Anandtech on Intel's new Skylake Processors.

This time around Intel has made some changes to the branding to reflect a larger push towards selling them as good gaming chips. At best, you can expect maybe a 10 percent performance bump (larger than in the past, but that’s not saying much if it’s from just 6 percent).

Once again, it may be a sign that we are hitting the limits of silicone and will soon need to finally move on towards the formal integration of technologies like optical transistors and graphene transistors.

One of the comments may have said it best, the small upward ticks in the performance might mean that you might be able to simply use a machine till it breaks once you have a Sandy Bridge processor or newer (unless you make the leap to the newer 8-core E-series processors). Sad but true, the world of CPU’s these days just doesn’t seem so exciting anymore, one’s best bet is to hope that sooner or later, AMD comes out with a major surprise and restarts the performance race.

In all, would it be a worthy upgrade for you, or is it just another dud?

Yeah, the performance improvements with each new generation of CPUs are nice but nowhere near as impressive as they were back in the early 2000’s. Seems like the main focus nowadays is with low power consumption and optimization for specific applications. My CPU is a fairly recent i7 4770 so it will be awhile before something shows up that’s worth the upgrade investment. I’d like to see high performance ARM processors on the desktop though, that would be neat.

i would have to buy a new motherboard as well so not for me. i am not rich so for me a better option would be to wait for a price drop then by a gen older tech, unless the new chips have some power saving feature than means it would pay for its self in a short time via my electric bill. reading the article it seems to consume more not less power. along with the move of cheaping out on thermal paste to save less than 1 cent on a $300 chip which increases the temp 18-20c i wouldn’t be touching it even if i had the money.

"Devil’s Canyon changed that - here was a better binned Haswell processor with a higher quality package, giving a ten degrees cooler system at load. It is worth noting that previously on certain platforms Intel had been providing a mixed metal interface (generalized as a soldered interface) between the silicon and the heatspreader, which is the best but most expensive option. If the cost of the interface is reduced by 0.1 cents, then that’s a significant saving on millions of processors. Devil’s Canyon was a small subset of sales, so spending that extra for that specific crowd could be seen as beneficial to Intel’s perspective by overclockers.

To paraphrase Splave again, he comments that the thermal paste (TIM)o n his Skylake is certainly worse than that of Devil’s Canyon. If the extra mass on the IHS is coming from a taller heatspreader (by virtue of the smaller package substrate), then more TIM is needed otherwise there will be substantial air bubbling of the TIM between the CPU and the heatspreader. By replacing his own thermal paste and resecuring the heatspreader, he saw an 18°C drop in temperatures at his highest air overclock with the old paste (5.1 GHz at 1.48 volts) - from 96ºC that overheated to 78ºC on the warmest core. An 18°C drop is immense. Under those conditions, and based on rough testing not published in our Skylake review, it could equal another 100-400 MHz depending on the quality of the processor. PCWatch confirms that switching out the paste with CoolLaboratory’s Liquid Pro (a liquid metal adhesion interface) reduced temperatures at 4.6 GHz from 88ºC to 68ºC"

this means that older gen hardware can be over clocked to beat the new expensive hardware. how you gimp you flagship to save a cent is beyond me. that temp could be 400 mhz of performance. slower, more prone to over heating, more expensive, needs ddr4 or ddr3l rather than plain ddr3,… i may have been born at night but it wasn’t last night.

I just recently built an X99 rig Skylake doesn’t really do much for me. Really at the end of the day any core i7 cpu from Sandybridge on should be good to go for a while. I haven’t noticed any real performance issues on older machines in quite some time. The biggest gains in-terms of speed are coming from other components in our computers.

Ace! You wrote a non-sensationalist headline! You should have named it “Skylake processors not fast enough! Is Intel doomed?” :wink:

Which wouldn’t have a single shred of truth as long as AMD continues to stay well behind them in terms of raw performance :wink:

pio actually i was the negative one, not ace. and if amantech are correct, that they gimped the processors by up to 10% of potential afted spending millions in r&d to save less than 1 cent per chip…the pencil pushers have run amok. what other upgrade can give you 10% performance for less than a cent? its probably going to be a $300 chip, it requires the newest ram, and they think people will pay $300 but would balk at $300.01?

lets assume they sell 10,000,000 if the chips. they save a max of 100,000 dollars by using sub standard thermal paste. thats nothing compared the the 3,000,000,000 people spend on the chips. its nothing, its basically free at that point. and to shaft the consumers to save .000003% on their bottom line is beyond me. and they just made it 10% easier for amd to beat their flagship. 10% performance on a $300 card would be $30 of performance. in what math does trading $30 for $0.01 make sense? and the chips are much more fragile, much more likely to be broken if you change the paste. there are people that will remove the old paste for you…for $40 and up on the old chips so it will probably be $50+ for the much more fragile chips. and many will pay the extra $50+, if its worth $50 is defiantly worth more that the less than one cent to do it right in the 1st place.

its a sad day when intel is shipping new parts that need repairs. when refurb is better than new…its not a good thing. i’ll stick to the older, cheaper, faster, more reliable, unbroken parts.

Only thing significant is the new socket and the DDR4 support,
of course I only looked at the spec sheets,

CPU dev has reached a long time ago a limit when it comes to increasing computation power.

So what is left - well energy consumption and that for mobile devises is a perfect match.

I run a 2008 hardware and do not think I need a faster CPU - everything runs fast enough
and rendering is done via GPU anyway.

Only when you really use CPU for rendering obviously more CPU power would be nice.

But the trend goes away from power desktop PCs back to mainframe computation (Cloud)
and the new area are mobile devices such as laptop tablet and smartphone.