Why didn't you read the rest of my post. You could easily find I was being facetious because the next line says that the results show only 5-7% gains at 1080p.
Useful in an academic sense, but no one with those CPUs games at 720p so completely pointless in the real world.
Who cares if those conditions exist when no one in the real world is going to run into them.
Also, the [H] article I linked
also tested at 1440 and found a truly bizarre result where more cores actually resulted in slightly lower performance despite being an advantage at lower resolutions. They said no one at AMD, NV, or Intel could really explain why either. My guess is drivers or some buggy game code, but even if the results weren't that way, you'd see almost no performance gain at the higher resolutions where most people game.
Yeah, they had to go all the way down to 720p with a Titan X to achieve that. Let me go make a poll in the VC&G section to ask how many Titan owners game at 720p.
Once again, useful in academic sense, but of no practical real world value right now. I suppose 5% gains at 1080p are 5% gains, but you have to understand that the percent price difference for AMDs 8C/16T CPU is going to be almost as bad as Intel's once Ryzen R3 processors are on the market, especially if the price leaks continue to be correct or close enough.
ifferences between 1700 and 1700X = no X is no XFR, buy base on your needs.
Facebook
Twitter