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

#101
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
Prima.Vera, post: 3512657, member: 98685"
??

I apologies, but what is so enthusiastic about those CPUs that are basically the same as the ones launched 5 years ago?!?
What's the same? We have more PCI-e lanes, new SATA etc. Want to blame someone? Stop blaming intel and start blaming software developers that are lazy.

Also remember clock for clock these chips vs a first gen are 100% faster if not more.
Posted on Reply
#102
Audiophizile
chaosmassive, post: 3510004, member: 159641"
If Zen able to output 90% performance of Skylake Haswell with 50% price of 6-8 cores CPU Intel, AMD is win.
The problem is there is a huge price difference between Intel's 6 and 8 core CPUs. If you want 90% of Intel's 4c/8t performance for half the price of an 8 core Intel you're getting ripped off by ~$200. Same 90% performance of 4c/8t Intel for half the price of Intel's 6c/12t 6900k and you may have a competitive chip. Remember kabylake should be at least a 5% improvement over skylake so really we should be comparing apples to apples with Zens release and putting zen up against that.
Posted on Reply
#103
TheGuruStud
cdawall, post: 3512660, member: 28601"
What's the same? We have more PCI-e lanes, new SATA etc. Want to blame someone? Stop blaming intel and start blaming software developers that are lazy.

Also remember clock for clock these chips vs a first gen are 100% faster if not more.
You have good jokes.
Posted on Reply
#104
MxPhenom 216
Corsair Fanboy
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.
Tell us how you really feel.
Posted on Reply
#105
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
TheGuruStud, post: 3512814, member: 42692"
You have good jokes.
What does an i7 920 perform like in comparison clock for clock?

Also why do games for the most part only use 4 cores?
Posted on Reply
#106
MxPhenom 216
Corsair Fanboy
Maybe building a Kaby Lake build this december if it comes out by then.
Posted on Reply
#107
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
I won't be I'm going to be quietly sitting praying amd releases something competitive that brings prices down
Posted on Reply
#108
MxPhenom 216
Corsair Fanboy
cdawall, post: 3513766, member: 28601"
I won't be I'm going to be quietly sitting praying amd releases something competitive that brings prices down
Well if you saw my thread about my current rig. its a bit broken right now and i need to buy a cheap board to hold me over.
Posted on Reply
#109
hapkiman
With that bump in frequency alone, the optimizations notwithstanding, this may be a bigger step-up over the 6700k than most think.
Posted on Reply
#110
R-T-B
cdawall, post: 3512872, member: 28601"
What does an i7 920 perform like in comparison clock for clock?
I've tested it. I don't have the numbers handy, but it was nowhere near a 100% increase to Skylake, anyways.
Posted on Reply
#111
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
R-T-B, post: 3525055, member: 41983"
I've tested it. I don't have the numbers handy, but it was nowhere near a 100% increase to Skylake, anyways.
Stock vs stock? The 2.66ghz i7 920 vs a 4.2ghz 6700K, it is a well over 100% performance increase. Even clock for clock core for core especially when you take into account the substantial leaps and bounds intel has made with multithreading there has been a more the 100% increase in performance.

I have all of the generations of chips at work I could in theory plop a comparison out.
Posted on Reply
#112
R-T-B
cdawall, post: 3525207, member: 28601"
Stock vs stock? The 2.66ghz i7 920 vs a 4.2ghz 6700K, it is a well over 100% performance increase. Even clock for clock core for core especially when you take into account the substantial leaps and bounds intel has made with multithreading there has been a more the 100% increase in performance.
You said:
cdawall, post: 3512660, member: 28601"
Also remember clock for clock these chips vs a first gen are 100% faster if not more.
Not Stock vs Stock, obviously. I'm talking singlethreaded IPC. Clock vs clock.
Posted on Reply
#113
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
R-T-B, post: 3525208, member: 41983"
You said:


Not Stock vs Stock, obviously. I'm talking singlethreaded IPC. Clock vs clock.
cdawall, post: 3525207, member: 28601"
Even clock for clock core for core especially when you take into account the substantial leaps and bounds intel has made with multithreading there has been a more the 100% increase in performance.
?

There are always going to be benchmarks that will show less than 100% scaling on single core IPC, however there are others that do show 100+ % gains. Overall the chips have gained huge bumps in performance. That being said I would not be surprised if we were nearing the end of performance boosts for this design. Intel has gone full AMD, 5ghz Xeons, 22 core Xeons ah how the times have changed :roll:
Posted on Reply
#114
R-T-B
cdawall, post: 3525210, member: 28601"
?

There are always going to be benchmarks that will show less than 100% scaling on single core IPC, however there are others that do show 100+ % gains. Overall the chips have gained huge bumps in performance. That being said I would not be surprised if we were nearing the end of performance boosts for this design. Intel has gone full AMD, 5ghz Xeons, 22 core Xeons ah how the times have changed :roll:
Admitedly, I'm just going by the simply CPU-Z bench. :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#115
EarthDog
cdawall, post: 3525210, member: 28601"
?

There are always going to be benchmarks that will show less than 100% scaling on single core IPC, however there are others that do show 100+ % gains. Overall the chips have gained huge bumps in performance. That being said I would not be surprised if we were nearing the end of performance boosts for this design. Intel has gone full AMD, 5ghz Xeons, 22 core Xeons ah how the times have changed :roll:
Intel has always been there. ;)
Posted on Reply
#116
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
EarthDog, post: 3525494, member: 79836"
Intel has always been there. ;)
Not like this...this is full retard mode
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment