Casual Enthusiasts Rejoice

No matter your taste for being labeled, the PC and gaming market is awash with different segments that loosely collate different requirements. Some want high-performance at any cost, others are power conscious, and some want the best gaming performance for their budget. For this latter group, the Core i3-7350K is a serious contender to throw some money at.

In our single GPU tests (which are admittedly showing their age a small bit), at 1080p and 4K, the Core i3-7350K was on par with the Core i5-7600K and Core i7-7700K. The Core i3 part is not seriously marketed at SLI/CFX configurations, so maintaining a good level performance at mainstream resolutions using a single graphics card is important in this performance for a 'budget' build. The high single core frequency at 4.2 GHz, or more when overclocked, ensures that the Core i3 hits a high level of performance in most DX11 gaming where performance can differ. Out of our gaming tests, the Core i5-7600K offered a small gain with mid-range GPUs on Grand Theft Auto, but for the most part performance was on par or within a few percent.


Core i7-7600K (left) and Core i3-7350K (right)

For underlying performance, the Core i3-7350K is one of the fastest single threaded performers on the market. The combination of 4.2 GHz and Kaby Lake IPC means that only the i7-7700K is the only one that beats it. For basic programming and web work, having one of the fastest chips on the market may help improve the experience. However, starting to add more complex work in to the mix shows that the dual core chip can be a bottleneck – any workload with heavy threads, such as compute (compression, rendering, matrix compute), is going to hand a performance advantage to a Core i5. A good example of this is Agisoft: the Core i5-7400 (which costs $14 more, quad core, 3.0-3.5 GHz) completes the work ~10% quicker.

For overclocking, the Core i3-7350K matches the other Kaby Lake overclocking parts. Our retail stepping sample achieved 4.8 GHz without any AVX offset, similar to our Core i5-7600K and Core i7-7700K. One of the upsides of the overclock was the power consumption: due to the 1.2 volts applied to the CPU at stock frequencies, our overclock only produced another +12W in power consumption. It was perhaps surprising that the Core i5-7400 had a much lower power consumption than the dual core, but the high base frequency leads to a higher stock voltage which translates to power consumption.

What would be interesting to see is how the power consumption changes with some of the lower clocked Core i3 parts. From our overclocking/underclocking results, a 4.0 GHz Core i3 at 1.100 volts would only consume 43W.

Ultimately, the state of the Core i3-7350K depends on what you are interested in as an enthusiast.

  1. Overclocking? It’s a fun choice.
  2. Responsiveness? Top class.
  3. Mainstream 1080p Gaming? A cheaper equivalent to the Core i5.
  4. Power? A lower clocked i3 is better on efficiency.
  5. Heavy workloads? Spend $14 and go for a Core i5.

The idea internally (inside my head) is to rerun this set of interesting Intel CPUs on Windows 10 with newer DX12 games and newer GPUs over the next few months. It’s going to be fun. I think.

More about Kaby Lake

For readers that want a more in-depth take on Kaby Lake as a platform, we have a dedicated article full of information for you. We also have other articles in our Kaby Lake bonanza. 

Other articles include:

Intel Launches 7th Generation Kaby Lake (Overview and Core Improvements)
The Intel Core i7-7700K Review: The New Out-of-the-box Performance Champion
The Intel Core i5-7600K Review: The More Amenable Mainstream Performer
The Intel Core i3-7350K Review: When a Core i3 Nearly Matches the Core i7-2600K (This Review)

Still to come

Calculating Generational IPC Changes from Sandy Bridge to Kaby Lake
Intel Core i7-7700K, i5-7600K and i3-7350K Overclocking: Hitting 5.0 GHz on AIR
Intel Launches 200-Series Chipset Breakdown: Z270, H270, B250, Q250, C232
Intel Z270 Motherboard Preview: A Quick Look at 80+ Motherboards

Core i3-7350K vs Core i7-2600K: More MHz Cap'n!
Comments Locked

186 Comments

View All Comments

  • watzupken - Friday, February 3, 2017 - link

    A dual core processor is still a dual core processor even if it is unlocked and offers a high clockspeed. I still feel Kaby Lake is a lazy upgrade over Skylake considering it barely offers anything new. Just take a look at the feature page to get a sense of the "upgrades". With competition coming from ARM and AMD Ryzen, is Intel only capable of a clockspeed war just like they did for Pentium 4?
  • CaedenV - Friday, February 3, 2017 - link

    Well, to be fair Kabby Lake isn't for you and I. It is Skylake with very minor improvements mostly aimed at fixing the firmware level sleep and wake issues that manufacturers had (ie, the reason Apple didn't move to Skylake until well after release, and the botched deployment of the Surface Pro 4).
    Outside of that it is just skylake with a minor clock bumb, slightly better thermals, and more of the chip on 14nm.
  • Shadowmaster625 - Friday, February 3, 2017 - link

    So it will be 2025 before an i3 beats a stock 2600K in all benchmarks? That must mean it will be 2030 before it can beat a 4.8GHz 2600K. That's crazy, considering how badly the Core2Quad compares to even a modern celeron.
  • user_5447 - Friday, February 3, 2017 - link

    Page 2: "There is one caveat however – Speed Shift currently only works in Windows 10. It requires a driver which is automatically in the OS (v2 doesn’t need a new driver, it’s more a hardware update), but this limitation does mean that Linux and macOS do not benefit from it."

    This is incorrect: support for Speed Shift (HW pstates) was commited to Linux kernel back in November of 2014, way before Skylake release.
    https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/11/6/628
  • Hinton - Friday, February 3, 2017 - link

    Of the 3 CPU'S Anandtech received to review, this was the only one that was marginally interesting (we didn't need a review to know Kabylake performs equally to Skylake).

    So of course you spent one month before reviewing it. Good for Anand that he took the money and ran.
  • fanofanand - Friday, February 3, 2017 - link

    You may be unaware, but Ian has been kind of busy lately......
  • Meteor2 - Sunday, February 5, 2017 - link

    He has? How so?
  • PCHardwareDude - Friday, February 3, 2017 - link

    This would be interesting if the part wasn't so bloody expensive. $120 would be interesting.
    At this price, you're better off spending a little more and getting an i5 or spending a lot less and getting the G4600, which is also dual core kaby lake with hyperthreading.
  • AssBall - Friday, February 17, 2017 - link

    If you have a GPU
  • notjamie - Friday, February 3, 2017 - link

    At £170 this is the exact price I paid for my 3570k almost 5 years ago. That's what I call progress.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now