• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Recovering from Halloween? Take part in our Spooky Giveaway to be in with a chance of replenishing your wardrobe. A simple riddle stands in your way. Visit the sweeptake thread over here.

Intel Skylake / Kaby Lake

Page 372 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,523
1,565
126
yep, and watch, I bet you SKX will be a good OCer.

Ryzen is a good value MT part, but the expectations that they were going to curb-stomp Intel were probably unrealistic.
Turned out that BW-E and KL could take a punch, and still answer the bell for the next round. :)
 

Ajay

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2001
5,793
1,708
136
yep, and watch, I bet you SKX will be a good OCer.

Ryzen is a good value MT part, but the expectations that they were going to curb-stomp Intel were probably unrealistic.
I expect SKL-X to overclock much better than BDW-E, that's for sure.

I think that Ryzen will be great for content creators, developers, anyone who needs very good multi-thread perforce at a great price. We'll just have to wait and see what sales are - most gamers aren't cranking down settings to get max framerates like competitive players do. Raven Ridge must do better than Ryzen, IMHO. I don't know how AMD accomplishes that with GF's 14nm process as it is (freq vs voltage ramps quickly over 3.2GHz).

Anyway, as you point out, no curb-stomp.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arachnotronic

mikk

Platinum Member
May 15, 2012
2,502
508
136
Based on Hardware.fr's review: Core i7-7700K is 25.2% faster than Ryzen 7 1800X in games, while the latter is 35.7% faster in applications (stock vs stock). IPC: Broadwell-E is 28.3% faster per clock in games and 11.9% faster per clock in applications, Skylake-X should increase the lead in August. Assuming Intel can improve the performance of entry-level Skylake-X performance by 10-15%, which is very doable with a clockspeed increase + higher IPC thanks to the newer core and new cache structure - their entry-level HEDT (6800K's successor) will almost match the fastest Ryzen in application performance while beating it in games by >30%. :)

I have to agree, looks like Intel has an easy job against Ryzen with Skylake-X. Intels design seems much more matured and a better allrounder. With the increased clock headrom from Skylake and 14nm+ as well as the increased L2, Intel looks to be in a very good position this year with Skylake-X.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arachnotronic

Bouowmx

Senior member
Nov 13, 2016
916
336
116
Why do you all suspect SKL-X will be a solid overclocker? (Not trolling Just curious of any evidence which might support this theory.)
14 nm + in Intel Kaby Lake Core i7-7700 and 7700K results in all-core frequencies of 4.0 and 4.4 GHz, respectively, while Broadwell-E tops out at 3.8 GHz with 1-2 cores, excluding Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0.
The following article talks about Skylake-EP being on 14 nm +: https://www.servethehome.com/new-intel-xeon-e5-2699a-v4-skylake-ep-details/

You can compare the average and maximum overclock achieved by members of overclocking community HWBot: http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/core_i7_6800k/ . Generally, Broadwell overclocks are lower than Haswell's.
 
Last edited:

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
6,878
772
126
Why do you all suspect SKL-X will be a solid overclocker? (Not trolling Just curious of any evidence which might support this theory.)
Haswell-E clocked to about what mainstream Haswell did and Broadwell-E does clock to about what mainstream Broadwell can. Expecting 5 Ghz with AVX-512 enabled might be unrealistic though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arachnotronic

Ajay

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2001
5,793
1,708
136
Why do you all suspect SKL-X will be a solid overclocker? (Not trolling Legitimately curious if any evidence exists which supports this theory.)
Skylake-X is built on Intel's 14+ manufacturing node, just like Kabylake. Higher drive current with less leakage == higher frequency headroom.
 
Mar 10, 2006
11,719
1,999
126
Skylake-X is built on Intel's 14+ manufacturing node, just like Kabylake. Higher drive current with less leakage == higher frequency headroom.
Also the physical implementation of Broadwell-E was garbage. Skylake/Kaby Lake both have much better ones, and I think we'll see that carried over in SKX-X.
 
Mar 10, 2006
11,719
1,999
126
I have to agree, looks like Intel has an easy job against Ryzen with Skylake-X. Intels design seems much more matured and a better allrounder. With the increased clock headrom from Skylake and 14nm+ as well as the increased L2, Intel looks to be in a very good position this year with Skylake-X.
Another thing to keep in mind is that L2 associativity dropped from 8 way in previous Intel designs to 4 way on Skylake client. That likely significantly hurt cache performance for the sake of trying to conserve power in the ULV chips. SKX will have a better, not just bigger, L2$ which should help the true IPC potential of the Skylake core shine through.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CHADBOGA

Nothingness

Golden Member
Jul 3, 2013
1,983
278
126
I have to agree, looks like Intel has an easy job against Ryzen with Skylake-X. Intels design seems much more matured and a better allrounder.
Their chipsbetter be more mature, their micro-architecture is the result of almost 15 years of tweaks :D

What AMD did at the first shot of a micro-architecture is a great achievement (though as far as I'm concerned I'll stick to Intel).
 

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,523
1,565
126
Any speculation on Skylake-X pricing, given the competition from Ryzen?
Well, one could say that it doesn't look like SL-X will have any competition...

We have heard so little about SL-X, X299, and socket 2066, though.
 

Sweepr

Diamond Member
May 12, 2006
5,151
1,124
131
mikk said:
I have to agree, looks like Intel has an easy job against Ryzen with Skylake-X. Intels design seems much more matured and a better allrounder. With the increased clock headrom from Skylake and 14nm+ as well as the increased L2, Intel looks to be in a very good position this year with Skylake-X.
PurePC Review: Core i7-5960X relative to Ryzen 7 1800X

- Battlefield 1: 17,1% faster
- Crysis 3: 5% faster
- Dishonored 2: 19.5% faster
- Deus Ex (DX11): 21.8% faster
- Fallout 4: 4.4% faster
- Hitman: 28.8% faster
- Rise of the Tomb Raider: 58.4% faster
- Total War: 3.7% slower
- Watch Dogs 2: 15.5% faster
- The Witcher 3: 46.1% faster

That's old Haswell-E from 2014 operating at lower clocks (up to 3.5 GHz vs up to 4.0 GHz). While i7-7700K's gaming performance is excelent, I'd rather invest in Skylake-X 6C/12T. With 1MB L2 per core and hopefully able to hit 4.5-5.0 GHz OCs it will be a fantastic all around choice in a few months.
 
Last edited:

Ajay

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2001
5,793
1,708
136
Any speculation on Skylake-X pricing, given the competition from Ryzen?
That will depend almost completely on how much of the HEDT market AMD can grab. That's why the impact will more likely be on SKL-X instead of BDW-E. Honestly, I expect Intel to be aggressive with clocks to counter AMD's price advantage, since the they already have better IPC.
 

IntelUser2000

Elite Member
Oct 14, 2003
6,301
913
126
Another thing to keep in mind is that L2 associativity dropped from 8 way in previous Intel designs to 4 way on Skylake client. That likely significantly hurt cache performance for the sake of trying to conserve power in the ULV chips. SKX will have a better, not just bigger, L2$ which should help the true IPC potential of the Skylake core shine through.
Anandtech heard from Intel that it was to save power and some benefits for server that Intel wouldn't tell yet. Also something about saving space.

The server part is interesting. Are they saying it'll be a 1MB L2 4-way now? Also saving space won't be big because L2 caches are now pretty close to core. I guess its possible they did that to make room for core enhancements?

The power argument can only make sense for lower leakage and average power. What are we talking about though in terms of average power? 100mW? 200mW? I highly doubt its even that. Back as far as Banias Intel chips could turn off portions of caches to save power.

Another possibility. Part of the reason Broadwell didn't clock well is because of 14nm issues. There were reports Intel could have possibly re-architected Skylake to get the clock to acceptable levels. Cutting the associativity of the L2 cache could have been one way. Server chips clock nowhere near PC chips so they can get away with some things.

If I am being cynical I'd even say they use the power/die excuse because they are still too embarassed to admit they completely messed up on the 14nm process, especially after all that fanfare about having 3+ year lead and they would use that to dominate everything. The lead is absolutely nonexistent considering despite the smaller pitch Ryzen L3 caches are denser than Intel's.
 

mikk

Platinum Member
May 15, 2012
2,502
508
136
I found a new Intel codename within Intels gfx driver: LakeField

They have also added a Gen12 graphics string.
 

french toast

Senior member
Feb 22, 2017
943
745
106
Skylake x will be a beast, no question after windows /game updates ryzens performance will inrease by another 10% on top of the >10% increase we see with new bios shown in a couple of reviews.
BUT it wont be fast enough to catch skylake x which is probably going to be 10-15% higher ipc than ryzen, as well as OC to 4.5ghz i would guess, monstrous performance.
6/12 skylake x might actually be faster than a hypothetical 6/12 i7 8800k, the best perf/$ gaming might still be with 8800k as i dont think Skylake x will fall below 400$.

If 6800k drops in price i would take that over 7700k as it will outlast it.
I would take r7 1700 or 1600x over both of those (just) but if 8800k performs and is priced at 350$, thats unbeatable imo.
 

Conroe

Senior member
Mar 12, 2006
324
32
91
Don't get Zen if you want the best gamming performance, ever. Unlike the 7700k it will never be the top gaming CPU. Enough.
 

Sweepr

Diamond Member
May 12, 2006
5,151
1,124
131
The tests above just prove that the fastest 4C/8T CPU money can buy is still the best gaming CPU today. We've heard about how Intel's quad-cores wouldn't be enough for ages, and they're still ahead of more expensive chips from both Intel and the competition in most CPU limited games. Till Skylake-X with 4x the amount of L2 cache, more than twice the memory bandwidth, 6C/8C/10C (12C?) options and possibly similar overclocks on air/water arrives, Core i7-7700K is at the top.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick

ASK THE COMMUNITY