i7-6820HQ vs i7-6820HK

Now that the ark.intel.com site has some of the new Skylake CPU's listed, I thought I would check out the i7-6820HQ vs i7-6820HK, here is the Intel Compare:

i7-6820HQ vs i7-6820HK
http://ark.intel.com/compare/88969,88970

There is no performance related difference...

And, oddly enough, under the Packaging section, there is no mention of pins/socket configuration for either CPU. That was where I was hoping to find out if the HK is socketed.

i7-6820HQ vs i7-6820HK - added the i7-6920HQ (no HK variant)
http://ark.intel.com/compare/88972,88969,88970

 

Since the HK is missing vPro, SIPP, and Trusted Execution... It looks like they may be doing what they do with desktop chips... They nerf advanced features of the chip in exchange for unlocked TDP. That would be my guess.

 

Good guess

It would be nice if that were reflected in the specs, the package TDP remains the same.

This is new, and a little worrisome: Configurable TDP-down

Configurable TDP-down is a processor operating mode where the processor behavior and performance is modified by lowering TDP and the processor frequency to fixed points. The use of Configurable TDP-down is typically executed by the system manufacturer to optimize power and performance. Configurable TDP-down is the average power, in watts, that the processor dissipates when operating at the Configurable TDP-down frequency under an Intel-defined, high-complexity workload.

Package TDP is 45w, but Configurable TDP-down is 35w.

 

TDP down isn't new. It might be new to Ark but my 4940MX has a TDP down (47W), TDP nominal (57W), and TDP up (67W).

 

Anything with an -H implies that is soldered

 

We already know all Skylake mobile chips are soldered. That doesn't mean they can't make one TDP unlocked to replace the MX chips.

 

Ethrem, interesting, my last 3 CPU's haven't had that Configurable TDP-down entry:
http://ark.intel.com/compare/78930,75116,87720,88969,88970

Your 4940MX has no entry for Configurable TDP-down on ark.intel.com either...
http://ark.intel.com/compare/78940,78930,75116,87720,88969,88970

 

Like I said, they added it for Skylake it seems but you can ask @Prema about it since his modified sBIOS exposes the setting on my machine.

 

Ethrem, cool, thanks

 

I'd show you but unfortunately my machine is in for another RMA at the moment.

 

from the cinebench performance numbers here it seems that i7-6820K is 21% slower in single threaded performance than stock desktop i7-6700k. i wonder how much of an overclock is possible to get closer to the desktop cpu :/

 

It just lends more evidence that these chips are meant to replace the MX chips... It is right on the line with the 4930MX. If it is unlocked, it shouldn't be a problem to get it running at desktop clocks with adequate cooling. In fact Intel cheaped out on materials for the desktop chips... They're thinner but have taller heatspreaders which means more TIM to contend with... Having a soldered chip could be a blessing in disguise in this situation..

 

but on the other hand laptops throttle even without overclocking oem cooling / airflow decisions :/

 

ghegde, notebookcheck removed the 5950HQ performance numbers, yes I checked before and they were there.

But I did run Cinebench r15 on my GT80 with 5950HQ, and so I have some numbers for comparison to the Skylake 6820K:

CPU Multi-core
Skylake 6820HK stock 687
Broadwell 5950HQ stock 795
Skylake 6820HK 4ghz 843
Broadwell 5950 4ghz 813

Here are my results:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/i7-4980hq-vs-i7-5950hq.779654/page-5#post-10064069
http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/i7-4980hq-vs-i7-5950hq.779654/page-7#post-10064728

The Skylake results seem too high for OC, or too low for stock

 

Depends on the OEM... With the help of Liquid Ultra, I was able to run my chip at 4.3GHz 24/7 - now that FIVR is gone, it will be much safer to use Liquid Ultra on Skylake chips and early results have shown that Skylake when delidded, cleaned of the stock junk and replaced with Liquid Ultra is 10+ degrees cooler than Haswell was at the same clocks.

Cinebench isn't really the most reliable benchmark to go by, I'm curious to see how these chips perform in Sandra, PCMark, AIDA64, etc.

 

isnt the i7-6820HK bga ? so how can clu be applied ? am i missing something ?

 

Heatsink comes off, just not the chip.

 

Ethrem, that's true, no one benchmark is enough, only one single run/sample is even worse - especially if it is questionable, but that is all we have right now.

When more benchmarks are released I will post comparisons from my testing, or run the test if I haven't already.

Fun stuff

 

so 6820HK or 6700k desktop in a sager?

 

Wait and see at this point. If the HK is TDP unlocked, it may well be the better choice... Provided Clevo doesn't ship it with a weak PSU.

 

People on this forum were getting their 4790ks overclocked to 4.5ghz-4.7ghz. 6700k overclocks better, so wouldn't the next '' batman'' laptop with the 6700k be more likely to get to 4.5ghz vs the mobile version?

 

@Phase just posted a video showing i7-6820HK overclocked in the TS thread here. Check it out and see what you think.

 

We'll see how they hold up the TDP over long periods when things come out.

 

if the chip in that video isnt cherry picked and is the median for i7-6820K then mainstream desktops (not hedt) make even less sense :/

 

The voltage was on the low side for 4.2GHz, the temp was high, and I'm not convinced that we'll have free TDP.

 

Intel showed a demonstration... 4.2GHz, 100W TDP and 100W turbo window, 120A... It shouldn't need all that in all actuality but it looks to be TDP unlocked.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...hes-expectations.775918/page-82#post-10083307

 

Well Intel can do as they please... but until I see that thing hold high TDP constantly I'm going to doubt it. It's the same thing when people benched the 4980HQ at 4.2GHz and such. It held its own in benches and physics tests BECAUSE the time limit was short. That Intel cinebench I watched was also extremely short, and it still managed to thermal throttle during the whole ordeal (check Dufus' post in throttlestop's thread that he linked here) which means the notebook wasn't even meant to handle that kind of chip either.

 

anyone think Apple will put this in retina MBP ?

 

I need my laptop back. I missed his post... Its the same video. Lol. My phone is dumb sometimes.

But he said that it's equivalent to 4.7GHz in the Haswell world which is still impressive to even get it there in the first place.

I believe that chip is unlocked. There is no reason to release the exact same chip in two different SKUs with the only differences being reduced features on the K chip just like the desktop K.

 

Mystery solved

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015...locked-overclockable-skylake-cpu-for-laptops/

 

Not even close to being equivalent to that. On average there's a 3.5% IPC bump from Haswell, which means 4.35GHz (let's assume 4.3GHz is close enough) from a 4.2GHz skylake chip. If you wanted to get it to compete with a 4.7GHz haswell, you'd need to be just over 4.5GHz on the skylake.

Besides, as I said, I'm not denying whether it's unlocked or not. The real issue is if the long power remains free as we please. I.E. if I have a Clevo with it and I'm OC'd to 4.5GHz and I'm livestreaming and it's sucking 110W down and I have a 330W power brick and I've got CLU on the thing and it's sitting somewhere around 90c and not thermal throttling at all, it had better sit at 4.5GHz drawing that lovely 110W down the drain for the 10 hours I decide to stream for some random sunday morning.

We've already established using all existing HQ chips above 47xxHQ level that they can hold a short power turbo well above 57W. Even @Mr. Fox benched the AW17 R2 with a 4980HQ at 4.1GHz in firestrike and blew away my 4800MQ's physics scores. But the 2.5 minute limit means benchmarks (like their cinebench) work just fine, and anything like rendering videos/streaming/super demanding games/CPU-based recording programs/etc will trip the throttle flag eventually. Until multiple people get Clevos with those chips and overclock them and all confirm to me that they can hold that TDP indefinitely, then I am skeptical.

Intel already has proven that they really do not care about mobile power users, and just because they say it's a K chip and has an unlocked multiplier I'm not ready to give them a free pass. It's also still soldered too, which still burns me to some extent.

 

Even if it performs flawlessly, being a BGA processor instantly disqualifies it and moves it to the "UNACCEPTABLE" category forever. BGA is trash under all circumstances.

 

It is, but working BGA is better than non-working BGA. I still would suggest people get the desktop-CPU using machines if they want full control out of the box (as those usually require less elbow grease and start at a high clockspeed) but it'd be good if I can at least point to a single BGA processor and say "this could do your video rendering properly".

Would I ever buy one? *ONLY* if I absolutely needed a new laptop, needed the power, and there were no desktop-CPU-using laptops available instead. And even then, I'd probably consider hunting for an older laptop from Eurocom that had a desktop chip or something.

 

I don't leave any wiggle room for them. I'd really question whether anyone actually needs a new laptop badly enough to compromise. To your point, used laptops that are not engineered from the ground up to suck would be a better option. The only way to deal with these imbeciles is to boycott their products. If you cut them any slack at all they will continue to abuse the situation, the undesirable trend will continue and things will become even worse. If astute consumers and enthusiasts will take a hard-line stand and punch them super hard in the wallet repeatedly, flatly reject their compromise crap, and deprive them of any opportunity to achieve financial success, only then will they stop being stupid. Acts of monetary vengeance and exacting fiscal violence will get their attention.

 

Yeah, I know. The problem is that we notebook enthusiasts account for by my estimate about 5% of the gaming notebook market. I keep running into TONS of people elsewhere who have or have had gaming notebooks and insist that the BGA TDP locked garbage is fine because all they want is to play games and they don't care about anything else, but then are the first ones to bash notebooks' upgrade-ability.

If I could sway the masses with a voice like Linus or the guy from Tech Of Tomorrow formerly of Motherboards.org, then I would do so. I would hope people realize what they're giving up, and I'd make it a huge point to show when things throttled or when they worked. But I don't, and thus the masses will continue.

At the least, I know it'd take a SERIOUS amount of "need" to make me have to buy a "performance notebook" with the soldered stuff.

 

If it is truly unlocked and the price it is listed at then I would say value wise the hk is much better value that the old extreme editions.

 

Better to spend more and each person do their small part to contribute to the abject failure of a entire platform than compromise and let them get away with selling BGA feces CPUs for a bargain price. If done properly, consumers have the power to dictate what happens next. Unfortunately, most consumer--especially where electronics and technology are concerns--are complete idiots that care more about saving a buck than owning something excellent. Anything built with a BGA CPU or GPU and marketed to suckers under the false pretense of being an enthusiast product is unworthy to wipe the pungent reside from my posterior orifice. This crap technology should be reserved for disposable garbage $300 notebooks, ultrabooks, ATMs, mall kiosks and web-surfing appliances.

 

But if you had an extreme edition when did you ever upgrade it? It was the end of the line anyway, it may as well have been soldered.

 

That's totally missing the point, Brother @Meaker and it's an overly narrow view of the problem that contributes to the sentiment that this nonsensical BGA crap is palatable. It has very little to do with upgrades and everything to do with product quality and serviceability. I've had three motherboard replacements. I have several excellent Extreme CPUs that are nicely binned and overclock like a banshee, and my GPUs have good ASIC values and also overclock nicely. The motherboard replacements have been inconvenient, but the larger ramifications on my experience were greatly minimized because of replaceable components. I don't want to roll the dice on the silicon lottery and just take whatever they give me. And, guess what happens to motherboard prices when they include an "integrated high end" (sorry for the oxymoron) CPU and GPU?

 

The motherboard and CPU are going to be about the same price as the old extreme editions, now you just buy the entire board.

 

I hope you realize that your use case is a VERY small portion of the market. If you were to draw a Venn diagram, your use case would be in the middle of:

* Needs high-performing CPU and GPU in a laptop
* Willing to deal with the portability trade-off (weight, battery life) to get that CPU and GPU power
* Willing to pay a price premium to get that CPU and GPU power in a portable form factor
* Wants to overclock CPU and GPU components
* Has motherboard (or other critical internal component) fail multiple times
* Has skills and capability to perform service / repair on that laptop.
* Wants to retain the existing CPU / GPU, on the basis that the overclockability of that part has been tested, validated, and known.

I mean, I get it... socketed CPUs are definitely preferable to soldered CPUs. But even as an enthusiast myself, I just don't see how it's that important. For example, I'd consider battery life and portability to be highly important factors when buying my own laptops... even more important than raw CPU / GPU power. If I have to settle for a socketed CPU in order to get that battery life and portability, I'd gladly take it.

If you had the option to get a socketed CPU, what trade-offs would you be willing to pay in order to get that?

 

Well, I keep hearing those lame excuses over and over, and frankly I don't care one iota what portion of the market I represent. Kool-Aid drinkers can rationalize their move to a retarded BGA model all they want to and that doesn't excuse it or make it acceptable if you care about quality and serviceability. Let's be perfectly clear... Intel is doing this because it serves their selfish interests, and the interests of the OEMs that want to sell dead-end disposable trash machines above and beyond anything and everything else. We can either become part of the problem or part of the solution. I'm unwilling to compromise to help Intel achieve their objectives.

The problem is the pendulum swinging one way and getting stuck there at the exclusion of everything else. I understand there is a market for poor and mediocre performance devices with long battery life and a diminutive form factor. Fine. I don't care about those things and I want DTR laptops that are huge, heavy and deliver face-melting performance, full serviceability and uncompromised flexibility. I can put that in a backpack and go anywhere and everywhere I can with a compromised product that is easier to deal with... I can have my cake and eat it, too. Buying a crippled, hobbled and disposable product isn't an option and the only reason I have a problem with it is because they seek to make that the status quo. There needs to be options for those that are unwilling to compromise. The lack of options is a problem, and I'm not going to be swayed by half-hearted efforts to deliver something that merely provides good performance in a disposable package.

Like our friend @D2 Ultima, a lonely voice of reason, crying in the wilderness, I represent the other side of the coin and my intent is to wake those that sleep and get them to think. The only decisions that are bad decisions are those that are made in a vacuum by the uninformed and misinformed. Far be it from me to tell someone they shouldn't buy a BGA machine if they have weighed the pros and cons and decide that's what they actually want and know what the trade-offs are for accepting a lesser product.

We're not talking about ULV CPUs for a pathetic tablet or Ultrabook that a university student needs to pack around all day without recharging the battery or getting a sore back. I actually get that, and there is already a plethora of nauseous options available to that customer. We're talking about a faked-out psuedo-enthusiast piece of crap, packaged in a pretty foil wrapper and marketed to people that think they are getting something awesome. That's compromise and those deceived by it are not wise. Think about how utterly idiotic the concept of a BGA "K" unlocked CPU is... ridiculous to put it mildly. That makes no sense... like placing solid gold rings in the snout of swine. It boils down to two things, which compliment one another: money and control. Neither of those serve the interests of customers.

 

I think at this point I would rather have our heavy DTRs to use desktops CPU only. I am skeptical as well for HK version and I don't think it will have any sort of TDP control that will serve in the long run.

Mobile CPUs are now all BGA and will probably remain so. Let's get some socketed desktop cpus running here. I mean the only reason I went with a 4720HQ is because it is technically the least... fraudulent HQ cpu in general, as it tends to run at its rated speed 99% of the time.

But as MrFox said, with BGA, if you had a good CPU bin, and your motherboard fails, you might get a replacement with a lower binned CPU. Sadly, it is true that the large majority of users don't care about BGA. This doesn't mean we give up and call it gg.

It's kind of sad that we currently have thousands of models running a 4720HQ, and ALL of them get different performance. A single product has a wide disparity of performance.

 

My laptop has a 4710HQ. If it wasn't BGA I could....

1. Pay hundreds of dollars for a Broadwell i7 that would probably end up 2% faster
or
2. Pay hundreds of dollars for the same CPU in the hope it runs a little cooler at the same voltage

Gee whiz I'm really upset about not being able to waste my money. Tell me what I'm missing here? As far as serviceability is concerned, I have a warranty, and I've never actually had a laptop die on me anyway.

 

All-righty then... since you don't have a problem with it, feel free enjoy not being able to do anything with a crippled product and contributing to the mediocrity of the status quo. Have fun with that.

On a more serious note, replacing a locked-down consumer CPU and an identical or marginally better locked-down consumer CPU would not make a lick of sense unless something was wrong with the first one. Instead of hoping it works better, one would just buy a better CPU. For example, replacing a 4700MQ with a 4930MX. If you have a really nicely binned CPU and need to replace the motherboard for some reason, you get to keep that excellent sample instead of rolling the dice on whatever screwed up piece crap may have been welded to the PCB. Having a warranty won't help you with that problem even a little bit. If you're out of warranty, expect the BGA CPU motherboard price to be significantly more expensive than one with an empty socket, as well as the joy of playing the silicon lottery in the same manner you would under warranty.

 

At the end of the day I fail to see why any enthusiast should be vehemently accepting BGA CPU's. It's a raw deal all round for the consumer. Why would any enthusiast want to buy into a non-serviceable ecosystem? I'd have been screwed many times over had this been the case.

If I had a golden CPU I certainly wouldn't want to part with it. By the same token, if I got dealt a lemon I'd also like the choice to replace it with some better silicon at a time of my convenience rather that being stuck with a gimp welded to my property for eternity. Not being able to execute such a simple task totally kills the sport. What's left after that?

Yes, let there be BGA for those who truly want it and are happy sacrificing ownership, choice and performance for apparent aesthetics or battery life . Just don't try and make it the status quo on every laptop. Not everyone wants to game on the go or play Battlefield for 6 hours without a power outlet.

Some people just want a beast that can be deployed and is portable in the literally sense, yes a DTR if you will.

 

Well I mean if you're going to talk like this, you might as well lump desktops into this.
"My desktop has a 4770R. If it wasn't BGA I could....

1. Pay hundreds of dollars for a Broadwell i7 that would probably end up 2% faster
or
2. Pay hundreds of dollars for the same CPU in the hope it runs a little cooler at the same voltage

Gee whiz I'm really upset about not being able to waste my money. Tell me what I'm missing here? As far as serviceability is concerned, I have a warranty, and I've never actually had a desktop die on me anyway."
And yes, there are desktop CPUs that are BGA, namely the R series. Form factor is irrelevant in my quote since very SFF desktops can take LGA CPUs. I think Intel even made a small motherboard made specifically for the Broadwell-C CPUs with Iris Pro 6200 (or was it the Skylake CPUs? I forget).
I'm more or less pointing out a flaw in your argument, that it's entirely subjective on one point of view (not multiple), and you're trying to put a negative spin on, well, a hobby. Hobbies are usually expensive, and if these people here want to spend hundreds to thousands on their hobby of "hunting for the golden, portable powerhouse", then let them. They're at least not spending thousands on getting a new laptop just to search for the best components.

 

I'm not arguing that LGA is pointless or that BGA is great, but looking at the colorful way some of you guys are portraying BGA I think you have gone way past hyperbole and into nonsense.

BGA isn't a sacrifice of ownership or choice, it's a sacrifice of flexibility. Ownership is not a measure of how many little pieces you can break something down into, and my choice hasn't been taken away. The product I wanted had a soldered CPU, my choice to look elsewhere wasn't taken away from me, I chose to buy it knowing it was soldered. The 2-3 other SKUs you can stick in a LGA socket is a very narrow view of what "choice" is, imo.

 

That's fine for you. You purchased it full well knowing what you're getting.

For me not being able to keep the CPU should I get a golden sample is infringing my property.

 

I think you are exaggerating.

Not everyone would want to carry a huge, bulky and heavy laptop and I also disagree that just because it uses a BGA then it is a "compromised, crippled and disposable" product.

There is more to a laptop than just the CPU and quite frankly 99% of the time replacing the CPU at least with the one that already comes with Core i7 is pointless.

Mobile BGA CPU such as i7 4710HQ can do 3.5Ghz on all cores provided the cooling solution can handle it and there is enough power. Majority of laptops have trouble keeping the components cool let alone do overclocking.

I also don't get why you think if the CPU is socketed then it must be the greatest thing on the face of earth; I mean as an example Mobile Haswell Motherboard is not compatible with Skylake and the difference between Haswell and Broadwell in terms of performance is so little. Then comes the other aspect of the machine like the memory, Haswell cannot accept DDR4 even if you have a socketed CPU.

Technology moves so fast that by the time you want to replace the CPU on a socketed mobo, it would be obsolete anyways and as I said there is more to a laptop than just the CPU. Things like display are getting better and better. Stuff like 4k, Adaptive Sync, NVMe storage, Thunderbolt, USB Type C, External Graphics, 802.11ad, etc... will become more common as the time goes by.