Intel Skylake / Kaby Lake

[Burpo]

"This download is valid for the product(s) listed below."

There is no Skylake CPU listed..

 

[mscrivo]

"This download is valid for the product(s) listed below."

There is no Skylake CPU listed..

Yeah I noticed that, that's why I need some comparison to go by. There's one failure in there that is particularly worrying. The max SMI latency number.

 

[Sweepr]

Reposting from last page:

Exclusive, prototype Kabylake-U details via SiSoftware

This one has 4MB L3 and 2.6GHz base clock so we're possibly looking at Core i7-6500U's successor.

Chipset/Memory Intel Wireless 8260;
8GB HMT451S6BFR8A-PB DDR3 SODIMM PC3-12800
Fixed Storage INTEL SSDSC2CT080A4
General Processor (GP) Intel Kabylake Mobile Graphics
General Processor (GP) Intel Kabylake HD Graphics ULT GT2
Computer/Device Intel Kabylake Client platform Kabylake Client System

''Intel(R) Kabylake Mobile Graphics Controller (192SP 24C 1GHz, 3.1GB) (OpenCL)''

Same iGPU config as Skylake but improved architecture/media (Gen 9.5)?


If this is real (not some current system listed wrong), looks like Kabylake-U is up and running.


Kabylake-U? vs Core i7-6500U's Average Scores

- Processor Arithmetic
Kabylake-U: 49.54GOPS
Core i7-6500U: 45.63GOPS

- Processor Multi-Media
Kabylake-U: 141.26Mpix/s
Core i7-6500U: 125.52Mpix/s

- .NET Arithmetic
Kabylake-U: 16.47GOPS
Core i7-6500U: 14.54GOPS

- .NET Multi-Media
Kabylake-U: 11.55Mpix/s
Core i7-6500U: 10.40Mpix/s

- Processor Cryptography (High Security)
Kabylake-U: 3.67GB/s
Core i7-6500U: 3.26GB/s

What core enhancements? I had thought KabyLake was a carbon-copy of Skylake + iGPU improvements (actually I had heard it was Gen10).

At the beginning I also thought the CPU side was simply a higher-clocked Skylake, but lately it has been speculated Kabylake brings a new x86 core.

To address this cadence, in the second half of 2016 we plan to introduce a third 14-nanometer product code named Kaby Lake, built on the foundations of the Skylake micro-architecture but with key performance enhancements.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Yea, but technically, faster clockspeed would be "enhanced core performance" would it not?

 

[Arachnotronic]

Yea, but technically, faster clockspeed would be "enhanced core performance" would it not?

That is true, but that's kind of pointless on an overclock-able chip!

From what I'm told, Kabylake includes core enhancements. We'll see if that pans out or not, but I have a good degree of confidence in this.

 

[roostrc0gburn]

b;ah

 

[ShintaiDK]

What core enhancements? I had thought KabyLake was a carbon-copy of Skylake + iGPU improvements (actually I had heard it was Gen10).

Its not a core refresh from what I have seen. We have to see what these enhancements are. I expect the usual 3-5% IPC.

 

[PPB]

Probably now they have a 14nm variant with higher fmax and were able to backtrack on pipeline lenght to hw/bw levels.

 

[nvgpu]

http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/2015-October/077255.html

It is Gen9p5, so it inherits everything from Skylake.

Kaby Lake is Gen 9.5, Gen10 GPU is Cannonlake.

 

[tweakboy]

Sighs where is the i8 technology ....... Lake Arrowhead ?

 

[vissarix]

Reposting from last page:






At the beginning I also thought the CPU side was simply a higher-clocked Skylake, but lately it has been speculated Kabylake brings a new x86 core.

i dont think its a new core, look at gops difference, 45-49...most likely slightly higher clocks..just like 4770k vs 4790k.

 

[dark zero]

So Kabylake is really the Godavari of Intel... another rebrand I guess.... seems that they can't even improved their iGPU...

Initially Kabylake was supposed to deliver a massive revamp on their iGPU.... but it seems that they didn't managed to get that levels.

Also, I heard rumors that Kabylake was supposed to make Skylake be like Nehalem somehow since it would block the BLCK OC in order to sell more K chips since the current Skylake is selling more "locked" chips than unlocked ones now.... that rumor is not that certain BTW...

