View Single Post
Old 02-16-2012, 10:21 AM   #19
aquielisunari
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Reputation: 23
Posts: 92
GrimReefer?

We are talking about gaming performance.Let's take a look at the 8150 vs the 2500K. http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=288 shows the 8150 gets smoked and embarrassed by a CPU with only 4 cores where GAMING is concerned. Ow wow the 8150 has the highest clock ever. Um yeah that is with some ELITE overclocking knowledge and a gallon of liquid nitrogen at the ready. Most people don't have that. This does not equate to the natural performance of each processor. The 8120 can in no way shape or form be between the 2500 and 2600 where gaming is key. Take a look at the 8120 here. Again this is with GAMING in mind https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...hl=en_US#gid=0 .

Realistically speaking GAMES do NOT use over 4 cores so the extra cores are wasted on gaming. the 2500K and the 2600K are better than the 8120 for gamers. I can go to Micro-Center http://www.microcenter.com/single_pr...uct_id=0354589 and pick up a $179.99 2500K. With the aforementioned links and other research that I have done I would most certainly NOT buy an 8120 or 8150 for more money and get less in the way of gaming performance.

Remember we are in a STEAM forum which is for GAMING. PS, rendering, encoding, transcoding, CAD and other tasks that benefit from the Multi-threaded side of those chips are down the hall, out the door and to your left. Intel's HT tech has something for those innefficient FX processors anyways.

Last edited by aquielisunari: 02-16-2012 at 10:25 AM.
aquielisunari is offline   Reply With Quote