But it does suck when it's compared to it's own previous gen cards. If it can't beat it's own 7900XTX in rasterization performance, then, yea, it lacks real world performance.
And your own quote, quoting them, "For context, it once
recommended readers purchase a
Core i5-13600K over the
Ryzen 7 9800X3D, asserting, and I quote, "Spending more on a gaming CPU is often pointless."" I've often said your benchmarking and reviews of CPUs in gaming is greatly flawed. You take a top of the line graphics card, then run it at 1080p to benchmark the CPU. No one is buying an RTX 4090 or RTX 5090 and gaming at 1080p. If you have those cards, you're gaming at 4K. What kind of difference in fps do you have then between the 13600K (which is highly overclockable) and the Ryzen 7 9800X3D?
You never do real world benchmarks like that. How much of a difference would it be from the core i7 to the core i9 in those situations when the core i7 can overclock much more, and have a lot less thermal throttling?