Dude, your expectations are completely off the charts. I completely agree with you that if you have a Sandy Bridge processor from 4 years ago, it's still stupid to even upgrade. And the reason for that is that Intel has a clear monopoly in the industry, and are being huge cocksuckers by feeding us peanut upgrades. Think about it; the i7 2600K came out 4 years ago, and it still performs more or less excactly the same as a modern i7 5770K in gaming, and in other task is maybe 10-15% worse in performance. 15% in 4 years. I would generally consider 60% a relevant increase, and with the pace that Intel is going, you won't need to change your CPU until at least 16 years. That sound stupidly long time, and we can assume that the terrible pace will be improved from Intel one way or other (because that's how naively optimistic we consumers are). Let's assume that the Zen-processor are actually as good as AMD promises, and forces Intel to make a bigger (even if small) push to keep it quite a bit ahead. Let's say AMD knock it out of the park and shorten 16 to 8 years. That's still a lot!
And you might think 8 years still is too much. But think about it: I have the i7 2600K. It has been 4 years, and I'm still able to overclock it as well as your processor and run games like BF4 in more or less the exact same FPS as yours, whereas your CPU is maybe 10% (hardly anything) in video editing programs.
This hype about Skylake is stupid and is something that I see every year from commentators about "the next Intel processors"; they never are any relevant improvements. Why the fuck do people say that they are "waiting for Skylake", when even the performance numbers Intel give us (which usually are best-case scenarios in certain specific areas) is hardly relevant?
Oh and btw, your processor is already a bottleneck, thanks to Intel nothing giving a fuck about improving technology ever since 2010. That's why you got Mantle and DX12, and probably other improvements too in the future. Because when Intel don't do their job, someone else will (in some way or other). Mantle and DX12 gives a percentage-wise upgrade to games on CPUs (especially the old ones) that you get by going from a 5 year old intel processor to a new one. That's what happens when you get 30-40% increase in GPUs and only 5-10% increase every year.
It's getting to a point where I get frustrated even hearing or reading about Intel. It's bad enough to watch reviews upon reviews of "Intel's newest chip" on hardware sites that don't do the processor the justice by slaughtering them and giving them deserving bad scores -- knowing very well that it also might have an impact on Intel. But to see general, smart and talented people on forums like these -- people whose integrity I trust more than that of reviewers -- talk about how they are excited about Intel's new chip or that it is impressive, makes me depressed.
The i7 2600K is my last and final Intel chip, no matter what. I don't even fucking care if AMDs Zen processor end up becoming only as good as the 2600K (which is a triumph in itself for AMD) and not any upgrade for me. There is no fucking way I'm supporting 1 cent of my money on Intel anymore, not for the way they have been acting. They have literally deleted half a decade of potential development of processor chips, the way I see it. Excusing it as market strategy and reality in our neoliberal world is not good enough argument in my book.
/endrage
