op, so there are scenic games, like Skyrim, where all you ever need is 60 fps and a G-Sync or Freesync compatible monitor to lock the game to 60 fps for a butter smooth experience. if the framerate never dips below 60, you will not notice a single difference, it doesn't matter if in theory you're getting 104 over 100 fps with the higher clocked chip. also, in scenic games, gpu plays a much bigger part than cpu does.
cpu intensive games are the likes of Civilization or Cities Skyline, where the AI needs the processing power to do a thousand things at once. some titles like Assasin's Creed are notoriously poorly optimized and tax cpus more than they should.
and then there are fast paced competitive games like cs:go, where pushing the frame rate as high as it can go will make the game seem a little bit faster and that is an advantage, but a higher refresh rate monitor will make an even bigger difference.
either way, virtually all pro gamers use Intel K series chips, cooled properly and overclocked , they all use 144Hz+ refresh rate monitors and resolution and details turned all the way to lowest as possible, but you're not really shooting for that.
to sum up, the 2700x was perfectly fine for running demanding games and they've improved in that respect and narrowed the gap between them and Intel with the 3700x.
they are still far superior in value when it comes to multi threaded workloads, not only are they faster, but cheaper too, so it's a jack of all trades, solid series of chips. paying the premium for the 3800x is simply not worth it.
if you want to watch a technical video, I'l leave a link, these guys have an amazing youtube channel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAGQwWDyURI
