Will my i5-4670K build bottleneck a GTX 1080?

[Misanthrope]

I'll do you guys one better: Video currently uploading to my youtube I'll edit this and post it back in a bit.

[ARikozuM]

Just now, Morgan MLGman said:

JESUS GODDAMN CHRIST...

 

So what? I'm not saying that a 1080 will not work at all when paired with an i5, only that you will be limiting the GPU performance. And that is precisely true, as you have proven in the video that you linked.

You're limiting what exactly? The extra 10 minimum frames that your monitor wouldn't be able to display anyways?

[Misanthrope]

10 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

0:40, right screen. CPU pegged at 100% across all 4 threads, GPU fluctuating at 80-90% load. That is exactly what bottleneck is. Not to mention almost 15FPS difference in favor of the i7***. Thank you for that source, although it's not a reputable, trustworthy one.

At 1080p. Which I stated is a bottleneck at higher framerates since the very first post on this thread.

 

But worry not if you're not convinced I'll post a video as soon as is done uploading and processing I just made it by using DSR.

[Dresta]

2 minutes ago, App4that said:

No where did I say that, I'm saying a i7 is worth the investment.

People simply dont have cash flows just running thru there wallet,an i5 is GREAT for budget builds,i always recommend an i7 if the budget is right for it since A) Its future proof B) Cuts bottlenecks C) Offers better performance for multi-tasking,video editing etc...but @App4that you simply got to understand people dont have cash just laying around ready to be spent

[Morgan MLGman]

Just now, ARikozuM said:

You're limiting what exactly? The extra 10 minimum frames that your monitor wouldn't be able to display anyways?

How the hell is this relevant to the CPU bottlenecking the 1080? I don't get you, we're talking about GPUs and CPUs and you're talking about monitors.

 

i5s bottleneck highest-end GPUs, period. Not always, not in every game, but they do limit their performance.

 

You give the same argument as I've always had when I was telling people that FX-series CPUs are not that bad for gaming. You wouldn't feel a difference between an i7-3770K and an FX-8350 when playing battlefield 4 for instance. Does that mean there's no difference? No.

[App4that]

1 minute ago, Dresta said:

People simply dont have cash flows just running thru there wallet,an i5 is GREAT for budget builds,i always recommend an i7 if the budget is right for it since A) Its future proof B) Cuts bottlenecks C) Offers better performance for multi-tasking,video editing etc...but @App4that you simply got to understand people dont have cash just laying around ready to be spent

Then stay with a graphics card that will be supported by the i5, get a 480 or 1060 and save more. No argument there.

[Misanthrope]

7 minutes ago, App4that said:

Then stay with a graphics card that will be supported by the i5, get a 480 or 1060 and save more. No argument there.

*raises hand* Argument here:

 

If you have or want a 1440p display to play at 60hz a 1070 paired with an i5 will be perfectly suited for your experience and will be significantly cheaper.

[Dresta]

2 minutes ago, App4that said:

Then stay with a graphics card that will be supported by the i5, get a 480 or 1060 and save more. No argument there.

Guess were finally on the same page  , in some games the i5 4670k will not bottleneck the 1070 and at 1440p or 4k the GPU gets more load so the bottleneck goes lower, @Morgan MLGman The thing you made out in the video on 0:40 is PURE nonsense,Because 1.It was running in 1080p with a GTX 1080 which is no where near recommend 2.It was the Witcher 3 which is a REALLY CPU intensive game and an i5 and 1080 in that situation will not hold up,the OP wants to upgrade to either 1440p or 4k which lowers the bottleneck + he has a 1070 which also lowers the bottleneck

[Techicolors]

Just now, Misanthrope said:

*raises hand* Argument here:

 

If you have or want a 1440p display to play at 60hz a 1070 paired with an i5 will be perfectly suited for your experience and will be significantly cheaper.

i have this exact setup. perfectly fine with the performance i'm getting, 1440p 60fps here 

[Guest]

7 hours ago, Dresta said:

-snip

I was being serious, hence my first post "how?"

[Misanthrope]

Just now, Technicolors said:

i have this exact setup. perfectly fine with the performance i'm getting, 1440p 60fps here 

I know I have it as well works just fine, video coming up.

[App4that]

1 minute ago, Misanthrope said:

*raises hand* Argument here:

 

If you have or want a 1440p display to play at 60hz a 1070 paired with an i5 will be perfectly suited for your experience and will be significantly cheaper.

No, those minimum frames remove the ability to use perfect.

 

And buying a 1440 monitor and 1070 without a CPU to match, is like buying a BMW without air conditioning. 

[Misanthrope]

Just now, App4that said:

No, those minimum frames remove the ability to use perfect.

