Is my system good enough for a GTX 1080?

[LordofSavages]

In my experience, at 1440p with a 4690k and a 1070. The CPU did bottleneck the graphics card slightly even while overclocked. However, the bottleneck wasn't very severe and at worst, it dropped the graphics card to 70-80% usage.

[i_build_nanosuits]

1 minute ago, Hip said:

Can the i5 4690k be compared to the 4670?

yes they are the same, the 4690K is clocked a bit faster but it won't change much if anything at all...

 

As you can see in the video the GPU isn't maxing out most of the time, and the CPU is maxed out most of the time...pointing to a pretty heavy CPU bottleneck...but Battlefield game is known to be very CPU heavy especially the multiplayer.

[i_build_nanosuits]

3 minutes ago, AngryBeaver said:

Ok there has been some misinformation spewed in this thread so I am going to try to correct as much of it as I can.

 

That cpu (4670k) might slightly bottleneck your gpu, maybe 10-12% at stock settings. It being a i5 without hyper-threading also hurts it a little in highly multi-threaded games, but in general that CPU will be fine with a 1080 and here is why.

 

It is an unlocked cpu, that means you an easily overclock it to 4+ ghz. If you were to say overclocking it to 4.2ghz (easy on that chip) then you would basically eliminate the bottleneck. If you push it to 4.5ghz (also easily doable for that chip) then you will be sitting pretty.

 

So even with stock values you might see some FPS loss, but nothing worth noting and it would only occur at high frame rate scenarios in 1080p. So instead of getting 150fps like you would on a brand new 8700k at stock, you might get 136 fps. So once again not an issue or deal breaker. The point is you can obtain more than enough fps to make your gameplay enjoyable and take advantage of a 144hz monitor. If you are willing to overclock then you can overcome the gap in performance. Just remember ANY cpu will bottle neck a powerful card.. the matter is where does that occur. I can take a 8700k overclock it to 5.5ghz and then toss in a 1060 and crank the graphics back to 720p and the 8700k would bottleneck the 1060 to a huge degree.

 

There is always going to be a bottleneck be it on the CPU or GPU. The easier it is for the gpu to render something the more load is put on the cpu, and the harder it is for a gpu to render the less load on the cpu. It all comes down to how many draw calls the CPU needs to process.

you underestimate the CPU demand of modern open world games and you are overestimating the performance of the core i5 by a long shot and also you overestimate the benefit of overclocking a CPU that is lacking ressources to begin with.

[Hip]

4 minutes ago, AngryBeaver said:

 

So even with stock values you might see some FPS loss, but nothing worth noting and it would only occur at high frame rate scenarios in 1080p.

But I have a 1440p monitor not a 1080p. Would it also be fine then?

[AngryBeaver]

5 minutes ago, Hip said:

But I have a 1440p monitor not a 1080p. Would it also be fine then?

If you are running 1440p, then you will not see any bottlenecking.

[AngryBeaver]

19 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

you underestimate the CPU demand of modern open world games and you are overestimating the performance of the core i5 by a long shot and also you overestimate the benefit of overclocking a CPU that is lacking ressources to begin with.

So the core i5 is identical to an i7 in every way except for hyperthreading and maybe a little less cache. So in a highly multi-threaded game the lack of hyperthreading will make a difference, but 6+ core cpu's didn't really take off until recently, so this still isn't something that we see a lot of in the gaming world. There are a handful of usage cases, but for the most part your clock speed and ipc make the biggest difference in gaming where Single thread performance is king.

 

So for him to see similar performance to the newest higher clock speed cpu's he would want to close that frequency gap, he cannot do anything to help with ipc improvements, but even still he is at worst 10% behind in IPC and at best 5%. So it isn't a huge factor.

 

So you are the one that is over-stating the issue. That being said OP is using 1440p, which means the bottleneck will 100% be on the GPU and not the CPU.

 

Also what "resources" do you say this cpu is lacking? Cache? Hyper-threading?  The latter is the only real argument, but overclocking DOES make a difference in a pretty meaningful way at this level. If for example he is running the cpu at stock clocks without multi-core enhancements that means this cpu can boost as high as 3.8ghz on 2 cores, but also drop to 3.4ghz when several 3+ are in use. If he for example has multi-core on that means it is at 3.8ghz on all 4 cores. So just with MCE on vs off = 11% difference in performance. Now if he pushes that clock to say 4.5ghz (very doable with this chip) that puts his total performance gain at 25% over stock. So that isn't any meaningful gain in your mind?  

[i_build_nanosuits]

5 minutes ago, AngryBeaver said:

So you are the one that is over-stating the issue. That being said OP is using 1440p, which means the bottleneck will 100% be on the GPU and not the CPU.

yeah sure...watch this:

 

 

[Hip]

1 minute ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

yeah sure...watch this:

 

 

That dude just gets around 80 FPS with better CPU than me? Is that okay for a 144Hz monitor? Would it run better with 75Hz?

[AngryBeaver]

3 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

yeah sure...watch this:

 

 

Give me a link that isn't a embedded video. I cannot view this from work as DLP rules block it.

[i_build_nanosuits]

1 minute ago, Hip said:

That dude just gets around 80 FPS with better CPU than me? Is that okay for a 144Hz monitor? Would it run better with 75Hz?

your monitor has Gsync?

If so, yes 80FPS is fine i myself use a 144hz 1440p Gsync monior and honestly anything above 80FPS is icing on the cake.

[i_build_nanosuits]

2 minutes ago, AngryBeaver said:

Give me a link that isn't a embedded video. I cannot view this from work as DLP rules block it.

https://youtu.be/gLCNq0OMTJw

 

[Hip]

6 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

your monitor has Gsync?

If so, yes 80FPS is fine i myself use a 144hz 1440p Gsync monior and honestly anything above 80FPS is icing on the cake.

Nope, it is Free Sync.

[AngryBeaver]

8 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

https://youtu.be/gLCNq0OMTJw

 

BF isn't a typical result though. It is one of the few games that is incredibly CPU hungry and also takes advantage of high core counts. So it means the Hyper-threading makes a big difference here as it can split tasks up in to smaller chunks and spread the work out.

 

Looking over benchmarks even with a recent high end cpu the 1080 is only pushing 85-90's average at 1440p. So even in that game it isn't life or death or even enough to make the game feel bad. Bf games are an outlier in how much they benefit hyper-threaded cpu's

[i_build_nanosuits]

1 minute ago, AngryBeaver said:

BF isn't a typical result though. It is one of the few games that is incredibly CPU hungry and also takes advantage of high core counts. So it means the Hyper-threading makes a big difference here as it can split tasks up in to smaller chunks and spread the work out.

want me to link witcher 3? ghost recon wildlands? resident evil 7? just cause 3? hitman? Rise of the tomb raider? or you can check them for yourself.

 

I'm not disputing the fact that the core i5 will perform well in MOST games...there are a lot of newer titles that rely heavy on the CPU and it's ability to process more than 4 threads at a time.

[-rascal-]

16 minutes ago, AngryBeaver said:

BF isn't a typical result though. It is one of the few games that is incredibly CPU hungry and also takes advantage of high core counts. So it means the Hyper-threading makes a big difference here as it can split tasks up in to smaller chunks and spread the work out.

 

Looking over benchmarks even with a recent high end cpu the 1080 is only pushing 85-90's average at 1440p. So even in that game it isn't life or death or even enough to make the game feel bad. Bf games are an outlier in how much they benefit hyper-threaded cpu's

 

@Hip is mainly using his PC for BF1 / BF5, though.

This is why @i_build_nanosuits is referencing BF videos (I'm assuming; work is also blocking YT for me).

 

 

You will be okay with a 144Hz monitor and a GTX 1080.

The i5-4670K, especially when at stock frequency, might limit your FPS a little.

The chance of dips below 144Hz might be more frequent.

All that said, there is NO reason to get a 75Hz monitor because of this.

 

You are like saying...

I'm thinking of buying a 840 HP Dodge DEMON!! So I can go FAST!! And maybe do some track runs for the LULs in the summer.

But the road limits around where I live max's out at 100 mph.

Should I buy a Nissan Sentra instead?

 

 

[Hip]

47 minutes ago, -rascal- said:

 

@Hip is mainly using his PC for BF1 / BF5, though.

This is why @i_build_nanosuits is referencing BF videos (I'm assuming; work is also blocking YT for me).

 

 

You will be okay with a 144Hz monitor and a GTX 1080.

The i5-4670K, especially when at stock frequency, might limit your FPS a little.

The chance of dips below 144Hz might be more frequent.

All that said, there is NO reason to get a 75Hz monitor because of this.

 

You are like saying...

I'm thinking of buying a 840 HP Dodge DEMON!! So I can go FAST!! And maybe do some track runs for the LULs in the summer.

But the road limits around where I live max's out at 100 mph.

Should I buy a Nissan Sentra instead?

 

 

Thank you for this clear statement!

[GoodGuy06]

yes, but I would recommend a better cpu later on