Haswell-E came after Devil's Canyon. Haswell-E is Intel's current enthusiast chip, Devil's Canyon is not.
No it wouldn't because of much higher DDR4 latencies. You didn't provide any kind of reasonable argumentation as to why other review results aren't valid while AnandTech is other than calling them payed by Intel, which shows that your only purpose here is to troll and defend your current system.
DDR3-1600 CL8/CL9 DDR3 (used in most Haswell tests) is superior to DDR4-2133 CL15 DDR4 in true latency (used in AnandTech's Skylake review).
Haswell DDR3 1600 CL9 = 1.25 ns x 9 CL = 11.25 ns true latency
Skylake
DDR4 2133 CL15 = 0.94 ns x 15 CL = 14.06 ns true latency
DDR4-2400 CL15 = 12.5 ns latency
DDR4-2800 CL15 = 10.7 ns latency
DDR4-3000 CL15 = 10 ns latency
PurePC was one of the few reviews where a clock per clock comparison at (nearly) the same true latency was done and Skylake was 15.8% faster than Haswell per clock in games (overall).
Skylake DDR4 2666 CL13 (9.75 ns)
Haswell DDR3 1600 CL8 (10 ns)
Then there is PCLab which favoured Haswell in terms of true latency and clock/CL ratio and Skylake still came out on top.
AnandTech's method:
PCLab
DDR4-2666/16 = 166 (Skylake-S)
DDR3-1866/9 = 207 (Haswell)
...and Skylake still manages 12.8% better performance per clock overall in 14 games.
Should we stop? No, here's Hardware.fr.
Here's Eurogamer:
Can you explain us why even in applications AnandTech showed different results than some other reviews that also used DDR4-2133 (or at most DDR4-2666)?
Now should I ask you, are most reviews being unfavourable to which chip? Hint: it's not Haswell.
Core i7 6700K is the better chip, deal with it.