Majestic

At 1080p any CPU is a bottleneck to the 1080TI. It just matters how many framerate you get. And the 2600X gets plenty.

No, they used a 192bit controller, not a 224+32 setup like the GTX 970. Meaning it just had one memory controller sliced off, hence the 3GB.
Your test methodology could be wrong, it could be within variance. There's no reason for slow system memory (22-30gb/s) to add anything meaningful to the performance of a chip running >120gb/s memory. 

Why, when your VRAM runs out, system RAM is the first memory the OS will go for to swap. All you're doing is sectioning off memory. This is pointless.

You can try going to the Nvidia control panel and force "thread optimization". That can help a little. Other than that, the single-core being maxed is the renderthread. Your CPU can't handle all the drawcalls and it chokes. Overclocking and using framerate limiters are your only help. 

Bottleneck test.
 
I think the most predominantly asked question is: "Does my X bottleneck my Y?" And right after that is probably: "Is an i5 enough for gaming?". Most people would argue something like an i5-4460 or i5-6500 is more than plenty for modern games at 60 fps. So I've grabbed a set of modern games that i'm going to explore in-depth with graphs to see if this is actually the case.
 
Games tested:
Deus Ex: Mankind Divided (DX12), Settings: link
Hitman (DX12), Settings: link
Rise of the Tomb Raider (DX12), Settings: link
Watch Dogs 2 (DX11), Settings: link (overlay didn't want to co-operate)
GTA 5 (DX11), Settings: link, link and link
--New--
Mass Effect Andromeda (DX11), 1080p maxed settings (ultra).
Mirror's Edge Catalyst (DX11), 1080p hyper settings.
 
Games settings are not picked at random, or set to highest. They are set to 60fps is guaranteed (and only just). It's a mixture of High/very high, whatever the game allowed. Resolution is 1080p
 
I've tried enabling DX12 where ever possible to reduce CPU overhead as much as possible. The testplatform is tested at two settings.
1. Overclocked CPU and fast memory (4.3ghz, 2400mhz CL11)
2. Stock CPU and generic memory (3.6ghz, 1333mhz CL9)
 
Take note, this is still Haswell, so don't look at these memoryspeeds and think i'm deliberately nerfing the CPU. 1333 is entry for Haswell. 2400 is fast for Haswell.
 
Test System:
Intel Core i5-4670K 
16GB Corsair Vengeance Pro 2400-CL11
MSI Z87i Gaming AC
MSI RX-480 Gaming X 8GB (set to default 1266 to simulate generic 480).
Crucial BX100/MX100 250GB drives for windows and games.
Samsung C24FG70 144hz 1080p VA panel
 
Results (overclocked = 4.3ghz/2400, stock = 3,6ghz/1333).
 
Deus Ex: Mankind Divided. 
Test entailed starting from your appartment (poor), walking downstairs and making two circles around the appartment complex (outside).
Overclocked:
Framerate can be read as 20 fps/division, framerate remains above 60fps the whole time but only barely. CPU load is averaging 80%. So if you have an overclocked i5 this game should still be playable above 60fps at high to very high settings. This could be an AMD thing, as I've not seen this on my 980, but the framepacing was pretty bad. A few stutters can be visible in the frametime graph. But it's not as bad as some other games. Let's continue.
 
Stock:
It's no longer able to maintain a surplus of 60 fps at all times. Note the high CPU load, averaging 90-95% and clearly as can be seen from the inconsistent GPU load there is some clear CPU bottlenecking taking place. So a locked i5 is not able to keep this game at 60fps paired with a mid-range RX-480 at the settings this card was designed for. You need to drop geometry related settings, resulting in less graphical fidelity. You can also see regressed framepacing performance and infrequent frametime spikes. This was not a pleasing visual experience, even on a freesync panel. Frametimes ranging from 16.5ms to 20ms consecutively. So visually it's constantly switching between 50 and 60 fps frame transitions. It bad.
 
Hitman (2016):
Test involves the Paris mission, walking through the front door and making a circle through the various first-floor crowded rooms, and walking back to the start.
 
 
Overclocked:
Fps was mostly 60-70 fps, with a few dips to high 50's at the start due to assets no doubt loading in. CPU load was at 85-90% average, so not much to spare. But it should be able to maintain 60 fps on an overclocked i5 yet again.
Framepacing wasn't steller again though, pretty sure it's just AMD's drivers and the lack of CPU overhead causing issues.
 
Stock.
Yes, it's as bad as it looks. Framerate might be at a constant surplus of 60fps, but the frametimes tell a different story, as do the GPU load graphs which are all over the place. CPU is pegged at 95%+ for the vast majority of the test and the frametimes suffer. Subsequent frametimes of 16ms to 26ms (60fps vs. 38fps) gives the visual experience of double-buffered v-sync 60hz with the frametargets being missed every other frame. It's jittery and nausiating to watch. A locked i5 paired with a 470 or 480 is not going to have a fluent experience running this game at the designed settings for these cards yet again. 
 
Rise of the Tomb Raider:
Test involved Geothermal valley, running (normal pace) from the village to the camp and back again. Panning the camera a bit to load in additional assets.
 
Overclocked:
Brief periods of CPU bottlenecking with erratic frametimes. But a mostly saturated GPU and frametimes remaining fairly consistent (14-16ms). FPS at 60-70fps average and remaining above 60fps the whole time. DigitalFoundry already pointed this out in the 2500K video they did, that Rise of the Tomb Raider suffers from massive driver overhead from AMD, even in DX12. And this is quite evident in these results. It's mostly a solid experience, but not flawless. I toggled off Tessellation for good measure, this being an Nvidia title, perhaps it was causing havoc. But this really didn't seem to fix it the overhead.
 
Stock:
Wew lad, this is not looking great yet again. Lots of erratic framepacing, a GPU load that is predominantly unsaturated and framerates that barely skimp 60fps. Frametimes can be as excessive as 52ms (<20fps). CPU load seems pegged to 95%-100% and is clearly the predominant performance denominator. It explains the stuttering and crappy frametimes. DigitalFoundry has repeated this multiple times aswell, you generally want to be GPU bottlenecked, as being CPU bottlenecked introduces stuttering. This is again a game that is not going to be fully enjoyable on a locked i5 with an AMD midrange card. I have some results for my 980 on this title. But as this is a i5/bottlenecking thread and not AMD vs. Nvidia, I will save it for the footnotes.
 
Watch Dogs 2:
An infamously CPU heavy game I put in here for good measure. Gamers Nexus has already showed that i5's are out of their league in this game, and my results show nothing different. The test involves driving around the park outside the dedsec hideout twice, and walking around the park with panning camera.

 
 
Overclocked:
Fps mostly above 60 fps, but the frametimes range from 15 to 20ms consequtively. The game however has some excellent motion blur that manages to make these sub-average framepacing look fluent still. CPU is struggling however, and there are some gnarly GPU load drops already visible, but this is not directly visible in the frametimes or pacing. This game, unlike many people proclaim, has an excellent engine that manages to drive consistent performance even under a struggling CPU at 60fps. This much can't be said for the other games.
 
Stock:
Wew2 Lad3, this is bad. CPU flatlined at 100% and fully driving performance. FPS sub 50fps most of the time and GPU load is literally all over the place. Here I have to admit the pollingfrequency of the capture is probably not fast enough. Because the frametimes don't look half as bad as they felt during gameplay. It's safe to say that for Watch Dogs 2 an i5 is woefully inadequate, especially with slow ram and no overclock.
 
Grand Theft Auto 5
 
This is an older game, and doesn't really fit the narrative of the test. But I've included it for comparisson purposes. The test involves starting at micheal's house and driving around downtown from dawn to midday.
 
Overclocked:
Framerate is certainly high enough and the frametimes are good enough to blend well with Freesync. Which is to be expected from an older game, and one that was recently removed from the test lineup at Gamers Nexus because the game engine starts to buckle beyond 180 fps. CPU is driving performance sometimes though, but increasing the AA settings would tone that down a bit, as the framerates would become a little lower.
 
Stock:
CPU is driving performance, saturation takes a hit and a poorer frametransition can be noticed (even through freesync). It's still certainly still playable, and again increasing fidelity would increase the CPU overhead. And alas, the game does not scale beyond 4 cores, so there wouldn't be any way of fixing a CPU bottleneck even if you wanted to.
 
--Updated--
Update is a small set of extra tests of games I've found the i5 to be lacking on. These are only in overclocked configuration and with the GTX 1070 only. The results speak for themselves though.
 
Mass Effect Andromeda
 
Test involves running around the Nexus Area's, where there is both a pretty high CPU load aswell as it not being cherrypicking seeing as you'll spend quite some time there. It is after I finished the game, so only Operations and the Docking Bay area. Spoiler alert.
 
Full resolution (right-click, open in new tab)
 
GPU load is not 99%, and there are the occasional spikes to 90-100% CPU load when loading in scenes. i5 seems to be mostly hanging in there (average 70% load), but take into account this is a 20% OC with fast memory. A stock configuration would be having a much harder time. Still very playable, I'm not certain however the spikes are elleviated with an i7, need someone to verify.
 
 
Mirror's Edge Catalyst
 
Test involves running around the city from the first safehouse to the first mission. Traversing the city in a fast pace and giving the engine a good workout. 
 
