View Single Post
Old Apr 7, 2012, 11:52 PM   #126
xenocide
1000 Posts
 
xenocide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Burlington, VT
Posts: 1,706 (2.15/day)
Thanks: 228
Thanked 404 Times in 297 Posts

System Specs

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steevo View Post
All else being equal if I were to build a basic box with light weight gaming needs the APU would win. An extra $90 to spend on a GPU would get you more bang for the buck than the CPU's 10-15% increased efficiency.
If you think the difference between a 2500 and even the best APU is only 10-15%, I hate to say it, but you're misinformed. The CPU side of Quad-Core SB's is upwards of 50% faster than Llano;

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...pu-review.html

Even with a 20% overclock, Llano wasn't really even close to the i5-2400. In games where the CPU plays any role, the i5's crush the Llano offerings, with the same discrete GPU. That's also comparing the $140 A8-3870K, the i5-2400 is currently $190, and you could even get an i5-2300 for $180, both of which are better than that CPU in every way (sans iGPU). If you look at the charts and see the ~$100 APU's, they are far worse.

Saying a Llano-based solution is as good as a Quad-Core SB solution, for anything short of day to day use, is dishonest at best.
__________________
If BF3 doesn't turn out to be the biggest selling PC shooter of all time, then I will eat my graphics card. -MatTheCat
xenocide is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to xenocide For This Useful Post: