i3 8100 vs i5 8400 in Photoshop, Lightroom and Premiere Pro

[iandcn]

Hi guys,

I'm on a very tight budget right now and wanting to upgrade my current i5 2400, h61m, 2x4gb ddr3 to Coffee Lake. I'm wondering if you guys can help me decide here since I really have no idea if I really NEED the 6 core i5 8400. The main reason why I want to upgrade is so I can have new parts, new platform plus new motherboard that can hold up to 4 ram sticks.

Right now, I'm leaning towards core i3 8100 because with that choice, I might be able to do the upgrade really really soon plus make 16gb RAM. especially that Photoshop is highly relying on RAM (based on my observance). However, if I go 8400, it's going to take a while before I can even afford to go buy 8gb kit of RAM.

Now, I really wonder if do I really need 6 cores? Any comments would help. Thank you guys!

 

[parani]

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i3-8100-cpu-review,5385-7.html. If you upgrade any time soon, then get i3 8100 it if you don't upgrade for couple of years , get ryzen 2600

 

[SkyNetRising]

The main reason why I want to upgrade is so I can have new parts, new platform plus new motherboard that can hold up to 4 ram sticks.
Now, I really wonder if do I really need 6 cores? Any comments would help. Thank you guys!

If main reason to upgrade is to get 16GB of ram, then upgrade ram of your current system. 16GB of DDR3 ram will cost you significantly less than completely new system.

 

[bmockeg]

I'd go ryzen for photoshop

 

[iandcn]

The main reason why I want to upgrade is so I can have new parts, new platform plus new motherboard that can hold up to 4 ram sticks.
Now, I really wonder if do I really need 6 cores? Any comments would help. Thank you guys!

If main reason to upgrade is to get 16GB of ram, then upgrade ram of your current system. 16GB of DDR3 ram will cost you significantly less than completely new system.

nah.. it's already planned. my current parts are so old that's another reason why I want to get rid of them. right now, i just really need to decide 4 core vs 6 core for what I need. I really don't have an idea if I need a six core. but im pretty sure i do need 16gb RAM.

 

[iandcn]

I'd go ryzen for photoshop

Hi thanks for the answer. Will you be able to explain a bit why you'd go for Ryzen? Thank you

 

[iandcn]

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i3-8100-cpu-review,5385-7.html. If you upgrade any time soon, then get i3 8100 it if you don't upgrade for couple of years , get ryzen 2600

Hi thanks for the answer. Can you tell me why you did not choose to suggest i5 8400 and instead suggested ryzen 2600? thank you

 

[parani]

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i3-8100-cpu-review,5385-7.html. If you upgrade any time soon, then get i3 8100 it if you don't upgrade for couple of years , get ryzen 2600

Hi thanks for the answer. Can you tell me why you did not choose to suggest i5 8400 and instead suggested ryzen 2600? thank you

Bcoz it has extra 6threads which will last longer than 8400 which only has 6threads ,it will help in productibity much better than i5

 

[justin.m.beauvais]

Eeeeh... Photoshop responds better to higher clocks actually. Most Adobe programs do. So you would be better off going with the i3 8100 or something with really high clock speeds like the 8350K (4 cores at 4GHz base speed). If you want multi threaded performance, there isn't anything that can beat the Ryzen 2600X in performance for the price (6 cores/12 threads at 3.6GHz base clock with 4.2 GHz boost).

All that said, the 8100 isn't a bad option for a budget machine, but for not a lot more there are better options. Something like the Ryzen 5 2400G (4 cores/8 threads at 3.6 GHz base with 3.9 GHz boost) would be a great productivity machine, and it splits the difference in price between the 2600X and 8100.

So, final suggestion is the Ryzen 5 2400G. You'll give up a little on single threaded performance, but more than make up for it with cores and threads.

 

[iandcn]

Eeeeh... Photoshop responds better to higher clocks actually. Most Adobe programs do. So you would be better off going with the i3 8100 or something with really high clock speeds like the 8350K (4 cores at 4GHz base speed). If you want multi threaded performance, there isn't anything that can beat the Ryzen 2600X in performance for the price (6 cores/12 threads at 3.6GHz base clock with 4.2 GHz boost).

All that said, the 8100 isn't a bad option for a budget machine, but for not a lot more there are better options. Something like the Ryzen 5 2400G (4 cores/8 threads at 3.6 GHz base with 3.9 GHz boost) would be a great productivity machine, and it splits the difference in price between the 2600X and 8100.

So, final suggestion is the Ryzen 5 2400G. You'll give up a little on single threaded performance, but more than make up for it with cores and threads.

Hi Justin! Thanks for the response! I have additional questions though. Does Photoshop, Lightroom and Premiere Pro benefit higher number of threads? I mean, is are these programs multi-thread happy?

 

[justin.m.beauvais]

Eeeeh... Photoshop responds better to higher clocks actually. Most Adobe programs do. So you would be better off going with the i3 8100 or something with really high clock speeds like the 8350K (4 cores at 4GHz base speed). If you want multi threaded performance, there isn't anything that can beat the Ryzen 2600X in performance for the price (6 cores/12 threads at 3.6GHz base clock with 4.2 GHz boost).

All that said, the 8100 isn't a bad option for a budget machine, but for not a lot more there are better options. Something like the Ryzen 5 2400G (4 cores/8 threads at 3.6 GHz base with 3.9 GHz boost) would be a great productivity machine, and it splits the difference in price between the 2600X and 8100.

So, final suggestion is the Ryzen 5 2400G. You'll give up a little on single threaded performance, but more than make up for it with cores and threads.

Hi Justin! Thanks for the response! I have additional questions though. Does Photoshop, Lightroom and Premiere Pro benefit higher number of threads? I mean, is are these programs multi-thread happy?

Generally, yes. They can utilize more threads, though they work better with higher clock speeds. More threads will make things faster, but clock speeds can easily make up for not having as many threads. That is why something like a 8700K with only 12 threads can beat something like an 1800X with 16 threads.

 

[iandcn]

Eeeeh... Photoshop responds better to higher clocks actually. Most Adobe programs do. So you would be better off going with the i3 8100 or something with really high clock speeds like the 8350K (4 cores at 4GHz base speed). If you want multi threaded performance, there isn't anything that can beat the Ryzen 2600X in performance for the price (6 cores/12 threads at 3.6GHz base clock with 4.2 GHz boost).

All that said, the 8100 isn't a bad option for a budget machine, but for not a lot more there are better options. Something like the Ryzen 5 2400G (4 cores/8 threads at 3.6 GHz base with 3.9 GHz boost) would be a great productivity machine, and it splits the difference in price between the 2600X and 8100.

So, final suggestion is the Ryzen 5 2400G. You'll give up a little on single threaded performance, but more than make up for it with cores and threads.

Hi Justin! Thanks for the response! I have additional questions though. Does Photoshop, Lightroom and Premiere Pro benefit higher number of threads? I mean, is are these programs multi-thread happy?

Generally, yes. They can utilize more threads, though they work better with higher clock speeds. More threads will make things faster, but clock speeds can easily make up for not having as many threads. That is why something like a 8700K with only 12 threads can beat something like an 1800X with 16 threads.

how about power consumption difference, is it that big? like comparing stock i5 8400 vs OC ryzen 5 2600 @4.2 and computer system is running 16 hours a day. coz I did a bit of research again and I find ryzen 5 2600 is a really good one but will have to OC for better performance overall especially on productivity. I was wondering if all the messing around OC with both CPU and RAM plus the power consumption difference will be all worth it thinking the difference it can give as to just having i5 8400 stock w/ 2666 RAMs.