<?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 rel="alternate" hreflang="en-GB"
                       href="https://www.tomshardware.com/uk/feeds/tag/intel-core-i5-8600k"
                       type="application/rss+xml"/>
                            <title><![CDATA[ Latest from Tom's Hardware UK in Intel-core-i5-8600k ]]></title>
                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/uk/tag/intel-core-i5-8600k</link>
        <description><![CDATA[ All the latest intel-core-i5-8600k content from the Tom's Hardware  UK 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 Core i5-9600K Review: A Mid-Range Gamer's CPU ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i5-9600k-coffee-lake-cpu,5922.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Intel's Core i5-9600K looks to upset the Ryzen 5 2600X as the value chip for the mainstream. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">CeGk8F7twKx5dxjocSUanW</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DhaAFvPvoRR2Tk4kMjYi4H-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:41:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:27:43 +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/DhaAFvPvoRR2Tk4kMjYi4H-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DhaAFvPvoRR2Tk4kMjYi4H-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="the-core-i5-doldrums">The Core i5 Doldrums</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:651px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:112.60%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cj6wtDtosJVD9NYEQCxYkg.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cj6wtDtosJVD9NYEQCxYkg.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="651" height="733" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cj6wtDtosJVD9NYEQCxYkg.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>It used to be that Core i5 processors represented the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">best choice</a> for mainstream users looking for value-oriented pricing, high performance, and modest power consumption. But now, fast Ryzen 5 CPUs often prove superior. Intel did increase the core count of its Coffee Lake-based Core i5s by 50 percent to grapple with AMD&apos;s first-gen Ryzen 5 chips. However, the latest round of Ryzen 5 models is even faster, particularly in threaded workloads, as you can see in our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">CPU Benchmark</a> Hierarchy.</p><p>Intel&apos;s ninth-gen Core i7 and Core i9 processors come with more cores, too. Unfortunately, the Core i5-9600K we&apos;re reviewing today does not. It includes the same six cores as its predecessor, along with a price tag that lands between Ryzen 5 2600X and Ryzen 7 2700. Worse, both competing CPUs are bundled with coolers, while Intel makes you buy your own.</p><p>The story isn&apos;t all bad for Intel. It did switch to a solder-based thermal interface material between its die and heat spreader, enabling higher multi-core Turbo Boost frequencies. But those incremental improvements are hardly earth-shattering.</p><p>Choosing between a Core i5-9600K and Ryzen presents the same conundrum we&apos;ve faced in the past: it depends on the type of software you run most frequently. If you&apos;re a gamer who doesn&apos;t really venture beyond 1920x1080, Intel&apos;s Core i5-9600K is the chip for you. But if a majority of your workloads are threaded in nature, including content creation and productivity, a powerful Ryzen gets you more performance at a competitive price.</p><p>AMD has also launched its Ryzen 3000-series processors. The updated Ryzen line-up employs a smaller 7nm process that should confer power and price benefits. It&apos;ll also wield the new Zen 2 microarchitecture, which is expected to boost performance while Intel remains mired in a derivative of the seven-year-old Skylake design. These chips have now taken our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs list by storm</a>, so be sure to head there for a list of the latest leading processors.</p><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/zYBgfFoA.html" id="zYBgfFoA" title="Buy the Right CPU" width="1920" height="1080" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe><h2 id="intel-core-i5-9600k">Intel Core i5-9600K</h2><p>The ~$263 Core i5-9600K lands between the $299 Ryzen 7 2700 and $225 Ryzen 5 2600X. Inexplicably, Intel raised the -9600K's price by $5 compared to its previous-gen Core i5-8600K.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ></td><td  ><strong>Core i9-9900K</strong></td><td  ><strong>Core i7-9700K</strong></td><td  ><strong>Core i5-9600K</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Architecture</strong></td><td  >Coffee Lake</td><td  >Coffee Lake</td><td  ><strong>Coffee Lake</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Socket</strong></td><td  >1151</td><td  >1151</td><td  ><strong>1151</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cores / Threads</strong></td><td  >8 / 16</td><td  >8 / 8</td><td  ><strong>6 / 6</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Base Frequency (GHz)</strong></td><td  >3.6</td><td  >3.6</td><td  ><strong>3.7</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Boost Frequency ( Active Cores - GHz)</strong></td><td  >1-2 Cores - 5.0, 4 Cores - 4.8, 8 Cores - 4.7</td><td  >1 Core - 4.9, 2 Core 4.8, 4 Core 4.7, 8 Core 4.6</td><td  ><strong>1 Core - 4.6, 2 Core - 4.5, 4 Core 4.4, 6 Core 4.3</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>L3 Cache</strong></td><td  >16MB</td><td  >12MB</td><td  ><strong>9MB</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Process</strong></td><td  >14nm++</td><td  >14nm++</td><td  ><strong>14nm++</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>TDP</strong></td><td  >95W</td><td  >95W</td><td  ><strong>95W</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Memory Speed</strong></td><td  >DDR4-2666</td><td  >DDR4-2666</td><td  ><strong>DDR4-2666</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Memory Controller</strong></td><td  >Dual-Channel</td><td  >Dual-Channel</td><td  ><strong>Dual-Channel</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>PCIe Lanes</strong></td><td  >x16</td><td  >x16</td><td  ><strong>x16</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Integrated UHD Graphics GT2 (Base/Boost MHz)</strong></td><td  >350 / 1200</td><td  >350 / 1200</td><td  ><strong>350 / 1150</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Recommended Customer Pricing</strong></td><td  >$488 - $499</td><td  >$374 - $385</td><td  ><strong>$262 - $263</strong></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Intel manufactures the -9600K on its 14nm++ process. In addition to six execution cores (without Hyper-Threading technology), the chip includes an integrated UHD 630 graphics engine, sports unlocked ratio multipliers for easy overclocking, and supports two channels of DDR4-2666 memory. Like the Core i5-8600K that preceded it, the -9600K comes equipped with 9MB of L3 cache and a 95W thermal design power rating.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  >Active Cores</td><td  >Base</td><td  >1 Core</td><td  >2 Cores</td><td  >3 Cores</td><td  >4 Cores</td><td  >5 Cores</td><td  >6 Cores</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Core i5-9600K (GHz)</strong></td><td  ><strong>3.7</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.6</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.5</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.4</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.4</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.3</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.3</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Core i5-8600K (GHz)</strong></td><td  ><strong>3.6</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.3</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.2</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.2</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.2</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.1</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.1</strong></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Intel does dial up the -9600K's Turbo Boost frequencies quite a bit, though. Solder-based thermal interface material improves heat transfer, facilitating higher frequencies whether you're using one core or all six. A base clock rate of 3.7 GHz already represents a 100 MHz improvement over the Core i5-8600K frequency floor, and you get as much as a 300 MHz speed-up when multiple cores are utilized.</p><p>We didn't see the need for extreme cooling with Intel's Core i5-9600K, even during our overclocking efforts. The processor held a steady 80°C under five hours of Prime95 optimized for AVX instructions, and ~64°C during a series of non-AVX tasks. Granted, we did use a beefy Corsair H115i cranking away at full speed. But you shouldn't have any trouble cooling the processor at stock settings. Overclocking is fine with a capable closed-loop liquid cooler.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Model</strong></td><td  ><strong>Cores / Threads</strong></td><td  ><strong>Base Frequency</strong></td><td  ><strong>Boost Frequency</strong></td><td  ><strong>Memory Support</strong></td><td  ><strong>PCIe Lanes</strong></td><td  ><strong>Cache</strong></td><td  ><strong>TDP</strong></td><td  ><strong>Price</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Core i9-9900K</strong></td><td  ><strong>8 / 16</strong></td><td  ><strong>3.6 GHz</strong></td><td  ><strong>5 GHz (1 / 2 Core)4.8 GHz (4 Core)4.7 GHz (6 / 8 Core)</strong></td><td  ><strong>DDR4-2666</strong></td><td  ><strong>16</strong></td><td  ><strong>16MB</strong></td><td  ><strong>95W</strong></td><td  ><strong>$488</strong></td></tr><tr><td  >Ryzen 7 2700X</td><td  >8 / 16</td><td  >3.7 GHz</td><td  >4.3 GHz</td><td  >DDR4-2966</td><td  >16 + 4 (NVMe)</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >105W</td><td  >$329</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Core i7-9700K</strong></td><td  ><strong>8 / 8</strong></td><td  ><strong>3.6 GHz</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.9 GHz (1 Core)4.8 GHz (2 Core)4.7 GHz (4 Core)4.6 GHz (6 / 8 Core)</strong></td><td  ><strong>DDR4-2666</strong></td><td  ><strong>16</strong></td><td  ><strong>12MB</strong></td><td  ><strong>95W</strong></td><td  ><strong>$374</strong></td></tr><tr><td  >Core i7-8086K</td><td  >6 / 12</td><td  >4.0 GHz</td><td  >5.0 GHz</td><td  >DDR4-2666</td><td  >16</td><td  >12MB</td><td  >95W</td><td  >$425</td></tr><tr><td  >Core i7-8700K</td><td  >6 / 12</td><td  >3.7 GHz</td><td  >4.7 GHz</td><td  >DDR4-2666</td><td  >16</td><td  >12MB</td><td  >95W</td><td  >$330</td></tr><tr><td  >Ryzen 7 2700</td><td  >8 / 16</td><td  >3.2 GHz</td><td  >4.1 GHz</td><td  >DDR4-2966</td><td  >16 + 4 (NVMe)</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >95W</td><td  >$299</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Core i5-9600K</strong></td><td  ><strong>6 / 6</strong></td><td  ><strong>3.7 GHz</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.6 GHz (1 Core)4.5 GHz (2 Core)4.4 GHz (4 Core)4.3 GHz (6 Core)</strong></td><td  ><strong>DDR4-2666</strong></td><td  ><strong>16</strong></td><td  ><strong>9MB</strong></td><td  ><strong>95W</strong></td><td  ><strong>$262</strong></td></tr><tr><td  >Core i5-8600K</td><td  >6 / 6</td><td  >3.6 GHz</td><td  >4.3 GHz</td><td  >DDR4-2666</td><td  >16</td><td  >9MB</td><td  >95W</td><td  >$279</td></tr><tr><td  >Ryzen 5 2600X</td><td  >6 / 12</td><td  >3.6 GHz</td><td  >4.2 GHz</td><td  >DDR4-2966</td><td  >16 + 4 (NVMe)</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >65W</td><td  >$225</td></tr><tr><td  >Ryzen 5 2600</td><td  >6 / 12</td><td  >3.4 GHz</td><td  >3.9 GHz</td><td  >DDR4-2966</td><td  >16 + 4 (NVMe)</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >65W</td><td  >$199</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>The Core i5-9600K drops into existing 300-series motherboards after a BIOS update. Most, if not all of them, should support Core i5-9600K and its power requirements quite easily, though you might want to steer away from the lowest-cost models if you plan on overclocking.</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-and-test-setup">Overclocking, Power, and Test Setup</h2><h2 id="power-consumption">Power Consumption</h2><p>Measuring the power consumption of modern CPUs can get tricky. But as long as your 12V supply (EPS) readings, motherboard power supply sensor values, and voltage transformer losses plausibly coincide, everything should be fine. Therefore, we're reporting pure package power to avoid possible influences from our motherboard. Results from the PWM controller are very reliable if you take them as averages over a few minutes.</p><p>We conducted this round of testing in our U.S. lab, and our results are not directly comparable with numbers from the German lab used in previous reviews.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EvKBUBpxLrbPXng7kGKs9G.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UCUiV9APMrg35ZP3hquhgi.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>As expected, the Core i5-9600K exceeded its 95W TDP at stock settings. Remember, though: that figure only applies to the base frequency, and it doesn't reflect power consumption during Turbo Boost activity.</p><p>Regardless, the stock -9600K's 119W (under the influence of AVX-optimized code) and 62W (in a non-AVX workload) measurements didn't raise any alarms. We saw a peak of 179W during an AVX-optimized workload with the processor operating at 5 GHz, but that was about what we expected from it. </p><h2 id="overclocking">Overclocking</h2><p>We tapped Corsair's H115i v2 to test our Core i5-9600K, which gave us enough headroom to run at 5 GHz with 1.36V Vcore and Auto Load Line Calibration settings. An AVX offset wasn't needed; our sample maintained ~80°C during AVX workloads. The temperature only reached ~64°C during non-AVX workloads.</p><p>Although some Core i5-9600K CPUs reportedly run stable at up to 5.2 GHz, we aren't comfortable pushing our chip beyond the "safe" 1.35V limit.</p><h2 id="meg-z390-godlike">MEG Z390 Godlike</h2><p>We're using MSI's MEG Z390 Godlike as our test platform for all Intel processors. This pricey board sells for $600, but has the power delivery subsystem to support aggressive overclocking.</p><p>MSI's motherboard imposes a 100.8 MHz base clock. Its extra 0.8 MHz serves to push overclocks even harder, though our motherboard review team would probably call it cheating. Consequently, our 5.1 GHz overclock is actually 5.14 GHz. Stock frequencies aren't spared, and there is no way to adjust the BCLK down to remove MSI's self-awarded advantage. Meanwhile, we are waiting on a solution from MSI that should allow us to dial in an exact 100 MHz BCLK.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1043px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:64.53%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QHgc8jRuZqCvMX4fio9PVd.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QHgc8jRuZqCvMX4fio9PVd.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1043" height="673" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QHgc8jRuZqCvMX4fio9PVd.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The MSI MEG Z390 Godlike sits at the top of MSI's motherboard hierarchy. It has a decked-out 18-phase power delivery subsystem that's designed to squeeze every drop of performance out of Intel's new processors. It also comes with a few nifty accessories like an M.2 PCIe riser card and an HDMI streaming card.</p><h2 id="comparison-products">Comparison Products</h2>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="be1e26c0-a04d-451a-9749-c7a9aa3e5219">            <a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113499" data-model-name="Ryzen 7 2700X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:83.03%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/c2cT8QyxBHDJ3zenoyjwN3.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 7 2700X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="654c88f1-79ad-404b-88bb-639ad8a2cead">            <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="69a031f8-7940-4bff-a54a-e002b17e07a6">            <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-Processor-Wraith-Cooler/dp/B07B428V2L/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Ryzen 5 2600X" 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/n6SEL4AuCHxdQqWBLh4Tsk.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 5 2600X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><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 (Z390)</strong>Intel Core i9-9900K, i7-9700K, i5-9600K, i7-8700K, i5-8600K, i5-8400MSI MEG Z390 Godlike2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2667 & DDR4-3466<strong>Intel LGA 2066</strong>Intel Core i9-7820XMSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC4x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2666, DDR4-3200<strong>AMD Socket AM4 (400-Series)</strong>AMD Ryzen 7 2700X, Ryzen 5 2600XMSI X470 Gaming M7 AC2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2933<strong>All Systems</strong>EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FE 1TB Samsung PM863SilverStone ST1500-TI, 1500WWindows 10 Pro (All Updates)</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cooling</strong></td><td  >Corsair 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="vrmark-3dmark-and-aots-escalation">VRMark, 3DMark and AotS: Escalation</h2><h2 id="vrmark-3dmark">VRMark, 3DMark</h2><p>We aren't big fans of using synthetic benchmarks to measure performance, but 3DMark's DX11 and DX12 CPU tests provide useful insight into the amount of horsepower available to game engines.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zTsdY2dzk8ZcBpMpxnoRk4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hF769DJmitjcsoPeCQvqpW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EHxXEUAyo46ut86LiaGX4S.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Core i5-9600K suffers due to its six threads. That's half of what the Ryzen 5 2600X offers to our DX11 test. AMD's stock chip beats the overclocked -9600K, then adds insult to injury with a bit of tuning. Notice that the stock -9600K demonstrates a decent boost compared to Intel's -8600K. Then, after overclocking, they end up faring similarly.</p><p>In the DX12 test, Intel's Core i5-9600K provides a slight improvement over the -8600K. Ryzen 5 2600X leads the stock -9600K, though overclocking helps extract the advantages of Intel's generally higher per-core performance.</p><p>VRMark 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. UL defines a passing score as anything above 109 FPS. The -9600K easily beats its Ryzen competition in this lightly-threaded benchmark. </p><h2 id="ashes-of-the-singularity-escalation">Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</h2><p><em>Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</em> is a computationally intensive title that scales well with thread count.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aYYQKnk2gUQHC5LnJzeRQA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bZwRk5tu3FJPXn2CRVFMoT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7uLPJvYHWeigeytMH9vmZX.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Core i5-9600K enables a few more frames per second than the -8600K, but surprisingly trails after tuning. A handful of frame time outliers obviously affected the overclocked configuration's performance.</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-and-ai-dawn-of-war-iii">Civilization VI Graphics and AI, Dawn of War III</h2><h2 id="civilization-vi-ai-test">Civilization VI AI Test</h2><p><em>Civilization VI</em>'s AI test measures CPU performance in a turn-based strategy game and tends to favor per-core performance.</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:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P2oL68ZpX7VkgHmGheWot.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P2oL68ZpX7VkgHmGheWot.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P2oL68ZpX7VkgHmGheWot.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The Ryzen processors trail due to their lower per-core performance, which is dependent on instruction-per-clock (IPC) throughput and frequency.</p><h2 id="civilization-vi-graphics-test">Civilization VI Graphics Test</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hs4SyRivfoSuR2TNfY4veK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ae2ooeeUcUGHpAB2AarGEH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/d7yuAacVkreSUGFHvzjzjQ.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Core i5-9600K carves out a respectable lead in this test, which typically favors physical cores over simultaneous multi-threading.</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/V2tZrcRqrQMiWYykvydN9k.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QejXgYXTWZUbpAtwsUZBgU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TKcZNbS4QvF44ZNVKxXj5D.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Although the <em>Warhammer 40,000 </em>benchmark responds well to threading, AMD's Ryzen 5 2600X still falls to the bottom of our chart.</p><p>Because we can only include so many CPUs in our current chart template, we're substituting in a Ryzen 7 2700X for the Ryzen 7 2700. The overclocked Ryzen 7 2700X provides roughly the same performance as a tuned 2700, and it's obvious that eight cores and 16 threads pay dividends in games optimized for parallelization.</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-and-hitman">GTA: V and Hitman</h2><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v">Grand Theft Auto V </h2><p><em>Grand Theft Auto V</em><span> </span>favors Intel architectures and, more generally, multi-core designs with high clock rates.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3VWr8ofBhipHHGJS2DftgQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4YvWAc77ruh8uAgYAvMqMB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qa6xQ6CGuYsgoSLGAaqZBd.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Core i5-9600K establishes a sizable lead over AMD's fastest processors. Strangely, though, an overclocked -9600K trails the tuned -8600K yet again.</p><h2 id="hitman">Hitman </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pxxn985DP2mQrojF36vRs7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/A5LyENKgJZCid9ULRsAECN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/m4TcKMG2EzArabadzA45zn.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Intel's Core i5-9600K easily beats the Ryzen chips in spite of their thread count advantage.</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-and-project-cars-2">Shadow Of War and 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/awHhWrzW4ucaRCLnTVB4FN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/j2jaxRBZZyin5qSKTzbo9Y.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EEr8gQjsYyJSkbwBTjNoDA.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Shadow of War</em> leans heavier on graphics resources than host processing, so we don't see much difference between the fastest and slowest CPUs. We test at 1920 x 1080, and at a high-enough resolution, most games are indeed limited by your GPU. Plan accordingly if you're running into a bottleneck.</p><h2 id="project-cars-2">Project CARS 2</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RAKuJtLF2hLdBQHuqjaeom.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pcBEMYdwEqa537XucvZHVT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/q2NMRmJJFFkKuWo5NpZ3sa.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Although <em>Project CARS 2</em> is purportedly optimized for threading, clock rates have the greatest effect on this title's frame rates. The test pool splits into two distinct groups with Intel processors up top and Ryzen CPUs at the bottom.</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="office-and-productivity">Office and Productivity</h2><h2 id="adobe-creative-cloud">Adobe Creative Cloud</h2><p>Even though this suite has a few parallelized workloads, its final score is heavily influenced by the lightly-threaded tasks common in most desktop applications.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JVR3enZ26BvTM2LrsuQB8.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V389vMFVjdKUtNE8Qh8AFe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DcEjgcU234uGeGkMkKhYsR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WpnBi6X7wuwAgCzAR6xwYV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Km2KgAAkPD4TbWbnfo2q5h.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3f3XaXqDwYhc4FAQ8TUyL5.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Core i5-9600K clearly excels in lightly-threaded tasks, while AMD's Ryzen carves out wins in the threaded applications. Overclocking does help Intel more, though.</p><p>We see slight advances favoring Intel's -9600K over the -8600K, but it's definitely not worth upgrading from the latter to the former.</p><h2 id="web-browser">Web Browser</h2><p>The Krakken suite evaluates JavaScript performance using audio, imaging, and cryptography workloads. Like most browser-based benchmarks, single-threaded performance reigns supreme.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/M3G5w68v4u67FdiWThWXKj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zWtU3MmYwztW4fmEj4Citk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pyPacCPEe9wAbr5kkXAUoh.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The stock Core i5-9600K leverages its relatively high clock rates to outperform the Ryzen processors.</p><h2 id="productivity">Productivity</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AYMaxkD5sJTv6F4TTaPNF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2HGzWZDGL74TEDB6RDVpMX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LXzwGVSKjESTbd2ixEAZA9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wThDsTkXzbBCgLnAVbnc4Z.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RxqeHGnm7DtxosAMFKzPFm.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. Other platform-level considerations affect this test as well, including the storage subsystem. Single-core performance largely determines responsiveness, so Intel's processors form a predictable hierarchy based on their frequencies.</p><p>Our video conferencing suite measures performance in single- and multi-user applications that utilize the Windows Media Foundation for playback and encoding. It also performs facial detection to model real-world usage. This workload responds well to available resources, so AMD's Ryzen family fares well. For example, the Ryzen 5 2600X takes a commanding lead over the Core i5-9600K. Even a Ryzen 7 2700 and its relatively low base clock rate ekes past the overclocked -9600K.</p><p>The photo editing benchmark measures performance with Futuremark's binaries using the ImageMagick library. Common photo processing workloads also tend to be parallelized, giving the Ryzen 7 2700 and Ryzen 5 2600X an easy advantage over Intel's Core i5-9600K. Also bear in mind that an overclocked Ryzen 7 2700 and 2700X offer similar performance.</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="rendering-encoding-and-compression">Rendering, Encoding and Compression</h2><h2 id="rendering">Rendering</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zwLYd2wQ6eXjBgobEJPqGC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/z8dBdFTaEtQEs6oUXgMYu.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yYBsUpHaYh4KAV4et9o7Eb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UEtXzJbpj6RWLTe5xpgNjP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SfJgQFTmh6uGxefMpJE67R.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7K2EyiiPbgNFiRZMEDeb8M.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eWQWVXqe4c5QNSNsbQdywW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/A63YtPPJaWQKgg5hcdDjM8.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/26Jqy5w4eubpnSqtCKpGMa.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>AMD's Ryzen 7 2700 shows the value of eight cores armed with simultaneous multi-threading technology through our parallelized rendering workloads.</p><p>The Core i5-9600K trails its comparably-priced competition from AMD, and it only offers a small step forward versus the previous-gen Core i5-8600K.</p><p>Single-threaded workloads, regardless of software type, are still dominated by Intel's capable architectures.</p><h2 id="encoding-amp-compression">Encoding & Compression</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Y67AFYfxDqskydib9cSuFf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DaGkaxCo7WxRfFKXWh9r7W.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VrKCmshaMGKfPfizu6N2f6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CyEyWdBdiVsG9ybUZPmNoi.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QRre24p37jzkKc3CwTS9Yk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JTgi8vBzj3bzA5mUJVCpBf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ExKUb9Zk5YeWfaocATCV9b.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Our threaded compression and decompression metrics work directly from system memory, removing storage throughput from the equation. The Ryzen 7 2700 and Ryzen 5 2600X are competitive in the compression test, but really stretch their legs during our decompression workload.</p><p>y-cruncher, a single- and multi-threaded program that computes pi, is a great benchmark for measuring the effect of AVX instructions. Intel processors have no trouble establishing a lead in this kind of test.</p><p>The Core i5-9600K beats AMD's Ryzen 7 2700 and Ryzen 5 2600X in our HandBrake x265 metric, which is heavily optimized for AVX instructions. That changes during the H.264 benchmark, which sees the Core i5-9600K trail a stock Ryzen 5 2600X. Intel needs a 5 GHz overclock to overtake the stock Ryzen 7 2700.</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">Conclusion </h2><p>Intel’s ninth-gen Core i5-9600K is so similar to the eighth-gen Core i5-8600K that it does little to change the family’s competitive position against AMD's Ryzen line-up. Similar to the original Coffee Lake model, Core i5-9600K gives you six physical cores without Hyper-Threading technology, plus 9MB of L3 cache in a similar 95W package. The company does throw in slightly faster base and multi-core Turbo Boost frequencies, enabled through the use of solder-based thermal interface material to help with heat.</p><p>In the chart below, we plot gaming 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 then convert into a frame-per-second measurement. Bear in mind that we tested with a Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 at 1920 x 1080 to alleviate graphics-imposed bottlenecks. Differences between our test subjects shrink at higher resolutions.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iNnt5Ef5dhBXd6jhvezHDg.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SdrANorStoQHdQvKRih6r3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KGgC3LdTtoPFaRQAvYUEag.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uSbzwYdRTfyqfksLCbxu35.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/L95BBhqCC6EuunN4rteTwe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gzZWro6NXp3KKLuj3FDzyH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kyouAnDrQogAuCvuSFaJB6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yVM3J2b2UfrZ4fyUJ9DZFn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dKnHJo6m7AWbEWDwTqZk2H.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7iTtzHcTyeKW57gD9xmXSa.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Core i5-9600K is the fastest gaming chip in its price range. But the performance advantage you get over an overclocked Ryzen 7 2700 or Ryzen 5 2600X might not justify spending extra money or sacrificing performance in other tasks. We know from experience that Intel's Core processors dominate when it comes to Web browsing, gaming, and office apps. But the Core i5-9600K isn't as competitive in heavily-threaded benchmarks like ones that involve rendering.</p><p>AMD's $299 Ryzen 7 2700 comes with a bundled cooler. That gives it a leg up on the ~$270 Core i5-9600K, which doesn't include a thermal solution. In both cases, you'll want something beefy sitting on top of the heat spreader for a shot at an aggressive overclock. You also get eight cores and 16 threads from the Ryzen. But it really needs tuning in order to keep up. Taking a small step down, the $225 Ryzen 5 2600X costs less than the Core i5-9600K and, again, comes with a heat sink/fan. However, you lose some performance in lightly-threaded tasks in exchange for a lower price tag.</p><p>Intel's ninth-gen Core CPUs add the benefit of solder-based thermal interface material. Aside from enabling higher multi-core Turbo Boost bins, the improved heat transfer didn't seem to do much for our tuning efforts. Maybe our sample is simply sub-par. But we think it's more plausible that Intel already squeezed most of the headroom out of this chip and its 14nm process. Fortunately, even a modest air cooler is fine for stock operation. The Core i5-9600K's relatively tame power draw is a good fit for mainstream motherboards. Just remember that you need a Z-series platform in order to overclock.</p><p>Choosing between a Core i5-9600K and Ryzen presents the same conundrum we've faced in the past: it depends on the type of software you run most frequently. If you're a gamer who doesn't really venture beyond 1920x1080, Intel's Core i5-9600K is the chip for you. But if a majority of your workloads are threaded in nature, including content creation and productivity, a powerful Ryzen gets you more performance at a competitive price.</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 i9-9900K 9th Gen CPU Review: Fastest Gaming Processor Ever ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i9-9900k-9th-gen-cpu,5847.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ More cores, higher frequencies, and performance-boosting Solder TIM place the Core i9-9900K ahead of the pack. Just be prepared to pay for it. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">HPmwPMQV85jYFP4Z7QDRq</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kPeMHnQz9EgYC6DPbr94oQ-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Fri, 15 Nov 2019 14:19:03 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:27:01 +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/kPeMHnQz9EgYC6DPbr94oQ-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kPeMHnQz9EgYC6DPbr94oQ-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="intel-strikes-back">Intel Strikes Back</h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:694px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.65%;"><img id="" name="" alt="Core i9-9900K" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kPeMHnQz9EgYC6DPbr94oQ.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kPeMHnQz9EgYC6DPbr94oQ.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="694" height="525" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kPeMHnQz9EgYC6DPbr94oQ.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class="pull-"><span class="caption-text">Core i9-9900K </span></figcaption></figure><p>Although Intel added more cores to its previous-gen Coffee Lake processors in an effort to keep up with AMD&apos;s Ryzen CPUs, struggles with its 10nm node obviously delayed a more significant response. The company&apos;s ninth-generation Core processors, otherwise known as the Coffee Lake refresh, represent another step forward in a contentious battle for desktop supremacy as the company looks to maintain its top spots on our list of <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs</a>. </p><p>Intel&apos;s line-up matches AMD&apos;s Ryzen core-for-core, including a new Core i9 with eight Hyper-Threaded cores (8C/16T) and the highest frequencies we&apos;ve seen in the mainstream space. There&apos;s also a bulked-up Core i7 armed with two extra cores, plus a revamped Core i5. AMD isn&apos;t setting still though: The company recently released its own new flagship, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-9-3950x-review">16-core 32-thread Ryzen 9 3950X</a>, to fend off Intel&apos;s new challengers.</p><p>AMD&apos;s high core counts, aggressive prices, and nods to enthusiasts have earned it plenty of goodwill. Now it&apos;s Intel&apos;s turn to respond. The Core i9-9900K, for instance, ships in a a translucent plastic dodecahedron obviously meant to wow system builders, similar to the way AMD impressed with its Threadripper packaging. Intel also switched back to using Solder Thermal Interface Material (STIM) between the die and heat spreader, facilitating better thermal transfer to cope with more cores and higher overclocks. Ninth-gen Core CPUs are also Intel&apos;s first with hardware-based mitigations for the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/cpu-security-flaw-everything-spectre-meltdown,36237.html">Meltdown and Foreshadow vulnerabilities</a>. These should minimize the performance impact of circumventing recently discovered exploits.</p><p>Core i9-9900K is the fastest mainstream desktop processor we&apos;ve ever tested. But it&apos;s also one of the most expensive. Knowing that Intel does not match AMD&apos;s value proposition, is the ultimate in desktop performance worth paying extra for? The new Core i9 was incredibly impressive through our benchmark suite. However, most users would be better served by cheaper alternatives, such as Core i7-9700K.</p><p>Then again, if money is no object and you have the need for speed, Core i9-9900K is the CPU to buy.</p><h2 id="intel-core-i9-9900k">Intel Core i9-9900K</h2><p>The Coffee Lake refresh begins with three new K-series processors. They all feature the same underlying Coffee Lake microarchitecture as previous-gen models. And as expected, the Core i5 and Core i7 brands are represented. This time around, though, an eight-core, 16-thread Core i9 commands the spotlight.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1173px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:55.33%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mLSBUVjaTccWyksKKsqwJU.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mLSBUVjaTccWyksKKsqwJU.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1173" height="649" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mLSBUVjaTccWyksKKsqwJU.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The new K-series chips are manufactured on Intel's 14nm++ node, include an integrated UHD 630 graphics engine, sport unlocked ratio multipliers that enable easy overclocking, and boast support for dual-channel DDR4-2666 memory. Intel also responds to increasing RAM density by <a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/13473/intel-to-support-128gb-of-ddr4-on-core-9th-gen-desktop-processors">doubling memory capacity support up to 128GB</a>.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ></td><td  ><strong>Core i9-9900K</strong></td><td  ><strong>Core i7-9700K</strong></td><td  ><strong>Core i5-9600K</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Architecture</strong></td><td  >Coffee Lake</td><td  >Coffee Lake</td><td  >Coffee Lake</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Socket</strong></td><td  >1151</td><td  >1151</td><td  >1151</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cores / Threads</strong></td><td  >8 / 16</td><td  >8 / 8</td><td  >6 / 6</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Base Frequency (GHz)</strong></td><td  >3.6</td><td  >3.6</td><td  >3.7</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Boost Frequency ( Active Cores - GHz)</strong></td><td  >1-2 Cores - 5.04 Cores - 4.8 8 Cores - 4.7</td><td  >1 Core - 4.92 Core 4.8 4 Core 4.78 Core 4.6</td><td  >1 Core - 4.62 Core - 4.54 Core 4.46 Core 4.3</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>L3 Cache</strong></td><td  >16MB</td><td  >12MB</td><td  >9MB</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Process</strong></td><td  >14nm++</td><td  >14nm++</td><td  >14nm++</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>TDP</strong></td><td  >95W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >95W</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Memory Speed</strong></td><td  >DDR4-2666</td><td  >DDR4-2666</td><td  >DDR4-2666</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Memory Controller</strong></td><td  >Dual-Channel</td><td  >Dual-Channel</td><td  >Dual-Channel</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>PCIe Lanes</strong></td><td  >x16</td><td  >x16</td><td  >x16</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Integrated UHD Graphics GT2 (Base/Boost MHz)</strong></td><td  >350 / 1200</td><td  >350 / 1200</td><td  >350 / 1150</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Recommended Customer Pricing</strong></td><td  >$488 - $499</td><td  >$374 - $385</td><td  >$262 - $263</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:1166px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:55.06%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rvbNFpewCAY6R8wdtsc3RK.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rvbNFpewCAY6R8wdtsc3RK.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1166" height="642" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rvbNFpewCAY6R8wdtsc3RK.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Core i9-9900K's Solder TIM improves the thermal transfer efficiency between the die and heat spreader, facilitating the headroom needed for two more physical cores on the Core i9 and i7 models without violating a 95W envelope at base clock rates. What's more, the -9900K's base frequency is 3.6 GHz, just 100 MHz lower than the previous-gen Core i7-8700K. And that's after adding those two extra cores.</p><p>The STIM, which is applied inside all three new models, also improves overclockability. Enthusiasts who previously lauded AMD for using Solder TIM in its Ryzen processors should be happy with Intel's decision here.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ></td><td  >Base</td><td  >1 Core</td><td  >2 Cores</td><td  >3 Cores</td><td  >4 Cores</td><td  >5 Cores</td><td  >6 Cores</td><td  >7 Cores</td><td  >8 Cores</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Core i9-9900K (GHz)</strong></td><td  ><strong>3.6</strong></td><td  ><strong>5.0</strong></td><td  ><strong>5.0</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.8</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.8</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.7</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.7</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.7</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.7</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Core i7-9700K (GHz)</strong></td><td  ><strong>3.6</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.9</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.8</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.7</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.7</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.6</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.6</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.6</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.6</strong></td></tr><tr><td  >Core i7-8700K (GHz)</td><td  >3.7</td><td  >4.7</td><td  >4.6</td><td  >4.4</td><td  >4.4</td><td  >4.3</td><td  >4.3</td><td  >-</td><td  >-</td></tr><tr><td  >Core i7-8086K (GHz)</td><td  >4.0</td><td  >5.0</td><td  >4.6</td><td  >4.5</td><td  >4.4</td><td  >4.4</td><td  >4.3</td><td  >-</td><td  >-</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Core i5-9600K (GHz)</strong></td><td  ><strong>3.7</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.6</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.5</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.4</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.4</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.3</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.3</strong></td><td  ><strong>- </strong></td><td  ><strong>- </strong></td></tr><tr><td  >Core i5-8600K (GHz)</td><td  >3.6</td><td  >4.3</td><td  >4.2</td><td  >4.2</td><td  >4.2</td><td  >4.1</td><td  >4.1</td><td  >-</td><td  >-</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Improved heat dissipation also facilitates impressive clock rates across the ninth-gen models. Core i9-9900K stretches up to 5.0 GHz when two cores are active, outstripping <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i7-8086k-cpu-8086-anniversary,5658.html">the Core i7-8086K</a> and its ability to hit 5.0 GHz on one core. As you can see in the chart above, Intel is pushing the voltage/frequency curve with its eight-core models. They both feature much higher boost multipliers than previous-gen CPUs. These should help extend Intel's advantage in lightly-threaded tasks like gaming. Meanwhile, the extra cores help Intel compete readily against Ryzen in more taxing workloads.</p><p>Core i7-7820X is perhaps the most comparable CPU from Intel's high-end desktop portfolio. But it employs a fundamentally different design. The $600 chip requires an expensive X299 motherboard, is best paired to a quad-channel memory kit, lacks integrated graphics, and utilizes a mesh architecture for connecting on-die logic instead of the familiar ring bus (check out our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-mesh-architecture-skylake-x-hedt,34806.html">deep dive</a> for more information). <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i9-7900x-skylake-x,5092-2.html">As we've shown</a>, the mesh architecture has a negative impact on some desktop-class workloads, so it isn't the best solution for enthusiasts.</p><p>As expected, the -9900K's extra cores are accompanied by two additional 2MB slices of L3 cache, adding up to 16MB across the processor. The Core i7-9700K comes with the same 12MB of L3 cache as its predecessor. Given a higher core count, though, this actually represents a lower cache-per-core ratio, meaning Intel purposely disabled some of the -9700K's cache for the purpose of segmentation.</p><p>Intel's Core i7 series traditionally features <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/hyper-threading-intel-definition,5746.html">Hyper-Threading</a>, allowing one physical core to execute two software threads simultaneously, thus boosting performance. Kaby Lake-based processors included up to four cores and eight threads, while Coffee Lake offered as many as six cores and 12 threads on the highest-end models. The 95W Core i7-9700K breaks this tradition with eight cores and no HT support. If you assume that HT yields a 15-20 percent performance uptick under ideal conditions, then Intel's clever removal of the feature on its $374 Core i7-9700K should make the 8C/8T CPU faster than the 12-threaded Core i7-8700K in most workloads, maintaining the carefully manicured product stack.