Everything We Know About Intel's Skylake Platform

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.


I don't think anyone expected that to happen, and it's kind of unnecessary because the difference between a graphics card running at PCIe x8 and x16 is negligible. A more realistic hope might have been for 20 lanes from the CPU, which would allow a PCIe x4 component to be used without affecting graphics performance.
 
MJ, I know it might be a pain, but could you be a bit more specific on the overclocking details, specifically which chipsets allow multiplier adjustment, which allow BCLK adjustment, which allow voltage adjustment, and if possible, which mfrs that applies to? You pointed out a few places some specifics between multipliers and BCLK, but I'd love a more detailed breakdown. Maybe that's beyond the scope of a single article, but I and other tech-heads would surely appreciate it.
 


I actually planned to add a little extra detail in there on that, but a few details got crossed and the piece went up a little premature. I'm working on getting that bit updated, but here is the gist of what I'm working to add.

Right off, none of the chipsets except Z170 allow users to manipulate BCLK, but motherboard OEMs have been able to work around this on C232, H170, H110 and B150 chipsets. There is likely nothing to stop OEMs from releasing Q170, Q150 and C236 boards with BCLK overclocking features as well, but none have been announced yet.

To improve the performance, stability and overclocking results of BCLK overclocking, OEMS may choose to add a third-party clock generator on Z170 motherboard. Intel has a dedicated connection for adding these external clock generators built into each chipset. The standard clock generator inside of each chipset can technically hit clock speeds of up to 200 MHz, although like just about any computer component the frequency it is able to achieve will depend on the yield quality of the PCH. The external clock generators can run separate components such as just the CPU core itself while other components use the standard clock generator built into the PCH, and can potentially attain much higher base clock frequencies than 200 MHz. A Z170 motherboard using a third-party clock generator will almost certainly achieve better BCLK overclocking results, but not all motherboard OEMs specify which products use these components, making it difficult to judge which board is best BCLK manipulation.

All non-Z170 chipset motherboards that are able BCLK overclock use a third-party clock generator to bypass the limitations Intel places on the PCH and enable overclocking features. As a result, it is possible that an H170 motherboard with an external clock generator may achieve better results while BCLK overclocking a processor than a more expensive Z170 motherboard that simply relies on the Intel integrated clock generator.

Currently, only Asrock and Super Micro have non-Z170 motherboards capable of overclocking Skylake processors using BCLK manipulation. All of these motherboards also enable voltage adjustments as well. It isn't clear if the non-Z170 chipsets permit users to adjust voltage by Intel's design, or if Intel had it locked down and Asrock and Super MIcro bypassed it somehow. I'd say that even if Intel doesn't enable it by default that there will boards that do feature voltage adjustment features either way. Excellent question though, I'll have to inquire with Intel to find out for sure.

Asrock and Biostar also enabled Z170 OC features, but removed it (mentioned above), and I was told directly by MSI and Asus that they do not agree with the decision to enable these features. It is doubtful either will. Not entirely sure on Gigabyte, I asked them but couldn't get a direct answer.

None of the LGA 1151 motherboard chipsets from any OEM with the exception of Z170 enable multiplier adjustments. Intel seems to have that locked down hard this time.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I will get these details updated in the copy soon. Hopefully that answers your questions, but if not feel free to ask more. All the better to help me see things I don't have enough detail on. I expect this piece to continue growing until the release with the 200-series chipsets, and then I can cap it off with information on Cannonlake compatibility. :)
 




I'd like this debunked one way or another. I've already read that data sheet cover to cover and it doesn't explicitly say anything about maximum voltage allowed on DDR3. We've heard this stuff before on previous intel platforms. It's funny, MJ, because most of the "sources" I find when googling eventually lead back to you and your nameless mystery engineers, lol.
Click to expand...

There's an included image here on hardwarecanuck's article referencing the intel specs regarding ddr3L and ddr4 (neither of which exceed 1.35v which standard ddr3 does at 1.5v to 1.65v)

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/70775-intel-skylake-ddr3-vs-ddr4-comparison.html

Intel went out of their way to list the various compatible memory and discluded ddr3 with specific mention to ddr3L
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/desktop-6th-gen-core-family-datasheet-vol-1.html
 
As I've looked over H170 boards, I've found some QVLs with 1.5V and even 1.6V DDR3 on them. Personally, I would keep it to 1.35V, and none of my tests used anything higher.
You'll have to wait for the first roundup article for more, but I will say I'm using one of the H170 boards myself now. I did encounter (and describe) some of HSIO limitations, like unusable SATA ports if the M.2 connector is used.
 
Curious that your article includes a picture of an Xbox 360 motherboard. The design and layout is its hallmark design: Failure! Anyways, just curious to know how that picture is relevant.
 
I'm disappointed at the Skylake XEON attitude. Offering a choice of CPUs with an iGPU and without is a good thing. Why force builders to 'waste' money on an Intel APU (in essence) when most moderate to enthusiast users will be using a dedicated GPU?

I cannot wait for Intel to have significant competition on the x86 platform again, and I hope it's Zen.
 


Well that might be, but there is a sort of limitation here. You see I asked them directly, and not only did both Asus and MSI say they didn't do this and would not do this, I have searched and been unable to find anything official from them on their sites that show otherwise.

Now I'm not saying that it isn't true that they made these. They may well have done so, and quickly back stepped on it because Intel's reaction to it. They may be trying to cover it up entirely to maintain peaceful relations between themselves and Intel. I've even checked product pages and BIOS download pages and can find no trace of it. Again, I'm not saying it didn't happen, but unless I can find evidence and prove it exists 100 percent without a doubt, we can't publish it. Even if I had one of these motherboards, downloaded the BIOS and tested it, I still couldn't go forward with it because the only download links are from third-party sources and we can't guarantee the driver is originally from MSI, and as I have said before, they have denied any involvement in this.
 
So I bought a gigabyte GA-B150m-D3H DDR3 and a i5-6600 to use my ddr3 ram modules, and now I read this news.
Bought because in the gigabyte site is listed in the specifications :
Support for DDR3 / DDR3L 1866 ( OC ) / 1600/1333 MHz memory modules.

If i check the setup an see that vram it's set to 1,65v, i can try down to 1,5v? Or it's not recomended?
 
I'm disappointed. For gaming, AMD's 4+ year old 990FX chipset and CPU still offer more PCIe lanes and 2x16 / 4x8 PCIe configs for Crossfire/SLI. That's the a key reason that AMD still does decent in gaming despite lower synth bench scores overall. Imagine the performance bump if Skylake could handle 2x16.
 


There's not much difference between x8/x8 or x16/x16 sli.
https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Impact-of-PCI-E-Speed-on-Gaming-Performance-518/

Amd's offering of more pcie lanes means little. More importantly their cpu's still lack ipc performance by comparison so to say amd does decent in gaming is a bit of a misconception from the argument that more pcie lanes is a perk. If an amd cpu is doing decent in games it's because the games aren't very cpu bound.

On top of it there are typically more drawbacks to xfire/sli setups and getting them to play nice with games compounded by the fact that multi gpu setups don't scale 1:1 and vram doesn't stack. A single more powerful gpu is still the preferred option with the best performance and least amount of headaches.

It's not just synthetic bench's where amd cpu's fall behind, it's evident in just about every real world benchmark as well. If someone has the cash for 2-3 gpu's (upper end) then they likely have a few spare dollars for better performing cpu/mobo combos than what amd offers as well.

As you can see from the benchmarks I posted, you don't have to imagine if skylake supported x16/x16, the gains are all but nonexistant. Much like ddr4 vs ddr3, sounds good on paper but fails to show up in reality.

 


I have had no problems installing Windows 10 from USB using the Microsoft tool.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/software-download/windows10
 
If you click the link it specifically states that win 8 or 10 doesn't have the problem, because those have support for USB 3 during installation. Win 7 doesn't, unless you hack it into the ISO somehow. The other thing they mentioned was no support for DACs which usually run USB 2. I assume that includes external music cards. Another reason I wouldn't touch Skylake.
 


What is Windows 7? Is that like VHS tapes?
 



Not to mention the fact Skylake is PCI-E 3.0 and AMD is still stuck @ 2.0, on AM3+. Essentially, PCI-E speed wise, they are tied, for dual GPU.
 
I suspect that if Zen is in any way successful, Intel will back off a bit, on the non z overclock stance. If they price a chip that is competitive, say at least on the same single threaded performance level as Haswell, with a locked i3 or i5, AMD will get a much needed boost in sales. I honestly hope something like this happens. This one side dominating completely, is bad for consumers.
Click to expand...

I Certainly hope Zen is competitive! Tired of Intel Overcharging since they tokk the performanc crown away from AMD! (Loking forward to some competition between the two again!)
 


Adding USB installation support to a Win7 thumbdrive created by the MS control can be easily found on the web. I had to do that for a recent NUC installation. Works great.
 

You are in the minority. X99 is very expensive and a niche platform.
Click to expand...

i7-6700K: $350
Decent Z170 board: about $140
Total: about $490

i7-5820K: Also $350
Decent X99 board: about $180
Total: about $530
$40 dollars for 50% more cores and still having an upgrade path (you can always grab a used Xeon later for pennies on the dollar because those drop in price sharply when another generation is out) sounds like a good deal to me.

Or, let's go with a four core to four core comparison:

Xeon E5-1620: $288
Decent X99 board: about $180
Total: about $468

It turns out that X99 can be cheaper than Skylake if you wanted Hyper-Threading.

For people who aren't overclocking to take advantage of X99 (since it has lower stock clocks but has similar max overclocking clocks), Haswell is still often a better deal than Skylake since you can usually get the same level of performance for considerably less money. X99's only major drawback is more power consumption, especially with the higher core count models with significant overclocks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom