I was eyeing up that i5 6600t 4c\35 watt @ 2.7 - 3.5 ghz for my upcoming new htpc build, i was hoping for a gt4e igpu to be included but i'm not sure thats gonna happen.The entire Skylake-S lineup except K models are 35W and 65W TDP. Also 35W quad-cores received a significant clockspeed bump, there's a 2.8-3.6GHz model now (up from Haswell's 2.2-3.2GHz). I think you should do your homework.
You don't have any concrete data to compare Carrizo and Skylake, which is what we're talking about.
Despite your childish rants everything points to another product that won't change AMD's position on the market and will end up inside cheap BestBuy craptops.
The entire Skylake-S lineup except K models are 35W and 65W TDP. Also 35W quad-cores received a significant clockspeed bump, there's a 2.8-3.6GHz model now (up from Haswell's 2.2-3.2GHz). I think you should do your homework.
You don't have any concrete data to compare Carrizo and Skylake, which is what we're talking about.
As said BDW over HW perf/Watt improvement is 13.5% in Hardware.fr
For Carrizo we have enough datas to have an accurate idea about the product
I dont think that in matter of CPU caracteristics analysis you could patronize me, quite the contrary, i dont count the posts of yours where completely erroneous numbers are used as holy grails..
As said BDW over HW perf/Watt improvement is 13.5% in Hardware.fr review and if the process is unchanged for Skylake there will be no miracles, it will perform about like BDW perf/Watt wise.
You are wrong.
We don't have.
You should put that in practice, perhaps you wouldn't be spreading bullshit about 95W 3.4GHz Skylake quad-cores then.
Der Core i7-6700K wird voraussichtlich mit 95 Watt TDP eingestuft.
Lots of assumptions here for someone with 0 knowledge about Skylake-Y/U performance and power metrics.
Where's all the invisible Carrizo design wins? What will be your excuse after Windows 10 launch?
The OEMs have spoken, all the interesting designs including Surface Pro 4 and H2/2015 Macbooks will be running Skylake later this year.
...holy grails.
As said BDW over HW perf/Watt improvement is 13.5% in Hardware.fr review and if the process is unchanged for Skylake there will be no miracles, it will perform about like BDW perf/Watt wise.
For Carrizo we have enough datas to have an accurate idea about the product, that its perfs seems very good and do not suit some people is another story...
As for SKL perfs there s already some numbers that are known if we are to get back to homeworks duties....
http://www.computerbase.de/2015-07/...-vergleichen-core-i7-6700k-und-core-i7-4790k/
And for perfs, you didnt notice that i posted a link, what are you rambling about..?..
Top line with the FX8800P :
http://www.notebookcheck.com/Toshib...t-C-und-P50D-C-Notebook-Modelle.146105.0.html
Medium line with the 8700P :
http://www.notebookcheck.com/Toshiba-Neue-Satellite-L50-C-und-L70-C-Notebooks.146094.0.html
The problem is that those same "holy grails" numbers shouldn't be repeated over and over: you know that an architecture/process isn't just x% more efficient than another. It's x% more efficient at a certain speed, temperature, ecc.
The
So at least stop using a single value that surely isn't always the correct one, also... why Skylake couldn't be much more efficient on the same process?
Isn't Carrizo built on the same node yet better than Steamroller?
Both architectures are literally built for mobile and better efficiency/performance, so I hardly see the problem here...
So no Skylake-Y/U numbers? That's what I though, yet you still proclaim similar perf/watt compared to Broadwell based on... your wishes to make AMD look better? Not surprising for someone who picks 35W Carrizo results to compare to Core M and Broadwell-U.
You should put that in practice, perhaps you wouldn't be spreading bullshit about 95W 3.4GHz Skylake quad-cores then.
Lots of assumptions here for someone with 0 knowledge about Skylake-Y/U performance and power metrics.
Where's all the invisible Carrizo design wins? What will be your excuse after Windows 10 launch?
The OEMs have spoken, all the interesting designs including Surface Pro 4 and H2/2015 Macbooks will be running Skylake later this year.
Agreed. No real Carrizo is here... But at least there is Carrizo-L coming out... But too late.Sweepr: Let Skylake come out and we'll talk about it. After Intel's lies about how Core M will perform, the balls on their court to prove their worth, even at Core M's level.
Abwx: No real Carrizo products are available.
He's afraid.
If that is the way, incrasing reasonably TDP in order to not to throttle is really a good idea. For now Core M should stay at max 8W instead of 4.5. yeah, you will use a fan, but definately won't throttle as expecting.You can build a product that performs similar to Llama Mountain. Of course Intel tried to show it in the best light possible. Broadwell-Y was the first step though, let's see what Skylake-Y can do. If the Geekbench leaks are correct regarding base clocks then this will be a very interesting chip.
You can build a product that performs similar to Llama Mountain. Of course Intel tried to show it in the best light possible. Broadwell-Y was the first step though, let's see what Skylake-Y can do. If the Geekbench leaks are correct regarding base clocks then this will be a very interesting chip.
Skylake-Y needs to meet BIG expectations. I would bet against it being a "fantastic" product. Maybe a "good" one.Now, Lenovo has stealthily updated the language on the Yoga 3 Pro landing page, reducing the estimated battery life from 'up to 9 hours' to a more evenhanded 7.2 hours.
The problem I believe lies in their process. Remember how they claimed 40% improvement for the 14nm over 22nm? It could be at levels which with 22nm runs at 500MHz. That's 700MHz at 14nm. But its absolutely useless at 1+ volts that Turbo frequencies run at.
What were the clock freqs in those tests? IPC is "per clock", while those chips can use turbo. A more power efficient core will win here if the available power or thermal headroom is the same.That ipc, just wow
I5 4200m vs 6300HQ geekbench single core
4200m (2.5ghz) - 2227
6300HQ(2.3ghz) - 3110
Isn't this like 30% increase in single core performance?
Can't wait for higher clocked one like 6340HQ
What were the clock freqs in those tests? IPC is "per clock", while those chips can use turbo. A more power efficient core will win here if the available power or thermal headroom is the same.
While the Intel Core i7-6700K and Core i5-6600K, the first Skylake processors and the chipset accompanying Z170 will be launched and available as of August 5, things seem to be complicated for 8 more planned processors that will only not overclockable but cheaper.
Several motherboard manufacturers have thus confirmed that the B150 and H170 cards and the rest of the range will not be launched between August 30 and September 5, as planned, but about a month later. Behind this unprecedented shift of 2 months between the CPU and the other K's probably hiding large stocks remaining to be sold on Haswell because of a PC market that is not in top form as recalled at Intel announcing its latest results .
Yup, this. The "HQ" parts are 47W, 4200M is 37W. 10W extra thermal headroom, plus 14nm instead of 22nm? I bet it is boosting significantly more than the Haswell part. Don't try to guess at IPC until we can measure clock locked parts with no turbo.
Its the european/US market being 1 month behind the asian for the mainstream. Only the K models will be released the same time (august 5th) in all segments.
Non K models will be released between august 30 - september 5th in asia and between september 27th and october 3rd for europe/US.
Asia is where the business is. And by Asia I mean China.
Asia=china lol :thumbup:
And I am sure according to you India would be in the 8th continent of Atlantis.