First benchmark for intel 6600k-6700k

[dark13]

6600k: http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/core-i5-6600k-processor-review-desktop-skylake,1.html

6700k: http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/core-i7-6700k-processor-review-desktop-skylake,1.html

 

Final words of 6600k: If you purchased say a Core i7 2600K back in 2011 then you are looking at a 5 to 10% CPU performance increase. Compared to the Core i5 2500K that number runs up to 25~30%. That's just not a lot in the world of technology where 4 years is a long time

 

Intel is babbling about desktop market shrinking years by years, they should REALLY start asking themselves why someone should buy a pricey upgrade only to get a +10%. People don't want to spend 600€+ for a more energy efficient CPU nor pay for an unused IGP on their hi-end CPUs, people just want MORE POWER to run their applications.

 

The +5ghz seen on "leaked" screenshots seems really far right now: 4.6ghz for 6600k and 4.8ghz for 6700k. Just too close to 4670k and 4770k OC capabilities. Those CPUs still get pretty hot, not as much as 4xxx did but mainstream high-end cooling is still suggested.

[dark13]

The problem is cash isn't exactly flowing in for desktop market and cpus are not getting nowhere "better" as years pass by. Only die-hard enthusiasts would upgrade their rigs to get +10% and anyway they are already on socket 2011v3 with a 6cores CPU and quadchannel ddr4. Intel's policy does totally NOT make sense, they are investing money in R&D just to get nowhere in terms of cpu performance. Examining the hi-tech market we can say the rule is always the same: where innovation cycle is fast enough and computing power is growing quickly people tends to upgrade more often. If you buy a mobile today you already know that in 2 years there will be a product with the same price tag and 2x more power, so you'll probably be encouraged to get a new device even if the mobile will still fit your needs. Intel's R&D seems more focused to laptops, where energy efficiency is more useful but intel should stop talk rubbish about desktop market: a decent part of the problem is intel (and AMD) itself. When power does not grow people upgrades only "dead" rigs...

[Trnzaddict]

It's funny alot of people on FB today were saying that the new 6600 and 6700k just aren't that much more powerful at all. 

[trebukenz]

It looks to me that there is a change of architecture here that will allow Intel to target the mobile market more.  I do not think this round of CPU's is servicing desktop users particularly.  Then again the pricing of these cpu's is reasonable compared to the last comparable models.  There are significant platform changes occurring as well.  Z170 motherboards, a new Intel chipset.  The cpu alone may not warrant an upgrade, but for myself -- who is due for a new rig -- all the features now available makes it time to upgrade.

[Zeosstud]

great info.. now, does golden tee fore still stutter when run on medium res..  :-)

[dark13]

As far as I can see they are priced just as 4770k and 4760k (euro prices are higher due to euro being weaker now and intel raising prices some months ago).

 

Intel is selling cpu with the same power of the previous line at the same price. This is freaking crazy. In 4 years we got 3 different socket and all we can say is 6600k is 25% faster than 2500k. Compare a gtx 580 with a gtx 980 and you'll get the point. In GPU world 20nm has been an epic fail BUT GPU are still getting faster...

[SIMPLYAUSTIN]

Always big circles... We thought back in the day we could never get faster than the P4 as it was tech on the limits of what physics and science can achieve at the time.

 

Then some dude thinks, fuck it, lets smash 2 together to make it better. Pays off and now we have double quad, squads of CPUs in one rig. 

 

It takes limits to push us further. Now we are at them, next comes the next breakthrough 

[dark13]

From P1 to P4 it has always been not only a matter of instruction sets (MMX was a BIG thing) but mostly performance increase through frequency increase. As far as I remember intel tought P4 on lga775 could be pushed up to 8ghz... in the very end it stopped at 3.8ghz. Then AMD cranked up 2 cores on a single die and got almost 2x performance.

 

If intel has reached a physical limit it should start thinking how to make and sell 6cores at the price of a 6600k and 8cores on a 6700k tag price instead of spending money to develop a new technology just as fast as the previous one...

[SIMPLYAUSTIN]

Great points however there is much to think about in this entire conversation, more than we could ever comprihend in the forums of Hyperspin.

 

I guess only the clever people who makevthus will ever know, until 20 years time when we can read about it in archives , emulated on a x45000 cpu

[omamez]

my 2500k main pc shits allover most 2600k, 2700k's in overclocking the 2500k's are the bee's knees in my opinion. not sure about anyone else,

 

unfortunately everything is turning to mobile device development like the intel atoms  /baytrails etc and making less power hungry cpu's.

 

And unfortunately hard times around the world has drop demand for supply and companies are not spending as much on pushing th elimits to design new product but just badging older product that was under clocked in the first place in performace

[omamez]

From P1 to P4 it has always been not only a matter of instruction sets (MMX was a BIG thing) but mostly performance increase through frequency increase. As far as I remember intel tought P4 on lga775 could be pushed up to 8ghz... in the very end it stopped at 3.8ghz. Then AMD cranked up 2 cores on a single die and got almost 2x performance.

 

If intel has reached a physical limit it should start thinking how to make and sell 6cores at the price of a 6600k and 8cores on a 6700k tag price instead of spending money to develop a new technology just as fast as the previous one...

Oh god those p4 days indeed a torture and whole day process to do anything on the pc

[azzbarb]

my 2500k main pc shits allover most 2600k, 2700k's in overclocking the 2500k's are the bee's knees in my opinion. not sure about anyone else,

 

unfortunately everything is turning to mobile device development like the intel atoms  /baytrails etc and making less power hungry cpu's.

 

And unfortunately hard times around the world has drop demand for supply and companies are not spending as much on pushing th elimits to design new product but just badging older product that was under clocked in the first place in performace

I run my 2600k at 4.4ghz for everyday use, i can have it at 4.8ghz stable if i want but i have left it at 4.4 for some time now and it seems happy, thats on water btw.

I was thinking about upgrading soon but i don't think i'll bother.

[dark13]

Some other numbers:
From Pentium 90 (1993) to P4 prescott 3.2ghz (2004) you got a +30X bump ONLY considering frequency

From a P4 prescott 3.2ghz (2004) to 6600k (2015) you got a 18X-21X. I considered a 6600k to be 3X my Q6600 (more realistic it's around 2.6X) and a Q6600 6X-8X a P4 3ghz, I know this for sure as I own both )

 

But, moreover:

From a Q6600 (2007) to 6600k (2015) you get a 2.6X-3X.

From a Pentium 90 (1993) to pentium 3 1ghz (2001) you get a 10X, again, only considering frequency.