@commander: Keep spamming random youtube guy all you want. It doesn't change the fact that you got rekt hard. Everyone in here understands that, except for you.
No everyone that reads this knows that you got rekt hard, especially when they see you actually made a thread calling me out , got rekt, then came back here and got rekt again. I've seen people make a fool of themselves but you really take the cake.
and that youtube guy is a respected benchmarker, I can't wait till more benchmarks arise lmao.
No dude... I've only just caught up with this thread and sorry to say but you're the one who got rekd and fucked in the ear.
@ronvalencia: So to simplify what you are trying to explain, you are basically saying: The X1X DX12 is so much better than PC DX12 that it can compensate for its under performing CPU?
Whoever compares a GPU to APU is pretty daft really. So is using 1070 benchmarks using a middle/high end CPU, cos the Xbox One X dont have one.
In some games the CPU bottlenecks the GPU, everyone knows this
Lets totally ignore professional comparisons claiming the Xbox One X doesn't do so bad against PC's running high/max settings. In some cases with minimal differences.
The proof is in the pudding, crunch numbers all you want. But its the output it delivers what counts.
The gap between the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X is bigger than the gap between Xbox One X and a decent PC.
A game running Dynamic resolution on other consoles aint going to suddenly change to Native on Xbox One X, they will simply run it at Dynamic on all and let it get to where ever it gets to THATS THE WHOLE POINT OF DYNAMIC resolution. On the Xbox One X in lots of games it gets to Native for a lot of the game.
Whoever compares a GPU to APU is pretty daft really. So is using 1070 benchmarks using a middle/high end CPU, cos the Xbox One X dont have one.
In some games the CPU bottlenecks the GPU, everyone knows this
Lets totally ignore professional comparisons claiming the Xbox One X doesn't do so bad against PC's running high/max settings. In some cases with minimal differences.
The proof is in the pudding, crunch numbers all you want. But its the output it delivers what counts.
The gap between the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X is bigger than the gap between Xbox One X and a decent PC.
A game running Dynamic resolution on other consoles aint going to suddenly change to Native on Xbox One X, they will simply run it at Dynamic on all and let it get to where ever it gets to THATS THE WHOLE POINT OF DYNAMIC resolution. On the Xbox One X in lots of games it gets to Native for a lot of the game.
Cant believe this thread is still going on.
That isnt the argument here is how people claimed the X1X would match a 1070gtx based on nothing but MS first party games which are screw up on pc and hold back.
Whoever compares a GPU to APU is pretty daft really. So is using 1070 benchmarks using a middle/high end CPU, cos the Xbox One X dont have one.
In some games the CPU bottlenecks the GPU, everyone knows this
Lets totally ignore professional comparisons claiming the Xbox One X doesn't do so bad against PC's running high/max settings. In some cases with minimal differences.
The proof is in the pudding, crunch numbers all you want. But its the output it delivers what counts.
The gap between the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X is bigger than the gap between Xbox One X and a decent PC.
A game running Dynamic resolution on other consoles aint going to suddenly change to Native on Xbox One X, they will simply run it at Dynamic on all and let it get to where ever it gets to THATS THE WHOLE POINT OF DYNAMIC resolution. On the Xbox One X in lots of games it gets to Native for a lot of the game.
Cant believe this thread is still going on.
That isnt the argument here is how people claimed the X1X would match a 1070gtx based on nothing but MS first party games which are screw up on pc and hold back.
A couple of developers/professionals claimed in their circumstances its like having a 1070 in the Xbox One X in DF claim they often said we shall have to wait and see how it pans out.
It got blown all out of proportion and the end result is the Xbox One X is being compared to PC favourably by those doing proper comparisons.
Like I said those that claimed it was like a 1070 should own up, but so should everyone else who claimed its like a certain GPU cos you can find a game to prove it wrong. Its a pointless comparison in a specific sense. The best you can do is a range.
he stil has 43k subscribers, that's lot for just benchmarks, if anyone would think the review is wrong, they would say it.
and why would he warp the review in the first place next thing you know you're going to say it's a conspiracy . I wouldn't be surprised lol
I don't care what the comment says. 43K subscribers is junk compared to reputable channels that have over 1M subscribers. His videos managed to get 4,000 views in a week lol. I could do more than that. This benchmark is junk and not from a reputable source.
he stil has 43k subscribers, that's lot for just benchmarks, if anyone would think the review is wrong, they would say it.
and why would he warp the review in the first place next thing you know you're going to say it's a conspiracy . I wouldn't be surprised lol
I don't care what the comment says. 43K subscribers is junk compared to reputable channels that have over 1M subscribers. His videos managed to get 4,000 views in a week lol. I could do more than that. This benchmark is junk and not from a reputable source.
Really that's all the come back you have.
Provide other evidence instead of slating some else's.
he stil has 43k subscribers, that's lot for just benchmarks, if anyone would think the review is wrong, they would say it.
and why would he warp the review in the first place next thing you know you're going to say it's a conspiracy . I wouldn't be surprised lol
I don't care what the comment says. 43K subscribers is junk compared to reputable channels that have over 1M subscribers. His videos managed to get 4,000 views in a week lol. I could do more than that. This benchmark is junk and not from a reputable source.
@tdkmillsy: I have no horse in this race so I don’t care about providing anything. Using s benchmark with 4K views from a random guy on youtube is not admissible. Find a reputable source. Techpowerup, Guru3D, Hardwarecanucks hell even Linus will do.
@tdkmillsy: I have no horse in this race so I don’t care about providing anything. Using s benchmark with 4K views from a random guy on youtube is not admissible. Find a reputable source. Techpowerup, Guru3D, Hardwarecanucks hell even Linus will do.
If you look at the other benchmarks he does they are in the ball park of the main sources, no reason to doubt this is wrong. Without evidence from anywhere else and the fact he's pretty close with others there is no reason to doubt he is wrong with this.
Whoever compares a GPU to APU is pretty daft really. So is using 1070 benchmarks using a middle/high end CPU, cos the Xbox One X dont have one.
In some games the CPU bottlenecks the GPU, everyone knows this
Lets totally ignore professional comparisons claiming the Xbox One X doesn't do so bad against PC's running high/max settings. In some cases with minimal differences.
The proof is in the pudding, crunch numbers all you want. But its the output it delivers what counts.
The gap between the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X is bigger than the gap between Xbox One X and a decent PC.
A game running Dynamic resolution on other consoles aint going to suddenly change to Native on Xbox One X, they will simply run it at Dynamic on all and let it get to where ever it gets to THATS THE WHOLE POINT OF DYNAMIC resolution. On the Xbox One X in lots of games it gets to Native for a lot of the game.
Cant believe this thread is still going on.
That's rubbish. From what we've seen so far, the difference between the One X and Pro is usually just a bump in resolution, perhaps with the odd higher graphical setting. Move to a decent PC and you get native res, ultra settings and usually at least double the FPS - that's a much greater leap forward.
@tdkmillsy: I have no horse in this race so I don’t care about providing anything. Using s benchmark with 4K views from a random guy on youtube is not admissible. Find a reputable source. Techpowerup, Guru3D, Hardwarecanucks hell even Linus will do.
there are no other sources which compare the i7 7700k and the I5 8600k overclocked.
I can totally understand that the sites you mentioned are more reputable but it's not like this is some random youtube guy either. He's got a ton of benchmarks videos some with a 200k views. 43k subscribers for hardware benchmarks is not bad. He's also is sponsored by instant-gaming, why would a site that sells games affliliate themselves with a fraud. They probably supply him the hardware.
If he would have a bad reputation this would not have gone this far with his channel.
@tdkmillsy: I have no horse in this race so I don’t care about providing anything. Using s benchmark with 4K views from a random guy on youtube is not admissible. Find a reputable source. Techpowerup, Guru3D, Hardwarecanucks hell even Linus will do.
there are no other sources which compare the i7 7700k and the I5 8600k overclocked.
I can totally understand that the sites you mentioned are more reputable but it's not like this is some random youtube guy either. He's got a ton of benchmarks videos some with a 200k views. 43k subscribers for hardware benchmarks is not bad. He's also is sponsored by instant-gaming, why would a site that sells games affliliate themselves with a fraud. They probably supply him the hardware.
If he would have a bad reputation this would not have gone this far with his channel.
Funny enough, you seem to be ok with the fact that the 8600K is clocked to 5.3G hz in this video, whereas the 7700K is only at 5.0 Ghz. Essentially an 8600K that won the silicon lottery, vs a 7700K that didn't.
Especially since you yourself said earlier....
@commander said:
"Most people don't go for max overclock and even if the quad core is able to dish out a couple of 100 mhz, it will still get murdered by the hexacore."
