I've made my hypothesis, conducted my experiments, and observed the results. So, do the results support the hypothesis? In some ways, yes. But not all. Does an 860K bottleneck a GTX 970? Yes. Is the bottleneck detrimental to your gaming experience? That of course is up to personal interpretation. So long as framerates stay north of 60 fps, does it matter a whole lot? For only $695 worth of hardware, you get smooth gaming across three screens, sometimes at the highest detail settings. Did you ever think you could do that?
It doesn't work for all games. Arma 3 showed that very clearly. There is also the lack of performance in productivity tasks. Let's be honest: this is not a machine most people would build. It was purpose built to conduct an experiment. As I said before, the idea of an 860K in an ITX case doesn't make a lot of sense due to thermal limitations. Adding aftermarket cooling leaves you spending more money than you would on a much more capable i3 platform. Also, if your budget is so tight that you build this lopsided system, I wonder how you would have three monitors for gaming.
Amid the absurdity of the Munchkin, I can't help but feel a sense of pride in it. It's a ridiculous machine. There's no way else to say it. But it still succeeds in its purpose and gives us a better understanding of the limits of the relationship between CPU and GPU in modern games. After seeing this, I'm very interested in what an i3 paired with a 970 or 290X could accomplish. The total cost of a system based on an i3-4160 and a cheap motherboard like the MSI H81M-E34 would be almost the same price as the Munchkin. And I'm willing to bet the Munchkin would get thoroughly embarrassed in such a matchup.