Intel Core i5-8600K: Six mid-range cores

Since Coffee Lake-S is becoming more and more a digital launch and the hardware is not really available in quantities, we could actually take our time. The new Intel Core i5-8600K is also more of a fata morgana, the auc... In the AI test of Civilization IV, all CPUs position themselves in a good way as one might expect from the technical data.

Two cores more for the middle class are certainly nice, no question. But whether they will really be sufficient in the near future remains to be seen. Because with hyper-threading disabled, it's actually only a matter of time before the software catches up with the hardware again.

As Intel continues to rely on a larger number of cores, software manufacturers are unlikely to be able to refuse to do so. It is difficult to predict how slowly or quickly this really happens in practice with games and application programs. But the beginnings are certainly evident.

Where can I really classify the Core i5-8600K? Is it now upper-class light with the 2-core premium surcharge for occasional rendering and a handful of suitable games, or is it rather the premium middle class that can give you a little bit of the feeling of the digital upper class? Or is this CPU in the end neither fish nor meat, because it does not offer enough for the price?

A Ryzen 7 1700 with boxed cooler costs a similar amount, but offers 8 cores and SMT, which ultimately results in 16 instead of 6 threads as with the Core i5-8600K. What needs to be taken into account with the Ryzen 7 1700, however, is the fact that it has to be overclocked and equipped with good memory in order to remain competitive in most cases. However, the suitable motherboards cost less.

Let's just take the gaming results and finally compare both the average and the minimum FPS. The overclocked Core i5-8600K is almost 10% faster than without overclocking, the overclocked Ryzen 7 is only 4% slower than the normal Core i5-8600K and is approx. 14% back. The Ryzen 7 1700 is not overclocked due to the low clock rates ex works, which is also true for the Ryzen 5 1600X.

With the minimum frame rates, the almost coincident picture results:

In the end, it remains to be seen that things are really relatively balanced. What we particularly like, however, is the new, much more exciting competitive situation, which in the end can only meet the customers. AMD is much better with the Ryzen at least at eye level, in the production area even in places. Thus, it is up to each individual to reconsider their premises and rely on the more appropriate product.

In the current situation, we deliberately do not want to award an award for the Core i5-8600K. The "Tested" award would not do the CPU justice, the "purchase tip" would be a misleading of the readers due to the lack of availability and for the "Editor's Choice" the CPU simply lacks the necessary cutting edge and some really outstanding feature.

Conclusion

What do you ultimately want as a customer? Gaming with merciless overclocking in the eternal hunt for the best frame times or rather an all-round PC with which you can also play, but not only? Good question, two possible answers. We haven't had that in this form for a long time and the agony of choice has pleasant sides.

Pages: