Tuesday, August 30th 2016

Intel Core i7-7700K "Kaby Lake" SANDRA Scores Surface

Someone with access to a Core i7-7700K "Kaby Lake" processor and an ASRock Z270-Extreme4 motherboard put the chip through SiSoft SANDRA 2015 CPU tests. Engineering sample or not, the clock speeds of the chip appear to check out with those of the lineup as we know it. The core ticks at 4.20 GHz, with a maximum Turbo Boost frequency of 4.50 GHz. You also get 8 MB of L3 cache, and HyperThreading. The benchmark confirms that Intel is working on a new platform refresh chipset, with the Z270 chipset succeeding the existing Z170. Existing LGA1151 could support the new chips, with BIOS updates.

At its stock speeds, the i7-7700K churns out a SANDRA 2015 "Processor Arithmetic" score of 151.94 GOPS. Its "Processor Multimedia" score yielded is 379.8 Mpix/s. To put things in perspective, a Core i7-6700K "Skylake" processor running at its stock speed of 4.00 GHz core with 4.20 GHz Turbo Boost typically yields 140.88 GOPS in "Processor Arithmetic" and 353.8 Mpix/s in "Processor Multimedia" tests, according to LegitReviews. Intel is expected to launch the 7th generation Core processor family, alongside the 200 series chipset, later this year. Kaby Lake is Intel's third CPU micro-architecture for the 14 nm process, after "Skylake" and "Broadwell."
Source: Reddit
Add your own comment

57 Comments on Intel Core i7-7700K "Kaby Lake" SANDRA Scores Surface

#27
$ReaPeR$
FordGT90Concept7.85% more GFLOPS
7.35% more Mpix/s
5.00% higher clockspeed

So, in terms of IPC, Kaby Lake is only 2.35-2.85% faster than Skylake which begs the question, "why does Kaby Lake exist?" There's no doubt in my mind that Intel could sell a Skylake 6750K with 4.2 GHz clock speed defeating the purpose of introducing another architecture.
because they have to sell "new" stuff every year to look good to the consumer and their investors.
Posted on Reply
#28
Brusfantomet
FordGT90Concept7.85% more GFLOPS
7.35% more Mpix/s
5.00% higher clockspeed

So, in terms of IPC, Kaby Lake is only 2.35-2.85% faster than Skylake which begs the question, "why does Kaby Lake exist?" There's no doubt in my mind that Intel could sell a Skylake 6750K with 4.2 GHz clock speed defeating the purpose of introducing another architecture.
Its actually worse than that, the measured increase in IPC is 2,7% for GFLOPS(1,0785/1,05) and 2,2% for Mpix/s (1,0735/1,05).

Comparing the Xeon versions of them we see that the E3 1275 V5at 3,6 Ghz with IGP is a 80W part, while the E3 1275 V6 at 3,8 with IGP is a 78 W part, add inn the anemic IPC increase at approximately 2,5 % and this seams like one massive let down performance wise.
Posted on Reply
#29
Mindweaver
Moderato®™
I don't know why a lot of users are getting upset over this? This is standard Intel practice.. This isn't one to get upset over... Get upset when they release a new chip next year with a new socket... lol I mean really? The cycle is pretty clear with 2x 1155, 2x 1150, and now 2x 1151 chips.

It's all marketing at this point with the second round cpu.. Clearly Intel didn't make enough money off of Devil's Canyon 4790 to offer a 6790k solution, but honestly who is going to upgrade from a 6xxx series cpu to a new faster clocked 6790 cpu? Not enough to matter... but consumers will see the 7xxx series and say oh I need that because it's faster due to the higher cpu name.. lol
Posted on Reply
#30
alucasa
General consumers will get these anyway as with OEMs.

But me's going backwards to Haswell-E path for more cores.
Posted on Reply
#31
ShurikN
That IPC increase is amazing.
Posted on Reply
#32
ensabrenoir
ernoratorGOGO AMD! SAVE US....
........gonna have to wait til next year......to get Intel's last years performance. Till then we got another 2 months of hype building followed by two months of silence and then a very slow trickle of back peddling.
Posted on Reply
#33
Sasqui
FordGT90Concept7.85% more GFLOPS
7.35% more Mpix/s
5.00% higher clockspeed

So, in terms of IPC, Kaby Lake is only 2.35-2.85% faster than Skylake which begs the question, "why does Kaby Lake exist?" There's no doubt in my mind that Intel could sell a Skylake 6750K with 4.2 GHz clock speed defeating the purpose of introducing another architecture.
Thanks for doing the math, puts it into perspective. :toast:
Posted on Reply
#34
Octopuss
As a smart person who only does major upgrades to his PC once every roughly five years, I am not going apeshit angry over this stuff that givs you guys borderline heart attack. I have i7 3770K in my PC and will happily upgrade to Kaby Lake when it his this banana country.
Posted on Reply
#35
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
MindweaverI don't know why a lot of users are getting upset over this? This is standard Intel practice.. This isn't one to get upset over... Get upset when they release a new chip next year with a new socket... lol I mean really? The cycle is pretty clear with 2x 1155, 2x 1150, and now 2x 1151 chips.
This is actally the end of the tick-tock model. This was supposed to be a die shrink, not just an update.
Posted on Reply
#36
Casecutter
A Tick - a Tock, while now just up the clocks... :rolleyes:

It all about their foundry than chip engineering for like a while now.
Posted on Reply
#37
GhostRyder
Not much overall, though I did not expect much it still is a bit more shallow than I was expecting. More interested in what the chipset will bring since that seems to be the only reason to upgrade to this (Well, if there is a reason and you have anything from recent history).
Posted on Reply
#38
Nobody99
Mindweaverlol I mean really? The cycle is pretty clear with 2x 1155, 2x 1150, and now 2x 1151 chips.
That is actually counter producitve, user will not upgrade if she/he has "latest but one" CPU and when new socket comes user can't upgrade because then she/he also needs to buy new motherboard.
Posted on Reply
#39
Sasqui
OctopussAs a smart person who only does major upgrades to his PC once every roughly five years, I am not going apeshit angry over this stuff that givs you guys borderline heart attack. I have i7 3770K in my PC and will happily upgrade to Kaby Lake when it his this banana country.
I must say the 4970k I got was a nice punch over the 3570k I have, though the only tangible gain was more Crunching points ;) That said, bot were overclocked to 4.7 Ghz, though the air cooler on the 4970k doesn't quite cut it.
Posted on Reply
#40
Mindweaver
Moderato®™
FrickThis is actally the end of the tick-tock model. This was supposed to be a die shrink, not just an update.
Yea, I know they are doing away with the Tick-Tock model, but I've yet to see it other than not calling it "tick-tock".. hehe I don't see them changing the cycle anytime soon, but we will see. I just hope it's good for us buddy... I think we need Zen to be great more than AMD.. lol I just dread going back to pin's.. lol
Nobody99That is actually counter producitve, user will not upgrade if she/he has "latest but one" CPU and when new socket comes user can't upgrade because then she/he also needs to buy new motherboard.
Who are you telling? hehe I never said it was productive, but it's profitable for Intel clearly. ;)
Posted on Reply
#41
GC_PaNzerFIN
Why do you even care if they release new stuff every year? Just use what you got, buy new rig when you need it not because you feel inferior by having "not the newest" stuff. Anyone with common sense will upgrade at reasonable intervals like every 5 years. For those that have been looking for update from way back like Sandy Bridge or earlier it makes sense to grab the latest incremental update.
Posted on Reply
#42
Dimi
Exactly, its nice for people who NEED to upgrade. Just because Intel decides to release a new line of CPU's every year doesn't mean you HAVE to upgrade, sheesh. Some people are completely retarded or just hate on Intel fueled by AMD Fanboyism.

People don't realise that most products get an upgrade/change every year. Every year there's a new model of the same car, tv, dryer, fridge, cellphone whatever you can think of. You want to hate on those brands too?
Posted on Reply
#43
BorisDG
FouquinNo love or recognition for the i7-5775C? Broadwell was so quickly forgotten...
5775C rocks. Visit the overclock thread to see some very interesting results against 6700K or 4790K. For gaming is the choice. Downsides was price and "old" Z97 socket. :P
Posted on Reply
#44
Fluffmeister
DimiExactly, its nice for people who NEED to upgrade. Just because Intel decides to release a new line of CPU's every year doesn't mean you HAVE to upgrade, sheesh. Some people are completely retarded or just hate on Intel fueled by AMD Fanboyism.

People don't realise that most products get an upgrade/change every year. Every year there's a new model of the same car, tv, dryer, fridge, cellphone whatever you can think of. You want to hate on those brands too?
Damn right, hell I'm still happy with my i7 920, this would be a fine upgrade.

You have to understand AMD fans are basically victims now, lashing out at a free market that doesn't seem to care as much about AMD as they do.
Posted on Reply
#45
MxPhenom 216
ASIC Engineer
FluffmeisterDamn right, hell I'm still happy with my i7 920, this would be a fine upgrade.

You have to understand AMD fans are basically victims now, lashing out at a free market that doesn't seem to care as much about AMD as they do.
I just bred new life into a i7 920 rig i built 8 years ago for someones workstation by installing an SSD. I have used SSds for so long for my builds that i forgot how fast it can make a system coming from a mechanical used for the OS.
Posted on Reply
#46
TheGuruStud
SasquiThanks for doing the math, puts it into perspective. :toast:
That's not accurate b/c of turbo. If it turbos more under a multithreaded load, then IPC gain is zero.
Posted on Reply
#47
Vlada011
This is absurd.
We will be more excited with motherboards than with performance of Processors.
Motherboards are my favorite hardware.
Posted on Reply
#48
Prima.Vera
OctopussAs a smart person who only does major upgrades to his PC once every roughly five years, I am not going apeshit angry over this stuff that givs you guys borderline heart attack. I have i7 3770K in my PC and will happily upgrade to Kaby Lake when it his this banana country.
I have the 3770K too. Do you really think is worth upgrading over this p.o.s. CPU?
Posted on Reply
#49
Octopuss
Prima.VeraI have the 3770K too. Do you really think is worth upgrading over this p.o.s. CPU?
Why would it be piece of shit? Maybe if you have the immediate predecessor (and only if you go by gains vs previous generation), but not if your CPU is five years old.
Now that I think about it, I don't even need the performance, I am mostly upgrading because of the platform features.
Posted on Reply
#50
BlueFalcon
BrusfantometIts actually worse than that, the measured increase in IPC is 2,7% for GFLOPS(1,0785/1,05) and 2,2% for Mpix/s (1,0735/1,05).

Comparing the Xeon versions of them we see that the E3 1275 V5at 3,6 Ghz with IGP is a 80W part, while the E3 1275 V6 at 3,8 with IGP is a 78 W part, add inn the anemic IPC increase at approximately 2,5 % and this seams like one massive let down performance wise.
You are both incorrect. You are using the term IPC synonymously with per core performance increase. That's not what the term means:

"instructions per cycle (IPC) is one aspect of a processor's performance: the average number of instructions executed for each clock cycle."

That means the only way to measure IPC of Kaby Lake against Skylake is at the same CPU frequency. Since Kaby Lake is simply made on a new 14nm+ node, but the underlying CPU architecture is 100% identical (GPU improvements are irrelevant here unless measuring 4K encoding/decoding acceleration), the IPC of Kaby Lake and Skylake will be identical at the same clocks. AnandTech confirms:

"We are being told that the underlying microarchitecture for Kaby Lake is the same as Skylake, and that the frequency adjustments from the new process, along with features such as Speed Shift v2 and the new fixed function media codecs, account for the performance improvements as well as battery life increases when dealing with 4K content.

For users that speak in pure IPC, this may/may not be a shock. Without further detail, Intel is implying that Kaby Lake will have the same IPC as Skylake, however it will operate with a better power efficiency (same frequency at lower power, or higher frequency at same power) and for media consumption there will be more idle CPU cycles with lower power drain. The latter makes sense for mobile devices such as tablets, 2-in-1s and notebooks, or for power conscious users, but paints a static picture for the future of the desktop platform in January if the user only gets another 200-400 MHz in base frequencies."


If you want to make any argument for an improved experience on the desktop against i7 6700K, it will either have to come from Kaby Lake's higher overclocking headroom, which we will not know about until January, or from system response time due to SpeedShift v2.

In my personal opinion, anyone on 2600K/3770K 4.5Ghz or faster who has not upgraded to i7 6700K starting August 2015 has little to no incentive to upgrade to Kaby Lake or even Cannon Lake. The most logical upgrade for those who skipped Skylake is the next true architecture with Ice Lake or at minimum Skylake-X on 2066.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 2nd, 2024 13:32 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts