Jump to content

What CPU for higher resolution, ultra graphics settings?

Literally every day someone asks, what CPU should they buy for 4k or 1440p Ultra-High settings gaming. Therefore I try to summarize the problem as I see it.

 

TLDR: higher the resolution, more demanding the graphics settings, the less you'll be limited by your CPU. More pixels and higher graphics are mostly GPU-bound. 

 

First, some useful links for those who are in doubt.

2600 vs 3600 GPU scaling benchmark by TechSpot. (Even though Zen2 has a clear advantage in both IPC and clock speeds, the differences are only marked on 1080p medium settings, and with high-end GPU-s (2070su and upwards, esp with 2080ti). For an entry, or lower-mid tier GPU, such as the 1660Ti, 2060, 5600xt, you will not notice that large gap between the performance of different CPU-s. When going with an RX580 or 1650super, the differences almost cease to exist. On higher resoultion (1440p or 4k) this will be further reduced. 

Another fine example is 1600 vs. 7700k on 1080p and 1440p. Note, that on 1440p, there is hardly any difference between the processors, though the gap widens on lower resolution, more so when you drop the graphics settings. (data not shown)

 

four or six cores?

4 cores for gaming (*NB: newer titles do indeed run better, smoother with more cores. That's why the 1600 actually proved to be a better "long term purchase" than 7600k back in their days: I would like to refer to this TechSpot test, revisiting 1600 vs 7600k )

Also noteworthy: the above findings are in single-player. When it comes to multi, CPUs with more cores& hyperthreading might come handy. The classic example is always BFV MP with lots of players. 

A more recent example: 4c4t 9100f vs. 6c12t 1600AF

I generally do not recommend investing into 4c cpu-s without hyperthreading. Nonetheless, the buyer knows best, and the questioner is always right. 

 

Judging by the benchmarks and IRL experiences, when you are using a mid-tier graphics card, or, playing on 1440p Ultra settings or higher, the GPU tends to be the limiting factor ("bottleneck"), and less crucial is the CPU performance. When you already have a 2600-8400, and you would like to game on 1440p or 4k, you do not need to rush the upgrade just yet! : )

Avg_1440p_Ultra.png

 

De azért legyen a fő üzenet anyanyelven is:

Minél magasabb felbontáson, nagyobb grafikai részletességgel játszol, annál kevésbé hangsúlyos, milyen procid van, mert jó eséllyel a videokártyád lesz a szűk keresztmetszet, az fogja limitálni az FPS-számokat. Fentebbi tesztekből amit kiemelnék:

2600 vs 3600 GPU scaling benchmark by TechSpot. (bár a harmadik generáció előnyben van mind IPC, mind órajelek tekintetében, de, ennek főleg 1080p-n, vagy 1080p mediumon van igazán jelentősége, illetve csúcs-VGA-k esetén. Belépő szintű kártyáknál v alsó-közép kategóriás kártyákkal alig van lényegi eltérés, magasabb felbontáson ez még kevésbé hangsúlyos. 4k? nem feltétlen kell 3000-es szériában gondolkozni! 1440p középkat vga-val? szintén nem életbevágó a harmadik gent preferálni).

 

Még egy remek példa, a korábbi etalon gémer-CPU 7700k ringben a 1600 ellen.

Jól látszik, hogy 1080p-n azért jócskán elmarad az AMD, ellenben 1440p-n gyakorlatilag marginális különbségekről beszélhetünk. 4k-n még annyi sem lenne köztük. : )

 

Négy vagy hat mag? 

4 mag mire (volt) elég (*NB: Újabb AAA címek valóban jól skálázódnak négynél több magra, s profitálhatnak az extra szálakból is. Emiatt volt pár éve "időtállóbb" befektetés egy 1600 a 7600k-val szemben (plusz AM4-be még jön egy generáció, míg a 1151v1 halott, kihűlt) Lásd Techspot tesztjét : revisiting 1600 vs 7600k )

4 erős mag 6 kevésbé tápossal szemben: 1600AF vs 9100F 

Plusz: ezek a bencsek egyjátékos módban készültek. Gyakori példa a "BFV multi", hogy a 6+ mag& HT előnyeit hangsúlyozza. Így oda, főleg, ha streamelsz is, nagyon hálás tud lenni pl. egy 3700x-3800x (8c16t)

 

Ezt csak azért írtam, hogy meglegyen állandó linkként, és tudjak mire hivatkozni. Kényelmi szempontok és lustaság :) 

Life is really challenging. I don't always suceed: )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing to consider (at that specs it wouldn't matter much but i see those settings in-game): if u are going to do that u must not use texture correction, like msaa, because your cpu will have to handle even more pixels than the display ones. Also, u should buy a cpu corresponding to its gpu: it shouldn't be mucchhhh better but it shouldn't be worse because it will bottleneck.

Litteraly, if u buy a expensive gpu u must buy a expensive cpu, to get the most out of it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ryzen 5 3600X is better only for 1080p gaming.

For 1440p Ryzen 7 2700X is really better. And not only for 1440p gaming. And for workstation in which 3600X is very weak!

 

for budget and no bottleneck Ryzen 7 2700X

GPU sapphire nitro+ 5700 RX XT https://pc-builds.com/

ryzen 7 2700X
https://pc-builds.com/calculator/Ryzen_7_2700X/Radeon_RX_5700_XT/0Qe14j28/16/

ryzen 5 3600
https://pc-builds.com/calculator/Ryzen_5_3600/Radeon_RX_5700_XT/0U914j28/16/

ryzen 7 3700X
https://pc-builds.com/calculator/Ryzen_7_3700X/Radeon_RX_5700_XT/0Ud14j28/16/
 

Look yourself

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

  @zooper72

Thanks for the responses. I've only started this thread, to express my opinion: on higher res & more detailed graphics, the CPU is rarely the limiting factor for most. : )

Life is really challenging. I don't always suceed: )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×