The Core i5-11400F coupled with a B560 motherboard make for an interesting build configuration, as it's significantly cheaper than the Core i5-11600K/Z590 and less than the cost of the Ryzen 5 5600X.
Rocket Lake is finally here and today we're checking out the new Core i5-11600K to see if it's a worthy replacement for the affordable 10600K and/or defeating the overpriced Ryzen 5 5600X.
Intel 10th-gen Core CPUs get big price cuts: would you pick more cores or better single thread performance?
In order to wrap up our 6 core/12 thread CPU testing, we had to add the Ryzen 5 5600X to the mix. We're going back to the data we recently collected for testing the Core i5-10400F and Ryzen 5 3600, all of it using the Radeon RX 6800 in a range of PC games at 1080p, 1440p and 4K resolutions.
Do you need to buy a Core i9 for gaming, and is a Core i3 sufficient for general desktop work? How about upgrading to a Core i5, how much faster is that? Our CPU reviews provide more than enough data to answer those questions, but this review will serve as a great reference for those wanting to compare Intel Core i3, i5, i7 and i9 processors directly.
Following up to our recent CPU comparison in competitive titles using low quality settings, we're pitting the Ryzen 7 3700X and 10th-gen Core i5-10600K against the 2700X to see how the previous-gen Ryzen stacks up.
The Core i5-10600K is arguably the most compelling of the 10th-gen unlocked desktop parts. First, it's the most affordable of the bunch, set to retail for $262. Second, if you look at the spec sheet, it's basically a Core i7-8700K, an amazing flagship processor in its heyday.
When we reviewed the new Ryzen 5 3600 we had plenty of positive things to say about it, and that was comparing it to the more expensive Core i5-9600K. Now against the 9400F, the cheapest 9th-gen Core i5 processor you can buy at $150. Budget-minded builders may be considering going Intel after all. Does it make sense?
This is a comparison we've been wanting to put together for some time. With Computex 2019 out of the way and the full confirmation of 3rd-gen Ryzen, before that hits us here's an updated comparison between the Ryzen 5 1600 and Core i5-7600K. It's time to see which processor offers gamers the best performance in 2019.
For the past few weeks we've been busy benchmarking AMD's Ryzen 5 2600 and Intel's Core i5-8400. For testing we have 36 games on the menu, each tested at 720p, 1080p and 1440p using the GeForce GTX 1080 Ti. That is, 324 individual tests, three times each... almost 1,000 benchmark runs, so grab a drink, some snacks and get comfortable.
Before the incoming 2nd-gen Ryzen parts arrive this shootout will let us establish how AMD and Intel currently stack up with all the latest Windows updates, BIOS updates, driver updates and new motherboards we have on hand, giving us an up to date reference point for the new CPUs.
Who would have thought a year ago that we'd see AMD dethrone Intel at the high-end CPU segment? It's an exciting time to be a PC enthusiast and after extensive testing, we've come up with this quick guide to bring you the best CPU choices available right now.
After our last CPU roundup, we made sense of the numbers and the processors that brought the best value when overclocked. We decided then to make a more straightforward shootout -- this was also the most demanded by readers -- putting an overclocked Ryzen 5 1600 against the Core i5-8400.
You've read the reviews and now we are putting them together on a single CPU comparison. On deck for this one we tested 8 processors in 9 games at not only 1080p, but also 720p and 1440p, amounting to more than 650 benchmark passes.
Today we're checking out the most affordable six-core processor ever released, and this time it's not from AMD. The Core i5-8400 is more affordable than the $215 Ryzen 5 1600, though it can't be overclocked and lacks HyperThreading, but it should nonetheless be ample for gamers and may even be the new go-to solution for budget builders.
After extensive testing, we've come up with this quick guide to bring you the best CPU choices available right now, divided into four categories: The Best Enthusiast/Value Gaming CPU, Best Extreme Desktop CPU, Best All-Round High-End CPU and Best Budget CPU.
The FX-8320E has been AMD's go-to option for budget quad-core computing without integrated graphics for a few months now. But the landscape has shifted on Intel's side with the arrival of its new Skylake-based Core i3 and Pentium processors. After being disappointed in August by the marginal performance between Skylake and Haswell Core i7s, we're interested in seeing how the i3-6100 stacks up against the older i3-4360, as well as the i5-4430 and the overclocked FX-8320E.
Take a look back at how Intel CPUs have progressed over the years. We're testing and comparing the original Core 2 Duo CPUs against the Nehalem-based Core i5-760 and Core i7-870, the Sandy Bridge Core i5-2500K and Core i7-2700K chips, and then to the current generation Haswell Celeron, Pentium, Core i3, Core i5 and Core i7 parts.
With desktop CPU prices ranging from as little as $60 to over $600 there are options for everyone wanting to buy or build a new Intel system. The Core i3 is intended as entry-level, the Core i5 is geared for mainstream usage, and the mighty Core i7 is meant for high-end systems and enthusiasts. But what do you get by spending more? Here's your answer.
These days you might expect buying a new processor to be fairly straightforward. The choice seems clear: Intel has proven to offer superior core performance with considerably greater efficiency. However, many enthusiasts argue that AMD offers better overclocking on its more affordable processors and therefore delivers a better bang for your buck. We put that notion to the test.