Full resolution (right-click, open in new tab)
 
As is evident, even at a moderate framerate of only 70-80 fps (144hz panel now) the CPU is having clear issues keeping up with the 1070. The framerate is predominantly limited by the CPU's ability to generate drawcalls and the GPU is not locked at a 99% load even when the settings are set to hyper. The result is an experience that is very smooth when the CPU is at 80-90%, but starts to spike in frametimes and give visual stuttering when it's being maxed. This is, like Deus Ex and Tomb Raider, a game that simply can't really perform well enough to saturate a mid/high-end GTX 1070 in a free range, and requires hardlocking to 60 to smooth out.
 
 
 
Verdict.
 
I hope these results are Real World enough for everyone. I didn't use a Titan X or super low resolutions or settings to prove my point. This is the experience the average user would be getting with their midrange i5 and graphics cards in the modern titles at a more in-depth and personal level. Average framerates simply don't tell you the entire story and this is something which always bothered me about outlets like Tech City or Hardware Unboxed. They go through all these benchmarks that ultimately tell you jack shit. Gamers Nexus are sufficiently better with 1% and 0.1% lows, but they still test GPU's with high-end CPU's, and CPU's with high-end GPU's. Never putting mid-tier hardware side-by side. Frankly, I have to admit that my i5-4670K is definitely on it's last legs after 4 years, and the i5's that are sold right now are, to me, woefully inadequate for future performance and should stop being recommended (or with the explicit caveat of them not lasting for years). Intel hasn't improved much with Skylake and Kaby Lake, so my overclocked performance should still be a rough indicator for locked i5's of the newer generations. 
 
These new console titles are beginning to require more than quadcores, and to me this should be a more compelling argument for new chips like Ryzen's 5 and 7. 
 
This is also a more in-depth analysis of visualizing bottlenecking. If you witness any of these pictures with your system when running Rivatuner (MSI Afterburner) in the background, it's safe to say your CPU is bottlenecking the hell out of the GPU.
 
So tell me what you guys think, I took the time to make this as inclusive as possible and I will probably be tinkering it a bit based on feedback and no doubt forgetting stuff. If anyone would supply me with results of Nvidia hardware on core i5's with the settings provided, that would be grand. You can look in the graphs which parameters I'm testing, pollingrate is set to 100ms (fastest possible).
 
 
 
 
 

Be Quiet! Dark Rock Pro 4, Noctua NH-D15.
 
Don't go for AIO's, they're not quiet.
 
Meh, a noctua fan at 300-350 rpm is virtually silent. No bearing or motor noise, even when hovering your ear next to it.
 

Soundcards are literally only good as coasters.

Be Quiet! Dark Rock Pro 4, Noctua NH-D15.
 
Don't go for AIO's, they're not quiet.
 
Meh, a noctua fan at 300-350 rpm is virtually silent. No bearing or motor noise, even when hovering your ear next to it.
 

There is no reason to overclock the 2700x as you allready get as good performance as you will be able to get out of it when stock. You can get to around 4.2 ghz if you have a cooler. 4.1 is very achievable. 
 
If stock presicion boost 2 will manage the cores quite well and at least 1 of them will run at 4.35 ghz. That is why there is no reason to overclock it. Especially when you are only thinking about doing 4.1 ghz

4+1 phase VRM with Niko-Semi fets, not going to happen on that board. Be happy if it remains stable under stock.

This
https://twitter.com/HardOCP/status/992584230499684352
 
You didn't do shit LTT, it was as you say Linus "really boring" to you, wasn't it.

quad SLI is no longer supported. 
 
Also not even sure if you're serious...

quad SLI is no longer supported. 
 
Also not even sure if you're serious...

Faraday cage, no internet, tinfoil hat. Maybe an Infowars water filter for good measure.

Just stop moving it around, it should settle. But yeah, ClC's are not bought for peace and quiet.

You fool, tinfoil is electrically conductive, the government will use it to steal your thoughts if you wear it on your head. 

The beeping things? No, some of them ship it as an accessory. Nor would it be sensitive enough to pick up anything from inside the case.

If you thought water cooling is more quiet than air cooling then you've been badly mistaken. Especially the cheaper AIOs can be a tad noisy.

You'll be perfectly fine on Ryzen and save money for the same core/thread count on the R5s
 
also the soldered IHS is nice, and on X470 you get StoreMI technology to speed up your hard drive with an SSD.

I would listen to this neckbeard sysadmin > jay :^)
 
 

You mean you're just plain suspended for 48 hours. You don't have an ETA on a shadowban, because it's....a shadow...ban. They won't tell you.

You mean you're just plain suspended for 48 hours. You don't have an ETA on a shadowban, because it's....a shadow...ban. They won't tell you.

You mean you're just plain suspended for 48 hours. You don't have an ETA on a shadowban, because it's....a shadow...ban. They won't tell you.

But XFR is pretty good under the correct cooling, and clocking a 2700X to 4ghz flat would actually make it perform worse than out-of-the-box. 

Not with the memory timings tightened on the 2700X. And with quadcores not being enough anymore to sustain 60fps, getting merely 2 threads extra doesn't really set you up for the long haul....

Look at the current ones...