![]() On Cinebench R15, the Core i5-6400 was 30% faster than the Core i3-6100, but 19% slower than the FX-8350. We ran the CPU benchmark, which renders a complex image using all the processing cores (real and virtual) to speed up the process. Rendering is an area where a bigger number of cores helps a lot, because usually this kind of software recognize several processors (Cinebench R15, for example, can use up to 256 processing cores). It is very useful to measure the performance gain obtained by the presence of several processing cores while rendering heavy 3D images. Cinebench R15Ĭinebench R15 is based on the Cinema 4D software. On the Cloud Gate benchmark, the Core i5-6400 was 9% faster than the Core i3-6100, and was 13% slower than the FX-8350. On the Sky Diver benchmark, the Core i5-6400 was 8% faster than the Core i3-6100, but was 5% slower than the FX-8350. On the Fire Strike benchmark, the Core i5-6400 obtained similar performance to the Core i3-6100 and the FX-8350. Keep in mind that we used a GeForce GTX 950 VGA in this test on all CPUs. The Cloud Gate benchmark measures DirectX 10 performance, and the Ice Storm Extreme measures DirectX 9 performance and is targeted to entry-level computers, so we don’t ran it. Sky Diver also measures DirectX 11 performance, and is aimed on average computers. Fire Strike runs a “heavy” DirectX 11 simulation. On the Work benchmark, the Core i5-6400 was on technical tie with the Core i3-6100, being 11% faster than the FX-8350.ģDMark is a program with a set of several 3D benchmarks. On the Creative benchmark, the Core i5-6400 was 8% faster than the Core i3-6100, and 18% faster than the FX-8350. On the PCMark 8 Home benchmark, the Core i5-6400 obtained similar performance to the Core i3-6100, and was 14% faster than the FX-8350. We ran three tests: Home, which includes web browsing, writing, light gaming, photo editing, and video chat tests Creative, that includes web surfing, video editing, group video chat, video conversion, and gaming and Work, which runs tasks such as writing documents, web browsing, spreadsheets, editing, and video chatting. PCMark 8 is a benchmarking software that uses real-world applications to measure the computer performance. In other words, products with a performance difference below 4% should be considered as having similar performance. Thus, differences below 4% cannot be considered relevant. Boot drive: Kingston HyperX Savage 480 GB.Memory (DDR4): 8 GiB DDR4-2400 two G.Skill Ripjaws 4 F4-2400C15Q-16GRR 4 GiB memory modules configured at 2133 MHz.Memory (DDR3): 8 GiB DDR3-2133, two G.Skill Ripjaws F3-17000CL9Q-16GBZH 4 GiB memory modules configured at 2,133 MHz.Motherboard (socket LGA1151): ASRock Fatal1ty Z170 Gaming K6+.Motherboard (socket AM3+): ASRock Fatal1ty 990FX Killer.Between our benchmarking sessions, the only variable device was the CPU being tested, besides the motherboard and memory, which had to be replaced to match the different CPUs. CPUĭuring our benchmarking sessions, we used the configuration listed below. CPUīelow you can see the memory configuration for each CPU. In the tables below, we compare the main features of the CPUs included in our review. Let’s compare the main specs of the reviewed CPUs in the next page. Second, because we believe most people who buys a CPU on this price range will use it with an independent video card, since people who uses integrated video usually prefers a more inexpensive CPU.įigure 1 unveils the box of the Core i5-6400 we used in our tests.įigure 2 shows the box content: a simple aluminum cooler, the CPU itself, a small manual and a sticker for your case.įigure 2: content of the Core i5-6400 boxįigure 3 gives a closer view of the Core i5-6400. We make it for two reasons: first, the FX-8350 has no integrated video. We ran the tests using an independent video card, the GeForce GTX 950 from Gigabyte ( read this video card review here,) disabling the integrated video on the CPUs with integrated GPU. We also included on the comparison the Core i3-6100, to check if the price difference between the two models is fair and if the Core i5-6400 is worth the higher price. So, we tested the performance of the Core i5-6400 against the FX-8350. The direct competitors of the Core i5-6400 are the FX-8370 (with stock cooler) and the FX-8350 (with Wraith cooler) from AMD. It has no unlocked multiplier, which means it is not aimed on overclocking and the only way to make it work at higher clock rates is incrementing the reference clock if your motherboard allows it. The Core i5-6400 is a quad-core CPU with 2.7 GHz base clock, 3.3 GHz turbo clock, TDP of 65 W, and manufactured under 14 nm technology. We tested the Core i5-6400, which is the entry model of the Intel sixth-generation (Skylake) Core i5 family.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |