@LinusTech @Slick
I made an account here just to say this. Myself and a huge portion of pc gamers are using 120+hz monitors and stop at no cost to try to achieve high FPS. This video actually is bad advice for someone like myself. Modern multiplayer FPS games like BF1 and Overwatch are heavily cpu bound for people on 1080p and lower settings trying to get high frame rates.
The majority of people in your audience use an overclocked core i5 or i7, yet there is no mention of clock. I'm completely bottlenecked by my i5 4670k at 4.3ghz in these games with a 1070. My frame rate fluctuates around around 80-150fps on low setting at 1080p with the cpu at 95-100% on all cores. People with i7s get much better results. This video also makes no mention of the stuttering people are getting (and is alleviated by capping FPS to stop 100% cpu usage) and shows no frame time comparisons.
I don't know if it's just me, but I really couldn't give a shit about 4K, especially when there are high refresh rate 1440p and 1080p monitors. I know it's the industry buzzword, but think about what portion of your viewers actually game on a 4K monitor or use it in supersampling? 240hz 1080p/1440p and 144hz 4K monitors are hitting the market next year. Competitive gaming and esports is a massive market segment these monitors are used in. The visual benefits of ultra/high settings in most modern games are marginal. Please get with the times and stop focusing on how an rx460 gets 20fps at 4K on ultra settings.
