Slashdot Mirror
Intel's Skylake Architecture Reviewed
Vigile writes: The Intel Skylake architecture has been on our radar for quite a long time as Intel's next big step in CPU design. We know at least a handful of details: DDR4 memory support, 14nm process technology, modest IPC gains and impressive GPU improvements. But the details have remained a mystery on how the "tock" of Skylake on the 14nm process technology will differ from Broadwell and Haswell. That changes today with the official release of the "K" SKUs of Skylake — the unlocked, enthusiast class parts for DIY PC builders. PC Perspective has a full review of the Core i7-6700K with benchmarks as well as discrete GPU and gaming testing that shows Skylake is an impressive part. IPC gains on Skylake over Haswell are modest but noticeable, and IGP performance is as much as 50% higher than Devil's Canyon. Based on that discrete GPU testing, all those users still on Nehalem and Sandy Bridge might finally have a reason to upgrade to Skylake.
Other reviews available at Anandtech, Hot Hardware, [H]ard|OCP, and TechSpot.
I just wish that Intel would make a version that's 8 cores instead with lots of cache rather than waste the space and power on the integrated graphics. If you are gaming with it then you would have a dedicated card since all IGPs pretty much suck, and if you aren't gaming on it there isn't much point to improving it since even the most basic IGP can run video and 2d applications just fine.
Yeah, I thought it was really suspicious when Microsoft heavily promoted the new version of their operating system. Then when hardware manufacturers kept on including wifi and bluetooth in their hardware, without the need for an external card, I knew the only possible explanation was a massive snooping campaign by the NSA.
Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
Are you kidding? As an owner of several Sandy Bridge systems there is no reason to upgrade.
Heck. I still have two Core i7-920 systems at work and I'm not touching them, they work just fine running Windows 10.
Intel hasn't had competition from AMD in years and this is the result.
If you're on Sandy Bridge or newer, don't bother unless you really need the new chipset features.
Benchmarks of course show a small gain, but in the real world I suspect you could do a blind test of Sandy Bridge next to Skylake and you couldn't tell the difference.
Anyone who needs the performance difference shouldn't be on either chip, if you do serious image/video editing, you should be on Xeon anyway with 8+ cores if you make a living doing such work. The cost of such a system is trivial compared to the cost of the employee doing such things.
I have several systems in my office, ranging from a single Q6600 machine and two Core i7-920 machines all the way up to a Haswell Refresh i7-4790k. The difference in general Windows performance between all those machines is minor. Games play, more or less, the same in anything Sandy Bridge or newer, and we don't do anything so intensive to require more power.
Come on AMD, get back in the game so Intel has some real competition. Since Core2Duo came out, you haven't been coming to the party.
Reading AnandTech's review, they make a bold statement at the end:
"Sandy Bridge, Your Time Is Up."
That is an interesting thought, but is it really?
If you need USB 3, if you want some of the other newer chipset features, perhaps. But for performance?
In benchmarks, Skylake appears to be about 25% faster than Sandy Bridge. Sure, if you're doing video encoding all day or other CPU intensive applications, it is... (and if you ARE doing that stuff, why aren't you on Xeon?)
But for most desktop computer uses, you likely won't see any difference between the two. What is worse, is that most of the above gains came from Haswell, not Skylake.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/...
Look at the "Gains over Sandy Bridge" chart on that page. Look at the red lines, then the purple lines. The red lines are the Haswell gain over Sandy Bridge, then the purple lines are the Skylake gains over Sandy Bridge.