![]() Most modern games have a degree of multi-thread capability, but only for ancillary tasks such as physics or audio calculations. For instance, video rendering using Adobe Photoshop is quite poorly optimised for multi-core processors, taking little advantage of more than four cores. ![]() However, there are a few instances where the clock speed advantage of the 8700K will shine through. Particularly demanding apps will have some sort of multi-threaded capability, which means the 2700X has an advantage. The clock speed deficit is unlikely to be noticeable in day-to-day use, since most apps don’t put that much strain on your CPU. Meanwhile, the 2600X is within 5% of the 8700K in the multi-thread test but falls back by 18% in the single-thread test. In the multi-core test, the 2700X holds a 24% advantage over the 8700K but in the single-thread test, the 8700K pulls out a 16% lead. Moving on to the POV-Ray benchmark, the picture is all but identical. Meanwhile, AMD’s six-core competitor – the 2600X – is another couple of percentage points behind, although Intel’s advantage in the multi-thread test is less than 1%. However, the clock speed advantage of the 8700K is also clear, with Intel’s chip holding a 14% lead in single-thread performance. The advantage of those eight cores compared to the six of the 8700K is also plain to see with a massive 28% lead in the multi-threaded test. Kicking things off with the ever-reliable Cinebench R15 benchmark, we can see that the higher clock speed of the 2700X delivers a nice 11% improvement in the single-core test over the 1800X, while the multi-core test also shows a 10% improvement. We’ve also included some comparisons to older AMD processors that were previously tested on an X370 motherboard and Intel processors tested on a Z270 motherboard. Both systems were equipped with the same Zotac Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Ti graphics card, Corsair Vengeance RGB 3000MHz RAM (CMR16GX4M2C3000C15), Samsung 860 Evo SSD, Corsair RM750i power supply and NZXT X52 cooler. We tested the AMD processor on a new X470 motherboard (the Asus Strix X470-F Gaming) while the 8700K was tested on a Z370 motherboard (the Asus TUF Z370-Pro Gaming). Its slower clock speeds means it’s almost guaranteed to be a little slower across the board, but with the right pricing it could make for a great choice for gamers. ![]() Ultimately, though, it’s the main choice buyers will be looking to make.Īlso, the new Ryzen 5 2600X is a direct, six-core competitor to the 8700K. It makes for a slightly lop-sided comparison, as Intel’s chip has fewer cores yet runs at a faster clock speed. This puts it up against the Intel Core i7-8700K. Instead, it’s only really right to compare the top-of-the-line processor from AMD’s mainstream platform (AM4) to Intel’s top-of-the-line for its mainstream platform, LGA1151. However, that chip only runs on Intel’s high-end LGA2066 platform.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |