At this rate of progress the i7-8700K should be as hot and slow as Bulldozer.
There is no new node. It was just PR talk.
Intel with 14nm already had 2 variations of 14nm: one density optimized, one fmax/performance optimized. 6700K was on the latter and little could Intel do to improve things for 7700K, which at this point is only a better binned CPU paired with a more robust uncore (peeps gotta get their 4K netflix, you know).
7 years ago this wouldn't pass as a new generation, just a new stepping a la D0 920's. The milking has to stop.
the milking won't stop until AMD provides something actually competitive. Intel has no motivation to innovate currently.There is no new node. It was just PR talk.
Intel with 14nm already had 2 variations of 14nm: one density optimized, one fmax/performance optimized. 6700K was on the latter and little could Intel do to improve things for 7700K, which at this point is only a better binned CPU paired with a more robust uncore (peeps gotta get their 4K netflix, you know).
7 years ago this wouldn't pass as a new generation, just a new stepping a la D0 920's. The milking has to stop.
the milking won't stop until AMD provides something actually competitive. Intel has no motivation to innovate currently.
The 'new' 14nm+ process appears to be extremely disappointing. Power consumption is through the roof.
I suspect this 14nm+ process 'improvement' is a marketing gimmick more than anything else, simply due to them not being able to continue with the tick tock model Any changes from 14nm to 14nm+ would probably not have been mentioned in previous years (such as 22nm improvements, from 4770k to 4790k etc).
Hopefully Zen proves to be interesting, otherwise it's a long time before Cannon/Coffee lake.
The 'new' 14nm+ process appears to be extremely disappointing. Power consumption is through the roof.
I suspect this 14nm+ process 'improvement' is a marketing gimmick more than anything else, simply due to them not being able to continue with the tick tock model Any changes from 14nm to 14nm+ would probably not have been mentioned in previous years (such as 22nm improvements, from 4770k to 4790k etc).
Hopefully Zen proves to be interesting, otherwise it's a long time before Cannon/Coffee lake.
Yes, that explains the Pentium with HT and the unlocked i3. Also the i3 with turbo. Intel doesn't want to sell you a new chip...the milking won't stop until AMD provides something actually competitive. Intel has no motivation to innovate currently.
The 'new' 14nm+ process appears to be extremely disappointing. Power consumption is through the roof.
I suspect this 14nm+ process 'improvement' is a marketing gimmick more than anything else, simply due to them not being able to continue with the tick tock model Any changes from 14nm to 14nm+ would probably not have been mentioned in previous years (such as 22nm improvements, from 4770k to 4790k etc).
Hopefully Zen proves to be interesting, otherwise it's a long time before Cannon/Coffee lake.
In fact, we have the OC SKL old chips still around there. And Intel is still not increasing he core count... AMD might surprise Intel if they are goofing like that. Similar thing with Core M. Apple is ready to counter them with their 16nm improved chip.Yes, that explains the Pentium with HT and the unlocked i3. Also the i3 with turbo. Intel doesn't want to sell you a new chip...
Et tu, Brute?We should reserve judgement about 14nm+ for desktops until the retail chips are out and tested in proper boards (14nm+ in mobile gives measurable performance/watt improvements), but from these preliminary results the power consumption/temperatures of 7700K are disappointing.
The higher overclocking capability at a given voltage shown in the tests is encouraging, though. Silicon Lottery says that only the top 19% of tested 6700K chips can hit 4.8GHz or better...at 1.424V (or less).
Our motherboard set the Core i7-7700K to 1.30V at its 4.50 GHz max turbo, whereupon it behaved exactly the way we’d expect our Core i7-6700K to act when overclocked to 4.50 GHz at 1.30V.
Even for the people who don't have the time to read the article, the Power consumption graph should also raise eyebrows: power usage at stock higher than Skylake, but overclocked power usage in line with Skylake? The evidence is so clear here every Intel fan who did not react should get an infraction. I'm not even going to mention the idle power usage difference, that would be a complete joke (-13W for idle power usage just from going from 6700K to 7700K)This Core i7-7700K sample can be overclocked on this motherboard to 4.80 GHz at 1.30V, compared to the Core i7-6700K’s 4.60 GHz.
Et tu, Brute?
Is there no one in this thread asking themselves how come the default 4.5Ghz stock turbo voltage for 7700K on that GA-Z170X-Ultra is the same 1.3V they used to overclock the chip to 4.8Ghz? This is the frequency domain where every increase in frequency should require a voltage sacrifice, yet KBL is cruising at 1.3V.
Even for the people who don't have the time to read the article, the Power consumption graph should also raise eyebrows: power usage at stock higher than Skylake, but overclocked power usage in line with Skylake? The evidence is so clear here every Intel fan who did not react should get an infraction. I'm not even going to mention the idle power usage difference, that would be a complete joke (-13W for idle power usage just from going from 6700K to 7700K)
As for the people who act completely disappointment by this clearly minor improvement, what exactly were you expecting? What did that PR machine promise anyway, except for higher overclocks?
This is how I read this preview, maybe it will help others understand it better as well:
my i5 6600K needs 1.44V for 4.8Ghz, 1.35V for 4.7Ghz
the i7 7700K needs 1.3V for 4.8Ghz, and will likely clock a bit higher at 1.35V and 1.4V respectively
I can only hope this launch will finally signal some people to ask what is the true relation between Intel stock voltage and motherboard stock voltage on desktop chips. Back when some AMD fans talked about it for Dozer family they were greeted with shouts about AMD incompetence, maybe this time people will be able to focus better.
This is how I read this preview, maybe it will help others understand it better as well:
my i5 6600K needs 1.44V for 4.8Ghz, 1.35V for 4.7Ghz
the i7 7700K needs 1.3V for 4.8Ghz, and will likely clock a bit higher at 1.35V and 1.4V respectively
I had this same issue with the other 6700Ks that I had in the past...4.7GHz with lots of volts was the limit, and I could forget about 4.8GHz or beyond.
Yep, Skylake 8 core then forget about CPU's for a decade. This "new" CPU is laughable. The only thing new that it gives you is Netflix 4k streaming. What a racket. Zen is going to kick this thing's ass.
The fundamental microarchitecture between Skylake and the new Kaby Lake parts is practically unchanged (DMI 3.0 now allows PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe drives from the integrated PCH), but the updated fin profile and reduced ‘strain’ by the larger fin pitch is being quoted as giving a 12% performance increase due to process alone, typically through additional frequency for the same power. The main benefits to KBL will be in that frequency due to the 14nm+ process as well as the new media capabilities.