Comparison of performance of intel processors drop-down list. Processor performance rating from Intel
Processor tests prepared in 2017 - 2019
April 3, 2019
March 18, 2019
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX: CPU Review and Test for Creative Professionals
The true specialization of this processor is not games or office applications, but complex creative tasks, especially those that are well parallelized across almost fifty computational threads. This chip will cost significantly less than ten-or more-core Intel HEDT processors, and the results will demonstrate at least not much worse than them, and in some places - significantly better.
February 5, 2019
AMD Ryzen 3000: Everything you need to know about the next generation CPU
The approximate date for the appearance of the third generation AMD Ryzen on the market is mid-2019, however, AMD has already published some of the most important details about the new chips, which we have supplemented with the most reliable, in our opinion, unofficial information, which we suggest you familiarize yourself with in this material.
April 3, 2019
Best CPU for Gaming: Current Market Analysis
Choosing the best processor for gaming is not easy - for some the best processor may be the most affordable processor, for others it may be the most productive. We try to take into account all factors and publish regularly updated material in which we try to recommend the truly best processor for games in any price category - from $100 to the top segment.
December 21, 2018
Intel Core i9-9900K: review and test of the flagship processor for multi-threaded computing
Eight-core sixteen-thread Intel processor installs new standard performance for pre-server class desktop PCs: workstations, gaming machines, personal video editing and 3D modeling studios. In terms of absolute performance in the price range it occupies, it currently has no rivals - even in the arsenal of Intel itself.
November 29, 2018
AMD Athlon 200GE: review and test of an inexpensive processor for home and office
The youngest member of the Zen family is a more than reasonable purchase as the basis for an entry-level home or office PC and in terms of price/features ratio it simply has no analogues.
November 22, 2018
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X: review and processor test
The flagship second-generation Ryzen processor has become real alternative top Coffee Lake from Intel, not inferior to them not only in computing, but also in gaming applications at a significantly lower price.
October 10, 2018
September 10, 2018
Athlon 200GE: AMD's new weapon
On September 8, AMD Corporation presented its new weapon in the fight against Intel, this time in the budget processor segment - these are new chips of the Athlon 200G family with powerful built-in Radeon graphics Vega 3. The fight promises to be hot.
September 3, 2018
Whiskey Lake and Amber Lake: Intel 8th Generation Mobile Processors
Just before the start of the next international consumer electronics exhibition IFA 2018 in Berlin, Intel introduced its 8th generation mobile processors codenamed Whiskey Lake and Amber Lake.
August 8, 2018
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2000 Series Processors: First Look
Last year, AMD significantly revived the desktop processor market upper class, releasing chips from the Threadripper family. This year the second generation of these processors will be announced.
July 9, 2018
What we know about Intel Core 9000 series processors
Intel's microcode update documentation contained information about the new 9000 series processors, and this data was immediately leaked onto the Internet. We have collected everything that is currently known about the new chips, and almost everything that needs to be known about them is already known.
June 22, 2018
How many cores are needed for games: the question is not so simple
The optimal choice for games is a quad-core processor, and it usually does not matter which manufacturer it is from.
May 10, 2018
AMD Ryzen second generation: what's new?
Improved performance, higher operating frequencies, updated Precision Boost 2 and XFR2 algorithms, support for faster random access memory, excellent bundled coolers and a traditionally unlocked multiplier - all this, coupled with reasonable prices, makes the Ryzen 2000 series an attractive choice.
March 28, 2018
Processor for 1080p gaming: comparing 14 models
It is almost impossible to reduce all the results of our tests to one general recommendation, especially considering today's prices for video cards. But we can identify some obvious trends.
March 19, 2018
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G: Vega graphics in budget Zen
The Raven Ridge series of processors changes the way we think about integrated graphics. Ryzen 3 2200G is great offer for building budget gaming systems, since you can do without purchasing a discrete video card. You can overclock the CPU, memory, and Vega graphics to improve performance. Another plus is compatibility with 300 series motherboards, just make sure the BIOS is compatible first.
March 6, 2018
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G testing: the impact of RAM on games
If you want to get the best performance that Raven Ridge is capable of, save up for a good RAM kit. Buying a mid-range memory kit and then overclocking it may be the best balance between price and performance.
March 5, 2018
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G: review of Zen processor with Vega graphics. Part 2
The Ryzen 5 2400G changes the way we think about integrated graphics. This is a great deal for building budget gaming rigs because you can actually get by without purchasing a discrete graphics card.
February 27, 2018
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G: review of Zen processor with Vega graphics. Part 1
Those who choose Raven Ridge will definitely have a lot of fun, as our tests show that these processors are equally suitable for overclockers and enthusiasts alike.
January 22, 2018
Intel Core i3-8100: review and test of a budget quad-core processor
The Core i3-8100 offers four physical cores for just $120, which is a stunning deal compared to previous-generation Intel chips. It will become even more attractive when it goes on sale. inexpensive boards on the B350 chipset.
