Intel Core i9 9900K processor review
Intel Core i7 9700K processor review
Intel Core i5 9600K processor review
MSI MEG Z390 ACE review
ASUS ROG Maximus XI Hero review
Crucial P1 M.2 1000GB SSD Review
Corsair Force Series MP510 M.2 SSD Review
MSI GeForce RTX 2070 Armor 8G review
ASUS Turbo GeForce RTX 2070 8GB review
Guru3D PC Buyers Guide Autumn 2018
Intel Core i5 8600K processor review
Posted by: on: 10/13/2017 12:14 PM [
98 comment(s) ]
We'll check out the more mainstream six-core proc from Intel as we put the Core i5 8600K through our benchmark paces. This $257 USD proc is again a six-core processor that you will need to seat on a Z370 chipset based motherboard. While it isn't fitted enabled with hyper-threading, it might, however, be one sweet gaming processor with its all-core turbo to 4.1 GHz and again it being tweakable to 5.0 GHz on all six cores.
Read article
Advertisement
Tagged as:
intel,
Core i5 8600K processor review
pages 1 2 3 4
Robbo9999
Senior Member
Posts: 1069
Senior Member
Posts: 1069
Posted on: 10/15/2017 09:58 AM
No, in BF1... 4C Sandy chokes badly. 4C8T Sandy is just OK. There are other games where my GPU is not fully utilized and CPU runs at 100%. But BF1 is 1st where CPU power has massive impact.
On other hand, Both can pull 60+ fps. But having even Fury X downclocking due to low utilization while CPU has no spare cycles left... Sandy is great chip of the past. Only reason why I do not have Ryzen is desire to move from 16 to 32GB of memory while keeping decent clock as It affects CPU itself. I hope 2nd generation does better in this department.
What do you mean "No", you have a 4 core 4 thread Sandybridge, I was replying to @Khronikos who has a 4 core 8 thread Sandbridge CPU. I was wanting to know from him if his overclocked 2600K competed against Ryzen in high refresh rate gaming. We all know 4 threads isn't enough/ideal for today's games let alone tomorrows.
No, in BF1... 4C Sandy chokes badly. 4C8T Sandy is just OK. There are other games where my GPU is not fully utilized and CPU runs at 100%. But BF1 is 1st where CPU power has massive impact.
On other hand, Both can pull 60+ fps. But having even Fury X downclocking due to low utilization while CPU has no spare cycles left... Sandy is great chip of the past. Only reason why I do not have Ryzen is desire to move from 16 to 32GB of memory while keeping decent clock as It affects CPU itself. I hope 2nd generation does better in this department.
What do you mean "No", you have a 4 core 4 thread Sandybridge, I was replying to @Khronikos who has a 4 core 8 thread Sandbridge CPU. I was wanting to know from him if his overclocked 2600K competed against Ryzen in high refresh rate gaming. We all know 4 threads isn't enough/ideal for today's games let alone tomorrows.
GlennB
Senior Member
Posts: 112
Senior Member
Posts: 112
Posted on: 10/15/2017 10:05 AM
You won't see games effectively using more than 4-6 cores/threads for years.
Key word here is effectively.
There are games that can use more than 8threads but they do not get a performance boost over a fast 6 core.
6 core will be the perfect medium for gaming for years.
The Unreal 4, CryEngine 3 and Frostbite 3 already scale pretty well with more cores. They should have more optimization ready making more cores even stronger.
You won't see games effectively using more than 4-6 cores/threads for years.
Key word here is effectively.
There are games that can use more than 8threads but they do not get a performance boost over a fast 6 core.
6 core will be the perfect medium for gaming for years.
The Unreal 4, CryEngine 3 and Frostbite 3 already scale pretty well with more cores. They should have more optimization ready making more cores even stronger.
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 7600
Senior Member
Posts: 7600
Posted on: 10/15/2017 10:13 AM
Haven't I wrote about both 4C4T and 4C8T? Term Competition is highly subjective. Yes, in poorly threaded games, you can call it competition due to not so different per core performance. But difference in memory bandwidth makes another huge impact.
And as you partly mentioned, either of 4C4T and 4C8T is not ideal today. 6C6T is next one to get fully used.
What do you mean "No", you have a 4 core 4 thread Sandybridge, I was replying to @Khronikos who has a 4 core 8 thread Sandbridge CPU. I was wanting to know from him if his overclocked 2600K competed against Ryzen in high refresh rate gaming. We all know 4 threads isn't enough/ideal for today's games let alone tomorrows.
Haven't I wrote about both 4C4T and 4C8T? Term Competition is highly subjective. Yes, in poorly threaded games, you can call it competition due to not so different per core performance. But difference in memory bandwidth makes another huge impact.
And as you partly mentioned, either of 4C4T and 4C8T is not ideal today. 6C6T is next one to get fully used.
Robbo9999
Senior Member
Posts: 1069
Senior Member
Posts: 1069
Posted on: 10/15/2017 10:28 AM
Haven't I wrote about both 4C4T and 4C8T? Term Competition is highly subjective. Yes, in poorly threaded games, you can call it competition due to not so different per core performance. But difference in memory bandwidth makes another huge impact.
And as you partly mentioned, either of 4C4T and 4C8T is not ideal today. 6C6T is next one to get fully used.
I'm asking Kronikos who actually has the 4C8T CPU that I asked about, not you who has a 4C4T CPU, unless you can link some supporting info that would be good though? I was just curious how an old overclocked 2600K 4C8T CPU stacked up against AMD's best of today in high refresh rate gaming. I'm not really interested in your 4C/4T.
Haven't I wrote about both 4C4T and 4C8T? Term Competition is highly subjective. Yes, in poorly threaded games, you can call it competition due to not so different per core performance. But difference in memory bandwidth makes another huge impact.
And as you partly mentioned, either of 4C4T and 4C8T is not ideal today. 6C6T is next one to get fully used.
I'm asking Kronikos who actually has the 4C8T CPU that I asked about, not you who has a 4C4T CPU, unless you can link some supporting info that would be good though? I was just curious how an old overclocked 2600K 4C8T CPU stacked up against AMD's best of today in high refresh rate gaming. I'm not really interested in your 4C/4T.
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 7600
Senior Member
Posts: 7600
Posted on: 10/15/2017 10:55 AM
Not like there is IPC difference between Sandy and Sandy. So, his situation is same with exception of games which already benefit from HT.
vid removed - no GN here plz.
OC often can catch to stock Ryzen. In one of cases even getting better. But that's purely based on game selection as one could just take another 10 games where i7-2600k would hold no candle to Ryzen or 10 where it would win.
To have it done properly, one would need to put it into context of engine and year build of given engine got release.
I'm asking Kronikos who actually has the 4C8T CPU that I asked about, not you who has a 4C4T CPU, unless you can link some supporting info that would be good though? I was just curious how an old overclocked 2600K 4C8T CPU stacked up against AMD's best of today in high refresh rate gaming. I'm not really interested in your 4C/4T.
Not like there is IPC difference between Sandy and Sandy. So, his situation is same with exception of games which already benefit from HT.
vid removed - no GN here plz.
OC often can catch to stock Ryzen. In one of cases even getting better. But that's purely based on game selection as one could just take another 10 games where i7-2600k would hold no candle to Ryzen or 10 where it would win.
To have it done properly, one would need to put it into context of engine and year build of given engine got release.
Loophole35
Senior Member
Posts: 9017
Senior Member
Posts: 9017
Posted on: 10/15/2017 01:01 PM
@Fox2232 there is a difference in cache though as 2600k has more than 2500k plus the 4 more logical threads. 2500k was a great CPU but got left behind. 2600k is still going strong however. I am not sure about BF1 as I don’t own it. All the games I’ve played recently have not really been an issue except the two Forza games but those had issues no matter the number of threads.
@Fox2232 there is a difference in cache though as 2600k has more than 2500k plus the 4 more logical threads. 2500k was a great CPU but got left behind. 2600k is still going strong however. I am not sure about BF1 as I don’t own it. All the games I’ve played recently have not really been an issue except the two Forza games but those had issues no matter the number of threads.
Robbo9999
Senior Member
Posts: 1069
Senior Member
Posts: 1069
Posted on: 10/15/2017 02:29 PM
Not like there is IPC difference between Sandy and Sandy. So, his situation is same with exception of games which already benefit from HT.
OC often can catch to stock Ryzen. In one of cases even getting better. But that's purely based on game selection as one could just take another 10 games where i7-2600k would hold no candle to Ryzen or 10 where it would win.
To have it done properly, one would need to put it into context of engine and year build of given engine got release.
Thanks for that info, looks like OC'd 2600K is about as good for gaming as OC'd AMD 1700 - still going very well for an old CPU!
Not like there is IPC difference between Sandy and Sandy. So, his situation is same with exception of games which already benefit from HT.
OC often can catch to stock Ryzen. In one of cases even getting better. But that's purely based on game selection as one could just take another 10 games where i7-2600k would hold no candle to Ryzen or 10 where it would win.
To have it done properly, one would need to put it into context of engine and year build of given engine got release.
Thanks for that info, looks like OC'd 2600K is about as good for gaming as OC'd AMD 1700 - still going very well for an old CPU!
TieSKey
Member
Posts: 71
Member
Posts: 71
Posted on: 10/15/2017 03:42 PM
I mean no personal offence to anyone but seriously, this "future proofing" topic is ill approached since the beginning and quite stupid.
The only way to "future proof" is to get the best bang for you buck on an upgradeable platform. To save say 100/150 now and use that to update earlier, reusing as much stuff as possible.
Price/performance is not linear, not even close. So for example, while buying a top end 1080 would get us an "usable" (assuming some heavy gaming) system for say.. 4 years??, we could get the same from 2 cheaper cards every 2 years. (We are talking about future proofing on a budget, if money isn't an issue then upgrading early isn't either)
Maybe it made some sense a couple years ago when cpus upgraded only less than 10% total performance from year to year and we were forced to change mb too, but it certainly doesn't now since Ryzen happened, some node upgrades on both sides are really close and AM4 will last at least until Ryzen2.
I mean no personal offence to anyone but seriously, this "future proofing" topic is ill approached since the beginning and quite stupid.
The only way to "future proof" is to get the best bang for you buck on an upgradeable platform. To save say 100/150 now and use that to update earlier, reusing as much stuff as possible.
Price/performance is not linear, not even close. So for example, while buying a top end 1080 would get us an "usable" (assuming some heavy gaming) system for say.. 4 years??, we could get the same from 2 cheaper cards every 2 years. (We are talking about future proofing on a budget, if money isn't an issue then upgrading early isn't either)
Maybe it made some sense a couple years ago when cpus upgraded only less than 10% total performance from year to year and we were forced to change mb too, but it certainly doesn't now since Ryzen happened, some node upgrades on both sides are really close and AM4 will last at least until Ryzen2.
leszy
Senior Member
Posts: 300
Senior Member
Posts: 300
Posted on: 10/15/2017 04:07 PM
You won't see games effectively using more than 4-6 cores/threads for years.
Key word here is effectively.
There are games that can use more than 8threads but they do not get a performance boost over a fast 6 core.
6 core will be the perfect medium for gaming for years.
The first ones are now available. Many more have already been announced. The main target of game developers are consoles. The only way to achieve performance for new 4K consoles (many weak cores) is to fully utilize multi-threading. By programming for 7 threads there is no reason not to go further and provide full scalability.
Last year, Anandtech wrote that no game is scaling over the 4 threads, and that buying a processor with a large number of cores (for gaming) does not make sense. What is the value now their tests and predictions ? Your predictions of the future do not convince me. Probably your crystal ball is faulty
You won't see games effectively using more than 4-6 cores/threads for years.
Key word here is effectively.