But you know the best part? After being utterly and thoroughly destroyed by yours truly, you were so triggered you posted this:
you could also look in the mirror and ask yourself why this picture has gotten the better of you
Deleted it, and then posted this:
@appariti0n: make sure to waste your precious time digging through old posts so you can spin the argument before you do it.
deleted your post yet again, to finally post this:
It's not going to change the fact that you lost this discussion, at least not until you post some benchmarks that can prove me otherwise.
Which I have by the way, you just find fault with every single one. Even ones from the same websites you yourself were using, until you realized you were benchmarking the wrong CPU lol.
What I find hilarious is the image of you, with steam coming from your ears, hammering furiously on the keyboard, posting a response, and then deleting it. Getting angrier, posting another response, and deleting it again and again.
Yep...I could honestly give a left testicle about all these numbers being thrown around in this thread. All I know is, the 4K patched games thus far, look and play unbelievably on my 65" LG OLED and that is all I care about. To know, I am playing the best possible version of games on a home console is all that is necessary for me and to think, this is just the beginning. This will be the case til the next generation so just accept that MS put out a beast of a console at a great price and move on. DF and others have said this in the passed few days, the X1X has surpassed their expectations and there is no way to beat it for under $500. period
I certainly did expect a bigger performance difference but you seem to be forgetting time and time again that this discussion started because I said it would be a cold day in hell if the 7700k comes close to 8600k performance and you replied they would be comparable. You backpedalled and I exagerrated but you had to make a point of it. The reason is not because you want a constructive discussion.
The reason is because that image pissed you off so much you take every opportunity you get to go into mindless discussions with me. Making threads calling me out, digging through old posts like a crazy person. Taking stuff out of context. You take this board and yourself way to seriously. I do think you should know that, but it doesn't really add something to this discussion, that why I delete those posts, I know you can read them anyway because you read your posts through your email.
and the I5 8600k has a boost clock active which actually means it runs at 4.9 ghz across all cores.
but you're right it's still only one benchmark, that's why I said you lost this discussion until you find any other benchmarks
@appariti0n: and I want to mention antoher thing, not so long ago I was making cartoons and laughing with sony or even xbox, and sure some people were offended but they don't take it that seriously. Some people find it funny too, especially when they know both teams will get it from me.
They talk about rabid sony fanboys but the reaction to that pc cartoon is something else, especially from you. Oh boy do not touch the pc, well I'm sure I will let you know when I make a cartoon ridiculing consoles. Maybe then you will realize there no reason to take it that seriously.
Or better yet , you make a cartoon ridiculing consoles.
Whoever compares a GPU to APU is pretty daft really. So is using 1070 benchmarks using a middle/high end CPU, cos the Xbox One X dont have one.
In some games the CPU bottlenecks the GPU, everyone knows this
Lets totally ignore professional comparisons claiming the Xbox One X doesn't do so bad against PC's running high/max settings. In some cases with minimal differences.
The proof is in the pudding, crunch numbers all you want. But its the output it delivers what counts.
The gap between the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X is bigger than the gap between Xbox One X and a decent PC.
A game running Dynamic resolution on other consoles aint going to suddenly change to Native on Xbox One X, they will simply run it at Dynamic on all and let it get to where ever it gets to THATS THE WHOLE POINT OF DYNAMIC resolution. On the Xbox One X in lots of games it gets to Native for a lot of the game.
Cant believe this thread is still going on.
That isnt the argument here is how people claimed the X1X would match a 1070gtx based on nothing but MS first party games which are screw up on pc and hold back.
On the subject of the Xbox One X's horsepower, Stieglitz said Ark can run at the equivalent of "Medium" or "High" settings on PC. It can run at 1080p/60fps (Medium) or 1440p/30fps (High), and it sounds like developer Studio Wildcard may offer an option to switch between them.
For GTX 1070, medium settings 1080p resolution with 60 fps target starts at https://youtu.be/nIbiUd3l4PQ?t=20
Loading Video...
https://youtu.be/SoHfywz2fqA?t=136 RX-480's 1920x1080 medium result which failed 60 fps.
As for the comparisons between the PC and Xbox One X, he said: "If you think about it, it's kind of equivalent to a GTX 1070 maybe and the Xbox One X actually has 12GB of GDDR5 memory. It's kind of like having a pretty high-end PC minus a lot of overhead due to the operating system on PC. So I would say it's equivalent to a 16GB 1070 PC, and that's a pretty good deal for $499".
