FirstTime Computer Customizer CPU Decision HELP!

[CaliforniaRich]

Hey guys, I'm a fairly smart guy in his 20s, and i need help deciding on a CoffeeLake 8th Gen Intel CPU. I've been looking at i5-8600k (not the 8400, which Linus tested but not the 8600k *sad face*). I want it for hard complex gaming everything from Paradox games, to FPS, and to all the latest graphic intensive games. Also, might wanna stream, but not professionally. I only do limited video editing and photoshopping (I'm a professional actor.) So now that, that's out of the way:

 

My decide did included AMD, but as of this month, not anymore. Mainly between i5-8600k and the i7-8700, maybe the i7-8700k (but i don't need that beast.) I do plan to learn to overclock. So here are the stats that differ for a referance:

 

i5-8600K - (only) 6 threats, 3.6 Base Frequency, 4.3 Turbo, (only) 9mb Cache, (only) 1.15gHz Graphic Frequency, and does not have Hyper-Threading.

i7-8700 - 12 threads, (only) 3.2 Base Frequency, 4.6 Turbo, 12mb Cache, 1.2gHz Graphic Frequency, but does have Hyper-Threading.

 

So the stats go back and forth on which is better, but I don't know which is better for me. The turbos are both fine and both are 6 cores, so is the i5's higher base frequency better for me than the down sides (mainly looking at the lack of hyperthreading.) Does the 3mb of cache matter? Does the .85mHz of graphics frequency matter? (I know even a new graphics care can be the bottle neck most of the time. Haven't bought a Graphics Card yet, want to decide on CPU first.) Also, do i need the other 6 threads that the i7 has? It doesn't seem to matter as much with the higher frequencies... they out perform the AMD CPUs which are all about the multi-threading.... (FYI, i don't understand how to value the cache with all of this.)

 

Any help of understanding the what is more valuable would be amazing help! Obviously there is like a $45 difference and i love the value of this i5-8600k, best on the market. I just wanna know this CPU will be good for gaming and such for the next few years.

[SquintyG33Rs]

i5 will be fine do take the K sku because i5's are kneecapped in speed by intel to make i7 more worth. you won't need the extra threads for games and since your streaming is just casual you can rely on NVENC to do it with close to null performance hit (rather than x264 super good looking super hard to encode that would totally require the i7 or ryzen 7) the bottleneck is mostly down to core speed rather than core count because the games don't use all the threads they can

[CaliforniaRich]

1 minute ago, SquintyG33Rs said:

i5 will be fine do take the K sku because i5's are kneecapped in speed by intel to make i7 more worth. you won't need the extra threads for games and since your streaming is just casual you can rely on NVENC to do it with close to null performance hit (rather than x264 super good looking super hard to encode that would totally require the i7 or ryzen 7)

Well should i consider then the i5-8400, the price is much lower, but i lacks a bunch of other special features i noticed along with performance... The price differance makes it look tasty too! Even more so.

Core i7-8700 3.2/4.6GHz 6/12 Cores/Threads $303
Core i5-8600K 3.6/4.3GHz 6/6 Cores/Threads $257
Core i5-8400 2.8/4.0GHz 6/6 Cores/Threads $182

[SquintyG33Rs]

6 minutes ago, CaliforniaRich said:

Well should i consider then the i5-8400, the price is much lower, but i lacks a bunch of other special features i noticed along with performance... The price differance makes it look tasty too! Even more so.

Core i7-8700 3.2/4.6GHz 6/12 Cores/Threads $303
Core i5-8600K 3.6/4.3GHz 6/6 Cores/Threads $257
Core i5-8400 2.8/4.0GHz 6/6 Cores/Threads $182

no because like i said running i5 the speed is so kneecapped that it's almost worthless, overclocking will fix that because we all know that these chips can do 5GHz but they aren't sold anywhere near that and you will need the speed much more than the threads the i7 has to offer. knowing that intel lowered the speed to make the i7 something most user will buy (either because they have to or because the speed benefit is very noticeable) rather than staying with the lower SKUs

[CaliforniaRich]

Just now, SquintyG33Rs said:

no because like i said running 4 core the speed is so kneecapped that it's almost worthless overclocking will fix that because we all know that these chips can do 5GHz but they aren't sold anywhere near that and you will need the speed much more than the threads the i7 has to offer. knowing that intel lowered the speed to make the i7 something most user will buy rather than staying with the lower SKUs

Why are you talking about 4 cores, all the new i5s have 6 cores bro... not sure what your point is, even with overclocking, which i thought you could only do with 'k' types, the bottle neck isnt the CPU normally.

[SquintyG33Rs]

Just now, CaliforniaRich said:

Why are you talking about 4 cores, all the new i5s have 6 cores bro... not sure what your point is, even with overclocking, which i thought you could only do with 'k' types, the bottle neck isnt the CPU normally.

yeah typo fixed it before your reply xDDD

[CaliforniaRich]

1 minute ago, SquintyG33Rs said:

yeah typo fixed it before your reply xDDD

Gotcha, now my question is, am i gonna regret not having extra 6 threats, no hyperthreading, less graphics frequency (not much), and a smaller cahce (still dont know what that really is)? Other wise for $45ish more, i can have the lower end i7 with all that stuff and no overclocking... just not sure if threads and the other stuff is a priority over the higher overclocked frequency.

[SquintyG33Rs]

1 minute ago, CaliforniaRich said:

Why are you talking about 4 cores, all the new i5s have 6 cores bro... not sure what your point is, even with overclocking, which i thought you could only do with 'k' types, the bottle neck isnt the CPU normally.

to try and explain my point with an example. I've worked allot on trying to find the problems with how PUBG runs. super popular game right now and it has terrible performance on most machines. well it turns out it's purely bottle necked by CPU speed. the g3258@4.4GHz (pentium anniversary overclock able) will run the game flawlessly where much more expensive chips that aren't as fast in raw speed struggle with stutters and lower framerates. it's a special case because it's an indie game that still needs to be optimized but it's a clear example where the speed matters much more than the cores

[SquintyG33Rs]

1 minute ago, CaliforniaRich said:

Gotcha, now my question is, am i gonna regret not having extra 6 threats, no hyperthreading, less graphics frequency (not much), and a smaller cahce (still dont know what that really is)? Other wise for $45ish more, i can have the lower end i7 with all that stuff and no overclocking... just not sure if threads and the other stuff is a priority over the higher overclocked frequency.

the threads are virtually useless to you. the cache is kinda very complicated to explain it's use for your performance -.-' but it shouldn't really make a difference. so i'd keep recommendation to the i5K

[CaliforniaRich]

Just now, SquintyG33Rs said:

to try and explain my point with an example. I've worked allot on trying to find the problems with how PUBG runs. super popular game right now and it has terrible performance on most machines. well it turns out it's purely bottle necked by CPU speed. the g3258@4.4GHz (pentium anniversary overclock able) will run the game flawlessly where much more expensive chips that aren't as fast in raw speed struggle with stutters and lower framerates. it's a special case because it's an indie game that still needs to be optimized but it's a clear example where the speed matters much more than the cores

Okay yea i play that game, and i should have used that as my example, so for a game like that, higher ghz is better than having multithreading... cool

[CaliforniaRich]

Just now, SquintyG33Rs said:

the threads are virtually useless to you. the cache is kinda very complicated to explain it's use for your performance -.-' but it shouldn't really make a difference. so i'd keep recommendation to the i5K

Is that gonna have me running low latency to my monitor too? or is that more of a motherboard thing?

[SquintyG33Rs]

1 minute ago, CaliforniaRich said:

Okay yea i play that game, and i should have used that as my example, so for a game like that, higher ghz is better than having multithreading... cool

the threshold for pubg seems to be at 4GHz then the problems disappear. also don't count turbo frequencies as the chip's speed. those only apply with 1 core active

[CaliforniaRich]

Just now, SquintyG33Rs said:

the threshold for pubg seems to be at 4GHz then the problems disappear. also don't count turbo frequencies as the chip's speed. those only apply with 1 core active

but isn't 1 core running more relevant to gaming? That's what a lot of YouTube videos have been saying.

[SquintyG33Rs]

Just now, CaliforniaRich said:

Is that gonna have me running low latency to my monitor too? or is that more of a motherboard thing?

that's more of a frame rate and screen quality thing

[SquintyG33Rs]

Just now, CaliforniaRich said:

but isn't 1 core running more relevant to gaming? That's what a lot of YouTube videos have been saying.

yeah single core performance but what i mean is the turbo advertised speed only comes into effect if ONLY one core is being used and ALL games will use at least 2 and generally 4

[CaliforniaRich]

Just now, SquintyG33Rs said:

that's more of a frame rate and screen quality thing

Well if my CPU is running PUBG 'perfectly at 60fps, and i want that to show up very quick and its a good monitor, doesnt something with data transferring from my tower to the monitor vary based on some part?

[SquintyG33Rs]

1 minute ago, CaliforniaRich said:

Well if my CPU is running PUBG 'perfectly at 60fps, and i want that to show up very quick and its a good monitor, doesnt something with data transferring from my tower to the monitor vary based on some part?

not really because the protocols for PCIe (talk between CPU and GPU) and your cable to your monitor HDMI or display port or what ever, is set and doesn't change no matter what hardware you use

[SquintyG33Rs]

so your latency is more about how much fps you're pushing. since having more frames rendered means you're more likely to see the newest information available on screen. and your display's refresh rate and pixel response time. for same reasons