Today we're doing a little benchmarking, a little playing around with Assassin's Creed Origins to see how it behaves on different CPUs. For those of you unaware Assassin's Creed Origins was recently released, and it has been creating a bit of a stir in the PC tech community due how aggressively it utilizes the CPU.
Today we're discussing what we feel were the worst CPU and GPU purchases of 2017. Some were just bad from the get go while others started life as viable options that sadly proved poor choices before year's end.
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.
Misspelled words on the box and inside the box was a piece of metal with a real looking heat spreader
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.
For generations we've put up with sub-10% YOY performance improvements on ultraportables, but with the threat of AMD's competition in the near future, Intel's low-power mobile chips are finally transitioning to quad-cores. Achieved while keeping within the same 15-watt TDP, let me tell you, the boost is huge.
For $180 the Core i3-8350K is nearly a rebadged Core i5-7600K: both are 14nm quad-cores operating at ~4GHz, but the 8350K is 25% cheaper. Meanwhile, the Core i3-8100 goes for a more appealing $120. And although it's locked at 3.6GHz, it's roughly 40% more affordable than a comparable i5 from the last generation.
Intel is hitting back with its eighth-generation Core series, which counters Ryzen with cores, lots of cores. On hand today we have the Core i7-8700K, based on Intel's new "Coffee Lake" architecture, it is designed to operate no slower than 3.7 GHz, with turbo boost taking it as high as 4.7 GHz.
How bad is bottlenecking these days? Well, that all depends on how bad you are at pairing hardware. Any experienced system builder will tell you it's important to build a balanced system, especially if you want the best bang for your buck.
Finally the Skylake-X series is complete. We now have Intel's new 16- and 18-core processors on-hand an while we don't doubt Intel had planned to release Skylake-X all along, did they really plan to offer something higher than a 12-core part before catching wind of AMD's Threadripper?
By using the Core i7-7700K and Ryzen 5 1600, each with the Vega 64 and GTX 1080 at 1080p and 1440p we have some very interesting results to go over. Further, we suspect these are typical hardware combinations many are considering for building a new high-end rig when gaming is a big factor.
While we wait for Zen-based APUs, AMD released Bristol Ridge through OEMs late last year, it recently became available on the retail market and this caught the attention of many. The AMD A12-9800 costs $110 and along with promising pretty decent integrated graphics performance, you can take advantage of it on a new AM4 motherboard.
Today we're going to do something a little different just for fun and look at the top 5 worst CPUs released in the last few years. This is not intended to be taken as seriously as one of our buying guides, and if you happen to have one of these CPUs please don't be offended. In fact, under certain conditions they might even be a justified purchase. Without further ado, let's see why we think these are bad picks for most users...
Set to be the Pentium 4 Prescott's successor, Tejas and Jayhawk CPUs were expected to run at frequencies at or above...
One hot processor running at 4GHz, 5GHz, 7GHz or 10GHz?