Is a 1080ti too much GPU for a 2700x or 3600x??

[Sin Stalker]

I am wondering if a GTX 1080ti or maybe even the newer RTX 2080ti, is bottlenecked by a Ryzen 2700x cpu? Is it bottlenecked by a 3600x? I currently have a 2700x. Thinking about upgrading to a 3600xt.

 

I know in the past a 1080ti paired with an i3 (the old two core four thread ones) was considered a mismatch. I guess I am wondering at what point is it no longer a mismatch? 

 

For instance, the new i3s are basically the old i7s (4 core, 8 thread). So are new 10th gen i3 processors no longer a mismatch for high end GPUs???

 

 

[ShadySocks]

https://pc-builds.com/calculator/Ryzen_7_2700/GeForce_GTX_1080_Ti/0Qg0XF8A/8/

[Sin Stalker]

1 minute ago, ShadySocks said:

https://pc-builds.com/calculator/Ryzen_7_2700/GeForce_GTX_1080_Ti/0Qg0XF8A/8/

How do you read this? What does 1.52% bottleneck mean?

[LIGISTX]

1 minute ago, Sin Stalker said:

I am wondering if a GTX 1080ti or maybe even the newer RTX 2080ti, is bottlenecked by a Ryzen 2700x cpu? Is it bottlenecked by a 3600x? I currently have a 2700x. Thinking about upgrading to a 3600xt.

 

I know in the past a 1080ti paired with an i3 (the old two core four thread ones) was considered a mismatch. I guess I am wondering at what point is it no longer a mismatch? 

 

For instance, the new i3s are basically the old i7s (4 core, 8 thread). So are new 10th gen i3 processors no longer a mismatch for high end GPUs???

 

 

I am not really sure why you are worried about i3 performance seeing as you have a 2700x.... Todays i3's are a lot better than they used to be, and if the game is not very multi threaded it would actually be a solid CPU for gaming, really good actually. But most games are now multi threaded an only a 6 core with HT should even be considered at this point.... A quad with HT would be "fine".

 

TLDR; your 2700x techically would bottleneck a little bit, but every CPU bottlenecks to some extent... Nothing will get the FPS of an all core OC 5.2 GHz Intel 8 core or higher. A 1080ti with your CPU wouldn't be a bad option, although a standard 1080 may make a little more sense.

[ShadySocks]

2 minutes ago, Sin Stalker said:

How do you read this? What does 1.52% bottleneck mean?

100% means lots of bottleneck

0% means no bottleneck

[LIGISTX]

Just now, Sin Stalker said:

How do you read this? What does 1.52% bottleneck mean?

Don't worry about "bottleneck percentages" and stuff. The term bottleneck is being thrown around in ways that are adding to confusion instead of explaining what is happening. Literally every CPU "bottlenecks" your GPU, it really just matters how unbalanced it is, and what your acceptance of that is. You can get a 1070, and a 1080 may only perform "75% better than a 1080 should" if that makes sense. It will still perform better, you just won't be getting everything out of it. 

[Sin Stalker]

7 minutes ago, LIGISTX said:

Don't worry about "bottleneck percentages" and stuff. The term bottleneck is being thrown around in ways that are adding to confusion instead of explaining what is happening. Literally every CPU "bottlenecks" your GPU, it really just matters how unbalanced it is, and what your acceptance of that is. You can get a 1070, and a 1080 may only perform "75% better than a 1080 should" if that makes sense. It will still perform better, you just won't be getting everything out of it. 

I tried to use that calculator to pair the 1080ti with a 3600x and it claims a 12% bottneck. Says the cpu is too powerful for that gpu?? Claims the 1080ti is a great match for the 2700x.

[Eigenvektor]

20 minutes ago, Sin Stalker said:

I tried to use that calculator to pair the 1080ti with a 3600x and it claims a 12% bottneck. Says the cpu is too powerful for that gpu?? Claims the 1080ti is a great match for the 2700x.

Forget about bottleneck calculators. Whether there is a bottleneck depends on the software you're using and how GPU and/or CPU intensive it is. Condensing that into a single number is pretty much pointless.

 

Find some benchmarks for the games you want to play with the hardware you want to buy and see whether the performance is acceptable to you.

[OfficialTechSpace]

I run a 1080 Ti with a Ryzen 5 3600, it works fine. A 1080 Ti isn't too much for any modern CPU, a 1080 Ti is a mid-range performing card nowadays (about an RTX 2070 Super equivalent).

[OfficialTechSpace]

47 minutes ago, ShadySocks said:

https://pc-builds.com/calculator/Ryzen_7_2700/GeForce_GTX_1080_Ti/0Qg0XF8A/8/

Bottleneck calculators don't work and all results are both hypothetical and theoretical, none of which are realistic.

[LIGISTX]

16 minutes ago, OfficialTechSpace said:

Bottleneck calculators don't work and all results are both hypothetical and theoretical, none of which are realistic.

This...

 

OP, technically, and AMY CPU is a bottle neck for every GPU that exists. The most FPS possible is a high clocked intel chip, plain and simple. A 10900k at 5.2 GHz will pump out more FPS on a gtx 670 (really old by todays standards) than any ryzen chip, simply because its a faster clock for clock CPU. Does that mean the Ryzen chip is bad? No. Does it mean its technically a bottleneck, yes.... Does the Ryzen perform better at other things, yes it does. Its all relative.

[Nena Trinity]

8-cores is what I would recommend for a super high end GPU.

[Sin Stalker]

2 hours ago, LIGISTX said:

 

 

OP, technically, and AMY CPU is a bottle neck for every GPU that exists. The most FPS possible is a high clocked intel chip, plain and simple. A 10900k at 5.2 GHz will pump out more FPS on a gtx 670 (really old by todays standards) than any ryzen chip, simply because its a faster clock for clock CPU. Does that mean the Ryzen chip is bad? No. Does it mean its technically a bottleneck, yes.... Does the Ryzen perform better at other things, yes it does. Its all relative.

That kind of sounds like Intel fan boy propaganda.

 

2 hours ago, Nena360 said:

8-cores is what I would recommend for a super high end GPU.

 

So you would say the 2700x is better than the 3600x (or xt when it comes out)??

[Nena Trinity]

12 minutes ago, Sin Stalker said:

That kind of sounds like Intel fan boy propaganda.

 

 

So you would say the 2700x is better than the 3600x (or xt when it comes out)??

In terms of per cores the 3600 is better but the issue is total multi-core its only on par more or less if I recall correctlymight be better to jump to a 3700x unless you do not have custom CPU cooler then 3800x... :I

[Curious Pineapple]

25 minutes ago, Sin Stalker said:

That kind of sounds like Intel fan boy propaganda.

It really does, there's only so much work a GPU can do and if the CPU can throw more frames to render than the GPU has time for, no additional CPU power is going to change that.

[Eigenvektor]

1 hour ago, Sin Stalker said:

So you would say the 2700x is better than the 3600x (or xt when it comes out)??

The 3600x has better performance per core, the 2700x has more cores. Which of these is more important depends on the game(s) you play and whether you're doing other stuff in the background (like streaming). Outside of gaming, productivity like video encoding usually benefits from more cores.

 

As a rule of thumb, most games still benefit more from higher per-core performance, which is also why Intel tends to have an edge despite having fewer cores. Their higher clock speed is an advantage in this case. This is slowly changing as more and more game engines start to be better at multi-threading.

 

Of course the clock speed advantage is relative. In some cases you're only talking about a few percent higher minimum frame rate in specific games at specific resolutions. Whether that is worth a premium is up to you. Personally I'd rather get a CPU that is a good compromise between clock speed and core count, since I do both gaming and productivity.

[HumdrumPenguin]

8 hours ago, Sin Stalker said:

I am wondering if a GTX 1080ti or maybe even the newer RTX 2080ti, is bottlenecked by a Ryzen 2700x cpu? Is it bottlenecked by a 3600x? I currently have a 2700x. Thinking about upgrading to a 3600xt.

 

I know in the past a 1080ti paired with an i3 (the old two core four thread ones) was considered a mismatch. I guess I am wondering at what point is it no longer a mismatch? 

 

For instance, the new i3s are basically the old i7s (4 core, 8 thread). So are new 10th gen i3 processors no longer a mismatch for high end GPUs???

 

 

You can pair anything with the 3600x.

[LIGISTX]

10 hours ago, Sin Stalker said:

That kind of sounds like Intel fan boy propaganda.

 

 

So you would say the 2700x is better than the 3600x (or xt when it comes out)??

