crashtech
Lifer
- Jan 4, 2013
- 10,573
- 2,145
- 146
It's very normal to dig heels in when presented with evidence that contradicts your beliefs. I think we all fall prey to confirmation bias. I am the worst one I know at this, chiefly because I know myself best. Even recently I got pulled into a very shameful exchange over an idea of which I still am having trouble letting go.You posted 2 benchmarks. The i3 kills it one (cinebench, which is totally useless based on the application list in the OP), and the ancient Q6600 destroys it in the other (POV-Ray, which is equally useless). Looks like a draw to me, which is not what I would spend $600 on.
If the system you are upgrading to isn't faster across the board in everything than your 8 year old system, don't spend the money unless there are certain non-performance based features you need with a new platform.
Again, you also have to consider how this system will perform 4 or 5 years from now. Gaming is moving beyond dual core now, and the only applications the OP uses that need anything more than an entry level APU are games. An i3 Haswell is already massive overkill for email and internet surfing. You will not want to be using a dual core system for gaming 5 years from now.
Lastly, I don't care what someone recommended earlier. The OP didn't have an SSD in the last configuration he posted. Considering, he's the one buying the computer for himself, his is the only config that matters.
But it's time to let the Core2 Quad go. It had its place in the sun. It led the charge for a paradigm shift that continues to this day, the idea that quad cores are the future of computing. Core2's time has come and gone, the IPC of their once advanced cores hopelessly outmatched by today's CPUs. An idea that had such resonance and such lasting implications deserves recognition and respect, but there also needs to be a constant acknowledgment that these ideas become obsolete nearly as fast as we can internalize them. An interesting time in which to live, to be sure.
