NVIDIA GTX 1060 + AMD FX-4300 - is bottlenecking possible?

[LOLZpersonok]

I have in mind to upgrade the GPU in my main computer. It's currently got an NVIDIA GTX 750 Ti and I was thinking about getting a GTX 1050 Ti, as it's pretty inexpensive and still a formidable upgrade; however, I was wondering if the GTX 1060 could possibly be too fast for the AMD FX-4300 that I have right now. 

 

And lastly, out of mere curiosity, what do you think the fastest GPU I could install before something gets bottlenecked? Sure, I could upgrade to a lovely Ryzen or Intel CPU, but that'd require a new motherboard and new RAM, and I'm just looking for something that I can afford in the not too distant future. I also don't see any of the 8 core AMD FX CPUs as a formidable upgrade to what I've already got, because they don't have much better single core performance. It'd work for Blender, though.

[Swealteek]

Yes that's a big bottleneck even a FX 8350 is a bottleneck

[Ordinarily_Greater]

RX 480 8GB would still be fine since it has less bottleneck than paired with X5460

[Jurrunio]

1050ti is already the fastest. I'd get a used 970 and save money for CPU upgrade.

[Mr.Meerkat]

This is how I view it.

No doubt the 4300 will bottleneck the 1060 however, if you're planning to upgrade your CPU relatively soon then you might as well go for something that's nice n powerful as it will save you money in the long run (assuming that the difference between a 1060 and 1050ti is large enough, for you). 

 

11 minutes ago, LOLZpersonok said:

out of mere curiosity, what do you think the fastest GPU I could install before something gets bottlenecked?

If you overclock your FX 4300, probably the 1050ti with minor bottlenecking as I remember an OCed FX 4xxx chip is able to just be powerful enough for a 7970  

 

Just now, Ordinarily_Greater said:

RX 480 8GB would still be fine since it has less bottleneck than paired with X5460

Although I'm unsure how drivers are looking right now, Nvidia would probably be the better choice as their drivers relied less on the CPU meaning if you had a slower CPU, typically a Nvidia GPU would perform better than its AMD counterpart. 

[Ordinarily_Greater]

1 minute ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

Although I'm unsure how drivers are looking right now, Nvidia would probably be the better choice as their drivers relied less on the CPU meaning if you had a slower CPU, typically a Nvidia GPU would perform better than its AMD counterpart. 

so nVidia's Driver is better for slower CPUs?

[Mr.Meerkat]

Just now, Ordinarily_Greater said:

so nVidia's Driver is better for slower CPUs?

At the start of the year (and I suspect still is), yes, Nvidia drivers are coded in a way (or heck, just the actual architecture) that the performance of its GPU is less affected by different performing CPUs (i.e. there's typically a smaller drop off in performance when a bottlenecking CPU is used). 

[LOLZpersonok]

5 minutes ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

This is how I view it.

No doubt the 4300 will bottleneck the 1060 however, if you're planning to upgrade your CPU relatively soon then you might as well go for something that's nice n powerful as it will save you money in the long run (assuming that the difference between a 1060 and 1050ti is large enough, for you). 

 

If you overclock your FX 4300, probably the 1050ti with minor bottlenecking as I remember an OCed FX 4xxx chip is able to just be powerful enough for a 7970  

 

Although I'm unsure how drivers are looking right now, Nvidia would probably be the better choice as their drivers relied less on the CPU meaning if you had a slower CPU, typically a Nvidia GPU would perform better than its AMD counterpart. 

I guess then I'll probably stop at the 1050 Ti, since my 4.1GHz overclock should be just fine. I was more or less just curious about the 1060, because the 10-series NVIDIA GPUs are pretty powerful and the FX series of CPUs wasn't that amazing. This GTX 750 Ti already handles pretty much all my games well, though not maxed out. Fallout 4 is pretty good right now as it is, but I would like better framerates in Dragon Age Inquisition (they're good, but I want moar).

[Ordinarily_Greater]

1 minute ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

At the start of the year (and I suspect still is), yes, Nvidia drivers are coded in a way (or heck, just the actual architecture) that the performance of its GPU is less affected by different performing CPUs (i.e. there's typically a smaller drop off in performance when a bottlenecking CPU is used). 

oah i guess stopping at 1050 Ti would be fine

[LOLZpersonok]

10 minutes ago, Jurrunio said:

1050ti is already the fastest. I'd get a used 970 and save money for CPU upgrade.

The GTX 970 is significantly more powerful than the GTX 1050 Ti. Based on what other users are saying about the 1060, wouldn't the FX-4300 bottleneck the 970?

[Ordinarily_Greater]

3 minutes ago, LOLZpersonok said:

The GTX 970 is significantly more powerful than the GTX 1050 Ti. Based on what other users are saying about the 1060, wouldn't the FX-4300 bottleneck the 970?

but if a 1050ti is stronger than 970 how can a 970 get more bottleneck?

[LOLZpersonok]

Just now, Ordinarily_Greater said:

but if a 1050ti is stronger than 970 how can a 970 get more bottleneck?

That's not what I meant, the GTX 970 benchmarks significantly faster than the GTX 1050 Ti all across the board. It gets much better framerates in the same games too.

[Ordinarily_Greater]

2 minutes ago, LOLZpersonok said:

That's not what I meant, the GTX 970 benchmarks significantly faster than the GTX 1050 Ti all across the board. It gets much better framerates in the same games too.

Wow, but are you sure you want to face with the 3.5GB VRAM + 0.5GB VRAM Problem?

