Intel core i5 8400 vs i7 8700: Core i5-8400 vs Core i7-8700 [in 15 benchmarks]

Intel Core i5-8400 vs Intel Core i7-870 Benchmarks, Specs, Performance Comparison and Differences

Intel Core i5-8400 vs Intel Core i7-870

Comparison of the technical characteristics between the processors, with the Intel Core i5-8400 on one side and the Intel Core i7-870 on the other side. The first is dedicated to the desktop sector, It has 6 cores, 6 threads, a maximum frequency of 4,0GHz. The second is used on the desktop segment, it has a total of 4 cores, 8 threads, its turbo frequency is set to 3,6 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.

Specification comparison:

Processor		Intel Core i5-8400				Intel Core i7-870
Market (main)		Desktop				Desktop
ISA		x86-64 (64 bit)				x86-64 (64 bit)
Microarchitecture		Coffee Lake				Nehalem
Core name		Coffee Lake-S				Lynnfield
Family		Core i5-8000				Core i7-800
Part number(s), S-Spec		BX80684I58400, BXC80684I58400, CM8068403358811, BOC80684I58400, BO80684I58400, SR3QT, QNMN				BX80605I7870, BXC80605I7870, BV80605001905AI, Q3AJ, SLBJG
Release date		Q4 2017				Q3 2009
Lithography		14 nm++				45 nm
Transistors		—				774. 000.000
Cores		6				4
Threads		6				8
Base frequency		2,8 GHz				2,9 GHz
Turbo frequency		4,0 GHz				3,6 GHz
Bus speed		8 GT/s				2,5 GT/s
Cache memory		9 MB				8 MB
Max memory capacity		64 GB				16 GB
Memory types		DDR4-2666				DDR3 1066/1333
Max # of memory channels		2				2
Max memory bandwidth		41,6 GB/s				21 GB/s
Max PCIe lanes		16				16
TDP		65 W				95 W
Suggested PSU		600W ATX Power Supply				600W ATX Power Supply
GPU integrated graphics		Intel UHD Graphics 630 (Coffee Lake)				None
GPU execution units		23				—
GPU shading units		184				—
GPU base clock		350 MHz				—
GPU boost clock		1050 MHz				—
GPU FP32 floating point		423,2 GFLOPS				—
Socket		LGA1151				LGA1156
Compatible motherboard		Socket LGA 1151 Motherboard				Socket LGA 1156 Motherboard
Maximum temperature		100°C				72. 7°C
CPU-Z single thread		442				322
CPU-Z multi thread		2.666				1.782
Cinebench R15 single thread		169				95
Cinebench R15 multi-thread		954				509
Cinebench R23 single thread		1.017				502
Cinebench R23 multi-thread		5.839				2.623
PassMark single thread		2.401				1.387
PassMark CPU Mark		9.206				3. 036
(Windows 64-bit) Geekbench 4 single core		4.765				2.585
(Windows 64-bit) Geekbench 4 multi-core		18.154				8.548
(SGEMM) GFLOPS performance		299,4 GFLOPS				66,72 GFLOPS
(Multi-core / watt performance) Performance / watt ratio		279 pts / W				90 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 Intel Core i5-8400 has more cores, the maximum frequency of Intel Core i5-8400 is greater, that the PDT of Intel Core i5-8400 is lower. The Intel Core i5-8400 was designed earlier.

Performance comparison with the benchmarks:

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 i5-8400	442 2. 666
Intel Core i7-870	322 1.782

In single core, the difference is 37%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 50%.

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 i5-8400	169 954
Intel Core i7-870	95 509

In single core, the difference is 78%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 87%.

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 i5-8400	1.017 5.839
Intel Core i7-870	502 2.623

In single core, the difference is 103%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 123%.

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 i5-8400	2.401 9.206
Intel Core i7-870	1.387 3. 036

In single core, the difference is 73%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 203%.

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 i5-8400	4.765 18.154
Intel Core i7-870	2.585 8.548

In single core, the difference is 84%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 112%.

