• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Wow, Ars Technica roasts Kaby Lake

I care about Kaby Lake. I really do. The low wattage i7-7700T version looks interesting for my next silent computer.
 
Same architecture on same process node? Should have been the 6790K.

Marketing is the process of seeing what crap you can get away with and convincing other people to pay you for it.
 
This is why I bought a 6700k last September instead of waiting, it is no surprise. I'd like to see the new graphics tested though.
 
I don't understand the decision to ship this CPU at all. It's not as if Intel have a large mindless zealot following who just go out and buy the latest every time (and even if they did, surely shipping a CPU of such a minimal improvement would test that faith to its limit?).

I think it's reasonable to guess that this newer CPU is more expensive than a 6700K, so either it competes with it based on very little and so the 6700K wins out almost every time, resulting in a load of unsold 7700K CPUs, or the 6700K is EOL'd and Intel have spent R&D and product line alteration funds for almost nothing.

It's been a long day; I can't remember if I had any other arguments about how bad an idea this is.
 
Lazy CPU commodity vendor is lazy. This is news? Intel has been stagnant since Haswell... the only people who still believe they are committed to improving their CPUs are fans now.
 
mikeymikec said:
I don't understand the decision to ship this CPU at all. It's not as if Intel have a large mindless zealot following who just go out and buy the latest every time (and even if they did, surely shipping a CPU of such a minimal improvement would test that faith to its limit?).

I think it's reasonable to guess that this newer CPU is more expensive than a 6700K, so either it competes with it based on very little and so the 6700K wins out almost every time, resulting in a load of unsold 7700K CPUs, or the 6700K is EOL'd and Intel have spent R&D and product line alteration funds for almost nothing.

It's been a long day; I can't remember if I had any other arguments about how bad an idea this is.
Click to expand...

If you read the review on this website it will give you pricing information.

i7700k = 305
i6700k = 338

The i7700k has a higher base and boost clock, and slightly lower power consumption. Also cheaper. The sky is falling!
 
Genx87 said:
If you read the review on this website it will give you pricing information.

i7700k = 305
i6700k = 338

The i7700k has a higher base and boost clock, and slightly lower power consumption. Also cheaper. The sky is falling!
Click to expand...
I was about to post the same thing. Oh no, a 5% to 10% boost on everything, for free or possibly even less money. And, for those who need it, there are a few other gems. While it isn't Earth-shattering, I'd gladly take that (and I will be buying a 7600 shortly).
 
mikeymikec said:
I don't understand the decision to ship this CPU at all. It's not as if Intel have a large mindless zealot following who just go out and buy the latest every time (and even if they did, surely shipping a CPU of such a minimal improvement would test that faith to its limit?).

I think it's reasonable to guess that this newer CPU is more expensive than a 6700K, so either it competes with it based on very little and so the 6700K wins out almost every time, resulting in a load of unsold 7700K CPUs, or the 6700K is EOL'd and Intel have spent R&D and product line alteration funds for almost nothing.

It's been a long day; I can't remember if I had any other arguments about how bad an idea this is.
Click to expand...

This, makes sense to me as well. Will maybe hard to come by within half a year. And the 7700K has a HVEC codec in hardware. With good software support from for streaming sites that provide an app such as netflix, that is quite the energy saver for people who are interested in such features.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10610...six-notebook-skus-desktop-coming-in-january/3
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Efficiency_Video_Coding
 
Genx87 said:
If you read the review on this website it will give you pricing information.

i7700k = 305
i6700k = 338

The i7700k has a higher base and boost clock, and slightly lower power consumption. Also cheaper. The sky is falling!
Click to expand...

Perhaps along with the money they earn from sales of the newer chipset, it makes sense for them to do this. Then again, I have no idea what their margins are.
 
IronWing said:
I care about Kaby Lake. I really do. The low wattage i7-7700T version looks interesting for my next silent computer.
Click to expand...

But the 7700T is almost exactly the same as the 6700T, except for slightly higher clock speeds on the Kaby Lake chip. Not much of a meaningful difference, IMO.
 
Genx87 said:
If you read the review on this website it will give you pricing information.

i7700k = 305
i6700k = 338

The i7700k has a higher base and boost clock, and slightly lower power consumption. Also cheaper. The sky is falling!
Click to expand...
Lots of people seem to think that's wrong. Ars says the 7700K is $350. 😕
 
After reading the bench scores and seeing that they think the price will actually be $350, I'm not sold at all. In fact I am rather interested in seeing the real-life scores of Ryzen. I may just go back to an all AMD board. (I upgraded to RX 480 Nitro from a 6950 Sapphire)

Which I guess the author is try to say here:
If you're still rocking an older Ivy Bridge or Haswell processor and weren't convinced to upgrade to Skylake, there's little reason to upgrade to Kaby Lake. Even Sandy Bridge users may want to consider other upgrades first, such as a new SSD or graphics card.
Click to expand...
 
MaxDepth said:
After reading the bench scores and seeing that they think the price will actually be $350, I'm not sold at all. In fact I am rather interested in seeing the real-life scores of Ryzen. I may just go back to an all AMD board. (I upgraded to RX 480 Nitro from a 6950 Sapphire)

Which I guess the author is try to say here:
Click to expand...
still rocking sandy bridge on the desktop w/ a new 1060 GPU. tempted to upgrade to kaby lake on desktop but i'll be focused on getting a Kaby lake based cpu w/ 1050 gpu as my money would be better spent there.
 
MaxDepth said:
After reading the bench scores and seeing that they think the price will actually be $350, I'm not sold at all. In fact I am rather interested in seeing the real-life scores of Ryzen. I may just go back to an all AMD board. (I upgraded to RX 480 Nitro from a 6950 Sapphire)

Which I guess the author is try to say here:
Click to expand...
Same here, very interested in Ryzen. I probably won't upgrade my 4790k desktop, not yet, but if I can get a reasonably priced 6-8 core Ryzen setup that supports ECC ram, that would be enticing enough to upgrade my home server.
 
FIVR said:
Lazy CPU commodity vendor is lazy. This is news? Intel has been stagnant since Haswell... the only people who still believe they are committed to improving their CPUs are fans now.
Click to expand...

Everyone knew this is what would happen without AMD to push them.
 
every reviewer is, it has nothing going for it and if you have a 3770 or newer there is no reason whatsoever to upgrade
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top