AMD FX-8350 vs Intel Core i7-6700: What is the difference?
35points
AMD FX-8350
52points
Intel Core i7-6700
vs
64 facts in comparison
AMD FX-8350
Intel Core i7-6700
Why is AMD FX-8350 better than Intel Core i7-6700?
- 2x faster CPU speed?
8 x 4GHzvs4 x 4GHz - 7MB bigger L2 cache?
8MBvs1MB - 128KB bigger L1 cache?
384KBvs256KB - Has an unlocked multiplier?
- 0.75MB/core more L2 cache per core?
1MB/corevs0.25MB/core - Has FMA4?
Why is Intel Core i7-6700 better than AMD FX-8350?
- 267MHz higher ram speed?
2133MHzvs1866MHz - 10°C higher maximum operating temperature?
71°Cvs61°C - 18nm smaller semiconductor size?
14nmvs32nm - 35.76% higher PassMark result?
8045vs5926 - 60W lower TDP?
65Wvs125W - 1 newer version of PCI Express (PCIe)?
3vs2 - Has integrated graphics?
- 13.
1GB/s more memory bandwidth?
34.1GB/svs21GB/s
Which are the most popular comparisons?
AMD FX-8350
vs
AMD Ryzen 5 3600
Intel Core i7-6700
vs
Intel Core i5-6500
AMD FX-8350
vs
Intel Core i7-4770K
Intel Core i7-6700
vs
Intel Core i5-10400
AMD FX-8350
vs
AMD Phenom II X4 965
Intel Core i7-6700
vs
Intel Core i7-7700
AMD FX-8350
vs
Intel Core i7-4770
Intel Core i7-6700
vs
Intel Core i7-4770
AMD FX-8350
vs
AMD FX-6300
Intel Core i7-6700
vs
Intel Core i5-7500
AMD FX-8350
vs
AMD Ryzen 5 5600G
Intel Core i7-6700
vs
Intel Core i7-3770
AMD FX-8350
vs
Intel Core i7-3770
Intel Core i7-6700
vs
Intel Core i5+8400
AMD FX-8350
vs
AMD FX-8320
Intel Core i7-6700
vs
Intel Core i3-10100
AMD FX-8350
vs
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G
Intel Core i7-6700
vs
Intel Core i5-7400
AMD FX-8350
vs
AMD Ryzen 5 5500U
Intel Core i7-6700
vs
AMD Ryzen 5 2600
Price comparison
User reviews
Overall Rating
AMD FX-8350
5 User reviews
AMD FX-8350
9.
8/10
5 User reviews
Intel Core i7-6700
0 User reviews
Intel Core i7-6700
0.0/10
0 User reviews
Features
Value for money
9.6/10
5 votes
No reviews yet
Gaming
9.6/10
5 votes
No reviews yet
Performance
9.2/10
5 votes
No reviews yet
Reliability
9.6/10
5 votes
No reviews yet
Energy efficiency
8.6/10
5 votes
No reviews yet
Performance
1.CPU speed
8 x 4GHz
4 x 4GHz
The CPU speed indicates how many processing cycles per second can be executed by a CPU, considering all of its cores (processing units). It is calculated by adding the clock rates of each core or, in the case of multi-core processors employing different microarchitectures, of each group of cores.
2.
CPU threads
More threads result in faster performance and better multitasking.
3.turbo clock speed
4.2GHz
When the CPU is running below its limitations, it can boost to a higher clock speed in order to give increased performance.
4.Has an unlocked multiplier
✔AMD FX-8350
✖Intel Core i7-6700
Some processors come with an unlocked multiplier which makes them easy to overclock, allowing you to gain increased performance in games and other apps.
5.L2 cache
A larger L2 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.
6.L3 cache
A larger L3 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.
7.L1 cache
A larger L1 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.
8.L2 core
1MB/core
0.25MB/core
More data can be stored in the L2 cache for access by each core of the CPU.
9.L3 core
1MB/core
2MB/core
More data can be stored in the L3 cache for access by each core of the CPU.
Memory
1.RAM speed
1866MHz
2133MHz
It can support faster memory, which will give quicker system performance.
2.maximum memory bandwidth
21GB/s
34.1GB/s
This is the maximum rate that data can be read from or stored into memory.
3.DDR memory version
DDR (Double Data Rate) memory is the most common type of RAM. Newer versions of DDR memory support higher maximum speeds and are more energy-efficient.
4.memory channels
More memory channels increases the speed of data transfer between the memory and the CPU.
5.maximum memory amount
The maximum amount of memory (RAM) supported.
6.
bus transfer rate
5.4GT/s
The bus is responsible for transferring data between different components of a computer or device.
7.Supports ECC memory
✖AMD FX-8350
✖Intel Core i7-6700
Error-correcting code memory can detect and correct data corruption. It is used when is it essential to avoid corruption, such as scientific computing or when running a server.
8.eMMC version
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-8350)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i7-6700)
A higher version of eMMC allows faster memory interfaces, having a positive effect on the performance of a device. For example, when transferring files from your computer to the internal storage over USB.
9.bus speed
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-8350)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i7-6700)
The bus is responsible for transferring data between different components of a computer or device.
Benchmarks
1.PassMark result
This benchmark measures the performance of the CPU using multiple threads.
2.PassMark result (single)
This benchmark measures the performance of the CPU using a single thread.
3.Geekbench 5 result (multi)
Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures a processor’s multi-core performance. (Source: Primate Labs, 2022)
4.Cinebench R20 (multi) result
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i7-6700)
Cinebench R20 is a benchmark tool that measures a CPU’s multi-core performance by rendering a 3D scene.
5.Cinebench R20 (single) result
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i7-6700)
Cinebench R20 is a benchmark tool that measures a CPU’s single-core performance by rendering a 3D scene.
6.
Geekbench 5 result (single)
Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures a processor’s single-core performance. (Source: Primate Labs, 2022)
7.Blender (bmw27) result
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-8350)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i7-6700)
The Blender (bmw27) benchmark measures the performance of a processor by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render the scene in less time.
8.Blender (classroom) result
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-8350)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i7-6700)
The Blender (classroom) benchmark measures the performance of a processor by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render the scene in less time.
9.performance per watt
This means the CPU is more efficient, giving a greater amount of performance for each watt of power used.
Features
1.uses multithreading
✖AMD FX-8350
✔Intel Core i7-6700
Multithreading technology (such as Intel’s Hyperthreading or AMD’s Simultaneous Multithreading) provides increased performance by splitting each of the processor’s physical cores into virtual cores, also known as threads. This way, each core can run two instruction streams at once.
2.Has AES
✔AMD FX-8350
✔Intel Core i7-6700
AES is used to speed up encryption and decryption.
3.Has AVX
✔AMD FX-8350
✔Intel Core i7-6700
AVX is used to help speed up calculations in multimedia, scientific and financial apps, as well as improving Linux RAID software performance.
4.SSE version
SSE is used to speed up multimedia tasks such as editing an image or adjusting audio volume. Each new version contains new instructions and improvements.
5.Has F16C
✔AMD FX-8350
✔Intel Core i7-6700
F16C is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting the contrast of an image or adjusting volume.
6.bits executed at a time
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-8350)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i7-6700)
NEON provides acceleration for media processing, such as listening to MP3s.
7.Has MMX
✔AMD FX-8350
✔Intel Core i7-6700
MMX is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting the contrast of an image or adjusting volume.
8.Has TrustZone
✖AMD FX-8350
✖Intel Core i7-6700
A technology integrated into the processor to secure the device for use with features such as mobile payments and streaming video using digital rights management (DRM).
9.front-end width
Unknown.
Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-8350)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i7-6700)
The CPU can decode more instructions per clock (IPC), meaning that the CPU performs better
Price comparison
Cancel
Which are the best CPUs?
AMD FX-8350 vs Intel Core i7-6700
Summary
-
AMD FX-8350
100%
-
Intel Core i7-6700
135%
Relative performance
-
AMD FX-8350
100%
-
Intel Core i7-6700
165%
Relative performance
-
AMD FX-8350
100%
-
Intel Core i7-6700
121%
Relative performance
Reasons to consider AMD FX-8350 |
| None |
Reasons to consider Intel Core i7-6700 |
Much higher single threaded performance (around 65% higher), makes a noticeable performance difference in gaming and the majority of applications. |
| Much higher multi threaded performance (around 21% higher). This allows for higher performance in professional applications like encoding or heavy multitasking. |
| 60 watts lower power draw. |
| This is a newer product, it might have better application compatibility/performance (check features chart below). |
| Around 35% higher average synthetic performance. |
Gaming
HWBench recommends Intel Core i7-6700
Based on game and synthetic benchmarks, and theoretical specifications.
Productivity
HWBench recommends Intel Core i7-6700
Based on productivity benchmarks, overall multithreaded performance and theoretical specifications.
Features
| AMD FX-8350 | Intel Core i7-6700 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMX | ||||
| SSE | ||||
| SSE2 | ||||
| SSE3 | ||||
| SSSE3 | ||||
SSE4. 1 |
||||
| SSE4.2 | ||||
| SSE4a | ||||
| AMD64 | ||||
| AMD-V | ||||
| AES | ||||
| AVX | ||||
| CLMUL | ||||
| CVT16 | ||||
| EVP | ||||
| FMA4 | ||||
| XOP | ||||
| Turbo Core | ||||
| HT3.1 | ||||
| AVX2 | ||||
| EIST | ||||
| Intel 64 | ||||
| XD bit | ||||
| VT-x | ||||
| VT-d | ||||
| HTT | ||||
| AES-NI | ||||
| TSX | ||||
| TXT | ||||
| FMA3 | ||||
| F16C | ||||
| BMI1 | ||||
| BMI2 | ||||
| vPro | ||||
Boost 2. 0 |
||||
Architecture
| AMD FX-8350 | Intel Core i7-6700 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | AMD Piledriver | vs | Intel_Skylake | |
| Market | Desktop | vs | Desktop | |
| Memory Support | DDR3 | vs | DDR4 | |
| Codename | Vishera | vs | Skylake | |
| Release Date | Oct 2012 | vs | Jul 2015 |
Cores
| AMD FX-8350 | Intel Core i7-6700 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cores | 8 | vs | 4 | |
| Threads | 8 | vs | 8 | |
| SMPs | 1 | vs | 1 | |
| Integrated Graphics | No | vs | No |
Cache
| AMD FX-8350 | Intel Core i7-6700 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| L1 Cache | 384 KB | vs | 64 KB (per core) | |
| L2 Cache | 8192 KB | vs | 256 KB (per core) | |
| L3 Cache | 8192 KB (shared) | vs | 8192 KB (shared) |
Physical
| AMD FX-8350 | Intel Core i7-6700 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ | vs | Intel Socket 1151 | |
| Max Case Temp | unknown | vs | 72°C | |
| Package | uPGA | vs | ||
| Die Size | 315mm² | vs | unknown | |
| Process | 32 nm | vs | 14 nm |
Performance
| AMD FX-8350 | Intel Core i7-6700 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cpu Frequency | 4000 MHz | vs | 3400 MHz | |
| Turbo Clock | 4200 MHz | vs | 4000 MHz | |
| Base Clock | 200 MHz | vs | 100 MHz | |
| Voltage | 1. 45 V |
vs | unknown | |
| TDP | 125 W | vs | 65 W |
-
AMD FX-8350
2562 points
-
Intel Core i7-6700
4600 points
Points — higher is better
-
AMD FX-8350
16006 points
-
Intel Core i7-6700
18924 points
Points — higher is better
-
AMD FX-8350
1497
-
Intel Core i7-6700
1748
points per second — higher is better
-
AMD FX-8350
6648
-
Intel Core i7-6700
8478
points — higher is better
-
AMD FX-8350
3201
-
Intel Core i7-6700
6002.5
points — higher is better
-
AMD FX-8350
16904
-
Intel Core i7-6700
24304.5
points — higher is better
-
AMD FX-8350
1.1
-
Intel Core i7-6700
1.93
points — higher is better
-
AMD FX-8350
6.
89 -
Intel Core i7-6700
8.86
points — higher is better
-
AMD FX-8350
97
-
Intel Core i7-6700
168.5
points — higher is better
-
AMD FX-8350
633
-
Intel Core i7-6700
802
points — higher is better
-
AMD FX-8350
21.6
-
Intel Core i7-6700
9.65
seconds — lower is better
-
AMD FX-8350
8.34
-
Intel Core i7-6700
6.8
seconds — lower is better
-
AMD FX-8350
4562
-
Intel Core i7-6700
5412.5
MB/s — higher is better
-
AMD FX-8350
138.75
-
Intel Core i7-6700
187.4
FPS — higher is better
-
AMD FX-8350
43.5
-
Intel Core i7-6700
50.8
FPS — higher is better
-
AMD FX-8350
3.6
-
Intel Core i7-6700
4.
45
GB/s
-
AMD FX-8350
0.75
-
Intel Core i7-6700
0.78
GB/s
-
AMD FX-8350
0.42
-
Intel Core i7-6700
0.46
GB/s
| VS | ||
| AMD FX-8350 | Intel Pentium Gold G6600 |
| VS | ||
| AMD FX-8350 | Intel Core i7-1068G7 |
| VS | ||
| Intel Core i7-6700 | AMD Ryzen 3 4300GE |
| VS | ||
| Intel Core i7-6700 | AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350GE |
| VS | ||
| AMD Ryzen 3 5300G | Intel Core i5-11400 |
| VS | ||
| Intel Core i5-11400 | Intel Core i5-11500 |
Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
Intel Core i7-6700 vs AMD FX-8350
|
|
|
|
|
Intel Core i7-6700 vs AMD FX-8350
Comparison of the technical characteristics between the processors, with the Intel Core i7-6700 on one side and the AMD FX-8350 on the other side. The first is dedicated to the desktop sector, It has 4 cores, 8 threads, a maximum frequency of 4,0GHz. The second is used on the desktop segment, it has a total of 8 cores, 8 threads, its turbo frequency is set to 4,2 GHz. The following table also compares the lithography, the number of transistors (if indicated), the amount of cache memory, the maximum RAM memory capacity, the type of memory accepted, the release date, the maximum number of PCIe lanes, the values obtained in Geekbench 4 and Cinebench R15.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
This page contains references to products from one or more of our advertisers. We may receive compensation when you click on links to those products. For an explanation of our advertising policy, please visit this page.
Specifications:
| Processor | Intel Core i7-6700 | AMD FX-8350 | ||||||
| Market (main) | Desktop | Desktop | ||||||
| ISA | x86-64 (64 bit) | x86-64 (64 bit) | ||||||
| Microarchitecture | Skylake | Piledriver | ||||||
| Core name | Skylake-S | Vishera | ||||||
| Family | Core i7-6000 | FX-8000 | ||||||
| Part number(s), S-Spec | BX80662I76700, SR2L2 |
FD8350FRW8KHK, FD8350FRHKBOX, FX-8350 Black Edition |
||||||
| Release date | Q3 2015 | Q4 2012 | ||||||
| Lithography | 14 nm | 32 nm SOI | ||||||
| Transistors | 1. 350.000.000 |
1.200.000.000 | ||||||
| Cores | 4 | 8 | ||||||
| Threads | 8 | 8 | ||||||
| Base frequency | 3,4 GHz | 4,0 GHz | ||||||
| Turbo frequency | 4,0 GHz | 4,2 GHz | ||||||
| Cache memory | 8 MB | 8 MB | ||||||
| Max memory capacity | 64 GB | 32 GB | ||||||
| Memory types | DDR4-1866/2133, DDR3L-1333/1600 |
DDR3-1866 | ||||||
| Max # of memory channels | 2 | 2 | ||||||
| Max memory bandwidth | 34,1 GB/s | 29,9 GB/s | ||||||
| Max PCIe lanes | 16 | 16 | ||||||
| TDP | 65 W | 125 W | ||||||
| Suggested PSU | 600W ATX Power Supply | 650W ATX Power Supply | ||||||
| GPU integrated graphics | Intel HD Graphics 530 | None | ||||||
| GPU execution units | 24 | — | ||||||
| GPU shading units | 192 | — | ||||||
| GPU base clock | 350 MHz | — | ||||||
| GPU boost clock | 1150 MHz | — | ||||||
| GPU FP32 floating point | 403,2 GFLOPS | — | ||||||
| Socket | LGA1151 | AM3+ | ||||||
| Compatible motherboard | Socket LGA 1151 Motherboard | Socket AM3+ Motherboard | ||||||
| Maximum temperature | 71°C | 61°C | ||||||
| Drystone MIPS | — | 97. 114 DMIPS |
||||||
| CPU-Z single thread | 428 | 231 | ||||||
| CPU-Z multi thread | 2.202 | 1.597 | ||||||
| Cinebench R15 single thread | 149 | 100 | ||||||
| Cinebench R15 multi-thread | 767 | 669 | ||||||
| Cinebench R23 single thread | 1.050 | 484 | ||||||
| Cinebench R23 multi-thread | 4.328 | 3.355 | ||||||
| PassMark single thread | 2.201 | 1.573 | ||||||
| PassMark CPU Mark | 8.042 | 5. 944 |
||||||
| (Windows 64-bit) Geekbench 4 single core |
4.434 | 2.738 | ||||||
| (Windows 64-bit) Geekbench 4 multi-core |
14.685 | 10.978 | ||||||
| (SGEMM) GFLOPS performance |
235,8 GFLOPS | 99,6 GFLOPS | ||||||
| (Multi-core / watt performance) Performance / watt ratio |
226 pts / W | 88 pts / W | ||||||
| Amazon | ||||||||
| eBay |
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
We can better compare what are the technical differences between the two processors.
Suggested PSU: We assume that we have An ATX computer case, a high end graphics card, 16GB RAM, a 512GB SSD, a 1TB HDD hard drive, a Blu-Ray drive. We will have to rely on a more powerful power supply if we want to have several graphics cards, several monitors, more memory, etc.
Price: For technical reasons, we cannot currently display a price less than 24 hours, or a real-time price. This is why we prefer for the moment not to show a price. You should refer to the respective online stores for the latest price, as well as availability.
The processor AMD FX-8350 has a larger number of cores, the turbo frequency of AMD FX-8350 is bigger, that the PDT of Intel Core i7-6700 is lower. The Intel Core i7-6700 was designed earlier.
Performances :
Performance comparison between the two processors, for this we consider the results generated on benchmark software such as Geekbench 4.
| CPU-Z — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i7-6700 |
428 2.  202 |
| AMD FX-8350 |
231 1.597 |
In single core, the difference is 85%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 38%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
CPU-Z is a system information software that provides the name of the processor, its model number, the codename, the cache levels, the package, the process. It can also gives data about the mainboard, the memory. It makes real time measurement, with finally a benchmark for the single thread, as well as for the multi thread.
| Cinebench R15 — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i7-6700 |
149 767 |
| AMD FX-8350 |
100 669 |
In single core, the difference is 49%.
In multi-core, the differential gap is 15%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Cinebench R15 evaluates the performance of CPU calculations by restoring a photorealistic 3D scene. The scene has 2,000 objects, 300,000 polygons, uses sharp and fuzzy reflections, bright areas, shadows, procedural shaders, antialiasing, and so on. The faster the rendering of the scene is created, the more powerful the PC is, with a high number of points.
| Cinebench R23 — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i7-6700 |
1.050 4.328 |
| AMD FX-8350 |
484 3.355 |
In single core, the difference is 117%.
In multi-core, the differential gap is 29%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Cinebench R23 is cross-platform testing software that allows you to assess the hardware capabilities of a device such as a computer, tablet, server. This version of Cinebench takes into account recent developments in processors with multiple cores and the latest improvements in rendering techniques. The evaluation is ultimately even more relevant. The test scene contains no less than 2,000 objects and more than 300,000 polygons in total.
| PassMark — CPU Mark & single thread | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i7-6700 |
2.201 8.042 |
| AMD FX-8350 |
1.573 5.944 |
In single core, the difference is 40%.
In multi-core, the differential gap is 35%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
PassMark is a benchmarking software that performs several performance tests including prime numbers, integers, floating point, compression, physics, extended instructions, encoding, sorting. The higher the score is, the higher is the device capacity.
On Windows 64-bit:
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Windows 64-bit | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i7-6700 |
4.434 14.685 |
| AMD FX-8350 |
2.738 10.978 |
In single core, the difference is 62%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 34%.
On Linux 64-bit:
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Linux 64-bit | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i7-6700 |
4.565 12.626 |
| AMD FX-8350 |
2.755 10.794 |
In single core, the difference is 66%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 17%.
On Android 64-bit:
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Android 64-bit | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i7-6700 |
2.698 8.030 |
| AMD FX-8350 |
2.233 5.530 |
In single core, the difference is 21%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 45%.
On Mac OS X 64-bit:
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Mac OS X 64-bit | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i7-6700 |
4.  86616.460 |
| AMD FX-8350 |
2.688 11.071 |
In single core, the difference is 81%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 49%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Geekbench 4 is a complete benchmark platform with several types of tests, including data compression, images, AES encryption, SQL encoding, HTML, PDF file rendering, matrix computation, Fast Fourier Transform, 3D object simulation, photo editing, memory testing. This allows us to better visualize the respective power of these devices. For each result, we took an average of 250 values on the famous benchmark software.
Equivalence:
Intel Core i7-6700 AMD equivalentAMD FX-8350 Intel equivalent
See also:
Intel Core i7-6700HQIntel Core i7-6700KIntel Core i7-6700T
Intel Core i7-6700 vs.
AMD FX-8320
Cpu Benchmark with tests
| Intel Core i7-6700 | AMD FX-8320 | |
| 3.40GHz | Frequency | 3.50 GHz |
| 4.00GHz | Turbo (1 core) | 4.00 GHz |
| 3.70GHz | Turbo (all cores) | 3.75 GHz |
| 4 | Core | 8 |
| yes | Hyperthreading ? | No |
| No | Overclocking? | yes |
| normal | Basic architecture | normal |
| Intel HD Graphics 530 | GPU | no iGPU |
| 12 | DirectX Version | |
| 3 | Max. displays | |
| memory size | DDR3-1866 | |
| 2 | Memory channels | 2 |
Max. memory size |
||
| No | ECC | yes |
| — | L2 Cache | — |
| 8.00MB | L3 Cache | 8.00 MB |
| 3.0 | PCIe version | |
| 16 | PCIe lanes | |
| 14nm | Technology | 32nm |
| LGA 1151 | Socket | AM3+ |
| 65 W | TDP | 125W |
| VT-x, VT-x EPT, VT-d | Virtualization | AMD-V |
| Q3/2015 | Issue date | Q4/2012 |
| show more details | show more details |
Cinebench R23 (Single-Core)
Cinebench R23 is the successor to Cinebench R20 and is also based on Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D shapes. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account.
Cinebench R23 (Multi-Core)
Cinebench R23 is the successor to Cinebench R20 and is also based on Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D shapes. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading.
Cinebench R20 (Single-Core)
Cinebench R20 is the successor to Cinebench R15 and is also based on Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D shapes. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account.
Cinebench R20 (Multi-Core)
Cinebench R20 is the successor to Cinebench R15 and is also based on the Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D shapes. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading.
Cinebench R15 (Single-Core)
Cinebench R15 is the successor to Cinebench 11.5 and is also based on the Cinema 4 Suite.
Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D shapes. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account.
Cinebench R15 (Multi-Core)
Cinebench R15 is the successor to Cinebench 11.5 and is also based on Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D shapes. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading.
Geekbench 5, 64bit (Single-Core)
Geekbench 5 is a memory-intensive, cross-platform benchmark. A fast memory will greatly push the result. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account.
Geekbench 5, 64bit (Multi-Core)
Geekbench 5 is a memory-intensive, cross-platform benchmark. A fast memory will greatly push the result. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading.
iGPU — FP32 Performance (Single-precision GFLOPS)
Theoretical processing performance of the processor’s internal graphics unit with simple precision (32 bits) in GFLOPS.
GFLOPS specifies how many billions of floating point operations the iGPU can perform per second.
Blender 2.81 (bmw27)
Blender is a free 3D graphics software for rendering (creating) 3D bodies that can also be textured and animated in the program. The Blender test creates predefined scenes and measures the time(s) required for the entire scene. The less time it takes, the better. We chose the bmw27 as our reference scene.
Geekbench 3, 64bit (Single-Core)
Geekbench 3 is a cross-platform benchmark that is memory intensive. A fast memory will greatly push the result. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account.
Geekbench 3, 64bit (Multi-Core)
Geekbench 3 is a cross-platform benchmark that is memory intensive. A fast memory will greatly push the result. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading.
Cinebench R11.
5, 64bit (Single-Core)
Cinebench 11.5 is based on the Cinema 4D Suite, a software that is popular for creating shapes and other things in 3D. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account.
Cinebench R11.5, 64bit (Multi-Core)
Cinebench 11.5 is based on the Cinema 4D Suite, a software that is popular for creating shapes and other things in 3D. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading.
Cinebench R11.5, 64bit (iGPU, OpenGL)
Cinebench 11.5 is based on Cinema 4D Suite, a software that is popular for creating shapes and other things in 3D. The iGPU test uses the CPU’s internal graphics unit to execute OpenGL commands.
Estimated results for PassMark CPU Mark
Some of the processors listed below have passed CPU-Benchmark testing. However, most of the processors were not tested and the results were evaluated by the secret patented CPU-Benchmark formula.
As such, they do not accurately reflect the actual values of Passmark CPU ratings and are not endorsed by PassMark Software Pty Ltd.
The speed of caches and working with RAM is also important.
Speed in office use
Core i7-8700K
79.4 (+7.2%)
Core i7-6700K
73.7
Performance in everyday work such as browsers and office programs.
The performance of 1 core has the greatest impact on the result, since most of these applications use only one, ignoring the rest.
Similarly, many professional applications such as various CADs ignore multi-threaded performance.
Speed in heavy applications
Core i7-8700K
53.5 (+17.6%)
Core i7-6700K
44.1
The performance of all cores and their number have the greatest impact on the result, since most of these applications willingly use all the cores and increase the speed accordingly.
At the same time, certain periods of work can be demanding on the performance of one or two cores, for example, applying filters in the editor.
Data obtained from tests by users who tested their systems with and without overclocking. Thus, you see the average values corresponding to the processor.
Speed of numerical operations
Simple household tasks |
|
Core i7-8700K 76.7 (+6.8%) Core i7-6700K 71.5 |
Demanding games and tasks |
|
Core i7-8700K 57.5 (+20%) Core i7-6700K 46 |
Extreme |
|
Core i7-8700K 18.5 (+37.8%) Core i7-6700K 11.5 |
Different tasks require different CPU strengths.
A system with few fast cores and low memory latency will be fine for the vast majority of games, but will be inferior to a system with a lot of slow cores in a rendering scenario.
We believe that a minimum of 4/4 (4 physical cores and 4 threads) processor is suitable for a budget gaming PC. At the same time, some games can load it at 100%, slow down and freeze, and performing any tasks in the background will lead to a drop in FPS.
Ideally, the budget shopper should aim for a minimum of 4/8 and 6/6. A gamer with a big budget can choose between 6/12, 8/8 and 8/16. Processors with 10 and 12 cores can perform well in games with high frequency and fast memory, but are overkill for such tasks. Also, buying for the future is a dubious undertaking, since in a few years many slow cores may not provide sufficient gaming performance.
When choosing a processor for your work, consider how many cores your programs use. For example, photo and video editors can use 1-2 cores when working with filtering, and rendering or converting in the same editors already uses all threads.
Data obtained from tests by users who tested their systems both with overclocking (maximum value in the table) and without (minimum). A typical result is shown in the middle, the more filled in the color bar, the better the average result among all tested systems.
Benchmarks
Benchmarks were run on stock hardware, that is, without overclocking and with factory settings. Therefore, on overclocked systems, the points can noticeably differ upwards. Also, small performance changes may be due to the BIOS version.
Cinebench R23 Single Core
Intel Core i7-8700K
1209 (+7%)
Intel Core i7-6700K
1124
Cinebench R23 Multi Core
Intel Core i7-8700K
8960 (+37.1 %)
Intel Core i7-6700K
5640
Cinebench R20 Single Core
Intel Core i7-8700K
487 (+13.6%)
Intel Core i7-6700K
421
Cinebench R20 Multi Core
Intel Core i7-8700K
3689 (+44.
2%)
Intel Core i7-6700k
2059
Cinebench R15 Single Core
Intel Core i7-8700k
208 (+13.5%)
9000 INTEL CORE I7-66 666666666666666
Cinebench R15 Multi Core
Intel Core i7-8700K
1447 (+38.6%)
Intel Core i7-6700K
888
Geekbench 5 Single Core
Intel Core i7-8700K
1283 (+10.3% )
Intel Core i7-6700K
1151
Geekbench 5 Multi Core
Intel Core i7-8700K
6693 (+33.4%)
Intel Core i7-6700K
4459
Blender 2.81 bmw27
Intel Core i7-8700K
232.4
Intel Core i7-6700k
369.3 (+37.1%)
Geekbench 3 Single Core
Intel Core i7-8700k
5330 (+10.8%) Intel Core
Intel Core i7-8700k
27445 (+38%)
Intel Core i7-6700k
17028
Cinebench R11.
5
Intel Core i7-8700k
9000 9000 9000 9000) -6700K
2.19
Cinebench R11.5
Intel Core i7-8700K
15.96 (+37.8%)
Intel Core i7-6700K
9.92
Cinebench R11.5 iGPU, OpenGL
Intel Core i7 -8700K
53.2 (+22.2%)
Intel Core i7-6700K
41.4
Passmark
Intel Core i7-8700k
13906 (+35.5%)
Intel Core i7-6700k
8973
Characteristics of
Data may not be filled with no information or can not be busted in the tables missing existing features.
Basic
| Manufacturer | Intel | Intel |
| DescriptionInformation about the processor, taken from the official website of the manufacturer. | Intel® Core™ i7-8700K Processor (12M Cache, up to 4.70 GHz) | Intel® Core™ i7-6700K Processor (8M Cache, up to 4. 20 GHz) |
| ArchitectureCode name for the microarchitecture generation. | Coffee Lake | Skylake |
| Process The manufacturing process, measured in nanometers. The smaller the technical process, the more perfect the technology, the lower the heat dissipation and power consumption. | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Date of Issue The month and year the processor was released. | 10-2020 | 10-2018 |
| Model Official name. | i7-8700K | i7-6700K |
| Cores The number of physical cores. | 6 | 4 |
ThreadsNumber of threads. The number of logical processor cores that the operating system sees. |
12 | 8 |
| Multi-Threading Technology With Intel’s Hyper-threading and AMD’s SMT technology, one physical core is recognized by the operating system as two logical cores, thereby increasing processor performance in multi-threaded applications. | Hyper-threading (note that some games may not work well with Hyper-threading, you can disable the technology in the BIOS of the motherboard for maximum FPS). | Hyper-threading (note that some games may not work well with Hyper-threading, you can disable the technology in the BIOS of the motherboard for maximum FPS). |
Base frequencyGuaranteed frequency of all processor cores at maximum load. Performance in single-threaded and multi-threaded applications and games depends on it. It is important to remember that speed and frequency are not directly related. For example, a new processor at a lower frequency may be faster than an old one at a higher one. |
3.7 GHz | 4GHz |
| Turbo frequencyThe maximum frequency of one processor core in turbo mode. Manufacturers allow modern processors to independently increase the frequency of one or more cores under heavy load, due to which performance is noticeably increased. It may depend on the nature of the load, the number of loaded cores, temperature and the specified limits. Significantly affects the speed in games and applications that are demanding on the frequency of the CPU. | 4.7 GHz | 4.2 GHz |
| L3 cache size The third level cache acts as a buffer between the computer’s RAM and the processor’s level 2 cache. Used by all cores, the speed of information processing depends on the volume. | 12 MB | 8 MB |
| Instructions | 64-bit | 64-bit |
Extended instruction set Allows you to speed up calculations, processing and execution of certain operations. Also, some games require instruction support. |
SSE4.1/4.2, AVX2 | SSE4.1/4.2, AVX 2.0 |
| Embedded Options Available Two housing versions. Standard and designed for mobile devices. In the second version, the processor can be soldered on the motherboard. | No | No |
| Bus frequency The speed of communication with the system. | 8 GT/s DMI3 | 8 GT/s DMI3 |
| Number of QPI links | No data | |
TDPThermal Design Power is an indicator that determines heat dissipation in standard operation. The cooler or water cooling system must be rated for a larger value. Remember that with a factory bus or manual overclocking, TDP increases significantly. |
95 W | 91W |
| Cooling system specifications | PCG 2015C (130W) | PCG 2015D (130W) |
Video core
| Integrated graphics core Allows you to use your computer without a discrete graphics card. The monitor is connected to the video output on the motherboard. If earlier integrated graphics made it possible to simply work at a computer, today it can replace budget video accelerators and makes it possible to play most games at low settings. | Intel® UHD Graphics 630 | Intel® HD Graphics 530 |
| GPU base clockFrequency of 2D and idle operation. | 350 MHz | 350 MHz |
Maximum GPU frequencyMaximum 3D frequency. |
1200 MHz | 1150MHz |
| Intel® Wireless Display (Intel® WiDi) Supports Wireless Display technology over Wi-Fi 802.11n. Thanks to it, a monitor or TV equipped with the same technology does not require a cable to connect. | No data | |
| Supported monitorsThe maximum number of monitors that can be connected to the integrated video core at the same time. | 3 | 3 |
RAM
| Maximum RAM Amount of RAM that can be installed on the motherboard with this processor. | 64 GB | 64 GB |
| Supported type of RAM The type of RAM depends on its frequency and timings (speed), availability, price. | DDR4-2666 | DDR4-1866/2133, DDR3L-1333/1600 @ 1. 35V |
| RAM Channels The multi-channel memory architecture increases data transfer speed. On desktop platforms, two-channel, three-channel and four-channel modes are available. | 2 | 2 |
| RAM bandwidth | 34.1 GB/s | |
| ECC memory Support for error-correcting memory that is used in servers. Usually more expensive than usual and requires more expensive server components. However, second-hand server processors, Chinese motherboards and ECC memory sticks, which are sold relatively cheaply in China, have become widespread. | No data | No data |
PCI
PCI-E The PCI Express computer bus version. The bandwidth and power limit depend on the version. There is backward compatibility. |
3 | 3 |
| PCI configuration options | Up to 1×16 or 2×8 or 1×8+2×4 | Up to 1×16 or 2×8 or 1×8+2×4 |
| Number of PCI lanes | 16 | Up to 1×16 or 2×8 or 1×8+2×4 |
Data security
| AES-NI The AES command set extension speeds up applications that use appropriate encryption. | No data | No data |
| Intel® Secure Key An RDRAND instruction that allows you to create a high performance random number generator. | No data | No data |
Decoration
| Dimensions | No data | No data |
| Supported sockets | No data | No data |
| Maximum processors per motherboard | No data | No data |
Which is better
Intel Core i7-8700K
- On average, gaming performance is 8% better.
- 6% faster in office applications and browsers.
- In complex multi-threaded applications, faster and outperforms by 7%.
- The number of physical cores is 2 more.
- The number of threads is 4 more.
Intel Core i7-6700K
- The price is 9 $ lower
- The base frequency is 0.3 GHz higher.
Test of Intel Core i7-5775C and Core i5-5675C processors in actual games (page 4)
Project CARS (Monza Circuit)
- Version Update 4.
- DirectX 11.
- FXAA — high quality.
- Other anti-aliasing techniques — disabled.
- Anisotropic filtering — X16.
- Texture resolution is high.
- Reflection quality — ultra high.
- The quality of the world map is ultra high.
- Machine detail — ultra high.
- Track detail — ultra high.
- Shadow detail — ultra high.
- Speed effect — high.
- Forward rendering — 1.
- Grass detail — ultra high.
- Particle level — high.
- Particle density — ultra high.
- Extended headlight reflection — enabled.
- Post-processing filter — enabled.
- Glare — enabled.
- Solar glare outside — saturated.
- Solar reflections inside — saturated.
- Glow — enabled.
- Marevo — included.
- Global specular glow — enabled.
- Exposure compensation — 1.00.
- Raindrops on the screen — included.
- Vignetting — enabled.
- Twilight rays — enabled.
- Dirt on the screen — enabled.
1920×1080
Nominal
Please enable JavaScript to see graphs
Acceleration
Please enable JavaScript to see graphs
Minimum and average FPS
recommendations
StarCraft II: Legacy of the Void