On Linux 64-bit:

	Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Linux 64-bit
Intel Core i5-8400	5.100 18.750
Intel Core i7-870	2.983 9.139

In single core, the difference is 71%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 105%.

On Mac OS X 64-bit:

	Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Mac OS X 64-bit
Intel Core i5-8400	5.098 20.285
Intel Core i7-870	2.685 8.616

In single core, the difference is 90%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 135%.

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 i5-8400 AMD equivalentIntel Core i7-870 AMD equivalent

See also:

Intel Core i5-8400HIntel Core i5-8400T

Intel Core i7-8700Intel Core i7-8700BIntel Core i7-8700KIntel Core i7-8700TIntel Core i7-8705GIntel Core i7-8706GIntel Core i7-8750HIntel Core i7-875K

Intel i5-8400 CPU Review: 2666MHz & 3200MHz Gaming Benchmarks | GamersNexus

 

Intel i5-8400 Thermals

Thermal testing is tricky for CPUs, as comparative data really only properly works if done on the same architecture, and ideally on the same motherboard. This can be negated with hardware measurement tools (something we are now building), but software monitoring works best when done within the same generation. Sensors can be moved, renamed, or averaged differently, which means that even same-company thermals (Intel vs. Intel or AMD vs. AMD) may not be a linear comparison. Auto voltage testing also means that the motherboard makers are largely in control of how high the temperatures go, but we can still look at the i7-8700K thermals and the i5-8400 thermals, with some additional perspective provided by the i9 CPU series.

NOTE: Some of the above data cannot really be cross-compared, e.g. between i9 & i7 CPUs, as the motherboard and CPU change so drastically.

Comparatively and just with out-of-box configuration, as we figure that’s what most people will use with an i5-8400, we found the CPU to be thermally sound in comparative testing versus the i7-8700K (using an X62 for comparative data). Keep in mind that workload and power consumption are what dictate thermal performance: HCC CPUs have a significantly larger die, a bigger substrate to sink into, and (we think) use a better version of the Dow Corning TIM. There’s also a difference in motherboard and platform, which means a difference in voltage behavior.

Regardless, the i5-8400 performs well here. Part of the 52C average core number is a result of the lack of hyperthreading. The i7-8700K spins-off two AVX threads per core, which increases per-core power consumption and load. That’s where the extra 23 degrees comes from, on the stock version of the 8700K.

There’s not really any need to delid the 8400. It’s good enough as is, and reducing thermals won’t gain us that much in power leakage reductions. You get about a 4% reduction in power for every 10C drop, and there’s just not much room here for more of that.

Intel i5-8400 Power Consumption

Cinebench Multithreaded Power Consumption

Thermals relate to power consumption directly. For Cinebench multi-threaded workloads, we’re measuring about 54W on the EPS12V cables to the CPU, positioning the i5-8400 at about equivalent power consumption to the overclocked R3 CPUs, and just below the previous i5-7600K CPU. We’re still adding the likes of the R5 1600, 1500X, and 1400 to these charts, as we recently completely redid our CPU testing methodology, but we do have R7s and the 1600X present. The R7 1700 measures at 76W, with the i7-8700K at 91W, providing some context to the 54W consumption.

Cinebench Single-Threaded Power Consumption

Single-threaded Cinebench performance has us at 16W, making for improved performance-per-watt in single-threaded tasks. This is where Intel has traditionally excelled, and that remains the case here.

i5-8400 Blender Power Consumption

For a real-world test, Blender pushes the 8400 to draw 57W under full load, tying it with the overclocked R3 1300X and i3-7350K. For comparison to a previous i5 CPU, the i5-7600K measures at 62W, or about 8.8% higher than the 8400. The current-gen flagship 8700K CPU tests at 96W stock, or 130W overclocked.