January 11, 2018
Processor rating 2017/2018. Part 3: Overall Performance
In the third and final part of our rating of processors at the turn of 2017 and 2018, we test pure computing power. To do this, we use not synthetic, but applied tests that guarantee the maximum practical value of the results obtained.
January 10, 2018
The day before the opening of CES 2018 in Las Vegas Intel company officially introduced five new chips, o main feature which have been rumored for a long time. It lies in the fact that the eighth generation Kaby Lake-R computing core is adjacent to the integrated Radeon RX Vega M graphics, developed by Intel’s main competitor, AMD.
January 9, 2018
Processor rating 2017/2018. Part 2: Performance in Workstation Applications
In the second part of our processor rating, we will look at performance in the field of real-time 2D and 3D graphics processing in the OpenGL and DirectX programming interfaces. Since this part is noticeably different from the game rating, it is also of interest to professional users.
January 6, 2018
Processor rating 2017/2018. Part 1: Gaming Performance
First, the bad news: there is no single best processor among those we tested, so in order to do right choice, all factors must be taken into account, such as the purpose of use, the required performance, general concept your PC and your budget. So good news The point is that everyone can find the best processor for themselves.
October 10, 2018
Hierarchy of Intel and AMD processors: comparison table
What about those processors that aren't on our list of recommendations in Best Processor for Gaming: Current Market Analysis? Are they worth buying or not? A comparison table will help you figure it out.
November 21, 2017
Intel Core i3-8350K: review and test of a quad-core processor
Core i3-8350K provides high gaming performance and competitive speeds across a wide range of applications. An unlocked multiplier allows you to achieve high clock speeds, but to overclock you will need an expensive Z-series chipset board.
July 10, 2017
Review of the Intel Core i9-7900X processor with Skylake-X architecture. Part 2
Intel Core The i9-7900X, based on the Skylake-X architecture, offers 10 cores with Hyper-Threading support and architectural enhancements that provide benefits in many workstation applications, including rendering and content creation. In some games new processor inferior to Core i7-6950X.
July 3, 2017
Review of the Intel Core i9-7900X processor with Skylake-X architecture. Part 1
Intel claims that a number of improvements to the Skylake-X architecture provide a performance increase of 15% over Broadwell-E in single-threaded workloads and 10% in multi-threaded workloads.
June 15, 2017
Review and testing of the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 processor
The Ryzen 5 1600 offers six cores and twelve threads at a very attractive price and directly competes with Intel's quad-core Kaby Lake processors.
May 22, 2017
How to overclock AMD Ryzen processors?
AMD didn't make sure to provide enthusiasts with enough information before launch, so it's time to study various settings a lot of time is wasted. But once we collected all the necessary data, overclocking the Ryzen seemed like child's play. Increase the multiplier, adjust the data transfer rate - everything is intuitive.
April 26, 2017
Review and testing of the AMD Ryzen 5 1600X processor. Part 2
The Ryzen 5 1600X delivers amazing price/performance for budget workstations and rivals the Core i7-6800K in professional applications. It also delivers acceptable gaming performance, although it often lags behind the Core i5 Kaby Lake and has less overclocking headroom.
April 17, 2017
Review and testing of the AMD Ryzen 5 1600X processor. Part 1
The Ryzen 5 series of processors, which includes four six- and four-core models, is aimed at enthusiasts and gamers and is designed to compete with Intel chips from the Skylake and Kaby Lake families.
April 13, 2017
Review and testing of the AMD Ryzen 7 1700 processor
The chip handles heavy multi-threaded tasks well, but is inferior to quad-core Intel processors in most gaming tests. However, the Ryzen 7 1700 offers the lowest price for a modern eight-core processor, has plenty of headroom for overclocking, and is capable of competing with more expensive models Ryzen.
April 6, 2017
Delidding and overclocking Intel Core i7-7700K with water and liquid nitrogen
We test the maximum frequency of Kaby Lake processors with different voltage power supply to the core, with the heat distribution cover removed and even using liquid nitrogen. Get ready to learn the details about overclocking chips based on the latest Intel microarchitecture using several copies of the Core i7-7700K as an example.
April 5, 2017
First optimization for AMD Ryzen: Ashes Of The Singularity
This update is the first example of a game optimized for AMD's Ryzen family of processors, which should provide improved performance.
March 23, 2017
Ryzen vs Core i7 in 11 popular games
AMD's new product may be in a serious battle for the hearts and minds of content creators, programmers, and other professionals, but in our estimation, the Ryzen 7 is not yet the processor that can change the situation in the gaming space.
March 17, 2017
Review of the AMD Ryzen 7 1800X processor. Part 2
We'd recommend the Ryzen 7 1800X for multi-threaded tasks like content creation and rendering. In many games he is less competitive. At Ryzen's relatively low price point, the new Zen microarchitecture and SMT result in impressive performance improvements over previous generation AMD processors.
March 10, 2017
Review of the AMD Ryzen 7 1800X processor. Part 1
It's time to see what Ryzen is really capable of. So far, only series 7 chips have appeared on sale and we have several copies in our laboratories. During testing, many unexpected results were revealed that require additional study.
February 28, 2017
Review of Intel Core i3-7350K processor with unlocked multiplier
The unlocked Core i3-7350K lived up to our expectations, delivering strong single-thread performance that provided decent acceleration in many tests. However, games that are highly optimized for parallel processing still work faster on quad-core Core i5.
February 2, 2017
History of AMD processors
In our illustrated review - the history of development AMD processors from 1969 to 2016.
January 25, 2017
Hierarchy of Intel and AMD processors by gaming performance
Proposed hierarchical table different models AMD and Intel processors are based on the average performance of each in our suite of tests, taking into account new gaming applications.
January 16, 2017
Review and testing of Intel Kaby Lake Core i7-7700K, i7-7700, i5-7600K and i5-7600 processors. Part 3
In the final part of our great overview older models of processors of the new Kaby Lake family, we will measure their power consumption and heat dissipation in standard and extreme modes, and also talk about the wide variation in the quality of specific copies of these chips.
January 13, 2017
Review and testing of Intel Kaby Lake Core i7-7700K, i7-7700, i5-7600K and i5-7600 processors. Part 2
To test performance, we selected several gaming benchmarks and demanding workstation applications, as well as the popular office suite Microsoft Office 2016 and the professional suite Adobe programs CC.
January 12, 2017
Review and testing of Intel Kaby Lake Core i7-7700K, i7-7700, i5-7600K and i5-7600 processors. Part 1
We've already dealt with early samples of the Core i7-7700K, and today we'll take a closer look at the entire Kaby Lake lineup.
At the end of each year, we summarize our testing results for most modern processors, taking into account BIOS updates and performance changes, and then divide the findings into three separate categories.
The first part of our rating is dedicated to performance in gaming benchmarks, in the second we will touch on performance in workstation CAD applications (real-time rendering), and finally in the third we will collect general data on performance, rendering and power consumption.
No one can be a leader forever: a system that lacks performance today may outperform all others tomorrow. So if you have a good strategy, then you can be confident in your future.
This truth works, but not always. First of all, you need to understand today's PC capabilities, tomorrow's computing needs, and also have a foundation for the future. This is what you need to focus on - and plan a small reserve.
Unfortunately, greater productivity always costs more, perhaps not always proportionally, so it is very important to optimally determine the volume of such reserves.
Our requests, desires and financial opportunities do not always coincide. However, in this case there is the concept of “common sense”, which allows you to discard insurmountable obstacles. It is always worth combining environmental aspects, such as energy consumption and durability, with economic ones - costs and profitability of the purchase. Simply put, you should buy exactly what you really need (or will need in the near future).
Our testing methodology is outlined in the article ", so for convenience we will refer to this article. If you are interested in details, we recommend that you refer to it.
Differences from this methodology in relation to this testing come down to the hardware configuration: processor, RAM, motherboard and cooling system, the features of which can be found in the table below.
| Test systems and measurement equipment | |
| Hardware: | AMD Socket AM4 MSI X370 Tomahawk 2x 8 GB G.Skill TridentZ DDR4-3200 RGB AMD Socket SP3 (TR4) AMD Socket AM3+ Intel Socket 1151 (Z370): Intel Socket 1151 (Z270): Intel Socket 2066 Intel Socket 2011v3: All systems: 1x 1 TByte Toshiba OCZ RD400 (M.2, system SSD) |
| Cooling: | Alphacool Eiszeit 2000 Chiller Alphacool Eisblock XPX Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut (for cooler replacement) |
| Monitor: | Eizo EV3237-BK |
| Frame: | Lian Li PC-T70 with expansion and modification kit Open test bench, closed case |
| Energy consumption measurement: | Non-contact current measurement on PCIe slot (using adapter card) Non-contact current measurement on the external power supply cable Direct voltage measurement on the power supply 2 x Rohde & Schwarz HMO 3054, 500 MHz (four-channel oscilloscope with data recording function) 4 x Rohde & Schwarz HZO50 (current clamp) 4 x Rohde & Schwarz HZ355 (oscilloscope probe 10:1, 500 MHz) 1 x Rohde & Schwarz HMC 8012 (multimeter with data recording function) |
| Temperature measurement: | Optris PI640 infrared camera PI Connect analysis software with various profiles |
| Noise level measurement: | NTI Audio M2211 (with calibration file, 50 Hz high pass filter) Steinberg UR12 (with Phantom Power for microphones) Creative X7, Smart v.7 Our own measurement chamber with blanking surfaces, dimensions 3.5x1.8x2.2 m (LxWxH) Measurements along an axis perpendicular to the center of the sound source at a distance of 50 cm Noise level in dB(A) (slow), Real Time Analyzer (RTA) Graphic spectrum of noise frequencies |
Let's start with two synthetic benchmarks, dividing them into two categories based on support for DirectX11 and DirectX12. In the 3DMark Fire Strike test highest value has a number of cores, which improves the performance of older multi-core processors that do not operate at high enough clock speeds, for example, the Core i7-6950X. AMD Threadripper and Ryzen 7 also show good results. quad-core processors there is little chance here, just like six-core Intel ones without Hyper-Threading support.
The picture is repeated in 3DMark Time Spy based on DirectX12. Regardless software interface, there is nothing to replace the number of cores with. The performance becomes even more convincing as clock speeds increase.
Like 3DMark, Ashes of Singularity: Escalation plays a major role in core count, followed by clock speed. This good example proper load distribution between multiple threads.
In Civilization VI, the number of threads also matters, but in processors with eight or more possible threads (for example, an Intel Core i7-7700K using Hyper-Threading, clock speeds also begin to play an important role. So in this game, the right balance between number of cores and clock speed.
In the game Warhammer 40K: Dawn of War III, the processor clock speed comes into play, and four well-scalable threads will be enough. This slightly reduces the performance of Ryzen and improves the results of chips from Intel.
Grand Theft Auto V is also a construction site that is generally dominated by Intel. At the same time, all Ryzens do not look too bad in terms of price and performance.
In Hitman 2016, the world of AMD processors looks pretty good. At the same time, the basic performance of the chips (for example, in the case of the Intel Core i5-8400) is limited by the power of the video card used. This is a clear example of the fact that if any of the components are limiting factors, any increase in productivity can come at a cost. The key to everything is the right balance: the video card must match the level of the processor, and vice versa.
In Game Project Cars processors from Intel completely dominate. Even the younger quad-core models without Hyper-Threading are significantly ahead of Ryzen 7 and Threadripper. The Ryzen 3 and Pentium are complete failures, and the Ryzen 7 1700 has problems due to its clock speeds being too low. So you can’t do without overclocking here.
Far Cry Primal is the second game in our tests where the graphics card is the limiting factor, but a little clarification is needed here. This game works well with eight threads, and it doesn’t necessarily require physical cores; a quad-core chip with Hyper-Threading will also work if the clock speeds are high enough. However, with “purely” quad-core models, this trick will no longer work if their clock frequency does not go beyond certain limits. In other words, frequency is important here, but it alone is no longer enough.
In the VRMark test we see a similar picture, and here Threadripper is already ahead of all modifications of Ryzen 7. However, this test is still the domain of Intel chips.
First, the bad news: there is no single best processor among the ones we tested, so to make the right choice, you need to take into account all factors, such as the purpose of use, the required performance, the overall concept of your PC and your budget. So the good news is that everyone can find the best processor for themselves.
Games or office applications, workstation packages or HTPCs? The applications and uses are multifaceted, and most of us already know how a new processor will be used before we even buy it. The wrong choice not only causes disappointment in the purchase, but also often leads to significant financial losses, especially if you have to resell, exchange or completely replace components that do not fit together.
There are many options for combining components. Does your CPU fit the socket on your motherboard, and if so, does the motherboard itself support it? Is the cooling system suitable for this processor in terms of power, and if so, does this cooler cover the RAM modules and does it interfere with installing a video card in the first PCI Express slot? There are “experts” who screw a huge cooler onto a mini-ITX board, and only then think about the case...
Processor prices fluctuate like palm trees during a tropical cyclone, and every novice assembler first of all pays attention to them. Therefore, we are not going to comment on the price level for now, since both the usual adjustments in market prices and the relative shortage individual models(For example, Coffee Lake-S from Intel) renders such comments meaningless within a few days of their utterance. Therefore, we simply present “clean” results and leave readers the opportunity to inquire about prices on their own.
Computers have entered our lives so tightly that we already consider them something elementary. But their structure cannot be called simple. Motherboard, processor, RAM, hard drives: all these are integral parts of the computer. You can’t throw away this or that detail, because they are all important. But the most important role is played by the processor. It’s not for nothing that they call it “central”.
The role of the CPU is simply enormous. It is responsible for all calculations, which means it depends on it how quickly you will complete your tasks. This could be surfing the web, composing a document in a word processor, editing photos, moving files and much, much more. Even in games and 3D modeling, where the main load falls on the shoulders of the graphics accelerator, the central processor plays a huge role, and with the wrong “stone” the performance of even the most powerful video card will not be fully realized.
At the moment, there are only two major processor manufacturers in the consumer market: AMD and Intel. We will talk about them in the traditional ranking.
The best inexpensive processors: budget up to 5000 rubles.
4 Intel Celeron G3900 Skylake
The most affordable Intel processor
Country: USA
Average price: 4,381 ₽
Rating (2019): 4.5
An extremely weak processor opens the rating Celeron line. The G3900 model has two cores of the previous generation - Skylake, which, coupled with a frequency of 2.8 GHz, gives the lowest performance result. In synthetic tests, the processor shows a result that is approximately half that of the Core i3. But the price here is quite affordable - 4-4.5 thousand rubles. It means that this processor perfect for assembling, for example, a simple office computer or a multimedia system for the living room. Overall, this model cannot be called bad. Still, the 14 nm process technology provides good energy efficiency, and graphics core HD Graphics 510 is suitable for casual games.
Advantages:
- Lowest price in class
- Perfect for office PC or HTPC
Flaws:
- Does not support Hyper-Threading technology
3 AMD Athlon X4 845 Carrizo
Best price
A country:
Average price: 3,070 RUR
Rating (2019): 4.5
The processors of the Athlon line belong to the budget class, which is clearly evident from the cost of the bronze medalist. But for a little over three thousand rubles you will get a very interesting stone. There are 4 cores (2 logical cores for each physical) made using a 28 nm process technology. Thanks to this, power consumption is low, and heat dissipation is quite low for AMD - only 65 W. True, you don’t have to be particularly happy about this because the multiplier is locked - you won’t be able to overclock the processor. Another disadvantage is the lack of a built-in graphics core, which means that when assembling an office PC or multimedia system you will have to separately purchase a video card.
Advantages:
- Lowest price in class
- Great performance for the price
Flaws:
- Lack of built-in graphics core
- Unlocked multiplier
2 AMD FX-6300 Vishera
The only 6-core processor in its class
A country: USA (Produced in Malaysia, China)
Average price: 4,160 RUR
Rating (2019): 4.6
AMD's FX-6300 is the only processor in the category with six cores. Unfortunately, hope for high power in the budget class it is not necessary - the model is based on the 2012 Vishera core. In normal mode, the cores operate at a frequency of 3.5 GHz, but, like many AMD CPUs, it overclocks well. Yes, judging by user reviews, the performance is sufficient even for games, but there are still a lot of disadvantages.
One of the main ones is high energy consumption. Due to the use of inexpensive 32 nm process technology, AMD gets very hot and consumes a lot of electricity. We also note the lack of support for modern DDR4 RAM. Because of this, the processor can be recommended not for building a new PC, but for updating an old one without replacing the motherboard and other components.
Advantages:
- 6 cores. Perfect for performing several simple tasks at the same time.
- Good overclocking potential
- Low cost
Flaws:
- Poor energy efficiency
- Aging platform
At the moment there are only two players in the processor market - Intel and AMD. But this doesn’t make the choice any easier. To make the decision to purchase a CPU from one manufacturer or another easier, we have highlighted for you several main pros and cons of the products of these companies.
| Company |
pros |
Minuses |
|
Programs and games are better optimized for Intel Lower power consumption Performance tends to be slightly better Higher cache frequencies |
Work effectively with no more than two resource-intensive tasks Higher cost When the line of processors changes, the socket also changes, which means the upgrade is more complicated |
|
|
Lower cost Better price/performance ratio Work better with 3-4 resource-intensive tasks (better multitasking) Most processors overclock well |
Higher power consumption and temperatures (not entirely true of recent Ryzen processors) Worse program optimization |
1 Intel Pentium G4600 Kaby Lake
Better performance
Country: USA
Average price: 7,450 RUR
Rating (2019): 4.7
We can recommend the good old Pentium for purchase in this category. This processor, like previous participants, is made using a 14 nm process technology, LGA1151 socket. Belongs to one of the latest generations - Kaby Lake. There are, of course, only 2 cores. They operate at a frequency of 3.6 GHz, which causes the lag behind the Core i3 by about 18-20%. But this is not much, because the price difference is twofold! In addition to the core frequency, the relatively low power is due to the small size of the L3 cache - 3071 KB.
In addition to the excellent price-performance ratio, the advantages of this CPU include the presence of built-in graphics Intel cores HD Graphics 630, which is more than enough for comfortable use PC without discrete graphics card.
Advantages:
- Great price for this performance
- Generation Kaby Lake
- Good integrated graphics core
The best mid-class processors: budget up to 20,000 rubles.
5 Intel Core i3-7320 Kaby Lake
The most affordable processor with integrated graphics
Country: USA
Average price: 12,340 RUR
Rating (2019): 4.6
Let's open the rating with the most affordable processor in the i-core line. It is extremely difficult to call the model excellent in terms of price/quality ratio, because the cheaper Ryzen 3 even shows slightly better results in synthetic tests. However, the model that opens the TOP 5 can be safely chosen not only for an office system, but also for a gaming computer.
There are only two physical cores, but these are modern 14 nm chips from one of the latest generations - Kaby lake. Frequency - 4100 MHz. This is a very shameful indicator. In addition, there is the possibility of overclocking. Considering the excellent energy efficiency and low heat generation - even with the included cooler, the temperature remains at 35-40 degrees when idle, and up to 70 degrees under load - you can safely increase the frequencies. Unlike competitors from AMD, the Core i3 has a built-in graphics core, which allows it to be used in an office system without a discrete graphics card. But keep in mind that officially it only works on Windows 10
Advantages:
- Built-in graphics core
- Overclocking capability
- Low temperatures
Flaws:
- Poor performance for the price
4 AMD Ryzen 3 1200 Summit Ridge
Best price
A country: USA (Produced in Malaysia, China)
Average price: 6,917 ₽
Rating (2019): 4.7
Ryzen 3 – junior inexpensive new line AMD processors, designed to once again impose a fight on Intel. And the 1200 does the job perfectly. For 7 thousand rubles, the buyer receives a 4-core processor. Factory frequencies are low - only 3.1 GHz (in increased productivity 3.4 GHz), but the multiplier is unlocked, which means enthusiasts can easily make the “stone” a little faster.
The transition to new chips not only improved performance, but also reduced power consumption, and also reduced temperatures to acceptable values. Due to the lack of built-in graphics chip we can recommend this processor only for budget game builds. Productivity is only slightly higher than the previous participant.
Advantages:
- Unlocked multiplier
Flaws:
- No built-in graphics chip
3 Intel Core i5-7600K Kaby Lake
Great processor for gaming
Country: USA
Average price: 19,084 ₽
Rating (2019): 4.7
Let's start with the fact that the i5-7600K is by no means an outsider. Yes, in terms of performance it is somewhat worse than the mastodons that you will see below, but for most gamers it will be enough. The processor has four Kaby Lake cores operating at 3.8 GHz (in reality up to 4.0 GHz with TurboBoost). There is also a built-in graphics core - HD Graphics 630, which means even in demanding games You can play at minimum settings. With a normal video card (for example, GTX 1060), the processor reveals itself completely. In most games with FullHD resolution (most gamers have these monitors) and high graphics settings, the frame rate rarely drops below 60 fps. Is anything else needed?
Advantages:
- Best price
- Enough power for most gamers
- Excellent graphics core
2 AMD Ryzen 5 1600 Summit Ridge
Best price/performance ratio
A country: USA (Produced in Malaysia, China)
Average price: 11,970 ₽
Rating (2019): 4.8
The second line of the TOP 5 mid-level processors is occupied by one of the best processors in terms of price/performance ratio. With an average cost of only 12,000 rubles, in synthetic tests Ryzen 5 is able to compete with the well-known Intel Core i7-7700K at standard settings (PassMark 12270 and 12050 points, respectively). This power is due to the presence of six Summit Ridge physical cores, made using a 12 nm process technology. Clock frequency not a record - 3.6 GHz. Overclocking is possible, but in reviews users claim that at frequencies above 4.0-4.1 GHz processor behaves unstable and gets very hot. With factory settings, idle temperatures remain at 42-46 degrees, in games 53-57 when using a standard cooler.
Also, high performance is due to large cache volumes at all levels. The CPU supports the modern DDR4-2667 standard, which allows you to create excellent computers based on this processor for gaming at medium-high settings in FullHD.
Advantages:
- Excellent price/performance ratio
- Heats up a little
Flaws:
- Low overclocking potential
1 AMD Ryzen 7 1700 Summit Ridge
Most powerful processor in class
A country: USA (Manufactured in Malaysia, China, China)
Average price: 17,100 RUR
Rating (2019): 4.8
As expected, the processor from the top-line Ryzen 7 has the best performance in its class. Once again, we cannot help but remember the cost - for 17 thousand rubles we get power at the level of the top-end Core i7 of previous years. The processor includes eight cores, divided into two clusters. The standard clock speed is only 3.0 GHz, Ryzen 7 is guaranteed to overclock to 3.7, and with a little luck, up to 4.1 GHz.
Like previous representatives of the line, the leader is made using a 12 nm process technology, which allows for economical energy consumption. The situation with heat dissipation is good - in stress tests, temperatures remain at 70-75 degrees.
Advantages:
- High performance
- There is an overclocking option
- A fresh platform that will be supported for at least 4 years
The best top processors
3 Intel Core i7-7700K Kaby Lake
The most popular top processor
Average price: 29,060 ₽
Rating (2019): 4.6
More recently, the i7-7700K was the top processor in the Intel lineup. But technology is developing extremely quickly, and in 2018 it is difficult to recommend this particular chip for purchase. According to synthetic tests, the model clearly lags behind its competitors - in PassMark the CPU scores only 12 thousand points, which is comparable to modern processors middle level. But these indicators are achieved on standard settings, when 4 physical cores operate at a frequency of 4.2 GHz, but the CPU can be easily overclocked to even higher frequencies, thereby increasing performance.