[LOLZpersonok]

Just now, Ordinarily_Greater said:

Wow, but are you sure you want to face with the 3.5GB VRAM + 0.5GB VRAM Problem?

That probably won't be an issue for me since I still play games at 1920x1080 and it could probably handle my most demanding games (Fallout 4 and Dragon Age Inquisition) at max or close to max graphics settings before this becomes a problem. Do you think a GTX 970 would be too much for the AMD FX-4300 CPU?

[Ordinarily_Greater]

1 minute ago, LOLZpersonok said:

That probably won't be an issue for me since I still play games at 1920x1080 and it could probably handle my most demanding games (Fallout 4 and Dragon Age Inquisition) at max or close to max graphics settings before this becomes a problem. Do you think a GTX 970 would be too much for the AMD FX-4300 CPU?

no, since it is like on par with RX 480

[Jurrunio]

17 minutes ago, Ordinarily_Greater said:

but if a 1050ti is stronger than 970 how can a 970 get more bottleneck?

Yes indeed, but it comes at a price little more than the 1050ti. Atm it's priced between the 1060 3gb and 1050ti, but has 1060 3gb performance. You can take advantage of its performance in the future.

[Ordinarily_Greater]

6 minutes ago, Jurrunio said:

Yes indeed, but it comes at a price little more than the 1050ti. Atm it's priced between the 1060 3gb and 1050ti, but has 1060 3gb performance. You can take advantage of its performance in the future.

I guess that card (970) is still reasonable

[Jurrunio]

22 minutes ago, LOLZpersonok said:

That probably won't be an issue for me since I still play games at 1920x1080 and it could probably handle my most demanding games (Fallout 4 and Dragon Age Inquisition) at max or close to max graphics settings before this becomes a problem. Do you think a GTX 970 would be too much for the AMD FX-4300 CPU?

I probably havent make it clear, but what I'm saying is that a 970 is a better investment assuming that you will upgrade the CPU soon.

[LOLZpersonok]

1 minute ago, Jurrunio said:

I probably havent make it clear, but what I'm saying is that a 970 is a better investment assuming that you will upgrade the CPU soon.

A CPU upgrade is actually pretty unlikely in the near future, considering at the very least I'd also need a new motherboard, and more likely need new RAM in addition to the CPU, which would bring my upgrade costs to above $400CAD, not counting any GPU upgrade. I was looking at the 1050 Ti because it's a formidable upgrade to what I've already got, yet it's pretty inexpensive (~$100). I am not wealthy, I'm an unemployed student still living with his parents. 

[Jurrunio]

41 minutes ago, LOLZpersonok said:

A CPU upgrade is actually pretty unlikely in the near future, considering at the very least I'd also need a new motherboard, and more likely need new RAM in addition to the CPU, which would bring my upgrade costs to above $400CAD, not counting any GPU upgrade. I was looking at the 1050 Ti because it's a formidable upgrade to what I've already got, yet it's pretty inexpensive (~$100). I am not wealthy, I'm an unemployed student still living with his parents. 

In that case dont get a 970. Before you get new 1050ti though also take a look at the used market. Many bought the 1050ti as a stepping stone to faster cards so there are plenty of them with decent warranty left available at good prices.

[Godlygamer23]

1 hour ago, Ordinarily_Greater said:

Wow, but are you sure you want to face with the 3.5GB VRAM + 0.5GB VRAM Problem?

That's a non-issue. I've gone past the 3.5GB partition in Hellblade, and the game ran fine. The 970, if I remember correctly from Hardware Unboxed's video, can even do some 4K gaming in certain titles.

[Ordinarily_Greater]

Just now, Godlygamer23 said:

That's a non-issue. I've gone past the 3.5GB partition in Hellblade, and the game ran fine. The 970, if I remember correctly from Hardware Unboxed's video, can even do some 4K gaming in certain titles.

Well i guess the problem has been solved

[aisle9]

2 hours ago, LOLZpersonok said:

I have in mind to upgrade the GPU in my main computer. It's currently got an NVIDIA GTX 750 Ti and I was thinking about getting a GTX 1050 Ti, as it's pretty inexpensive and still a formidable upgrade; however, I was wondering if the GTX 1060 could possibly be too fast for the AMD FX-4300 that I have right now. 

 

And lastly, out of mere curiosity, what do you think the fastest GPU I could install before something gets bottlenecked? Sure, I could upgrade to a lovely Ryzen or Intel CPU, but that'd require a new motherboard and new RAM, and I'm just looking for something that I can afford in the not too distant future. I also don't see any of the 8 core AMD FX CPUs as a formidable upgrade to what I've already got, because they don't have much better single core performance. It'd work for Blender, though.

Possible bottlenecking? No. Inevitable bottlenecking? Yes. The 4300 is a very weak CPU, but if you're looking at upgrading in the near future anyway, I see two options:

1. Get the graphics card you want to end up with now, and live with bottlenecking

2. Stick with the 750 Ti, which is more of a match for the 4300, until you're ready to do the full system upgrade, partly in hopes that graphics card prices come down some in the meantime.

 

I'd lean towards option 1.

[aisle9]

1 hour ago, Ordinarily_Greater said:

Wow, but are you sure you want to face with the 3.5GB VRAM + 0.5GB VRAM Problem?

Jesus not this again

[Mr.Meerkat]

2 hours ago, Ordinarily_Greater said:

no, since it is like on par with RX 480

*RX470