Originally Posted by fateswarm
Well, the average gamer should give the ~40 more (australia excluded) for an i7, if he has it, if he is a general gamer since many games now use 5-6 threads at least optimally.
Also the 770 vs the 290 is a silly comparison. The 770 is dead as a choice.
The 780 vanilla is still pretty good on many benchmarks.
Well i'm talking about the market here, where i7 is £78 more (translates to $131 USD) and GPU costs are as follows:
~£170 for a 760
~£190-200 for an r9 280
approx: £235 for an aftermarket, 2gb 770
got 290 below £300 a couple times (aftermarket) and we have 290x reference + bf4 for £320
cheapest 780 is £380 for aftermarket on ocuk. Just talking current prices for 290 vs 780, 290 seems ~10-15% cheaper but there are less deals on 780's, i have not seen them dip nearly as low.
As far as i'm concerned, i7 user should be the niche rather than the majority. Most people don't benefit from HT - which among my peers at least, seems to be used most for the 20% clock for clock boost video encoding - but is that really useful enough to take a 100-200mhz hit to their overclock and pay the equivalent of $130 more?
That cost difference will buy you a 760 from a 750ti. A 770 from a 760 - a 290 from a 770, etc. It can bring down the price of your build (£162+95+40+50 for cpu+mobo+ram+cooling instead of £240+95+40+50 - a cost increase of ~22.4% for this, before GPU, PSU, Case and Storage) or just allow you to take a leap like this.
If you have use for it, good for you - but in a value build, you really need a solid reason to take it.
Like i said, if thermal limits were not a problem, it would be more attractive for quite a few more people - but still not a go-to CPU. It's an added bonus as long as it does not force you to make a significant sacrifice somewhere else in the build to meet a certain budget, for most people - but that's hard to do, given the large cost increase (78 GBP, the equivalent of 131 USD!)Edited by Cyro999 - 4/24/14 at 3:42am