Originally Posted by Exeed Orbit
Not when you factor in the fact that games are now starting to use additional threads vs. physical cores. The i7 could in some (more and more as time goes by) offer additional performance when comparing to an i5. But for now, diminishing returns is the main factor of why they're not performing that much better.
So could the FX, which is what people have been saying for years. Yet, every time a game comes out and is bench-marked, there is little to no difference between the i5 and i7 in benches. Occasionally you will have the odd exception where a game runs significantly better on an i7, but those are incredibly rare, and not worth the extra 100$ considering the i5 still keeps above 60FPS without any issue.
It's like arguing that a souped up mustang is not as fast as a ferrari. Yes, you are technically correct, but in games/typical programs (highways and such) the difference isnt really noticeable. Now, in a benchmark or certain programs (racetrack) the difference is most certainly there, and it is noticeable that the ferrari is indeed faster, but the vast majority of people dont use them.
The i7 is better, but unless you are bench-marking or using a select few programs, the difference is down to a margin of error. Not worth the additional investment.Edited by GamerusMaximus - 6/13/16 at 8:37am