# Intel "Skylake" to be 6th Generation Core Series, First i7-6700K Benchmarks



## btarunr (Apr 29, 2015)

Intel's next major CPU architecture, codenamed "Skylake," could be classified as the company's 6th generation Core processor family. It will succeed the brief stint Core "Broadwell" will have at the market, with no major chips for PC enthusiasts to look forward to. The Core i7-6700K appears to be the flagship product based on the Skylake-D silicon, succeeding the i7-4770K and i7-4790K. The Core i5-6600K will succeed the i5-4670K and i5-4690K. 

The i7-6700K is a quad-core chip, with HyperThreading enabling 8 logical CPUs. Its nominal clock will be 4.00 GHz, with a rather shallow 4.20 GHz Turbo Boost frequency. It will feature an 8 MB L3 cache, and an integrated memory controller that supports both DDR4 and DDR3 memory types. This makes Skylake a transition point for the mainstream PC market to gradually upgrade to DDR4. You'll have some motherboards with DDR3 memory slots, some with DDR4 slots, and some with both kinds of slots. The resulting large uncore component, and perhaps a bigger integrated GPU, will result in quad-core Skylake parts having TDP rated as high as 95W, higher than current Haswell quad-core parts, with their 88W TDP.



Turkish tech publication PC FRM claims to have access to performance numbers of the i7-6700K and i5-6600K, which it probably sourced from engineering samples being circulated within the motherboard industry; compared to some popular current-generation chips from the segment. The i7-6700K, which features the same clocks as an i7-4790K, is 15 percent faster in most tests. Its performance is slotted somewhere between the i7-4970K and the six-core i7-5820K, in multi-threaded tests. In tests such as PC Mark, it outclasses every other chip in comparison, including the i7-5820K. 



 

 

 

 

 



*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## Nokiron (Apr 29, 2015)

This diagram is so misleading.


----------



## Naito (Apr 29, 2015)

Looks like a decent performance boost if claims are true. My Z77 feature set is growing a little stale, so this may be a good upgrade.


----------



## $ReaPeR$ (Apr 29, 2015)

interesting.. i really dont see the need for DDR4 though.. but i supose that technology has to move on.. also i expected the FX to be much slower than what they seem to be.


----------



## $ReaPeR$ (Apr 29, 2015)

Naito said:


> Looks like a decent performance boost if claims are true. My Z77 feature set is growing a little stale, so this may be a good upgrade.


mate, your system looks very nice  the only things i would upgrade are the gpu and the ssd, beyond that i see no reason for you to pull the trigger.


----------



## cheesy999 (Apr 29, 2015)

$ReaPeR$ said:


> interesting.. i really dont see the need for DDR4 though.. but i supose that technology has to move on.. also i expected the FX to be much slower than what they seem to be.



3d mark benchmark will use all 8 threads, and they're still pretty good in that scenario, they're a bit old but they have got 30w extra to play with


----------



## Naito (Apr 29, 2015)

$ReaPeR$ said:


> mate, your system looks very nice  the only things i would upgrade are the gpu and the ssd, beyond that i see no reason for you to pull the trigger.



Cheers. I'll probably hang on to it a bit longer, but with only two native SATA 3.0 ports and things like NVMe becoming common, the Z77s features set starts to fall a bit short.


----------



## $ReaPeR$ (Apr 29, 2015)

cheesy999 said:


> 3d mark benchmark will use all 8 threads, and they're still pretty good in that scenario, they're a bit old but they have got 30w extra to play with



i know..  i was just trying to be ironic. if one believes the fanboys AMD should have half of the scores they do.



Naito said:


> Cheers. I'll probably hang on to it a bit longer, but with only two native SATA 3.0 ports and things like NVMe becoming common, the Z77s features set starts to fall a bit short.



form that standpoint i agree with you, for the poweruser SSDs are becoming a necessity.


----------



## RCoon (Apr 29, 2015)

In other words, if you're still on Sandybridge and don't need a beefcake iGPU and DDR4 (nobody really _needs_ DDR4), you're welcome to skip this generation too. It doesn't even tick the power saving box. Gaming performance improvements are miniscule.

Only reason I can see for me to upgrade is for NVMe M6e m.2 drives.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Apr 29, 2015)

Naito said:


> Looks like a decent performance boost if claims are true. My Z77 feature set is growing a little stale, so this may be a good upgrade.


 
Not even actually necessary, sir!  I believe you merely have the "upgrade itch."    Perhaps some features are not present in Z77, true, depending on the board model, but really, nobody's performance is going to HUGELY increase going to this....unless they are on skt 775.


----------



## lemonadesoda (Apr 29, 2015)

I'm a bit disappointed. I'd have liked to see significant performance improvements AND/OR TDP improvements for this to be labelled "6th generation". As is, it's a small uptick in performance with no TDP gains, ie, buy new, but skip this generation for upgrades.


----------



## Jorge (Apr 29, 2015)

It's nice to see some folks have finally figured out that there is no need to upgrade when a new CPU or DRAM series is released and offers no tangible system performance boost. If you're upgrading just because you want some new toys, that's perfectly fine. If you're updating because you didn't do your homework and you don't understand that you're getting almost nothing in performance for your money, shame on you.

As noted by other folks here, DDR4 is a perfect example of an unnecessary, over-hyped, option. With DDR3 running at 1600+ MHz. not being a system bottleneck on a discrete CPU powered PC, spending on higher frequency DDR3 or over-priced DDR4 is just throwing good money away. While the DRAM purveyors will love you, you gain almost nothing in desktop PC system performance for your money.

A technically educated consumer can make an informed purchasing decision and skip the hype.


----------



## RCoon (Apr 29, 2015)

Jorge said:


> no tangible system performance boost



The processor does kinda offer a system performance boost, in both the generic benchmark department as well as iGPU department. Gaming performance, and general memory performance however, remain relatively meh.


----------



## Naito (Apr 29, 2015)

rtwjunkie said:


> Not even actually necessary, sir! I believe you merely have the "upgrade itch."  Perhaps some features are not present in Z77, true, depending on the board model, but really, nobody's performance is going to HUGELY increase going to this....unless they are on skt 775.



That's true, the upgrade itch continues to grow stronger even when I tell myself it needn't be scratched yet! If it wasn't for the chipset (NVMe system drive is damn tempting), I wouldn't even consider an upgrade, but who knows. Let's see how this plays out first.


----------



## MoupitShow (Apr 29, 2015)

as a gamer, no upgrade until i see the impact of directX 12 on games with the arrival of windows 10. Some games running with directX 11 are going to have patches in order to be compatible and run with directx12 like The Witcher 3 and Batman Arkham Knight. (see : The Witcher 3 and Batman Arkham Knight to support DX12 ).


----------



## rtwjunkie (Apr 29, 2015)

MoupitShow said:


> as a gamer, no upgrade until i see the impact of directX 12 on games with the arrival of windows 10. Some games running with directX 11 are going to have patches in order to be compatible and run with directx12 like The Witcher 3 and Batman Arkham Knight. (see : The Witcher 3 and Batman Arkham Knight to support DX12 ).



That article is pure speculation on their part, considering earlier this month CDPR said explicitly they wanted to make the best Direct X 11 experience they could and thusly, The Witcher 3 would only be DirectX 11.


----------



## farfigneugan42 (Apr 29, 2015)

RCoon said:


> In other words, if you're still on Sandybridge and don't need a beefcake iGPU and DDR4 (nobody really _needs_ DDR4), you're welcome to skip this generation too. It doesn't even tick the power saving box. Gaming performance improvements are miniscule.
> 
> Only reason I can see for me to upgrade is for NVMe M6e m.2 drives.




Agreed.  I'm on a 2700k @ 4.6, and see nothing here that entices me to buy newer. I guess I'll either go socket 2011v3, or just keep holding out for whatever comes after Skylake.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 29, 2015)

So it would seem Skylake isn't worth waiting for when 5820 can be had now (albeit for a lot more money).


----------



## Petey Plane (Apr 29, 2015)

rtwjunkie said:


> Not even actually necessary, sir!  I believe you merely have the "upgrade itch."    Perhaps some features are not present in Z77, true, depending on the board model, but really, nobody's performance is going to HUGELY increase going to this....unless they are on skt 775.




Agree.  Still see little reason to upgrade from my 2500k and Z77.  Most of what i currently use my PC for (BF4/Hardline, PoE, Total War 2), isn't CPU restricted.  And PCI-3.0 and DDR4 aren't going to give me more than a 5% or so FPS boost.  We'll see how CPU dependent Witcher 3 is though .  Hopefully the next "Tock" will offer something better than 95 watts.

If you're mainly using your PC for gaming, a new GPU should always be prioritized over a new CPU/platform, in the upgrade path.

In real world, daily use performance (gaming, startup, shutdown, app loading), the perceptible difference between a NVMe SSD and a regular SATA3 SSD will be virtually non-existent.  You'd see maybe an improvement of 1-2 seconds in start-up times and level loads, at best.  This is all a little myopic toward gaming PCs, but i have a feeling that's what the majority of TPU's readers have.  

And protip:  SSDs have zero effect on game FPS.


----------



## Parn (Apr 29, 2015)

Petey Plane said:


> In real world, daily use performance (gaming, startup, shutdown, app loading), the perceptible difference between a NVMe SSD and a regular SATA3 SSD will be virtually non-existent.  You'd see maybe an improvement of 1-2 seconds in start-up times and level loads, at best.  This is all a little myopic toward gaming PCs, but i have a feeling that's what the majority of TPU's readers have.
> 
> And protip:  SSDs have zero effect on game FPS.



Agreed. Until the time when the per GB price of a NVMe PCI-E SSD drops to the same level as a current high-end SATA3 SSD (e.g. 850 Pro), I won't bother with upgrade.


----------



## Captain_Tom (Apr 29, 2015)

Naito said:


> Looks like a decent performance boost if claims are true. My Z77 feature set is growing a little stale, so this may be a good upgrade.



Really?  A 20% performance increase is worth hundreds of dollars? lol


----------



## ZoneDymo (Apr 29, 2015)

Pretty much what happens without competition.
Just add as little as possible (they could give you a much better cpu but nooo that would make them less money) so that people still feel the "oh shiny new stuff, must buy".

Minimum effort, lots of power still in the bag for future releases, maximum profit.


----------



## puma99dk| (Apr 29, 2015)

looks like i found my new cpu


----------



## xorbe (Apr 29, 2015)

Meh, very incremental.  Another round of 2500K owners and up giving it a pass.


----------



## ensabrenoir (Apr 29, 2015)

.......all this logic and cost/performance mertics.....*ITS NEW TOYS FOR SAKES MAN!!!!!!*   Older chipsets are neices and nephews  M UST FEED THE ADDICTION!!!!!!!


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Apr 29, 2015)

*_pats 3930k system's tower like a puppy's head
_
Don't worry, your place is still safe


----------



## crsh1976 (Apr 29, 2015)

Jorge said:


> As noted by other folks here, DDR4 is a perfect example of an unnecessary, over-hyped, option. With DDR3 running at 1600+ MHz. not being a system bottleneck on a discrete CPU powered PC, spending on higher frequency DDR3 or over-priced DDR4 is just throwing good money away. While the DRAM purveyors will love you, you gain almost nothing in desktop PC system performance for your money.



You guessed it, hardware manufacturers are out of real improvement ideas to sell us new stuff - Intel suffers from a better-than-expected return on all those great Core chips since Nehalem. 

I'm still on a Sandy Bridge i7-2600 and I have little reason to upgrade eventhough I'll be 3 generations behind when Skylake comes out. A faster SSD and a newer video card give me the boost I need, a new processor barely makes any difference in real-life usage.


----------



## Uplink10 (Apr 29, 2015)

$ReaPeR$ said:


> interesting.. i really dont see the need for DDR4 though..


You are absolutely right, DDR4 default clock should be at least 2800 MHz. But they want you to buy DDR4 so you would not use older RAM which is perfectly fine and spend money on new one.



Naito said:


> If it wasn't for the chipset (NVMe system drive is damn tempting)


I also hope 100 series chipst will have USB 3.1 support and performance of NVMe depends on Microsoft NVMe driver (if you are running Windows) and the last time I read article on Anandtech that driver made SSD slower than AHCI driver.



MoupitShow said:


> Some games running with directX 11 are going to have patches in order to be compatible and run with directx12


Publishers will not order developers to make DX12 patches because that would mean a loss in profits because they do not gain anything by it (expect consumer appreciation which does not translate into money) and graphic cards sale would also slow down and that does not help anyone except consumers.


----------



## RejZoR (Apr 29, 2015)

Boring. I'm interested in Skylake with the DRAM integrated into the die. Probably the E models that will come sometime after these mainstream ones I guess...


----------



## RealNeil (Apr 29, 2015)

Skylake will probably not land in my house at all.

My i7-2600K will go to my wife soon, and her i7-870 will retire to Linux-Land.
There is an FX-9590 system here, and an i7-5930K CPU on the way in a month for an upcoming build.
I already have an i7-4790K and i5-4690K here, so there is no need for Skylake.

I'll probably get rid of the 9950 or the 4690, or maybe both.


----------



## MikeMurphy (Apr 30, 2015)

Jorge said:


> As noted by other folks here, DDR4 is a perfect example of an unnecessary, over-hyped, option. With DDR3 running at 1600+ MHz. not being a system bottleneck on a discrete CPU powered PC, spending on higher frequency DDR3 or over-priced DDR4 is just throwing good money away. While the DRAM purveyors will love you, you gain almost nothing in desktop PC system performance for your money.
> 
> A technically educated consumer can make an informed purchasing decision and skip the hype.



If you call an upgrade path "hype" then sure, go ahead and buy something on the verge of obsolescence.  

Some of us prefer to plan ahead.


----------



## Antykain (Apr 30, 2015)

I'll be grabbing one of these when they are released.. Not to upgrade or replace my 4790k, cuz well.. that would be kinda pointless really.  But I am building another intel rig for the house/family and the timing of the the Skylake's release might fall into the same time frame I plan on building the new rig.  We'll see I guess..


----------



## Naito (Apr 30, 2015)

Captain_Tom said:


> Really? A 20% performance increase is worth hundreds of dollars? lol



It ain't for the CPU performance. However, an extra 15%, whether it's needed or not, isn't bad for the same clock rate. As I've stated several times, a newer chipset would allow me to run more drives off the native SATA 3.0 interfaces and provide me with the option to boot NVMe drives. Besides, I wouldn't mind downsizing to something a bit smaller and quieter.

EDIT: Isn't that 15% over the Haswell/Broadwell figures? Add that to the small jump from Ivy Bridge to Haswell, and you're probably looking at ~20% in _some _areas. Gaming-wise that's probably nothing, if not a few frames. But as an enthusiast...

EDIT 2: Fixed figures according to article.


----------



## Frick (Apr 30, 2015)

Booohhoooring.


----------



## Captain_Tom (Apr 30, 2015)

Naito said:


> It ain't for the CPU performance. However, an extra 15%, whether it's needed or not, isn't bad for the same clock rate. As I've stated several times, a newer chipset would allow me to run more drives off the native SATA 3.0 interfaces and provide me with the option to boot NVMe drives. Besides, I wouldn't mind downsizing to something a bit smaller and quieter.
> 
> EDIT: Isn't that 15% over the Haswell/Broadwell figures? Add that to the small jump from Ivy Bridge to Haswell, and you're probably looking at ~20% in _some _areas. Gaming-wise that's probably nothing, if not a few frames. But as an enthusiast...
> 
> EDIT 2: Fixed figures according to article.



Dude I am totally an enthusiast, and I never upgrade GPU's unless it is 2-4 times stronger than my current one.  And I will apply that same logic to my CPU upgrade path (If not more since you need a new motherboard and RAM for a new CPU)...


----------



## deemon (Apr 30, 2015)

I would much rather see a 6-core i7 without any integrated useless GPU. Truly dissapointed in Intel... for 4th year in a row. USELESS "upgrade"!


----------



## Prima.Vera (Apr 30, 2015)

Unless they make their 8 core CPU as the current mainstream series, not interested on this. New RAM + mobo = _*waste of money*_.


----------



## Captain_Tom (Apr 30, 2015)

deemon said:


> I would much rather see a 6-core i7 without any integrated useless GPU. Truly dissapointed in Intel... for 4th year in a row. USELESS "upgrade"!



If AMD's Zen can get its IPC at or above Sandy Bridge levels while providing 8 cores in a 95w package Intel will have no choice but to do exactly what you (And me) want.  Pray they do!


----------



## ensabrenoir (Apr 30, 2015)

.....starting to wonder about some of these posts......intel dosent make cpu's that are designed for yearly upgrades....you can if you want but honestly there should be  a two to three+ year gap.  having a mainstream 6+ core cpu will make the HEDT line pointless. What many are asking is for Intel to do an AMD and just give away their profits with a bunch of bad business decisions.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Apr 30, 2015)

ensabrenoir said:


> .....starting to wonder about some of these posts......intel dosent make cpu's that are designed for yearly upgrades


 
Actually, I think that's exactly what Intel does.  The vast majority of users have absolutely ZERO clue.  They don't know that the total difference between Sandy Bridge and Skylake is 15-20% of performance MAX, and that in games it might be 2-5%.  But Intel hopes people buy!

You're thinking like one of the informed people on this forum.


----------



## bubbleawsome (Apr 30, 2015)

the last worthwhile upgrade I made was i7 870 -> i5 4670k. At 4.3Ghz that should last me a while, but I could see myself jumping to a 6700k or maybe one gen later because I could use an i7 and it might as well be modern.


----------



## ensabrenoir (Apr 30, 2015)

bubbleawsome said:


> the last worthwhile upgrade I made was i7 870 -> i5 4670k. At 4.3Ghz that should last me a while, but I could see myself jumping to a 6700k or maybe one gen later because I could use an i7 and it might as well be modern.



Went from an i7-860 to an i7- 3820..... ended up selling the 3820.  Although it was faster and all.....just didn't move me much.   Just got a 4790k, that will do until i go 8 core.  Wifey got an i5-4570, started to build an Fm2+ for my son  until intel dropped that G3258....which was prob the most fun cpu i had in quite a while.  That old i7-860 is in an itx build that is still chewing through everything i throw at it.


----------



## Dust (Apr 30, 2015)

RCoon said:


> In other words, if you're still on Sandybridge and don't need a beefcake iGPU and DDR4 (nobody really _needs_ DDR4), you're welcome to skip this generation too. It doesn't even tick the power saving box. Gaming performance improvements are miniscule.
> 
> Only reason I can see for me to upgrade is for NVMe M6e m.2 drives.




lol, It is hilarious that people still say stuff like this. I remember when a kid in my class was talking about his dad's computer and the size of his HDD came up. "One Gig", is what he said while everyone's eyes lit up. Man that is totally all the storage you need. This will have not have any real value to anyone.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Apr 30, 2015)

Dust said:


> lol, It is hilarious that people still say stuff like this. I remember when a kid in my class was talking about his dad's computer and the size of his HDD came up. "One Gig", is what he said while everyone's eyes lit up. Man that is totally all the storage you need. This will have not have any real value to anyone.


 
Welcome to TPU.

You might be interested to know that we have ALOT of members still on SB or IVB, and others that have done each level of upgrade.  The overwhelming consensus of this forum is that on the CPU front, nearly zero advance has been made to improve gaming performance.  Perhaps in some other processor-oriented tasks, but not gaming.  That is why the reaction here is a yawn-fest.  It is still perfectly valid to keep a SB system for gaming, and even alot of other tasks.


----------



## Frick (Apr 30, 2015)

Dust said:


> lol, It is hilarious that people still say stuff like this. I remember when a kid in my class was talking about his dad's computer and the size of his HDD came up. "One Gig", is what he said while everyone's eyes lit up. Man that is totally all the storage you need. This will have not have any real value to anyone.



But it's true.


----------



## flexy (Apr 30, 2015)

Am I the only one getting "sleepy" looking at those numbers? I really thought Skylake would be the next best Ubersystem, but looking at those numbers it just tells me that my overclocked i7 (4.4G) system and my DDR-3-2000 would last me an even longer time that I thought. And I initially bought this system second-hand to "tie me over". For that? 3% or so performance increase?  The MORE interesting questions here (now for "enthusiasts" would be A) thermals of Skylake (we all know how incredibly hot Haswell gets)  and then of course (related to this) B) overclocking potential. It is my understanding they moved voltage regulators away from the Skylake die...and then the dreaded "CPU/thermal paste gap problem w/ Haswell"...in other words, Skylake would THEN become interesting if it turns out it overclocks 5GHZ or more....otherwise I am not exactly impressed.

Edit: And yes, you all, you too, should get Skylake as soon as it comes out (like the guys who immediately 'upgraded' to Devil's Canyon...lol) ... why? Because it means many of you will sell their "old" systems cheaply again..which is always great...and of course it boost our economy too


----------



## flexy (Apr 30, 2015)

Dust said:


> lol, It is hilarious that people still say stuff like this. I remember when a kid in my class was talking about his dad's computer and the size of his HDD came up. "One Gig", is what he said while everyone's eyes lit up. Man that is totally all the storage you need. This will have not have any real value to anyone.



I always love those comparisons  My first HD ever was 40MB as far as I remember. Today, a graphics DRIVER alone, for one single component, comes in a 300MB archive. Means you would need 8 HDs just to download/store this single driver file...say...16 HDs total to store the driver .ZIP file and then to extract it. If someone would have told me that in 1990 or so I would called him crazy.


----------



## RealNeil (Apr 30, 2015)

My first hard drive was a Seagate RLL that was a whopping 5MB. (huge)

It looked like this,


----------



## RCoon (Apr 30, 2015)

RealNeil said:


> My first hard drive was a Seagate RLL that was a whopping 5MB. (huge)
> 
> It looked like this,
> 
> View attachment 64507



Please stay on topic guys.

That however is pretty freaking awesome


----------



## ypsylon (May 2, 2015)

It's *NOT* 6th generation. It's 6th *REFRESH*. 

It's same Core architecture we know from 2006 or so. Because AMD are nowhere (except producing beautiful slides) to be found, Intel can do nothing and offer minor tweaks instead offering real progress - like moving from P4 to C2D and then i7 920. That's generational sift. 1151/1150/1155/6 damn so many numbers... all the same inside.


----------



## aicragleon (Sep 17, 2015)

BarbaricSoul said:


> *_pats 3930k system's tower like a puppy's head
> _
> Don't worry, your place is still safe


Shoot, I still have my EVGA SR-2 with 2x X5660s.  I could even get some X5680s for cheap if I wanted to, but there is no point since this overclocks the X5660s just fine.  This build is still relevant today even though the board was released in 2010.  See them on ebay and their prices still.  No other 2010 board sells for that much.  The CPUs are slightly overclocked and I have it loaded with 96GB 1333 DDR3 currently and to beat this system, I would have to pay a lot of money so there is still no point.

edit: wait, just looked on ebay, maybe they are all in the hands of people who don't want to get rid of them or maybe it is time to upgrade.


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Sep 18, 2015)

aicragleon said:


> Shoot, I still have my EVGA SR-2 with 2x X5660s.  I could even get some X5680s for cheap if I wanted to, but there is no point since this overclocks the X5660s just fine.  This build is still relevant today even though the board was released in 2010.  See them on ebay and their prices still.  No other 2010 board sells for that much.  The CPUs are slightly overclocked and I have it loaded with 96GB 1333 DDR3 currently and to beat this system, I would have to pay a lot of money so there is still no point.
> 
> edit: wait, just looked on ebay, maybe they are all in the hands of people who don't want to get rid of them or maybe it is time to upgrade.



Supermicro has several dual socket 1366 boards available well around $100-125 on Ebay. I have one I was intending to build a dual 5660 system with for crunching. Supermicro builds quality motherboards, you just don't hear about them in mainstream because they build motherboards intended for servers.


----------



## peche (Sep 18, 2015)

Naito said:


> Looks like a decent performance boost if claims are true. My Z77 feature set is growing a little stale, so this may be a good upgrade.


just no ... i have the same chip on z68 chipset ... just no ...



ypsylon said:


> It's *NOT* 6th generation. It's 6th *REFRESH*.
> 
> It's same Core architecture we know from 2006 or so. Because AMD are nowhere (except producing beautiful slides) to be found, Intel can do nothing and offer minor tweaks instead offering real progress - like moving from P4 to C2D and then i7 920. That's generational sift. 1151/1150/1155/6 damn so many numbers... all the same inside.


no ... broadwell was the 4th gen refresh ... pretty bad move on intel side....


well i hope i can get a 3770K to take full advantage of my current Z68 chipset someday and see how i can do at 5.0GHZ .... i may say to skylake ... not today b*tch ...


----------



## RealNeil (Sep 19, 2015)

Just took my i7-2600K Z68 system apart and replaced it with an i7-4770K Z87 G1 Sniper 5.

The same GPUs are in it, and the same drives. My Firestrike score went from 13,437 to 16,580. So it's a good upgrade for me.


----------

