Wrong, 1440p can be highly CPU bound, so can 4K/UHD, it all depends on the framerate. High fps = More CPU bound. 4K native is just that demanding, that most peoples GPU will bottleneck anyway. Use 5090 and lower the settings to blast 200+ fps and you will be CPU limited at 4K as well. 4K/240Hz exist you know.
Besides, not many using 4K+ are actually using 4K+ at native res. They rely on upscaling meaning internal resolution is much lower, typically 1080p (at 4K) and then CPU matters again.
I use 1440p at 500 Hz and aim for 500 fps, I am CPU bound in pretty much everything with a RTX 4080 overclocked by 10% and a 9800X3D at 5.6 GHz all-core OC using eCLK.
Casual gamers, aiming for 30-60 fps will be GPU bound for the most part. That is true.
High fps gamers, looking to maximize their monitors, typically is not, and rarely play at maximum settings, as they prefer high fps over slightly better visuals and then CPU matters big time.
Believe it or not. 144 Hz with 100 fps is not alot these days. Most serious gamers use 240 Hz minimum and alot of us are using 360 to even 500+ Hz now.
I am playing BF6 at 400+ fps avg with 200+ minimums. CPU performance matters here. I matters alot actually.
There's a huge difference between casual gaming at 30-60 fps, and actually taking advantage of 240+ Hz monitors, and this is where X3D shine and GPU means less.
