Intel Skylake / Kaby Lake

[Revolver31]

The entire Skylake-S lineup except K models are 35W and 65W TDP. Also 35W quad-cores received a significant clockspeed bump, there's a 2.8-3.6GHz model now (up from Haswell's 2.2-3.2GHz). I think you should do your homework.



You don't have any concrete data to compare Carrizo and Skylake, which is what we're talking about.

Despite your childish rants everything points to another product that won't change AMD's position on the market and will end up inside cheap BestBuy craptops.

I was eyeing up that i5 6600t 4c\35 watt @ 2.7 - 3.5 ghz for my upcoming new htpc build, i was hoping for a gt4e igpu to be included but i'm not sure thats gonna happen.
I won't be getting another chip with anything prior to the gt4e, i would have got the broadwell had it not been so expensive.

 

[Abwx]

The entire Skylake-S lineup except K models are 35W and 65W TDP. Also 35W quad-cores received a significant clockspeed bump, there's a 2.8-3.6GHz model now (up from Haswell's 2.2-3.2GHz). I think you should do your homework.

I dont think that in matter of CPU caracteristics analysis you could patronize me, quite the contrary, i dont count the posts of yours where completely erroneous numbers are used as holy grails..

As said BDW over HW perf/Watt improvement is 13.5% in Hardware.fr review and if the process is unchanged for Skylake there will be no miracles, it will perform about like BDW perf/Watt wise.

You don't have any concrete data to compare Carrizo and Skylake, which is what we're talking about.

For Carrizo we have enough datas to have an accurate idea about the product, that its perfs seems very good and do not suit some people is another story...

As for SKL perfs there s already some numbers that are known if we are to get back to homeworks duties....

http://www.computerbase.de/2015-07/...-vergleichen-core-i7-6700k-und-core-i7-4790k/

 

[mikk]

As said BDW over HW perf/Watt improvement is 13.5% in Hardware.fr

You are wrong.

For Carrizo we have enough datas to have an accurate idea about the product

We don't have.

 

[Sweepr]

I dont think that in matter of CPU caracteristics analysis you could patronize me, quite the contrary, i dont count the posts of yours where completely erroneous numbers are used as holy grails..

You should put that in practice, perhaps you wouldn't be spreading bullshit about 95W 3.4GHz Skylake quad-cores then.

As said BDW over HW perf/Watt improvement is 13.5% in Hardware.fr review and if the process is unchanged for Skylake there will be no miracles, it will perform about like BDW perf/Watt wise.

Lots of assumptions here for someone with 0 knowledge about Skylake-Y/U performance and power metrics.

Where's all the invisible Carrizo design wins? What will be your excuse after Windows 10 launch?
The OEMs have spoken, all the interesting designs including Surface Pro 4 and H2/2015 Macbooks will be running Skylake later this year.

 

[Abwx]

You are wrong.

Lol, a blank statement has no value...

I already computed the numbers, you think that i m throwing %ages out of hot air..?..

That said i m curious to know your own estimation...

We don't have.

That s litteraly putting your head in the sand, sure that the available numbers do not please a certain public.

 

[Abwx]

You should put that in practice, perhaps you wouldn't be spreading bullshit about 95W 3.4GHz Skylake quad-cores then.

Der Core i7-6700K wird voraussichtlich mit 95 Watt TDP eingestuft.

Lots of assumptions here for someone with 0 knowledge about Skylake-Y/U performance and power metrics.

What is your own knowledge..?.
Take some risks rather than always negating what other people say, provide some numbers, estimations of yours for instance....

And for perfs, you didnt notice that i posted a link, what are you rambling about..?..

http://www.computerbase.de/2015-07/...-vergleichen-core-i7-6700k-und-core-i7-4790k/

Where's all the invisible Carrizo design wins? What will be your excuse after Windows 10 launch?
The OEMs have spoken, all the interesting designs including Surface Pro 4 and H2/2015 Macbooks will be running Skylake later this year.

That can be discussed in another thread but FYI Lisa Su said that there s currently 35 designs, and you can find some if you google, i provided Toshiba as exemple but i guess that you re voluntarly ignoring any info that do not suit your obvious bias.

Top line with the FX8800P :

http://www.notebookcheck.com/Toshib...t-C-und-P50D-C-Notebook-Modelle.146105.0.html


Medium line with the 8700P :


http://www.notebookcheck.com/Toshiba-Neue-Satellite-L50-C-und-L70-C-Notebooks.146094.0.html


Mainstream with Carrizo-L :

http://www.notebookcheck.com/Toshib...55D-C-C70-C-und-C70D-C-am-Start.146137.0.html

 

[SAAA]

...holy grails.

As said BDW over HW perf/Watt improvement is 13.5% in Hardware.fr review and if the process is unchanged for Skylake there will be no miracles, it will perform about like BDW perf/Watt wise.

For Carrizo we have enough datas to have an accurate idea about the product, that its perfs seems very good and do not suit some people is another story...

As for SKL perfs there s already some numbers that are known if we are to get back to homeworks duties....

http://www.computerbase.de/2015-07/...-vergleichen-core-i7-6700k-und-core-i7-4790k/

The problem is that those same "holy grails" numbers shouldn't be repeated over and over: you know that an architecture/process isn't just x% more efficient than another. It's x% more efficient at a certain speed, temperature, ecc.

So at least stop using a single value that surely isn't always the correct one, also... why Skylake couldn't be much more efficient on the same process? Isn't Carrizo built on the same node yet better than Steamroller?

Both architectures are literally built for mobile and better efficiency/performance, so I hardly see the problem here...

 

[Sweepr]

And for perfs, you didnt notice that i posted a link, what are you rambling about..?..

So no Skylake-Y/U numbers? That's what I though, yet you still proclaim similar perf/watt compared to Broadwell based on... your wishes to make AMD look better? Not surprising for someone who picks 35W Carrizo results to compare to Core M and Broadwell-U.

Top line with the FX8800P :

http://www.notebookcheck.com/Toshib...t-C-und-P50D-C-Notebook-Modelle.146105.0.html


Medium line with the 8700P :


http://www.notebookcheck.com/Toshiba-Neue-Satellite-L50-C-und-L70-C-Notebooks.146094.0.html

15,6'', 2,45 kg, Toshiba, is that a Skylake-U or Skylake-H competitor?
Why no 13,3'' notebook with a good Full HD+ IPS screen and lightweight?
Looks like another round of bulky craptops, too bad there's no contra revenue to blame now. After so many failures OEM's simply don't take AMD's products seriously and it doesn't look like Carrizo changes that.

 

[Abwx]

The problem is that those same "holy grails" numbers shouldn't be repeated over and over: you know that an architecture/process isn't just x% more efficient than another. It's x% more efficient at a certain speed, temperature, ecc.

Comparisons are done according to scientificals protocols, wich mean that the tests conditions wont favour a design over the other, here we are compairing close designs so the question doesnt even exist.

The
So at least stop using a single value that surely isn't always the correct one, also... why Skylake couldn't be much more efficient on the same process?

I gave an estimation of 10-15% better perf/watt for BDW in respect of HW with only very variable laptops reviews and well before Hardware.fr posted their DT review, susprisingly the DT numbers perfectly match the mobile SKU numbers apparently, and this say that if Intel process is mediocre relatively to the previous one its linearity is still very good, much better than what AMD has at hand.

Isn't Carrizo built on the same node yet better than Steamroller?

No and yes at the same time, this is the same process but with smaller transistors that have badly degraded conduction but also require less drive energy, this allow lower leakage, lower dynamic power in exchange of less frequency.

Both architectures are literally built for mobile and better efficiency/performance, so I hardly see the problem here...

Indeed Intel made the same choice, that is transistors with degraded conduction but with same advantages as above, what is surprising is that AMD made a much better work in this respect given the node disadvantage, and this allow them to get exceptional perf/watt below a given TDP that is at 25-30W, Intel is better above but not below, and only for the CPU part.

 

[Abwx]

So no Skylake-Y/U numbers? That's what I though, yet you still proclaim similar perf/watt compared to Broadwell based on... your wishes to make AMD look better? Not surprising for someone who picks 35W Carrizo results to compare to Core M and Broadwell-U.

I corrected someone else, who also misread my sayings, about the bolded, you can go on the Carrizo thread to get my answer about thoses false claims of yours...

For the rest i need no U/Y number, what i have at hand is about enough, as said Intel process has good linearity up to 3.5-3.8GHz, so we can easily extrapolate the TDP numbers from what is available..

That s more difficult for AMD as the 28nm degrade much earlier and more measurement points are necessary to interpolate the frequency power curve, fortunately they have published this curve for both EXV and SR, that spare a lot of hassle...

 

[Phynaz]

You should put that in practice, perhaps you wouldn't be spreading bullshit about 95W 3.4GHz Skylake quad-cores then.



Lots of assumptions here for someone with 0 knowledge about Skylake-Y/U performance and power metrics.

Where's all the invisible Carrizo design wins? What will be your excuse after Windows 10 launch?
The OEMs have spoken, all the interesting designs including Surface Pro 4 and H2/2015 Macbooks will be running Skylake later this year.

He's afraid.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Sweepr: Let Skylake come out and we'll talk about it. After Intel's lies about how Core M will perform, the balls on their court to prove their worth, even at Core M's level.

Abwx: No real Carrizo products are available.

 

[dark zero]

Sweepr: Let Skylake come out and we'll talk about it. After Intel's lies about how Core M will perform, the balls on their court to prove their worth, even at Core M's level.

Abwx: No real Carrizo products are available.

Agreed. No real Carrizo is here... But at least there is Carrizo-L coming out... But too late.

And about Core M.... If they don't increase the wattage to 6 or 7 it will still become a really bad product

 

[Sweepr]

You can build a product that performs similar to Llama Mountain. Of course Intel tried to show it in the best light possible. Broadwell-Y was the first step though, let's see what Skylake-Y can do. If the Geekbench leaks are correct regarding base clocks then this will be a very interesting chip.

 

[Sweepr]

He's afraid.

I just can't wait till the first tests come out only to prove false his claims about Carrizo being 20% faster than Intel at 15W TDP, that deserves a first post edit. Actually we don't need that, going back to reality top bin 35W TDP Carrizo can't touch top bin Broadwell-U @ CB MT, let alone come close in any single-thread metric. And remmember this chip will have to hold things till the next APU sometime in 2017. AMD's financial situation and their own expectations speak for themselves, no distorted/biased comparison will change that.

 

[dark zero]

You can build a product that performs similar to Llama Mountain. Of course Intel tried to show it in the best light possible. Broadwell-Y was the first step though, let's see what Skylake-Y can do. If the Geekbench leaks are correct regarding base clocks then this will be a very interesting chip.

If that is the way, incrasing reasonably TDP in order to not to throttle is really a good idea. For now Core M should stay at max 8W instead of 4.5. yeah, you will use a fan, but definately won't throttle as expecting.

BTW, what are you expectatives on Skylake?

[X] Core i5 Quad Cores on Laptops
[] Pentium Dual Core with HT (Mobile and Desktop)
[] 3.0 Ghz+ Dual Core Celeron
[] 4.0 Ghz+ Core i3 Chips

 

[IntelUser2000]

You can build a product that performs similar to Llama Mountain. Of course Intel tried to show it in the best light possible. Broadwell-Y was the first step though, let's see what Skylake-Y can do. If the Geekbench leaks are correct regarding base clocks then this will be a very interesting chip.

http://www.windowscentral.com/lenovo-silently-reduces-yoga-3-pro-lowers-price

Now, Lenovo has stealthily updated the language on the Yoga 3 Pro landing page, reducing the estimated battery life from 'up to 9 hours' to a more evenhanded 7.2 hours.

Skylake-Y needs to meet BIG expectations. I would bet against it being a "fantastic" product. Maybe a "good" one.

The problem I believe lies in their process. Remember how they claimed 40% improvement for the 14nm over 22nm? It could be at levels which with 22nm runs at 500MHz. That's 700MHz at 14nm. But its absolutely useless at 1+ volts that Turbo frequencies run at.

Now it could be that their process range is such that any significant advantage they claim has been shifted from Y CPU levels to IoT CPUs like Quark running at 400MHz. Perhaps 14nm Quark would be 40% faster than 22nm Quark. As for the rest? I said the ball is in Intel's court.

 

[Abwx]

The problem I believe lies in their process. Remember how they claimed 40% improvement for the 14nm over 22nm? It could be at levels which with 22nm runs at 500MHz. That's 700MHz at 14nm. But its absolutely useless at 1+ volts that Turbo frequencies run at.

I think that the big improvement is at very low power, explicitely within 4-4.5W TDP.

Thanks to lower leakage and better PCH they have perhaps as much as 1W saved that can be used to increase the power dedicated to the CPU part by 50% wich will increase perfs by 1.22x , on top of it is the genuine 1.135x perf/Watt improvement of the process and there you have your 40%, and even the much hyped 1.6x once you select a very favourable case...

 

[Dresdenboy]

That ipc, just wow

I5 4200m vs 6300HQ geekbench single core

4200m (2.5ghz) - 2227
6300HQ(2.3ghz) - 3110

Isn't this like 30% increase in single core performance?

Can't wait for higher clocked one like 6340HQ

What were the clock freqs in those tests? IPC is "per clock", while those chips can use turbo. A more power efficient core will win here if the available power or thermal headroom is the same.

 

[NTMBK]

What were the clock freqs in those tests? IPC is "per clock", while those chips can use turbo. A more power efficient core will win here if the available power or thermal headroom is the same.

Yup, this. The "HQ" parts are 47W, 4200M is 37W. 10W extra thermal headroom, plus 14nm instead of 22nm? I bet it is boosting significantly more than the Haswell part. Don't try to guess at IPC until we can measure clock locked parts with no turbo.

 

[Sweepr]

Not sure how reliabe this is but I'm the news guy:

While the Intel Core i7-6700K and Core i5-6600K, the first Skylake processors and the chipset accompanying Z170 will be launched and available as of August 5, things seem to be complicated for 8 more planned processors that will only not overclockable but cheaper.

Several motherboard manufacturers have thus confirmed that the B150 and H170 cards and the rest of the range will not be launched between August 30 and September 5, as planned, but about a month later. Behind this unprecedented shift of 2 months between the CPU and the other K's probably hiding large stocks remaining to be sold on Haswell because of a PC market that is not in top form as recalled at Intel announcing its latest results .

http://translate.google.com/transla...hardware%2Ffr%2Fnews+%28HardWare.fr+-+News%29

Yup, this. The "HQ" parts are 47W, 4200M is 37W. 10W extra thermal headroom, plus 14nm instead of 22nm? I bet it is boosting significantly more than the Haswell part. Don't try to guess at IPC until we can measure clock locked parts with no turbo.

Not necessarily. In fact expect a lot of quad-cores at 37W TDP this time, especially the lower-clocked ones.
We've got a complete line of 35W desktop quad-cores after all, mobile should improve at equal/lower TDPs too.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Its the european/US market being 1 month behind the asian for the mainstream. Only the K models will be released the same time (august 5th) in all segments.

Non K models will be released between august 30 - september 5th in asia and between september 27th and october 3rd for europe/US.

Asia is where the business is. And by Asia I mean China.

 

[redhotiron2004]

Its the european/US market being 1 month behind the asian for the mainstream. Only the K models will be released the same time (august 5th) in all segments.

Non K models will be released between august 30 - september 5th in asia and between september 27th and october 3rd for europe/US.

Asia is where the business is. And by Asia I mean China.

Asia=china lol :thumbup:😛
And I am sure according to you India would be in the 8th continent of Atlantis. 😉

 

[ShintaiDK]

Asia=china lol :thumbup:😛
And I am sure according to you India would be in the 8th continent of Atlantis. 😉

I didnt write that China is Asia.

If you note, PRC is specified as an entity, even tho its part of APJ.

Also business in China is what, 5 times greater than in India?

China is the center of business in Asia.

 

[CakeMonster]

Do we know how memory multipliers will work with overclocking on the K models and the new chipsets?

Like... do I risk not being able to utilize for example a 2800MHz set properly with its XMP profile if the math with my custom OC doesn't match the memory frequency exactly?