GPU's, CPU's, and Resolution.

[FruitBasketSilex]

Why do I keep hearing about how CPU's will bottleneck GPU's less and less the higher your resolution?

 

It doesn't make sense to me.

 

If a 6300 has to feed a certain amount of information to, say, a TitanX at 1080P, and it can't keep up with that, then why does it suddenly have less trouble at 4k, feeding, logically, more information to it?

 

Why does an FX4 bottleneck a 290x at 1080P but less-so at 4K?

 

AM I THE ONLY ONE NOT SEEING THE LOGIC????

 

The higher the resolution, the more the GPU needs to do.

The more the GPU needs to do, the more the CPU has to feed it.

 

Why is it okay to have an FX and TWO 980s (it bottlenecks one, ffs.) at 4K. (True story, saw a guy on here with that setup, Seems extraordinarily stupid unless he is in love with BF4)

 

Why does this completely illogical thing exist?

 

Someone please explain it to me.

[zlolslavez]

At higher resolutions, the computer will resort to using more gpu power than cpu, but it doesn't mean that you should be using a Intel Core Duo with 4 titan x's. (not like you can anyway)

[Chiobe]

Because the difference it much smaller on higher resolution. Thats why people think its less of an issue.

[FruitBasketSilex]

At higher resolutions, the computer will resort to using more gpu power than cpu, but it doesn't mean that you should be using a Intel Core Duo with 4 titan x's. (not like you can anyway)

Indeed you cannot.

 

Double checked to make sure, doesn't seem to be any 8x/8x/8x/8x 775 mobos.

[han_han08]

also read a post a while ago, an FX6300 wont bottleneck (or almost) a gtx 970 @ 1440p gaming..

 

and i guess it will bottleneck that gpu @ 720p gaming, but that will be like hundreds of fps so it doesn't really matter

 

edit: just learned about that here in the forums 

Edited April 29, 2015 by han_han08

[FruitBasketSilex]

---SNIP---

 

Yeah, I understand that it is actually this way.

 

I'm wondering WHY? Not the same repeated, "Oh, you don't need as good of a CPU at higher resolutions" spiel that you hear all over.

[Chiobe]

Yeah, I understand that it is actually this way.

 

I'm wondering WHY? Not the same repeated, "Oh, you don't need as good of a CPU at higher resolutions" spiel that you hear all over.

 

I belive its because they are used to seeing GPU have a higher impact then CPU

But that is only true to a certain extend

[Shakaza]

Isn't it because the CPU is telling the GPU to do the same stuff, except at a higher resolution? The CPU usage remains the same, allowing the graphics card to work harder because of the higher pixel count. The graphics card can display higher resolutions independent of the CPU's power, meaning the GPU usage can be higher on a CPU that would bottleneck it at a lower resolution, lessening the impact of the bottleneck and closing the gap between Intel and AMD CPUs.

 

I can't explain it very well, but I tried, okay?

[FruitBasketSilex]

I belive its because they are used to seeing GPU have a higher impact then CPU

But that is only true to a certain extend

 

Still doesn't answer my question.

[FruitBasketSilex]

Isn't it because the CPU is telling the GPU to do the same stuff, except at a higher resolution? The CPU usage remains the same, allowing the graphics card to work harder because of the higher pixel count. The graphics card can display higher resolutions independent of the CPU's power, meaning the GPU usage can be higher on a CPU that would bottleneck it at a lower resolution, lessening the impact of the bottleneck and closing the gap between Intel and AMD CPUs.

 

I can't explain it very well, but I tried, okay?

 

The bottleneck bit makes more sense, but that wuld still introduce the problem of:

 

Is there still hitching and stuttering, like would happen at 1080P?

For instance,

an FX-8350 at 1080P will cause hitching and stuttering in some games, is that still present at 4k?

 

This still all doesn't make any sense.

[Shakaza]

The bottleneck bit makes more sense, but that wuld still introduce the problem of:

 

Is there still hitching and stuttering, like would happen at 1080P?

For instance,

an FX-8350 at 1080P will cause hitching and stuttering in some games, is that still present at 4k?

 

This still all doesn't make any sense.

I would think so. I'm pretty sure the stuttering is caused by the GPU usage falling due to a CPU's inability to feed information quickly enough to the graphics card. At a higher resolution, the average GPU usage would be higher, but it would still fall because of the CPU's inability to work quickly enough for the card.

[Chiobe]

Isn't it because the CPU is telling the GPU to do the same stuff, except at a higher resolution? The CPU usage remains the same, allowing the graphics card to work harder because of the higher pixel count. The graphics card can display higher resolutions independent of the CPU's power, meaning the GPU usage can be higher on a CPU that would bottleneck it at a lower resolution, lessening the impact of the bottleneck and closing the gap between Intel and AMD CPUs.

 

I can't explain it very well, but I tried, okay?

Itsnt that the same teori behind overclocking?

An overclock that is fine at 40 fps might crash at 45fps, because the load is different.

[FruitBasketSilex]

Itsnt that the same teori behind overclocking?

An overclock that is fine at 40 fps might crash at 45fps, because the load is different.

That doesn't make sense.

I would think so. I'm pretty sure the stuttering is caused by the GPU usage falling due to a CPU's inability to feed information quickly enough to the graphics card. At a higher resolution, the average GPU usage would be higher, but it would still fall because of the CPU's inability to work quickly enough for the card.

That does. I think you may have just answered my question.

 

If so, my conclusion is thus:

The GPU works harder at 4k, making the CPU bottleneck less of an issue, as the card is stressed more, and the stuttering/hitching may still be present, as the GPU may still be at the edge of bottlenecking by the CPU, although to a lesser extent because of the higher GPU usage.

[Shakaza]

Itsnt that the same teori behind overclocking?

An overclock that is fine at 40 fps might crash at 45fps, because the load is different.

Well, I guess it's connected. By increasing the frequency of a graphics card, you are changing the rate at which it switches between the on and off states. I suppose you could say that puts a higher load on the GPU. If it happens too quickly, errors occur, which can causes crashes and whatnot, unless you increase the voltage. Though, I'm not sure why increasing the voltage gets rid of the crash-causing errors.

[Shakaza]

That doesn't make sense.

That does. I think you may have just answered my question.

 

If so, my conclusion is thus:

The GPU works harder at 4k, making the CPU bottleneck less of an issue, as the card is stressed more, and the stuttering/hitching may still be present, as the GPU may still be at the edge of bottlenecking by the CPU, although to a lesser extent because of the higher GPU usage.

Yes, that seems about right.

[FruitBasketSilex]

Yes, that seems about right.

 

There we go then.

 

This now seems a hell of a lot less illogical to me now, thank you.

[Shakaza]

There we go then.

 

This now seems a hell of a lot less illogical to me now, thank you.

No problem! It's what I do, man!

[i_build_nanosuits]

If a 6300 has to feed a certain amount of information to, say, a TitanX at 1080P, and it can't keep up with that, then why does it suddenly have less trouble at 4k, feeding, logically, more information to it?

the CPU workload is the same regardless of the screen resolution...only the GPU is working harder as you increase res.

So if we suppose the FX-6300 for example can do 50FPS in said game on a titan X at 1080p...the titan X for example will be used at say 50% of it's capacity...

if we crank up the resolution to 4K...now the FX-6300 can still do 50FPS in the same game...but the titan X might now be maxed out outputing those 50FPS since it's a lot more pixels to push for the GPU.

hope this is clear enough.

One thing for sure is that your framerate can only be as high as the one your CPU can produce...where as GPU's can run at any framerate if the CPU is fast enough it's just a question of graphics fidelity and detail level...regardless of the screen resolution.

[Chiobe]

That doesn't make sense.

It does if you keep an eye on things.

40 fps overclocked uses 98% of the voltage, hence being fine.

45 fps overclocked tries to use 105% of the voltage, hence the crash.

 

So how far you can push a system depends on what you try to make it do.

[FruitBasketSilex]

the CPU workload is the same regardless of the screen resolution...only the GPU is working harder as you increase res.

So if we suppose the FX-6300 for example can do 50FPS in said game on a titan X at 1080p...the titan X for example will be used at say 50% of it's capacity...

if we crank up the resolution to 4K...now the FX-6300 can still do 50FPS in the same game...but the titan X might now be maxed out outputing those 50FPS since it's a lot more pixels to push for the GPU.

hope this is clear enough.

 

That is indeed the conclusion that me and @Shakaza came to.

[FruitBasketSilex]

It does if you keep an eye on things.

40 fps overclocked uses 98% of the voltage, hence being fine.

45 fps overclocked tries to use 105% of the voltage, hence the crash.

 

So how far you can push a system depends on what you try to make it do.

THAT. THAT makes sense.

 

However, that also doesn't have anything to do with the topic, as we are talking about CPU usage scaling with resolution, and not overclocking to lessen the bottleneck that may be in effect.

[FruitBasketSilex]

It does if you keep an eye on things.

40 fps overclocked uses 98% of the voltage, hence being fine.

45 fps overclocked tries to use 105% of the voltage, hence the crash.

 

So how far you can push a system depends on what you try to make it do.

Also, i'm pretty sure I have the biggest bottleneck on the forum. 4790k with HD 4600.

Have to use the Igpu because no Dgpu.

[i_build_nanosuits]

Did some testing for fun earlier...GTA V...maximum settings...800x600 resolution...no AA...core i7-4770K@4.2ghz vs core i5-4670K@4.2ghz (same CPU only disabled hyper-threading) here are the results...at no point during the benchmark did my GTX 780 got maxed out...so this is what i call VALID cpu benchmarking in game...

RESULTS:

i7:

Avg: 167.685 - Min: 96 - Max: 257

i5:

Avg: 170.106 - Min: 98 - Max: 257

so, that's the kind of framerate the intel haswell chips can produce in GTA 5 @4.2ghz...wheter it's doing it at 1080p on dual titan X...or at 800x600 on a GTX 780...that's the CPU performance when it comes to GTA V...the framerate won't get any higher until you overclock the cpu furter...that's why it's important to have parts matching in terms of performance...and that's why you don,t want a shitty CPU that can only output 40FPS at times paired with a GPU that can drive ultra settings at 70FPS.

[Shakaza]

That is indeed the conclusion that me and @Shakaza came to.

Oh, I do suggest that you listen to him, by the way. @i_build_nanosuits knows a lot more about CPUs than I do.

 

Um, how do I tag him when he has a name like that?

Edited April 29, 2015 by Shakaza

[FruitBasketSilex]

Oh, I do suggest that you listen to him, by the way. @i_build_nanosuits knows a lot more about CPUs than I do.

 

Um, how do I tag him when he has a name like that?

 

I know. I've talked with him and seen him around the CPU section alot. I'm on here alot, if you look at my post count. We're both quite knowledgeable, i just couldn't wrap my head around the whole CPU is less relevant towards higher resolutions bit.