Generally it is considered acceptable to limit budget-oriented A10 builds to 8gbs, since very few games actually need 8gb RAM, even if they request it. For example, Witcher 3 doesn't even climb above 3gb over extended play, though in the "recommended" system requirements CDProjekt lists 8gb RAM.
That being said, though, yeah: 10gb or 12gb would be the better comparison than 16gb... you did neither. You also paired it with one of the more expensive varieties of A10 motherboard, while dropping the pentium into a cheap H81 mobo.
'or around £210 for the AMD with 8GB of RAM for both the GPU and CPU.'
I did actually put them up at the same price point. Around the £210 mark. £215 for 8GB high speed RAM. I was trying to get on the same price point. Not to say - oh you need 16GB to game on a 860k. Of course you don't. 6GB is enough. I'm not a troll nor stupid.
The point about the motherboard is valid. Force of habit to always go for the 88 chipset on the FM2+. The difference is £8. So that puts the 7870k build at £202.
I would also add that in the case of the g3258 build you can sell your GPU and upgrade, while with the APU you would have to sell all 3 - mobo, cpu and GPU. With that build you can upgrade gradually. It doesn't make much of a difference to most people, but my point is that the APUs are not very price/performance efficient.
Where I think it would truly shine is in mini-ITX builds. Ridiculous Performance/watt and no need for a bulky GPU, making virtually any case the perfect candidate. But for enthusiast builders, who make small upgrades to their system over time, it's either the 860k or g3258. More price/performance and at this price point that's nearly all that matters, together with upgradibility.
It's not so much that you don't know what you're talking about, but that the important detail was not mentioned in your topic sentence, and most of the post was devoted to the less proper comparison.
Yes, the G3258 is an upgrader's CPU, certainly. It sucks to upgrade to an i7 on a ****** H81 mobo, but it can be done, there's no doubt.
Yes, the 860K is superior to the A10 from an enthusiast's point of view.
None of that, however, is the point. The point is that the A10 does initially cost less. All I was trying to prove, and prove it I did.
Speaking of the 860K, it will be interesting to see if they release an 870K godavari. I'm assuming the A10-7870K is a highly-binned 7850K with a better stock cooler - presumably the 870K would be a higher-binned 860K (that was still binned out on the GPU side?)
I didn't present it properly, I agree.
Of course it does. As having a GTX970+g3258, but people do it. It's a temporary solution. Obviously not the best and most efficient one, but it works better for a certain period than not having the 970.
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
Costs less than the 7870k initially and also performs better. 6 more compute units clocked at 1070MHz instead of the 866mhz. Or if you would like to replace the GPU with a 2GB 750, it will precisely match the price of the APU. I will take the point, however, that while it's not very price efficient, it is not inefficient either.
Yeah, and as I said much earlier in this conversation, you don't need a 750 ti to beat the 7870k at price AND performance; even a 250X accomplishes this handily.