Sign in to follow this  
OneWhoKnocks53

I7-7700k looking good at $349

Recommended Posts

Several stores listing at $349 at intro. Also a quick Google, one was clocked at 6.7ghz on LN2 cooling, but not sure what voltage. Seems to have good overclocking potential, the 4.5 Turbo is good news too. Fun stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Hopefully we'll be running comfortable OCs at over 5GHz with this new chip and finally see some decent fps in flight sims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4.9 - 5.0 GHz maybe. I doubt much over though. Hopefully I'm wrong.

 

No prices yet here in the UK, but no doubt, as usual, we'll be ripped off. 

 

$349 so should be £285 of my English quid... plus the UK ripoff factor of 20% so 340 quid. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any news or leak for release? Waiting is hard when you are on a 3570K :)

 

 

EDIT: Just saw that :

Intel To Launch Kaby Lake Desktop Platform on 5th January at CES 2017

For those wondering when Kaby Lake processors will be available in the market, GDM.OR.JP has confirmed that Intel will be launching them on 5th of January 2017. The site confirms that 200-series motherboards will be available for purchase on the same day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://hwbench.com/cpus/intel-core-i7-7700k-vs-intel-core-i7-6700k

 

Most benchmarks are showing roughly a 10% single thread performance increase over an i7_6700k and that's factoring in that  the default and turbo clock speeds are 5 and 7% higher respectively for the i7-7700k. It's pretty clear to me that Intel is more focused on creating CPUs that have lower power usage so that they are more suitable for populating server farms. The Xeon design specs are just bleeding through to the consumer CPUs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its 10% more, so will perform better. The stock turbo frequency of the 6700K, is 4.2Ghz. By overclocking we add just 10% and makes a difference, going to 4.6Ghz. If the +10% was not important, overclocking wouldn't be so popular in flight sim...Accordingly, a +10% over stock turbo clock in the 7700K will yield 4.9 Ghz. I suppose it will make a difference. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recover $250 on Craigslist or eBay for the 6700k, $100 more gets me a 10% boost for a 7700k. Not too bad of a deal. Every little bit helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10% is certainly nothing to scoff at but I'm skeptical of the claims. Intel themselves seemed to have indicated they were merely optimizing the production processes and lowering the heat/power signature. If it was a die shrink or architecture changeover, I'd believe it but this just isn't adding up.

 

Regardless, if you find yourself in a CPU-bound scenario at around 15fps (a threshold I don't like dropping under) and you take half of the 10% improvement to FSX/P3D's Core 0, you've only gained three-quarters of a frame...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10% is certainly nothing to scoff at but I'm skeptical of the claims. Intel themselves seemed to have indicated they were merely optimizing the production processes and lowering the heat/power signature. If it was a die shrink or architecture changeover, I'd believe it but this just isn't adding up.

 

Regardless, if you find yourself in a CPU-bound scenario at around 15fps (a threshold I don't like dropping under) and you take half of the 10% improvement to FSX/P3D's Core 0, you've only gained three-quarters of a frame...

 

So, you say that even at 5Ghz the difference with a 4.6Ghz 6700K will be not noticable? Honest question..I would like to not buy the 7700K, cause I can't wait..but try to be reasonable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10% is certainly nothing to scoff at but I'm skeptical of the claims. Intel themselves seemed to have indicated they were merely optimizing the production processes and lowering the heat/power signature. If it was a die shrink or architecture changeover, I'd believe it but this just isn't adding up.

 

Regardless, if you find yourself in a CPU-bound scenario at around 15fps (a threshold I don't like dropping under) and you take half of the 10% improvement to FSX/P3D's Core 0, you've only gained three-quarters of a frame...

 

EDIT: didn't know what "scoff at" means, so we agree in theory. Of course I agree with you that a 1-2 fps increase is not worthy updating for sure for a 6700 user. What I don't know -as not a computer expert- is whether the improvement in fps is proportional to CPU frequency. I may try to test at 4.0 and 4.6Ghz and see the average fps increase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a well balanced system, no CPU or GPU botleneck, overclocking is linear. In other words if you overclock by 10% you get a 10% increase in frame rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a well balanced system, no CPU or GPU botleneck, overclocking is linear. In other words if you overclock by 10% you get a 10% increase in frame rate.

 

But it shouldn't be just that. Otherwise my 3570K at 4.6Ghz would perform the same as an 6700K at 4.6Ghz.

 

What I'm saying is, are we sure that 7700K@4.6Ghz and 6700K@4.6Ghz will perform the same?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What you are doing there is comparing two different architectues. It's not just about frequency, it's also about IPC, Instructions Per Cycle. Newer architectures like Skylake have a superior IPC.

 

The question re Kaby Lake is when both are clocked the same, for example 7700k at its stock 4.5 Turbo and 6700K overclocked to 4.5... which is superior. In other words, what is the IPC gain.

 

There will be a gain in IPC, so the 7700K will be faster than the 6700K both clocked the same. In addition we speculate that the 7700K may well overclock to 5 GHz or hopefully a tad higher for the lucky few.

 

Most 6700K's overclock to 4.6 So I would hope 7700K would perhaps overclock to 4.9. Above that, we will have to wait and see.

 

You should expect a few percent IPC plus whatever it clocks to above Skylake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And better chipsets are essential as well. Getting all the data to and from the CPU, GPU, HDs and RAM is key.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the other variable of course. What the new boards with the Z270 chipsets will bring to the table. Optane support of course.

 

At the end of the day, we can speculate but the leaked benchmarks are probably innacurate. Based on engineering samples rather than the chips we will get.

 

My guess is 2 or 3% IPC plus the higher frequency. Be lucky if we see 10% over Sky Lake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I know why people refer to "the good old days". You know, when we could expect 100%+ performance gains when buying a new PC :sad:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I know why people refer to "the good old days". You know, when we could expect 100%+ performance gains when buying a new PC :sad:

 

Which is primarily why I've held back from upgrading my CPU & MB for several cycles in a row.

 

Since I'm still on a 3570K as well, this slow, progressive climb upwards through each successive generation means that finally it *might* reach that threshold where the cost of upgrading is worth it for the cumulative increase in performance.

 

But I guess we'll see come the new year.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a well balanced system, no CPU or GPU botleneck, overclocking is linear. In other words if you overclock by 10% you get a 10% increase in frame rate.

 

You mean in a well balanced system where the CPU is the bottleneck... :wink: 

 

 

But it shouldn't be just that. Otherwise my 3570K at 4.6Ghz would perform the same as an 6700K at 4.6Ghz.

 

What I'm saying is, are we sure that 7700K@4.6Ghz and 6700K@4.6Ghz will perform the same?

 

Different CPU architectures and RAM speeds also affect the FPS. Here is how much they all perform relative to each other in FSX when you are CPU limited.

 

LynnfieldToSkylake.jpg?dl=0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You mean in a well balanced system where the CPU is the bottleneck...  :wink: 

 

 

 

 

It wouldn't be a well balanced system if the CPU was a bottleneck. As I said, in a well balanced system [no bottlenecks] overclocking is linear.  :smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean in a well balanced system where the CPU is the bottleneck... :wink:

 

 

 

Different CPU architectures and RAM speeds also affect the FPS. Here is how much they all perform relative to each other in FSX when you are CPU limited.

 

LynnfieldToSkylake.jpg?dl=0

 

 

Thats a great graph. Thanks for posting.

 

I think Kaby Lake my finally be the time to move from my well used 2600K

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember that Broadwell is not in the graph so the actual IPC improvement going 2 generations from Haswell to Skylake is minor. But when you also factor in the move to DDR4 it gives a lot more performance improvement. And the memorycontroller in Skylake handles way higher DDR4 speeds than 2133.

 

IPC improvements Skylake to Kabylake will be very minor Probably less than SanyBridge to IvyBridge. If you run your CPU at stock speed 7700K will be a bit faster but overclockability might be what determines if it is any improvement as an upgrade over 6700K. If you're upgrading from a previous platform I suspect 7700K will be the best option. But suspect upgrading from 6700K is not going to be worth it. Unless its a very good overclocker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember that Broadwell is not in the graph so the actual IPC improvement going 2 generations from Haswell to Skylake is minor. But when you also factor in the move to DDR4 it gives a lot more performance improvement. And the memorycontroller in Skylake handles way higher DDR4 speeds than 2133.

 

IPC improvements Skylake to Kabylake will be very minor Probably less than SanyBridge to IvyBridge. If you run your CPU at stock speed 7700K will be a bit faster but overclockability might be what determines if it is any improvement as an upgrade over 6700K. If you're upgrading from a previous platform I suspect 7700K will be the best option. But suspect upgrading from 6700K is not going to be worth it. Unless its a very good overclocker.

Saab340, think you ar spot on here , nice work with graph thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats a great graph. Thanks for posting.

 

I think Kaby Lake my finally be the time to move from my well used 2600K

 

 

Saab340, think you ar spot on here , nice work with graph thanks

Thanks,

 

Found this one I did a while ago that I don't think I've posted. To show the impact of RAM on my SandyBridge-E and Skylake.

RAMspeedandlatency.jpg?dl=0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SAAB340, thank you that's very interesting..So you conclude that the higher the RAM frequency the better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SAAB340, thank you that's very interesting..So you conclude that the higher the RAM frequency the better.

 

Yes. Higher frequency and tighter timings are beter. Westman has shown that as well in many great FSXmark11 tests . I posted quite a few results with different RAM speeds/timings when I built my Skylake build soon a year ago I think.

 

That's why Skylake with its good memorycontroller, IPC and overclockability is actually a worth while upgrade. Kaby lake will probably as well unless you're already on a Skylake. My SB-E only manages an overclock of 4.3GHz whilst the Skylake does 4.7. When you factor that and the RAM in the Skylake system gives me 45% higher FPS. That is a very notable improvement.

 

Katy Lake however won't introduce a much faster DDR4 memorycontroler as Skylake did. History shows that the IPC improvements will be very minor. The only variable left is overclockability, where as usual early indications are promising. Physics normally puts a damper on our hopes though. (Wouldn't surprise me if I still get a 7700K to play with though...=) Looking forward to seeing what Westman kan do with it when its released. 

 

 

I still prefer the SB-E system for photo scenery though as the extra cores still loads the ground textures faster despite the improvement in Single Thread performance that gives the much higher FPS. But boy does it irritate me every time I can't maintain my locked smooth 30FPS on the SB-E nowadays when I know I don't get that on the Skylake in the same situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this