Forget Intel Broadwell, Skylake On the Way

If you can put off buying; do.

I would bet that the system you spec (or better) will be available on a Skylake platform by the end of the year.

If I'm wrong? You'll be able to buy the system you want today for substantially less.

Either way a win and even a 10% improvement in addition to the newer/latest platform will be in your favor when you sell the new system soon afterwards for a Cannonlake platform as it becomes available then.

What is the performance increase over your current system if you buy today? And what will the ux501 be worth when Cannonlake comes out? These questions will also play a part in your decision here.

But with Skylake so close we can smell it, I can't see how upgrading to anything less will be beneficial in the long run.

 

The way I see it the improvements and benefits that skylake will bring will be so much greater on the mobile platform compared to the desktop platform.
Not so much as raw performance, but greater suitability and efficiency which is what most people or greater percentage of the population of the general public want, which goes without saying.
Most people here are usually enthusiast or tech head types that make up a very small percentage of the population, needs or wants are different, more likely to complain about aspects not being high enough, rather than be contemp with the progress improvements.

 

Greater suitability?

Stability? Sustainability?

 

Model numbers of integrated Skylake graphics units

 

This might be an interesting read. Overclocking support for non-K CPUs, so long as the motherboard BIOS allows it.

 

Skylake's i5-6300HQ has the most of my interest in the mobile segment, I'm expecting it to be 37W TDP CPU that matches the performance of the desktop Haswell i5-4670K or in other words the mobile Haswell i7-4712HQ in 4 core benchmarks.

 

that should be good news for xeon cpus on P750DM . The igpus are doing nothing but generating heat

 

Too many things wrong with that screen shot to have any credibility. TDP should be 35W not 65W, cache should be 6MB not 8MB, threads should be 4 not 8.

i5-6400T should look more like this with CPU-Z 1.72.1. Next version should hopefully fix the name bug (i7).

 

Why does it say i7 6400T when it's an i5? And voltage on that other screenshot looked awfully low unless Skylake is that power sipping, 0.48V.

 

@HTWingNut I already covered that in the post. The "specification" is the CPUID name derived from the CPU, the "name" with i7 is probably from a look up table bug in CPU-Z software.

As for VCore it's probably derived from the SIO so may be stale data. IOW the SIO hasn't refreshed the last reading before the CPU was woken up. It's not unusual on idle DT systems.

 

I suppose I should read next time then. :/ My i7-4790k on power saver idles at 0.687V and 1.121V at balanced or performance mode. Just thought it looked a bit low.

 

Have you enabled package C-States? Your idle voltage looks about right for when the CPU is at the LFM but voltages can be lower when package C-States are active.

 

@Mr. Fox

If you were waiting for the SkyFlake, please don't........

New leaked benchmarks.....













not even close to 3-5% in procesor performance increase

http://wccftech.com/intel-skylake-core-i7-6700k-review-gaming-performance-5820k/

 

@Mr. Fox

Another one bro, power saving nonesense:

Intel Core “Skylake-S” CPUs to sport advanced power supply circuitry

This image has been resized. Click this bar to view the full image. The original image is sized 600x270.


This image has been resized. Click this bar to view the full image. The original image is sized 700x350.


Quote:
...Adding capacitors to the power supply circuit of the Core i7-4790K “Devil’s Canyon” improved its average overclocking potential compared to the Core i7-4770K “Haswell”, thus one would expect the chip giant to use something similar on other microprocessors. Based on pictures of Intel Core i7-6700K published by Expreview and PCOnline.com.cn, the unlocked “Skylake” comes with power circuit that looks to be even more sophisticated than the one found on the “Devil’s Canyon”.

The amount of capacitors on the bottom of the Core i7-6700K “Skylake” is extremely high. Moreover, there are different types of capacitors with different capacitance, which means that power supply of Intel’s “Skylake” LGA1151 processors is completely different than power supply of Intel’s “Haswell” and “Devil’s Canyon” CPUs (which is logical, given the fact that the new chip lacks integrated voltage regulator). Moreover, the amount of elements in the circuit indicates that Intel wanted to ensure maximum overclocking potential of its new central processing unit. Still, keeping in mind that internal thermal interface of “Skylake” is similar to that of “Devil’s Canyon”, there will be limitations in overclockability of the new chips.

http://www.kitguru.net/components/c...sors-to-sport-advanced-power-supply-circuitry


Alos MSI's motherboards listed @ ShopBLT:
http://www.shopblt.com/search/order_id=%21ORDERID%21&s_max=25&t_all=1&s_all=skylake

 

@Matrix Leader - not sure where you got that info, but I'm not waiting for that poop CPU, LOL. I never expected it to be any good. 4960X and 5960X FTW. But, thanks for sharing the lackluster results... confirmed my suspicions that it would be junk.

 

Got it from Anandtech forums bro, very disappointing, thank God I didn't wait till September and got my 5930K + X99 motherboard

Technology is going back rather than forward.

 

Yeah looks like I'm opting for Haswell-E and X99 as well.

 

When do you guys think hex core / 6C12T will get to laptop? (I don't mean the AMD stuff)

 

Maybe whenever they can build a 5W 6C/12T BGA CPU that performs as poorly as the low-TDP BGA dual- and quad-core processors already do without creating a fire hazard.

 

I'll be reserving judgment of Skylake until there are real benchmarks from trusted sources, and the entire equation is taken into consideration: CPU performance, power consumption, any new features that might be added (e.g. instruction sets), and associated technologies including chipsets and wireless cards. The platform needs to be looked at as a whole to be valued properly.

 

like it or not,, all the leaks point to no perceivable cpu performance difference in browsing, multimedia and gaming. only the IGP upgrade is supposed to be decent :/ Anyway, its just Intel milking its monopoly position with no competition. what else did you expect ?

 

More to do with voltage/frequency scaling problems with the shrinks IMO.

Then there's the thin & light. One manufacturer designs a laptop with proper cooling and power delivery while the another skimps on it. The result, 2 laptops with the same spec CPU/GPU but ones heavier, bigger and more expensive than the other. When average Joe/Jill looks them side by side which one do you think most will pick?

 

Uh... erm... the CUTE ONE. Yeah, that's the ticket.

 

*looks at Clevo P6xxSx series*
*looks at Razer Blade, MSI GS series, Gigabyte P3xx series, Aorus series*
Where's the "more expensive" part with the bigger/heavier/better-cooled ones? I'm pretty sure the bigger, heavier, better-cooled ones seem to be cheaper....

 

Meh, who cares about performance, build quality or thermal management excellence. Just give us something SUPER CUTE, extra thin and as light as possible, and everything will be fine.

 

Just like women. Guys will pick the thin, light, and super cute one but costs a lot more and higher maintenance, than the homegirl, slightly heavier, but low maintenance and practical one, lol.

 

On the surface, yeah; the super cute are higher maintenance, superficially. But most of the super cute turn into something else soon enough...

But the homegirl, she gives us a family, makes us grow a pair and if we're tough enough to stick it out with them; turn into real men. She does cost much more in the end... but the value is also exponentially better.

 

Homegirl FTW! I've had mine for 30 years and she still rocks.

 

I love my homegirl too
I'm talking about my laptop though XD

 

Are we... going a bit off topic? xD

 

Isn't this thread 'love the homegirl and forget the blue eyed b****'?

NO? !!!

 

Skylake retail review via OC

"4% increase in Single Core and 4% increase in Multi Core in Cinebench when Haswell, Broadwell and Skylake are all clocked the same 3.6GHz. You read right, 4% "

Effectively stock Skylake is going to be slower or equal to Devils canyon due to DC's high clocks.


At this point, Anti Trust / Abuse of monopoly against Intel by US/EU is probably the only way to get an increase CPU performance lol

 

Your link doesn't work here, but I'm still banging my head against the door jamb with your conclusion...

 

Maybe this is the benchmarks he's referring to: http://www.overclock.net/t/1568025/dglee-retail-skylake-i7-6700k-reviewed-finally

 

Doesn't matter what the benchmark shows.

I'll test in my real world workload vs. what my current workstations can do and decide then on a system/platform jump (or not) from a real system I can buy myself locally.

The reason I'm still banging my head is because the introductory cpu that everyone seems to have on the Skylake iteration today is being compared to last gen top end models with higher TDP and base/turbo clocks that are much higher (not to mention some of them don't even have an igpu to power either...).

Thanks for the link, but these reviews of the phantom cpu's with their synthetic (at least to me) 'scores' don't hold much weight.

In almost every previous case that read the same (Oh no! Performance is in single digits for the new 'x' platform), the productivity improvements were much greater in my experience.

