Performance & price chart for Binned CPUs (May 2018)

voidshatter · 29 May 2018 at 07:16

Clock and price data were grabbed from a well known retailer selling binned CPUs.

Note that the 8600K is the only one here without hyper-threading so it's approximated as a quad-core.

sideways14a · 29 May 2018 at 08:09

Wonder what threadripper would do to that chart.
As expected, very strong on the AMD processors at the bottom.

bru · 29 May 2018 at 13:08

The 8600k being listed as a 4 core, with an excuse of it doesn't have hyperthreading, when none of the others have hyperthreading taken into account kinda make the entire chart useless, unfortunately. :confused:

AiiR · 29 May 2018 at 13:27

I find binned CPUs a bit of a pointless venture. A good percentage of retail samples will hit these speeds, albeit they may require fairly high voltage. you

eddiew · 29 May 2018 at 13:31

Yer, the 8600k is being badly underrated imho. HT is not worth half a core, more like 20-25% tops. It should be ranked as a 5 core unit :> But even then it wouldn't be a good comparison.

That said, those 8700k 5.0s are remarkably reasonable... I was tempted by one from OCUK but the £550 price tag turned of me off again. From what I've read, the 4.9s are the dog chips, and more will do 5.0 than not...

voidshatter · 29 May 2018 at 13:41

eddiew said:
Yer, the 8600k is being badly underrated imho. HT is not worth half a core, more like 20-25% tops. It should be ranked as a 5 core unit :>

Regarding 8600K as a quad-core equivalence, I took reference to comparisons like these:

4K8KW10 · 29 May 2018 at 13:44

sideways14a said:
Wonder what threadripper would do to that chart.

Will top it?!

eddiew · 29 May 2018 at 13:44

Those are done at stock speeds though, where the 8600k is scoring 5% better at 14% lower clocks. Equalise the clocks and it's going to be 19% (at least) faster. Which is almost the 5th core

voidshatter · 29 May 2018 at 13:45

bru said:
The 8600k being listed as a 4 core, with an excuse of it doesn't have hyperthreading, when none of the others have hyperthreading taken into account kinda make the entire chart useless, unfortunately.

Even if you don't agree that the 8600K has almost identical benchmark numbers as the 7700K does (as shown at #6 of this thread), you can use your finger to block your eyes from seeing the four rows of the 8600K, making the 29 remaining rows of the chart useful

eddiew · 29 May 2018 at 13:47

You win that point ^^^^

Personally I can't see why anyone would buy a binned, delidded, not-top-of-the-range chip in the first place...

voidshatter · 29 May 2018 at 13:50

eddiew said:
Those are done at stock speeds though, where the 8600k is scoring 5% better at 14% lower clocks. Equalise the clocks and it's going to be 19% (at least) faster. Which is almost the 5th core

Stock:
7700K: 4.5GHz singe and 4.4GHz quad
8600K: 4.3GHz single and 4.1GHz hex

It's just an error margin within 5%.

sideways14a · 29 May 2018 at 13:54

4K8KW10 said:
Will top it?!

We for outright performance it will be near the top but that chart really is all about performance/cost - where the AMD chip excel... TR would be very high but i dont think it would take the 2600 which seems to be the best.
Recon the top TR will beat the 7980xe price/performance ratio by a long way.

bru · 29 May 2018 at 22:22

voidshatter said:
Even if you don't agree that the 8600K has almost identical benchmark numbers as the 7700K does (as shown at #6 of this thread), you can use your finger to block your eyes from seeing the four rows of the 8600K, making the 29 remaining rows of the chart useful

Where did the chart come from? Link?
Or did you create it yourself?
What do the colours represent?

We need a bit more info to see if it has any use.

voidshatter · 30 May 2018 at 04:55

bru said:
What do the colours represent?

We need a bit more info to see if it has any use.

No no, it's clear that it's of no use to you xD

Troezar · 30 May 2018 at 05:44

bru said:
Where did the chart come from? Link?
Or did you create it yourself?
What do the colours represent?

We need a bit more info to see if it has any use.

It's from a well known US site. The colours represent what you would expect green is good red is not so good. The darker the colour the better or worse they are i.e. the 7980 XE is very strong multithreaded but poor value as its cost is high.

sideways14a · 30 May 2018 at 10:48

It does show some interesting, but well known, data.
Intel has some very high speed cpus at the top but they are also very poor VFM as they cost a fortune, meanwhile there more modestly priced stuff lower down doesnt have the grunt to match the cost being asked for.
AMD has very good priced cpus at the bottom with very good performance for there cost so earn a greener colored box and a better cost to performance ratio figure.

However as threadripper is MIA its not complete as that would put the TR chips way into the green with multicore performance (like the top intels) and keep a very high cost-performance ratio like the normal AM4 ryzens.

Martini1991 · 30 May 2018 at 10:52

bru said:
The 8600k being listed as a 4 core, with an excuse of it doesn't have hyperthreading, when none of the others have hyperthreading taken into account kinda make the entire chart useless, unfortunately.

Especially when it's a hex core

?

Journey · 30 May 2018 at 11:52

voidshatter said:
Note that the 8600K is the only one here without hyper-threading so it's approximated as a quad-core.

Surely then given this, you'd use the 8350K as the comparison if you are calling it a 6c CPU a 4c. Why fudge data to suit the table? :?

bru · 30 May 2018 at 13:37

Troezar said:
It's from a well known US site. The colours represent what you would expect green is good red is not so good. The darker the colour the better or worse they are i.e. the 7980 XE is very strong multithreaded but poor value as its cost is high.

bru said:
Where did the chart come from? Link?

Why no stock performance numbers
The clock price ratio number and price performance ratio numbers are far to complicated, why go to 9 decimal places, its just ridiculous.

I cant imagine any site worth its salt using such a flawed chart.

voidshatter · 30 May 2018 at 14:51

bru said:
Why no stock performance numbers

You prefer to run binned CPUs at stock? What a genius!

bru said:
The clock price ratio number and price performance ratio numbers are far to complicated, why go to 9 decimal places, its just ridiculous.

Some people are colour-blind and cannot distinguish between red and green I guess.