Skylake Clockspeeds and benchmarks!

nosehairuk · 25 Apr 2015 at 10:43

From the OP #1. Hopefully this is accurate.

Dave2150 said:
June release date, according to the source.

Supernova · 25 Apr 2015 at 11:11

nosehairuk said:
From the OP #1. Hopefully this is accurate.

Woops, I even read that the other day. So Broadwell will come out at the same time I suppose.

Just to confirm, these Skylake CPUs are unlocked (hence the 'K')?

=XDC=FluphyBunny · 25 Apr 2015 at 14:16

This isn't going to make it an easy choice between 4970k/5820k/6700k. Either SL will be over-priced making it to close to 5820k with 2 less cores, or cheaper and force 4970k prices down (lol yeah right).

Another incremental update. Ho hum.

ALXAndy · 25 Apr 2015 at 14:28

pastymuncher said:
Is this Haswells replacement? If so and I am reading that right yet another new socket, 1151, so Z97 boards won't be compatible. That's going to **** a lot of people off who bought Z97 and hoped to drop one of these in.

/jams his tongue firmly in his cheek.

Oh stop moaning. Just buy a new motherboard you tight git.

/removes tongue from cheek.

Oh goody. Another new socket, another new board, and 5-10% gains over the last.

*yawn*

bru · 25 Apr 2015 at 14:45

Dave2150 said:
The first leaked benchmarks are here! The general opinion is that these are quite real, though take that with a pinch of salt as we all know these could simply be fabricated:

Source: http://www.pcfrm.com/intel-i7-6700k-vs-i7-4790k

Well a google translation of that article give us this.

Intel Skylake 1151 with the name of the new processor in the socket (Core i7 and Core i5 6700 6600) we announced before the next in June. So i7 Processor 6700 predecessor, the 4790 i7 performance when compared with how much to reveal the gap? We have prepared the following about the potential performance graphics processors Skylake curve. Intel i7 6700 processor Intel has made this comparison in the previous year, where the benchmark test is designed on the basis of performance.

That makes it sound as if they have estimated the performance rather than actually running proper benches.

Maybe it is because their chip is undoubtedly a engineering sample and isn't clocked that high, so they have had to extrapolate the performance.

Martini1991 · 25 Apr 2015 at 14:49

smilertoo said:
They seem to have given up on power reductions in order to have better iGP, something only a minority of users ever use. Does the cpu power down the iGP if it's not being used or is that power just wasted going nowhere?

If it's anything like my Haswell you can disable the IGP.

Orangey · 25 Apr 2015 at 16:28

Is there any way to investigate if Intel crippled SL to save X99?

There's a company who xrays new chips and publishes a report, will be interesting what they find.

Sylver123 · 25 Apr 2015 at 17:01

Orangey said:
Is there any way to investigate if Intel crippled SL to save X99?

There's a company who xrays new chips and publishes a report, will be interesting what they find.

I expect that this is what they have and had to do with the mainstream Skylake so that
the performance of them isn't too fast and won't outperform their extreme platform.

Intel makes more money from their extreme platforms than the mainstream platforms.

Dave2150 · 25 Apr 2015 at 19:28

bru said:
Well a google translation of that article give us this.

That makes it sound as if they have estimated the performance rather than actually running proper benches.

Maybe it is because their chip is undoubtedly a engineering sample and isn't clocked that high, so they have had to extrapolate the performance.

It could well be that the benchmarks are fake, no way of telling at the moment.

Though the same could be said for 99% of all the leaked info, benchmarks, of CPU's, GPU's etc we've ever had. Some will be real, some will be low clocked early engineering samples, some will be the real deal.

Dave2150 · 25 Apr 2015 at 19:34

ALXAndy said:
/jams his tongue firmly in his cheek.

Oh stop moaning. Just buy a new motherboard you tight git.

/removes tongue from cheek.

Oh goody. Another new socket, another new board, and 5-10% gains over the last.

*yawn*

The benchmarks show at least a 15% improvement over Haswell in cinebench, assuming they are legitimate benchmarks.

The usual numbers thrown around here are 5% per generation, such as Sandy to Ivy, or Ivy to Haswell etc. So Haswell > Skylake being 15% shows Intel have done more work for us this time.

Intel have the market share already, their CPU's have no competition from AMD at this stage, so a 15% improvement over Haswell is quite decent imo. It further extends the huge lead Intel have over AMD.

WingZero30 · 25 Apr 2015 at 23:15

Broadwell provides around 5.5% IPC increase over Haswell. So how much IPC increase can we see going from Broadwell to Skylake ?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9070/intel-xeon-d-launched-14nm-broadwell-soc-for-enterprise

I am actually wondering if Intel could have squeezed more IPC from Skylake on the same 14nm process.

Orangey · 26 Apr 2015 at 00:40

You will probably only see a big improvement in computational workloads.

Look at the small print.

Dave2150 · 26 Apr 2015 at 01:38

WingZero30 said:
Broadwell provides around 5.5% IPC increase over Haswell. So how much IPC increase can we see going from Broadwell to Skylake ?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9070/intel-xeon-d-launched-14nm-broadwell-soc-for-enterprise

I am actually wondering if Intel could have squeezed more IPC from Skylake on the same 14nm process.

There are no top tier Broadwell CPU's being released for desktop. There will only be 2 desktop Broadwell CPU's, both of with have only 6MB l3 cache (compared to 8MB on the 4790k, 6700k etc). They are aimed for PC's without dedicated GPU's, and as such have Iris Pro, Intel's most expensive IGPU.

Best to forget about Broadwell for desktop, and just consider Skylake as the next step after Haswell.

Sylver123 · 26 Apr 2015 at 02:00

Dave2150 said:
There are no top tier Broadwell CPU's being released for desktop. There will only be 2 desktop Broadwell CPU's, both of with have only 6MB l3 cache (compared to 8MB on the 4790k, 6700k etc). They are aimed for PC's without dedicated GPU's, and as such have Iris Pro, Intel's most expensive IGPU.

Best to forget about Broadwell for desktop, and just consider Skylake as the next step after Haswell.

I take it there won't be a Broadwell-E after all then? Your post read that way to me anyways that there is only going to be two
Broadwell CPUs being released for desktop and both of them have integrated GPUs and they are not high end CPUs.

Do you have source that they have officially stated there won`t be a Broadwell-E release for the x99 platform?

Orangey · 26 Apr 2015 at 02:06

I think they said 2016 for Broadwell-E, or that may have just been the sites.

Sylver123 · 26 Apr 2015 at 05:07

Orangey said:
I think they said 2016 for Broadwell-E, or that may have just been the sites.

The x99 platform must be getting Broadwell-E because why would Intel release BIOS update support for
Broadwell for the x99 platform motherboards if they have no intention of releasing them.

Dave2150 · 26 Apr 2015 at 05:52

Sylver123 said:
I take it there won't be a Broadwell-E after all then? Your post read that way to me anyways that there is only going to be two
Broadwell CPUs being released for desktop and both of them have integrated GPUs and they are not high end CPUs.

Do you have source that they have officially stated there won`t be a Broadwell-E release for the x99 platform?

I meant only the mainstream Broadwell CPU's, LGA1150.

Broadwell-E should still be coming, either very late this year or very early next year, though Intel themselves describe a 5.5% IPC increase from Haswell > Broadwell, so it's completely pointless for existing X99 owners. The only saving grace would be if the 5930K equivalent is also an 8 core product, leaving the 5820k equivalent as the only 6 core part, though this is unlikely.

Sylver123 · 26 Apr 2015 at 06:07

Dave2150 said:
I meant only the mainstream Broadwell CPU's, LGA1150.

Broadwell-E should still be coming, either very late this year or very early next year, though Intel themselves describe a 5.5% IPC increase from Haswell > Broadwell, so it's completely pointless for existing X99 owners. The only saving grace would be if the 5930K equivalent is also an 8 core product, leaving the 5820k equivalent as the only 6 core part, though this is unlikely.

Is it true that Broadwell-E is supposedly meant to be based on their Broadwell-EP Xeon E5 v4 design?

Dicehunter · 26 Apr 2015 at 11:06

Guess I'll be keeping hold of my 4790K at 4.80GHZ a while longer then based on these benchmarks.

Boomstick777 · 26 Apr 2015 at 11:21

Dave2150 said:
There are no top tier Broadwell CPU's being released for desktop. There will only be 2 desktop Broadwell CPU's, both of with have only 6MB l3 cache (compared to 8MB on the 4790k, 6700k etc). They are aimed for PC's without dedicated GPU's, and as such have Iris Pro, Intel's most expensive IGPU.

Best to forget about Broadwell for desktop, and just consider Skylake as the next step after Haswell.

Yeah it looks this way, Broadwell just for low power with better IGPU on desktop, seems there is no replacement for high end 4770K / 4790K. You have to move to Skylake, early Z97 buyers got owned..

Orangey said:
I think they said 2016 for Broadwell-E, or that may have just been the sites.

Think this is right, Q1 2016 for Broadwell -E.

Dicehunter said:
Guess I'll be keeping hold of my 4790K at 4.80GHZ a while longer then based on these benchmarks.

Yup, literally no reason whatsoever to move from a 4790K to any of the upcoming quad cores, all within a few % of each other. Best move would be to X99 and gain extra cores / threads / cache. If you're just gaming etc, 4790K is probably the best anyway...

Oh well in about 5 years we might worthy upgrades to 4770K / 4790K