EPTComputer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread - Page 637
| Forum Index > Tech Support |
When using this resource, please read the opening post. The Tech Support forum regulars have helped create countless of desktop systems without any compensation. The least you can do is provide all of the information required for them to help you properly. | ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
| ||
|
z0rz
United States350 Posts
On January 04 2017 04:49 Cyro wrote: Just got Kaby Lake reviews, looks okay for new buyers and some interesting stuff in there. General performance gains of maybe 5-9% through higher achievable clockspeeds everywhere~ http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-kaby-lake-core-i7-7700k-i7-7700-i5-7600k-i5-7600,4870-12.html Microsoft is not officially supporting Kaby/Zen on windows 7 or 8/8.1 even though 8 is still in its mainstream support window Gains of 5-9% in performance? Maybe in efficiency, but I'm not so sure about performance. Doesn't look like Kaby Lake can consistently/reliably hit 5GHz, so it has maybe ~200-300MHz overclocking headroom over Skylake and is otherwise identical clock-for-clock. I like how HARDOCP summarized it: We have come to expect small advances in Intel IPC over the recent years and we have come to expect nothing from AMD. Intel has produced some fine silicon and injected excitement into our CPU industry when there were no others to lead. Thank you for that, it is much appreciated. As we watch Moore's Law fall, I have expected IPC and core width to be Intel's focus. Quite frankly, while I have not been impressed with 10% gains in IPC, I have been happy to at least see those. With Kaby Lake, Intel has just given the big middle finger its fan base, loyalists, and every hardware enthusiast in the world. Intel has just told us, we do not matter to its corporate structure any more. To the enthusiast, Kaby Lake in its Core i7-7700K form is nothing more than what Francois promised two years ago. I would not spend my money on Kaby Lake simply in protest. I was going to build a new PC this last summer but decided to put it off with Kaby Lake and Ryzen on the horizon. I knew Kaby Lake wouldn't be a huge improvement, but it's literally no different than Skylake for my purposes. I feel like such an idiot for waiting. So now I have to root for Ryzen to kick ass so I can justify protesting Intel, which I never really felt compelled to do before since Intel always got the job done for me. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20345 Posts
Gains of 5-9% in performance? Maybe in efficiency, but I'm not so sure about performance. Doesn't look like Kaby Lake can consistently/reliably hit 5GHz, so it has maybe ~200-300MHz overclocking headroom over Skylake and is otherwise identical clock-for-clock. 300mhz is ~6.5% and by the same standards, skylake sits around 300mhz worse. If you judge from one sample there is some significant chip to chip variance that will mask any changes, that's why i linked the comparison of 30 chips. It's just the voltage for 1 cinebench pass, so the chips won't be very stable there. Taking 100mhz off leaves the potato at ~4.9ghz@1.36v and the good chip at 5.0ghz@1.41v. These chips where you'd have to run high volts for 4.6ghz don't really seem to exist, being at ~4.9ghz now while with a non-potato it's 5.0, 5.1ghz - only ~1% of skylakes could stabilize 5ghz. It's very minor, yeah, if you don't care about minor changes then it wasn't the thing to wait for. Even intel's main architectural changes are relatively minor today, they just compound together to being significant performance improvements over multiple generations. It'll just make Skylake look and fare slightly better against 2011 chips and zen, it will be the new normal soon like Devil's Canyon was. | ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
| ||
|
Incognoto
France10239 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On January 04 2017 13:49 z0rz wrote: Gains of 5-9% in performance? Maybe in efficiency, but I'm not so sure about performance. Doesn't look like Kaby Lake can consistently/reliably hit 5GHz, so it has maybe ~200-300MHz overclocking headroom over Skylake and is otherwise identical clock-for-clock. I like how HARDOCP summarized it: I was going to build a new PC this last summer but decided to put it off with Kaby Lake and Ryzen on the horizon. I knew Kaby Lake wouldn't be a huge improvement, but it's literally no different than Skylake for my purposes. I feel like such an idiot for waiting. So now I have to root for Ryzen to kick ass so I can justify protesting Intel, which I never really felt compelled to do before since Intel always got the job done for me. Thank you for this post. My current laptop is over 3.5 years old and has a dying battery plus some other problems. I was originally thinking of waiting for the Kaby Lake systems to roll out, but went ahead and pulled the trigger on getting something now. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20345 Posts
| ||
|
z0rz
United States350 Posts