 

And buying a 1440 monitor and 1070 without a CPU to match, is like buying a BMW without air conditioning. 

Minimum its still above 60 FPS for most of the time, no noticeable suttering. Sorry but I am just not seeing evidence to show any of this. Show me a 1440p video with significant stuttering issues, please.

[App4that]

1 minute ago, Misanthrope said:

Minimum its still above 60 FPS for most of the time, no noticeable suttering. Sorry but I am just not seeing evidence to show any of this. Show me a 1440p video with significant stuttering issues, please.

That's what's funny here, I don't have to. It's well understood you balance a system. If you want a system out of balance that's fine, that's your experience. People with high end components buy i7 processors because they work. Intel sells them, because they work. You're asking me to prove why not everyone eats fast food but goes to restaurants that offer better quality.

[ARikozuM]

6 minutes ago, App4that said:

No, those minimum frames remove the ability to use perfect.

 

And buying a 1440 monitor and 1070 without a CPU to match, is like buying a BMW without air conditioning. 

A/C burns out of those things so quickly anyways.

 

The GPU is only drawing the landscape, the CPU is handling calculations. 1440 requires that the GPU work harder while the CPU works mostly the same.

[Misanthrope]

3 minutes ago, App4that said:

That's what's funny here, I don't have to.

No you don't. But one would expect that you'd back your claims with actual empirical proof or at least attempt to instead of just defending your position with a logical fallacy. But of course you don't have to do any of that, just saying.

[Techicolors]

4 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Minimum its still above 60 FPS for most of the time, no noticeable suttering. Sorry but I am just not seeing evidence to show any of this. Show me a 1440p video with significant stuttering issues, please.

all of the games i've tried stayed around 60fps as well. witcher 3, gta v, even AC unity... though the concern i think we have is whether it'll still hold up well in future games 

[App4that]

3 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

No you don't. But one would expect that you'd back your claims with actual empirical proof or at least attempt to instead of just defending your position with a logical fallacy. But of course you don't have to do any of that, just saying.

Watch the frame times.

 

 

[Misanthrope]

3 minutes ago, Technicolors said:

all of the games i've tried stayed around 60fps as well. witcher 3, gta v, even AC unity... though the concern i think we have is whether it'll still hold up well in future games 

As I mentioned, you have little reason to think there will be a very significant shift rendering the processor obsolete throughout the useful lifetime of a 1070 or 1080 which is 3 to 4 years.

 

Nobody can tell the future you can't claim you know games will be more CPU bound, not even by asserting that all games will quickly (as in within a year) move to Async Compute which is not the strong point of Pascal anyway.

[SSL]

17 minutes ago, App4that said:

And buying a 1440 monitor and 1070 without a CPU to match, is like buying a BMW without air conditioning. 

 

Is it? Seems more like an unlocked i5 is at present the best value proposition.

 

[App4that]

Just now, SSL said:

 

Is it? Seems more like an unlocked i5 is at present the best value proposition.

 

Yes, no one is arguing against the unlocked i5 being an excellent value. The point I've been trying to make is the i7 offer the ability to use your other investments to the fullest. If you don't want to spend the extra money (cost me 80 bucks after I sold my 4690k to buy a 4790k) then you have to accept the effect that has on your experience. If you're fine with that, you'll get no argument from me. But don't lie about the benefits of a i7 is all I ask.

[Morgan MLGman]

10 minutes ago, App4that said:

Watch the frame times.

I think this is the best video to prove the difference between i5 and i7:

Frametimes + Framerates are vastly in favor of the i7.

 

 

[Misanthrope]

1 minute ago, App4that said:

Yes, no one is arguing against the unlocked i5 being an excellent value. The point I've been trying to make is the i7 offer the ability to use your other investments to the fullest. If you don't want to spend the extra money (cost me 80 bucks after I sold my 4690k to buy a 4790k) then you have to accept the effect that has on your experience. If you're fine with that, you'll get no argument from me. But don't lie about the benefits of a i7 is all I ask.

We don't: we've said at nauseum the i7 has benefits, for gamers even like streaming and recording video. They're just mostly not the ones you imply which is any kind of inferior experience at 1440p 60fps.

[Misanthrope]

Anyway...here is the video. Not fully processed so the resolution of the video looks lower but you can see my settings and my performance already:

 

[App4that]

Just now, Misanthrope said:

We don't: we've said at nauseum the i7 has benefits, for gamers even like streaming and recording video. They're just mostly not the ones you imply which is any kind of inferior experience at 1440p 60fps.

I can't control that one experience is better than the other, for the price it better be. You're asking not to call a 750ti inferior to a RX 480, does that make sense?