# Skylake or wait?



## Octopuss (Jan 17, 2016)

I think my PC is due for an upgrade this year. The question is, shall I buy Skylake or wait for Kaby Lake (wasn't aware new architecture was to be released this early after the previous one)?


----------



## Frick (Jan 17, 2016)

Skylake or Cannonlake I think, unless you feel USB 3.1 is really important. Kaby Lake won't be supported on Windows 7 though. What that actually means I'm not so sure of.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jan 17, 2016)

The only thing maybe worth waiting for right now is Zen.

I don't think you'd see much improvement going from 3### to 6###.


----------



## RejZoR (Jan 17, 2016)

Frick said:


> Skylake or Cannonlake I think, unless you feel USB 3.1 is really important. Kaby Lake won't be supported on Windows 7 though. What that actually means I'm not so sure of.



From what I've gathered, it doesn't mean Windows 7 won't work anymore on those CPU's. It just means they won't release security updates for those CPU's if exploits or security holes happen to appear for those at some point. Just sacking the support entirely would be just utterly moronic decision. I mean, that would mean you'd be forced to upgrade to new OS and also pay for it whether you like it or not (or if Win7 was just fine for your needs). That would be just unacceptable imo.

But if OS keeps on working and you just aren't as secure as you'd be on latest OS, that's ok and something you already take into consideration by staying with an older version of OS.


----------



## Octopuss (Jan 17, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> The only thing maybe worth waiting for right now is Zen.
> 
> I don't think you'd see much improvement going from 3### to 6###.


While I am no fanboy of anything, I don't think I'd want to make such radical switch. I've been using Intel as my platform for over ten years and am too used to it. Besides, as much as I wish AMD got back into the serious competition, I wouldn't easily trust them anymore.
I am not really looking for serious performance gains, just some general improvements that come with the new technology (but USB2+ means nothing to me as I have no devices that could benefit from it).
It's just that I might as well wait a little longer if Kaby Lake is really going out in 2nd half of this year.


----------



## BiggieShady (Jan 17, 2016)

Octopuss said:


> I wouldn't easily trust them anymore.


The trust game begins just as soon as we see some benchmarks on paper


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jan 17, 2016)

There's really nothing "radical" about switching between AMD and Intel.  At their core, they are largely cross-compatible.  Even if you have no interest in Zen, Zen may force Intel to reduce their prices.  Kaby Lake and Zen are to debut at about the same time.

Remember, Kaby Lake is effectively just a "Skylake Refresh."  Devil's Canyon was "Haswell Refresh."  The clockspeeds are a little bit different and that's about it: http://ark.intel.com/compare/75123,80807


----------



## silentbogo (Jan 17, 2016)

I think your 3770K will hold just fine at least for another few years, until 10nm production goes on market.
Performance-wise you'll see a lot less benefit in every day tasks, so you should only consider Skylake if you are worried about heat and power consumption (but even that aspect is somewhat questionable).










The above video was tested at stock clock speeds for all CPUs, except 6700K. This means that with matching clocks, 3770K will be behind 6700K <10%, which I personally consider negligible.


----------



## silkstone (Jan 17, 2016)

I personally feel it's better to wait to upgrade until you start noticing poor performance in the things you run.

If you've got money burning a hole in your pocket, go for the skylake. Otherwise, if your 3770K can handle everything you throw at it, hold of for 1-2 generations.


----------



## hojnikb (Jan 17, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> From what I've gathered, it doesn't mean Windows 7 won't work anymore on those CPU's. It just means they won't release security updates for those CPU's if exploits or security holes happen to appear for those at some point. Just sacking the support entirely would be just utterly moronic decision. I mean, that would mean you'd be forced to upgrade to new OS and also pay for it whether you like it or not (or if Win7 was just fine for your needs). That would be just unacceptable imo.
> 
> But if OS keeps on working and you just aren't as secure as you'd be on latest OS, that's ok and something you already take into consideration by staying with an older version of OS.



Win10 is a free upgrade for win7 and up, so that argument is invalid.

I totally understand why M$ is doing this. They don't want another Windows XP. Why bother supporting a 7 year old operating system (yeah, w7 will be that old this year). Give users a free upgrade to a new system and concentrate resources into it. Better than to have two or 3 systems with half baked support.


Kudos to Microsoft for finally learning that they dont need another windows xp.


----------



## P4-630 (Jan 17, 2016)

hojnikb said:


> Win10 is a free upgrade for win7 and up, so that argument is invalid.
> 
> I totally understand why M$ is doing this. They don't want another Windows XP. Why bother supporting a 7 year old operating system (yeah, w7 will be that old this year). Give users a free upgrade to a new system and concentrate resources into it. Better than to have two or 3 systems with half baked support.
> 
> ...



So you seem to be very happy with windows 10 and it's automatic pushed driver/windows updates and all


----------



## Jack1n (Jan 17, 2016)

Your not even close to needing a CPU upgrade, if you really got the upgrade itch get a second 290 or maybe a 980ti/FuryX and get yourself a 4k monitor or a 165hz 1440p monitor.


----------



## Octopuss (Jan 17, 2016)

It's not about CPU peformance at all (although I certainly wouldn't mind more). It's more about the smaller improvements that come with the new platform and chipsets. That's why I am trying to figure out whether to go for Skylake or wait a little longer for the next thing. Or let me put it in another way: I am not asking whether to upgrade, I am looking for opinions about the choice between Skylake and Kaby Lake.



hojnikb said:


> Win10 is a free upgrade for win7 and up, so that argument is invalid.
> 
> I totally understand why M$ is doing this. They don't want another Windows XP. Why bother supporting a 7 year old operating system (yeah, w7 will be that old this year). Give users a free upgrade to a new system and concentrate resources into it. Better than to have two or 3 systems with half baked support.
> 
> ...


Microsoft messed Windows 10 up so badly (for lots of people) they are effectively creating another Windows XP out of 7.


----------



## Jack1n (Jan 17, 2016)

Then i firmly suggest to wait for Kaby Lake or even beyond that.


----------



## 64K (Jan 17, 2016)

I'm running a i5 3570k in my rig which I built around 3 1/2 years ago and planned to do a new build with Skylake when it came but decided that it really wasn't worth it. I only use my desktop for gaming. I am also waiting for Kaby Lake and Zen to see what they have to offer but at this point I'm skeptical of what performance increase will come with Kaby Lake. Maybe a few percent faster than Skylake. The thing is that by the time Kaby Lake and Zen arrive we should have some more information about Cannonlake and a better idea how many more months it will be until release. If 10nm Cannonlake is facing even further delays at that time then I'm going to do a Kaby Lake build at that time. 4 1/2 years with this rig at that time. It's a little frustrating that I want to spend the $$$ on a new build but lack a good reason to do so but I understand that the majority of CPUs are going into business PCs and you don't need a lot to run MS Office. People who build their own rigs and overclock are a small piece of the pie for Intel.

The one thing that might light a fire under Intel's ass is if Zen is decent competition for Kaby Lake but maybe there isn't much more performance that they can give with silicon anyway. It's my understanding that there's not much more that can be done with IPC or increased GHz.


----------



## RejZoR (Jan 17, 2016)

hojnikb said:


> Win10 is a free upgrade for win7 and up, so that argument is invalid.
> 
> I totally understand why M$ is doing this. They don't want another Windows XP. Why bother supporting a 7 year old operating system (yeah, w7 will be that old this year). Give users a free upgrade to a new system and concentrate resources into it. Better than to have two or 3 systems with half baked support.
> 
> ...



But why would you do that if Win7 runs just fine on Skylake at the moment? Or will they intentionally change the kernel to forcefully drop Win7 support for Skylake. That sounds like really shitty way to do business, free Win 10 or not, not everyone like it or want it. I still think updating is an absolute turd with Windows 10 and even worse with it's automatic partition creating when it installs larger upgrades like TH2. my tablet now has 6 freaking partitions because of it, out of which 3 are Win10 made (some recovery nonsense that didn't get rid of partitions when I've erased recovery "downgrade" data). That's just stupid. And don't get me started with absolutely retarded forced driver updates...


----------



## Shihab (Jan 17, 2016)

hojnikb said:


> Win10 is a free upgrade for win7 and up, so that argument is invalid.


Won't be for long. Come the end of July and 7/8 users will have to pay for the upgrade.



Octopuss said:


> It's not about CPU peformance at all (although I certainly wouldn't mind more). It's more about the smaller improvements that come with the new platform and chipsets. That's why I am trying to figure out whether to go for Skylake or wait a little longer for the next thing. Or let me put it in another way: I am not asking whether to upgrade, I am looking for opinions about the choice between Skylake and Kaby Lake.
> 
> 
> Microsoft messed Windows 10 up so badly (for lots of people) they are effectively creating another Windows XP out of 7.



Win 10 itself is as close to perfection as a consumer-OS gets. Win 10 plus an internet connection is what irks many (most?) people. 

On topic, make a decision based on how long you can wait. The next thing nearly always will be better. Wait for Kaby and next you'll be looking forward to Cannon lake, and ditto again when the latter comes around.


----------



## hojnikb (Jan 17, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> But why would you do that if Win7 runs just fine on Skylake at the moment? Or will they intentionally change the kernel to forcefully drop Win7 support for Skylake. That sounds like really shitty way to do business, free Win 10 or not, not everyone like it or want it. I still think updating is an absolute turd with Windows 10 and even worse with it's automatic partition creating when it installs larger upgrades like TH2. my tablet now has 6 freaking partitions because of it, out of which 3 are Win10 made (some recovery nonsense that didn't get rid of partitions when I've erased recovery "downgrade" data). That's just stupid. And don't get me started with absolutely retarded forced driver updates...



All of that can be easily solved with the help of google. Btw, i've upgraded plenty devices to w10 and on none were there any aditional partitions. Only leftover data to rollback to previous version of windows.

Obvioulsy they wont change the kernel (thats just expensive and pointless) but they wont bother supporting it for newer hardware. Which is fine.


----------



## vega22 (Jan 17, 2016)

i cant tell the difference from my 26k and 47k, your ivy is to sky the same kind of thing.

yes benchmarks show it a difference, but real world use...i notice the loading speeds from the pch more than any raw cpu power gap.

as others have said, zen is the reason to wait right now. it could really rock the boat for intel's mainstream dominance.

even if it doesn't beat the performance intel have, it will force them to change their price structure in reaction to where they slot in.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jan 17, 2016)

yeah, im in this position too. My GPU is being limited by my 2500k's "limited" technology, and cannot run in the main PCIe slot, which forces me to run in the lower slots @ X8. I figured this was a good reason to upgrade, but I have been having trouble since I dont game TOO much, and that is my heaviest CPU related task....so im gonna buy my new build slowly, and get the CPU/MoBo as late as possible, that way Ill have all i need, and wont suffer from the whole regret thing, when a Even newer CPU is released, since ill be buying the parts over atleast a 6month period, short of me winning the lottery


----------



## fusionblu (Jan 17, 2016)

Octopuss said:


> I think my PC is due for an upgrade this year. The question is, shall I buy Skylake or wait for Kaby Lake (wasn't aware new architecture was to be released this early after the previous one)?



A difficult choice with all considered with current releases and what will be released very soon.

Simple answer is that it would be better to wait given that the Haswell-E build is the best price per performance build given you go for the low end CPU compared to a full high end Skylake build with the best i7 CPU, but the new releases could have a considerably improved performance boost from the current generation and would make likely the pricing for Haswell-E CPUs and X99 motherboards cheaper than their current pricing.

