Tell me /g/ how bad did I fuck up? GPU is a 980ti I currently

If youve got money why not get a xeon or i7?
If you dont have money why get all that shit?

>>57599556

i have a budget of roughly $500 for an upgrade.

File: 1451834124281.jpg (98KB, 1024x904px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 1024x904px

>>57599513
>not waiting for Zen

>>57599729
Whats the point? It will be roughly the same cost and give basically the same performance, you're just support AMD instead of Intel, and waiting another 2-4 months.

>>57599729

well im going to keep all my parts and if zen turns out to be the bees knees i'll sell my intel stuff to some kid on reddit.

>>57599513
Cancel CPU.

Jet.com has the same cpu for $184 with SHOP15 coupon. Thats $35 saving there.

Newegg has Asus Z170-P mobo @ $99 ((89 after 10 rebate if you want that too)

For the same price, you can also get a 3000 Mhz ram instead of 2133 Mhz ram on newegg.

>>57599932

but i can't run SLI on that z170p mobo

>>57599969
The Z170-K has SLI I think @ $110

Also >multi gpu

File: Battlefield 1 1080p cpu.png (67KB, 523x440px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 523x440px

>>57599748

>16 threads
>same performance as a 4 thread

A stock 8350 - despite having less than half the IPC rivals a 6600k

File: 1477783450019.jpg (120KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 1600x900px

>>57599729
Or kaby lake

>>57600477
stop this meme

File: untitled-1.png (26KB, 686x551px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 686x551px

>>57602739

I'm sorry that your shiny new cpu struggles to beat a chip from 2012.

>>57602739
He's right though. I have both cpu's and there is virtually no difference in performance. I will go out on a limb and shill Intel for one and only one reason, motherboards. Options for AMD are pretty shitty.

>>57602868

AMD's motherboards come in exactly three flavours

1) Overbuilt to survive pumping over 1.5v through them
2) Tiny mitx and the like for apus
3) Shit

>>57600477
Lol wow an 8 core CPU barely keeping up with a 4 core CPU.

In anything that isn't as well threaded the 6600k leaps ahead. So in the absolute worst case scenario he's getting essentially identical performance. But for all the games and apps reliant on 1-4 cores the 6600k would dominate the 8350.

>>57603025

>Lol wow an 8 core CPU barely keeping up with a 4 core CPU.

>2012 vs 2016

Actually it shows just how little Intel has improved their arhcitecture.

>>57603074
Intel hasn't improved much since their i series architecture. I think they've just been either lazing around or saving their big guns for when AMD starts pulling Zen.

>>57603117

I doubt they are sitting on a secret sauce - if they were they would be drip feeding us proper improvements to encourage people to upgrade more often. My personal conspiracy theory is Intel's predictions for where Zen will end up price and performance wise is why they are releasing that K i3 - to prevent Zen gouging out a foothold in the lower end of the market (as Intel probably are untoucable on the HEDT side of things right now).

>>57600497
does anyone else see the 2nd dude on the left's massive erection?

>>57603074
Who cares? This isn't a philosophical argument over which company I'd rather support. It's simple numbers. The Intel CPU is a great buy, especially if you're going to OC since it hits 4.4GHz with ease. The only situations the 8350 would be better are 24/7 rendering or encoding where all 8 cores can be put to 100% load. The i5 would still keep up here, but more cores have their advantage in those niche workloads

>>57599513
>not actually going for the 6700k when already spending over 200
>buying a shitty mobo from asus that has problems with lane management, IO shielding and QC
>not at least 2400mhz ram

well you fucked up 3/3

>>57599513
>8350 to a 6600k
you are wasting your bucks you silly consumer whore.

>>57599556
Why the fuck should some gamer get a Xeon anything? The i7-6700k wouldn't offer him much, either.

>>57603210
Intel has been holding back.

Once AMD starts being competitive, they'll start releasing $200 6 core CPUS and $150 i5s quad cores, $100 i3s

If 6-core became the norm, games would utilize more of their power. Intel could've put out 6-core years before but they didn't because there was no competition. All they've been doing is increasing GPU power on their CPU. Literally why in the fuck would anyone want that if they're spending $200+?

They're just dicking around

>>57603254

> The Intel CPU is a great buy

No, its not. You either get the fx chip for signifcantly less or you go buy an i7 which will always outperform the i5 at identical clocks. The writing has been on the wall for a while - even for vidya you want moar coars because even if a game slams only one or two threads you will have extra cpu resources free for background tasks.

If you only care about single thread performance because you do nothing thats remotely threaded the highest clocked i3 will suit you just fine.

>>57603312

>Once AMD starts being competitive, they'll start releasing $200 6 core CPUS and $150 i5s quad cores, $100 i3s

That isn't holding back any performance though - just intel willing to take less shekels to ensure AMD can't get a foothold.

>>57603300
Generally for older generations Xeons are cheaper than consumer branded i7. Didn't always hold true but more often than not it does

>>57603273

find me one mobo that doesn't have reviews of 'shitty qc'