Although it's essentially a 7700K with 2 additional cores and some extra L3 cache, Intel's Coffee Lake-based Core i7-8700K proved to be plenty of an advancement over its Kaby Lake predecessor for us to crown information technology the newfound gaming king a few days past.

Yet, we recognize that it may not be an attractive upgrade for alive 7700K owners, non to mention that it's somewhat expensive at $360. With furnish existence same limited at the moment, buying unrivaled this year might glucinium challenging even if you are interested.

With that in mind, we've purchased the more inexpensive Core i3-8100 and 8350K to see what they have to offer.

For $180 the Core i3-8350K is most a rebadged Core i5-7600K: both are 14nm quad-cores operational at ~4GHz, but the 8350K is 25% cheaper and should be faster thanks to a larger 8MB L3 cache. In short, you're essentially acquiring a little more for a bit to a lesser extent with the 8350K.

The Core i3-8100 goes for a much more appealing $120. Although it's locked at 3.6GHz, it should embody comparable to the Core i5-7400 or 7500, sporting the same 6MB L3 stash, but roughly 40% Sir Thomas More affordable.

Whereas the Core i3-8350K is priced to compete with the Ryzen 5 1500X, the 8100 takes on the Ryzen 3 series. The only disadvantage the fastened 8100 part faces right now is the complete lack of budget motherboards. Z370 boards presently start at $120, while B350 boards can be had for atomic number 3 little as $60 or nearly half the Mary Leontyne Pric.

We're also interested to regard how the 8350K compares to the Core i5-8400. The six-core 8400 is just $10 more and I think I'd rather have the two extra cores for such a small price increase kind of than the ability to overclock, but let's see what the benchmarks have to say...

Benchmark Time

Memory and Application Public presentation

First up let's check out the memory bandwidth execution. These DDR4 dual-channel remembering controllers looking at to be good for roughly 31-39GB/s of memory bandwidth when using 3200 memory.

Since the Core i3-8100 is a locked part, you'll ideally want to feature it on a cheaper motherboard that the Z370 models currently connected offer. For now the options are limited so this means anyone buying an eighth-gen Burden processors will have to pair it with a Z370 gameboard and with that you throw unlocked computer storage frequencies. On upcoming B360 boards for instance you will be incomprehensive to DDR4-2400, so I've decided to test the i3-8100 using both DDR4-2400 and 3200 memory.

Here we see when victimisation DDR4-2400 memory the 8100 is narrow to a retentivity bandwidth of 28.6GB/s. Flared the memory speed to 3200 boosts the bandwidth by 25% and this leave without doubt assist operation in a number of games and applications. Meanwhile the unlocked and higher clocked 8350K was tested using DDR4-3200 memory and information technology managed 36.8GB/s of bandwidth.

Moving to Cinebench we interpret that the Sum i3-8100 is able to outpace the Ryzen 3 1300X in some the single and multi-threaded tests, so founded on this it's going to be a rough bait for the heavily write out down Ryzen serial publication. The 8350K based on frequency should only be around 10% faster than the 8100 simply here we see it with an 18% advantage, the sole achievable explanation being that the 33% increase in L3 cache capacity helps it therein essa.

Regardless patc it smokes the Ryzen 5 1500X's unary draw grievance information technology's 16% slower for the multithreaded workload. Then based on this I expect the 8350K to punish the 1500X in almost games but trail in most of the productivity tests. I should note that the 8350K alone just beatniks the Core i5-7600K while it's 23% slower than the Core i5-8400.

Before we get to that a quick look at the PCMark 10 scores. The 8350K actually manages to outscore the Core i5-8400 here while the 8100 beats both the Ryzen 3 1300X and R5 1500X. The 8100 was 5% faster when exploitation DDR4-3200 memory opposed to 2400, so not a huge margin but a small boost nonetheless.

Waving to the Surpass Monte Carlo pretence we incu that the Core i3-8350K is actually much slower than the Ryzen 5 1500X, 24% slower in fact. It was besides 9% slower than the 7600K and 19% slower than the 8400.

The Core i3-8100 has more luck as it was 18% faster than the Ryzen 3 1300X and 26% quicker than the Core i3-7350K. Information technology's also worth noting here that the faster DDR4-3200 retentivity didn't offering the 8100 an advantage therein application.

Next up we have the VeraCrypt results and here the Ryzen 3 1300X actually pulled ahead of the Core i3-8100, albeit by a melt off margin. The Core i3-8350K close to matched the 7600K but was 32% slower than the Core i5-8400. That said, it was at least 40% slower than the Ryzen 5 1500X, so the 8350K gets a bit hosed in this application.

Jumping to the 7-Zip data we see that once again the 8350K just can't in play with the R5 1500X, although IT was only 4% slower for the compression workload, it was 25% when decompression. The 8350K also gets completely annihilated past Intel's own 8400 as the Core i5 Processor was 35% faster. The Core i3-8100 looks much better and it is able to fishing tackle the Ryzen 3 lineup without much issue.