35% off @ $259.99 Intel Core Ultra 7 Desktop Processor 265K - 20 cores (8 P-cores + 12 E-cores) up to 5.5 GHz

[Tyler-98-W68]

Relative performance at 1080P (gaming)


5070Ti = 19% faster than 5070

Relative performance at 1440p (gaming)


5070Ti = 23% faster than 5070

Relative performance at 4K (gaming)



5070Ti = 28% faster than 5070

So if what you are saying is correct, going with a 265K would mean that it be

19% 23% and 28% slower than the 9800X3D with a 5070

Except....... The relative performance 1080p (gaming)



9800X3D 14.1% faster than 265K

The relative performance 1440p (gaming)


9800X3D 7.8% faster than 265K

The relative performance at 4K (gaming)



9800X3D is 2.9% faster than the 265K

So the math doesn't math here, a stronger GPU results in better performance with a 265K vs a 9800X3D with a weaker GPU

Spoon fed because you can't admit the numbers were correct

 

[LazyGamer]

...so you're back to using Average FPS again...?

Really? I thought you had a point to prove...

 

[Tyler-98-W68]

It's relative performance, sad you just can't admit your theory is wrong. Face it a 265K and 5070Ti games better than a 9800X3D and a weaker 5070 GPU, and the 265K kicks the 9800X3D to the curb outside of gaming.

 

[LazyGamer]

It's relative performance, sad you just can't admit your theory is wrong. Face it a 265K and 5070Ti games better than a 9800X3D and a weaker 5070 GPU, and the 265K kicks the 9800X3D to the curb outside of gaming.

So you're still ignoring 1.0% and 0.1% lows then?

 

[Tyler-98-W68]

Yes i am because a difference of a few fps i n1% lows is not going to be noticeable, but what is noticeable is how much lower the fps is with a 5070 vs a 5070ti

 

[LazyGamer]

Yes i am because a difference of a few fps i n1% lows is not going to be noticeable, but what is noticeable is how much lower the fps is with a 5070 vs a 5070ti

Ah, so you agree that you weren't paying attention. Glad we had this discussion!

 

[Tyler-98-W68]

Fact, a 5070 can not play some games at playable levels at 1440p and 4k, fact a 5070Ti can play games at playable levels vs a 5070....and the CPU doesn't matter. Why is that so hard for you to understand.

Using your logic, any arrow lake cpu is bad for gaming, yet when I tested my 225 with a 5090, I really couldn't tell the difference between my 285K and 9800X3D systems, but according to you I should have had a trash experience on arrow lake no matter what.

 

[LazyGamer]

and the CPU doesn't matter. Why is that so hard for you to understand.

But the CPU always matters, why is that so hard for you to understand?

 

[Tyler-98-W68]

But the CPU always matters, why is that so hard for you to understand?

So you are saying arrow lake cpu's give unplayable frame rates regardless of GPU used? And people should spend 350$ more when they don't have to because if they don't the games they play will be unplayable ?

 

[LazyGamer]

So you are saying arrow lake cpu's give unplayable frame rates regardless of GPU used?

Are you changing your argument from "a superior gaming experience" to... "unplayable frame rates"?

Cause I can "play" on integrated graphics just fine, but that doesn't make it "a superior gaming experience" lol.