4070 with i7 10700f

[KuroKami07]

I have i7 10700f with 1650 currently.

I want to upgrade my gpu and i thought of going with 4070 as it got 12gb VRAM but I'm worried about how big bottleneck will be. Idk much myself how i wanted to ask someone who might know.

My i7 is 2 years old. I have gigabyte h470m which have PCIe gen 3 16pin slot.

Also planning to get 750w PSU

Will this upgrade be worth it?

Or should i go with this new build with i7 13th 4060ti 8GB?

[MiszS]

there will be a slight bottleneck, but you will be able to play any game just fine, it's just a way better idea to get the 7800xt at this price point, especially if you care about vram. Also what PSU do you currently have? Without it idk if it will handle the gpu

[Gat Pelsinger]

@KuroKami07

 

Having a little bit of CPU bottleneck won't be much of a problem. Especially if you are planning to play really optimized titles which are more nicely GPU bound, it won't be a problem. High fps is high fps. Going lower tier would remove the bottleneck but you would also get almost equally less performance so there is no point.

 

Honestly, CPU bottleneck is only a problem when doing the pairing in extreme conditions like an i3 to a 4090, where even a 4070 would make little to no negative impact.

 

edit - Also the 10700f is not slow at all so there is no need to debate.

[porina]

I used a 4070 with a 7940X for a while, which is basically a slower 10700F in gaming (more cores, less clock). It's fine. 

[Gat Pelsinger]

1 minute ago, porina said:

I used a 4070 with a 7940X for a while, which is basically a slower 10700F in gaming (more cores, less clock). It's fine. 

I was like wait, AMD has a 7940X? Never heard of that. Now that AMD is catching up with the naming numbers, it is conflicting a lot with Intel's lol.

[Agall]

45 minutes ago, KuroKami07 said:

I have i7 10700f with 1650 currently.

I want to upgrade my gpu and i thought of going with 4070 as it got 12gb VRAM but I'm worried about how big bottleneck will be. Idk much myself how i wanted to ask someone who might know.

My i7 is 2 years old. I have gigabyte h470m which have PCIe gen 3 16pin slot.

Also planning to get 750w PSU

Will this upgrade be worth it?

Or should i go with this new build with i7 13th 4060ti 8GB?

Will a 10700f maximize the performance of an RTX 4070? -No.

Will it be more than capable for some time until you upgrade your platform? -Yes

 

I'd steer clear of the 4060ti, you'll get dramatically less performance especially at lower resolutions like 1080p with that card because of its PCIe 4.0 8x bus. RTX 4070 in comparison is a PCIe 4.0 16x card which'll downgrade far better to PCIe 3.0 comparably. Its also simply a better card, since 12GB of VRAM is really a minimum for modern games.

 

TLDR: Buy the RTX 4070 or 4070 Super, upgrade your CPU later. Look for at least an i5 or R5 newer generation CPU. Even the 12600kf at its $160 USD is a solid upgrade from a 10700f (about a 50% upgrade in single threaded performance and about the same in single threaded, kind of surprising). 

[KuroKami07]

10 hours ago, MiszS said:

there will be a slight bottleneck, but you will be able to play any game just fine, it's just a way better idea to get the 7800xt at this price point, especially if you care about vram. Also what PSU do you currently have? Without it idk if it will handle the gpu

I actually want good ray tracing performance so going with nvidia, with how bad nvidia is with 40s, i thought 4070 is a decent card with 12GB VRAM.

I currently have 450w and I'll upgrade it to msi or asus strix 750w if i buy 4070.

[KuroKami07]

46 minutes ago, Gat Pelsinger said:

@KuroKami07

 

Having a little bit of CPU bottleneck won't be much of a problem. Especially if you are planning to play really optimized titles which are more nicely GPU bound, it won't be a problem. High fps is high fps. Going lower tier would remove the bottleneck but you would also get almost equally less performance so there is no point.

 

Honestly, CPU bottleneck is only a problem when doing the pairing in extreme conditions like an i3 to a 4090, where even a 4070 would make little to no negative impact.

 

edit - Also the 10700f is not slow at all so there is no need to debate.

Oh, i see. 

Yes, i do plan to play well optimized game. 

 

I see, so this will be a little bottleneck which won't impact that much.

Thank you for the information.

I'll try to get 1440p monitor too, so gpu will be used more than CPU.

[KuroKami07]

25 minutes ago, Agall said:

Will a 10700f maximize the performance of an RTX 4070? -No.

Will it be more than capable for some time until you upgrade your platform? -Yes

 

I'd steer clear of the 4060ti, you'll get dramatically less performance especially at lower resolutions like 1080p with that card because of its PCIe 4.0 8x bus. RTX 4070 in comparison is a PCIe 4.0 16x card which'll downgrade far better to PCIe 3.0 comparably. Its also simply a better card, since 12GB of VRAM is really a minimum for modern games.

 

TLDR: Buy the RTX 4070 or 4070 Super, upgrade your CPU later. Look for at least an i5 or R5 newer generation CPU. Even the 12600kf at its $160 USD is a solid upgrade from a 10700f (about a 50% upgrade in single threaded performance and about the same in single threaded, kind of surprising). 

I actually plan to use i7 10700f for 2-3 more years with 4070.

Or if i can save more money in 1-2 year I'll upgrade the CPU as well.

 

I was planning to buy 4070 super but it's way too expensive than 4070 in my country. So i might settle down with 4070.

 

Thank you for your answer.

Also i plan to do 2k gaming, so ig should use more GPU? That should be better right?

[cmndr]

Rule of thumb, don't worry about bottlenecking unless you're comparing a VERY SLOW CPU to a very fast GPU or vice versa. 
Your CPU is fine. 

If anything the 4070 will be the slow part in most scenarios. 

[Agall]

56 minutes ago, KuroKami07 said:

I actually plan to use i7 10700f for 2-3 more years with 4070.

Or if i can save more money in 1-2 year I'll upgrade the CPU as well.

 

I was planning to buy 4070 super but it's way too expensive than 4070 in my country. So i might settle down with 4070.

 

Thank you for your answer.

Also i plan to do 2k gaming, so ig should use more GPU? That should be better right?

CPU limitations are quite complicated. Even a 7800x3D or 14900k can limit an RTX 4070 in the right scenario, even at 1080p. In the case of the 10700f, its on the border of good enough for now depending on the title. If you mostly play AAA games that are DX12 multicore optimized at 1440p on med-high settings, then you likely won't see a substantial limitation on the 10700f compared to a 13700k (as an example).

 

Either way your experience will be markedly better than the GTX 1650. Older CPUs aren't terrible with newer cards, hell I've even thrown my RTX 4090 overclocked into my old i7 4790k build and it was acceptable in Warframe.

[cmndr]

18 hours ago, Agall said:

CPU limitations are quite complicated. Even a 7800x3D or 14900k can limit an RTX 4070 in the right scenario, even at 1080p. In the case of the 10700f, its on the border of good enough for now depending on the title. If you mostly play AAA games that are DX12 multicore optimized at 1440p on med-high settings, then you likely won't see a substantial limitation on the 10700f compared to a 13700k (as an example).

 

Either way your experience will be markedly better than the GTX 1650. Older CPUs aren't terrible with newer cards, hell I've even thrown my RTX 4090 overclocked into my old i7 4790k build and it was acceptable in Warframe.

Using 4090 at 4K as a proxy for 4070 at 1440p... you're generally getting about 80% of the performance potential of the fastest CPUs on the market. 
This is fine.  Also the 1% lows are still around 100FPS... unless OP is being paid money to play games... 1% lows of around 100FPS is "just fine"

 

 

 

[Agall]

36 minutes ago, cmndr said:

Using 4090 at 4K as a proxy for 4070 at 1440p... you're generally getting about 80% of the performance potential of the fastest CPUs on the market. 
This is fine.  Also the 1% lows are still around 100FPS... unless OP is being paid money to play games... 1% lows of around 100FPS is "just fine"

Here's an amusing and very recent example of why CPU limitations are more complicated than that. I have fundamental disagreements with modern CPU benchmarking as well, since they're mostly academic. Not to say they're useless, but not all encompassing like most reviewers and readers make them out to be.

 

 

As I said before:

19 hours ago, Agall said:

depending on the title.

 

I've done this testing myself in a game I'm intimately familiar with the performance characteristics of with a whole variety of environments to test. 

 

TLDR: the performance difference is anywhere from 0% to 261%, depending on the specific scenarios, while using 4K ultra and a +3GHz/+1GHz VRAM overclocked RTX 4090.

 

As they mention in the HWUB video, its not just average framerate either, there's a substantial increase in frame consistency, especially with 3D v-cache (I test this myself between the CCDs of my 7950x3D) and newer Intel CPUs. 

 

Either way, its title dependent. Even in Warframe, the framerate stability of a rig playing 4K ultra with an RTX 4090 and i7 4790k was markedly better (not as good as the 7950x3D but surprisingly close) when running a Solo mission versus one with 3 other players connecting online. CPU draw call and server latency limitations are real with multiplayer games, which in my opinion, is most of the games people play.

 

Unless someone is exclusively a single player AAA gamer, the IPC/cache/frequency advantages of newer architecture are dramatically undersold, this new HWUB video at least shedding some needed light on the topic.