3DMark Physics CPU Power Consumption

3DMark’s CPU-constrained physics test gives an idea for synthesized gaming consumption, linking the i5-8400 to ~41W power draw. The i5-7600K draws about 43W, with the i7-7700K at ~49W. The R7 1700 is at around 55W, in this particular test.

Prime95 29.2 8K Power Consumption

The above is a Prime 95 29.2 8K power consumption torture, representing one of the worst possible cases for the CPUs.

Total War: Warhammer Power Draw

One more, here: This chart is sparser, as we were forced to collect new data when Total War updated its benchmark routine. The lower TDP R5s and R3s aren’t yet represented. We’ll get there. For now, the i5-8400 plots at 37W consumption during the Total War gaming scenario, with the R7 1700 at 47W and the i7-8700K at 52W. The spread isn’t huge, here, and shows what you can expect from a CPU-intensive game.

Continue to the next page for production and synthetic tests.

« Prev Next »

Intel Core i5-8400 vs Intel Core i7-8700B

• Main

&nbsp/&nbsp

• CPU Comparison

&nbsp/&nbsp

Overall score

Issued
Q4/2017

Issued
Q2/2018

Overall score

What is better to choose Intel Core i5-8400 or Intel Core i7-8700B?

We have prepared a comparison to help you choose the best processor. Compare their characteristics and benchmark results.

Intel Core i5-8400 has a maximum frequency of 2.80 GHz. 6 cores. Power consumption 65 W. Released Q4/2017.

Intel Core i7-8700B has a maximum frequency of 3.20 GHz. 6 cores. Power consumption 65 W. Released Q2/2018.

Differences
Characteristics
Benchmarks (tests)
Reviews

Differences

Reasons to choose
Intel Core i5-8400

Report a bug

Positions in benchmark results

General positions of Intel Core i5-8400 CPU in popular benchmarks, for comparison with other models.

• Cinebench R20 (Single-Core)

  294 place

• Cinebench R20 (Multi-Core)

  255 place

• Cinebench R15 (Single Core)

  313 ​​place

• Cinebench R15 (Multi-Core)

  327 place

• Geekbench 5, 64bit (Single-Core)

  380 place

• Geekbench 5, 64bit (Multi-Core)

  409 place

• iGPU — FP32 Performance (Single-precision GFLOPS)

  660 place

• Blender 2. 81 (bmw27)

  89 place

• Geekbench 3, 64bit (Single-Core)

  176 place

• Geekbench 3, 64bit (Multi-Core)

  188 place

• Cinebench R11.5, 64bit (Single-Core)

  333 place

• Cinebench R11.5, 64bit (Multi-Core)

  189 place

• Cinebench R11.5, 64bit (iGPU, OpenGL)

  10 place

• Estimated results for PassMark CPU Mark

  312 place

Reasons to choose
Intel Core i7-8700B

Report a bug

Positions in benchmark results

General positions of Intel Core i7-8700B CPU in popular benchmarks, for comparison with other models.

• Cinebench R23 (Single Core)

  225 place

• Cinebench R23 (Multi-Core)

  204 place

• iGPU — FP32 Performance (Single-precision GFLOPS)

  634 place

Characteristics

Technical data

Intel Core i5-8400

Intel Core i7-8700B

CPU group and family

Reference information on compared processors, series, generation and market segment.

• Segment

  Desktop / Server Desktop / Server

• Series

  Intel Core i5 Intel Core i7

• Generation

  8 8

• CPU group

  Intel Core i 8000 Intel Core i 8000

• Previous model

  Intel Core i5-7400 —

• Successor

  Intel Core i5-9400 —

CPU specifications

Basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base and turbo frequency, cache size. These parameters indirectly speak about the speed of the processor, the higher they are, the better.

• Frequency

  2.80 GHz 3.20 GHz

• CPU Cores

  6 6

• Turbo (1 Core)

  4.00 GHz 4.60 GHz

• Threads

  6 12

• Turbo (6 Cores)

  3.80 GHz no turbo

• Hypertrading

  No Yes

• Acceleration

  No No

• Kernel architecture

  normal normal

IGPU

Internal graphics does not affect CPU performance, performs the work of a graphics card in its absence or on mobile devices.

