Best GPU choice to pair with an i5-3570k?

[JTB123]

I've been considering upgrading my GPU over the past month and with the 980 and 970 coming down in price I'm tempted to go for it.

 

However, my PC is getting on a bit now (over 2 years old) and I haven't changed or over clocked the i5-3570K that's currently in it at the moment so I'm wondering if the extra horse power something like a 970 or 980 offers would go to waste if I don't upgrade or over clock my current CPU which is currently still at the stock 3.4Ghz speed.

 

That said, GPUs are something I don't know a great deal about so would appreciate your guys input on this. What would be your recommendations? My current GPU is a GTX 660Ti by the way.

 

Thanks in advance.

[pomaranc]

Your CPU won't bottleneck 980 or 970.

[stconquest]

The 3570K is still a competent CPU, the GTX 970 is a good pairing.

[ADZ_123_!"£]

Scene as it's a quad core it will not bottleneck any graphics system whether that be 980's 970;s or titan X's.

[Fluxx]

A 3570k won't bottleneck any of those cards.

[Ertman]

The CPU should provide no problems for a 980, and therefore a 970 should also be fine. That CPU is no slouch and is still relevant in terms of top gaming performance.

[Lord_Karango17]

I've been considering upgrading my GPU over the past month and with the 980 and 970 coming down in price I'm tempted to go for it.

 

However, my PC is getting on a bit now (over 2 years old) and I haven't changed or over clocked the i5-3570K that's currently in it at the moment so I'm wondering if the extra horse power something like a 970 or 980 offers would go to waste if I don't upgrade or over clock my current CPU which is currently still at the stock 3.4Ghz speed.

 

That said, GPUs are something I don't know a great deal about so would appreciate your guys input on this. What would be your recommendations? My current GPU is a GTX 660Ti by the way.

 

Thanks in advance.

Ive got a friend running a r9 290 (similar to a 970) with his 3570k, and it has had no problems at all. That cpu, especially considering most games are not heavily threaded, will not undermine the performance of your gpu.

 

Also since that cpu does not kick out a lot of heat, you would easily be able to oc it to around 4.1ghz without any increases on the voltage with something like a hyper 212 evo which is not a very expensive cooler. 

 

Personally, if you are able to afford the 980, I would rather get a 970, and get a cooler for the cpu, to make it a more evenly balanced system...

[Aniallation]

Anything. Find something that suits your gaming needs. For example, it won't bottleneck two 980s, but obviously two 980s is overkill if you only play League.

[Vendetta]

Ive got a friend running a r9 290 (similar to a 970) with his 3570k, and it has had no problems at all. That cpu, especially considering most games are not heavily threaded, will not undermine the performance of your gpu.

 

Also since that cpu does not kick out a lot of heat, you would easily be able to oc it to around 4.1ghz without any increases on the voltage with something like a hyper 212 evo which is not a very expensive cooler. 

 

Personally, if you are able to afford the 980, I would rather get a 970, and get a cooler for the cpu, to make it a more evenly balanced system...

I got my 3570k to 4.2Ghz on stock cooler and 4.4Ghz with hyper 212, shit I could have even got 4.5 on the hyper 212 but I replaced it when I upgraded my case so I never got to find out. People under estimate the OC potential of Ivy bridge and the cooling of a hyper 212, I was at 4.4ghz and never went above 70c in prime95 with only ONE fan in an Antec p180 which is a closed up low airflow silence optimized case.

[Monarch]

Your CPU won't bottleneck 980 or 970.

 

 

The 3570K is still a competent CPU, the GTX 970 is a good pairing.

 

 

Scene as it's a quad core it will not bottleneck any graphics system whether that be 980's 970;s or titan X's.

 

 

A 3570k won't bottleneck any of those cards.

 

 

The CPU should provide no problems for a 980, and therefore a 970 should also be fine. That CPU is no slouch and is still relevant in terms of top gaming performance.

 

 

Ive got a friend running a r9 290 (similar to a 970) with his 3570k, and it has had no problems at all. That cpu, especially considering most games are not heavily threaded, will not undermine the performance of your gpu.

 

Also since that cpu does not kick out a lot of heat, you would easily be able to oc it to around 4.1ghz without any increases on the voltage with something like a hyper 212 evo which is not a very expensive cooler. 

 

Personally, if you are able to afford the 980, I would rather get a 970, and get a cooler for the cpu, to make it a more evenly balanced system...

 

 

Anything. Find something that suits your gaming needs. For example, it won't bottleneck two 980s, but obviously two 980s is overkill if you only play League.

 

You can't generalize like that. We have plenty of CPU heavy games, and more are on horizon.

In BF4 for example, i5's struggle to maintain 60 fps, and even when your FPS counter tells you you're getting 60, your frame times are going way past 16.7 ms. In GTA V, my 4670K runs at 100% usage, especially in the city with a lot of NPCs on screen, and fps drops to 45-50. Now even though 45-50 fps doesn't sound too bad, frametimes are much more important, and at around 50 fps (20 ms) some frames will take way more than 20 ms, they will spike up to 30 ms, which is really bad and you'll see the stuttering.

 

i5's are the minimum you should have today to play AAA titles. There's no more "i5's are fine for gaming", stop living in the past. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying i5's are no good anymore. But they surely can and will bottleneck high-end cards and especially CF/SLI in CPU-bound situations, depending on resolution, the game itself and what's going on in it.

 

 

@JTB123

Here's an example. If you want 60 fps in GTA V at high/very high settings at 1080p in areas outside the city with a lot of trees and grass, you'll need a high-end GPU because that's a GPU-bound situation,so you'll need at least a 970. In the city however, there are a lot more objects and NPCs (AI) which is more of a CPU-bound situation and to get 60+ fps you'll need a better CPU than that i5. With that i5 you'd often drop below 60 (even though 970 is able to render 60+ fps) and frame times will be a mess with a lot of NPCs on screen.

 

You can feel free to pair that i5 with a 970 or 980 and you can be sure that you're fine in GPU-bound scenarios. You will see performance increase even in CPU-bound situations because currently that GTX 660 is bottlenecking your i5.

[ADZ_123_!"£]

You can't generalize like that. We have plenty of CPU heavy games, and more are on horizon.

In BF4 for example, i5's struggle to maintain 60 fps, and even when your FPS counter tells you you're getting 60, your frame times are going way past 16.7 ms. In GTA V, my 4670K runs at 100% usage, especially in the city with a lot of NPCs on screen, and fps drops to 45-50. Now even though 45-50 fps doesn't sound too bad, frametimes are much more important, and at around 50 fps (20 ms) some frames will take way more than 20 ms, they will spike up to 30 ms, which is really bad and you'll see the stuttering.

 

i5's are the minimum you should have today to play AAA titles. There's no more "i5's are fine for gaming", stop living in the past. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying i5's are no good anymore. But they surely can and will bottleneck high-end cards in CPU-bound situations, depending on resolution, the game itself and what's going on in it.

 

@OP you can feel free to pair that i5 with a 970 or 980 and you can be sure that you're fine in GPU-bound scenarios.

Yes but any open world game, GTA V or minecraft, will be massively cpu demanding.

[Aniallation]

In GTA V, my 4670K runs at 100% usage, especially in the city with a lot of NPCs on screen, and fps drops to 45-50. Now even though 45-50 fps doesn't sound too bad, frametimes are much more important, and at around 50 fps (20 ms) some frames will take way more than 20 ms, they will spike up to 30 ms, which is really bad and you'll see the stuttering.

I don't understand why everyone whines about GTA V raping CPUs when it runs perfectly fine on my (much worse then 4670K) Phenom II X6. Even in the city with lots of NPCs on screen, with pedestrian density and variety set to 3/4.

[Monarch]

Yes but any open world game, GTA V or minecraft, will be massively cpu demanding.

 

Yeah, so why did you say

 

Scene as it's a quad core it will not bottleneck any graphics system whether that be 980's 970;s or titan X's.

 

 

?

 

Like I said, you can't generalize like that. And BF4 isn't open world, though it does have huge maps. 

 

I don't understand why everyone whines about GTA V raping CPUs when it runs perfectly fine on my (much worse then 4670K) Phenom II X6. Even in the city with lots of NPCs on screen, with pedestrian density and variety set to 3/4.

 

Define "perfectly fine".

[Aniallation]

Define "perfectly fine".

Solid 60FPS (Vsync on) pretty much all the time, except when I'm driving at top speed through the city with a supercar, then it drops to around 52. I haven't seen below 50.

[Monarch]

Solid 60FPS (Vsync on) pretty much all the time, except when I'm driving at top speed through the city with a supercar, then it drops to around 52. I haven't seen below 50.

 

You must have lowered some settings to get that framerate with an AMD CPU. And like I said, check your frametimes. I bet they're a mess. They're much more important than fps.

[Lord_Karango17]

I got my 3570k to 4.2Ghz on stock cooler and 4.4Ghz with hyper 212, shit I could have even got 4.5 on the hyper 212 but I replaced it when I upgraded my case so I never got to find out. People under estimate the OC potential of Ivy bridge and the cooling of a hyper 212, I was at 4.4ghz and never went above 70c in prime95 with only ONE fan in an Antec p180 which is a closed up low airflow silence optimized case.

Oh yeah no doubt, the hyper 212 is a very capable cooler for the price, but i was recommending some core clocks that the op could manage on the stock volts (some people down feel comfortable with pumping volts into their chip, which is very understandable)

 

I dont have considerable experience, as 4.1ghz is the max i can reach with my chip as it is a non l sku, but 4.1-4.2ghz seems fairly achievable on the stock volts.

[Aniallation]

You must have lowered some settings to get that framerate with an AMD CPU. And like I said, check your frametimes. I bet they're a mess. They're much more important than fps.

1080p

2X AA, TXAA on

All 3 sliders set to 3/4

 

Everything up to soft shadows set to very high

No reflection MSAA

Nvidia PCSS shadows

High post FX

8X Anisotropic filtering

High ambient occlusion

High tessellation

 

Advanced graphics untouched 

[Monarch]

1080p

2X AA, TXAA on

All 3 sliders set to 3/4

 

Everything up to soft shadows set to very high

No reflection MSAA

Nvidia PCSS shadows

High post FX

8X Anisotropic filtering

High ambient occlusion

High tessellation

 

Advanced graphics untouched 

 

So you don't have those sliders set to max. I tried to lower them too and I was still getting stuttering, though less. The game is playable with an i5, and whether or not you're satisfied with it depends if you can see spikes to 30 ms and if they bother you. If not, good for you. But with spikes to 30 ms, the game isn't quite smooth. 30 fps = 33.3 ms, which means I'm almost hitting console frametimes in the city.

[Aniallation]

So you don't have those sliders set to max. I tried to lower them too and I was still getting stuttering, though less. The game is playable with an i5, and whether or not you're satisfied with it depends if you can see spikes to 30 ms and if they bother you. If not, good for you. But spikes to 30 ms isn't quite smooth. 30 fps = 33.3 ms, which means I'm almost hitting console frametimes.

I haven't looked at frame times so idk

[Monarch]

I haven't looked at frame times so idk

 

I even hit 33.3 a couple of times. It says 71 on average and when you see that on a benchmark you think the gameplay is smooth. But if you really want to know if it's smooth, you have to dig deeper. It's below 50 fps 1% of the time. This is stuttering, AKA micro-stuttering.

[IrshaadH]

Despite Ivy bridge's age, it still holds its own against haswell/devils canyon. Don't worry about bottlenecking, your 3570k will be fine for years to come.

[Guest]

I play GTA V with the specs in my signature.

The only time, the ONLY time I get Lagg is when it's day and I am in a heavily forested area in the wild, then it drops to 50 sometimes.

So the claims about 'i5 being the minimum and aren't as good anymore as they used to' are not very true imo, but they may hold water somewhat. @Monarch

This is at 1920x1200 with everything max but shadows and 2x aa.

[JTB123]

Thanks for the feedback everyone, always best to get some more information before taking the plunge. I'm tempted to go for a 980 at this point but I might wait just a little longer. They're still the best part of £500 in the UK and they are coming down in price slowly but surely so hopefully patience will pay off.

[Vrbas]

You can't generalize like that. We have plenty of CPU heavy games, and more are on horizon.

In BF4 for example, i5's struggle to maintain 60 fps, and even when your FPS counter tells you you're getting 60, your frame times are going way past 16.7 ms. In GTA V, my 4670K runs at 100% usage, especially in the city with a lot of NPCs on screen, and fps drops to 45-50. Now even though 45-50 fps doesn't sound too bad, frametimes are much more important, and at around 50 fps (20 ms) some frames will take way more than 20 ms, they will spike up to 30 ms, which is really bad and you'll see the stuttering.

i5's are the minimum you should have today to play AAA titles. There's no more "i5's are fine for gaming", stop living in the past. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying i5's are no good anymore. But they surely can and will bottleneck high-end cards and especially CF/SLI in CPU-bound situations, depending on resolution, the game itself and what's going on in it.

@JTB123

Here's an example. If you want 60 fps in GTA V at high/very high settings at 1080p in areas outside the city with a lot of trees and grass, you'll need a high-end GPU because that's a GPU-bound situation,so you'll need at least a 970. In the city however, there are a lot more objects and NPCs (AI) which is more of a CPU-bound situation and to get 60+ fps you'll need a better CPU than that i5. With that i5 you'd often drop below 60 (even though 970 is able to render 60+ fps) and frame times will be a mess with a lot of NPCs on screen.

You can feel free to pair that i5 with a 970 or 980 and you can be sure that you're fine in GPU-bound scenarios. You will see performance increase even in CPU-bound situations because currently that GTX 660 is bottlenecking your i5.

Please stop spreading this misinformation. An i5 has 0 problems in BF4 and GTAV. If you are getting 100% usage then you have something else running in the background. They no where near "struggle" to maintain 60fps in those games.

[Monarch]

Please stop spreading this misinformation. An i5 has 0 problems in BF4 and GTAV. If you are getting 100% usage then you have something else running in the background. They no where near "struggle" to maintain 60fps in those games.

 

Right. That's why there are 49038394892394 reports of 100% usage and stuttering in GTA 5 with i5's on reddit and steam forums. Just google it. i5's are no longer enough for gaming, deal with it.