Its certainly not intel fanboy propaganda, its just how the cookie crumbles. For most people, spending a few hundred extra dollars on the highest end intel chip for a few % higher FPS doesn't make any sense... spend the money on a better GPU since that will make a bigger difference in FPS by far. BUT, if you already have the best GPU, then get the highest end intel chip as it will net you the best performance in games.

 

Everything is a cost benefit analysis. If someone has a 1660 GPU, they WILL without a doubt see FPS gains with a 10900k vs a Ryzen 3600. Does it make any sense to do that though? No, because the couple hundred bucks extra for that "better gaming" CPU will only get you maybe 3-5% more FPS tops, heavily dependent on resolution. But if you took that few hundred bucks and moved up to a RTX 2070, now your talking serious FPS gains... Would that RTX 2070 get more FPS on a 10900k than the 3600, yes it would. But that doesn't make the 10900k "the right CPU to buy for that person". It just depends on their use case, and what makes sense to their wallet.

 

That said, no, a 3600x will do better. Zen 2 is a solid notch better than Zen 1/1.5 which is what the 2700x is. Is it worth upgrading too, I would say no. I would wait to see how the xt does when it comes out, or wait until the end of the year (or whenever it ends up being) for the next round of CPUs from AMD. The 2700x is still a capable chip, and going from that to a 3600x doesn't make much sense, its just not worth it. I would get a 1080ti if you can afford it now, enjoy that combo through the rest of the year or even into the next year a bit, then possibly look at a 4600x when that comes out. Its all cost benefit analysis..... 2700x to 3600x on a 1080ti, at 1080p resolution I bet you would see up to a 10% performance bump, at a higher resolution like 3440x1440 for example, I bet that margin drops to 5-6%. Hopefully a 4600x would be faster enough to make that maybe a 15% bump, which is now at the point where spending the money on that CPU makes some sense.

 

For more detail on how CPU's do make a difference, here is a good resource. A good example on that chart is the Devision 2 at 1440p. That is running into a GPU bottleneck, but you can see how Ryzen just can't keep up with Intel, and it is much more apparent in CPU bound games like F1, especially at 1080p where its extremely CPU bound. https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3587-intel-core-i9-10900k-cpu-review-benchmarks

[Sin Stalker]

On 6/7/2020 at 10:32 AM, LIGISTX said:

 

That said, no, a 3600x will do better. Zen 2 is a solid notch better than Zen 1/1.5 which is what the 2700x is. Is it worth upgrading too, I would say no. I would wait to see how the xt does when it comes out, or wait until the end of the year (or whenever it ends up being) for the next round of CPUs from AMD. The 2700x is still a capable chip, and going from that to a 3600x doesn't make much sense, its just not worth it. I would get a 1080ti if you can afford it now, enjoy that combo through the rest of the year or even into the next year a bit, then possibly look at a 4600x when that comes out. Its all cost benefit analysis..... 2700x to 3600x on a 1080ti, at 1080p resolution I bet you would see up to a 10% performance bump, at a higher resolution like 3440x1440 for example, I bet that margin drops to 5-6%. Hopefully a 4600x would be faster enough to make that maybe a 15% bump, which is now at the point where spending the money on that CPU makes some sense.

 

I hear you, but given compatibility, if I went 4000 series, I'd have to upgrade my mobo at the same time. I currently have a high end x370. So my upgrade path is limited. I can replace one component at the time. Then sell the old component and use those funds to get the next. Given this limitations I'd have to get a 3000 series chip, then upgrade to b550, then get the next gen chips when they come out. 

Or I could upgrade to a b450, but that would require another mobo upgrade after another year.

[LIGISTX]

4 hours ago, Sin Stalker said:

 

I hear you, but given compatibility, if I went 4000 series, I'd have to upgrade my mobo at the same time. I currently have a high end x370. So my upgrade path is limited. I can replace one component at the time. Then sell the old component and use those funds to get the next. Given this limitations I'd have to get a 3000 series chip, then upgrade to b550, then get the next gen chips when they come out. 

Or I could upgrade to a b450, but that would require another mobo upgrade after another year.

Thats true, I just don't think your money would be well spent on that upgrade. IMO, I would wait until 4000 series, sell your mobo and CPU, then upgrade at that point. Sit on the money your willing to spend right now for another ~6 months, save up a bit more, sell your old stuff, then make an upgrade that make more sense.