Kaby Lake - 5.0 GHz at 1.35 Volts reported.

[regis9 4,014]

Thanks Christopher

[ComSimPilot 623]

Decided to take the jump (well not exactly jump) from 6700K to 7700K. I willl have it on Wednesday and report back about its overclocking performance. As no IPC improvements are expected, my goal is to gain 1-2 FPS by a +400 Mhz overclock. If lucky maybe get +500 Mhz. Running a 30Hz monitor, sometimes 27-28fps with many eye-candy on, can cause micro-stutters so this improvement should cure that. My 6700K was not the best piece of silicon as it could maximum achieve 4.6Ghz at 1.41v. I'm getting the 7700K half price by selling my 6700K though it is a pricey upgrade for this small performance gain, however odds are it will easily do 4.8 Ghz.

 

@martin-w,  any idea about the temperatures? I read its quite hot, is this true even for <1.4v voltages? I'm on a H100i v2 cooler.

[martin-w 3,235]

 The performance improvement upgrading from an i5 2500k to an i7 6700k Skylake system will probably be a bit better than I think, but I bet it is nowhere near as impressive as it should be with such a large timespan between the release of both CPUs. It is getting to the point where I am praying that my latest PC avoids a catastrophic failure in the next couple of years, because having to fork out at least a grand for a replacement does not feel like the same value for money as it did in the past.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not sure what you expect to be honest Chris. Bit unrealistic your expectations really. I'm not sure where you get your "should" from. We are where we are technologically, miraculous improvements aren't part of that equation. I'm not sure they ever have been. More's law x 1000 seems to be your desire.  :smile:

 

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-vs-Intel-Core-i5-2500K/3502vs619

 

28% single core improvement.

79% multi-core improvement.

 

Most would be pleased with the above. Especially when you add in all the other advantageous features of the Skylake platform. I think you're being a bit unrealistic me old fruit.  :smile:

 

@martin-w,  any idea about the temperatures? I read its quite hot, is this true even for <1.4v voltages? I'm on a H100i v2 cooler.

 

 

Some of the leaked reports had it hot. However, Tom Logan from OC3D.Net, in the video I posted, said that initially Kaby was warm, but after a few BIOS updates the temps plummeted. There were background voltages that were causing an issue apparently.

 

So make sure you update the BIOS asap.   :smile:

 

Many, with the latest BIOS, seem to be reaching 5 GHz with the same cooler as you at mid 70's. Voltages are not that high, 1.35 or so I recall. Silicone lottery applies of course.

 

Check out the video's I posted. 

[Christopher Low 5,354]

 

28% single core improvement.

79% multi-core improvement.

 

Most would be pleased with the above. Especially when you add in all the other advantageous features of the Skylake platform.

 

Yes, but is that 28% single core performance improvement comparing an i7 6700k @ 4.0Ghz with an i5 2500k @ 3.3Ghz?

 

[ComSimPilot 623]

 

Some of the leaked reports had it hot. However, Tom Logan from OC3D.Net, in the video I posted, said that initially Kaby was warm, but after a few BIOS updates the temps plummeted. There were background voltages that were causing an issue apparently.

 

So make sure you update the BIOS asap.   :smile:

 

Many, with the latest BIOS, seem to be reaching 5 GHz with the same cooler as you at mid 70's. Voltages are not that high, 1.35 or so I recall. Silicone lottery applies of course.

 

Check out the video's I posted. 

 

Thank you Martin! I'll check the video too. I am on a Gigabyte Z170X-Gaming7, and have already the latest BIOS update from Nov16 (F20). Its the one that gave compatibility to the 7 gen processors, though I suspect you are talking about another BIOS update? I don't get if the background voltages was an issue of all z170 so I should expect a new update or not.

[martin-w 3,235]

Oh right, sorry, I was refering to the new Z270 boards. If you're keeping your Z170, same applies really. Use the latest BIOS. My Z170 Deluxe had an update for Kaby compatability a while ago and just recently a stability update.

[ComSimPilot 623]

Ok..Thanks. Do you know if is there any possibility to have an issue with the current F20? I see a F21 for the ultra version but the Gaming 7 is still on F20 as latest on gigabyte website. I wouldn't gonna stay with a buggy BIOS. Will drop an email to Gigabyte for sure..

[wiler 394]

can anyone report gains in xp10/11 w 7700k @ 5.0ghz + coming from a 6600/6700 @ 4.5/4.6ghz? 

[Patriot3810 182]

can anyone report gains in xp10/11 w 7700k @ 5.0ghz + coming from a 6600/6700 @ 4.5/4.6ghz? 

i really doubt you are gonna gain much more than a couple frames between 4.5 and 5 ghz if you can get the 7700k to clock that high. i have tested the 6700k alot, i have owned 3 of them, i didn't notice more than 2-3 frames with all 3. higher clock speeds these days over default just don't seem worth the effort anymore.although i have considered selling my 6700k i just bought 2 weeks ago on ebay for 300 and buying the 7700k for 350.00 on newegg, but i ask myself, is 50 bucks even worth the 6-8 percent gain between the 2. most people should be able to answer that themselves. keep in mind going from the 6700k to the 7700k, was like going from the 4770k to the 4790k. was that worth it? if a few frames are, then buy it. if you own skylake, i would say no. if you own a 2600k, i read you get a 27% gain to the 7700k. you also get ddr4 and alot of features you might want on current generation motherboards.i would say yes for 4770k users and older. thats just my opinion.

[martin-w 3,235]

Yes, but is that 28% single core performance improvement comparing an i7 6700k @ 4.0Ghz with an i5 2500k @ 3.3Ghz?

 

Well no. But you're concerned with single core performance because you're a simmer. So when considering "objectively" the performance we percieve Intel "should" give customers as a whole, we need to look at overall performance. We can't expect Intel to cater for flight simmers.

 

When we do that, clock for clock, the gain in IPC is worthwhile.

 

More's law is under threat. Huge performance jumps aren't going to happen. Especially just in single core performance to cater for a select group like flight simmers. There is no "should". What you say we "should" see isn't realistic or an objective expectation.

[Christopher Low 5,354]

Yes, and this is why I question whether it is worthwhile upgrading even an i5 2500k powered system unless the user is struggling with it for some reason, or it suffers a major failure. My use of the word "should" was probably incorrect, but my point is that forking out a grand or more for a new PC these days does not necessarily give us the performance improvements that we took for granted over a decade ago. When I see people stating that they are upgrading an i7 4790k PC to an i7 6700k, it makes me wonder if they have money trees in their back gardens :smile:

[westman 257]

If you run the fsx bench at 5ghz the difference 2500k and 6700k, 7700k is 30-35% depending on witch ddr4 mems you use ( fast or slow 2666mhz ddr4)

Its the same evry time , Google on this forum the SB guys think Its perform close to the new chips

Stock 6700k with decent mems outpeform my Old retired 5.4ghz 2700k in fsx

For example the i3 7350k 2core/4treads (HT) run fsx P3D better than a 4core 2500k

[gboz 157]

Also if you use vsync an overclock might only mean the difference between

say 62 and 58 FPS or 32 and 28 FPS but possibly make a big difference in

flight smoothness/screen tearing by getting you over the refresh rate.

 

gb.

[MarkW 1,493]

Some great points being made here on the other improvements, particularly on moving up to DDR4 at significantly higher speeds than the RAM most of the i2500K crowd currently have on board.

[martin-w 3,235]

Yes, and this is why I question whether it is worthwhile upgrading even an i5 2500k powered system unless the user is struggling with it for some reason, or it suffers a major failure. My use of the word "should" was probably incorrect, but my point is that forking out a grand or more for a new PC these days does not necessarily give us the performance improvements that we took for granted over a decade ago. When I see people stating that they are upgrading an i7 4790k PC to an i7 6700k, it makes me wonder if they have money trees in their back gardens :smile:

 

 

 but my point is that forking out a grand or more for a new PC these days does not necessarily give us the performance improvements that we took for granted over a decade ago.

 

A grand or more... that's only those intent on a brand new rig. Motherboard, CPU and RAM is of course less than that. But yes, of course we won't see the big gains after each new architecture we saw ten years ago, as we both agree. But as I said, it's overall performance that's relevant, not what a select group of simmers want in terms of single core. And when we look at that, and deduct the frequency difference, so clock for clock, we see improvements that most would be happy with.

 

Hasse has first hand experience, so worth paying attention to his post...

 

 

If you run the fsx bench at 5ghz the difference 2500k and 6700k, 7700k is 30-35% depending on witch ddr4 mems you use ( fast or slow 2666mhz ddr4) 

 

 

 

When I see people stating that they are upgrading an i7 4790k PC to an i7 6700k, it makes me wonder if they have money trees in their back gardens

 

They might be well off, nothing wrong with that. But by the same token, as I said before, newer platforms bring more than just performance. Thus, there may be other new features that they deem worthwhile and worth the outlay for them. We all have different needs.

 

What I do know is that those that have upgraded to Skylake from 2500K and reported about it on the forum, seem to be VERY pleased with their upgrades.