Will my CPU bottleneck the 1080 or 1080 ti?

[Mikealongo]

As the tittle say, i have an i7 3770 non k and recently I've seen some videos about bottleneck and, because im pretending to upgrade to the 1080 ti when it releases i want to know if my cpu will bottleneck it or the 1080.

Here you have my system specs:

 

Spoiler

 

System

• CPU
  Intel Core i7-3770 @ 3,4GHz
• Motherboard
  Asus Maximus V Formula
• RAM
  16 GB DDR3-SDRAM
• GPU
  GTX 980 Strix
• Case
  Corsair 760T
• Storage
  120 SSD Plus Sanddisk + Seagate Barracuda Green ST1500DL003 1.5TB 5900 6.0Gb/s +2TB Seagate Barracuda 7200 rpm
• PSU
  EVGA superNOVA 850 G2
• Display(s)
  asus swift pg278q
• Cooling
  Be Quiet! Dark Rock Pro 3
• Keyboard
  Razer Blackwidow
• Mouse
  Logitech G600
• Sound
  Logitech z506
• Operating System
  Windows 10

 

• How fo i notice if a CPU bottleneck a GPU?, just because the CPU usage will be 100% while GPUs will be under 100%?
   

[Cereal5]

You can tell that a CPU is bottlenecking a GPU because no matter what your settings are, your framerate will not increase or decrease. The CPU cannot logically send anymore information for the GPU to process any faster, so the GPU is limited in what it can actual render to your display. As for an i7-3770, even though they are becoming older cards, my guess would be no, it would not bottleneck a 1080 (ti) because of hyperthreading. If it were an i5 non k, then probably.

 

It also depends what resolution you are playing at

[ARikozuM]

I wouldn't worry too much over some over-imposed concept. I was perfectly content with my 4690K and 1080 at 5760x1080@60. If you're really worried, just take advantage of DSR to make the GPU work harder.

[Moress]

At 1080p, although ultrawide may be a different beast, even a 6700k will 'bottleneck' a 1080 to an extent, and for sure the 1080ti. At 1440p and 4k though no worries.

[Electronics Wizardy]

17 minutes ago, Mikealongo said:

How fo i notice if a CPU bottleneck a GPU?, just because the CPU usage will be 100% while GPUs will be under 100%?

You can be limited by a cpu and not a 100% usage, even if its multi threaded.

[Lostlogger]

Think your fine with the gtx 1080 shouln't bottleneck for the ti one idk couse you can't trust the leaks and reveals only when it comes to reputeble reviwers also saw a video of Jay doing a does a fx8350 think and it didn't really make much of a diffrence and a fx 8350 is weaker then your cpu so your fine imo

[TheRandomness]

4 minutes ago, Lostlogger said:

Think your fine with the gtx 1080 shouln't bottleneck for the ti one idk couse you can't trust the leaks and reveals only when it comes to reputeble reviwers also saw a video of Jay doing a does a fx8350 think and it didn't really make much of a diffrence and a fx 8350 is weaker then your cpu so your fine imo

FX 8320*

He lost over 40FPS in some games... 40 FPS.

[Lostlogger]

Yeah but honestly thats not that bad since he mostly lost them on the cpu intensive ones also ppl are way too opsessed about fps you can normally play on 40 fps its only that most ppl don't even consider it when they build a pc instead the want 250+ fps at all times which just insn't gonne happend bit off topic there but yeah he lost some not rly a big deal tho

[ARikozuM]

16 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

FX 8320*

He lost over 40FPS in some games... 40 FPS.

In games that still played nearly 100hz. We're talking about a CPU that's nearly 5 years old. Sorry but 60hz is the standard not 144hz.

[Mikealongo]

1 hour ago, Cereal5 said:

You can tell that a CPU is bottlenecking a GPU because no matter what your settings are, your framerate will not increase or decrease. The CPU cannot logically send anymore information for the GPU to process any faster, so the GPU is limited in what it can actual render to your display. As for an i7-3770, even though they are becoming older cards, my guess would be no, it would not bottleneck a 1080 (ti) because of hyperthreading. If it were an i5 non k, then probably.

 

It also depends what resolution you are playing at

Im playing at 1440p with an G-Sync panel.

Is that a disadvantage?

 

I'm playing right now games like WoW (Legion) and The Witcher 3 (all), but i want to be able to play GTA V and future AAA titles at max ress possible.

1 hour ago, Lostlogger said:

Think your fine with the gtx 1080 shouln't bottleneck for the ti one idk couse you can't trust the leaks and reveals only when it comes to reputeble reviwers also saw a video of Jay doing a does a fx8350 think and it didn't really make much of a diffrence and a fx 8350 is weaker then your cpu so your fine imo

I saw the coments in that video an ther is where i begin to be worried about bottlenecking hahah

38 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

In games that still played nearly 100hz. We're talking about a CPU that's nearly 5 years old. Sorry but 60hz is the standard not 144hz.

