-Core Average</td></tr><tr><td  >1333 MT/s</td><td  >14.8ns</td><td  >38.6 - 43.2ns</td><td  >41.5ns</td></tr><tr><td  >2666 MT/s</td><td  >14.8ns</td><td  >29.4 - 45.5ns</td><td  >42.13ns</td></tr><tr><td  >3200 MT/s</td><td  >14.7 - 14.8ns</td><td  >40.8 - 46.5ns</td><td  >43.08ns</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>The inter-core measurement quantifies latency between threads that are resident on the same physical core, while the core-to-core numbers reflect thread-to-thread latency between two physical cores. As we can see, there are slight gains as we increase the memory data rate on our stock Core i7, but they're only in the 4% range. This explains, at least in part, why we don't see explosive gains from overclocked memory on Intel CPUs.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  >Core i7-7700K Memory Data Rate</td><td  >Inter-Core Latency</td><td  >Core-To-Core Latency</td><td  >Core-To-Core Average</td></tr><tr><td  >1333 MT/s</td><td  >12.9 - 13.3ns</td><td  >38.3 - 41.1ns</td><td  >39.59ns</td></tr><tr><td  >2666 MT/s</td><td  >12.9ns</td><td  >34.5 - 39.9ns</td><td  >37.67ns</td></tr><tr><td  >3200 MT/s</td><td  >12.9ns</td><td  >36.1 - 39.2ns</td><td  >37.8ns</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>After increasing the CPU's clock rate to 5 GHz, we observe a quantifiable reduction in inter-core and core-to-core latency.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  >Ryzen 5 1600X Memory Data Rate</td><td  >Inter-Core Latency Range</td><td  >Inter-CCX Core-to-Core Latency</td><td  >Cross-CCX Core-to-Core Latency</td><td  >Cross-CCX Average Latency</td><td  >% Increase From 1333</td></tr><tr><td  >1333 MT/s</td><td  >14.8 - 14.9ns</td><td  >40.4 - 42.0ns</td><td  >197.6 - 229.8ns</td><td  >224ns</td><td  >Baseline</td></tr><tr><td  >2666 MT/s</td><td  >14.8 - 14.9ns</td><td  >40.4 - 42.6ns</td><td  >119.2 - 125.4ns</td><td  >120.74ns</td><td  >46%</td></tr><tr><td  >3200 MT/s</td><td  >14.8 - 14.9ns</td><td  >40.0 - 43.2ns</td><td  >109.8 - 113.1ns</td><td  >111.5ns</td><td  >50%</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Repeated tests on our stock Ryzen 5 1600X revealed more run-to-run variance, so these numbers are the average of two test sessions. The inter-core latency measurements represent communication between <strong>two logical threads resident on the same physical core</strong>, and they're unaffected by memory speed. Inter-CCX measurements quantify latency between <strong>threads on the same CCX that are not resident on the same core</strong>. We observe slight variances, but inter-CCX latency is also largely unaffected by memory speed. </p><p><strong>Cross-CCX quantifies the latency between threads located on two separate CCXes</strong>, and as we can see, there is a tremendous penalty associated with traversing the Infinity Fabric. Dialing in a higher memory data rate reduces the Infinity Fabric's latency, though that's subject to diminishing returns.</p><p>Doubling the data rate from 1333 to 2666 MT/s grants a 46% performance increase. However, jumping up another 20% to 3200 MT/s only yields a 4% reduction in cross-CCX latency. Moreover, we tested our 4 GHz overclock against the 1600X's stock 3.7 GHz, but latency was largely unaffected.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:989px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.03%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XvcpqsrhCPgAUejkf588ZS.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XvcpqsrhCPgAUejkf588ZS.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="989" height="742" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XvcpqsrhCPgAUejkf588ZS.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We also measured Inter-Core bandwidth during our tests, and that progresses nicely as smaller chunks of data populate the L1 cache. As the data size increases, it falls back into the L2 and L3 caches, and then finally encounters main memory on the chart's far right.</p><p>Though this brief experiment only looks at Ryzen 5 1600X, we're planning another deep-dive story that includes all available Ryzen CPUs. There are so many possible combinations to test, including SMT and various power profiles, that might affect Infinity Fabric performance. Stay tuned.</p><h2 id="and-we-still-can-39-t-measure-cache-performance">...And We Still Can't Measure Cache Performance</h2><p>During the Ryzen 7 1800X launch, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-cpu,4951-5.html">it came to light that AMD disagreed with the cache testing methodology</a> employed by leading test software vendors. That still holds true, apparently, even after recent updates to the utilities. From AMD's Ryzen 5 reviewer's guide:</p><p>Despite recent application updates, public cache analysis tools continue to produce spurious results for the AMD Ryzen family of processors. Though further investigation is warranted, we believe the public tools are utilizing datasets larger than the available cache size(s) and/or inadvertently mixing DRAM access into cache results. With specific regard to the AMD Ryzen 5 processor, we believe these applications are making erroneous assumptions about the size and/or topology of the 1500X and 1600X cache hierarchy. We continue to work with software vendors to accurize the results.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9MTWWxW7b3TWUFBWrmerPM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bxkoooHDLz3WUs3Dh4vHSP.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The first chart above comes from our performance data, while the second is AMD's reference results. We used Sandra's cache latency measurement, which produces similar results as AMD's numbers. As you can see in our chart, L1 latency (far left) weighs in at 1.1ns, L2 measures 4.8ns, and L3 registers 10.2ns. By comparison, it appears that Intel enjoys a considerable cache latency advantage.</p><p>We also tested bandwidth with other utilities in an attempt to match AMD's results, but noticed large disparities in L2 and L3 cache reporting. We've included AMD's in-house numbers, and are talking to other ISVs to facilitate accurate measurements. </p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPU Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="overclocking-creators-update-amp-test-setup">Overclocking, Creators Update & Test Setup</h2><h2 id="overclocking-5">Overclocking</h2><p>As mentioned, the Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 7 families share the same die configuration, so we run up against a similar 3.9 to 4.1 GHz overclocking ceiling. AMD recommends the same 1.35V maximum CPU voltage for long-term overclocks, and although the company says Ryzen can withstand 1.45V, longevity may be affected. In either case, voltages above stock aren't covered under Ryzen's warranty, so any damage you cause is yours to live with. That doesn't mean AMD wants you to shy away from enhancing the chip's performance. It even makes the <a href="https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/ryzen-master">Ryzen Master utility available for download</a>. The latest build corrects temperature reporting and doesn't require HPET (High Precision Event Timer) for accurate measurements.</p><p>We dialed in a Prime95-stable 4 GHz overclock with 1.375V core voltage and an auto LLC (Load Line Calibration) setting. In the U.S. lab, we recorded up to 87<strong>°</strong>C (per AIDA) with our Noctua NH-U12S SE-AM4 during extended stress tests. We had a sliver of thermal headroom to spare, so we tried to pass the 4 GHz barrier but just couldn't get our sample stable enough.</p><p>Ryzen processor performance responds well to higher memory data rates, as illustrated on the prior page. Unfortunately, the stability of overclocked DDR4 is dicey on early motherboard firmware. The situation is improving, though. We were able to successfully achieve 3200 MT/s on MSI's B350 Tomahawk and Asus' B350-Plus using their XMP-equivalents (A-XMP and D.O.C.P., respectively) with 14-14-14-34 timings. Surpassing 3200 MT/s requires reference clock adjustments. So far, we haven't had any success obtaining stable memory overclocks beyond 3200 MT/s with adjusted reference clock settings.</p><p>We also overclocked our Core i5-7600K sample to 5 GHz at 1.375V with the same 3200 MT/s XMP settings. At the same time, we disabled the stock Core i5-7600K configuration's Enhanced Turbo Boost feature, which allows all cores to run at the maximum Turbo Boost frequency. This feature facilitates a big speed-up in some applications. Nearly every motherboard exposes it, so it has become fairly common. But we consider it an unfair "cheat" in a CPU review.</p><h2 id="windows-creator-39-s-update">Windows Creator's Update</h2><p>Microsoft recently unveiled its Windows 10 Creators Update. It'll start rolling out right away through the normal Windows Update process. However, the software was available for manual installation prior to today's review, so we moved all of our test systems over before running the Tom's Hardware benchmark suite.</p><p>Most notably, the Creators Update includes a new Game Mode that optimizes GPU and CPU performance. The mode improves resource utilization by employing optimized scheduling in concert with isolating and reducing background tasks. This also confers performance consistency advantages. Windows enables Game Mode by default for a pre-selected whitelist, but it can also be turned on in any UWP or Win32 title.</p><p>Game Mode is easy to use. While in your game of choice, toggle the Game Bar with the Win + G key combination and select Game Mode from the settings menu. After that, the game continues to operate in Game Mode for any subsequent session until you disable the feature. We measured gains of several FPS in most titles and recorded improved frame time consistency. We also updated our GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition to Nvidia's 381.65 driver build.</p><h2 id="test-setup-7">Test Setup</h2><p>AMD's new architecture has several unique characteristics that, if accounted for, can improve your frame rates in some games. Performance under the Windows Balanced power plan was a notable weakness back when Ryzen 7 launched. But we discovered that <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-cpu,4951-6.html">switching to the High Performance profile</a> often remedied this.</p><p>Modern processors have several defined voltage and frequency settings called P-states that can be applied on a per-core basis. In the interest of preserving performance as much as conserving power, the processor can dynamically switch cores into various P-states based on utilization. Unfortunately, lower power states take longer to wake up from. P-state transitions can occur during gaming sessions, and when your application catches the CPU sleeping, performance suffers.</p><p>Windows' Power Saver and Balanced profiles allow the operating system to dictate when the cores transition between P-states. This approach is more efficient, but it incurs up to a 30ms delay between when the OS orders a transition and the processor acts upon it. However, switching to the High Performance profile hands power management back to the processor. With control of its own power states, a modern CPU can transition between the various P-states in 1ms, minimizing the performance issues we originally observed.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:623px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:39.49%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HsmX8EbZo6PBuwxCdbvTR6.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HsmX8EbZo6PBuwxCdbvTR6.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="623" height="246" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HsmX8EbZo6PBuwxCdbvTR6.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>AMD created a Ryzen-specific Balanced power plan that alters the P-state timers and thresholds. The company is rolling this plan into the next iteration of chipset drivers, but you can <a href="https://community.amd.com/community/gaming/blog/2017/04/06/amd-ryzen-community-update-3">download it today</a>. We stuck with the High Performance profile for our testing because it offers the best frame rates, but AMD does claim its power plan improves performance in several games.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:55.50%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VxjiGwMW8Q2Ra2jz2MYmQW.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VxjiGwMW8Q2Ra2jz2MYmQW.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="838" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VxjiGwMW8Q2Ra2jz2MYmQW.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We've also seen higher performance from Ryzen 7 in some games by disabling SMT. Even though we don't feel this is an acceptable workaround (you shouldn't have to toggle the feature on a per-application basis), we ran similar tests with Ryzen 5 1600X to explore a few unique characteristics.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:14.83%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6MaFtnN7S6oUpi2E2vDK3i.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6MaFtnN7S6oUpi2E2vDK3i.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="224" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6MaFtnN7S6oUpi2E2vDK3i.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>For this piece, we split testing between our German and American labs. The U.S. team ran the gaming benchmarks, while the Germans measured performance in workstation apps and thermal/power data. Both labs used MSI's B350 Tomahawk motherboard.</p><p>If you want to know more about how the Tom's Hardware DE system looks and is controlled, check out <strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-we-test-graphics-cards,4912.html">How We Test Graphics Cards</a></strong>.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2560px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:66.68%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hPmk2E54ZLWmLpipwrwFiV.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hPmk2E54ZLWmLpipwrwFiV.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="2560" height="1707" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hPmk2E54ZLWmLpipwrwFiV.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><div ><table><thead><tr><th  colspan="2"><strong>Test Systems and Measurement Setups</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  ><strong>Systems</strong></th><td  ><span>Germany AMD 1</span>Ryzen 5 1500X, 1600X, Ryzen 7 1800X, 1700X, 1700MSI X370 XPower Gaming Titanium<span><span>Intel LGA 1151</span> Intel Core i5-7600K, Core i5-7500 MSI Z270 Gaming 7AMD Socket AM3+</span> FX-9590 Asus Crosshair V Formula 2 x 8GB Corsair Dominator DDR3-2133 @1866 MT/s<span>Germany All</span>16GB (2x 8GB) G.Skill Ripjaws DDR4-3200 (15-15-15-35)1x 1TB Toshiba OCZ RD400 (M.2, System SSD)2x 960GB Toshiba OCZ TR150 (Storage, Images)be quiet Dark Power Pro 11, 850WWindows 10 Creators Update Version 1703<span>U.S. AMD 1</span>Ryzen 5 1600X, Ryzen 7 1700MSI B350 Tomahawk2x G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @2666 and 3200 MT/s<span>U.S. Intel 1</span>Intel Core i7-7700K, i7-7600K, i7-7500MSI Z170A Gaming M72x G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @2400 and 3200 MT/s<span>U.S. AMD 2</span>AMD FX-8370MSI 970 Gaming2x Kingston HyperX DDR3 2133 MT/s<span>U.S. All</span>EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FE1TB Samsung PM863SilverStone ST1500, 1500WWindows 10 Creators Update Version 1703</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Cooling</strong></th><td  ><span>Germany</span>- Alphacool Eispumpe VPP755 Pump - Alphacool NexXxoS UT60 Full Copper 240mm- Alphacool Eisblock XPX CPU-Alphacool Cape Corp Coolplex Pro 10 LT- 5x be quiet! Silent Wings 3 PWM- Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut <span>U.S.</span>-Corsair H100i v2-Noctua NH-U12S SE-AM4-Arctic MX-4</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Case</strong></th><td  >Lian Li PC-T70 with Expansion Kit and Mods</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Power Consumption Measurements</strong></th><td  >- Contact-free DC Measurement at PCIe Slot (Using a Riser Card) - Contact-free DC Measurement at External Auxiliary Power Supply Cable - Direct Voltage Measurement at Power Supply- 2 x Rohde & Schwarz HMO 3054, 500MHz Digital Multi-Channel Oscilloscope with Storage Function - 4 x Rohde & Schwarz HZO50 Current Probe (1mA - 30A, 100kHz, DC) - 4 x Rohde & Schwarz HZ355 (10:1 Probes, 500MHz) - 1 x Rohde & Schwarz HMC 8012 Digital Multimeter with Storage Function</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Thermal Measurements</strong></th><td  >- 1 x Optris PI640 80Hz Infrared Camera- PI Connect Analysis Software with Profiles</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Noise Measurements</strong></th><td  >- NTI Audio M2211 (with Calibration File)- Steinberg UR12 (with Phantom Power for Microphones)- Creative X7, Smaart v.7- Custom-Made Proprietary Measurement Chamber, 3.5 x 1.8 x 2.2m (L x D x H)- Perpendicular to Center of Noise Source(s), Measurement Distance of 50cm- Noise Level in dB(A) (Slow), Real-time Frequency Analyzer (RTA) - Graphical Frequency Spectrum of Noise</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPU Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="3dmark-ashes-of-the-singularity-battlefield-1">3DMark, Ashes of the Singularity, Battlefield 1</h2><h2 id="3dmark-3">3DMark</h2><p>We aren't big fans of using synthetic benchmarks to measure game performance, but 3DMark's DX11 and DX12 CPU tests provide useful insight into the amount of raw horsepower available to the game engine.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fopUz9AuwK6e7Vr27wfKfH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZNCVPwCDn6MJvuN5faoNAc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BE9iMrBst3BHeTWA7TCVBm.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The six-core Ryzen 5 1600X can work on three times as many threads than Intel's Core i5s, so it easily trumps the competition in the parallelized physics metric. AMD's 1600X also ekes past the Ryzen 7 1700 in Futuremark's DX11 physics test.</p><p>Overclocking yields a 7.9% speed-up over the Ryzen 5 1600X's stock settings in DX12. Comparatively, the Core i5-7600K is overclocked 25% beyond its all-core 4 GHz Turbo Boost bin, yielding a 29% performance improvement.</p><p>Disabling Ryzen's SMT feature, which eliminates the CPU's six logical cores, results in a roughly ~20% performance loss in DX12. Our DX11 test illustrates a similar step backward, though this time the overclocked Ryzen loses 40% of its performance with SMT disabled.</p><p>The Ryzen 5 1600X is competitive in some API overhead tests, such as the DX12 benchmark where it leverage its extra threads. However, Kaby Lake's IPC throughput advantage shines through in the DX11 overhead tests. The Ryzen 5 falls behind Intel's Core i5 family during the DX11 single- and multi-threaded workloads, even with the help of an overclock. That helps explain Intel's oft-superior frame rates in real-world game tests.</p><h2 id="ashes-of-the-singularity-escalation-9">Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</h2><p>From the launch of Ryzen 7 to now,<em> Ashes of the Singularity</em> demonstrates how a developer can optimize for AMD's Ryzen CPUs to great effect. <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-game-optimization-aots-escalation,34021.html">A recent update</a> improved the poor performance numbers we were seeing from Ryzen, creating much more interesting comparisons.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oHVmGwZntvtG8kTPBkyueh.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wYuHv84CHoWdkmmFRwtMfd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZmWoN2ZrX7bXDAsPNzkCJg.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ea5WUhvLobqUoR7UMXviNE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2h4TVNtyziyC5b4QnDQYgK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8ttpEXenacHGM5GaSJNW58.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qjVGGwgE49TeQdNMo8MzmX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ypfh7UXYsSfxccx7Qu33hd.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</em>'s CPU test scales well with core/thread count. However, Intel's third-generation 14nm+ process provides much more overclocking headroom, allowing Core i5 to secure a first-place finish if you're willing to tune it. Don't get us wrong: with both CPUs at their stock settings, Ryzen 5 1600X is faster. Intel's Kaby Lake design simply has more headroom left for enthusiasts to exploit.</p><p>The unoptimized version of <em>Ashes </em>offered notably higher performance with Ryzen's SMT feature disabled. However, the updated build does a better job of utilizing available resources. As a result, turning SMT off now hurts performance, rather than helping it. </p><h2 id="battlefield-1-4">Battlefield 1</h2><p>We dialed<em> Battlefield 1</em> up to the Ultra preset and repetitively took an armor-laden stroll across the O La Vittoria landscape.</p><p>Strangely, when we disabled Ryzen's SMT functionality, our recording utility stopped working in this game. As such, <em>Battlefield 1</em> is the only title where we're missing results with SMT turned off.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MVc7kL4XqMisTD7WdkeM5i.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/utbduJ9XMcxEQbPCWFUr4A.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MmxFxcQ4TWmxqy4cEoxA3S.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/e7aJavMfRnAkvHF7xC4jK4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tyaVbpaxBPXNMtCxvNWnQU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Xujxk7FeJ8EqiEc6M65PYd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fvwrhwrnHiv6rCqnB5JxBa.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Surprisingly, the stock Ryzen 5 1600X falls behind Intel's processors. Even overclocking doesn't bridge the gap completely.</p><p>If you want a sense of context, though, check out the FX's best effort (particularly the frame time chart). AMD has come a long way since the Piledriver era.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPU Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="civilization-vi-ai-amp-graphics-test-deus-ex-mankind-divided">Civilization VI AI & Graphics Test, Deus Ex: Mankind Divided</h2><h2 id="civilization-vi-ai-test-7">Civilization VI AI Test</h2><h2 id="16"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.00%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Q5bhi36yTsDCTRvX9DRkuh.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Q5bhi36yTsDCTRvX9DRkuh.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="834" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Q5bhi36yTsDCTRvX9DRkuh.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p><em>Civilization VI </em>spawns 45 threads during the CPU test. However, higher core counts don't seem to have a big impact on frame rates. Instead, the stock Core i5-7600K handily beats Ryzen 5 1600X in its default configuration. What's more, the six-core Ryzen 5 chip beats AMD's Ryzen 7 1700, which boasts more cores, but lower clock rates. We can assume this game responds better to high clock rates and IPC throughput than lots of cores.</p><h2 id="civilization-vi-graphics-test-7">Civilization VI Graphics Test</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ugfS9m85YyzcWLBtW9q6rX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ezUAX5qvMu8RXmttsdrpdM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KsG2Keh5MwpUgBYy9Hv947.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sd2mJ3hYH4nK7NSGpei8fB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Da6r9ni2RXVSenAyvHzxSn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FoATaf9mhvwYLTYgVgcaeW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/o7CdoDEpQbeYGfBRQ8tVKm.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The stock Ryzen 5 doesn't gain much from turning SMT off in <em>Civilization VI</em>'s graphics test. In fact, this surprisingly causes a significant number of frame time spikes.</p><p>See those purple spikes in the frame time chart? Those affect all of the Ryzen 7 processors we've tested under <em>Civilization VI</em>, but they don't plague the stock Ryzen 5 1600X. It's also notable that the 1600X provides a much higher frame rate than Ryzen 7 1700, which we attribute to its higher clock rate.</p><p>A stock Ryzen 5 1600X beats Intel's Core i5-7600K at its stock settings. Again, though, overclocking Kaby Lake to 5 GHz yields chart-topping performance that Ryzen can't match at 4 GHz.</p><h2 id="deus-ex-mankind-divided-2">Deus Ex: Mankind Divided</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dFaMtUCXcwT2mKGiGDRnNV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3ktLg4BNBBDnp9pHLfCbf8.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZvxLVRyhZMJg5bSGeDarvV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3zxKCMwEMNDevDnDCZmXGH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tDLMG25yk5Q5CqLcKPTiu6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jNCmoVQeUzuHZ8JyqFqBk3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/j9nwsQDzFc7CnTWMjHVY4n.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Deus Ex: Mankind Divided </em>remains the only game that Ryzen processors dominate in convincing fashion. The entire Intel line-up falls well below AMD's 1600X, apparently bottlenecked by something the Ryzen chips overcome. Overclocking doesn't help, based on the Core i5-7600K's performance at 5 GHz.</p><p>Interestingly, we observe lower performance and more frame time spikes when we disable the 1600X's SMT functionality. Apparently, turning SMT off isn't always a good way to make Ryzen a better gaming CPU.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPU Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="gta-v-hitman-2016-middle-earth-shadow-of-mordor">GTA V, Hitman (2016), Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor</h2><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-13">Grand Theft Auto V</h2><p>We measure performance during <em>Grand Theft Auto V</em>'s F-16 flight sequence with the built-in benchmark.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LNiTLFG6tZGbB4oHALoSoE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3cJL7QSK4fh6aCF2icaHQE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/K7LT4FFyMYLiHqqNR7oMQF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3Fj63JYToNjQfzm8vyCB8B.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zC7NojG7gvJejksVwqbDsa.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qQVUfmXuw9zAvvwEX8Fr5S.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8FByk4G6ZN7tQNUR5WGnRJ.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Core i5-7600K establishes a slight lead over the SMT-disabled Ryzen 5 1600X, but overclocking reveals just how effective Kaby Lake can be when we wring out all of its available headroom. If only we could explain that (repeatable) frame time spike it suffers toward the end of our benchmark... </p><h2 id="hitman-2016-6">Hitman (2016)</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/w4DxKgJuCeBEvTk59qviYD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pMKvS4zeH5GTiNDchpKV6W.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8cQPqkeH8BNEvQwZoAdMMM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2b4ZQjLbHVygSXBLrdccHR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5EzgyidiejwjL4kSSrbusR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wPCjuFY8RW5KN3bpRAanZi.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2UkmGWDELJQdiyAUCSZBb8.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The overclocked Core i5-7600K lands at the top of our <em>Hitman</em> charts. Separately, disabling the Ryzen 5 1600X's SMT feature once again hurts performance and introduces frame time spikes.</p><h2 id="middle-earth-shadow-of-mordor-6">Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4XyPx5dDZ6TpMJGaZ8bmiZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tMePRcy4JadrX6tiMcxwWR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SdBt9XxSCMs6nruoP8p4he.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9ZdPpax3fKQrQdKFcb7sP8.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/d3zkVgHASsPSL8Ppb8epZQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/G4GBhQ4oLT3UpEGNT6x3ne.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/enpy888aCysDKKbXDrMtpU.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor</em> appears mostly graphics-bound, so there isn't much difference between the various host processors. That's good new for Ryzen 5 1600X, which provides solid performance against Intel's Core i5-7600K.</p><p>It appears that turning off SMT helps average frame rates a little. However, the frame time charts reveal worrying spikes that affect smoothness. Overclocking does help smooth out those wrinkles.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPU Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="project-cars-rise-of-the-tomb-raider-the-division">Project CARS, Rise of the Tomb Raider, The Division</h2><h2 id="project-cars-6">Project CARS</h2><p><em>Project CARS</em> clearly responds most readily to high clock rates and IPC throughput, as evidenced by the difference between Intel's Core i5-7600K at stock and overclocked settings. Incidentally, those two configurations land in first and second place.</p><p>AMD's six-core Ryzen 5 1600X even manages to beat the eight-core Ryzen 7 1700 thanks to its higher frequency.</p><p>We noticed that our Core i5-7600K performed a little better here than in previous reviews. Curious if the extra speed was attributable to Microsoft's Game Mode, we toggled the feature on and off, only to determine that the frame rates were similar either way. </p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rJAVXSvz62jhViR3MQT34H.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bTEax6cCL2LY9tA3SPydQ3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/txdiWTPniHej6XwhUHsupX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JWgCQVpNUEqRFjHYu7Auog.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/T9K2mWezUVejgRFeKwXk8H.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xvZcsRWngpwqDSyR6q8b9R.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/trDWNVbf6Qgb9JnXvXhUH7.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><h2 id="rise-of-the-tomb-raider-7">Rise of the Tomb Raider</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FM8eiNNyTbXet82me2HjYH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YDMxBGE6fkwFiD29YiAhQh.