Finally, Kabylake wasn't supposed to be a mere Skylake Refresh, it was supposed to be more than that...

Seems that Intel is about to deliver a very lackluster year.... if it weren't for nVIDIA Pascal and AMD Zen/Polaris, I would say that 2016 would be a very lackluster year overall...

 

[mikk]

Are you smoking something? Basically everyone assumed that Kabylake is just a Skylake rebranding like Haswell refresh last year. Even now most websites still do including you. Kabylake will address one of the two big flaws of Skylake, adding 10 bit HEVC and VP9 decoding/encoding support in hardware. This is a big deal, definitely not just a rebrand like most people expected like you.

 

[Burpo]

Dark zero, didn't you read the Benchlife slide?

"Enhanced Full Range BCLK over clocking"..

Intel has no intention of nurfing bclk overclocking..

 

[Sweepr]

i dont think its a new core, look at gops difference, 45-49...most likely slightly higher clocks..just like 4770k vs 4790k.

100MHz difference (base clock, unknown turbo) wouldn't justify >10% better scores in some benchmarks. It's hard to draw any conclusion from SiSoftware.

Its not a core refresh from what I have seen. We have to see what these enhancements are. I expect the usual 3-5% IPC.

Sounds reasonable.

 

[Sweepr]

Macbook Pro 13'' 2016 @ Geekbench

First sight of 28W Skylake-U: Core i7-6567U 2C/4T (3.3-3.6GHz) + Iris Graphics 550 (1100MHz + 64MB eDRAM)

 

[Arachnotronic]

Macbook Pro 13'' 2016 @ Geekbench

First sight of 28W Skylake-U: Core i7-6567U 2C/4T (3.3-3.6GHz) + Iris Graphics 550 (1100MHz + 64MB eDRAM)

YES. Do want.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Interesting question, whether or not a lower clocked true quad at the same TDP would be a better solution.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Interesting question, whether or not a lower clocked true quad at the same TDP would be a better solution.

Probably dual core is better for something like a 13-inch rMBP. Quad would not be able to sustain high frequencies in 28w power envelope and graphics performance would have to be scaled down to accommodate more CPU cores.

Dual core is still sweet spot for such machines until there is a significant breakthrough in process technology.

 

[CHADBOGA]

Probably dual core is better for something like a 13-inch rMBP. Quad would not be able to sustain high frequencies in 28w power envelope and graphics performance would have to be scaled down to accommodate more CPU cores.

Dual core is still sweet spot for such machines until there is a significant breakthrough in process technology.

Could you post in the benchmark your Computer with Cinebench 11.5 and perhaps show the different scores with different ram speeds.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Could you post in the benchmark your Computer with Cinebench 11.5 and perhaps show the different scores with different ram speeds.

Sure, what speeds are you interested in?

 

[CHADBOGA]

Sure, what speeds are you interested in?

I guess from the officially supported 2133mhz, then the common speeds up from there, like 2400mhz, 2800mhz, & the 3000mhz your memory runs at.

I'm not super concerned about you finding the best latencies possible at each speed, as I don't want you to spend an inordinate amount of time doing this.

Skylake is the first CPU where memory speeds have captured my imagination.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Probably now they have a 14nm variant with higher fmax and were able to backtrack on pipeline lenght to hw/bw levels.

I'd hope so. But changing pipeline lengths aren't something they can so easily implement as to put in a core that's regarded as a "tick".

"Key performance" improvements mean more than just clock speed changes. Though I don't think it'll be more than 2-3%. 3-5% was back in the Penryn days but those are gone now.

 

[dark zero]

Dark zero, didn't you read the Benchlife slide?

"Enhanced Full Range BCLK over clocking"..

Intel has no intention of nurfing bclk overclocking..

Ok, that clears me. Thanks for the info... I was expecting at least a massive iGPU improvement from Kabylake... seems that I skip that generation then.

 

[Cali3350]

Macbook Pro 13'' 2016 @ Geekbench

First sight of 28W Skylake-U: Core i7-6567U 2C/4T (3.3-3.6GHz) + Iris Graphics 550 (1100MHz + 64MB eDRAM)

Why would Apple be using DDR3-1600 here? Lower power consumption?