• Graphic processor

  Intel UHD Graphics 630 Intel UHD Graphics 630

• GPU frequency

  0.35 GHz 0.35 GHz

• GPU (Turbo)

  1.15GHz 1.15GHz

• Processing units

  24 24

• Shaders

  192 192

• Max. GPU Memory

  64GB 64GB

• Max. displays

  3 3

• Generation

  9. 5 9.5

• DirectX Version

  12 12

• Tech. process

  14 nm 14 nm

• Issue

  Q4/2017 Q4/2017

Hardware codec support

Built-in codecs used to encode and decode content. Significantly speed up the work with the required operations.

• h365 / HEVC (8 bit)

  Decode / Encode Decode / Encode

• h365 / HEVC (10 bit)

  Decode / Encode Decode / Encode

• h364

  Decode / Encode Decode / Encode

• VP9

  Decode / Encode Decode / Encode

• VP8

  Decode / Encode Decode / Encode

• AV1

  No No

• AVC

  Decode / Encode Decode / Encode

• VC-1

  Decode Decode

• JPEG

  Decode / Encode Decode / Encode

RAM & PCI 9 specifications0009

Types, number of RAM channels supported by Intel Core i7-8700B and Intel Core i5-8400. Higher or lower memory frequencies may be supported depending on motherboards.

• Memory type

  DDR4-2666 DDR4-2666

• Maximum memory

  128GB 64GB

• ECC

  No No

• Memory channels

  2 2

• PCIe Version

  3.0 3.0

• PCIe channels

  16 16

Encryption

• AES-NI

  Yes Yes

Power Consumption

Compare the TDP requirements of Intel Core i5-8400 and Intel Core i7-8700B for cooling system selection. The TDP value refers to thermal watts, not electrical watts.

Technologies and extensions

Architecture, interfaces, instruction sets supported by Intel Core i5-8400 and Intel Core i5-8400, virtualization technology and process technology.

• Instruction set (ISA)

  x86-64 (64 bit) x86-64 (64 bit)

• Virtualization

  VT-x, VT-x EPT, VT-d VT-x, VT-x EPT, VT-d

• ISA Extensions

  SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2

• Cash L3

  9.00MB 12.00MB

• Architecture

  Coffee Lake S Coffee Lake S

• Tech. process

  14 nm 14 nm

• Socket

  LGA 1151-2 BGA 1440

• Issue

  Q4/2017 Q2/2018

Benchmarks (tests)

CPUs performance tests

Based on the results of several benchmarks, you can more accurately assess the performance difference between Intel Core i5-8400 and Intel Core i7-8700B.

Compare synthetic benchmarks and choose the best processor!

iGPU — FP32 Performance (Single-precision GFLOPS)

iGPU — Internal GPU performance in games. GFLOPS indicates the number of billions of operations per second that the iGPU is capable of performing.

Intel Core i5-8400

Intel Core i7-8700B

Latest comparisons

Intel Core i5-10600K

Intel Core i5-9400H

Intel Core i7-11700

Intel Core i5-9400H

Intel Core i7-10700

Intel Core i5-9400H

Intel Core i5-10400F

Intel Core i5-9400H

AMD Ryzen 5 5600X

Intel Core i5-9400H

Intel Core i5-10400F

Intel Core i7-10700

Intel Core i7-9750H

AMD Ryzen 7 1700X

Intel Core i5-12400

AMD Ryzen 9 5900

AMD Ryzen 5 5500U

Intel Core i7-11390H

AMD A8-7650K

AMD Ryzen 3 3200G

Intel Core i9-13900HX

Apple M2 Max

Intel Core i7-11700K

Intel Core i7-10700KF

AMD A8-3550MX

AMD A10-7350B

Intel Core i5-1235U

Intel Core i7-12700T

i7-8700 vs i5-9600KF — Just Cause 4 vs GTX 1660 performance comparison

GTX 1660 with

Intel Core i7-8700 @ 3. 20GHz

Just Cause 4

i7-8700
i5-9600KF

---

Ultra quality

Resolution	Frames per second
1080p	65.3 FPS
1080p	66.6 FPS
1440p	48.3 FPS
1440p	49.2 FPS
2160p	25.1 FPS
2160p	25.6 FPS
w1440p	39.3 FPS
w1440p	40. 0 FPS