There are games that can use more than 8threads but they do not get a performance boost over a fast 6 core.
6 core will be the perfect medium for gaming for years.
The first ones are now available. Many more have already been announced. The main target of game developers are consoles. The only way to achieve performance for new 4K consoles (many weak cores) is to fully utilize multi-threading. By programming for 7 threads there is no reason not to go further and provide full scalability.
Last year, Anandtech wrote that no game is scaling over the 4 threads, and that buying a processor with a large number of cores (for gaming) does not make sense. What is the value now their tests and predictions ? Your predictions of the future do not convince me. Probably your crystal ball is faulty
D3M1G0D
Senior Member
Posts: 1192
Senior Member
Posts: 1192
Posted on: 10/15/2017 04:19 PM
Yeah, I've always found "future proofing" to be a bit iffy. Essentially, we are making giant assumptions about how the future will pan out and planning our purchases based on those assumptions. Certainly, the focus of Coffee Lake is to add more cores but that doesn't mean game developers will follow through anytime soon (I think Agent is right in that it will probably take several years for games to make effective use of six cores).
IMO, you should buy CPUs mostly based on what you need right now. Coffee Lake is for those who want fast single-core performance, but who also have an immediate need for more cores (e.g., streaming, light productivity, heavy multi-tasking, etc). Buying Coffee Lake even though you don't need the extra cores will likely mean that those extra cores will go underutilized for months (if not years), and by the time games go multi-core there will be faster/better options available (i.e., Ice Lake, Zen 2).
I mean no personal offence to anyone but seriously, this "future proofing" topic is ill approached since the beginning and quite stupid.
Yeah, I've always found "future proofing" to be a bit iffy. Essentially, we are making giant assumptions about how the future will pan out and planning our purchases based on those assumptions. Certainly, the focus of Coffee Lake is to add more cores but that doesn't mean game developers will follow through anytime soon (I think Agent is right in that it will probably take several years for games to make effective use of six cores).
IMO, you should buy CPUs mostly based on what you need right now. Coffee Lake is for those who want fast single-core performance, but who also have an immediate need for more cores (e.g., streaming, light productivity, heavy multi-tasking, etc). Buying Coffee Lake even though you don't need the extra cores will likely mean that those extra cores will go underutilized for months (if not years), and by the time games go multi-core there will be faster/better options available (i.e., Ice Lake, Zen 2).
Agent-A01
Senior Member
Posts: 11297
Senior Member
Posts: 11297
Posted on: 10/15/2017 05:05 PM
The first ones are now available. Many more have already been announced. The main target of game developers are consoles. The only way to achieve performance for new 4K consoles (many weak cores) is to fully utilize multi-threading. By programming for 7 threads there is no reason not to go further and provide full scalability.
Last year, Anandtech wrote that no game is scaling over the 4 threads, and that buying a processor with a large number of cores (for gaming) does not make sense. What is the value now their tests and predictions ? Your predictions of the future do not convince me. Probably your crystal ball is faulty
Again. Read the word effectively.
Coffee lake 6c is faster in every game, including those “highly” threaded games.
No 8c, 10c, or even 18c can beat it.
Game developers are lazy and considering dx12 so far is bad this will continue for a few years at least
The first ones are now available. Many more have already been announced. The main target of game developers are consoles. The only way to achieve performance for new 4K consoles (many weak cores) is to fully utilize multi-threading. By programming for 7 threads there is no reason not to go further and provide full scalability.
Last year, Anandtech wrote that no game is scaling over the 4 threads, and that buying a processor with a large number of cores (for gaming) does not make sense. What is the value now their tests and predictions ? Your predictions of the future do not convince me. Probably your crystal ball is faulty
Again. Read the word effectively.
Coffee lake 6c is faster in every game, including those “highly” threaded games.
No 8c, 10c, or even 18c can beat it.
Game developers are lazy and considering dx12 so far is bad this will continue for a few years at least
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 7600
Senior Member
Posts: 7600
Posted on: 10/15/2017 05:53 PM
Again. Read the word effectively.
