Intel core i7 choice. Choosing a processor: Core i9 vs Core i7 or Core i5

For an office, home or gaming computer, it is not so difficult to choose the right processor. You just need to decide on your needs, orient yourself a little in the characteristics and price ranges. There is no point in thoroughly studying the smallest nuances if you are not a “geek,” but you need to understand what to pay attention to.

For example, you can look for a processor with a higher frequency and cache memory, but without paying attention to the core of the chip, you can get into trouble. The core, in fact, is the main performance factor, and the rest of the characteristics are plus or minus. In general terms, I can say that the more expensive the product in the line of one manufacturer, the better, more powerful, and faster it is. But AMD processors are cheaper than those from Intel.

The processor should be chosen depending on the tasks at hand. If in normal mode you have about two resource-intensive programs running, then it is better to buy a dual-core “stone” with a high frequency. If more threads are used, it is better to opt for a multi-core processor of the same architecture, even with a lower frequency.
Hybrid processors (with a built-in video card) will allow you to save on the purchase of a video card, provided that you do not need to play fancy games. These are almost all modern Intel and AMD processors of the A4-A12 series, but AMD has a stronger graphics core.
All processors marked “BOX” must be supplied with a cooler (of course, a simple model, which will not be enough for high loads, but is just what is needed for operation in nominal mode). If you need a cool cooler, then .
Processors marked “OEM” are covered by a one-year warranty, while processors marked “OEM” are covered by a three-year warranty. If the warranty period provided by the store is shorter, it is better to think about looking for another distributor.
In some cases, it makes sense to buy a percentage from hand, this way you can save about 30% of the amount. True, this method of purchase is associated with a certain risk, so you need to pay attention to the availability of a guarantee and the reputation of the seller.

Main technical characteristics of processors

Now about some characteristics that are still worth mentioning. It is not necessary to go into it, but it will be useful to understand my recommendations for specific models.

Each processor has its own socket (platform), i.e. the name of the connector on the motherboard for which it is intended. Whatever processor you choose, be sure to look at socket matching. At the moment there are several platforms.

LGA1150 – not for high-end processors, used for office computers, gaming and home media centers. Entry-level integrated graphics, except Intel Iris/Iris Pro. Already going out of circulation.
LGA1151 is a modern platform, recommended for future upgrade to newer hardware. The processors themselves are not much faster than the previous platform, i.e., there is little point in upgrading to it. But there is a more powerful integrated graphics core of the Intel Graphics series, DDR4 memory is supported, but it does not provide a significant performance gain.
LGA2011-v3 is a top-end platform designed for building high-performance desktop systems based on Intel X299 system logic, expensive, outdated.
LGA 2066 (Socket R4) - socket for HEDT (Hi-End) Intel processors of Skylake-X and Kaby Lake-X architecture, replaced 2011-3.

AM1 for weak, energy-efficient processors
AM3+ is a common socket, suitable for most AMD processors, incl. for high-performance processors without an integrated video core
AM4 is designed for microprocessors with Zen microarchitecture (Ryzen brand) with and without integrated graphics, and all subsequent ones. Added support for DDR4 memory.
FM2/FM2+ for budget versions of Athlon X2/X4 without integrated graphics.
sTR4 is a connector type for the HEDT family of Ryzen Threadripper microprocessors. Similar to server sockets, the most massive for desktop computers.

There are outdated platforms that you can buy in order to save money, but you need to take into account that new processors will no longer be made for them: LGA1155, AM3, LGA2011, AM2/+, LGA775 and others that are not on the lists.

Kernel name. Each line of processors has its own kernel name. For example, Intel currently has Sky Lake, Kaby Lake and the newest eighth generation Coffee Lake. AMD has Richland, Bulldozer, Zen. The higher the generation, the more high-performance the chip, with lower energy consumption, and the more technologies are introduced.

Number of Cores: from 2 to 18 pieces. The bigger, the better. But there is such a point: programs that do not know how to distribute the load across the cores will work faster on a dual-core with a higher clock frequency than on a 4-core, but with a lower frequency. In short, if there is no clear technical specification, then the rule works: more is better, and the further, the more correct it will be.

Technical process, measured in nanometers, for example – 14nm. Does not affect performance, but does affect processor heating. Each new generation of processors is manufactured using a new technical process with a smaller nm. This means that if you take a previous generation processor and a new one that is approximately the same, the latter will heat up less. But, since new products are made faster, they heat up about the same. That is, improving the technical process allows manufacturers to make faster processors.

Clock frequency, measured in gigahertz, for example - 3.5 GHz. Always the more the better, but only within one series. If you take an old Pentium with a frequency of 3.5 GHz and some new one, then the old one will be many times slower. This is explained by the fact that they have completely different kernels.

Almost all “stones” are capable of accelerating, i.e. operate at a higher frequency than that specified in the specifications. But this is a topic for those knowledgeable, because... You can burn the processor or get a non-working system!

Level 1, 2 and 3 cache size, one of the key characteristics, the more, the faster. The first level is the most important, the third is less significant. Directly depends on the kernel and series.

TDP– dissipated thermal power, or how much at maximum load. A lower number means less heat. Without clear personal preferences, this can be ignored. Powerful processors consume 110-220 watts of electricity under load. You can see a diagram of the approximate energy consumption of Intel and AMD processors under normal load, the less the better:

Model, series: does not relate to the characteristics, but nevertheless I want to tell you how to understand which processor is better within the same series, without delving too much into the characteristics. Processor name, for example " consists of a series Core i3″ and model number “8100”. The first number means the line of processors on a certain core, and the next ones are its “performance index,” roughly speaking. So, we can estimate that:

Core i3-8300 is faster than i3-8100
i3-8100 is faster than i3-7100
But the i3-7300 will be faster than the i3-8100, despite the lower series, because the 300 strongly more than 100. I think you get the idea.

The same goes for AMD.

Will you play on the computer?

The next point that you need to decide in advance is the gaming future of the computer. For “Farm Frenzy” and other simple online games, any built-in graphics will do. If buying an expensive video card is not part of your plans, but you want to play, then you need to buy a processor with a normal graphics core Intel Graphics 530/630/Iris Pro, AMD Radeon RX Vega Series. Even modern games will run in Full HD 1080p resolution at minimum and medium graphics quality settings. You can play World of Tanks, GTA, Dota and others.

If so, then it makes sense to take a processor without built-in graphics at all and save on it (or get more power for the same price). The circle can be narrowed down this way:

AMD has FX series processors for the AM3+ platform and hybrid solutions A12/10/8/6/4, as well as Athlon X4 for FM2+/AM4
Intel has SkyLake and Kaby Lake series processors for the LGA1151 and LGA2066 platforms and the aging BroadWell-E for LGA2011-v3 (there are only a few models).

You also need to take into account that a powerful video card and processor need to match. I won’t give clear answers to questions like “what kind of processor is needed for this video card.” You need to study this issue yourself by reading relevant reviews, tests, comparisons, and forums. But I'll give you a couple of recommendations.

Firstly, you need at least a 4-core processor. Even more cores will not add much fps in games. At the same time, it turns out that 4-core AMD processors are better suited for games than 2-core Intel processors at the same or even lower price.

Secondly, you can focus on this: the cost of the processor is equal to the cost of the video card. In fact, despite dozens of models, making the right choice is not difficult.

A note about AMD

The most budget line is called “Sempron”. With each new generation, performance improves, but these are still the weakest processors. Recommended only for working with office documents, surfing the Internet, watching videos and music.

The company has the FX series - these are aging top-end chips for the AM3+ platform. Everyone has an unlocked multiplier, i.e. they are easy to overclock (if necessary). There are 4, 6 and 8 core models. Supports automatic overclocking technology - Turbo Core. Only DDR3 memory works. It's better when the platform works with DDR4.

There are also mid-class products - Athlon X4 and a line of hybrid processors (with integrated graphics) A4/A6/A8/A10/A12. This is for FM2/FM2+/AM4 platforms. The A-series is divided into 2 and 4 cores. The integrated graphics power is higher in older models. If the name has the letter “K” at the end, then this model comes with an unlocked multiplier, i.e. easier to overclock. Turbo Core supported. It makes sense to take something from the A-series only if there is no separate video card.

