I couldn't find a conclusive answer anywhere, so I'm starting this thread.
I'm building a machine for a not-very-tech-savvy person, and I want this machine to last him at-least 6-7 years... maybe ~10 years, if possible.
He is going to be using the machine for basic browsing, document editing, movie watching and perhaps some casual gaming. No overclocking, please, as I don't want any reliability issues.
How well does AMD's Turbo-core compare to Intel's Turbo-boost?
I know that a cheaper CPU, like, say a Phenom II X4 965 BE can get the job done, but I want one which can handle at-least one OS upgrade, maybe even two with a GFX card, and if he learns more about computers, that he is not crippled by the CPU's speed.
So, my question: which of these is more future proof than the other?
The i5 760 blows the 1055T out of the water in single threaded benchmarks here (i.e. almost all the benchmarks there are) - only on about 10 of them is the Phenom better:
If you're talking future-proof I'd say you'd be better off with the Phenom II X6 for two reasons:
1) It's a genuine 6-core processor and the multiple threads should give that bit more future-proof-ness (if it's not a word it is now!) than the i5 760.
2) The AM3 socket that the Phenom II runs on will outlast the LGA1156 socket that the i5 760 uses. AMD's next generation processors will at least be compatible with the AM3 socket whereas the next Intel CPU's will likely only use LGA1366. Hence, if you ever need to upgrade the CPU in the future for whatever reason, you can simply drop in a newer model without having to upgrade the motherboard as well.
Other's here may have different opinions on this so I'd hang on for a few replies and go from there. Hope this helps!