Friday, November 4th 2016

Intel Core i5-7600K Tested, Negligible IPC Gains

Ahead of its launch, a Core i5-7600K processor (not ES) made its way to Chinese tech publication PCOnline, who wasted no time in putting it through their test-bench, taking advantage of the next-gen CPU support BIOS updates put out by several socket LGA1151 motherboard manufacturers. Based on the 14 nm "Kaby Lake" silicon, the i5-7600K succeeds the current i5-6600K, and could be positioned around the $250 price-point in Intel's product-stack. The quad-core chip features clock speeds of 3.80 GHz, with 4.20 GHz max Turbo Boost frequency, and 6 MB of L3 cache. Like all its predecessors, it lacks HyperThreading.

In its review of the Core i5-7600K, PCOnline found that the chip is about 9-10% faster than the i5-6600K, but that's mostly only due to its higher clock speeds out of the box (3.80/4.20 GHz vs. 3.50/3.90 GHz of the i5-6600K). Clock-for-clock, the i5-7600K is just about 1% faster, indicating that the "Kaby Lake" architecture offers only negligible IPC (instructions per clock) performance gains over the "Skylake" architecture. The power-draw of the CPU appears to be about the same as the i5-6600K, so there appear to be certain fab process-level improvements, given the higher clock speeds the chip is having to sustain, without a proportionate increase in power-draw. Most of the innovation appears to be centered on the integrated graphics, which is slightly faster, and has certain new features. Find more performance figures in the review link to PCOnline below.
Sources: PCOnline.com.cn, WCCFTech
Add your own comment

116 Comments on Intel Core i5-7600K Tested, Negligible IPC Gains

#3
Nuckles56
Clearly Intel isn't worried about Zen then if there is no IPC boost
Posted on Reply
#5
aldo5
"Negligible IPC Gains" - finaly - only titles like that would make one start to think and ask for more.... so far my comments about that Kaby lake will have worst gains of CPU history and definitely not worth for upgrade (if you have something from Sandy Bridge - year 2010 and above)... got respones like: "we can not know that... man, you are just a hater/broke/amd fanboi/stop trolling"
Posted on Reply
#6
Arnulf
It would appear that "optimization" in "process - architecture - optimization" stands for Intel's bottom line optimization ... Reselling same stuff on a somewhat larger (= cheaper) process.
Posted on Reply
#7
mistme
Arnulf said:
It would appear that "optimization" in "process - architecture - optimization" stands for Intel's bottom line optimization ... Reselling same stuff on a somewhat larger (= cheaper) process.
Intel's bottom line optimization is present in all these steps. And it is slightly better stuff on a slightly better/cheaper/more efficient process.
Posted on Reply
#8
TheLostSwede
aldo5 said:
"Negligible IPC Gains" - finaly - only titles like that would make one start to think and ask for more.... so far my comments about that Kaby lake will have worst gains of CPU history and definitely not worth for upgrade (if you have something from Sandy Bridge - year 2010 and above)... got respones like: "we can not know that... man, you are just a hater/broke/amd fanboi/stop trolling"
That's not quite true, Sandy Bridge is starting to get quite long in the tooth now and you'd at least want an Ivy Bridge or Haswell processor if you're playing recent games or doing some more computationally heavy things.
Also Sandy Bridge was launched in 2011...

Also keep in mind that you get other new technologies by upgrading, such as native USB 3.0, USB 3.1, M.2 and so on.

That said, you're right in saying that Kaby Lake is disappointing overall from a CPU perspective, as the improvements all seems to be on the graphics side, which I presume most of us here on TPU don't care much about.
Posted on Reply
#9
the54thvoid
Intel wants a chip in OEM systems and a mobile variant with iGPU graphics capability. In AMD's absence, they've had no business reason to vastly improve IPC (even if they could).
I might actually side grade to a Skylake if it gets price drops when Kaby releases or if Zen is AWOL or underperforms.
One factor we don't yet know is if Kaby can hold higher overclocking frequency. If Kaby can go to 5Ghz, the that might make it another far favourite. But we don't know these things yet.
Posted on Reply
#11
Nuckles56
Ferrum Master said:
Did anyone expect something else?
If AMD was going to pull one out of the hat with Zen, yes
Posted on Reply
#12
Hood
I like the fact that the 200 series chipset will have 24 PCIe 3.0 lanes (4 more than Skylake/100 series). That will allow more lanes for fast SSDs like the Samsung 960 series, without sacrificing any ports. Also, the i7-7700K will turbo boost up to 4.5GHz (300 MHz higher than Skylake i7-6700K).
Posted on Reply
#13
Vayra86
aldo5 said:
"Negligible IPC Gains" - finaly - only titles like that would make one start to think and ask for more.... so far my comments about that Kaby lake will have worst gains of CPU history and definitely not worth for upgrade (if you have something from Sandy Bridge - year 2010 and above)... got respones like: "we can not know that... man, you are just a hater/broke/amd fanboi/stop trolling"
Who said that to you? Names please, so I can laugh at them.

Everyone with half a brain knew Kaby Lake was not going to be anything interesting *at all*. Kaby Lake is Intel postponing their shit just a bit more and that is all she wrote. Basically, Skylake confirmed that Intel lost its mojo as far as CPU is concerned. Its underwhelming, and it is the architecture taxed to capacity. Intel needs to add cores to mainstream, it is the only way they now have to improve package performance apart from just raising clockspeeds. And they will, apparently Coffee Lake will be having 6-core mainstream CPUs.

Tick-tock-'optimize' said Intel... and people believed it was going to be great.

LMAO

the54thvoid said:
If Kaby can go to 5Ghz, the that might make it another far favourite. But we don't know these things yet.
If... I think what we are seeing here is Intel doing a Nvidia Pascal. The process allows for higher guaranteed clocks and those are directly taken away from its OC capability. The CPUs already have turbo and the clockspeed ceilings have not been going up across the board, but only very situationally. Sandy still clocked as good or better.
Posted on Reply
#14
Knoxx29
Nuckles56 said:
Clearly Intel isn't worried about Zen then if there is no IPC boost
Since when Intel has been worry about AMD?
Posted on Reply
#15
kaellar
I had no doubt Kaby Lake would bring zero performance gains over SkyLake. I only hoped Intel is still having a bit of conscience and would start soldering their 4-core CPUs to the heat spreaders like good ol' Sandy Bridge days. Not the case unfortunately.
Posted on Reply
#16
ZoneDymo
Knoxx29 said:
Since when Intel has been worry about AMD?
since Athlon
Posted on Reply
#17
Knoxx29
ZoneDymo said:
since Athlon
Intel has always been and will always be 3 steps ahead AMD, don't forget that.
Posted on Reply
#18
kaellar
Knoxx29 said:
Intel has always been and will always be 3 steps ahead AMD, don't forget that.
how old are you?
Posted on Reply
#19
P4-630
The Way It's Meant to be Played
Knoxx29 said:
Intel has always been and will always be 3 steps ahead AMD, don't forget that.
You do know that AMD had the first 64bit CPU?....
Posted on Reply
#20
Knoxx29
P4-630 said:
You do know that AMD had the first 64bit CPU?....
And?

It doesn't matter what they have/had or do, the fact is that AMD will be always 3 steps back to Intel.

kaellar said:
how old are you?
More than you and enough to know that AMD won't never catch Intel.
Posted on Reply
#21
P4-630
The Way It's Meant to be Played
Knoxx29 said:
Intel has always been and will always be 3 steps ahead AMD
Knoxx29 said:
And?
Well at that short time they weren't ahead, because AMD had the first 64bit capable CPU before Intel had one.
Posted on Reply
#22
Knoxx29
P4-630 said:
Well at that short time they weren't ahead, because AMD had the first 64bit capable CPU before Intel had one.
You're right ( SHORT TIME )
But after that AMD has not do anything worth in order to keep in competition with Intel, even it looks like year after year AMD is getting worse and worse, their last chance is Zen and let's hope for those AMD believers that this time they go back in the Game.
Posted on Reply
#23
xXMAKAVELIXx
Knoxx29 said:


More than you and enough to know that AMD won't never catch Intel.
Not old enough to understand double negation either.......:rolleyes:
Posted on Reply
#24
the54thvoid
xXMAKAVELIXx said:
Not old enough to understand double negation either.......:rolleyes:
Double negatives are part of 'pop' culture these days, unfortunately. Also, many posters aren't English native speakers, let alone writers. I think @Knoxx29 is German.

So I aint never not going to dis what you aint not written.
Posted on Reply
#25
mistme
kaellar said:
how old are you?
Knoxx29 said:
More than you and enough to know that AMD won't never catch Intel.
I guess the outcome of this Q&A is - don't ask how old the child is.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment