6600k/6700k (Skylake) or wait for Kaby Lake?

[zJordan]

So I want to get an ASUS Z170 Pro Gaming with an i5-6600k or an 6700k, but I don't really want to wait for Kaby Lake, I will be buying it in October, is it worth waiting until Q1 2017?

[SLAYR]

Not really, there will only be about a 10% improvement, and less if you get a good overclocking chip.

[Fungal]

I'd wait if i were you because they're gonna be priced the same with about 10% better performance so I personally would

[Beeeyeee]

Kaby Lake desktop CPU's are going to come out a LONG time after the mobile ones, so definitely get a 6700k now:)

[Beeeyeee]

Just now, Beeeyeee said:

Kaby Lake desktop CPU's are going to come out a LONG time after the mobile ones, so definitely get a 6700k now:)

if not they're supposed to use the same chipsetet so you can just pop a new one in there when they release:)

[zJordan]

Just now, Beeeyeee said:

if not they're supposed to use the same chipsetet so you can just pop a new one in there when they release:)

Well they are using the same socket (LGA 1151) but the chipset will change to the 200 series (likely 270) so a BIOS update is speculated to arrive on Z170 boards to offer support.

[MageTank]

I swear, I wish I knew where this 10% performance nonsense is coming from. It won't be 10% more performance. IPC is not going to change at all, not even 1%. There will be a 7% difference in clock speeds, but for overclockers, that won't even matter in the slightest. They will still land exactly where current Intel CPU's do when it comes to thermal limitations and max clock speeds, with the best of the best topping out at 5ghz delidded, and average topping out at 4.7ish. The same as it was back on Skylake, Haswell, Ivy, Sandy, etc. 

 

The only saving grace Kaby Lake has over Skylake, is the new fin design which may improve voltage tolerance. Will this impact overclocking? I personally do not think so. It might help slow thermal runaway down (the rate of degradation where heat causes power consumption to rise, which causes more heat, which yet again increases power consumption). Thermal threshold overall should remain exactly the same.

 

Those "12% improved productivity" numbers come from a random Intel slide, and are done comparing mobile SKU's, not the desktop SKU's. Until we get our hands on these CPU's, let's not throw out wild claims like 10% increased performance. Especially when the overall architecture remains mostly unchanged. 

[theTak]

There will always be something newer, faster, and better coming out. You have to just jump in at some point.

 

I just built a 6700k system from the ground up, and don't regret it in the least. There are a lot of good options out, the 'early adopter' kinks are worked out on the z170, and it is super capable hardware that will give you a lot of good service, especially if you over clock.

 

If you are building to have a functional computer that is a marked upgrade from you existing build, go for it. If you just want to upgrade for the sake.of upgrading and having the newest hot thing, wait a month. Either way is fine as long as you're having fun and the bills are still paid

[zJordan]

On 08/09/2016 at 7:39 PM, MageTank said:

I swear, I wish I knew where this 10% performance nonsense is coming from. It won't be 10% more performance. IPC is not going to change at all, not even 1%. There will be a 7% difference in clock speeds, but for overclockers, that won't even matter in the slightest. They will still land exactly where current Intel CPU's do when it comes to thermal limitations and max clock speeds, with the best of the best topping out at 5ghz delidded, and average topping out at 4.7ish. The same as it was back on Skylake, Haswell, Ivy, Sandy, etc. 

 

The only saving grace Kaby Lake has over Skylake, is the new fin design which may improve voltage tolerance. Will this impact overclocking? I personally do not think so. It might help slow thermal runaway down (the rate of degradation where heat causes power consumption to rise, which causes more heat, which yet again increases power consumption). Thermal threshold overall should remain exactly the same.

 

Those "12% improved productivity" numbers come from a random Intel slide, and are done comparing mobile SKU's, not the desktop SKU's. Until we get our hands on these CPU's, let's not throw out wild claims like 10% increased performance. Especially when the overall architecture remains mostly unchanged. 

Thanks, sorry for the bump and long response but this is what I figured, I was afraid to go Skylake just in case there really was a 10% IPC increase over Skylake (which for a Architecture which isn't even a die shrink confused me quite a bit)

 

10% is massive compared to what Intel have pushed out the past few years, so I doubted it quite a bit.

 

Suppose I will just go Skylake now then.

[Nena Trinity]

If you have a decent system now you can wait for Kaby and Zen!