Intel Core i5-8600K Review: Coffee Lake's Jolting Value

Civilization VI, Battlefield 1 & Dawn of War III

Civilization VI AI Test

Core i5-8600K claims a lead over the rest of our stock-clocked field, and tuning yields solid performance gains.

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.

Civilization VI Graphics Test

The Core i5-8600K is also nimble during our Civilization VI 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.

Battlefield 1 (DX11)

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. 

Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War III

The Warhammer 40,000: DoW III 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.

MORE: Best CPUs

MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy

MORE: All CPUs Content

Create a new thread in the Reviews comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
58 comments
Comment from the forums
    Your comment
  • logainofhades
    Great CPU, but the overall platform cost is a bit of a turn off, for me. I'd rather get a 1600, and a B350 board, to allow for a better GPU, if buying new. As stated in the review, even a 1700, with a less expensive board, is a very compelling option.
  • AS118
    Seems like a good product, but I'd like to see what the 8600 and 8500 non-k offers, and perhaps next year with the B360 boards that give them a more budget "locked cpu" option.

    I also feel that the availability will be low for Coffee Lake until the end of this year, particularly throughout the holiday season. Due to that concern (as well as the total cost of platform ownership) I think that Ryzen with its 1600 and 1700 CPU's along with the 1600x will be the value kings this year, with Coffee Lake not hitting it's stride until early next year.

    The fact that AMD's stuff doesn't have the same availability issues makes it a strong contender, imho, although Black Friday and Christmas sales will also like make Kaby Lake (and even Sky Lake) stuff at clearance prices appealing too, despite the lack of cores you'll find in Ryzen and now Coffee Lake.
  • almostdecent
    Since the chart shows the i5-8600k and the i5-8600K@4.9GHz at the same $260, I presume that means you achieved the overclock with the stock cooler.
  • ammaross
    It's kind of disappointing to see so many benchmarks where an i5 does as well or better than it's i7 counterpart. It just shows how poorly threaded some of these applications really are and almost necessitates running two benchmarks simultaneously to really judge the merit of these multi-core CPUs. Maybe run the photoshop test while rendering with After Effects or run a game benchmark while doing CPU h.265 handbrake.
  • almostdecent
    It is worth mentioning that this is essentially a paper launch at the moment, since none of the Coffee Lake processors are available anywhere.

    http://www.nowinstock.net/computers/processors/intel/

    and the rare place that has any, such as Microcenter, have gouging prices. Such as selling the plain i7-8700 (not the K version) with an MSRP of $300 for sale for $429.

    http://www.microcenter.com/product/486087/Core_i7-8700_Coffee_Lake_32_GHz_LGA_1151_Boxed_Processor
  • InvalidError
    2002675 said:
    I also feel that the availability will be low for Coffee Lake until the end of this year, particularly throughout the holiday season.

    On September 20, Intel responded to a story about yet another 10nm schedule slip by saying that Cannon Lake will begin shipping in limited quantities to some laptop manufacturers with production ramping up in 1H2018. Limited Coffee Lake volume could be due to Intel deciding to upgrade production lines to 10nm for Cannon Lake instead of 14++.
  • TJ Hooker
    41388 said:
    Since the chart shows the i5-8600k and the i5-8600K@4.9GHz at the same $260, I presume that means you achieved the overclock with the stock cooler.

    Not sure if you were being sarcastic, but the 8600K doesn't have a stock cooler.

    There are two different sets of graphs, one that looks at CPU only costs and the other that considers CPU, mobo, and cooler costs. In the latter, the 8600K at 4.9GHz is clearly shown to cost more.
  • InvalidError
    41388 said:
    Since the chart shows the i5-8600k and the i5-8600K@4.9GHz at the same $260, I presume that means you achieved the overclock with the stock cooler.

    Intel hasn't included a stock HSF with their unlocked CPUs since Skylake so on top of paying more for the unlock, you also get shafted by the price of a stock cooler which you no longer get on top of it. You need an aftermarket cooler for both stock and OC.

    Same thing with AMD's Ryzen nnnnX CPUs.
  • YoAndy
    59887 said:
    Great CPU, but the overall platform cost is a bit of a turn off, for me. I'd rather get a 1600, and a B350 board, to allow for a better GPU, if buying new. As stated in the review, even a 1700, with a less expensive board, is a very compelling option.


    A better GPU?//Why would you do that. at 1080p Ryzen will (bottleneck) hold back powerful GPU's, It won't give you equal performance. I bought a Ryzen for pure gaming and i ended up selling it..
  • acosta.87
    59887 said:
    Great CPU, but the overall platform cost is a bit of a turn off, for me. I'd rather get a 1600, and a B350 board, to allow for a better GPU, if buying new. As stated in the review, even a 1700, with a less expensive board, is a very compelling option.


    B350 VRM's are pretty low quality for any sort of OC unless it's a mild one so for me that's a no go. If you're primarily into gaming then the 1600 has nothing on the i5, it simply trails it whether at stock settings or OC'd and even at productivity it beats a 1600 Ryzen processors in most task even with a 6 thread deficit so it's a pretty good investment overall.
  • YoAndy
    41388 said:
    Since the chart shows the i5-8600k and the i5-8600K@4.9GHz at the same $260, I presume that means you achieved the overclock with the stock cooler.


    They don't come with a cooler!!!!!:lol:,, Intel sells their unlocked processors without heatsinks because overclockers will pretty much use liquid set ups or buy their own.
  • Wisecracker
    59887 said:
    Great CPU, but the overall platform cost is a bit of a turn off, for me. I'd rather get a 1600, and a B350 board, to allow for a better GPU, if buying new. As stated in the review, even a 1700, with a less expensive board, is a very compelling option.


    Pretty much this. AMD has nailed the price/performance sweet-spot with the Ryzen 5 1600/X hex cores --- especially with the combo deals out there.

    Not quite enough to move me off my FX-6350, though :lol: maybe if THG would work one into the charts at 4.7GHz or so for comparison (hint hint)

    With the extra costs involved it's too tough to beat the Ryzen 5s and the Kaby/Sandy i5s just to be "King of The Hill for A Day" ...
  • Yuka
    This might need a fix:
    Quote:
    Base Frequency 1 core: 3.6 GHz, 2 cores: 4.2 GHz: four cores: 4.2 GHz, 6 cores: 4.1 GHz


    Overall, no surprises. Great gaming CPU, but not necessarily the best value. Thank God we now have more options.

    Cheers!

    EDIT: Typo.
  • elbert
    Looks like the i5-8600k is the best option for gamings till you hit the tippy top.
  • DrakeFS
    So does remain the best price/performance for gaming after factoring in the cost of motherboards?
  • AgentLozen
    These 1080p 240Hz gaming monitors have been popping up recently. The gaming benchmarks at 1080p show that none of them can reach 200+ fps on modern hardware. Even overclocked to 4.9GHz, you'll have to reduce the settings if you want to see the full glory of your new 240Hz monitor. Or play Half Life 2.
  • logainofhades
    2408039 said:
    59887 said:
    Great CPU, but the overall platform cost is a bit of a turn off, for me. I'd rather get a 1600, and a B350 board, to allow for a better GPU, if buying new. As stated in the review, even a 1700, with a less expensive board, is a very compelling option.
    A better GPU?//Why would you do that. at 1080p Ryzen will (bottleneck) hold back powerful GPU's, It won't give you equal performance. I bought a Ryzen for pure gaming and i ended up selling it..


    PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

    CPU: Intel - Core i5-8600K 3.6GHz 6-Core Processor ($279.89 @ B&H)
    CPU Cooler: CRYORIG - H5 Universal 65.0 CFM CPU Cooler ($42.89 @ OutletPC)
    Motherboard: ASRock - Z370 Pro4 ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($121.98 @ Newegg)
    Total: $444.76
    Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
    Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-10-17 12:02 EDT-0400

    vs

    PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

    CPU: AMD - Ryzen 5 1600 3.2GHz 6-Core Processor ($193.89 @ OutletPC)
    Motherboard: ASRock - AB350 Pro4 ATX AM4 Motherboard ($87.39 @ OutletPC)
    Total: $281.28
    Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
    Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-10-17 12:02 EDT-0400

    That price difference is enough to get a GTX 1070, vs a GTX 1060 6gb. Unless a game is stupidly CPU bound, there is no way an i5 with a GTX 1060 6gb, is going to beat an r5 1600, with a GTX 1070. Also, I play @1440p, so the CPU gap is shorter anyway. ;)
  • TJ Hooker
    2558101 said:
    59887 said:
    Great CPU, but the overall platform cost is a bit of a turn off, for me. I'd rather get a 1600, and a B350 board, to allow for a better GPU, if buying new. As stated in the review, even a 1700, with a less expensive board, is a very compelling option.
    B350 VRM's are pretty low quality for any sort of OC unless it's a mild one so for me that's a no go.

    1) Chipset does not dictate VRM design/quality
    2) There are plenty of people getting good overclocks with B350 boards. I mean, Ryzen isn't a great overclocker overall, but you're probably not going to be (significantly) limited by your mobo. Especially because Ryzen isn't particularly power hungry.
  • ammaross
    2002675 said:
    Seems like a good product, but I'd like to see what the 8600 and 8500 non-k offers, and perhaps next year with the B360 boards that give them a more budget "locked cpu" option.


    The i5-8500/8600 are even worse off. They have a 2.8Ghz base clock and absolutely no promises to boost any higher. It's pure silicon lottery with those and remember, they didn't quality for the K-series, so no way are they going to boost as well as those.
  • TJ Hooker
    444610 said:
    2002675 said:
    Seems like a good product, but I'd like to see what the 8600 and 8500 non-k offers, and perhaps next year with the B360 boards that give them a more budget "locked cpu" option.
    The i5-8500/8600 are even worse off. They have a 2.8Ghz base clock and absolutely no promises to boost any higher. It's pure silicon lottery with those and remember, they didn't quality for the K-series, so no way are they going to boost as well as those.

    Eh, AFAIK for at least the last several generations you could pretty much assume that an Intel CPU would maintain its max boost clock indefinitely under load, unless you had crap cooling or something. I don't know if there's any reason to think things will be any different for Coffee Lake.