Naman Malik

Just threw a pretty CPU intensive game (Battletech, ST intensive) at my ancient rig (2600k @ 4.4ghz + RX 560 4gb).  CPU load is as follows...
720p ~30%
1080p ~20%
2160p ~10%.

Another way of thinking about it is...
 
If you had zero bottlenecks you would have infinite FPS, which is impossible.

Correct.  You want a CPU fast enough to not limit your GPU,  so your GPU performance is your limiting factor.
 
If you do game streaming or recording, you will need more CPU power for the same performance.  Same goes for those who multitask, tons of browser tabs open while gaming for example.

It absolutely can. Try comparing your CPU load on a modern game when running integrated graphics vs discrete graphics. It's why CPU tests are usually run with the highest end GPU that can be afforded and with the resolution turned to something lower.

YES

You increase resolution, GPU cant draw as many frames in a second, load is lightened on the CPU because it has to calculate updates for fewer frames in the same amount of time.
 
You decrease resolution, GPU draws more frames in a second, load is increased on the CPU because it has to calculate updates for more frames in the same amount of time.
 
How is this difficult to understand?

RTX 2060: newer, faster, ray-tracier
 
A used 1070 ti is the best deal, but new ones aren't really all that cheap because stock is diminishing.

If not gaming neither will be effected.
For gaming it would be the gpu that stress the most.

Which ever one the monitor defaults to or whatever input its set to.
Depends on the monitor.

MP stands for Mega (million) Pixels
Resolution is a number most often represented in this way: 'Number x Number' where the first one is horizontal number of pixels and the second vertical (there might be some excpetions where it is switched around)
You can always scale an image down. On a basic level you can take 4 pixels in an array of 2x2 and add their RGB values (each channel separately) then divide by 4 and you have the color of the resulting prixel representing all 4. Obviously you lose information but a photo shot at 8MP scaled down to 2MP will almost always look better than one originally shot at 2MP and displayed at that resoltion.

High resolutions mean the analog image is better represented by digital pixels. Remember, light isn't limited to square pixels, so the more pixels you have, the more data is preserved. Those very high resolution images are then digitally downscaled for viewing on screens that may be only 1080p, which looks far better than viewing an image of a resolution that matches the screen.

for viewing on something that isn't a cell phone screen

for cropping a section you dont want without losing quality

for...... ugh....

for reference , we had a digital camera in 2001 that shot in 2560x1600 as its max resolution , now can you think of a reason why it might be good in 2018 to have high resolution pictures of the past vs low resolution ones despite the fact that the camera had a 240p screen on it?

Thunderbolt 3 is, for most practical purposes, an extension of USB-C. If the thunderbolt port is thunderbolt 3, i.e. it uses a USB-C connector, then it will work with a monitor using a USB-C input.

Shooting in higher resolution is useful if you ever want to crop/zoom, other than that it's almost pointless, it'll look slightly better on your display even if your phone screen isn't 4K but probably not worth the extra size it'll use if you plan on only ever playing back those videos on your phone.

If you plan to shoot videos learn to edit well, color, lighting and focus matter just as much as resolution.

I though that went without saying. Like the fact that Linus will drop something at every booth in CES.

1) no, you'll need something external for that
2) yes
3) sometimes
4) probebly