Are you guys going to upgrade to a 6700k when its out?

I just get a dirty feeling about spending so much money on a chip that is 50% GPU that I will almost never use. If I don't use the GPU can I get a refund for half of the sale price?

They should make a chip where the entire die area is dedicated to the CPU, and then throw a small PowerVR GPU in there to give basic display and media capabilities. That would be worth buying.
 
rive22 said:
That gigabyte looks like a great board.

Function and features come first. I appreciate cosmetics, though good looks aren't a deciding factor. However bad looks are a deal breaker. Like the Asus Z87 gold and yellow, call it a subconscious psychological punishment to the company for being morons. hahaha
Click to expand...

When they first came out with that I told them that the plastic didn't look "gold". They were shooting for black and gold but the anodized parts of the heat sinks etc. didn't look anything like the plastic. Last generation they abandoned the oatmeal colored slots and went all black with gold accents and coloring on the heat sinks. It was a bit plain but at least it wasn't hideous.

arestavo said:
Still, it's is a bit of bupkiss that Intel (continues to) charges so much for such a small performance increase.

But at least with Win10 and DX12 multicore systems will actually benefit from increased core counts instead of just high clock speeds. Then maybe AMD will be back to being competitive with higher end gaming machines - which would be a very good thing.
Click to expand...

Strictly speaking, Intel doesn't charge you that much to upgrade. It charges roughly the same prices it did for CPUs since the Core i5/i7 2500K/2600K CPUs launched in the mainstream PC segment.

The difference isn't in pricing as much as it is the models that Intel offers each year. The Core i7 2700 replaced the Core i7 2600K. Then the Core i7 3770K replaced the 2700K. The 4790K replaced the 4770K which replaced the 3770K. Intel makes changes to its product lineup according to it's tick/tock strategy. Both CPUs will exist side by side for a time until stock of the older hardware is depleted. There is always a small price premium at the time of launch, but once those older chips are gone and things settle down you will probably pay around the same price for a Skylake that you paid for a 3770K two years ago or pretty close to it. There are some adjustments for inflation, geography, country, taxes etc. but essentially the price of Intel CPUs has been fairly consistent for several years now.

Let me give you another example: Intel's offered Extreme Edition CPUs since the launch of the series during the Pentium 4 days. Today the 5960X costs the same as the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition did when it was introduced. Gallatin Pentium 4 Extreme Editions launched in 2003 at a price of roughly $1,000. Hex core Gulftown based Core i7 980's had the same price point. Around a year later the Core i7 990 replaced it with a small bump in clock speed for the same price. The Core i7 980 was discontinued. X58 and the Core i7 980 Extreme Edition was roughly 5 years ago.

Today's $1,000 gets you a significantly better CPU on a much more advanced platform. Now you get PCIe Gen 3.0, DDR4 support, 8 cores and 16 threads instead of 6c/12t etc. If your the type of guy who buys an incremental upgrade like the Core i7 990X to replace a Core i7 980X then either you know what your doing and accept the costs, or you don't upgrade. From a financial standpoint such an "upgrade" would be a waste and it would be wiser to upgrade unless you just have money to burn.

There is nothing that says you need to buy a CPU every year. So it isn't charging you that much annually for processors unless you decide to buy that often. Basically if you can get 3-5 years out of a CPU then your spending the same amount of money again, but on a significantly faster piece of hardware. I don't see anything wrong with that.
 
jwcalla said:
I just get a dirty feeling about spending so much money on a chip that is 50% GPU that I will almost never use. If I don't use the GPU can I get a refund for half of the sale price?

They should make a chip where the entire die area is dedicated to the CPU, and then throw a small PowerVR GPU in there to give basic display and media capabilities. That would be worth buying.
Click to expand...

I felt the same way about onboard audio for many years. It was shitty quality and added costs and complexity to the motherboard I didn't desire. Today I might still opt not to buy onboard audio if such a motherboard existed. Of course now it isn't so bad with the proliferation of USB DACs and decent quality audio which saves precious expansion slots for graphics cards. :D
 
I'm definitely upgrading now, I have got to get me some of this:

MSI-Z170A-XPOWER-Gaming-Titanium-Edition-Board.jpg
 
RamonGTP said:
Reminds me of the old Soyo Platinum motherboards. The good ole days.
Click to expand...

I never saw a Soyo last more than a year so I have a different opinion on their boards when I think back on the "good ole days."
 
Dan_D said:
I never saw a Soyo last more than a year so I have a different opinion on their boards when I think back on the "good ole days."
Click to expand...

I wasn't a huge fan of their boards either, but it was an exciting time to be a PC gamer back then, hence the good ole days.
 
Dan_D said:
When they first came out with that I told them that the plastic didn't look "gold". They were shooting for black and gold but the anodized parts of the heat sinks etc. didn't look anything like the plastic. Last generation they abandoned the oatmeal colored slots and went all black with gold accents and coloring on the heat sinks. It was a bit plain but at least it wasn't hideous.



Strictly speaking, Intel doesn't charge you that much to upgrade. It charges roughly the same prices it did for CPUs since the Core i5/i7 2500K/2600K CPUs launched in the mainstream PC segment.

The difference isn't in pricing as much as it is the models that Intel offers each year. The Core i7 2700 replaced the Core i7 2600K. Then the Core i7 3770K replaced the 2700K. The 4790K replaced the 4770K which replaced the 3770K. Intel makes changes to its product lineup according to it's tick/tock strategy. Both CPUs will exist side by side for a time until stock of the older hardware is depleted. There is always a small price premium at the time of launch, but once those older chips are gone and things settle down you will probably pay around the same price for a Skylake that you paid for a 3770K two years ago or pretty close to it. There are some adjustments for inflation, geography, country, taxes etc. but essentially the price of Intel CPUs has been fairly consistent for several years now.

Let me give you another example: Intel's offered Extreme Edition CPUs since the launch of the series during the Pentium 4 days. Today the 5960X costs the same as the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition did when it was introduced. Gallatin Pentium 4 Extreme Editions launched in 2003 at a price of roughly $1,000. Hex core Gulftown based Core i7 980's had the same price point. Around a year later the Core i7 990 replaced it with a small bump in clock speed for the same price. The Core i7 980 was discontinued. X58 and the Core i7 980 Extreme Edition was roughly 5 years ago.

Today's $1,000 gets you a significantly better CPU on a much more advanced platform. Now you get PCIe Gen 3.0, DDR4 support, 8 cores and 16 threads instead of 6c/12t etc. If your the type of guy who buys an incremental upgrade like the Core i7 990X to replace a Core i7 980X then either you know what your doing and accept the costs, or you don't upgrade. From a financial standpoint such an "upgrade" would be a waste and it would be wiser to upgrade unless you just have money to burn.

There is nothing that says you need to buy a CPU every year. So it isn't charging you that much annually for processors unless you decide to buy that often. Basically if you can get 3-5 years out of a CPU then your spending the same amount of money again, but on a significantly faster piece of hardware. I don't see anything wrong with that.
Click to expand...

I know, I know - it's just me really just complaining (first world problems) about changes to the motherboard requirements. It's not the CPU costs that get me, but the entire system that has to be upgraded now as well (yeah, still rocking DDR3). At least Intel gaming systems stay viable as gaming systems for a LONG time.
 
arestavo said:
I know, I know - it's just me really just complaining (first world problems) about changes to the motherboard requirements. It's not the CPU costs that get me, but the entire system that has to be upgraded now as well (yeah, still rocking DDR3). At least Intel gaming systems stay viable as gaming systems for a LONG time.
Click to expand...

You've hit on exactly why I've resisted just going with Devil's Canyon and calling it a day. I fully expect for my 6700K to be the last conventional PC I own, as Gawd only knows what the industry will look like in 3-4 years. With the yield problems Intel has had with 14nm, I don't have a lot of faith in 10nm or even IBM's 7nm processes, so perhaps with the new 3D-Xpoint memory the PC paradigm will be completely changed.

It is wise to keep in mind that the current state has survived essentially unchanged since the '70s... have an uninitiated person look at an LGA 1150 motherboard and one from an 8088 and I'll bet they can't tell the difference. Today's systems still have Molex connectors from 1976 for crissakes.
 
Nope. I built two PCs since last August (i5 4690k and i5 4590), so I'm still very happy with the performance boost I got from them coming from an FX-6300 and Phenom II X4 980 BE. Considering how long I had the latter I'll probably keep these two about four years.
 
Weeth said:
You've hit on exactly why I've resisted just going with Devil's Canyon and calling it a day. I fully expect for my 6700K to be the last conventional PC I own, as Gawd only knows what the industry will look like in 3-4 years. With the yield problems Intel has had with 14nm, I don't have a lot of faith in 10nm or even IBM's 7nm processes, so perhaps with the new 3D-Xpoint memory the PC paradigm will be completely changed.
Click to expand...

Or god forbid they are actually forced to start making CPUs bigger to increase performance instead of simply making CPUs smaller and smaller and devoting more and more of the chip to the GPU. CPU cores these days are smaller than a dime, so small they have to use heatspreaders to prevent damage to the tiny little CPU :rolleyes:
 
GotNoRice said:
Or god forbid they are actually forced to start making CPUs bigger to increase performance instead of simply making CPUs smaller and smaller and devoting more and more of the chip to the GPU. CPU cores these days are smaller than a dime, so small they have to use heatspreaders to prevent damage to the tiny little CPU :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I think that Intel has pretty well hit the wall with silicon CPU progress as we're now in the realm of "dozens of atoms" in the pipe and as the whole industry is turning away from the conventional PC tower concept they're just giving up on providing us with "orders of magnitude" CPU performance improvements and concentrating on concentrating... everything into one chip. SoC is our future whether we like it or not. I hate it but who the heck am I and why should Intel listen to me?
 
I'll upgrade if Intel releases something really worthwhile for ultra high end enthusiasts to upgrade to (a quad core doesn't qualify, BTW) but given what I've seen from Intel in the last few years, I'm not holding my breath... :rolleyes:
 
LigTasm said:
I'm definitely upgrading now, I have got to get me some of this:
[snip]
Click to expand...

Nice to see mobo mfgs using white pcbs again. Reminds me of one of those Soyo or Sapphire boards from way back... but it is a little too much white - some more color to offset that would be nice. The Soyo Dragon Platinum had those purple slots which accented the white nicely.. Purple's not the most masculine color but oh well.. I loved how that old Dragon Platinum looked. The nice thing about the white is with the right lighting the board can be any color you want I guess too. :)

PS: I am feeling the upgrade itch from my z68/2400 combo.. but it would only be to have new gear for the sake of playing with new toys.. I don't really need more power on this machine.
 
LigTasm said:
I'm definitely upgrading now, I have got to get me some of this:

MSI-Z170A-XPOWER-Gaming-Titanium-Edition-Board.jpg
Click to expand...

Crap. Before I'd install that in my case, I'd spray with a can of "dry dust". You know, just like a can of air, but filled with dust, instead. ;)

Anything, as long as I can tone it down...

:)
 
DejaWiz said:
If there was a 100% chance that SKL was going back to a soldered IHS, then I'd be making the jump. Since there is high probability that Intel's paying customers are going to get screwed over again with paste under the lid, then I'll likely stay put for now.
Click to expand...

I don't think they're ever going back to that. Everything I've read says it's to small to do it. Maybe that BS, but I really don't see why Intel would intentionally cripple the processor, since they want people to upgrade.

I suppose they might do it with E CPUs, simply because they're already raping you on those processors, so they can afford to kill a few along the way
 
Dan_D said:
Many of you will I think be surprised by Skylake. We'll have to wait and see.

Unfortunately everything is under embargo. I can't get more specific than I already have. About the only thing I'm willing to say is that P67 users will definitely benefit from the upgrade. Z68 users will benefit less, but I think there is still some value in the upgrade. In part because of the CPU and in part due to the platform. Any X58 users who are still rocking 920 C0/D0 CPUs may want to consider Skylake as well.
Click to expand...

Well this P55 i7 860 user wants to upgrade....and I hope the MBs don't have too many issues.
 
nilepez said:
Well this P55 i7 860 user wants to upgrade....and I hope the MBs don't have too many issues.
Click to expand...

Go with a company that has an excellent customer service record. EVGA is good, but I have seen a distinct down tick in the past couple of years with regards to their motherboard quality (X79 series). Not too sure about other manufacturers.
 
arestavo said:
Go with a company that has an excellent customer service record. EVGA is good, but I have seen a distinct down tick in the past couple of years with regards to their motherboard quality (X79 series). Not too sure about other manufacturers.
Click to expand...

I had a really good experience with an x79 classified (really wish I would have never let that one go...). Then bad experience with a x79 ftw. Then bad again with z97 ftw. So Its been a mixed bag for me. I've also had really good experience with their classified gpus. Classified line just loaded with quality.
 
I was wanting to upgrade, but I think my 2500k has another "tock" left in it.

It's a pretty good jump on the platform side, (latest DDR4/PCI-E/USB revisions) but I think that it's worth waiting for those to stabilize a bit.
 
arestavo said:
Go with a company that has an excellent customer service record. EVGA is good, but I have seen a distinct down tick in the past couple of years with regards to their motherboard quality (X79 series). Not too sure about other manufacturers.
Click to expand...

EVGA's motherboards weren't ever really all that great. Their X58 motherboards were among the less desirable ones I reviewed back in the day. They did great things with NVIDIA's reference designs when they decided to fix what NVIDIA designed so wrong with it's VRM's on the 7xx SLI chipset based boards. They had a few good ones like the X58 Classified but aside from those outliers you could always easily do better with someone else's motherboards.
 
nilepez said:
Well this P55 i7 860 user wants to upgrade....and I hope the MBs don't have too many issues.
Click to expand...

arestavo said:
Go with a company that has an excellent customer service record. EVGA is good, but I have seen a distinct down tick in the past couple of years with regards to their motherboard quality (X79 series). Not too sure about other manufacturers.
Click to expand...

EVGA is good for customer service, but they are definitely not producing the better motherboards right now. I'd take ASRock, MSI, ASUS, or GIGABYTE over anything they've got or have had for the last several generations.
ASUS' customer service is improving quite a bit but they've got a hard road ahead of them to reverse their reputation. I've heard good things about GIGABYTE and MSI both as of late on that front as well.
 