</p><p>Ninth-gen Core i5s still come with six cores and no Hyper-Threading, just like the Coffee Lake generation before them. The 95W Core i5-9600K ($265) operates at a 3.7 GHz base clock rate that boosts as high as 4.6 GHz. Intel pairs each core with a 1.5MB of L3 cache, adding up to 9MB.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Model</strong></td><td  ><strong>Cores / Threads</strong></td><td  ><strong>Base Frequency</strong></td><td  ><strong>Boost Frequency</strong></td><td  ><strong>Memory Support</strong></td><td  ><strong>PCIe Lanes</strong></td><td  ><strong>Cache</strong></td><td  ><strong>TDP</strong></td><td  ><strong>Price</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Core i9-9900K</strong></td><td  ><strong>8 / 16</strong></td><td  ><strong>3.6 GHz</strong></td><td  ><strong>5 GHz (1 / 2 Core)4.8 GHz (4 Core)4.7 GHz (6 / 8 Core)</strong></td><td  ><strong>DDR4-2666</strong></td><td  ><strong>16</strong></td><td  ><strong>16MB</strong></td><td  ><strong>95W</strong></td><td  ><strong>$488</strong></td></tr><tr><td  >Ryzen 7 2700X</td><td  >8 / 16</td><td  >3.7 GHz</td><td  >4.3 GHz</td><td  >DDR4-2966</td><td  >16 + 4 (NVMe)</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >105W</td><td  >$329</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Core i7-9700K</strong></td><td  ><strong>8 / 8</strong></td><td  ><strong>3.6 GHz</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.9 GHz (1 Core)4.8 GHz (2 Core)4.7 GHz (4 Core)4.6 GHz (6 / 8 Core)</strong></td><td  ><strong>DDR4-2666</strong></td><td  ><strong>16</strong></td><td  ><strong>12MB</strong></td><td  ><strong>95W</strong></td><td  ><strong>$374</strong></td></tr><tr><td  >Core i7-8086K</td><td  >6 / 12</td><td  >4.0 GHz</td><td  >5.0 GHz</td><td  >DDR4-2666</td><td  >16</td><td  >12MB</td><td  >95W</td><td  >$425</td></tr><tr><td  >Core i7-8700K</td><td  >6 / 12</td><td  >3.7 GHz</td><td  >4.7 GHz</td><td  >DDR4-2666</td><td  >16</td><td  >12MB</td><td  >95W</td><td  >$330</td></tr><tr><td  >Ryzen 7 2700</td><td  >8 / 16</td><td  >3.2 GHz</td><td  >4.1 GHz</td><td  >DDR4-2966</td><td  >16 + 4 (NVMe)</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >95W</td><td  >$229</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Core i5-9600K</strong></td><td  ><strong>6 / 6</strong></td><td  ><strong>3.7 GHz</strong></td><td  ><strong>4.6 GHz (1 Core)4.5 GHz (2 Core)4.4 GHz (4 Core)4.3 GHz (6 Core)</strong></td><td  ><strong>DDR4-2666</strong></td><td  ><strong>16</strong></td><td  ><strong>9MB</strong></td><td  ><strong>95W</strong></td><td  ><strong>$262</strong></td></tr><tr><td  >Core i5-8600K</td><td  >6 / 6</td><td  >3.6 GHz</td><td  >4.3 GHz</td><td  >DDR4-2966</td><td  >16</td><td  >9MB</td><td  >95W</td><td  >$279</td></tr><tr><td  >Ryzen 5 2600X</td><td  >6 / 12</td><td  >3.6 GHz</td><td  >4.2 GHz</td><td  >DDR4-2966</td><td  >16 + 4 (NVMe)</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >65W</td><td  >$229</td></tr><tr><td  >Ryzen 5 2600</td><td  >6 / 12</td><td  >3.4 GHz</td><td  >3.9 GHz</td><td  >DDR4-2966</td><td  >16 + 4 (NVMe)</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >65W</td><td  >$199</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>The new Core CPUs drop into existing 300-series motherboards after a BIOS update, though Intel&apos;s partners also have a slew of Z390 motherboards available, which <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-z390-motherboards,37896.html">you can see here</a>. As we&apos;ll illustrate, the Core i9-9900K, specifically, draws enough power to make VRM selection an important factor in your motherboard purchase, especially if you plan on overclocking. Luckily, most high-end Z390 motherboards already employ beefier power circuitry than the Z370 models.</p><p>Plan on buying a beefy cooler for the Core i9-9900K, too. Its eight-core die hides beneath the same heat spreader used on previous-gen six-core models, meaning that even with Solder TIM, thermal density presents challenges. Intel&apos;s official spec sheet lists a 130W cooler as the entry-level solution. If you plan on tuning, open- or closed-loop liquid cooling is a must. Even then, thermal output could be what limits your overclock.</p><p>Let&apos;s see how the Core i9-9900K and its stablemates perform in our test suite.</p><p><em>Update 10/22</em>: Corrected the recommended pricing for the Ryzen 7 2700X in our efficiency charts. </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>CPU 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="hardware-based-security-fixes-architecture-amp-test-setup">Hardware-Based Security Fixes, Architecture & Test Setup</h2><p>Much like the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/whiskey-lake-mitigations-in-silicon-intel,37723.html">Cascade and Whiskey Lake processors</a> we recently covered, Intel's Coffee Lake refresh comes with hardware-based mitigations for the Meltdown and L1TF (Foreshadow) vulnerabilities. Current Spectre and Meltdown mitigations, which Intel delivers via software and microcode patches, can reduce performance by up to 10% on newer CPUs, with older hardware suffering even larger losses. The new mitigations, baked directly into the silicon, should reduce or even eliminate the performance impact for a few vulnerabilities.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Vulnerability</strong></td><td  ><strong>Coffee Lake Refresh/Whiskey Lake Mitigation</strong></td><td  ><strong>Cascade Lake Mitigation</strong></td></tr><tr><td  >Variant 1 (Spectre)</td><td  >Operating System</td><td  >Operating System/VMM</td></tr><tr><td  >Variant 2 (Spectre)</td><td  >Microcode + Operating System</td><td  >In-Silicon + Operating System/VMM</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Variant 3 (Meltdown)</strong></td><td  ><strong>In-Silicon</strong></td><td  >In-Silicon</td></tr><tr><td  >Variant 3a</td><td  >Microcode + Operating System</td><td  >Firmware</td></tr><tr><td  >Variant 4</td><td  >Microcode + Operating System</td><td  >Microcode + Operating System/VMM</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>L1TF (Foreshadow)</strong></td><td  ><strong>In-Silicon</strong></td><td  >In-Silicon</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>As we're learning, it may take several processor generations before the fixes for all vulnerabilities are applied at a silicon level. Intel's ninth-gen CPUs do still need a combination of microcode and operating system patches. But at least <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/meltdown-spectre-exploits-intel-amd-arm-nvidia,36219.html">Meltdown</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-chips-foreshadow-security-flaws,37608.html">L1TF Foreshadow</a> are patched fully in hardware.</p><h2 id="architecture">Architecture</h2><p>Although we don't have much new information about Coffee Lake refresh architectural changes, <a href="https://fuse.wikichip.org/news/1711/intel-discloses-9th-gen-core-refreshes-core-x-and-reintroduces-stim/">David Schoor at WikiChip</a> says the new chips use a familiar ring bus, an internal high-speed pathway connecting the cores and cache.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aw2FKErzsqhjXmvXD5EgZd.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pi8fjGZE3F3zmz5zdFmTjK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RqZWXdWgVdSTnrpo48uNM5.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>This stands in contrast to the mesh architecture (<a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-mesh-architecture-skylake-x-hedt,34806.html">deep dive here</a>) that Intel uses on its high-end desktop models, including the eight-core Core i7-7820X. We've found that the mesh architecture has a negative impact on some desktop applications, including games, which <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i9-7900x-skylake-x,5092-2.html">Intel acknowledges</a>. The mesh architecture was designed to increase scalability as it expands to higher core counts in the Xeon family.</p><h2 id="overclocking-rounds-one-and-two">Overclocking, Rounds One and Two</h2><p>We tapped Corsair's H115i v2 to test our Core i9-9900K sample in the U.S. lab. This liquid cooler afforded enough headroom to sustain a 5.0 GHz overclock with a 1.33V Vcore and a Load Line Calibration 4 setting. It kept the chip at a steady 85°C during extended non-AVX stress tests. Folding in AVX instructions did, unfortunately, overwhelm the all-in-one. To reign in the thermal output, we set the AVX offset to -2, meaning the chip ran at 4.8 GHz during AVX-optimized workloads and 5.0 GHz in the absence of AVX instructions. We maintained a temperature of 95°C during three hours of Prime95 using those settings.</p><p>To model real-world settings attainable by enthusiasts with closed-loop liquid coolers, we applied the -2 AVX offset for our 5.0 GHz overclock in the gaming, office and productivity, and rendering tests.</p><p>We did not use an offset for the workstation graphics, compute, power consumption, and temperatures sections.</p><h2 id="meg-z390-godlike-2">MEG Z390 Godlike</h2><p>We're using MSI's MEG Z390 Godlike as our test platform for all Intel processors. This pricey board retails for $600, but has the power delivery subsystem to support aggressive 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:1043px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:64.53%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QHgc8jRuZqCvMX4fio9PVd.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QHgc8jRuZqCvMX4fio9PVd.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1043" height="673" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QHgc8jRuZqCvMX4fio9PVd.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The MSI MEG Z390 Godlike sits at the top of MSI's motherboard hierarchy. It has a decked-out 18-phase power delivery subsystem that's designed to squeeze every drop of performance out of Intel's new processors. It also comes with a few nifty accessories like an M.2 PCIe riser card and an HDMI streaming card.</p><h2 id="comparison-products-2">Comparison Products</h2>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="4bd622b4-c97b-4b6d-93df-d7c8bea464ae">            <a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113499" data-model-name="Ryzen 7 2700X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:83.03%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/c2cT8QyxBHDJ3zenoyjwN3.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 7 2700X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="19c9ad0e-4ea1-44ff-8669-1e3aa5fc19e3">            <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="1de068a8-d779-4dff-b05b-75382bace152">            <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80673I77820X-Core-i7-7820X-Processor/dp/B072NF4BY3/?&tag=bom-tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Core i7-7820X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:113.55%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/szKQEJKd4KxovhGyP8HXaE.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Intel Core i7-7820X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  colspan="2"><strong>Test System & Configuration</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Hardware</strong></td><td  ><strong><span>Germany </span></strong><strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z390)</strong>Intel Core i9-9900K, i7-9700K, i5-9600K, i7-8700K, i5-8600K, i5-8400MSI MEG Z390 Godlike2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2667 & DDR4-3466<strong>AMD Socket AM4 (400-Series)</strong>AMD Ryzen 7 and Ryzen 5  MSI X470 Gaming M7 AC 2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2667, DDR4-3466<strong>Intel LGA 2066</strong> Intel Core i7 MSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC 4x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2666<span><strong>All Systems</strong></span>GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition (Gaming) Nvidia Quadro P6000 (Workstation)1x 1TB Toshiba OCZ RD400 (M.2, System SSD) 4x 1TB Crucial MX300 (Storage, Images)be quiet! Dark Power Pro 11, 850W Windows 10 Pro (All Updates)<span><strong>U.S. </strong></span><strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z390)</strong>Intel Core i9-9900K, i7-9700K, i5-9600K, i7-8700K, i5-8600K, i5-8400MSI MEG Z390 Godlike2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2667 & DDR4-3466<strong>Intel LGA 2066</strong>Intel Core i9-7820XMSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC4x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2666, DDR4-3200<strong>AMD Socket AM4 (400-Series)</strong>AMD Ryzen 7 2700X, Ryzen 5 2600XMSI X470 Gaming M7 AC2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2933<span><strong>All Systems</strong></span>EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FE 1TB Samsung PM863SilverStone ST1500-TI, 1500WWindows 10 Pro (All Updates)</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cooling</strong></td><td  ><span><strong>Germany</strong></span>AMD Wraith RipperAlphacool Ice Block XPXEnermax LiqTech 240 TR4Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut<span><strong>U.S.</strong></span>Wraith RipperCorsair H115iEnermax Liqtech 240 TR4 II</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: </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>CPU 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="vrmark-3dmark-amp-aots-escalation">VRMark, 3DMark & AotS: Escalation</h2><h2 id="vrmark-3dmark-2">VRMark, 3DMark</h2><p>We aren't big fans of using synthetic benchmarks to measure performance, but 3DMark's DX11 and DX12 CPU tests provide useful insight into the amount of horsepower available to game engines.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wJzXm4wrH4CwFcW7A3u2D5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vAEETFfPVKhrbnfZr3cbDY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yUQSRz5nYxZHziMGz25TXB.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Core i9-9900K's eight cores easily beat Ryzen 7 2700X during the DX12 and DX11 CPU benchmarks. For perspective, the Core i9-9900K has the same 4.7 GHz all-core boost frequency as the Core i7-8700K's single-core boost, which is quite impressive. As expected, tuning Core i9-9900K propels it into a league of its own.</p><p>In the DX12 test, we see a nice step forward from Core i7-9700K compared to its predecessor, the Core i7-8700K. That improvement is despite a loss of Hyper-Threading technology on the new Core i7 model.</p><p>Architecturally, the Core i5-9600K is very similar to Core i5-8600K. They offer the same number of cores. But the newer chip's higher clock rates deliver tangible gains. </p><p>UL'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. UL defines a passing score as anything above 109 FPS. The Core i7-9700K posts a surprisingly strong frame rate, beating the overclocked -9900K. That implies this benchmark runs best on eight physical cores.</p><h2 id="ashes-of-the-singularity-escalation-2">Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AGzLnComUiC9VDDgZMrPGP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8sDyQtdaAsRcZxSeCyc2NR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/U2YRKRqKZijtggRWyakbeD.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</em> is a computationally intense title that scales well with thread count. A stock Core i9-9900K beats the rest of the processors, except for an overclocked Core i7-8700K.</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>CPU 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="civilization-vi-graphics-amp-ai-dawn-of-war-iii">Civilization VI Graphics & AI, Dawn of War III</h2><h2 id="civilization-vi-ai-test-2">Civilization VI AI Test</h2><p><em>Civilization VI</em>'s AI test measures CPU performance in a turn-based strategy game and tends to favor per-core performance.</p><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:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/34R9zMQ9arGjkfHfSXUNg.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/34R9zMQ9arGjkfHfSXUNg.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/34R9zMQ9arGjkfHfSXUNg.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The Ryzen processors trail due to their lower per-core performance, defined by instructions per clock (IPC) throughput and frequency. Intel's Coffee Lake microarchitecture already dominates in comparisons of IPC, but bolstering it with higher clock rates extends the design's lead. Notice that the Core i5 and Core i7-9700K also perform exceedingly well, indicating this test runs best on physical cores. </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/EzxYCaEYexNHgDzSptZbtm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QRv5LyuFvDJYXkDLwFx4MA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HokkkpbxRcJzhQDtmME9iC.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Core i7-9700K takes the lead once again. The Coffee Lake-based Core i7 models remain impressive, though. As you'll see throughout our gaming suite, Intel's Skylake-X-based Core i7-7820X is no match for the mainstream processors' much higher frequencies.</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/rbH7jRP4SJpnZGn6VbaDdd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8TCDrDrZZzui6jRXEUUPFo.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UWjEPNjpMQrTYWodHLHFM6.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Ryzen 7 2700X is more competitive in the <em>Warhammer 40,000 </em>benchmark, largely because this game responds well to threading. Core i9 is a powerful chip, but the Core i7-8700K challenges it after some overclocking. Intel&apos;s Core i7-9700K essentially ties the Core i7-8700K, reminding us that its product stack remains carefully segmented.</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>CPU 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="far-cry-5-gta-v-amp-hitman">Far Cry 5, GTA: V & Hitman</h2><h2 id="far-cry-5">Far Cry 5</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/n7JbLyCfFhfHxZXM4MBb44.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/c3vYB3iV49CRMP5TRNQDfK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zAtt7KRiP3XevAscu7dgRk.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Although the overclocked Core i9 leads, a tuned Core i7-8700K offers similar performance. More than likely, the extra $118 you pay for a Core i9 probably isn't worth it for gamers.</p><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-2">Grand Theft Auto V</h2><p><em>Grand Theft Auto V</em><span> </span>favors Intel architectures and, more generally, multi-core designs with high clock rates.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9eXykvxgFweofcuMfB8dKV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RCz7BAtDdJpoHjsEpBMm3P.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7TQLB54mJ9YQCjCiYsKKxk.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The -9900K leads in convincing fashion. The Core i7 and i5 models also enjoy a healthy speed-up.</p><h2 id="hitman-2">Hitman </h2><p>Our <em>Hitman</em> benchmark was rendered almost useless by a patch that imposed a 90 FPS performance cap. A subsequent update restored our test to its prior glory.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/j9nux33pHJh4z5AjzSBi5R.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P68TNc4Q3y57n3imSqPXzf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RPShnwuMYi5L8nv4cdhDJX.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Given its price point, the Core i5-9600K appears to be a phenomenal chip for gaming, even without taking overclocking into consideration. Notice that the new i5 often outperforms Intel&apos;s previous-gen Core i7-8700K. Really, that isn&apos;t surprising given both chips&apos; multi-core Turbo Boost ratios. A lack of Hyper-Threading also helps in some games.</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>CPU 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="shadow-of-war-amp-project-cars-2">Shadow Of War & Project CARS 2</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/kqoVXRMyjvK73XfEguTTuP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RMBsYxE68v7cZocFuY2hk5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3XNh6wr6ffKbBQE7Gq4dvW.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Shadow of War</em> leans heavier on graphics resources than host processing, so we don't see large deltas between the fastest and slowest CPUs. This is another reminder that most games are limited by your GPU, so plan accordingly if you're running into a bottleneck.</p><h2 id="project-cars-2-2">Project CARS 2</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xv37WoNLsRFGtiAcCzjxvG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kNJRBhaLfmTrhRgYxy5HRk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bW7r59SJG2F3eo5v2uahMT.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Although <em>Project CARS 2</em> is purportedly optimized for threading, clock rates obviously affect this title&apos;s frame rates. Intel&apos;s per-core performance advantage pays big dividends in this title, but Core i5-9600K inexplicably trails the previous-gen -8600K. Repeated testing confirmed the results.</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>CPU 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="office-amp-productivity">Office & Productivity</h2><h2 id="adobe-creative-cloud-2">Adobe Creative Cloud</h2><p>Even though this suite has a few parallelized workloads, its final score is heavily influenced by the lightly-threaded tasks common in most desktop applications.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Eo9KaF3pVfRKAjQXeyw57N.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3Hb5ZDnZMVKEeZWZbQCMXJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/twapRy7h5RRA7f84662cKf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8gvwkGbxdLHpaAaKNwBSG9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ex7dCH4vpq2Y5o6cBbBFVJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kPjEXpqtw5N6ujWkFsaKKb.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Core i9-9900K takes a commanding lead throughout these tests. However, the Core i7-9700K proves to be an adept competitor. It should come close to matching the Core i9-9900K after overclocking in these types of lightly-threaded tasks.</p><h2 id="web-browser-2">Web Browser</h2><p>The Krakken suite evaluates JavaScript performance using several workloads, including audio, imaging, and cryptography. Like most browser-based benchmarks, single-threaded performance reigns supreme. These tests expose the trade-offs you make for an all-core overclock, particularly with the second-gen Ryzen processors.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qvoWaqeKonc7kzUeXSCFvW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GcuJ2kjb2J23wipxFtLJX7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7veyJdnKMAR6hAAo3ERvPm.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Intel's single-threaded advantage is clear. Once again the -9700K offers a nice step up from the -8700K, while Intel's Core i5-9600K proves its mettle. Our overclocked Ryzen 7 2700X trails the stock configuration in many of these tests because it offers a higher boost clock rate in stock form.</p><h2 id="productivity-2">Productivity</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iEDbzvCwyyoSKj2gJD8eiH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/79DeqDm72g2siUjcp6GyjX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kpHckwNenaJQDLTFhUXpZW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/T5UUcnMofWzkU5fVCAbpd7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yWwTVDteVuuiEH8fcJB247.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. Other platform-level considerations affect this test as well, including the storage subsystem. Core i7-7820X lags the rest of the test pool, possibly as a byproduct of its mesh architecture. Meanwhile, the Core i7-8700K and -9900K are closely matched. </p><p>Our video conferencing suite measures performance in single- and multi-user applications that utilize the Windows Media Foundation for playback and encoding. It also performs facial detection to model real-world usage. This workload responds well to more threads, so Ryzen 7 pops back up near the top of our test pool.</p><p>The photo editing benchmark measures performance with Futuremark&apos;s binaries using the ImageMagick library. Common photo processing workloads also tend to be parallelized. This application responds well to the Ryzen 7 2700X, which scores a rare win against the stock Core i9-9900K.</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>CPU 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="rendering-encoding-amp-compression">Rendering, Encoding & Compression</h2><h2 id="rendering-2">Rendering</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/stTdm4VmHXrTiTXBX3Z5f.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3mqZYQWznkTjfaJmTVa7EF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xvdSPXXH8wDGd2kVpwBSU4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/odPyNm9B6XK3csqm9dXkpN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/r5Ja2t7BukDrukCgF7gM68.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eywymg8uHDjNPpzQDz5hP4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RFudLwfGicvDV3Vv8BhoN6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nQpb9EGrmNPs5Q34ptSRxn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7eExYCWcE9WveUS8KX7nSb.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Intel’s processors extend their lead in the single-threaded POV-Ray and Cinebench tests. However, it's easy to see that AMD’s extra cores help offset their lower IPC in threaded benchmarks.</p><p>The Core i9-9900K sets a new high water mark for mainstream desktop performance at stock and overclocked settings in the threaded POV-Ray and Cinebench benchmarks.</p><h2 id="encoding-amp-compression-2">Encoding & Compression</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SYMNGiCETaLYuNcc5b4tAH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tohTo7tjXBzFHVogJ7BM6Y.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Cj8bM4FoyDQmQDQzPJPmwY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/q7cmRtDLVohkHS7vSAUHnH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rHBWwgZv7EBLgbXBmfpEf9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Zp73L5qUsxA32B6sixKSr7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HwnSETr7UfPUA2pmZiYH4P.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Our threaded compression and decompression metrics work directly from system memory, removing storage throughput from the equation. Ryzen 7 2700X is competitive in these workloads, especially after overclocking. But Intel&apos;s Core i9-9900K carves out a commanding lead.</p><p>y-cruncher, a single- and multi-threaded program that computes pi, is a great test to use for measuring the affect of AVX instructions. Core i7-7820X sports two 256-bit AVX FMA units per core that operate in parallel, so it isn&apos;t surprising to see that CPU leading through the multi-threaded test. Core i9-9900K is still highly competitive, but we dialed back its all-core AVX frequency to 4.8 GHz for our overclocked configuration. Consequently, the tuned -9900K is outperformed by the stock configuration, which benefits from the dual-core 5.0 GHz AVX frequency. </p><p>Core i9-9900K leverages high clock frequencies to dominate the HandBrake x265 test, which relies heavily on AVX instructions, and the H.264 test. Notice that the tuned -9900K outpaces the stock configuration in these tests despite our 4.8 GHz AVX offset. That&apos;s because the stock setup drops to an all-core 4.7 GHz under full utilization.</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>CPU 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="workstation-graphics">Workstation Graphics</h2><p>While workstation graphics are a niche for most readers, some might consider using the -9900K's eight cores and 16 threads for professional tasks. Really, though, there aren't many threaded applications for real-time graphics output. These benchmarks mostly benefit from high IPC and frequency.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/H44CpqjDYqCqxRGvE5jeoB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ecNDhKrkqbXMzk3vQzAC3T.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Cinebench profits equally from more cores and higher clock rates. That makes it one of the very few benchmarks able to show off what Core i9-9900K can do compared to Core i7-8700K.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1111px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.98%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mUjPCfUGmy984S9LtfK8CJ.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mUjPCfUGmy984S9LtfK8CJ.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1111" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mUjPCfUGmy984S9LtfK8CJ.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ndSPAhLveGw6JJnMTZ2xqX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mXGZ6KPFtRyyg8gu82b9be.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The older versions of Maya and Catia appear to be bottlenecked, despite the potent Nvidia Quadro P6000 being pushed to its limit. In the end, it makes no difference whether the CPU is overclocked or not. The differences are marginal from the Core i7-8700K upward.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7WsWiQzG5cKvFedKUPCWFK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cWpGUwqtyVzmcnRA3DYm66.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Blender loop relies on OpenGL and real-time graphics, but host processing power still helps. However, these applications use hardly more than four cores, so high per-core performance pays off.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1111px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.98%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PfXvfDkTKkzXewDnxPNxwG.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PfXvfDkTKkzXewDnxPNxwG.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1111" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PfXvfDkTKkzXewDnxPNxwG.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The same could be said for the GPU composite score of 3ds Max because, in the end, the highest clock rate wins. Multi-threading is not really in demand.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1111px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.98%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wy2LcX48TqfC5jSKMmyaoU.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wy2LcX48TqfC5jSKMmyaoU.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1111" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wy2LcX48TqfC5jSKMmyaoU.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>To summarize, we could say there is little added value in upgrading from a fast quad-core to a slightly faster eight-core CPU in these types of applications.</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>CPU 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="workstation-compute">Workstation Compute</h2><p>The CPU composite score of SolidWorks combines render and compute performance. Multi-core scaling isn't the emphasis. Rather, per-core performance moves the needle furthest.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1111px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.98%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xNjVR28udMXmt8UYsxuGuc.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xNjVR28udMXmt8UYsxuGuc.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1111" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xNjVR28udMXmt8UYsxuGuc.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>If the workload consists of strictly rendering, then Core i9-9900K is hard 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:1111px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.98%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3E8Y84kyfPmUbb5VRoZfKe.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3E8Y84kyfPmUbb5VRoZfKe.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1111" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3E8Y84kyfPmUbb5VRoZfKe.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Interestingly enough, AMD's CPUs dominate the 3ds Max composite score (this program seems better-optimized for AMD's architecture in general). For the first time, Core i7-8700K doesn't stand a chance against the Core i9.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1111px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.98%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QDhQyeVoojd8wmEP5RNYuC.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QDhQyeVoojd8wmEP5RNYuC.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1111" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QDhQyeVoojd8wmEP5RNYuC.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Intel's CPUs bounce back in the rendering test, whereas AMD's Ryzen 7 2700X drops a few spots.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1049px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:79.41%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yyXDcjpH3GiQLRDwxTDZ6K.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yyXDcjpH3GiQLRDwxTDZ6K.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1049" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yyXDcjpH3GiQLRDwxTDZ6K.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Creo reminds us that maximizing work done per clock cycle is critical. It'll probably take a very long time for developers to optimize for 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:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zNryXJD6Lw5B9w8qunCc7S.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zNryXJD6Lw5B9w8qunCc7S.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zNryXJD6Lw5B9w8qunCc7S.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Almost everything in this application is perfectly parallelized, so a combination of threads and per-core performance form a brutal alliance.</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/PuEst9fvvBPy6JfVPegK9.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PuEst9fvvBPy6JfVPegK9.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PuEst9fvvBPy6JfVPegK9.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Aside from the render workloads, there&apos;s no reason to buy a Core i9 over the older Core i7-8700K. But then the entire platform is out of place and you might want to consider a real workstation instead.</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>CPU 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="power-consumption-2">Power Consumption</h2><p>Power consumption measurements are always a bit tricky, but as long as the 12V supply (EPS) readings and the sensor values ​​of the power supply of the mainboard plus voltage transformer losses plausibly coincide, everything is fine. Therefore, we again rely on the pure package power to avoid possible influences from the motherboard. The values ​​of the PWM controller are really very reliable if taken as averages over a period of a few 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:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UThmfDHNRTjfixhQr5vD3S.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UThmfDHNRTjfixhQr5vD3S.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UThmfDHNRTjfixhQr5vD3S.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>At idle, everything is perfectly fine. Both the stock and overclocked Core i9-9900K sip power. The fact that the Ryzen 5 2600X lands at the top of our chart is confirmed by our bad sample. This is definitely not a general AMD problem though, as the Ryzen 7 2700X shows. In general, however, all the CPUs are quite economical.</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/UQXCekStHXkVYJrX8BxRdV.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UQXCekStHXkVYJrX8BxRdV.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UQXCekStHXkVYJrX8BxRdV.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Both -9900K configurations are still in good shape during the CAD workload: the chip's power consumption is only slightly higher than the Core i7-8700K. So far, the very high voltage needed for stable operation does not make a disturbing impression. Everything is still in the green.</p><p>Power consumption is also within the expected values during the gaming loop, especially since the game does not fully utilize all cores. Although a comparison test with <em>Assassin's Creed Origins</em> did yield much higher values (up to 20W more), that game is so poorly optimized that we measure completely different values each time.</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/5fXa7YGhCW4VYvd6yhGTMA.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5fXa7YGhCW4VYvd6yhGTMA.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5fXa7YGhCW4VYvd6yhGTMA.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Five measurements with five strongly diverging results are not something that would be apt for a fair comparison. However, at 5 GHz, the Core i9-9900K never really crossed the 100W limit, so it was still cool enough to make ends meet. At least for games.</p><p>But power becomes more of an issue in some productivity applications because a constant load on all cores at high clock rates is almost too much. And to be clear, the Core i9-9900K gets super hot faced with Prime95 and AVX instructions (205W stock, 250W overclocked), exceeding the specified TDP.</p><p>We measured 137W (232W) during the Cinebench test, and we topped 145W (241W overclocked) under the larger Blender workload. We even pushed past 120W (198W overclocked) with various CAD plug-ins for Creo and SolidWorks. The limits of normal all-in-one compact water cooling solutions are in sight during standard operation at 4.7 GHz on all cores, but you can easily overwhelm cheaper AIOs during 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:1112px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.91%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tdauREAwqYvHhsTjDHesSH.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tdauREAwqYvHhsTjDHesSH.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tdauREAwqYvHhsTjDHesSH.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Finally, and because we like the additional detail, here are the line charts corresponding to our long-term measurements.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1390px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:59.93%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3SxoStnyPZTQanvnT3S7Db.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3SxoStnyPZTQanvnT3S7Db.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1390" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3SxoStnyPZTQanvnT3S7Db.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><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>CPU 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="temperatures">Temperatures</h2><p>As we did in the past with Intel's Core i7-8700K, we again created absolutely identical test and measurement conditions. We use the same type of CPU cooler (Alphacool XPX), the same Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut TIM, and the Alphacool Ice Age 2000 chiller that, as always, provides exactly 20°C water temperature. We weigh the thermal paste (0.15 grams) on a laboratory balance to further ensure accuracy. Thus, our older test results are usable for comparisons to the Intel Core i9-9900K.</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:56.09%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MGHRfURaa8T98ZazpGXUDG.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MGHRfURaa8T98ZazpGXUDG.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="847" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MGHRfURaa8T98ZazpGXUDG.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><h2 id="thermal-grease-vs-solder">Thermal Grease Vs. Solder</h2><p>We have an important preliminary about the change from the thermal paste TIM on the Core i7-8700K to the solder of the Core i9-9900K. Since the height of the CPU has remained absolutely the same with the new chips, one can also assume that Intel uses the same heatspreader as the older CPUs. The distance between the die and heat spreader was previously relatively high due to the design, as the chips have a relatively thick layer of thermal paste.</p><p>Therefore, we can assume the solder layer also turns out to be a bit thicker than it would actually have needed. This fact, and the significantly smaller heat spreader (surface area) compared to the LGA 2066 CPUs, will certainly explain why the results that follow are the same as they were. Good, but not perfect.</p><p>The Intel Core i7-8700K achieves just under 160 watts in the stress test with Prime95, so we ran the Intel Core i9-9900K with a similar load. The Core i9-9900K did not always use all its cores fully, so slight fluctuations occur despite the same average waste heat over the entire time. But these remain negligible. Logically, the Intel Core i9-9900K runs much cooler than with Solder TIM:</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1389px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:70.48%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PbdtoPMYFTuiqFDfYU6qFU.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PbdtoPMYFTuiqFDfYU6qFU.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1389" height="979" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PbdtoPMYFTuiqFDfYU6qFU.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>With nearly identical power dissipation and identical cooling conditions, we calculate a mean package temperature of 57°C for the Intel Core i9-9900K and 75°C for the Intel Core i7-8700K. This results in a delta of 18°. Tests of the delidded Intel Core i7-8700K show that this is not necessarily optimal – the delta was at least 20° (better by 2°). In either case, even the industrial solder solution is always worth more than the thermal paste of the previous CPU generation.</p><h2 id="leakage-at-different-temperatures-but-same-load">Leakage at different temperatures but same load</h2><p>CPUs are thermistors, where the internal resistance decreases with rising temperature instead of rising. That makes it interesting to see how the temperatures, and thus the leakage currents (and consequently the power loss), develop with the same applied load. To measure this, we have the Core i9-9900K overclocked under Prime95 run once with chiller and with a normal AiO compact water cooling (Corsair H110i).</p><p>The result turns out as expected. While the chiller the CPU is at an average of 63° C, but the 90° C with the AiO is already near the absolute limit. Mind you, this result is at stock settings with an AVX load. Interestingly, when using SSE, the delta of 27°C remains nearly the same, as it is still 25°C on 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:1389px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:59.97%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/L4VXhJWFyumXDsrkR6QFNL.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/L4VXhJWFyumXDsrkR6QFNL.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1389" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/L4VXhJWFyumXDsrkR6QFNL.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>But back to the AVX load, because what does the almost 30° C temperature difference ultimately mean for power consumption? Here, too, we are amazed to a certain extent, because between the 205W with chiller and the 229W with the AiO compact water cooling, there is a difference of 24W. We can only attribute that to the now stronger 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:1389px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:59.97%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LYS7BzgNoazb6UAUfCa43a.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LYS7BzgNoazb6UAUfCa43a.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1389" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LYS7BzgNoazb6UAUfCa43a.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>You can see the remaining power consumption figures on the previous page, but under almost ideal conditions. The better the cooling, the better the power consumption. However, we were only able to record these large differences at package temperatures above 80°C, which then almost rise like an avalanche. This would dissuade us from air cooling, even if the Intel Core i9-9900K should not be overclocked any further. The 4.7 GHz all-core and a constant load are quite sufficient to make air cooling absurd.</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>CPU 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="conclusion-2">Conclusion</h2><p>Intel's Core i9-9900K answers several requests from the enthusiast community. It sports more cores, higher clock rates, and effective Solder TIM. The delayed 10nm process could be a liability as AMD works feverishly to respond with new 7nm processors. But for now, these 14nm++ CPUs are winners.</p><p>In the chart below, we plot gaming performance with both average frame rates and a geometric mean of the 99<sup>th</sup> percentile frame times (a good indicator of smoothness), which we then convert into a frame-per-second measurement. Bear in mind that we tested with a Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 at 1920x1080 to alleviate graphics-imposed bottlenecks. Differences between our test subjects would shrink with higher resolutions.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QgZdDTy49AaCiGwMitLWAM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vW5DJLDyyqSuknyVrTe6B5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mrRmSEhKJ3KcnCpfsg4nmJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tK7BsXJ3t6zrXTuPgYGGUH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4SzqRWgdQUvpRRef5HtAzS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zKb37wuYayRJdJX9S5fCFV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DUbMbNVatZxSTNmd55fz3V.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tLSJDYikQUoHZ68hCJxSmP.