Yes.
And the compare:
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Core-...ylake-Test-Core-i7-6700K-i5-6600K-1166741/#a3
Last edited:
I think I saw 12_1 mentioned by Nvidia, but I'm not sure about that.
Are those features useful if one has to use lower settings?
I don't know if Sandy Bridge's time is up now, but for me it was up when 22nm IB was released. At least 22nm IB gave a decent power reduction for same performance over SB.
But this 14nm Skylake launch just has me puzzled (business-wise, not technology-wise). Its like 14nm gave Skylake no benefit over 22nm Haswell. All the performance gains are architectural, designed in by some hard working engineers.
In the meantime, 14nm looks to be basically 100% cost-reduction focused (areal shrinkage maximized, electrical parametrics be damned) versus 22nm and 32nm.
So here is my half-baked assessment at this point - Whether or not Sandy Bridge is made obsolete by Skylake, the progression of diminishing returns with Intel's Tick-Tock tells me, as a consumer, that I may as well buy Skylake now because there is pretty much no damn good reason to hold out for any future Intel processor(s) as they are also just as likely to deliver, at best, a solid 5% performance bump in 1, 2, or 3 years time.
Intel's Skylake is telling us that this is not as good as it is going to get, but at the same time they are communicating that 10nm and 7nm are going to give us CPUs that might be, if we are lucky, another 10-20% over what Skylake is giving us today.
Buy one now, log out of your Anandtech forums account, and don't worry about the semiconductor world for at least 5 years. Save yourselves hundreds, if not thousands, of hours to go do something more productive with your lives in the meantime. Maybe 5nm will come along in 2022 and give us a grand total of 25% improvement in performance/watt over Skylake, then its time to consider an upgrade.
I don't know if Sandy Bridge's time is up now, but for me it was up when 22nm IB was released. At least 22nm IB gave a decent power reduction for same performance over SB.
But this 14nm Skylake launch just has me puzzled (business-wise, not technology-wise). Its like 14nm gave Skylake no benefit over 22nm Haswell. All the performance gains are architectural, designed in by some hard working engineers.
In the meantime, 14nm looks to be basically 100% cost-reduction focused (areal shrinkage maximized, electrical parametrics be damned) versus 22nm and 32nm.
So here is my half-baked assessment at this point - Whether or not Sandy Bridge is made obsolete by Skylake, the progression of diminishing returns with Intel's Tick-Tock tells me, as a consumer, that I may as well buy Skylake now because there is pretty much no damn good reason to hold out for any future Intel processor(s) as they are also just as likely to deliver, at best, a solid 5% performance bump in 1, 2, or 3 years time.
Intel's Skylake is telling us that this is not as good as it is going to get, but at the same time they are communicating that 10nm and 7nm are going to give us CPUs that might be, if we are lucky, another 10-20% over what Skylake is giving us today.
Buy one now, log out of your Anandtech forums account, and don't worry about the semiconductor world for at least 5 years. Save yourselves hundreds, if not thousands, of hours to go do something more productive with your lives in the meantime. Maybe 5nm will come along in 2022 and give us a grand total of 25% improvement in performance/watt over Skylake, then its time to consider an upgrade.
I'd rather see your analysis as a semiconductor engineer . I think you give Intel's process nodes too little credit, cause they are definitely better than 25%. Broadwell-y was at least 60%.
Can someone show me this microcenter 5820k+extreme4 bundle for $350 after rebate? I see it for $479 and a $30 rebate, so $449? where you getting the other $100 off from?
I can only wonder what TuxDave is thinking. Those guys spend so many effort in those architectures and then they have to face multitudes of moaning and whining and disappointed people..
I'm talking about Broadwell-y, Core m, 4.5W. That simply was not possible with Haswell on 22nm.The majority of posters here are consumers and don't care about a 60% improvement of there's only a 5% net improvement for what I use my cpu for. I'm with idontcare on this one too. I really should've kept my sandy bridge in my main rig years ago and saved tons of money meanwhile. Just call us spoiled over the glory days when a new generation of desktop CPUs actually meant something.
This is actually an interesting point. There are likely a lot of engineers that have worked very hard for this, only to gain minor improvements. They likely worked as hard as the CPU engineers 10-20 years ago, but the improvements are not the same any longer. That must be kind of demoralizing for them actually... :\
Where we see good leaps in IPC in processing limited applications. But hardly anything in memory limited.
A last example would be the Broadwell-C and its eDRAM. Complete game changer as well in memory stuck games and applications.
For the purposes of our testing, Asus supplied its excellent Z170 Deluxe board, while Corsair supplied two 8GB stocks of its new low-profile Vengeance LPX RAM, rated for 2666MHz. Our testing set-up was cooled with a Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo, with power supplied via a Corsair HX750. We used a 512GB Crucial MX100 SSD for storage.
Previously, we've tackled this by remaining at ultra settings, but knocking down resolution to 720p in order to do our best to remove graphics as the bottleneck without compromising CPU workload. However, with the arrival of Nvidia's borderline insane Titan X and its overclocking prowess, we now feel confident about repeating this process at 1080p - by far the most popular gaming resolution according to the Steam hardware survey.
There is a standout result here. The Witcher 3 is 17 per cent faster on the new 6600K, compared directly to the old 4690K - a result that is repeatable (and our initial tests on the new i7-6700K show that it is even faster) and obviously significantly beyond the vast majority of the synthetic results. We've chosen this particular scene because we know that it easily overpowers the 4690K, and even the 6600K at stock speeds maxes out on all four cores. It's the most strenuous test in our line-up, but there are other noteworthy results: GTA 5 is 11 per cent faster and Battlefield 4 sees a 10 per cent uplift. Other titles are less impressive - five per cent or lower. Based on the relatively level frame-time graphs, we believe that we may still be GPU limited.
...There's an argument that could suggest that the test scores are levelled off since we're GPU-limited - and we strongly suspect that in the case of Assassin's Creed Unity and Shadow of Mordor at least, that is more than likely the case. But on the flipside, The Witcher 3 and Grand Theft Auto 5 are clearly CPU-bound - and the i5 hands in some excellent results there.
...a fully maxed GTA 5 is CPU-limited even on an overclocked Core i7 4790K, while certain scenes in the Witcher 3 on ultra settings can also cause difficulties for even the most powerful processor. Our contention is that more games like this will come along, and in demanding CPU titles, the Core i5 6600K will make a noticeable difference.
But in the here and now, the Core i5 6600K is a strong product - at worst it provides mildly enhanced performance over its predecessors, at best it's noticeably faster and should help to reduce CPU bottlenecking during gameplay. For those looking to buy or construct a new, capable gaming PC, the i5 remains the default choice and the 6600K is the best iteration yet - AMD's older eight-core FX chips are cheaper, but our tests clearly demonstrate that despite the low-power many-core set-up of the new console CPUs, modern games generally prefer the high per-core performance that Intel provides.
There's plenty of examples where Skylake-S manages to provide the usual 10-15% Intel Tock boost (even more in specific apps), mostly coming from reviews that used DDR4-2666 or faster memory.
Those expensive CPU's with Iris Pro iGPU that nobody cares about? lolYou know, if we keep ignoring desktop Broadwell, maybe it will cease to exist. :awe:
Intel is just riding the slack wave because they have no competition. Looking at the Skylake die shot almost made me want to vomit at how much they are ripping us consumers off. The die-size is TINY and they are making a killing selling it for those prices.
6600K slapped 4690K and 3570K hard in that review!
But again it shows what happens when Skylake can run free.
Apples and oranges. Hardware Canucks uses DDR3 1866 Cas 11 and DDR4 2666 CAS 13(!). That is not even close.
Hardware Canucks said:Intel’s lock-step intergenerational improvements of about 10% continue here just like they did with Ivy Bridge, Haswell and Broadwell so some enthusiasts will likely want to roll their eyes and say “I’ll wait for whatever comes next”.
If this is the case I wonder how come Intel didn't add eDRAM to more of the Skylake desktop models. From what you've told us earlier, eDRAM should be quite cheap to add, so what's holding them back? Why only use it on some very specialized SKUs like Broadwell C?
I'm talking about Broadwell-y, Core m, 4.5W. That simply was not possible with Haswell on 22nm.
Let's see what Anandtech said about their RAM, since you allege that Anandtech reduced difference in RAM "as much as possible".Hardware Canucks uses DDR3 1866 Cas 11 and DDR4 2666 CAS 13(!). That is not even close. Hothardware and PcPer don't even post CAS latency under test system setup so god knows what they are testing. There are plenty of reviews where the memory difference between Haswell / Skylake comparison was reduced as much as possible, including here on anandtech showing the real IPC gain to be nowhere near the "usual" 10-15%
Performance index=frequency/CAS, supposedly.Normally in our DRAM reviews I refer to the performance index, which has a similar effect in gauging general performance:
DDR3-1600 C11: 1600/11 = 145.5
DDR4-2133 C15: 2133/15 = 142.2
As you have faster memory, you get a bigger number, and if you reduce the CL, we get a bigger number also. Thus for comparing memory kits, if the difference > 10, then the kit with the biggest performance index tends to win out, though for similar kits the one with the highest frequency is preferred.
DDR4: 2133/15=142.2For these tests, both sets of numbers were run at 3.0 GHz with hyperthreading disabled. Memory speeds were DDR4-2133 C15 and DDR3-1866 C9 respectively.
Somebody asked about when these chips would actually be available. Newegg now shows a release date of 8/14/2015. So looks like most of us have to wait another week.
Somebody asked about when these chips would actually be available. Newegg now shows a release date of 8/14/2015. So looks like most of us have to wait another week.
The Broadwell i5 is $30 more expensive than SKL i5. This price difference can easily dissipate when adding RAM and MB to the mix.Those expensive CPU's with Iris Pro iGPU that nobody cares about? lol