[TechSpot] Core i3-7350K vs. Core i5-7400 - moar cores or moar speed?

[crashtech]

It's very tough to parallelize code. I'm glad it's not up to me to do it. Expectations are high, but the reality is that too many things just have to be sequential and are going to stay that way, until perhaps a revolution in quantum computing.

 

[cbn]

It's very tough to parallelize code. I'm glad it's not up to me to do it. Expectations are high, but the reality is that too many things just have to be sequential and are going to stay that way, until perhaps a revolution in quantum computing.

But there have been games that have already done this very well (despite Intel holding back cores in the mainstream and consoles only using 6C/6T or 7C/7T).

Probably the best example of this has been Watch dogs 2 (see below):

http://gamegpu.com/action-/-fps-/-tps/watch-dogs-2-test-gpu

Notice how evenly the load is spread out across 16 threads on the i7 5960X.

 

[quietplates]

Agree, i3-k is too expensive. It's priced as if it does not require ponying up for a Z-series motherboard. The i5 in comparison does not.

 

[VirtualLarry]

If I were Intel, I would drop the price of the i3-K CPU to $100, to fight off loss at the low end from Ryzen 4C/4T CPUs for $129.

Edit: OTOH, that might just give Ryzen legitimacy, as seen by the eyes of Intel. So maybe not.

 

[thepaleobiker]

If I were Intel, I would drop the price of the i3-K CPU to $100, to fight off loss at the low end from Ryzen 4C/4T CPUs for $129.

Edit: OTOH, that might just give Ryzen legitimacy, as seen by the eyes of Intel. So maybe not.

If the Ryzen 5 1400X is aimed at $199 as suggested in leaks (4 C/ 8 T ; Base 3.5GHz boost 3.9 GHz) then this would essentially....kill any Intel i5 processor. There is that one report comparing the i7 7700K with a hafl-shutdown 1800X (thus emulating the 1400X) where the "1400X" is within 95% of the i7 in many apps, and falls below 90% in only a few games.

So between the $199 4C/8T Ryzen vs the $315 ish i7 4C/8T , I dont really see space for i5s at current pricing.

NOTE: As I make this argument, I'm buying a new boxed i5 7500 for $180 sale on Ebay (I wish Ryzen 5 + ITX AM4 came sooner)

Thoughts on i3s & i5s crashing in price soon? I still think Intel remains strongly relevant in single core reliant programs given the IPC leads....

Regards,
Vish

 

[Leyawiin]

From the Techspot article - "The 7350K should really be avoided. In fact, this goes for the entire Kaby Lake Core i3 range and even the higher end Pentium models such as the G4600 and G4620."

From 3/13 through 3/17 Fry's Electronics had the G4620 on sale with a promo code in store only for $77. Almost drove the hour to Sacramento to buy one.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

If so, then how long, until an i7-7700K is said to have "bad frametimes and stuttering", due to lack of core count, as compared to Ryzen 8C/16T? Could potentially turn the tables quite a bit, if "only" four real cores becomes a liability.

Edit: Yeah... "Coffee Lake" timeframe?

Well... it was about 12 years ago that we were arguing about those newfangled C2Ds and A64X2s, and how, while they were better for productivity and multitasking, in terms of FPS/$, and sometimes even in terms of absolute FPS, a budget or value-oriented gamer was better served by a lower cost, higher-clocked single core.

It's only been the last year or two that it seems like the arguments against dualies finally dried up. (The G3258 inadvertently did a lot of demonstrate its own obsolescence, honestly, losing out to i3s in almost every gaming test no matter how fast it was OC'd.)

So I honestly think Quads will be "the thing" for a long time yet. Years.