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Core i9-9900K takes the crown as the fastest gaming processor on the market, and it proves to be highly capable in the threaded workloads that AMD&apos;s Ryzen processors used to dominate. Pricing is still a problem for Intel, though. You pay dearly for the extra cores, while a majority of games don&apos;t fully utilize them. The Core i7-9700K, even at stock settings, is competitive with the -9900K in most titles, especially considering the $115 you save by stepping down a notch. We haven&apos;t overclocked our -9700K yet, though, so the small deltas observed between the two chips may shrink further.</p><p>Although AMD&apos;s second-gen Ryzen processors narrowed the gap with Intel&apos;s Coffee Lake-based line-up, these ninth-generation Core chips redefine the playing field. The $263 Core i5-9600K at stock settings regularly beat an overclocked $329 Ryzen 7 2700X in games, and we expect even more performance from the Core i5 once we overclock it. Ryzen 7 2700X does come with a capable cooler, but the Core i5’s lower price diminishes AMD’s value proposition for gaming.</p><p>In the end, Core i9-9900K serves up impressive performance across our benchmark suite. If you regularly run heavily-threaded applications, it&apos;s probably worth paying a premium for. But if you need real workstation-class features, you should step up to an appropriate platform.</p><p>And make no mistake, the Core i9-9900K requires expensive accommodations. You need a premium motherboard with robust power delivery, particularly if you plan on overclocking. The -9900K can drop into existing Z370 motherboards, but we’re sure that many of them will struggle with the chip’s voracious appetite for current. Also plan on investing in a high-end PSU.</p><p>The -9900K proved to be an impressive overclocker, largely due to its Solder TIM. Don&apos;t think that means you can skimp on cooling, though. High temperatures hampered our overclocking efforts, and a more capable cooler could have facilitated additional headroom. Intel even threw in new packaging to help win back the hearts and minds of enthusiasts.</p><p>Now the question is whether Intel can satisfy enthusiast demand. After all, we&apos;ve already heard reports of delayed pre-order shipments. Even though the company assures us that it can accommodate demand for eight-core CPUs, this doesn&apos;t bode well for availability as the company grapples with an ongoing shortage of 14nm manufacturing capacity.</p><p>The Core i9-9900K has no direct rival on a mainstream platform, but its high price point encroaches into the realm of AMD’s upcoming $649 12-core Threadripper 2920X (which has hefty platform requirements of its own). That chip isn&apos;t available yet, so its performance remains shrouded in mystery. For something more readily available, look to the previous-gen Threadripper 1920X.</p><p>Unless you regularly use heavily-threaded applications, it’s hard to justify stepping up to Core i9-9900K from any modern four- or six-core CPU. With that said, Core i9-9900K is the fastest mainstream processor on the market. Plenty of enthusiasts opt for the best possible performance in both single- and multi-threaded workloads at any price. There, the Core i9-9900K doesn’t disappoint.</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>CPU 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>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ The Core i7-8086K Review: 40 Years Of x86 ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i7-8086k-cpu-8086-anniversary,5658.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Intel pays homage to the 40th anniversary of the 8086, the first x86 processor, with the limited-edition Core i7-8086K. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">Ve64cAEsEip9QvQjqvjuQT</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gNS4LfKTyMoGQ5URjvTVEj-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2018 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:30:20 +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/gNS4LfKTyMoGQ5URjvTVEj-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gNS4LfKTyMoGQ5URjvTVEj-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="intel-core-i7-8086k-40th-anniversary-model">Intel Core i7-8086K 40th Anniversary Model</h2><p>Intel's 8086, the company's first processor to use its ubiquitous x86 instruction set architecture, debuted on June 8, 1978. Forty years later and by some stroke of fortuitous timing, Intel's desktop CPU portfolio is loaded with eighth-generation Core processors. So it was only fitting, then, that after a bit of <a href="https://twitter.com/david_schor/status/953979794437410816">prodding by a well-known chip analyst</a>, Intel announced that it'd pay homage to the 8086 with a 40th-anniversary limited-edition Core i7-8086K.</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:74.97%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gNS4LfKTyMoGQ5URjvTVEj.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gNS4LfKTyMoGQ5URjvTVEj.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="1132" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gNS4LfKTyMoGQ5URjvTVEj.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Core i7-8086K is based on the same Coffee Lake architecture as Core i7-8700K, right down to its six Hyper-Threaded cores able to work on 12 threads concurrently. But it features a higher base frequency and more aggressive Turbo Boost bins, which tell us that Intel carefully picked out the best dies to use in these chips. This is the first Intel processor to ship with a 5 GHz Turbo Boost bin, matching AMD's record with the FX-9590. And if you're only looking at clock rate, the -8086K represents a 1000x multiplication of the original 8086's 5 MHz frequency.</p><p>Incidentally, the -8086K is also Intel's first six-core processor with a 4 GHz base frequency, though that specification isn't as eye-catching.</p><p>Intel kicked off its anniversary celebration with a <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i7-8086k-40th-anniversary,37193.html">giveaway of 8086 Core i7-8086Ks</a>. If you didn't win one, you'll have to purchase the processor like we did. Your window of opportunity won't be large, though: our sources confirm a production run of just 50,000 units. We expect collector's items to sport premium pricing, and Intel doesn't disappoint in that department. As of this writing, the -8086K sells for $75 more than the once-flagship Core i7-8700K.</p><p>So what is this processor's appeal, other than the obvious nostalgia? Core i7-8086K comes from a higher-quality bin than Core i7-8700K, so enthusiasts with deep pockets can expect to receive the very best example of Coffee Lake silicon available. Of course, most folks won't consider the extra $75 worth paying for moderate gains at stock clock rates. But again, this is a limited-edition piece of hardware steeped in history.</p><h2 id="intel-core-i7-8600k">Intel Core i7-8600K</h2><p>The 6C/12T Core i7-8086K is manufactured on Intel's 14nm++ process, just like its other Coffee Lake CPUs. Like the company's Core i7-8700K, its 95W Core i7-8086K also features 13MB of L3 cache, support for up to 64GB of dual-channel memory at DDR4-2666, an unlocked multiplier to facilitate overclocking, and Intel's integrated UHD Graphics 630 engine that can boost up to 1.2 GHz. For more information about the Coffee Lake architecture, check out our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-cpu,5252.html">Core i7-8700K review</a>.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Frequencies</strong></td><td  ><strong>Base</strong></td><td  ><strong>1</strong></td><td  ><strong>2</strong></td><td  ><strong>3</strong></td><td  ><strong>4 - 5</strong></td><td  ><strong>6</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Intel Core i7-8086K</strong></td><td  >4.0 GHz</td><td  >5.0 GHz</td><td  >4.6 GHz</td><td  >4.5 GHz</td><td  >4.4 GHz</td><td  >4.3 GHz</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Intel Core i7-8700K</strong></td><td  >3.7 GHz</td><td  >4.7 GHz</td><td  >4.6 GHz</td><td  >4.5 GHz</td><td  >4.4 GHz</td><td  >4.3 GHz</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>The -8086K's real differentiation involves its modified Turbo Boost frequencies. But in an effort to maintain a 95W thermal design power rating, Intel only increased this chip's base clock rate by 300 MHz. Intel also increased the single-core clock rate to 5 GHz. We were able to sustain 5 GHz in tasks confined to a single core, such as Cinebench and LAME. However, the busy scheduling environment in a modern desktop operating system, which finds threads migrating frequently between cores, prevented 5 GHz operation in even mainstream tests like our gaming benchmarks. In other words, don't expect to see 5 GHz very often.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Product</strong></td><td  ><strong>Core i7-8086K</strong></td><td  ><strong>Core i7-8700K</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Socket</strong></td><td  >LGA 1151v2</td><td  >LGA 1151v2</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>TDP</strong></td><td  >95W</td><td  >95W</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Architecture</strong></td><td  >Coffee Lake</td><td  >Coffee Lake</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Process</strong></td><td  >14nm++</td><td  >14nm++</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cores/Threads</strong></td><td  >6 / 12</td><td  >6 / 12</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Frequency Base / Boost</strong></td><td  >4.0 / 5.0 GHz</td><td  >3.7 / 4.7 GHz</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Memory Speed</strong></td><td  >DDR4-2966</td><td  >DDR4-2966</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Memory Controller</strong></td><td  >Dual-Channel</td><td  >Dual-Channel</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cache (L2+L3)</strong></td><td  >13.5MB</td><td  >13.5MB</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Integrated Graphics</strong></td><td  >UHD Graphics 630 (up to 1200 MHz)</td><td  >UHD Graphics 630 (up to 1200 MHz)</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>PCIe Lanes</strong></td><td  >x16 Gen3</td><td  >x16 Gen3</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Price</strong></td><td  >$425</td><td  >$359</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>We've heard reports that some motherboards don't support Intel's 5 GHz single-core Turbo Boost bin. However, updated firmware could fix that in the future. Regardless, it's a shame that Intel didn't port over Turbo Boost 3.0 technology to pin lightly-threaded tasks to the CPU's fastest core. Overclockers might have more luck coaxing higher clock rates from the -8086K: our sample easily stretched up to 5.1 GHz with a bit of extra voltage.</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:74.97%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yK4YKhRW9FUt7ym99H2FrB.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yK4YKhRW9FUt7ym99H2FrB.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="1132" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yK4YKhRW9FUt7ym99H2FrB.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We normally don't cover processor packaging, but it is relevant given the Core i7-8086K's status as a collector’s item. Like all of Intel's K-series SKUs, the -8086K doesn't include a bundled heat sink or fan.</p><p>The box tell us us that this is a limited-edition CPU. Intel even includes a certificate of authenticity, along with a signed statement from former CEO Brian Krzanich.</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="forty-years-of-x86">Forty Years Of x86</h2><p>Compared to the 16-bit 8086, Intel's Core i7-8086K represents a quantum leap in technology. Whereas a modern CPU can spend four years in the design process, Intel brought its 8086 to market in just 18 months. Stephen Morse, then 36 years old, was the lead architect. The 8086 was originally designed to be a filler product before Intel released the 8800, but Morse designed it to be the first in a line of chips that shared a common architecture to ensure forward compatibility.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Product</strong></td><td  ><strong>Intel 8086</strong></td><td  ><strong>Core i7-8086K</strong></td><td  ><strong>Core i7-8700K</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Release Date</strong></td><td  >June 8, 1978</td><td  >June 8, 2018</td><td  >October 5, 2017</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>TDP</strong></td><td  >1W (power draw)</td><td  >95W</td><td  >95W</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cores / Threads</strong></td><td  >1 / 1</td><td  >6 / 12</td><td  >6 / 12</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Frequency Base / Boost</strong></td><td  >5 - 10 MHz (0.005 GHz)</td><td  >4.0 / 5.0 GHz</td><td  >3.7 / 4.7 GHz</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Transistors</strong></td><td  >29,000</td><td  >~3 billion</td><td  >~3 billion</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Manufacturing Process</strong></td><td  >nMOS/HMOS 3 micron (3000nm)</td><td  >CMOS 14nm++</td><td  >CMOS 14nm++</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Word Size</strong></td><td  >16-bit</td><td  >64-bit</td><td  >64-bit</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Lithography</strong></td><td  >G-Line (Mercury Arc Lamps) 436nm Wavelength</td><td  >Argon Fluoride Excismer Laser, 193nm Wavelength</td><td  >Argon Fluoride Excismer Laser, 193nm Wavelength</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Die Size</strong></td><td  >33mm2</td><td  >149mm2</td><td  >149mm2</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Minimum Feature Size</strong></td><td  >3.2 Microns (3200nm)</td><td  >8nm</td><td  >8nm</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Wafer Diameter</strong></td><td  >4 inches</td><td  >12 inches</td><td  >12 inches</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Memory Support</strong></td><td  >1MB</td><td  >64GB</td><td  >64GB</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Memory Bus Speed</strong></td><td  >4.77 MHz</td><td  >2966 MHz</td><td  >2966 MHz</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Integrated Graphics</strong></td><td  >None</td><td  >UHD Graphics 630</td><td  >UHD Graphics 630</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Socket</strong></td><td  >40-pin</td><td  >LGA 1151v2</td><td  >LGA 1151v2</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Price</strong></td><td  >$86.65 (1978) $330 adjusted for inflation</td><td  >$425</td><td  >$359</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>And thus, the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86">x86 instruction set architecture</a> was born. Over the course of 40 years, Intel continually <a href="https://newsroom.intel.com/editorials/x86-approaching-40-still-going-strong/">enhanced the x86 ISA</a>, adding more than 3500 new instructions like MMX, SSE, TSX, and three flavors of AVX, among many others. Amazingly, the 64-bit Core i7-8086K is capable of running original 16-bit 8086 code. That's a testament to the x86 instruction set's 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:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.97%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FviQd7asC8WWKSuKG2FMva.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FviQd7asC8WWKSuKG2FMva.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="1132" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FviQd7asC8WWKSuKG2FMva.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The original 8086 was fabbed on a 3200nm nMOS process using mercury arc lamps. Meanwhile, 40 years later, Intel is on its third-gen 14nm CMOS process that's manufactured with argon fluoride exerciser lasers.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:406px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:93.84%;"><img id="" name="" alt="8086 Die" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7z6HBdCNjTtTKV6Ev3GpuE.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7z6HBdCNjTtTKV6Ev3GpuE.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="406" height="381" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7z6HBdCNjTtTKV6Ev3GpuE.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class="pull-"><span class="caption-text">8086 Die </span></figcaption></figure><p>Transistor measurements are no longer based strictly on feature sizes, but we can derive some basic comparative metrics. Die sizes have increased from the 8086's 33mm<sup>2</sup> to the -8086K's 149mm<sup>2</sup>, and transistor counts are up from 29,000 to ~3,000,000,000 per processor, respectively. That means the original 8086 featured 879 transistors per square millimeter, while Core i7-8086K comes with 20,134,228 transistors per square millimeter for an astounding 22,905x density increase.</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:66.89%;"><img id="" name="" alt="Coffee Lake Die" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7KmmRcvrdb62Yk3Cw69Qfe.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7KmmRcvrdb62Yk3Cw69Qfe.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="1010" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7KmmRcvrdb62Yk3Cw69Qfe.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class="pull-"><span class="caption-text">Coffee Lake Die </span></figcaption></figure><p>Interfaces have also changed as Intel added more cores, cache, new buses, expanded memory support, and on-die graphics. The original 8086 dropped into a 40-pin quasi-PGA interface, whereas the eighth-generation Core processors employ an LGA 1151v2 socket that boasts 1151 pins. If we widen the scope to Intel's 28-core enterprise behemoths, some interfaces pack a whopping 4637 pins.</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="silicon-lottery-overclocking-amp-test-setup">Silicon Lottery, Overclocking & Test Setup</h2><p>Alternately, <a href="https://siliconlottery.com/">Silicon Lottery</a> procures batches of processors and delids them to replace Intel's thermal paste with liquid metal Thermal Grizzly Condoctonaut. According to the company, this reduces operating temperatures by 15°C to 25°C, depending on the workload. The improved thermal transfer material helps facilitate more aggressive overclocks. Silicon Lottery sells the modified processors at a premium price, and with a one-year warranty (rather than Intel's standard three-year coverage).</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  colspan="4"><strong>Core i7-8700K - December 2017</strong></td><td  colspan="4"><strong>Core i7-8700K - June 2018</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Clock</strong></td><td  ><strong>Vcore</strong></td><td  ><strong>AVX2</strong></td><td  ><strong>Percentile</strong></td><td  ><strong>Clock</strong></td><td  ><strong>Vcore</strong></td><td  ><strong>AVX2</strong></td><td  ><strong>Percentile</strong></td></tr><tr><td  >4.9 GHz</td><td  >1.387</td><td  >-2</td><td  >Top 99%</td><td  >4.9 GHz</td><td  >1.385</td><td  >-2</td><td  >Top 99%</td></tr><tr><td  >5.0 GHz</td><td  >1.4</td><td  >-2</td><td  >Top 72%</td><td  >5.0 GHz</td><td  >1.4</td><td  >-2</td><td  >Top 86%</td></tr><tr><td  >5.1 GHz</td><td  >1.412</td><td  >-2</td><td  >Top 43%</td><td  >5.1 GHz</td><td  >1.41</td><td  >-2</td><td  >Top 50%</td></tr><tr><td  >5.2 GHz</td><td  >1.425</td><td  >-2</td><td  >Top 16%</td><td  >5.2 GHz</td><td  >1.425</td><td  >-2</td><td  >Top 17%</td></tr><tr><td  >5.3 GHz</td><td  >1.437</td><td  >-2</td><td  >Top 3%</td><td  >5.3 GHz</td><td  >-</td><td  >-</td><td  >-</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Silicon Lottery compiles statistics about the samples it modifies and shares them publicly, giving us a reasonable gauge of what's coming out of Intel's foundries. Some enthusiasts speculate that reserving the highest-quality silicon for Core i7-8086K would hurt the chances of scoring a higher-clocking -8700K. But as we can see, the percentage of -8700Ks able to hit anywhere from 5 to 5.2 GHz actually increased during the period of time we would have expected Intel to set aside top-binned dies for its -8086K. Then again, it looks like samples able to hit 5.3 GHz disappeared entirely, possibly representing those precious -8086K-capable dies.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  colspan="4"><strong>Core i7-8086K - June 2018</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Clock</strong></td><td  ><strong>Vcore</strong></td><td  ><strong>AVX2</strong></td><td  ><strong>Percentile</strong></td></tr><tr><td  >5.0 GHz</td><td  >1.4</td><td  >-2</td><td  >Top 100%</td></tr><tr><td  >5.1 GHz</td><td  >1.41</td><td  >-2</td><td  >Top 92%</td></tr><tr><td  >5.2 GHz</td><td  >1.425</td><td  >-2</td><td  >Top 60%</td></tr><tr><td  >5.3 GHz</td><td  >1.435</td><td  >-2</td><td  >Top 14%</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Silicon Lottery also shares statistics on the Core i7-8086K, and its probability of receiving top silicon is markedly better than what we see from the latest round of Core i7-8700K data. Nearly all of the company's -8086Ks reach 5 GHz, and the top 14% are capable of reaching 5.3 GHz.</p><p>Our own Core i7-8086K achieved 5.1 GHz with a 1.35V Vcore and default load line calibration settings. In addition, we adjusted our AVX offset by -1 and saw a peak temperature of 86°C during AVX-heavy workloads using Corsair's beefy H115i closed-loop cooler. Although we successfully dialed in DDR4-3466 rates with 14-14-14-24 timings, we feel we could have pushed even higher with more time for tuning.</p><p>Instead of splurging on a Core i7-8086K, you could always purchase a modified Core i7-8700K from Silicon Lottery capable of hitting the same 5.1 GHz that we achieved. Unfortunately, <a href="https://siliconlottery.com/collections/coffeelake">those models sell for $479</a>, making the -8086K's $425 price tag attractive in comparison. If you're chasing the highest overclock possible, the company does sell a Core i7-8086K capable of 5.3 GHz for $849. As with all Silicon Lottery chips, however, you lose two years of warranty coverage in the exchange. </p><h2 id="comparison-products-3">Comparison Products </h2>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="a5d63b34-468d-4f2d-8d1a-3e5f8bf6d6fe">            <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i7-8700-Desktop-Processor-BX80684i78700/dp/B07598HLB4?ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Core i7-8700" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:113.36%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2MbHEgWse822su7gxLadzY.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Intel Core i7-8700 (8th Gen)</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="e3441ee6-54f3-4972-82f2-9ea74550af5a">            <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="c45931a0-40e6-460f-a785-2a8ec6b9ec31">            <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" 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:116.01%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HQW27ndzgmBQPigVEZcckG.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</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><h2 id="test-systems">Test Systems</h2><p>Like many other vendors, 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. For the Core i7-8086K, you're looking at 5 GHz across all six cores.</p><p>This setting modifies the CPU's clock rate and voltage to deliver higher performance, which is basically factory-sanctioned overclocking. Again, MSI enables it by default in the BIOS, similar to most of the competition. But performance, power consumption, and heat are all affected when it's on. We manually disable the feature for our stock CPU testing to best reflect Intel's specifications.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  colspan="2"><strong>Test System & Configuration</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Hardware</strong></td><td  ><strong><strong>AMD Socket AM4 (400-Series)</strong></strong>AMD Ryzen 7 2700, Ryzen 7 2700X, Ryzen 5 2600X, Ryzen 5 2600 MSI X470 Gaming M7 AC2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2933, DDR4-3466<strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z370):</strong>Intel Core i7-8086K, Core i7-8700K, Core i5-8600K, Core i5-8400, Core i7-8700MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2400, DDR4-2667, DDR4-3466<strong>All</strong> EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FE 1TB Samsung PM863 SilverStone ST1500-TI, 1500W Windows 10 Creators Update Version 1703 - All Spectre and Meltdown mitigations</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cooling</strong></td><td  >Corsair H115iIntel stock thermal solution (Core i7-8700)</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">VRMark & 3DMark </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5xaMxzvHv97sY3NhprZjBJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WxtUqMiSGu2zVhDJ2vUy45.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HajByWabAxxGtftq8KvTgd.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Out of the box, Core i7-8086K effectively tied Intel's Core i7-8700K in the DX12 CPU benchmark. But its higher overclocked frequency outstripped the tuned -8700K by a decent margin. Both processors traded places in the DX11 test, though again, overclocking propelled Core i7-8086K past the -8700K.</p><p>VRMark found the -8086K and -8700K offering virtually the same performance at stock and overclocked settings. The Core i5-8600K and -8400 both beat the Core i7 models though, suggesting that this benchmark rewards configurations without simultaneous multi-threading technology exposing logical cores. </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/YgFiTWN73MPFGweP34msxS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/G2qTyQqWgtk5rJvLnCYnqN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6m9AiLK3KF6jaA3v7R8Gv8.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>At stock and overclocked settings, Core i7-8086K and the Core i7-8700K performed almost identically in <em>Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</em>.</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-amp-ai-dawn-of-war-iii-2">Civilization VI Graphics & AI, Dawn of War III</h2><h2 id="civilization-vi-ai-test-3">Civilization VI AI Test</h2><p><em>Civilization's </em><span>AI test measures performance in a turn-based strategy game and tends to favor per-core performance.</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:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.11%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ScZTMWXExEgpM6yQAxTEMo.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ScZTMWXExEgpM6yQAxTEMo.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ScZTMWXExEgpM6yQAxTEMo.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>At stock settings, the Core i7-8086K surprisingly trailed Core i7-8700K and -8700, though just barely. Overclocking provides a minuscule boost over the other tuned Intel processors.</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/y7ZmpzN9HsJbRwaUgrgwK7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bjd4Z89DbqohS5LLtZeXLf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/p6HAHP6Df4sStjTnwGHWMn.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Core i5-8600K dominated at both stock and overclocked settings, which tells us that this benchmark prefers physical cores over logical resources. The overclocked Core i7-8086K fell next in line with a lead over competing Core i7 and Ryzen 7 models. However, it trailed the -8700 by 1 FPS on average at stock settings.</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/7iyMEmV4mwmRPXixCTL34b.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RBxFxPgMDBzag4H578hTyT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/r6Hh6dbgGPGBoRawjDV6sE.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Dawn of War</em> responds well to Intel's high clock rates, so it was no surprise to find overclocked Coffee Lake-based CPUs at the top of our chart.</p><p>Although the overclocked Core i7-8086K landed in first place, it's clear that the outcome in <em>Dawn of War III</em> was limited by graphics performance up top.</p><p>A stock Core i7-8086K beat the -8700K. But the difference between them was so small that the -8086K's 300 MHz peak Turbo Boost advantage didn't seem to help much.</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-gta-v-amp-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/PPmzvwSetJ4BvqE2Y5eriY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eyyY9SLBydGnsohaf2YXVK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DNZH2ULc3oiNjcQRCfvs9U.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Tuning provided small average frame rate boosts to Intel's six-core Coffee Lake-based CPUs. Meanwhile, Core i7-8086K only offered a slight advantage versus the less expensive eighth-gen Core i7s. </p><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-3">Grand Theft Auto V</h2><p><em>Grand Theft Auto V</em><span> </span>favors Intel architectures and, more generally, multi-core designs with high clock rates.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vvKFBATDART93bGntHZfM6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v9GE5kfxsnK3vAr6HPXi28.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5DkFnXiACCven6A6Yk8pVe.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The stock and overclocked Core i7-8086K yielded a small advantage over the Core i7-8700K.</p><h2 id="hitman-3">Hitman </h2><p>Our <em>Hitman</em> benchmark was rendered almost useless by a patch that imposed a 90 FPS cap on performance. A few weeks ago, though, a subsequent update restored our <em>Hitman </em>test to its prior glory.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aFFwdp88rVaGtrMAoT6ZAS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WpLpTRL5zuFVvCF2vvAeh6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SMkCG676yxZcN5RxBPdwY5.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>With the frame cap removed, Intel's overclocked processors hit a performance ceiling that may be imposed by available graphics horsepower.</p><p>Shifting focus to the stock configurations, Intel's six-core CPUs were clearly faster than last generation's quad-core flagship.</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-amp-project-cars-2-2">Shadow Of War & Project CARS 2</h2><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/npXBMHrmKrZvijozNfC2rW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7ihkTrKazQQoXDYrwTgLY7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gSNbi425cFUpWdNv6cEgVM.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Not all games respond to increased host processing resources; some of them are wholly limited by available graphics horsepower. <em>Middle-earth: Shadow of War</em> is definitely one of those graphics-bound titles, demonstrating a 4.5 FPS average variance from the slowest sample in our pool to the fastest. As a result, it was no surprise to see Core i7-8086K and -8700K tied.</p><h2 id="project-cars-2-3">Project CARS 2</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/x2emu5MRshVmwF29gNbXW6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NMUmYuqo7FkXBFLcc6oMwh.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/E5uTa3yfpo7VrRVoo9tS3a.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Project CARS 2</em> is purportedly optimized for threading. However, our 6C/6T Core i5-8600K beat the overclocked 8C/16T Ryzen 7 2700X, so it's clear that parallelism isn't the most influential factor in defining this game's performance.</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="office-amp-productivity-2">Office & Productivity</h2><h2 id="adobe-creative-cloud-3">Adobe Creative Cloud</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fdqoxJQpFoCv5wWcUJY8PD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rirgzDKTrUi44Sc6op7msT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RQmGTyYSjh5WqotHBb7Vu9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JYsq7LqR2DBMN7iarjx7a6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RQJL4f5RbAGP3f6uuqudAK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wRUQDtqHfyRidTDdoTpTw9.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>At stock settings, Core i7-8086K offered minimal improvement over the Core i7-8700K in our overall Adobe Creative Cloud score. Even though this suite has a few parallelized workloads, the final score is heavily influenced by the lightly-threaded tasks common in most desktop applications. So, it wasn't surprising to see the Core i7-8086K's superior overclock beat the tuned -8700K by 6.5%.</p><h2 id="web-browser-3">Web Browser</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GECqG3DJQj4BGeYdZNRFn7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CJjH5QE9Bwo4QbmVmtmSFW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SD4h2HNEKEJUxqCUKhZL5n.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Krakken suite tests JavaScript performance using several workloads, including audio, imaging, and cryptography. Core i7-8086K trailed the -8700K in stock form, though overclocking changed the story.</p><p>The MotionMark benchmarks, which emphasize graphics (rather than JavaScript), are exceedingly sensitive to CPU clock rates. Yet, Intel's stock Core i7-8086K trailed the -8700K again, reinforcing our opinion that some motherboard firmware versions aren't fully optimized to exploit the 5 GHz single-core Turbo Boost bin.</p><h2 id="productivity-3">Productivity</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SKaZhJcSLhr8sPUk7ZjUkK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KD9NEWTc4yNQ4jhxtg2EMb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sKvTMpyi8kfTWLkfWBGmrG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JQvCkizAR8cmR7XdeiekzC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UeyufAM3FR6F5bYVpQmfk3.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. Other platform-level considerations affect this test as well, including the storage subsystem. Core i7-8086K exploited its clock rate advantage in stock and overclocked trim to provide snappy performance.</p><p>Our video conferencing suite measures performance in single- and multi-user applications that utilize the Windows Media Foundation for playback and encoding. It also performs facial detection to model real-world usage. Core i7-8700 beat the -8086K by a hair; however, its locked multiplier prevents it from vying for chart-topping performance. Core i7-8086K posted a lead at stock frequencies during the writing benchmark, reinforcing that win after overclocking.</p><p>The photo editing benchmark measures performance with Futuremark's binaries using the ImageMagick library. Common photo processing workloads also tend to be parallelized, so it's no surprise the tuned Ryzen 7 processors lead by a large margin. The overclocked Core i7-8086K fared best among Intel's CPUs, but there's no substitute for core/thread count in this workload. </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="rendering-encoding-amp-compression-2">Rendering, Encoding & Compression</h2><h2 id="rendering-3">Rendering</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UbQeFuhsqiSfAfjV79udiK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3kQfEEysSBjKDWyccLppgN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ozp6fGNKEmUSdEUBzK4m8B.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/e4JQh6oG2n7BWT7uaei7Zo.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YuHJtBTMcT8kFJdknwnWUU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/b6noq8w8SGnaNfahEzDFa6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QDFUzUtByY6dRqHurKMaG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ti8hFXEjE6rojZzHPnfffT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9PnRNeqXerhEAAiHSryxXV.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Threaded workloads remain an uncontested strength of AMD's Zen-based processors and their hefty core counts. But tasks that are also affected by memory performance, such as Blender, allow Core i7 to claim a lead. The multi-core Cinebench and POV-Ray tests are dominated by the Ryzen line-up.</p><p>At stock settings, Core i7-8086K lead the -8700K in our single-core POV-Ray and Cinebench benchmarks. Overclocking opened up  a much wider gap between the two CPUs.</p><h2 id="encoding-amp-compression-3">Encoding & Compression </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Sd3uPRXjUceivsmvBCG89n.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wi7MTphzYfHMF4dLfPYG5D.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZwAQKN4xQFtLNb9zoPgiGH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mMyEFGa2HaLrYt52rwk9q3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MWoEF7nFLDM2MhyKYqFvk7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jJ2fQRm83BRkRcb2SZH3Go.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cKni5D9S3b8dpnZZGbRFLe.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>LAME is a single-threaded workload that typically illustrates the advantage of higher clock rates and IPC throughput. Not surprisingly, then, Core i7-8086K's frequency advantage lead to a win.   </p><p>Our threaded compression and decompression tests work directly from system memory, removing storage throughput from the equation. Thus, we found that performance scaled according to core/thread count.</p><p>y-cruncher, a single- and multi-threaded program that computes pi using AVX instructions, kept itself isolated to one core during our single-threaded test, allowing the Core i7-8086K to flaunt its higher frequency relative to the -8700K. Conversely, the multi-threaded y-cruncher test reminded us that both processors have the same multi-core Turbo Boost frequencies.</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>Core i7-8086K's higher base and single-core Turbo Boost frequencies delivered small speed-ups throughout our test suite. But because of Windows' busy nature, those gains were somewhat unpredictable. Although the -8086K rarely stayed in its single-core Turbo Boost bin for long, the same can be said for most CPUs. Regardless, Core i7-8086K earns recognition for becoming the fastest gaming processor on the market, if only just barely.</p><p>Our charts below plot gaming performance with a geometric mean of the 99<sup>th</sup> percentile frame times (a good indicator of smoothness) converted into a frame-per-second measurement. We also have price-to-performance charts that get split up to include the CPUs-only, plus extra platform costs. For the models that don't come with a bundled cooler, we add $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/jwPkwZUnzAMEqXknk62S7Z.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7tEr9E5bJmzXXyDsd2wuDf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8zzXYz2bv4CJR59mCEgsK9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YSPwXK8bFFFwh7sFDhJ2XT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cau935DSVbdSQfvBRtprEJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/thZZuMkCFTCRAt7fPxD8B6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4S652R834fsSfdzKJBZKAR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uPZv6SFwB44UubmDxRw3TL.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>If you're only looking to use Core i7-8086K at its stock settings, the processor provides nearly the same gaming experience as the Core i7-8700K at 4.9 GHz. Its advantage is minor at 1920x1080, and it'll shrink at higher resolutions. Granted, overclocking is one of the -8086K's selling points. But the extra 200 MHz you get compared to our -8700K just doesn't justify a $75-higher price tag. And as with all K-series SKUs, you need to buy your own cooler and 300-series motherboard.</p><p>We see similar trends throughout our application tests: Core i7-8086K is strikingly similar to the -8700K, and overclocking opens a slight advantage due to our sample's increased headroom. It's only a shame that Intel didn't have the margins to also improve Core i7-8086K's multi-core Turbo Boost frequencies. Such a move would have yielded bigger gains across the board.</p><p>You could always purchase a delidded Core i7-8700K, or do the risky work yourself, to match the -8086K's overclocking potential. But if you go the Silicon Lottery route, expect to pay even more than a brand new Core i7-8086K costs and lose two years of warranty coverage.</p><p>Core i7-8086K is probably overkill for most of our readers. Both Intel and AMD have far more economical options that provide similar performance through our benchmark suite. Given the limited supply of Core i7-8086Ks, however, we don't expect them to be available for long, and competitive positioning probably isn't the top priority for this CPU's target market.</p><p>In light of the anecdotal evidence we've heard from Silicon Lottery, you can rest assured that the -8086K represents Intel's very best Coffee Lake silicon. There are those among us who always seek out the best performance possible, regardless of price. If that describes you, then Core i7-8086K is the fastest gaming chip out there. Just be aware that you're paying dearly for a bit of overclocking headroom.</p><p>Moderate gains at stock clock rates mean Core i7-8086K isn't worthwhile for most of Intel's customers. But if you're willing to pay a premium for a piece of history that just so happens to perform well, the -8086K is a cool, enthusiast-oriented option.</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 i7-8700 Review: Stock Cooler Falls Flat ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i7-8700-cpu-review,5638.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Intel's Core i7-8700 sports all of the goodness expected from its Coffee Lake architecture. However, the bundled cooler proves insufficient under taxing workloads. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">MFk5YJ6csdyi57qrLRMs43</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NDEcMPLn9dLq3UHbvGCiR9-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2018 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:30:17 +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/NDEcMPLn9dLq3UHbvGCiR9-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NDEcMPLn9dLq3UHbvGCiR9-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="the-core-i7-8700-review">The Core i7-8700 Review</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:113.36%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2MbHEgWse822su7gxLadzY.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2MbHEgWse822su7gxLadzY.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1280" height="1451" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2MbHEgWse822su7gxLadzY.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Intel's Core i7-8700 packs all of the Coffee Lake architecture's goodness into a 65W envelope, including six Hyper-Threaded cores, the benefits of 14nm++ manufacturing, and higher Turbo Boost clock rates than previous-generation CPUs. Although it's handicapped somewhat by a locked ratio multiplier, stymieing enthusiasts looking for a 5 GHz+ overclock, Core i7-8700 does feature operating frequencies that come close to the flagship -8700K. As a result, its performance is often similar in real-world tasks. And yet, the vanilla -8700 costs $50 less. That's a win if you weren't planning to overclock anyway.</p><p>Great benchmark results and an attractive price also put Core i7-8700 up against AMD's revamped Ryzen 7 line-up. Specifically, it's forced to contend with Ryzen 7 2700's eight cores, 16 threads, unlocked multiplier, affordable motherboard support, and capable cooler. Particularly on that last point, Intel's solution is severely deficient.</p><p>You see, Intel's thermal design power specification applies to the CPU's base frequency. But its processors exceed that rating when they jump to higher Turbo Boost bins. We found that the Core i7-8700 can overwhelm Intel's bundled heat sink and fan during certain heavily-threaded workloads, negatively affecting performance. You'll have to purchase a better thermal solution for any chance at realizing Core i7-8700's highest Turbo Boost frequencies. Naturally, the CPU loses some of its luster as a result.</p><h2 id="intel-core-i7-8700">Intel Core i7-8700</h2><p>Core i7-8700 may be destined to live <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-cpu,5252.html">in the -8700K's shadow</a>. But again, it does feature the same complement of six cores, 12MB of L3 cache, and DDR4-2666-capable memory controller. Like all of Intel's Core i7, i5, and i3 models, the i7-8700 comes with an integrated UHD Graphics 630 engine that gives Intel a leg up over competing Ryzen 7 and 5 processors without any on-die graphics.</p><p>Unfortunately, due to Coffee Lake's lack of backward compatibility, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-cpu,5252-2.html">you do need a 300-series motherboard</a> if you're upgrading from an older platform.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ></td><td  ><strong>IntelCore i7-8700K</strong></td><td  ><strong>IntelCore i7-8700</strong></td><td  ><strong>AMD Ryzen 7 2700X</strong></td><td  ><strong>AMD Ryzen 7 2700</strong></td><td  ><strong>AMD Ryzen 5 2600X</strong></td><td  ><strong>Intel Core i5-8600K</strong></td><td  ><strong>AMD Ryzen 5 2600</strong></td><td  ><strong>Intel Core i5-8400</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>MSRP</strong></td><td  >$359</td><td  >$303</td><td  >$329</td><td  >$299</td><td  >$229</td><td  >$257</td><td  >$199</td><td  >$182</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Process</strong></td><td  >14nm++</td><td  >14nm++</td><td  >GloFo 12nm LP</td><td  >GloFo 12nm LP</td><td  >GloFo 12nm LP</td><td  >14nm++</td><td  >GloFo 12nm LP</td><td  >14nm++</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cores/Threads</strong></td><td  >6/12</td><td  >6/12</td><td  >8/16</td><td  >8/16</td><td  >6/12</td><td  >6/6</td><td  >6/12</td><td  >6/6</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>TDP</strong></td><td  >95W</td><td  >65W</td><td  >105W</td><td  >65W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >65W</td><td  >65W</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Base Freq. (GHz)</strong></td><td  >3.7</td><td  >3.2</td><td  >3.7</td><td  >3.2</td><td  >3.6</td><td  >3.6</td><td  >3.4</td><td  >2.8</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Precision Boost Freq. (GHz)</strong></td><td  >4.7</td><td  >4.6</td><td  >4.3</td><td  >4.1</td><td  >4.2</td><td  >4.3</td><td  >3.9</td><td  >4.0</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cache (L3)</strong></td><td  >12MB</td><td  >12MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >9MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >9MB</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Unlocked Multiplier</strong></td><td  >Yes</td><td  >No</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >No</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Integrated Graphics</strong></td><td  >UHD Graphics 630 (1200 MHz)</td><td  >UHD Graphics 630 (1200 MHz)</td><td  >No</td><td  >No</td><td  >No</td><td  >UHD Graphics 630 (1150 MHz)</td><td  >No</td><td  >UHD Graphics 630 (1150 MHz)</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cooler</strong></td><td  >No</td><td  >Intel Stock</td><td  >105W Wraith Prism (LED)</td><td  >95W Wraith Spire (LED)</td><td  >95W Wraith Spire</td><td  >No</td><td  >65W Wraith Stealth</td><td  >Intel Stock</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Intel is infamous for aggressively segmenting its portfolio, meaning it trims frequencies, only makes overclocking available on premium models, turns Hyper-Threading on and off, and disables cores to create lower-priced models. Of course, the company did this with its seventh-gen Core CPUs, too. The Core i7-7700 was multiplier-locked, while the -7700K catered to enthusiasts. But Intel capped the -7700's top Turbo Boost bin at a mere 4.2 GHz. Core i7-8700 isn't as constrained. Its four-core ceiling is 4.4 GHz, while six active cores reach up to 4.3 GHz, just like Core i7-8700K. In most workloads, the 500 MHz base frequency difference between Core i7-8700 and -8700K quickly disappears as Turbo Boost kicks in.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Frequencies</strong></td><td  ><strong>Base</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  >3.7 GHz</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 i7-8700</strong></td><td  >3.2 GHz</td><td  >4.6 GHz</td><td  >4.5 GHz</td><td  >4.4 GHz</td><td  >4.3 GHz</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Intel Core i7-7700K </strong></td><td  >4.2 GHz</td><td  >4.5 GHz</td><td  >4.4 GHz</td><td  >4.4 GHz</td><td  >-</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Intel Core i7-7700</strong></td><td  >3.6 GHz</td><td  >4.2 GHz</td><td  >4.1 GHz</td><td  >4.0 GHz</td><td  >-</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="the-stock-cooler-dilemma-amp-test-setup">The Stock Cooler Dilemma & Test Setup</h2><h2 id="the-stock-cooler-dilemma">The Stock Cooler Dilemma</h2><p>Intel ships its multiplier-locked CPUs with basic thermal solutions. Although they are notoriously flimsy and usually pretty noisy, they've proven sufficient for cooling previous-generation models. That changes with Core i7-8700.</p><p>In the not-too-distant past, Intel's stock heat sink employed a copper core. More recently, however, the company switched to all-aluminum designs. That means Core i7-8700 comes with the same cooler as quad-core Kaby Lake-based Core i5s.</p><p>Frankly, we're surprised that Intel carried over the same heat sinks from those seventh-generation Core CPUs. Despite the -8700's 65W TDP, it's still based on a notably more complex 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:1510px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.97%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XZ7NVUwa8kQLEGCqnxfxqA.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XZ7NVUwa8kQLEGCqnxfxqA.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="1132" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XZ7NVUwa8kQLEGCqnxfxqA.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>On paper, the -8700's 65W TDP fits nicely within the low-profile cooler's 73W rating. But remember that Intel specs the CPU's thermal design power according to its base frequency. Its chips actually exceed the TDP when they dynamically increase voltage and frequency through their Turbo Boost algorithms. As noted on <a href="https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/turbo-boost/turbo-boost-technology.html">Intel's Turbo Boost 2.0</a> informational page:</p><p>Note: Intel Turbo Boost Technology 2.0 allows the processor to operate at a power level that is higher than its TDP configuration and data sheet specified power for short durations to maximize performance.</p><p>According to our measurements, Core i7-8700 peaks at up to 126W during taxing all-core workloads. With that data in-hand, the stock cooler does appear insufficient. </p><p>While Intel guarantees base frequencies during normal operation, the company doesn't make promises about Turbo Boost clock rates because its processors only shift to higher P-states (pre-defined frequencies and voltages) when they're running below certain temperature, voltage, power, and current limits. Above them, the opportunistic algorithms are reigned in to keep the CPU in-spec.</p><p>As a general rule, Turbo Boost targets lower frequency bins as more cores become active. Intel does still advertise its maximum single-core clock rates, but it no longer divulges the multi-core clock rates (even though you can expose them through the company's XTU software).</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Frequencies</strong></td><td  ><strong>Base</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  >3.7 GHz</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 i7-8700</strong></td><td  >3.2 GHz</td><td  >4.6 GHz</td><td  >4.5 GHz</td><td  >4.4 GHz</td><td  >4.3 GHz</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>We've seen lots of speculation that Intel stopped disclosing multi-core Turbo Boost frequencies with Coffee Lake-based processors because its stock heat sink and fan couldn't fully facilitate those clock rates. Sure enough, a quick online search reveals several reports from owners claiming that their Core i7-8700s hit the maximum safe temperature of 100<strong>°</strong>C (TJ Max) during extended workloads. Once the processor reaches TJ Max, it throttles back voltage and frequency (along with power and heat) as a protection mechanism. Of course, throttling also results in lower performance.</p><h2 id="measuring-the-impact">Measuring The Impact</h2><p>To investigate the claims, we observed a Core i7-8700 and its stock cooler during our x265 HandBrake benchmark. This real-world application is optimized to utilize all available cores. Moreover, it employs AVX instructions, which tend to increase power consumption considerably. We opened AIDA's system stability test window to monitor our -8700 during the workload.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qarQKyPomUTg6836YDEBQh.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/h9V9io7hjyR8rg2WJoCi3D.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>As you can see in the second slide, Intel's cooler was quickly overwhelmed, causing the processor to repeatedly bounce off of its 100<strong>°</strong>C temperature limit and throttle performance to protect itself (charted in red in the lower window). </p><p>With the bundled fan manually set to 100% duty cycle, we logged frequency throughout our test run (first album image). Even with the thermal solution working as hard as possible, the -8700 regularly throttled back from its 4.3 GHz all-core bin into lower ranges.</p><p>We also monitored VRM temperature during the test to ensure our motherboard's power delivery subsystem wasn't responsible for the throttling. Those measurements landed within the range we expected.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uaAGfHGLw8LmgZCU96pr3h.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SU6xH8AVCgJvkL9xwZsJgn.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Next, we ran the same test using a beefy Corsair Hydro Series H115i "Extreme Performance" all-in-one liquid-cooler. Manually cranking the two 140mm fans and pump up to 100% helped ensure that thermal output had no impact on our test results.</p><p>The difference is night and day. Intel's Core i7-8700 never exceeded 67<strong>°</strong>C, and the processor's frequency remained at a pleasingly-constant 4.3 GHz (though we did notice a few spikes higher during brief periods of lighter utilization). AIDA's system monitor confirmed that the CPU didn't throttle. Again, we see that our motherboard's power delivery subsystem satisfied the Core i7-8700's power and current requirements.</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:74.84%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iE7DrQhCRrFxt9EpU7rpg7.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iE7DrQhCRrFxt9EpU7rpg7.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1113" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iE7DrQhCRrFxt9EpU7rpg7.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Comparing the difference between Intel's stock cooler (HS&F) and the all-in-one makes it clear that thermals clearly affect the -8700's performance. Turbo Boost is clearly designed to minimize the impact of thermal throttling: we only observe a 72-second delta over the course of our ~35-minute test.</p><p>A mere 3.4% separating those results may seem insignificant, but remember that we tested these configurations on an open test bench. A closed case would change the outcome almost assuredly. Also, we benchmarked at maximum fan settings, generating quite a bit of noise. It's far more common to use the motherboard's default fan curve, or to dial in an optimized fan profile that ramps up gradually. Unfortunately, those algorithms don't respond to control temperature fast enough to mitigate wild spikes and dips. As a result of the normal delay in fan speed adjustments, plus the less-than-ideal airflow in most PC cases, you could see larger slow-downs than what we recorded from a best-case test environment. This doesn't bode well for builders working with small form factors.</p><p>We did experiment with various thermal compounds between the stock cooler and heat spreader, but they didn't help much. Thus, we pin the negative outcome of our experimentation on Intel's paltry heat sink and fan combination.</p><p>Bear in mind that our benchmarks are run with the stock cooler and Corsair's all-in-one to highlight the difference in thermal performance. Some tests are short, while others take longer to complete. Some are single-threaded, while other are fully parallelized. Thus, the effects of heat influence each result in a unique way. As noted, we kept the fan speed at maximum and tested on an open-air bench, so our results represent a best-case scenario for Intel's stock cooler.</p><h2 id="comparison-products-4">Comparison Products </h2>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="59b4646b-b972-46e2-bb57-d9d1783c4b1e">            <a href="http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-8900246-12920453?sid=tomshardware-&url=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117824" data-model-name="Core i5-8400" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:108.91%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Mbp7fKeJrnqTAagSTBP399.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Intel Core i5-8400</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="c9731c4d-2a95-4963-8301-45bb0d40da2b">            <a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117825" 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="5c31c6c2-1253-41d1-9061-0aecff1ca373">            <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80677I77700-Processor-Frequency-Generation/dp/B01N0L41N7/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Core i7-7700" 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/BQZAGGZvsQUun8kc84LKzK.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Intel Core i7-7700</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><h2 id="test-systems-2">Test Systems</h2><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  colspan="2"><strong>Test System & Configuration</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Hardware</strong></td><td  ><strong><strong>AMD Socket AM4 (400-Series)</strong></strong>AMD Ryzen 7 2700, Ryzen 7 2700X, Ryzen 5 2600X, Ryzen 5 2600 MSI X470 Gaming M7 AC2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2933, DDR4-3466<strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z370):</strong>Intel Core i7-8700K, Core i5-8600K, Core i5-8400, Core i7-8700MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2400, DDR4-2667, DDR4-3466<strong>All</strong> EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FE 1TB Samsung PM863 SilverStone ST1500-TI, 1500W Windows 10 Creators Update Version 1703 - All Spectre and Meltdown mitigations</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cooling</strong></td><td  >Corsair H115iIntel stock thermal solution (Core i7-8700)</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-2">VRMark & 3DMark </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VEKniHxU7qtwWMPFFmmv7e.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GvBapntFe8zDm63qp4ozsa.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WgWTBs7uBmJahVeWKsSeRE.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Core i7-8700 fell right where we expected it to in VRMark: slightly below the stock Core i7-8700K.</p><p>AMD's Ryzen 7 2700X was a little faster though, as was the Core i5-8400. VRMark tends to reward high IPC throughput and frequency, but it also seems to prefer physical cores over simultaneous multi-threading technology.</p><p>Although the Core i7-8700 outstripped its K-series counterpart in the Fire Strike test, its lead isn't significant enough to call a definitive win. The heavily-threaded DX11 and DX12 benchmarks ran for an extended period of time. But frequent breaks in the sequence likely helped Core i7-8700 maintain the same level of performance under Intel's stock cooler and Corsair's Corsair H115i.</p><h2 id="ashes-of-the-singularity-escalation-4">Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CxKXw4ujKkvfbokR79QrhQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rsFac9YPvuthUTCY5RVMrV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RbtxzKSJdyQCtJzfhqvQNk.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Our three-minute <em>Ashes of the Singularity</em> benchmark scales exceedingly well with additional cores, so it was surprising to see Core i7-8700 perform similarly with both thermal solutions.</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-amp-ai-dawn-of-war-iii-3">Civilization VI Graphics & AI, Dawn of War III</h2><h2 id="civilization-vi-ai-test-4">Civilization VI AI Test</h2><p><em>Civilization's </em><span>AI test measures performance in a turn-based strategy game and tends to favor per-core performance.</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/b7A632zbJ4wuL66z9pyZxd.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/b7A632zbJ4wuL66z9pyZxd.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="833" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/b7A632zbJ4wuL66z9pyZxd.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>In our Core i7-8700K review, we pointed out that Intel's vanilla -8700 often outperformed the flagship -8700K in our gaming benchmarks. Obviously, those results were difficult to explain, given each CPU's specifications. But the issue persisted for several months (and many motherboard firmware updates). Intel and its motherboard partners have been unable to explain this phenomenon. However, we did notice that it was resolved around the time updates went out for our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-2600x,5579.html">Spectre/Meltdown patch testing</a>. We still saw a few scattered cases of Core i7-8700 beating the flagship K-series chip, but they're typically results that fall within a margin of error.</p><p>Our <em>Civilization VI</em> AI test results are a perfect example. The Core i7-8700 with Corsair's cooler slipped past the Core i7-8700K, but just barely. More important is that you can get -8700K-class performance from the locked model if you don't plan on overclocking.</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/XNveByisj6FNyrmAc39mKn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rCLstL9RfQ5WbtaCJSmhLm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iNYnVCJ4ZykiTQyYEBYpvW.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The <em>Civilization VI</em> graphics test shows Intel's Core i7-8700 beating the -8700K by a larger margin. In fact, strong performance put the -8700 on equal footing with a tuned Ryzen 7 2700X, and within striking distance of the overclocked Core i7-8700K.</p><p>Separately, we saw the Core i7-7700K about 6 FPS ahead of the -7700. This illustrates the bigger gap between Intel's previous-gen locked and K-series models, attributable to large differences in base and Turbo Boost frequencies. </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/WjmPnRMQevWexDNk9XUvDd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fqBj8Vb67waRJDMoup3pyJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CPwRChdMoGUUk8ZHuJHN3Y.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Core i7-8700 almost kept up with the stock -8700K. But tuning Intel's flagship Coffee Lake-based CPU solidified its lead.</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-gta-v-amp-hitman-2">Far Cry Primal, GTA: V & Hitman</h2><h2 id="far-cry-primal-2">Far Cry Primal</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ubmRHHaZNUZBnvKAb25TLL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SKbN9isDLmQK4mg5PDYfiX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oAyyYBDbTVPxkLoadom3QN.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Far Cry Primal </em>obviously runs well on quad-core processors, and doesn't gain much from architectures with more execution resources. Meanwhile, a big gap between the Core i7-7700K and -7700 tells us that the game is sensitive to operating frequencies, too.</p><p>Core i7-8700 and -8700K were nearly indistinguishable through this benchmark run.</p><p>AMD's Ryzen CPUs appear to fare worse than the Intel chips in <em>Far Cry Primal</em>. Average frame rates can be misleading, though. Our frame time charts reveal much more performance variability from the Core processors. Ryzen 7 2700X's nice clean line is indicative of a smoother experience.</p><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-4">Grand Theft Auto V</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/b2KUCZi4KttnovfYprbZDB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cVQTpPQWRcqRpED73mgunC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/csvxBGC8W9pKYxhszV3ejW.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The <em>Grand Theft Auto V</em> benchmark we use is one of our suite's longest in terms of run time. We record 100 seconds of the fly-by scene, first allowing the preceding sequences to run through and keep our hardware nice and toasty for consistent measurements.</p><p>Even though Intel's stock heat sink and fan finished in front of the -8700 cooled by Corsair's closed-loop H115i, the results fell within the range we anticipate between tests.</p><h2 id="hitman-4">Hitman </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qZuDPczFv9F76qmToLQ3RF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kJNJPqUbin6ujnTzrCBfae.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5vvMDezMRWyLnMMTcmaK9h.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Our <em>Hitman</em> benchmark found the Core i7-8700 and -8700K pretty much tied. Both models are ~4 FPS ahead of the nearest Ryzen 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 CPUs Content</a></strong></p><h2 id="shadow-of-war-amp-project-cars-2-3">Shadow Of War & Project CARS 2</h2><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/chQBmNBT37d94jkyNzJ5U5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WE76LptaoYW8ZKEhTMuyQj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jXhVrkrFcJaLSbWeCAnmpn.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Middle-earth</em> didn't respond any better to our six-core Coffee Lake-based samples than it did to their quad-core predecessors. Sometimes you just need more graphics horsepower.</p><h2 id="project-cars-2-4">Project CARS 2</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KynHiBhcDe2WWVyMiwCqKi.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ji3UPWRHzAEGnQ7JS9Qmpc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FYwEaQkDEZETtsXGZzkYF.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>According to its developers, <em>Project CARS 2</em><span> is well-optimized for multi-core CPUs. But a 6C/6T Core i5-8600K beat the overclocked 8C/16T Ryzen 7 2700X, so it's clear that threading isn't the most influential variable in determining this game's performance. <br/></span></p><p><span>The stock Core i7-8700K established a slight lead over the -8700 in our benchmark, although overclocking increased its advantage. More than likely, though, the top of this chart is graphics-bound.<br/></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="office-amp-productivity-3">Office & Productivity</h2><h2 id="adobe-creative-cloud-4">Adobe Creative Cloud</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/asaoJtkLgXUdvAEaNn8VyG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7pjWThdXbg23RukxVrqHqJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZQrkrjkQvV2Jmvgbeqhdsk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AEhyVNY6rrdJPWUch4eRHf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/d4TfoWh9ewcTwGEyFdFZH6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DzexvMp9dujtiPNJoEHS9Q.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Core i7-8700 with its stock heat sink lost some ground to Corsair's closed-loop liquid cooler in the Illustrator test. Otherwise, there was little to differentiate both configurations.</p><p>The stock Core i7-8700K barely beat Core i7-8700 in our aggregate score. However, overclocking the K-series chip to 4.9 GHz propelled it into a second-place finish (after Core i5-8600K, interestingly enough).</p><h2 id="web-browser-4">Web Browser</h2><p>The Meltdown and Spectre patches imposed performance penalties on Intel CPUs through our Web browser tests. However, Core processors still lead through these lightly-threaded benchmarks.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JXgSHogVds3HFGcgAaN8C9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bhXe8BNcYDtAsoKAd3bNUP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/udPMgSPdoYza8HVanmyna3.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Krakken suite tests JavaScript performance using several workloads, including audio, imaging, and cryptography. AMD's Ryzen 7 2700X slid in ahead of Core i7-8700, reminding us that second-gen Ryzen CPUs are much more competitive than their predecessors in workloads that aren't well-optimized for parallelization.</p><p>MotionMark emphasizes graphics performance, rather than JavaScript, but is also sensitive to CPU clock rates. There, Core i7-8700 turned things around and beat the Ryzen 7 2700X. We weren't expecting a stock Core i7-8700K to carve out such a large advantage over the vanilla -8700, though.</p><h2 id="productivity-4">Productivity</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nUquHz2DkcdHGVJqXtQPVj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/g3Ea4QyKZ6dmFWxBaxuqPR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oQRN3sxn8n3ZsEVHFbcFZW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/z7R6babiWLPGsnznegxGHj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iPb3thUAMEMUoKXqAonDGA.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. Core i7-8700 impressed in this benchmark by barely beating a stock -8700K. But the benefit of an unlocked K-series chip became evident in the Core i5-8600K and Core i7-8700K results at 4.9 GHz.</p><p>Our video conferencing suite measures performance in single- and multi-user applications that utilize the Windows Media Foundation for playback and encoding. It also performs facial detection to model real-world usage. This workload is parallelized, so it responds well to Ryzen's core count advantage. Nevertheless, a six-core design with Hyper-Threading allowed Core i7-8700K to muscle out the competition when we overclocked it to 4.9 GHz.</p><p>The photo editing benchmark measures performance with Futuremark's binaries using the ImageMagick library. Common photo processing workloads also tend to be parallelized, so the Ryzen processors took an uncontested lead.</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="rendering-encoding-amp-compression-3">Rendering, Encoding & Compression</h2><h2 id="rendering-4">Rendering</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/g8qUsiEoMZJK3hxzZ5dFzf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/b5NaAk5hVqEU2a9vVvPcbg.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kbdhCULwf7Zz8qyxzCSq3C.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cGPMHQBYNNrcQsJxwGn4SF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7KWYSZYqJM5ABRteqcofYY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WnRbmn3BuynrwKA6T2WiVa.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gR6zPiofWSJ2J8J7ZiuR7d.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QvrxqTsTrnNxpqmHh9H33C.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4yeMVzqwBSMWjuDFYpG4Ve.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>We expected to see more variation from Intel's stock cooler during our Cinebench multi-core test. Given its relatively short run time and our open-air bench, however, we didn't see much difference between our two configurations. Interestingly, the stock Core i7-8700K and -8700 performed almost identically.</p><p>Similar trends emerged through the other threaded rendering tasks. While Core i7-8700's stock heat sink and fan imposed slightly lower performance than the liquid cooler in certain cases, we still think the -8700 is a solid alternative to the pricier flagship if you don't plan to overclock and cooling inside your case is sufficient.</p><h2 id="encoding-amp-compression-4">Encoding & Compression </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9zUNrEaeoJ3wRokgVpELCb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qH7s4mhAJrutx8x9xvGSk7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iE7DrQhCRrFxt9EpU7rpg7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aaLmH7ce8aFfkNQMkvMCxC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Pa3Fppb85bsyVVft2xvSyD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GLoMLMAucJEkNp9daKa2SZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qmfiPbgna78P3ZFnHH6Xxb.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>LAME is a single-threaded workload that typically illustrates the advantage of higher clock rates and IPC throughput. Case in point: Core i7-7700K and -7700 were separated by a larger delta than the two Coffee Lake-based Core i7s, which we know feature similar single-core Turbo Boost bins.</p><p>Our threaded compression and decompression tests work directly from system memory, removing storage throughput from the equation. These workloads are especially intensive. Yet, we didn't record any surprising variations between the -8700 cooled by Intel's stock thermal solution and the Corsair all-in-one. Both of our HandBrake benchmarks, on the other hand, exploit AVX instruction, generate lots of heat, and illustrate a wider performance gap between the two configurations.</p><p>Surprisingly, y-cruncher, a single- and multi-threaded program that computes pi using AVX instructions, didn't expose any variation between the two coolers we tested atop Core i7-8700.</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 made some significant changes to the Coffee Lake architecture in order to keep its Core CPUs competitive with AMD's Ryzen line-up. Beyond giving the Core i7 family six Hyper-Threaded cores, Intel also narrowed the clock rate difference between premium K-series chips and the more mainstream models. Core i7-8700K does boast a 500 MHz base frequency advantage over Core i7-8700. But that gap shrinks as Turbo Boost is enabled and more cores spin up. By the time four cores are active, both chips <em>should </em>sustain 4.4 GHz.</p><p>Unfortunately, the decision to bundle Core i7-8700 with an all-aluminum heat sink means that you may not always get the chip's most aggressive Turbo Boost frequencies under taxing workloads. You'd assume that a CPU with 50% more cores would also dissipate more heat than its predecessor. And yet Intel didn't think to include a cooling solution with enough thermal headroom to realize its peak performance. This is especially perplexing given the praise AMD received for packaging its processors with beefy heat sinks.</p><p>Most of the time, though, Core i7-8700 does deliver an experience that closely mirrors the flagship -8700K at its stock settings. Check out the charts below, which plot gaming performance with average frame rates and a geometric mean of the 99<sup>th</sup> percentile frame times (a good indicator of smoothness) converted into a frame-per-second measurement. We also have price-to-performance charts that get split up to include the CPUs-only, plus extra platform costs. For the models that don't come with a bundled cooler, we add $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/qLYpXJkfcz9zweUpRSNcgG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/u5kVNoZmnEKuSjPRUcP6Yo.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nB4sdR4EyLSNvcw3MAGWnG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kgxZX4D4kMqwzsRUEGDQ4F.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CF32fQ9SKT9eEWwisRGSXN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wTUBQwMUAVTDhdD4mCPr76.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bAgVVZQymTaf8X8wjJFDwW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dbmxzEiJWC7MZC2nhjnYf7.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>For those similar performance results, expect to spend about $50 less on a Core i7-8700. If you game at higher resolutions, the differences between CPUs shrink even more. And the -8700 looks a lot like a stock -8700K through most of our other application benchmarks, too.</p><p>Intel doesn't have a great track record for building backward compatibility into its platforms, so you are on the hook for a new 300-series motherboard, regardless of what you're stepping up from. But unless specific features of the Z370 chipset catch your eye, Core i7-8700 offers the exact same performance if you drop it onto a cheaper B-series board. That should save a few extra dollars...</p><p>...which you'll want to turn around and spend on a better thermal solution than what Intel includes with its -8700. That heat sink and fan combination is obviously a poor fit, and better thermal paste won't fix the issue. By stepping up to a sufficient third-party cooler, you won't have to worry about artificially clipping the -8700's top-end Turbo Boost bins due to overheating. A six-core, Hyper-Threaded CPU rated for 65W sounds great for performance-sensitive applications in small form factors. But power consumption definitely spikes higher under load. Apparently, many low-profile coolers lack the headroom for Core i7-8700, so do your homework before replacing the stock sink in a space-constrained environment.</p><p>In the past, we recommended Ryzen 7 2700X over Intel's Core i7-8700K due to AMD's lower price point, similar gaming performance, bundled cooler, and better benchmark results in threaded applications. We expected Core i7-8700's comparable performance and pricing advantage to level the field. However, Intel's sub-standard cooling solution means we can't recommend the -8700 without a suitable replacement, adding to the CPU's overall cost.</p><p>AMD's Ryzen 7 2700 is also worth considering in this category. Its unlocked ratio multiplier and overclocking support on B-series motherboards yields a more attractive value story than what we get from Core i7-8700. Of course, if you need integrated graphics with your high-end CPU, Intel is the only game in town. And if you're looking for the best blend of price and performance for gaming specifically, the Core i5-8400 is still a favorite.  </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 Ryzen 2 vs. Intel Coffee Lake: What's the Best CPU Platform? ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-ryzen-2,5615.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ It's the age-old question that has spurred endless debate: AMD or Intel? ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">jPo9drxvkYb7Hdeguq7PF8</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QRDSMxsBxphswo5z5Wfxn3-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2018 13:30:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:52:11 +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/QRDSMxsBxphswo5z5Wfxn3-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QRDSMxsBxphswo5z5Wfxn3-1280-80.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:804px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:55.97%;"><img id="" name="" alt="Ryzen 2 vs Intel Coffee Lake" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QRDSMxsBxphswo5z5Wfxn3.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QRDSMxsBxphswo5z5Wfxn3.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="804" height="450" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QRDSMxsBxphswo5z5Wfxn3.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class="pull-"><span class="caption-text">Ryzen 2 vs Intel Coffee Lake </span></figcaption></figure><p>It's the age-old question that has spurred endless debate: AMD or Intel? Today, that rivalry has reached new heights with AMD's Ryzen 2000 Series, often referred to by users (but not AMD) as "Ryzen 2," competing against Intel's 8th Gen "Coffee Lake" for desktop dominance.</p><p>To help you decide which processor platform to get, we've put Ryzen 2 and Coffee Lake through a seven-round face-off.</p><h2 id="features">Features</h2><p>AMD and Intel fight their biggest battles in the Core i7/Ryzen 7 and Core i5/Ryzen 5 families that comprise the bulk of the PC market. As we can see, prices are generally comparable between the two companies' lineups, with Ryzen 7/Core i7 spanning from $303 to $360, while the Ryzen 5/Core i5 series span from $182 to $260.</p><p>Even after Intel's adjustments to the Coffee Lake Core i7 series, AMD holds the advantage of more cores in its Ryzen 7 product line. Intel's Core i7 models come with six cores and twelve threads, while AMD's Ryzen 7 line wields eight cores and sixteen threads.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ></td><td  ><strong>AMD Ryzen 7 2700X</strong></td><td  ><strong>Intel Core i7-8700K</strong></td><td  ><strong>AMD Ryzen 7 2700</strong></td><td  ><strong>Intel Core i7-8700</strong></td><td  ><strong>AMD Ryzen 5 2600X</strong></td><td  ><strong>Intel Core i5-8600K</strong></td><td  ><strong>AMD Ryzen 5 2600</strong></td><td  ><strong>Intel Core i5-8400</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>MSRP</strong></td><td  >$329</td><td  >$359</td><td  >$299</td><td  >$303</td><td  >$229</td><td  >$257</td><td  >$199</td><td  >$182</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cores/Threads</strong></td><td  >8/16</td><td  >6/12</td><td  >8/16</td><td  >6/12</td><td  >6/12</td><td  >6/6</td><td  >6/12</td><td  >6/6</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>TDP</strong></td><td  >105W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >65W</td><td  >65W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >65W</td><td  >65W</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Base Freq. (GHz)</strong></td><td  >3.7</td><td  >3.7</td><td  >3.2</td><td  >3.2</td><td  >3.6</td><td  >3.6</td><td  >3.4</td><td  >2.8</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Precision Boost Freq. (GHz)</strong></td><td  >4.3</td><td  >4.7</td><td  >4.1</td><td  >4.6</td><td  >4.2</td><td  >4.3</td><td  >3.9</td><td  >4.0</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cache (L3)</strong></td><td  >16MB</td><td  >12MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >12MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >9MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >9MB</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Unlocked Multiplier</strong></td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >No</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >No</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cooler</strong></td><td  >105W Wraith Prism (LED)</td><td  >No</td><td  >95W Wraith Spire (LED)</td><td  >Intel Stock</td><td  >95W Wraith Spire</td><td  >No</td><td  >65W Wraith Stealth</td><td  >Intel Stock</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>The Ryzen 5 and Core i5 series are the general-purpose workhorses of most desktop PCs, and both lineups come with six cores. Intel has segmented its product stack by disabling Hyper-Threading on its Core i5 models, meaning software can only assign a single thread to each core. Meanwhile, AMD's Ryzen 5 models come with the company's Simultaneous Multi-Threading, which allows software to schedule two threads to each core at the same time. That gives Ryzen 5 an advantage with a total of twelve threads.</p><p>But not all cores are created equal. Intel holds the per-core performance advantage with its higher frequencies and generally processes more instructions per clock (IPC). Ryzen 7 tops out at 4.3 GHz with the 2700X model, while Intel's Core i7-8700K stretches up to 4.7 GHz. Intel's per-core performance advantage equates to more performance and responsiveness in lightly-threaded applications, such as most games and general desktop PC applications.</p><p>AMD's Ryzen 2 (2000 series) offers improved performance in heavily-threaded productivity applications, like rendering, video editing, and transcoding, and it also boosts performance in game titles that can utilize the extra cores and threads. Ryzen 2 also comes with Precision Boost 2, which is similar to Intel's multi-core boost implementation that provides higher boost frequencies when applications exercise multiple cores at once. Neither company discloses the full list of turbo frequencies, so it's hard to make comparisons based on the specifications alone, but we’ll put the processors to the test shortly.</p><p><strong>Winner: </strong>Tie. AMD Ryzen 2’s has more cores and more threads. However, Intel has higher clock speeds.</p>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="0fd61f98-3d79-4f2a-8102-3958120434a4">            <a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16819113499" data-model-name="Ryzen 7 2700X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:83.03%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/c2cT8QyxBHDJ3zenoyjwN3.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 7 2700X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="63008e20-f589-414e-b413-1251afcbccb1">            <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="080dcab8-ed7f-40fb-816d-4884a49f1457">            <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-Processor-Wraith-Cooler/dp/B07B41717Z/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Ryzen 7 2700" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:85.13%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/F7QH5ABrY67xiuSF7GSJde.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 7 2700</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><h2 id="overclocking-2">Overclocking</h2><p>You'll need an unlocked ratio multiplier to overclock your processor, and AMD holds a distinct advantage with unlocked multipliers on every Ryzen 2 model. AMD also allows you to overclock your processor on any B- or X-series AM4 motherboard, which stands in contrast to Intel's segmentation practices.</p><p>Intel only allows overclocking with its K-series processors, which come at a premium, and you'll also need a pricier Z-series motherboard. AMD's flexible overclocking options have earned it plenty of praise in the enthusiast community because you can achieve nearly the same performance with the less-expensive "non-X" models as the pricier X models.</p><p>You'll pay for the privilege, but Intel does hold the uncontested lead in overclocking. Intel's processors generally land in the 4.9 to 5.0 GHz range after tuning, while AMD's Ryzen 2 often taps out at 4.2 GHz. Of course, the silicon lottery applies, so chip quality can have an impact on the maximum attainable overclocks.</p><p>Intel also holds the advantage on the memory overclocking front, too. The company's processors have a much higher memory data transfer rate potential than AMD's lineup. AMD's Zen microarchitecture profits greatly from increased memory data transfer rates, which often manifests as impressive performance scaling in games, while you don't see as much of a progressive performance increase from the Intel models.</p><p><strong>Winner: </strong>Intel. You can push Intel’s CPU and your memory far beyond AMD’s processors, which often run very close to the limits at stock settings.</p><h2 id="stock-coolers">Stock Coolers</h2><p>Intel's stock coolers certainly aren't noteworthy. These dinky coolers match the processors' TDP rating exactly, and Intel doesn't include them with the overclockable K-series models. Shelling out for an aftermarket cooler adds more cost to your build, so this is a problem you're paying for.</p><p>AMD's excellent coolers are one of the hallmarks of its Ryzen lineup. These coolers often support at least some level of overclocking, but they are also attractive. AMD's Ryzen 7 series now comes equipped with beefy LED-lit stock coolers, too.</p><p>The processors' TDP rating also serves as a general indicator of power consumption and thermal generation. Most of Intel and AMD's comparably-priced models share similar TDP ratings, though the Ryzen 7 2700X stands alone as the only 105W processor. That's higher than Intel's maximum 95W rating.</p><p><strong>Winner: </strong>AMD Ryzen 2. Intel's stock coolers are a joke, but nobody's laughing at AMD.</p>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="ec121d06-dc35-49ac-a7bb-bfa7e0f4716b">            <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-Processor-Wraith-Cooler/dp/B07B428V2L/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Ryzen 5 2600X" 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/n6SEL4AuCHxdQqWBLh4Tsk.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 5 2600X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="e5e1bef4-24e9-4ce2-84a6-d94c9ae2146d">            <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="0ac5b302-5596-42a5-880b-268c94ebebec">            <a href="http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-8900246-12920453?sid=tomshardware-&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16819113496" data-model-name="Ryzen 5 2600" 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/n6SEL4AuCHxdQqWBLh4Tsk.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 5 2600</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><h2 id="motherboards">Motherboards</h2><p>AMD and Intel's motherboards are also key considerations. As we mentioned, Intel restricts overclocking to its pricey Z-Series motherboards, while AMD allows you to overclock on its less-expensive B-series 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:711px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.96%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PJBp8A72ryG69MjTjWc5fV.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PJBp8A72ryG69MjTjWc5fV.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PJBp8A72ryG69MjTjWc5fV.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>AMD has also promised to support its AM4 motherboards (the models that support Ryzen processors) until 2020, so you can upgrade your system by simply dropping in a new processor. AMD has already released A-, B-, and X-series 300-series motherboards, and it is refreshing AM4 with newer 400-series motherboards. Compatibility is assured with both generations of Ryzen processors, though you may have to flash the BIOS on an older motherboard to support the newer processors.</p><p>In contrast, Intel refreshes its chipsets and sockets more frequently. The Coffee Lake models won't work in the previous-generation 200-series motherboards that have the same socket, so 300-series motherboards are your only option. Intel hasn't guaranteed socket support for its future processors, so it’s possible that newer chip generations will require a new motherboard, which restricts upgrade options.</p><p><strong>Winner:</strong> AMD. Intel squeezes you for every penny if you want to overclock, and its constant socket and chipset changes restricts future upgrades.</p><h2 id="gaming-performance">Gaming Performance</h2><p>When it comes to gaming, Coffee Lake beats Ryzen 2 on most titles, simply because more games are lightly-threaded and benefit from Intel's higher single-core clock speeds. AMD's processors are generally more competitive in game titles that can leverage their additional cores effectively, such as Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation, but Intel takes the lead in titles that benefit from increased frequency and instructions per clock cycle, like Grand Theft Auto V.</p><p>As you can see with our Middle-Earth: Shadow of War benchmark results, some games don't respond as well to increased host processing resources, instead responding better to more capable graphics cards.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/N3kQqi8SwQfkdsNVXuPAva.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VHzfnHfVkXf7fLUQbXKKQn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4vQizsZzJUmVDd7umHPeRG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ScMAau3xdFo8PkgxXErj8V.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rNmmkJJ3HTiVc3Xugb5HqS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fKVwJxepZXiFGAUbacEHpS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LtBUTh9Vj3aFqhhFPr4EPi.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/G9FNKCKtst8KTepiiVn7QB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TQW88EuFkpvZqeDfLEDLnm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/t8RK4sgRCvUu5qF3pGBK3G.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ruzxH5bbCffoUKDGVATbJG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZptHBoW62Cr2DEWw2cAWtC.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Our first two slides contain a geometric mean of frame rates for all of the games in our standard test suite. We split these values into average frame rates and 99th-percentile frame rates, with the latter being a good indicator of the smoothness of your gaming experience. The remainder of the slides contain the results of each test.</p><p>Intel's Core i7-8700K offers the highest average gaming performance at both stock and overclocked settings, though the Core i5-8600K does provide a slightly smoother experience with stock settings. AMD's Ryzen 2 processors don't provide as much peak performance, but they do offer near-equivalency in our tests at 1080p so you may not notice the difference. If you game with higher resolutions, these performance deltas will shrink further as the GPU becomes the bottleneck.