OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v1.0
Processors Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are evaluated mathematically under Frontumo Processors Methodology v1.0 using verified laboratory benchmarks, technical specifications, and authentic consumer ratings with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Processors Methodology v1.0

Intel Core i7 8700K Review | 78 Data compared

Avg. price:~£160PassMark benchmark result:13576N. of physical cores:6CPU boost clock speed:4.7 GHzCPU socket:LGA1151TDP (Thermal design power):95 W

Intel Core i7 8700K Review: Compare 78 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

5.9

Overall score

Score
5.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the processor's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best processors on the market.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 53% of models
Score components

90%

5.5

Technical score

10%

9.6

User score

▲Better than 53% of processors
5.5

Technical score

Technical score
5.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 51% of models
Score components

60%

5.5

Performance

18%

5.1

Cache & Architecture

10%

5.9

Memory & PCIe

7%

4.8

Power & Thermal

4%

7.8

Platform

1%

7.1

Integrated Graphics

▼Worse than 51% of processors
9.6

User score

User score
9.6/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 96% of models
Score components

70%

9.4

User ratings

30%

10

Number of reviews

Based on 9,534 buyer reviews from online shops.
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →
How we calculate this
User ratings – average star rating across all shop listings, weighted by how many reviews each has, on a 1–10 scale.
Number of reviews – how many buyer reviews the product has, on a logarithmic scale; the 8% most-reviewed models in the category get 10.
★Better than 96% of processors
  • intel-core-i7-8700k
  • intel-core-i7-8700k
  • intel-core-i7-8700k
  • intel-core-i7-8700k
  • intel-core-i7-8700k
  • intel-core-i7-8700k
intel-core-i7-8700k
intel-core-i7-8700k
intel-core-i7-8700k
intel-core-i7-8700k
intel-core-i7-8700k
intel-core-i7-8700k

Best prices

*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.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i7 8700K

Technical score
Technical score
5.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 51% of models
Score components:

60%

5.5

Performance

18%

5.1

Cache & Architecture

10%

5.9

Memory & PCIe

7%

4.8

Power & Thermal

4%

7.8

Platform

1%

7.1

Integrated Graphics

5.5
User score
User score
9.6/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 96% of models
Score components

70%

9.4

User ratings

30%

10

Number of reviews

Based on 9,534 buyer reviews from online shops.
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →
How we calculate this
User ratings – average star rating across all shop listings, weighted by how many reviews each has, on a 1–10 scale.
Number of reviews – how many buyer reviews the product has, on a logarithmic scale; the 8% most-reviewed models in the category get 10.
9.6
Popularity
Popularity
10.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you prefer to choose a processor reviewed and selected by many other buyers.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 92% of models
Popularity:
Intel Core i7 8700K has a popularity score of 10 points, which is higher than that of 91.9% of products in this category.
10
Value for money
Value for money
7.0/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 61% of models
Score components:

