Does cpu speed matter

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Z

zaranka12345

May 16, 2018
19
0
10
So im buying a new pc and im getting the i5 8400 i know you cant overclock it but it has 2.8 ghz so will it be slower on gaming?
 
Solution
Solandri
As stated above, you can pretty much ignore the base clock speed. The turbo boost speed is what's important. As long as the CPU isn't overheating (hence the need for a good fan), it will dynamically clock up to its turbo boost speeds. The base clock speed is only really relevant to the i3, celeron, and pentium CPUs, which don't get turbo boost.

The i5-8400 in particular is 2.8 GHz with a 10/10/11/11/11/12 turbo boost. The number in the turbo column is the number of 100 MHz increments, for the different number of cores in use. That means it can boost to 3.8 GHz (2.8 + 0.1*10) when using 5-6 cores. To 3.9 GHz (2.8 + 0.1*11) on 2-4 cores. And to 4 GHz when only a single core is being used...
Sort by date Sort by votes
That looks to be a good CPU to me. A base of 2.8Ghz, will Turbo Boost to 4Ghz! Just get a nice HSF so that it can reach those speeds.

For most gaming, money is well spent on a faster i5 than a slower i7. That's because most games are heavily dependent on single threaded execution speeds rather than parallelism. And for games that do multi-thread, I have yet to see the advantage of going with an i7 over an i5 in terms of cost justification.

Money well spent is on a fast clocked i5 with a mid-high to high-end GPU.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote


GHz is but one small factor in overall CPU performance.

That i5-8400 @ 2.8GHz is at least 10 times as fast as a Pentium IV @ 3.0GHz.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
As stated above, you can pretty much ignore the base clock speed. The turbo boost speed is what's important. As long as the CPU isn't overheating (hence the need for a good fan), it will dynamically clock up to its turbo boost speeds. The base clock speed is only really relevant to the i3, celeron, and pentium CPUs, which don't get turbo boost.

The i5-8400 in particular is 2.8 GHz with a 10/10/11/11/11/12 turbo boost. The number in the turbo column is the number of 100 MHz increments, for the different number of cores in use. That means it can boost to 3.8 GHz (2.8 + 0.1*10) when using 5-6 cores. To 3.9 GHz (2.8 + 0.1*11) on 2-4 cores. And to 4 GHz when only a single core is being used.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_...offee_Lake_microarchitecture_(8th_generation)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
Clock speed matters almost as much as core count in comparison to same architecture CPUs. These days many processors can ramp up their clock speed with Turbo Boost (Intel technology, AMD had Turbo clock and now XFR). It's not all that great, you need conditions that let you do this, Something as simple as motherboard supporting that functionality, then low enough temperature and enough voltage that can be supplied. While generally it means that you get temporary boost, it can also be annoying in some cases. If you have 40 fps with turbo boost working and it decides to lower clockspeed and then ramp it up again, that can make your gameplay appear freezy. Also there are cases, when Turbo Boost will not always work, so base clock speed matters in those cases. Basically if you want coffee lake i5, then i5 8400 is a great choice, but if you can get i5 8500 for almost same price, then it's rather wise to get i5 8500. In terms of core count 6 cores are enough for many things. If you aren't sure how do CPUs compare in terms of speed, then pick one benchmark, which tests CPU's performance and get familiar with it. I always look at Cinebench R15. It tends to show off maximum possible performance from processor, which not always translate into great real life task performance, but if you take it with grain of salt, it's a great tool for quick comparisons.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Yeah, but not with a tiny price difference however. Delta between the two is like $25 to $30 bucks.

At some point the buyer just need assess where on the scale of diminishing returns they wish to stop at. Personally, I'd stick with the i5-8400 and pocket the cash, or use it towards the rest of the PC build. If later on it's not enough CPU, just upgrade and sell off the old chip.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


While giving advice, I wanted to explain it from technological standpoint. I don't really care about price, because this is international forum. I don't know where that person is. Also it's better that they understand what is the difference. Let's say, person in the shop can buy i5 8400 or i5 8500 with 30% discount. Some people don't really know what the difference is between two and if we just say that 8400 is good and 8500 isn't, then that person may buy more expensive 8400. Sure it's theoretical scenario, bu I'm just saying what can happen. So I just say what is better in terms of hardware.

There's a reason why 8500 is more expensive by rather high margin. It's because company just makes chip with coffee lake architecture, 6 cores and let's those run at same voltage. It's much easier to achieve lower clock speed, meanwhile chips, that can reach higher clock speed are rarer. Easier to make = cheaper. And question of OP is good, because coffee lake i5s have generally low clock speed. So every 100 MHz should have more impact, than one let's say 3.5 GHz AMD FX 6300.

I also dislike when people just say to spend on something else, but if it was me. I would spend it on aftermarket air cooler for this CPU. It's not like 30 dollars could buy you a better graphics card, nor hard drive. Maybe motherboard. Anyway we don't know what situation is here. irl I would spend extra money on candies or ice cream. 30 dollars isn't a lot.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

The clock speed difference between the two (with turbo boost) is less than 3%. So $25-$30 is an exorbitant amount to be paying for such a minuscule performance improvement.

Intel's retail pricing difference between the two is only $10 ($182 vs $192). Market prices on Amazon right now are $179 vs $214. So right now the i5-8500 prices are inflated above Intel's MSRP due to people following the mistaken reasoning that "more expensive = better" creating a lot more demand for the -8500 than the -8400. That is, the prices are higher due to people mistakenly thinking it's a far superior product, not due to the actual performance difference.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

Technically it is a better product, whether it's worth extra it's up to you. We are in tech forum, so we can make it clear which is better and by how much. Financial advices are very unreliable, especially in international forum. OP at best could tell us prices of 8400 and 8500, then we can help. In my country currently AMD FX 8350 is cheaper than 6350


 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom