Likelihood of 6 or 8 core Skylake (LGA1151)?

[RejZoR]

So, I'm in a dilemma of just dropping the ball and buying a new system for quite few days now. Was determined to buy 6700k because it's brand new, but then got steered away by the 5820k with its 6 cores but slightly older platform. Don't like the idea of buying a platform that still has bunch of USB 2.0 ports and all that.

Now I'm back to 6700k, but this time because I'm wondering how likely it is for LGA1151 receiving a 6 or 8 (preferably with 12 and 16 HT threads) core CPU in the future (lets say mid to late 2016)? Any Intel charts on their future plans regarding this?

Because if I grab 6700K now and replace it with a 6 or 8 core later, this would be great. New platform with newer lithography and more cores at a later point. But if Intel only releases 4C/8T CPU's for the LGA1151, that will be s*it. And now I can't decide what to go for since I can screw myself pretty badly if there won't be 6 or 8 cores...

This will be a ~1000€ upgrade so I want to think this through thoroughly, that's why I'm asking about it on so many ends and regarding so many things...

 

[Vayra86]

5820K with solid cooling and a decent overclock = 6 cores at a small premium from a 4C/8T Skylake that you would intend to upgrade again later.

I wouldn't even have any doubts. I wouldn't worry about 5-8% performance differences at this level, especially since you can OC. Also you get yourself a better platform with more PCIE lanes, only DDR4 is something you may want, but I don't see a big advantage there.

All things considered, do YOU think it is realistic that Intel will change their product stacks in the foreseeable future? I don't see a 6C/12T Skylake non-E processor, ever, and I wouldn't put my money on Zen to change that all too soon either. You know how long the birds are singing the 'multi threaded' song now, but we're still looking at 4 core mainstream.

 

[RejZoR]

I've just noticed some info on Broadwell-E which is supposedly scheduled for 2016 and will be 14nm on LGA2011-v3 socket, meaning I could use the X99 and still get the new 14nm node CPU. Until then, I'd be using 22nm 5820K. Hm.

 

[Vayra86]

I've just noticed some info on Broadwell-E which is supposedly scheduled for 2016 and will be 14nm on LGA2011-v3 socket, meaning I could use the X99 and still get the new 14nm node CPU. Until then, I'd be using 22nm 5820K. Hm.

Makes a lot more sense to me. If you do more than gaming, that's a much better choice than placing a bet on Skylake.

 

[Aquinus]

Sooooo, what do you need those cores and PCI-E lanes for again? Realistically most people don't need more than a quad, which includes gamers. 16 3.0 lanes is enough for two GPUs as well. Not quite sure what the OP would be "gaining" by going to skt2011-3 instead of skt1151.

 

[RejZoR]

Erm, isn't DX12 suppose to utilize more threads? Since I'm looking for a long term upgrade, I'm also taking that into account. Also, the fact that 6700K is already clocked so high, you don't get much room to work with. Clocking a 4.2GHz to 4.7GHz isn't exactly what I'd call a huge gain. It's stuck at pretty much what you buy. Where 5820K goes to 4-4.2GHz easily and has 2C/4T more from the start.

Like the thread suggests, LGA1151 only makes sense if Intel plans on releasing 6 or 8 thread Skylakes. But then again, I'm suspecting they'll be clocked lower to accomodate more cores. Which then brings you back at stock 5820K so to speak.

 

[Vayra86]

Erm, isn't DX12 suppose to utilize more threads? Since I'm looking for a long term upgrade, I'm also taking that into account. Also, the fact that 6700K is already clocked so high, you don't get much room to work with. Clocking a 4.2GHz to 4.7GHz isn't exactly what I'd call a huge gain. It's stuck at pretty much what you buy. Where 5820K goes to 4-4.2GHz easily and has 2C/4T more from the start.