For socket AM4, the newest processors are the Ryzen 3, Ryzen 5, Ryzen 7 series. They are positioned as competitors to Intel Core i3, i5, i7. There are ones without built-in graphics and with it, then the model name will have the letter G, for example AMD Ryzen A5 2400G. The top line with 8-16 core processors is AMD Ryzen Threadripper with a massive cooling system.

A note about Intel

The LGA1151 platform includes a full range of models, listed in ascending order of performance: Celeron, Pentium, Core i3/i5/i7. There are economical processors with the letters “T” or “S” in their names. They are slower and I don’t see the point of putting them in home computers unless there is a special need, for example for a home file storage/media center. Supports DDR4 memory, built-in video everywhere.

The most budget-friendly dual-core processors with integrated graphics are Celeron, an analogue of AMD's Sempron, and the more powerful Pentium. For domestic needs it is better to install at least a Pentium.

Top LGA2066 for Skylake and Kabylake with i5/i7 and top i9 series processors. They work with DDR4 memory, have 4-18 cores on board and no built-in graphics. Unlocked multiplier.

For information:

Core i5 and i7 processors support Turbo Boost automatic overclocking technology
processors on the Kaby Lake socket are not always faster than their predecessors on Sky Lake. The difference in architecture can be offset by different clock frequencies. As a rule, the faster processor costs a little more, even if it is Sky Lake. But Skylake accelerates well.
processors with integrated Iris Pro graphics are suitable for quiet gaming builds, but they are quite expensive
processors based on the LGA1151 platform are suitable for gaming systems, but there will be no point in installing more than two video cards, because A maximum of 16 PCI Express lanes are supported. For complete separation, you need an LGA2011-v3 or LGA2066 socket and the corresponding stones.
The Xeon line is designed for servers.

Which is better AMD or Intel?

This is an eternal debate, to which thousands of pages of forums on the Internet are devoted, and there is no clear answer to it. Both companies follow each other, but for myself I made a choice which is better. In a nutshell, AMD produces optimal budget solutions, while Intel produces more technologically advanced and expensive products. AMD rules in the low-cost sector, but this company simply has no analogues to the fastest Intel processors.

Processors do not break down, like monitors or, for example, so reliability is not an issue here. That is, if you do not overclock the “stone” and use a fan no worse than the boxed one (complete), then any processor will last for many, many years. There are no bad models, but there is a desirability of purchasing depending on price, characteristics and other factors, such as the availability of a particular motherboard.

I provide for your reference a summary table of the approximate gaming performance of Intel and AMD processors on a powerful GeForce GTX1080 video card, the higher -> the better:

Comparison of processors in tasks. close to everyday, normal load:

Archiving in 7-zip (less time - better results):

To independently compare different processors, I suggest using tables. So, let's move on from verbosity to specific recommendations.

Processors costing up to $40

Of course, you shouldn’t expect high performance for this money. Typically, such a processor is purchased in two cases:

For an office computer that does not require high performance
For the so-called “home server” - a computer whose main purpose is to store and play video and audio files.

These computers will run high-definition movies and simple games without any problems, but don't expect anything more. AMD A4, A6 processors are suitable for operation in nominal mode (the higher the model, the slightly more expensive and faster). The cheapest models from the A4 series are NOT recommended; these are slow processors with sluggish graphics, worse than those of Intel.

An excellent choice would be the Intel Celeron G3900-3930 processor (socket LGA1151) with support for DDR4 memory and a more powerful integrated graphics core. These processors overclock well.

If you have an external video card, then you can save a little more and take an AMD Athlon A4 X2, but it is better to aim for 4 cores of an Athlon II X4 or, because This processor does not have a built-in graphics core. Separately, it is worth mentioning that you should NOT pay attention to the quad-core AMD Sempron and Athlon Kabini X4 for socket AM1. These are slow processors, unsuccessful company products.

Up to 80$

There are somewhat more possibilities here, since for this amount you can buy a good quad-core processor. This also includes initial motherboard + built-in processor kits. Their purpose is to ensure stable operation of low- and medium-power stationary computers. Usually they are enough for comfortable work on the Internet, but such a kit is not suitable for serious workload.

To operate in nominal mode, it is best to choose an AMD Athlon X4 processor for the AMD AM4 platform. If you need integrated graphics, then take any one you like at the price from the AMD A8 series, or the Intel Pentium Dual-Core G4600 microprocessor for the Intel LGA1151 platform.

Processors of the AMD FX series or Athlon X4 xxxK show good performance when working in overclocking mode, i.e. with the letter "K". These models have an unlocked multiplier, which means they can be easily overclocked. But when buying it, you need to take into account that not every motherboard is suitable for overclocking. Can be used with an NVidia GTX1050Ti level video card.

About 120$

You can choose a quad-core AMD APU from the Ryzen 3 series on the AMD AM4 platform, which is suitable for creating a media center and even for gaming at medium settings. These “stones” have a very good Radeon Vega R8 Series video card built into them. If you look at Intel in the price category up to $120, then there is nothing interesting, except perhaps the Pentium G5600.

To work in overclocking mode, and not only, choose the Intel i3-7100 processor. Not the best option for games, because... there are only 2, but very fast cores. But the AMD FX-8350 processor with its 8 cores will come in handy. And the clock frequency can be raised from the standard 4 to 4.5 GHz.

Up to $200

The best performance in this category is provided by processors from Intel on the LGA1151 platform, although AMD is still trying to maintain its position. The best choice would be the Intel i5-7400. Despite its 4 cores, it supports multi-threading up to 8. It will show good performance in games and ideal in household applications. AMD Ryzen 5 with an excellent Vega 11 graphics card attracts attention.

At a slightly lower price, AMD may be more efficient in multi-threaded operations. In other words, you can take the Ryzen 5 series for games and save money. For other tasks where multithreading is not required, it is better to take a closer look at Intel.

Up to $280

For nominal work, the Intel Core i5-8600 is best suited. If you need to save a little money, then the i5-8500 is suitable. Among AMD, you can take the Ryzen 5 2600X without hesitation. This is an excellent LATEST processor from AMD that makes sense to buy (and overclock;).

For overclocking, the best choice would be the Intel Core i5-8600k processor for LGA 1151, which in this case has no competitors. The high frequency and unlocked multiplier make this “stone” ideal for gamers and overclockers. Among the processors used for overclocking, this is the one that so far shows the best price/performance/power consumption ratio.

The Core i5-5675C of the Broadwell generation carries on board the most powerful integrated graphics card Iris Pro 6200 (GT3e core) and at the same time it does not get very hot, because made using a 14nm process technology. Suitable for compact and no-compromise gaming systems.

Processors starting from $400

If we talk about the best model in this price range, it is worth highlighting the Intel Core i7-8700K for the Intel LGA 1151 platform. This percentage is the best for both use in nominal mode and for overclocking, and is also excellent for top games at high settings. at corresponding video card. Its antipode is AMD Ryzen 7 products.

If you can afford to spend more money on a “stone,” the choice here is clear - the Intel Core i7-7820X processor for the LGA 2066 socket. For the right price, you will get fast 8 cores, but without integrated graphics. Yes, I think who takes such a hustler and thinks of working on an integrated card :) AMD has a worthy competitor - this is the monster Ryzen Threadripper 1920X with 12 cores.

But the flagship Intel Core i9-7980XE with 18 cores is worth buying only for greater reliability, since, despite the significant difference in price (the flagship costs three times more), in desktop PC tasks the processor is not much ahead in terms of performance. This animal is the sole leader in this price category, both for nominal use and for overclocking.

Is it worth changing the processor?

Unlike smartphones and tablets, progress in the desktop and laptop industry has not been as noticeable. As a rule, the processor does not change for several years and works fine. Therefore, it is better to take his choice responsibly, preferably with a small margin.

So, processors from 2 or even 3 years ago are not particularly inferior to their modern brothers. The increase in performance, if we take similar prices, is on average 20%, which is almost unnoticeable in real life.

Finally, I want to give a couple more tips:

Don't go after top models with super power. If you don’t play games or work in highly demanding applications, then a powerful processor will only consume excess electricity and quickly become cheaper over time.
New products are not much faster than their predecessors, by 10-20%, and this is almost noticeable in everyday work, but they are more expensive and sometimes require replacing the motherboard for installation.
When choosing a powerful processor, consider that your power supply has enough power based on the power consumption of the “stone” and the entire system unit as a whole!

The central processor is the heart of the computer and the speed of computing operations depends on it. But the speed of work depends not only on it. If other components are slow, such as a hard drive, your computer will slow down even with the coolest beast!

It seems like I told you everything I wanted, now if something is not clear, ask in the comments! Only one request - do not write, like “which processor is better Intel i5-xxxx or amd fx-xx” and similar questions. All processors have long been tested and compared with each other. There are also ratings that include hundreds of models.

Edited: 2019-04-15

My name is Alexey Vinogradov, I am the author of this wonderful site. I am interested in computers, programs, programming. We have more than 20 years of experience and a lot of wasted nerves :)

Comments (225)
In contact with

Minsk Repairman

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer
- Answer
  
  Answer

BRedScorpius

Answer

aleksandrzdor

Answer

Elena Malysheva

Answer
- Alexey Vinogradov
  
  Answer

Dmitriy

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Answer

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Leonid

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Leonid

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Sergey

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer
- Sergey
  
  Answer
  - Alexey Vinogradov
    
    Answer

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Stanislav

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Vladislav

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Alexander

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Alexander

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Igor Novozhilov

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer
- Answer
  - Alexey Vinogradov
    
    Answer

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Alexander S.

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Alexander S.

Answer
- Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Answer

Alexander S.

Answer

Alexander S.

Answer

Alexander S.

Answer

Vyacheslav

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Dmitriy

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Alexander S.

Answer

Konstantin

Answer

Alexander S.

Answer

Vitaly

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Alexander S.

Answer

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Alexander S.

Answer

Gregory

Answer

Dmitriy

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Alexander S.

Answer

Answer

Alexander S.

Answer
- Answer

Alexander S.

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Alexander S.

Answer

Leonid

Answer

Alexander S.

Answer
- Leonid
  
  Answer

Answer

Vladimir

Answer

Alexander S.

Answer

Answer

Seryoga

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Alexander S.

Answer

Answer

Alexander S.

Answer
- Answer

Leonid

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Alexander S.

Answer

Natalia

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Andrey

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer

Alexander S.

Answer

Andrey

Answer

Alexey Vinogradov

Answer
- Alexey Vinogradov
  
  Answer

Andrey

CPU. This is the component where a computer begins. It is the processor that determines what programs and games can be run on a PC and laptop. At the moment there are two manufacturers - AMD and Intel. These companies traditionally compete with each other. But for now the advantage is on the side of the blue brand. It’s just that it’s easy to get confused in the labeling of their processors. After all, even “stones” with a slight change in characteristics are positioned by the company as a breakthrough. So what should a poor user choose? Core i5 or i7? This question is quite complicated, since both types of processors are almost identical. Nevertheless, let's try to determine their distinctive features. Moreover, the price differs significantly.

A little about the company

Intel began its journey back in the 70s of the last century. Even then, it was producing i386-type processors. And even then the blue brand was competing with the red with might and main. Years have passed and... nothing has changed. However, to this day, Intel products are considered more productive and energy efficient than processors from AMD. But the “blues” are playing tricks with modifications. Prices may vary by hundreds of dollars and changes may be minor. And now many potential buyers are thinking about what to buy: i5 or i7? The price difference is significant. But changes in the design are not visible to the average user.

Nevertheless, both processors from Intel are highly popular. Most users simply do not understand the difference between these models and instinctively buy the more expensive product, hoping that it will be better. But things don't always work out this way. There is an opinion that Intel specialists (especially marketers) specifically created such a system of models in order to pump more money out of gullible consumers. And their marketing ploy was quite successful. It's time to figure out whether it's worth overpaying for phantom performance, or can you even save on a processor? So, Intel Core i5 vs i7.

Specifications

In the case of processors, it is the technical characteristics that you should pay special attention to. And for all the numbers. For it is in them that the difference between two almost identical “stones” lies hidden.

So, 2550K. This processor operates at a frequency of 3400 megahertz (in turbo mode), has 4 cores and boasts a 6 MB L3 cache. What does it mean? The performance of this processor is enough to solve all tasks, including modern games and working with video editors. A large third-level cache allows the processor to store more operations in memory, which has a positive effect on performance. So which is better - i5 or i7? We will answer this question later. For now, let's look at the main characteristics of the opponent.

The opponent is the Intel Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition. The processor has 6 cores, a clock frequency of 3300 megahertz and a third level cache of 12 megabytes. Productivity here is, of course, at the highest level. But if we take an unbiased look, we will see that there is no point in overpaying. Six cores are needed for complex calculations that the average user does not need. And the core operating frequency is even lower than the previous i5. This “stone” is interesting only because of its rather large L3 cache, which may be useful to the user. There aren't that many differences. And the price difference is about 400 US dollars. So the question arises: Core i5 or Core i7? But let's not rush yet. Let's look at other features of the "stones".

Integrated Graphics

Processors of the Core line include a graphics core, which is used in the absence of a discrete video card. Integrated graphics, of course, cannot replace a good graphics accelerator, but some processors have a fairly powerful adapter. And this cannot but rejoice. In this regard, the difference between i5 and i7 is noticeable to the naked eye. The Intel Core i5 2550K has an integrated graphics chip. It cannot boast of any particular performance. Moreover, video memory is limited to 650 megabytes. But there are decent core and memory bus frequencies. However, there is nothing to count on modern games. Here the i5 clearly loses.

Now let's move on to the Intel Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition. The Intel Iris Pro graphics accelerator can be found here. It is worth noting that this is exactly the adapter used by Apple in their MacBooks. This alone speaks volumes. this chip is unlimited (as long as there is enough RAM). The frequencies are comparable to discrete video adapters in the mid-price segment. In general, if you want to play some modern masterpiece, then this graphics chip will not lose face. In this regard, the superiority of the i7 is clearly visible. So which is better - i5 or i7? Let’s not rush to conclusions for now and consider some other features.

Overclocking options

Here, too, the superiority of the i7 is noticeable. The fact is that the Intel Core i5 2550K cannot be overclocked. The manufacturer did not provide such an option. The only thing that can be done is that it will give a small performance increase. But nothing more. So far it is noticeable that the latter wins the “battle” of Intel i5 vs i7, since it supports extreme overclocking. Processor frequencies can be significantly increased without any problems. But before that, it is recommended to install liquid cooling. Yes, the i7 wins. But the fact is that the average user does not need such subtleties. Integrated graphics are not required if you have a good discrete adapter. Overclocking is also unimportant for the average user. So all the advantages of the “seven” are clearly exaggerated.

Energy efficiency

But here is a confident victory for the “five”. As a less powerful processor, it features low power consumption. This means that heat transfer will be noticeably lower. Therefore, the user does not have to spend money on a cool cooling system. As for the "seven", here things are much worse. To power this processor you will need a good power supply. Also, not every fan can cope with heat dissipation. In terms of energy and money savings, the i5 is more attractive.

Almost always, under any publication that in one way or another touches on the performance of modern Intel processors, sooner or later several angry reader comments appear that progress in the development of Intel chips has long stalled and there is no point in switching from the “good old Core i7-2600K "to something new. In such remarks, most likely, there will be irritated mention of productivity gains at an intangible level of “no more than five percent per year”; about the low-quality internal thermal interface, which irreparably damaged modern Intel processors; or about the fact that in modern conditions buying processors with the same number of computing cores as several years ago is generally the lot of short-sighted amateurs, since they do not have the necessary reserves for the future.

There is no doubt that all such remarks are not without reason. However, it seems very likely that they are greatly exaggerating the existing problems. The 3DNews laboratory has been testing Intel processors in detail since 2000, and we cannot agree with the thesis that any kind of their development has come to an end, and what has been happening with the microprocessor giant in recent years can no longer be called anything other than stagnation. Yes, any drastic changes with Intel processors rarely occur, but nevertheless they continue to be systematically improved. Therefore, those Core i7 series chips that you can buy today are obviously better than the models offered several years ago.

Generation Core	Codename	Technical process	Development stage	Release time
2	Sandy Bridge	32 nm	So (Architecture)	I quarter 2011
3	IvyBridge	22 nm	Tick (Process)	II quarter 2012
4	Haswell	22 nm	So (Architecture)	II quarter 2013
5	Broadwell	14 nm	Tick (Process)	II quarter 2015
6	Skylake	14 nm	So (Architecture)	III quarter 2015
7	KabyLake	14+ nm	Optimization	I quarter 2017
8	CoffeeLake	14++ nm	Optimization	IV quarter 2017

Actually, this material is precisely a counterargument to arguments about the worthlessness of Intel’s chosen strategy for the gradual development of consumer CPUs. We decided to collect in one test the older Intel processors for mass platforms over the past seven years and see in practice how much the representatives of the Kaby Lake and Coffee Lake series have advanced relative to the “reference” Sandy Bridge, which over the years of hypothetical comparisons and mental contrasts have become in the minds of ordinary people a true icon of processor engineering.

⇡ What has changed in Intel processors from 2011 to the present

The starting point in the recent history of the development of Intel processors is considered to be microarchitecture SandyBridge. And this is not without reason. Despite the fact that the first generation of processors under the Core brand was released in 2008 based on the Nehalem microarchitecture, almost all the main features that are inherent in modern mass CPUs of the microprocessor giant came into use not then, but a couple of years later, when the next generation became widespread processor design, Sandy Bridge.

Now Intel has accustomed us to frankly leisurely progress in the development of microarchitecture, when innovations have become very few and they almost do not lead to an increase in the specific performance of processor cores. But just seven years ago the situation was radically different. In particular, the transition from Nehalem to Sandy Bridge was marked by a 15-20 percent increase in IPC (the number of instructions executed per clock), which was caused by a deep reworking of the logical design of the cores with an eye to increasing their efficiency.

Sandy Bridge laid down many principles that have not changed since then and have become standard for most processors today. For example, it was there that a separate zero-level cache appeared for decoded micro-operations, and a physical register file began to be used, which reduces energy costs when operating out-of-order instruction execution algorithms.

But perhaps the most important innovation was that Sandy Bridge was designed as a unified system-on-a-chip, designed simultaneously for all classes of applications: server, desktop and mobile. Most likely, public opinion placed him as the great-grandfather of modern Coffee Lake, and not some Nehalem and certainly not Penryn, precisely because of this feature. However, the total amount of all the alterations in the depths of the Sandy Bridge microarchitecture also turned out to be very significant. Ultimately, this design lost all the old kinship with the P6 (Pentium Pro) that had appeared here and there in all previous Intel processors.

Speaking about the general structure, one cannot help but recall that a full-fledged graphics core was built into the Sandy Bridge processor chip for the first time in the history of Intel CPUs. This block went inside the processor after the DDR3 memory controller, shared by the L3 cache and the PCI Express bus controller. To connect the computing cores and all other “extra-core” parts, Intel engineers introduced into Sandy Bridge a new scalable ring bus at that time, which is used to organize interaction between structural units in subsequent mass-produced CPUs to this day.

If we go down to the level of the Sandy Bridge microarchitecture, then one of its key features is support for the family of SIMD instructions, AVX, designed to work with 256-bit vectors. By now, such instructions have become firmly established and do not seem unusual, but their implementation in Sandy Bridge required the expansion of some computing actuators. Intel engineers strived to make working with 256-bit data as fast as working with vectors of smaller capacity. Therefore, along with the implementation of full-fledged 256-bit execution devices, it was also necessary to increase the speed of the processor and memory. Logical execution units designed for loading and storing data in Sandy Bridge received double the performance, in addition, the throughput of the first level cache when reading was symmetrically increased.

It is impossible not to mention the fundamental changes made in Sandy Bridge in the operation of the branch prediction block. Thanks to optimizations in the applied algorithms and increased buffer sizes, the Sandy Bridge architecture made it possible to reduce the percentage of incorrect branch predictions by almost half, which not only had a noticeable impact on performance, but also made it possible to further reduce the power consumption of this design.

Ultimately, from today’s perspective, Sandy Bridge processors could be called an exemplary embodiment of the “tock” phase in Intel’s “tick-tock” principle. Like their predecessors, these processors continued to be based on a 32-nm process technology, but the performance increase they offered was more than convincing. And it was fueled not only by the updated microarchitecture, but also by clock frequencies increased by 10-15 percent, as well as the introduction of a more aggressive version of Turbo Boost 2.0 technology. Taking all this into account, it is clear why many enthusiasts still remember Sandy Bridge with the warmest words.

The senior offering in the Core i7 family at the time of the release of the Sandy Bridge microarchitecture was the Core i7-2600K. This processor received a clock frequency of 3.3 GHz with the ability to auto-overclock at part load to 3.8 GHz. However, the 32-nm representatives of Sandy Bridge were distinguished not only by relatively high clock frequencies for that time, but also by good overclocking potential. Among the Core i7-2600K it was often possible to find specimens capable of operating at frequencies of 4.8-5.0 GHz, which was largely due to the use of a high-quality internal thermal interface - flux-free solder.

Nine months after the release of the Core i7-2600K, in October 2011, Intel updated the older offering in the lineup and offered a slightly accelerated Core i7-2700K model, the nominal frequency of which was increased to 3.5 GHz, and the maximum frequency in turbo mode was up to 3.9 GHz.

However, the life cycle of the Core i7-2700K turned out to be short - already in April 2012, Sandy Bridge was replaced by an updated design IvyBridge. Nothing special: Ivy Bridge belonged to the “tick” phase, that is, it represented a transfer of the old microarchitecture to new semiconductor rails. And in this regard, the progress was indeed serious - Ivy Bridge crystals were produced using a 22-nm process technology based on three-dimensional FinFET transistors, which were just coming into use at that time.

At the same time, the old Sandy Bridge microarchitecture at a low level remained practically untouched. Only a few cosmetic tweaks were made to speed up Ivy Bridge's division operations and slightly improve the efficiency of Hyper-Threading technology. True, along the way, the “non-nuclear” components were somewhat improved. The PCI Express controller gained compatibility with the third version of the protocol, and the memory controller increased its capabilities and began to support high-speed overclocking DDR3 memory. But in the end, the increase in specific productivity during the transition from Sandy Bridge to Ivy Bridge was no more than 3-5 percent.

The new technological process did not provide serious reasons for joy either. Unfortunately, the introduction of 22 nm standards did not allow for any fundamental increase in Ivy Bridge clock frequencies. The older version of the Core i7-3770K received a nominal frequency of 3.5 GHz with the ability to overclock in turbo mode to 3.9 GHz, that is, from the point of view of the frequency formula, it turned out to be no faster than the Core i7-2700K. Only energy efficiency has improved, but desktop users traditionally care little about this aspect.

All this, of course, can be attributed to the fact that no breakthroughs should occur at the “tick” stage, but in some ways Ivy Bridge turned out to be even worse than its predecessors. We're talking about acceleration. When introducing carriers of this design to the market, Intel decided to abandon the use of flux-free gallium soldering of the heat distribution cover to the semiconductor chip during the final assembly of processors. Starting with Ivy Bridge, banal thermal paste began to be used to organize the internal thermal interface, and this immediately hit the maximum achievable frequencies. Ivy Bridge has definitely become worse in terms of overclocking potential, and as a result, the transition from Sandy Bridge to Ivy Bridge has become one of the most controversial moments in the recent history of Intel consumer processors.

Therefore, for the next stage of evolution, Haswell, special hopes were placed. In this generation, belonging to the “so” phase, serious micro-architectural improvements were expected to appear, from which it was expected to be able to at least push forward stalled progress. And to some extent this happened. The fourth generation Core processors, which appeared in the summer of 2013, did acquire noticeable improvements in the internal structure.

The main thing: the theoretical power of Haswell actuators, expressed in the number of micro-operations executed per clock cycle, has increased by a third compared to previous CPUs. In the new microarchitecture, not only was the existing actuators rebalanced, but two additional execution ports appeared for integer operations, branch servicing and address generation. In addition, the microarchitecture gained compatibility with an expanded set of vector 256-bit instructions AVX2, which, thanks to three-operand FMA instructions, doubled the peak throughput of the architecture.

In addition to this, Intel engineers reviewed the capacity of internal buffers and, where necessary, increased them. The planner window has grown in size. In addition, the integer and real physical register files were enlarged, which improved the processor's ability to reorder the execution order of instructions. In addition to all this, the cache subsystem has also changed significantly. L1 and L2 caches in Haswell received a twice wider bus.

It would seem that the listed improvements should be enough to significantly increase the specific performance of the new microarchitecture. But no matter how it is. The problem with Haswell's design was that it left the front end of the execution pipeline unchanged and the x86 instruction decoder retained the same performance as before. That is, the maximum rate of decoding x86 code in microinstructions remained at the level of 4-5 commands per clock cycle. And as a result, when comparing Haswell and Ivy Bridge at the same frequency and with a load that does not use the new AVX2 instructions, the performance gain was only 5-10 percent.

The image of the Haswell microarchitecture was also spoiled by the first wave of processors released on its basis. Based on the same 22nm process technology as Ivy Bridge, the new products were unable to offer high frequencies. For example, the older Core i7-4770K again received a base frequency of 3.5 GHz and a maximum frequency in turbo mode of 3.9 GHz, that is, there has been no progress compared to previous generations of Core.

At the same time, with the introduction of the next technological process with 14-nm standards, Intel began to encounter various kinds of difficulties, so a year later, in the summer of 2014, not the next generation of Core processors was launched onto the market, but the second phase of Haswell, which received the code names Haswell Refresh, or, if we talk about flagship modifications, then Devil's Canyon. As part of this update, Intel was able to significantly increase the clock speeds of the 22nm CPU, which really breathed new life into them. As an example, we can cite the new senior Core i7-4790K processor, which at its nominal frequency reached 4.0 GHz and received a maximum frequency taking into account turbo mode at 4.4 GHz. It is surprising that such a half-GHz acceleration was achieved without any process reforms, but only through simple cosmetic changes in the processor power supply and by improving the thermal conductivity properties of the thermal paste used under the CPU cover.

However, even representatives of the Devil’s Canyon family could not become especially complained about proposals among enthusiasts. Compared to the results of Sandy Bridge, their overclocking could not be called outstanding; moreover, achieving high frequencies required complex “scalping” - removing the processor cover and then replacing the standard thermal interface with some material with better thermal conductivity.

Due to the difficulties that plagued Intel when transferring mass production to 14 nm standards, the performance of the next, fifth generation of Core processors Broadwell, it turned out very crumpled. The company could not decide for a long time whether it was worth releasing desktop processors with this design onto the market, since when attempting to manufacture large semiconductor crystals, the defect rate exceeded acceptable values. Ultimately, Broadwell quad-core processors intended for desktop computers did appear, but, firstly, this happened only in the summer of 2015 - with a nine-month delay relative to the originally planned date, and secondly, just two months after their announcement, Intel presented the design next generation, Skylake.

Nevertheless, from the point of view of microarchitecture development, Broadwell can hardly be called a secondary development. And even more than that, desktop processors of this generation used solutions that Intel had never resorted to before or since. The uniqueness of desktop Broadwells was determined by the fact that they were equipped with a powerful integrated graphics core Iris Pro at the GT3e level. And this means not only that the processors of this family had the most powerful integrated video core at that time, but also that they were equipped with an additional 22-nm Crystall Well crystal, which is a fourth-level cache memory based on eDRAM.

The point of adding a separate fast integrated memory chip to the processor is quite obvious and is determined by the needs of a high-performance integrated graphics core in a frame buffer with low latency and high bandwidth. However, the eDRAM memory installed in Broadwell was architecturally designed specifically as a victim cache, and it could also be used by the CPU cores. As a result, Broadwell desktops have become the only mass-produced processors of their kind with 128 MB of L4 cache. True, the volume of the L3 cache located in the processor chip, which was reduced from 8 to 6 MB, suffered somewhat.

Some improvements have also been incorporated into the basic microarchitecture. Even though Broadwell was in the tick phase, the rework affected the front end of the execution pipeline. The window of the out-of-order command execution scheduler was enlarged, the volume of the second-level associative address translation table increased by one and a half times, and, in addition, the entire translation scheme acquired a second miss handler, which made it possible to process two address translation operations in parallel. In total, all the innovations have increased the efficiency of out-of-order execution of commands and prediction of complex code branches. Along the way, the mechanisms for performing multiplication operations were improved, which in Broadwell began to be processed at a significantly faster pace. As a result of all this, Intel was even able to claim that microarchitecture improvements increased the specific performance of Broadwell compared to Haswell by about five percent.

But despite all this, it was impossible to talk about any significant advantage of the first desktop 14-nm processors. Both the fourth level cache and microarchitectural changes only tried to compensate for Broadwell's main flaw - low clock speeds. Due to problems with the technological process, the base frequency of the senior representative of the family, Core i7-5775C, was set at only 3.3 GHz, and the frequency in turbo mode did not exceed 3.7 GHz, which turned out to be worse than the characteristics of Devil’s Canyon by as much as 700 MHz.

A similar story happened with overclocking. The maximum frequencies to which it was possible to heat up Broadwell desktops without using advanced cooling methods were in the region of 4.1-4.2 GHz. Therefore, it is not surprising that consumers were skeptical about the Broadwell release, and processors of this family remained a strange niche solution for those who were interested in a powerful integrated graphics core. The first full-fledged 14-nm chip for desktop computers, which was able to attract the attention of wide layers of users, was only the next project of the microprocessor giant - Skylake.

Skylake, like the previous generation processors, was produced using a 14 nm process technology. However, here Intel has already been able to achieve normal clock speeds and overclocking: the older desktop version of Skylake, Core i7-6700K, received a nominal frequency of 4.0 GHz and auto-overclocking in turbo mode to 4.2 GHz. These are slightly lower values when compared to Devil's Canyon, but the newer processors were definitely faster than their predecessors. The fact is that Skylake is “so” in Intel nomenclature, which means significant changes in the microarchitecture.

And they really are. At first glance, not many improvements were made in the Skylake design, but all of them were targeted and made it possible to eliminate existing weak points in the microarchitecture. In short, Skylake received larger internal buffers for deeper out-of-order execution of instructions and higher cache memory bandwidth. Improvements affected the branch prediction unit and the input part of the execution pipeline. The execution rate of division instructions was also increased, and the execution mechanisms for addition, multiplication and FMA instructions were rebalanced. To top it off, the developers have worked to improve the efficiency of Hyper-Threading technology. In total, this allowed us to achieve approximately a 10% improvement in performance per clock compared to previous generations of processors.

In general, Skylake can be characterized as a fairly deep optimization of the original Core architecture, so that there are no bottlenecks in the processor design. On the one hand, by increasing the decoder power (from 4 to 5 microoperations per clock) and the speed of the microoperations cache (from 4 to 6 microoperations per clock), the rate of instruction decoding has significantly increased. On the other hand, the efficiency of processing the resulting micro-operations has increased, which was facilitated by the deepening of out-of-order execution algorithms and the redistribution of the capabilities of execution ports, along with a serious revision of the execution rate of a number of regular, SSE and AVX commands.

For example, Haswell and Broadwell each had two ports for performing multiplications and FMA operations on real numbers, but only one port for additions, which did not correspond well to real program code. In Skylake, this imbalance was eliminated and additions began to be performed on two ports. In addition, the number of ports capable of working with integer vector instructions has increased from two to three. Ultimately, all this led to the fact that for almost any type of operation in Skylake there are always several alternative ports. This means that the microarchitecture has finally successfully eliminated almost all possible causes of pipeline downtime.

Noticeable changes also affected the caching subsystem: the bandwidth of the second and third level cache memory was increased. In addition, the associativity of the second level cache was reduced, which ultimately made it possible to improve its efficiency and reduce the penalty when processing misses.

Significant changes have also occurred at a higher level. Thus, in Skylake, the throughput of the ring bus, which connects all processor units, has doubled. In addition, the CPU of this generation has a new memory controller, which is compatible with DDR4 SDRAM. And in addition to this, a new DMI 3.0 bus with twice the bandwidth was used to connect the processor to the chipset, which made it possible to implement high-speed PCI Express 3.0 lines also through the chipset.