Whoever compares a GPU to APU is pretty daft really. So is using 1070 benchmarks using a middle/high end CPU, cos the Xbox One X dont have one.
In some games the CPU bottlenecks the GPU, everyone knows this
Lets totally ignore professional comparisons claiming the Xbox One X doesn't do so bad against PC's running high/max settings. In some cases with minimal differences.
The proof is in the pudding, crunch numbers all you want. But its the output it delivers what counts.
The gap between the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X is bigger than the gap between Xbox One X and a decent PC.
A game running Dynamic resolution on other consoles aint going to suddenly change to Native on Xbox One X, they will simply run it at Dynamic on all and let it get to where ever it gets to THATS THE WHOLE POINT OF DYNAMIC resolution. On the Xbox One X in lots of games it gets to Native for a lot of the game.
@ronvalencia: “It can run at 1080p/60fps (Medium) or 1440p/30fps (High)”
That sounds suuuuuuuuper suspect. Higher settings and a higher resolution at 30 vs lower settings and lower resolution at 60. Why not higher resolution and equal settings at 60 or higher settings but lower resolution at 60? Those “optimization’s” sound moronic. No PC gamer would make those choices
he stil has 43k subscribers, that's lot for just benchmarks, if anyone would think the review is wrong, they would say it.
and why would he warp the review in the first place next thing you know you're going to say it's a conspiracy . I wouldn't be surprised lol
I don't care what the comment says. 43K subscribers is junk compared to reputable channels that have over 1M subscribers. His videos managed to get 4,000 views in a week lol. I could do more than that. This benchmark is junk and not from a reputable source.
How is the bench mark wrong? Clock for clock performance comparing the exact cpu's being discussed in a bunch of games that scale well with more cores... and cross the line 8600k is better. This is the perfect test isolating 2 more cores vs 4 extra threads.
the X1X has surpassed their expectations and there is no way to beat it for under $500. period
How many freakin times am I gonna have to read bullsh*t like this? do people like you ACTUALLY conduct research before stating a claim? have you actually googled "$500 4k PC" before running your mouths? god thats the irritating thing about console peasants, the source of their information is deep from the abyss of their butt holes and not the result of concrete investigation.
@ronvalencia said:
@scatteh316 said:
Ronbot still riding that GTX1070 dick train.......hahahahahahaha......
R9-390X with 35 fps (5.9 TFLOPS) closing into GTX 1070's 41 fps (6.5 TFLOPS) results. hahahahahahaha
There's a reason why MS based X1X's improved 44 CU GPU on Hawaii 44 CU model.
OK Ron enough, look I'll be nice and try to help you out here so we are going to go through this once step at a time OK?
OK just answer this question: what CPU has been used on that bench chart?
he stil has 43k subscribers, that's lot for just benchmarks, if anyone would think the review is wrong, they would say it.
and why would he warp the review in the first place next thing you know you're going to say it's a conspiracy . I wouldn't be surprised lol
I don't care what the comment says. 43K subscribers is junk compared to reputable channels that have over 1M subscribers. His videos managed to get 4,000 views in a week lol. I could do more than that. This benchmark is junk and not from a reputable source.
How is the bench mark wrong? Clock for clock performance comparing the exact cpu's being discussed in a bunch of games that scale well with more cores... and cross the line 8600k is better. This is the perfect test isolating 2 more cores vs 4 extra threads.
How does any one think commander got rekt?
Thanks man at least someone noticed that I wasn't the one who got rekt in this discussion lol
Whoever compares a GPU to APU is pretty daft really. So is using 1070 benchmarks using a middle/high end CPU, cos the Xbox One X dont have one.
In some games the CPU bottlenecks the GPU, everyone knows this
Lets totally ignore professional comparisons claiming the Xbox One X doesn't do so bad against PC's running high/max settings. In some cases with minimal differences.
The proof is in the pudding, crunch numbers all you want. But its the output it delivers what counts.
The gap between the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X is bigger than the gap between Xbox One X and a decent PC.
A game running Dynamic resolution on other consoles aint going to suddenly change to Native on Xbox One X, they will simply run it at Dynamic on all and let it get to where ever it gets to THATS THE WHOLE POINT OF DYNAMIC resolution. On the Xbox One X in lots of games it gets to Native for a lot of the game.