I think I'd be less offended if Kaby Lake was a 6790K and stayed on the 100 series. | ||
|
z0rz
United States350 Posts
On January 05 2017 08:48 xDaunt wrote: Thank you for this post. My current laptop is over 3.5 years old and has a dying battery plus some other problems. I was originally thinking of waiting for the Kaby Lake systems to roll out, but went ahead and pulled the trigger on getting something now. In all fairness, my disdain is for the high-end desktop offering. Seems like Kaby Lake is more focused on mobile advancements than anything else, so a Kaby Lake laptop is probably a fine choice for the boost in energy efficiency, if nothing else. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20345 Posts
A 5% increase in overclocking headroom is not definitive enough to equal 5% performance. IPCs are identical. You have to push Kaby Lake beyond the physical limitations of Skylake to see that 5% Both a 5% IPC improvement and a 5% clockspeed improvement show a 0% increase if the CPU is not utilized but a 5% gain if it is. There's not much of a practical difference there in how the performance is gained, it's a question of if it's being utilized or not and that question applies to all hardware. You can run a gtx1050 and a gtx1080 in starcraft 2 and get the same framerate but the 1080 is still way faster; the FPS is just the same because neither card is holding it back. That doesn't mean that the performance improvement from the gtx1050 and 1080 isn't ever realized in its entirety or useful, it's just not helping in this particular case. --- I think I'd be less offended if Kaby Lake was a 6790K and stayed on the 100 series. Kaby is supported by z170 AFAIK but probably requires a bios update for the new cpu's. I don't care much for what's written on the box with the mess of a naming scheme that they pretend to have  | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On January 05 2017 13:03 z0rz wrote: In all fairness, my disdain is for the high-end desktop offering. Seems like Kaby Lake is more focused on mobile advancements than anything else, so a Kaby Lake laptop is probably a fine choice for the boost in energy efficiency, if nothing else. Probably, but I doubt that the mobile Kaby Lakes will offer the same kind of generational leap that the series 10 nvidia cards did. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20345 Posts
| ||
NovemberstOrm
Canada16217 Posts
Ebay I wish the x99 platform wasn't so expensive :[ | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20345 Posts
| ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
On January 05 2017 16:37 NovemberstOrm wrote: 6800k for $500 CAD, $130 off Ebay I wish the x99 platform wasn't so expensive :[ That's pretty nice, the 6700k is like $420CAD at memory express, but yeah, considering the cheapest x99 are $300 for nothing of note to a consumer, won't be buying obviously. | ||
|
ArtyK
France3144 Posts
| ||
|
bluegarfield
Singapore1128 Posts
any opinions? | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20345 Posts
On January 07 2017 01:41 ArtyK wrote: Pentiums have hyperthreading with Kaby Lake now? Are they gonna replace i3s as the budget intel CPU option? Why whould you ever want an i3 now oO Actually the first i've heard of it, that's interesting! Pentiums don't support avx, avx2, fma3 (which affect performance in certian workloads) or a couple of other obscure instruction sets but that price gap is extreme | ||
|
Craton
United States17303 Posts
On January 07 2017 02:07 bluegarfield wrote: So my friend got a GTX 750 in his PC, and recently it starts throwing "display driver stopped responding" continuously despite reinstall to latest drivers on windows 8.1. Is it a sign that the GPU is gonna die soon? Didn't have time to ask him to install monitor software to check for temp yet, but even browsing facebook is throwing that error, so I doubt it's due to temp or dust. any opinions? Not necessarily hardware related. I'd start with the normal steps. Boot into safe mode and run the driver cleaner tool and then reinstall the driver. Could also be windows update related, so I'd see if any updates were installed around the time this started occurring and probably make sure to update everything if it was. If it hasn't been too long you could also try rolling back to a restore point, but I haven't had much success with them, especially if any length of time has gone by. | ||
|
bluegarfield
Singapore1128 Posts
On January 07 2017 07:24 Craton wrote: Not necessarily hardware related. I'd start with the normal steps. Boot into safe mode and run the driver cleaner tool and then reinstall the driver. Could also be windows update related, so I'd see if any updates were installed around the time this started occurring and probably make sure to update everything if it was. If it hasn't been too long you could also try rolling back to a restore point, but I haven't had much success with them, especially if any length of time has gone by. Thanks Craton. Guess I gonna have to visit him some time to try those steps out. Any recommended driver cleaner tool? | ||
| ||
