Intel Skylake / Kaby Lake

[RichUK]

Those temps give me confidence that mine are accurate.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Quad-core i3? I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[witeken]

Quad-core i3? I'll believe it when I see it.

You'll see in 2018 .

 

[TheELF]

Quad-core i3? I'll believe it when I see it.

Maybe the locked i5-6400 replacement without turbo clocks since i3s don't have those,would be a pretty crappy chip.

 

[Sweepr]

http://pclab.pl/art72145-5.html

 

[mikk]

That's a big IPC advantage for Skylake over Vishera, roughly twice as fast.

 

[Arachnotronic]

That's a big IPC advantage for Skylake over Vishera, roughly twice as fast.

81.2% perf/clock advantage!

Skylake seems to have a 9.2% perf/clock advantage over Haswell in this test.

 

[mikk]

IPC advantage is much higher than 81%. There is a good core scaling over 4+ looking by Vishera 6C vs 8C and Haswell 8C, which is faster than 6700k with less IPC and lower CPU clock.

 

[majord]

So basically, Dual cores are completely out. And Octo-cores are in.

 

[Excessi0n]

I wonder if they overclocked the memory for the 6700K in that chart? I've seen some pretty decent memory scaling with mine. If Watchdogs 2 is significantly affected by memory performance, then a fair bit of the difference between the OC'd 6700K and 5960X could be due to the latter having quad-channel memory when everything else has dual-channel.

 

[Dave2150]

I'm curious, what are you running now and what are you hoping to get with your next CPU purchase?

6700K@4.7Ghz, 1.3v, since August 5th 2015.

Next CPU will probably be an Icelake 8 core. Though it depends on 2017 abd 2018's games, whether they all start benefiting from 6/8 cores or not. If they do, I'll likely get Zen or Skylake-E, though I think high clocked quad cores will continue to be the overall best gaming CPU for all of 2017 and much of 2018.

 

[Arachnotronic]

I think high clocked quad cores will continue to be the overall best gaming CPU for all of 2017 and much of 2018.

Same.

 

[Arachnotronic]

IPC advantage is much higher than 81%. There is a good core scaling over 4+ looking by Vishera 6C vs 8C and Haswell 8C, which is faster than 6700k with less IPC and lower CPU clock.

Aha, you're right. It is an 8 core/8 thread vs 4 core/8 thread.

 

[Sweepr]

Sharing InstLatX64's finding (via Arachnotronic):

Skylake-EP (Purley) comes with 1MB L2 per core (and 1408 KB L3/core)

2x, 12-Core Intel Skylake-E (CPUID 50652, SKX) + GB4 https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/cpu/857083 1024 KB L2, 1408 KB L3 / core

Existing quad-core Skylake-S for desktops packs 256 KB L2 per core (and up to 2MB L3/core). This means the weird 13.75 MB L3 from BenchLife's leak about Skylake-E (HEDT) might actually be true.

 

[Novirius]

How long would an i5 4670k last compared to an i5 6600k Skylake? I am curious if I should upgrade. Would an i7 make that any different? It seems Kaby lake is indistinguishable from Skylake based on comments and it got me thinking about the best way to decide upgrades for CPU.

 

[jelome1989]

I wonder if they overclocked the memory for the 6700K in that chart? I've seen some pretty decent memory scaling with mine. If Watchdogs 2 is significantly affected by memory performance, then a fair bit of the difference between the OC'd 6700K and 5960X could be due to the latter having quad-channel memory when everything else has dual-channel.

Nice. Can you give some numbers? I'm really interested. I'm building a new PC soon and that'll give me good info. Thanks

 

[RichUK]

How long would an i5 4670k last compared to an i5 6600k Skylake? I am curious if I should upgrade. Would an i7 make that any different? It seems Kaby lake is indistinguishable from Skylake based on comments and it got me thinking about the best way to decide upgrades for CPU.

By applying a logical thought process, you should only consider upgrading when you know your current CPU is unacceptably (personally defined) bottlenecking your usage of the system, and thus avoid upgrading for the sake of it.

You may find your current CPU satisfies your requirements for the next 10 years. As an aside, I see a lot of people on here talking about 'use cases', but use cases are just a visual representation of requirements.

Anyway, apply some logical thinking, understand if your current solution still meets your requirement, and if not, consider an upgrade. Execute this process annually and if the outcome is you require an upgrade, assess the prevailing options taking into account budget allowance and make a decision.

Does that waffle help? Probably not

 

[Novirius]

By applying a logical thought process, you should only consider upgrading when you know your current CPU is unacceptably (personally defined) bottlenecking your usage of the system, and thus avoid upgrading for the sake of it.

You may find your current CPU satisfies your requirements for the next 10 years. As an aside, I see a lot of people on here talking about 'use cases', but use cases are just a visual representation of requirements.

Anyway, apply some logical thinking, understand if your current solution still meets your requirement, and if not, consider an upgrade. Execute this process annually and if the outcome is you require an upgrade, assess the prevailing options taking into account budget allowance and make a decision.

Does that waffle help? Probably not

Normally, I would use that criteria as well. However, I am in a unique situation to give my dad parts from my PC and use the money from that to build my own PC. When I asked about this, I was told to buy an Intel NUC for him, but he said he would prefer for me to build him a midtower desktop. I feel he could get away with an i3 ($100) or an i5 ($180). However, he is unsure if he'll try more intensive things in the future because he never had the PC to do that before. He's also starting to learn about smartphones and PCs in general, so we'll see how that goes.

So in this situation, we require a new CPU regardless and both of us are uncertain about future use (I may end up streaming more often with a better CPU). That's why I'm curious about general consensus on lifetime expectancy. I don't think I'll save money upgrading later on, so if I can expect good returns on the current line of CPU, I prefer to do that. Some of the things I am considering are the comments of people saying more cores and threads are being used. The core issue worries me since none of the current CPU have eight cores other than $1000+ CPUs.

 

[Nothingness]

Sharing InstLatX64's finding (via Arachnotronic):

Skylake-EP (Purley) comes with 1MB L2 per core (and 1408 KB L3/core)

EDIT: the rumors were talking of L2 512 KB... That looks crazy

 

[lolfail9001]

If it really is 1MB L2 per core, then Skylake Xeon is, for all intents and purposes, a preview version of IceLake.

 

[Arachnotronic]

If it really is 1MB L2 per core, then Skylake Xeon is, for all intents and purposes, a preview version of IceLake.

Nah, aside from AVX-512 and L2$ size, the cores are pretty much the same. Ice Lake should be a significant improvement over the Skylake core under the hood.

 

[witeken]

Nah, aside from AVX-512 and L2$ size, the cores are pretty much the same. Ice Lake should be a significant improvement over the Skylake core under the hood.

Only if you consider yet another 5% IPC significant.

 

[mikk]

Only if you consider yet another 5% IPC significant.

I don't thing trolling is something we should consider when we don't have information about changes of Icelake over Skylake.

 

[witeken]

I don't thing trolling is something we should consider when we don't have information about changes of Icelake over Skylake.

The really big futuristic upgrade will be 7nm code named Great Lakes .

 

[lolfail9001]

Nah, aside from AVX-512 and L2$ size, the cores are pretty much the same. Ice Lake should be a significant improvement over the Skylake core under the hood.

L2 and L3 caches indicate that cache hierarchy has changed. It has to. And that's a fairly big change over Skylake under the hood. That, and +5%, do hint that SKX is like IceLake beta.