- Sep 22, 2007
Right, and if the base is 4.2 with a 4.5 turbo, I may not even bother overclocking much or at all. My 2600K is fine, but I've got the urge to upgrade and I have a sinking feeling that I will be disappointed in SKL-X - disappointed that I had to wait that long for what will likely be really high prices and similar performance to the 7700k at 4-6 threads. I really thought BW-E was the ticket but was super disappointed in performance, overclocking, and especially pricing.Anyway, I don't know why it matters whether Intel is getting the performance thru more frequency or higher perf/MHz. All that matters is delivered performance.
I also know that KBL is built off the SKL core, but your own quote from Intel states they're seeing performance increases. Now, whether that is solely due to clock increase or not I'm not sure, but whatever the case may be, I don't think it makes sense for me to go with a 6700K unless there is a huge cost savings over the 7700k. My next rig will probably be another 5 year rig and may even be the last I build. It has been hard to get excited about Intel silicon the last few years, so humor me guys.
Fair enough. I know about the video decoder improvements, but do most modern (NV 900 series+) incorporate a similar decoder in their cards? I haven't kept up with that news, but let's say a 1x00 series GeForce has a similar or better decoder - it might make sense to stick with a 6700K and just upgrade my video card. Not only would I get the video decoding capability, but performance increases in other areas.Mobile Kaby Lake was already benched at notebookreview. No IPC increase. Not that there was any doubt, since Intel said the same. There is no core changes. Its a Skylake refresh on 14nm+ and with the video decoder improved.