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2K2wchHteFx9TLbsaAkj28.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ARFB8fEDVSfAiRwcfiqPYK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FftgouCb3DWg7TVXYHuMgB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wmjDn49hD4n8oWhDkHH7oK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4rG8WZ8z6NavX7U2CciKcU.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Rise of the Tomb Raider</em> is also sensitive to IPC throughput and clock rate, which is why the Core i5s fare so well. Overclocking Core i5-7600K to 5 GHz only adds to Intel's dominance in this title.</p><p>Overclocking does help Ryzen 5 1600X quite a bit, too. Meanwhile, there's little benefit to disabling SMT. In fact, doing so causes a lot of ugly frame time spikes.</p><h2 id="the-division-2">The Division</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/R7Vn9wF6csmXeLPR3xj35L.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YbVvz664HMYx9bSAg8TYM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Uq2NrfiHRZMaoSqW9DvWUo.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VEb8TPav4PBEytxwAoAitC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bEuXhhBcixjfGxSLLqhGw9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KxGxCuU7scVSSwhNxdMQ3R.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ibJaj9wzdGyQKTWduYXjUd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9HGKX6UKXoNFFv8wgSrR8S.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Tom Clancy's The Division</em> has AMD's overclocked Ryzen 5 1600X going head to head against Intel's Core i5-7600K at 5 GHz. Impressive, right?</p><p>This game also serves as a cautionary tale against disabling SMT. The frame time spikes are horrible. To better illustrate, we break frame time into two charts: one with SMT on and another with SMT off. We left Ryzen 7 1700 in the second chart to show that it also experiences severe spikes that rival the FX-8370's poor performance in some cases.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPU Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="temperatures-and-many-questions">Temperatures And Many Questions</h2><h2 id="the-tctl-sensor-results-pose-many-questions">The Tctl Sensor Results Pose Many Questions</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:722px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:106.37%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/X3rsAsmbvYaYzKKu7hp6rU.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/X3rsAsmbvYaYzKKu7hp6rU.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="722" height="768" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/X3rsAsmbvYaYzKKu7hp6rU.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>One of the lessons learned during the Ryzen 7 launch was that AMD's temperature sensor output has its share of problems. The company configured some of the models to report an additional 20°C on top of the actual temperature in order to guarantee adequate cooling. We’re still puzzled by this choice.</p><p>Nevertheless, we're accepting it as reality and going all-out on cooling for Ryzen 5's introduction. Alphacool offers a modified version of an industrial compression cooler under the name "Eiszeit 2000 Chiller." It has a powerful pump, and it’s compatible with the usual 1/4" connectors, thus making the technology accessible to enthusiasts like us.</p><p>We’re cooling the processors by connecting an Alphacool Eiszeit XPX CPU block directly to the Eiszeit 2000 Chiller. The compression cooler’s reservoir has a capacity of almost eight liters, serving double duty as a storage tank and compensating reservoir. This provides a large thermal buffer. At 40L per minute, the flow rate is high enough for our purposes as well.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2560px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:62.70%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rmVg85a9EMfgygYhQQ738R.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rmVg85a9EMfgygYhQQ738R.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="2560" height="1605" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rmVg85a9EMfgygYhQQ738R.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>One of the Eiszeit 2000 Chiller’s standout features is its programmable temperature controller, which can keep the cooling fluid’s temperature very close to a level set by the user. We chose 20°C, which the Eiszeit 2000 Chiller handled without any problems, in spite of it being below the ambient temperature.</p><p>At first, we just wanted to see if we could explore how AMD's XFR feature behaved under perfect conditions, and how leakage current would compare to measurements taken with other cooling solutions. However, the first test run delivered a huge surprise:</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:47.40%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8eoyMfKTKVTbnaHW62PrNH.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8eoyMfKTKVTbnaHW62PrNH.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="337" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8eoyMfKTKVTbnaHW62PrNH.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>At just under 17°C, the Ryzen 5 1500X’s reported Tctl temperature values at 19W total power consumption of the CPU package come in a full 3°C below the cooling fluid’s temperature of a constant 20°C!</p><p>We don’t really need to explain why these results can’t be correct. Consequently, we dug deep into our toolbox and found a liquid metal pad that was originally developed as a substitute for thermal paste. Our potent cooler kept the temperatures well below the pad’s melting point, so that it didn’t fuse with the processor’s heat spreader or the water block’s heat sink. We placed a thin strip between the heat spreader and the heat sink during our water-cooled measurements, making sure to cut the strip thin enough for it not to result in a measurable change in cooling performance. We used a tiny copper plate milled into a very thin strip for the stock cooler measurements.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2560px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:52.66%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aGoGuiei9q7zyhPkxRmSd7.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aGoGuiei9q7zyhPkxRmSd7.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="2560" height="1348" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aGoGuiei9q7zyhPkxRmSd7.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2558px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:52.70%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8PS4Qwywxu7RmRMsteXBhE.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8PS4Qwywxu7RmRMsteXBhE.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="2558" height="1348" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8PS4Qwywxu7RmRMsteXBhE.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The plan was simple: find the exact difference between the temperatures reported by the processor and the temperatures we measured for the processor’s heat spreader with the help of our constant cooling fluid temperature setup and infrared camera. Unfortunately, we found that the resulting differences between the temperature curves weren’t consistent and, consequently, still didn’t make any sense. There were two points at which the temperature curves changed drastically and clearly diverged from a linear pattern.</p><p>Based on these findings, we hypothesized that the behavior of the processors’ temperature sensors changed once certain temperature thresholds were reached. If this was the case, we could predict the sensors’ behavior for different temperature ranges and correct the temperature readings.</p><h2 id="temperature-vs-power-consumption">Temperature vs. Power Consumption</h2><p>For our second round of testing, we compared the Tctl values to actual power consumption. A software tool developed in-house allowed us to generate different loads over long time periods, avoiding any jumps or delays that could skew the results. The tool would do its best to spread the loads equally across all possible threads. The results proved our previous hypothesis:</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tTPHRfqodhKUHXsM7X5RQg.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tTPHRfqodhKUHXsM7X5RQg.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tTPHRfqodhKUHXsM7X5RQg.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The reported temperatures are complete nonsense below ~20 to 25W. It’s also plain to see that there are significant differences between the Tctl reporting patterns of AMD’s Ryzen 5 and 7.</p><p>In general, we saw that upwards of 20 to 22W, there was a difference of approximately 4 to 6°C between AMD’s Ryzen 5 and 7 when using our cooling solution with its constant fluid temperature. The Ryzen 5 processors’ sensors consistently displayed higher temperature readings than the Ryzen 7 processors at the same power consumption level!The additional 20°C that AMD builds into some of its Ryzen processor models are already taken into account in this calculation.</p><p>One more thing to consider is the potential difference in heat transfer between components for our particular cooling solution. Plugging in numbers based on our experience and then comparing the final figures to our infrared measurements yields the following results for the three wattage ranges:</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  ><strong>Package </strong><strong>Power Consumption</strong></th><th  ><strong>Temperature DifferenceRyzen 7</strong></th><th  ><strong><strong>Temperature Difference</strong>Ryzen 5</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  ><strong>18 to app. 25W</strong></th><td  >12 to 10°C (Falling)</td><td  >8 to 6°C (Falling)</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>App. 25 to 50W</strong></th><td  >10 to 8°C (Falling)</td><td  >6 to 4°C (Falling)</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>50W to Pmax</strong></th><td  >8 to 4°C (Falling)</td><td  >4 to 0°C (Falling)</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Across the entire wattage range, the Ryzen 5 produces a difference of approximately 8°C. That's pretty significant. We ran several control tests and got the same results every time.</p><h2 id="which-one-s-right-ryzen-5-or-ryzen-7">Which One’s Right: Ryzen 5 or Ryzen 7?</h2><p>The next question is whether Ryzen 5's temperature displays too high, or if Ryzen 7 is too low by 4 to 6°C.</p><p>The following graph shows the CPU heat spreader’s temperatures over a time period of approximately 30 minutes in degrees Celsius. The <strong>Ryzen 7 1800X</strong>’s leakage current is approximately 58 to 60W. Comparing that to the curve in the graph above shows that Tctl and heat spreader temperatures should not be the same. The expected difference of approximately 3 to 5°C between the Tctl and heat spreader temperatures is reached by the <strong>Ryzen 5 1500X</strong>, though. These finding are consistent with what we thought.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:30.52%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PPMfdMfeK5Z8KLnAvfSE9S.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PPMfdMfeK5Z8KLnAvfSE9S.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="217" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PPMfdMfeK5Z8KLnAvfSE9S.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The tentative bottom line seems to be that all Ryzen 7 processors report their temperatures as being approximately 4 to 6°C lower compared to the two Ryzen 5 processors at the same leakage current level.</p><h2 id="consequences-for-air-cooling">Consequences for Air Cooling</h2><p>The bend in the curve at approximately 50W becomes more interesting once we get to the gaming power consumption results. The smaller CPUs may stay in this range during gaming, which means that it might be beneficial to take our results into account when setting fan curves. Most people don’t have a compression cooler at home, after all. The lower your cooling performance, the more important it is to change sensor characteristics!</p><p>We measured the Ryzen 5 1500X with AMD's stock air cooler to illustrate our point further. Its fan was set to a fixed speed we chose after first running a stress test. The curve's two bends are easy to see in spite of the curves being much steeper. A closer look shows that the total power consumption increased by approximately 5W. This is due to increased leakage currents that accompany the much higher temperatures.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8YgZEh9mFbYW95TJPc2Xu.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8YgZEh9mFbYW95TJPc2Xu.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8YgZEh9mFbYW95TJPc2Xu.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We stay with the temperature results a little while longer and take a look at all of the Ryzen processors’ temperatures. These are corrected for the temperature differences due to the three wattage ranges and the two processor lines.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/H2TuxiaB2BLBWsQHXu7eYZ.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/H2TuxiaB2BLBWsQHXu7eYZ.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/H2TuxiaB2BLBWsQHXu7eYZ.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Here’s a computational example for the Ryzen 7 1800X during the stress test:</p><p><em><strong>67°C (Tctl, Sensor) - 20°C (AMD Ryzen Offset) + 4°C (Additional Offset for Ryzen 7) = 51°C</strong></em></p><p>If you feel confused by all of this, then you’re certainly in good company. Nobody knows what prompted AMD to take the approach it did. If we didn’t use our offsets, then Ryzen 7 would be much cooler than Ryzen 5 at the same level of leakage current, which is physically impossible.</p><p>Before we close, we’d like to point out one more time that the temperature differences and offsets only apply to our particular test setup. Different hardware may very well affect behave some other way. The general principle shouldn’t change, though. A final judgement can’t be reached before these – admittedly elaborate – measurements have been repeated with a wide variety of setups.</p><p>Doing this just wasn’t possible under the time constraints of a product launch. The measurements took us three days for just the one setup.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPU Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="power-consumption-results">Power Consumption Results</h2><h2 id="important-preamble">Important Preamble</h2><p>In addition to AMD's new Ryzen 5 processors, we also tested the Ryzen 7s once more, given a number of platform changes, the Windows 10 Creators Update, and new drivers. This means the results from our Ryzen 5 review aren't comparable to what we presented in the Ryzen 7 launch story. Fortunately, the differences are very small.</p><p>The power consumption results are based on numbers provided by the MSI motherboard’s power supply sensors. We used a special low-pass filter that eliminates brief peaks and valleys, as well as an adjusted average calculation method. The individual clips last only two minutes, but the bar graphs are based on the full 15-minute tests needed for an accurate measurement.</p><h2 id="power-consumption-comparison-ryzen-5-processors">Power Consumption Comparison: Ryzen 5 Processors</h2><p>The data we're presenting is the result of lengthy test intervals. These are necessary to avoid (or at least minimize) sporadic measurement errors and the influence of unwanted fluctuations.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CsJvuvoCzWZCqDDpfaQeTo.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CsJvuvoCzWZCqDDpfaQeTo.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CsJvuvoCzWZCqDDpfaQeTo.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The findings get interesting once the cores are stressed with a higher load. Power consumption goes up significantly, and there’s a large difference by the time we hit the stress test.</p><h2 id="power-consumption-comparison-all-processors">Power Consumption Comparison: All Processors</h2><p>The following chart includes all of the Ryzen models we've reviewed thus far at idle. The differences between them are very small. In fact, they can only be measured reliably with a 15-minute test run.</p><p>AMD's six- and eight-core models demonstrate similar power characteristics. Because there's really no difference between them, we can only assume that the CPUs with disabled cores didn't have them cut off electrically. As a result, they're still being supplied with power.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xf9Gnvj2zaP74AZRFUb2Pm.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xf9Gnvj2zaP74AZRFUb2Pm.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xf9Gnvj2zaP74AZRFUb2Pm.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>It’s anyone’s guess at this point whether it'll ever be possible to activate disabled cores/cache against AMD's wishes. More than likely, though, the company took pains to prevent that kind of modding.</p><p>Even though AutoCAD is predominantly single-threaded, the differences between Ryzen processors prove to be marginal once again. They are probably attributable to variations in chip quality and clock rate more than anything else.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/y7D8A2tgYCLR59sACsCCaB.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/y7D8A2tgYCLR59sACsCCaB.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/y7D8A2tgYCLR59sACsCCaB.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Under heavier loads, the larger Ryzen models are left behind. AMD’s Ryzen 7 1700 comes closest to the architecture's sweet spot due to its lower clock rate.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/opRXh9DDAPBxbRwf3dFkT7.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/opRXh9DDAPBxbRwf3dFkT7.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/opRXh9DDAPBxbRwf3dFkT7.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>A similar picture emerges during the stress test. AMD’s Ryzen 7 1700 with its 16 threads and low frequency beats the 6C/12T Ryzen 5 1600X.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1113px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.84%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uyWDKbcCu3wyPDYpWerkXG.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uyWDKbcCu3wyPDYpWerkXG.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1113" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uyWDKbcCu3wyPDYpWerkXG.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>What we’ve found in our Ryzen 5 tests fits in well with what we’ve known and suspected based on our previous experiences with AMD’s Ryzen 7 processors. Mainly, the Ryzen 5s aren’t any more or less efficient than the eight-core variants. This leads us to two conclusions. First, the Ryzen 5's die quality isn't any worse than what you get from Ryzen 7, and it doesn’t negatively impact efficiency or drive up power consumption. Second, disabling cores to yield a Ryzen 5 doesn’t result in better efficiency, which makes it highly likely that these deactivated parts are still supplied with power.</p><p>The power consumption results across all of AMD's Ryzen processor models are solid compared to Intel's equivalent CPUs, except at idle. AMD’s efficiency really isn’t any worse than Intel's, provided that you present Ryzen with a threaded workload able to fully utilize the architecture.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPU Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="workstation-benchmarks">Workstation Benchmarks</h2><p>As mentioned, our U.S. and German teams worked on different parts of our launch coverage. Both teams unified on their utilization of the Windows 10 Creators Update, though, updating to the latest motherboard firmware versions and chipset drivers as well. As with the gaming results, these are completely new for today's story.</p><h2 id="2d-benchmarks-directx-and-gdi-gdi">2D Benchmarks: DirectX And GDI/GDI+</h2><p>The Ryzen 5 1600X lands exactly where we'd expect in a lightly-threaded workload dependent on clock rate: between the 1800X and Ryzen 7 1700X.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HtS8YkbbHWtWqj3nVsKYpM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DsGW6hCPWmEW3F3CYigQaK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uLGqS5UDZjEWgEAv5KD7KQ.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><h2 id="2d-benchmarks-adobe-creative-cloud-2">2D Benchmarks: Adobe Creative Cloud</h2><p>Clock rate reigns supreme yet again, though the Ryzen 5 1600X does trail Ryzen 7 1700X this time around. Still, when you consider a higher frequency helps the 1600X beat AMD's eight-core Ryzen 7 1700, we might already be looking at a better value play just days after commending the 1700's position against AMD's higher-end Ryzen 7s.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZQqbqQ59YM8iLHcGs8uN94.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ABN9Rvr8ukk4sghaiHAwck.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xyDpaQxNJkUvU4svGH6P6Y.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LXiPPYC23pLB3XUHUKe3gj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gVwTJuxEUyDkHb5EPuwZgA.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><h2 id="3d-benchmarks-directx-and-opengl">3D Benchmarks: DirectX and OpenGL</h2><p>Consistently, we see AMD's Ryzen 5 1600X land between the Ryzen 7 1800X and 1700X. It should be clear by now how important clock rate is to per-core performance, particularly when the workload doesn't utilize all of a processor's available execution resources (as in these benchmarks).</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xyD5o4GoQQFtdswicnQtkL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BpiSNVrQadgHBuf3wrywzP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Dw7RgXKbhsSqVVVfNkMaj3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tfvuoo8WcmSZecEHaV7Df7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DPVSFGbZQWZqiT5SmHNJhT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ja6RaC3mPFw9SBm5tAUWGM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/x2aKgmcwW96UB42nbQHJZh.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fixgQ5qxcHchMK8QjuKASe.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><h2 id="cpu-performance-workstation-4">CPU Performance: Workstation</h2><p>In the professional apps able to fully utilize an eight-core Ryzen 7 CPU, the Ryzen 5 1600X cannot keep up. It does, however, trounce quad-core Core i5s in those workloads. Where the threading isn't as thick, a clock rate advantage helps propel the 1600X above Ryzen 7 1700.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DTuQ3RtB6uPrLBjRtkCSD9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aok2a5Fzgv8Szt9xpE5aXD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iky55iarcmZA9gCpd4dwKV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xu2ykG9mdLogxpG9pjXcdC.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><h2 id="cpu-performance-photorealistic-rendering-5">CPU Performance: Photorealistic Rendering</h2><p>Blender really likes the 1600X's combination of 6C/12T and 1800X-equivalent clock rates, often placing the Ryzen 5 over AMD's Ryzen 7 1700. Once again, in the tests that do utilize Ryzen's resources, it obliterates the Core i5s, going so far as to challenge Core i7-6800K in certain workloads.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3u2CXPsr57VDUTp4Gbxwvj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/49ELMwVacWwcMkUTroQxs5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8Q6Ywg49DxvjVUXtQQ988o.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YiMpcYTz3E7DaAJ73D4p5R.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TkFrQtjWd9j7vQiV9aw5Y6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BozaX6bzoYknXtmxi6W6MC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7VsAuyfPvAVzcY5raGKKfZ.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><h2 id="cpu-performance-encoding-amp-compression-decompression-2">CPU Performance: Encoding  & Compression/Decompression</h2><p>HandBrake readily utilizes all of the cores these CPUs present, so it's no surprise that the Ryzen 7 line-up appears ahead of Ryzen 5 1600X. More interesting, perhaps, is the fact that Ryzen 5 1600X appears alongside the $420 Core i7-6800K.</p><p>Our 7-Zip compression workload is threaded, yet the higher-clocked Ryzen 5 1600X slides in ahead of Ryzen 7 1700. The quad-core Core i5s are quite simply out-classed. The decompression test cares only for clock rate and IPC throughput, though. Intel's Kaby Lake architecture rises to the top, followed by Broadwell-E. Ryzen 5 1600X must do battle against the Ryzen 7 models using its generally higher frequency.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ProTTvzg9kzzRJAjdRzWii.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kuuE9Xh3SA6ngpw85zDN3M.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/e9sa9ZZAZKZqTmoCdrHGcM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zJVNXYvRtKbkciV3UzeXr7.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Overall, Ryzen 5 1600X is an interesting workstation chip. It leverages six SMT-enabled cores and a reasonably high clock rate. Pair the 1600X up with an inexpensive B350-based motherboard, and Intel's Broadwell-E-based Core i7s can't touch the resulting value. AMD's weakness is memory support. We couldn't use more than 32GB in our test system, and if you go over two modules, you're sacrificing bandwidth on the already-anemic dual-channel controller.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPU Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="conclusion-3">Conclusion</h2><p>Ryzen 5 1600X offers many of the same features and capabilities first introduced by Ryzen 7, except you get them at a more mainstream price point. That really isn't surprising since this CPU is based on the same die, albeit with a couple of disabled cores. Although Ryzen 5 1600X's idle power consumption is much higher than even the fastest Kaby Lake-based processors, it's more competitive under taxing workloads. Overall, the trimmed-down design boasts similar power consumption as the eight-core Ryzen 7s.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull- inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:46.89%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TAJuk9kwrqAMYKysQ9gmnj.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TAJuk9kwrqAMYKysQ9gmnj.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="708" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TAJuk9kwrqAMYKysQ9gmnj.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Due to its identical clock rates, AMD's Ryzen 5 1600X demonstrates similar performance as the Ryzen 7 1800X in lightly-threaded content creation and productivity tests. The 1600X also outpaces the Ryzen 7 1700 in a great many scenarios where its higher frequency weighs heavier than its core count deficit. This makes the 1700 a tougher sell.</p><p>Intel’s Kaby Lake-based processors beat Ryzen 5 1600X in lightly-threaded applications where they can leverage superior IPC throughput. But the 1600X’s extra cores/threads turn the tables in software well-optimized for multi-core CPUs. Surprisingly, the 1600X even rivals the 1700X in certain scenarios. That paints a pretty convincing picture for a budget workstation chip, especially in light of the incredible price-to-performance ratio compared to Intel’s Broadwell-E line-up.</p><p>The Ryzen 5 1600X also makes a compelling argument <em>against</em> purchasing the 1700 for your next gaming PC. Six nimble cores regularly match or beat AMD's budget-oriented eight-core model. It'd be easy to speculate that, due to the 1600X’s lower core count, less inter-CCX traffic unburdens the Infinity Fabric and provides more competitive performance. We'll explore this in more depth later. For now, we think it's safe to say there's little reason for enthusiasts to splurge on the higher-end Ryzens for gaming, especially when the dual-CCX die overclocks similarly, regardless of configuration.</p><p>But don't forget the Core i5-7600K. It's a capable gaming processor. And although the 1600X challenges it in much of our benchmark suite, the Core i5 still comes out on top at stock settings. Further, overclocking Kaby Lake opens up a sizeable advantage that AMD cannot overcome, given limited frequency headroom. We expect Ryzen's overclocking potential to improve as GlobalFoundries' 14nm process evolves, but Intel's isn't sitting by idly, either.</p><p>AMD is still working on improving the utilization of Ryzen 5's resource-rich architecture, and a few gaming titles make it apparent that this is still a work in progress. We’ve seen several developers come forward with Ryzen-specific patches, and if AMD's gets its wish, more will follow suit. In the meantime, AMD developed its own Windows power profile to combat the performance issues we observed back when Ryzen 7 launched. Unfortunately, some of the other workarounds we played with may not apply as universally to Ryzen 5. For instance, disabling SMT on the 1600X resulted in choppy frame delivery, apparent in our frame time charts.</p><p>At least overclocking is allowed on inexpensive B350-based motherboards. This makes Ryzen 5 a much better value than Broadwell-E, arguably superior to Ryzen 7 for mainstream gamers, and at least competitive with Kaby Lake. As shown in our Infinity Fabric-oriented tests, though, you'll want a fast memory kit to achieve the best gaming performance.</p><p>Ryzen 5 1600X provides a tremendous price-to-performance ratio for budget workstations, rivaling Core i7-6800K. It also facilitates playable performance in games (though it still lags Kaby Lake-based Core i5s more often than not). Considering what Intel charges for its Core i5-7600K, we'd certainly like Ryzen 5 1600X a lot more for gaming if it debuted at a lower price. Much of the Ryzen tapestry is woven using value as its thread. But it's hard to keep that story together when Ryzen 5 1600X sells for $249 and Core i5-7600K goes for $240. With that said, professionals on a budget are far more likely to jump on a potent six-core chip like the 1600X when it's able to beat the $450 Core i7-6800K.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">All CPU Content</a></strong></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ AMD Ryzen 7 1700 CPU Review ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1700-cpu-review,5009.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ AMD claims that Ryzen 7 1700 is the most efficient eight-core CPU available, and at $330, it’s undoubtedly the cheapest one with modern amenities. We think it can match its bigger brothers with a decent overclock. Let’s put it to the test. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">6ZxtFYcEmqmWSAdfpHF9E7</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BDs5RHihvWFSdmfNJzpQrY-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 06 Apr 2017 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:30:35 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ palcorn@outlook.com (Paul Alcorn) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Paul Alcorn ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RZRmFeQfPy3etHjBQitbGW.jpeg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;As a teenager, Paul scraped up enough money to buy a 486-powered PC with a turbo button (yes, a turbo button). Back when floppies were still popular he was already chasing after the fastest spinners for his personal computer, which led him down the long and winding storage road, covering enterprise storage. His current focus is on consumer processors, though he still keeps a close eye on the latest storage news. In his spare time, you’ll find Paul hanging out with his kids or indulging his love of the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                <cf:isSponsored>false</cf:isSponsored>
                <cf:hasAffiliateLinks>false</cf:hasAffiliateLinks>
                <cf:isPaid>false</cf:isPaid>
                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BDs5RHihvWFSdmfNJzpQrY-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BDs5RHihvWFSdmfNJzpQrY-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="introduction-5">Introduction </h2><p>AMD is trying to claw back lost market share with its eight-core Ryzen processors, and in the process, the company is generating a tremendous amount of excitement. Most of the enthusiasm stems from competitive pricing and solid performance in content creation and productivity workloads, even if Ryzen isn't shaping up to be universally superior, as many hoped prior to launch. The chips still suffer an IPC deficit compared to Intel’s Kaby Lake processors, and the unique Zen microarchitecture falls behind in some games at lower resolutions. While the Ryzen 7 CPUs we've tested provide a smooth experience in most titles, they don't oust Intel from its comfortable position atop the benchmark charts. This makes it difficult to universally recommend those high-end parts.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:600px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.00%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FTmktPSGtKCrEmsCEyRoQ7.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FTmktPSGtKCrEmsCEyRoQ7.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="600" height="450" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FTmktPSGtKCrEmsCEyRoQ7.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>But it appears the bottom of AMD's Ryzen 7 stack offers the best value. The company claims that its Ryzen 7 1700 is the most efficient eight-core CPU available. And priced at $330, it's undoubtedly the cheapest one with modern amenities. The 1700 wields the same design as its more expensive counterparts, including the same Zen-based architecture, two CCXes enabling 16 logical cores, and 16MB of L3 cache. It also sports an unlocked ratio multiplier, AMD's SenseMI suite, and Socket AM4 compatibility.</p><p>As a result, the Ryzen 7 1700 might hit a value sweet spot that the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-cpu,4951.html">$500 Ryzen 7 1800X</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1700x-review,4987.html">$400 1700X</a> couldn’t.</p>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="11b17be9-120d-4317-96ed-ef3d4c5cfb25">            <div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:74.96%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rnHXwa3cYBob5DkU7MMjEo.jpg" alt=""><span class='featured__label hero__label'> </span></p></div>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 7 1800X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="46ab2cec-6d58-494f-9cb6-c0359319f019">            <div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:97.22%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4hFswsDbGakWZtmX6Uw8KK.png" alt=""></p></div>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Ryzen 7 1700X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="9ce4b737-8e09-437d-ac91-c40e966d074a">            <div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:97.22%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4hFswsDbGakWZtmX6Uw8KK.png" alt=""></p></div>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Ryzen 7 1700</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><p>The 1700’s 65W TDP stands out as its most notable differentiator compared to the higher-end 95W Ryzen 7s. A more conservative power rating means lower voltages (and heat), so its 3 GHz base and 3.7 GHz boost frequencies understandably trail the 1700X and 1800X as well.</p><p>Both X SKUs do benefit from AMD's XFR (eXtended Frequency Range) technology, which provides an additional 100 MHz over the boost ceiling if your thermal solution is beefy enough. In contrast, the 1700 comes equipped with a reduced XFR feature set that doesn’t boost beyond 3.7 GHz, though it does facilitate an all-core 3.1 GHz boost in threaded workloads. You also save a few bucks with the bundled 95W Wraith Spire cooler, and although we wouldn’t recommend using the stock heat sink for overclocking, it’s a nice addition.</p><p>The 1700 wades into a brutally competitive segment; its $330 price tag is only slightly lower than the $350 Core i7-7700K rocking a 4.2 GHz base and 4.5 GHz Turbo Boost clock rate. The Ryzen 7 1700 beckons with twice as many cores and double the L3 cache, though that doesn't translate to more performance in every application. After all, even Intel's Core i5-7600K competes with the top Ryzen 7s in certain workloads.</p><p>The Ryzens we've tested thus far suffer curious performance losses in some games. But AMD contends that many developers will patch their software to improve frame rates. Encouragingly, Stardock/Oxide recently patched <em>Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</em> to optimize for Ryzen. Valve also released a patch for <em>Dota 2</em>. Both updates improve performance, and more important, they hint at what we might see from other devs in the future.</p><p>In the meantime, Ryzen 7 1700 offers a great starting price for eight cores and an unlocked multiplier. We think it can match its bigger brothers with a bit of tuning. Let's test that theory out. </p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-zen-cpu-microarchitecture,32540.html">Everything Zen: AMD Presents New Microarchitecture At HotChips</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-kaby-lake-core-i7-7700k-i7-7700-i5-7600k-i5-7600,4870.html">Intel Kaby Lake Core i7-7700K, i7-7700, i5-7600K, i5-7600 Review</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i7-broadwell-e-6950x-6900k-6850k-6800k,4587.html">Broadwell-E: Intel Core i7-6950X, 6900K, 6850K & 6800K Review</a></strong></p><h2 id="overclocking-amp-test-setup-3">Overclocking & Test Setup</h2><h2 id="overclocking-6">Overclocking </h2><p>We dialed in a 3.9 GHz overclock for all three Ryzen processors, and the tuning experience was similar across the trio. A 1.3875V core voltage and 1.2V CPU SoC voltage paved the way for extended stability in Prime95. During our tests in the U.S. lab, we saw the 1700 peak at 65<strong>°</strong>C (according to AIDA), while the 1700X and 1800X reached 70<strong>°</strong>C.</p><p>Waste heat appears to accumulate quickly at higher clock rates (we hit 82°C with the 1800X at 4 GHz using Corsair's H100i v2). The Wraith Spire cooler can dissipate up to 95W, but it’s best to purchase a beefy cooler if you plan on pushing the limits of Ryzen's frequency headroom. Regardless of the heat sink we used, or the unsafe voltages we dialed in, though, we couldn't run at the same 4 GHz with our 1700. Our sample just wouldn't make it past our stress tests. Your mileage may vary, of course.</p><p>AMD recommends a "safe" limit of 1.35V for long-term overclocks, but doesn't provide warranty coverage for voltage settings beyond default. The company also claims Ryzen can take up to 1.45V, though it doesn't recommend this for long-term use. </p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  ><strong>Ryzen Memory Support</strong></th><th  ><strong>MT/s</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  ><strong>Dual-Channel/Dual-Rank/Four-DIMM</strong></th><td  >1866</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Dual-Channel/Single-Rank/Four-DIMM</strong></th><td  >2133</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Dual-Channel/Dual-Rank/Two-DIMM</strong></th><td  >2400</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Dual-Channel/Single-Rank/Two-DIMM</strong></th><td  >2677</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>We bumped Corsair's LPX memory modules up to DDR4-2933 for our overclocked tests. There are reports that higher data rates yield notable gains from Ryzen processors. Unfortunately though, even after the most recent wave of BIOS updates, support for 3000 MT/s+ is dicey. The motherboard ecosystem continues to mature, and we plan to follow up when AMD opens up additional timings and improves memory overclocking with an update later in April.</p><h2 id="test-setup-8">Test Setup</h2><p>For this piece, we split testing between our German and American labs. The team in the U.S. ran the gaming benchmarks, while the Germans measured performance in HPC and workstation apps, and then collected thermal/power data. They used MSI's X370 XPower Gaming Titanium motherboard and we went with Asus' Crosshair VI Hero and an EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FE. We stuck with AMD’s recommended presets for our stock configurations to minimize issues attributable to the dissimilar boards.</p><p>If you want to know more about how the Tom's Hardware DE system looks and is controlled, check out <strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-we-test-graphics-cards,4912.html">How We Test Graphics Cards</a></strong>.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2560px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:66.68%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hPmk2E54ZLWmLpipwrwFiV.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hPmk2E54ZLWmLpipwrwFiV.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="2560" height="1707" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hPmk2E54ZLWmLpipwrwFiV.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><div ><table><thead><tr><th  colspan="2"><strong>Test Systems and Measurement Setups</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  ><strong>Systems</strong></th><td  ><span>Germany AMD 1</span>Ryzen 7 1800X, 1700X, 1700MSI X370 XPower Gaming Titanium2x Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-3000 @2666 MT/s<span>Intel LGA 2011-v3</span><span> Intel Core i7-6900K MSI X99S XPower Gaming Titanium 4 x 4GB Crucial Ballistix DDR4-2400<span>Intel LGA 1151</span> Intel Core i7-7700K MSI Z270 Gaming 7 2 x 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4-3200 @2400 MT/sAMD Socket AM3+</span> FX-9590 Asus Crosshair V Formula 2 x 8GB Corsair Dominator DDR3-2133 @1866 MT/s<span>Germany All</span>1x 1TB Toshiba OCZ RD400 (M.2, System SSD)2x 960GB Toshiba OCZ TR150 (Storage, Images)be quiet Dark Power Pro 11, 850WWindows 10 Pro (All Updates)<span>US AMD 1</span>Ryzen 7 1800X, 1700X, 1700Asus ROG Crosshair VI Hero2x Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-3000 @2666 MT/s<span>USA Intel 1</span>Intel Core i7-7700KMSI Z270 Gaming M72x Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-3000 @2400 MT/s<span>USA Intel 2</span>Core i7-6900KASRock X99 Extreme44x Crucial DDR4-2400<span>US All</span>1TB Samsung PM863SilverStone ST1500, 1500WWindows 10 Pro (All Updates) Version 1607</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Cooling</strong></th><td  ><span>Germany</span>- Alphacool Eispumpe VPP755 Pump - Alphacool NexXxoS UT60 Full Copper 240mm- Alphacool Eisblock XPX CPU-Alphacool Cape Corp Coolplex Pro 10 LT- 5x be quiet! Silent Wings 3 PWM- Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut <span>US</span>-Corsair H100iv2-Noctua NH-U12S SE-AM4-Arctic MX-4</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Case</strong></th><td  >Lian Li PC-T70 with Expansion Kit and Mods</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Power Consumption Measurements</strong></th><td  >- Contact-free DC Measurement at PCIe Slot (Using a Riser Card) - Contact-free DC Measurement at External Auxiliary Power Supply Cable - Direct Voltage Measurement at Power Supply- 2 x Rohde & Schwarz HMO 3054, 500MHz Digital Multi-Channel Oscilloscope with Storage Function - 4 x Rohde & Schwarz HZO50 Current Probe (1mA - 30A, 100kHz, DC) - 4 x Rohde & Schwarz HZ355 (10:1 Probes, 500MHz) - 1 x Rohde & Schwarz HMC 8012 Digital Multimeter with Storage Function</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Thermal Measurements</strong></th><td  >- 1 x Optris PI640 80Hz Infrared Camera- PI Connect Analysis Software with Profiles</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Noise Measurements</strong></th><td  >- NTI Audio M2211 (with Calibration File)- Steinberg UR12 (with Phantom Power for Microphones)- Creative X7, Smaart v.7- Custom-Made Proprietary Measurement Chamber, 3.5 x 1.8 x 2.2m (L x D x H)- Perpendicular to Center of Noise Source(s), Measurement Distance of 50cm- Noise Level in dB(A) (Slow), Real-time Frequency Analyzer (RTA) - Graphical Frequency Spectrum of Noise</td></tr></tbody></table></div><h2 id="3dmark-ashes-of-the-singularity-battlefield-1-amp-4">3DMark, Ashes of the Singularity, Battlefield 1 & 4</h2><h2 id="3dmark-4">3DMark</h2><p>Synthetic benchmarks usually don't provide an accurate measure of real-world gaming performance, but 3DMark's DX11 physics and DX12 CPU tests provide useful insight into the raw horsepower available to the game engine.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YY7dENLzUDAhDQ2PnxVb25.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Vq39eXd6Lr6GwU6N6kehmi.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UWBHJSGygoAuxqHWuB8zhd.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The DX11 and DX12 CPU tests reveal a similar trend. Ryzen 7 1700 trails the other eight-core processors, but passes the Core i7-6900K once we overclock it. Of course, the same treatment applied to Intel's chip would have a similar effect, so we'll stop short of calling this an AMD victory.</p><p>The quad-core Core i7-7700K and i5-7600K are far less potent in the threaded Time Spy and Fire Strike tests. However, they leverage their superior IPC throughput and clock rate to turn in a solid showing during the single-thread DX11 API overhead metrics. Intel's four-core CPUs are also competitive against the Ryzen processors in multi-threaded DX11 draw call performance, which helps explain their commanding lead in most gaming benchmarks. </p><p>DX12 leverages additional cores more efficiently, which turns the tables in favor of the eight-core chips. AMD's 1700 makes a solid showing, though it naturally trails the quicker 1700X and 1800X at stock settings. The overclocked 1700 pulls closer to its companions, but all overclocked Ryzen 7 processors suffer curiously reduced DX11 multi-threaded performance compared to stock settings. Through it all, the stock Core i7-6900K stubbornly refuses to budge from its commanding lead in DX11 threaded and DX12 tests. </p><h2 id="ashes-of-the-singularity-escalation-10">Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</h2><p><em>Ashes of the Singularity</em><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>is notoriously CPU-bound, but it responds well to higher core counts and clock rate, which makes it particularly well suited for examining the impact of increased processing performance on CPU-intensive titles.</p><p>Lackluster results in <em>Ashes of the Singularity</em> was a notable thorn in Ryzen's side, which surprised us given the purportedly close collaboration between AMD and Stardock/Oxide. Before the Ryzen launch, AMD stated that <em>Ashes of the Singularity's</em> Nitrous game engine wasn't optimized to fully leverage Ryzen's unique cache topology and SMT implementation, but that a patch was inbound. We <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-game-optimization-aots-escalation,34021.html">gained access to the pre-release update</a> and recorded significantly better performance from Ryzen 7. We saw the Core i7-6900K speed up too, though.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/E3XwxPqyuL8MyDBCn8TmUA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dhouUuFRKxmuDXrnT9sPV7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wWhdLXqgEUUCFB5gW4iSD5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Wav5mUPFpRNePxP5dmC2zB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Kp8kLzr6KnVJWYN2vyFrec.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WbBPx9BPTCUyVigRyvSxpK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JWYejVTvvkhDS6KHRaSzfE.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The stock Ryzen 7 1700 and 1700X can't beat a stock Core i7-7700K, but a little overclocking puts them in the lead. Unsurprisingly, though, the Core i7-6900K asserts its dominance with a large lead over the other processors.</p><h2 id="battlefield-1-5">Battlefield 1</h2><p>We dialed<em> Battlefield 1</em> up to the Ultra preset and repetitively took an armor-laden stroll across the O La Vittoria landscape.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YFcMXTDaUVTHRvHzFiwFuZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pdyRV9fEEjqyMbH4zEjZM9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LuYg3ee75WkTkWbg3hMnsh.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7ZxSRTLoJ5NnHk3jb9ASXY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/c2oVjhPWQDVr2nDeD6jxPd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LLqfHNJRboFxL2ZfHUpzRS.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>We run into a graphics bottleneck during the test, so we don't observe much variation between contenders. They all enable smooth game play through our test sequence. This is why AMD says Ryzen is great for high-res gaming!</p><h2 id="battlefield-4">Battlefield 4</h2><p><em>Battlefield 4</em> also leans on the GPU more than the CPU, so again, we notice little variation at the upper end of the 1920x1080 benchmark results.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KWVn6r6YafYLHBqw6KqhFZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/onCHCPQyS2xLRSF3x74uwV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/urq6bFcc5dw56hi2KDxrzk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iJ7fmziT7GE2HVmsMyV6F4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dJvuAXgWYoyWVkTkf4frRe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Kr2UTpDJ9m6YpyrPSQdsLK.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Ryzen 7 1700 and 1700X trail the other contenders, but pull up to the faster processors after overclocking. In many ways, these results mirror the common trend we see at higher resolutions. All of the processors offer acceptable performance when you encounter a graphics bottleneck.</p><h2 id="civilization-vi-ai-amp-graphics-test-deus-ex-mankind-divided-gta-v">Civilization VI AI & Graphics Test, Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, GTA V</h2><h2 id="civilization-vi-ai-test-8">Civilization VI AI Test</h2><p><em>Civilization VI's </em>AI benchmark measures the amount of computational horsepower available to the system during a turn-based strategy gaming session. The AI benchmark is very consistent, so it was strange when we noticed the Ryzen 7 1700 outpacing the rest of the field. Alas, the remarkable performance came from a <em>Civilization VI</em> Spring 2017 update, which dramatically improved AI performance, forcing us to toss our old numbers.</p><h2 id="17"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.00%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PQoNNvXYVrkA5CD5iXuVWe.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PQoNNvXYVrkA5CD5iXuVWe.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="834" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PQoNNvXYVrkA5CD5iXuVWe.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We retested all of the processors and noted higher performance across the board, so it appears this wasn't an AMD-targeted patch. The finishing order remains the same, reflecting a ~3-second improvement for all CPUs. The stock Ryzen 7s can't keep up with Core i7-6900K, though they do jump in front after overclocking.</p><p>The Core i7-7700K and i5-7600K continue to dominate this test. We did log CPU utilization during our run and saw the benchmark scale across all 16 logical cores (it spawns 45 threads). But scaling and scaling <em>well</em> are two different matters, so the four-core processors continue enjoying a lead. </p><h2 id="civilization-vi-graphics-test-8">Civilization VI Graphics Test</h2><p>The update had little impact on our graphics test, though we did notice a slight decline in average frame rates for most processors, along with more consistent minimum frame rate measurements.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V7niz7rLNhmUuKFAXzh2mE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dqSHKGd2aq6otivRm46ax.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ihW4yiWmNtPP7wNe7jkun5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5A9TsJfsKr3WqhSaRzRroB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yG5YBoDh6NuseHiXvQArXQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WVTAzKPgBAZ7ZP6BDS5rjY.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The results line up familiarly, though the Core i5-7600K isn't as competitive as it is in other titles. Meanwhile, Intel's Core i7-6900K leads, while the company's Core i7-7700K falls into its wake. The stock Ryzen 1700 isn't competitive and trails its siblings by a large margin. An overclock helps put the chip within range of the two faster SKUs. </p><h2 id="deus-ex-mankind-divided-3">Deus Ex: Mankind Divided</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nv9gCUZcyU7uTAiazz9Wu9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nEYmWcZ2WLBLZxSkUNNKKC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RVztSiZkxctTK3iiTzfwHK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DZiBqxPw8B7yJ5NT8WhK6X.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SHvabFu48AAd4ncdaqmQMn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SvZbj2aAgBQGHqJVGTZMe.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Deus Ex: Mankind Divided </em>remains the only game that Ryzen processors dominate in convincing fashion. That trend continues as we look at Ryzen 7 1700's performance. The CPU secures its spot in the leading group at stock settings. And due to an apparent graphics bottleneck, it experiences minimal uplift from our overclocking efforts.</p><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-14">Grand Theft Auto V</h2><p>We measure performance during <em>Grand Theft Auto V</em>'s F-16 flight sequence with the built-in benchmark. The scripted path yields a solid and consistent benchmark, while constantly changing terrain applies a significant graphics workload.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UwZhv62ixAqsEFg8A2Racb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/c5wXm6xGzGNqczALmoeNE5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DRnWijVDpAMtNbSyUSsoma.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SSuoXM5xggKPBpHnxDAPYE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/i8vHnieNsoBj9qTFUMToPH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/o3PhHWjAoNtQgDKUHd4kuQ.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The stock Ryzen 7 1700 shows up at the bottom of our performance chart. But once again, it climbs into a more competitive position after we overclock. Unfortunately for AMD, all of the Ryzen processors trail their Intel competition by a significant margin. Even the affordable Core i5-7600K at stock clock rates outperforms. And overclocking would certainly propel it into a much higher position.</p><h2 id="hitman-2016-metro-last-light-redux-middle-earth-shadow-of-mordor">Hitman (2016), Metro: Last Light Redux, Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor</h2><h2 id="hitman-2016-7">Hitman (2016)</h2><p><em>Hitman</em> prefers high clock rates and additional logical cores, so the Core i7s lead while the Core i5-7600K tumbles to the bottom.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pTmq9coaCuUM2jTbnZaZvj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rtmLZKvnkpgatw2pqwq8VM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vvAnQ9PddED7NvqmysVpxB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5sUcaUi6pCVmi2k3GdJRYM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PwNKHbvoG8GrArNFQNvePn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/U8nohyXKCbhFEP9vhtqfrn.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>We recorded moderate improvements from the overclocked Ryzen 7s, but they still aren't competitive with Intel's Core i7s. A clear delineation between the processor families, apparent in our average frame rate over time chart, suggests that the game could benefit from Ryzen-specific optimizations.</p><h2 id="metro-last-light-redux-2">Metro: Last Light Redux</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GAFgCYHdxS8LEJjvvLd9W7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8XtSXCgEXqnx9avfD2JnVE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v8vsgPfNNJRc4fmFzBcGgT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v3NdShMPvLkbvyXLPY4ah8.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ByJGPAxJ4NRyao6FHeevr6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CuyVZcES9UHgqGToYc57U.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>We encounter a graphics bottleneck during our <em>Metro: Last Light Redux </em>tests. The stock 1700 only loses by 1.5 FPS compared to the Ryzen 7 1800X, but trails the Core i7-7700K's average frame rate by 4.1.  </p><h2 id="middle-earth-shadow-of-mordor-7">Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UhZNSfcSR7Zz49Uc6mZEkN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/onSWKg3XXXSKqkt6uiTPM7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Gg5U4wEacwCHrkeQV9ELDN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ABQBffj5kLfdc6atCjuuda.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gq3Acj7DRJRMpwV2sPbRFP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GAHTamHToZRxS35Q3gXMdJ.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor</em> also reflects a GPU-imposed ceiling at the top end of the scale. A stock Ryzen 1700 doesn't have the clock rate to keep up, so it trails the leader by an average of 8.9 FPS. Overclocking helps put the 1700 into a more competitive position, though.</p><h2 id="project-cars-rise-of-the-tomb-raider-the-division-2">Project CARS, Rise of the Tomb Raider, The Division</h2><h2 id="project-cars-7">Project CARS</h2><p><em>Project CARS</em> is a CPU-intensive title that promotes parallelism by breaking tasks into smaller chunks and spreading them among the cores. Intel's quad-core models take a commanding lead during our benchmark run, though, indicating a particular sensitivity to clock rate. </p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bEQG8DbgoQnWG9mEXF7Sr5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WeyyZ2jwEhR65CHzCv6PAa.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fmu7c4Ye3fVxHLrHWxUrw9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/37KgFMmZMFXtGTcVEGVine.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nzwv6p5XkbjWFEne55tFd9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6vqgaqovqFFWXqH5xS9Ag3.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Ryzen processors aren't as fast as Intel's Core i7-6900K, even after overclocking. We measure a 27.4 average FPS gulf between the Ryzen 7 1700 and Core i7-7700K. Although this gap narrows to 17.5 FPS after overclocking the 1700, we expect the -7700K would also benefit greatly from a bit of tuning.</p><h2 id="rise-of-the-tomb-raider-8">Rise of the Tomb Raider</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/igFBiwux97FVqSHMvByRG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ubCSJwkJZqRb5FFMDoeJfY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VrrxUvqPbj4DHDpeAsAmUE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dgiARDJhcuBHsup3tWd5sV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/teYmmGEbpHHubypyGcMs3a.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sEthafNgCPZ76UYnQkfqtS.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Rise of the Tomb Raider </em>is another sore spot for AMD's architecture, as evidenced by a 55.9 FPS gap between the Core i7-6900K and stock Ryzen 7 1700. The -6900K's solid performance points to respectable scaling based on host processing resources. But even after our overclocking efforts, the eight-core Ryzen 7s still trail Intel's chips by more than 30 FPS. The 1700, for its part, averages 24.2 FPS higher after overclocking to 3.9 GHz.</p><h2 id="the-division-3">The Division</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2PXHSLmT7pSixJWbRMJ5JL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/M2DHu2uNLkeghyzJnmCqHZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/M4S8RDHhtNqBjSkAqi5erj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fHVNnHCHndDSWjZtPZ5zdD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xMLwwXrgMod94tvff3Cu8N.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/s89UsBGzifQS9i5KzsYkeQ.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>We spot little variation between the overclocked Ryzen processors as they slip by Intel's Core i7-6900K.</p><h2 id="workstation-amp-hpc-benchmarks">Workstation & HPC Benchmarks</h2><h2 id="2d-benchmarks-directx-and-gdi-gdi-2">2D Benchmarks: DirectX And GDI/GDI+</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ht4EEqmd948xbRcdq2hoZU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9nskkUWzjFfw8mSQ5q9wpa.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7vCwbHdgaZkq2gTPhM7UQ.