Poll: Are Skylake CPUs tempting you to upgrade?

It's been almost two weeks since Intel's Skylake enthusiast CPUs hit the market. We know how they perform, and we have a good idea of what the accompanying Z170 chipset and motherboards have to offer. We're sure we're not the only ones wondering whether the combo of a new CPU and chipset are tempting enough for those with older systems to consider an upgrade, so it's time for a new poll. Tell us what you think using the choices below, or elaborate in the comments.

Comments closed
    • Chrispy_
    • 4 years ago

    So, Ivy Bridge came along three generations ago and it comes with:

    PCIe 3.0
    USB 3.0 native
    SATA3
    M.2
    mainstream UEFI support
    cheap, dual-channel DDR3 up to 32GB
    NVMe support

    Skylake, with all it’s shiny goodness seems to offer

    Uh, still PCIe 3.0
    USB 3.1, which nobody uses yet and is a mishmash of confusion.
    SATA3 still, and SATAExpress which is stillborn, it would seem….
    since M.2 seems to have won the war
    expensive DDR4, or cheap DDR3, still only dual-channel.
    Uh, NVMe support again.

    So, unless you’re coming from something close to a decade old, like Core2, you’re basically experiencing a huge, flaming hole in your wallet for what realistically amounts to no tangible improvement on the platform side of things, and incrimental, yawnworthy improvements to performance outside of some specific workloads.

    Throw the US availability of any models except the K-series into the mix and you’re comparing them to ‘vintage’ K chips that clock higher and more easily along with a whole world of [i<]meh[/i<]. [b<]What we need is competition from AMD.[/b<]

    • ronch
    • 4 years ago

    Well, if the world’s gonna end this year then yeah, I’ll smash my piggy bank for money to buy a 6700K, a Z170 mobo, 16 gigs of DDR4, and maybe a GTX 970. Last chance to get that warm, wonderful feeling.

      • Milo Burke
      • 4 years ago

      You’ll get warmer feelings with Bulldozer and a reference 290x.

    • Prestige Worldwide
    • 4 years ago

    Really no need to upgrade from my X79 Sandy Bridge-E system. Have not felt CPU bound in any game in recent memory. Will keep upgrading my GPU every year or two but I will be good with this system at 4.4 GHz for years to come.

    • moose17145
    • 4 years ago

    Think ima hold off for Skylake-E… or whatever AMD has out at the time if it is better. Unlikely, but they have pulled rabits out of their @$$es before…

    • marraco
    • 4 years ago

    No choice is right. Skylake doesn’t looks good.

    My choice is not upgrading. I’m not even tempted.

    If I will spend the money needed to upgrade, I need real improvement in performance, and skylake doesn’t deliver a t all.

    Also, it forces to upgrade not only the processor, but also the mother and memory.

    Skylake is not even cheap, and when all the other components are added to the price, it turns really expensive, for no gain in performance.

    • UberGerbil
    • 4 years ago

    Skylake is tempting me to build an HTPC. A Broadwell 5775C-based HTPC.

    • MarkD
    • 4 years ago

    My Core (1?) 9550 is still working.

    • internetsandman
    • 4 years ago

    I built my current sandy bridge system over five years ago and in that time I’ve only upgraded it twice; once for a GTX 680 and again for a larger SSD. I’m in the annoying situation that nothing I do is really pushing my hardware at all, but I still really wanna upgrade to the latest and greatest

      • ludi
      • 4 years ago

      That describes a lot of us, actually. Almost four years for me but haven’t even done the video card upgrade I thought I would have done by now. Sandy Bridge is still a “modern” platform.

        • UberGerbil
        • 4 years ago

        My daily driver is still a 2500K (which I got for ~$180 on NCIX.COM’s “coming to America” special sale) which I don’t even bother overclocking… or using with a GPU.

          • moose17145
          • 4 years ago

          Mine is still a I7-920… and I still cannot find a valid reason to upgrade it… it still does everything I need with relative ease.

          I did make a few upgrades though. This machine is pretty much at it’s limit for being able to be upgraded though I would say.

          Upgraded to a R9 290
          Upped the PSU from a 600Watt 80 Plus unit to a 1KW 80 Gold unit
          Upped the Ram from 6GB to 24GB
          Moved the OS drive to a 500GB Samsung SSD
          Added 6 3TB WD Reds into a massive Raid 5
          Added a USB 3.0 card
          Moved the guts into a Corsair Obsidian 900D case
          replaced the PCI X-Fi XtremeMusic with a PCI-E Asus Xonar DX

          Really I guess all I would NEED to have a “new” system at this point would be mobo, cpu, and ram… everything else in it is still relevant / up to date.

          That is how I tend to upgrade though… I upgrade everything I can, then replace the core components and recycle as much as I can from the previous build that is still relevant. Pretty sure I do not save money doing that way… but it also makes it so that I do not have one massive expense by doing a build all at once.

            • qasdfdsaq
            • 4 years ago

            That was my system a year ago. I wouldn’t say it’s at the limit – I swapped my i7 920 (4-core, OC at 4.0) to a i7 980x (W3680) 6-core, OC to 4.4 for £100. Aside from that you could also double the RAM but ultimately you’re close.

            One of the biggest benefits I saw moving to Skylake wasn’t pure CPU power (it was unchanged) but really everything else in the platform: PCIe 3.0 instead of PCIe 2.0 + 1.1. Also got to ditch a bunch of add-in cards: On-board sound is decent nowadays. Onboard SATA 6G means I could ditch the SATA card. Onboard USB 3.1 means I could ditch the USB 3 card. Onboard video means I could ditch the second graphics card (for outputs).

      • ronch
      • 4 years ago

      How could your Sandy Bridge be more than 5 years old? Sandy came out in January of 2011, so the oldest Sandy chips are now 4 years and 7 months.

    • bhtooefr
    • 4 years ago

    I’m tempted by Skylake-H, my MacBook Pro is into the beginning of my planned (3-5 year) replacement window. Although, really, I’m not as tempted by the faster CPU as I am the faster GPUs that would come along with such an upgrade. (Oh, and getting a pointing stick. I’m sick of trackpads, and the Mac’s trackpad is one of the worst I’ve used in Windows. Decent in OS X, but OS X is terrible and (obviously) sucks for gaming, which I’m doing more of lately.)

    The other way I’ve thought of going is a desktop build around a Skylake, because the graphics options are better there, but I really don’t like sitting at desks, and such a build would basically end up just being a gaming machine.

      • windwalker
      • 4 years ago

      How do you play PC games without sitting at a desk?

    • cldmstrsn
    • 4 years ago

    Not even a little bit.

    • Shinare
    • 4 years ago

    Is it bad that I still think my 3.0GHz E6850 Conroe based Core 2 Duo setup is “good enough”?

      • southrncomfortjm
      • 4 years ago

      Nope, as long as you are getting the performance you want that’s all that matters. Upgrades should really only happen when you can’t do what you want to do with your machine – like hitting the frame rates (or latencies to speak in Tech Report terminology) you want, or the resolution, etc, in terms of gaming.

    • HisDivineOrder
    • 4 years ago

    I was forced to choose “Skylake looks good, but I’m not upgrading anytime soon.” That said, I don’t think Skylake looks good. I’m not about Broadwell. And I’m not leaning toward AMD without a LOT more evidence they’ve given up their hyperbolic ways.

    • Freon
    • 4 years ago

    I’ve been holding out for Skylake mostly for arbitrary reasons knowing every generation the last few is really incremental at best. But now that it is here I’m in no rush. Still looking over motherboards and RAM. Low stocks aren’t increasing my urgency either.

    I’m even contemplating just waiting out Broadwell-E or Skylake-E since I have some other non-gaming and non-typical justifications for wanting the more powerful workstation, and I know whatever I get will likely last 5+ years which makes the high cost not look so bad.

      • HisDivineOrder
      • 4 years ago

      If I were upgrading today, I’d be tempted to go with the 5820K instead of a 6700K. Not sure, though, what Broadwell-E will add to the picture in terms of Haswell-E and improvements over it. Most of what Broadwell has going for it is the ESRAM and its iGPU, neither of which will be on Broadwell-E.

        • mikepers
        • 4 years ago

        Yep, same here, 5820K looks good. Looks like one of the less expensive ways to get a couple more physical cores. Also, there’s a 5% off deal over at Newegg today & tomorrow. (so about $370 after discount.)

    • Milo Burke
    • 4 years ago

    If the money works out, I’ll be interested in a Skylake-E system. But nothing out right now.

    • ColeLT1
    • 4 years ago

    I’ve ordered the “ASUS Z170 PRO GAMING” board (all caps their emphases, not mine) [url<]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813132567[/url<] and G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR4 3000 (the fastest CAS15 I could find at a reasonable price) [url<]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231897[/url<] Also ordered a EK Supremacy Evo with the naked mounting kit, going to delid and run no cap. Still have not seen a 6700k on newegg/amazon yet, playing the waiting game. I've got 2 friends interested in buying my 4970k/z97/RAM/gtx970 combo, or to ebay they go.

      • ronch
      • 4 years ago

      Is SSK working for Asus now?

      • southrncomfortjm
      • 4 years ago

      What GPU you going to pair all that with?

        • ColeLT1
        • 4 years ago

        16nm nvidia or amd sometime in 2016.

        Don’t laugh, but 2xGTX460s for now. I have 3 of them now just sitting around from upgrading 2 friends both to haswell and gtx970, both were on phenom II rigs. I am about to tackle some older games (Fallout 1 and 2 are first) and I don’t need much GPU power right now.

        Pretty much all my local buddies are gamers, and are always asking for a new build or upgrades, so I end up I rebuilding my computer about once or twice a year, selling all my parts off knowing that the overclock is nice and stable. One of my employees is on a core2 duo+9800gtx-m laptop, and the other guy is on a Core2 quad + gtx260. Cash in hand gets the parts first. The only cost is time, and I enjoy it.

          • southrncomfortjm
          • 4 years ago

          Sorry, I laughed. Can we still be friends? 🙂

          Wish I had more gamer buds around.

    • Ninjitsu
    • 4 years ago

    Intel should get into the discrete GPU business. Make it a yearly cadence on the GPU side and mobile CPU side, but give a two year gap on the desktop side (so new arch + new process).

    At least GPUs will scale better. Once the new APIs come into play and the PC gaming community upgrades to Sandy Bridge or newer, their sales may take a hit on the desktop.

    If their GPUs can compete with Nvidia, they can get a new revenue stream and Nvidia gets a company that can suitably rival both their engineering talent and financial health.

      • brucethemoose
      • 4 years ago

      They tried. It didn’t really work out, and the Xeon Phi is what they managed to salvage.

        • crsh1976
        • 4 years ago

        Was this Larrabee?

          • Ninjitsu
          • 4 years ago

          Yeah.

        • Ninjitsu
        • 4 years ago

        Yeah, but they [i<]have[/i<] made a GPU arch that works - they just have to scale it. AMD did the exact opposite after all - took GCN and put it into their APUs.

    • stdRaichu
    • 4 years ago

    I upgraded a few months ago from a 2600K to a Xeon E5-1650v3… so nope. Basically I figured that skylake and broadwell wouldn’t be that much cop in terms of IPC improvements and I’d be better off going fox six cores at a reasonable price given that the only thing I’m hamstrung on CPU for is video encoding. The speed gains on most single threaded tasks from my sandy to my haswell-E is about 10-15% improvement, so barely worth the upgrade in that regard.

    The broadwell performance has come out of nowhere though. I’ve got a linux HTPC gone into service with an old IVB [url=http://ark.intel.com/products/65703/Intel-Core-i5-3470T-Processor-3M-Cache-up-to-3_60-GHz<]i5 3470T[/url<] and I'm already tempted to replace it with the i5 5675C. Their graphics performance in linux is pretty damned spectacular given the TDP plus peace of mind of not having to deal with binary blobs or even a discrete graphics card. But can't really justify the expense.

    • southrncomfortjm
    • 4 years ago

    Tempted to upgrade? Pretty much always. But then the rational part of me takes over and reminds me that none of the games I’m playing tax my system at 1080p60fps. Not even close.

    What surprises me about this poll are all the votes for Zen. I’d love to see AMD come charging back, but does anyone really expect them to be competitive with Skylake? Or even Ivy Bridge?

      • Demetri
      • 4 years ago

      No one expects Zen to beat Skylake in pure performance. The hope is that it could be something like Ivy or Haswell performance at a much lower price than a comparable Sky/Kabylake processor.

        • southrncomfortjm
        • 4 years ago

        Well, good. I thought people were going crazy for a moment.

      • ronch
      • 4 years ago

      I’m cautiously optimistic. While it may not beat Skylake, it may still present a good upgrade over my current CPU, which is an 8350. In this case I can at least expect them to be priced below Intel. I’m not hoping for this scenario but hey, if it becomes reality, I might as well buy some chips from AMD before they close shop, right?

      Also, with Barcelona, AMD became too lazy, confident, and cocky due to the success of K8, and with Bulldozer, they consciously avoided going toe-to-toe with Intel and only wanted to ‘hold the line’. They consciously wanted to slow down. Shoot for the stars and you just might hit the moon, shoot for the moon and you just might hit the ceiling. In BD’s case, they merely shot for the ceiling, so, they fell flat on the floor. With Zen, I think they’re shooting for the next galaxy so maybe they’ll hit the moon.

        • southrncomfortjm
        • 4 years ago

        Cautious optimism I can totally understand. I can also totally understand an overwhelming desire for AMD to hit the moon, stars or galaxy.

        It really is a shame that the design and manufacturing of the two biggest parts for a PC, the CPU and GPU, are both basically controlled by one company each, and the only competitor in each case is an overwhelmed AMD.

      • marraco
      • 4 years ago

      Voting for Zen is the closest thing to voting for “no to skylake”, since THERE IS NO CHOICE FOR THAT IN THE POLL.

    • Prestige Worldwide
    • 4 years ago

    As a SB-E user, nope.

    • anotherengineer
    • 4 years ago

    Won’t bother either, my old AMD 955 BE still exceed my needs…………..for now, and just turned 6 years old!!

    I don’t think we will ever see gains like we did with the A64 over pentium or C2D over A64 again. For most users with a quad-core cpu 6 years and newer, cpu upgrades are diminishing returns and that ‘upgrade’ money would be better used for a good SSD, monitor, keyboard, mouse, etc.

    Keyboard and monitor are next on my list, followed perhaps by an OS and gpu upgrade.

