Monday, August 22nd 2016

Intel Core "Kaby Lake" Desktop Processors First Wave Detailed

Intel is reportedly planning launch its 7th generation Core "Kaby Lake" processors by Q4-2016. Its desktop variants, built in the existing LGA1151 package, will be the third Intel micro-architecture built on the 14 nm process (after "Skylake" and "Broadwell" architectures). With this generation, Intel is planning to sub-classify LGA1151 into three categories, to ensure people don't try to install higher-powered CPUs on low-power machines.

These are LGA1151-Standard Power; LGA1151-Low Power; and LGA1151-Ultra Low Power. These are defined by the TDP of the packages. Standard Power chips run at 95W TDP, Low Power at 65W TDP, and Ultra Low Power at 35W TDP. There could be motherboards and machines that, depending on their VRM setup, completely shut out Standard Power or even Low Power chips.

Among the Standard Power Core "Kaby Lake" chips are the Core i7-7700K and the Core i5-7600K. The two feature unlocked base-clock multipliers, and are targeted at PC enthusiasts. The i7-7700K leads the pack with 4.20 GHz clock-speed, a staggering 4.50 GHz Turbo Boost frequency, 8 MB of L3 cache, and HyperThreading enabling 8 logical CPUs. The i5-7600K features 3.80 GHz clocks with 4.00 GHz Turbo Boost, 6 MB of L3 cache, but as characteristic of Core i5 quad-core chips, it lacks HyperThreading.

The 65-Watt "Low Power" LGA1151 is made up of four SKUs, all of which are quad-core. Leading the pack is the i7-7700 (non-K). This chip features lower clock speeds than the i7-7700K, with 3.60 GHz and an unknown Turbo Boost frequency; HyperThreading, and 8 MB of L3 cache. It's the same story with the i5-7600, which features 3.50 GHz clocks, and 6 MB of L3 cache. The i5-7500 is clocked at 3.40 GHz, and the i5-7400 at 3.30 GHz. Thankfully, Intel isn't designing a sub-3 GHz part like the i5-6400 in this sub-category.

The 35-Watt "Ultra Low Power" lineup includes the quad-core Core i7-7700T, featuring 2.90 GHz clocks, 8 MB of L3 cache, and HyperThreading; Core i5-7600T with 2.60 GHz clocks and 6 MB L3 cache; and the Core i5-7500T, with 2.40 GHz clocks.
Source: OCaholic
Add your own comment

116 Comments on Intel Core "Kaby Lake" Desktop Processors First Wave Detailed

#26
Prima.Vera
The Quim Reaper, post: 3509953, member: 116062"
..they'd come with more than 4 cores if they were targeted at enthusiasts you monopoly operating, price gouging douchebags.
Agreed!

LOL, in this rithm, I can keep my 3770K for another 5 years.
Posted on Reply
#27
noname00
lanlagger, post: 3510040, member: 165974"
Move along, nothing to see here a"6" replaced with a "7" and if it overclocks less (as it was the case for 2011-3 "newest" release) then it is a little regression. If one has Sandy or newer and thinks about upgrade with this Kaby lake - then one should not use word "thinks", because thinking requires to gather data, process that and evaluate... and who just throws more money at intel for nothing - does not do either of those.
There are a few more reasons to upgrade from a 2500k or above, most of them being IO related (M.2, USB3.1), other new features that someone might want. But if I had a 2500k, (or even a i5 750/760), I'm prety sure I would not upgrade CPU+motherboard.
Posted on Reply
#28
Melvis
I wonder what temps these new chips will run at. One thing that always turns me off Intel chips is the amount of heat they produce. I am impressed at the 4.5GHz Turbo speed though on the 7700k, very nice!
Posted on Reply
#29
zelnep
lanlagger, post: 3510040, member: 165974"
Move along, nothing to see here a"6" replaced with a "7" and if it overclocks less (as it was the case for 2011-3 "newest" release) then it is a little regression. If one has Sandy or newer and thinks about upgrade with this Kaby lake - then one should not use word "thinks", because thinking requires to gather data, process that and evaluate... and who just throws more money at intel for nothing - does not do either of those.
agree with this... only thing that made me upgrade my i7-860 to i7-6700K is m.2 nvme in z170 board (and usb 3.1 also did not hurt), but for cpu performance increase - fyou intel, I hope someone did steal my money (thaty I paid for i7-6700k) from your register and I hope the thief left invisible legos in the room!
Posted on Reply
#30
Nobody99
7th generation will have native H.265 10 bit decode which Skylake should already have, I mean what is the point of having iGPU if Intel doesn't ever update its capabilities for decoding which serves better old CPUs than new CPUs. Why do only new CPUs get new software improvements when the older ones are not EOL?
Posted on Reply
#31
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
They must be maxing out the process, look at that TDP walking up, Intel is back into the 95w game.
Posted on Reply
#32
RejZoR
Intel will have to dramatically change the architecture. They are hiting the clock wall now, they can't up the clock anymore. Smaller processes won't make higher clocks more viable either. They could stack more cores, but considering how long they are dragging the quad core config, I find that VERY unlikely.
Posted on Reply
#33
Nokiron
RejZoR, post: 3510115, member: 1515"
Intel will have to dramatically change the architecture. They are hiting the clock wall now, they can't up the clock anymore. Smaller processes won't make higher clocks more viable either. They could stack more cores, but considering how long they are dragging the quad core config, I find that VERY unlikely.
I think it will be a while before the cores starts coming. The first steps are probably more dedicated circuits and accelerators.
Posted on Reply
#34
Parn
TheLostSwede, post: 3509967, member: 3382"
Let's see if we get Nvidia grade price gauging on these ones...
They've already been doing that ever since the launch of Skylake. I expect no difference with Kaby Lake at least until AMD officially launches Zen.
Posted on Reply
#35
alexsubri
It's like a game of chess, AMD made their move and now Intel made theirs. Still feel like AMD has the upper hand in this scenario. More threads than cores, still not seeing anything evolutionary here on Intels part.

Zen has more cores and threads this time around. Hopefully it will live up to the hype. The stocks sure think so! :pimp:

No more wishful thinking ;)

Posted on Reply
#36
alucasa
Oh for ... fu's sake..., bring 6c/12t into mainstream already.

We really need Zen to be successful here. Intel is buttlicking us.
Posted on Reply
#37
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
alucasa, post: 3510139, member: 68481"
Oh for ... fu's sake..., bring 6c/12t into mainstream already.

We really need Zen to be successful here. Intel is buttlicking us.
What software uses 6/12? Most software developers still only uses 4 cores...
Posted on Reply
#38
xorbe
Is it worth upgrading from 4790K@4.5 DDR3-2400, to a 7700K@4.5 with DDR4? I'm guessing it's not really worth the cost or hassle for a few extra fps in games.
Posted on Reply
#39
alucasa
cdawall, post: 3510154, member: 28601"
What software uses 6/12? Most software developers still only uses 4 cores...
I use lots of rendering via Blender. Me no gamer.
Posted on Reply
#40
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
xorbe, post: 3510160, member: 102945"
Is it worth upgrading from 4790K@4.5 DDR3-2400, to a 7700K@4.5 with DDR4? I'm guessing it's not really worth the cost or hassle for a few extra fps in games.
Really depends what you are trying to do. Power consumption will be a decent gain.

alucasa, post: 3510168, member: 68481"
I use lots of rendering via Blender. Me no gamer.
X99 with a mainstream style board and 5820K/6800K is roughly the same pricing both of which are mainstream pricing.
Posted on Reply
#41
alucasa
cdawall, post: 3510169, member: 28601"
X99 with a mainstream style board and 5820K/6800K is roughly the same pricing both of which are mainstream pricing.
Not in Canada. It costs around 350CAD more. But I am considering going into 5820k. Just waiting on some news on Zen before pulling trigger. I also have an option of going for either 2011-v1 + E5-2670 or X99 + ES 12c/24t for the price of 5820k + x99.

Just waiting on some reliable news on Zen before going for it.
Posted on Reply
#42
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
alucasa, post: 3510174, member: 68481"
Not in Canada. It costs around 350CAD more. But I am considering going into 5820k. Just waiting on some news on Zen before pulling trigger. I also have an option of going for either 2011-v1 + E-2670 or X99 + ES 12c/24t for the price of 5820k + x99.