Like the thread suggests, LGA1151 only makes sense if Intel plans on releasing 6 or 8 thread Skylakes. But then again, I'm suspecting they'll be clocked lower to accomodate more cores. Which then brings you back at stock 5820K so to speak.

I notice you are always trying to predict the future when you are about to make a purchase. My advice: stop doing that. You will get disappointed every single time

Also, to chime in on the gaming aspect; if you think you should buy into E- because your games will run better, stop dreaming. Not a single gamer with sensible spending is running on enthusiast Intel, games are not optimized for 6C/12T but rather for the mainstream 4C/4T. If all you do is gaming, get the highest IPC processor, end of story. DX12 isn't going to change jack shit, Microsoft's marketing is working far too well on you. Games will always optimize for the lowest common denominator and DX12 isn't going to automagically give players more cores. I'm still running on 3570k and a bottleneck is nowhere to be seen, my cores are chillin' and relaxin' at 60-70% utilization and a healthy 50 degrees celcius on a 20-euro cooler, while my GPU is working overtime. It has never been different, which is another reason I keep saying DX12 won't change gaming.

 

[RejZoR]

I wasn't disappointed when I predicted that going with more expensive LGA1366 instead of cheaper LGA1156 was the way to go. It served me brilliantly for more than 5 years. Since I'm again thinking for the same long term usage, thinking about the future isn't a silly thing at all. If I buy 6700K I'm basically stuck with that and hardly any OC potential. Unless Intel is going to release a 5GHz Skylake or something... which seems very unlikely scenario if you ask me. And with DX12 down the 5 years lane, cores will matter. Hell, they already do matter in quite some games.

If you change whole platform every 2 years, 6700K is an absolute no brainer. But for up to 5 years, I'm not so sure anymore.

 

[qubit]

Go Skylake. Don't look backwards.

 

[Aquinus]

Erm, isn't DX12 suppose to utilize more threads?

Only for draw calls. Nothing more AFAICT. It's not going to myseriously make every game utilize a bunch of threads as we're talking about only rendering. DX12 does nothing for game logic from what I can see. Sure, there might be some gain but, it probably won't be worth the extra cost. I suspect DX12 gains will still be had on i7s with hyperthreading. Either way, I see very little reason to try to plan for the future based on information that is sketchy at best. I've had my quad core 3820 for 2 and 1/2 years now and I have no plans on upgrading. I seriously don't think the extra cost incurred with skt2011-3 will be of any benefit to you.

+1 to this.

I notice you are always trying to predict the future when you are about to make a purchase. My advice: stop doing that. You will get disappointed every single time

And agreement on this:

Go Skylake. Don't look backwards.

 

[Vayra86]

I wasn't disappointed when I predicted that going with more expensive LGA1366 instead of cheaper LGA1156 was the way to go. It served me brilliantly for more than 5 years. Since I'm again thinking for the same long term usage, thinking about the future isn't a silly thing at all. If I buy 6700K I'm basically stuck with that and hardly any OC potential. Unless Intel is going to release a 5GHz Skylake or something... which seems very unlikely scenario if you ask me. And with DX12 down the 5 years lane, cores will matter. Hell, they already do matter in quite some games.

If you change whole platform every 2 years, 6700K is an absolute no brainer. But for up to 5 years, I'm not so sure anymore.

Sandy Bridge release was 4,5 years back, jan 2011. People who run SB today are still not running into bottlenecks on a 2500k with a half-decent OC. I'm sorry but it really doesn't matter for gaming, no matter what you want to tell yourself. But hey, if you want to go back to Intel E- just to play games nobody is stopping you.

The tech world is crying 'moar cores' for almost a decade and we are still running games without bottlenecking on 4 cores just fine. 8-core FX is the biggest pita in CPU history, and when i7 came out every nerd with a lot of money burned 100-150 bucks extra on HT only to find out it is just about worthless in gaming. Only now do engines scale (SOME engines) somewhat OK on 4+ cores, but when they do, none of those cores are running at 100% load. So what's the point? You and I are already at the top of the food chain with regards to gaming, you don't need a workstation PC to play some games, stop fooling yourself.

If you were going all out crazy on Quad SLI and you needed those lanes, sure, otherwise, go for the highest IPC like every sensible guy out there.

 

[R-T-B]

I don't know about the arguments you are getting here... IPC isn't everything it's more about how you like to upgrade. It's more a matter of how long you want to go before the next mobo upgrade in particular. If you don't want to upgrade your mobo frequently, like me, the Haswell-E (or any enthusiast line product) has always made more sense from a future proofing perspective. It's not like the IPC is that much higher anyhow... and then you can look forward to other upgrade options, such as possibly SLI in the future (this was my line of reasoning)

 

[Woomack]

For me 5820k is better option in similar price. I mean you get more cores ( some new games and other soft can use it ) and higher memory bandwidth ( this actually barely counts in games ) and everything else is almost the same. Also every X99 motherboard is actually a high end what I can't say about Z170 boards.
I haven't seen any 6 core+ CPUs for 1151 socket in Intel plans and I doubt they will be released. For 2011-3 will be probably more 8 cores when Broadwell/Skylake-E will be released.
Just to be clear, I have both platforms.

 

[Vayra86]

I don't know about the arguments you are getting here... IPC isn't everything it's more about how you like to upgrade. It's more a matter of how long you want to go before the next mobo upgrade in particular. If you don't want to upgrade your mobo frequently, like me, the Haswell-E (or any enthusiast line product) has always made more sense from a future proofing perspective. It's not like the IPC is that much higher anyhow... and then you can look forward to other upgrade options, such as possibly SLI in the future (this was my line of reasoning)

That is the whole point. On mainstream you can also SLI two cards, you can overclock your 4 cores to a higher frequency (making single thread run even further ahead of an Enthusiast proc of the same gen, now Skylake is one gen ahead of that as well) and the price is generally lower. If all you do is gaming, that IS the most powerful platform you can buy into. If you do more / workstation related business, you could defend X99 much easier. For just gaming however, it is sub-par... Now motherboard quality is debatable, but X99 may be the breaking point for that too seeing as there is a little price war going on there now that pricing is close to Skylake/mainstream.

 

[Aquinus]

it's more about how you like to upgrade.

The point is that there may be no point in upgrading by the time he would need to. Do you think @qubit is disappointed with the 2700k years later? Probably not. All we're saying is that Skylake is going to offer the same experience so you might as well go with the cheaper option. Plus, Skylake has that new and improved PCH that uses DMI 3.0 so I/O on 1151 is bound to be pretty slick. So all in all, if I were choosing, I would go with Skylake.

For me 5820k is better option in similar price. I mean you get more cores ( some new games and other soft can use it ) and higher memory bandwidth ( this actually barely counts in games ) and everything else is almost the same.

The CPU is similar price. X99 (like X79,) has expensive motherboards. Also the 6700k is bound to overclock better as well. Why pay more for things you won't be using?

If you do more / workstation related business, you could defend X99 much easier. For just gaming however, it is sub-par...

It's not that skt2011-3 is sub-par, it's just that you're paying for a lot of things you very well might never use. This isn't about performance, it's about cost. Going 2011-3 is going to cost more for no gain.

 

[RejZoR]

Ok, so this is what I was aiming for in parallel...

X99 setup:
5820K + Sabertooth X99 + 16GB/32GB RAM = ~900-1000€

Z170 setup:
6700K + Maximus VIII Hero + 16GB 2666-3000MHz RAM (2x8GB) = ~720€
6700K + Sabertooth Z170 + 16GB 2666-3000MHz RAM (2x8GB) = ~720€

Any idea why Sabertooth Z170 only has 2400MHz RAM listed here but Maximus Hero has 3600+?
http://www.asus.com/microsite/best-100-series-motherboards/compare/

I've now also thrown cooling into consideration and 6700K does look tempting from this aspect. It's a 95W CPU, meaning I'll be able to keep my single rad Antec 920 at crazy low RPM (silence!).

Considering how super brand new Z170 is, it would be absolutely stupid if Intel wouldn't release any CPU for it with more cores or even higher clocks at a later time. They usually have CPU's up to 140W TDP, meaning we surely can expect something being released at a later time for LGA1151.

I think you guys kinda have a point here. 6700K will be a cheaper build with same high end grade components, I'll be able to keep my current cooler and to some degree I can expect new faster CPU's for LGA1151 where I can then invest the difference I'll save up with the Z170 platform.

I'll have to sleep this through a bit, but I think you guys convinced me. Now I just have to decide between Sabertooth and Maximus...

 

[R-T-B]

The point is that there may be no point in upgrading by the time he would need to. Do you think @qubit is disappointed with the 2700k years later?

No, but I also don't think the past is indicative of the future.

I guess it's a matter of trying to predict the future, which both RejZor and I were very lucky in doing with X58... Maybe we'll be wrong this time, maybe he'll go with Skylake and be happier for it, only time will tell. My point is speculating on the future is pointless, do what sounds good to you and make an educated judgement based on the facts available.

I personally also have a weighting factor of the fact I run a 24/7 game server on my machine that eats a fair bit of 2 cores, so the additional 2 cores make my decision cut and dry, lol.

 

[RejZoR]

Prediction is not pointless. I'm doing this for everything I buy and so far I haven't really burned myself. If done riht, you can save some money and have a great system that can last you for several years.

 

[Vayra86]

Prediction isn't pointless, but I am probably just like you; I scour the internet looking for every bit of info on my purchases and more often than not, that gets you dragged into an endless weighing of almost nonsensical details.

After all these years I am convinced that 'keep it simple, stupid' is the most cost-effective way of going about it. And I am also convinced that future predictions with regards to 'big changes' are almost always later than expected, more often than not SO much later that they don't matter at all. Look at multi threading in games... we've been waiting for quadcore optimized engines for over a decade Economical arguments are actually the most influential of them all regardless of what 'us gamers' or 'us consumers' say we want to badly - if there is no economical sense in having 'more' of something, it's not going to be a good purchase. The more cores argument falls into this and still holds true.

 

[R-T-B]

Prediction is not pointless. I'm doing this for everything I buy and so far I haven't really burned myself. If done riht, you can save some money and have a great system that can last you for several years.

I meant more speculating with certainty is pointless. You can of course make educated guesses.

I don't think I need to remind you of the "eat my shoes" incident.

 

[Woomack]

Ok, so this is what I was aiming for in parallel...

X99 setup:
5820K + Sabertooth X99 + 16GB/32GB RAM = ~900-1000€

Z170 setup:
6700K + Maximus VIII Hero + 16GB 2666-3000MHz RAM (2x8GB) = ~720€
6700K + Sabertooth Z170 + 16GB 2666-3000MHz RAM (2x8GB) = ~720€

Any idea why Sabertooth Z170 only has 2400MHz RAM listed here but Maximus Hero has 3600+?
http://www.asus.com/microsite/best-100-series-motherboards/compare/

Anything above 3200 has been tested by ASUS only on 2x4GB and I can already tell you that most memory kits won't work good above that clock ( already tested 7 or 8 memory kits on M8 Hero and Ranger ). 3200 is working on probably every X99 motherboard using 4x8GB kits.
Not all Z170 motherboards will handle anything above 3466. For example Ranger can't run in dual channel above that point. There are also huge differences between max clocks on each memory slot. For example on my board ( right now it's Hero ) 1/3 slot can make 3600+, 2 slot can make 3800+, 4 slot can make 4000+. These are max clocks on 4GB modules. Max on 8GB is lower.

X99 will cost about the same as Z170 but if you want Sabertooth then you will pay more. There are other boards, not worse than Sabertooth in about the same price as Maximus VIII Hero ( or you have weirdly high prices in your country ).

It just looks like you are looking for more reasons to stick to Skylake

I've now also thrown cooling into consideration and 6700K does look tempting from this aspect. It's a 95W CPU, meaning I'll be able to keep my single rad Antec 920 at crazy low RPM (silence!).

Considering how super brand new Z170 is, it would be absolutely stupid if Intel wouldn't release any CPU for it with more cores or even higher clocks at a later time. They usually have CPU's up to 140W TDP, meaning we surely can expect something being released at a later time for LGA1151.

I'm using the same cooling for Z170 and X99 but I stick to the same water cooling kit which I got couple of years ago.

CPUs at higher TDP and higher core count are dedicated for 2011-3 platform. You pay premium but get more. As I said, on intel roadmap there are not 6 core+ 1151 CPUs. Maybe they will release something on new core but it will take some time.

 

[Assimilator]

To answer the topic of this thread: nil. LGA-1151 will never have more than 4 physical cores, anything more would cannibalise Intel's more expensive HEDT segment.

 

[cadaveca]

Any idea why Sabertooth Z170 only has 2400MHz RAM listed here but Maximus Hero has 3600+?
http://www.asus.com/microsite/best-100-series-motherboards/compare/

Sabertooth isn't an memory overclocking board, never has been. It's about the ultimate in longevity and stability with modest clocks. If you want memory OC, buy the ROG series, and for serious OC, only the Extreme will do (limits on BIOS options in the least).

Anything above 3200 has been tested by ASUS only on 2x4GB and I can already tell you that most memory kits won't work good above that clock ( already tested 7 or 8 memory kits on M8 Hero and Ranger ). 3200 is working on probably every X99 motherboard using 4x8GB kits.
Not all Z170 motherboards will handle anything above 3466. For example Ranger can't run in dual channel above that point. There are also huge differences between max clocks on each memory slot. For example on my board ( right now it's Hero ) 1/3 slot can make 3600+, 2 slot can make 3800+, 4 slot can make 4000+. These are max clocks on 4GB modules. Max on 8GB is lower.

Memory OC above 3466 is only BIOS-limited, nothing else. Ranger COULD run 3600 with the right BIOS (probably coming soon). NO board would run 3600 when I first got my 3600 MHz sticks... now every board I have does.

 

[Woomack]

Sabertooth isn't an memory overclocking board, never has been. It's about the ultimate in longevity and stability with modest clocks. If you want memory OC, buy the ROG series, and for serious OC, only the Extreme will do (limits on BIOS options in the least).

Not even all ROG boards as Ranger is not good for memory overclocking. My board stuck at 3466 in dual channel and I replaced it to Hero which runs at 3733+ in dual and 4000+ in single channel. I haven't seen any special limits in Hero BIOS ( which should be about the same as Gene or Extreme in this case ). I could reach 3600 on Ranger but only on 1 memory stick in last slot.

Memory OC can be limited by BIOS but if manufacturer won't release any version with additional options then it doesn't change anything. ASUS usually cares to improve overclocking only for the highest boards what in this case is Hero/Gene/Extreme. I just don't think that Ranger will have similar support.

I have Hero for 2 weeks now and it was working at 1st BIOS up to 4000+. Actually I haven't seen any improvements on newer releases.

 

[cadaveca]

Not even all ROG boards as Ranger is not good for memory overclocking. My board stuck at 3466 and I replaced it to Hero which runs at 3733+ in dual and 4000+ in single channel. I haven't seen any special limits in Hero BIOS ( which should be about the same as Gene or Extreme in this case ).

It's a BIOS problem. Most users on Ranger won't pay $300-$300 for 2x 4 GB 3600 MHz sticks, so ASUS hasn't bothered to tune BIOS yet, just like they didn't both to make it possible to install Win7 without creating custom OS install disc.