OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Intel Core i7-7700K review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£110PassMark multi-core score:9636N. of physical cores:4CPU boost clock speed:4.5 GHzCPU socket:LGA1151TDP (Thermal design power):91 W

Intel Core i7-7700K Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 32 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

Intel Core i7-7700K
6.7/10

Overall score

Score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
Score components

40%

4.9

Technical score

25%

8.0

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

8.6

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 51% of processors
7.6

Value for money

Value for money
7.6/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 65% of models
Score components

70%

6.7

Overall score

30%

9.9

Price

â–²Better than 65%
4.9

Technical score

Technical score
4.9/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 64% of models
Score components

60%

4.5

Performance

18%

4.7

Architecture

10%

5.4

Memory & PCIe

7%

5.4

Power & Thermal

4%

7.8

Platform

1%

6.5

Integrated graphics

â–¼Worse than 64%
8.0

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 72% of models

80%

7.6

Average grade

20%

9.5

Popularity

Grades by review (32)
19 reviews: 11 with a printed score, 8 estimated from the review. 13 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–²Better than 72%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • intel-core-i7-7700k
  • intel-core-i7-7700k
intel-core-i7-7700k
intel-core-i7-7700k
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the Intel Core i7-7700K

Based on 9 · 14

Reviewers enjoy its overclocking and gaming punch, but most find the speed gain over older chips small and it runs hot.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the Intel Core i7-7700K

Based on 143 owners sharing their experience in online comments

63%positive17%mixed20%negative

Owners praise its lasting gaming speed and overclock headroom, while high temperatures and a limited upgrade path remain common frustrations.

What owners dislike

  • Owners report it runs very hot under load, often 80 to 100 C at stock or mild overclocks, and stock coolers struggle to keep it cool.33
  • Reaching 5 GHz often needs high voltage around 1.35 V or more, and some owners find it unstable or hot at that speed.11
  • Owners complain there is no upgrade path, since the chip sits on the Z270 platform that Intel did not carry forward to newer CPUs.7
  • Owners say it hits 100% CPU use in heavy multitasking or video work while streaming and gaming, and it lags behind newer chips there.5
  • Owners say newer games and the next console generation are starting to push it, and some are now considering an upgrade.5
  • Owners say the gain over the 6700K was small, and in benchmarks it did not beat older Intel chips by much.5
  • Owners say auto voltage settings on many boards run high, and the voltage readings shown in software can look confusing or wrong.5
  • Owners who bought it just before the 8700K launch felt it was soon outdated, with the newer chip arriving sooner than they expected.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i7-7700K

Technical score
Technical score
4.9/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 64% of models
Score components:

60%

4.5

Performance

18%

4.7

Architecture

10%

5.4

Memory & PCIe

7%

5.4

Power & Thermal

4%

7.8

Platform

1%

6.5

Integrated graphics

4.9
Reviews score
8.0
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.6/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 65% of models
Score components:

70%

6.7

Overall score

30%

9.9

Price

7.6
Processor type
desktop
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 54.7% of processors and equal to that of 39.5% of processors.
CPU socket
LGA1151
This processor uses the LGA1151 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 59% of processors and equal to that of 9% of processors.
Chipset
?
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES instruction sets, which is narrower support than 65.5% of processors and equal to that of 0.5% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
4
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 4 CPU cores, which is fewer than 52.8% of processors and equal to 27.5% of processors.
CPU threads
8
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 8 CPU threads, which is more than 33.4% of processors and equal to 18.8% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.5 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.5 GHz which is higher than that of 53.9% of processors and equal to that of 5.5% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
4x 4.2 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 4x4.2 GHz which is higher than that of 57.5% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
9,636
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 9,636 in PassMark, which is lower than 54.1% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Semiconductor size
14 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 14 nm process node, which is older than that of 52% of processors and equal to that of 32.9% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 14 nm
This processor is built on the Intel 14 nm foundry process, which is less advanced than that of 55.9% of processors and equal to that of 29% of processors.
L3 cache
8 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 8 MB which is smaller than that of 50.7% of processors and equal to that of 11.5% of processors.
L2 cache
1 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 1 MB which is smaller than that of 68.3% of processors and equal to that of 17% of processors.
L1 cache
256 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 256 KB which is smaller than that of 60.4% of processors and equal to that of 18.1% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
DDR memory version
DDR3L/DDR4
This processor supports DDR DDR3L/DDR4, which is older than that of 78.6% of processors and equal to that of 5.1% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
2,400 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 2,400 MHz, which is lower than that of 64.6% of processors and equal to 11.7% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
?
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
?
Maximum memory capacity
64 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 64 GB of memory, which is more than 27.2% of processors and equal to 26.1% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Intel HD Graphics 630
This processor uses the Intel HD Graphics 630 integrated GPU, which is less advanced than that in 71.9% of processors and equal to that in 2.7% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
24
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 24 GPU execution units, which is more than 49.1% of processors and equal to 20.8% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
350 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 350 MHz which is higher than that of 42.7% of processors and equal to that of 25.4% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), VP8 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode)
This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), VP8 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode) media codecs, which is broader support than 52.1% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
TDP (Thermal design power)
91 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 91 W which is higher than that of 86.9% of processors and equal to that of 0.4% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
91 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 91 W which is higher than that of 87.1% of processors and equal to that of 0.4% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
91 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 91 W which is higher than that of 62% of processors and equal to that of 0.6% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
?
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say

Intel Core i7-7700K vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 3.29x faster classroom rendering
    This processor has a lower Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (1,117.4 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    1,117.4 vs 340.075
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 19.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.0/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 72% of models

    80%

    7.6

    Average grade

    20%

    9.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (32)
    19 reviews: 11 with a printed score, 8 estimated from the review. 13 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.0 vs 6.7
  • 31.1% smaller die size
    This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (122 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    122 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 19.4% higher sentiment score
    8.6 vs 7.2
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (4x4.2 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    4x4.2 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 14 higher clock multiplier
    This processor has a higher clock multiplier than the average processor (42 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    42 vs 28
  • 19.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.0/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 72% of models

    80%

    7.6

    Average grade

    20%

    9.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (32)
    19 reviews: 11 with a printed score, 8 estimated from the review. 13 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.0 vs 6.7
  • 19.4% higher sentiment score
    8.6 vs 7.2
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1151 vs FP5).
    LGA1151 vs FP5
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 3.29x faster classroom rendering
    This processor has a lower Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (1,117.4 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    1,117.4 vs 340.075
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (4x4.2 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    4x4.2 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 14 higher clock multiplier
    This processor has a higher clock multiplier than the average processor (42 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    42 vs 28
  • 5.7% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (2,703 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    2,703 vs 2,558
  • 31.1% smaller die size
    This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (122 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    122 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 8.1% more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 2 fewer CPU cores
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (4 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    4 vs 6
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 2.02x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (91 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    91 W vs 45 W
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 66.7% smaller L2 cache
    This processor has a lower L2 cache than the average processor (1 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    1 MB vs 3 MB
  • 16.7% larger process node
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (14 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    14 nm vs 12 nm
  • 50% less L2 per core
    This processor has less L2 cache per core than the average processor (0.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    0.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 2.02x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (91 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    91 W vs 45 W
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, MPX, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, MPX, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 3 years older release date
    This processor has an older release date than the average processor (2017 vs 2020).
    January 2017
    2017 vs 2020
  • More limited crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more limited crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES vs AES, SHA).
    AES vs AES, SHA
  • 2 fewer CPU cores
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (4 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    4 vs 6
  • 19.5% weaker multi-core performance
    This processor has a lower multi-core performance than the average processor (2,257 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    2,257 vs 2,804.5
  • 16% lower PassMark score
    This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (9,636 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    9,636 vs 11,469
  • 4.9% lower Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a lower Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (466 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    466 vs 490
  • 14.6% slower Blender rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (339.9 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    339.9 vs 398.015
  • 66.7% smaller L2 cache
    This processor has a lower L2 cache than the average processor (1 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    1 MB vs 3 MB
  • 16.7% larger process node
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (14 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    14 nm vs 12 nm
  • 50% less L2 per core
    This processor has less L2 cache per core than the average processor (0.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    0.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 33.3% smaller L1 cache
    This processor has a lower L1 cache than the average processor (256 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    256 KB vs 384 KB
  • 64.6% fewer transistors
    This processor has fewer transistors than the average processor (1.8 billion vs 4.95 billion). The average processor has 4.95 billion transistors.
    1.75 billion vs 4.95 billion
  • 25% lower memory speed
    This processor has a lower maximum memory speed than the average processor (2,400 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    2,400 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • Older DDR support
    This processor supports an older DDR generation than the average processor (DDR3L/DDR4 vs DDR4).
    DDR3L/DDR4 vs DDR4
  • 18.1% lower memory bandwidth
    This processor has a lower memory bandwidth than the average processor (38.4 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    38.4 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (H.264 (HW decode/encode), VP8 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    H.264 (HW decode/encode), VP8 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • Inferior integrated GPU
    This processor uses an inferior integrated GPU to the average processor (Intel HD Graphics 630 vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
    Intel HD Graphics 630 vs Intel UHD Graphics 630
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 2.02x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (91 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    91 W vs 45 W
  • 2.02x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (91 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    91 W vs 45 W
  • 42.2% higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (91 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    91 W vs 64 W

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

8.0
RandomGaminginHD
≈ estimated
19/05/2024
Budget PC build · gaming tests at 1080p
Verdict
Intel Core i7-7700K is a decent budget gaming choice for 2024, though it falls short in demanding titles like Starfield.
7.0
Hardware Unboxed
≈ estimated
22/07/2020
Retrospective review · gaming and productivity benchmarks
Verdict
Intel Core i7-7700K is still capable in games, especially overclocked, but it is dated and newer chips are a clear upgrade for productivity.
8.0
Nicolas11x12 English
≈ estimated
03/02/2017
Hands-on review · benchmarks, gaming tests and overclocking
Verdict
Intel Core i7-7700K is a good pick for rendering and overclocking, but has no IPC gain and no better gaming than the 6700K.
9.0
Digital Foundry
≈ estimated
15/01/2017
Hands-on review · gaming benchmarks and overclocking tests
Verdict
Intel Core i7-7700K is an excellent gaming CPU, but Skylake owners gain almost nothing from upgrading.
6.0
Linus Tech Tips
≈ estimated
05/01/2017
Hands-on review · performance, thermals and overclocking
Verdict
Intel Core i7-7700K is only a small step over the 6700K and not a worthwhile upgrade, though still a solid platform.
8.0
TechteamGB
≈ estimated
03/01/2017
Hands-on review · benchmarks and overclocking tests
Verdict
Intel Core i7-7700K is a great CPU for new gaming and editing builds, but it is only a small step up from last generation.
6.0
Gamers Nexus
≈ estimated
03/01/2017
Full review · gaming, rendering, thermals and overclocking tests
Verdict
Intel Core i7-7700K is only worth upgrading to for specific features, and 6700K owners should stay put, as thermals are a real challenge.
9.0
ThinkComputers
≈ estimated
03/01/2017
Hands-on review · benchmarks and overclocking
Verdict
Intel Core i7-7700K is a good choice for a new PC right now, though upgrading from Skylake is not worth it.
7.0
PC Perspective
≈ estimated
03/01/2017
Benchmark review · desktop CPU performance and upgrade advice
Verdict
Intel Core i7-7700K is a good choice for new builds, but it's only a small step up, so upgrading from Skylake isn't worth it.
6.0
Franklin Reid
≈ estimated
25/01/2017
Benchmark review · 7700K vs 6700K and 6600K
Verdict
Intel Core i7-7700K is a solid processor, but its small gain makes waiting for Ryzen the better choice.
Not graded
Shop video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

10
guru3d.com
✓ explicit
03/01/2017
Architecture review · Board compatibility
Verdict
The Intel Core i7-7700K is a refined Skylake chip with an unlocked multiplier that fits older Z170 boards after a BIOS update, but Optane needs a newer board.
9.0
trustedreviews.com
✓ explicit
03/01/2017
Benchmark review · Desktop processor
Verdict
The Core i7-7700K is a modest upgrade over the Core i7-6700K, aimed at enthusiasts who want easy overclocking, though its built-in graphics are weak.
7.0
techspot.com
✓ explicit
03/01/2017
Benchmark review · Two desktop chips
Verdict
The Core i7-7700K is a small step up from the Skylake 6700K, mainly suited to people who want easy overclocking on a Z270 board.
9.1
tweaktown.com
✓ explicit
03/01/2017
Lab test · Kaby Lake desktop
Verdict
The Intel Core i7-7700K is faster than the 6700K only because of higher clocks, with no gain per clock, though most chips reach a stable 5GHz.
8.0
digitalfoundry.net
≈ estimated
23/01/2017
Benchmark test · Gaming and overclocking
Verdict
The Intel Core i7-7700K hits 4.5GHz out of the box with XMP enabled and is the fastest Core i7 for games, though its gains over Skylake are small clock for clock.
8.5
pcgamer.com
✓ explicit
24/01/2017
Benchmark review · Gaming and video
Verdict
The Intel Core i7-7700K is Intel's highest-clocked chip yet, but it is only about 6 percent faster than Skylake, so gamers gain little.
8.0
uk.pcmag.com
✓ explicit
20/01/2017
Lab test · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The Core i7-7700K is the fastest chip in this test, but only a small step up from the 6700K, and its stable overclock tops out at 4.8GHz.
5.0
techspot.com
≈ estimated
21/06/2019
Retrospective test · Ryzen comparison
Verdict
The Intel Core i7-7700K is a fast single-core chip for lightly threaded games, but the Ryzen 7 1800X outpaces it in rendering and video encoding.
8.0
pcmag.com
✓ explicit
20/01/2017
Lab test · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The Intel Core i7-7700K is the fastest chip in this comparison, but only a small upgrade, and its overclock stops near 4.8GHz.
8.0
popzara.com
≈ estimated
24/05/2017
Upgrade experience · Gaming
Verdict
The Intel Core i7-7700K is a big jump from an older quad-core, delivering smooth gaming in demanding titles, but it adds little over Skylake chips.
4.0
pcgamesn.com
≈ estimated
05/01/2018
Hands-on test · Gaming and overclocking
Verdict
The Intel Core i7-7700K is only a small step up from the 6700K, but it beats the Ryzen 7 1800X in games and runs hot at 4.9GHz.
8.4
ginjfo.com
✓ explicit
03/01/2017
Lab test · Kaby Lake desktop
Verdict
The Core i7-7700K is a high-end desktop chip with a 4.5GHz Turbo and an unlocked multiplier, gaining about 7 to 9 percent over the Core i7-6700K.
8.0
tomshardware.fr
✓ explicit
01/12/2016
Lab test · Overclocking and power
Verdict
The Core i7-7700K reached 4.8GHz at 1.3V, but on the first board it drew more power and ran hotter than the 6700K.
6.0
xataka.com
≈ estimated
20/09/2017
Lab test · 4K video decoding
Verdict
The Intel Core i7-7700K brings native 4K 10-bit video decoding and a 4.5GHz turbo, but its gains over the 6700K stay small.
6.0
tweakers.net
✓ explicit
25/06/2017
Short review · Heat and benchmarks
Verdict
The Intel Core i7-7700K posts strong Cinebench 15 scores and copes with gaming, but it reaches 97°C under Prime95 stress on an air cooler.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i7-7700K

  • Excellent single-core performance, making it a top-tier choice for high-refresh-rate gaming at launch.
  • Higher out-of-the-box clock speeds (4.2GHz base / 4.5GHz boost) compared to its predecessor, the i7-6700K.
  • Integrated hardware support for 4K HEVC and VP9 video decoding, enabling smooth 4K streaming (e.g., Netflix).
  • Strong overclocking headroom, with many users reporting stability at 4.8GHz to 5.0GHz with adequate cooling.
  • Compatible with existing Z170 motherboards (via BIOS update) as well as the newer Z270 chipset.

What customers don't like about Intel Core i7-7700K

  • Significant thermal issues, with frequent reports of high temperature spikes and overheating even under light loads.
  • Poor-quality internal Thermal Interface Material (TIM) often requires users to 'delid' the CPU to achieve acceptable temperatures.
  • Stagnant core count (4 cores/8 threads) at a time when competitors began offering higher core counts for similar prices.
  • Minimal IPC (instructions per clock) improvements over the previous generation, with gains mostly coming from higher clock speeds.
  • Motherboards often applied excessive default voltages (Vcore), necessitating manual undervolting to prevent thermal throttling.

Verdict

The Intel Core i7-7700K is a high-performance 7th Generation Kaby Lake desktop processor featuring 4 cores and 8 threads, a base clock speed of 4.2 GHz, and a Max Turbo frequency of 4.5 GHz. Built on a 14nm process with a 91W TDP, it includes 8MB of Smart Cache, supports DDR4-2400 or DDR3L-1600 memory up to 64GB, and integrates Intel HD Graphics 630 with 4K support. Its primary advantages include an unlocked multiplier for easy overclocking, high single-core performance ideal for gaming, and improved media codec hardware acceleration for 4K streaming. However, it lacks an included stock cooler, is limited to the LGA 1151 socket, and has been noted by some users to run significantly hotter than its predecessors under heavy loads.

Compare Intel Core i7-7700K with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel Core i7-7700K and other processors

No results found