Intel Core i9 9900KS processor review
AMD Ryzen 9 3950X review
Promo: Windows 10 Pro for $13 With Office 2016 For $33
ASUS PRIME X570 Pro review
ASUS ROG STRIX Scope keyboard review
GALAX GeForce RTX 2070 Super WTF review
ADATA Spectrix S40G 512GB NVMe M.2 SSD review
Red Dead Redemption 2: PC graphics performance benchmark review
XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT THICC III Ultra review
Promo: URcdkey Halloween sale Windows 10 Pro for 11$
Six Core Intel Core i5 8500 Spotted in Sandra
Nothing exactly earth-shattering news, but it could actually be a sweet-spot processor. The six-core Intel Core i5 8500 has some entries in Sandra, and that indicates the proc might become available rather sooner than later.
The entry lists an i5-8500 six-core processor listed on several budget motherboards, as the colleagues from TPU spotted earlier today. The Intel Core i5-8500 has six cores, no hyperthreading but would be a notch faster compared to the Core i5 8400. It is expected to be a 200 USD processor.
| Processor | Cores / Threads | Base Clock | Turbo 2.0 (6c) | Turbo 3.0 (1c) | L3 | TDP | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Core i7 8700K | 6/12 | 3.7 GHz | 4.3 GHz | 4.7 GHz | 12 MB | 95 W | $359 / €389 |
| Core i7 8700 | 6/12 | 3.2 GHz | 4.3 GHz | 4.6 GHz | 12 MB | 65 W | $303 / €327 |
| Core i5 8600K | 6/6 | 3.6 GHz | 4.1 GHz | 4.3 GHz | 9 MB | 95 W | $257 / €273 |
| Core i5 8500 | 6/6 | 3.0 GHz | 4.2 GHz* | 4.3 GHz* | 9 MB | 65 W | $199* |
| Core i5 8400 | 6/6 | 2.8 GHz | 3.8 GHz | 4.0 GHz | 9 MB | 65 W | $182 / €192 |
| Core i3 8350K | 4/4 | 4.0 GHz | NA | NA | 8 MB | 91 W | $169 / €189 |
| Core i3 8300 | 4/4 | 4.0 GHz | NA | NA | 8 MB | 65 W | - |
| Core i3 8100 | 4/4 | 3.6 GHz | NA | NA | 6 MB | 65 W | $117 / €123 |
* spec not final
The CPU has a 3.00 GHz base clock speed, unfortunately, the Turbo Boost frequencies are not listed. The i5-8400 comes with a 4.00 GHz Boost frequency so arguably you can expect something 4.20 or 4.30 GHz.
Six Core Ryzen based QNAP TS-677 6-Bay NAS Unit Is Out - 12/11/2017 08:57 AM
QNAP released a new four and six-bay NAS server, the TS-677, by itself nothing new, however, it is powered by a 3.2GHz AMD Ryzen 5 1600 processor, this high-end business NAS server is equipped with s...
Six Core AMD Ryzen 5 1600X Processors With Eight Working Cores Spotted - 10/03/2017 03:01 PM
If you are in the market for a nice 6-core Ryzen 5 1600X processor, you might might be in luck. Some users have reported some of the parts to work with 8-cores. ...
Intel Six Core Lineup exposed - Core i7-8700K and Core i5-8600K - 07/17/2017 04:34 PM
We've been talking and debating intel Coffee Lake for some time now. new information surfaced on the web, including SKU names and base clock frequencies. The big daddy proc would be the Core i7 8700...
Six Core AMD Ryzen Processors Might Still Possible - 02/02/2017 09:02 AM
So we have posted a thing or two already about Ryzen being released as 4 and 8 core processors. AMD will release an 4 and 8-core model with and without hyper-threading. ...
New Six core and fast quad core Phenom II CPUs soon - 08/13/2010 07:03 AM
The colleagues over at X-bit Labs report that AMD will introduce a couple of new processors on September 21st, 2010. This includes a new six-core chip clocked at 3.0GHz and also a muliplier unlocked
vbetts
Moderator
Posts: 14714
Joined: 2006-07-04
Moderator
Posts: 14714
Joined: 2006-07-04
#5511155 Posted on: 01/16/2018 02:38 PM
It's not really that much of a performance hit though...Nothing anyone would notice in real world situations at least.
