• 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.

Surprising jump in perfromance from Kaby-lake to Sky-lake

I wouldn't say it was surprising - especially since desktop Skylakes probably aren't as power/heat bound in regards to their turbo usage compared to their mobile counterpart (which seems to be where a lot of the "improvement" comes from in this test - the Kaby-Lake "turbos" higher and for longer)

It does seem like a lot of the "optimisation" that has gone into Kaby-Lake is aimed at mobile and htpc style devices, hence the focus on things such as H.265 decoding.
 
Yeah think it's just the refined 14nm+ process allowing them to maintain higher average clocks in a TDP-limited scenario.

This actually bodes badly for the desktop versions. There'll likely be very little change at all. Perhaps the average 7700k will manage 200 MHz higher overclock than the average 6700k, and that'll be that.

Zen may be the only hope for getting better performance for our money :(
 
It might just be that we're reaching a performance barrier with silicone, and that Intel are focussing more on efficiency.
 
These higher stock clockspeeds will probably mean even less overclocking headroom yet there will still be a premium for a unlocked k series. Skylake has very little overclocking headroom as it is with people lucky to get 6-800mhz out of a 6700k. The glory days of overclocking are sadly long gone. I used to enjoy the challenge of getting a massive stable overclock (sometimes double) out of a cpu.
 
pastymuncher said:
The glory days of overclocking are sadly long gone. I used to enjoy the challenge of getting a massive stable overclock (sometimes double) out of a cpu.
Click to expand...

Yup, those were the days, maybe with all this boosting and higher stock clocks, modern chips are released much nearer their limit, so overclocking seems less impressive than it used too.
 
From a pure CPU performance perspective, I honestly think Kaby Lake will be just as disappointing.

However, I'm hoping they change the tiers. In that an i3 would be a 4c/4t, with an i5 being 4c/8t etc. That'd be progress for me.

But overall, Kaby Lake will be very good (Simply for the fact, nothing currently exists that can offer parity or superiority)
 
Martini1991 said:
From a pure CPU performance perspective, I honestly think Kaby Lake will be just as disappointing.

However, I'm hoping they change the tiers. In that an i3 would be a 4c/4t, with an i5 being 4c/8t etc. That'd be progress for me.

But overall, Kaby Lake will be very good (Simply for the fact, nothing currently exists that can offer parity or superiority)
Click to expand...

Supposedly that is happening with Coffee Lake, which comes after Kaby Lake and is supported on Z270 chipsets.

The 8700k is supposed to be 6c/12t. So it'd make sense if all the i7's were 6c/12t, i5's were 4c/8t, and i3's were 4c/4t.

Also if Zen is ok, Intel may be forced to do that anyway.


AiiR said:
It might just be that we're reaching a performance barrier with silicone, and that Intel are focussing more on efficiency.
Click to expand...

You might be right there.

Seems odd Intel has had very little gains after Haswell (and not that much from Sandy to Haswell), other than efficiency and direct hardware optimisation (e.g. h.265 decoder). The raw arch. IPC has not gone far at all.

Plus there was that article saying Intel were going to focus hard on efficiency, and we could actually see IPC decrease from them. Even though perf/w will carry on increasing.

I suppose the other interpretation here is software really has to catch up, and the only performance gains going forward are to massively parallelise everything and up core counts.

If AMD can fit 32c/64t on 7nm at the top end server chip. It shouldn't be out of the question to get a ~3.5 GHz 12c/24t chip from Intel/AMD for us normal people. But it'd be pointless if software won't use it.
 
Last edited:
Why do you think OCUK had that fantastic offer on the 6700k bundle yesterday guys? :D

7700K are rumored to clock to 5Ghz/5.1Ghz on air. Couple that with a slight IPC increase and we have a decent upgrade on our hands.
 
I wouldn't be surprised if the new speed step and other improvements along with the increase in clock speed, make a nice difference with general computing tasks. But for gaming I can see that the increase in clock speeds will only make a much smaller difference, with the other features not making much of an impact.
 
Dave2150 said:
Why do you think OCUK had that fantastic offer on the 6700k bundle yesterday guys? :D

7700K are rumored to clock to 5Ghz/5.1Ghz on air. Couple that with a slight IPC increase and we have a decent upgrade on our hands.
Click to expand...

Ha, remember when people were saying that for skylake. I agree with the others it'll just be higher stock clocks with less overclocking headroom as a result.
 
Yutang13 said:
Ha, remember when people were saying that for skylake.
Click to expand...

We were saying it for Ivy Bridge, tbh... then Haswell, then Devil's Canyon after that :)

I'll get excited when it's live and when the community is posting benches. Until then, I'm guessing it's another 4.7-4.8 on average.
 
Clock-for-clock performance increases compared to Skylake will be within the margin of error, except maybe if the improvements to speed shift have an effect.

Of course the lower end offerings will be better simply due to the increased clock speeds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom