BOTTLENECK ISSUE

[CuriousIndian1769]

How much do you think an I5 3570 will bottleneck with a gtx 1080 at 1080p resolution gaming? And what issues might i face while playing modern titles? 

[FlappyBoobs]

That CPU is a bottle neck even for a 1060. 

[dgsddfgdfhgs]

expect occasion dips in fps, that said, imo 4core i5 & gtx 1060 is great match for most 1080p gaming

[5x5]

I mean you won't see the 1080 perform to its fullest. In most cases you will be severely CPU limited with some stuttering in modern AAA titles.

[191x7]

37 minutes ago, CuriousIndian1769 said:

How much do you think an I5 3570 will bottleneck with a gtx 1080 at 1080p resolution gaming? And what issues might i face while playing modern titles? 

50%, maybe even more.

[RasmusDC]

1 hour ago, FlappyBoobs said:

That CPU is a bottle neck even for a 1060. 

bullshit...

 

i have a 3570k 4790k and my 8700k, taking a 970GTX which is nearly the same as the 1060, actually faster than a 1060 3GB, the performance increments are small, they are there, but in 1080p it does not matter.

 

a 1080 on a 3570 will make everything run easily... YES you will loose some frames compared to a faster CPU in some games.. but it is still a nice pc.

[RasmusDC]

there are differences... but still.. it is a fine pc

[dgsddfgdfhgs]

2 minutes ago, RasmusDC said:

there are differences... but still.. it is a fine pc

very biased clip.

- using only 1 game (especially ubisoft's)

- gtx1080is much faster than a 970 (roughly 3~4x faster)

[RasmusDC]

1 minute ago, dgsddfgdfhgs said:

very biased clip.

- using only 1 game (especially ubisoft's)

- gtx1080is much faster than a 970 (roughly 3~4x faster)

he was talking 1060 in his reply..

 

and yes.. i we look at Battlefield V with all the bells and whistles ,a I5 3570k not OC vs a 8700k the difference is around 20%+ to the 8700k but it is 120fps vs maybe 150fps.. YES on paper it is a lot, but he is well within margin of good 1080p gaming..

 

had i still had a 3570k and someone offered me a cheaper 1080 i would say thankyou, i would have a kick ass gaming rig... 

[RasmusDC]

personally i am running a 4K screen, so i need all the power i can get, so i run a 8700k and a 1080TI, and it is close to not enough, the 8700k vs my old 4790k actually did not impact that as much as i thought it would.

[Lathlaer]

28 minutes ago, RasmusDC said:

YES you will loose some frames compared to a faster CPU in some games.. but it is still a nice pc

 

25 minutes ago, RasmusDC said:

there are differences.

That is one way of putting 100% performance decrease vs. 8700k.

[FlappyBoobs]

1 hour ago, RasmusDC said:

bullshit...

 

i have a 3570k 4790k and my 8700k, taking a 970GTX which is nearly the same as the 1060, actually faster than a 1060 3GB, the performance increments are small, they are there, but in 1080p it does not matter.

 

a 1080 on a 3570 will make everything run easily... YES you will loose some frames compared to a faster CPU in some games.. but it is still a nice pc.

It's not bullshit, it's fact.

 

I actually have a 3570k (overclocked to 4.2Ghz), and a 1060 6GB the 1060 is bottlenecked by the CPU in all games. The GPU never gets above 70% usage. EVER.

 

 

[Frankenburger]

10 hours ago, FlappyBoobs said:

It's not bullshit, it's fact.

 

I actually have a 3570k (overclocked to 4.2Ghz), and a 1060 6GB the 1060 is bottlenecked by the CPU in all games. The GPU never gets above 70% usage. EVER.

 

 

Sounds like a system issue to me.

 

My laptop has an i7-6700HQ with turbo boost disabled (effectively locking it to 2.6GHz), and the GTX 1060 in the system hits 100% usage all the time. And just FYI, a stock 6700HQ is only a smidge faster than a stock 3570k, and a mobile 1060 is only about 10% slower than a desktop 1060.

[RasmusDC]

Yes but it is still perspective..

 

if you are building a 1080p gaming rig, seriously what will you need the extra frames for.... there will ALWAYS be a bottleneck, i have run my 1080ti with my 8700k my 4790k and even my 3570k, mostly on 4k, and i haven´t really "FELT" the need, in the games that i am playing, BF1 needed the 4790k to run smooth, apparently the lack of HT hit the 3570k quite hard.

 

yes if i benchmark, i can see a difference, in some things less that others. 

 

but dropping the pixel count by 3/4th i would NEVER have felt any issues at all.

 

YES i had games where the 1080ti ran 70% usage, or less, but i did not care. the fun part is if i have that pc for 1080p gaming, i would restrict my fps to around the hz of the monitor, if i had a 60hz monitor i would restrict it at 75fps (not vsync)... the CPU/GPU would be could, and even run passive at times.

 

the pc would use WAY less power, and it would be way less noisy, even though it does not say much today.

[Mira Yurizaki]

To add what @RasmusDC said, people need to stop worrying about having a bottleneck in their system. Having a bottleneck is not the problem. If the system still performs to your requirements, it doesn't matter if there's a bottleneck or not.  Sure you could ask "well why didn't you get a video card that is more balanced with it?" But then what if at some point you do decide to upgrade the rest of the system? Now you have to upgrade the video card again to actually get a performance improvement. A Pentium and a GT 1030 are balanced, but that doesn't make it ideal.

 

Worry about getting the performance you want first, then worry about where the bottlenecks are if you're not getting the performance.