Intel Skylake / Kaby Lake

[Ajay]

Platform TDP options are 65W and 95W for CFL-S according to the slide I have from a manufacturer, although the CPU TDP might differ from earlier Roadmaps (7700k TDP is 91W, platform/cooler TDP is 95W). We obviously shouldn't expect 4.4 Ghz on default when 6C are loaded, but even with something like 3.8 Ghz it should give us a nice multithread boost over 4C Kabylake. It's a different question with OC of course. It will be interesting to see how it compares regarding temperatures, I mean the Die is bigger and I wonder what Intel did compared to Kabylake.

In my mind (and no place in reality). I was figuring Intel would want to hit at least 4.0 GHz (*majic* number) all core, to help pull in potential Ryzen buyers. My guesstimate was based on scaling out an i7-7700K (4.2/4.5 GHz) to six cores minus improved efficiency for 14nm++. To hit 95 Watts, I think a stock six core CFL would be lucky to hit 3.6 GHz on all cores. While, as you point out, overclocking would be a different story - stock clocks would not impress. Perhaps this is why Intel has waited so long to push more cores.

In any case, I really hope Intel can find a way push the TDP on S4H to yield higher stock clocks, though that might mean that 200 series motherboards might become physically incompatible.

 

[mikk]

In my mind (and no place in reality). I was figuring Intel would want to hit at least 4.0 GHz (*majic* number) all core, to help pull in potential Ryzen buyers. My guesstimate was based on scaling out an i7-7700K (4.2/4.5 GHz) to six cores minus improved efficiency for 14nm++. To hit 95 Watts, I think a stock six core CFL would be lucky to hit 3.6 GHz on all cores.

There is a huge difference between even 4.0 Ghz and 4.4 Ghz. In fact Skylake or Kabylake runs extremely inefficient over 4 Ghz in terms of energy efficiency, especially the last hundreds of Mhz on Kabylake. My 7700k doesn't even need 1.0V to run with 3.6 Ghz but requires 1.20V to run with 4.4 Ghz, it's a huge difference.

 

[cytg111]

There is a huge difference between even 4.0 Ghz and 4.4 Ghz. In fact Skylake or Kabylake runs extremely inefficient over 4 Ghz in terms of energy efficiency, especially the last hundreds of Mhz on Kabylake. My 7700k doesn't even need 1.0V to run with 3.6 Ghz but requires 1.20V to run with 4.4 Ghz, it's a huge difference.

Is my math failing me? That computes to proportional growth here..

 

[krumme]

Intel has shown little sign of being bothered by RyZen so far, imo.

Well you can pretty much asume that everyone at Intel that shows just remotely similar attitude as yours, and have anything that resembles a managerial position, will get the kick.

I dont know if you cant see the woods for trees but retail sales ranks speaks in volume and Intel is responding swiftly. As they should.

 

[mikk]

Is my math failing me? That computes to proportional growth here..

There is no linear power increase with a linear Vcore increase, more like a quadtratic increase.

 

[cytg111]

There is no linear power increase with a linear Vcore increase, more like a quadtratic increase.

I understand that but you dont seem to be hitting the exponential part of that graph yet, vcore/clocks.

 

[krumme]

It's been known since January (before any X399 leak) that Skylake-X wouldn't top out at 10C - thanks to BenchLife. They could easily offer more than 12C if they wanted as well, the Skylake-X MCC die they are using has 18C as well as much more cache than Skylake-X LCC, but they're probably confident it will be enough to maintain the performance lead.

Well they won't have the performance lead with a 12c vs a 16c ryzen for most of the loads. Dx9 drawcall bm doesnt really help here.
We know where this lands.
But they dont have to have the performance lead either. And its not about branched avx2 code whatever but because a cpu is just a part if the solution.
Secondly they will not risk server margins. But maintain margins.
They are a data company.

 

[mikk]

Well they won't have the performance lead with a 12c vs a 16c ryzen for most of the loads.

IPC and clock speed is more important for those models which I think SKL-X will easily outpace Ryzen. Just have a look at those high end server models with a super high core count. Clock speeds look rather uninspiring for consumer. For many consumer workloads you don't even get an advantage with more than 8 cores.

 

[krumme]

IPC and clock speed is more important for those models which I think SKL-X will easily outpace Ryzen. Just have a look at those high end server models with a super high core count. Clock speeds look rather uninspiring for consumer. For many consumer workloads you don't even get an advantage with more than 8 cores.

Do we have tdp of the 12c model?

I wouldnt think those 12/16c as consumer products but who is buying the 6950 now?

 

[psolord]

It's public now!

Intel to unveil Basin Falls, launch Coffee Lake ahead of schedule



http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20170419PD207.html

- 6C/8C/10C Skylake-X launch at the end of June
- 12C Skylake-X SKU confirmed and launching in August!
- Considering 12C is now an option at the top, we may get higher core count options for lower prices than Broadwell-E (8C Skylake-X replacing 6850K / 10C replacing 6900X?)
- Coffee Lake-S will be released in August along with Z370 chipset motherboards
- Several K-series Core i7/i5/i3 processors planned!
- H370, B360 and H310 chipsets motherboard at the end of 2017 or early 2018

Thanks.

This looks weird however.

Meanwhile, AMD is planning to announce its top-end 16-core Ryzen processor and X399 platform in the third quarter to compete for the gaming market.

 

[psolord]

you didn't lose much

Well from what I've been seeing lately, the 7700k is still king of the hill regarding gaming and I don't play MP games, so it seems it will be a great upgrade from my 2500k.

From what I have seen I am looking at about 50% more gaming performance in cpu limited cases and around 100% in apps. If the 2500k lasted me so long, I believe I will be ok.

 

[jpiniero]

It's been known since January (before any X399 leak) that Skylake-X wouldn't top out at 10C - thanks to BenchLife. They could easily offer more than 12C if they wanted as well, the Skylake-X MCC die they are using has 18C as well as much more cache than Skylake-X LCC, but they're probably confident it will be enough to maintain the performance lead.

The die supports 12C I assume, but probably they intended it only for Xeon. I doubt they could offer a Skylake-EP die though on X299 though given all the differences.

This is their emergency response to Ryzen basically.

What is the point of the 4-core KL-X? Isn't it going to compete with the 7700K and the 4-core CL?

Probably cancelled.

 

[dark zero]

IPC and clock speed is more important for those models which I think SKL-X will easily outpace Ryzen. Just have a look at those high end server models with a super high core count. Clock speeds look rather uninspiring for consumer. For many consumer workloads you don't even get an advantage with more than 8 cores.

Heck, for the average Joe, it only needs a single thread for everything

 

[tential]

It's public now!

Intel to unveil Basin Falls, launch Coffee Lake ahead of schedule



http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20170419PD207.html

- 6C/8C/10C Skylake-X launch at the end of June
- 12C Skylake-X SKU confirmed and launching in August!
- Considering 12C is now an option at the top, we may get higher core count options for lower prices than Broadwell-E (8C Skylake-X replacing 6850K / 10C replacing 6900X?)
- Coffee Lake-S will be released in August along with Z370 chipset motherboards
- Several K-series Core i7/i5/i3 processors planned!
- H370, B360 and H310 chipsets motherboard at the end of 2017 or early 2018

So this is what competition feels like....

 

[Sweepr]

Well they won't have the performance lead with a 12c vs a 16c ryzen for most of the loads. Dx9 drawcall bm doesnt really help here.

Intel is using a Skylake-SP MCC die for this product and if they chose 12C and not some extravagant 14C/16C/18C configuration it's because they found the right core count & clockspeed balance to make it faster than 16C Ryzen more often than not. Updated cores, new cache architecture, faster quad-channel memory should improve performance per clock compared to Broadwell-E, and that's before we factor process improvements (14nm+/14nm++). >25% better performance per core than a (possibly) lower clocked 16C Ryzen is doable. I'm talking applications here, because gaming should largely favor 12C Skylake-X and the (higher clocked) cheaper options from both Intel/AMD.

 

[Sweepr]

The die supports 12C I assume, but probably they intended it only for Xeon. I doubt they could offer a Skylake-EP die though on X299 though given all the differences.

This is their emergency response to Ryzen basically.

BenchLife hinted at a >10C Skylake-X product as soon as January, so this product has been in the works for quite some time.

Probably cancelled.

Kaby Lake-X is basically a HEDT version of i7-7700K and might end up cheaper than 6C Skylake-X. Personally I'd wait two months to see what Coffee Lake has to offer first. Even if you intend to buy a 4C/8T CPU, 14nm++ could help reaching the magic >5.0 GHz mark.

 

[Sweepr]

There is a huge difference between even 4.0 Ghz and 4.4 Ghz. In fact Skylake or Kabylake runs extremely inefficient over 4 Ghz in terms of energy efficiency, especially the last hundreds of Mhz on Kabylake. My 7700k doesn't even need 1.0V to run with 3.6 Ghz but requires 1.20V to run with 4.4 Ghz, it's a huge difference.

True. If you look at i7-7700 (non K) they are already offering 4C/8T @ 3.6-4.2 GHz at 65W TDP with iGPU included at 14nm+. With 14nm++ I don't expect a major clock regression from a 6C/12T Coffee Lake-S at 95W TDP (compared to i7-6700K/i7-7700K). Anyway, the most important metric to us (enthusiasts) will be overclocked performance.

 

[Ajay]

There is a huge difference between even 4.0 Ghz and 4.4 Ghz. In fact Skylake or Kabylake runs extremely inefficient over 4 Ghz in terms of energy efficiency, especially the last hundreds of Mhz on Kabylake. My 7700k doesn't even need 1.0V to run with 3.6 Ghz but requires 1.20V to run with 4.4 Ghz, it's a huge difference.

I didn't realize there was that much of a difference in Vcore for that frequency. That being the case, seems quite reasonable to fit 6C/12T in 95W @ ~4 GHz.

Damn, I wish this was out NOW. My wife's computer is dog slow so we decided to spend our tax refund on it. We've talked about sharing the computer (since we use mobile devices more often now), in which case, I'd love a hexacore CFL. Boo Hoo :-\

 

[iiiankiii]

It's public now!

