photonboy :
ikaz :
Just to throw in my 2 cents thats not really much of an upgrade maybe even less so since alot of the new games can use more than 2 or 4 cores ( I think the new frost byte can use 6 cores).
If you're only playing new games that are well threaded which is still rare overall.
GW2 as mentioned gets as little as 60% of the performance on the FX-8350 as the i5-4670K. I don't have that exact link, but this one's close enough:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/guild-wars-2-performance-benchmark,3268-7.html
Skyrim is yet another game that does far better on an Intel CPU.
The VALUE of upgrading is another question entirely and that's up to the individual. I hope AMD has something to close the gap on Intel soon.
The necessity to upgrade a good CPU like a recent i5/i7 has really dropped. Some people whine that Intel isn't making big processing improvements. Well, why should they? Aside from a sensible allocation of funds towards the MOBILE sector, on the desktop side:
a) AMD is far behind so why spend money distancing even further? And,
b) GAME developers are the main problem by not multi-threading properly yet.
This is why a good quad-core Intel is likely to be the best gaming CPU for a couple years yet. Hopefully the new consoles will encourage much better threading support but that doesn't necessarily mean the FX-8350 is suddenly going to be a better CPU than the i5-4670K for example in most new 2014/15 releases.
Agreed with most of what you said. I don't know whether you have or not, but I encourage you to read the stickied AMD Steamroller speculation thread.
The intel is a no-brainer choice if you play a lot of single-threaded games like MMO's, it performs vastly better. However even in recently released titles that utilise 4 threads the FX 83xx will perform similarly to the i5 - in some cases when you just play you can't tell the difference.
a) AMD is actually closer than you'd expect. The architecture is nowhere near as good as intel's though (who've had years to perfect it by having that much market share, especially because of the bad rep that AMD got from releasing the flop that Bulldozer turned out to be.)
b) It seems many are beginning to utilise more cores/threads - BF4, Crysis 3, capcom have anounced their new engine will, I believe some form of frostbite/havok engine is going to use more too. Seems to be the new trend, intel have just about reached as much efficiency as they can with their i5 quad-core line - I'm willing to bet that their next gen of desktop CPUs will have more than 4 cores.
I still agree with you though, the i5 4670k is the best choice IMO, and even in games like BF4 that use all of the threads the i5 will still be equal or better even with it's lower core count (however crysis 3 can be a different story). I think we just have to take it on a case-by-case basis, every game is different so it's hard to outright state which CPU is better, since everyone has different needs and games they play.
There's no way the 4670k will become anywhere near obsolete for the next few years. Amazing CPU.