New Skylake build, is it even worth it?..

fociz

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 16, 2006
Messages
345
It's that time for me, and all i see are M.2 issues, and uncooked bios's from these supposed top tier mfg's.
I'm looking at these two boards to begin with.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813132566

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128838

..And while i understand teething problems, it seems this new platform is not only expensive(i7 6700k being sold for WAY beyond msrp..Let the e-tailer gouging commence!)but seems buggy as hell.

I have the means of upgrading right now with an $1100 budget for proc, mobo, case, ps, and maybe a new ssd for os. I already have a decent 970 gpu, and everything else.
Or..i can funnel it back into mundane life stuff(bills etc)and go on waiting another year for Intel to shit out another mediocre platform.

I am cynical and bitter i know, but i really would like to build a new rig, as it's been what, 5 years now? Geezust.. I have poked at x99/5820k, but 6700k simply seems better for gaming, and usb type c, dmi 3.0 etc etc.

What to do..
 
Simple solution - does the PC you have now do what you want it to do? If you're in to gaming, you already have a decent video card. Unless you're still on an old Core 2 system, save your $$$. Maybe pick up an SSD if you are still using a HD for your OS drive.
 
I upgraded from an i5 2500K setup and I'm very happy with it. I reused my SSD, optical drive, case, and power supply. Sold the old motherboard, CPU, and DDR3 RAM right here on the forum. Also went to a GTX 950 just to get something that less power until Pascal comes out.

I had one issue with RAM and that was solved with a BIOS update. My PC was feeling "old" to me even though it otherwise worked fine. I think I had that 2500K setup running for 4.5 years. I replaced the fans and CPU cooler as well since 5 years is about as long as those last without breaking down / making a lot of noise.

For M.2 drives, looks like most people are having issues running two of them due to the resources they use from PCI E lanes or regular SATA ports. I didn't have any plans to use two M.2 drives so that didn't affect me.

So yes I think it's worth it, sounds like we were in a similar position. When 6700K prices go back to normal I may upgrade, though my 6500 has zero issues now and sips power.
 
Last edited:
I have 2 x 6700k systems and while I had a lot of DDR4 problems initially both systems work perfectly now. I am not using any M.2 drives, mostly because the real world tests don't really show any tangible improvement.
 
I did practically the same upgrade as Ocellaris, upgraded from a 4.5yr old clocked 2500K to a 6600K.
This was to improve my minimum framerate in Project Cars, Witcher 3 and GTA V so I can hug 60fps. This it did.

The switchover wasnt quite smooth, I had to get an MSI motherboard that I didnt really want because of a shortage of decent mobos.
It proved to have no LLC so voltage droop was rather large (50 to 60mV).
And my Corsair LPX 3000MHz 4x4GB ram would only run stable at 2800MHz until after a BIOS update.

I changed to a Asrock Z170 Xtreme 4+ mobo which is a much better clockers board but my ram again would not work full speed.
Next BIOS update let me run at 3000MHz but wasnt stable long term under testing. Games ran fine so no issues.
Next BIOS update knocked it down to 2500MHz, the BIOS update after was no better despite them both supposedly improving memory compatibility.
So I want back to the earlier BIOS update.

The memory to get is GSkill Ripjaws V.
As soon as the shop I bought my ram from gets stock I will be changing mine to that.

I'm not using M.2 as it steals 2 SATA ports.
When I get my next SSD it will be a large SATA 850 Pro, not an M.2 because the gains are not worth the SATA port loss.
And its early days for M.2. Who knows what issues will arise and whether it will be a forward going standard.

My opinion:
Annoyed at my ram issues and MSI for not making it clear that their lower end boards dont support LLC.
Its very quick and CPU overclocking is good. My 6600K is at 4.7GHz.
It does everything I needed.
Happy camper :)
 
Last edited:
I have the upgrade bug pretty bad as my 2600k system is feeling long in the tooth.

