overclock Not performance improvement noticeable on i7 7700k overclocked to 4.8GHz

[Karl Sven]

Well, simple as that. No improvement AT ALL.

Is not the first time I try this. Now I'm trying it with AC: Origins, a game I've read is CPU demanding. I tried also with The Division back in the day, 4.9GHz that time with the same results. No noticeable improvement whatsoever.

Is not that I need it on 3440x1440 cause it runs 60fps stable, but in my 4K TV still have some issues running at 45/50 with some eventual drops, so I thought maybe a CPU overclock might have helped. And anyway, Is always nice to learn more ^^. 

Anyone throwing some light?

I'll copy my Pc components list here  :

• CPU
  Intel Core i7-7700K @ 4.20GHz
• Motherboard
  Asus ROG STRIX Z270E GAMING
• RAM
  16 GB
• GPU
  MSI GeForce GTX 1080 Gaming X
• Case
  Thermaltake Core P5
• Storage
  M.2 Samsung 960 EVO Series 250GB
• PSU
  Toughpower Grand RGB 750W Gold Full Modular
• Display(s)
  Ultrawide 3440x1440 Asus ROG SWIFT PG348Q
• Cooling
  Water cooled Corsair H100i v2
• Keyboard
  Razer Blackwidow X Chroma
• Mouse
  Logitech G502 Proteus Spectrum
• Sound
  Astro's A50 3gen
• Operating System
  Windows 10

[unknownmiscreant]

Its probably GPU limited. You can have the best CPU money can buy and it will make no difference till you upgrade the GPU.

[Karl Sven]

Just now, unknownmiscreant said:

Its probably GPU limited. You can have the best CPU money can buy and it will make no difference till you upgrade the GPU.

Mmmmm possible. Though with a 1080 is not in my plans to buy a Ti or a titan just for this

Funny story cause I bought the card just 2 weeks before the Ti was released  Though the reviews with the Ti aren't much better than with the 1080 stock, so don't think even that would make night and day difference. 

I have the GPU a bit more overclocked than MSI stock btw, that it does gives me like a 5fps boost.

[unknownmiscreant]

Bad luck. But welcome to PC hardware....

 

A 1080ti is quite a jump compared to a 1080, it will make a difference. But I would buy another 1080 and run SLI rather than a 1080ti. It looks like you have a decent card with an aftermarket cooler, so I overclocking it to 2GHz ish would make a difference.

[Carclis]

At that resolution you're unlikely to find a game that is limited by your CPU more than your GPU.

[Karl Sven]

1 minute ago, unknownmiscreant said:

Bad luck. But welcome to PC hardware....

 

A 1080ti is quite a jump compared to a 1080, it will make a difference. But I would buy another 1080 and run SLI rather than a 1080ti. It looks like you have a decent card with an aftermarket cooler, so I overclocking it to 2GHz ish would make a difference.

Yeh, I overclocked it until it gave me artifacts. Still running at 40 degrees under high load with fans at 150% speed. 

[unknownmiscreant]

3 minutes ago, Karl Sven said:

Yeh, I overclocked it until it gave me artifacts. Still running at 40 degrees under high load with fans at 150% speed. 

Leave the CPU OCed if you do professional workloads or stuff other than gaming. Otherwise I would push it back a bit to prolong life.

 

If you want better gaming performance get another 1080. I'll likely get another 1070 once volta comes out and pascal is cheap 2nd hand. What have you got it OCed to?

[Karl Sven]

3 minutes ago, unknownmiscreant said:

Leave the CPU OCed if you do professional workloads or stuff other than gaming. Otherwise I would push it back a bit to prolong life.

 

If you want better gaming performance get another 1080. I'll likely get another 1070 once volta comes out and pascal is cheap 2nd hand. What have you got it OCed to?

 

[unknownmiscreant]

Thanks, but due to GPU boost 3.0, I have no way of knowing the core clocks under load. Depending on what that does you might be able to get a bit more out of the core and dial back the memory.

[Karl Sven]

3 minutes ago, unknownmiscreant said:

Thanks, but due to GPU boost 3.0, I have no way of knowing the core clocks under load. Depending on what that does you might be able to get a bit more out of the core and dial back the memory.

I copied this from a webpage where they were making tests with same model as I have. Then I tried rising the numbers little by little until it gave me artifacts.

I can rise a bit without failing but with not noticeable improvement either. So i decided to let it be like the web suggested. 

[MVPernula]

12 minutes ago, Carclis said:

At that resolution you're unlikely to find a game that is limited by your CPU more than your GPU.

It's the other way around.

At lower resolutions it's more CPU bound since it has to keep up with the GPU.
"Less pixels- easier for GPU"

 

At higher resolutions like 3840x2160 or 3440x1440 the GPU has to work more pixels around, your CPU doesn't have to work as much with the GPU to keep up with the frames.

This is why your CPU is the bottleneck at 1080p in higher framerates, it can't keep up with the GPU.

In higher resolutions your GPU simple doesn't have the horsepower to run those frames, so your CPU is chilling

[Karl Sven]

I'll share some screenshots =)

The artistic department in this game is absolutely astonishing.

 

[Carclis]

5 minutes ago, MVPernula said:

It's the other way around.

At lower resolutions it's more CPU bound since it has to keep up with the GPU.
"Less pixels- easier for GPU"

 

At higher resolutions like 3840x2160 or 3440x1440 the GPU has to work more pixels around, your CPU doesn't have to work as much with the GPU to keep up with the frames.

This is why your CPU is the bottleneck at 1080p in higher framerates, it can't keep up with the GPU.

In higher resolutions your GPU simple doesn't have the horsepower to run those frames, so your CPU is chilling

That is what I said =)

[MVPernula]

2 minutes ago, Carclis said:

That is what I said =)

 

28 minutes ago, Carclis said:

At that resolution you're unlikely to find a game that is limited by your CPU more than your GPU.

He said he's playing on high resolutions, that means he's limited by GPU, right?

Am I misunderstanding something?  

[Carclis]

Just now, MVPernula said:

 

He said he's playing on high resolutions, that means he's limited by GPU, right?

Am I misunderstanding something?  

Let me rephrase that.

At 3440*1440 he is unlikely to find a game where his CPU is a greater limiting factor than his GPU.

[MVPernula]

1 minute ago, Carclis said:

Let me rephrase that.

At 3440*1440 he is unlikely to find a game where his CPU is a greater limiting factor than his GPU.

Hey now I see what I missed.. SOrry!

[Karl Sven]

9 minutes ago, Carclis said:

Let me rephrase that.

At 3440*1440 he is unlikely to find a game where his CPU is a greater limiting factor than his GPU.

 

7 minutes ago, MVPernula said:

Hey now I see what I missed.. SOrry!

Actually even in the resolution I'm having "problems" (only running at 45/50fps with eventual drops) Is at 4K, at 3440x1440 I'm at rock solid 60 all the time.

Though more than that is not achivable either