Better late than never, Skylake in August

Subject: General Tech | June 18, 2015 - 12:20 PM |
Tagged: Skylake, lga1151, Intel, i7-6700K, i5-6600K, H110, 14nm

DigiTimes has some dates for Skylake, with the desktop chips you are most interesting being revealed at Gamescon in Germany at the end of August.  There will be a pair of i7 models, one unlocked K model and a power optimized T model and six i5 models, three with lower TDPs and at least one unlocked i5, the 6600K.  A month after the new chips are shown off will come the arrival of the new LGA 1151 socketed H110 chipset, which will likely be compatible with a certain AiO watercooler.  Mobile versions will not be for sale until the new year but the long wait will likely mean the inclusion of the new USB 3.1 Type-C ports on those laptops.

View Full Size

"Intel will then unveil its Skylake-based Core i7-6700/6700T, Core i5-6600, 6500, 6400, 6600T, 6500T and 6400T, and H170 and B150 chipsets between August 30-September 5."

Here is some more Tech News from around the web:

Tech Talk

Source: DigiTimes

June 18, 2015 | 12:57 PM - Posted by Edkiefer (not verified)

only one K , I thought I read it would be i7-6700k and i5-6600k

June 18, 2015 | 01:17 PM - Posted by Jeremy Hellstrom

only one i7, I will make that clearer ... Core i7-6700K and Core i5-6600K will be a thing

June 18, 2015 | 03:47 PM - Posted by Zen00

After reading through the source, it's apparent this is still rumor grounds as there was no official source revealed, only "sources in the supply chain" which could mean anything.

June 18, 2015 | 04:04 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

USB 3.1 Type-C, there is no USB 3.1 Type-C, there is a USB Type-C plug, that can be paired with a USB 3.0 controller chip, or a USB 3.1 controller chip. Using the USB 3.1, number along with the Type-C name in confusing. The plug standard is called USB Type-C, the controllers that may be used are either the USB 3.0, or USB 3.1, and consumers are not guaranteed to get USB type 3.1 speeds just because the device has a USB Type-C plug on any PC/Laptop device.

So the question remains will Intel have integrated chipset support for the USB 3.1 data protocol. The plug standard, USB Type-C does offer some additional electrical handling abilities, but it's the job of the USB controller chip to provide the USB 3.0, or 3.1, bandwidth. When do you think laptops will get USB 3.1 controller chips, and faster internal PCI based SSD connector standards in order to take advantage of data transfers up to 10Gb per Second?

I'm more interested in devices getting USB 3.1 controllers, and faster laptop internal Drive PCIe based sockets/standards, so the laptop has sufficient available bandwidth to saturate the bandwidth on transfers to an external USB 3.1 capable peripheral, external drive/whatever. I expect that because of the USB Type-C plug for factor, in addition to the added electrical standards, that most laptop manufactures will readily adopt the USB Type-C plug standard as the plugs allow for thinner devices, and Intel's thunderbolt 3 is also adopting the USB Type-C plug with extended pinout to handle the additional thunderbolt pins as an extended Type-C standard.

Hopefully also the Laptop OEMs will adopt thunderbolt to a greater degree, as the thunderbolt 3 controller chips(Alpine Ridge) will support both active, and passive thunderbolt cables, In passive cable mode TB3 will only support 20Gbs transfers, but using active TB3 cables will allow 40. Passive TB cables should be much less costly as they do not have chips embedded in the cables themselves. Also a big plus for TB3 is peer-to-peer networking at 10Gbps speeds! Using existing networking stacks in Windows, OS X, and Linux, the protocol will allow peer-to-peer networking at 10Gbps speeds! If you have ever priced 10Gb Ethernet controllers, that TB3 peer-to-peer is great news for those in Video/Audio processing, and maybe even gaming, can you say LAN party at 10Gbs, etc.

June 19, 2015 | 05:25 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Man, you must be working for Monster Cable corporation with its over-priced cable promotion racket.

June 20, 2015 | 02:46 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

No! but with TB3 any passive TB3 cable(at half of TB3's speed) should not cost any more than the bog standard USB cable, it's the chips in the active cables that add to TB's unaffordability. But TB active cable chips is more of an Intel racket, that and any cable makers additional markup racket, as Intel Exclusively makes the active cable controller chips with which to price gouge the market with. Now that TB3 controllers will work with passive cables the cable cabals have no more excuses. TB3 does have a few innovations, one being that peer-to-peer 10GB networking between PCs over thunderbolt, a great boost for audio professionals, graphics professionals, and those wishing to LAN up a few workstation PCs for render-farm and audio uses, 10Gb Ethernet is costly likewise. So there is more functionality to TB3 than simply connecting to disk/SSD peripherals, there is networking at 10Gbs for gaming also, should any TB3 capable systems be brought to a LAN party. imagine being able to LAN your newest gaming rig up to another/s at 10Gbs and distributing the gaming workloads across both rigs, I'm looking forward to PCPer testing TB3 to its fullest.

June 19, 2015 | 05:20 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Desktop computers and laptop computers and tablets should supply only USB 3.1 Type A full size ports. To hell with the reversible and thin USB 3.1 Type C ports.

Most people have full size USB 2.0 and USB 1.1 peripherals.

We don't need to be damn iSheep followers of dictator Apple Corporation with its use of USB 3.1 Type C ports.

June 20, 2015 | 03:43 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

No! Blame Intel's thin and light illogical Apple envy for the Ultrabook fiasco, for all that thin and light laptop crap!

And there is no "USB 3.1 Type A" standard, there is a USB Type-A plug form factor/electrical standard that works with either a USB 2.0, or 3.0 controller chip, the controller chip is what gives the data transfer speeds, the USB plug(A, C, whatever) only specifies the wire pin-out and electrical delivery capacity standards. You already have laptops with plenty of USB 3.0 controller capacity, via Intel's chipset support for the USB 3.0 controller/protocol, or standalone USB 3.0 controller chips.

What I'm looking for is the USB 3.1 controller chips and their 10Gbs data transfer speeds, to go along with the USB Type-C plug's extra added electrical delivery capabilities. Adaptors for the new USB Type-C plug form factor are but an incidental cost compared to the extra added benefit of the USB Type-C PLUG standard. Unfortunately the USB 3.1 controller chip is loosely tied to the USB Type-C standard and since the USB Type-C plug standard is the newest general purpose PC/Laptop standard with some extra space/electrical delivery benefits, expect most newer systems to go with the latest plug standard(Type-C).

People need to remember to separate the USB plug standards(A, C, etc.) from the USB controller standards (2.0, 3.0, 3.1), as all the controller Chips are backwards compatible, it's the USB plug standard's many shapes and sizes that leads to the need for adaptors, and the Pin-outs are the same, or supersets on the previous generation plugs with each successive Controller generation requiring additional wires be added to the plug's pin-outs themselves. The plug's electrical delivery changes with each generation also, but the additional wires added to the pin-out and some electrical sensing in the newer controllers keep things from getting fried electrically with previous generation's standards.

P.S. in order for laptops to fully benefit from USB 3.1 controllers the laptops are going to have to have faster than SATA 3 speeds, at least as far as Internal SSD drivers are concerned, or also possibility dual internal hard drives in RAID 0. It's no good if the internal drive's data transfer speed is limited to SATA 3.0 6Gbs connection speeds, with the USB 3.1 controller able to push 10Gbs over its connection.

June 21, 2015 | 07:50 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

So does this mean that there is no hope for a Surface Pro 4 this fall with Skylake?

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote><p><br>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.