Intel’s Core i3-8350Ok CPU most likely isn’t the primary processor you’d consider for building your next gaming PC, however this £170 / $195 quad-core chip holds its personal surprisingly nicely in opposition to the Core i5 and Ryzen 5 massive boys. Priced at an identical stage to AMD’s Ryzen 5 2600X CPU, Intel’s Core i3-8350Ok might be simply the factor in the event you’re searching for a brand new best gaming CPU that doesn’t find yourself breaking the financial institution.
A big a part of the Core i3-8350Ok’s attraction comes from these 4 cores I simply talked about. Previous Intel Core i3 CPUs solely ever had two cores to their title, for instance, so the truth that Intel bumped this as much as 4 for his or her eighth Gen Coffee Lake Core i3 chips is basically fairly the factor. Not solely does it give them a bit extra oomph for on a regular basis desktop duties, but it surely additionally makes them a viable proposition for gaming, too – particularly in the event you’re after a gaming CPU that doesn’t price greater than £200 / $200.
Another level in its favour is its excessive base clock velocity of 4.0GHz. This is definitely loads nippier than a few of Intel’s different CPUs up the road – the Core i5-8400, for instance, solely begins at 2.8GHz – and, as you’ll see from my benchmarking outcomes under, truly offers it a reasonably respectable leg up in relation to general efficiency.
There are some downsides to the i3-8350Ok, although. Unlike the most recent crop of ninth Gen Coffee Lake Core i3 CPUs, for instance, it doesn’t assist Intel’s Turbo Boost expertise. This means its max velocity will probably be endlessly locked at 4.0GHz – except, after all, you strive overclocking it (however extra on that in a second).
There’s additionally the actual fact it doesn’t assist Intel’s Hyper Threading expertise, both. This signifies that, regardless of doubling the variety of cores from the earlier era of Core i3 chips, you continue to solely get 4 threads. On paper, this places it at an obstacle in comparison with AMD’s six-core, twelve-thread Ryzen 5 2600 and 2600X CPUs, and for normal desktop duties, certain, you’ll most likely see and really feel the distinction. For gaming, although, I actually wouldn’t get too nervous about it – and the identical might be stated for the entire ‘no Turbo Boost’ assist factor, too.
Now, I’ll be upfront. Testing a CPU’s gaming efficiency remains to be a little bit of a nebulous train. As our buddies at Digital Foundry have explained in the past, quite a lot of benchmarks both don’t take a look at your CPU correctly, or just aren’t very correct within the first place. Fortunately, a handful of gaming benchmarks have gotten loads higher at this just lately, with the likes of Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Forza Horizon 4, Assassin’s Creed Odyssey and extra all offering an in-depth have a look at your CPU’s efficiency in addition to what your graphics card’s doing.
That stated, there are additionally a number of different elements that may affect gaming efficiency, corresponding to your graphics card, the kind of RAM you’ve received, and even what sort of storage you’ve put in the game on. As a consequence, getting a really correct image of a CPU’s gaming efficiency is hard, however I’ve executed the most effective I can with the gear obtainable to me.
I’ve additionally centered much more on gaming efficiency than I’ve, say, on software efficiency or media creation ins and outs as a result of, nicely, I’m not likely curious about that. I’ve included some cursory Cinebench scores as a fundamental indicator of what every CPU will probably be like for common desktop duties, however actually, my principal objective right here is to work out what CPU is the most effective for gaming and gaming alone.
With that in thoughts, then, let’s transfer on to a few of that juicy knowledge. As you may see from the graphs under, the Core i3-8350Ok operating at its inventory velocity of 4.0GHz was neck and neck with AMD’s Ryzen 5 2600 in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, producing nigh-on equivalent speeds at each 1080p and 1440p. It couldn’t fairly match the Ryzen 5 2600X’s 1080p efficiency, thoughts, but it surely did handle to slim the hole considerably at 1440p.
The AMD chips regained the higher hand in Assassin’s Creed Odyssey, blasting previous the Core i3-8350Ok by at the least 15fps at 1080p and 10fps at 1440p, however the Core i3-8350Ok managed to tug it again in each Total War: Warhammer II and Forza Horizon 4, providing up important leads in each titles at 1080p, and even giving the Core i5-8400 and Core i5-8600K a run for his or her cash in Total War.
Of course, it’s arduous to say whether or not that type of efficiency hole will translate precisely to the lower-end GPUs you’re extra more likely to be pairing this specific processor with, however in my eyes, the i3-8350Ok places in a reasonably good exhibiting in opposition to its equally priced Ryzen 5 2600X rival. As I discussed in my Intel Core i3-8100 review, the non-X Ryzen 5 2600 might be nonetheless the higher worth alternative for these on a funds, however in the event you do have nearer to £200 / $200 in your gaming CPU, then I reckon you’ve received a few choices at your disposal.
If you’re after a CPU that’s purely for enjoying games, then it is best to most likely go together with Intel. The Core i3-8350Ok presents a stable basis, but it surely additionally doesn’t include a cooler within the field, so that you’ll must issue that on high of the price of the processor – and by the point you’ve picked out a good cooler, you could as nicely simply have gone with the Core i5-8400, which does include a cooler and solely prices an additional £15 / $20. Sure, it may not carry out fairly in addition to in Assassin’s Creed Odyssey because the Ryzen 5 2600X at 1080p, but it surely does come out on high in every single place else – and by fairly a good margin over each the i3-8350Ok and Ryzen 5 2600X.
If you’re planning to make use of your PC for issues different than gaming, nevertheless, then you definitely’ll most likely be a lot better served by the identically-priced Ryzen 5 2600X. It may not be fairly as fast because the i3-8350Ok or i5-8400 in completely each game going, but it surely’s nonetheless fairly nippy in its personal proper and in addition presents considerably higher multicore efficiency for extra artistic duties corresponding to picture and video enhancing – as its big Cinebench multicore rating will attest. Plus, it comes with a cooler within the field.
But what concerning the Core i3’s overclocking potential, I hear you ask? Doesn’t that make it higher than the non-overclockable Core i5? Well, sure and no. With my BeQuiet cooler, I used to be in a position to get the i3-8350Ok operating at a steady 4.4GHz utilizing Intel’s Extreme Tuning Utility software earlier than it began to conk out, which, sure, is loads sooner than the Core i5’s max Turbo velocity of 4.0GHz.
However, whereas this gave it a really fine addition to its single core efficiency in Cinebench, elevating all of it the best way as much as 445 (which is one thing that even Intel’s Core i7-8700K couldn’t beat operating at inventory speeds), it made naff all distinction to its general gaming efficiency. I managed to get a few further frames out of Total War: Warhammer II, however that was it. Everything else was precisely the identical because it was operating on the CPU’s inventory speeds, so that you’re not likely gaining as a lot as you suppose by choosing an overclockable CPU versus a locked one.
As a consequence, the £185 / $212 Core i5-8400 might be the gaming CPU to go for in the event you’ve received round £200 / $200 to spend, however the £185 / $230 Ryzen 5 2600X can also be value a glance in the event you’re after one for extra artistic desktop functions in addition to a little bit of gaming.
