doesn't seem right....

[Goldensapling]

Take it to the doctor, it may have the flu

[Monarch]

I'm not denying that the CPU isn't holding his card back. But a bottleneck is where zero performance gains are achieved by updating another part. Until the point that one component holds back another to its peak its not a bottleneck. Its just not the right terminology for the situation.

The best situation is probably Sata 3 with current SSDs. The limit is a theoretical 600MB/s.So while a sata chip set may not reach that it will still show a improvement between different SSD's that arent hitting the limit of the interface. Once you hit the peak that the chip set and data 3 interface will allow you then get a true bottleneck.

Its not that the point people try make when they say something is a bottleneck isn t right, because the part still holds back the system to an extent. Its that they are applying a term that's much worse to the situation and it makes parts look a lot worse than they are. A new term to explain the situation should really be introduced to differentiate a partial bottleneck from a full bottleneck.

 

There's no such thing as a full bottleneck when it comes to CPU+GPU because it depends on the content. Even within a single game, say BF4, at one point (depending on what's going on) you can drop below 60 fps due to your CPU, and another time it can be caused by your GPU. You can stare at the wall and even a dual core will give you 100 fps. Then jump into action and down you go to unplayable framerates. So that shouldn't be called a bottleneck according to you just because CPU was able to fully feed the GPU when looking at the wall?

 

This is the definition: Bottleneck in engineering refers to a phenomenon where the performance or capacity of an entire system is limited by a single or small number of components or resources.

A bottleneck is a bottleneck, whether significant or not, whether consistent throughout the content or not. It can also be used when a single component keeps other components from reaching their full potential at any given time. The term does not restrict this usage because it conveys the same idea. In the case of the CPU and GPU, the "flow" of content data can be limited by either CPU or GPU, therefore the term "bottleneck" is perfectly appropriate.

 

And bottleneck is not necessarily a bad thing. Besides, you'll always have a certain component bottlenecking the performance while other components could achieve more. It's their fault whoever thinks a bottleneck is automatically bad. The question is if you're satisfied with the performance you're getting at the point a bottleneck occurs. If not, you upgrade the component causing that bottleneck.

[Alpha11]

So until I can afford A new mobo and CPU I just got. Really nice paperweight. -.-

Not a nice paperweight, just a computer that can run CS:Go at 90fps