60%

5.9

Overall score

40%

9.7

Price

7.0
Brand name
Intel
Processor type
desktop
Processor type
desktop
▲ Better than 56% of models
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 56% of processors and equal to that of 37.9% of processors.
CPU socket
LGA1151
CPU socket
LGA1151
▲ Better than 61% of models
This processor uses the LGA1151 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 60.7% of processors and equal to that of 9.4% of processors.
Chipset
Z390, Z370, Q370, H370, B365, B360, H310
Chipset
Z390, Z370, Q370, H370, B365, B360, H310
▲ Better than 57% of models
This processor supports Z390, Z370, Q370, H370, B365, B360, H310 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 57.2% of processors and equal to that of 4.4% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
CPU architecture
x86-64
▲ Better than 2% of models
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.7% of processors and equal to that of 98.3% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
6
N. of physical cores
6
▲ Better than 50% of models
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 6 CPU cores, which is more than 49.9% of processors and equal to 13.4% of processors.
CPU threads
12
CPU threads
12
▲ Better than 55% of models
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 12 CPU threads, which is more than 55% of processors and equal to 14.1% of processors.
Threads per core
2
Threads per core
2
▲ Better than 30% of models
Market range: <0 – >2.5
This processor offers 2 threads per core, which is more than 30.3% of processors and equal to 69.7% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.7 GHz
CPU boost clock speed
4.7 GHz
▲ Better than 67% of models
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.7 GHz which is higher than that of 67.1% of processors and equal to that of 3.7% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
6x 3.7 GHz
CPU base clock speed
6x 3.7 GHz
▲ Better than 72% of models
This processor has a base clock of 6x3.7 GHz which is higher than that of 71.7% of processors and equal to that of 0.8% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
14 nm
Semiconductor size
14 nm
▼ Worse than 51% of models
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 14 nm process node, which is older than that of 50.6% of processors and equal to that of 33.9% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 14 nm
Foundry
Intel 14 nm
▼ Worse than 55% of models
This processor is built on the Intel 14 nm foundry process, which is less advanced than that of 55.2% of processors and equal to that of 29.3% of processors.
L3 cache
12 MB
L3 cache
12 MB
▲ Better than 54% of models
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 12 MB which is larger than that of 54.4% of processors and equal to that of 9% of processors.
L2 cache
1.5 MB
L2 cache
1.5 MB
▼ Worse than 62% of models
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 1.5 MB which is smaller than that of 62.2% of processors and equal to that of 4.6% of processors.
L1 cache
384 KB
L1 cache
384 KB
▲ Better than 45% of models
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 384 KB which is larger than that of 44.9% of processors and equal to that of 15.7% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4
DDR memory version
DDR4
▼ Worse than 42% of models
This processor supports DDR DDR4, which is newer than that of 26.3% of processors and equal to that of 31.7% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
2,666 MHz
Maximum memory speed
2,666 MHz
▼ Worse than 55% of models
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 2,666 MHz, which is lower than that of 54.7% of processors and equal to 8.1% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-2666 MHz
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-2666 MHz
▼ Worse than 58% of models
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR4-2666 MHz, which is lower than that of 58.3% of processors and equal to 8% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
?
Maximum memory capacity
128 GB
Maximum memory capacity
128 GB
▲ Better than 62% of models
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 128 GB of memory, which is more than 61.9% of processors and equal to 21.4% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
Integrated graphics
yes
▲ Better than 12% of models
This processor includes integrated graphics. 12.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 630
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 630
▼ Worse than 47% of models
This processor uses the Intel UHD Graphics 630 integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 44.3% of processors and equal to that in 8.3% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
24
Integrated GPU execution units
24
▲ Better than 49% of models
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 24 GPU execution units, which is more than 49.3% of processors and equal to 21.5% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
350 MHz
Integrated GPU base frequency
350 MHz
▲ Better than 42% of models
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 350 MHz which is higher than that of 42.3% of processors and equal to that of 26.1% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), VP8 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode)
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
95 W
TDP (Thermal design power)
95 W
▼ Worse than 89% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 95 W which is higher than that of 88.7% of processors and equal to that of 1.7% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
95 W
Base power (PL1)
95 W
▼ Worse than 89% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 95 W which is higher than that of 88.9% of processors and equal to that of 1.8% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
119 W
Boost power (PL2)
119 W
▼ Worse than 80% of models
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 119 W which is higher than that of 79.6% of processors and equal to that of 0.4% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
8 seconds
Tau (power duration limit)
8 seconds
★ Better than 90% of models
Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 8 seconds which is longer than that of 89.9% of processors and equal to that of 7% of processors.
Configurable TDP
no
Configurable TDP
no
▼ Worse than 53% of models
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 52.8% of processors support configurable TDP.
Show more

Intel Core i7 8700K vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceCache & ArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated GraphicsPower & Thermal
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    Unlocked multiplier
    yes
    ▲ Better than 78% of models
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, the average processor does not. 21.7% of processors have an unlocked multiplier.
  • 61.2% higher multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    7,783
    ▲ Better than 66% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (7,783 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    7,783 vs 4,829
  • Supports memory overclocking
    Memory overclocking
    yes
    ▲ Better than 56% of models
    This processor supports memory overclocking, the average processor does not. 43.6% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 2.73x faster classroom rendering
    Blender (bmw27) benchmark result
    911.68
    ▼ Worse than 68% of models
    Market range: <97 – >1.3k
    This processor has a lower Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (911.7 vs 334.1). The average processor needs 334.1 for the Blender Classroom test.
    911.68 vs 334.1
  • 9.3% higher boost clock
    CPU boost clock speed
    4.7 GHz
    ▲ Better than 67% of models
    Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.7 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
    4.7 GHz vs 4.3 GHz
  • 4 more CPU threads
    CPU threads
    12
    ▲ Better than 55% of models
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (12 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    12 vs 8
  • Higher base clock
    CPU base clock speed
    6 x 3.7 GHz
    ▲ Better than 72% of models
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (6x3.7 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz).
    6x3.7 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz
  • 2x more memory capacity
    Maximum memory capacity
    128 GB
    ▲ Better than 62% of models
    Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (128 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    128 GB vs 64 GB
  • 10x more popular
    Intel Core i7 8700K is more popular than the average processor (10 vs 1).
    10 vs 1
  • 19.7% higher user score
    User score
    9.6/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
    When it matters
    When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    Intel Core i7 8700K
    the average processor
    Intel Core i7 8700K has a higher user score than the average processor (9.57 vs 8.000).
    9.57 vs 8
  • Advanced security extensions
    Security extensions
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, MPX, OS Guard, Boot Guard
    ▲ Better than 57% of models
    This processor provides more 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 Processor).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, MPX, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor
  • Includes crypto acceleration
    Cryptographic acceleration
    AES, SHA, RSA/PKA
    ▲ Better than 84% of models
    This processor includes crypto acceleration, the average processor does not. 0.00% of processors include crypto acceleration.
    AES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA
  • Modern CPU socket
    CPU socket
    LGA1151
    ▲ Better than 61% of models
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1151 vs FP4).
    LGA1151 vs FP4
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    Unlocked multiplier
    yes
    ▲ Better than 78% of models
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, the average processor does not. 21.7% of processors have an unlocked multiplier.
  • 61.2% higher multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    7,783
    ▲ Better than 66% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (7,783 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    7,783 vs 4,829
  • 2.73x faster classroom rendering
    Blender (bmw27) benchmark result
    911.68
    ▼ Worse than 68% of models
    Market range: <97 – >1.3k
    This processor has a lower Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (911.7 vs 334.1). The average processor needs 334.1 for the Blender Classroom test.
    911.68 vs 334.1
  • 9.3% higher boost clock
    CPU boost clock speed
    4.7 GHz
    ▲ Better than 67% of models
    Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.7 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
    4.7 GHz vs 4.3 GHz
  • Higher base clock
    CPU base clock speed
    6 x 3.7 GHz
    ▲ Better than 72% of models
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (6x3.7 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz).
    6x3.7 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz
  • 4 more CPU threads
    CPU threads
    12
    ▲ Better than 55% of models
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (12 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    12 vs 8
  • 35.9% better multi-core performance
    Cinebench R20 multi-core benchmark score
    3,793
    ▲ Better than 62% of models
    Market range: <702 – >10.8k
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (3,793 vs 2,791). The average processor scores 2,791 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    3,793 vs 2,791
  • 28.4% higher PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    13,576
    ▲ Better than 57% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (13,576 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    13,576 vs 10,572.5
  • 8.6% better single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    2,716
    ▲ Better than 58% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (2,716 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    2,716 vs 2,500
  • 10.3% higher single-core score
    Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
    1,622
    ▲ Better than 56% of models
    Market range: <561 – >2.7k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,622 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,622 vs 1,471
  • 16.7% more L3 per core
    L3 per core
    2 MB/core
    ▲ Better than 52% of models
    Market range: <1 MB/core – >3 MB/core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 1.7 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.714 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 1.714 MB/core
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Coffee Lake
    ▼ Worse than 50% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Coffee Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Coffee Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 50% larger L3 cache
    L3 cache
    12 MB
    ▲ Better than 54% of models
    Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (12 MB vs 8 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 8 MB.
    12 MB vs 8 MB
  • Supports memory overclocking
    Memory overclocking
    yes
    ▲ Better than 56% of models
    This processor supports memory overclocking, the average processor does not. 43.6% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 2x more memory capacity
    Maximum memory capacity
    128 GB
    ▲ Better than 62% of models
    Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (128 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    128 GB vs 64 GB
  • No configurable TDP
    Configurable TDP
    no
    ▼ Worse than 53% of models
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, the average processor does. 52.8% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 2.11x higher base power
    Base power (PL1)
    95 W
    ▼ Worse than 89% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (95 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    95 W vs 45 W
  • 98.3% higher boost power
    Boost power (PL2)
    119 W
    ▼ Worse than 80% of models
    Market range: <25 W – >150 W
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (119 W vs 60 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 60 W.
    119 W vs 60 W
  • 16.7% larger process node
    Semiconductor size
    14 nm
    ▼ Worse than 51% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    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
  • Narrower media codec support
    Integrated media encoders/decoders
    H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), VP8 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode)
    Category Benchmark
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), VP8 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)).
    H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), VP8 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)
  • 50% less L2 per core
    L2 per core
    0.25 MB/core
    ▼ Worse than 63% of models
    Market range: <0.25 MB/core – >2 MB/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
  • Narrower instruction support
    Instruction sets
    MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, BMI1, BMI2
    ▼ Worse than 72% of models
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, BMI1, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA).
    MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, BMI1, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
  • 12.1% lower Cinebench R20 single-core score
    Cinebench R20 single-core benchmark score
    430
    ▼ Worse than 65% of models
    Market range: <282 – >775
    This processor has a lower Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (430 vs 489). The average processor scores 489 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    430 vs 489
  • Narrower instruction support
    Instruction sets
    MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, BMI1, BMI2
    ▼ Worse than 72% of models
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, BMI1, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA).
    MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, BMI1, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
  • 3 years older release date
    Release date
    2017
    ▼ Worse than 69% of models
    Market range: <2k – >2k
    This processor has an older release date than the average processor (2017 vs 2020).
    May 2017
    2017 vs 2020
  • 12.1% lower Cinebench R20 single-core score
    Cinebench R20 single-core benchmark score
    430
    ▼ Worse than 65% of models
    Market range: <282 – >775
    This processor has a lower Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (430 vs 489). The average processor scores 489 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    430 vs 489
  • 35.9% slower Blender rendering
    Blender (bmw27) benchmark result
    248.4
    ▼ Worse than 68% of models
    Market range: <97 – >1.3k
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (248.4 vs 387.66). The average processor needs 387.66 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    248.4 vs 387.66
  • 16.7% larger process node
    Semiconductor size
    14 nm
    ▼ Worse than 51% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    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
    L2 per core
    0.25 MB/core
    ▼ Worse than 63% of models
    Market range: <0.25 MB/core – >2 MB/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
  • 40% smaller L2 cache
    L2 cache
    1.5 MB
    ▼ Worse than 62% of models
    Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
    This processor has a lower L2 cache than the average processor (1.5 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.
    1.5 MB vs 2.5 MB
  • Lower JEDEC memory speed
    Max memory speed (JEDEC)
    DDR4-2666 MHz
    ▼ Worse than 58% of models
    This processor has a lower JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (DDR4-2666 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    DDR4-2,666 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • 9.2% lower memory bandwidth
    Maximum memory bandwidth
    41.6 GB/s
    ▼ Worse than 55% of models
    Market range: <25 GB/s – >100 GB/s
    This processor has a lower memory bandwidth than the average processor (41.6 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 45.8 GB/s.
    41.6 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s
  • 9.1% lower memory speed
    Maximum memory speed
    2,666 MHz
    ▼ Worse than 55% of models
    Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
    This processor has a lower maximum memory speed than the average processor (2666 MHz vs 2933 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 2933 MHz.
    2,666 MHz vs 2,933 MHz
  • Narrower media codec support
    Integrated media encoders/decoders
    H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), VP8 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode)
    Category Benchmark
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), VP8 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)).
    H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), VP8 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)
  • No configurable TDP
    Configurable TDP
    no
    ▼ Worse than 53% of models
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, the average processor does. 52.8% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 2.11x higher base power
    Base power (PL1)
    95 W
    ▼ Worse than 89% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (95 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    95 W vs 45 W
  • 98.3% higher boost power
    Boost power (PL2)
    119 W
    ▼ Worse than 80% of models
    Market range: <25 W – >150 W
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (119 W vs 60 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 60 W.
    119 W vs 60 W
  • 2.11x higher TDP
    TDP (Thermal design power)
    95 W
    ▼ Worse than 89% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (95 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    95 W vs 45 W
  • 20 seconds shorter turbo duration
    Tau (power duration limit)
    8 seconds
    ★ Better than 90% of models
    Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
    This processor has a lower turbo duration limit than the average processor (8 seconds vs 28 seconds). The average processor maintains turbo for 28 seconds.
    8 seconds vs 28 seconds

Video reviews

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

Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet

Third-party reviews

Based on 9,534 buyer reviews from online shops.
Reviews last updated: October 2026 · How we calculate this
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →

What we like about Intel Core i7 8700K

  • Exceptional gaming performance, often cited as a top-tier choice for high-refresh-rate gaming
  • Significant multi-core improvement with 6 cores and 12 threads compared to previous generations
  • Strong overclocking potential, with many users easily reaching 5.0GHz
  • Excellent single-core speeds that benefit both gaming and specific productivity tasks
  • Competitive pricing at launch relative to high-end alternatives

What we don't like about Intel Core i7 8700K

  • Requires a new Z370 motherboard, as it is incompatible with older LGA 1151 boards
  • Tends to run hot, especially when overclocked, often requiring high-end cooling solutions
  • Does not include a stock heatsink/cooler in the box
  • High power consumption under heavy load or when pushed to its limits
  • Limited performance gains in GPU-bound games compared to the previous i7-7700K

Verdict

The Intel Core i7-8700K is an 8th Generation Coffee Lake desktop processor featuring 6 cores and 12 threads with a 95W TDP. It operates at a base clock frequency of 3.7 GHz and a max turbo boost of 4.7 GHz, supported by 12MB of Intel Smart Cache and an integrated UHD Graphics 630 engine. Main pros include exceptional single-core gaming performance, a 50% increase in multi-threaded power over its predecessor, and an unlocked multiplier that allows for significant overclocking headroom, often reaching 5.0 GHz or higher. However, notable cons include its high operating temperatures under load, the lack of an included stock cooler, and the requirement for a 300-series chipset motherboard despite using the familiar LGA 1151 socket.

Compare Intel Core i7 8700K 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 8700K and other processors

No results found