Intel Skylake / Kaby Lake

Page 451 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

tamz_msc

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2017
3,708
3,554
136
I buy hardware because I like hardware, I make no pretense that I buy this stuff because I "need" it.

It may come as a shock to you, but hobbyists don't buy things necessarily because they need them ;)

Much cheaper hobby than smoking, gambling, or any of those other things that I don't do! :)
Oh please, this was your excuse for selling your 6950X and getting the 7700K:
I made a general statement about why for consumer usage, a lower-latency-but-lower-throughput processor could be preferable to a higher-throughput-but-higher-latency processor.

Do note that I sold a 6950X and replaced it with a 7700K, so I put my money where my mouth is.
Some time ago you were more interested in replacing the 7700K with 6C/12T CFL-S. So not only did you try to justify nonsensically about why the 7700K ought to be preferable to the 6950X, but now you also promptly forget to "put your money where your mouth is" and try to argue about how you want the best because it's your "hobby".

Oh and smoking and gambling aren't hobbies. They're addictions, or more appropriately, afflictions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick

dahorns

Senior member
Sep 13, 2013
550
83
91
Oh please, this was your excuse for selling your 6950X and getting the 7700K:

Some time ago you were more interested in replacing the 7700K with 6C/12T CFL-S. So not only did you try to justify nonsensically about why the 7700K ought to be preferable to the 6950X, but now you also promptly forget to "put your money where your mouth is" and try to argue about how you want the best because it's your "hobby".

Oh and smoking and gambling aren't hobbies. They're addictions, or more appropriately, afflictions.

What is the point of this post? Reported.
 

lolfail9001

Golden Member
Sep 9, 2016
1,056
353
96
Honestly, if i was a third party i would probably think that AMD sympathizers have gone insane with lack of any meaningful AMD news.

That said, i am still in disbelief over the usage of TIM. I guess Intel really does not want them to be overclocked under warranty.
 

tamz_msc

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2017
3,708
3,554
136
That said, i am still in disbelief over the usage of TIM. I guess Intel really does not want them to be overclocked under warranty.
Intel and AMD both have maintained a consistent view when it comes to overclocking - they recommend against it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick

lolfail9001

Golden Member
Sep 9, 2016
1,056
353
96
Intel and AMD both have maintained a consistent view when it comes to overclocking - they recommend against it.
AMD's view is hardly consistent with unlocked multipliers on every SKU and all.

Intel's view OTOH... now that's active action against any and all overclocking except the one with paid premium.
 

tamz_msc

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2017
3,708
3,554
136
AMD's view is hardly consistent with unlocked multipliers on every SKU and all.

Intel's view OTOH... now that's active action against any and all overclocking except the one with paid premium.
Overclocking aka running the CPU outside of the manufacturer-approved specifications, is not covered under warranty in normal circumstances, and is applicable to both AMD and Intel.

Unlocked multipliers means jack sh!t.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick

lolfail9001

Golden Member
Sep 9, 2016
1,056
353
96
Overclocking aka running the CPU outside of the manufacturer-approved specifications, is not covered under warranty in normal circumstances, and is applicable to both AMD and Intel.
I am well aware of their legal position.

And you are also well aware of what they are actually doing about it, so why pretend otherwise?
 

Carfax83

Diamond Member
Nov 1, 2010
6,841
1,536
136
That 7900x really looks interesting to me, although I promised myself I wouldn't do a platform upgrade until PCI-E 4.0, which will hopefully come next year with the node shrink for the Skylake-X CPUs. And the AVX-512 support has finally been confirmed.

It's a shame though that this massive amount of CPU power won't be utilized by games because current gen consoles don't have AVX2 :(
 

tamz_msc

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2017
3,708
3,554
136
I am well aware of their legal position.

And you are also well aware of what they are actually doing about it, so why pretend otherwise?
Intel isn't under any obligation to provide better thermal solution for their unlocked chips. Just because AMD does one thing it doesn't mean that Intel has to do the same - I thought this was the accepted position in these forums long before I started posting here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick

lolfail9001

Golden Member
Sep 9, 2016
1,056
353
96
Intel isn't under any obligation to provide better thermal solution for their unlocked chips. Just because AMD does one thing it doesn't mean that Intel has to do the same - I thought this was the accepted position in these forums long before I started posting here.
Intel was not under any obligation to introduce BCLK governor either, yet it did.
 

tamz_msc

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2017
3,708
3,554
136
Really. I guess all that support over the years for overclocking competitions and whatnot was just liked the faked moon landings?
Those are sponsored events, they've got nothing to do with the general public.

Or do you believe that der8auer and Elmor have an email conversation with Intel customer support on overclocking issues?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick

R0H1T

Platinum Member
Jan 12, 2013
2,582
162
106
Really. I guess all that support over the years for overclocking competitions and whatnot was just liked the faked moon landings?
You know all those fake moon landings were real, I mean fake, I saw an excerpt in Fargo last week :(
 

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
15,332
7,792
136
Those are sponsored events, they've got nothing to do with the general public.

Or do you believe that der8auer and Elmor have an email conversation with Intel customer support on overclocking issues?

Uh, how long have you been involved in the DIY enthusiast PC world? Intel and AMD have literally sponsored such events. I don't know if it's still available, but one used to be able to buy an Intel protection plan that even covered failure due to overclocking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick

tamz_msc

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2017
3,708
3,554
136
Intel was not under any obligation to introduce BCLK governor either, yet it did.
Where is the statement from Intel that says "we are committed to supporting overclocking, hence we give you adjustable BCLK and soldered chips?"

What people 'feel' about overclocking has no bearing on what Intel or AMD are legally obligated to do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick

tamz_msc

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2017
3,708
3,554
136
Uh, how long have you been involved in the DIY enthusiast PC world? Intel and AMD have literally sponsored such events. I don't know if it's still available, but one used to be able to buy an Intel protection plan that even covered failure due to overclocking.
Ferrari sponsored Michael Schumacher to test the FXX around Maranello - that doesn't mean that you and I can turn up at their HQ throwing money at them expecting the same courtesy to be extended to us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick

moonbogg

Lifer
Jan 8, 2011
10,635
3,095
136
Yeah, if anyone thinks any of this would have happened without Ryzen, they'd be kidding themselves.
Honestly, if i was a third party i would probably think that AMD sympathizers have gone insane with lack of any meaningful AMD news.

That said, i am still in disbelief over the usage of TIM. I guess Intel really does not want them to be overclocked under warranty.

I'm pretty shocked by the TIM as well. I've read the arguments about solder being bad on smaller dies, but with these high end chips I don't get it. I can't help but see it as a way to reduce time and cost for manufacturing. It might also help to encourage people to upgrade sooner, because a good soldered 8 or 10 core skylake running cool @4.6 would be enough to wreck everything for about a decade. Gimping the OC headroom through thermal derping with TIM is one way to mitigate that issue and save a buck at the same time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick

blue11

Member
May 11, 2017
151
77
51
Honestly, if i was a third party i would probably think that AMD sympathizers have gone insane with lack of any meaningful AMD news.

That said, i am still in disbelief over the usage of TIM. I guess Intel really does not want them to be overclocked under warranty.
Intel is most likely not actively thinking about overclocking one way or the other. Sure, they advertise the capability on their marketing slides, but that does not mean they are going to do anything to actively improve overclockability. In fact, it would be terrible business to sell CPUs at frequencies below what they could reasonably achieve for the sake of "headroom." The packages with TIM meet official thermal specifications, which is as much thought as Intel is going to put into this matter.

Regarding TIM, it appears to be a move that Intel is making across all of its production lines. One (nutty) thread over, it was revealed that new Sandy Bridge CPUs are being made with TIM, whereas the originals were soldered. The reasoning for this likely has to do with cost cutting, but it is not the cost of the solder that is being optimized. What is probably happening is the manufacturing procedure for applying the solder causes some fraction of CPUs to fail, and that is hurting yield. You have to consider that packaging is likely being done with relatively crude processes, perhaps involving a robotic arm dropping the pre-glued lid onto the PCB at high speed. Or even worse, considering how packaging occurs in south-east Asia, perhaps the lids are being applied manually.

Of course, at the end of the day, this is all unfortunate for the enthusiast. I know a lot of folks in this thread were anticipating 4.5 GHz or even 5 GHz frequencies on the LCC parts, which is not going to happen without delidding. In fact, with TIM, it remains to be seen if the SKUs can even avoid thermal throttling in AVX (not AVX512) workloads, which have been problematic on client SKUs since i7-4790K. Intel could handle it the same way as the server SKUs by having an automatic AVX frequency reduction, but I suspect that would be unpopular with enthusiasts.
 
Last edited: