Hence, regardless of how efficient Intel’s Hyperthreading technology is, a dual core CPU like the i3-6100 which can process up to four threads will typically fall behind its more expensive quad core siblings. The benefits of a native quad core processor in today’s workloads can’t be overlooked.

TDP also remains identical to its more expensive sibling at 65W. While it still includes four native processor cores and a quartet of threads, its base clock (typically what the processor will run at under heavily multithreaded workloads) and graphics clock are much lower than the 6500’s despite a slim $15 cost savings. Judging from the response on various online forums, the i5-6400 is considered by many to be the black sheep of Intel’s lineup. Unfortunately the 3.6GHz max Turbo speed is a far cry away from the 8-threaded i7-6700K’s 4.2GHz but the i5-6500 costs nearly $150 less. It offers Base and Boost frequencies that are within a mere 10% of Intel’s lowest-priced unlocked Skylake CPU while still incorporating four native processor cores, a 6MB cache and a 26W lower TDP.

The $192USD i5-6500 is a processor many have considered to be a fitting replacement for the significantly higher priced i5-6600K. Unfortunately, since we purchased all of these processors it was the only one which wasn’t available but, on paper at least, it really doesn’t offer that much more than the i3-6100. All of these have been chosen for their price points above all else but there is a notable absence: the i3-6300. This all brings us to the three processors in today’s review, namely the i5-6500, i5-6400 and i3-6100. However, some of these more affordable alternatives could be an excellent option if a user believes the money saved versus something like the i7 6700K would be better invested in a motherboard with a huge feature set or a better graphics card. Many have asked themselves whether or not those unlocked multipliers that distinguish K-series processors are really worth the investment.Įnthusiasts who really want to push their systems will always gravitate towards overclocking. It has however contributed to prices remaining high which has pushed potential customers to lower price points. While this situation could eventually play into AMD’s hands provided their Zen microarchitecture meets expectations, for the time being this isn’t negatively impact Intel’s commanding market share.

Simply put, Intel can’t produce Skylake processors fast enough to satisfy the market’s demand. Much of this odd rollout seems to have been dictated by challenges brought about by Intel’s advanced 14nm manufacturing process, one which has effectively broken the ground rules set out by Moore’s Law. Instead of offering a broad range of products from day one, additional i5, i3 and Pentium-class CPUs became available in fits and spurts, sometimes months after their initial “launch” dates. The way Intel has approached Skylake’s cadence into lower price points has been drastically different from previous generations. These remained the only two possibilities for Skylake-bound buyers until late last year when Intel finally rolled out a top-to-bottom lineup. Both boasted features enthusiasts looked for like unlocked multipliers and fast out-of-box performance but they were also priced accordingly. When Intel first launched their Skylake processors, buyers’ choices were essentially limited to a pair of options: the i7 6700K and later the i5 6600K.

I5 6600k quicksync