Intel Core i7-6950X Broadwell-E has 10 Cores and 20 Threads

Paul's hardware (Youtube). Skylake vs video. Benchmark results start at about 6 mins in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOh19-No2Nw

It was specifically the GTA 5 benchmark at 4k, another one or 2 more games there was a decent difference in min fps also. It just made me think, there is generally not a lot of difference (at the moment) between skylake vs 4790K or 5930K so an advantage even though not huge, is something at least. I'll be using 4k with my next build, so this was enough to make me want to wait and see what an overclocked 6/8 core Skylake can do. I usually keep my cpu/mb/ram for 4/5 years or more, so the wait for me is worth while.

 

Nobody needs more than 2 cores!
Gill Bates. :nerd:

 

Thank you!

That particular GTA result looks like an anomaly as it's higher in 4k than in 2560x1440 test. Nonetheless these results made me thing a little. Also, they're based on stock clocks. Haswell-E overclocks much better.

One Polish site had an extensive list of CPUs in Battlefield Hardline test, but without Skylake, and in Fallout 4, but without Haswell-E. Yet, one can extrapolate:
http://pclab.pl/art62700-10.html
http://pclab.pl/art66856-16.html

Of course I'd love to see Hilbert test a few CPUs, including Haswell-E and Broadwell-E including overclock, in some CPU-bound cases.

A small side note - gaming with 4k setup is kinda difficult. I mean you *need* some kind of adaptive vsync, as getting 100% 60fps+ is not possible yet. And you don't get 100fps+ smoothness offered by lower-resolution monitors. In fact, high-fps monitors seem to put higher requirements on CPU's, as there's much less time to process game logic, while in 4k scenario, these are GPUs, which are the limit. UHD 60fps monitor which can do FullHD 120Hz+ would be a great option for gaming, but I don't think they'll happen. The closest option are probably these QHD high-framerate monitors, but they cost arm and leg and having >100fps framerate at such resolution is very tricky, even with 980Ti.

 

He was right too. That's why the Pentium K Anniversary G3258 is one of Intel's best ever chips.

If the 2 cores are fast enough then i doubt 4/8 cores would be needed for 99% of computers.

 

Core count became marketing gimmick. People pay more for something they don't and won't use it.

 

Depends on what you do. There are people using more than two physical cores.