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Even though it sports considerably lower base and boost frequencies (and doesn't benefit from XFR), the Ryzen 7 1700 stays within striking distance of its faster 1700X and 1800X counterparts. </p><h2 id="2d-benchmarks-adobe-creative-cloud-3">2D Benchmarks: Adobe Creative Cloud</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ihn8DiUpKnnfSeBYquPpXB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/afNb2PNJFzz3WXxUtyiZKe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WwnaU2w63GGkEz3RuA9Hs6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/stSPArVVN5EFMqKMZp6Rhd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PN92UcGTNULdw2Gy4ewGY3.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>As with most productivity-focused workloads, AMD's Ryzen 7 processors battle fiercely for a position near the top of these charts. They're especially attractive in light of their low price points. Intel's less expensive Core i7-7700K leads though, so it takes a Ryzen 7 1700 to make a value case.</p><h2 id="3d-benchmarks-directx-and-opengl-2">3D Benchmarks: DirectX And OpenGL</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ui3iB2YiEFK3djKHiKQRQV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cQjbhVu87mXdAJ8CDuTAJV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9SAtLV3nAE5qVx4ogUV4KY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PL6fdqDaFboXDmDCzhsQSh.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pgcNPupd6AVZ2Gv47gCu2L.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NQ6PHKX2csd4n9aVwCYSda.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Lq72G7fYv6euQ2f4C6aY7G.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4zo3ai3rAWZNMfuCEhna76.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>We see more of a delta between the 65W 1700 and 95W X SKUs during the DirectX and OpenGL tests. Many of these metrics respond best to single-threaded performance at high clock rates, so Kaby Lake enjoys a natural advantage.</p><h2 id="cpu-performance-workstation-5">CPU Performance: Workstation</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cgdancHWBtNKL9Eq8EnwPG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wkePKU3wLYZVmigm4sYMXk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jNjWpVZ9iTW4KdWMkwiJ3h.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gwzd8PeuuASybaKvw9Gvf7.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Parallelized workloads are in Ryzen's wheelhouse, so all three models turn in strong results in our SolidWorks 2015 and 3ds Max 2015 composite/computing benchmarks. In many cases, they're faster than Intel's pricier Core i7-6900K in its stock configuration.</p><h2 id="cpu-performance-photorealistic-rendering-6">CPU Performance: Photorealistic Rendering</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oVDyBFX692djifzQgnJ22A.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zCpzonQzpZSi6Fwvuvnty9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hQKtdewJqviRa8hvg9Sya3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zZugBDpHZqHeS8ixzH4EcJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zwfcZZxRF2yuAs6dHE7TNA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tdk64q4G2wXBrTvFdKMguA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kz4J4bzYNE3JT9CmBQh63K.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The 95W Ryzen processors compete aggressively against the Core i7-6900K in our CPU rendering test suite, while the 65W 1700 trails its faster counterparts and battles the stock Core i7-7700K during many of the Blender tests. AMD's 1700 does beat the Core i7-6900K in 3ds Max, but falls behind during the LuxRender benchmark.</p><h2 id="cpu-performance-encoding-amp-compression-decompression-3">CPU Performance: Encoding & Compression/Decompression</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YZpxaNwgWRQE39aFwPEdHo.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JyqXJvEpSKKtjgaTaRnpmf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AcLhGHDsJoAcNxx4gkYtRb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9pgUBg3FE7skBJyS288wK3.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The 1700 is particularly competitive in HandBrake. It beats the -6900K during high-quality encoding tasks, and puts up a fight in our test using default settings. At $330, it's impossible to dismiss the 1700's value proposition compared to Intel's $1100 price point. Likely due to its lower frequency, the 1700 loses steam when we decompress an archive using 7-Zip (it even trails the old FX), but it fares better in the more parallelized compression workloads.</p><h2 id="hpc-benchmarks-high-performance-computing">HPC Benchmarks (High Performance Computing)</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cnFTsbLrh5RzatPob4scba.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ebLMJrQmP322uhV7rtcVVh.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CLuZT5Du3YgsZhy3a2dQvK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Np7ADMYATeFAzBn8B3T3BR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jxfHTHhRgJAunqHasxqdfB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RLdkZJ57iXrfiZHR5upwgn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GNeJj7mLg5Cmtr7PrUiyx.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ywyzS52V5sb5cUoc3L84dY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MALYRjhBM93ukZspC6zV4m.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SnxJBqwYMnGk8w52HpGHUZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WZvggT2bnvegyyzGDrxQcT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rEC9hZAbxNHHqMu6hFL83.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BMpYrzTdP6mFVrFwF9Q3FZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2zhuSAr5cAB3GWQ5b8h2Ue.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6FZX2M4VYKVVRivPqgABb3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/w8UtNyNWd5j6oozwi5FHT7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PMRSUrWxKjXuETMeZSyfzF.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The results of these HPC-oriented benchmarks vary depending on how they utilize each architecture. As a general trend, though, when a test is able to exploit Ryzen 7's eight cores, AMD beats the Core i7-7700K. It's usually able to give Core i7-6900K a run for its money, too. In the cases where Intel's -6900K is significantly faster, we might suspect specific optimizations for efficiency on Intel CPUs. We know, for example, that there are accelerated packages for LAMMPS, one of which includes Intel CPUs and Xeon Phi. SPEC doesn't say if any of these are part of its wpc 2.0 suite, though. AMD's market penetration with the Naples server chips will likely determine how much reaction we see in the HPC software ecosystem.</p><h2 id="power-consumption-amp-temperatures">Power Consumption & Temperatures</h2><h2 id="direct-comparisons-of-power-consumption">Direct Comparisons of Power Consumption</h2><h2 id="18"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZgAHkkfKChQ2HR5damCUcW.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZgAHkkfKChQ2HR5damCUcW.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZgAHkkfKChQ2HR5damCUcW.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The 65W 1700 consumes slightly more power at idle than the 95W Ryzens.</p><p>Meanwhile, our mildly overclocked Core i7-6900K consumes more power at idle than its stock configuration because we reduced its single-core Turbo Boost frequency to achieve a 3.9 GHz clock rate. </p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SGBSUr3PGYgGohYq7L8KwR.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SGBSUr3PGYgGohYq7L8KwR.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SGBSUr3PGYgGohYq7L8KwR.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The 1700's power consumption is impressive during the AutoCAD 2015 workload; it only consumes 29.3W. A stock Core i7-7700K uses considerably more power. But looking at these figures on their own can be misleading. Remember that Intel's top Kaby Lake-based CPU demonstrated a commanding lead in the previous page's AutoCAD workloads, so it ends up offering superior performance per watt.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SBzmK5y6mfSqtEEJzPPyDY.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SBzmK5y6mfSqtEEJzPPyDY.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SBzmK5y6mfSqtEEJzPPyDY.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>AMD's Ryzen 7 1700 proves its frugal nature by drawing only 44.3W during our gaming benchmark. The -6900K consumes less power than Intel's Core i7-7700K, likely because the workload doesn't fully utilize all eight cores.</p><p>The 32nm FX-9590 is in a class of its own, which isn't a good thing. Still, it highlights one of the 14nm process' main advantages.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hpdbHtPvh2EXoz5ZvJ3EDB.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hpdbHtPvh2EXoz5ZvJ3EDB.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hpdbHtPvh2EXoz5ZvJ3EDB.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Prime95's Small FFT stress test pushes power consumption to the max, revealing one of the 65W 1700's best attributes: it consumes 23.3W less than the 1700X. The 1700's modest power use, coupled with a small performance delta between it and the 1700X in our application benchmarks, paints a convincing picture of efficiency.</p><h2 id="temperatures-4">Temperatures</h2><p>We optimized our CPU cooler for Socket AM4 by using two nuts between the spring and bracket to increase the force on the package to 0.4Nm. That is why these results differ from those in our launch article, where we only used washers.</p><p>Both AMD and Intel employ different temperature measurement methodology. While these readings aren't entirely comparable, they do serve as a close approximation.</p><h2 id="19"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rANcFWxCCL6Kx8UMprUKK8.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rANcFWxCCL6Kx8UMprUKK8.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rANcFWxCCL6Kx8UMprUKK8.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>In its stock form, Ryzen 7 1700 runs cooler than the rest of the field due to its lower TDP. Of course, all bets are off once you start overclocking and dialing in higher voltages. In any case, AMD uses solder between its die and heat spreader, which generally provides better thermal transfer than thermal paste. Intel famously uses thermal paste and contends that it boosts processor longevity.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rnMsKt2QHsYu7KK2d4bxH7.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rnMsKt2QHsYu7KK2d4bxH7.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rnMsKt2QHsYu7KK2d4bxH7.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Even though our results aren't apples-to-apples, it's clear that the 1700's 65W TDP does convey an expected power and thermal advantage over the other Ryzen 7s. </p><h2 id="conclusion-4">Conclusion </h2><p>Ryzen 7 1700 pulls AMD's entry-level eight-core price point below the quad-core Core i7-7700K. That's powerful. The 1700's compelling performance in desktop productivity and content creation workloads, even at stock settings, is impressive. Moreover, the chip's power consumption and thermal characteristics align with our expectations of a CPU with a 30W-lower TDP. Combine those two strengths and you have a recipe for hard-to-beat efficiency.</p><p>The 1700 also challenges or beats Intel's Core i7-6900K in several of our application tests. Moreover, it sells for roughly one-third of the -6900K's $1100 price tag, and the bundled cooler is a nice bonus. Overall, Ryzen 7 1700's price to performance ratio is very attractive for most productivity use-cases.</p><p>AMD's higher-end Ryzen 7 1700X and 1800X are fast enough for smooth gaming. But in light of their $400 and $500 prices, there's no real reason to recommend them over Intel's Core i5-7600K or Core i7-7700K. Ryzen 7 1700 demonstrates the same behaviors as both X-series SKUs, albeit with lower frame rates if you refrain from overclocking. Tuning the 1700 somewhat aggressively breaks the 65W chip free of its shackles and allows it to trade blows with the faster Ryzen 7s. It's a bummer that our sample didn't overclock quite as well; it just wouldn't crack 4 GHz like the X-series parts. Still, a respectable clock rate ceiling enables similar performance as the 95W models, so if you expect to overclock, spending more money on a 1700X or 1800X may not make sense.</p><p>The recent<em> Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation </em>and <em>Dota 2</em> patches bring hope that game developers can, and will, address Ryzen's most quantifiable weakness. Ideally, all developers would follow suit, but in reality, most older games won't be changed. It's the future of gaming we must look to. And in that, the more accessible Ryzen 5 and 3 families may prove to be even better options for gaming, perhaps encouraging devs to spend more time improving the FHD experience on Ryzen-based platforms.</p><p>For now, Ryzen 7 1700 provides good-enough gaming performance at an acceptably low price point, which makes it a viable option for anyone shopping for an eight-core workstation-class chip ready for some entertainment, too.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-zen-cpu-microarchitecture,32540.html">Everything Zen: AMD Presents New Microarchitecture At HotChips</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-kaby-lake-core-i7-7700k-i7-7700-i5-7600k-i5-7600,4870.html">Intel Kaby Lake Core i7-7700K, i7-7700, i5-7600K, i5-7600 Review</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i7-broadwell-e-6950x-6900k-6850k-6800k,4587.html">Broadwell-E: Intel Core i7-6950X, 6900K, 6850K & 6800K Review</a></strong></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ De-Lidding and Overclocking Core i7-7700K with Water and LN2 ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/kaby-lake-de-lidding-overclocking-test,4970.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ We're testing Kaby Lake's maximum frequency at various core voltages, the influence of de-lidding, and even applying a bit of liquid nitrogen. Get ready to learn more about overclocking Intel's latest architecture with a bunch of Core i7-7700K CPUs. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">dH5P3u6bmvDDbfeXUH3gwW</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3hxBre7jjBGz2uyK2hZqyj-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Mon, 20 Mar 2017 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:58:06 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Overclocking]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jean Michel &quot;Wizerty&quot; Tisserand ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                                        <dc:description><![CDATA[ null ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                <cf:isSponsored>false</cf:isSponsored>
                <cf:hasAffiliateLinks>false</cf:hasAffiliateLinks>
                <cf:isPaid>false</cf:isPaid>
                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3hxBre7jjBGz2uyK2hZqyj-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3hxBre7jjBGz2uyK2hZqyj-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="intel-core-i7-7700k-de-lidded-and-overclocked">Intel Core i7-7700K: De-Lidded and Overclocked</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3J7bB8PD8NxSzTNF4Ydu3Z.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3J7bB8PD8NxSzTNF4Ydu3Z.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3J7bB8PD8NxSzTNF4Ydu3Z.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Intel&apos;s Sandy Bridge-based Core i7 processors spoiled enthusiasts with the ease at which they could hit 5 GHz with <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/how-to-overclock-a-cpu">CPU overclocking</a> using air cooling. Sadly, these CPUs weren&apos;t well-suited for extreme overclocking, and we were never able to push past 6 GHz under liquid nitrogen.</p><p>Ivy Bridge saw Intel selling Core i7s that were less amenable to traditional overclocking efforts, but much more receptive to extreme measures. Record-setting efforts saw them break the 7 GHz threshold.</p><p>The sixth generation of Core i7 (Skylake) demonstrated the best efficiency in a CPU yet.</p><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="ecd04d39-536f-41ca-b179-f035f10334f7" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-7700K" href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Desktop-Processor-i7-7700K-BX80677I77700K/dp/B01MXSI216/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="uXuLfgK33H8rdH2AUffqUk" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uXuLfgK33H8rdH2AUffqUk.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uXuLfgK33H8rdH2AUffqUk.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="0" height="0" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i7-7700K<a class="view-deal button" href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Desktop-Processor-i7-7700K-BX80677I77700K/dp/B01MXSI216/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="ecd04d39-536f-41ca-b179-f035f10334f7" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-7700K" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><p>Now imagine a processor that overclocks like Sandy Bridge under air cooling, like Ivy Bridge with the help of liquid nitrogen, and with Skylake's efficiency. Could that be Kaby Lake? We're going to find out.</p><p>For this little experiment, we're using one of the latest motherboards to land in our French lab: MSI's Z270X XPower Gaming Titanium.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ngu6pNFjffarNs3KvuHzob.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ngu6pNFjffarNs3KvuHzob.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ngu6pNFjffarNs3KvuHzob.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Of course, processors are subject to the silicon lottery's uncertainties, so we obtained multiple samples. You'll see that the spread in what's possible is large indeed.</p><h2 id="de-lidding-intel-39-s-core-i7-7700k">De-Lidding Intel's Core i7-7700K</h2><p>Quite simply, de-lidding is the process of removing the integrated heat spreader that typically sits atop your CPU. The primary function of the IHS is to protect the die underneath, but by adding this shield between the fragile silicon and bulky heat sink, thermal transfer is restricted somewhat.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HWUxRbgeRZMCcvmRu9oVV9.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HWUxRbgeRZMCcvmRu9oVV9.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HWUxRbgeRZMCcvmRu9oVV9.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="the-procedure">The Procedure</h2><p>Although de-lidding was once considered an extreme measure reserved for the most hardcore enthusiasts, the process became more popular when it became clear that Intel's Haswell-based CPUs ran hot, in part due to a different thermal interface material between the die and IHS.</p><p>It's no longer necessary to white-knuckle the procedure with a razor blade or workshop vice, though. To de-lid an Ivy Bridge, Haswell, Devil's Canyon, Skylake, or Kaby Lake processor, you need a tool like the Delid Die Mate, some good thermal paste, and glue (optional, silicone is preferred).</p><p>Simply place the processor on the correct side of the tool, oriented properly, close the tool, and turn the screw until the black glue breaks free when the two parts separate.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GURdPDkVf8bXWiodjcUREJ.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GURdPDkVf8bXWiodjcUREJ.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GURdPDkVf8bXWiodjcUREJ.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7sYNwuHk3wAvYybQY3dmDH.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7sYNwuHk3wAvYybQY3dmDH.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7sYNwuHk3wAvYybQY3dmDH.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UAsvFDCALxrFhmvMLtiZyY.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UAsvFDCALxrFhmvMLtiZyY.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UAsvFDCALxrFhmvMLtiZyY.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>With the IHS removed, we can see Intel's thermal paste, which looks quite dry. For information on how to thoroughly clean a bare chip (CPU or GPU), take a look at <span class="GVLWinKIal"><strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/optimizing-graphics-cooling,4838.html">How To: Optimizing Your Graphics Card's Cooling</a></strong></span>. We apply thermal paste (we're using Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut) to the die and IHS. All that's left is add a little glue and reseal the processor.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6YdcWQHcXmZhuGgbHAozzj.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6YdcWQHcXmZhuGgbHAozzj.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6YdcWQHcXmZhuGgbHAozzj.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="0a9d70da-3230-4c4e-9848-db55744dd70c" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Rockit 88 - Intel CPU Delid Tool Kit" href="https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/rockit-88" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="jt8eADkfB5m6rsazk2eN6" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jt8eADkfB5m6rsazk2eN6.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jt8eADkfB5m6rsazk2eN6.png" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="0" height="0" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Rockit 88 - Intel CPU Delid Tool Kit<a class="view-deal button" href="https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/rockit-88" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="0a9d70da-3230-4c4e-9848-db55744dd70c" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Rockit 88 - Intel CPU Delid Tool Kit" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><h2 id="thermal-paste">Thermal Paste</h2><p>If heat isn't removed from the die as quickly as it's generated, the CPU's internal temperature rises as a consequence. In order to minimize the IHS' effect on thermal transfer, we need a good paste, which fills surface imperfections and eliminates the tiny pockets of air that'd otherwise inhibit heat sink performance. In this role, not all thermal pastes are created equal.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hCUmHDhnesKQHu5XAkUiWE.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hCUmHDhnesKQHu5XAkUiWE.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hCUmHDhnesKQHu5XAkUiWE.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>In the image above, the thermal paste on the left limits heat transfer, resulting in a hotter processor. The higher-quality compound in the middle performs better, helping our hypothetical CPU top out at 70°C. Finally, on the right, the die is covered with a premium product that keeps the processor's temperature at a maximum of 60°C.</p><p><span class="StrongEmphasis">We're going to compare three different thermal pastes: </span></p><ul><li>Original thermal paste (Intel)</li><li>Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut</li><li>Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut</li></ul><p>Intel's thermal paste doesn't always perform very well, but it is applied to all of the Kaby Lake-based processors. Because it's unavoidable, it serves as a logical reference for our measurements.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Hit43uzPSwt72Q4QuVhyyU.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Hit43uzPSwt72Q4QuVhyyU.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Hit43uzPSwt72Q4QuVhyyU.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Kryonaut is a solid performer with a conductivity of 12.5 W/mK. But it's quite expensive (an 11g tube can be found for around $26). Still, in this piece it plays second fiddle to an even higher-end product.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z64kgdP4DVYdxt7yTxXGhh.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z64kgdP4DVYdxt7yTxXGhh.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z64kgdP4DVYdxt7yTxXGhh.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>At the top of our hierarchy we have Conductonaut, a metallic paste that is conductive. Its thermal conductivity is listed as 73 W/mK. But you cannot use it below freezing, or on aluminum surfaces. Its price is as high as its performance, at about $11 per gram!</p><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="d1cb89c4-21b7-4bee-b13f-3b78a21024f5" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut" href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Thermal-Grizzly-Conductonaut-Grease-Paste/dp/B01A9KIGSI/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="ZUWDcGmZJZKCuaVHsodNLc" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZUWDcGmZJZKCuaVHsodNLc.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZUWDcGmZJZKCuaVHsodNLc.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="0" height="0" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut<a class="view-deal button" href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Thermal-Grizzly-Conductonaut-Grease-Paste/dp/B01A9KIGSI/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="d1cb89c4-21b7-4bee-b13f-3b78a21024f5" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><h2 id="results">Results</h2><p>Of course, results can vary from one processor to the next, but the delta between cooling solutions remains fairly similar. To show the disparity, we're using Prime95 with a CPU core voltage of 1.3V.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><th class="firstcol " ><strong>Intel</strong></th><td  >82.5°C</td></tr><tr><th class="firstcol " ><strong>Kryonaut</strong></th><td  >76.5°C</td></tr><tr><th class="firstcol " ><strong>Conductonaut</strong></th><td  >60.5°C</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>As expected, Intel's thermal interface material trails. The Kryonaut performs only 6°C better. And the Conductonaut gives us a -22°C temperature drop.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WacUYN7DMDMrRiRt8GjbKP.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5YH9ANaYfbzJNtvGvHFm6n.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Go6KoGdj64vLhG6VH8oC53.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Our screen captures show that the temperatures are more homogeneous between cores once the thermal paste is upgraded. For the tests that follow, we are going to keep Intel's paste as a reference, and the Conductonaut as its replacement.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-1080-ti-water-cooling,4975.html#xtor=RSS-100">Overclocking GeForce GTX 1080 Ti To 2.1 GHz Using Water</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-overclocking-guide,4593.html">CPU Overclocking Guide: How (and Why) to Tweak Your Processor</a></strong></p><h2 id="overclocking-with-water-cooling">Overclocking with Water Cooling</h2><h2 id="cinebench-r15-2">Cinebench R15</h2><p>In order to determine what our processors can do, we first test them with Cinebench R15. This benchmark does not utilize AVX (Advanced Vector Extensions), so it gives us an idea of the frequencies and temperatures a gamer might see.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ceCUP8HR5unzqLQDKJ4c69.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ceCUP8HR5unzqLQDKJ4c69.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ceCUP8HR5unzqLQDKJ4c69.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p><strong><span class="StrongEmphasis">We don't run the benchmarks with Intel's TIM above a core voltage of 1.3V to keep from damaging the processors.<br/></span></strong></p><p>Since we're here, we run a number of different experiments:</p><ul><li>For those who want to under-volt for lower temperatures and power consumption, we dial in 1.1V. We were able to run stably at 4580 MHz before de-lidding, and 4610 MHz after.</li><li>When we increase the voltage to 1.2V, our maximum attainable frequency climbs more than 250 MHz, yielding a remarkable gain. At this voltage, the difference between thermal pastes increases slightly (from 30 MHz at 1.1V to 40 MHz at 1.2V).</li><li>At 1.3V we reach 5 GHz. The thermal paste difference now reaches 50 MHz.</li><li>With 1.4V, we pass the test at 5190 MHz. Not bad!</li><li>In search of 5.2 GHz, we give ourselves a couple of tries at 1.45V. The outcome is 5232 MHz.</li><li>And why not 5.3 GHz? Alas, 1.5V wouldn't allow us to break the 5262 MHz mark.</li></ul><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hDS5mtrGUxAfW5ZMyAvecA.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hDS5mtrGUxAfW5ZMyAvecA.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hDS5mtrGUxAfW5ZMyAvecA.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Looking at the temperatures, we see that de-lidding does very little at Intel's base voltage. The processor doesn't get particularly hot, and the change to Conductonaut only yields an 8°C improvement; it's understandable that the frequency gain would also be small. But when voltage is increased, the processor heats up more and the thermal paste plays a greater role, lowering temperature by 10°C at 1.2V and 14°C at 1.3V. <strong><span class="StrongEmphasis">Using Conductonaut at 1.5V gives us the same operating temperature as Intel's TIM at 1.3V!</span></strong></p><p>It's fairly simple then: de-lidding only becomes interesting when you intend to apply a voltage greater than 1.25V.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Lt33977ZrXHWaFU6ymn33V.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Lt33977ZrXHWaFU6ymn33V.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Lt33977ZrXHWaFU6ymn33V.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><div ><table><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong><span class="StrongEmphasis">Tip:</span></strong> When you start chasing megahertz, you risk meeting our friend <em>the blue screen</em>. This is part of the game. But the blue screen, as annoying as it is, may also clue you in on whatever caused your failure. “Memory management” errors speak for themselves. In other cases, you'll often see some 101s and 124s, which, for the most part, are explained like this: STOP: 0x00000101 -> Not enough Vcore, or you're gunning for too high of a frequency.STOP: 0x00000124 -> Not enough Vcache, or you're gunning for too high of a cache frequency.</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>For the curious, here is the data we collected:</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  ><strong>Setting</strong></th><th  ><strong>TIM</strong></th><th  ><strong>Freq. (MHz)</strong></th><th  ><strong>Vcore (V)</strong></th><th  ><strong>Score (pt)</strong></th><th  ><strong>Temp. (°C)</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  rowspan="2"><strong>Stock</strong></th><td  >Intel</td><td  >4500</td><td  >1.22</td><td  >983</td><td  >55.75</td></tr><tr><td  >Conductonaut</td><td  >4500</td><td  >1.22</td><td  >984</td><td  >46</td></tr><tr><th  rowspan="2"><strong>1.1V</strong></th><td  >Intel</td><td  >4580</td><td  >1.1</td><td  >1010</td><td  >48.25</td></tr><tr><td  >Conductonaut</td><td  >4610</td><td  >1.1</td><td  >1018</td><td  >40.5</td></tr><tr><th  rowspan="2"><strong>1.2V</strong></th><td  >Intel</td><td  >4840</td><td  >1.2</td><td  >1060</td><td  >56.75</td></tr><tr><td  >Conductonaut</td><td  >4880</td><td  >1.2</td><td  >1070</td><td  >46.75</td></tr><tr><th  rowspan="2"><strong>1.3V</strong></th><td  >Intel</td><td  >5010</td><td  >1.3</td><td  >1099</td><td  >67.5</td></tr><tr><td  >Conductonaut</td><td  >5060</td><td  >1.3</td><td  >1108</td><td  >53.5</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>1.4V</strong></th><td  >Conductonaut</td><td  >5190</td><td  >1.4</td><td  >1132</td><td  >60.5</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>1.45V</strong></th><td  >Conductonaut</td><td  >5232</td><td  >1.45</td><td  >1138</td><td  >63.75</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>1.5V</strong></th><td  >Conductonaut</td><td  >5262</td><td  >1.5</td><td  >1147</td><td  >67.5</td></tr></tbody></table></div><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pLLwfuJqQDSZ7x4Ud5mSVW.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pLLwfuJqQDSZ7x4Ud5mSVW.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pLLwfuJqQDSZ7x4Ud5mSVW.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Before moving on to a more demanding test, let's take a closer look at the evolution of frequency as a function of core voltage. In other words, we want to examine scaling.</p><p>The transition from 1.1V to 1.2V facilitates a significant frequency jump (+270 MHz). This is a very good progression: small voltage, many MHz. The processor scales well. With an additional 0.1V, the gain drops to 180 MHz. You can see diminishing returns kick in a bit, though we're still getting a fairly favorable outcome.</p><p>Pushing to 1.4V, however, only yields 130 MHz. The processor appreciates increased Vcore less and less, and if this is your daily computer, it's time to stop. Effectively, you're increasing temperature and voltage while netting less impressive speed-ups.</p><p>Naturally, moving to 1.45V sees the curve level off even more. A 40 MHz jump for 0.05V is the equivalent of 80 MHz for 0.1V. Getting to 1.5V gives us barely 30 MHz more. The only way to keep frequency scaling up is to cool the CPU more aggressively.</p><h2 id="avx-stability">AVX Stability </h2><p>To put greater stress on the processor, we launched a stability test that uses massive amounts of AVX instructions. This is not a scenario you would encounter in daily usage.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bVgPsiLuyHNyVQouoqhLRZ.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bVgPsiLuyHNyVQouoqhLRZ.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bVgPsiLuyHNyVQouoqhLRZ.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Before we explain the chart, it's important to clarify that with 1.1V the processor cache is not stable at 4.2 GHz. We therefore lowered it to 4 GHz to run this test properly.</p><p>With the core voltage lowered to 1.1V, the processor was stable at 4400 MHz before de-lidding, and 4450 MHz with the help of Conductonaut. The rise to 1.2V yields an additional 250 MHz with both configurations. At 1.3V, the difference (50 MHz) with de-lidding is unchanged.</p><p>We expected this gap to grow, but with the tests being very long and the increments relatively large, subsequent steps simply were not stable. Still, we noticed an important difference: at 1.1 V the next clock rate up wouldn't even hold up for one second, while at 1.3V it was almost stable. Sadly, in dealing with stability, we're either good or not. Let's just say that at 1.3V we're in reach of 4950 MHz.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/c7htoNE4Gsqh3RG4ku6NXX.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/c7htoNE4Gsqh3RG4ku6NXX.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/c7htoNE4Gsqh3RG4ku6NXX.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>If you are a fan of OCCT (OverClock Checking Tool), Lynx, or Prime 95, you are going to love de-lidding. AVX loads generate lots of heat, so the gains become more important. Starting at <strong>a<span class="StrongEmphasis"> 13°C difference at 1.1V, we reach a 22°C difference at 1.3V.</span></strong> Instead of pushing the limits at 79°C, you're breezing with a low of 57.5°C.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  ><strong>Setting</strong></th><th  ><strong>TIM</strong></th><th  ><strong>Freq. (MHz)</strong></th><th  ><strong>Vcore (V)</strong></th><th  ><strong>Temp. (°C)</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  rowspan="2"><strong>Stock</strong></th><td  >Intel</td><td  >4500</td><td  >1.24</td><td  >66.5</td></tr><tr><td  >Conductonaut</td><td  >4500</td><td  >1.24</td><td  >50</td></tr><tr><th  rowspan="2"><strong>1.1V</strong></th><td  >Intel</td><td  >4400</td><td  >1.1</td><td  >55.75</td></tr><tr><td  >Conductonaut</td><td  >4450</td><td  >1.1</td><td  >42.25</td></tr><tr><th  rowspan="2"><strong>1.2V</strong></th><td  >Intel</td><td  >4650</td><td  >1.2</td><td  >67.5</td></tr><tr><td  >Conductonaut</td><td  >4700</td><td  >1.2</td><td  >50</td></tr><tr><th  rowspan="2"><strong>1.3V</strong></th><td  >Intel</td><td  >4850</td><td  >1.3</td><td  >79</td></tr><tr><td  >Conductonaut</td><td  >4900</td><td  >1.3</td><td  >57.5</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Take note of your motherboard's default values and do not leave the settings on automatic. If you don't need to overclock, at least drop the core voltage.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong><span class="StrongEmphasis">Tip:</span></strong> If you want to overclock your processor to higher frequencies, but don't want to give up stability in AVX-heavy workloads, use your BIOS' AVX Offset feature. Let's say your CPU isn't stable in AVX-based tests above 4.8 GHz, but is stable at up to 5 GHz otherwise. You have three options:Set the chip to operate at 4.8 GHz. It'll be stable in every test, even though you lose out on the 200 MHz it'd accommodate in non-AVX tasks like games.Set your processor to 5 GHz, knowing if you start an AVX-optimized workload, a crash is likely imminent.Set your processor to 5 GHz with an AVX offset of -2 in the BIOS. For non-AVX applications, the processor runs at up to 5 GHz, and when an AVX-optimized task starts, the frequency automatically drops to 4.8 GHz. Isn't technology wonderful?</td></tr></tbody></table></div><h2 id="memory">Memory</h2><p>Memory overclocking on Kaby Lake and Skylake is exactly the same, so we won't go into much depth there. If you'd like a look at what's possible, check out the image below.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NnuBSBUHyuH3vfHb6Xu24n.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NnuBSBUHyuH3vfHb6Xu24n.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NnuBSBUHyuH3vfHb6Xu24n.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Although we had to apply <span class="StrongEmphasis">1.93V (instead of the standard 1.2V supply) to our DDR4 modules, they seem to love this. We saw 4060 MT/s at 12-12-12-28 120 and 1T!</span></p><p>Remember that not all motherboards and memory kits are made to handle that much voltage or facilitate tight timings. For our experiment, we're using DRAM modules with Samsung memory chips (revision B-die) and an MSI Z270 XPower Titanium motherboard.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dTcmELUuj6UWY9kNHueWhH.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dTcmELUuj6UWY9kNHueWhH.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dTcmELUuj6UWY9kNHueWhH.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><h2 id="overclocking-with-liquid-nitrogen">Overclocking with Liquid Nitrogen</h2><p>The difference between conventional and extreme overclocking is largely a matter of temperatures. In theory, the distinction is subtle. But in practice, the latter involves major considerations (like condensation, for example). You have to take special care to protect your hardware from the ice (and related water droplets) that forms on the cooler.</p><h2 id="preparation">Preparation</h2><p>There are multiple ways to prepare sensitive electronics for the rigors of extreme overclocking. Similar to the fashion industry, those styles evolve and come back in vogue years later. Without going into too many details, the most popular techniques are:</p><ul><li><strong>Vaseline:</strong> Coat the surface to keep water from coming into contact with the PCB. It's quick and cheap, but hard to clean up. In addition, certain chips can be very sensitive and malfunction in its presence.</li><li><strong>Plasti Dip:</strong> This is a plastic that can either be applied with a brush or an aerosol can. Once the solvents have evaporated, the layer solidifies. It's more expensive (about $10 per can), but its inconveniences are the long application time and difficult clean-up.</li><li><strong>Kneaded eraser:</strong> This is a sort of modeling putty. It's also quite expensive at around $10 per motherboard. On the flip side, you can re-use the material, and it's easy to clean up (depending on how long it was in contact with your hardware).</li><li><strong>Neoprene:</strong> This is simply covering the motherboard with a layer of synthetic rubber. Clean-up can't get any easier than this, but the preparation time is quite long. This technique exposes more of the motherboard because there is not a tight seal. Water can therefore infiltrate.</li></ul><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mm9E7joqqrjfdeXr45AbLP.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mm9E7joqqrjfdeXr45AbLP.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mm9E7joqqrjfdeXr45AbLP.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Having lost USB ports on multiple motherboards last year, I decided to skip Vaseline this time around. My motherboard is covered in paper towels cut to size, which serve as the final protection in case water gets under the first line of defense.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qWq7ZwUkvCeiAWGkunLDqZ.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qWq7ZwUkvCeiAWGkunLDqZ.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qWq7ZwUkvCeiAWGkunLDqZ.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Extreme overclockers aren't interested in aesthetics. Though it's far from beautiful, this piece of neoprene is trimmed to hug the motherboard's PCA as tightly as possible. Cutouts accommodate the processor interface, inductors, capacitors, and PCIe slots. Once finished, it will be coated in adhesive for support and partial waterproofing.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8XHdypPiPPdJLf8MuY3aPT.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8XHdypPiPPdJLf8MuY3aPT.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8XHdypPiPPdJLf8MuY3aPT.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The back side of the motherboard is less vulnerable, but still important to protect. We use a combination of kneaded eraser and an anti-static bag. Just the putty would be sufficient, but covering the entire motherboard with it takes a long time and costs quite a bit. Therefore, we created a barrier of kneaded eraser around the border of the motherboard and covered all openings, then sealed everything water-tight with the anti-static bag. Anti-static? Only because it was sitting around when we were searching for a solution!</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sFq7Rpmcxv8yknmUC2TwPa.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sFq7Rpmcxv8yknmUC2TwPa.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sFq7Rpmcxv8yknmUC2TwPa.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>After many hours spent in the motherboard's BIOS, we came to a realization that only become funny later: our first three sessions failed and were a complete loss due to a small and trivial voltage setting. Without it, we couldn't get the multiplier above 60x.</p><p>The problem wasn't related to stability. A combination of 102 MHz x 59 yields a frequency above 6 GHz, and that was completely stable. But the system would hang without fail if we switched to 100 MHz x 60. After tens of liters of liquid nitrogen, a bottle of gas, and more than 10 hours of chilling to test the BIOS, processor, RAM, and operating system, we finally stumbled on a solution: the “PLL SFR” setting must also be increased to more than 1.1V instead of 0.9V to unlock the higher multiplier.</p><p>After hurdling this roadblock, we were able to push our -7700K a little harder.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KB4GPFpJpbbeBSM3TFcaQW.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KB4GPFpJpbbeBSM3TFcaQW.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KB4GPFpJpbbeBSM3TFcaQW.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We reached about 6.6 GHz on Cinebench R11.5. World records won't be broken with this sample, but for a first attempt with a -7700K that wasn't hand-selected, it is quite satisfying.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3FZE6Ug8xMr3txbtzjmnxS.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3FZE6Ug8xMr3txbtzjmnxS.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3FZE6Ug8xMr3txbtzjmnxS.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We achieved a little more than 6.6 GHz under Wprime 32M and 1024M.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JnnoL8AcBs6ZvTYDduMW3Y.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JnnoL8AcBs6ZvTYDduMW3Y.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JnnoL8AcBs6ZvTYDduMW3Y.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>In the end, we logged about a dozen results, and they're all available on HWBOT. Without question, these will be vastly improved in the weeks to come. This was just a first attempt.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpu-coolers,4181.html">Best CPU Cooling</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-pc-builds,4390.html">Best PC Builds</a></strong></p><h2 id="how-39-d-we-do-with-20-core-i7-7700k-cpus">How'd We Do with 20 Core i7-7700K CPUs?</h2><p>Overclocking potential can vary tremendously from one processor to the next. In order to give you a better idea of what you might encounter, we tested several processors under similar conditions.</p><p>All tests were performed with Cinebench R15, before de-lidding. This is not a stable frequency under AVX-heavy software; we'd need to use a -200 MHz offset for stability in those.</p><h2 id="results-from-20-core-i7-7700k-cpus">Results From 20 Core i7-7700K CPUs</h2><ul><li>The worst -7700K we tested would not pass Cinebench R15 at 4.8 GHz using 1.3V.</li><li>Around 25% were not stable at 4.9 GHz using 1.3V.</li><li>Less than 50% pass 5 GHz at 1.3V.</li><li>Around 25% pass 5 GHz at 1.25V or less.</li><li>The best -7700Ks we tested pass Cinebench R15 with 5 GHz at 1.23V.</li></ul><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3J7bB8PD8NxSzTNF4Ydu3Z.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3J7bB8PD8NxSzTNF4Ydu3Z.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3J7bB8PD8NxSzTNF4Ydu3Z.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Those are the results we observed, but there are undoubtedly better samples out there. A diamond in the rough may be on a shelf waiting for your to discover it!</p><p>We've heard of enthusiasts seeing 5 GHz at 1.16V. This isn't impossible, but we don't have a Core i7-7700K capable of such a feat. A de-lidded processor or one tested at 10°C requires less core voltage. Certain motherboards can also be slightly less power-hungry. And measurement tools and software must also be trustworthy.</p><h2 id="a-first-test-with-three-core-i5-7600ks">A First Test with Three Core i5-7600Ks</h2><p>We were only able to test three Core i5-7600K processors. Although the sample number is too small to derive trustworthy statistics, we can get an idea of the possible performance range (even if the real spread is larger than our observations).</p><ul><li>The worst -7600K we tested would not pass Cinebench R15 at 4.9 GHz with 1.28V.</li><li>The best -7600K we tested would not pass Cinebench R15 at 5 GHz with 1.2V.</li><li>The third needed 1.28V for 5 GHz.</li></ul><p>We hear you. "1.2V for 5 GHz? That's harsh!" True. But keep in mind that the -7600K does not have Hyper-Threading, so it won't run as hot.</p><h2 id="kaby-lake-is-good-for-overclocking">Kaby Lake is Good for Overclocking</h2><p>We thoroughly enjoyed playing with these Kaby Lake processors. They aren't revolutionary in any way, and performance at a given clock rate is identical to Skylake. But from overclocking point of view, Kaby Lake is attractive from all angles.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xtiSZZM4VNgnCFfehrCokm.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xtiSZZM4VNgnCFfehrCokm.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xtiSZZM4VNgnCFfehrCokm.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p><strong><span class="StrongEmphasis">Not everyone will reach speeds in the 5 GHz range.</span></strong> However, that should be an attainable goal for the most cooperative -7700Ks. If you don't get lucky with your sample, the introduction of an AVX offset could give your overclock a second chance.</p><p>Only you can determine if de-lidding is worth the risk inherent to such a serious modification. If you don't plan on pushing your core voltage beyond 1.25 to 1.3V, you probably shouldn't bother. On the other hand, if you're gunning for a big overclock using aggressive voltage settings, the gain will be much more worthwhile.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BHQQT4oBCRtwEF4Lq4qHA.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BHQQT4oBCRtwEF4Lq4qHA.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BHQQT4oBCRtwEF4Lq4qHA.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>If you consider yourself an overclocker, and you were disappointed by the headroom of Intel's past few architectures, Kaby Lake is calling. We promise you'll have some fun with this one!</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-1080-ti-water-cooling,4975.html#xtor=RSS-100">Overclocking GeForce GTX 1080 Ti To 2.1 GHz Using Water</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-overclocking-guide,4593.html">CPU Overclocking Guide: How (and Why) to Tweak Your Processor</a></strong></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Kaby Lake Core i7-7700K, i7-7700, i5-7600K, i5-7600 Review ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-kaby-lake-core-i7-7700k-i7-7700-i5-7600k-i5-7600,4870.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Intel's Kaby Lake falls into the comes bearing the tuned 14nm+ process, a revamped graphics engine and a new chipset. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">UHQj5s6UkpwxRqrL9nc4hT</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/k5JjMWfsjsjHdnynaNyoB6-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 03 Jan 2017 17:00:01 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:45:26 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Igor Wallossek ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ogLD9JqVHzkUgGLjpstsRK.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Igor Wallossek wrote a wide variety of hardware articles for Tom&#039;s Hardware, with a strong focus on technical analysis and in-depth reviews. His contributions have spanned a broad spectrum of PC components, including GPUs, CPUs, workstations, and PC builds. His insightful articles provide readers with detailed knowledge to make informed decisions in the ever-evolving tech landscape.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                <cf:isSponsored>false</cf:isSponsored>
                <cf:hasAffiliateLinks>false</cf:hasAffiliateLinks>
                <cf:isPaid>false</cf:isPaid>
                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/k5JjMWfsjsjHdnynaNyoB6-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/k5JjMWfsjsjHdnynaNyoB6-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="introduction-6">Introduction </h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:149.77%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Sdd82bUL9dHTubnkSFm2ES.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Sdd82bUL9dHTubnkSFm2ES.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1280" height="1917" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Sdd82bUL9dHTubnkSFm2ES.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Intel is in the midst of the largest restructuring in its history. The company is shifting focus to what it considers growth opportunities like the IoT, cloud, and data center markets. Meanwhile, it's grappling with a slowly declining mainstream desktop PC market, even as the unlocked K-series SKUs grew 20% year-over-year.</p><p>The company’s insistence that it isn’t abandoning enthusiasts is genuine. And in the face of an impending AMD Ryzen roll-out, Intel really wants power users to get excited about a refreshed processor portfolio. Today's desktop-oriented Kaby Lake launch is different, though. It marks a departure from the heady days of its Moore’s Law-fueled tick-tock cadence, which normally finds the company presenting a new microarchitecture followed by a die shrink. Intel is now adhering to its new Process-Architecture-Optimize cadence, or tick-tock-tock, if you will.</p><p>Instead of plowing forward with a 10nm shrink, Kaby Lake falls into the optimize phase and comes bearing Intel’s tuned 14nm+ process. These CPUs are borne from targeted refinements to the existing node, resulting in faster transistors that enable 300-400 MHz-higher clock rates than Skylake could achieve. However, the previous-gen architecture rides back into the picture atop the process improvements. So we aren't the lucky recipients of any IPC enhancements or other new technologies. As we learned during Intel’s <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-7th-gen-core-kaby-lake-preview,4728.html">mobile Kaby Lake launch</a>, most of the changes come in the form of an improved media engine, a nimbler SpeedShift, and the welcome addition of higher frequencies.</p><p>These revelations may be disappointing to enthusiasts, but at least Kaby Lake is accompanied by a new chipset. And although this generation isn't going to inspire a computing renaissance, there are a few interesting reasons to find it attractive. For instance, Intel is teasing us with 3D XPoint-powered Optane compatibility (availability expected later this year).</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:22.65%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/o7ezFZzw6Pp2yapyDc4WAc.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/o7ezFZzw6Pp2yapyDc4WAc.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="342" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/o7ezFZzw6Pp2yapyDc4WAc.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We’ve already <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-kaby-lake-core-i7-7700k-overclocking-performance-review,4836.html">taken a few</a> quick <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i7-7700k-kaby-lake-overclocking-update,33119.html">pre-NDA snaps</a> with early Core i7-7700K samples, so let’s take a more expansive look at the Kaby Lake line-up.</p><h2 id="intel-core-i7-7700k-i7-7700-and-core-i5-7600k-i5-7600">Intel Core i7-7700K, i7-7700 and Core i5-7600K, i5-7600</h2><p>The launch includes a healthy array of seventh-generation -S, -H, -U, and -Y-series processors that include Core i7, i5, and i3 models, along with two Xeon chips for mobile workstations. The bulked-up portfolio includes offerings that range from 4.5W to 91W with a wide range of integrated HD and Iris Plus Graphics. Naturally, we focus on the S-series chips destined for the desktop.</p>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="f151704e-9772-4c1d-9e22-79547ce2904b">            <div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:66.64%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uYH2LYzGDYjyWc7fT4SBGN.jpg" alt=""></p></div>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Kaby Lake i7-7700K</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="01d5b031-b92e-4cd6-8253-1fcb39144afd">            <div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:66.64%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uYH2LYzGDYjyWc7fT4SBGN.jpg" alt=""></p></div>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Skylake i7-6700K</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="7774a086-7ff5-4e6e-92ce-719c36b6c620">            <div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:66.64%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uYH2LYzGDYjyWc7fT4SBGN.jpg" alt=""></p></div>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Kaby Lake i5-7600K</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><p>Kaby Lake processors drop into the LGA 1151 interface, so you can use them with existing Z170-based motherboards (after a requisite BIOS update) or the new Z270 chipset. Not surprisingly, we find the same allotment of IA cores, TDP ratings, and cache hierarchies. Intel also moved to the slightly-enhanced HD Graphics 630.</p><p>We're dealing with the same dual-channel memory controller from Skylake, though Intel bumps official DDR4 support up to 2400 MT/s from 2133 MT/s. We expected Intel to add Turbo Boost 3.0 support, which identifies single-threaded workloads and pins them to the fastest core, but it's apparently keeping that feature exclusive to Broadwell-E.</p><p>The four-core/eight-thread Core i7-7700K catches our eye with a top Turbo Boost frequency of 4.5GHz. We also saw the chip sustain 4.4 GHz across all four cores during our stress tests. The MSI motherboard we used as a test platform also features an Enhanced Turbo feature that increases the four-core frequency to 4.5 GHz. The -7700K's base clock rate is 4.2 GHz, an increase of 200 MHz over the previous-gen -6700K, and all four Turbo Boost levels jump by 300-400 MHz.</p><p>The four-core/four-thread Core i5-7600K stands out as an impressive value with its 3.8 GHz base clock, which is up 300 MHz faster compared to its predecessor. Turbo Boost binning is also impressive, ranging from a single-core 4.2 GHz to 4.0 GHz on all four cores.</p><p>Thankfully, Intel left its pricing structure alone, and the Core i7-7700K retails for $339 while the versatile i5-7600K weighs in at $242. The Core i5-7600K is a great deal for the value-conscious, but an unlocked Core i3 adds a new wrinkle to the locked-i5 purchasing decision.</p><h2 id="the-unlocked-i3-debut">The Unlocked i3 Debut</h2><p>Intel's Core i3-7350K marks the company's first unlocked dual-core/quad-threaded model with a 60W TDP. Obviously that makes it an interesting option for overclocking on the cheap. A 4.2 GHz base clock rate is encouraging, and the lack of Turbo Boost shouldn't bother tuners much. The increased capabilities of HD 630 graphics make the on-die solution usable, but a stingy 4MB L3 cache is a bummer.</p><p>Regardless, the prospect of an unlocked Core i3 is exciting, and it shows Intel listening to the post-Pentium G3258 feedback. As with all unlocked K SKUs, the -7350K doesn't include a heat sink. A $168 MSRP is within reach of its locked Core i3-7320 counterpart, but it would be even more compelling in the $155 range.</p>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="8d0350e8-52ed-443f-b5ab-d2b54bf25b5d">            <div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:66.64%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uYH2LYzGDYjyWc7fT4SBGN.jpg" alt=""></p></div>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Kaby Lake i3-7350K</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="2c9d50f4-7ad0-4445-8f78-66942422eeae">            <div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:66.64%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uYH2LYzGDYjyWc7fT4SBGN.jpg" alt=""></p></div>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Kaby Lake i3-7320</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="f4b97e1e-5988-40f5-8e06-6bfe0d5ababc">            <div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:66.64%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uYH2LYzGDYjyWc7fT4SBGN.jpg" alt=""></p></div>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Skylake i3-6320</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><p>The rest of the Core i3 series is broken up between 51W and 35W TDPs, and they all feature Intel HD Graphics 630. On-die graphics does get a minor clock rate bump, but higher CPU frequencies are definitely more noteworthy. The entire series features a 200 MHz speed-up. Those clocks probably aren't going to compel anyone to upgrade, but if you were already on the prowl for a low-power solution, Kaby Lake Core i3s are compelling. </p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/picturestory/710-history-of-intel-cpus.html">The History Of Intel CPUs</a></strong></p><h2 id="z270-optane-overclocking-tools-and-hd-graphics-630">Z270, Optane, Overclocking Tools, And HD Graphics 630</h2><h2 id="200-series-chipsets-and-optane-ready-support">200-Series Chipsets and Optane Ready Support</h2><p>The 200- and 100-series chipsets support both Kaby Lake and Skylake processors. This dual compatibility might create an interesting dilemma for enthusiasts who purchase a Skylake processor, or for those who are interested in a new Z270 motherboard.</p><p>Intel's 200-series portfolio includes Z270 with overclocking support for enthusiasts, H270 and B270 without overclocking for mainstream desktop and business use, and the business-specific Q270 and Q250 chipsets. These chipsets include limited improvements that build upon the 100-series feature set. Realistically, you're going to have a hard time finding a reason to upgrade if you already own a Z170-based motherboard.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CGt2WyKmffNkwUKvaZX78F.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hD3kN7TCcWsrmAnPGgqifk.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UCQRBZWUH6U9QdaxeUngNP.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aozF6SKpmH7cjRg2EdG5eL.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qG4iUYa3LahUhmQ39RJ7bJ.