Intel Core i7-6800K 15M Broadwell-E 6-Core 3.4 GHz LGA 2011-v3 140W BX80671I76800K Desktop Processor
Cheapest on staticice is $669. (http://www.staticice.com.au/cgi-bin/search.cgi?q=Intel+Core+…)
CamelCamelCamel.
I reckon that's too expensive, I can't afford it haha
Will this work in my PS2?
Yep, go for it mate. Report back to us how it performs!
Instructions unclear, Ps2 now wedged in death star.
Digital Foundry tested gaming performance by cores. Most games saw no appreciable improvement with more than 4 cores, and many showed no real improvement for more than 2 cores.
Absolutely. For gaming, it's about raw speed, and anything beyond 4 cores is an absolute waste. However, for stuff that can really use the extra threads (like running VMs, video editing and transcoding, etc) this thing would be a beast. Still, people buy the workstation-grade CPUs thinking that more cores = faster, when in reality, those cores are SLOWER than a much more inexpensive i5/i7, and if your game is CPU-bound, it'll suffer.
Agreed, games prefer a higher clock speed rather than a lot of cores, a quad core will be more than suffice for any pc game that is cpu hungry eg a 4790k is a beast of a cpu at 4.00Ghz.
I may be wrong, but could that be because most games don't utilise more than 4 cores? Don't programmers have to set the amount of cores an application/game can use?
Yes, but its not so much as setting how many cores a program can use as designing things that can happen in parallel. Games are inherently linear which means finding things to do at the same time is difficult.
Typically the peripheral things like audio, AI (if needed) and physics can run in different threads but the main state machine which controls what is happening in the game is going to be running on one core.
Usually ships within 1 to 2 months.
WTF? Is this a pre-order or something?
Are there any motherboards there that would take more than one of these? Or is that a Xeon-only thing? I can keep 8 cores flat out for hours on end when building stuff…
It does seem like a long wait, but yes there are motherboards that are compatible, LGA 2011-v3 already support them.
I've done a bit of "looking up" and it seems that i7 6800 series only support uniprocessor operation.
hmmm, tried to find some a decent MB for them, looks like you'll be chipping nearly the same amount for the CPU as for the motherboard. I think its best to leave it mature a bit, and don't bother for those asking prices on MBs. [MSI X99] (http://www.scorptec.com.au/product/Motherboards/Intel_Socket…)
According to multiple tech sources these new 6800+ skylake CPUs are not worth it, for just about any task there are better value/performance older gen cards. These CPUs are not for gaming. Not really sure what Intel is trying to pull with this apart from a couple quick bucks from unaware consumers.
I'm more or less in agreement with the above, even though my usage patterns don't tend to fit the typical consumer. I build a lot of code and the build system can use huge amount of parallelism and memory. From my point of view, loads of cores, loads of fast RAM (32GB or more) and big cache make the biggest difference. Decent I/O bandwidth is nice and graphics are not much of a concern. As long as I can run two 2k monitors side-by-side with KDE desktop and text editors, I'm fine. Hardware H.265 acceleration is a nice bonus, but not a requirement.
From what I can see, all of that is already available in previous generations. I can't see where the new i7 6800 series would give advantage - if they supported multi-processor configuration, then maybe, but they don't.
Price dropped to $441 delivered.
In before someone says wait for the 10 core version.