 So we reviewed the Core i7-5960X here, an 8-core hyper-threaded DDR4-fueled monster of a computer processor that seems to be positioned as the elite-tier CPU in gaming systems among boutique system builders, and yet, doesn't appear, at first glance at least, to offer a compelling improvement over a more mainstream, and much less expensive, DDR3-equipped quad-core processor like the Core i7-4790K. Perhaps there is more to this than meets the eye, though, like how I've been using an iPhone 6 for a couple weeks. I mean, actually, that one's pretty easy. I have a review coming. Subscribe so you don't miss it. Back to CPU performance for now, though. Corsair Gaming RGB keyboards feature precision Cherry MX RGB keyswitches for 16.8 million color-per-key backlighting for virtually unlimited customization. Click now to learn more. So here's the problem with the way that benchmarks are typically run in a CPU review. In order to isolate as many variables as possible and keep the results as reproducible as possible, this is the correct way to do things, scientifically speaking, by the way, background processes on the system are kept in check, so only the applications being benchmarked at a given time are run, and fresh system images are loaded very regularly to ensure random extra junk isn't interfering with getting the best results possible. However, in the real world, a more cluttered environment, the kind where you've got, you know, a thousand sometimes poorly coded random apps in the system tray like bloated gaming peripheral software, antivirus, game streaming, VoIP clients, printer auto-updaters, etc., is oftentimes more realistic. And beyond that, power users and prosumers may be interested to know how their system will perform in games when they intentionally have a demanding application running in the background. So the test I set up is based on a worst-case scenario for a prosumer like a game streamer, someone who's heavily into gaming and uses their gaming rig for some content creation as well. So here's my hypothetical scenario. Our pro streamer just finished editing together a highlight reel in Sony Vegas Pro 12 and is rendering the file. Then he or she wants to fire up a game. We'll use Far Cry 3 at 1080p Ultra details with 8x MSAA, wants to stream a aforementioned game on Twitch using the fast preset with an HD webcam feed in the corner using Xsplit, wants to use screen capture to have a buddy Skype in to join the stream, and then while all that's happening, an antivirus scan starts running in the background. So for the test, I used an Asus Rampage 5 Extreme motherboard with the Core i7-5960X. Then I used the handy-dandy multiplier adjustments that all K and X series chips have, along with Asus' manual turbo boost controls and hyper-threading toggle to simulate the performance of all the other CPUs in the test. So I'm using the same platform, same OS, everything. So there are two different ways to evaluate the performance of our system here. First up, we can look strictly at average FPS in our game over a two-minute span at the beginning of my benchmark. The overclocked 8-core runs away with this, but not everyone overclocks, and at stock speed, our quad-core 4790K with hyper-threading does just as well as our stock 5960X, which costs about three times as much, presumably thanks to its high turbo clock speed of 4.2 to 4.4 GHz. Adding minimum frame rates to the mix gives us a little bit more insight, though. Now we can see that our 6-core seems to be struggling a bit thanks to its lower core count or lower clock speed compared to the other competitors, depending on which one we're looking at it against. And even though on average our quad-cores hold up against our 8-core, the dips in frame rate are 20% lower, which would normally be okay, but what the numbers don't even tell us here is how noticeable the hitching and stuttering is in each of those configs. The 8-core configs, on the other hand, both ran the game with smoother animations, and the 6-core stuttered occasionally, but better than the quad-cores. The quad-core with hyper-threading was noticeable, but usable, and the quad-core without hyper-threading was basically unplayable. And you can see a full explanation for why these FPS numbers might look okay, even though the animations are terrible, in the video linked here. But there's another completely different angle that we can use to examine this torture test scenario to give us a clearer idea of how the chips are holding up to the load. How well was the stuff in the background running? Well, first, let's have a look at dropped frames in the Twitch stream. Only our non-hyper-threaded quad-core dropped frames here. So we can see that our simulated 4690K was really struggling to multitask like this in a way that the others weren't. Now, finally, we can look at render times. It's a one-minute chunk of my Corsair Gaming K70 RGB keyboard video that I exported at 1080p with CPU encoding while everything else was running. And this is where we see the men separated from the boys. Our hyper-threaded 6-core stutters less in-game and renders the video a full two minutes faster than the hyper-threaded quad-core, even though its average frame rates are not as good. Then our A-core improves frame rates, smooths out gameplay completely, and knocks another 40 seconds off the render time, with our overclocked 4.4 GHz 8-core delivering smooth gameplay, the best frame rates out of all the configs, and also it manages to render the video in a third the time of our similarly clocked quad-core with hyper-threading. So, in conclusion, am I saying any of this is the kind of thing a normal user will encounter every day, or am I saying that this is the only way to achieve butter-smooth gaming while working on projects in the background? Absolutely not. Using a device with an onboard H.264 encoder, setting up a separate machine for capture, or utilizing a network render farm are all strategies that might actually be more elegant depending on the exact workload. Now, the point of this video was just to explore the effects of an overwhelming workload on a variety of different configs and have a look at what those lucky dogs with 8-core extreme editions can throw at their machines before they even really start to feel it. And the answer, I guess, is a whole heck of a lot. Guys, thanks for watching. Like this video if you liked it, dislike it if you disliked it, leave a comment letting me know. Was this about what you were expecting? Did you think it would be able to handle much more? Did you think even the 8-core would suffer? Love to hear from you guys. Also check out the link in the video description. You can give us a monthly contribution to help support us to make videos. You can buy a t-shirt, a cool one like this, which does the same thing, or you can change your Amazon bookmark to one with our affiliate code so we get a small kickback whenever you buy CPUs or tape or stands or whatever else it is you buy on Amazon. I actually got these on Amazon. Great product, very inexpensive. Anyway, thanks again for watching and as always, don't forget to subscribe.