CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 6600K vs 8370 among all CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

8

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Core i5 6600K 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i5 6600K  based on its performance and single-core performance.

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Intel Core i5 6600K

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Core i5 6600K

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i5 6600K

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 6600K

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 14 nm vs 32 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much better geekbench 3 single core score 4,824 vs 2,186 Around 2.2x better geekbench 3 single core score
More l3 cache 6 MB vs 0 MB Compared to all cpus, 6 MB l3 cache is just OK
Much more l3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core vs 0 MB/core Compared to all cpus, 1.5 MB/core l3 cache per core is just OK
Much better cinebench r10 32Bit 1-core score 8,372 vs 4,436 Around 90% better cinebench r10 32Bit 1-core score
Lower typical power consumption 73.94W vs 101.56W More than 25% lower typical power consumption
Better cinebench r10 32Bit score 29,116 vs 23,394 Around 25% better cinebench r10 32Bit score
Newer Jul, 2015 vs Sep, 2014 Release date 10 months later
Higher Maximum operating temperature 64 °C vs 61 °C Around 5% higher Maximum operating temperature
Lower annual commercial energy cost 79.72 $/year vs 109.5 $/year More than 25% lower annual commercial energy cost
Lower annual home energy cost 21.92 $/year vs 30.11 $/year More than 25% lower annual home energy cost
Front view of AMD FX 8370

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 8370

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 8 MB vs 1 MB 8x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Higher clock speed 4 GHz vs 3.5 GHz Around 15% higher clock speed
Higher turbo clock speed 4.3 GHz vs 3.9 GHz More than 10% higher turbo clock speed
Much better performance per dollar 8.56 pt/$ vs 1.59 pt/$ More than 5.2x better performance per dollar
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
More cores 8 vs 4 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
More threads 8 vs 4 Twice as many threads
Better performance per watt 12.32 pt/W vs 4.01 pt/W More than 3x better performance per watt

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i5 6600K vs FX 8370

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i5 6600K
15,392
FX 8370
11,583

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

FX 8370
2,186

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i5 6600K
6,560 MB/s
FX 8370
2,450,000 MB/s

Cinebench R10 32-Bit

Core i5 6600K
29,116
FX 8370
23,394

Cinebench R10 32-Bit (Single Core)

FX 8370
4,436

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i5 6600K  vs
FX 8370 
Clock speed 3.5 GHz 4 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.9 GHz 4.3 GHz
Cores Quad core Octa core
Is unlocked Yes Yes

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
AVX 1.1
SSE2
F16C
MMX
SSE4
XOP
AVX
SSE3
SSE
ABM
BMI1
CLMUL
AMD64
SSE4.1
FMA4
FMA3
SSE4.2
CVT16
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
AES
TBM
AVX 2.0
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1866
DDR3L-1600
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC No Yes
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 29,866.66 MB/s

details

Core i5 6600K  vs
FX 8370 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 8
L2 cache 1 MB 8 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 6 MB 0 MB
L3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core 0 MB/core
Manufacture process 14 nm 32 nm
Operating temperature Unknown - 64°C Unknown - 61°C

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics 530 N/A
Number of displays supported 3 N/A
GPU clock speed 350 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 1,150 MHz N/A

power consumption

TDP 91W 125W
Annual home energy cost 21.92 $/year 30.11 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 79.72 $/year 109.5 $/year
Performance per watt 4.01 pt/W 12.32 pt/W
Typical power consumption 73.94W 101.56W
Intel Core i5 6600K
Report a correction
AMD FX 8370
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

Showing 1 comment.
The AES score seems to be messed up
comments powered by Disqus