Ok, I'll reference the very first benchmark here
Apart from one instant, the average framerate didn't vary more than ~2FPS between the different CPU speeds, this alone implies that:
1) All CPUs of the same family operate at the same FSB/HTT speed regardless of internal clock frequency, therefore all I/O bandwidth will be equal among all cores of that family. Average I/O bandwidth of modern processors is over 6GB/sec which is nowhere near the size of an instruction set or compiled data, therefore it takes a fraction of a second to send instructions from point-to-point
2) A GPU and a CPU are dedicated independant components working at seperate speeds simulteanously. Therefore the speed of either the CPU or GPU will have absolutely no bearing on the speed of the other component as they are never directly communicating with one another, nor are they dependant on one another to operate. A GPU will always have a pixel fillrate of x pixels per second and a CPU will always have a set number of FLOPS regardless of the capabilities of either
3) Rendering is entirely dependant on the pixel fillrate of the GPU, the CPU has absolutely no workload in regards to drawing the image you see on your screen. Therefore as illustrated in the benchmarks, a bottleneck is not present (let me remind you that a bottleneck is a slowest communication in a set of operations). The reason the framerates are the same is because the GPU has reached the limit in regards to how quickly it can render the image, and seeing how the CPU has no contribution to the process of rendering the image, a faster CPU will not attribute a faster rendering process. Likewise, adding a faster GPU will not result in an increased number of calculations of physics laws in a game as a GPU has no contribution to the process of executing physics information.
Let me repeat this last part, neither part are bottlenecking each other. Once you reach a steady and unpassable framerate it simply means that one component is limiting ITSELF, it has absolutely nothing to do with the workload of the other component
Now, by your definition, and according to "all of your supposed benchmarks", the framerate should greatly vary among different clocked CPUs. I have illustrated that this is not the case, and now I would like to ask you why exactly you think I am wrong, and why exactly you think you are right, apart from simply telling me I am wrong and not justifying anything you have said
I don't even know why I'm wasting so much time trying to clarify this, I'm freaking sick of people getting misconceptions about what a bottleneck is and what is simply means to have a slow piece of hardware...the only bottleneck that exists in PCs is the FSB/Mem Bus ratio and any overclocker who uses memory dividers should know exactly what I'm talking about and what EXACTLY a bottleneck is
Apart from one instant, the average framerate didn't vary more than ~2FPS between the different CPU speeds, this alone implies that:
1) All CPUs of the same family operate at the same FSB/HTT speed regardless of internal clock frequency, therefore all I/O bandwidth will be equal among all cores of that family. Average I/O bandwidth of modern processors is over 6GB/sec which is nowhere near the size of an instruction set or compiled data, therefore it takes a fraction of a second to send instructions from point-to-point
2) A GPU and a CPU are dedicated independant components working at seperate speeds simulteanously. Therefore the speed of either the CPU or GPU will have absolutely no bearing on the speed of the other component as they are never directly communicating with one another, nor are they dependant on one another to operate. A GPU will always have a pixel fillrate of x pixels per second and a CPU will always have a set number of FLOPS regardless of the capabilities of either
3) Rendering is entirely dependant on the pixel fillrate of the GPU, the CPU has absolutely no workload in regards to drawing the image you see on your screen. Therefore as illustrated in the benchmarks, a bottleneck is not present (let me remind you that a bottleneck is a slowest communication in a set of operations). The reason the framerates are the same is because the GPU has reached the limit in regards to how quickly it can render the image, and seeing how the CPU has no contribution to the process of rendering the image, a faster CPU will not attribute a faster rendering process. Likewise, adding a faster GPU will not result in an increased number of calculations of physics laws in a game as a GPU has no contribution to the process of executing physics information.
Let me repeat this last part, neither part are bottlenecking each other. Once you reach a steady and unpassable framerate it simply means that one component is limiting ITSELF, it has absolutely nothing to do with the workload of the other component
Now, by your definition, and according to "all of your supposed benchmarks", the framerate should greatly vary among different clocked CPUs. I have illustrated that this is not the case, and now I would like to ask you why exactly you think I am wrong, and why exactly you think you are right, apart from simply telling me I am wrong and not justifying anything you have said
I don't even know why I'm wasting so much time trying to clarify this, I'm freaking sick of people getting misconceptions about what a bottleneck is and what is simply means to have a slow piece of hardware...the only bottleneck that exists in PCs is the FSB/Mem Bus ratio and any overclocker who uses memory dividers should know exactly what I'm talking about and what EXACTLY a bottleneck is