To be fair, the i3 is intended to be a cheap, low-power processor. It's certainly not meant for a gaming PC, so I don't doubt that the benchmarks are shite.
I'm rebuilding my PC with the Core i5-750, which I've heard nothing but good things about. I'm slightly worried about how easy it will be to use SLI or Crossfire with future graphics cards as the P55 architecture of the chip and all Socket 1156 motherboards allows for an absolute maximum of 16 PCI-E lanes, so two cards get 8 lanes each, but everything I've seen suggests the i5-750 is still a better gaming processor than anything AMD has at present. I certainly hope that's the case, since I could've saved myself £60 by getting a Phenom II X4 965 BE!
All I need now is a decent case as my NZXT Hush, as much as I love the look of it, isn't too great at keeping things cool. I wish you could get the Acer Predator cases seperately as they're lovely looking machines, much nicer looking than anything Alienware has ever produced.
FWIW: the i5-750 is a proper quad-core chip, but it doesn't have Hyper Threading, so it's a bit of an anomoly in the i5 range.
I'm only beginning to understand the I5 range tbh. It's almost like someone at Intel said "quick, take all the existing cpus and call them all I5". It seems that the newer ones now are all dual core so it might end up that you can only get quads on I7? god knows. Once again they've done their best to make it as confusing as bloody well possible
I wasn't aware that I3 was supposed to be a cheap processor tbh. I read about how it's really low nm etc but had no idea it was low end. Well, at least as an AMD owner I don't have to worry about AMD going out of business any time soon. I don't think AMD will ever be able to compete at the top end tbh. I think it would break every rule of the company (cheap chips).
God I wish my 4890 would arrive