• Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 days ago

    They really segmented that market in the worst possible way, 2 cores and 4 cores only, possibility to use vms or overclock, and so on. Add windoze eating up every +5%/year.

    Remember buying the 2600(maybe X) and it was soo fast.

    • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 days ago

      The 2600k was exceptionally good and was relevant well past the normal upgrade timeframes.

      Really it only got left behind because of its 4C/8T limit as everything started supporting lots of threads instead of just a couple, and just being a 2nd Generation i7.

      • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 days ago

        Really it only got left behind because of its 4C/8T limit as everything started supporting lots of threads instead of just a couple, and just being a 2nd Generation i7.

        Past me made the accidentally more financially prudent move of opting for the i7-4790k over the i5-4690k which ultimately lasted me nearly a decade. At the time the advice was of course “4 cores is all you need, don’t waste the money on an i7” but those 4 extra threads made all the difference in the longevity of that PC

      • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        Yes, that was a beast! I was poor and had to wait and got the generation after, the 3770K and already the segmentation was there, I got overlooking possibilities but not the VM stuff…

        • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 days ago

          At this point the only “issue” with it is power usage versus processing capability. Newer chips can do the same with less power.