And here I came expecting a CPU review. Temperatures, clock speeds on 2 core, 3 core, 4 core 6 core boost, memory speed performance differences, actual power draw...you know, normal things. What I got was an authors opinion on how AMD 2600 with more expensive PSU, Board, cooler and usually memory, when overclocked, is a better choice, and 5$ more expensive.
Your shilling for AMD is just off the rails. Maybe dial it down a bit and keep things professional? Do a proper review while you're at it?
Let's say I am looking at this CPU because
- My OC carrier is long over, no time, no nerves, no joy.
- I want a cool (cold) CPU to upgrade from Sandy Bridge and ddr4 with minimum hassle (I hate choosing and going through memory compatibility lists, especially for AMD)
- I am looking for cheap out of the box performance (not looking to spend my monthly sallary on an upgrade), and to reuse some existing parts I have, like my Megahalems cpu cooler, also get a chepoo z370 (under 100e) so I could use faster ddr4. Paired with i5 9400f that is 140e, my existing 530W tT modular PSU I thought this would be good combo for light desktop use and occasional gaming with my 1060 6gb. Somehow I think I will manage to wait 0.3s longer for something to unzip compared to ryzen xxxx or i5 xxxx K overclocked to 5.1GHz.
edit: come to think of it, this review is almost useless. You have no point of reference for this CPU, you just pitted it against stronger or similar performing ones. This means almost nothing for people like me looking to upgrade. How faster is that ryzen XXXX and that intel XXXX from intel SB, or Haswell (maybe even put Bulldozer in there so we can have a laugh) ?