It's not really that much of a performance hit though...Nothing anyone would notice in real world situations at least.
Venix
Senior Member
Posts: 966
Joined: 2016-08-01
Senior Member
Posts: 966
Joined: 2016-08-01
#5511164 Posted on: 01/16/2018 02:59 PM
Bug aside how diferent is really to 8400? Those are theoritical max under perfect conditions for short amount of time asuming ideal contitions those 300* mhz for few seconds will matter for almost nothing no?
Bug aside how diferent is really to 8400? Those are theoritical max under perfect conditions for short amount of time asuming ideal contitions those 300* mhz for few seconds will matter for almost nothing no?
nevcairiel
Senior Member
Posts: 612
Joined: 2015-05-19
Senior Member
Posts: 612
Joined: 2015-05-19
#5511179 Posted on: 01/16/2018 03:34 PM
If you need one now or reasonably soon, you can't wait 2-3 years for new CPU designs to roll out.
Buying a new processor which has the inbuilt Meltdown/Spectre vulnerabilities, how about waiting for a CPU (next generation) that fixes the issues at a hardware level with hopefully zero/less performance hit!
If you need one now or reasonably soon, you can't wait 2-3 years for new CPU designs to roll out.
FrostNixon
Senior Member
Posts: 191
Joined: 2016-04-15
Senior Member
Posts: 191
Joined: 2016-04-15
#5511199 Posted on: 01/16/2018 04:16 PM
I've been saying lack of 8500 makes me recommend a budget intel build to no one ever again and it seems it finally arrived, I was pretty sure they would release it at some point.
Back in the days when I built 5+ pcs with i5-6500, it was the best budget CPU out there, 10$ more than 6400 and 500mhz higher speed, but this one has just 200-300mhz tops and there is AMD so I don't see myself recommending this one this time.
I've been saying lack of 8500 makes me recommend a budget intel build to no one ever again and it seems it finally arrived, I was pretty sure they would release it at some point.
Back in the days when I built 5+ pcs with i5-6500, it was the best budget CPU out there, 10$ more than 6400 and 500mhz higher speed, but this one has just 200-300mhz tops and there is AMD so I don't see myself recommending this one this time.
RS-X
Senior Member
Posts: 452
Joined: 2006-04-18
Senior Member
Posts: 452
Joined: 2006-04-18
#5511210 Posted on: 01/16/2018 04:38 PM
you know its just a slap in the face for all 8400 buyers. $189 - $199 just $10 difference. i bet 99% of could of dish out 10 bucks for few extra mhz. Intel always make us look stupid.
1st any one who purchased i5 7600k will look at i3 8130k and feel bad as thats much cheaper. Now this; along will all of the security issues. it like intel dont care about their customer at all. sad for both intel and buyers.
you know its just a slap in the face for all 8400 buyers. $189 - $199 just $10 difference. i bet 99% of could of dish out 10 bucks for few extra mhz. Intel always make us look stupid.
1st any one who purchased i5 7600k will look at i3 8130k and feel bad as thats much cheaper. Now this; along will all of the security issues. it like intel dont care about their customer at all. sad for both intel and buyers.
Primey0
Senior Member
Posts: 120
Joined: 2014-06-27
Senior Member
Posts: 120
Joined: 2014-06-27
#5511220 Posted on: 01/16/2018 05:00 PM
Sounds like you haven't actually read up on the vulnerabilities. Let me guess, you think Gaming and day to day basic tasks are affected
Buying a new processor which has the inbuilt Meltdown/Spectre vulnerabilities, how about waiting for a CPU (next generation) that fixes the issues at a hardware level with hopefully zero/less performance hit!
Sounds like you haven't actually read up on the vulnerabilities. Let me guess, you think Gaming and day to day basic tasks are affected
nevcairiel
Senior Member
Posts: 612
Joined: 2015-05-19
Senior Member
Posts: 612
Joined: 2015-05-19
#5511227 Posted on: 01/16/2018 05:41 PM
So what should they do? Make it actually more expensive so you don't feel bad? How is that better for the users? The specs and rumored pricing of the 8500 have been known for a long while, if you rush into a sale and then have buyers remorse, you shouldn't blame the company for that.
you know its just a slap in the face for all 8400 buyers. $189 - $199 just $10 difference. i bet 99% of could of dish out 10 bucks for few extra mhz. Intel always make us look stupid.
So what should they do? Make it actually more expensive so you don't feel bad? How is that better for the users? The specs and rumored pricing of the 8500 have been known for a long while, if you rush into a sale and then have buyers remorse, you shouldn't blame the company for that.
Robbo9999
Senior Member
Posts: 1333
Joined: 2012-10-07
Senior Member
Posts: 1333
Joined: 2012-10-07
#5511255 Posted on: 01/16/2018 07:03 PM
Well I don't think we know the true extent of the final performance hit yet, BIOS & OS patches are still being released. I know BIOS & OS update was tested here on Guru3D and for gaming & most consumer stuff it didn't make much of a difference, but I think I heard that more patches could be incoming from which we will not know the performance impact. Buying new hardware I'd prefer that bug to be fixed in hardware, rather than investing in something that needs to be patched.
Yes, I agree, if you need one then you just have no choice.
I've read up on it. I just don't like the idea of buying new hardware that has bugs/vulnerabilities built into it. I know gaming is not really affected, but see my response to the first post I quoted within this post - I think there could be more patches incoming that could worsen performance. I also think it's a bit rubbish that Intel is going to release some future CPUs with the vulnerability/bug already baked straight into their own hardware.
It's not really that much of a performance hit though...Nothing anyone would notice in real world situations at least.
Well I don't think we know the true extent of the final performance hit yet, BIOS & OS patches are still being released. I know BIOS & OS update was tested here on Guru3D and for gaming & most consumer stuff it didn't make much of a difference, but I think I heard that more patches could be incoming from which we will not know the performance impact. Buying new hardware I'd prefer that bug to be fixed in hardware, rather than investing in something that needs to be patched.
If you need one now or reasonably soon, you can't wait 2-3 years for new CPU designs to roll out.
Yes, I agree, if you need one then you just have no choice.
Sounds like you haven't actually read up on the vulnerabilities. Let me guess, you think Gaming and day to day basic tasks are affected
I've read up on it. I just don't like the idea of buying new hardware that has bugs/vulnerabilities built into it. I know gaming is not really affected, but see my response to the first post I quoted within this post - I think there could be more patches incoming that could worsen performance. I also think it's a bit rubbish that Intel is going to release some future CPUs with the vulnerability/bug already baked straight into their own hardware.
JamesSneed
Senior Member
Posts: 610
Joined: 2017-02-14
Senior Member
Posts: 610
Joined: 2017-02-14
#5511377 Posted on: 01/17/2018 12:34 AM
Robo9999, I agree in theory however in practice buying a bug free CPU is really really hard. Which CPU does not have any bugs? I honestly can't think of any consumer CPU's that don't have a decent amount of bugs. If you wait until Intel fixes these in hardware I'm pretty sure, if history is any indicator, new bugs will pop up on any new architecture like Ice Lake etc.
Robo9999, I agree in theory however in practice buying a bug free CPU is really really hard. Which CPU does not have any bugs? I honestly can't think of any consumer CPU's that don't have a decent amount of bugs. If you wait until Intel fixes these in hardware I'm pretty sure, if history is any indicator, new bugs will pop up on any new architecture like Ice Lake etc.
tensai28
Senior Member
Posts: 1416
Joined: 2013-10-31
Senior Member
Posts: 1416
Joined: 2013-10-31
#5511397 Posted on: 01/17/2018 01:51 AM
It isn't Intel making them look stupid, it's the buyers that haven't learned by now. Like the article stated; "Nothing exactly earth-shattering news" -as in most of us knew better and were expecting this CPU.
you know its just a slap in the face for all 8400 buyers. $189 - $199 just $10 difference. i bet 99% of could of dish out 10 bucks for few extra mhz. Intel always make us look stupid.
It isn't Intel making them look stupid, it's the buyers that haven't learned by now. Like the article stated; "Nothing exactly earth-shattering news" -as in most of us knew better and were expecting this CPU.
Robbo9999
Senior Member
Posts: 1333
Joined: 2012-10-07
Senior Member
Posts: 1333
Joined: 2012-10-07
#5511462 Posted on: 01/17/2018 07:58 AM
I see where you're coming from, but for Intel to release CPUs in the future that have this known Spectre/Meltdown vulnerability is poor - I'm thinking they should put releases on hold until they fix the problem in hardware - accelerate hardware fixes or accelerate future releases that don't have the issue. I know that there are long lead times associated with design, tape out, production, but I'm sure there are for smartphones too, and Samsung recalled & ceased production of those dangerous exploding Note 7's didn't they, and these CPUs are dangerous & flawed, just in a different way - I'm thinking Intel need to do the same, absorb this loss, gain some integrity and only release CPUs without this flaw.
Robo9999, I agree in theory however in practice buying a bug free CPU is really really hard. Which CPU does not have any bugs? I honestly can't think of any consumer CPU's that don't have a decent amount of bugs. If you wait until Intel fixes these in hardware I'm pretty sure, if history is any indicator, new bugs will pop up on any new architecture like Ice Lake etc.
I see where you're coming from, but for Intel to release CPUs in the future that have this known Spectre/Meltdown vulnerability is poor - I'm thinking they should put releases on hold until they fix the problem in hardware - accelerate hardware fixes or accelerate future releases that don't have the issue. I know that there are long lead times associated with design, tape out, production, but I'm sure there are for smartphones too, and Samsung recalled & ceased production of those dangerous exploding Note 7's didn't they, and these CPUs are dangerous & flawed, just in a different way - I'm thinking Intel need to do the same, absorb this loss, gain some integrity and only release CPUs without this flaw.
fantaskarsef
Senior Member
Posts: 10937
Joined: 2014-07-21
Senior Member
Posts: 10937
Joined: 2014-07-21
#5511466 Posted on: 01/17/2018 08:23 AM
The problem I guess is, when it comes to Intel, they consider the current Spectre / Meltdown bugs to be taken care of with their microcode update and windows / program patches. So they are not thinking about skipping a year without creating sales revenue... they have to give out money to the investors or they are royally screwed. They should, however, do it like you said @Robbo9999 and not release any hardware with a known bug.
The problem is that you can't compare a flaw like Intel's vulvernabilities (or AMD's / ARM's for that matter) that's a security bug with an exploding device that can possibly harm or kill people in the worst case scenario. That's instant, directly traceable, as opposed to a security flaw you might not even realise is exploited while you use your computer. That's why they can get away with it rather than having to take a full halt in their approach. By the way, when it comes to this, we would need to see Ryzen2 delayed, as well as practically every smartphone that gets the next generation of ARM based chips.
The problem I guess is, when it comes to Intel, they consider the current Spectre / Meltdown bugs to be taken care of with their microcode update and windows / program patches. So they are not thinking about skipping a year without creating sales revenue... they have to give out money to the investors or they are royally screwed. They should, however, do it like you said @Robbo9999 and not release any hardware with a known bug.
The problem is that you can't compare a flaw like Intel's vulvernabilities (or AMD's / ARM's for that matter) that's a security bug with an exploding device that can possibly harm or kill people in the worst case scenario. That's instant, directly traceable, as opposed to a security flaw you might not even realise is exploited while you use your computer. That's why they can get away with it rather than having to take a full halt in their approach. By the way, when it comes to this, we would need to see Ryzen2 delayed, as well as practically every smartphone that gets the next generation of ARM based chips.
Robbo9999
Senior Member
Posts: 1333
Joined: 2012-10-07
Senior Member
Posts: 1333
Joined: 2012-10-07
#5511559 Posted on: 01/17/2018 02:15 PM
The problem I guess is, when it comes to Intel, they consider the current Spectre / Meltdown bugs to be taken care of with their microcode update and windows / program patches. So they are not thinking about skipping a year without creating sales revenue... they have to give out money to the investors or they are royally screwed. They should, however, do it like you said @Robbo9999 and not release any hardware with a known bug.
The problem is that you can't compare a flaw like Intel's vulvernabilities (or AMD's / ARM's for that matter) that's a security bug with an exploding device that can possibly harm or kill people in the worst case scenario. That's instant, directly traceable, as opposed to a security flaw you might not even realise is exploited while you use your computer. That's why they can get away with it rather than having to take a full halt in their approach. By the way, when it comes to this, we would need to see Ryzen2 delayed, as well as practically every smartphone that gets the next generation of ARM based chips.
Yes, this bug sucks, they all messed up!
The problem I guess is, when it comes to Intel, they consider the current Spectre / Meltdown bugs to be taken care of with their microcode update and windows / program patches. So they are not thinking about skipping a year without creating sales revenue... they have to give out money to the investors or they are royally screwed. They should, however, do it like you said @Robbo9999 and not release any hardware with a known bug.
The problem is that you can't compare a flaw like Intel's vulvernabilities (or AMD's / ARM's for that matter) that's a security bug with an exploding device that can possibly harm or kill people in the worst case scenario. That's instant, directly traceable, as opposed to a security flaw you might not even realise is exploited while you use your computer. That's why they can get away with it rather than having to take a full halt in their approach. By the way, when it comes to this, we would need to see Ryzen2 delayed, as well as practically every smartphone that gets the next generation of ARM based chips.
Yes, this bug sucks, they all messed up!
tensai28
Senior Member
Posts: 1416
Joined: 2013-10-31
Senior Member
Posts: 1416
Joined: 2013-10-31
#5511807 Posted on: 01/18/2018 02:49 AM
The problem I guess is, when it comes to Intel, they consider the current Spectre / Meltdown bugs to be taken care of with their microcode update and windows / program patches. So they are not thinking about skipping a year without creating sales revenue... they have to give out money to the investors or they are royally screwed. They should, however, do it like you said @Robbo9999 and not release any hardware with a known bug.
The problem is that you can't compare a flaw like Intel's vulvernabilities (or AMD's / ARM's for that matter) that's a security bug with an exploding device that can possibly harm or kill people in the worst case scenario. That's instant, directly traceable, as opposed to a security flaw you might not even realise is exploited while you use your computer. That's why they can get away with it rather than having to take a full halt in their approach. By the way, when it comes to this, we would need to see Ryzen2 delayed, as well as practically every smartphone that gets the next generation of ARM based chips.
Every CPU that exists has many vulnerabilities. They just haven't been found yet. I'd be more worried about those vulnerabilities getting discovered by the hackers before the security teams notice them.
The problem I guess is, when it comes to Intel, they consider the current Spectre / Meltdown bugs to be taken care of with their microcode update and windows / program patches. So they are not thinking about skipping a year without creating sales revenue... they have to give out money to the investors or they are royally screwed. They should, however, do it like you said @Robbo9999 and not release any hardware with a known bug.
The problem is that you can't compare a flaw like Intel's vulvernabilities (or AMD's / ARM's for that matter) that's a security bug with an exploding device that can possibly harm or kill people in the worst case scenario. That's instant, directly traceable, as opposed to a security flaw you might not even realise is exploited while you use your computer. That's why they can get away with it rather than having to take a full halt in their approach. By the way, when it comes to this, we would need to see Ryzen2 delayed, as well as practically every smartphone that gets the next generation of ARM based chips.
Every CPU that exists has many vulnerabilities. They just haven't been found yet. I'd be more worried about those vulnerabilities getting discovered by the hackers before the security teams notice them.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 1333
Joined: 2012-10-07
Buying a new processor which has the inbuilt Meltdown/Spectre vulnerabilities, how about waiting for a CPU (next generation) that fixes the issues at a hardware level with hopefully zero/less performance hit!