The information presented in these charts is probably not relevant for people looking to build a system in 2016 from scratch, but it is way misleading if they already have an AMD based system which needs a GPU upgrade. The point is, there is no way you would be %100 bottlenecked by an FX 8350-70 or even an FX 6350 (as in you would definately see FPS increases all the way up to a Titan XP) but the increase will probably not be as much as you would get with a higher tier skylake. With that being said, I have seen dozens of videos about the subject and can say that i3-6100, i5-6400 and the i5-6500 are about equal in gaming performance. I also have seen some videos that reveal that the Vishera based FX chips perform similarly to these processors when they are clocked 4 Ghz and up. Furthermore, one game favours AMD, the other Intel as it has always been, it is near impossible to determine if and when the bottleneck will occur. So, if you need a GPU upgrade and have an FX system, you will be more than happy with the increases to FPS you get if you upgrade to an RX-480, GTX 1060 and GTX 1070 and you do not need to build an Intel based system from scratch to enjoy the performance benefits of the newer GPUs.
Just wanted to get it out there as the term "bottleneck" is being thrown around a lot, like AMD chips are so insufficient, you wouldn't see any performance gains when going from a 750ti to a 1060, which is simply not true. Again, the lower price, the ability to overclock and better multithreaded performance makes these chips still relevant and you can be sure that the adaptation of DX12 and Vulkan APIs will level the playing field even further.