CPU Computing & Rendering Performance
CPU Performance: Workstation
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 i5-7600K to the newer -8600K, which benefits from more cores and cache.
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...
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.
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.
CPU Performance: Photorealistic Rendering
Final rendering doesn’t require a CPU that's good at everything. Rather, this task wants efficiency and fast parallel computation.
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.
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.
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.
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 Ryzen 5 1600X.
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.
With the workload's rendering portion easing up, a stock Core i7-8700K suddenly becomes more competitive.
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. The tuned Core i5-8600K even takes the top spot.
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.
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. This keeps the Core i5 from dating above its league. If the chip performed too well, it'd cannibalize sales of pricier Core i7 models.
Going up against AMD isn't easy, though. The Ryzen processors fare well in stock form, and then respond readily to our overclocking efforts.
MORE: Best CPUs
MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy
MORE: All CPUs Content
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.
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.
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.
Same thing with AMD's Ryzen nnnnX CPUs.
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..
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.