High quality

Resolution	Frames per second
1080p	109.8 FPS
1080p	111.7 FPS
1440p	84.9 FPS
1440p	86.2 FPS
2160p	48.2 FPS
2160p	49.1 FPS
w1440p	71.1 FPS
w1440p	72.2 FPS

Medium quality

Resolution	Frames per second
1080p	154. 4 FPS
1080p	156.8 FPS
1440p	121.5 FPS
1440p	123.3 FPS
2160p	71.3 FPS
2160p	72.5 FPS
w1440p	102.9 FPS
w1440p	104.4 FPS

Low quality

Resolution	Frames per second
1080p	243.5 FPS
1080p	247.0 FPS
1440p	194. 7 FPS
1440p	197.4 FPS
2160p	117.6 FPS
2160p	119.4 FPS
w1440p	166.5 FPS
w1440p	168.8 FPS

i7-8700

• i7-8700 has higher level 2 cache. The data/instructions that need to be processed can be loaded from the fast L2 and the CPU doesn’t have to wait for the very slow DDR

RAM

• The i7-8700 has a higher level 3 cache. This is useful when you have significant multi-processor workloads, many computational processes at the same time. Rather on a server rather than a personal computer for interactive workloads.
• The i7-8700 has more cores. The advantage of having more cores is that the system can handle more threads. Each core can process a separate data stream. This architecture greatly improves the performance of a system running parallel applications.
• The i7-8700 has more themes. Large programs are divided into threads (small sections) so that the processor can execute them simultaneously to speed up execution.
• In some games, a processor with a higher clock speed, or with the technical name IPC (Instructions per clock), performs better than other processors with more cores and a lower core frequency.
• The i7-8700 has a higher turbo clock. Turbo Boost is a processor feature that will run at a processor clock speed faster than its base clock speed if certain conditions are present. This will allow older software that runs on fewer cores to run better on newer hardware. Since games are also software, they are also applicable.

i5-9600KF

• i5-9600KF i5-9 processor600KF is more energy efficient and generates less heat.
• i5-9600KF The i5-9600KF has a smaller process size. The faster a transistor can turn on and off, the faster it can work. And transistors that turn on and off with less power are more efficient, reducing the operating power or «dynamic power» required by the processor.

Compare i7-8700 vs i5-9600KF specifications

i7-8700 vs i5-9600KF Architecture

	i7-8700	i5-9600KF
Codename	Coffee Lake	Coffee Lake
Generation	Core i7 (Coffee Lake)	Core i5 (Coffee Lake Refresh)
Market	Desktop	Desktop
Memory Support	DDR4	DDR4
Part#	SR3QS	BX80684I59600KFBXC80684I5960KFSRFAD
Production Status	Active	Active
Released	Jan 2018	Jan 2019

i7-8700 vs i5-9600KF Cache

	i7-8700	i5-9600KF
Cache L1	64K (per core)	64K (per core)
Cache L2	256K (per core)	256K (per core)
Cache L3	12MB (shared)	9MB (shared)

i7-8700 vs i5-9600KF Cores

	i7-8700	i5-9600KF
# of Cores	6	6
# of Threads	12	6
Integrated Graphics	N/A	N/A
SMP# CPUs	1	1

i7-8700 vs i5-9600KF Features

	i7-8700	i5-9600KF

i7-8700 vs i5-9600KF Performance

	i7-8700	i5-9600KF
Base Clock	100 MHz	100 MHz
Frequency	3.