    • SuperSpy
    • 4 years ago

    Meh. I built a 4790k/Z97-A box a few months ago, and am glad I did. Skylake may be nice but it’s not that nice, and I didn’t have to re-buy 32 GB of RAM.

    • Kurotetsu
    • 4 years ago

    I got a 2nd hand Core i5-3570K about a month ago today, as an upgrade from my Core i3-2120. I still haven’t installed it yet.

      • southrncomfortjm
      • 4 years ago

      I’ve been running a 3750K since March 2013 and it is still going strong. Enjoy it.

    • gmskking
    • 4 years ago

    Still loving my 2600k. The next upgrade for me would be video card if any.

    • WasabiVengeance
    • 4 years ago

    I’m being strongly tempted, but really only because I’m running a first gen i3, and not because of anything special about skylake.

    • deinabog
    • 4 years ago

    Aside from it being near impossible to get a Core i7 6700K processor I’m good with my current builds.

    • crsh1976
    • 4 years ago

    The only reason I will eventually build a Skylake rig is because I literally have no rig right now (aside from a work-issued laptop), so Skylake coming out is as good as any to build a new one. I’m not going for the K chips tho, I’ll wait for the mainstream models (which are getting announced today at IDF?).

    • hansmuff
    • 4 years ago

    I slapped a refurb evga 970 for $250 into my 2600k system and had a better upgrade for 1/3 of the price than a board/cpu/memory upgrade to Skylake would have given me.

    It is a really nice chip, I wish I had one, but I can’t justify it at all.

    • Laykun
    • 4 years ago

    Forced to choose the option “Skylake looks good, but I’m not upgrading anytime soon”. I don’t think Skylake “looks good” in such that it doesn’t live up to what I think “good” should be in 2015. Certainly it’s the BEST, but that’s not saying a lot.

    While DX12 certainly improves the multi-threaded aspects of command serialisation for the GPU (and makes my 980X’s life even longer) it still doesn’t solve the other parts in the game engine pipeline where single core performance is a blocker, and I’m just so underwhelmed by Skylake that it just doesn’t seem worth while. Unless my motherboard/CPU simply stop working then I see no real reason to move on.

      • sweatshopking
      • 4 years ago

      yeah, with you there. A “skylake doesn’t need to really exist at this stage” option wasn’t there. not really that much faster than devils canyon which was like 2 launches ago.

    • Chrispy_
    • 4 years ago

    There needs to be a 7th option:

    [quote<]What's the point? I already have an Intel chip from this decade[/quote<]

      • brucethemoose
      • 4 years ago

      ^

      I feel no need to upgrade for a tiny boost, and I don’t think Zen will change that.

        • Chrispy_
        • 4 years ago

        Heh, yeah.

        If Zen is the promised 40% better IPC, that’ll put AMD at Sandy Bridge levels of IPC, just in time for 2011!

      • derFunkenstein
      • 4 years ago

      I look at it as how spoiled we have been, going back to Sandy Bridge.

    • RuiFig
    • 4 years ago

    I think I’ll stick with my overclocked 5960x for a while, although I’m quite curious how Zen will work out.
    Would love to see some competitive high-performance CPUs from AMD, for a change. 🙁

      • sweatshopking
      • 4 years ago

      it’ll suck.

        • ronch
        • 4 years ago

        I bet you’d make a great weather forecaster. /s

          • sweatshopking
          • 4 years ago

          Yeah. my prediction will too accurate for weather.

          • maxxcool
          • 4 years ago

          “IT’S GONNA’ RAIN!”

            • cmrcmk
            • 4 years ago

            Thank you, Ollie.

      • maxxcool
      • 4 years ago

      It will likely have parity with Ivy Bridge. However unless its 70$ cheaper most people will ignore it. Especially small biz and medium biz.

    • Zizy
    • 4 years ago

    I will wait for Zen. And keep waiting afterwards.

      • ronch
      • 4 years ago

      So um, exactly what are you waiting for then? 🙂

    • Flapdrol
    • 4 years ago

    OC skylake is only 25% faster than OC sandy bridge. Where’s the “another disappointing cpu” option?

    Compared to sandy bridge performance barely went up, and price/performance went down.

    • yogibbear
    • 4 years ago

    Current system: i7 4770K. So no. Skylake still looks awesome as always though.

      • Zarf
      • 4 years ago

      I’m in about the same boat. I’ve got a 4970K at 4.7 GHz, and I feel like we’ve hit a wall. We want faster single-threaded operations, and there’s really no way to see that without faster clocks. Architecture improvements have been helping, but very slowly. I’d love to see a modern i7 paired against a Nehalem, running at the same clock speed in a thorough benchmark. I’ll bet the single-threaded difference isn’t staggering.

      I’m afraid I won’t have reason to upgrade until we start seeing exotic materials like graphene and it’s ilk in processors. Which means I will be able to upgrade in…

      2023. [i<]OUCH[/i<].

        • southrncomfortjm
        • 4 years ago

        Is there anything the lack of upgrades in per thread performance is really holding you back from doing? I’m all about more power, but I know that I don’t need anything more than what I have at the moment, but I’m curious what other people really need the extra performance for.

        Would a 20-30% gain in per thread performance dramatically increase your productivity? I’m really just curious since my PC usage is mostly limited to gaming, web surfing and word processing.

          • Zarf
          • 4 years ago

          In my mind, single-threaded performance is where the real meat of the upgrade needs to be.

          I do video editing and gaming on my computer. In video editing, my overclock reduced render times a respectable amount. Increasing the thread count from 8 to 12 would have produced a similar result.

          However, those 12-threaded chips can’t be as easily overclocked. Disabling hyperthreading doesn’t greatly effect my FPS in games, and it doesn’t increase my overclocking headroom noticeably. I keep it on, since it does greatly reduce video render times.

          Overclocking gave me a big boost in Skyrim (The only game I did actual before-and-after benchmarks on). I was getting ~35-40 FPS outside in hectic situations (Lots of mods), or looking at the temple in Markarth. After the overclock, I was getting ~45-50 FPS in the same situations, and adding a second GPU put me at a pretty consistent 60 FPS.

          Getting 60 FPS in Skyrim isn’t super important to me (Or at least it wasn’t before I experienced it), but the overclock definitely added headroom for more mods, giving me functionality changes that improved the overall experience of the game.

          In Team Fortress 2, I went from ~200 FPS to ~240 FPS, the second GPU boosted me to ~450 FPS. I still can’t hit a dang thing.

            • southrncomfortjm
            • 4 years ago

            > In Team Fortress 2, I went from ~200 FPS to ~240 FPS, the second GPU boosted me to ~450 FPS. I still can’t hit a dang thing.

            I’m with you on that. I gave up on FPS games.

            Seems to me that if adding another GPU gives you way more frames, then you aren’t CPU bound.

            Can’t argue with the productivity gains though.

            • Ninjitsu
            • 4 years ago

            [quote<] However, those 12-threaded chips can't be as easily overclocked. [/quote<] Haswell-E hits 4.5 GHz easily...

            • Zarf
            • 4 years ago

            Yeah, and 4790Ks hit 5 GHz not infrequently. I’m just not a good overclocker. I tried overclocking a 5830K once, and couldn’t get it stable above 4 GHz.

            • Ninjitsu
            • 4 years ago

            Actually, Haswell ran into a hard limit at around 4.7 GHz. I don’t think I remember any review site that managed greater than 4.7 GHz on Haswell with acceptable stability and voltage.

            I [i<]have[/i<] however read quite a few articles with Haswell-E at 4.3+ GHz. Of course, chips vary, as in your case - overclocking isn't an exact science after all!

      • JustAnEngineer
      • 4 years ago

      Current system: Core i7-4770K. So yes, I’m tempted to upgrade. Skylake looks awesome. Let’s see if we get some awesome micro-ATX Z170 motherboards for less than the price of the [url=http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813132569<]Maximus VIII Gene[/url<].

    • James296
    • 4 years ago

    meh, I just upgraded to 4790k and Z97 a week before Skylake came out so no. not to mention the only reason why I upgraded was my previous mobo (asus 990FX crosshair V-z) developed a corrupted bios chip and I wasn’t willing to go through ASUS’ RMA process.

    Plus I’m pretty happy with my current setup, although I still have the itch to make a Mighty Mouse build (X99 and Asrock mini ITX board :3 )

    • StefanJanoski
    • 4 years ago

    i5-2500K here, and really the only CPU intensive thing I do is gaming. From the many benchmarks published so far, it seems like in most cases even at 1080p there’s not much of a performance jump when going to Skylake. GTA V seems to be the one exception, and more performance there would be nice, but it’s not worth the cost.

    I’m thinking I wait to do a massive upgrade: significantly increased CPU and memory performance, a higher resolution, higher (variable) refresh rate monitor and of course a beefy GPU. Maybe even an SSD-only system with post-SATA interfaces.

    But right now, while Skylake looks good, I don’t see myself upgrading until at least Kaby Lake. Happy to wait and see what that brings.

    • Major-Failure
    • 4 years ago

    My 80286 is working fine for me. No need to upgrade.

      • ronch
      • 4 years ago

      Would you like a copy of Space Quest III?

    • SnowboardingTobi
    • 4 years ago

    It’s more like my 8 year old computer is making me want a new computer
    *sad panda*

    • Prototyped
    • 4 years ago

    I upgraded to a (used) Phenom II X6 1055T three years ago (to replace a Phenom II X2 550 from 2009). I haven’t felt the need to upgrade to a newer CPU yet. Perhaps because I’m not a gamer.

    Laptop-wise I just bought myself a (used) ThinkPad T430 equipped with Ivy Bridge in February (to replace a used T61 I bought towards the tail end of 2009). Not planning to replace it any time soon.

    The biggest upgrades I’ve made in recent years are (SATA) SSD storage.

      • crabjokeman
      • 4 years ago

      Yeah, it’s really nice to not play (demanding) games.
      I have a Phenom II X3 and the only time I feel that an upgrade would be nice is when I’m encoding HEVC.

    • jackbomb
    • 4 years ago

    Ivy Bridge user here – 4930k at 4.3GHz. I rarely see CPU usage in the double digits, so no, I won’t be “upgrading” to Skylake. I didn’t even really [i<]need[/i<] to upgrade from my Q6600 @ 3GHz, but a guy's gotta have some fun once in a while.

    • Klimax
    • 4 years ago

    Missing option: Waiting for Skylake-E…
    Even 5-10% improvement means hours saved on x264 encoding. And there are games which are terminally CPU bound. X3: Reunion despite being old game has still brutal performance regressions when fighting. (Just its benchmark will show it in Scene 2 Fight)

    And I did forget about compiling C++ code…

    • Jigar
    • 4 years ago

    As a Haswell CPU owner – I am not interested in upgrading to Skylake, also it didn’t impress me.

      • ronch
      • 4 years ago

      Wait… You are not Krogoth! How dare you say you are not impressed!!?!

        • Jigar
        • 4 years ago

        Sorry… 🙁

    • joselillo_25
    • 4 years ago

    For my workload and some light gaming, the current multiprocessor improves in win 10 an the edge browser and the use of gpu to accelerate tasks in a lot of apps and internet browsers I will stick with my venerable q6600go until the mobo says good bye.

    is underclocked to 1.6ghz and I barely see 100% CPU use.

    • ZGradt
    • 4 years ago

    And what’s the deal with the clock speed? I thought that was the whole reason for die shrinks! It seems like Intel just went from 22 nm to 14 nm so they could get more chips per wafer. I was dreaming of a 5 -6 Ghz Skylake.

      • ronch
      • 4 years ago

      More like the shrink allowed them to put in more GPU resources without going past 200mm^2.

      • Klimax
      • 4 years ago

      Physics/reality is against that.

      • crabjokeman
      • 4 years ago

      Intel shouldn’t even promise something like that after 10 GHz NetBurst projections made them look the fool.

        • Klimax
        • 4 years ago

        That’s why they never again made such promise.

        • ZGradt
        • 4 years ago

        Hah. Netburst. High clockspeeds and low efficiency. I think they’ve swung too far in the opposite direction.

      • UberGerbil
      • 4 years ago

      Did you fall asleep in the early oughts and just wake up? Die shrinks stopped enabling higher clockspeeds about a decade ago.

      (Actually, the right way to put that is that leakage in the transistor libraries optimized for high frequency went non-linear back then, and Intel has taken heroic measures with each shrink to just maintain the frequency ceilings they were already hitting).

    • ZGradt
    • 4 years ago

    I’ll stick to my Ivy Bridge. I might’ve been tempted by a Skylake with iris pro graphics or more than 4 cores, but I don’t see the need for another 4 core system with slightly higher IPC.

    It might’ve been different if it were a drop in replacement. Investing in a new motherboard and memory isn’t cheap! Actually, I’d probably go with a 5830K instead, or the equivalent Xeon, since I tend to turn my old desktops into servers…

    But I really don’t have a need to upgrade. My rule of thumb is to upgrade when I can get something 2x as fast as my old one for the same price. I think I’ll be waiting for a while.

    • jihadjoe
    • 4 years ago

    I dunno about Skylake, but Z170 is tempting me.

    • Rand
    • 4 years ago

    Nope. Some nice board level improvements since Z77, and the idea of an NVMe PCI-E SSD is pretty appealing but I can’t justify the cost of upgrading just for access to that since the CPU side of things is entirely forgettable.

    Already have a 3770K that runs at 4.8GHz. Skylake isn’t going to offer any significant gains on this, and what gains it might have is in the uncertain luck of overclocking.

    I’m doubtful I feel any real urge to upgrade for a couple more years.

    • SetzerG
    • 4 years ago

    I was planning on building a Skylake system this year, but now that the reviews are out, it’s actually tempting me to NOT upgrade. And I’m still running a Core 2 Quad. Skylake has me seriously contemplating holding off until Kaby Lake or Cannonlake… especially since I’m really interested in nVidia’s Pascal micro-architecture, and that doesn’t come out until next year.

    • ronch
    • 4 years ago

    Since I’m mostly playing non-demanding games from the mid 2000’s or relatively new but still undemanding games like Amnesia or those from GoG, I think my FX-8350 will do very well until my retirement many many years from now.

    • kuttan
    • 4 years ago

    I upgraded to my currently using Core i5 750 which is now more than 5 years old from a Pentium4 3Ghz machine and that upgrade was a HUGE one. So I am looking for such a performance difference to happen at least close to that compared to my current CPU vs newer CPUs for an upgrade. I used the Pentium 4 PC for 5.5 years till it become too slow for my usage pattern. But my 5 year old overclocked Core i5 750 still going pretty strong just like the days I bought it. What happened to the CPU progress these years is a big question to me.

      • ozzuneoj
      • 4 years ago

      In the span of time between P4 and first generation Core i5 we had the release of the Athlon 64, Athlon X2, Core 2 Duo, Core 2 Quad, Phenom II, DDR2 and DDR3 etc. There was some competition. After that, incremental upgrades have been all that Intel has bothered with, as the latest CPUs from AMD are still trading blows with 2nd gen Core i5 CPUs from 2011. They probably COULD push the envelope and increase performance substantially, but when there is so little reason to do so it seems more forward thinking (for them as a business) to bide their time and save the huge jumps as long as they can milk the current technology.

      And for the most part games aren’t really requiring that much more CPU power than they used to. Generally, over the past ten years a game engine that is severely CPU limited is either insanely complex or terribly inefficient. Most games are neither, so you can still get by with a 5 year old CPU.

        • Klimax
        • 4 years ago

        Nope. Intel needs market to buy their CPUs. If market doesn’t see need to upgrade then Intel doesn’t make money.

        It is precisely opposite: if they could, they would get us bigger improvements. Problem is, most of energy efficient upgrades are already gone and market for high TDP chips with mid-range price is almost nonexistent in comparison to mobile/AIO/NUC/… They’d be losing money just making masks for those chips.

        And general code is massively branchy and function calls heavy. There’s not much to get anymore… and games are mostly console bound and thus can’t load really powerful cores nor many of them.

        • Laykun
        • 4 years ago

        [quote<]And for the most part games aren't really requiring that much more CPU power than they used to. Generally, over the past ten years a game engine that is severely CPU limited is either insanely complex or terribly inefficient. Most games are neither, so you can still get by with a 5 year old CPU.[/quote<] That's because games target the lowest common denominator. If the target doesn't shift then neither will the games. If faster CPUs comes out, games will make use of them. It's financial suicide to release a game that no-one has a rig powerful enough to play.

          • kuttan
          • 4 years ago

          [quote<]That's because games target the lowest common denominator. If the target doesn't shift then neither will the games. If faster CPUs comes out, games will make use of them. It's financial suicide to release a game that no-one has a rig powerful enough to play. [/quote<] Such lowest common denominator factor were applicable to the past as well. Starting with Pentium series CPUs games showed drastic performance gains when newer, faster CPU appeared. Such gains is not happening for the last few years.

            • Laykun
            • 4 years ago

            The business of game production has pretty much completely changed since the 90’s, they’re financial products now, they don’t push the hardware envelope, they’re only concerned with what will push the most copies.

          • isotope123
          • 4 years ago

          But can it play Crysis!?!

      • qasdfdsaq
      • 4 years ago

      Progress? There’s been progress. The top end processor these days sports 18-22 cores, whereas the top-end processor when the i5 750 came out was 4 cores.

      Sure, [i<]mainstream desktops[/i<] have stuck at 4 cores, mainly because there's not much demand for more, but the difference between a 4-core and an 18-core in HPC is just as "HUGE" as between a P4 and i5. The 6700K is double the speed of your 750 at stock, and only packs 1/5 the power of the top-end chips available. I'd say the 1st gen Core i's picked up a lot of the low-hanging fruit, i.e. fixing major bottlenecks - ditching the FSB, native quad-cores, on-chip memory controller, etc. After that there hasn't been much to "fix". And even then, there's been quite a bit of progress. I just upgraded to Skylake from my X58 - there wasn't much [i<]need[/i<] per se, but a stock 6700K performs the same as my 6-core W3680 (i7 980x) overclocked to 4Ghz, which used twice the power. 50% more IPC and half the power consumption is pretty big IMO.

        • coldpower27
        • 4 years ago

        Yeah that’s one of the reasons I am moving to Skylake, better energy efficiency! i970 to i5 6500. Looking forward to it for sure. Not to mention all the new motherboard functionality.

    • Waco
    • 4 years ago

    If the 6700K was in stock, I’d probably upgrade just for the hell of it.

    My 2700K @ 4.7 GHz is still awesome, but I have the upgrade bug since I haven’t changed a thing in my rig in…a long time.

    • ronch
    • 4 years ago

    Zen? Meh. I’m waiting for Zen++++ to arrive.

    • siberx
    • 4 years ago

    I’m still running an X58 system that I built back in 2008 (7 years!) although to be fair I did upgrade the processor a year ago from the i7 920 I bought it with to a Westmere X5670 server pull for a couple more cores and an overclock bump. Cost me the princely sum of $140, and it alleviated any mild concerns about the performance of the system for at least a couple more years.

    CPUs don’t improve quite as quickly any more these days…

      • jihadjoe
      • 4 years ago

      That’s because all of the tricks that give good performance bumps have pretty much been figured out.

    • TopHatKiller
    • 4 years ago

    There is no greater thing for a man to do:-
    then upgrade to Skylark entire.
    I have my Life, useless and spent,
    on foolish meanderings of work,
    the empty breeding of children,
    the tender touch of my family dear;-

    When all it takes,
    to be Beloved and True,
    is a 6700…
    then my life would be ended well,
    all pains and worries,
    finished and so still.

      • TopHatKiller
      • 4 years ago

      Policies at TR have buggered the enjambement… life, sometimes is just nor fair.

      • chuckula
      • 4 years ago

      Ooh it’s open-mic poetry night!

      Roses Are Red,
      Violets are Blue,
      THK don’t think it be like it is….
      BUT IT DO!

        • TopHatKiller
        • 4 years ago

        That doesn’t scan. Nor make much sense. And… I spent over ten minutes writing that, you utter utter, bastard.

        • ronch
        • 4 years ago

        <Excitedly raises hands>

        Ooh, me, me, me!!!

        If you will upgrade
        Will it be Skylake or Zen?
        Watcha think, Krogoth?

        • f0d
        • 4 years ago

        zen will be krogoth strong
        because amd can do no wrong
        amd fans will says its great
        even though it came too late
        the 40% ipc increase will be lies
        while the kaby lake flies
        zens refresh will do the trick
        and will beat intels tick
        in 2020 they will start anew
        yet another design hopefully will do

        yeah a bit of negativity in there but meh i wrote in 2 minutes for fun
        i actually hope zen does well though

        • Shobai
        • 4 years ago

        Said TechReport lurker Shobai:
        “Which CPU should I buy?
        Skylake is quite nice,
        But at that “sky high” price,
        Won’t my 1090T get by?”

        [please note, price ‘jab’ for poetic effect only]

          • TopHatKiller
          • 4 years ago

          There is every shame in greeting card verse…and worse apologising for it.
          Sigh… “Don’t hate me! Don’t! Don’t downvote me, don’t!! Don’t! Please!!!!!!”
          …[sigh]… i do not, and will not, give a flying crap at a weirdly rectangular shaped skylark imprint – if you do.

      • TopHatKiller
      • 4 years ago

      I officially hate myself for doing that.

      • rootheday3
      • 4 years ago

      <to the tune of Simple Minds “Don’t you forget about me”, as sung by Skylake >

      Won’t you upgrade to me?
      New chipset and better IPC..
      Tell me you’re CPU bound
      and your mobo caps make funny sounds

      Will you overclock me?
      or run me stock and undervolt me?
      Ram price falling, ram price falling
      Down, down, down

      You say you like your Sandy
      she’s pretty swell; so is Ivy
      Haswell’s still so beefy
      and what’s up with that Broadwell C?

      Hey, hey, …

      How ’bout new iGP
      DX12 features maxed out
      new codecs like HEVC
      gaming duel against Kaveri

      Don’t you feel that need
      to upgrade for maximum speed?
      Check for inventory
      refresh browser, refresh browser..

        • TopHatKiller
        • 4 years ago

        Tar. I now hate myself even more. And I wasn’t sure that was even possible.

    • DancinJack
    • 4 years ago

    I can NOT believe more people are waiting for Zen than are willing to get a Broadwell with edRAM. Ya’ll out your damn minds.

      • TopHatKiller
      • 4 years ago

      Why? How fast and good is Zen?…. Do you know?
      According to some rumours Zen will kill all intel products, according to others’ it has no chance….. If you don’t need to upgrade now, waiting to see what actually happens hardly seems a bad attitude to take.

        • Waco
        • 4 years ago

        AMD is promising 40% IPC increase. That puts them…at Sandy Bridge.

        That’s assuming AMD actually hits an IPC goal for once, which they haven’t done since…the Athlon 64.

        Color me skeptical.

          • Chrispy_
          • 4 years ago

          I used all the crayola in the pack and it was a new pack too, all eight colours worn down to little crayon stubs.

          I’d love to see AMD compete again, but their execution appears to be somewhere between bad and nonexistant if you look back as far as far as 2003.

      • ronch
      • 4 years ago

      That’s because according to AMD Zen’s gonna be super awesome! They never miss the Mark and they always keep their PowerPoint promises, ya know.

      • Pancake
      • 4 years ago

      I voted for that option not because I particularly care about Zen but because there wasn’t a plain “meh” comment. Just meh. Meh.

    • tipoo
    • 4 years ago

    So, what do you guys think of Skylake maybe having inverse hyperthreading? I don’t think I believe it, I think someone just got confused at seeing something that worked with turbo boost really well, maybe AVX-512 uses more power than normal turbo boost stuff….But here it is, anyways.

    [url<]https://techreport.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=116173[/url<]

    • odizzido
    • 4 years ago

    skylake is okayish…..my i5 750 is a little slow and I wouldn’t mind upgrading but considering everything I do is still very usable it’s simply not worth the cost. I have been checking if there have been any sales that looked good for haswell/broadwell but nothing so far….guess that’s what happens when the performance is so similar.

    If they were to cut the IGP and sell the processor for significantly less I’d probably bite but I guess they don’t feel the need to even really compete against their older products.

    • blastdoor
    • 4 years ago

    These poll options remind me of

    [url<]http://www.cc.com/video-clips/d5rh5f/the-colbert-report-great-president---or-greatest-president-[/url<]

    • CampinCarl
    • 4 years ago

    I’m tempted, but only because I want to downsize, and spending money on an Ivy Bridge mini ITX motherboard sounds silly.

    • BlackDove
    • 4 years ago

    After reading that Skylake is using the same cheap TIM that Ivy and Haswell do im reconsidering. Maybe Kaby Lake will fix it?

    Maybe ill just wait until Skylake Purley if there are any desktop versions. That might have XPoint anyway.

      • flip-mode
      • 4 years ago

      I’d have no problem de-lidding but I don’t overclock anymore. Back in the day I had an X2-3600, that 900 MHz brought meaningful gaynz. My old X4-955 sure could have been helped by an overclock but it was an overclocking dud. Now with an i5-4670K, I miserably leave the thing at stock speed because 99.9% of the time I’m not doing anything that needs it.

        • BlackDove
        • 4 years ago

        You shouldnt have to do something as stupid as delid a i7-6700K CPU.

          • flip-mode
          • 4 years ago

          Yes, I very much agree with you, didn’t mean to imply otherwise. Intel’s use of crappy TIM is most unimpressive, and a slap in the face to overclockers – and I used to count myself as one.

      • Krogoth
      • 4 years ago

      Actually, the problem is the IHS mounting not the TIM. There are people who just delid their Skylake chip and remount the IHS. They saw a significant drop just by doing that.

      I suspect that first-batch of Skylake chips were rushed to the market to meet “Back to School” season. Intel cut corners to meet the deadline. The next batch of Skylake chips will probably be closer to “Devil’s Canyon”.

        • Ninjitsu
        • 4 years ago

        There is a chance you’re right – especially considering they don’t have many available. I’ve never seen Intel launch processors like this. Hopefully the batch that hits shelves in September-October is the fixed one.

    • travbrad
    • 4 years ago

    Not really. If I had to build a new system right now I’d definitely go with Skylake, but it isn’t enough of a jump over my OCed 2500K to be worth spending that kind of money. The only CPU-intensive things I do are gaming and video/audio encoding.

    My video encoding (mostly just ripping blurays/DVDs to mp4 and mkv for media server) isn’t really time sensitive. I can already encode stuff much faster than I can watch it all.

    For gaming there is very little difference in performance, and my GTX660 is much more of a bottleneck than my CPU. My next couple upgrades will probably be a new GPU and high refresh rate monitor.

      • Airmantharp
      • 4 years ago

      Even with video editing (I do photography now), I’d only consider an upgrade if I were doing it professionally; and at that, I’d be going for more cores.

      Pretty much everyone that has a Sandy quad or better is in the same boat.

    • NovusBogus
    • 4 years ago

    CPU, not so much. Boards…well it’s been a long time since Z77, lots of tasty candy to be had. So I’m definitely tempted, but not so much that I’m pricing out parts. The big step backward on power consumption in exchange for minimal improvement over Haswell will probably keep me out until at least a refresh.

      • Airmantharp
      • 4 years ago

      …and here I am with a Z77 in the mail to trade out my Z68 with it’s broken UEFI!

      And there’s really almost nothing that will make that upgrade worthwhile. I would have kept the Z68 board for a few more years; none of the enhancements, all the way up to the latest Z170 jazz, will provide meaningful improvements over what I have now.

    • Ochadd
    • 4 years ago

    I don’t see the ROI coming from an overclocked i7-2600k. I’ll wait for another 15% IPC improvement, 6-8 cores, two x8 U.2 connectors on-board, and high bandwidth (lower cost) DDR4 memory.

    • uni-mitation
    • 4 years ago

    I was looking for the option of “I’ll pass, I want more COARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

      • chuckula
      • 4 years ago

      Needs moar exclamation mark.

        • TopHatKiller
        • 4 years ago

        Frankly, we all need more exclamation marks.

      • fhohj
      • 4 years ago

      oh bother.

      I may or may not have used uni-mitation’s bang trick to fool around a bit. and it being 2015, with sponsors’ ads on the same page as this tomfoolery, I may have reconsidered the comical value of it all when compared to possible ramifications for TR, and so have removed said tomfoolery which may or may not have existed.

      blah

    • christos_thski
    • 4 years ago

    What upgrade? Intel has been resting on its laurels for so long that almost 5 year old sandy bridges have nothing to envy from their newest processors, really. They’re crawling at a snail’s speed compared to what used to be the upgrade cycles in personal computing, tick tock cycles be damned. This makes AMD’s complete inability to compete even more pitiable .

    • LoneWolf15
    • 4 years ago

    Missing option:

    My Devil’s Canyon is doing me just fine.

      • itachi
      • 4 years ago

      Yea so many people went for Satan’s path (lol) you guys won’t need to upgrade in a long time ;).

        • NovusBogus
        • 4 years ago

        I would totally upgrade if the refresh is an i5-6666K Ozzieversary Edition.

      • ronch
      • 4 years ago

      Intel’s next chip ought to be called Angel’s Breath for their own redemption for giving their chip such an evil name.

      If I had a Devil’s Canyon chip though, I would’ve paired it with one of Powercolor’s Devil 13 graphics cards and barely adequate cooling to make the PC as toasty as hell just for laughs.

    • itachi
    • 4 years ago

    I’m tempted to upgrade from my FX 8320@4.65ghz, for the simple fact I get bad frame drops in some games like GTA V and stutter, also bf4@150% resolution scale with a r9 290x OC sometimes my fps drop to like slideshow, yesterday I was doing some testing and went back to 125% to reduce the min frames a bit, during explosions it’s horrible, also fire/flames and smoke is heavy, I think a Skylake would help a bunch..

    The thing is if I go Skylake I’d spend arround 600$ to upgrade.. don’t know if I really feel the need for that just for 2 games, other games run perfectly fine, but that’s the 2 game I play most lately pretty much..

    Meh FX 8000’s is indeed good multithreaded but that single threaded poor performance really lacks, if I knew it would be that bad I’d go for a used Sandy bridge platform LOL! or save a litle more and go i5 haswell, in the end it’s a good budget CPU but for high end, nono, since I plan to upgrade my screen to something like 1440p 144hz IPS Asus is about to release, and then quite logically change my GPU to a G-sync(980Ti would be tempting too..) I need max CPU power..

    And BF4 supposedly optimize for 8 threads, I won’t if Skylake beats it in minimum frames though..

      • Bensam123
      • 4 years ago

      Unpark your cores bro if you haven’t done so yet.

      Google parkcontrol.

        • Waco
        • 4 years ago

        That’s not going to help anything.

          • Bensam123
          • 4 years ago

          Sure… he can try it and figure that out for himself. I’ve heard and experienced otherwise, especially when it comes to AMD processors.

      • ozzuneoj
      • 4 years ago

      If graphical effects and transparencies are causing you performance problems, its probably your GPU, not your CPU.

      • anubis44
      • 4 years ago

      The irony is that both your FX-8320 and your R9-290X are about to get a nice boost from DX12 in Windows 10, so you might as well hang on to you CPU and GPU until you see how they perform in DX12 games.

      • baobrain
      • 4 years ago

      I haven’t had any problems with my FX-8320 and GTX 970.

      Might be a setup problem.

    • Bensam123
    • 4 years ago

    No. Skylake with the Broadwell edram cache. I assume it’s coming…?

      • willmore
      • 4 years ago

      In time for Zen with HBM2, maybe?

        • swaaye
        • 4 years ago

        David Kanter’s facial expressions when HBM was mentioned in conjunction with CPUs make me think this is less of a likelihood than you might imagine. Unless it’s there to feed yet another thrilling IGP.

      • HisDivineOrder
      • 4 years ago

      They’ll probably save THAT for their version of Devil’s Canyon…

      …in a year or so right when you need a performance upgrade. They’re following the Apple model of, “Design the perfect product, then remove a key feature or two to save for next gen just in case you got nothing else to use to make a great product then.”

        • Bensam123
        • 4 years ago

        Not sure why they’d wait that long. Broadwell came out a tiny bit before Skylake. There isn’t much room for buying it for the sake of a upgrade.

    • Andrew Lauritzen
    • 4 years ago

    Where’s the “waiting for SKL-E” option? 🙂

      • Deanjo
      • 4 years ago

      Yup

    • Billstevens
    • 4 years ago

    Where is the option for, my CPU is only 1-2 years old and because Intel has no competition its only worth upgrading every 3+ years…

      • September
      • 4 years ago

      or 5+ years…

    • Krogoth
    • 4 years ago

    I see no reason to upgrade from my current platform.

    There’s no killer mainstream application that even makes my old rig (Q6600) woefully inadequate.

      • cegras
      • 4 years ago

      Curious, what’s your usual workload, because I’m sitting on a i3-2120 and skylake looks pretty tempting.

        • Pancake
        • 4 years ago

        i3-2120 vs Q6600 would be an interesting battle. Two newer faster cores vs 4 older slower ones. It would be like a hypothetical battle between USS Texas and SMS Prinz Eugen. When a workload gets all four cores going the Q6600… POW! Right in the kisser!

          • Ninjitsu
          • 4 years ago

          Actually, the i3 wins single threaded and often multi threaded benchmarks as well.
          [url<]http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/289?vs=53[/url<]

          • kuttan
          • 4 years ago

          If you match the clock of Q6600 that of i3 2120, Q6600 will surely beat i3 2120 in Multi threaded applications for sure.

          • jessterman21
          • 4 years ago

          Here’s a similar comparison:

          [url<]http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ivy-bridge-wolfdale-yorkfield-comparison,3487.html[/url<]

      • Ochadd
      • 4 years ago

      I’m running dozens of office machines sporting a Q6600 and 128GB SSD on my network. There is a difference between those and the brand new desktop i5s but it’s not $600 difference.

      • Ninjitsu
      • 4 years ago

      Yeah but for games it’s probably high time.

      • albundy
      • 4 years ago

      Jeebuz H. Krustofski! You still on DDR-2/PCI-E 1.0/SATA II? I guess that was AMD’s main benefit on my older rig. My AM3 Phenom II 955BE CPU was able to last so long because it overlocked very well and crossed many chipsets…7xx, 8xx, and even 9xx…quite a number of generations.

    • Captain Ned
    • 4 years ago

    No.

    • TwistedKestrel
    • 4 years ago

    Was all about Skylake until I realized they’d clipped the PCIe bandwidth. Holding on until they fix that

    • Growler
    • 4 years ago

    I’ll probably upgrade when the new system guide comes out, or if there are any good sales between now and Labor Day.

    • I.S.T.
    • 4 years ago

    I need to upgrade anyway. I’ve got a weird system instability I’ve traced down to either the CPU, the RAM, or both. Frankly, I don’t trust either of them anyway.

    So, uh, I guess Skylake would be a good jumping point. Somewhat higher IPC in most tasks than a Haswell, which I have, and better clockspeeds than the particular Haswell I have(An i5 4570S, thus a somewhat low clockspeed), so I’d get a performance boost.

      • willmore
      • 4 years ago

      Did you try the usual memtest86/Prime95 testing?

      • HisDivineOrder
      • 4 years ago

      How long’s it been since you did a fresh OS installation? I find that after three or so years, I have to install Windows again.

      Fortunately, Microsoft keeps releasing new versions of Windows, which keeps me honest.

      • willmore
      • 4 years ago

      Have you tried turning it off and back on again?

    • bthylafh
    • 4 years ago

    Sticking with Sandy for the foreseeable future.

    • Ninjitsu
    • 4 years ago

    Need an option that says “waiting for proper availability” or something.

      • sleeprae
      • 4 years ago

      Agreed. My main system will remain a Haswell-E, but I wanted to buy a Skylake to play around with. That was before it became clear that the 6700k is completely unavailable.

    • Mikael33
    • 4 years ago

    Sort of, was going to anyway but I won’t be able to upgrade till tax season, last upgrade was a R9 290, from a 7850, nice upgrade but I run a phenom II 965BE C3@ 4ghz so in some games, mainly just one, SWTOR, there wasn’t much of a performance upgrade, since it’s heavily CPU bound/uses only 2 threads. Gonna need a new case and PSU too, my Nzxt H2 is cramped with my massive graphics card and temps could be better too.
    My Seasonic 620 watt PSU also is the loudest thing in my case during gaming, very aggressive fan profile, even with my bottom case filter removed, as it was constricting PSU intake airflow significantly.

    • Firestarter
    • 4 years ago

    It would not be a perceptible upgrade from my OCed i5-2500K in [i<]most[/i<] games. In some, sure, but then the question is still: Is it worth it? I'll save my pennies for what may come next, who knows what Kaby Lake will bring?

      • ImSpartacus
      • 4 years ago

      Yeah, it’s tough to justify spending a pile of cash on a new cpu-mobo-ram set when you could add that to your gpu upgrade fund and get a pretty fearsome gpu.

        • Firestarter
        • 4 years ago

        yep, i7-6700K + HD7950 vs. i5-2500K + GTX 980 Ti, that is an easy choice to make IMO when upgrading from an i5-2500K and a HD7950 as I would be. Granted a GTX 980 Ti is a bit more expensive than a i7-6700K, a Z170 motherboard and 16GB of DDR4, but it’s a small difference compared to the difference in gaming performance

        I remain undecided though as I’m still pretty happy with what I’ve got

      • NovusBogus
      • 4 years ago

      This is the way I’m leaning, also with a 2500k. DDR4 is a performance wash, USB3.1 is really nice but nothing will use it for a while, M.2 slots are neat and all but I’m rocking a terabyte Extreme Pro these days so won’t be getting a new drive for quite a while. The CPU itself isn’t stressed by anything I do even at stock clock, so while I might use it as a justification to bump up to an i7 the smart money’s on waiting for moar cowbell.

      • CB5000
      • 4 years ago

      A lot of the things I do require fast single threaded performance and with my 2500k OCed to 4.6 Ghz, its only going to be just a “bit” slower than a stock i5 skylake. On Average it looks like my over clocked sandy bridge is going to be about 3-10% slower than a stock skylake depending on the application… which i dont think is worth the upgrade cost. I think the only thing it will bring me is power savings since at 4.6 Ghz and the voltage needed to keep my i5 2500k stable, I’m pushing over 130 Watts at max usage.

        • Firestarter
        • 4 years ago

        you need to save a LOT of power to justify spending $500+ to upgrade to Skylake

          • qasdfdsaq
          • 4 years ago

          He could probably still get some resale value out of his current system. Right now DDR3 RAM still costs [i<]double[/i<] what I paid for it in 2010, and my mainboard fetches £150+ on Ebay.

    • Derfer
    • 4 years ago

    No cpu is tempting me to upgrade but Kaby lake has my attention now. Kaby has twice the l4 cache of the 5775C. If it also has the overclocking ease of Skylake that will be the magic chip, the truly worthwhile upgrade we’ve been waiting for. A complete all around upgrade. Since Intel tends to be aiming for the same stock clock speeds gen to gen and it will be on the same node all signs point to it being a great clocker. I mean the stock speed of Skylake now is already the same or greater than what most 5775Cs can overclock too, so it’s easy to extrapolate how nice this chip could be.

      • itachi
      • 4 years ago

      Twice the l4 cache ?! that’s silly ! nice, well too bad I just checked the info about release and from wiki ” it was announced on July 16, 2015 that Cannonlake had been delayed until the second half of 2017″ 🙁

      Perhaps I just go mid-end i5 for now so that an i7 Kaby might be a justifyable upgrade lol, guess it will be on a different chipset too..

      And so curious about what Zen will be like, but of course, i would be very very surprised to see it beat, even the i5 Skylake..

    • chuckula
    • 4 years ago

    Ahem… [url<]https://techreport.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=115846&p=1268903&hilit=skylake+poll[/url<]

    • Shambles
    • 4 years ago

    My 3570K will do me fine for a looong time still.

      • Srsly_Bro
      • 4 years ago

      as will my 2700k

        • Choz
        • 4 years ago

        Same here. The only way I can see myself upgrading would be if I end up handing down my current rig to someone in the family or if something goes wrong with the mobo and I’m forced to.

          • travbrad
          • 4 years ago

          Even then I’m not sure if I’d upgrade or just find a used/refurbished mobo for $70-80. Z170 boards that support DDR3 seem to be pretty rare, and a mobo+CPU+DDR4 is getting up towards $500-600.

        • lycium
        • 4 years ago

        and, my axe!

      • Ifalna
      • 4 years ago

      Yup. With the rate things are going I will only upgrade if one of the components fails.

      • sreams
      • 4 years ago

      Same here (3570K).

      Without AMD really competing like they used to, Intel doesn’t seem to really move forward at the same rate anymore. Wish they had some real competition so they’d get off their a$$es.

      -S

      • HERETIC
      • 4 years ago

      SNAP.
      And as usual-Lot’s reviews on i7-but i5 that will probably sell more like hens teeth….

        • flip-mode
        • 4 years ago

        I think you used “hen’s teeth” improperly. Hen’s teeth implies extreme rarity. If something sells like hen’s teeth then it would be an extremely rare sell. “Sell like hot cakes” is probably the meaning you were looking for. The two can be combined to parody “like a hot knife through butter” with “like hen’s teeth through hot cakes” at which point you reach nerd level 10.

          • HERETIC
          • 4 years ago

          My poor grammar-What I meant was-i5 will probably sell more than i7,
          Lot’s reviews on i7.
          But finding a review on a i5 like looking for hen’s teeth…………………

          And it’s rather ironic most shops only have i5-no i7…………………………

      • DPete27
      • 4 years ago

      Same here. The only motivations for an upgrade would be the platform features (ie M.2 and USB 3.1 Type-C) but I don’t need those yet.

        • Shambles
        • 4 years ago

        And even if you do it will be easy enough to buy a cheap PCI-E adapter to add those features onto a Z97/87 platform.

      • jessterman21
      • 4 years ago

      Same – I’m eyeing a better CPU cooler to push to 4.5GHz and a huge SATA SSD this year.

      Maybe when DX12 games start using 6 threads properly I’ll be tempted.

    • willmore
    • 4 years ago

    Where’s the “I’m fine, thanks for asking.”

      • flip-mode
      • 4 years ago

      Not difficult:

      [quote<]Skylake looks good, but I'm not upgrading anytime soon [/quote<]

        • willmore
        • 4 years ago

        I don’t know how I missed that. Fixed the -1 someone gave you.

          • flip-mode
          • 4 years ago

          Full disclosure: I missed it on the first glance, too. I think it’s because it starts with “Skylake looks good”.

    • TwoEars
    • 4 years ago

    How can you upgrade to something which doesn’t end ‘well’?

    • appaws
    • 4 years ago

    Not really “in the mail” yet…but that was the closest choice. I am definetly getting a 6700k as soon as it is available to buy. Already got clearance from the wife as well!!!

    • brothergc
    • 4 years ago

    maybe a skylake for a HTPC build , thinking like a core I 3 in a mini ITX might be fun to build , but for my main rig , nope sticking with my 3770k

    • DrDominodog51
    • 4 years ago

    I voted for the 5775c and z97, but I’m actually going for the 5675c and z97

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This