My reasons for not recommending Skylake is that there are known design flaws from Intel going cheap with all CPUs such as the main board which is thinner and weaker compared to previous releases and worst of all Skylake most powerful CPU (Intel Core i7-6700K) is priced higher than the lowest end Haswell-E CPU (Intel i7-5820K) which is considerably more powerful and does not have the design flaws seen with the Skylake CPUs.

There are also the new releases which are on their way such as Broadwell-E for socket 2011-V3 and there is the AMD Zen which could have some potential, but all is not known until those CPUs are released and that decent benchmarks have been done for those.


----------



## Octopuss (Mar 24, 2016)

My wife's PC is crying for an upgrade as well with its bullshit socket 1156 board. I am actually thinking to upgrade it with Skylake hardware rather than anything newer, because it's a budget office-like PC and performance is not a priority. The price kind of is though. Do you think we can expect noticeable price drops on boards and CPUs at some point in near future, or no sooner than around the end of the year (when is Kaby lake supposed to be released into the wilds again?)? If not, I might just as well just buy the stuff right away. It's not that it doesn't work and wouldn't for a few more years, but it's annoying to do anything on it, and the integrated GPU really sucks ass even for watching films.


----------



## overclocking101 (Mar 24, 2016)

I just went from 1156 875k lynnfield to a 1151 i5 6600k skylake in February. I will say this. my new setup performs just a little bit better then my 875k setup. That said I went from 8 threads to 4 threads with better overall performance imo. I wouldn't tell you that skylake is a must for you because 1156 still performs well depending on the setup. but z170 boards also give the ability for m2 ssd's and usb 3.0 thats not slow because its not via a controller. and native sata 6g/s also. my 1156 board had a controller for the sata and usb 3.0 but my new board performs better because its native not add in. If it were me and I had the money to ditch 1156 I would but your 3770k setup should still be sufficient. at least until the next lineup comes out. also some skylake boards are still buggy (ah-hem mine thanks a lot gigabyte) so it may be worth a wait just for it to become more mature.


----------



## Octopuss (Mar 24, 2016)

Buggy in what way?

I am keeping the 3770K for the time being - that's my PC I don't intend to upgrade with Skylake (after all).
I just used the thread to expand on the idea of upgrading another PC (which has the crappiest original i3 CPU I believe).


----------



## alucasa (Mar 24, 2016)

CPU performance wise, like some say, you won't notice OMFG-like increase. But as OP says it's more than just CPU uarch upgrade. The introduction of native M.2 enables more possibilities for SFF builds. And, if one is upgrading from pre-native USB3 platform, USB3 is a big upgrade itself. Though you will want Win 8.1 or Win 10 to take advantage of native USB3.

DDR4 for Skylake, they do help iGPU as well.


----------



## ASOT (Mar 24, 2016)

If u have the money go Skylake or wait for Zen.


----------



## silentbogo (Mar 24, 2016)

Octopuss said:


> My wife's PC is crying for an upgrade as well with its bullshit socket 1156 board. I am actually thinking to upgrade it with Skylake hardware rather than anything newer, because it's a budget office-like PC and performance is not a priority. The price kind of is though. Do you think we can expect noticeable price drops on boards and CPUs at some point in near future, or no sooner than around the end of the year (when is Kaby lake supposed to be released into the wilds again?)? If not, I might just as well just buy the stuff right away. It's not that it doesn't work and wouldn't for a few more years, but it's annoying to do anything on it, and the integrated GPU really sucks ass even for watching films.


I'd say Skylake right now is as good as anything. 
My cousin's fiance asked to build a cheap office PC with provisions for longevity (she doesn't care much about performance), and when it came to checking prices on new hardware I concluded that entry-level Skylake cost about the same as an entry-level Haswell (I'll spend overall $15-20 more on $200 rig incl. wireless KB/mouse)... All they do is type documents and use proprietary software from the turn of last century, so you see why performance is not an issue.

If her computing needs are close to what you've described, then get Pentium G4400 and be happy. It can do lots of things, including hardware-accelerated 4K playback (not as good as HD530, but still adequate).
And if you sell your LGA1156 hardware and reuse the remaining stuff(case, hdd etc.), you might actually make it under $100.


----------



## Grings (Mar 24, 2016)

I'd say build her a skylake (or even haswell if the price is good enough) i3, newer ones are hyper threaded, and for the most part will perform as well as a quad core.

given a few more years, with a 2 core 2 thread chip you will just have another sluggish old nail like the current 1156 rig


----------



## Octopuss (Mar 24, 2016)

The question is when, though. Can we expect anything somewhat important (price drops, significantly improved new board revisions or whatever) in the next few months?
Whatever I'm going to build is supposed to last another five years, so I want to make it as best as I can.


----------



## cracklez (Mar 24, 2016)

CPU won't be a big upgrade in regards to performance, it'll mostly be for the features like other people said (USB 3.0/3.1, M.2 capable MBs, etc..). Changing to a new platform is always an expensive endeavor, so I'd suggest the biggest upgrade to keep longevity at the maximum would be a fast SATA 3 SSD. I don't know what components the rig you plan to upgrade has, therefore I can't elaborate any more than that.


----------



## Flow (Mar 24, 2016)

I doubt intel will drop prices due to new cpu's, they never did in the past either.
Hm, if you really want to upgrade the other pc, then just get the parts you're interested in, and can afford ofcourse.
Then when new cpu's are released you can upgrade your main pc.

As for speed in os and general, I run dual boot win 7 and 10, and imo 10 runs the same as 8/8.1 with the exception of the start menu, which I really like. You can translate that back to the speed difference between 7 and 8 in desktop mode.
My benches are more or less the same on either platform so DX12 should make the difference.
Having rebuild an old amd system myself recently, with a 965BE, I found general windows operation smooth enough. Again imo, there isn't much difference overall in speed.
Only the new tech ofcourse like ssd etc. which does require newer os and hardware.

Games will show the most difference with old and new hardware, as always.

ps. if it's the other build, you could take the non K cpu and some cheaper ram + an average motherboard with limited overclocking possibilities.
This would make it a bit cheaper while still being competitive for the next 5 years.

On the other hand, building an amd system could be refreshing and definitely cheaper.
As for your main rig, as you already said, it's good for another couple of years.


----------



## silentbogo (Mar 24, 2016)

Octopuss said:


> The question is when, though. Can we expect anything somewhat important (price drops, significantly improved new board revisions or whatever) in the next few months?
> Whatever I'm going to build is supposed to last another five years, so I want to make it as best as I can.


Doubt that. Haswell is no cheaper than it was last year, Skylake is still a fresh platform and only half of announced SKUs are on the market today.


----------



## overclocking101 (Mar 24, 2016)

Octopuss said:


> Buggy in what way?
> 
> I am keeping the 3770K for the time being - that's my PC I don't intend to upgrade with Skylake (after all).
> I just used the thread to expand on the idea of upgrading another PC (which has the crappiest original i3 CPU I believe).


I know that with my board its really weird I still have not been able to properly reset the cmos via jumper, also it has very cruddy fan speed options like normal or full speed no in between and the pwm features don't function properly either. I tried their SIV software and it just makes the fans pulsate for some reason unless I turn them up to 100%. my post speaker goes off randomly for no reason at all. and if I disable turbo it hangs, if I try to set most oc features manually it just doesn't post and hangs forever and like I said I cant reset cmos so I have to wait for the board to post and shut down until it finally resets its self and posts. just stupid little things that seem to be overlooked because my board isn't top end nor bottom but somewhere in between. hopefully future bios releases fix this as I have reached out to gigabyte and haven't gotten response yet.
I cant speak for all boards/ manufacturers because this is my first 1151 board but I will suggest don't buy this board= Gigabyte z170x G1 Gaming 6


----------



## overclocking101 (Mar 24, 2016)

cracklez said:


