Intel 6th Generation Platform and CPUs Detailed

WYP

News Guru
Here are the latest Details on Intel's Skylake and their 1151 Socket. How about an i7 with a base clock of 4GHz.

10093451630l.jpg


Read more on Intel's Skylake here.
 
"Including enhanced full range BCLK overclocking" looked interesting, would be nice to be able to overclock every chip with BCLK again not just the k series
 
Sounds like Skylake could be a decent step forward in performance unlike some of the poor efforts that intel has produced for the last few years.
 
seems pretty good tdp for 4ghz i think.
having said that i still dont really see the need for a 4ghz stock cpu think i would have been happier with 6 cores and 12 threads at 3ghz as a game plan.. that is provided dx 12 brings all it says it will to the table.
The multi core (above 4) intel chips are what i would really like to see being produced at a good rate with lower costs for end users.
I guess we may have to wait for dx 12 to hit and prove its worth before that happens.
and hopfully by then i3's will have 4 cores no ht.
i5's will be 4 cores with ht. or 6 cores no HT
and i7s will have 6 with ht and 8 cores with or without HT depending on the suffix/prefix

I really would like to have a solid multi core cpu to abuse to its full potential when dx 12 gets here.
Having said that i would not be complaining if one of these chips fell out of the sky and hit me in the head so i could use it lol. even if i was put in hospital for a couple of days because of it "provided it still worked"

it was pretty much decided that extra clock rates was not going to really boost performance that much back when every one had a 32 bit os.
since then the advances in extra cores and 64bit threads has come allong lots (although 64bit for some reason is still lagging terribly in terms of becoming main stream for gaming and apps etc)

so i really find it curious that they still sell an extra ghz here as a big thing. Im sure we have all oc'd our systems with similar clock rate boosts. and yes it does help and yest it does make things faster. but not really that much faster at all. and unless your benching then you wont even notice.
So the clock speeds im not that fussed about. I am happy to see the tdp at 95w with 4ghz though that is a good thing.
but like i said more cores at a slower speed would be my personall game plan if i was intel.
 
Last edited:
I'm surprised by the TDP. We're still on 4 cores 8 threads, smaller node 14nm yet it has the same TDP at devils canyon. Must be a lot more GPU power which no one uses installed on these chips
 
Still don't think its worth upgrading too if you already have Ivy Bridge or newer. It'd have to be a huge step in performance.

TBH if it's not a huge jump considering my sandy still does the job I'll just have to wait even longer to get rid of this upgrade urge
 
very disappointing here we are still using Sata 3.0 and PCI Express 3.0. Technology advancements are too slow ever since the global recession.
 
I wonder if it will be worth to upgrade my 2600k sandy bridge with new skylake chip. I am mostly playing fps games on full hd 144Hz monitor and prefer smoothness over eye candy so good old 2600k still serves me well and it is not bottleneck at that resolution.
 
very disappointing here we are still using Sata 3.0 and PCI Express 3.0. Technology advancements are too slow ever since the global recession.

That would make a lot of sense wouldn't it? Plus you can easily make an argument against that opinion that it's actually accelerating faster. It will slow down soon though once we hit 10nm.


And plus you are wrong.. There is no Sata4 and there is no PCIe 4.. So its not intels fault there.
 
So .. this is a step DOWN from x99 ...? Hardly any PCIe lanes, so no SLI fun - especially not if you fancy any of the new storage options.
 
Back
Top