Intel to unveil Basin Falls, launch Coffee Lake ahead of schedule



http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20170419PD207.html

- 6C/8C/10C Skylake-X launch at the end of June
- 12C Skylake-X SKU confirmed and launching in August!
- Considering 12C is now an option at the top, we may get higher core count options for lower prices than Broadwell-E (8C Skylake-X replacing 6850K / 10C replacing 6900X?)
- Coffee Lake-S will be released in August along with Z370 chipset motherboards
- Several K-series Core i7/i5/i3 processors planned!
- H370, B360 and H310 chipsets motherboard at the end of 2017 or early 2018

Wow. It's pretty amazing what some competition will do. This might be the most proactive Intel has been in years. If Intel is able to price that Coffee Lake 6c/12t CPU under $400, that's going to be a very compelling product. Of course, that's assuming it can overclock atleast 4.5Ghz.

 

[jpiniero]

Core pretty obviously has issues above 4 Ghz. They can still get away with it but the voltage needed goes up dramatically.

BenchLife hinted at a >10C Skylake-X product as soon as January, so this product has been in the works for quite some time.

I think it was more like they were claiming that it was possible than anything else.

Wow. It's pretty amazing what some competition will do. This might be the most proactive Intel has been in years. If Intel is able to price that 6c/12t CPU under $400, that's going to be a very compelling product. Of course, that's assuming it can overclock atleast 4.5Ghz.

I think the 6C Skylake-X now will be around $390. That was the price point that Kaby-X was going to take.

Where it was going to be this:

10C SKX $1799
8C SKX $1099
6C SKX $629
6C SKX $429 cut lanes
4C KBX $389

To something like this:

12C SKX $1299
10C SKX $999
8C SKX $599
6C SKX $449
6C SKX $389 cut lanes
6C CFL $349
4C8T CFL $249 (basically a 7700K)

 

[lolfail9001]

Fairly certain that 12C is still within confines of LCC Skylake-SP die, though.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Wow. It's pretty amazing what some competition will do. This might be the most proactive Intel has been in years. If Intel is able to price that Coffee Lake 6c/12t CPU under $400, that's going to be a very compelling product. Of course, that's assuming it can overclock atleast 4.5Ghz.

It'll hit at least 4.5GHz. Remember, Broadwell-E on the crappy original 14nm and a rushed, sub-optimal physical implementation could hit about 4.4GHz for the six core models. Coffee Lake-S is two generations removed from that, and it's a really refined physical design, so expect really nice OC capability.

I would be surprised if it could not achieve 4.8GHz+ on high-end air/decent CLC.

IMHO, this is going to be the "sweet spot" -- high core count, high IPC, high frequency, all in a really nice platform. I'm pumped!

 

[Sweepr]

First time since original Nehalem hit, things are real interesting! Being able to choose between HEDT Skylake-X with reworked cache structure and quad channel on 14nm+ or "mainstream" six core with hopefully 12MB of L3 on 14nm++?

If both clock 4.5Ghz+ and i don't see why they shouldn't, gonna be interesting to see what wins: larger (but somewhat slower?) L2 on HEDT or 12MB of that sweet Intel L3 ( assuming uncore can hit 4.5Ghz as on Kabys). Fun comparisons ahead, both will improve gaming perf for sure.

P.S. i am personally leaning towards HEDT, as 256kb of L2 is anemic in 2017 and could boost IPC 10-15% in gaming and those pesky web tests.

Agreed. After the DDR4 scaling tests with Skylake / Kaby Lake and surprising gaming results with Broadwell (eDRAM), I'm very curious about the impact of Skylake-X's 1MB L2 cache + quad-channel DDR4 in games. I fully expect it to take the lead in certain titles over Coffee Lake-S, but the latter should be cheaper and might hit higher clocks (OC).

Let's not forget this...

The Basin Falls-based products are expected to be launched at the E3 gaming show in the US in June, with the official release at the end of the month.

If you're unveiling your chips at the biggest game event of the year, they better perform well.

 

[Ajay]

To something like this:

12C SKX $1299
10C SKX $999
8C SKX $599
6C SKX $449
6C SKX $389 cut lanes
6C CFL $349
4C8T CFL $249 (basically a 7700K)

Maybe this?

12C SKX $1299
10C SKX $999
8C SKX $599 [R7 1800x]
6C SKX $449 $399 [R7 1700x]
6C SKX $389 cut lanes
6C CFL $349
4C8T CFL $249 (basically a 7700K)

Don't see the need for a cut down 6C SKX when a 6C CFL will match it performance wise and in 2x CF/SLI.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Maybe this?

12C SKX $1299
10C SKX $999
8C SKX $599 [R7 1800x]
6C SKX $449 $399 [R7 1700x]
6C SKX $389 cut lanes
6C CFL $349
4C8T CFL $249 (basically a 7700K)

Don't see the need for a cut down 6C SKX when a 6C CFL will match it performance wise and in 2x CF/SLI.

6C SKX has greater # of PCIe lanes, higher IPC, and it gets you onto the X299 platform.