Originally Posted by Masked
This is what I don't understand
about you people.
When Intel released it's first quads, I.e. let's use the Q6600's as an example, the dual cores crushed them...Yet, it wasn't a failure...You all saw it as "innovating" "MOAR CORES MOAR POWA".
Now we have an 8 core chip that actually competes with the 4 core version and it's a "failure".
The 8150 is meant to compete with the 2500k and it does so WITH an "equal" price point.
Less QQ and more pew pew IMHO.
You clearly don't, the 8150 for instance is $60 more on newegg than the i5-2500k. You also failed to notice in applications where eight cores are used it's only on average on par with the i5-2500k.
The huge difference there is that when quads came out dual cores were faster in less threaded apps but lost in threaded apps, this processor came out and isn't any faster in threaded apps than a processor with half the cores, which also costs less. However it is also much slower in less threaded apps, the comparison you're trying to make has no merit here.
Typically I ignore your posts, but sometimes they're just so far off a comment is needed to correct them.