Originally Posted by PostalTwinkie
He is going to be upgrading his GPU, so the "GPU in question" isn't in question, and is completely irrelevant to the situation.
Sorry I missed that. The difference in performance still isn't significant enough from my perspective. To help give you a taste of my perspective. My previous machines that I ran side-by-side were single core, 1GB RAM each, 32 bit machines. One was a 1GHZ G4, the other was a Athlon XP ~2000 something. The upgrade to the propus + GTX460 2 years ago, was approximately a 10-20 fold increase in performance. THAT is an upgrade.
Yup, it was totally software, because I don't have a clue as to what I am doing.
I agree with your statement when taken out of context.
Did you even look at the math in the article you supposedly read? Or did you just do a quick Google, and grab the first link that appears to be in favor of your argument? Here....let me help you with the article YOU provided to back YOUR statements up.
I guess we have very different definitions of what an "upgrade" is. 10-20% average frame rate is negligible unless you play games with the FPS counter on. That sort of typical change in performance is well within the margin of what I labeled it, a "semi-side-grade." Like I said, there are limited cases, like SC2, where the difference is noteworthy and those limited cases don't seem to apply in this case.
Your position on the matter here seems to be, that 10-20% upgrades are worth pursuing. I would argue that they are not.
Ah, I looked at your sig rig, that explains your willingness to so quickly call double digit performance increases a side grade.
Double digit percentage INCREASES are
typically considered in the computer industry to be a side grade. You're position here, is that a 10-20% improvement is worth the hassle, I say it is not. I am willing to bet that 99% of computer users and system administrators the world over would consider a 10-20% performance increase to be a complete waste of time.
I take more flak on this forum for arguing in favor of Intel builds, for new system builders, than probably anyone on the forum, because I know that from the perspective of BUILDING A NEW MACHINE TODAY, the best value for most users (gamers) is with an intel chip. Why settle for those 10-20% performance cuts on a new system build when you don't have to? Why use more electricity doing it when you don't have to? I argue in favor of Intel where it makes sense, and in favor of AMD where it makes sense. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, I am not arguing in favor of a chip because of what it is or who made it, and especially not because of what is in a rig I built 2 years ago when Propus was a value leading chip, but because of what makes sense from a value perspective today. I can't see the logic in making the move, perhaps you can because you have a different perspective of what an "upgrade" is.
I personally, could not justify the hassle and expense of moving to an i3 build from my propus. It's a pointless endeavor that would cost me more time and money than the chip would ever save me.