| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 143423 | 2017-01-06 22:55:00 | Upgrade advice: KaybyLake or SkyLake | bk T (215) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1430477 | 2017-01-06 22:55:00 | Upgrade time: Should I upgrade my aging Sandybridge i7 to KaybyLake or Skylake? This is a gaming machine, advice, please. Cheers |
bk T (215) | ||
| 1430478 | 2017-01-06 23:30:00 | Thi Might be helpful: arstechnica.com | Laggard (17509) | ||
| 1430479 | 2017-01-07 00:33:00 | Thi Might be helpful: arstechnica.com Quite a good article. I'm quite happy with my recent upgrade. Asus Z-170 Pro Gamer Intel Core i7 6700K Zalman CNPS 10X Performa Corsair CMK16GX4M2400C14 Gigabyte GV-N1080G1 GTX1080 Also the good deal & service from DTC Systems |
Driftwood (5551) | ||
| 1430480 | 2017-01-07 03:34:00 | The only difference in them is the clock speed, so kaby is slightly faster purely because it clocks higher. Here's a review www.tomshardware.com On the gaming benchmarks they clocked a 6700K to the same speed as a 7700K and got the same results - no surprises there. If there's a significant price difference then go the cheaper way - you won't notice a difference anyway. But if the price is close go for the newer CPU and a motherboard based on the newer chipset. I would never upgrade from skylake to kabylake, but if choosing between them from sandybridge I'd go for the newer one if possible. Edit: the article Laggard posted makes some good points but is a little slanted against intel, what they say about performance is true but to suggest intel aren't trying is a bit of a leap. As CPUs have shrunk in die size it has gotten increasingly difficult to maintain the pace of improvements, as evidence I point out that after several generations of intel "not trying" AMD still haven't matched their performance and have certainly tried. |
dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1 | |||||