>Windows 7 would take minutes to boot. Citation needed. I went from Win7 on a i5-2500k that booted in sub 15 seconds on a SATA SSD to Win10 on a 5600x that takes 45 seconds to a minute to boot an NVME drive.
Likes it
My favorite OCs were a $250 Black Friday special Celeron laptop that I pin-modded using a few-mm long piece of a single strand of stranded cat5 to go from (IIRC) 1.5Ghz to 2.0Ghz by just shorting two pins on the socket under the CPU, and a 4.6ghz (3.3-3.7ghz stock) Sandy Bridge i5-2500k that was rock-solid on air cooling with a comically large (especially at the time) tower cooler. That latter desktop ran the heck out of Team Fortress 2 (which I still play at least once a week with one of the last remaining community servers, End of the Line Gaming) for many many years.
Doesn’t like it
I've always said computers have been so powerful for ages that it doesn't matter what the average home user buys anymore. I just upgraded from my trusty 2011-built i5-2500K, not for any performance reason, but because the motherboard was getting flaky with random poweroff events and difficulty powering on again. My new i5-12400F doesn't really feel much faster. (I'd upgraded the old system along the way with better GPU and SSD)
Likes it
I am running an i5-2500k from 2011 as my desktop. Just dropped an rx580 in as my graphics card, and it's running great for my light gaming purposes (overwatch, 1080x60 screen). I think I could get away using it for 1440 or 1080x120 pretty comfortably.
Likes it
with an entry-level GPU and slow RAM that works with an i5-2500k, i can play every modern game i have tried on high. Nothing about me opening a text editor, interpreting most code, or compiling the occasional thing require anywhere near that much power. For the overwhelming majority, and i really mean overwhelming, there's really no progress or point to upgrading anything except the gpu in the past 7 years or so in laptops, new stuff uses a LOT less power for the same speed, so there's that I guess.