6700K price going up??? Now $399.99 @ Newegg

[Arachnotronic]

Ya, so what's the point of all the bickering and some arguments in this thread? I don't get the point some are trying to make or what is everyone arguing about when it's clearly supply vs. demand.

Newegg Canada - $530+$12 shipping add tax = $612 CDN, yet it's OOS :thumbsdown:

Amazon Canada - $591.95 + tax = $669 CDN :thumbsdown:

NCIX Canada - backordered until December 28, 2015. What about in a combo? Nope, not available.

PCCanada - OOS indefinitely

Canada Computers - $509 + tax = $575 CDN. (Converted, this is $430 US!) for a quad in 2015. Are they kidding?)

If someone has a decent rig, the solution isn't to freak out but just wait for 6800K. Paying almost $600 CDN for a glorified i5 sounds absurd to me even if I have the $ - it's a matter of principle. If someone is already spending that much $, why in the world would they want to get a quad-core?

So many reviews/benches/YouTube reviews already showed 5820K OC beating 6700K OC overall. The 5820K is barely slower in games but it's way faster in multi-tasking and 6800K will clobber the i7 6700K even more. Also, Z170 is going to be a dead end platform with quad-cores while X99 gives you options down the line to get an 8/10 and even 12-18 core Xeons (think how X58 users are dropping in Xeons now). X99 platform has more PCIe lanes too.

This is very similar to the old the days of E6800/E8400 series vs. Q6600/Q9550. Long-term, slightly higher single core performance doesn't matter but if you run an app that's well multi-threaded, you cannot just magically produce extra cores out of thin air and you cannot upgrade since your mobo is stuck on quads max.

For $430, might as well pay a little extra and get the 5930K which can apparently be had for $460.

 

[RussianSensation]

For $430, might as well pay a little extra and get the 5930K which can apparently be had for $460.

I was listing CDN prices converted to USD. In Canada, after taxes, a 5930K would be $850+ CDN or $636 US.

MicroCenter now dropped the 5930K to $399.99 and they are selling i7 6700K at $359.99. Skylake is the least impressive new Intel architecture since Nehalem and yet it's selling out. Maybe 1st gen i7 owners and 2nd gen i5 owners are finally upgrading.

This is with DDR4-2666 and GTX980Ti.

(http://www.techspot.com/review/1041-intel-core-i7-6700k-skylake/page6.html)

Gaming performance gains are pathetic too.
http://www.techspot.com/review/1041-intel-core-i7-6700k-skylake/page10.html

I thought Nehalem was extremely impressive of a jump. Not the least impressive. And yeah, I finally upgraded this week after 7 years of the i7 920.

Sorry if I misconstrued the meaning with that sentence. What I meant to say is if we go back to Nehalem, Skylake is the least impressive jump among Nehalem to Sandy to Haswell jumps.

Skylake's single threaded performance advantage is just not showing up in most games against the 5820K OC but yet i7 6700K sells for more or less the same price as a 5820K but has 2 less cores. It's going to get even worse with 6800K gaining another 3-5% IPC over 5820K and possibly even higher OCing headroom.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kw-qyZB8qtk

 

[bystander36]

I was listing CDN prices converted to USD. In Canada, after taxes, a 5930K would be $850+ CDN or $636 US.

MicroCenter now dropped the 5930K to $399.99 and they are selling i7 6700K at $359.99. Skylake is the least impressive new Intel architecture since Nehalem and yet it's selling out. Maybe 1st gen i7 owners and 2nd gen i5 owners are finally upgrading.

This is with DDR4-2666 and GTX980Ti.

I thought Nehalem was extremely impressive of a jump. Not the least impressive. And yeah, I finally upgraded this week after 7 years of the i7 920.

 

[RussianSensation]

^ Even with DDR4-3200 and i7 6700K overclocked to 4.7Ghz, Skylake fails so hard, it's not even funny. In multi-threaded apps, it gets destroyed by an i7 5820K while barely beating the 2-year-old Haswell.

So much hype was generated but reviews show it's mostly just that- hype.

 

[ShintaiDK]

So much hype was generated but reviews show it's mostly just that- hype.

You either dont have any clue what you link to. Or you deliberately try to twist it.

This is with DDR4-2666 and GTX980Ti.

And you didn't post anything gaming related.

 

[bystander36]

^ Even with DDR4-3200 and i7 6700K overclocked to 4.7Ghz, Skylake fails so hard, it's not even funny. In multi-threaded apps, it gets destroyed by an i7 5820K while barely beating the 2-year-old Haswell.

That's why I upgraded to an i7 5820K last weekend. It was on sale at Fry's for $320. I got a stable 4.5Ghz OC on it, though I backed it down to 4.4Ghz. I'm already seeing a few games being highly multithreaded, so I figured I should prepare for more of it in the future.