Coffee lake 6c is faster in every game, including those “highly” threaded games.
No 8c, 10c, or even 18c can beat it.
Game developers are lazy and considering dx12 so far is bad this will continue for a few years at least
In 2011, you could say it about Dual core CPUs. In 2015, It would be fine to say it about Quad core CPUs. Today, you say it about Hexa core CPUs.
But what really laughs at your statement is inner design of Vulkan/DX12. You actually ignore very reason why you need now more than 4 cores to reach 100% GPU utilization on powerful chips.
But do not worry, your chip will be just fine. Even if it holds your GPU back here and there in few years, it will still prepare more than 60fps.
Again. Read the word effectively.
Coffee lake 6c is faster in every game, including those “highly” threaded games.
No 8c, 10c, or even 18c can beat it.
Game developers are lazy and considering dx12 so far is bad this will continue for a few years at least
In 2011, you could say it about Dual core CPUs. In 2015, It would be fine to say it about Quad core CPUs. Today, you say it about Hexa core CPUs.
But what really laughs at your statement is inner design of Vulkan/DX12. You actually ignore very reason why you need now more than 4 cores to reach 100% GPU utilization on powerful chips.
But do not worry, your chip will be just fine. Even if it holds your GPU back here and there in few years, it will still prepare more than 60fps.
airbud7
Senior Member
Posts: 6183
Senior Member
Posts: 6183
Posted on: 10/15/2017 07:02 PM
In 2011, you could say it about Dual core CPUs. In 2015, It would be fine to say it about Quad core CPUs. Today, you say it about Hexa core CPUs.
But what really laughs at your statement is inner design of Vulkan/DX12. You actually ignore very reason why you need now more than 4 cores to reach 100% GPU utilization on powerful chips.
But do not worry, your chip will be just fine. Even if it holds your GPU back here and there in few years, it will still prepare more than 60fps.
Agent is right...if not then explain to me how a 4core 7700k is faster than any Rizen 8 core?
In 2011, you could say it about Dual core CPUs. In 2015, It would be fine to say it about Quad core CPUs. Today, you say it about Hexa core CPUs.
But what really laughs at your statement is inner design of Vulkan/DX12. You actually ignore very reason why you need now more than 4 cores to reach 100% GPU utilization on powerful chips.
But do not worry, your chip will be just fine. Even if it holds your GPU back here and there in few years, it will still prepare more than 60fps.
Agent is right...if not then explain to me how a 4core 7700k is faster than any Rizen 8 core?
Khronikos
Senior Member
Posts: 597
Senior Member
Posts: 597
Posted on: 10/15/2017 09:01 PM
Well, there are not that many CPUs out there that hold up to 144FPS in games like BF1 with good resolution. I don't know to be honest, but I will never really know any time soon. My next upgrades would be getting to 4K more often at 60FPS, and for that I need a better GPU.
As you can see in the Watch Dogs II comparison the slightly higher resolution evens out a lot of things, and this game is also a CPU beast. But the better Ryzens? No, it is very apparent the better Ryzens are very good CPUs, and those will get better too in the future.
If you are just doing 1080p at 144FPS, I mean it depends on the game I am sure. I think the 2600K would be decent still. It only seems to show big weaknesses against the very best CPUs. But I would not pick this if I was doing something like 144FPS. I would go high-end Intel or Ryzen for sure. Part of the reason I have this is because I don't have the time or money to do a full switch, I love win 7, and well yeah a big bother it would be.
My 2600k vs my 2500K it is like night and day to be honest. It really is like a whole new CPU upgrade in many respects as it almost totally eliminates the judder and stutter in so many games.
What do you mean "No", you have a 4 core 4 thread Sandybridge, I was replying to @Khronikos who has a 4 core 8 thread Sandbridge CPU. I was wanting to know from him if his overclocked 2600K competed against Ryzen in high refresh rate gaming. We all know 4 threads isn't enough/ideal for today's games let alone tomorrows.
Well, there are not that many CPUs out there that hold up to 144FPS in games like BF1 with good resolution. I don't know to be honest, but I will never really know any time soon. My next upgrades would be getting to 4K more often at 60FPS, and for that I need a better GPU.
As you can see in the Watch Dogs II comparison the slightly higher resolution evens out a lot of things, and this game is also a CPU beast. But the better Ryzens? No, it is very apparent the better Ryzens are very good CPUs, and those will get better too in the future.
If you are just doing 1080p at 144FPS, I mean it depends on the game I am sure. I think the 2600K would be decent still. It only seems to show big weaknesses against the very best CPUs. But I would not pick this if I was doing something like 144FPS. I would go high-end Intel or Ryzen for sure. Part of the reason I have this is because I don't have the time or money to do a full switch, I love win 7, and well yeah a big bother it would be.
My 2600k vs my 2500K it is like night and day to be honest. It really is like a whole new CPU upgrade in many respects as it almost totally eliminates the judder and stutter in so many games.
airbud7
Senior Member
Posts: 6183
Senior Member
Posts: 6183
Posted on: 10/15/2017 10:22 PM
My 2600k vs my 2500K it is like night and day to be honest. It really is like a whole new CPU upgrade in many respects as it almost totally eliminates the judder and stutter in so many games.
present-day the same can be said about 8600k vs 8700k.....
8700k owners/buyers are much like previous 2600k owners....future proof?...it's the fastest now late 2017 so who knows?.....Zoom Zoom Fast!
My 2600k vs my 2500K it is like night and day to be honest. It really is like a whole new CPU upgrade in many respects as it almost totally eliminates the judder and stutter in so many games.
present-day the same can be said about 8600k vs 8700k.....
8700k owners/buyers are much like previous 2600k owners....future proof?...it's the fastest now late 2017 so who knows?.....Zoom Zoom Fast!
Robbo9999
Senior Member
Posts: 1069
Senior Member
Posts: 1069
Posted on: 10/16/2017 07:09 AM
Well, there are not that many CPUs out there that hold up to 144FPS in games like BF1 with good resolution. I don't know to be honest, but I will never really know any time soon. My next upgrades would be getting to 4K more often at 60FPS, and for that I need a better GPU.
As you can see in the Watch Dogs II comparison the slightly higher resolution evens out a lot of things, and this game is also a CPU beast. But the better Ryzens? No, it is very apparent the better Ryzens are very good CPUs, and those will get better too in the future.
If you are just doing 1080p at 144FPS, I mean it depends on the game I am sure. I think the 2600K would be decent still. It only seems to show big weaknesses against the very best CPUs. But I would not pick this if I was doing something like 144FPS. I would go high-end Intel or Ryzen for sure. Part of the reason I have this is because I don't have the time or money to do a full switch, I love win 7, and well yeah a big bother it would be.
My 2600k vs my 2500K it is like night and day to be honest. It really is like a whole new CPU upgrade in many respects as it almost totally eliminates the judder and stutter in so many games.
Cheers for the response, yep you don't need a better CPU for 60Hz gaming, so you're set! Good to see the benefits of HT, that gives me some hope for my 6700K too when it comes to future games!
Well, there are not that many CPUs out there that hold up to 144FPS in games like BF1 with good resolution. I don't know to be honest, but I will never really know any time soon. My next upgrades would be getting to 4K more often at 60FPS, and for that I need a better GPU.
As you can see in the Watch Dogs II comparison the slightly higher resolution evens out a lot of things, and this game is also a CPU beast. But the better Ryzens? No, it is very apparent the better Ryzens are very good CPUs, and those will get better too in the future.
If you are just doing 1080p at 144FPS, I mean it depends on the game I am sure. I think the 2600K would be decent still. It only seems to show big weaknesses against the very best CPUs. But I would not pick this if I was doing something like 144FPS. I would go high-end Intel or Ryzen for sure. Part of the reason I have this is because I don't have the time or money to do a full switch, I love win 7, and well yeah a big bother it would be.
My 2600k vs my 2500K it is like night and day to be honest. It really is like a whole new CPU upgrade in many respects as it almost totally eliminates the judder and stutter in so many games.
Cheers for the response, yep you don't need a better CPU for 60Hz gaming, so you're set! Good to see the benefits of HT, that gives me some hope for my 6700K too when it comes to future games!
xIcarus
Senior Member
Posts: 927
Senior Member
Posts: 927
Posted on: 10/16/2017 07:35 AM
noun: vapourware; noun: vaporware
software or hardware that has been advertised but is not yet available to buy*, either because it is only a concept or because it is still being written or designed.
I disagree because you use a term incorrectly. the 8 series is not a concept, and is not still being designed. People have it in their systems right now as I type, which makes your comment effectively dumb as bricks and factually incorrect. The end.
Well since the availability is still close to null, this product is borderline* vaporware.
1 a: being in an intermediate position or state: not fully classifiable as one thing or its opposite
a borderline state between waking and sleeping
b: not quite up to, typical of, or as severe as what is usual, standard, or expected
borderline intelligence
borderline hypertension
c: characterized by psychological instability in several areas (such as interpersonal relations, behavior, and identity) but only with brief or no psychotic episodes
a borderline personality disorder
-----------------------------------------------------
You should try out reading properly. I hear it's useful these days.
@Fox2232 there is a difference in cache though as 2600k has more than 2500k plus the 4 more logical threads. 2500k was a great CPU but got left behind. 2600k is still going strong however. I am not sure about BF1 as I don’t own it. All the games I’ve played recently have not really been an issue except the two Forza games but those had issues no matter the number of threads.
Not only the cache, remember that hyperthreading helps in gaming when you're in a core starved scenario. Remember how strong those i3s were going a while back? Not sure of their current state as I've lost touch with the lower-end segment; but I'm assuming they're starting to show their weakness.
noun: vapourware; noun: vaporware
software or hardware that has been advertised but is not yet available to buy*, either because it is only a concept or because it is still being written or designed.
I disagree because you use a term incorrectly. the 8 series is not a concept, and is not still being designed. People have it in their systems right now as I type, which makes your comment effectively dumb as bricks and factually incorrect. The end.
Well since the availability is still close to null, this product is borderline* vaporware.
Definition of borderline
1 a: being in an intermediate position or state: not fully classifiable as one thing or its opposite
a borderline state between waking and sleeping
b: not quite up to, typical of, or as severe as what is usual, standard, or expected
borderline intelligence
borderline hypertension
c: characterized by psychological instability in several areas (such as interpersonal relations, behavior, and identity) but only with brief or no psychotic episodes
a borderline personality disorder
-----------------------------------------------------
You should try out reading properly. I hear it's useful these days.
@Fox2232 there is a difference in cache though as 2600k has more than 2500k plus the 4 more logical threads. 2500k was a great CPU but got left behind. 2600k is still going strong however. I am not sure about BF1 as I don’t own it. All the games I’ve played recently have not really been an issue except the two Forza games but those had issues no matter the number of threads.
Not only the cache, remember that hyperthreading helps in gaming when you're in a core starved scenario. Remember how strong those i3s were going a while back? Not sure of their current state as I've lost touch with the lower-end segment; but I'm assuming they're starting to show their weakness.
Loophole35
Senior Member
Posts: 9017
Senior Member
Posts: 9017
Posted on: 10/16/2017 11:43 AM
@xIcarus did you miss the part where I said the 2600k has 4 more logical cores than the 2500k?
@xIcarus did you miss the part where I said the 2600k has 4 more logical cores than the 2500k?
liesenberg
Junior Member
Posts: 18
Junior Member
Posts: 18
Posted on: 10/16/2017 06:12 PM
Great review HH! I must say that was expected due to higher core clock and some marginal IPC gain. Ineed it looks like a really good gaming chip for those who aim exclusively at high count FPS... I might add that indeed in terms of bang for the buck AMD its the way to go not only because when we got a GPU bottleneck things get on pair, but its due the fact that one could upgrade later to refreshed revision of Ryzen probably with higher clocks.
Other thing I like to add in the recent discussion about old gen's and gaming at 1080p (60hz)
I am proud owner (some might laugh) of an i7 875k at 4.0Ghz (1.2750v) paired with a GTX 1060 6GB.
I have found that I dont have any problems running any game at rock solid 60 FPS with my very very very old i7. There are a very few games witch still relys on pure single thread performance where I see my 1st Core (Core0) almost maxed out. But in 90% of the games my GPU is always at 99% and in the other 10% its always above 85% witch confirms the fact that my old i7 still a very competent processor to deliver me 60 rock solid FPS.
I like to share my experience with you guys because having the first unlocked i7 its something rare this days and with some fine tweaking I was able to squezze a very amazing amount of performance of him.
Regards from Will.
Great review HH! I must say that was expected due to higher core clock and some marginal IPC gain. Ineed it looks like a really good gaming chip for those who aim exclusively at high count FPS... I might add that indeed in terms of bang for the buck AMD its the way to go not only because when we got a GPU bottleneck things get on pair, but its due the fact that one could upgrade later to refreshed revision of Ryzen probably with higher clocks.
Other thing I like to add in the recent discussion about old gen's and gaming at 1080p (60hz)
I am proud owner (some might laugh) of an i7 875k at 4.0Ghz (1.2750v) paired with a GTX 1060 6GB.
I have found that I dont have any problems running any game at rock solid 60 FPS with my very very very old i7. There are a very few games witch still relys on pure single thread performance where I see my 1st Core (Core0) almost maxed out. But in 90% of the games my GPU is always at 99% and in the other 10% its always above 85% witch confirms the fact that my old i7 still a very competent processor to deliver me 60 rock solid FPS.
I like to share my experience with you guys because having the first unlocked i7 its something rare this days and with some fine tweaking I was able to squezze a very amazing amount of performance of him.
Regards from Will.
Elder III
Senior Member
Posts: 3471
Senior Member
Posts: 3471
Posted on: 10/16/2017 08:53 PM
This looks nice for the dedicated gamer. If I wanted to keep a gaming pc more then ~2 years or so without upgrading the CPU I think I would want more threads, but if you plan to upgrade every 2-3 years and don't play the smallish amount of games that actually use more then 6 cores/threads then this i5 8600K is a superb buy. For almost everyone else out there I'd get a Ryzen 1700.
This looks nice for the dedicated gamer. If I wanted to keep a gaming pc more then ~2 years or so without upgrading the CPU I think I would want more threads, but if you plan to upgrade every 2-3 years and don't play the smallish amount of games that actually use more then 6 cores/threads then this i5 8600K is a superb buy. For almost everyone else out there I'd get a Ryzen 1700.
x2xx
Junior Member
Posts: 8
Junior Member
Posts: 8
Posted on: 10/19/2017 08:37 AM
hi, any SLI benchmarks with coffee lake in the future? that will be nice
hi, any SLI benchmarks with coffee lake in the future? that will be nice
tensai28
Senior Member
Posts: 1054
Senior Member
Posts: 1054
Posted on: 12/01/2017 09:45 AM
I guess I missed this review. This looks like a good cpu for the future but don't see any reason to upgrade from my 6600k for now since I use a 4k 60hz display.
I guess I missed this review. This looks like a good cpu for the future but don't see any reason to upgrade from my 6600k for now since I use a 4k 60hz display.
pages 1 2 3 4
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 7600
No, in BF1... 4C Sandy chokes badly. 4C8T Sandy is just OK. There are other games where my GPU is not fully utilized and CPU runs at 100%. But BF1 is 1st where CPU power has massive impact.
On other hand, Both can pull 60+ fps. But having even Fury X downclocking due to low utilization while CPU has no spare cycles left... Sandy is great chip of the past. Only reason why I do not have Ryzen is desire to move from 16 to 32GB of memory while keeping decent clock as It affects CPU itself. I hope 2nd generation does better in this department.