They'll just use it as an excuse to say that the upper end of AMD is 'close enough', completely negating their original argument of it not making a difference.
144fps vs 178fps may not seem like a meaningful difference, until you consider longevity. Frames will fall faster with newer more demanding titles with AMD than they will with Intel. And in actuality, that 144 vs 178 is a difference of 20%, which is pretty significant.
let's say a game comes out that the 4770k + Titan can only get 60fps in. It's reasonable to assume an AMD will get around 20% less, which drops them from 60fps to 48fps with the same exact videocard.
Funny thing is, the 3470 is cheaper or on par with the 8350, yet gets slightly better FPS. So if they want to focus on gaming, they've already lost. Of course that's right about when they'll try to cite non gaming performance, despite having shifted the focus off of it previously to say that it was gaming performance that mattered. Perfect explanation of the hypocrisy.Edited by AMDATI - 3/28/14 at 1:32pm