Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Will CPU Bottleneck new GPU?

Last response: in Components
Share
March 5, 2014 1:22:21 PM

I have an AMD FX-4100 CPU and I am planning to buy a Gigabyte GTX 770, but I am afraid my CPU will bottleneck the performance of the GPU. Will this be a real problem? I am mainly planning on gaming on my system.

More about : cpu bottleneck gpu

a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
March 5, 2014 1:29:10 PM

Yes. First generation AMD FX CPUs basically suck. A 4100 FX has similar performance to an Intel Q9550 or 9450, of which definitely can't support a 770.

The most powerful GPU I would use with a 4100 would be a 650 it, a 750 GTX or a 7770 HD.
m
0
l
a c 114 à CPUs
a b À AMD
March 5, 2014 1:32:26 PM

It won't bottleneck the 770 in games that are GPU-intensive, it has enough power to allow the 770 to perform at its best, but in any kind of game that utilizes the CPU as well you will see bad performance.

Bottleneck is thrown around too easily. It depends on what game you'll be playing.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b à CPUs
March 5, 2014 1:50:50 PM

A GTX770 will do just fine in your PC. It is a newer CPU and won't "bottleneck" your GPU. A game will perform based on its requirements and you will see increased performance in all games. However, in those that have already exhausted your CPU resources you will see less of a gain and that will now be the component that will hold your PC back. Typically, it's the GPU that holds back gaming performance on a machine.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
March 5, 2014 2:20:13 PM

Well to each their own. I just feel that's a bad investment.
m
0
l
a c 114 à CPUs
a b À AMD
March 5, 2014 2:28:57 PM

Not exactly 'to each their own' to answer this question. The question is will it bottleneck, and the answer is no. Feeling it's a bad investment is another topic, and is opinion based. It takes a pretty slow CPU to effectively bottleneck a 770.

No matter what, buying a 770 now will give better performance than using that amount of money and buying a newer FX-series CPU and one of the GPUs you listed above.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
March 5, 2014 2:47:01 PM

i dont see any bottleneck but..... you need to be in dual channel mode memory and have a really good aftermarket
cpu cooler because of the heat of fx cpu , get at least 8GB (2x4)1600 Mhz MEMORY

m
0
l

Best solution

a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
March 5, 2014 3:23:17 PM

HiTechObsessed said:
Not exactly 'to each their own' to answer this question. The question is will it bottleneck, and the answer is no. Feeling it's a bad investment is another topic, and is opinion based. It takes a pretty slow CPU to effectively bottleneck a 770.

No matter what, buying a 770 now will give better performance than using that amount of money and buying a newer FX-series CPU and one of the GPUs you listed above.


I completely disagree. Yes the term bottleneck is used too much. The the reason people ask the question is because they want to know if they have adequate hardware for an upgrade. The 4100 isn't adequate for a 770 GTX. The 770GTX will be held back and by quite a bit by the 4100. I didn't mean to make this into an argument which is why "I said to each their own" to simply move on. The 4100FX is slow. It has the performance level of an Phenom II 945. I wouldn't pair a 945 with a 6970 or a 7850. Even if the game is GPU dependent, having consistent frames is going to be tough. Which is why it's a bad investment. You're absolutely correct, the 770 will complete destroy the GPUs I listed. But I also didn't jump to the conclusion that the OP didn't want to consider updating their CPU either.

HiTech, you smart guy. We've agreed on many things. This one I'm just going to have to say no. I haven't read anything that would make me think otherwise. I'm for having a balanced system. I just don't see how there's any balance here.

Again, to each their own.
Share
a c 114 à CPUs
a b À AMD
March 5, 2014 6:20:56 PM

I personally agree with you on the balanced build, and I probably should have said that in my first post, I apologize. What I was meaning to get across, was if someone finds this thread in the future after, let's say, getting a 770 for a birthday, and wanted to know if they need a new CPU for it, they would know that the 4100 isn't going to bottleneck the card. Granted, a better CPU will yield better performance, but what if someone can only upgrade here and there? For gaming, the biggest return will be from the GPU upgrade. So if they wanted immediate returns, the 770 now, and a 6350 or 8350 in the future would be a great path.

I apologize for kind of jumping the gun here, and my personal opinion is the same as yours. I just wanted to point out that physically speaking, the 4100 will not bottleneck the 770.
m
0
l
March 6, 2014 12:24:13 AM

Thank you all for your replies. I will think about upgrading my CPU. Is there any AMD CPU you recommend, so I don't have to replace my Motherboard, or do you think I should get an Intel instead?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
March 6, 2014 4:52:23 AM

In order for a CPU upgrade, we need to know the make and model of the motherboard you have. While you're at it, please post your entire computer build. Let's make sure that you have all the right components to support the 770 GTX.
m
0
l
March 6, 2014 6:04:23 AM

My build:
Motherboard- Asus M5A97
CPU- AMD FX4100 Black Edition
GPU- Radeon HD 6700 Series
600 Watt 80+ Bronze PSU
8Gb Ram @ 1600 Mhz (overclocked from 1333 Mhz and haven't had any problems with that)
1TB HDD WD Caviar Green


m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
March 6, 2014 6:54:18 AM

HiTechObsessed said:
I personally agree with you on the balanced build, and I probably should have said that in my first post, I apologize. What I was meaning to get across, was if someone finds this thread in the future after, let's say, getting a 770 for a birthday, and wanted to know if they need a new CPU for it, they would know that the 4100 isn't going to bottleneck the card. Granted, a better CPU will yield better performance, but what if someone can only upgrade here and there? For gaming, the biggest return will be from the GPU upgrade. So if they wanted immediate returns, the 770 now, and a 6350 or 8350 in the future would be a great path.

I apologize for kind of jumping the gun here, and my personal opinion is the same as yours. I just wanted to point out that physically speaking, the 4100 will not bottleneck the 770.


Well, you do make a good points. Ultimately, this is a common thing. There's nothing stopping people from buying/building unbalanced systems. We know it happens. It comes down to education on components which apart from the people who read computer sites everyday, the average person wouldn't have a clue. I'm no expert. I've made a few foolish purchases in the past. Over the past few years, I've geared myself towards having a better balanced build. The upgrade of a GPU will yield the most returns in performance. But sustaining those yields, in this case, will fall back on the CPU. You know, like BF4? I can only imagine watching the FPS on High go from 80 to 20 because of the explosions. Now BF4 is a special case because it's a demanding game. Considering I can't make the choice on which games a person will play, I guess I'd play the safe scenario.
m
0
l
March 6, 2014 8:03:51 AM

Yeah I might go for a fx-6300 or fx-8320, but then I'll buy a less expensive GPU, maybe a GTX 760 or a R9 270X.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
March 6, 2014 12:54:51 PM

LoTechx said:
Yeah I might go for a fx-6300 or fx-8320, but then I'll buy a less expensive GPU, maybe a GTX 760 or a R9 270X.


To be honest, I would stick with your current FX-4100 and get the GTX770. You will see better performance with that and your currently CPU than you would upgrading you CPU and getting a lesser performing video card. It is a quad core chip so it should handle most games pretty decently. The URL below is a BF4 CPU benchmark using a 290X and performance is pretty good until you get to the much lower end CPU's and less than 4 cores. There will be few games that your 4100 will REALLY take a beating on. If you were building from scratch, sure I'd advise spending a few extra bucks on an FX6300 or greater, but at this point the money is better spent on a better GPU.

http://www.techspot.com/review/734-battlefield-4-benchm...
m
0
l
a c 114 à CPUs
a b À AMD
March 6, 2014 1:12:06 PM

Wow, I'm going to store that test, that's really interesting. This shows the 4100 isn't actually that bad for gaming, although we know it's awful for normal computing lol

Edit: Although, this test is done on single player. 64 player multiplayer would take a lot more CPU power, would be interesting to see that test's results.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
March 6, 2014 2:57:28 PM

HiTechObsessed said:
Wow, I'm going to store that test, that's really interesting. This shows the 4100 isn't actually that bad for gaming, although we know it's awful for normal computing lol

Edit: Although, this test is done on single player. 64 player multiplayer would take a lot more CPU power, would be interesting to see that test's results.


You pointed out exactly what I point out every time I see that test, single player. The moment multiplayer is engaged, all bets are off.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-4100-core-i3-210...
http://www.legitreviews.com/amd-fx-4100-quad-core-3-6gh...
m
0
l
!