Monday, August 3rd 2015
Intel Core "Skylake" Retail Boxes Surprisingly Colorful
The retail packaging of Intel's 6th generation Core "Skylake" processors in the LGA1151 package, will be surprisingly colorful, and a throwback to the pre-Pentium 4 era, according to spy-shots of the retail boxes of the upcoming Core i7-6700K and Core i5-6600K. What's even more surprising, is that packages of the i7-6700K and i5-6600K, which feature unlocked base-clock multipliers, making them primed for overclocking, do not include stock cooling solutions. Their retail packages resemble those of Intel's Core i7 HEDT processors. In the box, you'll find just the processor, its case-badge, and basic documentation.
Both the Core i7-6700K and Core i5-6600K feature the same integrated graphics SKU - HD Graphics 530. Both feature integrated memory controllers that support both DDR3L and DDR4 memory types. The Core i5 predictably lacks HyperThreading, and only features 6 MB of L3 cache, while the Core i7 features HyperThreading, and the full 8 MB present on the chip. The "Skylake" silicon will be built on the 14 nm process.
Both the Core i7-6700K and Core i5-6600K feature the same integrated graphics SKU - HD Graphics 530. Both feature integrated memory controllers that support both DDR3L and DDR4 memory types. The Core i5 predictably lacks HyperThreading, and only features 6 MB of L3 cache, while the Core i7 features HyperThreading, and the full 8 MB present on the chip. The "Skylake" silicon will be built on the 14 nm process.
37 Comments on Intel Core "Skylake" Retail Boxes Surprisingly Colorful
Intel, wake up from this years-long sleep!
It's nice to see tho, that chip uses the new Broadwell cap design.
first impression is important
Only ask people whether they want their CPUs with 8-real cores instead of whatever they are forced to buy and you will see.
The results from the poll will be pro more cores. Never use people's lack of knowledge and ignorance to spoil technological advancement.
You need more cores to give customers better experience. The only question is if you want or not.
The CPUs should be used to maximum potential and if someone wanted fewer cores he could go to BIOS and disable them, the same goes with frequency on locked models.
I wish people would stop buying "unlocked" versions because nowadays they have a premium vs. locked versions and price per performance is not anymore better because Intel started to cash in (take advantage of or exploit) overclocking.
You don't need more efficient cores. What you need is corporations, governments and people who are much less greedy. You need a world open to new energy source - there are but the world decided to use dirty oil and coal. Tries also to confuse itself that the solution is using less power.
When the solutions are either less greed - means for instance prices of electricity at 10% of current rates.
Or usage of completely new energy sources.
At more than 1000$ per one processor 5960X, intel is doing gigantic profit margins. And contributes little to nothing for a better world.
Just imagine that every household has that 8-core 16-thread processor and all of them are connected in a gigantic worldwide network for different helpful calculations.
What does contribute to a better world? Does a Pentium G3258 make a big improvement in the innovative yet horribly twisted world that we live in? It provides gamers with a cheap, overclockable CPU. Does it rake in big points in BOINC or FAH? I don't think so. Does it push CPU progress along? I don't think so; that job was left to whatever CPU was the guinea pig or first engineering sample for the Haswell family, and it sure as hell wasn't the G3258. The 5960X is more significant because it is basically the first new die in the HEDT generations since 2 generations ago, where HEDT was a six-core design.
I'm going to leave this here:
How well did that turn out? I'm no Intel fanboy and I know exactly what AMD's potential exit from the market means for us all. More cores? AMD knew that Intel was slow on the cores front, so they took advantage of consumers and advertised integer units as "cores". They tried to play the consumers, the vast majority of whom don't know and don't care for the difference between a Haswell "core" and a Piledriver "core" (again, not even a module, just an AMD "core"). Why did this happen? All because we constantly complained and demanded more cores from Intel.
So what about every household having an affordable, powerful 8-core CPU that isn't AMD FX? How many people would you expect to provide their system's processing power for crunching and folding for free? Out of all the enthusiasts in the world, only a tiny fraction are involved in folding. I don't pretend that I fold all the time; I go on and off because my 4790K is not low power and super efficient, and my 280X just about draws enough power to sustain an northern Afghan village.
A logical answer to this problem would be to make it mandatory, then. But with all the debate surrounding Windows 10's forced updates and supposed "backdoors" implemented by MS, how likely is it that we would be able to harness the power of those CPUs?
But sure will be a 6790K in future...
You sir just fucking killed me :)