Yes, the bronze medalist lags behind its competitors, but it costs at least half as much, and given its popularity, it is quite possible to find a good used processor. Also, the high prevalence and long-standing presence on the market allows you to find an affordable motherboard with the LGA1151 socket. In general, we have an excellent basis for a powerful gaming system at a relatively low cost.
Advantages:
- Good price for this class
- High performance
- Great overclocking capabilities
- High popularity
Flaws:
- Not entirely relevant in 2018
2 Intel Core i9-7900X Skylake
The most powerful processor in the Intel line
Country: USA
Average price: 77,370 RUR
Rating (2019): 4.7
Until recently, Intel's top line was the Core i7 series. But modern realities require everything more power. If you are not familiar with solutions, pay attention to the Core i9-7900X. The processor, already at a standard clock frequency, is capable of entering the TOP 10 most powerful CPUs. For example, in PassMark the model scores almost 22 thousand points - this is twice as many as the bronze medalist of the rating. At the same time, in reviews, users talk about trouble-free overclocking to 4.2-4.5 GHz with high-quality air cooling. Temperatures do not exceed 70 degrees under load.
Such high performance is due to the use of 10 cores made using a 14 nm process technology. The model supports all the necessary modern standards and commands, which allows you to use it for any task.
Advantages:
- Highest performance
- Excellent overclocking potential
- Acceptable temperatures
Flaws:
- Very high cost
- No solder under the cap.
1 AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
The leader of the rating is crazy in everything - from the price of 65 thousand rubles to the incredible performance. In terms of power in synthetic tests, the model is slightly ahead of the previous participant. The internal structure is significantly different. Threadripper uses 16 (!) cores. The clock speed is comparable to the Core i9 - 3400 MHz - but the overclocking capabilities are more modest. The “stone” operates stably at a frequency of 3.9 GHz; as rates increase, the necessary stability is lost.
So a large number of cores performs well in all tasks. But using a monster for games is not entirely reasonable - not all projects can reveal its potential. AMD will be useful for professional video editors, 3D designers, etc. - in professional software, an increase in cores gives a noticeable increase in rendering speed.
Advantages:
- Relatively low price tag
- High power
- Excellent performance in professional programs
Almost every year a new generation of Intel Xeon E5 central processors enters the market. Each generation alternates between socket and process technology. There are more and more nuclei, and heat generation is gradually decreasing. But a natural question arises: “What does the new architecture give to the end user?”
To do this, I decided to test the performance of similar processors of different generations. I decided to compare models from the mass segment: 8-core processors 2660, 2670, 2640V2, 2650V2, 2630V3 and 2620V4. Testing with such a generational spread is not entirely fair, because Between V2 and V3 there is a different chipset, a new generation of memory with a higher frequency, and most importantly, there are no direct peers in frequency among the models of all 4 generations. But, in any case, this study will help to understand to what extent the performance of new processors has increased in real applications and synthetic tests.
The selected line of processors has many similar parameters: the same number of cores and threads, 20 MB SmartCache, 8 GT/s QPI (except 2640V2) and the number of PCI-E lanes equal to 40.
To assess the feasibility of testing all processors, I turned to the results of the PassMark tests.
Below is a summary graph of the results:
Since the frequency is significantly different, it is not entirely correct to compare the results. But despite this, conclusions immediately arise:
1. 2660 is equivalent in performance to 2620V4
2. 2670 is superior in performance to 2620V4 (obviously due to frequency)
3. 2640V2 sags, and 2650V2 beats everyone (also due to frequency)
I divided the result by frequency and got a certain performance value at 1 GHz:
Here the results are more interesting and clear:
1. 2660 and 2670 - an unexpected turnaround for me within one generation, 2670 is justified only by the fact that its overall performance is very high
2. 2640V2 and 2650V2 - a very strange low result, which is worse than the 2660
3. 2630V3 and 2620V4 - the only logical growth (apparently due to the new architecture...)
After analyzing the result, I decided to weed out some of the uninteresting models that are of no value for further testing:
1. 2640V2 and 2650V2 - an intermediate generation, and not very successful, in my opinion - I’m removing them from the candidates
2. 2630V3 - excellent result, but it costs unreasonably more than the 2620V4, given the similar performance and, moreover, this is the outgoing generation of processors
3. 2620V4 - reasonable price (compared to 2630V3), high performance and, most importantly, this is the only 8-core processor model latest generation with Hyper-threading is on our list, so we definitely leave it for further tests
4. 2660 and 2670 - an excellent result in comparison with 2620V4. In my opinion, it is precisely the comparison of the first and last (at the moment) generation in Intel line Xeon E5 is of particular interest. In addition, we still have sufficient stocks of first-generation processors in our warehouse, so this comparison is very relevant for us.
The cost of servers based on 2660 and 2620V4 processors can differ by almost 2 times, not in favor of the latter, so by comparing their performance and choosing a server on V1 processors, you can significantly reduce the budget for purchasing a new server. But I will tell you about this proposal after the test results.
For testing, 3 stands were assembled:
1. 2 x Xeon E5-2660, 8 x 8Gb DDR3 ECC REG 1333, SSD Intel Enterprise 150Gb
2. 2 x Xeon E5-2670, 8 x 8Gb DDR3 ECC REG 1333, SSD Intel Enterprise 150Gb
3. 2 x Xeon E5-2620V4, 8 x 8Gb DDR4 ECC REG 2133, SSD Intel Enterprise 150Gb
PassMark PerformanceTest 9.0
When selecting processors for testing, I already used the results of synthetic tests, but now it’s interesting to compare these models in more detail. I made the comparison in groups: 1st generation versus 4th.
More detailed report about testing allows us to draw some conclusions:
1. Mathematics, incl. and floating point, mainly depends on frequency. The difference of 100 MHz allowed the 2660 to outpace the 2620V4 in computational operations, encryption and compression (and this despite the significant difference in memory frequency)
2. Physics and calculations using extended instructions are performed better on the new architecture, despite the low frequency
3. And, of course, the test using memory passed in favor of V4 processors, since in this case have already competed different generations memory - DDR4 and DDR3.
It was synthetic. Let's see what specialized benchmarks and real applications show.
Archiver 7ZIP
Here the results have something in common with the previous test - a direct link to the processor frequency. It doesn’t matter that slower memory is installed - V1 processors confidently take the lead in frequency.
CINEBENCH R15
CINEBENCH is a benchmark for evaluating computer performance for working with professional program to create MAXON Cinema 4D animation.
The Xeon E5-2670 pulled up the frequency and beat the 2620V4. But the E5-2660, which has a not so visible advantage in frequency, lost to the 4th generation processor. Hence the conclusion - this software uses useful additions of the new architecture (although perhaps it’s all a matter of memory...), but not so much that this is a decisive factor.
3DS MAX + V-Ray
To evaluate processor performance when rendering in a real application, I took a combination: 3ds Max 2016 + V-ray 3.4 + a real scene with several light sources, specular and transparent materials, and an environment map.
The results were similar to CINEBENCH: the Xeon E5-2670 showed the lowest rendering time, and the 2660 could not beat the 2620V4.
1C: SQL/File
At the end of the testing, I attach the results of the gilev tests for 1C.
When testing a database with file access, the E5-2620V4 processor confidently leads. The table shows the average values of 20 runs of the same test. The difference between the results of each stand in the case of a file database was no more than 2%.
Single thread test SQL databases showed very strange results. The difference was insignificant, considering different frequency for 2660 and 2670, and different frequencies for DDR3 and DDR4. There was an attempt to optimize the SQL settings, but the results turned out to be worse than they were, so I decided to test all the stands on basic settings.
The results of the multi-threaded SQL test turned out to be even more strange and contradictory. The maximum speed of 1 thread in MB/s was equivalent to the performance index in the previous single-threaded test.
The next parameter was the maximum speed (of all streams) - the result was almost identical for all stands. Since the results of different runs fluctuated greatly (+-5%) - sometimes they were at different stands with a significant gap in one direction or the other. The same average multi-threaded SQL test results lead me to 3 thoughts:
1. This situation is caused by an unoptimized SQL configuration
2. The SSD became a system bottleneck and did not allow the processors to overclock
3. There is almost no difference between the frequency of memory and processors for these tasks (which is extremely unlikely)
The result for the “Recommended number of users” parameter also turned out to be inexplicable. The average result of 2660 turned out to be the highest - and this despite the low results of all tests.
I will also be glad to see your comments on this issue.
conclusions
The results of several diverse computing tests showed that the processor frequency in most cases turned out to be more important than the generation, architecture, and even memory frequency. Of course, there is modern software that uses all the improvements of the new architecture. For example, video transcoding is sometimes performed incl. using AVX2.0 instructions, but this is specialized software - and most server applications are still tied to the number and frequency of cores.Of course, I’m not saying that there is no difference at all between processors, I just want to point out that for certain applications there is no point in a “planned” transition to a new generation.
If you disagree with me or have suggestions for testing, the stands have not yet been dismantled, and I will be happy to test your tasks.
Economic benefit
As I already wrote at the beginning of the article, we offer a line of servers based on first-generation Xeon E5 processors, which are significantly cheaper in cost than servers based on the E5-2620V4.These are the same new servers (not to be confused with used ones) with a 3-year warranty.
Below is an approximate calculation.
