• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

;)

8 Pack said:
^^But you don#t need Z270.

I dont get all these hatters of Intel 5.0+ 24-7 yes please.
Click to expand...


UK mentality, cynical and boring.

Martini1991 said:
Most of their rage is directed at the currency.

But even then, it's a boring launch, it does nothing to stimulate the CPU market. Maybe it does for you, but you're a completely different user.
Click to expand...

Nobody is forcing anyone to buy KabyLake. There are other CPUs in the pipeline this year. If you're building a system now, you'd have to be a complete fool to not opt for KabyLake over Sky if you care about overclocking at all.
 
Last edited:
I maintain, for anyone with an older chip especially this is a good upgrade. Same price currently as the highly thought of 6700k, lots of little improvements and good overclocking ability which I thought would be quite high up on the list of requirements for OCers.

Lots of negativety when the 6700k came out I think but went on to do well.

Probably only way to see big improvements until/unless we can overcome the limit of high frequency is to throw more cores at a chip but that doesn't mean gains in all applications, ie,such as gaming. Modern CPU's are all pretty fast too. I remember the days when an OS upgrade meant a new CPU as it was too slow afterwards. My nearly 5 year old 3770k is still very very good with WIndows 10 :)

Would love to see big improvements but don't see it happening anytime soon and doubt AMD will improve much over Intel's offerings performance wise unless they target at a niche Intel aren't really covering..... if there is one.
 
Last edited:
I think that while the 7700k is a great CPU, the main complaint boils down to "its boring" and that's my complaint as well. Its definitely better than what I have, but only a little bit better. Upgrading would make next to no difference, anything I could do with the upgrade I can do now, just slightly slower.

People here are all enthusiasts, we want the cutting edge, but we want it to be exciting. This isn't exciting.

I certainly would recommend the 7700k to anyone buying a new high end computer, but upgrading to it is a bit of a waste of money.
 
StarShock said:
I think that while the 7700k is a great CPU, the main complaint boils down to "its boring" and that's my complaint as well. Its definitely better than what I have, but only a little bit better. Upgrading would make next to no difference, anything I could do with the upgrade I can do now, just slightly slower.

People here are all enthusiasts, we want the cutting edge, but we want it to be exciting. This isn't exciting.

I certainly would recommend the 7700k to anyone buying a new high end computer, but upgrading to it is a bit of a waste of money.
Click to expand...

So what would have made it exciting and not boring? Aircooled 7ghz? That ain't gonna happen. How about 7ghz and £800? Then we'd be moaning about the price. Or 20 cores running at 2.2ghz ?

I get you though and agree it's not super exciting :) but I think there's a reason we are where we're at and I don't think that's solely down to lack of competition. I guess we'll have to see if AMD can do something exciting which may then give Intel the push to invest more in R&D :D.
The Broadwell-E10 core is exciting but look at the price :)
 
Last edited:
DarrenM343 said:
So what would have made it exciting and not boring? Aircooled 7ghz? That ain't gonna happen. How about 7ghz and £800? Then we'd be moaning about the price. Or 20 cores running at 2.2ghz ?

I get you though and agree it's not super exciting :) but I think there's a reason we are where we're at and I don't think that's solely down to lack of competition. I guess we'll have to see if AMD can do something exciting which may then give Intel the push to invest more in R&D :D.
The Broadwell-E10 core is exciting but look at the price :)
Click to expand...

Some IPC improvement would have made it less boring, and the UK's currency not being in the crapper.

Kaby Lake is more akin to a stepping revision than anything else.
As far as CPU launches go, it's hard to get excited over a stepping revision as a new line up.
There's obviously nothing else to buy if you're buying new, because Intel have just made their superior line up even better. But that's not enough for many anymore. I've been on a 4770k for years now and have no desire to upgrade to this.
 
DarrenM343 said:
I maintain, for anyone with an older chip especially this is a good upgrade. Same price currently as the highly thought of 6700k, lots of little improvements and good overclocking ability which I thought would be quite high up on the list of requirements for OCers.

Lots of negativety when the 6700k came out I think but went on to do well.
Click to expand...
Well obviously. If you're going to get a new rig and you're on this forum, you basically only have two choices: either the latest mainstream i7-K or the lowest-end enthusiast i7-K. If my rig exploded and I wasn't going second hand then, yes, I'd go Kaby Lake or Broadwell-E.

What does that have to do with the fact that the generational improvements are crap and the prices never go down, and therefore the value for those upgrading is generally awful? Yes in a vacuum Kaby Lake is great but you have to consider the context of what else is out there from the last 10 years. Enthusiasts would not still be using X58 and Z68/Z77 systems in droves if Kaby Lake was a significant and useful improvement for the money.
 
DragonQ said:
Well obviously. If you're going to get a new rig and you're on this forum, you basically only have two choices: either the latest mainstream i7-K or the lowest-end enthusiast i7-K. If my rig exploded and I wasn't going second hand then, yes, I'd go Kaby Lake or Broadwell-E.

What does that have to do with the fact that the generational improvements are crap and the prices never go down, and therefore the value for those upgrading is generally awful? Yes in a vacuum Kaby Lake is great but you have to consider the context of what else is out there from the last 10 years. Enthusiasts would not still be using X58 and Z68/Z77 systems in droves if Kaby Lake was a significant and useful improvement for the money.
Click to expand...

Don't see anyone else setting the benchmark here, maybe some people have become too complacent. Software development in terms of multi core execution or lack there of, also is as much to blame.

That said, I can tell you with certainty that if I were to switch back to X58, I'd get the hump.
 
Kaby Lake is a bit like when AMD were releasing endless Phenom II X4s with slight bumps to clock speed and bugger all else. 945, 955, 967, 970, 975, 980. Appart from the odd change in stepping (and the odd unrestricted multiplier) they ware the same chip.

The good thing about them was the top chips stayed roughly the same price as the previous chip when they launched and everything else moved down accordingly.
 
8 Pack said:
^^But you don#t need Z270.

I dont get all these hatters of Intel 5.0+ 24-7 yes please.
Click to expand...

As you know its just a re-brand of Skylake, another incremental increase in performance.

The fact that this small increase is hitting the very marketable 5GHz number is meaningless to those who were hoping for something special.

I get that you work for OC's and need to market the cpu but anyone vaguely aware of the CPU market for the last 5 years recognises the same tired pattern.

Kaby is not a bad chip, Skylake wasn't either, but yet again people were hoping for Intel to maybe do something a bit more special.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom