Why it's not wise to compare products with performance close to each other

1. I should buy a E5xxx CPU + Biostar mobo becuz it's cheap
2. I should get the Geforce 8 mobo because it's good and just costs slightly more
3. I should just get an Athlon X2 because it costs the same but it's (was) AMD's mainstream part and performs better than E5200
4. I should get a E8xxx CPU because it's just slightly more ex but has much better performance at stock and even more when o/ced to hell
5. I should get a Phenom X3 because it costs around the same, but 3 cores
6. Fk Phenom, it sucks, Q6600/9350 is the way to go

So somehow from the cheapest dual-core I'm now looking at a quad.

Reverse is true also:

- UE-10 Pro
- triple.fi 10 Pro is almost the same, using same drivers
- super.fi 5 Pro isn't too far triple.fi, but 2 drivers instead of 3
- super.fi 3 sounds okay, it's still a super.fi
- Mylarone X3i has the same sound as UE earphones

Conclusion: X3i is close to a triple.fi 10 Pro (coz it's not custom)

Yeah rite

Because, when we say something is almost like another thing, we often fail to measure "by how much". Even a $65 ATP3 can sound almost as good as a $1K system, and I'm not kidding.
Which is how there are reviews sites like 6sun that can claim a $39 T-amp has similar performance as a $3200 integrated, and online forums like neck-fi where everything seemingly is a poor-man's-version of something else more expensive.

And strangely, my non-audiophile family members can tell the difference between "two products with similar performance" easily.

Have we all become audiophools who listen with our brains instead of our ears?