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Z170's features carry over to Z270. You get dual-channel memory support with up to two DIMMs per channel, six SATA 6Gb/s ports, up to 10 USB 3.0 ports, and a maximum of 14 total USB 2.0 and 3.0 ports. Intel also updates Management Engine (ME) 11.6 for all chipsets. The Z270, H270, and Q270 platforms support on-board RAID 0, 5, and 10, although throughput is limited by the Direct Media Interface (DMI) 3.0 connection between the CPU and PCH.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  ></th><th  >Z270</th><th  >Z170</th><th  >H270</th><th  >H170</th><th  >B250</th><th  >B150</th><th  >Q250</th><th  >Q270</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  >Chipset PCIe 3.0 Lanes (Up To)</th><td  >24</td><td  >20</td><td  >20</td><td  >16</td><td  >12</td><td  >8</td><td  >14</td><td  >24</td></tr><tr><th  >HSIO Lanes</th><td  >30</td><td  >26</td><td  >30</td><td  >22</td><td  >25</td><td  >18</td><td  >27</td><td  >30</td></tr><tr><th  >Processor PCIe 3.0 Lanes Configuration</th><td  >1x16 or 2x8 or 1x8+2x4</td><td  >1x16 or 2x8 or 1x8+2x4</td><td  >1x16</td><td  >1x16</td><td  >1x16</td><td  >1x16</td><td  >1x16</td><td  >1x16 or 2x8 or 1+8+2x4</td></tr><tr><th  >DMI</th><td  >3.0</td><td  >3.0</td><td  >3.0</td><td  >3.0</td><td  >3.0</td><td  >3.0</td><td  >3.0</td><td  >3.0</td></tr><tr><th  >SATA 3.0 (6Gb/s) Ports (Up To)</th><td  >6</td><td  >6</td><td  >6</td><td  >6</td><td  >6</td><td  >6</td><td  >6</td><td  >6</td></tr><tr><th  >USB 3.0 Ports</th><td  >Up to 10</td><td  >10</td><td  >8</td><td  >8</td><td  >6</td><td  >6</td><td  >8</td><td  >Up to 10</td></tr><tr><th  >Total USB Ports (2.0 + 3.0)</th><td  >14</td><td  >14</td><td  >14</td><td  >14</td><td  >12</td><td  >12</td><td  >14</td><td  >14</td></tr><tr><th  >Intel RST PCIe 3.0 Ports</th><td  >3</td><td  >3</td><td  >2</td><td  >2</td><td  >1</td><td  >1</td><td  >1</td><td  >3</td></tr><tr><th  >Overclocking</th><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >No</td><td  >No</td><td  >No</td><td  >No</td><td  >No</td><td  >No</td></tr><tr><th  >Independent Display Support</th><td  >3</td><td  >3</td><td  >3</td><td  >2</td><td  >3</td><td  >3</td><td  >3</td><td  >3</td></tr><tr><th  >System Memory Support</th><td  >DDR4/3L</td><td  >DDR4/3L</td><td  >DDR4/3L</td><td  >DDR4/3L</td><td  >DDR4/3L</td><td  >DDR4/3L</td><td  >DDR4/3L</td><td  >DDR4/3L</td></tr><tr><th  >System Memory Channels/DPC</th><td  >2/2</td><td  >2/2</td><td  >2/2</td><td  >2/2</td><td  >2/2</td><td  >2/2</td><td  >2/2</td><td  >2/2</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>The PCH serves as a communications hub for many key features, and Intel continues using the same ~4GB/s DMI 3.0 point-to-point link between it and the CPU. Intel does add four chipset PCIe lanes to Z270, H270, and B250. Motherboard vendors also receive a more generous helping of <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-100-series-hsio-chipset,30210.html">HSIO (High Speed I/O) lanes</a>, which they use to carve out various features, such as extra SATA, Ethernet, USB, and M.2 functionality. Z270-based boards enjoy an increase from 26 to 30 lanes, while the H270 makes a much larger jump from 22 to 30.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1279px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:60.13%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pEfoG3sp3dBvQH4yfCYksY.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pEfoG3sp3dBvQH4yfCYksY.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1279" height="769" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pEfoG3sp3dBvQH4yfCYksY.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The H-series chipset traditionally serves as a watered down version of the Z-series model due to lesser HSIO lane allocations and a lack of overclocking support. But the jump from 22 to 30 HSIO lanes will enable broader feature sets, such as increased storage and connectivity options. Intel allows motherboard vendors to use a x8 connection to a device through the use of a third-party bridge chip. That could even allow for an additional PCIe slot. It is noteworthy that the x8 arrangement will suffer from limited DMI 3.0 throughput.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:49.07%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DnKwsmNZnXoyHQfADriTiC.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DnKwsmNZnXoyHQfADriTiC.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="741" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DnKwsmNZnXoyHQfADriTiC.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Intel's "Optane Memory Ready" branding is the elephant in the room, and though the company isn't ready to address it yet, it's eager to start marketing the feature. <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/3d-xpoint-guide,4747.html">Optane is Intel's brand name for its 3D XPoint-based products</a>, which it promises will usher in the era of persistent memory. Optane should slot into the price and performance range between NAND and DRAM, so it will be much faster than existing storage devices, but also more expensive. Optane is even fast enough to serve as a layer of system memory that <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-3d-xpoint-picture-nvdimm,30890.html">slots in as a DIMM</a>. It appears Intel has delayed its Optane DIMMs indefinitely, so 3D XPoint will debut on the Kaby Lake platform as a storage caching device.</p><p>We've also spotted the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-optane-client-first-pictured,32506.html">AIC (Add-In Card) Optane SSD</a>, which rides in a normal PCIe slot. Intel's briefing materials indicate the company will bring an M.2 variant to market first, though. The Optane M.2 SSD will be available in 2H'17 as a caching front-end to accelerate boot times and application launches. Intel's RST (Rapid Storage Technology) driver will likely be responsible for detecting frequently-accessed "hot" data and promoting it to the Optane NVMe SSD.</p><p>Intel has offered various caching options in the past, none of which garnered much favor from enthusiasts. Optane may not do much to change this situation. Caching implementations are invariably susceptible to latency spikes due to out-of-cache data access, and the frequency of "stuttery" performance usually has a direct correlation to the amount of capacity available for caching. The M.2 Optane SSDs will likely come in 16GB and 32GB sizes, which isn't enough space to use as a boot device. It also comes up short for caching heavy multitasking environments.</p><p>Optane caching SSDs will require the 200-series chipset and a Kaby Lake-based Core i3 or better CPU. If you upgrade to Kaby Lake with a 100-series motherboard, you will not be able to utilize the caching feature. The chipset requirement also implies that the speedy Optane is constrained by the DMI 3.0's limited throughput.</p><h2 id="bclk-aware-voltage-frequency-curve-and-avx-offset-ratio">BCLK Aware Voltage/Frequency Curve And AVX Offset Ratio </h2><p>Intel promotes its BCLK-aware Voltage/Frequency curve tool as a useful utility for overclocking, but provides little detail about its inner workings. Intel designed the software to increase overclock stability and reliability by optimizing voltage fed to the processor based on BCLK frequency. We have had little success with BCLK-based overclocking using our locked samples, so it may have limited use. We hope to learn more soon, though.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1404px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:51.35%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/x7Fp3KY6tWXUC7aQDvMuH3.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/x7Fp3KY6tWXUC7aQDvMuH3.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1404" height="721" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/x7Fp3KY6tWXUC7aQDvMuH3.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The adjustable Advanced Vector Extension (AVX) offset ratio debuted on the Xeon line-up as a locked parameter. Broadwell-E marked the first time Intel offered it as an unlocked and adjustable parameter, and Kaby Lake brings the feature to mainstream overclocking.</p><p>AVX workloads are power-hungry, and thus generate far more heat than non-AVX workloads. This ratio allows the processor to reign in clock rates when it executes AVX instructions, in turn allowing you to dial in higher overclocks for non-AVX workloads. The MSI Z270 Gaming M7 allowed us to define an AVX offset ratio and use it alongside our manually-adjusted Vcore settings.</p><h2 id="intel-hd-graphics-630-gen9-5-brings-4k-to-the-fore">Intel HD Graphics 630 - Gen9.5 Brings 4K To The Fore</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1278px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:53.05%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MbouXuJG9tdPdSTcEv5sR9.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MbouXuJG9tdPdSTcEv5sR9.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1278" height="678" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MbouXuJG9tdPdSTcEv5sR9.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Intel replaced the HD Graphics 530's Gen9 Media Architecture with Gen9.5 for HD Graphics 630. The new architecture is similar to Gen9, so it has the same design that features subslices with 8 EUs each (totaling 24 EUs in a GT2 configuration), along with support for all the previous features. Intel also changes the branding from Iris Pro to Iris Plus for its eDRAM-infused offerings.</p><p>HD Graphics 630 gets the same 350 MHz base and 1150 MHz dynamic clock rates, with revamped MFX (decode/encode) and VQE engines. The MFX (Multi Format Codex) engine supports legacy VP8 and AVC codecs, along with HEVC 10-bit decode/encode, VP9 8/10-bit decode, and VP9 8-bit encode (no support for VP9 10-bit encode). The VQE engine also enjoys the addition of HDR and Wide Color Gamut support.</p><p>The optimized fixed-function hardware eliminates Skylake's Gen9 hybrid CPU/GPU processing strategy during HEVC Main10 Decode and VP9 8-bit decode operations, thereby reducing CPU overhead and the associated power consumption. The Gen9.5 engine supports up to eight simultaneous 4Kp30 HEVC and AVC streams, along with real-time 4Kp60 HEVC decode operations at 120 MB/s.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1086px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:84.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RNhfLWk6FJp7wnqhR9T4mf.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RNhfLWk6FJp7wnqhR9T4mf.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1086" height="915" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RNhfLWk6FJp7wnqhR9T4mf.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>These advances are great for the mobile space, but might have limited utility for enthusiasts with add-in graphics cards. There is an odd conundrum with 4K Netflix streaming. Netflix requires PlayReady 3.0 DRM and hardware-based 10-bit HEVC decoding, which is a combination currently only available with Windows 10 and Kaby Lake processors. Skylake and its predecessors don't support 10-bit HEVC decode. Nvidia's 10-series GPUs support both technologies, but cannot stream 4K yet.</p><p>While 4K video streaming is still in the teething stage, onerous DRM and requirements like HDCP 2.2 could be serious limitations. The string of prerequisites, which also includes the Windows 10 Anniversary Update and HDMI 2.0 or DisplayPort, is confusing enough for "regular" users that Intel created an infographic to help navigate the 4K minefield. Streaming 4K may give some mainstream users a reason to upgrade their desktops, but the narrow stream of content providers will likely hamper adoption.</p><h2 id="windows-10-users-need-only-apply">Windows 10 Users Need Only Apply</h2><p>Microsoft announced earlier this year that it would not support Kaby Lake and Zen processors with pre-Windows 10 operating systems. The company indicated that it would not update drivers for older operating systems to support the new hardware. </p><p>Based on our initial testing with MSI's Z270 Gaming 7 motherboard, we can confirm that HD Graphics 630 does not function correctly under Windows 7 and 8.1. Both operating systems install generic drivers for the display adapter, even after applying the latest drivers and updates, so many core features remain unavailable. We also experienced stability issues with Windows 7 that might even negate using an add-in GPU as a workaround. </p><p>This may be a minor concern to enthusiasts who already keep up to date. But the estimated 47% of worldwide computer users who still use Windows 7 (and the 8% on Windows 8.1) need to account for the cost of Windows 10 as part of a Kaby Lake upgrade. Microsoft allows a limited number of component changes before invalidating your OS license, so it is a valid concern if you plan to upgrade an existing system with a 100-series chipset. It's noteworthy that Microsoft's official mainstream support for Windows 7 expired in January 2015, but the company has obviously not convinced a majority of users to upgrade. Interestingly, Microsoft still offers "mainstream support" for the unpopular Windows 8 until Jan 2018, though that's misleading since it isn't supporting modern processors with the OS.</p><h2 id="test-setup-9">Test Setup </h2><h2 id="processors">Processors</h2><h2 id="20"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:22.65%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/o7ezFZzw6Pp2yapyDc4WAc.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/o7ezFZzw6Pp2yapyDc4WAc.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="342" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/o7ezFZzw6Pp2yapyDc4WAc.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  >Core i7-7700K</td><td  >Core i7-7700</td><td  >Core i7-7600K</td><td  >Core i7-7600</td></tr></tbody></table></div><h2 id="motherboard-amp-memory">Motherboard & Memory</h2><p>We used MSI's Gaming M7 motherboard as our test platform for the seventh-gen Kaby Lake and sixth-gen Skylake processors. We used MSI's Z97 Gaming 7 motherboard for the Haswell-refresh CPU, and the MSI 970 Gaming AM3+ for our AMD comparison.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:63.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Jp5WQsrr7WuAFvLfWbrNDc.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Jp5WQsrr7WuAFvLfWbrNDc.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="953" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Jp5WQsrr7WuAFvLfWbrNDc.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The MSI Gaming M7 offers a range of features that provide simplistic auto-overclocking for beginners, and a dual-function firmware that offers an easy interface with limited options or an advanced layout with a plethora of overclocking knobs. MSI added ASMedia Lightning USB 3.1 and an additional M.2 connection (for a total of three) to its latest Gaming M7.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:16.69%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Hf6vHhPP8fpC43fnDcDXC7.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Hf6vHhPP8fpC43fnDcDXC7.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="252" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Hf6vHhPP8fpC43fnDcDXC7.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We used two 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR4-3400 modules for the Z270 platforms and 8GB of Crucial DDR3L-1866 for the MSI Z97 Gaming 7 platform. </p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:61.85%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pRReHmHtMYz4ZhLRKBbHNF.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pRReHmHtMYz4ZhLRKBbHNF.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="934" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pRReHmHtMYz4ZhLRKBbHNF.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>A beefy Enermax Liqtech 240 AiO cooler fitted with two be quiet! Silent Wings II fans assured that we were within a safe thermal envelope during the overclocking and test sequences. This solution can dissipate up to 300W of heat, which is more than enough for most overclocked configurations. However, we introduced the water cooler to Intel's Power Thermal Utility (PTU), which can push any processor to its limit, even at stock clocks.  </p><h2 id="overclocking-and-stability">Overclocking And Stability</h2><p>Overclocking is a quest to find the right balance between an aggressive clock rate and a reasonable amount of voltage that won't reduce the processor's longevity. We strive to find acceptable settings that most users could use without de-lidding their CPUs and conducting 7 GHz suicide runs at 2.5V.</p><p>We test stability with the AIDA64 FPU, CPU, and cache stress test for several hours, and then subject the processor to Prime95 workloads for several hours to assure the overclock is stable and reliable enough for extended usage.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  colspan="2"><strong>Power Consumption Test Setup</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  ><strong>Test Method</strong></th><td  >Contact-free DC Measurement at External Auxiliary Power Supply Cable Direct Voltage Measurement at Power Supply Real-Time Infrared Monitoring and Recording</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Test Equipment</strong></th><td  >2 x Rohde & Schwarz HMO 3054, 500 MHz Digital Multi-Channel Oscilloscope with Storage Function 4 x Rohde & Schwarz HZO50 Current Probe (1mA - 30A, 100 kHz, DC) 4 x Rohde & Schwarz HZ355 (10:1 Probes, 500MHz) 1 x Rohde & Schwarz HMC 8012 Digital Multimeter with Storage Function 1 x Optris PI640 80Hz Infrared Camera + PI Connect</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Water Cooling</strong></th><td  >AIO: Enermax Liqtech 240Fans: 2x be quiet! Silent Wings II</td></tr></tbody></table></div><h2 id="results-rendering-and-office-applications">Results: Rendering And Office Applications</h2><h2 id="benchmark-selection-and-practical-aspects">Benchmark Selection and Practical Aspects</h2><p>We could have just taken the easy route and used synthetic benchmarks. However, they would have primarily shown just one thing, which is that there’s nothing to show.</p><p>Comparing equivalent models of Skylake and Kaby Lake at the same clock rate shouldn’t yield different results. Intel’s saying that there are a few small upgrades, but it’s questionable if they're enough for a measurable performance gain in real-world applications.</p><p>We used several gaming benchmarks and high-end workstation applications. For those titles with a 3D output, we also needed a graphics card that wouldn't limit the CPUs we're testing. Consequently, we settled on the similar-performing GeForce GTX 1080 FE and Quadro P5000, switching back and forth between them since some software requires certified drivers.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2560px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:53.83%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/suDGuncohBSbsbeos4349D.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/suDGuncohBSbsbeos4349D.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="2560" height="1378" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/suDGuncohBSbsbeos4349D.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>There’s a reason that we like using applications that represent the industry standard. This way, we get results that are representative of actual performance. These tests generally run for a long time and across several different iterations, which makes their results much more reliable.</p><p>We tested the four larger Kaby Lake CPUs and their predecessors from Intel’s Skylake family. All of the latter were tested twice: at stock clock rates and then overclocked to their Kaby Lake counterparts’ frequencies. Intel’s Core i7-4790K and AMD’s current flagship, the FX-9790, rounded out the field. It will become clear from the graphs that adding more CPUs at the bottom end would have been pointless.</p><h2 id="rendering-blender-and-the-ryzen-workload">Rendering: Blender and the “Ryzen” Workload</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.00%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2xSHz6ioQaGBqK56JEpAPY.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2xSHz6ioQaGBqK56JEpAPY.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="280" height="210" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2xSHz6ioQaGBqK56JEpAPY.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>It’s too bad that Ryzen’s not out yet, since it would have given AMD a boost in this competition. The company did publish an official benchmark, though. In it, a Ryzen CPU at 3.4 GHz (without Turbo) should be as fast as an Intel Core i7-6900K. We followed AMD’s lead and used Blender Version 2.78a and the company's render project with the corrected 150 tiles. AMD provides the latter as a free download.</p><p>The maximum number of concurrent threads running at the highest possible frequency is the key to success in this benchmark.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gCQ78Kwo8bYJcPLGQkWhhh.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gCQ78Kwo8bYJcPLGQkWhhh.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gCQ78Kwo8bYJcPLGQkWhhh.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>It’s plain to see that the Kaby Lake and Skylake CPUs perform similarly as long as their clock rates are the same. Any performance gains observed using the new generation are due to their higher frequencies, and not due to architectural changes.</p><h2 id="rendering-cinebench-r15">Rendering: Cinebench R15</h2><p>Cinebench R15 by Maxon’s another great benchmark for comparing your own results to ours. It’s nice that this benchmark provides both multi-core and single-core performance results.</p><p>The multi-core results turn out as expected, with the maximum number of concurrent threads running at the highest clock rate winning the competition. AMD’s FX-9590 ends up in the middle of the pack, even though a lot of power is needed to get there.</p><p>Interestingly, Cinebench R15’s one of the few benchmarks in which the overclocked Skylake-based Core i5 beats the Kaby Lake equivalent. This isn’t due to measurement error. We ran the benchmark several times just to be sure.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wbFEffSkmoFaNkTpGskAeR.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wbFEffSkmoFaNkTpGskAeR.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wbFEffSkmoFaNkTpGskAeR.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Switching to a single-threaded workload changes the game quite a bit. AMD’s FX-9590 and Intel’s Core i7-4790K Haswell-refresh suffer massive losses compared to the competition. The small but noticeable difference between Kaby Lake and Skylake is still there.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kNPNvSup2HJTXRysQLqm7G.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kNPNvSup2HJTXRysQLqm7G.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kNPNvSup2HJTXRysQLqm7G.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="microsoft-office-2016">Microsoft Office 2016</h2><p>No desktop benchmark suite is complete without Microsoft’s popular Office suite. We’re leaving control over the workloads (as well as computing and reporting the geometrical mean of the three runs per application) to PCMark 8 Professional.</p><p>Some might say that benchmarking Microsoft Office 2016 is just about as exciting as watching paint dry. However, many of our readers spend a lot of time with the applications in this package. It'll be interesting to see if Kaby Lake saves us any time in Office.</p><p>We start with Microsoft Word, which only responds to clock rate. Expensive CPUs with features like SMT aren’t necessary.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  ></th><th  ><strong>File Size</strong></th><th  ><strong>Pages</strong></th><th  ><strong>Words</strong></th><th  ><strong>Pictures</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  ><strong>Source Document</strong></th><td  >3.25MB</td><td  >77</td><td  >17,987</td><td  >5</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Target Document</strong></th><td  >57MB</td><td  >138</td><td  >30,800</td><td  >10</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Actions</strong></th><td  colspan="4">- Start Application and Open Document - Open Target Document in New Window - Copy Large Part of Original Document to Target Document - Save Target Document with New File Name - Expand Target Document's Window - Cut and Paste Large Part of Target Document - Save Target Document Again - Text Input with Simulated Delay - Save Target Document Again - Insert Pictures in Target Document - Save Target Document Again and Close Application</td></tr></tbody></table></div><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mYJdAFcnteRfEJf2bV9viE.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mYJdAFcnteRfEJf2bV9viE.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mYJdAFcnteRfEJf2bV9viE.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Microsoft Excel is a bit pickier. In larger workloads, performance doesn’t just depend on frequency, but also on the number of threads. Even a dinosaur like AMD’s FX-9590 does a bit better in this benchmark.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  ></th><th  ><strong>File Size</strong></th><th  ><strong>Worksheets</strong></th><th  ><strong>Active Cells</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  ><strong>Source Files</strong></th><td  >4.62MB2.33MB</td><td  >4</td><td  >240,800</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Target File</strong></th><td  >4.18 MB</td><td  >2</td><td  >10,930</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Actions</strong></th><td  colspan="3">- Start Application and Open All Three Worksheets  - Open All Workbooks - Expand Application Window - Copy Data from Original to Target Workbook with Formula Evaluation - Copy Data from Original to Target Workbook without Formula Evaluation - Copy From Cells with Formulas - Copy More Data to Cells with Formula Evaluation - Insert Specific Values in Three Cells with Formula Evaluation - Save Target Document and Close Application</td></tr></tbody></table></div><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aKniEzfW5XbethVc5xyo4R.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aKniEzfW5XbethVc5xyo4R.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aKniEzfW5XbethVc5xyo4R.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Microsoft PowerPoint provides completely different results. No matter what we did, the finishing order stayed the same, which is to say that it practically reversed compared to what we saw before. Intel’s newer Core i7s seem to be at a disadvantage due to SMT, of all things. Microsoft PowerPoint can’t make use of multiple cores and ends up having nothing but problems with the new setup.</p><p>Disabling SMT actually gives the Core i7-7700K a performance boost. Still, even the higher clock rate isn’t enough to propel it to the top. We think that the lower core-to-core latencies of the lower-clocked models might be the reason for their advantage. It also looks like Kaby Lake’s able to inch out the older competition at the same clock rates. The differences are tiny, though.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  ></th><th  ><strong>File Size</strong></th><th  ><strong>Slides</strong></th><th  ><strong>Pictures</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  ><strong>Source File</strong></th><td  >27.1MB</td><td  >15</td><td  >12</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>PDF Export</strong></th><td  >2.83MB</td><td  >16</td><td  >13</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Actions</strong></th><td  colspan="3">- Start Application and Open Presentation - Expand Application Window - Browse Slides (Looking at Them Simulated with Pauses) - Add New Slide - Insert and Cut Picture - Insert Text - Save Document - Export to PDF and Close the Application</td></tr></tbody></table></div><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/acJEsobLuZst2JGpoNKQwU.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/acJEsobLuZst2JGpoNKQwU.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/acJEsobLuZst2JGpoNKQwU.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Our Microsoft Office benchmarks turned out to be more eventful than using the suite during a normal workday. However, practically speaking, lower-end CPUs cost most Office users less money without negatively affecting their productivity.</p><h2 id="results-workstation-applications">Results: Workstation Applications</h2><h2 id="opengl-cinebench-r15">OpenGL: Cinebench R15</h2><p>We decided to run one more small synthetic benchmark before getting to the heavy hitters: Cinebench R15’s OpenGL benchmark. In this test, clock rate rules and more than four cores aren’t necessary. The results aren’t exactly newsworthy, but they do make for a nice transition to the larger applications.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TrfzivfdQxT3sLqfhqWqSY.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TrfzivfdQxT3sLqfhqWqSY.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TrfzivfdQxT3sLqfhqWqSY.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="creo-3-0-4">Creo 3.0</h2><p>The Creo test’s biggest advantage (and disadvantage, to be honest) is its long run time. The longer a benchmark runs, the more reliable its results tend to be. If the results of different CPUs are still the same after an hour, then there shouldn't be any noticeable differences between them during daily use.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  ></th><th  ><strong>Description</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  ><strong>Workflows</strong></th><td  >CPU Composite (1)I/O Composite (1)Graphic Composite (6)</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Content</strong></th><td  >- Open, Generate, Close and Delete Workflows- GPU- and CPU-based Output Computations (Tessellation, Mass Properties Analysis)- All Possible Types of Shading Functions and Movements (Rotate, Pan, Zoom)- Usage of Screen Space Ambient Occlusion (SSAO)- Bump Mapping and Image Background Support- Snapshots</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Let’s take a look at the three composite results of the individual benchmarks, starting with CPU performance. Once again, the eight simulated threads are more of a hindrance than an asset. True quad-core CPUs fare significantly better. However, this is only the case for pure CPU testing, which doesn’t provide us with the whole picture.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xFvfqNdsxg6JEASRm9J2QY.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xFvfqNdsxg6JEASRm9J2QY.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xFvfqNdsxg6JEASRm9J2QY.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>If we’re looking at the <em>visible</em> results instead, which is limited to the graphical output, then SMT doesn’t matter that much and higher clock rates are all you want. This means that the equivalent Kaby Lake and Skylake models with the same number of physical cores generate the same performance.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pHj2Febc26eqzDAPKRz7dm.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pHj2Febc26eqzDAPKRz7dm.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pHj2Febc26eqzDAPKRz7dm.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The I/O composite numbers round out the results and paint a similar picture. Kaby Lake’s only advantage over its predecessor comes from higher frequencies. Anyone considering an upgrade should spend some time thinking about the value story here. Otherwise, you'll end up spending a lot of money going sideways instead of stepping up.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7eB7GA9iokcsWHRHKfeQii.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7eB7GA9iokcsWHRHKfeQii.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7eB7GA9iokcsWHRHKfeQii.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="solidworks-2016">Solidworks 2016</h2><p>Solidworks by Dassault Systems is also very CPU-dependent. Additionally, it’s a benchmark that runs for long periods of time and doubles as a stress test. Overclocked CPUs are actually more likely to show errors during this benchmark than during the more common Prime95 or OCCT runs.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  ></th><th  ><strong>Description</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  ><strong>Workflows</strong></th><td  >CPU Composite (2 Tests)Graphic Composite (9 Tests)</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Content</strong></th><td  >CPU- Tessellation- PhotoView360 RenderingGPU- RealView- Ambient Occlusion On- Shadows- Up to 4.75 Million Triangles- Order Independent Transparency (OIT)</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>The CPU composite results show very clearly that processors able to work on lots of threads at high clock rates have the advantage. SMT is a big help as well. In this case, the benchmark tasks consisted of CPU-based tessellation and rendering.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Mo5czRgBjB8rfHbJhnsWJD.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Mo5czRgBjB8rfHbJhnsWJD.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Mo5czRgBjB8rfHbJhnsWJD.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Conversely, graphics output performance depends primarily on a CPU’s frequency and IPC throughput. This makes the comparison between Kaby Lake and Skylake at the same clock rates a worthwhile endeavor.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CeBv7y3QErMd6mLjFXGaQi.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CeBv7y3QErMd6mLjFXGaQi.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CeBv7y3QErMd6mLjFXGaQi.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="autocad-2016">AutoCAD 2016</h2><p>This software suite is a classic that runs well on consumer graphics cards since DirectX is used for 3D rendering instead of OpenGL.</p><p>Ever since the introduction of the unified shader model, graphics cards haven’t included specialized 2D hardware. Also, hardware-based 2D commands are all but extinct due to the driver model of all Windows versions since Vista. This means that many steps need to be computed by the CPU before a direct output can be executed. So, the 2D test exposes even the smallest weakness in IPC performance.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SA8d8K7Qm7BMgnn9W8kSQ7.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SA8d8K7Qm7BMgnn9W8kSQ7.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SA8d8K7Qm7BMgnn9W8kSQ7.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>There’s a small difference between Kaby Lake and Skylake CPUs in 2D, but it vanishes completely in 3D. Once again, multi-threading doesn’t really provide an advantage. The clock rate's really all that matters.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uHndWVyRkWiK96iCUpBNf6.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uHndWVyRkWiK96iCUpBNf6.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uHndWVyRkWiK96iCUpBNf6.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="results-dtp-and-multimedia">Results: DTP And Multimedia</h2><p>We're often asked which CPU or graphics card is best for intensive Adobe CC workloads, and we're ready to answer the question as far as CPUs are concerned.</p><p>Once again, we leave the provisioning and automation of the benchmarks, as well as the computation of the geometrical mean (GEOMEAN), to PCMark 8 Professional.</p><h2 id="adobe-photoshop-cc-64-bit">Adobe Photoshop CC (64 Bit)</h2><p>We have two different Adobe Photoshop benchmarks to run. The top of the chart stays the same, but the lower rungs change places depending on the workload. We start with the light version.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  ></th><th  ><strong>Pictures</strong></th><th  ><strong>File Size</strong></th><th  ><strong>Picture Size</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  ><strong>Source</strong></th><td  >14</td><td  >3.9 - 17.6MB</td><td  >2500 x 16776048 x 4032</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Target</strong></th><td  >14</td><td  >388 - 778KB</td><td  >1200 x 800</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Actions</strong></th><td  colspan="3">- Start Application and Load Data File - Change Color Balance - Add Auto Level - Adjust Shadows and Glare - Downscale with Bicubic Interpolation - Compute and Add Unsharp Mask - Save Results in Files and Close Application</td></tr></tbody></table></div><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7E8nvX5rYYhWXNTrVZRwNE.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7E8nvX5rYYhWXNTrVZRwNE.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7E8nvX5rYYhWXNTrVZRwNE.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Using additional functions, which includes output in different compressed file formats, puts even more strain on the hardware. Taken together, the two tests provide a fairly complete picture of any bottlenecks that would be encountered in daily usage. The filters used here don’t include GPU acceleration, which means that we're measuring CPU and platform performance.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  ></th><th  ><strong>File Size</strong></th><th  ><strong>Picture Size</strong></th><th  ><strong>Resolution</strong></th><th  ><strong>Layer</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  ><strong>Source PSD</strong></th><td  >113MB</td><td  >5184x7744</td><td  >300 DPI</td><td  >1</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>PSD Export</strong></th><td  >1320MB</td><td  >7000x10457</td><td  >300 DPI</td><td  >4</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>TIFF Export</strong></th><td  >476MB</td><td  >7000x10457</td><td  >300 DPI</td><td  >None</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>JPEG Export</strong></th><td  >177KB</td><td  >1000x1494</td><td  >300 DPI</td><td  >None</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Actions</strong></th><td  colspan="4">- Start Application and Load PSD File - Upscale with Bicubic Interpolation - Change Color Depth to 16-bit per Channel - Create Color Range and Copy to New Layer - Merge Two Picture Layers and Insert as New Layer in Front - Compute and Add Unsharp Mask to this Foreground Layer - Create and Delete Elliptical Selection in this Layer - Merge All Layers into One Layer - Add Gaussian Blur - Add and Delete Gradient Mask - Decrease Layer's Opacity - Export File to PSD, TIFF and JPEG - Flatten Picture and Downscale with Bicubic Interpolation - Compute and Add Unsharp Mask - Export as JPEG and Close Application</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>We don't see the usual order due to the Core i7-7700’s surprisingly bad performance. We repeated the benchmark run several times, but, for whatever reason, the result stayed the same. Still, the differences are tiny. None of the CPUs, not even AMD’s FX-9590, are actually slow.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/s6iNpFEsCqWL2Vp69DAgSD.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/s6iNpFEsCqWL2Vp69DAgSD.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/s6iNpFEsCqWL2Vp69DAgSD.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="adobe-indesign-cc-64-bit">Adobe InDesign CC (64 Bit)</h2><p>Adobe InDesign emphasizes IPC throughput, as evidenced by its sensitivity to clock rate. It’s interesting that the Kaby Lake CPUs end up being slower than the corresponding Skylake models at the same frequencies.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  ></th><th  ><strong>File Size</strong></th><th  ><strong>Pages</strong></th><th  ><strong>Pictures</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  ><strong>Source File</strong></th><td  >385MB</td><td  >40</td><td  >42</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Target File</strong></th><td  >378MB</td><td  >40</td><td  >40</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>PDF Export</strong></th><td  >64.7MB</td><td  >40</td><td  >40</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Actions</strong></th><td  colspan="3">- Start Application and Load Data File - Change Picture Size and Reposition Pictures - Add Colored Rectangle as Decorative Element - Change Border Settings - Insert Text - Save Document as New File - Export as PDF File and Close Application</td></tr></tbody></table></div><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ePc35JhZpC42zkARhsCf8T.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ePc35JhZpC42zkARhsCf8T.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ePc35JhZpC42zkARhsCf8T.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="adobe-illustrator-cc-64-bit">Adobe Illustrator CC (64 Bit)</h2><p>For Adobe Illustrator, CPU and storage performance are the deciding factors. The hardware’s particularly important when it comes to writing operations.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  ></th><th  ><strong>Original File</strong></th><th  ><strong>Saved File</strong></th><th  ><strong>Exported PDF</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  ><strong>File</strong></th><td  >733KB</td><td  >6.2MB</td><td  >5.6MB</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Actions</strong></th><td  colspan="3">- Start Application and Load Data File - Change Picture Sizes and Reposition Pictures - Add Translucent Filled Rectangle for Color Effect - Vectorize Pictures in Document - Add Text Fields, Lines, Rectangles, Ellipses, Stars and Spines - Save the Documents in a New File - Export as PDF - Close Document and Application</td></tr></tbody></table></div><h2 id="21"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xUeXxizkiXQ2TpQS5jS5BS.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xUeXxizkiXQ2TpQS5jS5BS.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xUeXxizkiXQ2TpQS5jS5BS.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="adobe-after-effects-cc">Adobe After Effects CC</h2><p>Adobe After Effects is able to schedule tasks like vector conversion in parallel. This is reflected in the results from CPUs with SMT that achieve better multi-threading performance, placing them above their competition. Uncompressed AVIs drive home the point that a higher clock rate can compensate for the lack of SMT.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th  ></th><th  ><strong>File Size</strong></th><th  ><strong>Resolution</strong></th><th  ><strong>Data Rate</strong></th><th  ><strong>Audio</strong></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th  ><strong>File 1</strong></th><td  >890MB</td><td  >1080p, 30 FPS</td><td  >1458 Mb/s</td><td  >1536 Kb/s 48 KHzStereo</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Output</strong></th><td  colspan="4">AERender (Uncompressed AVI)</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>File 2</strong></th><td  >5.64MB</td><td  >1080p, 30 FPS</td><td  >0.9 Mb/s</td><td  >256 Kb/s44 KHzStereo</td></tr><tr><th  ><strong>Output Settings</strong></th><td  colspan="4">Windows Media Video 9 Advanced Profile- Constant Bitrate: 0.9 Mb/s- Image Quality: 98- Keyframe Interval: 1 Second- Buffer Size: 1 SecondsWindows Media Audio 9.2- Constant Audio Bitrate: 256 Kb/s, 44 KHz, Stereo (A/V) CBR</td></tr></tbody></table></div><h2 id="22"></h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/byujUgSaP7ZxDngRVgBt84.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/byujUgSaP7ZxDngRVgBt84.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/byujUgSaP7ZxDngRVgBt84.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="bottom-line">Bottom Line</h2><p>Adobe CC doesn’t demand a CPU with SMT at this point. In the end, any good quad-core processor will do, with the largest gains observable from high IPC throughput and clock rates. Processors that can hit even higher clock rates via Turbo Boost/Core across four cores have an advantage.</p><p>A direct comparison shows that Kaby Lake CPUs aren’t any faster than Skylake CPUs at the same clock rate. It’s actually the opposite in some situations, with the Skylake CPUs edging out Intel’s new processors. In order to achieve this, the older CPUs first need to be manually overclocked, though.</p><h2 id="results-gaming-and-integrated-graphics-igp">Results: Gaming And Integrated Graphics (iGP)</h2><h2 id="3d-performance-with-a-discrete-graphics-card">3D Performance with a Discrete Graphics Card</h2><p>Of course, gamers want to know just how well Intel’s new Kaby Lake CPUs fare under the latest games. In the next two tests we used an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition.</p><h2 id="discrete-graphics-watch-dogs-2">Discrete Graphics: Watch Dogs 2</h2><p><em>Watch Dogs 2</em> likes to have four physical cores, and continues to scale with more threads enabled via SMT. However, the game’s performance doesn’t ramp up linearly with thread count. A fast quad-core CPU without SMT is perfectly ample.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AV5FnMhgmqDts83usPpGaP.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AV5FnMhgmqDts83usPpGaP.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AV5FnMhgmqDts83usPpGaP.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="discrete-graphics-metro-last-light">Discrete Graphics: Metro: Last Light</h2><p><em>Metro: Last Light</em> uses a lot of computing power for physics, especially since we disabled PhysX. We also skipped any form of anti-aliasing and SSAO to achieve the highest possible frame rate. These CPUs don't bottleneck performance, but the difference between the fastest and slowest ones are approximately 10 percent.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tmseE57pPBxTycLdipszj7.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tmseE57pPBxTycLdipszj7.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tmseE57pPBxTycLdipszj7.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>As we've seen already, corresponding Kaby Lake and Skylake CPUs at the same clock frequency perform the same.</p><h2 id="3d-performance-with-integrated-graphics-igp">3D Performance with Integrated Graphics (iGP)</h2><p>Nobody’s going to play current games on integrated graphics after spending big bucks on a high-end platform. Still, we tested two titles using settings that provided playable frame rates anyway, even though Intel’s drivers don’t really deal with this kind of task very well. We also want to know if AutoCAD works with an integrated graphics solution. Since AMD’s FX-9590 is the only test CPU without integrated graphics, we used one of AMD’s APUs, the A10-7890K, instead.</p><h2 id="integrated-graphics-igp-half-life-2-lost-coast">Integrated Graphics (iGP): Half Life 2 - Lost Coast</h2><p><em>Half Life 2</em> runs on anything, even the most entry-level GPUs. The only host processing attribute that matters is clock rate and, by extension, IPC throughput. When this game was made, nobody was thinking about four or more x86 cores. Intel’s graphics driver works fairly well in this case. Consequently, the performance of AMD’s APU takes a hit due to its lackluster CPU. The game runs on one core alone, and the graph reflects this.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MHqAG6EApXNjddrYU96oF4.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MHqAG6EApXNjddrYU96oF4.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MHqAG6EApXNjddrYU96oF4.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="integrated-graphics-igp-bioshock-infinite">Integrated Graphics (iGP): Bioshock Infinite</h2><p>Next, we take a look at what happens when we push the graphics solution harder. Without CPU performance bottlenecking the frame rate, AMD's APU rules supreme. That doesn’t mean it's actually fast, though.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7hdmQH6NDjczeMTM4stPjj.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7hdmQH6NDjczeMTM4stPjj.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7hdmQH6NDjczeMTM4stPjj.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="integrated-graphics-igp-autocad-3d-performance">Integrated Graphics (iGP): AutoCAD 3D Performance</h2><p>All of the CPUs we're testing work well for 2D; the results we generate are almost identical to what we saw from Nvidia's Quadro P5000. The CPU limits performance in every scenario for the reasons we've already covered.</p><p>The CPU remains the most important component as we switch over to 3D, translating to similar results. High clock rates and IPC throughput rule once again, and AMD’s APU can’t compete in spite of its better graphics solution and driver. It’s time for Raven Ridge. We can't wait to see how it fares.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/psQgEFL8p8cdac56jAV9tN.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/psQgEFL8p8cdac56jAV9tN.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/psQgEFL8p8cdac56jAV9tN.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="intel-core-i7-7700k-power-consumption-and-temperatures">Intel Core i7-7700K: Power Consumption And Temperatures</h2><p>It’s a well-known fact that processors vary widely in quality due to their manufacturing process. This time around, we didn’t get all of our test samples from Intel directly, but they’re the same retail models that anyone can buy at the store. This means that the manufacturer didn't provide pre-sorted CPUs. Unfortunately, the luck of the draw worked against our German lab, and we received a sample on the lower end of the quality range.</p><p>This doesn’t affect the benchmark results at all. However, it does have an impact on the power consumption and cooling results, as well as how far this particular CPU sample can be overclocked. Consequently, we have a page dedicated to the quality variations of the four CPUs that we tested. We were also able to use a test sample that Intel’s PR department gave us at the last minute.</p><h2 id="the-intel-core-i7-7700k">The Intel Core i7-7700K</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:100.28%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KWcLwdhoFAjLF6x9JvtZaH.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KWcLwdhoFAjLF6x9JvtZaH.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="713" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KWcLwdhoFAjLF6x9JvtZaH.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The “K” CPUs have an unlocked multiplier and a significantly higher base clock rate compared to non-K models. There’s also room for manual overclocking.</p><p>The Intel Core i7-7700K’s stock base frequency is 4.2 GHz. Even under extreme loads, it runs all four of its cores at a Turbo Boost frequency of 4.5 GHz. Let’s take a look at how it acts under different loads. Do keep in mind that this particular sample’s an extreme case and represents what happens if you have bad luck when buying this processor.</p><h2 id="core-voltage-vcore">Core Voltage (Vcore)</h2><p>We start with the actual core voltage (Vcore), which shouldn’t be confused with the voltage identification (VID), or what GPU-Z or CoreTemp show the Vcore to be. Our sensor readings come straight from the motherboard and represent the voltage that actually runs through its voltage converters.</p><p>The loads change both dynamically and quickly during gaming (grey curve). Voltage regulation works well with this kind of load pattern, since the CPU is only regulated down if there’s a strong load increase. This is also demonstrated by the blue curve, which represents the results from a constant computing load. The motherboard regulates the voltage down in order to keep the CPU safe from leakage currents. On the plus side, it does manage to keep the voltage constant for the entire duration, though.</p><p>There are a lot of observable fluctuations during the extreme stress test. This is because the CPU runs into its thermal limit in spite of our compact water cooling solution, and it throttles accordingly for safety reasons.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CdjgTdryPmEXCrsZbDs9FN.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CdjgTdryPmEXCrsZbDs9FN.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CdjgTdryPmEXCrsZbDs9FN.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="normal-load-gaming">Normal Load: Gaming</h2><p>We’re using a <em>Watch Dogs 2</em> sequence to test the gaming load. The player stands in a well-populated spot in the city center, which creates a high CPU load due to the many NPCs and constant traffic. This makes the test very reliable. Across 30 minutes, the CPU load is very similar to the <em>average</em> CPU load that we measured during actual gaming. Of course, the average load might change based on the specific title you're looking at.</p><p>Now let's look at overall power consumption and the components that go into it, such as the IA cores, cache, and memory controller. After the warm-up phase, we measure a relatively high 77W for the entire CPU, 67W of which comes from the execution cores. The difference is covered by the needs of the Uncore (cache, memory controller, etc.) and leakage currents.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kMwTYvr5qp9ktr6e4KZ5Jf.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kMwTYvr5qp9ktr6e4KZ5Jf.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kMwTYvr5qp9ktr6e4KZ5Jf.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>As the CPU heats up, power consumption goes up as well. This is a sign that leakage currents increase, pushing power up another 3W during our gaming workload.</p><p>The temperatures increase at a different pace, depending on the position of the sensor. They do stabilize after a maximum of 22 minutes at up to 71°C, though.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zyFUwjbEdotxW6Ze93cUsY.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zyFUwjbEdotxW6Ze93cUsY.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zyFUwjbEdotxW6Ze93cUsY.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="heavy-load-stress-test-floating-point-unit">Heavy Load: Stress Test (Floating-Point Unit)</h2><p>For our next test run, we tax the CPU's floating-point unit using the stability test included in FinalWire's AIDA64. This results in a power consumption measurement of 98W. Leakage currents increase right along with the temperatures, and this time the increase is significant.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ivBoGJh3EzCEdNpjzBXgEm.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ivBoGJh3EzCEdNpjzBXgEm.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ivBoGJh3EzCEdNpjzBXgEm.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>With the Tcore reaching up to 85°C, we’re still in the clear. But that's not a good sign for the thermal headroom available when we want to start overclocking.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JYrghBB2QU3zRYmk5pFV23.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JYrghBB2QU3zRYmk5pFV23.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JYrghBB2QU3zRYmk5pFV23.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="maximum-load-intel-power-thermal-utility-100">Maximum Load: Intel Power Thermal Utility (100%)</h2><p>To prove the old adage that things can always get worse, we drop the hammer with Intel’s Power Thermal Utility, which isn't publicly available for Kaby Lake. The Core i7-7700K in our German lab consumed a hefty 137W. The one in our U.S. lab consumed 18W less than that!</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/igYX83CsM4jWZ8s3SrYDxA.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/igYX83CsM4jWZ8s3SrYDxA.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/igYX83CsM4jWZ8s3SrYDxA.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Unsurprisingly, temperatures explode right along with the power consumption. The CPU hit 101°C very quickly, which means that it even exceeded its maximum temperature. Consequently, it throttled up to 25 percent. At least the processor survived our full 30-minute test.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rFWv57HUBjuSb5wuVV8VJi.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rFWv57HUBjuSb5wuVV8VJi.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rFWv57HUBjuSb5wuVV8VJi.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Dissipating almost 140W isn't really a challenge for our water cooling solution. It’s able to deal with an Intel Core i7-6950X overclocked to 4 GHz, which generates a lot more heat than this. The problems lie elsewhere. First, there’s the CPU package's smaller surface area. Second, there’s the thermal paste, which might have made Intel's accounting department happy, but causes overclockers nothing but worry.</p><h2 id="intel-core-i7-7700k-vs-core-i7-6700k-at-4-5-ghz">Intel Core i7-7700K vs. Core i7-6700K @ 4.5 GHz</h2><p>For our performance benchmarks, we had the Core i7-7700K compete against a Core i7-6700K at the same frequency. The latter fared pretty well, but was also close to its maximum overclocking potential. We have an above-average chip, but it's far from a golden sample.</p><p>Consequently, we end up comparing a solid Skylake CPU to a bad Kaby Lake sample at the same clock rate. The result’s somewhat of a shocker: our Skylake CPU comes in just below Kaby Lake in our power consumption test, in spite of its manual overclock and a slightly higher voltage set in the BIOS.</p><p>This means that a decent retail Core i7-6700K beats a below-average retail Core i7-7700K. We already feel sorry for the online retailers that’ll have to deal with the returns and exchanges generated by enthusiasts trying to get the best possible sample.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PrTG95Nksbgs6W4kx3cBG4.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PrTG95Nksbgs6W4kx3cBG4.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PrTG95Nksbgs6W4kx3cBG4.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The Core i7-6700K’s voltages are always higher than those of the Core i7-7700K with its new manufacturing process. This doesn’t guarantee better efficiency than the preceding processor generation, though.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wEhsLkNeZhniVfW2fuYsrk.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wEhsLkNeZhniVfW2fuYsrk.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wEhsLkNeZhniVfW2fuYsrk.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We have to stress that the variability of the processors’ quality can have a major impact on the results. We go over this variability later on, on its own page.</p><p>We learn two things from our experiences with Intel's Core i7-7700K. First, Intel’s Power Thermal Utility is no joke. Second, the Core i7-7700K does have some thermal and performance reserves, so long as you don't hit it with such a worst-case workload. There should be some room for overclocking, though it won't be much.</p><h2 id="intel-core-i7-7700-power-consumption-and-temperatures">Intel Core i7-7700: Power Consumption And Temperatures</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:100.00%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vruRChPdARQ2eAQjj7o3rg.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vruRChPdARQ2eAQjj7o3rg.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="711" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vruRChPdARQ2eAQjj7o3rg.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>As opposed to the Core i7-7700K, Intel's Core i7-7700 (without the K) doesn’t have an unlocked multiplier. Its base clock rate is also quite a bit lower. Furthermore, Intel chose some of the other values, such as those for the ring bus, to make overclocking endeavors via the BCLK pointless.</p><p>The Core i7-7700’s stock base frequency is 3.6 GHz. However, even under extreme loads, the processor manages to hold a 4 GHz Turbo Boost frequency on all four cores.</p><h2 id="core-voltage-vcore-2">Core Voltage (Vcore)</h2><p>Before we get to the power consumption and temperature numbers, let's take a look at the core voltage (Vcore). This shouldn’t be confused with the voltage identification (VID) that can be set in the BIOS and is always higher than the Vcore.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ij8jrTmr8oHiB9gx2ZzD44.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ij8jrTmr8oHiB9gx2ZzD44.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ij8jrTmr8oHiB9gx2ZzD44.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>It’s plain to see that the voltage decreases as the loads increase. This is necessary to ensure the Core i7-7700’s maximum leakage currents aren’t exceeded, which could damage the CPU. The more taxing the load, the less the curve fluctuates as well.</p><h2 id="normal-load-gaming-2">Normal Load: Gaming</h2><p>We again use <em>Watch Dogs 2</em> for our gaming load. In this task, Intel’s CPU consumes a total of 50 to 52W. That's a great result, and it comes in well below the processor's TDP. The IA cores only consume 40W, with the rest going to other parts of the die.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dZZKRPjvNAPB6fRvn8uqCn.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dZZKRPjvNAPB6fRvn8uqCn.