rtx2080 super will bottleneck overclocked i7 6700k?

[gilad]

10 hours ago, Midnitewolf said:

I don't believe there is any risk of a crash.  Generally speaking with a bottleneck you only see a reduction in performance. Basically with bottlenecking either your GPU or CPU will reach 100% utilization and you will reach a maximum fps value, no more, no less.

 

For example lets say you upgraded to a 9900k and a RTX 2080 Super.  You would just see those numbers you listed increase.  You might for example see that now that the 2080 Super has a more powerful processor to work with, those numbers would be.

 

Average 1080p Performance 180 fps

Average 1440p Performance 133 fps

Average 4k performance 79 fps.

 

Basically because you have eliminated the bottleneck created by your processor, your GPU can now stretch its legs a bit more and give you overall better performance.  That is all that occurs.  Another way to look at it is if a Corvette with a 400 HP engine can go 180 mph then you change the engine to a 500 HP model, the Corvette can now go 200 mph.  Same principle.  

so mean if in theory i have monster cpu  lets say running at 450.00ghz and 2200 cores and 4400  Threads and L3 OF 6tb i can run the gpu will not get bottlenecked and its mean countless fps?  i dont an expert of pc so if im "sounds" stupid tell me pls XD 

[Midnitewolf]

14 minutes ago, gilad said:

so mean if in theory i have monster cpu  lets say running at 450.00ghz and 2200 cores and 4400  Threads and L3 OF 6tb i can run the gpu will not get bottlenecked and its mean countless fps?  i dont an expert of pc so if im "sounds" stupid tell me pls XD 

No in that case you would have a GPU bottleneck.  Basically your GPU utilization would be at 100% meaning it is working as hard as it can while your CPU would be at probably 5% utilization due the GPU not being able to process information as fast as the CPU can supply that information. 

 

Don't get me wrong, bottlenecks do exist and in an ideal world, you would want your system to be at 100% utilization of both your GPU and CPU at any given time. This is what people are referring to when they use the word "balanced".  However, from what I have seen, nothing is completely balanced.  For example you have some games that are very CPU intensive and because of that they can push you toward a situation where you have a CPU bottleneck.  In other cases, the games tend to be GPU intensive where the GPU can be the source of a bottleneck.  I guess my point here is that no matter what you do or what hardware you have, at some point your probably going to see a bottleneck somewhere and it is probably going to fluxuate between being a CPU bottleneck in some situations and a GPU bottleneck in others. Since this is unavoidable, it just seems to make more sense to me to look at a performance target and then decide what it is going to take to get you there rather than struggling over whether a more powerful GPU will cause a bottleneck.  

 

Again don't get me wrong, bottlenecking can be an important factor.  In the example you provided, spending $100k on that monster CPU running at 45000 GHZ and 2200 cores probably wouldn't make sense if the video card you were using couldn't take advantage of even 1% of its processing power and vice versa, if you had a mega video card and very weak CPU but I tend to believe most people overthink the issue when you can just look to performance to see if it makes sense.  For example, if you were to look at the numbers and found a 2080 Ti was getting you the same FPS as a 2080 Super with your current processor, then it obviously doesn't make sense to spend the extra money on the 2080 ti but as long as it does get better performance, then it might. 

 

Another way to look at it is If you are seeing a performance increase, then just look at the percentage increase and compare that to the cost and ask yourself if X percent greater performance is worth Y dollars.   For example if the performance increase is 20% and only going to cost an additional $50 then sure, if the performance increase is only 5% and going to cost you $500 more, then it probably doesn't make sense.  This is how I usually look thing when determining if I should perform an upgrade on my PC.

 

Anyway, sorry for the wall of text but I thought I should explain in detail what I was talking about.