Just waiting on some reliable news on Zen before going for it.
http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117559&cm_re=6700k-_-19-117-559-_-Product

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117402&cm_re=5820k-_-19-117-402-_-Product

where is the 350CAD difference? Getting comparable decent boards are both in the $200CAD range.
Posted on Reply
#43
thebluebumblebee
Isn't this a "backwards" announcement? Isn't the real news here that there will be 3 levels of motherboards? Imagine some of the simple and therefore cheap motherboards that we'll see, especially mITX.
Posted on Reply
#44
alucasa
cdawall, post: 3510176, member: 28601"
http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117559&cm_re=6700k-_-19-117-559-_-Product

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117402&cm_re=5820k-_-19-117-402-_-Product

where is the 350CAD difference? Getting comparable decent boards are both in the $200CAD range.
100 from CPU.

250 from Mobo. Google my mobo in system spec. It's a cheapass one. I am looking at X99 Asrock Extreme4 mATX. I don't want full ATX.
Posted on Reply
#45
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
alucasa, post: 3510183, member: 68481"
100 from CPU.

250 from Mobo. Google my mobo in system spec. It's a cheapass one. I am looking at X99 Asrock Extreme4 mATX. I don't want full ATX.
Ah so you are just comparing based on bargain bin 1151 stuff. Remember there are low watt Xeon 6 cores in the $300CAD range.

thebluebumblebee, post: 3510178, member: 55599"
Isn't this a "backwards" announcement? Isn't the real news here that there will be 3 levels of motherboards? Imagine some of the simple and therefore cheap motherboards that we'll see, especially mITX.
Not much different than what they do now on both AMD and intel. Can't exactly run the 9590 on the $30 760G motherboard they sell due to TDP. I imagine this will be similar, low end boards with 2-4 phase CPU power and high end with god knows how many.
Posted on Reply
#46
alucasa
cdawall, post: 3510186, member: 28601"
Ah so you are just comparing based on bargain bin 1151 stuff. Remember there are low watt Xeon 6 cores in the $300CAD range.
Yeah, I don't OC due to using mini-itx and tight case and I don't use fancy high-end stuff to save money. The 350CAD difference was based on my current setup.

I can save 50 by choosing Gigabyte X99 but I avoid Killer NIC and I don't really trust EVGA mobo.

I am still considering my options and really hoping Zen hits the jackpot here, for my own sake instead of fanboy's.

And I need HT.
Posted on Reply
#47
EarthDog
Caring1, post: 3509971, member: 153156"
"Intel is planning to sub-classify LGA1151 into three categories, to ensure people don't try to install higher-powered CPUs on low-power machines."
Maybe AMD should have done this with 70% of their boards using FX processors... haha!
Posted on Reply
#48
dj-electric
Yeah. Extremely high 220W, stupidly high 140W and horribly slow 95W.
Posted on Reply
#49
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
Dj-ElectriC, post: 3510194, member: 87186"
Yeah. Extremely high 220W, stupidly high 140W and horribly slow 95W.
Intel sounds like they are joining that game they do have that 165w quad core xeon...I would be curious what actual power draw is.

EarthDog, post: 3510188, member: 79836"
Maybe AMD should have done this with 70% of their boards using FX processors... haha!
They should have done it with 100% of their boards or just never released 220w parts.
Posted on Reply
#50
RejZoR
cdawall, post: 3510154, member: 28601"
What software uses 6/12? Most software developers still only uses 4 cores...
Except all compressors, be it general purpose or audio/video. Image editos also all use as many cores as they can utilize. Granted, if you odn't use any of that enough, who cares. But long term, if you buy a 6c/12t system now, it'll last for ages, 5 years easily especially if you overclock it. I mean, just look at Nehalems, the first 4c/8t CPU's. People still run them for very demanding stuff. Granted, they need to be overclocked to at least 4GHz now, but then they aren't much slower than modern 400€ CPU's. And those are freaking 6 years old.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment