• 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.

Sandybridge to Skylake?

RavenXXX2 said:
25% on average.
Click to expand...

More like 25% best case.

Going by Cinebench on this page the 6700K gets 22% more points per GHz than a 2700K.

The increases for each gen (2700K -> 3770K -> 4790K -> 6700K) were:

6.5%, 5.7%, 8.4%

For a 25% IPC improvement the Skylake needs to post scores at clock speeds 43% higher than SB. Can't find any benchmarks with that much of a difference.
 
Last edited:
Most gaming benchmarks show less than a handful of fps difference between a sandybridge i7 and a 6700k. I think the biggest gap I saw was 8 FPS (when over 110fps). But since sandybridge probably overclocks further, I bet there is no gap at all really :/

I suppose Skylake is better for CPU intensive workstation duties, but for that a Haswell-E or Xeon is a better option anyway. For everything else there is no improvement. It doesn't even use less power than a SB CPU.
 
Last edited:
Nasher said:
Most gaming benchmarks show less than a handful of fps difference between a sandybridge i7 and a 6700k. I think the biggest gap I saw was 8 FPS (when over 110fps). But since sandybridge probably overclocks further, I bet there is no gap at all really :/

I suppose Skylake is better for CPU intensive workstation duties, but for that a Haswell-E or Xeon is a better option anyway. For everything else there is no improvement. It doesn't even use less power than a SB CPU.
Click to expand...

So for arguements sake. If you play games AND do video editing etc but don't want to spend the extra for the higher end stuff.... You buy 2 computers now?

Give me a break.
 
As long as your CPU can power your GPU if your a gamer and not bottleneck it. I have a 2700k and 980ti, and there is still lots of headroom looking at the usage across all my cores in modern games. If your on a single top end card i think your prob get another 2 years before a 2700k overclocked would hold your GPU back.
 
djxput said:
haha ya - worst thing with bulldozer is all of amds reps were suggesting we were in for something fast etc ...
Click to expand...

I waited for Bulldozer for about six months... putting off upgrading my Phenom II Black because I was assured better things were coming.

Then the day after it came out I bought a 2500K :)
 
BornEvil said:
Agree, I just don't see why people where expecting skylake to beat or even match Haswell-E.

The i5 is my sweet spot, I just game and watch youtube with my PC. The saving of £100 (vs 6700k/5820K) can be put to better use on the GPU.

I don't see who exactly failed, surely not intel. People will still buy their stuff if they need a new PC, like myself. It is the hype train that failed more than anything else.

My new toys should arrive when I wake up, just a little longer for me the see first hand the difference between Sandy and Skylake.
Click to expand...

Yup, it's the same as apple nerds. They'll buy anything new just because it's Apple. Marginal improvement on a previous gen thing yet they will happily spend hundreds on it. Same with Intel. Release average chips and the fanboi's will be first in line to pay out silly money just to be able to update their forum signature lol.
 
badbiddy said:
So for arguements sake. If you play games AND do video editing etc but don't want to spend the extra for the higher end stuff.... You buy 2 computers now?

Give me a break.
Click to expand...

Except the higher end stuff is cheaper. 5820K is £280ish whereas the 6700K is the same or more. I'd rather 2 more cores, 12 more pcie lanes and quad channel memory support.
 
Disco_P said:
Except the higher end stuff is cheaper. 5820K is £280ish whereas the 6700K is the same or more. I'd rather 2 more cores, 12 more pcie lanes and quad channel memory support.
Click to expand...
5820k is now at the price that the 4970k was at release, a cpu that the skylake 6700k barely improves on yet costs a good chunk more.
 
Looks like ill be saving rather than spending!

Cheers for the feedback guys! Definite shame though. Maybe next time right? :rolleyes:
 
The only reason to upgrade would be for board features, very little point otherwise. However this all depends on what you want to do with it of course. If you want more cores or M.2 etc etc then just get your wallet out spend some cash and feel happy about it :D

Sometimes you just gotta scratch that upgrade itch ;)
 
Last edited:
I have a i5 2500k, No chance I am upgrading to Skylake, For £320 then another 100 for a motherboard then you have the ram price another 100 or so for 16gb DDR4, Rather put that money towards a 980 ti.
 
MSTRBKR said:
Agree as well, the 6600k is the one for me. Intel don't expect people to upgrade every time they release something new.

It seems as though the people complaining just want an upgrade for the sake of it? I bought my current i7 5 years ago and have got so much value from it. I am playing Alien Isolation at the moment, and I can't turn up the graphics any higher. It's running at 100+ FPS at 1080p.

In the last few days I've read quite a few posts from people like myself who are still on some 2009/2010 CPUs. I'm looking forward to my half decade upgrade :p I pretty much buy a CPU every 5 years and a graphics card every 2-3 years which seems to work just fine.
Click to expand...

That is very sensible for you to upgrade every 5 or so years, but tbh it only really possible recently because of the slow progress of CPUs. I've been overclocking my CPUs for a long time, wow I've been a member of this forum for 13 year and I am 'only' 30, and it was always new builds every year.

We just need to accept Skylake is a replacement of Haswell, Intel do this every year, nothing new.

I see so many threads turning into skylake bashing threads, it is getting boring. I agree at the current hiked 6700k price vs a discounted 5820k, 5820k will get my nod.

But for my budget conscious mind, a mATX x99 board of equal features as my 8 gene will set me back £250 (e.g. EVGA m2 or Asus x99-WS, an extra £70 plus more waiting), have to buy a quad ddr4 kit (extra £30), plus the £100 saving from 6600k vs 5820k.

£200 saving if worth the compromise of features I don't need. Probably could save another 70 by buying a low end matx z170.

My parts has arrived this morning, just got home and will be pulling a l8 night cos will not have time till Sunday. :)
 
I currently have a 2500k, bought it the same day bulldozer came out. I will be upgrading to skylake, main reason is I want to go from i5 to i7 and the new features of the 170 chipset would be great to.

I seem to feel my 2500k clocked at 4.4GHz is holding my 7990 back, I have also tried clocking it higher. But it doesn't seem to like going higher than 4.4GHz, though it has been very stable at this for nearly 4years.
 
w00dy85 said:
I currently have a 2500k, bought it the same day bulldozer came out. I will be upgrading to skylake, main reason is I want to go from i5 to i7 and the new features of the 170 chipset would be great to.

I seem to feel my 2500k clocked at 4.4GHz is holding my 7990 back, I have also tried clocking it higher. But it doesn't seem to like going higher than 4.4GHz, though it has been very stable at this for nearly 4years.
Click to expand...

It won't be holding it back. My i7 2600k clocked at 4.4 or 4.6 makes no noticeable difference in gaming on a 780gtx.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom