That does seem pretty excessive. It's obviously not an off the shelf part but the list release price of the 4770R was only $392 VS $339 for the 4770k. Sub-$400 might be justifiable, but not almost $500.
They are probably selling chips that came off of OEM trays.
btw who said it was going to be $480 for the i7-5775C? That's insane if true.
480 dollars for 5775c. No thank you.
I'm waiting for confirmation for price and overclock, and buying 4790k if true
It is good to see some shops carrying it for less than $500. What we have are etailers gouging at prices far above apparent MSRP.
Abxw, how do we know it was under LN2? I've heard the claim, but all the pics show it with a tower cooler in a push/pull configuration. The voltages WERE stupidly-high for the 5 ghz boot . . . definitely not what you want for your daily driver.
So basically, you're speculating . . . nobody has shown screens of LN2 pots, or any of the insulation necessary to stop a board from frying itself due to condensation while under LN2. I'm going to agree with Crashtech on this one.
At this frequency and with 1.419V it wont even boot
Abwx how can you deduce they have the same voltage scaling and actually why it should be similar to 22nm? They had all those delays till now, a new stepping and finally there might be a good process optimized for high frequency too.
Indeed the proof of this should be the fact that Skylake is launching with 4GHz base from start while on 22nm only recently Haswell refresh got that (and we were lucky, sincerely).
Also if they are going to release a Skylake refresh (from another leaked roadmap) what do you expect them to do on the top part: add AVX, GT4?
I'm seriously expecting a bump in clocks, that or they will stop a 10 years long streak of increasing performance on quad cores (at stock speed obviously).
So some 4.2-4.4GHz base to get that 5-10% every year, regardless of overclocking potential.
they had to accomodate this with a 95W TDP instead of 84-88W.
Broadwell has FIVR,but Skylake won't.
The increase in wattage could be down to the absence of the FIVR (I'm assuming putting it on the chipset nets in a decrease in power efficency) and Skylake's IGPU could consume more power the Haswell's.
Broadwell has FIVR,but Skylake won't.
The increase in wattage could be down to the absence of the FIVR (I'm assuming putting it on the chipset nets in a decrease in power efficency) and Skylake's IGPU could consume more power the Haswell's.
That only aggravate the case since the IVRs TDP will be extracted from the chip and deported to the usual external VRMs, otherwise they would have had to set the bar at 100-105W instead of 95W...
Less hardware increase power comsumption and/or losses..?.
I'd assume the absence of the FIVR on Skylake would mean the 'standard' VR would be less efficent, since it's not on die and isn't able to send as low voltages to each core.
Pretty logical that the CPU would end up receiving slightly more voltage for any given task, compared to the fine degree of voltage control that Haswell/Broadwell with the FIVR are capable of.
At this frequency and with 1.419V it wont even boot, a suicide run would require 1.625V to make it effectively run on air for a fast screen capture but this is surely too high for 14nm, hence the need of LN2, it s not speculations otherwise there would be 4C Broadwell DTs at 4.0+ and 65W TDP all over the place..
Idealy at 5.0 Haswell would require 1.28V, yet to get 5.0 for sure require 1.4-1.5V, and BDW/SKL need said 15% more from the start.
The process is a very different one for those chips, they have the dense soc variant (probably used in core-M and xeon-D) while for quad cores it's pretty certain they are using a high performance variant.
Indeed the proof of this should be the fact that Skylake is launching with 4GHz base from start while on 22nm only recently Haswell refresh got that (and we were lucky, sincerely).