Intel Core i3-8350K Review
Why you can trust Tom's Hardware
VRMark, 3DMark & AotS: Escalation
VRMark & 3DMark
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.
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.
Four cores and a high clock rate benefit the Core i3-8350K in VRMark, particularly after overclocking. The -8350K even challenges the 65W Core i5-8400 at stock settings. A tuned Ryzen 5 1600 is the closest contender from AMD's camp.
We expected Core i3-8350K to trail the beefier processors during 3DMark's Fire Strike and Time Spy tests, and it does. The -8350K may fall behind much of its competition, but it leapfrogs Core i3-7350K and i5-7400 by a large margin.
Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation
Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation scales well with core count, so we find Ryzen 5 1600 up top after some tuning. Intel's stock six-core Core i5-8600K isn't far behind.
Core i3-8350K easily dispatches the Core i3-7350K in its default configuration, even after we tune Intel's Kaby Lake model. The -8350K responds well to overclocking too, though, and squeaks by the Core i5-8400.
If we could find the Core i3-8350K anywhere close to its MSRP, the chip would do battle at Ryzen 5 1500X's price point. AMD's 1500X beats the -8350K at stock settings. However, the tables turn once we start tuning.
MORE: Best CPUs
MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy
MORE: All CPUs Content
Current page: VRMark, 3DMark & AotS: Escalation
Prev Page Overclocking, MCE & How We Test Next Page Civilization VI, Battlefield 1 & Dawn of War IIIStay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Paul Alcorn is the Managing Editor: News and Emerging Tech for Tom's Hardware US. He also writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage, and enterprise hardware.
Nintendo Switch 2 design seemingly leaked by carrying case maker — similar aesthetics but with a larger screen and Joy-Cons
Elon Musk reportedly wanted OpenAI to be a for-profit entity but has now sued to block the move
PlayStation 5 transformed into a laptop for $2,750 — Chinese modders made Sony's console more portable with a 17.3-inch 4K display weighing over 9 pounds
-
Brian_R170 Newegg shows the Core i3-8350K in-stock right now for $189 (still $10 higher than "recommended customer price" from Intel), but well below the pricing button that says it costs $250 on Newegg. I thought those pricing buttons were updated real-time now?Reply -
salgado18 Intel made a mess of a rushed launch to answer Ryzen, but there is one thing they are unbeatable: low price. I know, they have always been expensive, but given the circunstances, it's very easy for them to underprice their chips to have better value.Reply
Well, sounds bad, but then again AMD triggered this, and consumers are the winners, right? -
Quaddro How to block permanently the ad video..?Reply
Dude, i'm in limited quota here..
I dont want to waste every bit for some useless video.. -
mhokett So my I7-4790K is now being beat in cinebench by an OC i3. At stock speeds it gets a Cinebench score of 830 and the OC i3 gets 840. So glad i can still OC it and at least beat the i3.Reply -
1_rick "It's only a shame that, as with all K-series processors, you're on the hook for your own thermal solution."Reply
Translation: "We're disappointed that Intel didn't bundle in the usual under-powered fan that you'll need to replace if you want to overclock." -
rgrigio Should i assume it to be as fast as a STOCK i7 4790k? At least when only 4 cores are required?Reply -
East17 I believe we need to stop putting so much emphasis on <current> single threaded performance. As long as the difference is not over 20%, for gamers and power users this matters less now.Reply
All games, all apps and even browsers are going Multi-Threaded so what's the point in putting so much emphasis on Single Threaded performance ?!?
Sure, if AMD or Intel launch a new gen of CPUs that double or triple the single threaded performance, that's worth the talk, but differences between 0% and 15% are not worth to fill entire pages of a review with.
Anyway, I'm not an expert reviewer :) It's just my opinion after 20+ years in IT hardware industry.
I generally want a very capable processor at a good platform price with modest IDLE power consumption. The rest is arguable. If it can game, good. If it can game well, even better, but I'm never going to chose a less productive CPU just because I get 10% higher FPS. That's just me :)
The graphics can be a bit misleading .... I would really like to see them full scale.
Because the way they are now, you get the impression that (in Gaming Price Efficiency - Platform Cost) AMD Ryzen 1300 is 10 times less capable than the i8400 which is not.
When you look at the dot placement on the table, you'll see that i5 8400 appears to be 1000% the performance of AMD Ryzen 1300 while only being 2 times the price. -
10tacle I've been waiting for this review. I'm looking to replace my dying i5 2500K backup gaming rig using a 1080p monitor that was built in Jan. 2011. It's severely showing its age. The price of the 8350k is a little higher than I expected, but since that rig is only for gaming and nothing else, the overclocking capability of it is impressive for improved FPS performance. And as the game benchmarks show, we are still not seeing most AAA title games really taking advantage of more than four cores over an overclocked four core CPU.Reply
If I was wanting to build a combination of both a gamer and multi-threaded video rendering box I'd still probably go with the Ryzen 1600 or 8400, but for a strict gaming box and going for a killer overclock, this wins hands down in the price segment. RIP to my faithful and trusty Sandy Bridge. You served me well for seven years - a chip that I successfully overclocked to 5.0GHz as well but never kept it that high due to the at-the-time rather weak Zalman 9700LED cooler...weak by today's higher end cooler standards. And thank you AMD for putting the pressure on Intel to add more cores to their i3 and i5 chips. -
why_wolf 20384951 said:Newegg shows the Core i3-8350K in-stock right now for $189 (still $10 higher than "recommended customer price" from Intel), but well below the pricing button that says it costs $250 on Newegg. I thought those pricing buttons were updated real-time now?
shows $189 for me. I doubt the button is updating it's pricing in real real-time. Probably more like once an hour. -
Llorelie 20385554 said:"It's only a shame that, as with all K-series processors, you're on the hook for your own thermal solution."
Translation: "We're disappointed that Intel didn't bundle in the usual under-powered fan that you'll need to replace if you want to overclock."
I know, this has bothered me in every review on this site that I have seen. I understand that its important that you inform consumers that you will need to purchase a heatsink, but if you are buying a -k chip and a z- motherboard, it seems likely that you'll want an aftermarket cooler. I would MUCH rather intel prices these chips $10 lower and not include a paperweight.