</p><p>Intel's Core i5-8400 is the least expensive chip in our tests, but it offers a great level of performance for its price point. The Ryzen 5 2600X also stands out as a capable performer but overclocking the Ryzen 5 2600 yields nearly the same performance. We also see the same story play out with the Ryzen 7 2700X and 2700.</p><p><strong>Winner:</strong> Intel offers stronger performance in more games. However, if you're streaming, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/game-streaming-encoding-coffee-lake-ryzen,5326.html">AMD's multitasking might is better</a>.</p><h2 id="productivity-performance">Productivity Performance</h2><p>Our productivity results generally mirror the respective capabilities of Ryzen 2 (2000 series), which tends to perform better in heavily-threaded applications, and Coffee Lake processors, which tend to perform best in lightly-threaded apps.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/z6vPSaP8xTEE2NhsZhD9vP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mGqJjv6iN2SaUqJgTGm29F.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7j4PGaXPps3WwJA8cRppA9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XTbaQTwGjzPHQb3deXZCYQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/utwvwLpPm4RuWjcYHijuZP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RegSvidozSmAeAm7Bmrai5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/T9rh737cLvL8UwY6FQSC7E.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NqWus4zmnsBtawY4tztJsR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SMQBvc4Ku2px5AfkDTcm54.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tM6yTr4XRw3y7PhSct4eCk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QDAyAcy9qe9uQSYLabFhni.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aDaxbdoDFpjgakKbpWpsVC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2Za7JrfbpDYwdwFMRpkiJd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XtrWpskDDzcUmjPGbAt5QV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uCnfZuH2dnETPu4zxsvyod.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zrdLVXSeH5sqTESHyicfKL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SwGgZcPgJvoCKbGxY8ZQif.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jufPuUTL8bVhVh3v3z4cqS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KFxRVyoiTYK5MBfFgVyAR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DXANDd5pSH58iBjaHVJj2e.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YYYzYnuonCQwUy69uErwgM.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>That means Ryzen excels in decompression, compression, and rendering applications, but the chips also provide more than acceptable performance across our wide range of lightly-threaded workloads.</p><p>Intel's Coffee Lake processors also provide acceptable performance in those applications, but they excel in lightly-threaded apps. That includes applications like the Adobe Creative Cloud Suite, web browsers, single-core rendering workloads, and our LAME encoding benchmark. Intel also enjoys a performance advantage in applications that leverage powerful AVX instructions, like our x265 HandBrake test.</p><p><strong>Winner:</strong> Tie. If you are primarily browsing the web, using office apps or even playing with Adobe's creative suite, Intel is faster. However, if you use a lot of multi-threaded, non-Adobe software for rendering videos, photos and animations, AMD is a better choice.</p><h2 id="value">Value</h2><p>By almost any measure, AMD processors offer more bang for your buck. First, with two equivalent chips, the AMD processor is usually cheaper. For example, at publishing time, the high-end AMD Ryzen 7 2700X ($319) was $20 cheaper than the equivalent Intel chip, the Core i7-8700K ($339) while the mid-range Ryzen 5 2600X ($219) was about $35 less its counterpart, the Core i5-8600K ($244).</p><p>If you want to overclock with Intel, you have to spend extra for a K-series CPU, but with AMD, you can buy a mainstream chip and overclock it. And if you want to overclock your Intel CPU, you need a pricey,  Z-Series motherboard, but with AMD, you can overclock with even an inexpensive B-Series board.</p><p>But wait, there's more. The AMD chips all come with really good stock CPU coolers that you might actually want to use while Intel doesn't even give you a fan for its K-series chips and gives you a poor-quality one for the rest of its lineup.</p><p><strong>Winner: </strong>AMD Ryzen 2 by a landslide.</p><h2 id="bottom-line">Bottom Line</h2><p>Ryzen 2 wins this competition by a nose, winning five rounds to four. Of the seven rounds in our face-off, two -- features and productivity performance -- were a tie. However, the real winner here is you. As a consumer, you have a wide variety of great processor choices from two strong manufacturers.</p><p>Which CPU platform you choose should depend on two main factors: your budget and what types of software you use most. If you want the best performance for the majority of games and productivity apps, which are lightly threaded, Intel Coffee Lake is your top choice. However, if you want the best speed for the money or you use a lot of heavily-threaded apps, AMD Ryzen 2 was made for you.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Round</strong></td><td  ><strong>Intel Coffee Lake</strong></td><td  ><strong>AMD Ryzen 2</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Features</strong></td><td  >✗</td><td  >✗</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Overclocking</strong></td><td  >✗</td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Stock Coolers</strong></td><td  ></td><td  >✗</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Motherboards</strong></td><td  ></td><td  >✗</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Gaming Performance</strong></td><td  >✗</td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Productivity Performance</strong></td><td  >✗</td><td  >✗</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Value</strong></td><td  ></td><td  >✗</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Total</strong></td><td  >4</td><td  >5</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>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ AMD Ryzen 7 2700 Review: The Non-X Factor ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ryzen-7-2700-2700x-review,5606.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ AMD's Ryzen 7 2700 sports the same eight-core, 16-thread architecture as the company's more expensive Ryzen 7 2700X. But this is one of those rare situations when we think it's worth paying extra for the higher-end model ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">YU7CQ69TJtXJx2bwyn8SuM</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/H4xvXgiwehChtP9ZmQRKSD-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2018 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:30:31 +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/H4xvXgiwehChtP9ZmQRKSD-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/H4xvXgiwehChtP9ZmQRKSD-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="go-x-or-go-home">Go X Or Go Home</h2><p>AMD's Ryzen 7 2700 includes the same eight cores as its more expensive <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-review,5571.html">Ryzen 7 2700X</a> flagship, plus simultaneous multi-threading technology that allows each core to work on two software threads at the same time. But its clock rates are trimmed back to create a $30-cheaper model sporting a little less performance. Even though the 2700 loses its enthusiast-targeted X modifier, AMD still arms the chip with an unlocked ratio multiplier for flexible overclocking. And this less expensive CPU should hit nearly the same frequencies as the Ryzen 7 2700X we like so much.</p><p>Last generation, plenty of overclocking headroom and lower prices earned AMD's non-X Ryzen SKUs praise up and down the stack. Much of that was based on the company's bundled coolers, though. For example, the then-flagship Ryzen 7 1800X launched at $500 with no thermal solution at all. Meanwhile, the Ryzen 7 1700 sold for $330 with a cooler in the box. Now, AMD bundles a heat sink and fan with all of its new Ryzen chips. Moreover, it only sells 2700 at a $30 discount. Worse, although it's possible to match Ryzen 7 2700X's performance after a bit of overclocking, you need an aftermarket cooler to get there. AMD's freebie won't cut it. This time around, there's not much reason to step down a tier.</p><h2 id="ryzen-7-2700">Ryzen 7 2700 </h2><p>With its 2000-series Ryzen processors, AMD was challenged to deliver more than the incremental improvements we've been seeing from Intel lately. To begin, the company swapped out its 14nm manufacturing process with a 12nm node, enabling higher clock rates at the same power consumption levels. AMD also optimized the Zen architecture by adding more sophisticated multi-core boost algorithms and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-review,5571-3.html">lowering cache and memory latencies</a>. Together, those changes enable speed-ups in pretty much every type of workload we test with, and they're all baked in to Ryzen 7 2700.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ></td><td  ><strong>AMD Ryzen 7 2700X</strong></td><td  >AMD Ryzen 7 1800X</td><td  ><strong>AMD Ryzen 7 2700</strong></td><td  >Ryzen 7 1700</td><td  >AMD Ryzen 5 1600X</td><td  >AMD Ryzen 5 2600X</td><td  >AMD Ryzen 5 2600</td><td  >Intel Core i7-8700K</td><td  >Intel Core i5-8600K</td><td  >Intel Core i5-8400</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>MSRP</strong></td><td  >$329</td><td  >$349</td><td  >$299</td><td  >$299</td><td  >$219</td><td  >$229</td><td  >$199</td><td  >$359</td><td  >$257</td><td  >$182</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cores/Threads</strong></td><td  >8/16</td><td  >8/16</td><td  >8/16</td><td  >8/16</td><td  >6/12</td><td  >6/12</td><td  >6/12</td><td  >6/12</td><td  >6/6</td><td  >6/6</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>TDP</strong></td><td  >105W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >65W</td><td  >65W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >65W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >65W</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Base Freq. (GHz)</strong></td><td  >3.7</td><td  >3.6</td><td  >3.2</td><td  >3.0</td><td  >3.6</td><td  >3.6</td><td  >3.4</td><td  >3.7</td><td  >3.6</td><td  >2.8</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Precision Boost Freq. (GHz)</strong></td><td  >4.3</td><td  >4.1</td><td  >4.1</td><td  >3.8</td><td  >4.0</td><td  >4.2</td><td  >3.9</td><td  >4.7</td><td  >4.3</td><td  >4.0</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cache (L3)</strong></td><td  >16MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >12MB</td><td  >9MB</td><td  >9MB</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Unlocked Multiplier</strong></td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >No</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cooler</strong></td><td  >105W Wraith Prism (LED)</td><td  >-</td><td  >95W Wraith Spire (LED)</td><td  >95W Wraith Spire</td><td  >-</td><td  >95W Wraith Spire</td><td  >65W Wraith Stealth</td><td  >-</td><td  >-</td><td  >Intel</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>AMD rates its Ryzen 7 2700 at a much lower 65W thermal design power than its 105W Ryzen 7 2700X. That's partly why the 2700's base frequency is a much more conservative 3.2 GHz, while its maximum Precision Boost clock rate tops out at 4.1 GHz. You'd think, then, that the bundled 95W Wraith Spire thermal solution with LED lighting would be beefy enough for aggressive overclocking. It's not, though. If you're really after Ryzen's peak potential, purchase a more capable aftermarket heat sink/fan combination or closed-loop liquid cooler.</p><p>All 2000-series Ryzen CPUs are compatible with motherboards sporting new X470 or older 300-series chipsets. You can even overclock the new processors on value-oriented B-series platforms. While lower-cost 400-series chipsets aren't available yet, we're counting on them to offer a more affordable option for enthusiasts looking to tune 2000-series Ryzen CPUs.</p><p>The Ryzen 7 2700 supports up to DDR4-2933 memory, just like the 2700X. Just be aware that you'll only get those data rates with single-rank modules installed in a maximum of two slots. Even then, it takes a motherboard with six PCB layers to operate at 2933 MT/s stably. AMD uses Indium solder between its Ryzen 7 die and heat spreader, improving thermal transfer performance compared to Intel CPUs reliant on paste instead.</p><p>Like all 2000-series models, the Ryzen 7 2700 comes with <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-fuzedrive-fuzeram-enmotus-ryzen,36368.html">StorMI Technology</a>, which is a software-based tiering solution that blends the low price and high capacity of hard drives with the speed of an SSD, 3D XPoint, or even up to 2GB of RAM.</p><h2 id="precision-boost-2-and-xfr2">Precision Boost 2 And XFR2</h2><p>AMD's previous-gen Ryzen processors include Precision Boost functionality, which is similar to Intel's Turbo Boost technology. They also sport a feature called eXtended Frequency Range (XFR), which enables higher clock rates when it's determined that your cooling solution has thermal headroom to spare.</p><p>The new Precision Boost 2 (PB2) and XFR2 algorithms improve performance in threaded workloads by raising the frequency of any number of cores. AMD doesn't share a list of specific multi-core PB2 and XFR2 bins because the opportunistic algorithms accelerate to different clock rates based on temperature, current, and load. However, we collected our measurements on a motherboard with solid voltage regulation circuitry and a good cooler, two requirements for optimal frequencies.</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:75.03%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KfSHM4wcaYKM9VWgPk9FdS.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KfSHM4wcaYKM9VWgPk9FdS.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="989" height="742" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KfSHM4wcaYKM9VWgPk9FdS.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The Ryzen 7 2700 offers an impressive 4.1 GHz clock rate benchmarked in a single-threaded workload. Try as we might, though, the CPU wouldn't exhibit the same graceful downward frequency slope as AMD's 2700X as we increased the test's thread count. No doubt, Ryzen 7 2700 is a step up compared to the previous-gen Ryzen 7 1700, but its frequency drops further and faster than the 2700X.</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-amp-test-setup"> Overclocking & Test Setup</h2><h2 id="overclocking-3">Overclocking</h2><p>Like the Ryzen 7 2700X, we overclocked AMD's 2700 to 4.2 GHz. While the lower-end chip did need a bit more voltage to get there, our 1.4V Vcore, 1.2V SoC, and Level four Loadline Calibration (LLC) settings are still within the safe zone for AMD's processors. They just make the CPU operate a little warmer than it would otherwise. Top the 2700 with a capable closed-loop watercooler and thermals won't be an issue. If you're stuck with AMD's bundled heat sink and fan, though, expect Ryzen 7 2700 to fall short of its best possible overclock. Our sample topped out at 4.05 GHz as it exceeded 95°C.</p><p>We did match the 2700X's overclocked memory settings (DDR4-3466 at 14-14-14-34 timings) with minimal effort. That's particularly encouraging since memory tuning dramatically improves Ryzen's gaming performance.</p><h2 id="precision-boost-overdrive">Precision Boost Overdrive</h2><p>AMD isn't giving us much detail about its Precision Boost Overdrive feature, though we know it increases maximum boost voltage and boost duration. However, we also know that Precision Boost Overdrive is an AMD-sanctioned feature. Because this is a standard capability for Ryzen 2000-series processors, we leave it enabled. Conversely, we disable the Multi-Core Enhancement BIOS option found in many Intel-based motherboards because it overclocks beyond the company's specifications.</p><h2 id="msi-x470-gaming-m7-ac">MSI X470 Gaming M7 AC</h2><p><span class="notranslate">Our MSI X470 Gaming M7 AC has a PCI Express 3.0 slot with a x16 link, a slot with a x8 connection, and another PCI Express 2.0 slot with a four-lane link for graphics cards. Its </span><span class="notranslate">four RAM slots support DDR4-2933 and scale quite a bit higher through overclocking.</span></p><p><span class="notranslate">The motherboard also provides two M.2 slots with PCIe connectivity.</span><span class="notranslate"> The I/O panel has a USB 3.1 Type C connector.</span><span class="notranslate"> The </span><span class="notranslate">USB 3.1 and USB 3.1 Gen 2 ports support fast charging for smartphones and tablets.</span><span class="notranslate"> If RGB is your thing, MSI has you covered. T</span><span class="notranslate">he integrated RGB Mystic lighting allows customizable effects with several software-controlled zones.</span><span class="notranslate"><br/></span></p><h2 id="comparison-products-5">Comparison Products </h2>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="0a8c3551-37ba-4b18-bb4f-2232d3d107bb">            <a href="http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-8900246-12920453?sid=tomshardware-&url=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117824" data-model-name="Core i5-8400" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:108.91%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Mbp7fKeJrnqTAagSTBP399.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Intel Core i5-8400</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="1099908a-53a6-42cd-a705-522be99da110">            <a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117825" 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="5552584e-ab34-4e75-944a-627b0405ea86">            <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><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  colspan="2"><strong>Test System & Configuration</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Hardware</strong></td><td  ><strong><strong>AMD Socket AM4 (400-Series)</strong></strong>AMD Ryzen 7 2700, Ryzen 7 2700X, Ryzen 5 2600XMSI X470 Gaming M7 AC2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2933, DDR4-3466<strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z370):</strong>Intel Core i7-8700K, i5-8600K, Core i5-8400MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2400, DDR4-2667, DDR4-3466<strong>AMD Socket AM4 (300-Series)</strong>AMD Ryzen 7 1800X, 1700, Ryzen 5 1600XMSI X370 Xpower Gaming Titanium2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2667, DDR4-3200<strong>All</strong> EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FE 1TB Samsung PM863 SilverStone ST1500-TI, 1500W Windows 10 Creators Update Version 1703 - All Spectre and Meltdown mitigations</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cooling</strong></td><td  ><strong>U.S.</strong>Corsair 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="vrmark-3dmark-amp-aots-escalation-4">VRMark, 3DMark & AotS: Escalation</h2><h2 id="vrmark-amp-3dmark-3">VRMark & 3DMark </h2><p>While synthetic benchmarks scale well with increased host computing resources, those gains don't always translate to real-world gaming performance. Rather, these benchmarks give us a solid measure of theoretical horsepower available to game engines.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NwhqtgZHjgBEF2iTSt8vjS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5FgDXwiWVorUL2YKHR5uw9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VBnJj76wG5ZeWgNHCywzGS.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>All of our test processors easily passed the 109 FPS threshold that UL sets as the minimum for a smooth virtual reality experience.</p><p>The stock Ryzen 7 2700 nearly matched AMD's previous-gen 1800X. However, it also trailed the 2700X by a significant margin. A bit of tuning goes a long way though, and the overclocked 2700 came close to tying our overclocked Ryzen 7 2700X. Also interesting, the stock Ryzen 5 2600X beat Ryzen 7 2700 out of the box. </p><h2 id="ashes-of-the-singularity-escalation-5">Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RkEi8bzu3Qyg3pu5MvMQXX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gfs3D6HDEgkhCHB5SGU7bj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5Jqcz9SAxJwufjKSNrnHQg.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The 2700's stock performance was impressive, highlighting the advantage of lower memory latency and enhanced multi-core turbo algorithms. Overclocked, Ryzen 7 2700 exceeded the performance of a stock 2700X.</p><p><em>Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</em> scales well with additional threads, so six-core models without Intel's Hyper-Threading Technology like the Core i5-8400 and -8600K languish at the bottom of our chart. Overclocking propelled the Core i5-8600K into contention with a tuned 6C/12T Ryzen 5 2600X. </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-amp-ai-dawn-of-war-iii-4">Civilization VI Graphics & AI, Dawn of War III</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/6MyvAFxuFjB3UriKgRXZEj.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6MyvAFxuFjB3UriKgRXZEj.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="834" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6MyvAFxuFjB3UriKgRXZEj.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p><em>Civilization's </em><span>AI test measures performance in a turn-based strategy game and tends to favor per-core performance. Therefore, its comes as no surprise that a stock Ryzen 7 2700 delivered the turn time we expected, given fairly conservative clock rates. <br/></span></p><p><span>An unlocked ratio multiplier is a mighty equalizer, though. After overclocking, the 2700 outpaced Ryzen 7 2700X operating at its default clock rates and nearly matched the Core i7-8700K. Of course, tuning the Intel processors widened their lead considerably. <br/></span></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/njwbeYixwEsc3hWkXByZeS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TnDG5KGHvp2dLc7NZmg77Q.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6HCw8ZhXhUMxRjetJpoL9B.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Ryzen 7 2700 beat the Ryzen 7 1800X in stock trim, though tuning improved its outcome significantly.</p><p>Clearly, Intel's Core i5-8400 is a formidable competitor. It achieved almost the same performance as an overclocked Ryzen 7 2700. Too bad, then, that Intel locks the chip's multiplier, preventing enthusiasts from making it any faster. Stepping up to an overclockable Core i5-8600K yielded a big performance boost, though that also compels you to spend big on a Z-series motherboard and aftermarket cooler.</p><p>A tuned Ryzen 7 2700 trailed the 2700X at a similar 4.2 GHz, if only slightly. </p><h2 id="warhammer-40-000-dawn-of-war-iii-5">Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War III</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dbSg4SHAPv2TsHqoZGRNBA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/74VLc6D6Pm5otoibR3d3dF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Lbys6tgnuLQqx9znjGRe4J.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War III</em> responds best to the high clock rates of Intel's tuned CPUs. This time around, however, an overclocked Ryzen 7 2700 nearly matched the stock Core i7-8700K.</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-gta-v-amp-hitman-3">Far Cry Primal, GTA: 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/Xt4biXQT7uhu7xEvrHxFAP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YKbv9Tkr753YpyohpTDYqN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NwHkHMTbfdybN7mgcjNfhc.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Our F<em>ar Cry Primal</em> benchmark used to swing entirely in Intel's favor. But AMD's 2000-series Ryzen processors are much more competitive than their predecessors. Again, a stock Ryzen 7 2700 easily outpaced AMD's Ryzen 7 1800X and 1700. And this time around, a bit of overclocking even pushed the 2700 beyond AMD's flagship at 4.2 GHz.</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/vGw6A37K2Y9CwThZfgNxVf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tWbhGB2uzCuoZgfL8xwLW7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GpFKqHAuHTiDYjhJNE5vsP.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Grand Theft Auto V</em><span> </span>favors Intel architectures and, more generally, multi-core designs with high clock rates. The tuned Ryzen processors, which effectively tied each other, go a long way to improve AMD's competitive position.</p><h2 id="hitman-5">Hitman </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/85x32P6bjQWTmnk6saLtNm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FmfcPM7m82dRpg88TDnxp9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Dz9MQ5C3sVAqXLJptBeokm.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Hitman</em>'s Game of the Year update imposed a 90 FPS cap, so this title no longer scales well with high-end PCs. Unfortunately, some popular AAA titles employ similar frame rate limits, so we leave this result in our suite to show that not all titles respond to faster components.</p><p>Overall, the results are unsurprising given IO Interactive's newly-imposed performance ceiling. However, the Core i5's results stand out for their low 99th percentile frame rates.</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-amp-project-cars-2-4">Shadow Of War & Project CARS 2</h2><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/NSh5x9L9RqkJQY3dqQbfda.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Zady9ZZXzA2uwMdfPXdfB6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Uck6zsiQUC9R6HHsnNq6ii.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Middle-earth: Shadow of War</em><span> </span>doesn't scale as well as some of our other benchmarks, and it certainly isn't as sensitive to IPC throughput and clock rate as <em>Shadow of Mordor</em><span>. <br/></span></p><p><span>All of the processors we benchmarked offered a similar gaming experience, though the Ryzen 7 1700 obviously lagged the group due to its lower frequency and lack of multi-core turbo. <br/></span></p><h2 id="project-cars-2-5">Project CARS 2</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SBmpD88msw7F9ZnoHz5UGo.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3sSmxAohrKfgzQ2cUFdus3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yYB4xRYunfyVpdJvUTcFuL.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>While the tuned Ryzen 7 2700 effectively tied Core i7-8700K, Intel's Core i5-8400 remained a formidable challenger. Overclocking helped the Core CPUs to some extent, though as we saw from Intel's Core i5-8600K, these numbers are indicative of a graphics 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="office-amp-productivity-4">Office & Productivity</h2><h2 id="adobe-creative-cloud-5">Adobe Creative Cloud</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZFnbhZafXnTFiebEMBZQNF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nxRbJ3yLBQDx7vcL2wrYrf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Tgk79UocashD6BXX25mCaN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Mr5osmXZjWQmtGcJgxo7yH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/txfUAS4ZjSTnz6cSAxPPKg.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/t682Nfw4Q4L7ACXBg4tuPo.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Ryzen 7 2700 lagged behind AMD's 2700X flagship at stock settings in our Creative Cloud suite, particularly during the benchmark's lightly-threaded tests. Overclocking helped achieve near-parity, though.</p><p>Intel's processors benefited from increased overclocking headroom and the ability to get more done per clock cycle, easily outpacing the rest of our CPUs.</p><h2 id="web-browser-5">Web Browser</h2><p>The Krakken suite tests JavaScript performance using several workloads, including audio, imaging, and cryptography.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eqQjSHXA7GC6sqwWgW86TT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7eYFYkNC57qBDskZURbkea.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PE4GmtBafEg7rFAnJLgqPR.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>AMD's processors typically lag Intel's in Web browser benchmarks due to their lower per-core performance. So it comes as little surprise that a stock Ryzen 7 2700 suffered in these metrics due to its low frequency range. Of course, overclocking helped rectify this.</p><h2 id="productivity-5">Productivity</h2><p>The application start-up metric measures load time snappiness in word processors, GIMP, and Web browsers under warm- and cold-start conditions. Other platform-level considerations affect this test as well, including the storage subsystem.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/q3gpm7JRv3xTHJNbkHXPJE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WM5FNciKf8LqBFdnxzb2kC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XL8Rm3QjqnWQP2a5rGoHzM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AqCLairno7pnMHr9EYAVjH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SzHgwpPnEHJWDwsBTzRp5R.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>AMD's Ryzen 7 2700 performed admirably right out of the box. While overclocking yielded a big boost, the 2700 still fell behind the pricier Ryzen 7 2700X.</p><p>Our video conferencing suite measures performance in single- and multi-user applications that utilize the Windows Media Foundation for playback and encoding. It also performs facial detection to model real-world usage. This workload benefits from parallelism, so the 8C/16T Ryzen models naturally enjoyed the largest advantage from their architecture. Although an overclocked Ryzen 7 2700 slipped past AMD's 2700X, its lead fell within the margin of error. </p><p>The photo editing benchmark measures performance with Futuremark's binaries using the ImageMagick library. Common photo processing workloads also tend to be parallelized, so Ryzen 7 2700X took an expected lead.</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="rendering-encoding-amp-compression-4">Rendering, Encoding & Compression</h2><h2 id="rendering-5">Rendering </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cETUpTcvAHGbtbrYViuCz9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/urCJLtBsGVfxiVzNCaxXEZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/72bqjGMvQYhu8yF8j5LbdK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KN2Ye4nUVX3gdhfwYnbQLH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TGvmFaxoyPrr9MA8azaLtJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/w2kxf6Yy26JqFSDpnMFLDZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/L3BZf2YvHcwLUiaAimLHt8.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BG2UcGvg2e4dx5JTrZ2nrL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Axybz3BMtqSfbgfzG44Vj8.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Ryzen 7 CPUs find plenty of fans among the rendering crowd. AMD's Ryzen 7 2700 represents a solid step beyond the company's 1000-series processors in our multi-threaded tests. In fact, it often provided a similar performance level as the previous-generation 1800X flagship in our tests.</p><p>The Intel processors demonstrated their per-core advantage in our lightly threaded tests. Meanwhile, a stock Ryzen 7 2700X proved faster than the same chip overclocked in many of the same benchmarks, since its 4.3 GHz dual-core boost frequency is higher than our 4.2 GHz all-core overclock.</p><h2 id="encoding-amp-compression-5">Encoding & Compression </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mszLo4E6UzeCLcPU3GUhJP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WGdR8n69zQpdXQg7vpueoU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DRuBvuCYSGNpTjNHjV9WXV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uY9FfYWMUq4fykY5ygQ5MY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UN3tpLd29Zp5ZNcEJhFccj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/B2Qjrn9KtZsv25n8dx9dC8.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PsYsuzprxC2CNUDxhCUkuH.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>LAME is a quintessential single-threaded workload that typically illustrates Intel's per-clock advantage. This time around, though, AMD's Ryzen 7 2700X and Ryzen 5 2600X landed on top of the mighty Core i7-8700K in stock form.</p><p>Our threaded compression and decompression tests work directly from system memory, removing our SSDs from the equation. The Ryzen 7 2700 put its eight cores to good use, beating most of its competition.</p><p>There's a larger delta between Intel and AMD processors in our HandBrake x265 test compared to the x264 benchmark, given the former's heavier reliance on AVX instructions. AMD looks much better in both metrics than it used to, though. The improved multi-core Precision Boost 2 frequencies help level the playing field.  </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>AMD's Ryzen 7 2700 boasts many of the same features as the flagship 2700X, including an eight-core architecture and 16MB of L3 cache. But it loses quite a bit of steam in our benchmarks due to its lower clock rates. Overclockers can get comparable performance out of both CPUs, but they need to replace the stock heat sink and fan with higher-end aftermarket cooling first. This sullies any value advantage the 2700 might have enjoyed.</p><p>How does a frequency disadvantage affect the 2700's viability in a gaming PC versus AMD's Ryzen 7 2700X? The charts below plot 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 then convert into a FPS measurement. We also present price-to-performance charts that get split up to include CPUs-only 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/35z8g4hYoc68Rq8HjT6Fb7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UpHZ9QjgEp4mdwqUak323B.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BPasEVDY6n89mUsNtnf3HT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zpD5VKVucbtTm2EitPVCu5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zBuz6ohsAJ6CZLQWEqtJVU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LtRbsB8a3M6n5wMyFunRJH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5N6xXhNPb7HechJzJFXLoP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wn5TQgVdnjdbsHhzJ3iqsP.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>When it comes to gaming, an overclocked Ryzen 7 2700 provided a statistically insignificant ~1 FPS advantage over the 2700X in 99th percentile frame rates. In essence, both tuned processors offer a very similar experience through our suite. It's unfortunate, then, that you need to buy an aftermarket cooler in order to overclock Ryzen 7 2700 to its potential. So much for the $30 savings versus Ryzen 7 2700X.</p><p>That means you get more value from AMD's flagship than the stepped-down Ryzen 7 2700. In fact, at stock settings, even a Core i5-8400 is roughly equivalent to the 2700. And it costs $110 less. And you can drop it into affordable motherboards. Intel's stock cooler is fine, too. You get the picture.</p><p>Similar trends surfaced in our desktop productivity tests. Ryzen 7 2700's frequency deficit resulted in notably less performance than a stock Ryzen 7 2700X across the board. Although Ryzen 7 2700 <em>is </em>faster than Intel's Core i5-8400 and -8600K in threaded workloads thanks to its eight-core design, AMD's own Ryzen 7 2700X is more compelling if you're interested in those types of applications.</p><p>If you tune the memory, the Ryzen 7 2700X doesn't gain much from overclocking the cores. That means you can pair the 2700X and its stock cooler with a capable memory kit and get impressive performance. In contrast, you'll have to invest in a more capable cooler to achieve the same level of performance with the Ryzen 7 2700. That largely negates the 2700's scant $30 price advantage.</p><p>Gone are the days of AMD selling its X-series Ryzen CPUs at higher prices and without thermal solutions. Newer models like the Ryzen 7 2700X only cost a bit more than the 2700, plus they also include a heat sink and fan. We'd rather spend the extra $30. Of course, gamers might want to go another direction. Intel's Core i5-8400 costs less and is every bit as quick in our favorite titles. And then there's the Ryzen 5 2600X, which is surprisingly fast across a broader range of workloads and much more affordable.</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 Ryzen 5 2600X Review: Spectre Patches Weigh In ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-2600x,5579.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ AMD's Ryzen 5 2600X comes with all of the goodness of AMD's new Zen+ architecture, let's see how it stacks up against Intel's finest. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">gZWKPwGXvsXSjEHppMzm7n</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kyuhaB8ZPeNE6ikCCpdTfk-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2018 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:30:17 +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/kyuhaB8ZPeNE6ikCCpdTfk-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kyuhaB8ZPeNE6ikCCpdTfk-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="ryzen-to-the-mainstream">Ryzen To The Mainstream </h2><p>AMD's 2000-series Ryzen CPUs are already available, challenging the Coffee Lake-based Core line-up from Intel. As we found in our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-review,5571.html">Ryzen 7 2700X review</a>, a host of improvements made possible by 12nm manufacturing, such as higher frequencies and Precision Boost 2, add more performance in threaded apps. Meanwhile, lower system memory and cache latencies augment AMD's showing in lightly-threaded apps like games. Unlocked multipliers, backward compatibility with older Socket AM4 motherboards, a beefy bundled cooler, and a $330 price tag combine to leave us impressed. The Ryzen 7 2700X offers a great alternative to Intel's Core i7-8700K, which costs more, doesn't come with a thermal solution, and drops into more expensive motherboards (at least if you want to overclock).</p><p>Similarly, Ryzen 5 2600X targets Intel's enthusiast-oriented Core i5-8600K, leveraging similar advancements and a more attractive $230 price tag. As we'll see, it's even faster than the first-gen flagship Ryzen 7 1800X in many workloads.</p><h2 id="but-first-spectre-variant-2">But First, Spectre Variant 2</h2><p>Unfortunately, due to a lack of communication from AMD, we weren't told that the company had rolled its Spectre Variant 2 patch into shipping X470 platforms. As a result, our Ryzen 7 2700X launch day coverage didn't include Intel CPUs tested with their corresponding patches. Today's review does, however, feature results generated on Intel-based systems with the latest Spectre microcode updates.</p><h2 id="ryzen-5-2600x">Ryzen 5 2600X</h2><p>Ryzen 2000-series processors, otherwise known by their Pinnacle Ridge code name, are based on the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-zen-cpu-microarchitecture,32540.html">same basic Zen core design</a> as previous-gen models (though AMD now uses Zen+ nomenclature to reference the architecture's various improvements). The CPUs still utilize a <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-1600x-cpu-review,5014-2.html">dual-CCX configuration, tied together with Infinity Fabric</a>, yielding eight physical cores. The flagship Ryzen 7 2700X comes with all eight of its cores active. For Ryzen 5 2600X, AMD turns two off, creating a six-core, 12-thread configuration with an unlocked ratio multiplier.</p><p>As mentioned, Ryzen 5 2600X sells for $230, replacing <span>the $220 Ryzen 5 1600X. </span>It slots into the gap between Core i5-8600K and the Core i5-8400, forcing the chip to contend with <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-coffee-lake-300-series-chipset,36791.html">Intel's recently-announced Core i5-8600</a>. While we don't have that model in our lab yet, we do have the two nearest Coffee Lake-based competitors in today's benchmark charts.</p><p>What do you get, performance-wise, for the extra $10? Ryzen 5 2600X <span>sports the same 3.6 GHz base clock rate and a slightly higher 4.2 GHz Precision Boost 2 frequency (+200 MHz) than 1600X. That might seem minor, but as our benchmarks show, the gains are quite pronounced in threaded workloads. Like its predecessor, the 2600X also features 16MB of L3 cache and a 95W TDP.<br/></span></p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ></td><td  >AMD Ryzen 7 2700X</td><td  >AMD Ryzen 7 1800X</td><td  >AMD Ryzen 7 2700</td><td  >AMD Ryzen 5 1600X</td><td  >Ryzen 5 1600</td><td  ><strong>AMD Ryzen 5 2600X</strong></td><td  ><strong>AMD Ryzen 5 2600</strong></td><td  >Intel Core i5-8600K</td><td  >Intel Core i5-8600</td><td  >Intel Core i5-8400</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>MSRP</strong></td><td  >$329</td><td  >$349</td><td  >$299</td><td  >$219</td><td  >$189</td><td  >$229</td><td  >$199</td><td  >$257</td><td  >$224</td><td  >$182</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cores/Threads</strong></td><td  >8/16</td><td  >8/16</td><td  >8/16</td><td  >6/12</td><td  >6/12</td><td  >6/12</td><td  >6/12</td><td  >6/6</td><td  >6/6</td><td  >6/6</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>TDP</strong></td><td  >105W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >65W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >65W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >65W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >65W</td><td  >65W</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Base Freq. (GHz)</strong></td><td  >3.7</td><td  >3.6</td><td  >3.2</td><td  >3.6</td><td  >3.2</td><td  >3.6</td><td  >3.4</td><td  >3.6</td><td  >3.1</td><td  >2.8</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Precision Boost Freq. (GHz)</strong></td><td  >4.3</td><td  >4.1</td><td  >4.1</td><td  >4.0</td><td  >3.6</td><td  >4.2</td><td  >3.9</td><td  >4.3</td><td  >4.3</td><td  >4.0</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cache (L3)</strong></td><td  >16MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >9MB</td><td  >9MB</td><td  >9MB</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Unlocked Multiplier</strong></td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >No</td><td  >No</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cooler</strong></td><td  >105W Wraith Prism (LED)</td><td  >-</td><td  >95W Wraith Spire (LED)</td><td  >-</td><td  >95W Wraith Spire</td><td  >95W Wraith Spire</td><td  >65W Wraith Stealth</td><td  >-</td><td  >Intel</td><td  >Intel</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Although AMD didn't include thermal solutions with its original Ryzen X-series processors, the company does bundle coolers with its pricier models now. On one hand, it's nice that the 95W Wraith Spire cooler neatly matches the 2600X's thermal design power. On the other, we're not expecting much overclocking headroom from the combination.</p><p>Ryzen 5 2600X can drop into either new X470 or older 300-series motherboards. As usual, AMD allows you to overclock on value-minded B-series boards, too. And even though 400-series B-models aren't available yet, they'll undoubtedly offer a lower-priced alternative for overclocking.</p><p>Officially, the Ryzen 5 2600X supports up to DDR4-2933 memory, just like Ryzen 7 2700X. This trumps Coffee Lake's Intel-specified DDR4-2666 ceiling (<a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-review,5571-2.html">with a few caveats</a>). AMD also sticks with Indium solder between Ryzen 5's die and heat spreader, improving thermal transfer performance. And as we mentioned in our Ryzen 7 2700X review, these new CPUs also include StorMI Technology, which is a software-based tiering solution that blends the low price and high capacity of a hard drive with the speed of an SSD, 3D XPoint (including <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-optane-ssd-800p,5497.html">Intel's Optane parts</a>), or even up to 2GB of RAM.</p><h2 id="precision-boost-2-and-xfr2-2">Precision Boost 2 and XFR2</h2><p>In a nutshell, AMD is leveraging GlobalFoundries' 12nm process to enhance its design, rather than shrink it. The enhancements offer higher performance or lower power consumption at any given frequency, giving AMD headroom for other improvements.</p><p>The company's previous-gen Ryzen processors have Precision Boost, which is similar to Intel's Turbo Boost technology, and eXtended Frequency Range (XFR), capable of delivering a frequency uplift when your cooling solution has thermal headroom to spare.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dP5hpEZQKxe9nAP9Zd2WJ7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NYSEggBR5g7BcaEzuSpik9.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The new Precision Boost 2 (PB2) and XFR2 algorithms improve performance in threaded workloads by raising the frequency of any number of cores. AMD doesn't share a list of specific multi-core Precision Boost 2 and XFR2 bins because the opportunistic algorithms accelerate to different clock rates based on temperature, current, and load.</p><p><span> AMD gave us a graph of the PB2 frequencies for Ryzen 7 2700X, but we followed up with our own measurements to compare the current and previous-gen Ryzen 5 models. As you can see, Ryzen 5 2600X offers more robust multi-core frequencies than its predecessor, and our Ryzen 7 2700X measurements largely mirror AMD's. We tested both CPUs with AMD's Precision Boost Overdrive active. The Ryzen 7 2700X does have a higher TDP rating that some older motherboards may struggle with, so <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-review,5571-2.html">PB2 performance will vary</a> based upon the power delivery subsystem.