My objection was you calling Nehalem the least impressive, when that was probably the most impressive jump in the last 10 years for Intel. At least if you OC'ed it.

 

[TeknoBug]

Sounds like Intel shipped a fairly small amount of i7 6700Ks (like those Broadwell) and retailers going OOS on purpose to have reasons to jack up prices. I'm seriously not buying the idea of the selling out with inflated prices. Something else is going on.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Sounds like Intel shipped a fairly small amount of i7 6700Ks (like those Broadwell) and retailers going OOS on purpose to have reasons to jack up prices. I'm seriously not buying the idea of the selling out with inflated prices. Something else is going on.

If that was the case, then everyone wouldn't have 6700K. But they do.

 

[Magic Carpet]

If that was the case, then everyone wouldn't have 6700K. But they do.

They definitely oversupplied Europe and undersupplied the US though. But that's how I feel.

 

[ShintaiDK]

They definitely oversupplied Europe and undersupplied the US though. But that's how I feel.

That we can agree on.

But that's just the unfairness of life.

 

[Ghost of Cyrix]

-snip-

You can't be serious... talk about cherrypicking. Did you miss this?

The Core i7-6700K was benchmarked with DDR4-2133 memory installed while all Haswell chips were paired with DDR3-2400 memory. The high-speed DDR3 dual-channel memory allowed the Core i7-4790K to achieve a bandwidth of 30GB/s while the Core i7-6700K was limited to just 26.4GB/s.

DDR4 2666 my rear end, they gave Haswell a huge memory advantage (massive latency disparity and 14% bandwidth disparity) in these tests (while evidently running Skylake's DDR4 without XMP enabled). Plus the 4790K's turbo boost profile is anywhere from 5-10% in Haswell's default favor over Skylake (6700K being at 4 GHz when using more than one core, the 4790K boosting to 4.4 GHz while using up to two cores and 4.3 GHz with three cores). No wonder the 6700K didn't show gains in those tests.



There are more fair comparisons out there with more equivalent memory performance and clock speeds showing Skylake's IPC gains in the ~10% or higher region, particularly with CPU-bound games:


http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/core_i7_6700k_processor_review_desktop_skylake,11.html


http://www.hardware.fr/articles/940-17/cpu-jeux-3d-watch-dogs-total-war-rome-2.html


http://www.purepc.pl/procesory/test_procesora_intel_core_i76700k_skylake_premiera_lga_1151?page=0,35


http://pclab.pl/art65154-30.html

Come on man, I appreciate the recommendations you make to people and your committal to disclosing detailed information, but you need to make sure what you're saying is actually correct first. Your thoughts on Skylake's performance are flat-out ignorant.

 

[Boze]

Ah now I see why Shintai is trying to attack Russian's analysis of the i7-6700K vs. i7-5820K... because he bought in for an i7-6700K early...

C'mon, you should know better. Don't buy the very first releases of a new architecture... should waited for i7-6770K / i7-6790K.

Don't be a sad early adopter, Shin. The numbers aren't there, period. And with $399 i7-5930Ks at Microcenter and $469 at Newegg, there's literally zero reason to buy an i7-6700K right now for $399. Spend the $70 extra at Newegg, or the same amount at a Microcenter and get a vastly superior CPU.

 

[dark zero]

^ Even with DDR4-3200 and i7 6700K overclocked to 4.7Ghz, Skylake fails so hard, it's not even funny. In multi-threaded apps, it gets destroyed by an i7 5820K while barely beating the 2-year-old Haswell.

So much hype was generated but reviews show it's mostly just that- hype.

Russian, are you meaning that Skylake is ending to be into.... Intel's version of Bulldozer?

If that is true, Purley might end into a massive dissaster and that is definately not funny.

Also.. come on!
Gaming is now GPU dependant to the point that is not a good CPU referent compared to more serious tests, like rendering or even Virtual Machines test.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Ah now I see why Shintai is trying to attack Russian's analysis of the i7-6700K vs. i7-5820K... because he bought in for an i7-6700K early...

C'mon, you should know better. Don't buy the very first releases of a new architecture... should waited for i7-6770K / i7-6790K.

Don't be a sad early adopter, Shin. The numbers aren't there, period. And with $399 i7-5930Ks at Microcenter and $469 at Newegg, there's literally zero reason to buy an i7-6700K right now for $399. Spend the $70 extra at Newegg, or the same amount at a Microcenter and get a vastly superior CPU.

The successor to the 6700K will probably be an i7-7xxx series chip as it will be Kaby Lake, not Skylake based

 

[dark zero]

The successor to the 6700K will probably be an i7-7xxx series chip as it will be Kaby Lake, not Skylake based

INBF Kabylake ends to be into another Broadwell and it will end only on Laptops and as a C or R version of the chip.

 

[Arachnotronic]

INBF Kabylake ends to be into another Broadwell and it will end only on Laptops and as a C or R version of the chip.

Are you trolling?

 

[dark zero]

Are you trolling?

Remember what happened with Haswell and Broadwell... we can't be sure if Intel change plans....

 

[Boze]

Are you trolling?

What I'm seeing is completely unacceptable.

Kaby Lake, or the i7-7000 series, should be a minimum of hexacore for Enthusiast parts. There's zero reason to have an i7 be quad-core after Skylake. Absolutely none. Skylake processors are already hitting the same price as Haswell-E.

Intel better pull their head out of their ass. Just because AMD isn't competitive today doesn't mean someone else, or AMD themselves, won't be competitive tomorrow.

Quad-core processors, even with Hyper-threading, should not be sold in 2016/2017. Its time to move on and improve. Frankly I'm in agreement with dark here. I want to see someone do to Intel what Intel's done to AMD if they're going to pull this crap.

 

[bystander36]

What I'm seeing is completely unacceptable.

Kaby Lake, or the i7-7000 series, should be a minimum of hexacore for Enthusiast parts. There's zero reason to have an i7 be quad-core after Skylake. Absolutely none. Skylake processors are already hitting the same price as Haswell-E.

Intel better pull their head out of their ass. Just because AMD isn't competitive today doesn't mean someone else, or AMD themselves, won't be competitive tomorrow.

Quad-core processors, even with Hyper-threading, should not be sold in 2016/2017. Its time to move on and improve. Frankly I'm in agreement with dark here. I want to see someone do to Intel what Intel's done to AMD if they're going to pull this crap.

Exactly why do you have such a strong opinion on this? Why does Intel need to increase core count now? They are starting to make higher core count processor more accessible, which you should like, but why is it so unacceptable that they don't make all their CPU's increase in core count now? What has changed?

It's not like gaming has needed more than 4 threads for a while. Sure, there are some that are starting to use more, but 4 have been enough, especially with HT. All you'll do, if you increase core count on the standard system, is cause most everyone to get lower end parts. Having Haswell-E 6 cores at a respectable price should be enough to satisfy the needs of people like yourself.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Ah now I see why Shintai is trying to attack Russian's analysis of the i7-6700K vs. i7-5820K... because he bought in for an i7-6700K early...

C'mon, you should know better. Don't buy the very first releases of a new architecture... should waited for i7-6770K / i7-6790K.

Don't be a sad early adopter, Shin. The numbers aren't there, period. And with $399 i7-5930Ks at Microcenter and $469 at Newegg, there's literally zero reason to buy an i7-6700K right now for $399. Spend the $70 extra at Newegg, or the same amount at a Microcenter and get a vastly superior CPU.

You should read the post before your own. Then you wouldn't look so silly

RS "analysis" is nothing but garbage. And like my GTX980 he hates so much, I enjoy my 6700K to the fullest.

What I'm seeing is completely unacceptable.

Kaby Lake, or the i7-7000 series, should be a minimum of hexacore for Enthusiast parts. There's zero reason to have an i7 be quad-core after Skylake. Absolutely none. Skylake processors are already hitting the same price as Haswell-E.

Intel better pull their head out of their ass. Just because AMD isn't competitive today doesn't mean someone else, or AMD themselves, won't be competitive tomorrow.

Quad-core processors, even with Hyper-threading, should not be sold in 2016/2017. Its time to move on and improve. Frankly I'm in agreement with dark here. I want to see someone do to Intel what Intel's done to AMD if they're going to pull this crap.

Oh, this explains your attitude and lack of objectivity.

Can you get better by paying more? Sure thing. But that isn't new.

 

[Magic Carpet]

Is there enough of die space to fit 6 cores with intergrated graphics for the mainstream platform?

 

[Arachnotronic]

Is there enough of die space to fit 6 cores with intergrated graphics for the mainstream platform?

Intel could put six cores on a mainstream CPU, no problem. It would add cost (product cost & development resources), but there's no technical reason why it can't be done.

 

[Magic Carpet]

Intel could put six cores on a mainstream CPU, no problem. It would add cost (product cost & development resources), but there's no technical reason why it can't be done.

But if they don't have a similar server part, they would have to make it from the ground-up. Too expensive, no?

 

[dark zero]

Is there enough of die space to fit 6 cores with intergrated graphics for the mainstream platform?

Yes, they can... Only if they stop to put a ridiculously high iGPU on there

 

[Arachnotronic]

But if they don't have a similar server part, they would have to make it from the ground-up. Too expensive, no?

Intel can afford it, but does it make business sense? In other words, if they spend X million dollars designing it, will they make a good return on it? Is there a cheaper way to generate roughly the same revenue without having to spend those X millions?

And, as it turns out, there is. It's called HEDT and it leverages silicon development that already happens for the server market.