Thats nonsense. Yes you can get more gaming performance with e cores off cause you can clock the cache higher, but you know in what scenario you can notice it? I kid you not, 720p dlss ultra perfromance with a 3090. Thats what i needed to run on cyberpunk to see if the higher cache makes a difference.
Im running a high overclocked cpu (5.3 all core) with 6000c32 manual tuned kits and a 3090 with 550w custom bios. Cant tell the difference with e cores on or off in gaming unless i drop to 32p resolution. For example, in cp the difference was 234 with e cores off and 217 with e cores on. You know what gpu youd need to get 220 fps on full rt ultra cyberpunk for the difference to even matter? I dunno, propably a 6090 or something
Then you just agreed to what I said, about the e-cores being the shortest plank of the barrel.
And
If you are so gaming focus, then you don't need e-cores in the first place.
The e-cores are there for bumping up the MT benchmark which, gaming doesn't need and, the presents of e-cores are hindering your cache performance, what you've mentioned.
The 12900k would be a much better gaming CPU if the e-cores are replaced with 2 big fat P-cores.
For MT workload,
Who wants a Hybrid CPU for MT workloads?
Myself doing rendering and heavy VM applications, I sure don't want a Hybrid CPU.
Who wants their money making workload getting slow down randomly just because the CPU itself decides to thrown the thread into subpar e-cores ?
Please consider the fact that Intel themselves don't put hybrid CPU into their mission critical MT workload Sapphire Rapids lineup, only pure P-core design there.
Seems it's you that cannot read or remember, i said "so imo you are pissing into the wind"
That's normal
Who pays attention to your troll reply.