Originally Posted by computerparts
I have to disagree with you here just from looking at where we have come from in the last 5 years. People said the exact same thing about quad core cpus. "Games will never take advantage of 4 cores." "Dual core is the future." Remember those days? Fact is just about no one foresaw the incoming change that the quad core was going to bring. True, right now the i5 is not all that far behind an 8350 and oc'ing potential, they are about equal. But what happens when Steamroller gets released? We don't know much about it right now but if that leaked die shot going around is Steamroller, it's going to leave an i5 in the dust. We are at a crossroads right now just like back in the dual core days. This time the road splits between quad core + current programming and HSA + more cores. Right now is just a bad time to be spending a ton of money on a rig.
This thread is about the current i5s and the 8350, steamroller isn't here yet. It can't be purchased yet so I fail to see why it's relevant.
But anyways, yes you're right about the quad core vs. dual core argument. But the problem is that in those cases the quad cores usually had almost 100% more performance when all cores were utilized to the max.
This hardly the case with the i5s and the 8350, overall the 8350 is probably just between the 3770K and 3570K when it comes to properly multithreaded software. So about 10-15% faster than the i5s when all cores are stressed 100%. That as a difference is obviously insignificant compared to 100% and it's also very small when you take into account the fact that games wont be using all those cores to the max. It just doesn't happen as the software wont be coded to be parallel enough.When all cores are used core count is irrelevant.
It's just a number. Only overall performance matters. And since this theoretical situation is next to impossible with games the design with a little lower multithreaded perf and much higher single threaded perf will still be the best design for gaming.