Who cares?... Don't like what the bar charts tell you, but you like the performance you get with your current hardware? Good--so stop reading the bar-chart, frames-per-second sections in cpu reviews. (Your insecurities are showing...) Sure, you may be right that most people still using older platforms/cpus do indeed OC--but you have forgotten that the same rule applies to people using the latest hardware as well, I guess. So...the approximate performance ratios hold, oc'ing included. I was happy with my FX-8320e for years, but overclocked or not, it is no match for my current R5 1600...(which overclocks to 3.8GHz with a simple multiplier change.) Still, as HH demonstrated, it's not just the cpu--the entire platform changes when upgrading. The good part of that is the performance increases--the bad part, of course, is the expense. Depending on which cpu you opt for, DDR4 ram can cost as much as the cpu, if not more. But even with older hardware, if you game at decent resolutions like 2560x1440 and up, you are limited to the performance of the GPU and it almost doesn't matter which cpu you use these days--or GPU, for that matter--as performance differences among GPUs at QHD and up are small indeed. But is ~$600 (for new motherboard, ram, and cpu) really too much to spend on a new computer? Replace just those three components--keep the rest--and a "new computer" is what you get.