Intel Core i5 8400 Linux Performance

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Intel Core i5 8400 Linux Performance

Today marks the embargo expiry for reviews on Intel's new Coffeelake desktop processors. While a CPU refresh may not normally be too exciting, thanks to the pressure from AMD with their Ryzen processors pushing core counts higher, Intel is now upping the core counts in their desktop CPUs. Today we will be featuring Linux benchmarks of the Core i5 8400 and Core i7 8700K while this article is focusing on the i5-8400: a six-core Core i5!

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=25311

[L_A_G]

The remarkable speed at which Intel was able to respond by upping the number of cores in their products across the range really goes to show how badly they've been sandbagging development to increase profits as AMD was pretty much out of the running. If we want this speed of development to continue, we really ought to avoid buying Intel and favor AMD for the next couple of years to ensure that they stay around and maintain competition in the high end x86 space.

[starshipeleven]

Thanks AMD for this new 6-core processor that does not cost 1000$.

As a sidenote, all times I read coffeelake I read it as "covfevelake".

[edwaleni]

The remarkable speed at which Intel was able to respond by upping the number of cores in their products across the range really goes to show how badly they've been sandbagging development to increase profits while AMD was pretty much out of the running. If we want this speed of development to continue, we really ought to avoid buying Intel and favor AMD for the next couple of years to ensure that they stay around and maintain competition in the high end x86 space.

I am not sure if it was a speed to market thing as Intel's lead times on new products are just as long as AMD's. The word on the street factor (the silicon fab street that is) did force Intel to get with the program and I agree the competition is definitely getting them off the pot to accelerate their updates.

We also know that Intel has a great deal of flexibility engineered in their manufacturing processes, which has an impact on how quickly they can respond to market conditions.

With AMD lagging for years and the mobility market distracting Intel with Atom, the desktop definitely suffered from lack of innovation.

It's good to see the turnover in product now and for those who spent something near $1k less than a year ago, we can only say "sorry".

[Spooktra]

For me what's so amazing is that the i5 8400 with "just" 6C/6T is capable of matching and even beating the 8C/16T Ryzens in some benchmarks. Microcenter is currently selling this processor for $250, once the price comes down to the $200 range and the driver issues with the iGPU are straightened out I will definitely be picking one of these up.

[schmidtbag]

The remarkable speed at which Intel was able to respond by upping the number of cores in their products across the range really goes to show how badly they've been sandbagging development to increase profits while AMD was pretty much out of the running. If we want this speed of development to continue, we really ought to avoid buying Intel and favor AMD for the next couple of years to ensure that they stay around and maintain competition in the high end x86 space.

It's not that remarkable at all - they've had this planned over a year ago, and these parts are basically just tweaked versions of Xeons that have been available for a while. The part that really raises an eyebrow is how much Intel shortened the roadmap in order to respond to Ryzen.

For me what's so amazing is that the i5 8400 with "just" 6C/6T is capable of matching and even beating the 8C/16T Ryzens in some benchmarks. Microcenter is currently selling this processor for $250, once the price comes down to the $200 range and the driver issues with the iGPU are straightened out I will definitely be picking one of these up.

You seem to be ignoring the fact that pretty much everywhere the 8400 beat Ryzen 7s, it is also roughly the same as KL/CL i7s. In other words, it suggests the tasks don't scale with more threads that well. That doesn't detract that the 8400 has pretty decent performance-per-dollar, but to think it's amazing that it competes with an 8c Ryzen is very short-sighted. Don't forget the 8400 also has higher clocks than the 1700.

[Kendji]

Nice, finally Intel is forced to up their core counts on their cheaper offerings as well!!

[torsionbar28]

Once again, we can thank AMD for the latest intel chips, lol. But that Ryzen 1800X sure dominated a lot of these benches. My next gaming rig is definitely going to be based on an 1800X. We've given enough money to intel over the years.... too much.

[starshipeleven]

For me what's so amazing is that the i5 8400 with "just" 6C/6T is capable of matching and even beating the 8C/16T Ryzens in some benchmarks.

Comparing a 6-thread part to a 16-thread one is kinda an apples to bananas comparison, as people seriously looking at the 16-thread part will have very multicore workloads, and in multicore workloads the i5 is getting pwnz0red by higher end Ryzens and the i7 that has 12 threads.

[dimtass]

I've seen that in both reviews for 8400 & 8700k, the kernel compile time test is missing.
Are you going to update those benchmarks at some point?