However, like all previous versions of the Core architecture, Skylake was another variation on the original design. This means that in the sixth generation of the Core microarchitecture, Intel developers continued to adhere to the tactics of gradually introducing improvements at each development cycle. Overall, this is an underwhelming approach that doesn't allow you to see any significant changes in performance right away when comparing CPUs from neighboring generations. But when upgrading old systems, it’s not difficult to notice a noticeable increase in productivity. For example, Intel itself willingly compared Skylake with Ivy Bridge, demonstrating that processor performance has increased by more than 30 percent in three years.

And in fact, this was quite serious progress, because then everything became much worse. After Skylake, any improvement in the specific performance of processor cores stopped completely. Those processors that are currently on the market still continue to use the Skylake microarchitectural design, despite the fact that almost three years have passed since its introduction in desktop processors. The unexpected downtime occurred because Intel was unable to cope with the implementation of the next version of the semiconductor process with 10nm standards. As a result, the whole “tick-tock” principle fell apart, forcing the microprocessor giant to somehow get out and engage in repeated re-release of old products under new names.

Processors generation KabyLake, which appeared on the market at the very beginning of 2017, became the first and very striking example of Intel’s attempts to sell the same Skylake to customers for the second time. The close family ties between the two generations of processors were not particularly hidden. Intel honestly said that Kaby Lake is no longer a “tick” or “so”, but a simple optimization of the previous design. At the same time, the word “optimization” meant certain improvements in the structure of 14-nm transistors, which opened up the possibility of increasing clock frequencies without changing the thermal envelope. A special term “14+ nm” was even coined for the modified technical process. Thanks to this production technology, the senior mainstream desktop processor Kaby Lake, called Core i7-7700K, was able to offer users a nominal frequency of 4.2 GHz and a turbo frequency of 4.5 GHz.

Thus, the increase in Kaby Lake frequencies compared to the original Skylake was approximately 5 percent, and that was all, which, frankly, cast doubt on the legitimacy of classifying Kaby Lake as the next generation Core. Until this point, each subsequent generation of processors, no matter whether it belonged to the “tick” or “tock” phase, provided at least some increase in the IPC indicator. Meanwhile, in Kaby Lake there were no microarchitectural improvements at all, so it would be more logical to consider these processors simply as the second Skylake stepping.

However, the new version of the 14-nm process technology was still able to show itself in some positive ways: the overclocking potential of Kaby Lake compared to Skylake increased by about 200-300 MHz, thanks to which the processors of this series were quite warmly received by enthusiasts. True, Intel continued to use thermal paste under the processor cover instead of solder, so scalping was necessary to fully overclock Kaby Lake.

Intel also failed to cope with the commissioning of 10-nm technology by the beginning of this year. Therefore, at the end of last year, another type of processors built on the same Skylake microarchitecture was introduced to the market - CoffeeLake. But talking about Coffee Lake as the third guise of Skylake is not entirely correct. Last year was a period of radical paradigm shift in the processor market. AMD returned to the “big game”, which was able to break established traditions and create demand for mass processors with more than four cores. Suddenly, Intel found itself playing catch-up, and the release of Coffee Lake was not so much an attempt to fill the pause until the long-awaited arrival of 10nm Core processors, but rather a reaction to the release of six- and eight-core AMD Ryzen processors.

As a result, Coffee Lake processors received an important structural difference from their predecessors: the number of cores in them was increased to six, which happened for the first time on a mass Intel platform. However, no changes were reintroduced at the microarchitecture level: Coffee Lake is essentially a six-core Skylake, assembled on the basis of exactly the same internal design of computing cores, which are equipped with an L3 cache increased to 12 MB (according to the standard principle of 2 MB per core ) and are united by the usual ring bus.

However, despite the fact that we so easily allow ourselves to say “nothing new” about Coffee Lake, it is not entirely fair to say about the complete absence of any changes. Although nothing has changed in the microarchitecture, Intel specialists had to spend a lot of effort to ensure that six-core processors could fit into a standard desktop platform. And the result was quite convincing: the six-core processors remained true to the usual thermal package and, moreover, did not slow down at all in terms of clock frequencies.

In particular, the senior representative of the Coffee Lake generation, Core i7-8700K, received a base frequency of 3.7 GHz, and in turbo mode it can accelerate to 4.7 GHz. At the same time, the overclocking potential of Coffee Lake, despite its more massive semiconductor crystal, turned out to be even better than that of all its predecessors. Core i7-8700K are often taken by their ordinary owners to reach the five-gigahertz mark, and such overclocking can be real even without scalping and replacing the internal thermal interface. And this means that Coffee Lake, although extensive, is a significant step forward.

All this became possible solely thanks to another improvement in the 14nm process technology. In the fourth year of using it for mass production of desktop chips, Intel was able to achieve truly impressive results. The introduced third version of the 14-nm standard (“14++ nm” in the manufacturer’s designations) and the re-arrangement of the semiconductor crystal made it possible to significantly improve performance per watt spent and increase the total computing power. With the introduction of six-cores, Intel was perhaps able to take an even more significant step forward than any of the previous microarchitecture improvements. And today Coffee Lake looks like a very tempting option for upgrading older systems based on previous Core microarchitecture media.

Codename	Technical process	Number of cores	GPU	L3 cache, MB	Number of transistors, billion	Crystal area, mm 2
Sandy Bridge	32 nm	4	GT2	8	1,16	216
Ivy Bridge	22 nm	4	GT2	8	1,2	160
Haswell	22 nm	4	GT2	8	1,4	177
Broadwell	14 nm	4	GT3e	6	N/A	~145 + 77 (eDRAM)
Skylake	14 nm	4	GT2	8	N/A	122
Kaby Lake	14+ nm	4	GT2	8	N/A	126
Coffee Lake	14++ nm	6	GT2	12	N/A	150

⇡ Processors and platforms: specifications

To compare the seven latest generations of Core i7, we took the older representatives in the respective series - one from each design. The main characteristics of these processors are shown in the following table.

	Core i7-2700K	Core i7-3770K	Core i7-4790K	Core i7-5775C	Core i7-6700K	Core i7-7700K	Core i7-8700K
Codename	Sandy Bridge	Ivy Bridge	Haswell (Devil's Canyon)	Broadwell	Skylake	Kaby Lake	Coffee Lake
Production technology, nm	32	22	22	14	14	14+	14++
release date	23.10.2011	29.04.2012	2.06.2014	2.06.2015	5.08.2015	3.01.2017	5.10.2017
Cores/threads	4/8	4/8	4/8	4/8	4/8	4/8	6/12
Base frequency, GHz	3,5	3,5	4,0	3,3	4,0	4,2	3,7
Turbo Boost frequency, GHz	3,9	3,9	4,4	3,7	4,2	4,5	4,7
L3 cache, MB	8	8	8	6 (+128 MB eDRAM)	8	8	12
Memory support	DDR3-1333	DDR3-1600	DDR3-1600	DDR3L-1600	DDR4-2133	DDR4-2400	DDR4-2666
Instruction Set Extensions	AVX	AVX	AVX2	AVX2	AVX2	AVX2	AVX2
Integrated Graphics	HD 3000 (12 EU)	HD 4000 (16 EU)	HD 4600 (20 EU)	Iris Pro 6200 (48 EU)	HD 530 (24 EU)	HD 630 (24 EU)	UHD 630 (24 EU)
Max. graphics core frequency, GHz	1,35	1,15	1,25	1,15	1,15	1,15	1,2
PCI Express version	2.0	3.0	3.0	3.0	3.0	3.0	3.0
PCI Express lanes	16	16	16	16	16	16	16
TDP, W	95	77	88	65	91	91	95
Socket	LGA1155	LGA1155	LGA1150	LGA1150	LGA1151	LGA1151	LGA1151v2
Official price	$332	$332	$339	$366	$339	$339	$359

It is curious that in the seven years since the release of Sandy Bridge, Intel has not been able to significantly increase clock speeds. Despite the fact that the technological production process has changed twice and the microarchitecture has been seriously optimized twice, today's Core i7 has made almost no progress in its operating frequency. The latest Core i7-8700K has a nominal frequency of 3.7 GHz, which is only 6 percent higher than the frequency of the Core i7-2700K released in 2011.

However, such a comparison is not entirely correct, because Coffee Lake has one and a half times more computing cores. If we focus on the quad-core Core i7-7700K, then the increase in frequency still looks more convincing: this processor has accelerated relative to the 32-nm Core i7-2700K by a fairly significant 20 percent in megahertz terms. Although this can still hardly be called an impressive increase: in absolute terms, this is converted into an increase of 100 MHz per year.

There are no breakthroughs in other formal characteristics. Intel continues to provide all its processors with an individual L2 cache of 256 KB per core, as well as a common L3 cache for all cores, the size of which is determined at the rate of 2 MB per core. In other words, the main factor in which the greatest progress has occurred is the number of computing cores. The development of Core began with four-core CPUs and came to six-core ones. Moreover, it is obvious that this is not the end and in the near future we will see eight-core variants of Coffee Lake (or Whiskey Lake).

However, as is easy to see, Intel’s pricing policy has remained almost unchanged for seven years. Even the six-core Coffee Lake has risen in price by only six percent compared to previous quad-core flagships. However, other older processors of the Core i7 class for the mass platform have always cost consumers about $330-340.

It is curious that the biggest changes have occurred not even with the processors themselves, but with their support for RAM. The bandwidth of dual-channel SDRAM has doubled since the release of Sandy Bridge until today: from 21.3 to 41.6 GB/s. And this is another important circumstance that determines the advantage of modern systems compatible with high-speed DDR4 memory.

And in general, all these years, along with the processors, the rest of the platform has evolved. If we talk about the main milestones in the development of the platform, then, in addition to the increase in the speed of compatible memory, I would also like to note the appearance of support for the PCI Express 3.0 graphical interface. It seems that high-speed memory and a fast graphics bus, along with progress in processor frequencies and architectures, are significant reasons why modern systems have become better and faster than past ones. Support for DDR4 SDRAM appeared in Skylake, and the transfer of the PCI Express processor bus to the third version of the protocol occurred in Ivy Bridge.

In addition, the system logic sets accompanying processors have received noticeable development. Indeed, today's Intel chipsets of the three hundredth series can offer much more interesting capabilities in comparison with the Intel Z68 and Z77, which were used in LGA1155 motherboards for Sandy Bridge generation processors. This is easy to see from the following table, in which we have summarized the characteristics of Intel's flagship chipsets for the mass platform.

	P67/Z68	Z77	Z87	Z97	Z170	Z270	Z370
CPU compatibility	Sandy Bridge Ivy Bridge		Haswell	Haswell Broadwell	Skylake Kaby Lake		Coffee Lake
Interface	DMI 2.0 (2 GB/s)				DMI 3.0 (3.93 GB/s)
PCI Express standard	2.0				3.0
PCI Express lanes	8				20	24
PCIe M.2 support	No			Eat	Yes, up to 3 devices
PCI support	Eat	No
SATA 6 Gb/s	2		6
SATA 3 Gb/s	4		0
USB 3.1 Gen2	0
USB 3.0	0	4	6		10
USB 2.0	14	10	8		4

Modern logic sets have significantly improved the ability to connect high-speed storage media. The most important thing: thanks to the transition of chipsets to the PCI Express 3.0 bus, today in high-performance assemblies you can use high-speed NVMe drives, which, even compared to SATA SSDs, can offer noticeably better responsiveness and higher read and write speeds. And this alone can become a compelling argument in favor of modernization.

In addition, modern system logic sets provide much richer possibilities for connecting additional devices. And we’re not just talking about a significant increase in the number of PCI Express lanes, which ensures the presence of several additional PCIe slots on boards, replacing conventional PCI. Along the way, today's chipsets also have native support for USB 3.0 ports, and many modern motherboards are also equipped with USB 3.1 Gen2 ports.

Choosing a processor is one of the most important decisions affecting the performance of a computer or laptop, so you should at least know what to expect from it

When choosing, everyone wants to get the best. There are not many tasks here. Usually they ask which is better: amd manufacturer or intel manufacturer, which generation, which line and which manufacturer.

Regarding which processor is better amd or intel, then everyone is leaning towards intel, and they are correspondingly more expensive.

Usually in searches they rush between intel core2 duo, pentium, celeron, atom, i3, i5, i7, but if you choose, for example, for games, then it is not a fact that intel core i5 will be better than i3, since there are many of both.

Choosing the wrong computing device can lead to deep feelings of dissatisfaction, for example, when you are a gamer and accidentally bought a model strictly for the office.

Unfortunately, this will not pass painlessly, since the insight into change comes too late.

There are significant differences among the systems installed in desktop PCs, making it difficult to make a quick decision.

The number of cores, confusing symbols, Turbo mode, multipliers - such a flow of information leaves most buyers in a stupor.

They cannot understand what is what and rely on the experience of retailers, who are not always competent in these matters, but are well versed in marketing.

How to choose the best Intel processor yourself

Many sites publish comparisons of processors, although such publications are usually aimed at advanced readers, showering them with confusing analyzes that mean nothing to ordinary users.

If you don't have the slightest idea about computer components, then you'd better sit in front of the monitor for a while now, rather than rely on someone else's opinions, to master the basics, so to speak.

Contrary to appearances, choosing the "best processor" for your computer is easier than you might think, just a little technical knowledge to navigate the categories.

Let's start with a simplified map - Intel processors have a very diverse offer, which is divided into several segments, starting from budget.

Of course, faster models are more expensive and offer better performance and additional technology.

Detailed characteristics of each line will be found on this page below, which will facilitate further understanding of the description.

Which is the best Intel Celeron processor?

Celeron is the cheapest dual-core processor for office applications and computers with basic functionality, that is: for text editors, simple browser games, surfing the Internet or watching movies.

The Pentium is dual-core and noticeably faster than the Celeron, but it's still not primarily designed for complex tasks. Often chosen by players with modest requirements.

The Core i3 is a very versatile device for work and play, has two cores and Hyper Threading.

Core i5 - has four cores and Turbo Boost technology, supports all typical applications, including semi-professional ones. Designed, one might say, for games.

Intel K-series / X - processors with an unlocked multiplier for overclockers and unlimited power, which, if necessary, can independently increase their clock frequency to higher than standard settings.

Intel T/S series - both types of processors are characterized by a lower TDP, which emit less heat. Their performance is lower than conventional models, but at the same time the demand for electricity is reduced.

To choose the best processor, determine your needs

First, you need to answer the basic question - what will be mainly used on the computer?

Only then can you look for a suitable solution. If you are in an area of interest that does not require PC games and powerful software, a low to mid range processor is sufficient for you.

The situation is completely different for entertainment lovers who use a multi-threaded application.

Here you will definitely need a modern block of the best work. For processors that can handle Battlefield 4, Crysis 3 and Watch Dogs well, and you want the latest releases of Grand Theft Auto V, Far Cry 4 and The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, the bar certainly needs to be raised.

The processor is the most important because it is responsible for part of the calculation, no other system does it.

A weak processor combined with a fast graphics card will limit the performance of the entire computer. Let's see what features the different series offer.

Hyper Threading is a technology for doubling the number of supported threads in order to increase the efficiency of parallel computing, that is: a dual-core processor can perform four operations simultaneously. It is available in Core i3 and Core i7 models.

Turbo Boost - Automatically increases the processor clock speed to the value specified by the manufacturer, providing a safe way to free up performance. You don't need to configure anything. It is available in Core i5 and Core i7.

Intel Quick Sync is a technology that uses special mechanisms to create and process multimedia, making their conversion faster and easier. Supported by all fourth generation Celeron, Pentium, Core i3, Core i5 and Core i7.

Layout - All Intel Core socket LGA 1150 based on the Haswell architecture have a built-in Intel HD graphics chip, so no external graphics card is required to run the computer. The performance of such chips varies greatly.

Instructions are a set of programmed commands to speed up the execution of certain operations that have a very significant impact on processor performance.

The fourth generation Core series supports a variety of instructions depending on the model, and their number increases with higher position in the product hierarchy.

Load “to the maximum” - insurance processor

An interesting service that probably few people have heard of is an extended warranty on Intel processors, which covers emergency situations due to user failure.

The fact is that processors “die” extremely rarely, however, incorrect settings can cause overheating.

If the product performs normally, use the normal warranty. The problem may be in the cases mentioned above, which is not included in the standard contract.

In other words, Extended Service provides a brand new warranty for replacement if damaged.

The cost of such protection varies greatly depending on the model, starting at $10 and rising to $35.

All action is aimed primarily at overclockers, various enthusiastic experimenters and covers only blocks with an unlocked multiplier (K or X versions).

Which is the best Intel Celeron processor?

For desktop computers, the cheapest dual-core Celeron processors use the modern, energy-efficient Haswell architecture, thereby delivering good performance in mainstream applications.

Working with spreadsheets, documents, tests, surfing the web or watching movies will be no problem with the Celeron.

It's important to note that the integrated Intel HD graphics chip eliminates the need for an external graphics card, lowering the cost of your PC if you're interested in gaming.

Celeron G1840T - 2500 MHz ->
Celeron G1840 - 2800 MHz ->
Celeron G1850 - 2900 MHz -> two cores / two threads / Intel HD.

For example, the Celeron G1840 build is suitable for creating a small media center connected to a TV or a home file server, drawing a minimal amount of power so they can be cooled passively.

Which is the best Intel Pentium processor?

Like Celeron processors, Pentium dual-core processors are aimed at users with modest requirements who need a PC mainly for simple tasks.

Their advantages over their weaker brothers are higher clock speeds, but the price is still low.

Although the manufacturer did not create them for entertainment, i.e. technically advanced games, in combination with an external video card, have proven themselves well in games that do not use more than two cores.

Unfortunately, people who are looking to the future should consider buying something sooner. The Pentium line includes the following models:

Pentium G3240T - 2700 MHz -> 2 cores / 2 threads / Intel HD.
Pentium G3440T - 2800 MHz -> 2 cores / 2 threads / Intel HD.
Pentium G3240 - 3200 MHz -> 2 cores / 2 threads / Intel HD.
Pentium G3258 - 3200 MHz -> 2 cores / 2 threads / Intel HD.
Pentium G3440 - 3300 MHz -> 2 cores / 2 threads / Intel HD.
Pentium G3450 - 3400 MHz -> 2 cores / 2 threads / Intel HD.

Pentiums are inexpensive - the price depends on the configuration. Since they have Intel HD integrated, they can work successfully without an external video card.

These solutions are admittedly weak, but make it easy to display your desktop, watch a movie, or play a simple game.

The newest Pentium celebrated its twentieth birthday, which the manufacturer celebrated with the release of a limited G3258 processor that allows overclocking. This is an interesting choice for budget-conscious enthusiasts.

Which is the best Intel Core i3 processor?

The Core i3 is definitely in a higher league than the Celeron and Pentium processors. It supports Hyper Threading technologies, doubling the number of supported threads and increasing parallel computing efficiency.

In this case, the dual-core processor can perform up to four operations simultaneously. But here you must clearly understand that such a function must be supported by the operating system and the application being launched.

Thus, the advantage of Hyper Threading may not always work, but in recent games it is immediately noticeable. The series includes the following models:

i3-4150T – 3000 MHz ->
i3-4350T – 3100 MHz ->
i3-4150 - 3500 MHz -> two cores / 4 threads / Intel 4400 HD.
i3-4350 - 3600 MHz -> two cores / 4 threads / Intel 4600 HD.
i3-4360 - 3700 MHz -> two cores / 4 threads / Intel 4600 HD.

Core i3 fourth generation which can be used for various tasks. While players recommend investing in a Core i5 Quad, Core i3s also provide decent liquidity, especially when paired with NVIDIA GeForce graphics whose drivers enable Hyper Threading.

In addition, Core i3 processors have their own integrated Intel HD 4000 cards, which are much faster than those found in Celeron and Pentium, allowing you to run more modern games.

Which is the best Intel Core i5 processor?

Core i5 should meet the expectations of the vast majority of computer users who are looking for efficient and future-proof solutions.

First, they have four cores (without Hyper Threading), which has enough processing power for every type of application.

Secondly, they are equipped with Turbo Boost technology, automatically increasing their timing. Overall this makes for a very powerful combination, especially with the Intel Haswell architecture.

Quad cores are slowly becoming the standard these days, so you should consider buying one, especially if you want to play Battlefied 4, Grand Theft Auto V, or The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt. The series includes the following models:

i5-4460T - 1900 MHz -> 2700 MHz Turbo / 4 cores / 4 threads / Intel 4600 HD.
i5-4590T - 2000 MHz -> 3000 MHz Turbo / 4 cores / 4 threads / Intel 4600 HD.
i5-4690T - 2500 MHz -> 3500 MHz Turbo / 4 cores / 4 threads / Intel 4600 HD.
i5-4460S – 2900 MHz ->
i5-4590S – 3000 MHz ->
i5-4690S – 3200 MHz ->
i5-4460 - 3200 MHz -> 3400 MHz Turbo / 4 cores / 4 threads / Intel 4600 HD.
i5-4590 - 3300 MHz -> 3700 MHz Turbo / 4 cores / 4 threads / Intel 4600 HD.
i5-4690 - 3500 MHz -> 3900 MHz Turbo / 4 cores / 4 threads / Intel 4600 HD.

Core i5 can be equipped with a dedicated graphics card, which will allow you to play comfortably. But like the rest of Intel's fourth-generation processors, the Core i5 has an integrated graphics chip that allows it to handle images on its own.

Such devices do not require additional investment in other components. The original cooling system is quite enough for them, as well as mid-level power supply and the motherboard.

Although the price of the Core i5 is noticeably higher than the Core i3, in the long run such a purchase will be worth it. A good processor, after all, doesn't change too often.

Which is the best Intel Core i7 processor?

The Core i7 is absolutely the top shelf offering from Intel and is designed for demanding gamers and professionals, combining all the positive features of other models in one system.

The first is four cores and support for Hyper Threading, doubling the number of supported threads in parallel, that is: a quad-core processor can perform up to eight operations simultaneously.

Of course, this function must be supported by the operating system, as well as the application being launched. The second thing is the Turbo Boost mode, which automatically increases the clock speed to very high values, reaching up to 4400 MHz, providing owners with uncompromising performance. The series includes models:

i7-4785T -> 2200 MHz - 3200 MHz Turbo / 4 cores / 8 threads / Intel 4600 HD.
i7-4790T -> 2700 MHz - 3900 MHz Turbo / 4 cores / 8 threads / Intel 4600 HD.
i7-4790S -> 3200 MHz - 4000 MHz Turbo / 4 cores / 8 threads / Intel 4600 HD.
i7-4790 -> 3600 MHz - 4000 MHz Turbo / 4 cores / 8 threads / Intel 4600 HD.

Until recently, the Core i7 required specialized software to be able to take advantage of Hyper Threading.

Nowadays, more and more games are starting to use Hyper Threading, such as Crysis 3.

Core i7 processors have integrated graphics and are among the fastest among all models designed for the desktop market.

Which is the best processor from Intel?

A separate category of Core i5 and i7 LGA 1150 core socket models with the letter K in the name (with the exception of Core i7 Extreme series models, intended for absolute performance enthusiasts) will provide free overclocking using a multiplier.

Despite the fact that the Pentium G3258, released twenty years ago, offers identical functionality, it certainly belongs to the lower segment of the market.

So let's focus on these two. What benefits will K processors bring?

When you find that your computer is not powerful enough, you can manually increase or free up unused processing power.

Conventional models do not allow such operations to be performed in any respect, and the gains can reach several hundred megahertz, increasing overall productivity by tens of percent. The series includes:

i5-4690K -> 3500 MHz - 3900 MHz Turbo / 4 cores - 4 threads / Intel 4600 HD.
i7-4790K -> 4000 MHz - 4400 MHz Turbo / 4 cores / 8 threads / Intel 4600 HD.

You'll have to pay a little extra for the privilege of having an unlocked processor, but you'll be gaming at the highest settings, so consider buying at least a core i5-4690K.

Don't worry - I'll soon explain how to safely perform these activities. Only if you are very afraid of damage to the processor, you can take advantage of an extended warranty that covers accidents, for example, when it burns out due to too high supply voltages.

A good game is certainly worth it, and in the future gaming loads will only increase - don’t doubt it, but now you know which is the best processor and which generation is better to choose: intel i5 or i7, celeron or intel pentium, intel or mediatek, pentium or intel, mediatek or intel atom. Good luck.