Can my rig handle 240hz?

[c0un1]

Okay so my rig is i7 6700 and im going to buy a gtx 1660 super.... but my answer is if it Can run a 240hz moniter? 
 

Btw i only use it for csgo and i use 4:3 1024x768 and low settings:)

 

[Entropy.]

1 minute ago, c0un1 said:

Okay so my rig is i7 6700 and im going to buy a gtx 1660 super.... but my answer is if it Can run a 240hz moniter? 
 

Btw i only use it for csgo and i use 4:3 1024x768 and low settings:)

 

Even at 1080p a 1660s would be far more than enough. Go for it!

[tishous]

It'll probably be close, but I would say no. You'd probably get around or a bit higher than 200fps on average though. 

[Entropy.]

6 minutes ago, tishous said:

It'll probably be close, but I would say no. You'd probably get around or a bit higher than 200fps on average though. 

From LTT, but still. Not even close man, even with a 1060. Lowest 1% on GTX 1060 on high is still nearly 200. C'mon. 

[tishous]

1 minute ago, Brok3n But who cares? said:

I'm still mad… but buy it anyway - RTX 3060 Review - YouTube
From LTT, but still. Not even close man, even with a 1060. Skip to 5:20. 

That's with a 5950x. The i7 6700 isn't even close to the performance of that CPU. CS:GO is a mainly CPU dependent game. 

 

Check this vid: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9ykNdnQtuA&ab_channel=BGLita

 

[Quackers101]

you wouldn't need an 240hz screen, 144 should do good. but even so that card on that game should do fine.

you should be playing on higher settings since its csgo. when fps is too low on high hz screens, it can be often horrible (overdrive setting on the monitor).

anything more demanding might not do so well, but should be able to play overwatch too at decent settings and fps.

[Entropy.]

1 minute ago, tishous said:

That's with a 5950x. The i7 6700 isn't even close to the performance of that CPU. CS:GO is a mainly CPU dependent game. 

 

Check this vid: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9ykNdnQtuA&ab_channel=BGLita

 

CS:GO : Ryzen 5 3600 + GTX 1660 Super | 1080P & 1440P | Low & High Settings - YouTube

 

Sketchy yt channels with barely any transparency. Let's do this. 

[tishous]

Just now, Brok3n But who cares? said:

CS:GO : Ryzen 5 3600 + GTX 1660 Super | 1080P & 1440P | Low & High Settings - YouTube

 

Sketchy yt channels with barely any transparency. Let's do this. 

Again, the Ryzen 5 3600 is a much faster CPU in gaming than the i7-6700.

[Entropy.]

4 minutes ago, tishous said:

Again, the Ryzen 5 3600 is a much faster CPU in gaming than the i7-6700.

Still wouldn't make nearly as much of a difference as you claim. CSGO system Requirements and FPS Benchmarks
 

[tishous]

1 minute ago, Brok3n But who cares? said:

Still wouldn't make nearly as much of a difference as you claim. CSGO system Requirements and FPS Benchmarks

It absolutely would. He's planning on gaming at 1024x768 which is a heavily CPU bound resolution. The 1660 Super can definitely do above 240fps, just not with this CPU. 

Say the i7-6700 performs as good as the i5-8400 (which it definitely doesn't), with the 1660 Super on the website YOU sited, it's not even at 240fps.

[Entropy.]

8 minutes ago, tishous said:

Again, the Ryzen 5 3600 is a much faster CPU in gaming than the i7-6700.

Game Test GTX 1660 6GB i7 6700 - YouTube another sketchy channel, at ultra on a 6700 and 1660S they're pushing 200 frames at what's likely 1080p, without even the S variant. 

[Entropy.]

2 minutes ago, tishous said:

It absolutely would. He's planning on gaming at 1024x768 which is a heavily CPU bound resolution. The 1660 Super can definitely do above 240fps, just not with this CPU. 

Say the i7-6700 performs as good as the i5-8400 (which it definitely doesn't), with the 1660 Super on the website YOU sited, it's not even at 240fps.

Lol maybe because it's on ultra? 

[tishous]

Just now, Brok3n But who cares? said:

Game Test GTX 1660 6GB i7 6700 - YouTube another sketchy channel, at ultra on a 6700 and 1660S they're pushing 200 frames. 

They're not consistently above 240fps, or even that close in that video while the GPU utilization is ~80% at most. Lower resolution/settings and it would be at like 40%. That is the max amount of frames that CPU can do.

 

Just now, Brok3n But who cares? said:

Lol maybe because it's on ultra? 

Doesn't matter at 1024x768, or even at 1080p. The GPU utilization isn't at 100% which means the CPU is bottlenecking it. 

[Entropy.]

6 minutes ago, tishous said:

It absolutely would. He's planning on gaming at 1024x768 which is a heavily CPU bound resolution. The 1660 Super can definitely do above 240fps, just not with this CPU. 

Say the i7-6700 performs as good as the i5-8400 (which it definitely doesn't), with the 1660 Super on the website YOU sited, it's not even at 240fps.

 

even on medium.... I'd expect a 7500 to perform somewhat similarly to a 6700

[Entropy.]

5 minutes ago, tishous said:

They're not consistently above 240fps, or even that close in that video while the GPU utilization is ~80% at most. Lower resolution/settings and it would be at like 40%. That is the max amount of frames that CPU can do.

 

Doesn't matter at 1024x768, or even at 1080p. The GPU utilization isn't at 100% which means the CPU is bottlenecking it. 

Your point is null, Didn't hear that people make 1204x768p 240hz monitors. If you're so concerned about the usage just tell OP to run it at 1080p, which would probably be the native resolution of a 240hz monitor. Not consistently above 240fps? Maybe it's because they're running on very high with a 1660 non-S

[tishous]

29 minutes ago, c0un1 said:

Btw i only use it for csgo and i use 4:3 1024x768 and low settings:)

You don't need a 1024x768 monitor to run games at that resolution. I don't really care about the usage, I'm just making the point that the CPU is bottlenecking the GPU even at 1080p ultra, let alone 1024x768 low settings, and it's not able to reach 240fps consistently.

 

OP can go for it if he wants, I just think his system couldn't run it at 240hz.

[Entropy.]

4 minutes ago, tishous said:

You don't need a 1024x768 monitor to run games at that resolution. I don't really care about the usage, I'm just making the point that the CPU is bottlenecking the GPU even at 1080p ultra, let alone 1024x768 low settings, and it's not able to reach 240fps consistently.

 

OP can go for it if he wants, I just think his system couldn't run it at 240hz.

Depends how you use the term "bottleneck." Does that mean a 5900x is bottlenecking a 3090 in certain applications when it can run better with with a 5950x and 3090? Yes, that is an extreme situation, it's just there to make you think. Our benchmarks have conflicting results but I'm quite confident that his system would be able to run CS:GO on low at 240hz fine. We'll see though. 

[tishous]

6 minutes ago, Brok3n But who cares? said:

Depends how you use the term "bottleneck." Does that mean a 5900x is bottlenecking a 3090 in certain applications when it can run better with with a 5950x and 3090? Yes, that is an extreme situation, it's just there to make you think. Our benchmarks have conflicting results but I'm quite confident that his system would be able to run it fine. We'll see though. 

I would define bottleneck in this context as: when a component doesn't allow another to reach its full performance in a game.

 

With that in mind, yes a 5900x will more than likely bottleneck a 3090 at 1080p, or in this case 1024x768 because the CPU can't keep up with the amount of frames the 3090 is able to push.

 

My point about the settings/resolution is since the GPU can't push as many frames at high settings and a higher resolution, the CPU is able to keep up more. In the video you sent, even at 1080p high settings, the 1660 Super wasn't able to reach 100% utilization therefore wasn't able to consistently reach 240fps due to the i7 6700.

 

Either way, a 240hz monitor would still be smoother than 144hz even if it can't reach 240fps.

[MadAnt250]

As long as everything runs smooth, who cares about some minor bottlenecking in this case, not every game is optimized the same. Just get a good monitor with G-sync and you can always upgrade other stuff in the future.

 

I would recommend spending more money on quality rather than higher refresh rate or maybe something in the middle, I am not competitive in FPS games, so really it is up to you.