The Intel Core i5-7600K (91W) Review: The More Amenable Mainstream Performer
by Ian Cutress on January 3, 2017 12:01 PM ESTOffice Performance
The dynamics of CPU Turbo modes, both Intel and AMD, can cause concern during environments with a variable threaded workload. There is also an added issue of the motherboard remaining consistent, depending on how the motherboard manufacturer wants to add in their own boosting technologies over the ones that Intel would prefer they used. In order to remain consistent, we implement an OS-level unique high performance mode on all the CPUs we test which should override any motherboard manufacturer performance mode.
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
Dolphin Benchmark: link
Many emulators are often bound by single thread CPU performance, and general reports tended to suggest that Haswell provided a significant boost to emulator performance. This benchmark runs a Wii program that raytraces a complex 3D scene inside the Dolphin Wii emulator. Performance on this benchmark is a good proxy of the speed of Dolphin CPU emulation, which is an intensive single core task using most aspects of a CPU. Results are given in minutes, where the Wii itself scores 17.53 minutes.
Since a big uptick in emulator performance with Sandy Bridge, the Intel processor line has had a good run in Dolphin and that continues with Kaby Lake. This is shown with the Core i7-7600K coming above the i7-6700K and i7-4790K, both former leaders in this benchmark.
WinRAR 5.0.1: link
Our WinRAR test from 2013 is updated to the latest version of WinRAR at the start of 2014. We compress a set of 2867 files across 320 folders totaling 1.52 GB in size – 95% of these files are small typical website files, and the rest (90% of the size) are small 30 second 720p videos.
WinRAR is more geared towards a variable threaded environment but also memory speed. In the last of ‘which benchmarks benefit from hyperthreads’, WinRAR is in – almost every Core i5 takes a back seat to all the Core i7 parts. We see performance jumps moving from i3 to i5, and a smaller one from i5 to i7, but in the case of WinRAR it’s quite obvious that threads matter here.
3D Particle Movement v2
3DPM is a self-penned benchmark, taking basic 3D movement algorithms used in Brownian Motion simulations and testing them for speed. High floating point performance, MHz and IPC wins the day. This is the second variant of this benchmark, fixing for false sharing in the first version, and lending itself to better multithreaded performance.
3DPMv2 is still new, so we don’t have too many results for it so far – even to go and say that Kaby Lake is the only set of i5 processors it has been run on. 3DPMv2, like WinRAR, likes hyperthreads as well, so we see the Core i7-6700T sit above the i5-7600K despite the frequency difference. In a benchmark like this, the older AMD FX processors come into play and the FX-8370 knocks on the door of the i5.
SYSMark 2014
Engineered by BAPco (to which Intel is a consortium member), this set of tests are designed to be an office/data/media/financial range of tests using common well-known CAD, image editing, web browsing and other tools to put out a score, where a score of 1000 is attributed to an old Core i3 using a mechanical harddrive. Here we report the overall score, however the test breakdowns can be found in Bench.
Because SYSMark is a variety of tests that rely on response and throughput, the Core i5-7600K hits a good score in the middle of most of the previous generation extreme processors but also gives a good 5% on the previous generation i5-6600K.
Web Benchmarks
On the lower end processors, general usability is a big factor of experience, especially as we move into the HTML5 era of web browsing. For our web benchmarks, we take well known tests with Chrome as installed by SYSMark as a consistent browser.
Mozilla Kraken 1.1
Google Octane v2
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
70 Comments
View All Comments
Magichands8 - Tuesday, January 3, 2017 - link
This Optane looks completely useless. But Optane DRAM sounds like it could be interesting. Depending upon how much slower it is.lopri - Wednesday, January 4, 2017 - link
I immediately thought of "AMD Memory" which AMD launched after the Bulldozer flop. But then again Intel have been going after this storage caching scheme for years now and I do not think it has taken them anywhere.smilingcrow - Tuesday, January 3, 2017 - link
Games frame rates to 2 decimal points adds nothing but making it harder to scan the numbers quickly. Enough already.1_rick - Tuesday, January 3, 2017 - link
One place where the extra threads of an i7 are useful is if you're using VMs (maybe to run a database server or something.) I've found that an i5 with 8GB can get bogged down pretty drastically just from running a VM.Meteor2 - Tuesday, January 3, 2017 - link
I kinda think that if you're running db VMs on an i7, you're doing it wrong.t.s - Wednesday, January 4, 2017 - link
or if you're Android developer using Android Studio.lopri - Wednesday, January 4, 2017 - link
That is true but as others have implied you can get 6 or 8 real core Xeons for cheaper than these new Kaby Lake chips if VM is what you need the performance of a CPU is for.ddhelmet - Tuesday, January 3, 2017 - link
Well I am more glad now that I got a Skylake. Even if I waited for this the performance increase is not worth it.Kaihekoa - Tuesday, January 3, 2017 - link
Y'all need to revise your game benchmarking analysis. At least use some current generation GPUs, post the minimum framerates, and test at 1440p. The rest of your review is exceptional, but the gaming part needs some modernization, please.lopri - Wednesday, January 4, 2017 - link
I thank the author for a clear yet thorough review. A lot of grounds are covered and the big picture of the chip's performance and features is well communicated. I agree with the author's recommendation at the end as well. I have not felt that I am missing out anything compared to i7's while running a 2500K for my gaming system, and unless you know for certain that you can take advantage of HyperThreading, spending the difference in dollars toward an SSD or a graphics card is a wiser expenditure that will provide you with better computing experience.Having said that, I am wtill not compelled to upgrade my 2500K which has been running at 4.8 GHz for years. (It does 5.0 GHz no problem but I run it at 4.8 to leave some "headroom") While I think the 7600K is barely a worthy upgrade (finally!) on its own light, but the added cost cannot be overlooked. A new motherboard, new memory, and potentially a new heat sink will quickly add to the budget, and I am not sure if it is going to be worth all the expenses that will follow.
Of course all that could be worthwhile if overclocking was fun, but Intel pretty much have killed overclocking and the overclocking community. Intentionally if I might add. Today overclocking does not give one a sense of discovery or accomplishment. Competition between friendly enthusiasts or hostile motherboard/memory vendors has disappeared. Naturally there is no accumulation or exchange of knowledge in the community, and conversations have become frustrating and vain due to lack of overclocking expertise. Only some brute force overclocking with dedicated cooling has some following, and the occasional "overclocking" topics in the forums are really a braggadocio in disguise, of which the competition underneath is really about who spent the most on their rigs with the latest blingy stuff. Needless to say those are not as exciting or illuminating as the real overclocking of the yore, and in my opinion there are better ways to spend money for such a self-gratification without the complication that often accompanies overclocking which in the end fails to impress.
Intel might have a second thought about its overclocking policies now, but just as many things Intel have done in recent years, it is too little too late. And their chips have no headroom anyway. My work system is due for an upgrade and I am probably going to pick up a couple of E2670s which will give me 16 real cores for less than $200. Why bother with the new stuff when the IPC gain is meager and there is no fun in overclocking? And contribute to Intel's revenue? Thank you but no thank you.
P.S. Sorry I meant to commend the author for the excellent (albeit redundant) review but ended up ranting about something else. Oh well, carry on..