DubbleClick - please, just answer this one question, coz any dispute, or debate with You is utterly pointless, because You fail to see very foundational principles of trends and hierarchy of information technologies and corresponding hardware cases.
Question: Which is better?
A: Paying now [2015] mere 50-70 bucks more for Z97 board and:
- be able to get 4790k and OC it to 4,5-5 GHz on air/water? [and thus, getting a free 15-20% raw power increase] and prolonging the life of the current system by 2/-4 years. At a time he's gonna go from i5, he'll probably be somewhere around 150 - 200 euro price tag
- be able to SLi another GTX 970 [yes, he's going for the GTX 970] for 150-200 euros
- in general, do an upgrade of 300-400 euros, and be able to run everything on high/ultra-high for another year/or two, after upgrade
B: Paying now [2015] mere 50-70 bucks less for H81 board and:
- be able to get 4790k, but won't be able to OC it at all, whatsoever [thus losing 15-20% raw power]
- won't be able to SLi, and thus being able to buy only new and better graphics card for 300-400 euro, and most likely, 500 euro graphics card, if he'd wanted the SLi of GTX 970 effect
- in general and ultimately get a new motherboard/ram, for new system for another 500 euro
Allow me to sum that up for You, will ya?
A: All he has to do is invest somewhere within the range of a year, or two 300-400 euro, and he's good for another year-two.
B: He has to invest either extra 650-700 euro, to get the same effect as he'd get with option A, without the ability to push the CPU for another generation/or two!*, in a year, or two, and ultimately invest another 1000 euro, because he'd bought the c*appy h81 two years ago, and saved 50-70 euro!
* many of my clients are running on 2600K OCed to 4,5 - 4,8 [some 5.0] GHz nowadays, because they didn't think like You, but thought like me. And now, they still have superior CPU, that didn't need to be changed for past 4 years, and they won't need to change it for another 3-5 years!
So please, be so kind, and answer that. Is it A, or B? Which seems more logical to You?
My question is very simple, really. Why saving now a marginal sum of 50-70 euro, that will force me to invest extra 300 - 350 euros in a year/or two, or eventually 500-600 euros? I fail to see Your point, utterly, absolutely and totally, and You're absolutely right in this aspect, I really do fail to see what You're trying to prove here.