Core i7-6700K and Core i5-6600K SkyLake Specs ?

Maybe, just maybe, these chips are going to be the "tock" in Intels road map since Sandy Bridge and thats why they used the same naming as Sandy

 

One would hope. But considering the lack of competition in this segment I strongly believe we will see another small 10% performance increment. I mean there's not much incentive for them to push their own boundaries.
We'll see.

 

Yes, Skylake will be tock.

I know it's not a necessity, and certainly Intel's not forced to work on it, but still no 6 core for the mainstream platform? D'oh.

 

Yeah I was hoping to see a mainstream 6-core aswell. Especially now that DX12 is around the corner there would be benefits even in gaming. By the looks of it I will likely skip skylake aswell.

But who knows maybe that 6700k will dish out great performance.

 

That's always possible. Also I wonder how they will behave temp wise, and how much they can be overclocked. 4.2GHz stock boost should enable people to get it closer to 4.6 with decent cooling, maybe even more. This alone could mean a reasonable bump in performance, this making people upgrade.

But I just bought my 5930K, so I will not sidegrade / downgroade to regular Skylake anyway

 

LGA1151, I wonder if with a bios update it could work on existing mother boards.

 

That's why nobody is upgrading as they are pushing out crappy 10% boost on each CPU release. Whats the point spending another £250 quid on 10%?

However if they upped the speeds by 33% or more there would be massive uptake.

Intel are shooting themselves in the foot at the moment. :bang:

 

While there might be no competition from the AMD side and prices will go up drastically, If Intel does not deliver better performance, customers will just refuse to upgrade until it becomes something of a larger difference. What we will likely see is a slow to a crawl on the increased complexity of processor intensive software like Games, who knows maybe we will see more optimized titles from now on. But the truth still remains: Customers will not buy crap they do not need...remember that Intel!

 

So, Intel decided to go to 'C' for unlocked in the Broadwell CPU's, but go back to K for Skylake?

 

Still 4 cores? No thanks, I was hoping in 2010 when I got mine that I would upgrade to something like double the cores in 3-4 years time. But pay for a Quad at these exorbitant sums of money that the Intel's cost? Not even a Multithreaded i5...

 

Yeah well that's the exact reason I haven't upgraded my sandy. This thing pulls off 4.9GHz, there's absolutely 0 reason to upgrade to anything other than an enthusiast processor. Which I'm not willing to do since they're quite expensive.

They still need to keep things moving and we will see improvements at the same rate as long as they're in business. Look at what's going on with AMD with the 3-year-old processors. People are losing interest massively and switching to Intel. Old and inefficient architectures.

If anything, this gives AMD the chance to catch up. Only AMD is balling their eyes out and wasting time, trying to do everything instead on focusing on a few important things: GPUs and proper desktop CPUs.
APUs are barely used. I seriously don't know anyone who owns an APU for the graphics capabilities. You're better off with an i3 for entertainment PCs.

 

AMD's lack of technological advancement over the past few years is why I went the Intel route when I last upgraded. It's also the reason why I no longer suggest AMD processors to my friends building a gaming computer. There's just no point in investing in ancient hardware.

Intel's small steps is also why I haven't upgraded from my 3570k. There's just no point in going for a 4670k/4690k as it's such a small upgrade/sidegrade.

Intels constant switching of CPU sockets doesn't help either. No longer can you just get a newer generation CPU and throw it into your older motherboard and have a cheap but powerful upgrade. Want to upgrade now? Be prepared to shell out $$$ for a new motherboard too.

 

Firmware updates don't change hardware physically.

 

AMD did not have lack of technological advancement, especially not compared to Intel. AMD had lack of good market choices, and bad cooperation with partners (both sides). Basically, even AMD chips from 2012 are more advanced compared to the Intel chips, but in "wrong route", for the market needs, that is.

Bad partner support, and questionable socket compatibility is another aspect where AMD is far behind Intel.

Either way, I cannot recommend AMD products to friends also.

On topic, nope, this CPU's will have up to 10% improvements, same as those before, the difference is higher default clocks (and TDP), so effective stock speed would probably be up to 20%, with new RAM types and some instruction sets.

 

I'm really itchy to upgrade my Sandy (even if i have no reason to do so).

Idk, kinda hoping it will be worth it and finally have some new toy to play with. Seeing its still 4core brings me down though...

 

(4 core i5)
welp, at least i could still hope to prioritize my GPU upgrade heh

 

I was looking for an upgrade as well but when i see the new CPU's not being any faster than what i have i am really really hesitant about it. I should just push my CPU a little higher for OC since i installed my Corsair H90

 

I have had my 3570K at 4.4 since Day 1 and it feels as fast now as it did in Summer 2012.