Intel I7-4720HQ vs I7-5700HQ vs I7-6700HQ?

[icecrimson]

I am looking at a new gaming laptop with these 3 CPUs. I have looked at intel and it compares them all at the same speed. Looking at http://www.cpubenchmark.net and a few other sites and here is the benchmarks

4720HQ- 8155
5700HQ- 8620
6700HQ- 7832

So is this saying the slowest is the 6700HQ? If th only difference between these 3 is the CPU the 5700HQ would be best. Correct?

 

[seeingeyegod]

There is a lot more to a fast system, ESPECIALLY a laptop than what CPU it has. The system with the slowest of the three could easily be the best choice for other reasons (graphics, RAM, keyboard, battery, screen, hard drive, etc)

 

[nathan22thom]

There is a lot more to a fast system, ESPECIALLY a laptop than what CPU it has. The system with the slowest of the three could easily be the best choice for other reasons (graphics, RAM, keyboard, battery, screen, hard drive, etc)

Suppose that there are two laptops with the same exact specs (16gb RAM, 256 SSD, 1 TB Hard Drive, 960M) except for the processor. One has the i7-4720hq and the other has the i7-6700hq. Will there be a noticeable speed difference when using processor hungry applications between the two laptops? Would you pay more for one or the other in any case (not just gaming)?

By the way I'm seeing that the 4720 is worse than the 6700 on this website: http://laptopmedia.com/top-laptop-cpu-ranking/

 

[seeingeyegod]

Noticeable if you sit there timing tasks with a stop watch, probably not really otherwise.

 

[dardarbinkz]

I believe the 6700hq has faster transfer speeds than the 5700hq

 

[NumPad]

I'm facing the same choice at the moment. Basically the price difference is pretty negligible given the overall laptop price (around 60$ to jump from i7-4720HQ to i7-5700HQ and +25$ for i7-6700HQ) and the rest of the hardware is identical (apart from Skylake having DDR4).

Do I get it right: i7-6700HQ may show lower benchmarks due to lower frequencies in the TurboBoost for 4 cores, but it should stay in this mode longer than i7-5700HQ due to lower power usage (which should give anyway better performance in the long run)? Moreover, the number of samples for the benchmarks is really low for the Skylake comparing to the older generations.

Also, after reading some reviews of DDR4 I'm a bit worried that the upgrade may turn out to be a downgrade as higher frequencies may result in higher latency.

 

[jmgggg2]

go with the 6700.

Intel confused things by basically releasing three generations of chips in a very short time frame. The 4720 is a haswell architecture (third newest architecture available), 5700 is broadwell (second newest architecture), the 6700 is skylake, the current, newest architecture.

The bottom line is that in terms of pure processing power, there really isn't a heck of a lot of difference between these processors. You certainly won't notice anything based on their processing power.

But what you Will notice are the feature differences which is the main reason intel released skylake. Anyway, if you're looking for reasons why you should go with the 6700:

• 
  * Skylake has integrated 530 graphics, which more or less compare favorably to Nvidia 920m mobile graphics. You'll be able to run modern games on low-to-medium settings (with more low than medium), not stutter when scrolling through a graphics rich powerpoint, etc. Broadwell and haswell integrated graphics are inferior. not much of an issue if you're getting a laptop with a discrete graphics, but keep in mind that even if you get a laptop with discrete graphics, for the most part you'll be running the integrated graphics until it switches to the discrete graphics.
  
  * Skylake is more efficient than either broadwell or haswell. Not wo much more than broadwell, but definitely more than haswell. All else being equal, a skylake equipped laptop willlast longer on a single charge than a broadwell or haswell equipped laptop. saeger had a 15" model, for example, that from earlier this year that uses a broadwell processor. the same laptop is now available with syklake-- that single option adds an hour to their estimated run time (which is still pathetic since it's a gamming laptop, but an hour is an hour)
  
  * Skylake natively supports thunderbolt 3 -- may not seem like a big deal, but external docks that allow you to connect your laptop to a standard desktop video card are just around the corner -- razer is about to release one, so is msi. they connect to your laptop using thunderbolt 3. So, this will let you get a laptop with a (mediocre) integrated graphics, save money, and down the road get an external dock with a nifty NVidia titan, and run whatever game/graphics intensive program you want. This to me really is a game changer... and is really going to make people who are not on the lunatic, bleeding edge of desktops REALLY, really consider spending money on a decent laptop with a thunderbolt dock. Not too many laptops include t-bolt 3 port now (see msi gs40 as an example... razer shadow is a laptop with just integrated graphics that will connect to razer's dock when it comes out), but it will be pretty standard in the next few months.
  
  * USB 3.1 -- pretty sure this is natively supported by skylake... I've only seen it on skylake laptops, but something I'd checkout. A lot of laptops are implementing usb3.1 using the usb3 physical plug, which is reversible (like apple's lightining port), and also allows the manufacturer to implement thunderbolt 3 over the same port.. msi for example includes a single usb-c port that supports usb 3.1, thunderbolt 3, and also allows "super charging" ... you can charge your laptop through the usb-c port (so, when you connect your dock, you only have to connect a single cable).

So... really, all else being equal, for a laptop, if price is the same, there really is no reason to even consider broadwell or haswell., ESPECIALLY if you're not getting a discrete graphics processor.

 

[AS85]

* USB 3.1 -- pretty sure this is natively supported by skylake.............msi for example includes a single usb-c port that supports usb 3.1, thunderbolt 3, and also allows "super charging" ... you can charge your laptop through the usb-c port (so, when you connect your dock, you only have to connect a single cable).

Which MSI series are you referring to? I'm trying to decide between these two GS70s and I'm wondering if the extra $225 is worth it. I suppose because of the lower prices of the outgoing models, quite a few people are asking this Q.
https://forum-en.msi.com/index.php?topic=261698.0

MSI GS70 STEALTH PRO-607 $1350
i7-5700HQ Broadwell
4 USB 3.0

MSI GS70 STEALTH PRO-006 $1575
i7-6700HQ Skylake
2 USB 3.0 + 2 USB 3.1 Type-A

Side note: very odd MSI put a USB Type-C (Thunderbolt?) on the GS60 and not the GS70 Skylake late last year.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwMTDD2tKxo&feature=youtu.be&t=5m57s

And thanks for your previous write up. Very helpful.

 

[Kimshiyun]

Which MSI series are you referring to? I'm trying to decide between these two GS70s and I'm wondering if the extra $225 is worth it. I suppose because of the lower prices of the outgoing models, quite a few people are asking this Q.
https://forum-en.msi.com/index.php?topic=261698.0

MSI GS70 STEALTH PRO-607 $1350
i7-5700HQ Broadwell
4 USB 3.0

MSI GS70 STEALTH PRO-006 $1575
i7-6700HQ Skylake
2 USB 3.0 + 2 USB 3.1 Type-A

The second MSi GS70 STEALTH PRO-006 seems a better choice to me. But it's price ($1575) is too much.
I believe you can find a cheaper laptop for around $1000~$1100.
But if you can afford it then it's a no issue.