shadow2761
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2016
- Messages
- 455
Anyone if this CPU would bottleneck a 2080 Ti @ 1440p and 4K?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Not really, no. While a faster CPU is always better to some extent, we are primarily GPU limited in games. The difference between various CPU's in games is going to be incredibly small. That's why I've stayed with my 5960X for so damn long. I want a new CPU, but everything out there on the HEDT platforms is going to be a lateral move in terms of gaming performance. AMD's Threadripper has similar IPC to what we've got. Even if it had slightly more, 5930's and 5960X's should be able to clock a little higher. You would honestly have to grab a 8700K or 9900K to get an "upgrade" and even then it would be so small I wouldn't feel like it justified the cost in the slightest. On the HEDT front, there isn't much that will break 4.5GHz and therefore, very little that would be an upgrade for playing games.
CPU's have advanced more than people realize in the last few years. In the realm of performance per watt, virtualization, and parallelism today's CPU's are considerably faster than what was on the market 7 or 8 years ago. This is also true of the mobile market. However, the problem is that the advancements have little to no impact on gaming. IPC has barely gone anywhere by itself in the last 8 years. Clock speeds haven't gone up much either and when they have its come at the cost of IPC in most cases. We aren't at a point where gaming benefits from additional threads.
At 1440p the cost of a new cpu and motherboard in no way would justify the very small gain in fps... from everything I see you will only see the fps gains from a high dollar new cpu at 1080p
you question is impossibel to answers because what is the bottlenekc depends on you system load aka what ressoruce you are using in your software
yu cpu will bt the bottlenck in runnings 7-zip compression
but not in a modenr game running in 8k ressouluionts with 16xMSAA and 8xAF
Tou can't simply not boi lthe question down to hardware alone
The only thing making me want to upgrade is my lust for hardware. Basically agreeing with you.Not really, no. While a faster CPU is always better to some extent, we are primarily GPU limited in games. The difference between various CPU's in games is going to be incredibly small. That's why I've stayed with my 5960X for so damn long. I want a new CPU, but everything out there on the HEDT platforms is going to be a lateral move in terms of gaming performance. AMD's Threadripper has similar IPC to what we've got. Even if it had slightly more, 5930's and 5960X's should be able to clock a little higher. You would honestly have to grab a 8700K or 9900K to get an "upgrade" and even then it would be so small I wouldn't feel like it justified the cost in the slightest. On the HEDT front, there isn't much that will break 4.5GHz and therefore, very little that would be an upgrade for playing games.
CPU's have advanced more than people realize in the last few years. In the realm of performance per watt, virtualization, and parallelism today's CPU's are considerably faster than what was on the market 7 or 8 years ago. This is also true of the mobile market. However, the problem is that the advancements have little to no impact on gaming. IPC has barely gone anywhere by itself in the last 8 years. Clock speeds haven't gone up much either and when they have its come at the cost of IPC in most cases. We aren't at a point where gaming benefits from additional threads.
Not really, no. While a faster CPU is always better to some extent, we are primarily GPU limited in games. The difference between various CPU's in games is going to be incredibly small. That's why I've stayed with my 5960X for so damn long. I want a new CPU, but everything out there on the HEDT platforms is going to be a lateral move in terms of gaming performance. AMD's Threadripper has similar IPC to what we've got. Even if it had slightly more, 5930's and 5960X's should be able to clock a little higher. You would honestly have to grab a 8700K or 9900K to get an "upgrade" and even then it would be so small I wouldn't feel like it justified the cost in the slightest. On the HEDT front, there isn't much that will break 4.5GHz and therefore, very little that would be an upgrade for playing games.
CPU's have advanced more than people realize in the last few years. In the realm of performance per watt, virtualization, and parallelism today's CPU's are considerably faster than what was on the market 7 or 8 years ago. This is also true of the mobile market. However, the problem is that the advancements have little to no impact on gaming. IPC has barely gone anywhere by itself in the last 8 years. Clock speeds haven't gone up much either and when they have its come at the cost of IPC in most cases. We aren't at a point where gaming benefits from additional threads.
So specifically talking about 1440p and referencing the chart above, wouldn’t a 5930 technically be a bottleneck if better performance can be had by installing a faster 8700K/9900K? I mean the gains probably won’t be giant, but if there are still gains to be had when moving to a faster CPU, then I would technically consider that a bottleneck.
We are talking about buying a new motherboard, processor and RAM for what probably amounts to less than 10FPS when you are already above 100FPS using the examples above. At 4K, the difference will probably be even smaller. If you think that's worth it, then by all means go right ahead. I've looked at this many times myself. I'm a hardware guy and will justify all kinds of upgrades with little real benefits just so I can pull the trigger on new hardware. The gains are so pathetic at this point I've seen very little reason to upgrade my motherboard and CPU right now. Especially considering the cost / benefit ratio for doing so.
Correct, I'm in no way trying to justify the cost of the hardware for such a small gain. I'm just saying, there would technically be a bottleneck if there is more performance to be had just by changing out the CPU. Meaning the 5930 would hold the 2080 Ti back from performing at it best. We could even say the 9900K might also be a bottleneck to an extent, but since there is nothing faster on the market, it's hard to say at this point.
Amazing that the 2600K can still hang. Might be the greatest CPU of all time, past, present, and future.
Amazing that the 2600K can still hang. Might be the greatest CPU of all time, past, present, and future.
Couldn't agree more. I've been gaming on my 2600k (Stock Speeds) for 8+ years...recently paired with a 1080SC card @ 4k. BF5 was definitely hitting the system hard, I struggled whether to upgrade the CPU or pick up a 2080 based on some of these charts. I went the 8700k route with supporting hardware, gain 30 FPS in BF5. Run's butter smooth!
1440P still matters slightly.
Once you game at 4K though, you can underclock your CPU and it's still going to be GPU limited.
For me it is the opposite. Every game I play at 4k is CPU limited. ARMA 3, Fallout 4, Supreme Commander, 7 Days to Die, Kerbal Spae Program, and GTA V are all CPU bottlenecked. For games that are not CPU intensive, I use a higher refresh rate display.
But yes, in general you are absolutely correct.
Sure, if you are playing extremely old games that aren't well multithreaded, or multithreaded at all, then everything is CPU bound no matter the resolution. Shoot the older you go, the more you are basically doing a form of emulation, that's why emulators are all so CPU bound. The one that doesn't work in your list is GTAV because the 2080 TI is about 23% faster than 1080 Ti, which is relatively close to the average 27% increase in DX11 between the cards, so it's still more GPU bound than a CPU bound game.