Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Would this bottleneck?

Tags:
  • GPUs
  • Nvidia
  • Bottleneck
  • CPUs
  • AMD
Last response: in Components
Share
September 24, 2014 10:36:14 AM

Yeah so im going to get a AMD FX-8350 (Just for "future proofing") and a Gigabyte GTX 970 Gaming so would the CPU bottleneck the 970 or would it be "the perfect match" im asking this because i don't want to get like 30 FPS on low on Watch dogs (That is the worst example for this but still) and also im going to buy a Asus Sabertooth 990FX R2.0 mobo and a Noctua NH-D15 (Or D14 because the D14 is 29 euros cheaper) So the things im asking are would there be any bottleneck, Is that mobo good for overclocking and should i get the D14 instead of the D15?

More about : bottleneck

a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 24, 2014 10:38:47 AM

The CPU is great for OCing with that MoBo, a member here got 5.2GHz with Phanteks air cooler here! No bottlenecks anywhere :) 
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 24, 2014 10:53:27 AM

MeteorsRaining said:
The CPU is great for OCing with that MoBo, a member here got 5.2GHz with Phanteks air cooler here! No bottlenecks anywhere :) 


You sure? http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8350-core-i7-377...

Quote from the conclusion " From now on, we'll need to limit the use of AMD's flagship to systems already bottlenecked by their graphics cards. A less expensive CPU is more attractive when it isn't affecting performance negatively. "

I do know that if the resolution is higher than 1080p the bottleneck dissapears, but up to 1080p intel is better and will let the high end GPUs stretch their legs more.

PS: The 7970 used in the article is slower than a GTX970 as well, so the gap will be even wider I assume. I'm thinking that an Intel i5/i7 would be better overall until you go past 1080p. Above that the CPU does not matter as much, so the FX would be fine at that point. I guess it's something that will eventually be looked into.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 24, 2014 10:58:31 AM

https://www.google.com/search?q=fx+8350+bottleneck&espv...
Check if the real world difference is more than 5 FPS. Also, bottleneck is when the CPU load touches 100% while GPU has not reached it. Going by that, its not a bottleneck, but simply enough the weak cores of FX 8.
m
0
l
September 24, 2014 11:00:22 AM

I don't care is i lose 0-5 frames but if i lose 10+ then im not happy. But is the GTX 970 about equal to a GTX 780? because my brother has the exact same setup that im going to get but he has a 780 and it doesen't bottleneck at all.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 24, 2014 11:02:44 AM

MeteorsRaining said:
https://www.google.com/search?q=fx+8350+bottleneck&espv...
Check if the real world difference is more than 5 FPS. Also, bottleneck is when the CPU load touches 100% while GPU has not reached it. Going by that, its not a bottleneck, but simply enough the weak cores of FX 8.


Weak cores is still a bottleneck though if the competition is getting better performance IMO. Go back and look at Skyrim and F1 from the review I posted ;)  A LOT more than 5 fps in those titles, no matter what the resolution is.....

m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 24, 2014 11:03:23 AM

Thepixel02 said:
I don't care is i lose 0-5 frames but if i lose 10+ then im not happy but is the GTX 970 about equal to a GTX 780 because my brother has the exact same setup that im going to get but he has a 780 it doesen't bottleneck at all?


Bottleneck? No. You'll be looking for i5 if you want some more FPS, but from what I've seen, the FX 8 simply is fine enough for any GPU.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 24, 2014 11:05:00 AM

sincreator said:
MeteorsRaining said:
https://www.google.com/search?q=fx+8350+bottleneck&espv...
Check if the real world difference is more than 5 FPS. Also, bottleneck is when the CPU load touches 100% while GPU has not reached it. Going by that, its not a bottleneck, but simply enough the weak cores of FX 8.


Weak cores is still a bottleneck though if the competition is getting better performance IMO.



As bottleneck is defined, you can't term that a bottleneck, its just the inability of FX 8 at stock to produce great results, OCing usually solves that.

m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 24, 2014 11:07:32 AM

MeteorsRaining said:
sincreator said:
MeteorsRaining said:
https://www.google.com/search?q=fx+8350+bottleneck&espv...
Check if the real world difference is more than 5 FPS. Also, bottleneck is when the CPU load touches 100% while GPU has not reached it. Going by that, its not a bottleneck, but simply enough the weak cores of FX 8.


Weak cores is still a bottleneck though if the competition is getting better performance IMO.



As bottleneck is defined, you can't term that a bottleneck, its just the inability of FX 8 at stock to produce great results, OCing usually solves that.



Overclocking didn't solve Skyrim/F1 performance from that article though.... Both the i7 and FX were clocked at 4.4ghz....

If the CPU is holding the graphics card(s) back from acheiving it's best results, it is the bottleneck.


m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 24, 2014 11:10:09 AM

sincreator said:
MeteorsRaining said:
sincreator said:
MeteorsRaining said:
https://www.google.com/search?q=fx+8350+bottleneck&espv...
Check if the real world difference is more than 5 FPS. Also, bottleneck is when the CPU load touches 100% while GPU has not reached it. Going by that, its not a bottleneck, but simply enough the weak cores of FX 8.


Weak cores is still a bottleneck though if the competition is getting better performance IMO.



As bottleneck is defined, you can't term that a bottleneck, its just the inability of FX 8 at stock to produce great results, OCing usually solves that.



Overclocking didn't solve Skyrim/F1 performance from that article though.... Both the i7 and FX were clocked at 4.4ghz....





Comparing an i7 to FX 8? Its vs i5. You're comparing a $330 CPU to $170 CPU, that's what you call a fair comparision?
m
0
l
September 24, 2014 11:10:40 AM

And should i get the Noctua D15 or D14 because there is a 29€ difference in the price an what would be the best cheapest case and by cheapest i mean i don't want to pay 700 dollars so that i get like one more drive bay?
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 24, 2014 11:12:31 AM

Thepixel02 said:
And should i get the Noctua D15 or D14 because there is a 29€ difference in the price an what would be the best cheapest case and by cheapest i mean i don't want to pay 700 dollars so that i get like one more drive bay?


Get D14, no real world advantage except 2-3C on OCing. D15 has more memory clearance that's all.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 24, 2014 11:15:11 AM

MeteorsRaining said:
sincreator said:
MeteorsRaining said:
sincreator said:
MeteorsRaining said:
https://www.google.com/search?q=fx+8350+bottleneck&espv...
Check if the real world difference is more than 5 FPS. Also, bottleneck is when the CPU load touches 100% while GPU has not reached it. Going by that, its not a bottleneck, but simply enough the weak cores of FX 8.


Weak cores is still a bottleneck though if the competition is getting better performance IMO.




As bottleneck is defined, you can't term that a bottleneck, its just the inability of FX 8 at stock to produce great results, OCing usually solves that.



Overclocking didn't solve Skyrim/F1 performance from that article though.... Both the i7 and FX were clocked at 4.4ghz....





Comparing an i7 to FX 8? Its vs i5. You're comparing a $330 CPU to $170 CPU, that's what you call a fair comparision?



k, fair enough. What about these results then? http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8350-vishera-rev...

This shows exactly what I was saying. Up to 1080p Intel is best, higher than that and they equal out. It only happens because the stress is shifted towards the graphics card at the higher resolution. All of codemasters games, GRID/DIRT/F1 show this as well.

m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 24, 2014 11:22:06 AM

And this?




Quoting benchmarks is not everything. This can go on and on. The game majorly decides what will run great on it, some are Intel inclined, but most multi core optimized games run just as well on FX 8, if not better.

m
0
l
September 24, 2014 11:24:43 AM

Im going to play at 1080p and in the future get a 1440p monitor but im not going to play "old games" with this hardware that would just be stupid.
But more about the case think what is the best cheapest case that would fit all these components without like modifying it?
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 24, 2014 11:26:07 AM

Thepixel02 said:
Im going to play at 1080p and in the future get a 1440p monitor but im not going to play "old games" with this hardware that would just be stupid.
But more about the case think what is the best cheapest case that would fit all these components without like modifying it?


Bitfenix Ghost, Phantoms, Fractals, Lian Li, and more. Budget?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 24, 2014 11:28:55 AM

In the first pic you posted, it shows what I have been saying. Look at stock vs stock. The second bench shows a game that is actually able to use all 8 cores vs a 4 core chip. Sadly most games are not that well optimised yet, and better hardware will be available by the time it is normal in games.... I believe BF3/4 is the only case where this happens as well. I'm not going to argue further because pretty much every review out there shows the Intel i5/i7 to be superior in games. It's in pretty much every conclusion that i5's and i7's are better gaming chips. Even an i3 beats the 8350 in some rare cases, lol. Bottom line, in order to get the most out of your GPU in the majority of cases, you need an i5/i7. We are talking about high end video cards, not mid range, or low end. For those I would recommend an FX because they are most likely to be on a tighter budget.
m
0
l
September 24, 2014 11:30:44 AM

Well under 120 dollars i can be on sale also so if it normally is 170 dollars and its on sale for 120 dollars its then on my budget.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 24, 2014 11:31:50 AM

sincreator said:
In the first pic you posted, it shows what I have been saying. Look at stock vs stock. The second bench shows a game that is actually able to use all 8 cores vs a 4 core chip. Sadly most games are not that well optimised yet, and better hardware will be available by the time it is normal in games.... I believe BF3/4 is the only case where this happens as well. I'm not going to argue further because pretty much every review out there shows the Intel i5/i7 to be superior in games. It's in pretty much every conclusion that i5's and i7's are better gaming chips. Even an i3 beats the 8350 in some rare cases, lol.


Fair enough, the notion that i5 is better chip was never argued upon, on what basis do you say FX 8 will bottleneck the hardware in any way. The first thing I said is FX 8 has weak cores, so it definately won't win vs i5, but is that what OP asks? If you're keeping your opinion or suggestion, you can't say FX 8 will 'bottleneck', that's an insult of a CPU which can max out any game without any issues, and that's coming from an Intel user.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 24, 2014 11:40:04 AM

I just assume if someone spends over $300 on a video card they would want the most performance out of it, honestly. I see Intel beating AMD in these games as a bottleneck on AMD's part, and yes it is a sign of weak cores as well. It doesn't change the fact that the AMD chip is holding back performance. Call it a bottleneck or not, it doesn't change the facts. Intel comes out on top 95% of the time. Even the writer from the article I posted called it a bottleneck. I quoted that part in my first post. "Not allready bottlenecked by it's graphics card"
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 24, 2014 11:43:54 AM

Whatever you do OP, don't drop the 970.
m
0
l
September 24, 2014 11:50:34 AM

What would be the case for these part for under 120 dollars? And also what does that OP mean i have seen it in so many posts?
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 24, 2014 11:52:45 AM

NZXT 530 or Corsair 450D or Fractal R2 XL.
m
0
l
September 24, 2014 12:05:40 PM

Thanks ill ask some more questions tomorrow because here in finland the time is past midnight.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 24, 2014 12:21:12 PM

OP means Original poster. :) 
m
0
l
September 24, 2014 9:27:52 PM

Would the Corsair 450D fit the Noctua NH-D14 without trouble and (i now that every chip is different) how much would i be able to overclock? 4.2Ghz? 4.5Ghz? 4.7Ghz?
m
0
l
September 24, 2014 10:03:33 PM

And also what is the difference between AMD FX-8350 and AMD FX-8350 BLACK EDITION?
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 24, 2014 11:46:25 PM

According to reviews, 450D can allow big coolers upto 165mm, D14 won't be an issue. 4.7GHz should be possible. It really depends on chip, some people have trouble going past 4.5, some can get 5+ on air coolers, with that very MoBo.
No real world difference b/w normal and Black edition, get the one you find cheaper.
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 2:13:09 AM

But what is the difference between the normal and black edition does the black edition overclock better or something like that?
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 25, 2014 2:17:32 AM

All FX CPU's are "Black Edition" CPU's. That term used to signify that that particular CPU had an unlocked multiplier, but since all FX CPU's do, it's kind of redundant. Both are the exact same.
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 2:25:41 AM

So if i buy a AMD FX-8350 and i doesen't say black edition it still has unlocked multiplier?
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 25, 2014 2:55:48 AM

Yep, all FX CPUs have unlocked multipliers, wheather or not they're BE.
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 4:20:17 AM

Can you overclock with a Asus M5A97 R2.0 because i was reading forums and at one forum they said it is really bad at overclocking and at other forum one guy said that he had overclocked a 8320 to 4.5Ghz.

EDIT: I found the post its http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answers/id-2301082/asus-m...
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 25, 2014 4:27:47 AM

Thepixel02 said:
Can you overclock with a Asus M5A97 R2.0 because i was reading forums and at one forum they said it is really bad at overclocking and at other forum one guy said that he had overclocked a 8320 to 4.5Ghz.

EDIT: I found the post its http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answers/id-2301082/asus-m...


We were on a 99FX Sabertooth R.2 right? It's fine for OCing, moderately, not the best at it though. 4+2 Power phases is not going to be great for OCing.
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 4:35:58 AM

Yes im on the Sabertooth but my brother (one of them) has a Asus M5A97 R2.0 and he says its BS in overclocking but the guy on the post said he had a 8320 OC'd to 4.5Ghz (without changeing the volts?!?).
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 25, 2014 4:38:07 AM

Its not great for OCing, don't expect 4.7GHz on it, 4.3Ghz is what I'd say.
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 4:55:26 AM

But should i get the 8320 instead on 8350 and save 60 euros on it? And OC ofcourse.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 25, 2014 4:57:58 AM

Get 8320 with Sabertooth and OC to around 4.7GHz, they're the same chips with different clock rates.
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 4:59:25 AM

And also i was watching JayzTwoCents and he got 4.4Ghz on stock volts on the 8350 would that be possible with the 8320 with stock volts? And i know that every chip is different but would it still be possible?
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 25, 2014 5:05:01 AM

As you already mentioned, possible on some, not on many.
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 5:11:31 AM

I was watching one OC guide just 2 minutes ago and somebody said this "
The 8320 isn't a underclocked 8350. amd take the poorer quality, less stable chips and lable them as 8320's, that's why you can oc 8350 to 5 ghz and above with good cooling but you can't usually oc to 5ghz with an 8320 unless you are very lucky."
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 25, 2014 5:13:01 AM

You simply can't take every 8350 to 5Ghz that way, even with CLCs and 12 power phases MoBo. 8350 is better, but both have nearly the same max OC point.
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 5:38:40 AM

But the "amd take the poorer quality, less stable chips and lable them as 8320's" is that true and what is CLC i know what a power phase is but what is CLC?
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 25, 2014 5:47:16 AM

CLC means Closed loop coolers, ie, liquid coolers which are usually used for extreme OCs. Also, CPU requires more power for more OC, so to supply that power, there are power phases, and on top of that are thermals to control the heat which comes out of those.
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 5:50:47 AM

But the "amd take the poorer quality, less stable chips and lable them as 8320's" is that true? Can you say if (its a big IF) i buy the 8320 to get the most performance out of the GTX970 how much should i overclock it? 4.2Ghz? 4.4Ghz 4.5+Ghz?
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 25, 2014 5:52:34 AM

4.4GHz will suffice. How can I justify something which I don't agree with, which is said by someone else? The chips are as stable with 20 as with 50, I've seen people OC it past 4.5Ghz, I don't understand why you neglect 100 reviews for 1 critic?
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 5:59:59 AM

Just to be sure but my brother (again one of them) has the exact same setup im going to get also i decided to get the 8320 and drop the GTX 970 for a GTX 28... just kidding im not going to change it and also im surprised about that you guys gave me a suggestion of the case as Corsair 450D and just before that my brother said after i asked him that he has the 450D and now i know that everything will fit inside the case.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 25, 2014 6:02:42 AM

Haha great, you're good to go it seems :) 
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 6:05:38 AM

But what does higher pinned CPU mean because at one forum someone said that the 8350 is higher pinned than the 8320?
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a c 266 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 25, 2014 6:07:23 AM

Higher clocked...
m
0
l
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!