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dZZKRPjvNAPB6fRvn8uqCn.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Again, the CPU’s power consumption increases along with its temperature. This results in additional leakage currents of up to 1.7W.</p><p>The rate of the temperature increase over time depends on the position of the sensor. Readings stabilize after more than 24 minutes, though. The package heats up more slowly than the other components.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V2Ht6goDiAaBqXykNbf6PX.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V2Ht6goDiAaBqXykNbf6PX.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V2Ht6goDiAaBqXykNbf6PX.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="heavy-load-stress-test-floating-point-unit-2">Heavy Load: Stress Test (Floating-Point Unit)</h2><p>We're back to AIDA64's stability test, which results in an increased power consumption measurement of 63W. The temperature and leakage current increases are similar to what we saw during the gaming power consumption benchmark.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UTXxzkNsCCjJghtfAwNCbX.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UTXxzkNsCCjJghtfAwNCbX.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UTXxzkNsCCjJghtfAwNCbX.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The Tcore increases noticeably up to 58°C. Other than that, the readings are similar to what we saw in the gaming power consumption benchmark. Even simple air coolers shouldn’t have a problem coping with this amount of waste heat.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/R4TS4JuRJ9EgbF9UeW7HPa.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/R4TS4JuRJ9EgbF9UeW7HPa.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/R4TS4JuRJ9EgbF9UeW7HPa.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="maximum-load-intel-power-thermal-utility-100-2">Maximum Load: Intel Power Thermal Utility (100%)</h2><p>We push the Core i7-7700 just about as far as it will go using Intel’s Power Thermal Utility. A measurement of up to 88W comes close to Intel’s stated TDP. It’s interesting that the increase in leakage currents doesn’t exceed 2W when comparing the cold and warmed-up CPUs.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/f9WtPsehb84qzLtpb3XN5M.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/f9WtPsehb84qzLtpb3XN5M.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/f9WtPsehb84qzLtpb3XN5M.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The temperature results show us that the CPU diode stays a bit cooler than the other parts, whereas the package sensor displays the highest temperatures.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DGXsi6ki3PLUgVBaVYAi9.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DGXsi6ki3PLUgVBaVYAi9.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DGXsi6ki3PLUgVBaVYAi9.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>In the end, it looks like we drew an average CPU sample. Cooling the vanilla Core i7-7700 isn't particularly challenging. A maximum clock rate of 4 GHz across all four cores under heavy load strikes a good balance between efficiency, compute power, and waste heat. However, it’s not enough to reach the Core i7-7700K’s performance.</p><h2 id="intel-core-i5-7600k-power-consumption-and-temperatures">Intel Core i5-7600K: Power Consumption And Temperatures</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:100.00%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7CYVSXWPNSUE5EAvUHJnVP.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7CYVSXWPNSUE5EAvUHJnVP.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="711" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7CYVSXWPNSUE5EAvUHJnVP.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Being a “K” model, the Core i5-7600K naturally has an unlocked multiplier and a higher base clock rate than the non-K model, just like the Core i7-7700K. This makes overclocking much more accessible.</p><p>The stock base frequency is 3.8 GHz. Still, our Core i5-7600K manages to run all four of its cores at a Turbo Boost rate of 4.2 GHz under heavy load.</p><h2 id="core-voltage-vcore-3">Core Voltage (Vcore)</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uzYKeZ5y2EMb9zLi2NUcCJ.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uzYKeZ5y2EMb9zLi2NUcCJ.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uzYKeZ5y2EMb9zLi2NUcCJ.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>It’s plain to see that the voltage decreases as the loads increase. This is necessary so that the Intel Core i5-7600K’s maximum leakage currents aren’t exceeded. And as before, the more taxing the load, the less the curve fluctuates.</p><h2 id="normal-load-gaming-3">Normal Load: Gaming</h2><p>Using the same <em>Watch Dogs 2</em> gaming load, we measure an average of 54 to 56W for the entire CPU. That's well below Intel’s 90W TDP for this processor. It’s also a generally good result. The IA cores on their own account for 45W, with the rest being consumed by other parts of the CPU.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SgY6ZR2zrEbQw5MFKHPqCg.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SgY6ZR2zrEbQw5MFKHPqCg.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SgY6ZR2zrEbQw5MFKHPqCg.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Once again, the CPU’s power consumption increases along with its temperature. This results in additional leakage currents of up to 2.2W.</p><p>The rate of temperature increase over time depends on the position of the sensor. Our measurements stabilize after more than 25 minutes.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ksMggiyvXhvU6gY8Auir6.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ksMggiyvXhvU6gY8Auir6.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ksMggiyvXhvU6gY8Auir6.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="heavy-load-stress-test-floating-point-unit-3">Heavy Load: Stress Test (Floating Point Unit)</h2><p>AIDA64's stability test yields a power consumption reading of 64W. Temperature and leakage current increases are similar to what we saw during the gaming workload.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/y8AJJjcrzBmtmsaiVuk3cm.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/y8AJJjcrzBmtmsaiVuk3cm.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/y8AJJjcrzBmtmsaiVuk3cm.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The Tcore increases noticeably up to 61°C. Other than that, the picture still looks a lot like what we saw while gaming. Again, simple air coolers shouldn't have a problem dealing with this amount of waste heat.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SCvSp3r2QKDjZMLKEaaMDf.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SCvSp3r2QKDjZMLKEaaMDf.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SCvSp3r2QKDjZMLKEaaMDf.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="maximum-load-intel-power-thermal-utility-100-3">Maximum Load: Intel Power Thermal Utility (100%)</h2><p>Power consumption increases substantially when the Core i5-7600K is pushed to its limit by Intel’s Power Thermal Utility. The 104W we measured far exceeds this CPU's TDP. Still, though, the increase in leakage current doesn’t affect power by more than 2W comparing the cold and warmed-up operating states.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zFMdxaYC3DZFmBKjxQoSdd.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zFMdxaYC3DZFmBKjxQoSdd.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zFMdxaYC3DZFmBKjxQoSdd.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The temperature results show us that the on-die diode stays a bit cooler than the other parts, whereas the package sensor displays the highest temperatures. Readings between 88°C and 89°C are right on the edge of what can still be considered acceptable.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2UBraPLPjH9RVKbnvSfe6P.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2UBraPLPjH9RVKbnvSfe6P.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2UBraPLPjH9RVKbnvSfe6P.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="intel-core-i5-7600k-vs-intel-core-i5-6600k-at-4-2-ghz">Intel Core i5-7600K vs. Intel Core i5-6600K @ 4.2 GHz</h2><p>We had two Skylake-based CPUs compete in the performance benchmarks after overclocking them to match Kaby Lake. The intention was to let us compare their IPC throughput. But power consumption is another good indicator of changes between processor generations. And there are substantial changes to observe, so long as you have a decent CPU sample!</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8L8zsfQPZ6EJTrmBGDAoT.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8L8zsfQPZ6EJTrmBGDAoT.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8L8zsfQPZ6EJTrmBGDAoT.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>A direct comparison across four scenes with different loads shows that the new CPU generation’s power consumption is significantly lower at the same performance level compared to the previous generation. This difference gets larger under more intensive workloads.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HLhRsBrhd2YSwexjhF2AoC.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HLhRsBrhd2YSwexjhF2AoC.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HLhRsBrhd2YSwexjhF2AoC.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>This is likely due to Intel’s improved manufacturing process, which allows the new chips to operate at much lower voltages. Results from our sensors would seem to validate this theory. Then again, there’s a question mark as well. The comparison between Intel's Core i7-7700K and Core i7-6700K at the same frequency showed the latter exhibiting lower overall power consumption in spite of its higher Vcore.</p><p>We said it before, and we feel the need to reiterate: there’s a lot of variability in CPU quality, which can impact these results specifically. We only had one CPU sample each, so this comparison’s really more of a case study. We'll go into more depth on this shortly.</p><p>Compared to the Core i7-7700K we tested previously, it looks like we ended up with a better Core i5-7600K. Again, this chip appears to have some thermal and performance reserves available to overclockers, so long as you aren't subjecting the chip to worst-case workloads.</p><h2 id="intel-core-i5-7600-power-consumption-and-temperatures">Intel Core i5-7600: Power Consumption And Temperatures</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:100.00%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RAK3pqNVpX74HSYHLNPqBK.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RAK3pqNVpX74HSYHLNPqBK.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="711" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RAK3pqNVpX74HSYHLNPqBK.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Just like the Core i7-7700, Intel's Core i5-7600 doesn’t have an unlocked multiplier, and it has a much lower base clock rate than the Core i5-7600K. It also shares the same fate as the Core i7-7700 when it comes to other stock settings that render BCLK overclocking a pointless endeavor. The few megahertz that might be accessible just aren’t worth the effort.</p><p>The stock base frequency is rather low at 3.5 GHz. Under a heavy load, though, all four of the Core i5-7600's cores can maintain 3.9 GHz via Turbo Boost technology.</p><h2 id="core-voltage-vcore-4">Core Voltage (Vcore)</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9cgzxkAx8SyW6Be6vnNkjj.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9cgzxkAx8SyW6Be6vnNkjj.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9cgzxkAx8SyW6Be6vnNkjj.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The Core i5-7600’s power consumption is low enough that it uses the same voltages during our gaming and FPU-intensive benchmarks. Only Intel’s Power Thermal Utility imposes a voltage drop to minimize leakage currents.</p><h2 id="normal-load-gaming-4">Normal Load: Gaming</h2><p>Under our <em>Watch Dogs 2</em> sequence, we measure an average power consumption of 42 to 43W across the entire CPU. Nice. On their own, the execution cores consume just 32W.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9gt4DnnqWxioaNtdbwR3o.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9gt4DnnqWxioaNtdbwR3o.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9gt4DnnqWxioaNtdbwR3o.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Again, the CPU’s power consumption increases along with its temperature, though this happens more slowly than in the previous tests. The additional leakage current bumps our power measurement up by 1.4W.</p><p>Once again, the rate of the temperature increase over time depends on the position of the sensor. This time around, our measurements stabilize after just 18 minutes. And, for the first time, we see the highest readings from the CPU's diode.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/banPLrRVpkLNQRkmKQVRSm.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/banPLrRVpkLNQRkmKQVRSm.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/banPLrRVpkLNQRkmKQVRSm.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="heavy-load-stress-test-floating-point-unit-4">Heavy Load: Stress Test (Floating-Point Unit)</h2><p>AIDA64's stability test results in an increased power consumption of 49W. Temperature and leakage current increases are similar to what we saw during the gaming power consumption benchmark.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tnwNuMF8vcrmzT3m6RXPDA.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tnwNuMF8vcrmzT3m6RXPDA.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tnwNuMF8vcrmzT3m6RXPDA.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The temperature increases substantially up to 61°C. But even simple air coolers should have no problem dealing with this amount of waste heat.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uRWxW5ggWYGAzXiB5mgnoa.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uRWxW5ggWYGAzXiB5mgnoa.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uRWxW5ggWYGAzXiB5mgnoa.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="maximum-load-intel-power-thermal-utility-100-4">Maximum Load: Intel Power Thermal Utility (100%)</h2><p>One last time, we use the Intel Power Thermal Utility to push the Core i5-7600 to its limits. Power consumption rises quite a bit, leaving us with a reading between 72 to 73W. As the CPU heats up, further power losses attributable to leakage current remain below 1.5W.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MKiaVHUAB7ZVgNNGoxJiok.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MKiaVHUAB7ZVgNNGoxJiok.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MKiaVHUAB7ZVgNNGoxJiok.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>A look at the temperature results shows us that the CPU diode, which ran hot during our previous benchmark, stays far below the four cores’ average temperature under maximum load. As usual, the CPU package sensor reports the highest readings, which are in line with the CPU cores’ highest temperatures.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vY9EtpZjZWo6gzKnCdkYbX.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vY9EtpZjZWo6gzKnCdkYbX.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vY9EtpZjZWo6gzKnCdkYbX.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The most mainstream CPU in our line-up is also the most economical and efficient. That's not just because of our sample's quality, either. Rather, the Core i5-7600’s frequency range is a lot closer to the processor’s sweet spot. This makes the quad-core model ideal for applications that put a premium on minimizing waste heat. Consider it for small form factor builds or other environments with limited cooling capacity.</p><h2 id="inconsistent-cpu-quality-and-its-consequences">Inconsistent CPU Quality And Its Consequences</h2><h2 id="golden-sample-or-potato-chip">Golden Sample or Potato Chip?</h2><p>We already mentioned that we used retail CPUs for all of our tests. This means that our results should be representative of what you can expect when you purchase a new Kaby Lake-based processor. In light of our experiences, early adopters should be aware that CPU quality can vary widely, and this is especially true for early production runs. We experienced this very problem with our Core i7-7700K retail sample.</p><p>It turns out that MSI has assessed 30 more retail Core i7-7700Ks. For each of them, the company found the minimum voltage necessary for stable operation under a given workload at a specific frequency. Thirty CPUs might not be a huge number, but it still yields a good idea of how much individual samples vary in quality.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:841px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:71.70%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LgtZ5QtFJeafVmTmrTpYLN.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LgtZ5QtFJeafVmTmrTpYLN.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="841" height="603" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LgtZ5QtFJeafVmTmrTpYLN.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The curve tells us that the Core i7-7700K in our German lab falls toward the bottom of the distribution. Both the voltages and the maximum frequency of “only” 5 GHz are the same as the ones on the bottom of the curve. This explains why that particular processor didn’t do so well under Intel’s Power Thermal Utility: its quality is just too low, necessitating a voltage increase that’s too high to allow for sufficient cooling.</p><h2 id="is-undervolting-the-solution">Is Undervolting the Solution?</h2><p>In Germany, sending below-par CPUs or graphics cards back to online retailers, which is made possible by a specific right of withdrawal, has become very popular of late. This is probably going to continue with Intel’s new Kaby Lake CPUs, driving those sellers insane once again.</p><p>For several CPU generations, Intel has provided each processor a voltage identification (VID). This allows the motherboard to configure voltages in a way that has the CPU run stably within its specifications. Unfortunately, the increments are relatively large, meaning there could be room for lower voltages set manually. This is exactly what we test next. The question we want to answer is whether we can get our Core i7-7700K sample's power consumption under control, or if it's a lost cause.</p><p>Our efforts did help pull power use lower, but they ultimately didn't make a big enough difference. We had to step all the way up to Intel’s Power Thermal Utility to save 8W. Temperatures were a little lower across all of the tests as well, resulting in somewhat lower leakage currents. A better outcome wasn't possible because we were only able to decrease the voltage by one step in the BIOS. Any further and our Core i7 wouldn't run stably.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2EfpBsqAgRMTVcrAyGEZik.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2EfpBsqAgRMTVcrAyGEZik.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2EfpBsqAgRMTVcrAyGEZik.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Voltages decrease a little bit, but there definitely aren’t any substantial improvements to be found.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bbKZoFVzafbPzauPGWsVxb.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bbKZoFVzafbPzauPGWsVxb.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bbKZoFVzafbPzauPGWsVxb.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>For enthusiasts who receive one of these potato chips, there are two possible solutions. First, you can cool it as well as possible and hope for a long winter. Or, you can move to Germany and send the processor back to wherever you bought it. Playing the lottery again doesn’t guarantee a winning CPU, though.</p><h2 id="an-engineering-sample-in-a-retail-box">An Engineering Sample in a Retail Box?</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:800px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:98.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6TX3zuiQpHdpPRp3So9YgD.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6TX3zuiQpHdpPRp3So9YgD.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="800" height="786" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6TX3zuiQpHdpPRp3So9YgD.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We were again surprised when our German lab received Intel’s review sample, sent to us by the company directly. It arrived in the same retail box that you'd get after purchasing a Core i7-7700K without a cooler from the store.</p><p>After breaking the seals and pulling the processor from its box, we found an actual engineering sample CPU, though. This made us wonder if we received a pre-screened golden sample that'd outperform the CPUs we sourced from elsewhere.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2146px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:48.74%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ecMt2Adt3U4sA7Drd8wgQ8.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ecMt2Adt3U4sA7Drd8wgQ8.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="2146" height="1046" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ecMt2Adt3U4sA7Drd8wgQ8.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The first benchmark runs put an end to our excitement. Our engineering sample's power consumption and temperatures were almost identical to the retail sample. We're presenting the results below anyway, even though the differences are very small.</p><p>Notice that the engineering sample’s power consumption is approximately 1W lower than the retail sample’s at both idle and while gaming, but 2W higher during the Intel Power Thermal Utility benchmark. The voltage curves are almost identical as well, which shows just how similarly these two samples behave. The maximum overclock we achieved on them was also identical: 5 GHz at 1.35 and 1.36V.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bJfsj3mFqVXhKiDzFS3zY4.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bJfsj3mFqVXhKiDzFS3zY4.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bJfsj3mFqVXhKiDzFS3zY4.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We pushed the Core i5-7600K to a Prime95-stable 4.9 GHz overclock at 1.34V, with temperatures in the 80°C range under load using Corsair's H100i v2 cooler. We also ran the AIDA64 stress test at 5.1 GHz for several hours with 1.35V, but couldn't maintain that frequency under Prime95 without employing the AVX offset to reduce clock rates by 200 MHz.</p><p>In the end, we could have saved ourselves the three hours we spent running the temperature benchmarks. The two CPU samples’ temperatures are practically identical as well. We decided to use a bar graph to display these results because the curves would have been on top of each other.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ySkv73sCpaHKiCZoia3TzW.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ySkv73sCpaHKiCZoia3TzW.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ySkv73sCpaHKiCZoia3TzW.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="there-s-hope">There’s Hope!</h2><p>Alright, so Germany’s lab has two sub-par Core i7-7700Ks, and that's the hardware used in our performance, power consumption, and temperature benchmarks. However, the U.S. lab does have its own retail sample that consumes significantly less power. It also runs cooler.</p><p>We weren’t able to run all of our measurements in Germany and the U.S. with identical air coolers, so we went with compact closed-loop liquid coolers instead. Unfortunately, we still weren't able to achieve completely comparable performance. The Corsair H100i v2 in our U.S. lab gave us sporadic issues and generally didn’t cool as well. Consequently, we're only comparing power consumption results. We should still get plenty of information from those data points, though.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PkEBBNvBLTrLjpG9PhDFCc.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PkEBBNvBLTrLjpG9PhDFCc.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PkEBBNvBLTrLjpG9PhDFCc.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Whether we look at idle power consumption or the readings under Intel's Power Thermal Utility, the difference between samples is massive. And remember, these are retail processor we're comparing, not CPUs hand-selected by Intel for the press.</p><p>The difference between the CPU package and readings from the IA cores shrinks to a mere 2W. And leakage currents at the CPU’s highest temperature compared to before it warms up rise by a maximum of 1W. Compared to the four other CPU samples that we tested, this one’s really something special.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KiSG3ERr82LKLqTTRWUbRZ.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KiSG3ERr82LKLqTTRWUbRZ.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KiSG3ERr82LKLqTTRWUbRZ.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>In this case, higher voltages paired with lower power consumption must mean lower currents, which keep the CPU significantly cooler.</p><h2 id="the-cpu-lottery-continues">The CPU Lottery Continues</h2><p>Once again, the Kaby Lake generation will see enthusiasts receiving great CPUs, mediocre CPUs, and terrible CPUs that still managed to make it through quality control. For the time being, we’ll have to live with this, since the manufacturing process isn’t mature enough to produce consistent high-quality results. We haven’t seen extreme differences like these since the days of Intel’s first quad-core CPU, the Q6600.</p><h2 id="conclusion-5">Conclusion</h2><p>Intel’s slow cadence of incremental upgrades hasn’t done much to distance its products from AMD's. Instead, you could argue that AMD fell behind on its own accord. The Ryzen processors will be launching soon, so it's time for the speculation to begin once again. We won't know how this match-up is going to turn out until AMD makes its move, though. Obviously we need a competitive AMD to help reinvigorate the desktop PC space.</p><p>The announcement that Intel was moving away from a tick-tock cadence prepared us for even smaller generational gains, and Kaby Lake doesn't disappoint. Intel went with the same overall architecture, so there are no extra cores, IPC throughput increases, or cache to get us excited. At stock settings, the Kaby Lake processors perform almost exactly like overclocked versions of their predecessors.</p><p>To its credit, Kaby Lake brings the mythical 5 GHz threshold into play for overclockers. But beyond the clock rate boost (roughly 200-300 MHz over Skylake overclocks), there is little reason for enthusiasts armed with Skylake CPUs to upgrade. If you already have a modern processor, spend those dollars on a new GPU or SSD. Kaby Lake is really only an option for power users building new PCs. </p><p>Intel’s beefier media capabilities are nice for mobile and mainstream desktop users, and the power consumption/CPU utilization savings are great if you use integrated graphics. However, those benefits don't do much for enthusiasts with add-in graphics cards. Streaming 4K content is awash in a sea of caveats. Until it's easily accessible, adoption is going to be limited.</p><p>The 200-series chipsets offer more HSIO lanes than the 100-series models, allowing motherboard manufacturers to enable diverse connectivity options. Unfortunately, much of that is going to be hidden behind the restrictive DMI 3.0 link. Intel also dangles Optane-branded 3D XPoint memory compatibility as another add-on hanging off the PCH. Although the prospect of futuristic memory is exciting, it's not ready yet. Intel also curiously chooses to use it as a cache layer for hard drives, which may yield questionable results among enthusiasts with SSDs. The real value of 3D XPoint lies in using it as a cheap supplemental layer of RAM, which would truly be revolutionary. Apparently we have to wait for the next generation to see that functionality.  </p><p>The Core i7-7700K is a powerful processor, but it can also create a tremendous amount of waste heat. This creates a thermal ceiling for pursing aggressive overclocks; effective cooling is a must. The Core i5-7600K offers a better balance and more thermal headroom, but sacrifices Hyper-Threading and a few bins of base and Turbo Boost clock rate. The agile Core i5-7600 also offers a nice balance of performance and efficiency; it's just constrained to minimal BCLK adjustments.</p><p>An AVX offset mode is nice to have, but we would have rather seen Intel add Turbo Boost 3.0. The unlocked Core i3 SKU is tantalizing as a replacement for the Pentium G3258, but we can't recommend it until we run tests of our own.</p><p>The Kaby Lake CPUs are priced just like their predecessors, which we appreciate. Frankly, without much competition, Intel is free to price its products unchecked. If you do make the jump to Kaby Lake for its overclocking potential, or as part of a brand new PC, be sure to factor in a beefy liquid cooler and, if you don't already have one, a Windows 10 license.</p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy</a></strong></p><p><br/><strong>MORE: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/picturestory/710-history-of-intel-cpus.html">The History Of Intel CPUs</a></strong></p><p><em>Igor Wallossek is a Senior<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></em><em>Contributing Editor for Tom's Hardware Germany,<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></em><em><em>covering<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">CPUs</a><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>and<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/graphics">Graphics</a>.</em></em></p><p><em>Paul Alcorn is a Contributing Editor for Tom's Hardware US. He writes news and reviews on <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus">CPUs</a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/storage">Storage</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/enterprise-storage">Enterprise</a> hardware.</em></p><p><em>Follow us on </em><a href="https://www.facebook.com/tomshardware"><em>Facebook</em></a><em>, </em><a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/+tomshardware/posts"><em>Google+</em></a><em>, RSS, </em><em><em><a href="https://twitter.com/tomshardware">Twitter</a></em> and <a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/TomsHardware">YouTube</a>.</em></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
            </channel>
</rss>