Are 6820HK's better binned than 6700HQs?

We all know that the Skylake chips in laptops often get too much voltage supplied to them from the MB BIOS, to guarantee stability. This is because the 6700HQ chips in particular are not well-binned, and so you get a silicon lottery of sorts where some chips can be undervolted -200mv while others can't be at all.

The overvolting by manufacturers means that even if you get a bad chip in your PC that requires more voltage, it will be stable.

As many will know, undervolting skylake CPUs is a widespread practice to lower heat output at basically zero compromise, as long as you don't have a lemon of a chip.

Does anybody know if 6820HK's, the unlocked variant at 100mhz higher boost, is a better binned chip? That is, does it generally undervolt better than the 6700HQ?

 

You cannot get it from silicon lottery because the chips are soldered on the motherboard.

The 6820HK and 6700HQ cannot be compared, the latter is a locked down and retarded version of the CPU.


That being said, if you were to run both chips at 3.1 or 2.7GHz (turbo disabled) - you can get slightly lower undervolt on the 6820HK, but not by much. If it's power efficiency you're looking at, both chips will perform the same without any performance tuning (without overclocking, running at base frequency with undervolt to save battery life).

Better binned chip could come from either, but you're not looking at a significant difference. The biggest difference is when you overclock (in which case, the bin on the 6820HK matters).

 

Thanks for the reply, @Mobius 1

By silicon lottery I mean that the soldered chip -- each chip -- will have it's own 'quality', and that some people get 'golden' chips whereby they can undervolt -200mv and still be stable, while others get terrible chips where even a -25mv undervolt results in hard lock.

So I guess my question is, are 6820HK chips more likely to achieve a greater undervolt and stay stable at stock frequencies (including stock boost) than 6700hq chips?

 

It might, but not by much.


The difference only matters when you're overclocking.

 

@CedricFP - This is my opinion, based on what I've seen in the past couple of generations - ever since Haswell (including, but more prominent in later iterations) grIntel "forgot" what binning is. There were performance variances before as well, but not as severe as they are now and if there was a bad chip, it was more like exception, than a rule. Gone are the days with guaranteed performance and ironically (it is actually not, since this was the whole point (or most of it) of soldered) if you get a dud, you can't change it. So yes, Silicon lottery's chances of getting a good CPU is closing the chances to win the real lottery.

 

@Mobius 1
@triturbo

Thanks for the information. So I guess there's no point in assuming that opting for a 6820HK over the 6700HQ will yield me better temps by way of a greater undervolt, even accounting for the 100MHZ speed increase.

I'm not particularly interested in the overclockability of the HK since I'm looking at the 14 inchers.

 

Get the HK, HQ is very weak in today's standards.

 

Agreed.. The HQ is a joke... We have 3 year old CPUs beating this!

 

How is the HK any different? I wouldn't buy any of these if it was for me and go with one of these 3 year-old-CPUs/machines you mentioned.

 

The HK does 4.0GHz easily usually... A 3940XM will not beat it clock for clock however around 4.5GHz it will beat it... A 3940XM is more likely to do 4.5GHz then a 6820HK doing 4.5GHz..

 

I'm well aware of the IPC difference. The thing is, I'll stretch your example - a 3940XM is more likely to do 4.5GHz than a 6820HK doing 4.0GHz. That was my point about the 3 y.o. CPU. Back on topic - stock for stock I don't see much difference between 6700HQ and 6820HK. The OP has almost equal chances of undervolting, since this is all he seems to care and the 100MHz difference between the two wont change the world for him, but the price difference might.

 

Yes the undervolting is primarily what I care about. I'm looking to get a 14 incher which all have overheating problems, or at least run very hot. I certainly won't be overclocking in one of those chassis'.

I thought being an unlocked, higher clocked, and more "premium" chip, the 6820HK might be binned better to allow for a greater undervolt at stock clocks relative to a 6700HQ.

Whether or not the CPUs suck or not is not really something I can realistically worry about. These are the only CPUs I can get in the laptops that are available to me.

The cost of the 6820HK is not something prohibitive, either. In practical terms, it's the difference between getting something like an Aorus X3 (14 inch, 6820HK), or an Alienware 13 (13inch, 6700HQ).

 

Yes, there was a time when unlocked/Extreme meant better silicon, but as I already said that's no longer the case. Anyway, count your blessings and shoot. Get the machine you want, I don't think that the CPU should be the deciding factor (in this case).

 

Just ordered a Clevo laptop with the 6820hk. Don't have much experience overclocking. Does overclocking increase temps significantly? I know Skylake cpu's tend be overvolted, so is undervolting pretty much required to keep temps down?

Also, is there anything one can do if a chip is "poorly binned"? Thanks in advance.

 

The CPU power requirement is proportional to the clock speed x the voltage needed to keep the CPU stable at the higher speed. You may be lucky and find that the stock overvolting means that no further increase is needed but there will still be the power increase proportional to the clock speed increase.

John

 

Power consumption is linear to frequency, quadratic to voltage.

 

You can't do anything.. It is a lottery so only thing you can do is return it and try for a new one..


Sent from my LG-H850 using Tapatalk