Schtask
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2011
- Messages
- 436
I'd still be rocking x58 nephalem if my mobo hadn't died.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Seems to overclock better?IPC have been known to be the same for like a year. So if you expect 2 equally clocked CPUs to perform different you set yourself up for a disappointment long ago.
The 14nm+ process allows for higher clocks and lower power consumption. Out of the box a 7700K is 5% faster in 2-4 threads and 7.5% faster in 1 thread over 6700K. It also seems to overclock better in average with those 200-300Mhz.
the biggest change is in mobile, with higher clocks and higher sustained boost. So you end up with 20-25% performance increases. For server the same pretty much applies. First server part is Skylake-EP tho and Skylake-X for HEDT. 32 cores with a 2.1Ghz base vs Broadwell with 24 cores and 2.2Ghz base.
With Coffee Lake in a year you will see the same IPC again. However you will get 6 cores instead of 4 on LGA1151. If you are looking for IPC increases outside caches, you have to wait till Icelake.
Seems to overclock better?
Please show me a large sample of retail chips that prove this. Oh wait, its not released yet. Intel would never send out cherry chips though would they.............
That said, the higher clocks are not proven stable. They are quick test runs. Anyone can get a higher clock running a short 3d app or cpu test. Show me it can maintain constant gaming (or whatever it is you need it to do) for a period of time.
Time will tell but dont assume its some magical clocking chip. History shows this has happened in the past with only mediocre clocks being the norm.Private people already got retail 7700K chips here and there and they clock well.
And sending out cherry samples only works the first time. Next time its cherry picked vs cherry picked. If we presume it was the case to begin with.
Jury is still out on that with the samples I have.If Kaby can reliably hit 5+ GHz that will be some consolation.
Are there any new hex/octo cores on the way? Kaby Lake-E or something. Maybe those will be good.
Thanks for the review. Looks like Intel just released their Bulldozer.
Any idea if kabylake still uses the terrible TIM?
Lol no. Kaby is quite a big success.
I suppose perspective is subjective. Care to elaborate why you feel it's a success, despite it being a carbon-copy of Skylake?
I think that Intel actually wants people move to Zen, they might have something lot faster in stores and after people have moved to Zen, they release their Zen killer, which will again make people to pay a lot to get fastest and newest.
I regret of getting Skylake to replace Core2Duo, I should of moved to X99, but as Skylake was the newest I though it will get faster CPU's (especially for single core performance), but looks like Kaby Lake is not going to give a lot. Maybe Kaby Lake i3 K model would be more interesting for single core performance needs as there is not much point paying from i7 when only situations where I find CPU needing more power are those where software uses only 1 thread.
For majority of enthusiast certainly Kaby Lake i3 would be too weak even when clocked, some like from soundless pc builds and for those it might be interesting option as is current Skylake i3, I'm running semi passive cooling on mine and only noise is buzz from Seasonic fanless PSU (don't buy), my room is enough quiet to hear power adapters making noise at wall socket or cat breathing, so even slight noise from pc is heard quite well, maybe that is why Seasonic was a disappointment.
So in contrast to this background Kaby Lake does give some improvement over Skylake as it might be possible to get bit more computing power for close to 0db, but there are not many (if at all?) reviews that try to find that, maybe because there are not so many with these needs. However Kaby Lake does not deliver much improvement even on that, so don't see point from moving to it from Skylake. So maybe just wait for socket 2066 then, maybe that is where Intel wants people move from Zen, after all more money to market would help revive pc.
Intel actually wants people move to Zen
Take a look on notebookreview with 20-25% higher speed.
And else look at the desktop lineup. The speedbump isn't bad at all +200-300Mhz here and there.
To call it Bulldozer is simply ignorance.
Hopefully the first 10nm parts will provide at least a 10% IPC gain while significantly lower power consumption...then I'll be impressed.
If you want something faster than Kaby Lake its called Skylake-X.
Yeah, there was also Kaby Lake-X on some news, both for socket 2066, I believe, but I guess it is still quite bit of rumors, we know such is coming, but what those will deliver remains to be seen.
You're entitled to your opinion.
IMO; Those miniscule speed increases, while offering no IPC increases, makes this a pointless release.
Hopefully the first 10nm parts will provide at least a 10% IPC gain while significantly lower power consumption...then I'll be impressed.
For you, yes. But so have it been forever haven't it?
First(Cannon Lake) 10nm is unlikely to give 10%. Second generation perhaps yes (Icelake).
IPC history:
This i had my 3930k rig for 4 or 5 years and only upgraded when the mb started to die. Its sad how litle cpus have come in the last few years higher ipc but lower clook room and less power thats about it.
At least gpus still need upgrading
Zen with its lower IPC (remember this is supposed to be between Ivy Bridge and Haswell if AMD was telling the truth about the 40%) and lower clocks for the 8C / 16T versus Intel's mainstream will not make it the CPU that many people are dreaming about.
I think while Zen may not have a faster IPC I do believe AMD will offer more cores and threads than Intel at a cheaper price and multi threaded applications may thrive.
Even if Zen comes close to Intel for gaming they will win back all of the AMD fans.
Thanks for the review. Looks like Intel just released their Bulldozer.
I suppose perspective is subjective. Care to elaborate why you feel it's a success, despite it being a carbon-copy of Skylake?
Zen with its lower IPC (remember this is supposed to be between Ivy Bridge and Haswell if AMD was telling the truth about the 40%) and lower clocks for the 8C / 16T versus Intel's mainstream will not make it the CPU that many people are dreaming about.
Loved the article! Intel really are doing everything they can to allow AMD to catch up so it's not a monopoly. What i think would make an amazing article would be to do a comprehensive round up of IPC 'gains' of all Intel quad cores dating back to Core 2 Extreme QX6700. Simply choose a clock all CPUs can reach and see how the benchmarks fall. There will be a little help from RAM development but it would make for such an interesting read don't you think?
I'd honestly like to see a completely NEW CPU, utilizing a better "infrastucture" than the x86. There are so many transistors "wasted" to get around the limitations of the x86 architecture it isn't even funny.
If a company sat down and actually devised a new instruction set, with the idea of muli-core/multi-thread execution in mind, especially with an eye towards massive multitasking. None of these things were on the minds of CPU developers when the x86 architecture was designed. And companies have done amazing work with adding instructions, register renaming, task switching, but it's patch upon patch upon patch. Which in no way can be as efficient as designing something from the ground up to have these abilities.
Honestly, i am thinking with a really new design, the machine would be fast enough to "decode on the fly" old x86 code, or even just run a VM with an x86 emulator setup.
I mean we are still stuck with clocks, when the articles i read are all about clockless designs being the future.
I know what i am talking about has been attempted, but it wasn't by a company with the brain power and deep pockets of intel.
I'd honestly like to see a completely NEW CPU, utilizing a better "infrastucture" than the x86. There are so many transistors "wasted" to get around the limitations of the x86 architecture it isn't even funny.
If a company sat down and actually devised a new instruction set, with the idea of muli-core/multi-thread execution in mind, especially with an eye towards massive multitasking. None of these things were on the minds of CPU developers when the x86 architecture was designed. And companies have done amazing work with adding instructions, register renaming, task switching, but it's patch upon patch upon patch. Which in no way can be as efficient as designing something from the ground up to have these abilities.
Honestly, i am thinking with a really new design, the machine would be fast enough to "decode on the fly" old x86 code, or even just run a VM with an x86 emulator setup.
I mean we are still stuck with clocks, when the articles i read are all about clockless designs being the future.
I know what i am talking about has been attempted, but it wasn't by a company with the brain power and deep pockets of intel.
You might want to look into POWER by IBM. It's pretty epic and designed completely around parallelization. It supports up to 8 way SMT and is user configurable for different thread counts based on workload.I'd honestly like to see a completely NEW CPU, utilizing a better "infrastucture" than the x86. There are so many transistors "wasted" to get around the limitations of the x86 architecture it isn't even funny.
If a company sat down and actually devised a new instruction set, with the idea of muli-core/multi-thread execution in mind, especially with an eye towards massive multitasking. None of these things were on the minds of CPU developers when the x86 architecture was designed. And companies have done amazing work with adding instructions, register renaming, task switching, but it's patch upon patch upon patch. Which in no way can be as efficient as designing something from the ground up to have these abilities.
Honestly, i am thinking with a really new design, the machine would be fast enough to "decode on the fly" old x86 code, or even just run a VM with an x86 emulator setup.
I mean we are still stuck with clocks, when the articles i read are all about clockless designs being the future.
I know what i am talking about has been attempted, but it wasn't by a company with the brain power and deep pockets of intel.