 

LOL tiller...maybe burying your head in the sand and drinking the cool blue Intel Kool-Aid is your self-justification for upgrading every gen despite Intel not doing anything worthwhile since Sandy Bridge

 

Read my posts again. I don't upgrade every iteration.

Nobody can fool me; real and significant productivity increases don't lie.

I don't compare meaningless 'scores' - I compare actual output. In my actual workloads.

Just like I didn't jump on the SSD bandwagon for almost three years, I upgrade platforms when the results show me indisputable improvements regardless of what the 'scores' may say. And not what sells stories and/or gets the most likes/hits on the www.

 

Fair enough.

 

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

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

Just happy I don't have buyers remorse. Kinda figured hype was the driving force.

And OCing a laptop? No thanks; that's abuse lol.

 

So many ppl ignorant about laptop OC...

 

I'm sure people felt the same way last century with their horses hopped up on 'super hay' and getting 1.05 HP out of each one while others only got 1HP or less (depending if they fed them at all or not).

OC'ing is a dying hobby. Getting higher performance with less lifetime, stability or reliability and additional heat, noise and power requirements is not a tradeoff many want to make anymore vs. just buying a better performing platform instead.

 

Wow, someone is drinking that blue Intel Kool-Aid! It is only a dying hobby because they're killing it. It's not just about a hot running machine. It's about tuning and making it run cooler even by undervolting. And if they don't make a faster chip? Then what? You're stuck with what you've got. And people have been tuning their cars since they were invented to eek every last ounce of performance out if it too. If overclocking is a dying hobby, then so are sporting events and hobbies too. They are all about making the most out of something.

 

No Kool-Aid, thanks.

If they don't make a faster chip; they're out of business. And you and I don't buy them. So far, I have never been stuck for upgrading my systems if money was no object.

Cars are exactly the same way, except for a long time now, software is what is tuned to make the go even faster. But add up enough speeding tickets and even the fastest cars don't sparkle as brightly after a while (just like an OC'd cpu/gpu that has died on you and cost you real $$$). Like I said, it is a hobby, not a necessity for high performance. And that circle of OC'ing friends gets smaller and smaller (I don't have any, anymore...).

 

I meant a faster chip for that generation. IMHO there should always be an "enthusiast" level CPU that can be tuned as desired. Enthusiasts and hobbyists are the free cheerleaders and advertising for companies. They may be a small group compared to the rest, but they offer an invaluable resource for users having questions. Most forums on the internet wouldn't survive if it weren't for hobbyists and enthusiasts the pushed the limits and tuned stuff to death.

Kill the hobbyist?

 

Sounds mildly interesting to me. Hopefully it will encourage more manufacturers to include adequate cooling, instead of the doesn't-always-even-run-at-stock-speeds that we've seen with some Broadwell Core M processors. I have been known to OC my laptop, and as long as you aren't stupid about it, it's not usually a problem. Even at 3 GHz vs. the 2.2 GHz maximum stock option for my old laptop, it runs cooler than multiple stock laptops I've seen that simply haven't had any maintenance done in years and have poor airflow due to dust. Though I wouldn't recommend folding 24/7 at such an overlclock; for that I'd use a desktop.

Of course the other question is what the prices will be - the Core 2 Extremes and Core i7 XM CPUs have historically been very expensive. For $851 (actual launch price of the Core 2 Extremes), I'll pass, for $225 vs $210 for a non-K like in desktop i5's, I'm game.

The Core 2 Extreme in my laptop? I bought it years after release for less than a tenth of the release price.

 

No, we don't need to kill the hobbyist either. There is a middle ground.

Even Intel has publicly stated that with Skylake forward the methods to OC are being expanded on, not reduced.

Intel or any other company doesn't get 'free cheerleaders' for free - there is always a cost - and that is what they're trying to keep in constant balance.

And there are forums and users helping others for other than OC'ing, right.

In any case, the hobbyist are not the ones that necessarily need the most performance for anything other than games. That is when other aspects of the performance envelope become more prominent and especially when time (or lack thereof) is of essence; a newer platform is the shortest distance to the higher performance point, rather than babysit an OC'd system that becomes less and less stable over time.

 

Skylake looks like a bit of a disappointment.. Looks like I'll be sticking to my AW for a bit longer lol..

Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk

 

Could it be because Skylake for notebooks has not been released yet? Lol...

 

No, it's because if the desktop CPUs are disappointing, so will the mobile ones be since they are derivatives