I think most of my issues would actually be solved by going from 8 to 16GB and just waiting another year or so.

Some games seem to run better on other CPUs, but not the game I play. (Guild Wars 2)

I do like to multi-box some times so I wonder if a 5820k would make a big difference when running 3 instances?

It's a lot of money to shell out without knowing.
 
I have the upgrade bug pretty bad as my 2600k system is feeling long in the tooth.

I think most of my issues would actually be solved by going from 8 to 16GB and just waiting another year or so.

Some games seem to run better on other CPUs, but not the game I play. (Guild Wars 2)

I do like to multi-box some times so I wonder if a 5820k would make a big difference when running 3 instances?

It's a lot of money to shell out without knowing.

True story. If you'd have asked me 5 years ago when i upgraded to sandy bridge, i would've put money on my next upgrade in 2015 would most definitely be an 8 core, or even 12/16 core processor. NOPE..

Little to no competition, and the sheer amount of fucks not given by Intel would've lost me that bet.

Sadly, I say you'd still be better served by the 6700k simply because of it's better single thread performance, along with the chipset/IO upgrades. But this is just one mans opinion.
 
I know I'm splitting hairs here but M.2 doesn't steal / use SATA ports. Often times M.2 slots share PCI-Express lanes with the SATA Express ports, which are backwards compatible with SATA devices. However, those are not primarily intended for SATA, but rather SATA Express. You should also still have lots of SATA ports in most cases. People running 8x to 10x drives might need that many SATA ports, but for people with three, four or less drives should generally be fine.

There are also AHCI M.2 drives but I wouldn't recommend using them.
 
I can tell you that upgrading my 2500k to a 6600k made a HUGE difference in my minimum frame rates. Even in old games like Diablo 3, which I run at 4k, I was dropping to 45fps in those fire filled maps. After the upgrade it was a solid 60fps everywhere. That's huge. In World of Warcraft, which is hugely CPU bound, I saw 15-25fps increase to my minimum frame rate (at 1080p on my 144Hz monitor). For instance, in my garrison, even with SLI'd 980s, I was getting about 70fps when outside taking in the whole garrison view. After the upgrade I'd sit between 85-95fps.

I was skeptical that the upgrade would make much difference in my framerates before I did it. I was mostly doing the upgrade to get rid of my flakey old motherboard and have a new CPU to play around with. Well, it did make a difference. It wasn't subtle. With the extra PCI-E lanes available, ability to use PCI-E 3.0 vs only 2.0, and the upgrade to DMI 3.0, there were huge improvement in minimum frame rates. If your goal is to improve graphics performance and reduce the CPU and bus speed being the bottleneck in your system, this is a worthy upgrade and you will be happy.

Now, keep in mind, my old 2500k was overclocked to 4.5GHz. My new 6600k is overclocked to 4.6GHz. Results will vary based upon your overclock.

I decided against the 6700k because of its diminishing returns for gaming.
 
If you're playing some of the more demanding games out there at 1440p or lower and have 8GB or less of system memory, then get some more RAM and GPU muscle...sell your 970, upgrade to 16+ GB, and get a 980 Ti. Your SB i7 isn't going to make much different with GPU-bound performance, especially since you've got it OC'd to 4.5 GHz.
 
I do want to upgrade from my ancient system, but probably waiting to see how things mature into 2016
 
Right now I'd rather put my money into a new monitor preferably something like the 34" Predator or something like it that has a higher refresh rate, g-sync and is curved ultrawide.

I also want to wait it out to see what directX 12 does for cpu loads. Basically with a gsync monitor and just upgrading my graphics card, I should still get more smooth game play then I do now, and then upgrade the cpu when something worthwhile comes out. To me gaining 10-15% in frames for some games is more expensive then just getting a new graphics card. And lets be real here, if you're just gaming, surfing the net, listening to music, and watching movies on your pc then Sandybridge is still relevant.
 
I just built a new Skylake 6700K system because I was in need of a proper desktop system (instead of the laptop I was using for a few years). My experiences are that Skylake is a highly immature platform, which will have you troubleshooting lots of compatibility and other issues.

When it works it's nice, but you have to ask yourself whether you wouldn't rather just opt for a slightly older platform with most issues already sorted and fixed.
 
What problems have you had?
The only issue I have had is memory compatibility but that is the fault of Corsair.
 
Sadly, I say you'd still be better served by the 6700k simply because of it's better single thread performance, along with the chipset/IO upgrades. But this is just one mans opinion.

You are correct. For the most part, people in general would be better served by the 6700k for the reasons you stated. Granted there are cases where the X99/5820k or 5960X setup would be the better route but they are few and far between.

I can tell you that upgrading my 2500k to a 6600k made a HUGE difference in my minimum frame rates. Even in old games like Diablo 3, which I run at 4k, I was dropping to 45fps in those fire filled maps. After the upgrade it was a solid 60fps everywhere. That's huge. In World of Warcraft, which is hugely CPU bound, I saw 15-25fps increase to my minimum frame rate (at 1080p on my 144Hz monitor). For instance, in my garrison, even with SLI'd 980s, I was getting about 70fps when outside taking in the whole garrison view. After the upgrade I'd sit between 85-95fps.

I was skeptical that the upgrade would make much difference in my framerates before I did it. I was mostly doing the upgrade to get rid of my flakey old motherboard and have a new CPU to play around with. Well, it did make a difference. It wasn't subtle. With the extra PCI-E lanes available, ability to use PCI-E 3.0 vs only 2.0, and the upgrade to DMI 3.0, there were huge improvement in minimum frame rates. If your goal is to improve graphics performance and reduce the CPU and bus speed being the bottleneck in your system, this is a worthy upgrade and you will be happy.

Now, keep in mind, my old 2500k was overclocked to 4.5GHz. My new 6600k is overclocked to 4.6GHz. Results will vary based upon your overclock.

I decided against the 6700k because of its diminishing returns for gaming.

PCIe 3.0 and DMI 3.0 don't exactly translate directly into better gaming performance. The difference between PCIe 2.0 and 3.0 in games is minimal. DMI 3.0 vs. 2.0 does nothing in actual games. It's nice to have, but by itself it doesn't help with your frame rates. The CPU and overall platform improvements aiding you in achieving higher minimum frame rates doesn't surprise me at all. But those improvements are coming primarily from a CPU that's clocked higher, with better IPC. The memory subsystem being faster is something we've seen helping on Skylake compared to say DDR4 on Haswell-E. It's also the main differentiator of Skylake vs. Devil's Canyon.

I just built a new Skylake 6700K system because I was in need of a proper desktop system (instead of the laptop I was using for a few years). My experiences are that Skylake is a highly immature platform, which will have you troubleshooting lots of compatibility and other issues.

When it works it's nice, but you have to ask yourself whether you wouldn't rather just opt for a slightly older platform with most issues already sorted and fixed.

I'll go out on a limb and say I've logged more hours on various Skylake motherboards than you have. That has not been my experience. I'm not saying the platform was totally mature from the start. In fact Z170 / Skylake is quite polished for most motherboard manufacturers not having had finalized UEFI BIOS code until a week before retail release. By now the bulk of earlier issues we did see are now resolved.

What problems have you had?
The only issue I have had is memory compatibility but that is the fault of Corsair.

How is that Corsair's fault? I'm not saying it isn't, but memory compatibility is most often a motherboard / UEFI BIOS issue.
 
How is that Corsair's fault? I'm not saying it isn't, but memory compatibility is most often a motherboard / UEFI BIOS issue.

The motherboard has been out 4 months and has had 6 bios updates.
I put in an RMA to Corsair and they immediately accepted the memory should be changed, I didnt have to move beyond a basic description.
 
The motherboard has been out 4 months and has had 6 bios updates.
I put in an RMA to Corsair and they immediately accepted the memory should be changed, I didnt have to move beyond a basic description.

Fair enough. As I said, there can be issues on the side of the memory manufacturers. Corsair gave us some pre-production samples which I used in reviews early on that had two XMP profiles. Some motherboards would pick up one profile or the other. One of the profiles had settings in it which the RAM was incapable of running at just to make things more interesting. Post-Z170 launch RAM is far more problem free than the early stuff designed to work with X99.
 
eh..Get a used z97 setup is what I'd do.
Cheaper..better..faster..
They're all over the place.
 
Depends, on what you are planning to do with it. I still have a 2600K @ 4.5 Ghz and I still don't feel the need to upgrade.

Yes I do lose some of the newer features, but so far I haven't run into anything that requires me to upgrade my PC.
 
I'll go out on a limb and say I've logged more hours on various Skylake motherboards than you have. That has not been my experience. I'm not saying the platform was totally mature from the start. In fact Z170 / Skylake is quite polished for most motherboard manufacturers not having had finalized UEFI BIOS code until a week before retail release. By now the bulk of earlier issues we did see are now resolved.

Fair enough :) The RAM compatibility issue on my Asus Pro Gaming mainboard was with the original BIOS (0302, IIRC), which I have since updated to the new BIOS (1102). Still, it seems pertinent to at least do a BIOS update on new Skylake systems if they are easily 10 BIOS revisions behind with current retail mainboards.

The only other major issue I had was not due to the hardware itself, but due to the sucktastic AI Suite malware which I got told by an Asus representative to uninstall post-haste. Since that time it has been relatively trouble-free.
 
Fair enough :) The RAM compatibility issue on my Asus Pro Gaming mainboard was with the original BIOS (0302, IIRC), which I have since updated to the new BIOS (1102). Still, it seems pertinent to at least do a BIOS update on new Skylake systems if they are easily 10 BIOS revisions behind with current retail mainboards.

The only other major issue I had was not due to the hardware itself, but due to the sucktastic AI Suite malware which I got told by an Asus representative to uninstall post-haste. Since that time it has been relatively trouble-free.

There is definitely something going on with the ASUS AI Suite III and Sonic Radar software packages. We've reported this in the last two ASUS ROG motherboard articles we've done. At the very least the software creates horrible DPC latency issues and causes some performance anomalies. Fortunately this software is far from essential for most motherboards. The only ones that "need" it are the Sabertooth boards. They have more thermal monitors and fan control features than other motherboards do and AI Suite III has to be used to access them. As far as I know there isn't a third party tool that can access that many thermal sensors and control the fans to the same degree as Fan Xpert 3.
 
eh..Get a used z97 setup is what I'd do.
Cheaper..better..faster..
They're all over the place.

Cheaper sure, but no on the other two. Also keep in mind Z97 platforms weren't all rock solid on launch anyway. Almost every new platform has a few months of stabilization with BIOS updates and drivers to smooth things out.
 
There is definitely something going on with the ASUS AI Suite III and Sonic Radar software packages. We've reported this in the last two ASUS ROG motherboard articles we've done. At the very least the software creates horrible DPC latency issues and causes some performance anomalies. Fortunately this software is far from essential for most motherboards. The only ones that "need" it are the Sabertooth boards. They have more thermal monitors and fan control features than other motherboards do and AI Suite III has to be used to access them. As far as I know there isn't a third party tool that can access that many thermal sensors and control the fans to the same degree as Fan Xpert 3.

I only installed AI Suite III because I was in a rush and just wanted to quickly flash the BIOS, even if it was done from within Windows... in hindsight I should just have copied the BIOS to a USB stick and done it the proper way: from within the BIOS itself :)

I find that SpeedFan works fine for all my monitoring needs.
 
I only installed AI Suite III because I was in a rush and just wanted to quickly flash the BIOS, even if it was done from within Windows... in hindsight I should just have copied the BIOS to a USB stick and done it the proper way: from within the BIOS itself :)

I find that SpeedFan works fine for all my monitoring needs.

And it should for everything but the TUF series / Sabertooth boards. Those have far more thermal sensors and fan features like the anti-dust feature which reverses the fan speed. You can also control fan ramp up and down speeds. As far as I know, Speedfan doesn't do any of that.
 
And it should for everything but the TUF series / Sabertooth boards. Those have far more thermal sensors and fan features like the anti-dust feature which reverses the fan speed. You can also control fan ramp up and down speeds. As far as I know, Speedfan doesn't do any of that.

Yup, Speedfan just does monitoring with some limited control over fan speeds. None of such fancy features :)
 
PCIE M.2 makes a HUGE difference in the apparent speed of your gaming and day to day usage.
 
seems like early adopters are getting the bone...as per usual
 
Just migrated everything to a new 6700K setup from my trusty 2600K. Smooth so far - I'm assuming due to the bios revisions.

I'm trying to get it to 4.7 Ghz, but dont want to pump huge voltages to do it. Lots of LLC makes me nervous, especially past 1.4V. Temps are generally good though and CPU effected games are producing higher minimum frames, which was my main objective - gpu bound games are, well, gpu bound as per usual. I'm hoping Pascal will address that.
 
seems like early adopters are getting the bone...as per usual

I've seen more than a handful of processor and motherboard chipset launches. As far as those go the launch of Skylake and Z170 has been fairly smooth. It's not the smoothest launch I've ever seen but it was better than X99 was.
 
True story. If you'd have asked me 5 years ago when i upgraded to sandy bridge, i would've put money on my next upgrade in 2015 would most definitely be an 8 core, or even 12/16 core processor. NOPE..

Little to no competition, and the sheer amount of fucks not given by Intel would've lost me that bet.

Sadly, I say you'd still be better served by the 6700k simply because of it's better single thread performance, along with the chipset/IO upgrades. But this is just one mans opinion.

100% agree. SKL can give you as much as a 10-15% increase in singlethread over Haswell E Assuming you get good OCs on both. 4.5GHz HW vs 4.8GHz SKL
 
I am also thinking of upgrading my X58 6 core setup with Asus Z170 Deluxe,Intel i7 6700K. Just trying to figure out memory and hard drive. Thinking Samsung 950 Pro 512 GB or Intel 750 series. Memory not sure which speed. Gskill or Corsair. Thanks Dan for your input on this thread. I always love your reviews.
 
I am also thinking of upgrading my X58 6 core setup with Asus Z170 Deluxe,Intel i7 6700K. Just trying to figure out memory and hard drive. Thinking Samsung 950 Pro 512 GB or Intel 750 series. Memory not sure which speed. Gskill or Corsair. Thanks Dan for your input on this thread. I always love your reviews.

I'd go with the Samsung 950 Pro 512GB for performance reasons. For consumer work loads it seems to be slightly better. Although I like being able to go U.2 with the Intel SSD 750. Memory is pretty easy, you can grab whatever's on sale. I'd go with at least 16GB and at least DDR4 3000MHz speeds.
 
Thanks Dan. That really helps. Hope to get a good overclock. I have a good Danger Den water cooling set up. Probably need new water block to fit 6700. Happy New Year!
 
In day to day usage, yes. In games, not really.

I guess I'm referring more to loading the games, LOD, etc etc. Not actual FPS difference, just a difference in how quickly you're able to start playing.
 
I guess I'm referring more to loading the games, LOD, etc etc. Not actual FPS difference, just a difference in how quickly you're able to start playing.

Even Intel stated that SSD's don't generally benefit games too much. They want to change that so they can sell more SSD's, but ultimately right now it does very little for you, even with regard to load times.
 
Back
Top