That seems a bit harsh, you post about what a average user needs or doesn't in a thread where people bench high core count processors that are also usually overclocked. A Ryzen 5 1600 recommendation today makes sense cause while it may seem overkill for grandmothers facebook it adds longevity to the computer too. I had friends calling me a idiot in 2007 replacing my E6750 with a Q6600 but UT3 loved the threads and well even till last year when i last used a Q6600 it was VERY usable for average tasks.I guess this idiot did alright.
Remember the whole dual-core Core2 versus quad-core Core2Quad? Remember which group of PCs "had the longevity to keep working"? Even today, a Core2Quad can manage, and even traditionally single-threaded web browsers like Firefox are now multi-core optimized and aware. (And default to 8 threads!)
The dual-core PCs? Left in the dust, collecting dust.
Is it so hard to fathom, that today's quad-core PCs, maybe end up like yesteryear's dual-core PCs, in a few more years? We're already seeing it this year, in AAA Gaming, some of the most high-end modern games demand
MORE than 4 cores/threads. Those 2500K CPUs, the old dependable "Intel quad-core CPUs"? They don't cut it
But, today's Ryzen 6C/12T, and Intel's i5-9400 / 9400F, those are today's minimum CPUs for gaming, and in a few years, the bar will be moved upwards (mostly due to consoles moving to at least
8C/16T) to 8C/16T on the desktop at a minimum
Since 8C/16T is available TODAY, and NOT that expensive (Ryzen R7 3700X is $329, similar to what a top-end Intel quad-core unlocked CPU would have cost in the past), then why not buy a little future-proofed rig TODAY, if you are in the market for a system upgrade.
I consider myself a average user, outside of forum visits basic browsing and facebook i game occasionally. My i7 8700 non k usually is overkill but i had a good laugh the other day. I was playing some GTA V and spots where i hit over 100 i was hitting closer to 80 and while i was a bit annoyed seeing lower gpu usage the gameplay was fine and smooth so i kept on playing. I found out later W10 was running 69-78% of my cpu running a dang scan in the background. W10 is a bit new to me and i didn't realize that perhaps from what i read W10 does these scans quite often. If i was on my i5 4460 still i would have been perhaps in stutter city. Having all these threads i rarely open up task manager outside of a program crash so i found it funny that perhaps these scans have been happening the entire time and i felt absolutely no slowdown.
Yeah, Windows 10 especially can decide to do some CPU- or I/O-heavy things in the background. Updates, Anti-virus/malware scans, content-indexing, you name it. Having a decently multi-core CPU, and a fast primary OS drive (NVMe!), can really help with mitigating those aspects of Windows-based computing platforms.
I myself, found that my web browsing was noticeably improved, moving up to a 3rd-Gen Ryzen 3000-series CPU (a 3600). Although I only bought the "baby" 6C/12T minimum-class Ryzen 3000-series CPU, it has performed magnificently, and as good or better in most things than my 4.0Ghz OCed R7 2700 2nd-Gen Ryzen CPU.
Both of them blow away my i5-7400 in my HP Power Gaming PC. (Why did I ever buy that thing? I guess because I wanted to sample "retail Intel rigs".)
Edit: And if you're upgrading NOW or SOON, there's really no excuse not to go AM4. (Unless AMD ran over your cat or something...?)
A Ryzen 1600 CPU 6C/12T (on fire-sale now for $104.99 @ Newegg, or $79.99 @ MC), or a 2400G 4C/8T (on sale at Newegg during Prime Days for $99.99, probably similar at MC), is really the minimum
you should be looking at for a desktop CPU. (Or if you "must" have Intel, an 8700K.)