Sold my unused RC stuff and got the money ready for next month to buy a completely new computer.
Decided against buying a GPU and just keeping my 280X until the next gen. nvidia (AMD never again)

i`ll give old faithful (X58, 5690X 24GB RAM) to my little brother who`s still rocking a Q6600 for his intense Facebook gaming or whatever the kids play these days, got a feeling that antville or whatever will run faster.
 
That white MSI motherboard looks amazing, but they seem to have questionable components / QC in the past?

I'd rather go ASUS and have more confidence in my O/C and components that are getting me there, just accepting the fact that if I ever have to RMA it I'm screwed. I'd probably buy a new mobo while I wait for the RMA to go through with ASUS, sometime in 6-12 months I assume, if ever!
 
T_A said:
Sold my unused RC stuff and got the money ready for next month to buy a completely new computer.
Decided against buying a GPU and just keeping my 280X until the next gen. nvidia (AMD never again)

i`ll give old faithful (X58, 5690X 24GB RAM) to my little brother who`s still rocking a Q6600 for his intense Facebook gaming or whatever the kids play these days, got a feeling that antville or whatever will run faster.
Click to expand...


How did you get a 5690x to fit in the x58 socket? :D
 
Is it odd that there are no credible benches out when it's releasing this week? Typically they release samples?

I'm itching to upgrade my 2500k but it seems many of you aren't going to. I'm running it at 4.3 with two 670s in SLI an think it could improve my GTA V experience :)
 
More I read about Skylake the more it seems like Haswell-E is the best choice to go to from my 2600k. Just picked up an Asus Deluxe yesterday and will be grabbing a 5820k shortly. No reason to go to another quad-core that probably won't OC all that well when I can get a 6 Core with more PCIE lanes. As much as I hate the term. Haswell-E just seems more "future proof" right now and offers more for the money. Guess we'll all see later this week, but wouldn't shock me to see a huge demand on X99 stuff after this week.
 
TDSlam720 said:
More I read about Skylake the more it seems like Haswell-E is the best choice to go to from my 2600k. Just picked up an Asus Deluxe yesterday and will be grabbing a 5820k shortly. No reason to go to another quad-core that probably won't OC all that well when I can get a 6 Core with more PCIE lanes. As much as I hate the term. Haswell-E just seems more "future proof" right now and offers more for the money. Guess we'll all see later this week, but wouldn't shock me to see a huge demand on X99 stuff after this week.
Click to expand...

Not sure that you'll actually be getting that many more PCIe lanes with the 5820K.

I think the Z170 platform is going to support quite a bit of PCIe connectivity.

But I'm right there in the boat with you. Remember the 5820K only has 28 lanes, not 40 :(
 
obiwansotti said:
Not sure that you'll actually be getting that many more PCIe lanes with the 5820K.

I think the Z170 platform is going to support quite a bit of PCIe connectivity.

But I'm right there in the boat with you. Remember the 5820K only has 28 lanes, not 40 :(
Click to expand...

My understanding it that skylake will support 20 and the 5820k supports only 28.
 
doug_7506 said:
My understanding it that skylake will support 20 and the 5820k supports only 28.
Click to expand...


I think you might be off a little bit.

The z97 platform supports 8 lanes of PCIe 2.0 and the CPU supports 16 lanes of PCIe 3.0

http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/chipsets/performance-chipsets/z97-chipset.html
http://ark.intel.com/products/80807/Intel-Core-i7-4790K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_40-GHz

But what I think we are hearing about the Z170 is that we get 20 Lanes on the mobo connected via a highspeed DMI link to the CPU AND 16 lanes on the CPU.

So Skylake will have 16 lanes for the GPU and the platform will have 20 more for M.2, thunderbolt 3, expansion cards, ect...

The X99 is similiar to the Z97 with 8 PCIe 2.0 lanes so an x99 will have 28 lanes of PCIe 3.0 and 8 lanes for 2.0
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/chipsets/performance-chipsets/x99-chipset.html

Z710 - 36 lanes 3.0
X99 - 28 lanes 3.0, 8 lanes 2.0
z97 - 16 lanes 3.0, 8 lanes 2.0
 
obiwansotti said:
Not sure that you'll actually be getting that many more PCIe lanes with the 5820K.

I think the Z170 platform is going to support quite a bit of PCIe connectivity.

But I'm right there in the boat with you. Remember the 5820K only has 28 lanes, not 40 :(
Click to expand...


Oh I know, I don't have a need for the lanes now, but I was just referring to the "future proofing" of it. If I did have a need I could just upgrade CPUs for the full 40.

Also I'm pretty sure Z170 will only give you x8 x8 using SLI, but X99 you can get x16 x16
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top