Intel Core i7-8700K and Core i5-8400 Processor Review – Coffee Lake

Jump To:

Media Encoding & Encryption Benchmarks

HandBrake v1.0.1 – link

HandBrake is an open-source, GPL-licensed, multiplatform, multithreaded video transcoder, available for MacOS X, Linux and Windows. It is popular today as it allows you to transcode multiple input video formats to h.264 output format and is highly multithreaded. We used Big Buck Bunny as our input file, which has become one of the world standards for video benchmarks. For our benchmark scenario we used a standard 2D 4K (3840×2160) 60 FPS clip in the MP4 format and used Handbrake version 1.0.1 to do two things.

We used the new Fast 1080p30 preset to shrink that down to a 1920 x 1080 video clip to reduce the file size. This is something people often do to save space to put movies onto mobile devices. We also ran the workload using the normal preset as it puts the CPU at a higher load than the Fast 1080p30 preset as it keeps it at 4K.

X264 HD Encoding – link

the x264 HD Benchmark is a reproducible measure of how fast your machine can encode a short HD-quality video clip into a high quality x264 video file. It’s nice because everyone running it will use the same video clip and software. The video encoder (x264.exe) reports a fairly accurate internal benchmark (in frames per second) for each pass of the video encode and it also uses multi-core processors very efficiently. All these factors make this an ideal benchmark to compare different processors and systems to each other. We are using x264 HD v5.0.1 for this test.

Cinegy Cinescore 10.4 Professional Video Encoding Benchmark:

The broadcast and media industry needs benchmarks that are meaningful and relevant. Cinegy Cinescore uses many commonly used professional quality codecs to measure the encoding speed of a system. This sets expectations of how many channels a given machine can capture, how suitable it is for e.g. UHD editing, or which speed can be expected to do transcode jobs. Cinegy Cinescore covers a fair number of commonly used formats and codecs and measures the encoding speed as well as the system load for doing that for the different target resolutions – HD, UHD and 8K.

Media Encoding Benchmark Results Summary: Simply impressive results from the Intel Core i7-8700K processor in both stock and overclocked forms. The 8700K is trading blows with the Intel Core i7-6900K and 6950X in many of the benchmarks, so to see a $359 processor competing against the last generations $1,000 processor is going to make many enthusiasts happy.

The new Cingey Cinescore benchmarks that we just added to our test suite about a month ago to show 8K video results, so it doesn’t have all the processors on there, but it shows that the Intel Core i7-8700K does pretty well against the Intel Core i9-7900X and AMD Threadripper 1920X & 1950X processors with regards to 1080P, 4K and 8K video!

VeraCrypt 1.19 – link

VeraCrypt is an open-source disk encryption software brought to you by IDRIX and is a fork based on the discontinued TrueCrypt 7.1a utility. The developers claim that weaknesses found in TrueCrypt have been resolved with the VeraCrypt project. This is a popular utility used by people that don’t want to use Microsoft’s built-in encyption tool for Windows 10 called Bitlocker.

Encryption Benchmark Results Summary: If encryption is something you do, you’ll find having more cores and threads to be very beneficial as you can see from the results above. The Intel Core i5-8400 is comparable to the AMD Ryzen 7 1800X processor that has 2 more physical cores and multi-threading capabilities, so it  goes to show how far ahead Intel is on this type of workloads. The Intel Core i7-8700K is comparable to the Intel Core i7-6950X processor in stock form and overclocked it was faster than a stock Intel Core i7-7900X processor!

Print
Jump To:
  • Jake40563

    I really hope that reviews are unbiased, however I noticed that power consumption of 8700k in overclocked mode was completely ignored or I may say omitted, why????

  • goldstone77

    It takes ~1 hour for liquid in a 240mm liquid cooler to absorb heat and become saturated. How does 5 min. AIDA64 show real world temperatures that the average user would find if he would run blender or handbrake for 1+ hours? How do you factor in the all core turbo boost of 4.7GHz and 145W into this equation for helping people come up with a proper cooling solution? 95W TDP hahaha

    • Nathan Kirsch

      So, the liquid in the cooler warms up a bit more than this. It’s not worth the time doing it when there are thousands of case and cooler options out there. We test on an open test bench anyway, so all of our temperature results are going to be different than most of what the readers will see at home. We quickly look at temps and move on. This is a CPU review and not a CPU cooler review!

      • goldstone77

        I agree that a CPU review should be about the CPU. But the cooling solutions and motherboard settings involved do change the results of tests, and I believe this should be noted in the review for clarity and transparency. So, in respect to your viewers do you feel it important to convey to them that your tests will vary from real world situations that the average user would encounter at home? As a viewer I would like to see statements like this incorporated in future reviews. Also, I wouldn’t mind seeing some real world scenarios with testing in a case with typical fans and using an air cooler with the processors TDP rating, and with the full array of motherboard settings. Just my 2 cents.

  • goldstone77

    Why did you disable turbo boost for your temp test, and enable it for your performance tests? You do realize that you are getting an all core turbo or 4.7GHz consuming 145W, and saying that the 8700K falls in line with your expectations of a 95W TDP. Gamers Nexus “Multi-core “enhancement” options are either enabled, disabled, or “auto” in motherboard BIOS, where “auto” has somewhat nebulous behavior, depending on board maker. Enabling multi-core enhancement means that the CPU ignores the Intel spec, instead locking all-core Turbo to the single-core Turbo speeds, which means a few things: (1) Higher voltage is now necessary, and therefore higher power draw and heat; (2) instability can be introduced to the system, as we observed in Blender on the ASUS Maximus X Hero with multi-core enhancement on the 8700K; (3) performance is bolstered in-step with higher all-core Turbo.”

    • Nathan Kirsch

      Testing was done on the Gigabyte Z370 Gaming 7 motherboard and we left multi-core enhancement to the default setting of ‘auto’ and that is off. This is not a CPU feature and is an overclocking feature done by the board makers. We did try multi-core enhancement with the 8400 on the Gaming 7 and found that it flat out didn’t work. Gigabyte Taiwan confirmed this and is fixing it for the next UEFI release. Since multi-core enhancement is not an Intel feature and varies between board manufactures the decision was made not to cover it. Multi-core enhancement in our opinion should be put in motherboard reviews when dealing with overclocking.

      • goldstone77

        Thanks for sharing that information. Jayz2cents ended up making another review after finding out his motherboard has “Multi-core enhancements” enable on the auto setting. And was told by the manufacturer it was turned off on auto setting. He confirmed to them it was in fact turn “on”. They said they will be putting out a bios change to disable it on auto.

  • IntelAMDNvidia
  • Dorian Kunch

    Really want to thank you Nate for including the old i7-2700 in the review. I have been holding out for that magical 2x the speed thing to manifest, probably there are others too. And it’s all gotta work; games and video processing.

  • Six_Tymes

    waiting for an 8350K