While I see it being touted here and there, is there solid evidence for Kaby Lake being that much more efficient than Skylake? And by solid evidence I do not mean TDP classification but real world measurements with a sample size >1?Getting 15-20% lower power consumption at the same performance level, without microarchitectural changes or a new process node is pretty impressive, IMHO.
I understand Kaby Lake looks disappointing for anyone on this forum; Most here care more about performance, CPU or GPU, more than anything else. It's the same if Bugatti announced their new Veyron had 20% better mileage instead of 20% more hp; Useful, but not sexy.
Cheers
It seems a bit of a strange one, Tom's Hardware shows the 7700K having the same or at times slightly higher power consumption to the 6700K (apples-to-apples same clock frequency), but then the 7700K has better (lower) Vcore with up to 8% improvement.While I see it being touted here and there, is there solid evidence for Kaby Lake being that much more efficient than Skylake? And by solid evidence I do not mean TDP classification but real world measurements with a sample size >1?
Our KBL efficiency testing in the desktop has been a mixed bag so far with 7700K being nearly on par efficiency-wise with 6700K while 7600K was more efficient than 6600k - all of course with a sample size of 1.
I think Haswell was still pretty good.
Desktop Haswell had a 10% higher TDP than Ivy Bridge, so some of that may be maintaining the higher boost frequencies more consistently rather than IPC.And IPC got a ~10% boost:
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/897-25/gains-moyennes-cpu.html
https://www.cpchardware.com/intel-prepare-la-riposte-a-ryzen/
Some sources are mentioning an upcoming Core i5 7640K being released with HyperThreading turned on. Only difference would be 6MB L3 cache instead of 8MB, and perhaps some security or virtualization features turned off.
It'll be interesting to see what kind of reactionary measures Intel will (or will not) do with RyZen's release.
Does anyone know why the base and boost clocks of the rumored 7640K are the same (assuming this report is true)? That seems strange to me considering the "nearby" CPUs (7600K, 7700K, and 7740K*) have boost clocks that are higher than the base clocks.
The Intel Core i7-7740K processor will become the fastest Core i7 chip in the Kaby Lake lineup. It will replace the Core i7-7700K with slightly better specs. This chip features a quad core, hyper-threaded design. The chip is based on the latest 14nm+ process node which delivers improved efficiency and performance on the existing 14nm FinFET technology.
The clock speeds are rated 4.3 GHz base and 4.5 GHz boost.
lga 1151 and lga 2066 did they really need to do that
I think that might count as Kaby Lake-X.lga 1151 and lga 2066 did they really need to do that
I agree that it's very confusing since there seems to be a Skylake-X (or is it Skylake-E?).
From a competitive perspective, I'm not certain why it makes sense to jump up to that platform. Maybe it was necessary for the tdp bump? I'm just grasping at straws at this point.
BenchLife (Google Translate) said:"-G" means that this series of Kaby Lake processor package will be through the PCIe x8 channel, directly connected to a separate GPU chip, and is equipped with HBM2 memory package GPU chip.
What I don't get is why they supposedly have a MCM with the GPU so close to the CPU and then they connect it through a PCIe 8x bus.
I have the same question as Videocardz. But at least it has Turbo Boost unlike the rest of the desktop Core i3 lineup….It’s only 100 MHz faster than 7350K. The turbo clock is 4.3 GHz. The TDP though, skyrockets to 112W.
According to the leaker, the i3-7360X is 1.25% faster than 7350K. The price of 7360X is expected around 1699 Yuans (220 USD), so it’s not cheap.
A 112w i3 on an expensive platform....
For that times when you want to expense 3 times as much in your Motherboard than in your CPU and 2 times as much in Ram. Yeah its a logic path to me.