> CPU won't be a big upgrade in regards to performance, it'll mostly be for the features like other people said (USB 3.0/3.1, M.2 capable MBs, etc..). Changing to a new platform is always an expensive endeavor, so I'd suggest the biggest upgrade to keep longevity at the maximum would be a fast SATA 3 SSD. I don't know what components the rig you plan to upgrade has, therefore I can't elaborate any more than that.


i know its off topic but nice avatal lol


----------



## erocker (Mar 24, 2016)

With a 3770k, I'd wait. I'd still be using mine if I didn't wreck my socket. I'm waiting until at least the end of the year for the next round of CPU's from Intel and AMD.


----------



## Octopuss (Mar 27, 2016)

So after some thinking, I ordered
MSI Z170-A PRO
i3 6320
8GB of Kingston HyperX Savage Black DDR4 3000MHz

Total cost: €347
Everything else is reusable (and that CoolerMaster HAF XB case looks really awesome)


----------



## silentbogo (Mar 27, 2016)

Octopuss said:


> So after some thinking, I ordered
> MSI Z170-A PRO
> i3 6320
> 8GB of Kingston HyperX Savage Black DDR4 3000MHz
> ...


Excellent!

This is pretty much what I planned for my new work PC, except I will probably go with an i3-6100, since it is the cheapest Skylake with HD530 graphics.
Maybe it's just me, but 200MHz advantage and some extra cache will not make any noticeable difference to justify almost $50 premium.
In productivity software and multimedia you'll get at most 10% increase over 6100... same goes for gaming on an IGP [*!*].

Couldn't find a review in English with both CPUs on the same chart, but here are some benchmarks from 3dnews.ru:


Spoiler


----------



## Octopuss (Mar 27, 2016)

Well, I can't be arsed to try to overclock locked CPU, so I bought the fastest thing I could. You're right though. The CPU isn't horribly expensive anyway, so why not.
I hope the performance of the integrated GPU is light years ahead of that of i3-530.


----------



## P4-630 (Mar 27, 2016)

Octopuss said:


> I hope the performance of the integrated GPU is light years ahead of that of i3-530.



Hmm, don't expect much from intel HD530, I can play games such as GRID, Prison Architect and game dev tycoon with it.

Older games should work fine though.


----------



## Octopuss (Mar 27, 2016)

Actually, in relative numbers, LOL! http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compar...vs-Intel-HD-530-Desktop-Skylake/m7702vsm33102

No it's not supposed to run games (at least not the usual demanding games we play), I just wanted to know how much faster it was.


----------



## silentbogo (Mar 27, 2016)

Octopuss said:


> Well, I can't be arsed to try to overclock locked CPU, so I bought the fastest thing I could. You're right though. The CPU isn't horribly expensive anyway, so why not.
> I hope the performance of the integrated GPU is light years ahead of that of i3-530.


The overall difference is not that noticeable. i3-6320 is the fastest i3 on the market, but even in a gaming rig with a dedicated GPU it won't give you as much advantage as you'd expect from base level i5.
If your budget allows you - go i5-6400, if not - i3-6100 is your best option.


----------



## P4-630 (Mar 27, 2016)

silentbogo said:


> The overall difference is not that noticeable. i3-6320 is the fastest i3 on the market, but even in a gaming rig with a dedicated GPU it won't give you as much advantage as you'd expect from base level i5.
> If your budget allows you - go i5-6400, if not - i3-6100 is your best option.





Octopuss said:


> *So after some thinking, I ordered*
> MSI Z170-A PRO
> i3 6320
> 8GB of Kingston HyperX Savage Black DDR4 3000MHz
> ...



So he already ordered the new hardware, so I guess he has to do it with that i3-6320.


----------



## Octopuss (Mar 27, 2016)

Too late now, but anyway - the i5 is hugely slower. Yes it's twice as many cores, but 2.7GHz compared to 3.9 on the i3. Considering it's not supposed to be a gaming PC...


----------

