3700x with 3080 ti - will it bottleneck it ?

[keavlar]

Hey. 

I got to the point where people telling me to keep the 3700x for another year or 2 with 3080 ti. 

And then upgrade. 

Should I do it? will it bottleneck gpu badly? 

Or just buy 5800x and sell the 3700 x

 

mainly this juice i need for gaming,. 

[porina]

It really doesn't matter unless you're going for competitive benchmarking. That combo will play anything you can throw at it at a high level for a while yet. Possibly getting a few more fps with a newer CPU doesn't change the gaming experience.

[keavlar]

13 minutes ago, porina said:

It really doesn't matter unless you're going for competitive benchmarking. That combo will play anything you can throw at it at a high level for a while yet. Possibly getting a few more fps with a newer CPU doesn't change the gaming experience.

I am asking cause of this

https://www.cpuagent.com/cpu/amd-ryzen-7-3700x/bottleneck/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-ti?res=2&quality=ultra 

[porina]

2 minutes ago, keavlar said:

I am asking cause of this

That's on their test system at their settings. The potential difference will be different depending on your hardware and settings choice.

 

With the above in mind, if we take their numbers, are those fps difference going to affect your gaming experience? The lowest fps game they listed, goes from 131 to 148 fps. Is 131 fps unplayable to you that 148 fps will fix that? That's why I say it doesn't matter. The fps the system can throw out will cope with any game at sensible high end settings.

 

Out of interest, what is your display? 3080 Ti will really shine at 4k. It's a bit overkill for 1440p, but I wouldn't say no to one anyway  

[DarkSmith2]

Quote

3700x with 3080 ti - will it bottleneck it ?

yes

8 minutes ago, porina said:

Out of interest, what is your display? 3080 Ti will really shine at 4k. It's a bit overkill for 1440p, but I wouldn't say no to one anyway  

overkill doesnt excist. playing in gpu bottleneck, is playing in the world of LAG. Better do console then, much cheaper than PC.

[porina]

8 minutes ago, DarkSmith2 said:

overkill doesnt excist. playing in gpu bottleneck, is playing in the world of LAG. Better do console then, much cheaper than PC.

What lag? At least for my gaming, since going G-sync, render lag has not been a problem. I can't speak for those who play games at like 400fps low settings/resolution. Consoles don't have the games I care about.

[DarkSmith2]

2 minutes ago, porina said:

What lag? At least for my gaming, since going G-sync, render lag has not been a problem. I can't speak for those who play games at like 400fps low settings/resolution. Consoles don't have the games I care about.

i want 4k 240 with 40series. :]

[Chris Pratt]

32 minutes ago, keavlar said:

I am asking cause of this

https://www.cpuagent.com/cpu/amd-ryzen-7-3700x/bottleneck/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-ti?res=2&quality=ultra 

Every system has a bottleneck. What matters is the needs of the particular applications or workflows you're doing. For gaming, it's hard to bottleneck a CPU at 1440p or above. At 1080p, you might create a bottleneck at the CPU, depending on the game. However, that's not necessarily a problem. So you only get 400 FPS in CS:GO instead of 425, for example. It doesn't matter.

[DarkSmith2]

 

1 hour ago, Chris Pratt said:

Every system has a bottleneck. What matters is the needs of the particular applications or workflows you're doing. For gaming, it's hard to bottleneck a CPU at 1440p or above. At 1080p, you might create a bottleneck at the CPU, depending on the game. However, that's not necessarily a problem. So you only get 400 FPS in CS:GO instead of 425, for example. It doesn't matter.

or he could just have 120-150fps in apex legends instead of 300fps, cause he is using a god damn slow 3700x

[Chris Pratt]

Just now, DarkSmith2 said:

 

or he could just have 120-150fps in apex legends instead of 300fps, cause he is using a god damn slow 3700x

What in the world makes you think a 3700X would be remotely "slow"? You'd need a 11th gen+ or Zen 3 to beat it, so it's not exactly a slouch, even if it's a little old at this point. Plenty of people gaming just fine on much older, less capable hardware.

[DarkSmith2]

Just now, Chris Pratt said:

What in the world makes you think a 3700X would be remotely "slow"? You'd need a 11th gen+ or Zen 3 to beat it, so it's not exactly a slouch, even if it's a little old at this point. Plenty of people gaming just fine on much older, less capable hardware.

in gaming? 20% slower then intel 8th gen.
Slower than my 8700k.

[Chris Pratt]

Just now, DarkSmith2 said:

in gaming? 20% slower then intel 8th gen.
Slower than my 8700k.

You're cracked.

[DarkSmith2]

27 minutes ago, Chris Pratt said:

You're cracked.

 

just compare to 11600k at 4.6GHz. while 10600k and 8700k are essentially all the same while rocketlake is even weaker than both in some games.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

So when using something like a 3080ti at 1080p difference will atleast be about 20% to my 5GHz, 4000CL17 overclocked 8700k.

Not that i needed the gamestar chart, https://www.gamestar.de/artikel/amd-ryzen-7-3700x-test-2021,3372889.html#ryzen-7-3700x-im-spiele-test-720p-aufloesung

Already knew where the performance of this CPUs where at for gaming.....

 

Ryzen 3000 was still well behind intel, a waste of silicon in terms of gaming performance. Good for productivity tho.

[YoungBlade]

14 minutes ago, DarkSmith2 said:

 

just compare to 11600k at 4.6GHz. while 10600k and 8700k are essentially all the same while rocketlake is even weaker than both in some games.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

So when using something like a 3080ti at 1080p difference will be atleast about 20% to my 5GHz, 4000CL17 overclocked 8700k.

Not that i needed the gamestar chart, https://www.gamestar.de/artikel/amd-ryzen-7-3700x-test-2021,3372889.html#ryzen-7-3700x-im-spiele-test-720p-aufloesung

Already knew where the performance of this CPUs where at for gaming.....

But plenty of gamers don't play at 1080p competitive settings. I'm a 1440p High-Ultra single-player gamer, so anything from a 3600 or a 8700K to a 5950X or a 12900K will be equivalent. A 2600 or 7700K might be a bit slower depending on the game, but even those are probably fine.

 

Yesterday I was playing Quantum Break at 1440p max settings on my 2060 Super and I was getting around 90-115fps with 20-30% utilization for my 5900X. None of the cores were maxed out. To lower the FPS in that game with a CPU bottleneck at those settings would require something much slower.

 

Sure, the 2060 Super is itself much slower than a 3080 Ti, but I'd probably run into the 170Hz refresh rate on my monitor before a 3700X would be the limitation in that situation. In those kinds of games, you don't really benefit from going over the refresh rate of the monitor, so for me, any CPU capable of pushing 170fps in a game is equivalent to any other CPU.

[DarkSmith2]

4 minutes ago, YoungBlade said:

But plenty of gamers don't play at 1080p competitive settings. I'm a 1440p High-Ultra single-player gamer, so anything from a 3600 or a 8700K to a 5950X or a 12900K will be equivalent. A 2600 or 7700K might be a bit slower depending on the game, but even those are probably fine.

 

Yesterday I was playing Quantum Break at 1440p max settings on my 2060 Super and I was getting around 90-115fps with 20-30% utilization for my 5900X. None of the cores were maxed out. To lower the FPS in that game with a CPU bottleneck at those settings would require something much slower.

 

Sure, the 2060 Super is itself much slower than a 3080 Ti, but I'd probably run into the 170Hz refresh rate on my monitor before a 3700X would be the limitation in that situation. In those kinds of games, you don't really benefit from going over the refresh rate of the monitor, so for me, any CPU capable of pushing 170fps in a game is equivalent to any other CPU.

I dont care about FPS in single player games all that much, im happy to get 100fps in cool single player games. With gsync doesnt even have to be at that.

I also wouldnt worry about potential bottlenecks at high graphic settings or very high resolutions. Its not essential for me to get low latency gameplay in such games.

 

But when i get asked about if there would be a Bottleneck issue, i kinda have to assume that FPS are relevant.

[Bobbysixjp]

If the OP can afford a 3080 Ti he can probably afford a CPU upgrade. The 3700x will definitely hold back a 3080 Ti depending on the resolution and desired FPS.

 

[DarkSmith2]

23 minutes ago, Bobbysixjp said:

If the OP can afford a 3080 Ti he can probably afford a CPU upgrade. The 3700x will definitely hold back a 3080 Ti depending on the resolution and desired FPS.

 

yea or he probably need all the money to afford the 3080ti.

[YoungBlade]

1 hour ago, Bobbysixjp said:

If the OP can afford a 3080 Ti he can probably afford a CPU upgrade. The 3700x will definitely hold back a 3080 Ti depending on the resolution and desired FPS.

Being able to afford an upgrade is necessary but not sufficient to justify one.

 

I'm using RAM running at DDR4-3200 CL16 for my 5900X. Considering that I over $550 on my CPU, I could certainly afford to buy a nicer RAM kit for $250.

 

But why would I do that unless it's going to give me a meaningful upgrade? For what I do with my computer, I wouldn't really benefit much from higher speed, lower latency memory. In the same way, if the OP isn't playing games that benefit from super high FPS, then even if affordable, the upgrade is kinda pointless.

[Mister Woof]

14 hours ago, Chris Pratt said:

You're cracked.

Outside of a few titles, Skylake+++++++ with enough core count, cache, and frequency (overclocked 8700k, 9900k, 10900k, etc) generally do significantly outperform Zen 2 at gaming with a sufficiently strong GPU and the right settings; it's been a thing that's been explored ad nauseam on Gamers Nexus and several other outlets for the past several years.

 

Here's an example of a pretty CPU heavy game with only a 2080ti

 

 

As you can see, even a stock 8700k is ahead of all Zen2 here...it pulls ahead even harder with an OC. It will be close to the 5.1ghz 10600k result in this chart.

 

Here's another example of RTX 3080 CPU scaling...at 1080p/medium the gap between Zen2 and Skylake++++ is quite large.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.tomshardware.com/amp/features/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-ampere-cpu-scaling-benchmarks

 

A 3080ti will be worse.

 

So @DarkSmith2 is right in that respect. But otherwise, I tend to mostly agree with @porinaon this- that while it is faster at gaming, it's mostly academic in the here and now, because those settings are not realistic.

 

Lets take the best Zen2 result here against the best Skylake+++++ result....that's Zen2's 149 fps vs Intel's 178. That's more than 16% better with and old GPU, and the gap widens with better GPUs...is the Intel better? Yes. Does it matter? Not really, because who gets a 2080ti or better to play 1080p medium?

 

It's a decent way to predict on future gpu performance, so I do suspect that a Zen2 will perform even worse than Skylake++++ in this example with the 4xxxx/7xxxx cards...but who cares? 

 

People who will be able to afford 4xxxx and 7xxx cards are not typically the ones who are gonna hang onto old cpu technology anyway. They won't be using 3700x's or 8700k's anyway.

 

[Bobbysixjp]

18 hours ago, keavlar said:

Hey. 

I got to the point where people telling me to keep the 3700x for another year or 2 with 3080 ti. 

And then upgrade. 

Should I do it? will it bottleneck gpu badly? 

Or just buy 5800x and sell the 3700 x

 

mainly this juice i need for gaming,. 

Buy a 5800x especially as you don’t need a  motherboard upgrade. You’ll more than likely see a difference in performance even if it is a small one. 

[HorseBattery]

The V Cache Ryzen CPUs are just around the corner and will probably only need a BIOS update. It will be a more noticeable performance upgrade. They should be the last CPUs on AM4 as well. Wait for that instead.

[DarkSmith2]

8 hours ago, Mister Woof said:

So @DarkSmith2 is right in that respect. But otherwise, I tend to mostly agree with @porinaon this- that while it is faster at gaming, it's mostly academic in the here and now, because those settings are not realistic.

well for most people not realistic, but there is a whole competitive gamer scene that cant get enough of sh1t like this
And also, most of them would also say ddr4 3200cl14 is bottlenecking hard in that GN benchmark on top of it.

 

 

8 hours ago, Mister Woof said:

Lets take the best Zen2 result here against the best Skylake+++++ result....that's Zen2's 149 fps vs Intel's 178. That's more than 16% better with and old GPU, and the gap widens with better GPUs...is the Intel better? Yes. Does it matter? Not really, because who gets a 2080ti or better to play 1080p medium?

178/149=1.20, so its 20%. And yea i agree Medium settings is kinda weird. Low settings would make more sense. Still in GPU bottleneck with that one, guess the 2080ti isnt even overclocked either. KEK

[Jarett066]

I have a ryzen 7 3700x paired with a rtx3080ti playing at 1440p with a 165hz refresh and it plays every game I throw at it with no lag or any problems at all! Also I get very high fps in every game I play if unlocked! I’m sure a better cpu would give me better fps and performance but if your just gaming I think your fine bro!! Personally I have had no issues  at alll and I get high frame rates in all games and mainly a smooth gaming experience with awesome visuals if wanted!

[Queen Chrysalis]

On 12/2/2021 at 4:55 AM, keavlar said:

I am asking cause of this

https://www.cpuagent.com/cpu/amd-ryzen-7-3700x/bottleneck/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-ti?res=2&quality=ultra 

This is a guess based on an overgeneralized ‘speed’ rating. The people who make these applets are always morons.  The easy way to know is to get recorded footage of a game being played on your desired setting and resolution uncapped, and see if the gpu or cpu core 0 is pinned to 99%, and/or if the fps is exceeding your monitor’s refresh rate.  
 

short answer is no you’re fine.  3700x is plenty fast.

[Queen Chrysalis]

On 12/2/2021 at 9:18 PM, Mister Woof said: