Sandybridge to Skylake?

Emjay86 · 5 Aug 2015 at 13:52

Hey guys, just a quickie!

Now that the Skylake stuff has been announced is it worth me going from Sandybridge to a Skylake?

Im currently using an "Intel Core i7 2600K @ 3.40GHz Sandy Bridge 32nm Technology" and as its a little old now was wondering if it was worth it. The reason why I ask is because ive read the Skylake isn't apparently all that much of an upgrade from the Sandybridge.

My current CPU isn't overclocked and I can quite easily ramp it up if needed.

Thanks in advance!

Orangey · 5 Aug 2015 at 13:56

No point, Skylake is a flop.

Jasonst888 · 5 Aug 2015 at 13:57

If you are using it without overclock and have not encountered any bottlenecking then i would leave it. If you need more performance than overclock it and see how it performs. I think the only two reasons to upgrade to skylake are: 1) the features of the 170 motherboards would be useful to you, 2) because you want to.....

~Mike~ · 5 Aug 2015 at 13:58

No point, overclock your 2600K

RavenXXX2 · 5 Aug 2015 at 14:01

Keep the 2600k, intel has nothing to offer you with ****lake, just like ivybridge and haswell does not.

Martini1991 · 5 Aug 2015 at 14:01

Wouldn't bother.

xb8browney · 5 Aug 2015 at 14:03

I've had my 2500k for over 3 years now and it's probably the best £140 I ever spent.

///Rage · 5 Aug 2015 at 14:06

Whats the IPC improvement clock for clock over an i7-2600K?

Frenzy · 5 Aug 2015 at 14:09

xb8browney said:
I've had my 2500k for over 3 years now and it's probably the best £140 I ever spent.

Ditto on my 2600k, my first one died and I got a replacement too

Another 3 year warranty on top...

RavenXXX2 · 5 Aug 2015 at 14:11

///Rage said:
Whats the IPC improvement clock for clock over an i7-2600K?

25% on average.

Harlequin · 5 Aug 2015 at 14:12

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2015/08/05/intel-skylake-review/7

if your gaming @1080p on a high end card you`ll see a little improvement (5%) , otherwise no it wont be noticeable , and less so if your at 1440 or 4k

Orangey · 5 Aug 2015 at 14:18

RavenXXX2 said:
25% on average.

That makes it sound better than it is, going by testing in various things the difference is negligible when clocked.

~>Dg<~ · 5 Aug 2015 at 14:45

looked at a gaming benchmark not long ago in some games older i7s were doing better

no point if gaming is main concern to go from anything sandybridge up.

PieEater · 5 Aug 2015 at 14:58

Am in the same position (2700k @ 4.7). For me the cost of upgrading to Skylake compared to the negligible performace benefits makes it a non option. Just wish AMD had something that would make Intel push the boat out bit more.

Karateyid · 5 Aug 2015 at 14:59

looks like I'll be sticking with the trusty 2500k for another year then..

snips86x · 5 Aug 2015 at 15:00

If you want to do it properly, go X99

eddiew · 5 Aug 2015 at 15:03

Looks a lot like Sandy Bridge is still competitive :<

Disappointed. I have a couple of games that are yearning for improved single-thread performance, and once again there's not really anything better than clocking the bolts off what I have already. I'd almost be willing to sacrifice a core for better 1T throughput :/

wazza300 · 5 Aug 2015 at 15:49

just overclock your current cpu,you'd see more gain from upgrading your gpu

JediFragger · 5 Aug 2015 at 16:03

RavenXXX2 said:
25% on average.

Or 3fps in games

David Bisset · 5 Aug 2015 at 16:07

Haha nowhere near 25% IPC for most uses - slightly higher clocks may make it 25% faster.

Haswell was single-digits faster per clock (which is what we're talking about with IPC) than lynnefield for most uses, only when using new instructions (rare) did it shine - it spanked it overall but that was almost all down to much better clockspeeds. Skylake is looking to be a tiny margin faster per clock than Haswell so 25% is wildly optimistic (yes, I know all the launch hype for each gen has claimed lots of IPC gains and if you add them up you get lots... but that's the hype misleading people unfortunately)