I'm not an expert by any means but isn't owning an i7 7700K a safe purchase for several years? Aren't CPU's slower to age as opposed to GPU's?
This is the part where I got confused :S
Later reported by Golem and PCGamesN that an Intel rep at Computex retconned it to December or early next year.
People are thinking Intel will let them use their current motherboards?
I need a gif that goes from laughing to crying.
I kept a first gen i7-870 for 7 years. Only reason I upgraded was because of Oculus and PUBG which isn't optimized that well. It ran everything else fine. CPU progress has been stalled for 5+ years. Maybe with Ryzen it will give Intel a shot in the arm, though.
Intel only gives each socket 2 generations:It's an 1151 socket. I'm not sure why it wouldn't. The 6700k, and 7700k use the same set.
I'd say too many cores from intel means high heat temps, I just hope these 6 cores are cool.
56% of the reviews for that board are 1 and 2 stars on Newegg. Not the best of examples...
People are thinking Intel will let them use their current motherboards?
I need a gif that goes from laughing to crying.
I'm sitting here with a 2500k trying to make my next processor last as long as this one.
Please hit it out of the park Intel.
are those clock speeds the stock ones or is that with turbo boost?
The opposite would make it a hard sell compared to the i7-7800X.Base clocks, according to some tech sites.
The opposite would make it a hard sell compared to the i7-7800X.
Just built my daughter an PC with an i3 6100 and a used gtx 970. Division is her jam and it runs 60fps on ultra. A 6 core i7 would triple that performance, lol.
The "damage control" is there you only need to look at press slides used for recently released Skylake SP.Intel may finally be pushed to accelerate their product schedules, with Ryzen in the market. They have been used to stretching each generation as long as possible.
All the talk of Intel being "scared" or in "damage control" is comical, though. That's commission based sales people type of blabbering.
Intel's cores are much faster than what AMD has on offer so these are to compete with AMD offering inexpensive 6-8 core CPUs. Having said that, less but faster cores is usually much better.Is 6 cores enough though. I feel like this is a half step to 8.
Intel's cores are much faster than what AMD has on offer so these are to compete with AMD offering inexpensive 6-8 core CPUs. Having said that, less but faster cores is usually much better.
There is little technical reason to limit to 4 core CPUs for mainstream chips from Intel though 6 cores shouldn't impact the thermals of the package in a notable way.
Its crazy to see what a little competition can do. But anyways we are so far in front of min req's as far as cpu tech its crazy. Just build my daughter an PC with an i3 6100 and a used gtx 970. Division is her jam and it runs 60fps on ultra. A 6 core i7 would triple that performance, lol.
A Ryzen core is comparable to a broadwell core from 2-3 years ago. It getting delayed has largely dulled its impact, even Skylake has a pretty decent IPC bump over that.Eh, I wouldn't say much faster. AMD is an option now.
A Ryzen core is comparable to a broadwell core from 2-3 years ago. It getting delayed has largely dulled its impact, even Skylake has a pretty decent IPC bump over that.
Where Intel lagged behind was in pricing and namely on their higher than 4 core offerings. Competition is great here because Intel has been holding back for years. The jump was long overdue.
1151 has been a good choice so far, my little £500 pc is going to last a while with these kinds of upgrades.
Don't forget, clocks are noticeably worse between the two. The gap per core is 20-30% with between Skylake-X and Ryzen 5 which are the best performers either player has in high-core configurations.Yeah, but we are talking about a very small IPC jump over those 2-3 years (make that 4, actually). Kabylake has the same as Skylake. We don't know how much of a jump there new Inter CPU's will have, but I would be very surprised if its 20% over Haswell, let alone Broadwell and Ryzen. The difference isn't much, and extra cores of a similarly priced Ryzen may offset the smaller IPC difference for many applications.
If I don't need a new MB, I'll upgrade. Otherwise, I'll ride out my 6700k for a couple generations more.
I'm sitting here with a 2500k trying to make my next processor last as long as this one.
I'm at the same spot.
I could go Amd but I still want that clock speed for emulation.
Regular KabyLake does have an significant clock advantage, but has Skylake-X been consistently clocked at over 4.5Ghz on all cores? While is indeed a shame that Ryzen can't reach over 4Ghz consistently, KabyLake has problems on its own, with many reporting out of control temperatures at over 4.5Ghz OC's. After all, people arent deliding their 7700k for nothing.Don't forget, clocks are noticeably worse between the two. The gap per core is 20-30% with between Skylake-X and Ryzen 5 which are the best performers either player has in high-core configurations.
(Skylake is a big jump from Haswell and Broadwell and Kaby gives pretty good clock clock bumps considering it's a refresh, Skylake-X has some nice IPC optimisations)
Yeah which is good news, an viable upgrade path from an 6700k
Only comparing stock clocks here. For many tasks single core performance is king and basically anything lower than 8 core ryzen is pointless. Intel bringing out skylake x has reduced the appeal of ryzen significantly.Regular KabyLake does have an significant clock advantage, but has Skylake-X been consistently clocked at over 4.5Ghz on all cores? While is indeed a shame that Ryzen can't reach over 4Ghz consistently, KabyLake has problems on its own, with many reporting out of control temperatures at over 4.5Ghz OC's. After all, people arent deliding their 7700k for nothing.
When staying at stock speeds, the difference isn't enough to complete supersede the number of cores advantage. I'm on a 5930k and I'm in no hurry to upgrade, as it reaches stable 4.5Ghz on all cores easily, and I fail to see how the same wouldn't apply to an OC 1700x, as it has (a bit) higher IPC and two more cores to mitigate the clock disadvantages.
I'm happy with my 5820k.