the i5 8400

[SETÄ #1]

Is it any good? its base clock is 2.8 ghz sooooo... does it suck?

[Princess Luna]

base clock is meaningless nowadays since what truly counts is the all core turbo boost which is realistic the lowest clock the CPU should truly operate once in full load.

[Shreyas1]

It’s good. Core clock can’t really be compared outside the same architecture; if it could, AMD FX processors would have been the top of the market and still relevant today

[Guest]

Dont worry about base clock frequencies, what matters is the all core turbo boost which is when all cores are locked at one frequency which I am assuming is the lowest, because single cores can run at higher frequencies while lots of cores run at slower frequencies.

[RadiatingLight]

it's a really good CPU.

only problem is that the platform cost is really expensive right now, since you have to buy a Z370 board to use it.

[Matu20]

Good or bad is subjective, check benchmarks and decide if it manages to satisfy your needs, easy as that.

[pinksnowmanshandle]

6 minutes ago, RadiatingLight said:

only problem is that the platform cost is really expensive right now, since you have to buy a Z370 board to use it.

And that's why I will not buy into coffee lake, realistically that is the end of LGA 1151 and the fact that you need to buy a motherboard because of the chipset, just seems kinda lame. No doubt those i5s and i7s are beastly but that's kinda to be expected since they're basically adding two to four more cores to what was already good on its own.

[AnalogCanavity]

Linus made a Video about this

 

[RAM555789]

Once cheaper boards are available its defiantly going to be a good CPU to consider if you wanna save some cash. The real question will be how it shapes against Ryzen CPUs in price per performance.

[RAM555789]

Just now, Zic05 said:

Linus made a Video about this

 

No that's a video about the i7 8700k not the i5 8400

[Coaxialgamer]

It's basically an i5 6400 with 2 extra cores. 

I wouldn't buy it. You're getting less performance in every way vs an r5 1600.

[AnalogCanavity]

1 minute ago, RAM555789 said:

No that's a video about the i7 8700k not the i5 8400

It has the 8400 in it

[Streetguru]

41 minutes ago, SETÄ #1 said:

Is it any good? its base clock is 2.8 ghz sooooo... does it suck?

It's fine if you don't need the extra multi-threading performance an R5 1600 can give you. Or don't need 5ghz single threaded performance for say emulation or even better 144hz gaming. Or want a platform that will probably be replaced soon lol.

Motherboards come with multi-core enhancement which will force it do a higher base clock, even if you can't really overclock it, though MCE may be unstable under certain workloads. Otherwise the all core turbo is reasonable.

[Gawron10001]

Read some revies on the internet

35 minutes ago, Princess Cadence said:

base clock is meaningless nowadays

Yep, everyobody is doing video about it, just watch or read

[RAM555789]

Just now, Zic05 said:

It has the 8400 in it

Not in much detail, the main focus is the i7 8700k. I watched this a within a few hours of it coming out.

[pinksnowmanshandle]

2 minutes ago, RAM555789 said:

 The real question will be how it shapes against Ryzen CPUs in price per performance.

I'm curious to see how it ages.

[RAM555789]

1 minute ago, wcreek said:

I'm curious to see how it ages.

Its going to probably depend on the prices of the 10nm Intel processors, and future Ryzen processors.

[Streetguru]

3 minutes ago, wcreek said:

I'm curious to see how it ages.

 

1 minute ago, RAM555789 said:

Its going to probably depend on the prices of the 10nm Intel processors, and future Ryzen processors.

I hope AMD is working their asses off right now to get out at least 4.5ghz Ryzen silicon ASAP.

[TahoeDust]

2 minutes ago, Streetguru said:

 

I hope AMD is working their asses off right now to get out at least 4.5ghz Ryzen silicon ASAP.

As a max overclock or stock frequency?  Until they are able to go 5GHz+, they are still going to be playing catch up IMHO.  Adding cores is a lot easier than adding frequency capability. 

[Streetguru]

1 minute ago, TahoeDust said:

As a max overclock or stock frequency?  Until they are able to go 5GHz+, they are still going to be playing catch up IMHO.  Adding cores is a lot easier than adding frequency capability. 

They should be able to hit 5ghz as well, Ryzen was a "worst case scenario" for frequency, new arc and relatively new process.

4.5ghz would be the new max turbo, hopefully it doesn't take XFR to reach it.

Currently it takes Ln2 to hit 5ghz on Ryzen.

[pinksnowmanshandle]

18 minutes ago, Streetguru said:

 

I hope AMD is working their asses off right now to get out at least 4.5ghz Ryzen silicon ASAP.

Well I think at 12nm, they probably can improve their frequency headroom by at least 300MHz, so I think a 12nm replacement for the R7 1800X will probably see at least 4GHz as its base frequency, the 12nm replacement for the R5 1600X I could see maybe getting a 100MHz-200MHz bump over the 12nm top end R7. So like it might ship with like a 4.2GHz base clock probably. XFR might add about 200-300MHz on top of that possibly.

 

I should clarify, I'm making these numbers up. But I'd say they're conservative guesses for what we can see out of a 12nm Ryzen Refresh. Zen 2 in 2020 I think will probably share the same frequency range as whatever Intel has at that point which I think by then we might be closer to 5.5GHz possibly. I mean early 2020 is less than 3 years away.

[SETÄ #1]

now im confused. Should i go for an another CPU like R5 1600 or I5 7600K ?

[Streetguru]

3 minutes ago, SETÄ #1 said:

now im confused. Should i go for an another CPU like R5 1600 or I5 7600K ?

You didn't say what you were using your PC for, and if gaming is it 144hz gaming?

[SETÄ #1]

For gaming of course, and i have 144hz monitor so yes

[TahoeDust]

Can you swing a 8600k?  If not the 8400 will still be better than the ryzen offering for high FPS gaming.