Corrected![]()
Ta forgot that happening lol
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.
Corrected![]()
Totally correct!!Best is best, eh.
They like their lakes. So far we are talking about:
skylake
kabylake
coffee lake
cannonlake
icelake
tigerlake
Too many "lakes". Does Intel believes that we are fish to bite their prices, if they keep them at same levels?
The Skylake/Kabylake-E/X ain't going to be some great overclocker. We should be expecting 4.5 max if not less due to heat and power issues packing all these cores in that tiny space.
Exactly the same issues B-E, H-E and Ryzen have.
So if comes to consider £1000+ 8 core Skylake clocking at 4.5, over £380 Ryzen 1700X clocking at 4.1Ghz clearly many i7 going to end up on the shelves.
Even the current pricing of the 6800K at around £380 cannot be fully justified, but only if someone wants a more stable and mature platform than the X370.
It didn't officially support gen3, that was ivybridge. The sandybridge xeons however did.The "E" architecture isn't exactly the same just the same generation, I.E Sandy Bridge-E was the first architecture to support PCI-E 3.0.
just to highlight Skylake-X isnt a Skylake with more cores
https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cp...eal_intel_s_upcoming_32-core_skylake-ep_cpu/1
its an expensive beast!
It didn't officially support gen3, that was ivybridge. The sandybridge xeons however did.
Skylake EP are the Xeons aren't they? (As opposed to skylake-E), you're not going to see a 32 core beast quad socket supporting i7.. Also are we going to see a skylake X I thought the -X was a one off fast kaby quad on this platform.
SB didn't support Gen3, SB-E did, SB-E on X79 was the first desktop architecture to support it.It didn't officially support gen3, that was ivybridge.
SB didn't support Gen3, SB-E did, SB-E on X79 was the first desktop architecture to support it.
Nope, all SB-E CPUs and X79 boards supported PCI-E 3.0, it was the architecture that introduced it. I think the issue that's confusing you is that Nvidia did not officially support PCI-E 3.0 on SB-E (due to teething issues with the new architecture, similar in a way to what Ryzen is experiencing with RAM). However even Nvidia users were able to enable PCI-E 3.0 support in their drivers on SB-E/X79 if they chose too.Not officially on SB-E on the x79.. It did work, but it wasn't officially supported by intel. Ivybridge-E is where support became official on the x79.
At the launch of Intel's LGA-2011 based Sandy Bridge E CPU we finally had a platform capable of supporting PCI Express 3.0, but we lacked GPUs to test it with. That all changed this past week as we worked on our review of the Radeon HD 7970, the world's first 28nm GPU with support for PCIe 3.0.
Simply enabling PCIe 3.0 on our EVGA X79 SLI motherboard (EVGA provided us with a BIOS that allowed us to toggle PCIe 3.0 mode on/off) resulted in a 9% increase in performance on the Radeon HD 7970. This tells us two things: 1) You can indeed get PCIe 3.0 working on SNB-E/X79, at least with a Radeon HD 7970, and 2) PCIe 3.0 will likely be useful for GPU compute applications, although not so much for gaming anytime soon.
Nope, all SB-E CPUs and X79 boards supported PCI-E 3.0, it was the architecture that introduced it. I think the issue that's confusing you is that Nvidia did not officially support PCI-E 3.0 on SB-E (due to teething issues with the new architecture, similar in a way to what Ryzen is experiencing with RAM). However even Nvidia users were able to enable PCI-E 3.0 support in their drivers on SB-E/X79 if they chose too.
Anandtech said:Intel increased bandwidth on the other side of the chip as well. A single SNB-E CPU features 40 PCIe lanes that are compliant with rev 3.0 of the PCI Express Base Specification (aka PCIe 3.0). With no PCIe 3.0 GPUs available (yet) to test and validate the interface, Intel lists PCIe 3.0 support in the chip's datasheet but is publicly guaranteeing PCIe 2.0 speeds. Intel does add that some PCIe devices may be able to operate at Gen 3 speeds, but we'll have to wait and see once those devices hit the market.
X299 can't come soon enough for me, X99 has served me well - but from what I've heard, some of the features coming are too good to pass up
So if this is true, you get a 100mhz base clock increase for an extra 21watts, no integrated graphics on a no doubt pretty expensive new platform. Sounds awful.