I play with a G-Sync 144hz if that info helps...

[Cereal5]

3 minutes ago, Mikealongo said:

Im playing at 1440p with an G-Sync panel.

Perfect. I play on a 1440p panel and my GTX 1080 does very well. 1080p and below is the only resolution that will be "bottlenecked" by the CPU. but seriously, don't worry about it. it you had like a core 2 duo then yeah it would be a problem. But you have a CPU that is still very good. So don't even worry about a CPU bottleneck because it will only happen at 1080p and you still still get well over 100 fps.

[ARikozuM]

8 hours ago, Mikealongo said:

Im playing at 1440p with an G-Sync panel.

Is that a disadvantage?

 

I'm playing right now games like WoW (Legion) and The Witcher 3 (all), but i want to be able to play GTA V and future AAA titles at max ress possible.

I saw the coments in that video an ther is where i begin to be worried about bottlenecking hahah

I play with a G-Sync 144hz if that info helps...

1080@144hz isn't a case of bottlenecking by CPU or GPU, but rather monitor. 144hz monitors can display everything below their refresh rate with little to no issues.

 

I play many games at 5760@1080@60 and neither my CPU nor GPU go above 70% simply because all the work that is needed is done. There's nothing else that need to be worked on.

 

Your 1440 monitor will require more work from your GPU so you'll be fine. Half of the benchmarks we've been shown regarding this topic comes from 1080@144 with the i7 only having 10-20 frames more than the 100 that the i5 gives making the expense of an extra $100 a diminished return.

 

Hopefully this answers your questions, but feel free to ask more.

[smokefest]

Will not bottleneck or very very few....

Should get it. You'll get good performance and won't notice much the bottleneck if theres one...

Just like the i5... I would suggest to stil lget the 1080 as the bottleneck is minimal, barely notice it, some games, but few...

Dont over react on bottleneck.. i mean.. a i3 first gen surely bottlenecks a 1080.. an i5 skylake ? nah, it wont. Might not perform 100% of a i7 but pretty close.

[Matias_Chambers]

You should be fine. 

[Dackzy]

Showed that a i5 6600k bottlenecks a Maxwell Titan X aka a 1070 in performance and showed how much load a i5 6600k is under with a 1060 at 1080p locked 60fps

[Prysin]

15 hours ago, Mikealongo said:

As the tittle say, i have an i7 3770 non k and recently I've seen some videos about bottleneck and, because im pretending to upgrade to the 1080 ti when it releases i want to know if my cpu will bottleneck it or the 1080.

Here you have my system specs:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

System

• CPU
  Intel Core i7-3770 @ 3,4GHz
• Motherboard
  Asus Maximus V Formula
• RAM
  16 GB DDR3-SDRAM
• GPU
  GTX 980 Strix
• Case
  Corsair 760T
• Storage
  120 SSD Plus Sanddisk + Seagate Barracuda Green ST1500DL003 1.5TB 5900 6.0Gb/s +2TB Seagate Barracuda 7200 rpm
• PSU
  EVGA superNOVA 850 G2
• Display(s)
  asus swift pg278q
• Cooling
  Be Quiet! Dark Rock Pro 3
• Keyboard
  Razer Blackwidow
• Mouse
  Logitech G600
• Sound
  Logitech z506
• Operating System
  Windows 10

 

• How fo i notice if a CPU bottleneck a GPU?, just because the CPU usage will be 100% while GPUs will be under 100%?
   

a few% in some games, perhaps. Generally not.

It is an i7 after all, it should mostly be fine

[ARikozuM]

7 minutes ago, Dackzy said:

Showed that a i5 6600k bottlenecks a Maxwell Titan X aka a 1070 in performance and showed how much load a i5 6600k is under with a 1060 at 1080p locked 60fps

I'm sorry but losing 10 frames from an i5 over an i7 doesn't make the extra $100 justifiable.

[Dackzy]

2 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

I'm sorry but losing 10 frames from an i5 over an i7 doesn't make the extra $100 justifiable.

that is in a game that is getting a bit old now. Think about the future and the stuttering. The i5 6600k is bearly keeping up with the 1060, if you watched the video you would see how bad a i5 is, come on 70%+ all the time at 1080p locked 60fps, that is NOT good, just think if you had some other programs running in the background like chrome and a skype call. 

[ARikozuM]

Just now, Dackzy said:

that is in a game that is getting a bit old now. Think about the future and the stuttering. The i5 6600k is bearly keeping up with the 1060, if you watched the video you would see how bad a i5 is, come on 70%+ all the time at 1080p locked 60fps, that is NOT good, just think if you had some other programs running in the background like chrome and a skype call. 

Locking the frame-rate stops the CPU from over-working which accounts for the 70%. Most of the games on the picture are putting out more frames due to clock speed and not hyper-threading (Witcher 3, Unity, BF4, Crysis 3, COD:AW, Shadow of Mordor, and Ryse) while GTAV is the only one possibly being helped by it. Remember that for most of these games your CPU has to do ONE calculation for EACH object on EACH frame unlike the GPU which is doing its normal job rendering the scenes. Far Cry 4 is the only one that I see as an outlier.

[Dackzy]

3 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Locking the frame-rate stops the CPU from over-working which accounts for the 70%. Most of the games on the picture are putting out more frames due to clock speed and not hyper-threading (Witcher 3, Unity, BF4, Crysis 3, COD:AW, Shadow of Mordor, and Ryse) while GTAV is the only one possibly being helped by it. Remember that for most of these games your CPU has to do ONE calculation for EACH object on EACH frame unlike the GPU which is doing its normal job rendering the scenes. Far Cry 4 is the only one that I see as an outlier.

Remember what is here, DX12 and a lot of new AAA titles have DX12. Do you think that you can for sure get your i5 6600k up to 4.5GHz and at that speed it is bearly keeping up with the stock i7. Just look at a very old game like crysis 3, even when OCed the i5 cannot keep up with a stock i7.

 

The locked FPS does so the CPU doesn't work that hard, but it should also tell you how weak the i5 is, it struggles with a 1060 at locked 60fps, now think about a 1070, it is what 40% more powerfull, think about if it was 144Hz, think about DX12. A i5 is shit, no way around that, it bearly keeps up with a 1060 at 1080p and is going to bottleneck anything above a 1060, heck even in witcher 3 it bottlenecked a bit.

[ARikozuM]

1 minute ago, Dackzy said:

Remember what is here, DX12 and a lot of new AAA titles have DX12. Do you think that you can for sure get your i5 6600k up to 4.5GHz and at that speed it is bearly keeping up with the stock i7. Just look at a very old game like crysis 3, even when OCed the i5 cannot keep up with a stock i7.

 

The locked FPS does so the CPU doesn't work that hard, but it should also tell you how weak the i5 is, it struggles with a 1060 at locked 60fps, now think about a 1070, it is what 40% more powerfull, think about if it was 144Hz, think about DX12. A i5 is shit, no way around that, it bearly keeps up with a 1060 at 1080p and is going to bottleneck anything above a 1060, heck even in witcher 3 it bottlenecked a bit.

Crysis 3

-----------

 

i5 6600K = $240

i7 6700K = $340

Newegg Prices

 

6600K @ 3.5Ghz = 109.4

6700K @ 4.0Ghz = 119.5

Delta of 0.5Ghz = 10.1

 

Cost of delta frames = $9.90 for each additional frame.

 

6600K @ 4.5Ghz = 117.0

6700K @ 4.6Ghz = 121.9

Delta of 0.1Ghz = 4.9

 

Cost of delta frames = $20.41 for each additional frame.

 

You're paying $100 for an extra 10 frames stock or 4.9 frames when overclocked. If you want your Titans to not be bottlenecked, use DSR to create more work.

 

Witcher 3 has almost 50 characters on screen. Each of which requires ONE calculation every frame from the CPU. Even then the delta isn't justifying the price.

[Dackzy]

10 hours ago, ARikozuM said:

SNIP

You are thinking of right now and with numbers that had no programs running in the back. If you had something running in the back then the load on the i5 would be different and higher. You also only look at the average FPS, the FPS on a i7 is way more stable and from experience once you go over that 80% in just normal gameplay, then you will sometimes see a bit of stuttering when more things happen and that is not fun.

You pay 100$ more to remove the bottleneck, no matter how small it is, BUT your system would be way better off in the future.

[Mikealongo]

So short story is that my 3770 will not bottleneck the future 1080 ti? XDDDDDDDD

[ARikozuM]

3 hours ago, Mikealongo said:

So short story is that my 3770 will not bottleneck the future 1080 ti? XDDDDDDDD

An i5 won't bottleneck any modern card to the point where performance will degrade and the i7 will do better (obviously it would). This bottleneck nonsense is just that. 

If you have the i7 3770, just keep it as past trends indicate that you'll have it for another 3 to 4 years before needing or wanting an upgrade.

 

Edit: You want the CPU to be the weaker (but still capable) of the two components since the GPU is what draws the frames and getting a lower tier GPU for fear of bottlenecks is foolish as the stronger card will still push out more frames. 

[Mikealongo]

39 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

An i5 won't bottleneck any modern card to the point where performance will degrade and the i7 will do better (obviously it would). This bottleneck nonsense is just that. 

If you have the i7 3770, just keep it as past trends indicate that you'll have it for another 3 to 4 years before needing or wanting an upgrade.

 

Edit: You want the CPU to be the weaker (but still capable) of the two components since the GPU is what draws the frames and getting a lower tier GPU for fear of bottlenecks is foolish as the stronger card will still push out more frames. 

Thanks =D thats what i want to read =)