>>105851081
>...how the fuck does that matter?
it matters because the pricing difference here is not negligible
>my argument is literally that you don't need one and it doesn't make sense to trade off 50% of performance for an igpu
except it's NOT a 50% performance difference you idiot. The highest difference, CS2 is what? a ~27% difference. My monitor is 144hz, I literally wouldn't even see a difference between 450 FPS and 596. The VAST majority of monitors today don't even go past 240Hz.

I literally posted a video where multiple games weren't hitting nowhere near 60+ cpu usage and over 70-75% gpu usage and BOTH cpus were within a 10-15% difference. So like I said, for me? negligible.
>are you still talking about the 5800x? jesus christ you are retarded
Oh, so you're illiterate, I get it. I was talking about the pricing difference here between the 5700x and 5800x.
>why does that matter when the use case is "a gpu to use as video out while i rma my broken dgpu"? woah, that week that you don't have your dGPU you have 5% less performance, sure it makes sense to trade off 50% performance
I already told you the time I bought the 5700g, it was priced pretty much the same as the 5700x. You're saying I should've wasted MORE on a cpu without a iGPU + one crappy disposable dGPU because of a 10-15% performance uplift in most cases? with like a sub 30% difference in worst case scenarios. Yet you're claiming it's 50% without any actual data to back it up.
>...what does this even mean? the clocks are the same...
My point was that it doesn't matter if the clocks are the same because I'm limiting the cpu to 4GHz.
>and the 5700x would be even less affected by running at a lower clock speed thanks to the bigger cache
I already said that at the same clock speeds, both perform IN THE VAST MAJORITY of games within a 10~15% diff
I KNOW that cache is important, otherwise the 5500x3d wouldn't perform like a 5700x despite having less cores and a lower clock but way more cache