Cant believe this thread is still going on.
That isnt the argument here is how people claimed the X1X would match a 1070gtx based on nothing but MS first party games which are screw up on pc and hold back.
On the subject of the Xbox One X's horsepower, Stieglitz said Ark can run at the equivalent of "Medium" or "High" settings on PC. It can run at 1080p/60fps (Medium) or 1440p/30fps (High), and it sounds like developer Studio Wildcard may offer an option to switch between them.
For GTX 1070, medium settings 1080p resolution with 60 fps target starts at https://youtu.be/nIbiUd3l4PQ?t=20
Loading Video...
https://youtu.be/SoHfywz2fqA?t=136 RX-480's 1920x1080 medium result which failed 60 fps.
As for the comparisons between the PC and Xbox One X, he said: "If you think about it, it's kind of equivalent to a GTX 1070 maybe and the Xbox One X actually has 12GB of GDDR5 memory. It's kind of like having a pretty high-end PC minus a lot of overhead due to the operating system on PC. So I would say it's equivalent to a 16GB 1070 PC, and that's a pretty good deal for $499".
Eat it.
Still posting videos from 2016 before ARK started to patch up SOME of the performance issues?...
RX 580: 1440p Medium-High settings
Loading Video...
GTX 1070: 4K High settings 30FPS
Loading Video...
The only thing that anyone will be eating is the framerate issue that will plague the X1X version just like all the console version because the game is a CPU intensive and unoptimised POS.
The X1X clealry isn't matching the GTX 1070... Even the RX 580 gets 1440p medium-high with 30FPS with ease.
@waahahah: Why do you quote me? I never said he got “rekt” in the cpu discussion. Simply that the benhmark he used is not from a reputable source no matter how much he wants it.
the X1X has surpassed their expectations and there is no way to beat it for under $500. period
How many freakin times am I gonna have to read bullsh*t like this? do people like you ACTUALLY conduct research before stating a claim? have you actually googled "$500 4k PC" before running your mouths? god thats the irritating thing about console peasants, the source of their information is deep from the abyss of their butt holes and not the result of concrete investigation.
@ronvalencia said:
@scatteh316 said:
Ronbot still riding that GTX1070 dick train.......hahahahahahaha......
R9-390X with 35 fps (5.9 TFLOPS) closing into GTX 1070's 41 fps (6.5 TFLOPS) results. hahahahahahaha
There's a reason why MS based X1X's improved 44 CU GPU on Hawaii 44 CU model.
OK Ron enough, look I'll be nice and try to help you out here so we are going to go through this once step at a time OK?
OK just answer this question: what CPU has been used on that bench chart?
CPU is being bottle-necked by GPU at 4K resolution. CPU's potential is 1/3 at 4K resolution
Whoever compares a GPU to APU is pretty daft really. So is using 1070 benchmarks using a middle/high end CPU, cos the Xbox One X dont have one.
In some games the CPU bottlenecks the GPU, everyone knows this
Lets totally ignore professional comparisons claiming the Xbox One X doesn't do so bad against PC's running high/max settings. In some cases with minimal differences.
The proof is in the pudding, crunch numbers all you want. But its the output it delivers what counts.
The gap between the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X is bigger than the gap between Xbox One X and a decent PC.
A game running Dynamic resolution on other consoles aint going to suddenly change to Native on Xbox One X, they will simply run it at Dynamic on all and let it get to where ever it gets to THATS THE WHOLE POINT OF DYNAMIC resolution. On the Xbox One X in lots of games it gets to Native for a lot of the game.
Cant believe this thread is still going on.
That isnt the argument here is how people claimed the X1X would match a 1070gtx based on nothing but MS first party games which are screw up on pc and hold back.
On the subject of the Xbox One X's horsepower, Stieglitz said Ark can run at the equivalent of "Medium" or "High" settings on PC. It can run at 1080p/60fps (Medium) or 1440p/30fps (High), and it sounds like developer Studio Wildcard may offer an option to switch between them.
For GTX 1070, medium settings 1080p resolution with 60 fps target starts at https://youtu.be/nIbiUd3l4PQ?t=20
https://youtu.be/SoHfywz2fqA?t=136 RX-480's 1920x1080 medium result which failed 60 fps.
As for the comparisons between the PC and Xbox One X, he said: "If you think about it, it's kind of equivalent to a GTX 1070 maybe and the Xbox One X actually has 12GB of GDDR5 memory. It's kind of like having a pretty high-end PC minus a lot of overhead due to the operating system on PC. So I would say it's equivalent to a 16GB 1070 PC, and that's a pretty good deal for $499".
Eat it.
Still posting videos from 2016 before ARK started to patch up SOME of the performance issues?...
RX 580: 1440p Medium-High settings
GTX 1070: 4K High settings 30FPS
The only thing that anyone will be eating is the framerate issue that will plague the X1X version just like all the console version because the game is a CPU intensive and unoptimised POS.
The X1X clealry isn't matching the GTX 1070... Even the RX 580 gets 1440p medium-high with 30FPS with ease.
Nice try.
Your GTX 1070 falls below 30 fps target at 4K resolution and it's 2.038 Ghz overclocked! ..7.825 TFLOPS hahahahahahahaha it's hardly stock GTX 1070 FE with default clock speeds.
RX-580... 1450Mhz overclocked... 6.68 TFLOPS, the shown scene is not showing the large multiple trees scene. You are showing less tree scenes.
Well, my old MSI Gaming X GTX 980 TI goes to 8.1 TFLOPS when it's end user overclocked and it's factory overclocked at 7.7 TFLOPS.
I think your point is the X1X delivers good performance, relative to powerful pcs, for what you pay, [edit] at 4k - a lot of qualifiers there - but I agree with that and have said so time and again. Personally, I think the X1X is a very attractive piece of hardware.
But some of these arguments are bordering on delusion. My PC with a GTX970 - a WORSE gpu than what the X1X is sporting in its APU - handily outperforms the X1X in TW3 at 1080p. That's clearly because its CPU is crap. The X1X's 4k(ish) is a smokescreen - the machine was built to favor pixels over framerate. Which is fine I guess, since that's what devs seem hell-bent on focusing on on consoles these days anyway.
You can talk about its GPU TFLOPS all you want, but it doesn't even have a discrete GPU. You have to look at the sum of the parts - the system's actual output. Real world, I'm seeing a machine that can be outperformed by a freaking 970 at 1080p given a halfway decent CPU (my i5 6500 is not exactly a high end CPU...), that performs worse than an RX580 at 1440p, and only starts to shine at 4k, typically at "console settings", and typically 30fps. In other words, it is NOT a balanced machine, and it really shouldn't be directly compared to a 1070.
It's the most powerful console ever. What more do you want?
Uses Dynamic resolution and occasionally hits 4K = Its close enough and 4k doesn't matter
Runs at 30FPS with dips to 20FPS = its 30FPS and those dips are normal
Runs at 60FPs with dynamic resolution and still dips to 50-55FSP or less = Its a 60FPS game and 4K doesn't matter
A PC:
Performs better than the X = Its too expensive
Performs worse = Haha see X is the better than PC
PC dips in framerate = It can't handle that resolution
PC can't do 60FPS with Native 4K = X is better
And now?... Apparently overclocking is the new caveat and a unfair advantage?... Not real world thing, like no one who buys a £400 GPU is going to overclock.
Also the developer you are talking about claimed GTX 1070 levels.... The 1070 can play 1440p on Epic at 40+ FPS, and the X is at medium?... and that's the same to you?... medium and Epic?...
I think your point is the X1X delivers good performance, relative to powerful pcs, for what you pay - I agree with that and have said so time and again.
With PC's silicon lottery, end users has option for end user overclock, but that's a silicon lottery e.g. GTX 1070 can be made faster with 2.038 Ghz overclock. I seen faster overclocks with 8 TFLOPS for GTX 1070.
ARK dev's didn't made their comments with non-reference +2Ghz GTX 1070.
I'm lucky that my old MSI Gaming X GTX 980 Ti which can reach 8.1 TFLOPS OC which enables my secondary gaming PC to be used in another location and it can easily counter and beat X1X's results. The highest OC for my GTX 980 Ti is similar to http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_geforce_gtx_980_ti_gaming_oc_review,35.html which is 8.47 TFLOPS at 1.504 Ghz. Memory OC is problematic for my GTX 980 Ti which didn't match guru3d's review sample.
The value for PC is via non-reference GPU clock speeds, but that's a silicon lottery.
As for Witcher 3's 1080p 60 hz, X1X was design for high resolution box not with 60 hz 1080p.
Log in to comment