Any Coffelake Processors (iX-8xxx Series) better (performance,etc) than i5-4690?

[ajy0903]

The purpose of asking this question is just for "researching/want to know information/might be future PC Spec to build from scratch".

So, here goes for question for now.

Any Coffelake Processors (iX-8xxx Series) better than i5-4690?

 

[mackerel]

Define "better"? You can get more clocks, more cores, they're more efficient in general, faster ram, new features... if it is worth it is another matter.

 

[ajy0903]

Define "better"? You can get more clocks, more cores, they're more efficient in general, faster ram, new features... if it is worth it is another matter.

Sorry for not clear enough.
I have changed the subject of thread.
So, I was talking about performance wise, other important factors that tells.
Also, I meant worth or Same Quality as i5-4690 or higher.

 

[EarthDog]

Yep.

Take a look at some reviews.

 

[ajy0903]

Yep.

Take a look at some reviews.

Thanks for reply.
I tried to look all the reviews, but there are just too many of them.
I want to know which "Any Coffelake Processors (iX-8xxx Series)" have "Same Quality or Higher Quality" as i5-4690.

 

[EarthDog]

Well....at a high level, they all all faster clock for clock by a few percent. The i5-8100 has the same thread count and slightly raisdd base clock.. it doesnt have boost. I5-8400 starts off slower, boosts higher, and has more cores...

So...it depends, really. But for the most part, any are a slight improvement at minimum. See macks post.

Its simple though... more cores is faster if you use them... otherwise its similar.

 

[ajy0903]

Well....at a high level, they all all faster clock for clock by a few percent. The i5-8100 has the same thread count and slightly raisdd base clock.. it doesnt have boost. I5-8400 starts off slower, boosts higher, and has more cores...

So...it depends, really. But for the most part, any are a slight improvement at minimum. See macks post.

Its simple though... more cores is faster if you use them... otherwise its similar.

Oh ok, cool.

 

[trents]

An i3 8350k will outperform your i5 4690k. The i3 Coffee Lakes now have 4 cores and 4 threads, same as the i5 haswell but the stock clock of the Coffee Lake is 4.0 ghz whereas the stock clock of the i5 4690k is only 3.5 ghz. Which do you think is faster?

 

[ajy0903]

An i3 8350k will outperform your i5 4690k. The i3 Coffee Lakes now have 4 cores and 4 threads, same as the i5 haswell but the stock clock of the Coffee Lake is 4.0 ghz whereas the stock clock of the i5 4690k is only 3.5 ghz. Which do you think is faster?

Oh, really?
That's great then.
I guess i3-8350K is faster than i5-4960.
By the way, in above thread, I put it as i5-4960, not i5-4960K.
Still either one, looking at the ghz of CPU, i3-8350K is still faster then i5-4960.

 

[trents]

I think you meant to type "4690" instead of "4960" in your last post.

With the Coffee Lake series, Intel has removed the HT from the i3 and given it 4 true cores. It has bumped the i5 from 4 cores/no HT to 6 cores/no HT and it has added to more cores to the i7 so that it is no longer 4c/4 HT but 6c/6 HT.

The Coffee Lake series departed from a mere marginal performance improvement over the previous generation but actually took it to a new level. The Coffee Lake i3 performs about the same as a as the Kaby Lake i5 did. The Coffee Lake i5 performs about the same as a Kaby Lake i7. And the Coffee Lake i7 is a beast.

Of course the Coffee Lakes are more expensive than are their Kaby Lake counterparts in the same niche.

 

[Pinky]

Hopefully the link to this comparison works...

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=2236&cmp[]=3097

This is the i5-4690 [7627] compared to the 'slowest' i5-8400 [11774] desktop cpu.

Passmark isn't a definitive test but it's a solid starting point, then research for specific needs from there (gaming, video production, etc).

 

[||Console||]

Big question .
What do you use your system for and when do you find it slow ?
If you use it for gaming , 1080/60hz then just get a new gfx card IMO .
I lowered my haswell to 3.2 and did some test's Check them out .
If production is your thing then you should be looking @ somthing that hase more cores and treads than the new i5's .

Hopefully the link to this comparison works...

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=2236&cmp[]=3097

This is the i5-4690 [7627] compared to the 'slowest' i5-8400 [11774] desktop cpu.

Passmark isn't a definitive test but it's a solid starting point, then research for specific needs from there (gaming, video production, etc).

Only reason it is "winning" by that margin is the extra threads are used in that bench most things still don't use more than 4 well .
With a 4670k ( 2 less cores) vs 8400 in cinebench I beat it in single core and lose by 200 in multi thredded .

 

[Woomack]

I guess that i5 4690 will be as fast as i3 8100 so it's not really a challenge. If you think about upgrade then i3 8350K is a mistake. Better go for i5 8600K or move to the AMD team and look for 6-8 core Ryzen at lower price ( all current motherboards that support 8k series Intel are quite expensive comparing to what you can get for AMD ).

 

[||Console||]

I guess that i5 4690 will be as fast as i3 8100 so it's not really a challenge. If you think about upgrade then i3 8350K is a mistake. Better go for i5 8600K or move to the AMD team and look for 6-8 core Ryzen at lower price ( all current motherboards that support 8k series Intel are quite expensive comparing to what you can get for AMD ).

And from what I have seen even a 8700 non k for normal users might be better bang for buck.

@ op What I'm trying to get at is spend your $ on a good gfx card the fps jump will be higher .

 

[trents]

We need to ask this question before we go any further: ajy0903, what will by your primary use or uses of this computer?

 

[ajy0903]

Pinky, ||Console||, Woomack, trents thanks all of you for reply.

We need to ask this question before we go any further: ajy0903, what will by your primary use or uses of this computer?

^ I will be using Intel Gen 8 CPU as primary use (Watch 1080p 30/60 youtube, Watch 4K youtube, Play Various PC Games, Watch 4K UHD: I gave up in "this thread" and "this thread", but I found out that Z370 Motherboard will be compatible.) and i5-4690 ones for 2nd Gaming PC, cause there are certain games that I have to use Windows 7 for perfect game play, instead of Windows 10. So, hope you guys don't mind me doing that.

@||Console||: I already have GTX 970, is that enough? And I wouldn't buy graphics card these days, cause the prices are very much hiked up expensive.

@ Woomack: I would like to keep my GTX 970 (I think that card is still good enough?) and if I ever buy new one, I will buy either GTX 1070/1080 or GTX 20xx.

Spec Research:
1. Case: Currently Undecided or Not Sure

2. Power Supply (PSU): Currently Undecided

3. CPU: i5-8600K or i5-8600 (Also considered i5-8600 cause: If this one comes out if when the time for me to decide to build in future: All these questions or reply or post above is currently in "Researching" Period. For now, they aren't for actual PC building)

4. Motherboard: Gigabyte Z370N WIFI (rev. 1.0) (Key Features) Gigabyte Z370N WIFI (rev. 1.0) (Specification)

5. RAM: Undecided (DDR4, 2133/2400/Undecided)

6. VGA: Undecided

7. HDD: Undecided (If HDD: Western Digital/HGSS | If SSD: Samsung 860 Pro or Other Brand?)

8. ODD: LG Internal Blu-ray Drive Ultra HD Blu-Ray Playback & M-DISC Support (WH16NS60)

9. OS: Windows 10 (Not sure if I go for Home or Pro)

 

[EarthDog]

Id also consider this exercise a lot closer to whenever you plan on building as the landscape will change considerably im sure.

 

[ajy0903]

Just updated Spec Research

Updated Spec Research:
1. Case: Currently Undecided or Not Sure

2. Power Supply (PSU): Currently Undecided

3. CPU: i5-8600 (It's currently out on Retail Store and Online)

4. Motherboard: Gigabyte Z370N WIFI (rev. 1.0) (Key Features) Gigabyte Z370N WIFI (rev. 1.0) (Specification) (This motherboard is selling on Fry's Electronics online and retail, but in the Central Computers, it only sells online.

5. RAM: Undecided (DDR4, 2133/2400/Undecided)

6. VGA: Use Integrated Graphics (Intel UHD Graphics 630), cause playing 4K UHD Disc only allowed on Intel Integrated Graphics for now.

7. HDD: Undecided (If HDD: Western Digital/HGSS | If SSD: Samsung 860 Pro or Other Brand?)

8. ODD: LG Internal Blu-ray Drive Ultra HD Blu-Ray Playback & M-DISC Support (WH16NS60)

9. OS: Windows 10 (Not sure if I go for Home or Pro)

 

[Alaric]

Windows 10 updates have stripped a lot of the value from the Pro version (taking away settings options, etc.) to the point I don't know if there is any value left in the higher cost of W10 Pro.

 

[wingman99]

If your mostly going to use it for 4K UHD Disc player. I would just buy a dedicated player less trouble getting it work like tying using a PC. If you use a PC 4K UHD Disc player, you also need most recent HDCP compliant monitor or TV.