no, kaby lake isn't expected to be that hot.
no, kaby lake isn't expected to be that hot.
Derbixrace :
weberdarren97 :
Probably need to disable the CPU in the future, nothing else seems necessary haha
We all understand that Kaby Lake comes from an overly confident Intel, but I only realized it after searching online that they were so proud of their efficiency they thought it was a smart move to use lower quality TIM.
http://wccftech.com/intel-core-i7-7700k-...nce-tests/
It's really a shame they went for such a cheap option, because if I disabled it, I'd likely be able to push this chip beyond 5ghz since it runs smoothly at 4.9 @ 1.26v and the max safe voltage is around 1.4v according to most sources
If you choose to disable it, keep in mind that Kaby Lake is more prone to damage from minor scratches than earlier CPUs were. This is due to Intel opting for a thinner material to fit the die and surrounding parts. As I mentioned before, Kaby Lake is a result of Intel's complacency, as they haven't had real competition in the CPU market for nearly ten years now.
Thanks for the warning, I’ll be extra careful if I decide to delid. Right now I’m running on the sweetspot 4.8ghz 1.2v stable as a rock for now. This is why I suggest Skylake. A slight overclock will easily surpass Kaby Lake performance because they share the same IPC (which is why PCPartPicker labels Kaby Lake Skylake-S). The winner is the one that runs higher. There’s no gain in core performance from Skylake to Kaby Lake.
Yet Intel said a 15% boost, but what about onboard graphics?
weberdarren97 :
Thanks for the warning, I’ll be extra careful if I decide to delid. Right now I’m running on the sweetspot 4.8ghz 1.2v stable as a rock. That’s why I suggest Skylake. A slight overclock will easily surpass Kaby Lake performance since they share the same IPC (which is why PCPartPicker labels Kaby Lake Skylake-S). The winner is the one that runs higher. There’s no real gain in core performance from Skylake to Kaby Lake.
Intel said there’s a 15% boost, but what? Onboard graphics?
No real difference between Skylake and Kaby Lake, actually. I chose Kaby just because it’s newer and I got a 100€ discount on CPU, MOBO, and RAM combo.
It's amusing since Ryzen hasn't arrived yet and we haven't received any professional reviews or benchmarks, yet Intel is already reacting. They've launched the i5 7640K and the i7 7740K, both overclocked versions of the 7600K and 7700K models, featuring a higher factory TDP. In short, they're stepping up their game when AMD released the FX 9590, which was an overclocked 8350 with a 220W TDP that only worked on the most costly motherboards. To be honest, it reached 5GHz right out of the box—a notable achievement for 2011.
They're certainly anticipating Ryzen to perform well, as per the leaks—Ryzen sometimes outperforms the 6950X but struggles against a 7700K in others. IPC appears roughly 10% lower than that of Kaby/Xenon, so it will be interesting to see how effectively they optimize it.
Derbixrace shared some insights based on leaks. It seems Ryzen could perform well, though it might struggle in certain scenarios compared to the 6950x and lose to a 7700k. IPC appears roughly 10% lower than what we see with Kaby/sky, so the real performance will depend on how well they are optimized. You're correct about the market trends—FX's decline had three main factors:
1) AMD relied heavily on software that didn't deliver, which caused problems.
2) Mixing AM3 and AM3+ sockets, along with BIOS updates, led some users to think upgrading to FX was beneficial.
3) All FX CPUs were unlocked, but only a handful of boards could handle overclocking safely.
Starting a new platform on a different socket with SMT similar to Intel's HyperThreading shows AMD is trying to prevent these issues from appearing with Ryzen.