Originally Posted by Oj010
North of 5 GHz on air...?
If it is, then count me in!
Yet don't count on it. One will be lucky to see a 4.2GHz quad core version of this CPU, and that would be breaking a record before Turbo Boost kicks in.
4.5GHz will be more realistic, and I believe doable. If AMD would only introduce an 8 core (really a quad w/4 logical cores) running at 5.0GHz, then Intel would have no choice other than stop holding back. They are doing so because as long as AMD isn't riding their backs close, there's no need to to ramp things up. AMD needs to make Intel compete, then they will.
On the other hand, Intel 8 core CPU's are truly just that, with 8 H/T cores. Only thing is, I've never understood why for $600-1,000, these runs at less than 4.0GHz stock, sometimes far less. I'd never give that much for a CPU, even if wealthy, for one that doesn't run at 4.0Ghz or higher. Intel knows that overclocking voids the warranty, so they're intentionally holding back performance on these very expensive CPU's, any plus is that these (plus the 6 core models) doesn't double as a GPU. Yet at least one can get a 6 core for about $50 more than the i7-4790K/6700K, the million dollar question being, are these any better? Sure if overclocked, but how long can one run one of these at say, 4.5Ghz before thermal meltdown?
I'd wager the life wouldn't be that of a traditional quad running at 4.0GHz, if pushed to match the performance of one.
That's what Intel is banking on, and why if purchasing a six core or larger would go AMD.
Hopefully more details about kaby_lake will become available soon, we don't know enough to say if their top quad will be as powerful (in GHz) as current offerings. If not, there's little reason to take the plunge. Plus as stated previously, Intel needs to get more out of their releases, for example, the Haswell series has had a fantastic run & it's not over with by a longshot. The 5th gen may as well had not been released, and we're just into the 6th gen release. Intel needs to milk as much profit out of each release before introducing another, by that meaning allow retail & online stock levels to drop low before shipment. Intel still makes cash on every CPU sold, including retail packaged computers. So with the 6th gen settling in, it's good to know what's up coming & begin production, but let stock levels dip well below 10% before releasing the next gen batches for retail sale (PC OEM's will get theirs first). This is a win-win for all.
Think about it, Haswell CPU's has been on the market for over 3 years & there's warehouses still full of these & pricing stable, though inching upwards. That's a great run that neither Sandy nor Ivy Bridge had, though there's some Ivy Bridge CPU's of limited models available still. For that matter, the 4th gen of the 'i' series has been the most successful to date. Even my semi-retired i7-4770 is still listed as a Top 5 Common CPU on the Passmark site (actually #4 on the list). That's amazing for a 3 year old CPU to be in that position. The 6700K shows on the overall list, though still not in the Top 10 Common models.
They should try & make a similar run with Skylake, releasing kaby_lake too fast will only result in wasted R&D on Intel's side. And hopefully the days of substituting thermal paste for fluxless solder are forever gone. This doesn't help Intel image, to cheap out on this detail for a $300+ boxed CPU.