<br/></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>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="8f103f28-167f-4177-a017-f775eb3a9177">            <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-Processor-Wraith-Cooler/dp/B07B428M7F/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Ryzen 7 2700X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:83.03%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/c2cT8QyxBHDJ3zenoyjwN3.jpg" alt=""><span class='featured__label hero__label'> </span></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 7 2700X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="49be5ab8-560f-4752-913c-a936800de481">            <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-Processor-Wraith-Cooler/dp/B07B428V2L/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Ryzen 5 2600X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:82.55%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NGCRsMpYvNzAhf8vPeWere.jpg" alt=""><span class='featured__label hero__label'> </span></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 5 2600X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><h2 id="patching-up-overclocking-amp-test-setup">Patching Up, Overclocking & Test Setup</h2><h2 id="patching-up">Patching Up </h2><p>The Spectre and Meltdown security vulnerabilities impose overhead that affect performance, but it's the Spectre Variant 2 patches that incur the largest penalties. We've been waiting for AMD and Intel to release their respective updates, leveling the playing field. AMD gave no indication in its press material that the X470 motherboards used in our Ryzen 7 2700X review already had Spectre 2 mitigations built-in. But hours before launch, we learned that the patches were present. At that point, we didn't have enough time to test with Intel's corresponding microcode.</p><p>In our 2700X review, the test rigs included Meltdown And Spectre Variant 1 mitigations. Spectre Variant 2 requires both motherboard firmware/microcode and operating system patches, though. We had already installed the operating system updates for Variant 2 on our Intel-based platforms, so we only lacked the fourth and final piece: new microcode.</p><p>There are two options for applying this microcode. One is a Windows KB that allows the operating system to load microcode during boot-up. The other is a motherboard firmware update. We used the Windows KB to install patches on our Z270-based platform, providing a true measure of pre- and post-patch performance.</p><p>Faster processors suffer less from the Spectre Variant 2 updates. This creates a conundrum for us and our Z370-based platform. In previous reviews, we noticed that Intel's Core i7-8700 was consistently faster than the more expensive Core i7-8700K on MSI and Gigabyte motherboards. We <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-cpu,5252-4.html">disclosed this during our launch coverage</a>. The issue becomes relevant today because MSI's latest firmware update, which also includes the Spectre Variant 2 microcode, fixes most of the performance disparities we observed. As we suspected, the problem seems attributable to the Core i7-8700K. It's now faster in several games, performing the way we originally expected. So, on this motherboard, we're using new firmware instead of the Windows-based patch since it fixes our Core i7-8700K issues. That means our Coffee Lake-based CPUs don't correctly reflect pre- and post-patch performance. Instead, allow those results to serve as a general indication of competitive deltas.</p><p>In any case, with the exception of our AMD X370-based motherboards, all of the platforms in today's review are fully patched. The company hasn't given us a time frame for securing its previous-gen chipsets, but you can bet that we'll follow up with benchmark results once a Spectre Variant 2 patch becomes available.</p><h2 id="overclocking-4">Overclocking</h2><p>We ran our gaming and application tests in the U.S. lab, while power/thermal measurements were collected in our German lab.</p><p>In the U.S. lab, we paired our Ryzen 5 2600X with Corsair's H115i cooler for overclocking. This allowed us to maintain a 4.2 GHz all-core frequency at 1.3875V Vcore, 1.2V SoC voltage, and default Load Line Calibration settings. These are the same settings used on the Ryzen 7 2700X, albeit with a slight 0.009V Vcore boost to ensure stability.</p><p>First-gen Ryzen processors don't have much memory overclocking headroom, so we're still testing tuned X370 platforms at DDR4-3200. The X470 chipset is remarkably stable at higher data rates with both 2000-series Ryzen CPUs installed. So, we settled on DDR4-3466 with 14-14-14-34 timings. We also ran our overclocked Intel processors at DDR4-3466.</p><h2 id="precision-boost-overdrive-2">Precision Boost Overdrive</h2><p>AMD hasn't shared much information on this pending feature, which increases the maximum boost voltage and boost duration. We attempted to disable Precision Boost Overdrive as we tested for our Ryzen 7 2700X review, but didn't observe a performance difference one way or the other. Now we know the feature wasn't toggling correctly due to an issue with the board. Instead, it remained enabled throughout our benchmarking.</p><p>Precision Boost Overdrive is an AMD-sanctioned feature, unlike the multi-core enhancements you often find in Intel-based motherboards. Because this is a standard capability for Ryzen 2000-series processors, we leave it enabled.</p><h2 id="msi-x470-gaming-m7-ac-2">MSI X470 Gaming M7 AC</h2><p><span class="notranslate">Our MSI X470 Gaming M7 AC has a PCI Express 3.0 slot with a x16 link, a slot with a x8 connection, and another PCI Express 2.0 slot with a four-lane link for graphics cards. Its </span><span class="notranslate">four RAM slots support DDR4-2933 and can scale up quite a bit higher through overclocking.</span></p><p><span class="notranslate">The motherboard also provides two M.2 slots with PCIe connectivity.</span><span class="notranslate"> The I/O panel has a USB 3.1 Type C connector.</span><span class="notranslate"> The </span><span class="notranslate">USB 3.1 and USB 3.1 Gen 2 support fast charging for smartphones and tablets.</span><span class="notranslate"> If RGB is your thing, MSI has you covered. T</span><span class="notranslate">he integrated RGB Mystic lighting allows customizable effects with several software-controlled zones.</span><span class="notranslate"><br/></span></p><h2 id="comparison-products-6">Comparison Products </h2>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="0122049c-6163-4620-b0fd-b76e0bda898b">            <a href="http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-8900246-12920453?sid=tomshardware-&url=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117824" data-model-name="Core i5-8400" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:108.91%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Mbp7fKeJrnqTAagSTBP399.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Intel Core i5-8400</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="f26d68fa-fd80-4ad6-b2f3-526977dd83ef">            <a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117825" 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="7bbf8fae-b90a-48a9-b706-eca3f1d7d599">            <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" 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:128.84%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uXuLfgK33H8rdH2AUffqUk.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</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><h2 id="test-systems-4">Test Systems</h2><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>AMD Socket AM4 (400-Series)</strong>AMD Ryzen 7 2700X, Ryzen 5 2600XMSI X470 Gaming M7 AC2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2933, DDR4-3466<strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z370):</strong>Intel Core i5-8600K, i5-8600K, Core i5-8400MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC2x 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4-3200 @ 2666<strong>AMD Socket </strong><strong>AM4 Workstation (300-Series)</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 i7-7700KMSI 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.AMD Socket AM4 (400-Series)</strong></strong>AMD Ryzen 7 2700XMSI X470 Gaming M7 AC2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2933, DDR4-3466<strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z370):</strong>Intel Core i7-8700K, i5-8600K, Core i5-8400MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2400, DDR4-2667, DDR4-3466<strong>AMD Socket AM4 (300-Series)</strong>AMD Ryzen 7 1800X, 1700X, 1700, Ryzen 5 1600XMSI X370 Xpower Gaming Titanium2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2667, DDR4-3200<strong><span>Intel LGA 1151 (Z270)</span></strong>Intel Core i7-7700K MSI Z270 Gaming M72x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2400<strong>All</strong> EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FE 1TB Samsung PM863 SilverStone ST1500-TI, 1500W Windows 10 Creators Update Version 1703 - All Spectre and Meltdown mitigations</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cooling</strong></td><td  ><strong>Germany</strong>Alphacool Eiszeit 2000 ChillerAlphacool Eisblock XPXThermal Grizzly Kryonaut (For Cooler Switch)<strong>U.S.</strong>Corsair H115i</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-5">VRMark, 3DMark & AotS: Escalation</h2><h2 id="vrmark-amp-3dmark-4">VRMark & 3DMark </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7njLmU4V9WdRQTpUyNTEhR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2pi4uXr3JnsUn7NvBm56LB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DFHxEZPQuZWnQknUA5pLWH.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>These are busy charts with the addition of our retested Intel platforms, including the Spectre Variant 2 microcode patches. At stock settings, the Ryzen 5 2600X outperforms its overclocked predecessor across the board, which is especially meaningful in the lightly-threaded VRMark workload. Overclocking yields significant gains in synthetic gaming benchmarks, which don't necessarily translate to the rest of our benchmark suite.</p><p>Several of the patched Intel processors do lose performance compared to before the updates. This is particularly apparent in VRMark on Intel's Core i7-8700K, while other tests reflect minimal regression. Meanwhile, the Core i5-8400 and -8600K give us mixed results. Core i7-7700K is a more representative measure of pre- and post-patch performance, and it takes a healthy dive in VRMark as well (verified several times by removing and reinstalling the OS-based Spectre patch).</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/eLEZAd5njhD7qm8LBnG7DP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sf8ALTVZUwECBWTCQk2nGN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/u7iKMypvLDcPC4xBsKhgdS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Eci5ZbggCkzVpMQrifppma.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UyQbYNrbUyxT3VwG85RfS3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vPreZMhUMLW5xUGcWNYhqE.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Ryzen 5 2600X is clearly superior to its predecessor in threaded titles. After all, the stock 2600X beats an overclocked 1600X. Those gains propel the Ryzen 5 up the chart, where it matches a stock Core i7-8700K.</p><p>Flip over to the album's next slide, which includes Intel CPUs before and after we patched their platforms. The Core i7-7700K loses a few frames per second in our retest, falling outside of this consistent benchmark's margin of error. Aside from the Core i5-8400's gains, which remind us that firmware updates sometimes fine-tune performance, too, most of the Intel CPUs land within the run-to-run variance we expect to see. </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-amp-ai-dawn-of-war-iii-5">Civilization VI Graphics & AI, Dawn of War III</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/UZEEDekrDNxk6gEDBQjATT.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UZEEDekrDNxk6gEDBQjATT.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="834" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UZEEDekrDNxk6gEDBQjATT.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The Ryzen 5 2600X represents a nice step forward for AMD, particularly since Intel's processors typically lead in this test due to their per-core performance advantage.</p><p>A few of the processors exhibit slight regressions post-patch, but nothing outside of the variances we'd expect.  </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/oiMyzPHtGDNb2e2Lyhan4K.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/U9M4PGQKAGPqPww9MtYcTB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vMkCLafYBt3fxm9kDLPK8n.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vTyjtbJAwvFEUg4hBdxcGT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zDprcyp2nPqrTxLsVXZX3Y.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/R6vgtMrMoVvEEh8gz28kPH.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>An overclocked Ryzen 5 2600X beats the stock Ryzen 7 2700X, which should excite value-seekers.</p><p>Then again, Intel's Core i5-8400 slips past the tuned Ryzen 5 in this test, yielding better performance at a lower price (and despite a locked ratio multiplier).</p><h2 id="warhammer-40-000-dawn-of-war-iii-6">Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War III</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/egeHx5WEjK6ugd6ZujbYpS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3pv4f5jSBwCJswQrUdBnUo.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YK8LW6uPrBgdUURxkGaMsm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YxAGfUoxu9oBhQbGGQNdw9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/s3iWx9EHNHFgA8tjvJWVH9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EBj84HXwwsnLv5tgNuMtYf.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Dawn of War</em> finds the tuned Coffee Lake-based CPUs at the top of our chart. Even the fastest Ryzen (overclocked, no less) lands behind a stock Core i7-7700K.</p><p>Interestingly, the Coffee Lake CPUs enjoy slight gains after we patch them, while Core i7-7700K doesn't change much.  </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-gta-v-amp-hitman-4">Far Cry Primal, GTA: V & Hitman</h2><h2 id="far-cry-primal-4">Far Cry Primal </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nb869QrBhFQvCTSMRgdyRG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fhyei95gymgRTC53AzMUhZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iLUA37jiCAus6YstNZHbkk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZsZtF8AVNXs3zWYhQMtSVV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GkJSSuvRnRegTGzrZeBpAG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uRH6F37mEBiKg5RdrBFdxX.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Ryzen 5 2600X nearly matches Intel's Core i7-8700K at stock clock rates. But tuning propels the chip ahead of an overclocked Ryzen 7 2700X and into contention with Core i5-8600K at 4.9 GHz. Clearly, this title responds well to physical core count, favoring platforms without SMT enabled.</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/37jP8mExYhGuXQ7FQThWoC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/h8yWj7hYaSqCi5WJGwqcMj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zhyCwmxzCHYpUDVk9V4Eh9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yczVBNG7vYrxdFm4X24mWY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NE2nFBpFaqJKA2pGTMBefA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pWAyvABWkUtzHX7GzU85bh.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>It's no surprise to see Intel's processors dominate our <em>Grand Theft Auto V</em> charts. An overclocked Ryzen 5 2600X essentially ties the stock Core i7-7700K, while Core i5-8400 stands out again for its higher performance and lower price point.</p><p>The post-patch Core i7-8700K averages 9 FPS-higher in <em>GTA V.</em> This is one of the games where -8700K historically lagged the slower Core i7-8700, so it looks like motherboard firmware fixed a few issues. We also see an improvement from the Core i5-8400.</p><h2 id="hitman-6">Hitman </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BabLDJjHoVkmY3G9qNuCC8.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LXaEY6aEm6MahMdwm5tUMC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NK3iS9QXsKsHV9CoZRDsmL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/47jcKkHXrBjEDPdf6pAgjP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CdY6BxEXXwfi8MkBqzePei.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ksz62BH6NbeP3SvtPtytEm.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>A recent update added a frame rate cap to <em>Hitman</em>, causing most of our configurations to reflect a graphics bottleneck. It's no surprise, then, that an overclocked Ryzen 5 2600X nearly matches the fastest Intel 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-amp-project-cars-2-5">Shadow Of War & Project CARS 2</h2><h2 id="middle-earth-shadow-of-war-6">Middle-earth: Shadow Of War</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fXxsEsXAa2uRMKCD55RDBK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ygoUCSDea9o2BfEc6pk4F9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QNtSGey6iozyQK7nkgxfJH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/g4ta6b69YL4o3nbxo6Dd2K.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aqw9gTjjftsm5qcYDqHxwT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/K3iyFU5irFHvmW9qVnuDi9.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Ryzen 5 2600X beats the overclocked Ryzen 7 1800X, and tuning propels it to within 0.5 FPS of the fastest CPU.</p><p>Intel's Core i5-8400 is less expensive and tends to outperform the 2600X in many games, but the 2600X does lead in this one. Aside from the Core i5-8400, we observe lower average frame rates from the post-patch Intel processors, though the variances only amount to one or two frames per second.</p><h2 id="project-cars-2-6">Project CARS 2</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CgcFVc9RPAt4WukLw6VZqj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oxRMkF4gJnGY8kY4uKDKaA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/chTYug9pLE2QLioRpWdwCU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/M53ugEUe3EqRvsCvAFNmCF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YjP8zGAaiJnU3wKWtbnhYH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pruWwnc9azhtYgsjDoGukc.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Ryzen 5 2600X delivers a commendable performance in <em>Project CARS 2</em>, but it lags the less expensive Core i5-8400.</p><p>Aside from the Core i7-8700K's and i5-8400's performance gains, we don't significant variations related to Spectre mitigations.</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="office-amp-productivity-5">Office & Productivity</h2><h2 id="adobe-creative-cloud-6">Adobe Creative Cloud</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BrTQPDTp9rqYbrm2j6csuF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/b63wnE26tm38HtNhQNsnWK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/S6tjunNqXzscrbqccvbdd3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BCCp2rtcs7F3ZobhWtJf9M.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qFzELxzQkSS6xJkr42KkPJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4S3S8QE3cs4WtnZU3YE6wA.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The stock Ryzen 5 2600X trails most of AMD's first-gen Ryzen CPUs, notably lagging behind the previous-gen Ryzen 5 1600X. We reran this benchmark several times to verify its results, and the outcome is repeatable. But given the performance observed in other tests, PCMark's Creative Cloud component may be an outlier.</p><p>Although we didn't see much performance variation from the patches in our game testing, that changes drastically in our Adobe Creative Cloud suite. Every Intel processor's overall score takes a significant haircut (the Core i7-8700K drops ~9%, while the Core i5-8400 drops ~10%).</p><h2 id="web-browser-6">Web Browser</h2><p>The Krakken suite tests JavaScript performance using several workloads, including audio, imaging, and cryptography.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xmeicgbei7WSKy2hiWhcjL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TL3hwoZw6AGm9k4VrL9sPh.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xUU8TLkbKSokhpxwQY9vFA.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>AMD's processors typically lag Intel's in Web browser benchmarks due to their lower per-core performance. The Ryzen 5 2600X is competitive with Intel's Core i5-8400 in this test. But as we noted in our Ryzen 7 2700X review, overclocking actually results in lower scores during lightly-threaded tasks. That's a bit more surprising in this case because, as we pointed out on the first page, Ryzen 5 2600X sustains up to 4.2 GHz on a single core, which is the same frequency as our all-core overclock. XFR2 contributes an extra boost during sporadic workloads though, and that's likely what we're seeing here.</p><p>The MotionMark benchmarks, which emphasize graphics performance (rather than JavaScript), are also sensitive to CPU clock rates. Ryzen 5 2600X isn't as competitive compared to the Intel models, reminding us that AMD still lags what it comes to IPC throughput.</p><p>Again, we see performance regressions from Intel's processors in these workloads, which we measured with a Spectre-patched version of Firefox.  </p><h2 id="productivity-6">Productivity</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ibkoKJ2TpyUz6dw5UQt7SZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vQc7XMGYSrY3oNLX2PK5mJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6s5Q6bECv6WMcMehtUtW3L.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/j7BWeia3882bPAT7Xc3kBh.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ni4w3qD3KqyxPiubK8MZvB.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. Other platform-level considerations affect this test as well, including the storage subsystem. Initially, we thought that'd be bad news for Intel's CPUs. After all, the security mitigations have an intense impact on I/O operations. Surprisingly, though, we actually recorded higher results from the Intel-based platforms. Meanwhile, the Ryzen 5 2600X beats AMD's first-gen Ryzen CPUs, but trails the Core i5-8400.</p><p>Our video conferencing workload measures performance in single- and multi-user applications that utilize the Windows Media Foundation for playback and encoding. It also performs facial detection to model real-world usage. Ryzen processors perform well in this test, joining an overclocked Core i7-8700K at the top of the chart. At stock settings, the Ryzen 5 2600X handily dispatches Intel's Core i5-8400.</p><p>The photo editing benchmark measures performance with Futuremark's binaries using the ImageMagick library. Common photo processing workloads also tend to be parallelized, so Ryzen 7 2700X naturally takes a lead. The Ryzen 5 2600X performs well given its price point. And the Intel CPUs all take a hit after we get them patched.</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="rendering-encoding-amp-compression-5">Rendering, Encoding & Compression</h2><h2 id="rendering-6">Rendering </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hbHhKGQ2qzqLhWj73hFJuB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yBNqW3ihayiBxP8YopJKnV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/taVrircKXii7Z5cDWZfUpg.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KoDvH5dmZZzQsEt3aMSsuY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2zqv9PRtdfoY82DQG4FAfe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4xpipzAXJU55SYfkCjdLoK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v4joAcwPFjRZzjdxU3kmCC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dDcKZ47DhaxCgNnJ5RULfF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eNydz6fUFYMdybte55wXUZ.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Threaded rendering workloads favor Ryzen's SMT-enabled cores. Ryzen 5 2600X slots in right where we'd expect it to land, while Intel's processors suffer slight performance hits after installing the Spectre mitigation patches. </p><h2 id="encoding-amp-compression-6">Encoding & Compression </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HzGCigTc4uuamgtKG6NN6P.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Sau9jQmaNnoBQLGBbZUr3V.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4KyRnnwGRTGQCPmwTBHzKJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eFaADwFdAXekT9YfoM4EcW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZSnwhfLDvKsnydcnV74DR7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2NGG62svK3HUrP3NNvZ2NR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6ob88byeYMKa6mkG5BzD7F.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>LAME is the quintessential example of a single-threaded workload, normally favoring Intel's per-core performance advantage. AMD's 2000-series Ryzen CPUs go a long way in closing the gap by offering better per-core performance than their predecessors.</p><p>Our threaded compression and decompression tests adsorb data directly from system memory, removing storage from the equation. The Ryzen 5 2600X fares well during the test, easily beating Intel's Core i5-8400 and -8600K. Given <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-performance-meltdown-spectre-intel-amd,5457-2.html">Windows' new dual page table addressing structure</a> that prevents Meltdown-based attacks, we expected more performance overhead after the patches. However, the company's latest processors have a PCID (Post-Context Identifiers) feature that accelerates page table translations. As a result, older Core CPUs without the PCID feature are likely affected more than the ones we're testing. </p><p>There's a larger delta between Intel and AMD processors during our HandBrake x265 test compared to the x264 benchmark due to its heavier distribution of AVX instructions. The 2600X slots in where we'd expect given its six cores with SMT technology.</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-4">Final Analysis</h2><p>AMD’s Ryzen 5 2600X isn’t quite as impressive as the higher-end Ryzen 7 2700X, but it does offer a solid mixture of performance and value that's well-suited to many different workloads. Whereas professionals might be more interested in the 2700X's eight cores, gamers on a budget will want to check out the 2600X. After all, saving money on other system components is critical at a time when you're certain to pay a premium for discrete graphics.</p><p>In the chart below, we plot gaming performance with both average frame rates and a geometric mean of the 99<sup>th</sup> percentile frame times (a good indicator of smoothness), which we then convert into a frame-per-second measurement. We also have price-to-performance charts that get split up to include CPUs-only and extra platform costs. For the models that don't come with a bundled cooler, we add $25 for a basic heat sink. We also add $20 if overclocking requires a more expensive motherboard (as is the case for Z370). The Intel test results reflect our patched configurations.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QKpKdiSKAN2YQCVoM3dNve.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/skUzqN7QR5p3CwUsjqbLyY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LtosqbVjj3tFaMSs82MmXV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8nmx38orqbK9a9TjHVALmQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HpAojDQ9NVVzdkBhgXVwYK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HkW9km3KCCvEC7rDR6kB2e.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TUzwk5voXA4hJnqu2KKNi.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Games show the Ryzen 5 2600X offering a universal improvement over AMD's previous-gen Ryzen 5 1600X. Unfortunately, we see limited gains from overclocking, though that's just as well given this family's meager headroom. More important is that Ryzen 5 2600X beats the Ryzen 7 1800X throughout our suite.</p><p>Intel's Core i5-8600K is also in the 2600X’s crosshairs; AMD takes aim with a significantly lower price, a bundled thermal solution, and compatibility with less expensive motherboards. If you're not worried about overclocking, though, the Core i5-8400 is an even better buy for gaming. It offers nearly the same performance as the 2600X at a ~$50 discount. The i5-8400 drops into value-oriented B-series motherboards and comes with a stock cooler/fan, too.</p><p>Although we're big fans of the Core i5-8400 for entertainment, Ryzen 5 2600X is a smarter all-around value when it has the change to stretch its six cores and 12 threads. The processor distances itself from the i5-8400 in our rendering, encoding, compression, and decompression apps. It even challenges the eight-core Ryzen 7 1700X in several tests, particularly after tuning. That highlights the improvements borne of the Ryzen 2000-series’ enhanced multi-core boost algorithms and lower memory/cache latency.</p><p>Like all of AMD’s processors, the Ryzen 5 2600X comes with an unlocked ratio multiplier. AMD is pushing the frequency/voltage curve to its limits, so we didn’t experience massive gains in some mundane workloads. However, we did see more of a benefit with the 2600X in heavily-threaded tasks compared to the Ryzen 7 2700X. That’s largely due to the 2600X’s lower multi-core boost frequencies.</p><p>We wish AMD was ready with its B450-series motherboards at launch time. But you can still pair the Ryzen 5 2600X with a capable 300-series model.</p><p>The Spectre patches did take some wind out of Intel’s sails in many of our application tests, but the impact varies by application. In most cases, the regressions aren’t severe enough to change our recommendations. Still, it's always disappointing to observe performance stepping backward. Luckily for Intel, gaming wasn't affected much.</p><p>Intel beefed up its Coffee Lake-based Core i5s by adding 50% more cores. Up against the Ryzen 5 1600X, we couldn't help but acknowledge Intel's great performance and generally better compatibility with existing games. This time, however, AMD brings the heat in our benchmarks, while most of its optimization-oriented issues are ancient history. If gaming is your <em>only </em>concern, save some cash and pick up a Core i5-8400. But we think you’ll be happier with the Ryzen 5 2600X, which has more resources to handle general desktop workloads with ease.</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 Ryzen 7 2700X Review: Redefining Ryzen ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-review,5571.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ AMD claims the Ryzen 7 2700X brings up to a 20% productivity boost, and is near-equivalent in gaming to Intel's Coffee Lake chips. Does it live up to the hype? ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">FkVWnVNjecFK6NRcDeHUyD</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DjTvUxuaE4ry2dRpHwUtuR-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 19 Apr 2018 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:30:14 +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/DjTvUxuaE4ry2dRpHwUtuR-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DjTvUxuaE4ry2dRpHwUtuR-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="redefining-ryzen">Redefining Ryzen</h2><p>AMD's return to prominence last year found it rolling out a long stream of CPUs that pressured Intel in almost every segment of the desktop PC market. Even after Intel countered with dramatic adjustments to its processor portfolio, AMD continues gobbling up market share. Even in the face of stiff competition, AMD says it enjoys as much as 50% of CPU sales to DIYers on sites like Newegg and Amazon.</p><p>And <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-docs-dual-core-cannon-lake-10nm,36504.html">a slow transition to 10nm manufacturing</a> continues to leave Intel vulnerable. AMD is now ready to evolve its Zen architecture with a round of new processors. To be sure, the improvements they offer are iterative. The low-hanging fruit that made it possible for first-gen Ryzen to compete are already baked in. These chips do incorporate some notable advantages, though.</p><p>To begin, second-generation Ryzen processors are manufactured using an optimized 12nm LP node that promises performance and efficiency gains compared to the original Ryzen's 14nm LPP process. AMD also tweaked the Zen architecture, now dubbed Zen+, to support higher frequencies, more sophisticated multi-core boost rates, and faster memory/caches. Overall, the company claims that its 2000-series facilitates nearly equivalent gaming performance compared to similarly-priced Core CPUs, plus a 20% advantage in threaded workloads.</p><p>AMD certainly hasn't forgotten its core message: more cores and features for less money. The second-gen Ryzen processors are priced competitively, all models come with beefy stock coolers, and they are backward compatible with older Socket AM4 motherboards. AMD even throws in free caching software to sweeten the deal. It all starts with silicon though, so let's take a look.</p><h2 id="ryzen-7-2700x">Ryzen 7 2700X</h2><p>Ryzen 2000-series processors, otherwise known by their "Pinnacle Ridge" code name, are based on the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-zen-cpu-microarchitecture,32540.html">same basic Zen core design</a> as previous-gen models. But they benefit from 12nm manufacturing, along with targeted tweaks to improve cache and memory latency. The company says its resulting Zen+ architecture delivers up to a 3% boost in IPC (instructions per cycle) throughput.</p><p>The CPUs still utilize a <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-1600x-cpu-review,5014-2.html">dual-CCX configuration tied, together with Infinity Fabric</a>. Not surprisingly, then, they're divided into eight-core, 16-thread Ryzen 7 and six-core, 12-thread Ryzen 5 families, both with 16MB of L3 cache. Like the Ryzens that came before, all 2000-series models boast unlocked ratio multipliers for easy overclocking. Intel, in comparison, still charges a premium for its overclockable K-series SKUs.</p><p>AMD separates its the 2000-series stack into high-performance X-series models and their non-X counterparts. But it shrinks the Ryzen 7 family from three models to two. Ryzen 7 2700X would seem to suggest a Ryzen 7 1700X replacement. However, it actually replaces the flagship Ryzen 7 1800X. AMD claims that its 2700X offers up to 12% more performance than Ryzen 7 1800X in threaded applications. Much of that improvement comes from a 100 MHz-higher base clock and 200 MHz of additional boost frequency (though multiple other refinements also contribute).</p><p><span>While the Pinnacle Ridge processors drop into 400-series motherboards, AMD is only releasing its X470 chipset at launch time. </span><span><span>We still don't have a release date for the less expensive B450- and A420-based motherboards. </span></span><span><span><span><span>As the company originally promised, it continues supporting Socket AM4 (and purportedly will until 2020), so the new Ryzen CPUs also work with 300-series motherboards after a BIOS update. First-gen Ryzens do work with 400-series platforms as well, allowing you to drop an older CPU into a brand-new board, if desired.</span></span></span></span><span><br/></span></p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ></td><td  ><strong>AMD Ryzen 7 2700X</strong></td><td  >AMD Ryzen 7 1800X</td><td  ><strong>AMD Ryzen 7 2700</strong></td><td  >AMD Ryzen 5 1600X</td><td  >AMD Ryzen 5 2600X</td><td  >AMD Ryzen 5 2600</td><td  >Intel Core i7-8700K</td><td  >Intel Core i7-8700</td><td  >Intel Core i5-8600K</td><td  >Intel Core i5-8400</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>MSRP</strong></td><td  >$329</td><td  >$349</td><td  >$299</td><td  >$219</td><td  >$229</td><td  >$199</td><td  >$359</td><td  >$303</td><td  >$257</td><td  >$182</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cores/Threads</strong></td><td  >8/16</td><td  >8/16</td><td  >8/16</td><td  >6/12</td><td  >6/12</td><td  >6/12</td><td  >6/12</td><td  >6/12</td><td  >6/6</td><td  >6/6</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>TDP</strong></td><td  >105W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >65W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >65W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >65W</td><td  >95W</td><td  >65W</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Base Freq. (GHz)</strong></td><td  >3.7</td><td  >3.6</td><td  >3.2</td><td  >3.6</td><td  >3.6</td><td  >3.4</td><td  >3.7</td><td  >3.2</td><td  >3.6</td><td  >2.8</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Precision Boost Freq. (GHz)</strong></td><td  >4.3</td><td  >4.1</td><td  >4.1</td><td  >4.0</td><td  >4.2</td><td  >3.9</td><td  >4.7</td><td  >4.6</td><td  >4.3</td><td  >4.0</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cache (L3)</strong></td><td  >16MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >16MB</td><td  >12MB</td><td  >12MB</td><td  >9MB</td><td  >9MB</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Unlocked Multiplier</strong></td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >No</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >No</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Cooler</strong></td><td  >105W Wraith Prism (LED)</td><td  >-</td><td  >95W Wraith Spire (LED)</td><td  >-</td><td  >95W Wraith Spire</td><td  >65W Wraith Stealth</td><td  >-</td><td  >Intel</td><td  >-</td><td  >Intel</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>The $329 Ryzen 7 2700X should sell for $20 less than an 1800X (though prices of previous-generation chips will likely fall as long as stock is robust), while the $299 Ryzen 7 2700 lands right where you formerly found the 1700. AMD's non-X models were apparently more popular with enthusiasts since they also had unlocked multipliers, enabling similar performance as the pricier models (after some tuning) for less money. You could save $50 stepping down from Ryzen 7 1800X to the 1700, for example. But that gap shrinks to $30 this time around.</p><p>AMD's Ryzen 7 2700X grapples with Intel's $359 flagship <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-cpu,5252.html">Core i7-8700K</a>. Though that seems like an uncomfortably close comparison, AMD allows you to overclock with one of its value-oriented B-series motherboards (B350-based, for now), whereas Intel compels users splurge on a Z-series platform for overclocking. Adding the CPU and motherboard together, Intel's premium ends up being quite a bit higher. </p><p>Second-gen Ryzens now support up to DDR4-2933 RAM as well, trumping the Coffee Lake architecture's official DDR4-2666 ceiling (with a few caveats that we'll cover shortly). More bandwidth should help latency-sensitive apps, such as games. Also, X470 motherboards pave the way for better memory overclocking than previous-gen platforms.</p><p><span>AMD's first-gen X-series processors, which topped out at 95W, came without a bundled thermal solution. This time around, all 2000-series CPUs include a cooler. The 105W Ryzen 7 2700X includes a "Wraith Prism" LED cooler that features four direct-contact copper heat pipes, three independent RGB zones, switchable fan profiles, and a 39 dB(A) noise rating. The cooler is rated to dissipate 116W of waste heat in "L" mode (2800 RPM) and 124W in "H" mode (3600 RPM). Cooler Master manufactures the heat sink/fan, while AMD provides software for controlling the lighting and fan profiles. Company representatives claim the cooler represents a  roughly $43 value, and that it also allows for some overclocking headroom. <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:764px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:77.75%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eGJn67fyRdcLfvohX8PDiU.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eGJn67fyRdcLfvohX8PDiU.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="764" height="594" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eGJn67fyRdcLfvohX8PDiU.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p><span>As with the generation before, AMD employs Indium solder between its die and heat spreader to improve thermal transfer. In contrast, Intel uses standard thermal interface material on its Core i7-8700K. Also, that Intel chip doesn't come with a cooler, widening the price gap between a Ryzen 7 2700X-based configuration and a current-generation unlocked Intel Core i7.<br/></span></p><p><span>According to AMD, its 2000-series CPUs benefit from an </span>improved <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-cpu,4951-2.html">SensMI suite</a> that also includes its new StorMI Technology. The latter is a software-based tiering solution that melds the low price and high capacity of a hard drive with the speed of an SSD, 3D XPoint (including <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-optane-ssd-800p,5497.html">Intel's Optane parts</a>), or even up to 2GB of RAM. AMD sold this software as a $20 add-on in the past, but now it comes free as part of the 2000-series package. As with any tiering utility, you assume the same risks of data loss inherent to a RAID 0 array. For more details about this software, read our feature: <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-fuzedrive-fuzeram-enmotus-ryzen,36368.html">AMD and Enmotus Expand FuzeDrive Offerings</a>. </p><h2 id="the-globalfoundries-12nm-lp-process">The GlobalFoundries 12nm LP Process</h2><p>As mentioned, AMD's 2000-series CPUs are not manufactured on GlobalFoundries' 14nm GPP node, but rather its 12nm LP process technology. The ported-over design helps boost transistor performance, but does not affect die area or transistor density. As a result, Pinnacle Ridge's ~4.8 billion transistors and 213mm<sup>2</sup> area remain the same as first-gen Ryzen.</p><p>Lower leakage current does enable roughly 300 MHz-higher clock rates or a 50mV core voltage reduction at any given frequency compared to 14nm manufacturing. The company also refined some of the architecture's critical pathways with higher-performance transistors. All told, AMD claims the 12nm design enables up to 11% less power consumption than 14nm-based Ryzen CPUs at the same clock rates, or up to 16% more performance at the same thermal design power. All-core overclocks are expected to land in the 4.2 GHz range moving forward.</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: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>AMD also adds other nuanced refinements to the performance story, reportedly improving L1, L2, and L3 cache latencies, while also reducing memory latency by 11%.</p><p>Ryzen 7 2700X's 105W TDP represents a 10.5% increase compared to the 1800X for a 4.65% increase in boost frequencies. That seems like a simple trade-off of power consumption for higher clock rates. But the TDP rating also takes the multi-core Precision Boost 2 and XFR2 algorithms' higher power draw into account, allowing access to Socket AM4's full 95-amp current ceiling even during stock operation. </p><h2 id="precision-boost-2-and-xfr2-3">Precision Boost 2 And XFR2</h2><p>AMD's previous-gen Ryzen processors have Precision Boost (a <span>Dynamic Voltage Frequency Scaling implementation similar to Intel's Turbo Boost), and </span>eXtended Frequency Range, which provides additional frequency uplift if your cooling solution has thermal headroom to spare. Those 1000-series CPUs only offer dual-core or all-core Precision Boost and XFR clock rates. But lightly-threaded applications (like games) often offload less-critical tasks to other threads. Unfortunately, light helper threads can apply enough of a load to trigger the lower all-core frequency, limiting performance potential even when the CPU <em>could</em> be operating at higher clock rates.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:961px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:61.29%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NYSEggBR5g7BcaEzuSpik9.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NYSEggBR5g7BcaEzuSpik9.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="961" height="589" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NYSEggBR5g7BcaEzuSpik9.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p><br>The new Precision Boost 2 (which <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-2400g-zen-vega-cpu-gpu,5467-3.html">debuted on the desktop with AMD&apos;s Raven Ridge processors)</a> and XFR2 algorithms improve performance in threaded workloads by raising the frequency of any number of cores. Precision Boost 2 delivers up to 500 MHz-higher clocks during multi-core workloads, while XFR2 adds an additional 7% boost if your cooler is beefy enough. This extends Ryzen&apos;s already-strong threaded performance to a wider variety of tasks, though it levels off when the processor reaches 60°C (tCase) or 95 amps of current. Precision Boost 2 and XFR2 also work on 300-series motherboards.</p><p>AMD doesn&apos;t share a list of specific multi-core Precision Boost 2 and XFR2 bins, because its opportunistic algorithms achieve different frequencies based on temperature, current, and load.</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 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>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="39c95e9c-6fed-4d30-bbd1-57fb14b8fe48">            <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-Processor-Wraith-Cooler/dp/B07B428M7F/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Ryzen 7 2700X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:83.03%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/c2cT8QyxBHDJ3zenoyjwN3.jpg" alt=""><span class='featured__label hero__label'> </span></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 7 2700X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="f7e48c3d-ecaa-4f70-be88-193c3ee1d79a">            <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-Processor-Wraith-Cooler/dp/B07B428V2L/?tag=bom_tomshardware-20&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback" data-model-name="Ryzen 5 2600X" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:82.55%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NGCRsMpYvNzAhf8vPeWere.jpg" alt=""><span class='featured__label hero__label'> </span></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">AMD Ryzen 5 2600X</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><h2 id="x470-and-ryzen-master-1-3">X470 And Ryzen Master 1.3</h2><p>AMD's Socket AM4 was designed with robust power delivery capabilities that aren't entirely used by first-gen Ryzen processors. The 2000-series chips are much better at leveraging the platform's current headroom through their improved boost algorithms. Some value-oriented motherboards employ scaled-back power delivery capabilities, so AMD's second-gen Ryzen CPUs communicate with the platform to modulate performance based on what the motherboard can do. That's a necessary addition to accommodate Ryzen 7 2700X's 105W TDP, which didn't exist before this new chip line. As a result, less-capable motherboards may not expose the full performance potential of higher-TDP processors like the Ryzen 7 2700X.</p><p>The processor monitors <span> Package Power Tracking (PPT) and </span><span><span>Thermal Design Current (TDC)</span> variables, measuring available margin to the motherboard's maximum power output and current, respectively. Electrical Design Current (EDC) also indicates the maximum current possible from the VRMs during peak/transient conditions. A control loop feeds the real-time telemetry data back to the Infinity Fabric, which then allows the processor to dynamically affect performance based on thermal and power conditions.</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:1440px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:54.65%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KDfG9SJTVMdBLhWgXyWenP.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KDfG9SJTVMdBLhWgXyWenP.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1440" height="787" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KDfG9SJTVMdBLhWgXyWenP.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>If the motherboard BIOS supports it, AMD exposes some of these monitoring features with its updated Ryzen Master 1.3 overclocking software. The fastest cores are identified during the binning process and flagged by Ryzen Master with gold stars on a per-<a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ccx-definition-cpu-core-explained,6338.html">CCX</a> basis. The third- and fourth-fastest cores are marked with a circle.</p><p>AMD's software now supports per-CCX overclocking as well, and includes a built-in stress test. The warranty does not cover damage caused by overclocking, so exercise caution.</p><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1261px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:32.36%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/G8hvzJZ9Xc7DPHLfLd2hGg.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/G8hvzJZ9Xc7DPHLfLd2hGg.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1261" height="408" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/G8hvzJZ9Xc7DPHLfLd2hGg.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p><span> Because there are still plenty of 300-series motherboards available for sale, AMD designed a badge to let you know that a firmware update may be necessary before dropping a 2000-series CPU into one of those older platforms. Unless your 300-series motherboard has an out-of-band update mechanism like BIOS Flashback, y</span><span><span>ou need a previous-gen Ryzen processor to update it. </span></span><span>AMD also offers its <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-raven-ridge-boot-kit,36552.html">Boot Kit solution</a>, which is a loaner processor you can use to update the motherboard firmware. <br/></span></p><p><span>Eventually, all 300-series motherboards will support 2000-series processors right out of the box. AMD expects X470 and X370 boards to coexist for the foreseeable future, so it may be possible to find excellent deals on those previous-gen motherboards. <br/></span></p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>DIMM Slots Filled</strong></td><td  ><strong>Memory Ranks</strong></td><td  ><strong>Supported Speed</strong></td></tr><tr><td  >2 of 2</td><td  >Single</td><td  >2933*</td></tr><tr><td  >2 of 2</td><td  >Dual</td><td  >2677</td></tr><tr><td  >2 of 4</td><td  >Single</td><td  >2933*</td></tr><tr><td  >2 of 4</td><td  >Dual</td><td  >2400</td></tr><tr><td  >4 of 4</td><td  >Single</td><td  >2133</td></tr><tr><td  >4 of 4</td><td  >Dual</td><td  >1866</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>*Note: requires a motherboard with at least six PCB layers. DDR4-2667 is supported on four-layer PCBs.</p><p>AMD's 2000-series processors support up to DDR4-2933 with a pair of single-rank DIMMs, though you need a six-layer motherboard to unlock that capability. Support drops back to DDR4-2667 for four-layer motherboards. Fortunately for enthusiasts, most mainstream platforms utilize six or eight layers. <span><br/></span></p><p><span>From what we've seen thus far, X470 motherboards have an improved layout to</span><span> facilitate aggressive memory overclocking. As you might expect, X470 boards in our labs are much more mature at launch than the 300-series platforms we battled last year. Thanks to this, we're easily running memory at DDR4-3466 with tight timings. Our motherboard team also noticed vastly improved overclocking with all memory slots populated, which was an issue on some X370 motherboards. <br/></span></p><p><span>X470-based motherboards feature lower power consumption, higher multi-hub USB throughput, and improved power delivery. But they still have the same connectivity options as 300-series motherboards. </span></p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>I/O Source</strong></td><td  ><strong>USB 3.1 Gen2</strong></td><td  ><strong>USB 3.1 Gen1</strong></td><td  ><strong>USB 2.0</strong></td><td  ><strong>PCIe Gen3</strong></td><td  ><strong>GPP PCIe Gen2</strong></td><td  ><strong>SATA</strong></td></tr><tr><td  >AMD Ryzen SoC (1000- and 2000-series)</td><td  >0</td><td  >4</td><td  >0</td><td  >20x</td><td  >0</td><td  >2</td></tr><tr><td  >X470/370</td><td  >2</td><td  >6</td><td  >6</td><td  >0</td><td  >8</td><td  >8</td></tr><tr><td  >B350</td><td  >2</td><td  >2</td><td  >6</td><td  >0</td><td  >6</td><td  >6</td></tr><tr><td  >A320</td><td  >1</td><td  >2</td><td  >6</td><td  >0</td><td  >4</td><td  >6</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>The first line in our chart covers Ryzen's I/O capabilities, which you then combine with one of the chipsets underneath to determine platform connectivity. A Ryzen CPU sports 20 PCIe 3.0 lanes. Sixteen are dedicated to the PCIe slots, while four lanes are dedicated to SATA ports or a 4x link for NVMe SSDs. Four of the SATA ports can also be assigned to SATA Express interfaces at a 2:1 ratio, yielding a maximum of two SATA Express connections.</p><p>As you can see, the X470 chipset offers the same connectivity options as its predecessor, with two USB 3.1 Gen2 ports, four USB 3.1 Gen1 ports, six USB 2.0 ports, and eight general-purpose PCIe 2.0 lanes that vendors can carve up for additional functionality (like hanging M.2 slots off of the chipset or enhanced 5/10GbE support).</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="cache-and-memory-performance-ipc">Cache And Memory Performance, IPC</h2><h2 id="memory-latency">Memory Latency</h2><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>AMD Measurements </strong></td><td  >L1 Cache Latency</td><td  >L2 Cache Latency</td><td  >L3 Cache Latency</td><td  >Memory Latency</td></tr><tr><td  >Latency Improvements</td><td  >13%</td><td  >34%</td><td  >16%</td><td  >11%</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>AMD's first-gen processors demonstrated higher memory latency than we expected, affecting the performance of memory-sensitive applications. The company claims it reduced memory latency by 11% this time around, as well as cutting cache latencies by double-digit percentages. We'll start by measuring the memory and Infinity Fabric subsystems, and then move on to IPC tests.</p><p>SiSoftware's Sandra is used to measure cache and memory latency with three different access patterns, giving us more granularity than a single test. Sequential access patterns are almost entirely prefetched into the TLB, so that one's a good measure of prefetcher performance. The in-page random test measures random accesses within the same memory page. It also measures TLB performance and represents best-case random performance. The full random test features a mix of TLB hits and misses, with a strong likelihood of misses, so it quantifies worst-case latency.</p><p>We tested both the Ryzen 7 1800X and Ryzen 7 2700X on the same X470 motherboard. We include results with the Ryzen 7 2700X at DDR4-2933 for the stock configuration, DDR4-3466 for the overclocked configuration, and DDR4-2666 to normalize it with AMD's Ryzen 7 1800X.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xM5WeyyjftkgmQJPHPhJYi.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EgupZhSHKVrxPpUZNmhPjT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gBbXhiDQJeGi3Mq5yKqv6M.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>With normalized DDR4-2667 data rates and timings, the Ryzen 7 2700X posts impressive gains over Ryzen 7 1800X, regardless of the data access pattern. As percentages, the 2700X's improvements weigh in at 11.49% for full random, 6.64% for in-page, and 9.35% for the sequential access pattern.</p><p>The Infinity Fabric speeds up as we increase memory frequency to the 2700X's default DDR4-2933. This fabric ties the IMC and cores together, so we record even larger improvements of 18% in the full random test, 13.4% with a full random access pattern, and 12.9% with the sequential metric.</p><p>AMD isn't fully disclosing the steps it took to improve memory latency, but we suspect the company worked on the Infinity Fabric and integrated memory controller to realize these gains.</p><h2 id="cache-latency-and-bandwidth">Cache Latency And Bandwidth</h2><p>Regardless of the memory access pattern, the smallest data chunks fit into L1 cache. As the data gets larger, it populates the 2700X's higher tiers of cache, which we outlined in the following table:</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ></td><td  ><strong>L1</strong></td><td  ><strong>L2</strong></td><td  ><strong>L3</strong></td><td  ><strong>Main Memory</strong></td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Range</strong></td><td  >2KB - 32KB</td><td  >64KB - 512KB</td><td  >1MB - 4MB</td><td  >8MB - 1GB</td></tr></tbody></table></div><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7YGBjmApj5uPfwbtsj5Ub8.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gtFwWCcFnfB4QgGE7QZ8ZP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ryeu9ZUM2sDaxmF7AeAAsh.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uhut46CiQvM7WiLiyWKHdm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/c3AFSwWVjyRtCf6pMdxnqQ.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>% Improvement Over 1800X</strong></td><td  >L1</td><td  >L2</td><td  >L3</td></tr><tr><td  >In-Page</td><td  >11.11%</td><td  >51.72%</td><td  >26.38%</td></tr><tr><td  >Full-Random</td><td  >11.11%</td><td  >53.5%</td><td  >25.64%</td></tr><tr><td  >Sequential</td><td  >11.11%</td><td  >13.3%</td><td  >13.3%</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>The cache latency reductions that we measured are even better than what AMD suggested we'd see, though its lab might be using different access patterns. Regardless, the apples-to-apples results in our table are downright impressive.</p><p>We also see a notable increase in cache bandwidth. Feeding the cores with lower latency and higher throughput is a win-win on the performance front. Intel's S-series processors still have a big single-core L1 bandwidth advantage, but AMD's updated L2 cache is measurably faster than the 1800X in both single- and multi-threaded tests. AMD even enjoys better L2 cache latency than Intel in the sequential test and better L3 cache latency with several data patterns.</p><h2 id="to-infinity-and-beyond">To Infinity, And Beyond</h2><p>The updated Zen+ design fuses two four-core CCXs together with <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-1600x-cpu-review,5014-2.html">the Infinity Fabric, </a>which is a crossbar that also handles IMC, northbridge, and PCIe traffic. As such, fabric latency is a critical variable that ensures the memory latency gains we observe can actually be delivered to the cores.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/82p4KRANX89DddwzMNJAAF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UouPKncxtzqaFTcNxbqhX8.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>SiSoftware Sandra's Processor Multi-Core Efficiency metric helps illustrate the Infinity Fabric's performance. We use the Multi-Threaded test with the "best pair match" setting (lowest latency). The utility measures ping times between threads to quantify fabric latency in every possible configuration. We boil those benchmarks down to latency averages for the different pathways, but <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-threadripper-1950x-game-performance,5207-2.html">head here for a more detailed explanation</a> of the various components.</p><p>AMD reduced Ryzen 7 2700X's intra-core latency by 11.8% and the critical cross-CCX latency by 8.3%. We also notice that Ryzen 7 2700X offers significantly improved fabric bandwidth.</p><h2 id="instructions-per-clock">Instructions Per Clock</h2><p>It's important to remember that IPC can vary by workload, so dissimilar tasks may yield different outcomes. We set a static 3 GHz clock rate for the following tests:</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jHNaZSxCzbMHK4ZJEJ3ug7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ANQwzjmCMmkyomStsaWq5i.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mrhEnShifeUP89B3UAtsoc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QBLmn2f5JZPAWsCD4YKXSe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZACrw5LDQrNVNagJaqfMjW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3Ga5sdcFjbf92HksLXzPNe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xovEKgPjEeT869GKUWE4ii.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/poUjSomiLRJfuJ7gavi7bm.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Our single-core Cinebench benchmark suggests a 1.6% IPC improvement favoring Ryzen 7 2700X. But while AMD does improve, Intel still holds onto a distinct IPC throughput advantage. Switching to the Multi-Threaded Cinbench test gives Ryzen 7 2700X a 2.7% improvement over its predecessor.</p><p>Core i9-7820X employs two 256-bit AVX FMA units per core that operate in parallel, whereas Ryzen's Zen architecture divides 256-bit AVX operations across two FMA units per core. That difference hands the Skylake-X processor a commanding lead in y-cruncher. We do see a 3.9% increase in the 2700X's Multi-Threaded y-cruncher result compared to Ryzen 7 1800X. But the gains in single-threaded AVX performance are marginal.</p><p>We see similar results in our single-core cryptographic tests, though Ryzen 7 2700X takes an 8.7% lead over the 1800X in the Multi-Threaded AES-256-ECB encryption workload. AMD's Zen architecture includes two AES cryptographic accelerators for each core, so it isn't surprising to see Ryzen dominate over Intel's S-series CPUs in the AES-256-ECB tests.</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-spectre-and-test-setup">Overclocking, Spectre, And Test Setup</h2><h2 id="overclocking-5">Overclocking</h2><p>We ran our gaming and application tests in the U.S. lab, while power/thermal measurements were collected in our German lab.</p><p>In the U.S. lab, we paired our Ryzen 7 2700X with Corsair's H115i cooler for overclocking. This allowed us to maintain a 4.2 GHz all-core frequency at 1.3785V Vcore, 1.2V SoC voltage, and the default Load Line Calibration settings. Since we couldn't smash through to 4.3 GHz without exceeding AMD's 1.40V maximum recommended Vcore setting, we stopped at 4.2 GHz.</p><p>We did encounter temperatures as high as 90°C during extended AVX testing, so we recommend a capable closed-loop or custom water cooler for overclocking. AMD would really benefit from an AVX-offset feature as well, which could cut clock rates during power-hungry AVX workloads. Should you choose to go the more extreme route, there have been reports of 5.8 GHz with Ryzen 7 2700X under LN2.</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:57.35%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tSJuyouTU9BXb2cHYXVrH6.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tSJuyouTU9BXb2cHYXVrH6.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="866" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tSJuyouTU9BXb2cHYXVrH6.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>First-gen Ryzen processors don't have much memory overclocking headroom, so we're still testing tuned X370 platforms at DDR4-3200. However, the X470 platform was remarkably stable at higher data rates with Ryzen 7 2700X. So, we settled on DDR4-3466 with 14-14-14-34 timings (though we're confident that more time to tune would yield even higher overclocks). We also ran our overclocked Intel processors at DDR4-3466.</p><h2 id="spectre-and-meltdown">Spectre And Meltdown</h2><p>Our test rigs now include Meltdown And Spectre Variant 1 mitigations. Spectre Variant 2 requires both motherboard firmware/microcode and operating system patches. We have installed the operating system patches for Variant 2.</p><p>Today's performance measurements do not include Intel's motherboard firmware mitigations for Spectre Variant 2 though, as we've been waiting for AMD patches to level the playing field. Last week, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-spectre-meltdown-patch-microcode,36860.html">AMD announced that it’s making the mitigations available</a> to motherboard vendors and OEMs, which the company says should take time to appear in the wild. We checked MSI's website for firmware updates applicable to our X370 platforms when AMD made its announcement, but no new BIOSes were available (and still aren't).</p><p>Unfortunately, we were only made aware that Variant 2 mitigations are present in our X470 board's firmware just before launch, precluding us from re-testing the Intel platforms with patches applied. We're working on this now, and plan to post updated results in future reviews.</p><p>The lack of Spectre Variant 2 patches in our Intel results likely give the Core CPUs a slight advantage over AMD's patched platforms. But the performance difference should be minimal with modern processors.</p><h2 id="test-setup">Test Setup</h2><p>AMD is working on a Precision Boost Overdrive feature, which seems similar to the Multi-Core Enhanced Turbo (MCE) feature that allows Intel's K-series processors to run at their maximum Turbo Boost bin across all cores at all times. The setting on Intel platforms modifies the CPU's clock rate and voltage to deliver higher performance, basically amounting to factory-sanctioned 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:76.82%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4i9P6bW9RwPVbaeK4gcjZ4.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4i9P6bW9RwPVbaeK4gcjZ4.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1510" height="1160" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4i9P6bW9RwPVbaeK4gcjZ4.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>AMD's Ryzen Master 1.3 software doesn't currently let you activate this feature from within Windows. But as we often find with MCE, AMD's Precision Boost Overdrive is enabled by default in many BIOSes. After extensive experimentation, we can conclude that the option doesn't deliver an appreciable performance gain in its current form. Thus, we ran our tests with Precision Boost Overdrive disabled.</p><h2 id="comparison-products-7">Comparison Products </h2>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="93396447-445f-445e-b76b-d2c9e863f678">            <a href="http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-8900246-12920453?sid=tomshardware-&url=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117824" data-model-name="Core i5-8400" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:108.91%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Mbp7fKeJrnqTAagSTBP399.jpg" alt=""></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">Intel Core i5-8400</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="d0df2fff-a9a6-4e21-bc7b-9660bcadb475">            <a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117825" 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="f8c39dc7-0eab-4bf5-81ad-718055bc798e">            <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" 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:128.84%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uXuLfgK33H8rdH2AUffqUk.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</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p> </p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><h2 id="test-systems-5">Test Systems</h2><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>AMD Socket AM4 (400-Series)</strong>AMD Ryzen 7 2700XMSI X470 Gaming M7 AC2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2933, DDR4-3466<strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z370):</strong>Intel Core i5-8600K, i5-8600K, Core i5-8400MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC2x 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4-3200 @ 2666<strong>AMD Socket </strong><strong>AM4 Workstation (300-Series)</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 i7-7700KMSI 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.AMD Socket AM4 (400-Series)</strong></strong>AMD Ryzen 7 2700XMSI X470 Gaming M7 AC2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2933, DDR4-3466<strong>Intel LGA 1151 (Z370):</strong>Intel Core i7-8700K, i5-8600K, Core i5-8400MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2400, DDR4-2667, DDR4-3466<strong>AMD Socket AM4 (300-Series)</strong>AMD Ryzen 7 1800X, 1700X, 1700, Ryzen 5 1600XMSI X370 Xpower Gaming Titanium2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2667, DDR4-3200<strong><span>Intel LGA 1151 (Z270)</span></strong>Intel Core i7-7700K MSI Z270 Gaming M72x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2400<strong>Intel LGA 2066</strong>Intel Core i7-7820XMSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC4x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2666<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)<strong>U.S.</strong>Corsair H115i</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-and-aots-escalation-2">VRMark, 3DMark And AotS: Escalation</h2><h2 id="vrmark-amp-3dmark-5">VRMark & 3DMark </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JsCZFJk8aYhd6MeRgh2vZb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dpH8zr2uewe2eT99efGZyA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GhY7upv5Mw7oio28og79Ji.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Gaming is where rubber meets the road for most enthusiasts. AMD tells us that its 2000-series processors should be nearly equivalent to Intel's comparable models, at least at stock settings. And there's no doubt that Ryzen 7 2700X will excel in heavily-threaded titles. But tests that are sensitive to clock rate and IPC throughput, such as VRMark, have traditionally been a challenge for Ryzen.</p><p>The 2700X bridges the gap between Intel's processors and first-gen Ryzen. AMD's stock 2700X outstrips the Ryzen 7 1800X by 11.8%. More impressively, it also beats the overclocked 1800X by 2%. The 2700X's lead over its predecessor extends further after tuning its cores and memory subsystem.</p><p>Synthetic benchmarks are great because they tend to scale more clearly than real-world applications. 3DMark's real usefulness lies in measuring the amount of performance available to game engines, giving us a peek at what highly-optimized games <em>could be</em> capable of.</p><p>Ryzen 7 2700X's 16 threads beat Core i7-8700K's 12 threads in our DX11 and DX12 CPU tests, even after overclocking. The 2700X also bests Intel's $589 Core i7-7820X during both tests.</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/SbMPgdaXLnC5GStdsJpfzf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/B7ZLs2HBtEA3xgJQAA2jpQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FzfQW8ggx7Bjw9PKPaZp3b.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YWA6Fna7J2dFjxHTcvkBR9.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/n3jMvgxD2ZxgTJgK4dv8zC.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation </em><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-cpu,4951-6.html">evokes memories of AMD's early struggles</a> with the Zen architecture. This was one of the first games to receive an update optimized for AMD's processor design.</p><p>Although the patch improved performance, Ryzen 7 1800X still fails to beat a stock Core i7-8700K. But Ryzen 7 2700X and its Precision Boost 2 algorithm turn the tables, giving AMD an advantage in stock and overclocked trim.</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-amp-ai-dawn-of-war-iii-6">Civilization VI Graphics & AI, Dawn of War III</h2><h2 id="civilization-vi-ai-test-7">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/bKKpwwbwu3PFB3qbzk5WTT.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bKKpwwbwu3PFB3qbzk5WTT.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="834" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bKKpwwbwu3PFB3qbzk5WTT.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p><em>Civilization's </em><span>AI test measures performance in a turn-based strategy game and tends to favor per-core performance. Ryzen 7 2700X almost ties the Coffee Lake-based Core i7-8700K at its stock settings. However, Intel gains more from overclocking, pulling away after our tuning efforts. <br/></span></p><p><span>Again, notice that the stock Ryzen 7 2700X is fast enough to beat the overclocked 1800X. <br/></span></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/t2UnUVceMcwJaDfKFcn9ZR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Xm6h4ZnZ5A6RqiL5xVNq8a.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DuJnrjJFZNDUKjiaoD4xf4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7biz84mSyjuQeb2E6FW968.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DNxG2gsQew4SzTh6n8TgMb.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The stock Ryzen 7 2700X beats every other Ryzen CPU by ~10 FPS (or more). But Intel's stock CPUs have no problem maintaining their advantage.</p><p>Tuning the 2700X yields a 6.3% speed-up on average. But that doesn't help it catch the Core i5-8600K, which takes the top two spots in our chart.</p><h2 id="warhammer-40-000-dawn-of-war-iii-7">Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War III</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/h2vBs2X4cjG9iRPN5PiZLG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EccsRnKKRzuoMNJy4UdGUN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Et5JzBHDpnvZ6xiUQqZQMS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RftKQqm2yFUW6fhTapYxNQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pRpzykJR5C8VMrLC3x9KKZ.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The overclocked Ryzen 7 2700X lands just shy of the Core i7-7700K and -8700K. Tuning those chips allows them to walk away from AMD's flagship, though.</p><p>Meanwhile, Ryzen 7 2700X beats AMD's Ryzen 7 1800X by 14% right out of the box.</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-gta-v-hitman">Far Cry Primal, GTA: V, Hitman</h2><h2 id="far-cry-primal-5">Far Cry Primal </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5NzSdHWYS35uwSRErvjLRh.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dUwx8ziHEmKo6HgPVzpjyn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FAGpzdtKfHuEKpqjfruaUA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VGuMHJ9jM7LfwEKFAmbLji.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VrVXGUbafzKmcewkbZnrtL.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Far Cry Primal</em> responds well to Intel's Core i7-7700K. It's also interesting that a stock Core i5-8600K beats the overclocked 6C/12T Core i7-8700K. Then again, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-core-i5-8600k-cpu,5264-6.html">we've seen this tendency before</a>.</p><p>The stock Ryzen 7 2700X lags behind Intel's newest K-series CPUs, though tuning does help AMD's case.</p><h2 id="grand-theft-auto-v-7">Grand Theft Auto V</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uTXs2Gx43WJPGzMMaz2dqk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rFDtRCxSwHUH2hdh7KsJNe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mCLz2VV8sqneu6UCNZgJkf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5GZv46SUGVEyGwzB25fbtN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3vRgj6HSf34qHnABR5rNXi.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Grand Theft Auto V</em><span> favors Intel architectures and, more generally, multi-core designs with high clock rates. The overclocked Ryzen 7 2700X vies with Intel's chips at stock frequencies. But again, giving Coffee Lake the same treatment propels those chips to the top of our chart. <br/></span></p><p><span>Ryzen 7 1700 suffers from a low base clock rate and languishes at the bottom of our chart as a result. This processor often provides similar performance as AMD's Ryzen 7 1800X after some tuning. However, it's clear that the Ryzen 7 2700X sets a new high water mark for AMD CPUs in games. <br/></span></p><h2 id="hitman-7">Hitman </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fuQRsc29rEthfMhwdqwdXZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/29WTuGbHrqPPYmGm5NEZh7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ypHPDkJFALHUWrHaK2TVgn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CEWAy7KBKY3er7L5iCV8eF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uZXYBRajDZYWUQKAqL8Zik.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Hitman</em>'s GOTY update imposed a hard 90 FPS cap on performance, so this title no longer scales well with high-end PCs. Unfortunately, some popular AAA games employ similar frame rate limits, so we leave this result in place to show that not all titles respond to faster components.</p><p>We do see slight scaling from Ryzen 7 1700 up to Intel's overclocked models. However, these differences would be hard to spot during a gaming session. Ryzen 7 2700X lands in a familiar position ahead of AMD's previous-gen Ryzen 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-project-cars-2">Shadow Of War, Project CARS 2</h2><h2 id="middle-earth-shadow-of-war-7">Middle-earth: Shadow Of War</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xrVSA9d2xPecnQeSyzSsge.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cKXsiuaFuPdGpVJHyCbS3L.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GbHbUAu9UtDsWiYdWtff9Q.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/abyBqVm5ftuBsCMn6A2chC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Nssck5kwE8QRBQYKWnSPQb.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Middle-earth: Shadow of War</em><span> doesn't scale as dramatically as some of our other benchmarks, and it certainly isn't as sensitive to IPC throughput and frequency as </span><em>Shadow of Mordor</em><span>. While CPU reviews tend to focus on games that scale well with certain host processing specifications, some games just can't get enough graphics performance. </span></p><p>Ryzen 7 2700X comes tantalizingly close to matching the Coffee Lake-based processors at stock and overclocked settings.</p><h2 id="project-cars-2-7">Project CARS 2</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9KrcKFsoAjCshrUysfANEP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CDRJfXt7qETqMmJ5o2phUC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9PKQxnG4qMvU2GfzFKtTQn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ufUBFsiJXA9MS6kpzgSBFM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ouRxWoLUmSdNXmiXt9XDxm.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Project CARS 2</em><span> is purportedly optimized for threading. A 6C/6T Core i5-8600K beats the overclocked 8C/16T Ryzen 7 2700X though, so it's clear that parallelism isn't the most influential factor in defining this game's performance. <br/></span></p><p><span>A stock Ryzen 7 2700X trails all of the Intel CPUs except for Core i7-7820X. But overclocking nudges AMD's flagship closer to the top. <br/></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="office-and-productivity-2">Office And Productivity</h2><h2 id="adobe-creative-cloud-7">Adobe Creative Cloud</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tfjCvNLBtKiWHucnE3bAVX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TwetPQjDCLsSJ9iymruFRY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WULRUem2wbqnm6fvrANap7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ryy25g6nDsxsqNAgt7DWX5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wTPhCdvG9b2uU4cL5gUsvL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/j2d3nmNUbnuoHp6QZeJKbi.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Adobe's Creative Cloud suite generally favors higher frequencies and IPC throughput, giving Intel an advantage. Still, Ryzen 7 2700X provides a nice balance of high clock rates and core count, yielding an impressive 13.8% speed-up in the overall score compared to AMD's tuned Ryzen 7 1800X.</p><p>Overclocking doesn't deliver the big gains we recorded in our gaming suite. In some of the lightly-threaded application tests (like After Effects), a stock Ryzen 7 2700X is even faster than the overclocked one. This is a result of the 2700X's 4.3 GHz Precision Boost 2 frequency, which outstrips our 4.2 GHz all-core overclock. These tests also aren't as latency-sensitive as gaming workloads, so DDR4-3466 doesn't deliver as much of a performance improvement.</p><h2 id="web-browser-7">Web Browser</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SMfPiajv8TE5RXcGAjAH9o.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SW6oTberoPVWkp6GUfLU9Y.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7xRx4z7C9QuoQLR7gg4WFX.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The Krakken suite tests JavaScript performance using several workloads, including audio, imaging, and cryptography. AMD's processors typically lag Intel's in Web browser benchmarks due to their lower per-core performance. However, a stock Ryzen 7 2700X still outpaces its overclocked predecessor.</p><p>The MotionMark benchmarks, which emphasize graphics performance (rather than JavaScript), are also sensitive to CPU clock rates. Again, the 2700X's higher stock Precision Boost 2 frequencies allow it to slip past the overclocked configuration. At the same time, we measure a 14.6% gain over the stock 1800X.</p><h2 id="productivity-7">Productivity</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PzPkAQY2cjsD9NtaaEwXCB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5wHRhLPmis5sJWZZzSNqqM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/afSSFomzcXGkWTagCrVsHZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4tFm6tjNUSLUardMhzg4ZE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gvpoqyjFpFvEdts8gSh2C6.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. Other platform-level considerations affect this test as well, including the storage subsystem.</p><p>Ryzen 7 2700X is much more competitive than AMD's previous-generation CPUs. We also observe slim gains from overclocking in many of these workloads. </p><p>Our video conferencing workload measures performance in single- and multi-user applications that utilize the Windows Media Foundation for playback and encoding. It also performs facial detection to model real-world usage. Not surprisingly then, a stock Ryzen 7 2700X leads the rest of the field at default clock rates thanks to its 8C/16T configuration and higher frequencies. </p><p>The photo editing benchmark measures performance with Futuremark's binaries using the ImageMagick library. Common photo processing workloads also tend to be parallelized, which obviously plays to the 2700X's eight-core design.</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="rendering-encoding-and-compression-2">Rendering, Encoding, And Compression</h2><h2 id="rendering-7">Rendering </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XkJiW43Y7WpoQC7FkJRAae.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FcMK96TEnbxAATzXenqq8L.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/p8ZMubzYdkyTQmCbNggD5J.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6adbv9c287mLsn7gQx9MSL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YD8yDUfQVJAMCgjwzP4jRH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EuNKCTjLM8yK9bWYBBxuNE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/26Ri7Mt5yWkpyUmK3hywXg.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wi7MJzXQx8CNLFWXDG8fyJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Bpkbe36DCCuSasNXHh64ia.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Ryzen 7 2700X takes a commanding lead in the multi-core Cinebench benchmark, which we expected in light of the radical cache latency and bandwidth improvements that AMD made. POV-Ray also shows the 2700X to be a chart-topper, though again it's faster in stock form than overclocked.</p><p>AMD's Ryzen 7 2700X leads in many of the threaded workloads, but isn't as impressive in workloads that tax a single core. There, Intel's architectures continue shining.</p><p>Core i7-7820X leads in LuxMark. But notice that we don't have <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-threadripper-1900x-cpu,5222-8.html">OpenCL results</a> for it. This is because the older OpenCL SDK doesn't support AVX-512. Intel updated the SDK fairly recently, and it works correctly with Skylake-X-based processors. We'll have to retest all of these CPUs to reflect the changes, but be assured that AVX-512 is a powerful addition. </p><h2 id="encoding-amp-compression-7">Encoding & Compression </h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qfSLDgNaYGdttHCbMNAZLk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/x5CtqbxFn62pd3n5uZ4rhD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3u5eoaY9qpty6p63xCaxa8.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NpHTiwfwqB3HnyDByssamm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BQ6MexcRCFv8pUbq6v2hEb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Rw9V4NmcsQiNDGXFMXeSDg.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UuN2KxiFb8LKpvcbXe6HN3.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>LAME is the quintessential example of a single-threaded workload, and the 2700X posts solid gains over Ryzen 7 1800X in its stock configuration. </p><p>Our threaded compression and decompression tests adsorb data directly from system memory, thus removing storage from the equation. As per usual, the Ryzen processors dominate the decompression workload while Intel's Skylake-X leads in compression-oriented benchmarks. It's notable that Core i7-8700K needs overclocking in order to beat AMD's flagship.</p><p>There's a larger delta between Intel and AMD processors during our HandBrake x265 test compared to the x264 benchmark due to its heavier distribution of AVX instructions. Ryzen 7 2700X is particularly impressive in the x264 metric, where it upsets the capable Core i7-7820X.</p><p>We also provide results from y-cruncher, a single- and multi-threaded program that computes Pi using AVX instructions. We tested with version 0.7.3.9474, which includes Ryzen optimizations. The 2700X trails Intel's portfolio in the single-core benchmark. However, parallelization puts it in a more competitive position. Also, we clearly see the benefit of Core i7-7820X's dual 256-bit AVX FMA units (per core) in the AVX workloads.</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="xfr2-vs-manual-overclocking">XFR2 vs. Manual Overclocking</h2><h2 id="xfr2-cooling-and-clock-rates">XFR2, Cooling, and Clock Rates</h2><p>In contrast to the first-gen Ryzen models and their strange temperature curves, the tCTL (core temperature) values now correspond with what we'd expect to see. AMD does add a 10-degree offset to the 2700X specifically, which motherboard BIOSes already take into account. We subtract this offset from our own measurements.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/e5sLeoPVNFgBMPe5iPgg9B.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4Ftx8K8rZASU2hWF7CDwi7.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Chip quality naturally influences achievable clock rates as well. These effects are seen much more clearly with second-gen Ryzen CPUs supporting XFR2, since they have to be binned precisely.</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/L3PbZYLXHQtyxp2SfJy8Jd.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/L3PbZYLXHQtyxp2SfJy8Jd.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="534" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/L3PbZYLXHQtyxp2SfJy8Jd.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>With as much cooling performance as we could muster, Ryzen 7 2700X still reaches almost 4.2 GHz. A more conventional thermal solution would result in a lower clock rate. However, with a good air cooler, it should be possible to sustain 4 GHz on all cores.</p><h2 id="manual-overclocking">Manual Overclocking</h2><p>Ryzen 7 2700X can be manually overclocked to 4.3 GHz. But the 1.475V required for this is more aggressive than we want to get long-term. Pushing to 4.35 GHz resulted in a crash no matter how much voltage we applied.</p><p>As the following curve shows, power consumption and performance in Cinebench are almost directly proportional, so long as the system runs stably and doesn't crash. It's also worth noting that <span class="js-about-module-abstr">Cool'n'Quiet</span> is completely disabled on our test platform when we configure the ratio multiplier manually. When that happens, the configured clock rate doesn't drop from its specified maximum, even at idle.</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/c9mYyg9hNU4PucR5P5NWpN.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/c9mYyg9hNU4PucR5P5NWpN.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/c9mYyg9hNU4PucR5P5NWpN.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>We measure a maximum of 135W in Cinebench and just over 150W in Prime95 with AVX, although this extreme torture test is more of an exhibition.</p><p>If you spend some money on good cooling, there's no reason to manually overclock Ryzen 7 2700X. Thanks to XFR2, AMD's flagship should remain stable above 4 GHz, even under full load. Try to go any higher and you'll pay a hefty price in heat, power, and possibly long-term reliability.</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-3">Power Consumption</h2><p>At idle, Ryzen 7 2700X lands behind most of the Intel competition, but ahead of previous-gen Ryzen CPUs. First and second place in our chart go to a couple of AMD APUs, perhaps surprisingly.</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:202.25%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/j8RgMrmb7eNCdy3eTVK9wH.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/j8RgMrmb7eNCdy3eTVK9wH.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="712" height="1440" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/j8RgMrmb7eNCdy3eTVK9wH.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Under a light CAD workload, Ryzen 7 2700X performs better and uses less power than its predecessor. This shows us that AMD didn't pay for better clocks with a sacrifice to power consumption. Its progress is already apparent at this point in the measurements.</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:202.39%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2zWA9u4xTiCfBzmBQEwFSL.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2zWA9u4xTiCfBzmBQEwFSL.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="712" height="1441" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2zWA9u4xTiCfBzmBQEwFSL.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Gaming tells a similar story; the performance increase is again more pronounced than the differences in power consumption.</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:202.39%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zBPmrpHwjdWU3DPjhhhnHX.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zBPmrpHwjdWU3DPjhhhnHX.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="712" height="1441" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zBPmrpHwjdWU3DPjhhhnHX.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>When it comes to our stress test, AMD's Ryzen 7 2700X is much more reserved than its predecessor. We attribute this to the chip's XFR2 functionality, along with more granular frequency/voltage settings.</p><p>Even when we hit it as hard as possible, the new CPU stays stable above 4 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:712px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:202.39%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XsKfxBaQHBoRFvcEbH2KQC.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XsKfxBaQHBoRFvcEbH2KQC.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="712" height="1441" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XsKfxBaQHBoRFvcEbH2KQC.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Performance rises and power consumption falls (if only slightly). There's truth to AMD's marketing material, so says our lab equipment. Ryzen 7 2700X really does deserve attention for these results.</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="thermals-and-noise">Thermals And Noise</h2><h2 id="the-wraith-prism">The Wraith Prism</h2><p>Ryzen 7 2700X's Wraith Prism thermal solution is a large, high-finned cooler with four flattened heat pipes and a plate behind them for stabilization. The heat sink's entire contact surface is thus made of copper. Its fins are arranged in such a way that the exhaust air is focused toward the memory and I/O shield.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CthuXFi3mAL7pWiwrnmwGf.jpg" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6TJ9hvMwnodCztBpg8uvQh.jpg" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The fastening clamp is a big disadvantage of this large cooler, which takes us back to the old Athlon XP days. Even at maximum load on all cores in the stress test, the CPU only reaches a maximum temperature of 82.8°C (corrected value), so it remains below the thermal throttle threshold. The cooler handles the 105 watts easily. You can expect peaks up to 70°C and a little above, depending on the motherboard's predefined fan curve.</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/wUi2jyGLJqjXhJvmR7WYYB.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wUi2jyGLJqjXhJvmR7WYYB.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wUi2jyGLJqjXhJvmR7WYYB.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>The cooler is loud and emits 44 dB(A) under load (50 cm distance, 45° diagonal) when the fan is spinning at 2600-2700 RPM. The fan can even be a bit noisy even when the system is idling on the Windows desktop. Unfortunately, the fan adjusts much too rapidly as the cooler reacts to short-term temperature jumps.</p><p>We see the result in the narrow-band frequency spectrum of the motor noise, which shifts back and forth between approx. 240 and 300 Hz. The fan generates almost 39 dB(A) at idle, which isn't necessary. It helps if adjust the fan curve to a fixed speed of at least 1400 RPM if the processor is under 60°C. However, you'll have to experiment because each case will require different settings.</p><p>AMD has made good progress with XFR2 and the powerful cooling finally pays off in terms of performance. The power consumption remains largely the same and you get a nice clock rate increase, but we don't like the unnecessary noise levels or the fiddly mounting mechanism.</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-5">Final Analysis</h2><p>AMD's 2000-series processors aren't revolutionary, but they are far beyond the normal evolutionary updates we've become accustomed to over the last several years.</p><p>In the chart below, we plotted gaming performance with both average frame rates and a geometric mean of the 99<sup>th</sup> percentile frame times (a good indicator of smoothness), which we then converted into an FPS measurement. We're also presenting price-to-performance charts that get split up to include CPUs-only 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/z2Xcvqgfv9ueoC7ajEbEJ6.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Hdu5T3fyLSmKSHBevNzzwN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oNtaZnfYHfguGNBksV26Nm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4qQmVd6uAMvVbGTEMv4odW.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8bKUSbqH8EpriT2QCuNS3C.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uH4RoHqMngQzdsf3rjAwCk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Gj6D5QDPCR7gZHGtwxcHRZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pjkQMGzUS6MMr3mVUThfe9.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>In gaming, AMD's stock Ryzen 7 2700X delivers a great performance boost that rivals its overclocked predecessor in every one of our tests. Tuning the 2700X provides additional performance, though you probably won't notice the difference. Check out our chart: as you can see, the Ryzen 7 2700X effectively ties Core i7-8700K based on the geometric mean. But it sells at a $30 discount, drops into a less expensive motherboard, and comes with a thermal solution that adds even more value.</p><p>While the overclocked Core i7-8700K is a fierce competitor, it requires you to buy a Z-series motherboard for overclocking, along with a capable cooler. Core i5-8600K offers most of the -8700K's performance, but you lose Ryzen 7 2700X's sixteen threads and bundled heat sink/fan. We think it's safe to say that AMD is delivering on its pledge to provide a near-equivalent gaming experience in most titles.</p><p>If you're searching for a more productivity-oriented processor, Ryzen 7 2700X is incredibly attractive. It offers superior performance compared to the Core i7-8700K in many of our threaded tests, and is much more competitive in lightly threaded applications than previous-gen models.</p><p>AMD's Precision Boost 2 and XFR2 algorithms are already pushing the voltage/frequency curve to its limits, so don't expect much in the way of overclocking headroom. We did tune Ryzen 7 2700X up to 4.2 GHz, but a higher dual-core Precision Boost 2 frequency of 4.3 GHz offers better performance than our all-core overclock in certain applications. Significant gains in games were likely a result of heightened sensitivity to our DDR4-3466 memory.</p><p>AMD's latest Ryzen 7  delivers a host of features that make enthusiasts swoon, such as an unlocked multiplier, backward compatibility with 300-series motherboards, solder between the heat spreader and die, and an LED-equipped cooler. We only wish that B450-based motherboards were available at launch time. Hopefully we hear more about AMD's lower-cost platform soon.</p><p>In a broader sense, AMD is delivering on its first update to the Ryzen processor series, proving that it can execute on its roadmap. It looks like it's going to be another busy year in the CPU space--and that's more good news for enthusiasts and gamers.</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 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-2">Overclocking & Test Setup </h2><h2 id="overclocking-6">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-2">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-8">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-2">Far Cry Primal, GTA: V, Hitman</h2><h2 id="far-cry-primal-6">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-8">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-8">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-2-2">Shadow Of War, Project CARS 2</h2><h2 id="middle-earth-shadow-of-war-8">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-2-8">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-6">Office & Productivity</h2><h2 id="test-setup-3">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-8">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-8">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-8">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-6">Rendering, Encoding & Compression</h2><h2 id="rendering-8">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-8">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="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: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-6">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-9">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-7">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-9">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-9">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-2-9">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-4">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-6">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-6">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-10">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-8">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/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-8">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-8">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-8">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-10">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-9">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-2-10">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-5">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-11">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-10">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-12">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-11">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-13">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-12">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-6">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 i3-8350K Review ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i3-8350k-cpu,5304.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Intel improved its Core i3 family by arming it with four physical cores. Let's see if the unlocked Core i3-8350K can usurp the competition from AMD. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">6X6RAVrkteD9kw7MBZGMVh</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ABd3kJsFRhJihobxni2DbL-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 16 Nov 2017 14:00:01 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:27:41 +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/ABd3kJsFRhJihobxni2DbL-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[null]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ABd3kJsFRhJihobxni2DbL-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="core-i3-goes-quad">Core i3 Goes Quad </h2><figure class="van-image-figure pull-" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:838px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:114.56%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ABd3kJsFRhJihobxni2DbL.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ABd3kJsFRhJihobxni2DbL.jpg" align="" fullscreen="1" width="838" height="960" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ABd3kJsFRhJihobxni2DbL.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>While the Coffee Lake-based Core i7 and i5 CPUs benefit from 50% more cores, Intel's newest Core i3 CPUs enjoy an even more significant makeover. Previous i3s featured two Hyper-Threaded cores. But these Coffee Lake models come with four physical cores (and no Hyper-Threading), making them more capable in the tasks Core i3s once struggled with.</p><p>In fact, that jump from two to four cores puts Core i3 on the same level as prior Kaby Lake-based Core i5 CPUs. Better still, Intel's official pricing suggests the company now sells quad-core processors where its dual-core chips were once found. There's just one problem: shortages are causing prices to spike, negatively affecting Intel's value story. Hopefully that's rectified sooner than later.</p><p>The Core i3-8350K already has its work cut out: we weren't impressed by last generation's Core i3-7350K, which was too expensive, required a premium Z270-equipped motherboard for overclocking support, and didn't include a cooler. Now Intel has to hope the -8350K fares better in the face of limited availability and higher cost. Unfortunately, the company's continued insistence that a Z-series motherboard is needed for overclocking won't help the value equation. Doubly so since you still don't get a thermal solution.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td  ><strong>Active Cores</strong></td><td  ><strong>Base Frequency</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  >Intel Core i5-8600K</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  >Intel Core i5-8400</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  ><strong>Intel Core i3-8350K </strong></td><td  >4.0</td><td  >4.0</td><td  >4.0</td><td  >4.0</td><td  >-</td></tr><tr><td  ><strong>Intel Core i3-7350K</strong></td><td  >4.2</td><td  >4.2</td><td  >4.2</td><td  >-</td><td  >-</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>As with older Core i3s, the Coffee Lake models do not include Turbo Boost technology. If you aren't overclocking, this means the -8350K runs at up to 4 GHz, regardless of workload, whereas Core i5 and i7 models accelerate to higher clock rates based on the number of active cores. Moreover, the new Core i3s are limited to DDR4-2400, while Core i5 and i7 give you official access to DDR4-2666.</p><h2 id="specifications">Specifications</h2><p>Core i3-8350K&apos;s extra cores impose a few other changes. For instance, L3 cache jumps to 8MB. Compare that to Core i3-7350K&apos;s 4MB or the 6MB found on Core i5 (Kaby Lake). The -8350K is also Intel&apos;s first 91W Core i3. Previously, Core i3-7350K set the high bar with its 65W TDP. It&apos;s only a shame that, as with all K-series processors, you&apos;re on the hook for your own thermal solution.</p><p>The -8350K does come with UHD Graphics 630, which becomes more relevant as we descend Intel&apos;s product stack in search of value. The thing is, we don&apos;t imagine many folks shopping for unlocked CPUs plan on using on-die graphics engines. GeForce GTX 1060 or Radeon RX 580 cards are more probable in the enthusiast-on-a-budget space.</p><p>Intel lists the -8350K at a recommended $168 to $179, similar to its dual-core -7350K. Of course, after a few months of availability, the -7350K started showing up around ~$30 less than its MSRP, where the CPU still sits today. It&apos;d be great to see Coffee Lake CPUs hit their recommended prices sooner than later. Unfortunately, Core i3-8350K starts around $230. Pairing it up to the least-expensive Z370 motherboard, hovering around $120, pushes this chip into six-core Ryzen 5 1600 territory, with its bundled cooler and B350 motherboard support.</p><p>The Core i3-8350K also faces another (somewhat unexpected) competitor in Intel&apos;s 6C/6T Core i5-8400, which sells for just a few dollars more. We&apos;re plenty impressed with the well-rounded -8400 in both games and applications, even if you can&apos;t really tune it. The quad-core -8350K won&apos;t be able to match an i5 in heavily threaded workloads. But its unlocked multiplier should be better suited to gamers aiming for higher frequencies. We have the relevant contenders lined up for testing, so let&apos;s get to it.</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 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="overclocking-mce-amp-how-we-test">Overclocking, MCE & How We Test</h2><h2 id="overclocking-7">Overclocking</h2><p>Intel borrowed the AVX offset feature from its high-end processors, introducing it to mainstream CPUs during the Kaby Lake generation. Densely-packed AVX workloads are power-hungry, and thus generate far more heat than non-AVX tasks. The offset is responsible for pulling frequency back when the processor executes AVX instructions, allowing you to achieve higher overclocks without worrying about AVX workloads causing instability.</p><p>The feature came in handy for our Core i3-8350K overclocking efforts. We dialed in a 5 GHz clock rate at 1.32V and passed numerous non-AVX stress tests. But we couldn't achieve stability with AVX-enabled utilities unless we exceeded our preferred limit of 1.35V. Adjusting the AVX offset to -2 set a 4.8 GHz ceiling in AVX workloads. That proved to be Prime95-stable for extended periods.</p><p>Since Core i3-8350K doesn't come with a bundled heat sink and fan, we used our Corsair H115i for testing. Temperatures remained under 70°C with the beefy thermal solution, so heat wasn't a problem as we overclocked. Of course, your mileage may vary, especially if you top Core i3-8350K with a more value-oriented cooler. </p><p>We also have several overclocked Ryzen models in our test pool. These chips are famously <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-1600x-cpu-review,5014-2.html">sensitive to memory performance</a>, so we attempted to test all overclocked AMD CPUs at a 3200 MT/s data rate. Ryzen 5 1400 was the only processor that fell short, stabilizing at 2933 MT/s.</p><h2 id="multi-core-enhancement-mce">Multi-Core Enhancement (MCE) </h2><p>MSI motherboards feature a default Enhanced Turbo feature that allows K-series processors to run at their maximum Turbo Boost bin across 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 option for our stock CPU testing to reflect Intel's specifications.</p><h2 id="msi-z370-gaming-pro-carbon-ac">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-processors">Comparison Processors</h2>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="974325bb-7fc9-446f-bf3b-80c264343785">            <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>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="60abede7-07c7-4b25-8ffd-2e34734d3ccf">            <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>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="06126604-f2ed-4409-b81f-509e098858aa">            <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><h2 id="test-systems-7">Test Systems</h2><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, i5-8400, i3-8350KMSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC4x 8GB G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 @ 2666, 2933, and 3200 <strong>AMD Socket AM4 </strong>AMD Ryzen 5 1500X, Ryzen 5 1600, Ryzen 5 1400, Ryzen 3 1300XMSI X370 Xpower Gaming Titanium2x 8GB G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 @ 2667 and 3200 <strong><span>Intel LGA 1151 (Z270)</span></strong>Intel Core i3-7350K, 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 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="vrmark-3dmark-amp-aots-escalation-7">VRMark, 3DMark & AotS: Escalation</h2><h2 id="vrmark-amp-3dmark-7">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/RYV9UpTQ9Meq9LMBWFDHmM.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YUZ8U5Fc7rQ4YfwrrZTDRQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TYJe89VSDVjTTFeKvASuG9.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>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. </p><p>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.</p><h2 id="ashes-of-the-singularity-escalation-11">Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DrNeWkcgjymppusQqSE5TX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CLuRnqumTskJJjXFmocgoJ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GkzEKmJNHnLyYkmVGEZe6D.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Jgq4AUaCTNk63to3wvqz5T.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WEpRFwjL5TmC3ZCB58LPPg.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2gHwsQJmKYVficPrXGCEeW.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation</em> 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.</p><p>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.</p><p>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. </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-9">Civilization VI AI Test</h2><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:75.00%;"><img id="" name="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FErtLxipc3AgRjSst3vRGF.png" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FErtLxipc3AgRjSst3vRGF.png" align="" fullscreen="1" width="1112" height="834" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pull- expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FErtLxipc3AgRjSst3vRGF.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div></figure><p>Our <em>Civilization VI</em> AI test measures performance in a turn-based strategy game, and it tends to favor a mixture of high frequency and core count.</p><p>Core i3-7350K performs well in this test, though the i3-8350K leads once we start overclocking. Notably, Core i5-8600K offers nearly the same performance as an overclocked i3, but accomplishes this at its stock frequency. The Ryzen 3 1300X also performs well, beating out more expensive CPUs.</p><p>The Kaby Lake-based -7400 languishes at the bottom of the group due to its 3.5 GHz peak Turbo Boost frequency.</p><h2 id="civilization-vi-graphics-test-9">Civilization VI Graphics Test</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hXiMYLveKNdRr2XYcNEXXn.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sqyR8dhWbjTZVmyXcWj26g.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hSrq6DrVbQJj22rbJJLCy3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/u8ySmey5PW7JAC6SJfHpSR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Mrxk9TqfJqmXGDghWZVmSC.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7FvMZKP8qURRsnz3zh8awF.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Core i3-8350K is impressive during the <em>Civilization VI</em> graphics benchmark at stock clocks rates, where it essentially ties the Core i5-8600K and surpasses the Core i5-8400. Tuning provides a nice boost that catapults Core i3 ahead of everything else in our test pool. It seems this title responds exceptionally well to four physical cores, even if the -8350K encounters higher frame time variance in the beginning seconds of our benchmark.</p><h2 id="battlefield-1-dx11">Battlefield 1 (DX11)</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tjawyjUQQLEmo5ZReaYs4M.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v7iwiWrpGkg6JpJhaw3sTA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/63cxj26YMiNwqvz4mhqJkV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MaGYvFNHN3TWXgxpopNceA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/e9NkS7kXmxiTUAdVuUMZBR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9kweWoKDFcU37mTGCYvi8P.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Core i3-7350K's bottom-dwelling performance serves to hammer home the -8350K's step up: it provides a 20% advantage over its predecessor at stock settings. Tuning the Kaby Lake-based chip doesn't do much to close the gap, either.</p><p>Ryzen 5 1500X can't match the Ryzen 5 1600 when we lock them to the same frequency, showing that <em>Battlefield </em>responds well to higher core counts, among other factors. </p><h2 id="warhammer-40-000-dawn-of-war-iii-9">Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War III</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tDMrgsEdtLdCDa7QzPFqNf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fFyJcYYGsusSWKiqC82brj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/e9ZqygN2XG24TpyNxqeGQT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7s5YffuMrg5u3xmbHQeARe.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EXRTb6FPz9NwW4V9mEPhB4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5kXJf84ie44UKXuYjzU737.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The <em>Warhammer 40,000: DoW III</em> benchmark scales well with execution resources, but aggressive clock rates also provide a big benefit.</p><p>Intel's Core i3-8350K falls beneath the i5-8600K and i5-8400 at stock settings, and the tuned Ryzen 5 1600 also proves to be a formidable competitor.</p><p>Overclocking the Core i3-8350K unleashes a big speed-up, though, that reminds us of what we saw from Intel's <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-core-i5-8600k-cpu,5264-4.html">Core i5-8600K</a>. We don't have the overclocked -8600K in this batch of results, but it does outperform the -8350K with 122.8 FPS.</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-14">Grand Theft Auto V</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5P6Arj2wM5BwXty5VhwPiR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ubm9689QMEmMGJE53XbDVm.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aBxwzs2GD8pQpqeRjgmSLj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YBtcCWP9josRvSaabSDYcd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mpwdD7XpG6D6EmpXsTGpiY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2rCYrDsEa2cNDiCxJJQKwD.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Core i3-8350K falls behind the higher-end Coffee Lake models at stock settings, but overclocking changes that completely.</p><p>The Ryzen models aren't as competitive in this benchmark, even after overclocking.</p><p>A huge performance difference between the stock Core i3-7350K and -8350K is striking. This certainly isn't the generational step forward we're used to from Intel. </p><h2 id="hitman-2016-2">Hitman (2016)</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2wYBhCc9pqh9NT8vsum8hf.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CvBr4kmvWue9gX9yaBg5oZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/D3uJ3jnnyjBFy42vdgKD9K.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yMJzbDdcFC9f2qHU5kAdZR.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8mcgBZXTVV5AApE2tNVKWN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wCaKgWsTqeqbeToJsUzEnR.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The -8350K falls beneath AMD's 6C/12T Ryzen 5 1600 at stock settings, but overclocking sees the two chips switch places.</p><p>Core i5-8400 and -8600K profit greatly from their 6C/6T designs, carving out a lead over the lesser-equipped Core i3-8350K. Meanwhile, the older Core i3-7350K finds itself near the bottom of our chart; tuning does provide a considerable boost, though.</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/QcBCpQgybo7N2yihEgqsp.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QwKdX4JPeqt74PYX9XHBxZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aRm4Q46mLra39JGDYXZZj3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UPSVU7M94JFt2cxC9CijF4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GFnZ4NYmdjEv9b5eZSNKfQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qFfrBWWLc2zxv9jTjr3VsJ.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>This title is about as single-threaded as it gets, so clock rates and IPC throughput tend to affect frame rates most.</p><p>Core i3-7350K takes a big lead over the Coffee Lake-based processors 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="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/w5xRAjJdgxHd5MJfxjSMRY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WmjoaHbrsYEe3D9G3KrQsL.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xEG9WFvBabPjm5hE97u9KP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Qpq3hMftQLLbJG7Mbx2vYS.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/brhVvhRMZZQr7dcU4Wn3Fb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BdTRpDKvoQgK2xHUiovt34.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Core i3-8350K performs surprisingly well in <em>Project CARS</em>, even beating the 6C/6T Core i5-8400. This could be because the -8350K features a stock 4 GHz clock rate, while Core i5-8400's base 2.8 GHz is pushed up to 4 GHz via Turbo Boost and may not benefit fully from its peak frequency bin.</p><p>Surprisingly, the overclocked Ryzen 5 1600 trails Intel's overclocked Core i3-7350K.</p><h2 id="far-cry-primal-9">Far Cry Primal</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AzZVnxsUV4DovdsEjA6toU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LQ6mAXqHkxPhy7wTHfA42M.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TtskVJdgStzmzxwvKrYJA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5aUMChA3ZhQT9k7DY7FzDQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/extqnFnYVjjVaLP8AZyPCU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2dsiUSZkvJAWqPmWacWF28.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 simultaneous multi-threading disabled. That plays well to the Core i5 and i3 models, which don't feature Hyper-Threading.</p><p>Intel's processors clump together at the top of the chart with nearly identical frame rates. But a bit of tuning helps the Core i3-8350K break through that 101 FPS ceiling.</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/8TyqfKsV7zt2yjNNi4QNzE.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GUfFMhvwh7zQXyBci9gNBP.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iiMUQfMfWabxk9suAzsGmU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hNpE7LVyGkxQargX3Ga8iN.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mh9hEviTAqq5VW6dnWuR3B.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wysA6WA5USHJFYDuhRdaBF.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p><em>Rise of the Tomb Raider</em> is a thorn in AMD's side. Even after recent game updates, which helped fix the most glaring issues, our test pool separates into two distinct tiers with the Intel processors up top and AMD processors below. We've seen this play out through most of our game testing with Coffee Lake-based CPUs.</p><p>Of course, while Intel wins when we look at raw performance, AMD still has a compelling value story, particularly in the application testing...</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="office-amp-productivity-7">Office & Productivity</h2><h2 id="adobe-creative-cloud-9">Adobe Creative Cloud</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iyMM9DnYrRcnVEkeajKzaG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jNU4ytsxn7hZbyg9YiynbT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PMdE6K428GfQh62jEcYtiY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eE3cQGYYWZHeNJmHpsi6yQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uBj7S9MwHssrWr5GwUcgpZ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GvmxPMPHKfQTHkViMwKvoc.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Most of the Adobe Suite responds well to high clock rates and IPC throughput, favoring Intel's CPUs. InDesign scales well with core count, but Intel's Coffee Lake models cling on to a lead nonetheless.</p><h2 id="web-browser-9">Web Browser</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JTMVSCgbdPzEFr5F2YFCbG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ftzAJ8RBAxmNxK5LqNXyLB.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/neEvTgCnrzXK68TrkkZDPi.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>The web browsing tests are largely organized into per-core performance, so frequency and IPC throughput clearly matter most. These results mirror what we found in Adobe's suite: mainly, Intel's Coffee Lake processors offer higher performance.</p><h2 id="productivity-9">Productivity</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kcu5MifZ5tFzVjo44ELaBc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vdYGfrLrEa9M3uVXVvDX6D.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MECUqh4g3WQysuqMtFwhND.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xPoR3cwanA7xbf9XeBXDBT.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fH52rFwQr9BH4sZp3kcdU6.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. Intel's Core i3-8350K scores well in the test, though the -7350K's 4.2 GHz clock rate also facilitates impressive performance. It even beats Core i5-8400.</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. As you might imagine, cores and cache play a big role in determining the outcome of this benchmark. The Ryzen 5 1600 leads the default-configured CPUs, and overclocking improves its standing. A stock Ryzen 5 1500X leverages its eight threads to beat the stock Core i3-8350K, but they switch places after overclocking. Surprisingly, the Core i5-8400's two extra cores don't translate to a big lead over the -8350K.</p><p>The photo editing benchmark measures performance with Futuremark's binaries that use the ImageMagick library. A tuned Ryzen 5 1600 tops the chart again, though the overclocked -8350K lands in second place. It's not as fast at Intel's factory-set frequency, and AMD's Ryzen 5 1500X even scores a win over the stock -8350K. Similar to what we saw in the video conferencing test, Core i3-7350K shows us the liability of its dual-core design in heavily-threaded workloads.</p><p>A spreadsheet-heavy test emphasizes clock rates most, though we do see the impact of a less successful memory overclock from our tuned Ryzen 5 1400. It might be surprising to see Ryzen 3 1300X on top of the other Ryzen CPUs at stock settings, but it and the 1500X have the highest boost frequencies (4.7 GHz) of our AMD models. </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="rendering-encoding-amp-compression-7">Rendering, Encoding & Compression</h2><h2 id="rendering-9">Rendering</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YRsMNiHnZKqWCqNXqarAXF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XY9sUhgYs53QukGBbPJuc3.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/r4spLCS9KtnGGSLrWZi4cj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fHxQschAfiPQrWJfJwkXcV.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Tg7QTnzHsyCBJnGtuyvqRc.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HHPafysuAHAVnNUgDQ2eXA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hxQ68od9AkCigAjdUtzQMi.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VeQQBdAU4hVwPK2hHv5pzH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/56QaKvPU2E7LG8ThCC9CJb.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Core i3-8350K performs well, as expected, during the single-threaded Cinebench test. But it isn't nearly as impressive when the workload spreads out over more cores. We do observe a big performance speed-up compared to Intel's Kaby Lake models, including the quad-core Core i5-7400. And the overclocked -8350K is surprisingly competitive with AMD's Ryzen 5 1500X after overclocking. However, the stock 1500X offers more performance due to its higher thread count.</p><p>Heavily-threaded workloads are AMD's forte these days, so its Ryzen 5 1600 fares unsurprisingly well in our rendering tests. Even at stock settings, the Ryzen 5 1600 leverages its 12 threads to lead almost all of the threaded benchmarks. On the flip side of the coin, Ryzen 5 1600 rocks the third-lowest boost frequency among our Ryzen line-up, so the stock configuration loses steam during the lightly-threaded tests. The value of AMD's unlocked multiplier is undisputed. But even after overclocking, we're still trading quite a bit of single-threaded performance to gain the impressive performance in rendering applications.</p><p>Core i5-8400 provides a solid mix of performance in both lightly- and heavily-threaded workloads.</p><h2 id="encoding-amp-compression-9">Encoding & Compression</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GM5xpGKuJ7Pvza27TS7RkF.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TysMdAXGvocrGhoqoiF42g.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Fgky4GxbyTBiMFzmgGnDY4.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P4aM2KT4G7o3FkV5tpeY7a.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/teGZjhvtRrVBQc4AQ3v6Dj.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xPk4CaSpCrU4jfdAyFGrwU.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qYByRcCsLVyyQaPVj7rc5U.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>LAME responds well to higher frequencies, as evidenced by the tight grouping of overclocked models at the top of the chart. Core i3-7350K leads the group at stock settings, with Core i3-8350K close behind. Intel's Core i5-8400 trails most of the test pool, suggesting that it might not be hitting its peak Turbo Boost frequency consistently through our benchmark.</p><p>AMD's Ryzen 5 1600 dominates the compression and decompression workloads, but all of the Ryzen processors excel in our integer-heavy decompression workload after tuning. Core i5-7400's relatively low 3.5 GHz ceiling hinders performance significantly during the 7-Zip workloads.</p><p>A quick reminder: we tested the overclocked -8350K with a 4.8 GHz AVX offset, which is particularly important in the HandBrake and y-cruncher tests. There's a larger delta between the Intel and AMD processors during our HandBrake x265 test than the x264 test, and it's likely due to the former's heavy use of AVX instructions. Core i3-8350K is surprisingly adept in both workloads, even challenging the Ryzen 5 1500X at stock frequencies during the x264 test run. A quick glance at Core i3-7350K again speaks volumes of the huge step forward Intel took with Coffee Lake.</p><p>We also provide results from y-cruncher, a single- and multi-threaded program that computes Pi using AVX instructions. We tested with version 0.7.3.9474, which includes Ryzen optimizations. Despite a 4.8 GHz AVX offset, the tuned -8350K offers stellar AVX performance.</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-7">Final Analysis</h2><p>Dramatic changes to the Core line-up are a boon to PC enthusiasts, and there is little to complain about in the performance department. Intel's Core i3-8350K gives us twice as many cores at a supposedly comparable price point versus the previous generation. But considering we didn't like that last model much, the -8350K would need to be exceptional to earn our affection.</p><p>In the chart below, we plotted gaming performance with both average frame rates and a geometric mean of the 99<sup>th</sup> percentile frame times (a good indicator of smoothness), which we then converted into an FPS measurement. We're also presenting price-to-performance charts that get split up to include CPUs-only 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/BSLWYPUiGcjsePKZvqvARG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XdvMxSNhAqoLf7fR2DgcVk.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZQXH5smqHRnDzhzmZUVUWK.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Jme5LwyY8du6Ed6nKEuLpG.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P6eCzZGiAvdNKhcthjSkjb.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jVMdogweEGXdPFUXrR5xdY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MUew3KKpJpPgAK7yZLi2vh.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QjR5mmLq8EDoqyyB5SA6kj.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>It's hard to beat an overclocked Core i3-8350K for gaming unless you have the cash for a pricier Core i5 or i7. In fact, the i3-8350K is surprisingly competitive with those more expensive Coffee Lake-based models if you spend some time overclocking. And Core i3-8350K destroys Kaby Lake in everything. An overclocked Ryzen 5 1600 provides the biggest challenge from AMD, but it's only able to go up against the stock -8350K. Overclocking propels this chip into a league of its own. The less expensive Ryzen 5 1500X also makes a compelling case for enthusiasts willing to turn the overclocking dials, but its much lower stock performance isn't as attractive.</p><p>The Core i3-8350K is surprisingly agile in our application suite. We recorded impressive performance in lightly-threaded applications, and observed competitive results in the multi-threaded workloads, too. Of course, any threaded benchmark is going to go Ryzen 5 1600's way. But Intel's quad-core Core i3 does help close distance that Kaby Lake lost to Ryzen, so the losses in heavily-threaded workloads aren't as pronounced.</p><p>And that's the issue we have right now with Ryzen 5 1600. You gain some performance in productivity workloads, as expected from a 6C/12T processor, but you lose quite a bit of single-threaded speed in other applications. Core i3-8350K presents a more balanced profile.</p><p>Speaking of balanced, the Core i5-8400 is our biggest winner here. You can drop it into a cheaper B-series platform, once those arrive, and get a really good mix of performance across the board. It also comes with a bundled cooler. You won't get the extreme gaming performance available from an overclocked Core i3-8350K, but you're going to gain a lot of flexibility in other workloads. Software is undoubtedly evolving to utilize multi-core architectures more extensively, so the two extra cores should come in handy down the road.</p><p>We weren't particularly fond of Intel's Core i3-7350K. Its high-end motherboard requirement and lack of a bundled cooler were out of touch for this value-sensitive segment. Core i3-8350K suffers from the same problems, compounded by limited availability leading to insane premiums. Even at Intel's MSRP, you're only a few bucks away from the six-core -8400 that comes with a thermal solution and drops into a cheaper motherboard.</p><p>Given what we've seen from Coffee Lake, it's time to steer you clear of Kaby Lake. But Intel won't let us. The lack of any meaningful Coffee Lake availability is causing severe price gouging, making it difficult for us to recommend anything from Intel's line-up right now. Should the Coffee Lake models fall to where they're supposed to be, they'll represent a big step forward in computing power for your dollar.</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 Coffee Lake Gaming Results: Core i5-8600K Cheat Sheet ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-coffee-lake-gaming-i5-8600k,35722.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ For those without time to sift through all 12 pages of our latest CPU review, we've condensed our Core i5-8600K gaming results to give you a little cheat sheet. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">ypUPyetVDqTLPbNhEYvUF3</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7rH9dNkWhqRWXpJZzGs5wn-1280-80.png" type="image/png" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 18 Oct 2017 21:20:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:55:49 +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>
                                <p>We're diving deeper into Coffee Lake with the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-core-i5-8600k-cpu,5264.html">Intel Core i5-8600K Review: Coffee Lake's Jolting Value</a> article, but for those of you without the time to dig through all 12 pages, we've condensed all of our gaming results to give you a cheat sheet of sorts on Intel's newest Core i5.</p><p>Coffee Lake has arrived, and after nearly a decade of quad-core doldrums in Intel's mainstream desktop space, the company finally decided to bulk up its Core i7, i5, and i3 series. Intel added two more cores to each of the families and also increased the Turbo Boost frequencies across the board. Unfortunately, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-coffee-lake-shortage-cpu,35632.html">the processors are not readily available at retail</a>.</p><p>We also have articles that <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-coffee-lake-kaby-lake,35549.html">compare Intel's full Coffee Lake lineup to Kaby Lake</a> and a full breakdown of <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-coffee-lake-amd-ryzen,35546.html">comparisons to AMD's beefy Ryzen stable</a>. And <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-coffee-lake-z270-z370-motherboard,35554.html">no, Coffee Lake will not run in Z270 motherboards</a>.</p><p>If you're interested in the flagship Core i7-8700K's gaming performance, visit our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-gaming-tests,35595.html">Intel Coffee Lake Gaming Results: i7-8700K Cheat Sheet</a>. </p><p>So, is it worth whipping out your wallet for Intel's six-core, six-thread Core i5 and a new motherboard?</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DYGyMYgHGFJLkB2d3ZAULd.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8DUmw4RFKin55nZ9t3eZpQ.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YDcxMrA2WsfDa72vDViqbH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6QHyCn8VqE4m6ZriuWYbw.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vaSubfctqYi9SDVPB5p2fH.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZkhVSDhHHWWfKscuAPT7B5.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/x3u4X29UZisgYmU6pWXye7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sF8bWeT4XevqAWpjaSjWkX.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XdZbvowHMSxDTXVJsM32kY.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mtvMvHjgpJJzk7Y8PZqgfg.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iEtU49Vv99sT4qX6h9YT73.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GYLvqLKMLZiAJeLVgi6mYA.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WLyqRRoRmLGTw55EcsPKhD.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kcTqKgZQBmUHhykrP5M2Q7.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JAo68APmPZz2u9hBTiHa2L.png" alt="" /></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kXTYb9fixbN8rcHx5VwQq4.png" alt="" /></figure></figure><p>Our 99th percentile FPS chart provides a geometric mean of the results, converted into an FPS measurement, of all the games in our test suite. That single figure boils the story down rather nicely, although we've also provided the performance results in each game so you can see how the Core i5-8600K fares in your favorite titles.</p><p>Surprisingly, the Core i5-8600K matches or beats the previous-gen Core i7-7700K in the majority of titles, which represents a great value for your gaming dollar. Now you can build a gaming PC with the unlocked Core i5 model and a GeForce GTX 1080 TI or Radeon RX Vega 64 without worrying about processor bottlenecks.</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>We use MSRP pricing for all models in our value chart, but be aware that you can find many of these processors well below MSRP, particularly the Ryzen models.</p><p>Intel promised Coffee Lake's increased resources would come with a minimal price increase over the Kaby Lake models for the unlocked K-series chips, and the same price for the locked models. Unfortunately, like most of the Coffee Lake models, the Core i5-8600K is a unicorn that's almost impossible to find in stock, although some outlets are accepting preorders. We also see pricing at $280, which could be the result of intense demand and limited availability. We'll have to see where prices fall after the processors are readily available, but they currently command a $40 premium over the previous-generation i5-7600K.</p><p>AMD's Ryzen 7 1700 still weighs in as a competitive processor with some tuning, but, on average, it offers nearly the same gaming performance as an overclocked Ryzen 5 1600X. You can find great deals on those processors; the Ryzen 5 1600X retails for $240, and the Ryzen 7 1700 is roughly $300. The Ryzen 7 1700 presents a compelling value alternative with its bundled cooler.</p><p>The Core i7-8700K is simple to overclock and won't require exotic cooling solutions unless you're chasing the bleeding edge, which makes it a fun chip for enthusiasts.</p><p>As we noted in the full review:</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><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="a95c2579-b25b-4ea6-b2d3-8c0e1c59ca87" data-action="Deal Block" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-8600K" href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16819117825" 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="488Bpuf3cBvtyVKT5Q29ET" name="" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/488Bpuf3cBvtyVKT5Q29ET.jpg" mos="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/488Bpuf3cBvtyVKT5Q29ET.jpg" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="711" height="533" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a>Intel Core i5-8600K<a class="view-deal button" href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16819117825" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="a95c2579-b25b-4ea6-b2d3-8c0e1c59ca87" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-8600K" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></div><p>We've given the Editor Recommended to the Core i5-8600K, but stay tuned for our pending Core i5-8400 review. That locked model should provide a compelling gaming price-to-performance ratio, particularly for those who aren't looking to overclock.</p><p><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-coffee-lake-8th-generation-everything,35577.html">Everything You Need To Know About Intel's Coffee Lake</a></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">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-8">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-8">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-8">VRMark, 3DMark & AotS: Escalation</h2><h2 id="vrmark-amp-3dmark-8">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-12">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-10">Civilization VI AI Test</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: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-10">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-10">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-15">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-10">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">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">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">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">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">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/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">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">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">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">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">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">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">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 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">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="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/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-8">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-4">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-3">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>
            </channel>
</rss>