Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

I7 3930k or 3820 to avoid bottleneck 680 gtx Sli?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 4, 2012 2:08:45 PM

I am going to buy a new PC with 680 gtx Sli. If I equip it with a i7 3820, could the 680 gtx Sli be limited by the CPU? Would a i7 3930k be a better choice? Worth spending more money? I am going to play at 1920x1080 with all filters on AA AF AO Vsync. Thanks.
a b Î Nvidia
November 4, 2012 2:21:18 PM

It would not bottle neck with a i5-2500K or a i5-3570k but if your going to go with the kind of setup i think i7 3930k is a much better choice then i7 3820
November 4, 2012 2:25:58 PM

bigcyco1 said:
It would not bottle neck with a i5-2500K or a i5-3570k but if your going to go with the kind of setup i think i7 3930k is a much better choice then i7 3820


thanks. I forgot to mention that i am not going to overclock it, so i will keep the 3820 at 3,6ghz. Could it be a problem to push the 680 gtx SLI?
Related resources
a b Î Nvidia
November 4, 2012 2:34:28 PM

jaredimre said:
thanks. I forgot to mention that i am not going to overclock it, so i will keep the 3820 at 3,6ghz. Could it be a problem to push the 680 gtx SLI?
:lol:  No bud. ;) 
a c 80 Î Nvidia
November 4, 2012 2:34:56 PM

Two 680's at 1080p will likely cause some bottlenecking no matter what CPU you get. That is generally way more graphics horse power than you need at 1080p, unless you are using 120hz or 3D. However, bottlenecks different from game to game. Games that are CPU bound will certainly bottleneck that much horse power.

That said, it won't hardly matter, as you'll be getting FPS far above your monitors refresh rate, so anything beyond 60 FPS is pointless, unless you have a 120hz monitor.
a b Î Nvidia
November 4, 2012 2:37:36 PM

The i7 3820 does 4.5Ghz easy and no even two 690 will not bottleneck. I know you mentioned you won't be overclocking but if worse came to worse i am just giving you a example of what you could do.
a b Î Nvidia
November 4, 2012 2:37:36 PM

bystander said:
Two 680's at 1080p will likely cause some bottlenecking no matter what CPU you get. That is generally way more graphics horse power than you need at 1080p, unless you are using 120hz or 3D. However, bottlenecks different from game to game. Games that are CPU bound will certainly bottleneck that much horse power.

That said, it won't hardly matter, as you'll be getting FPS far above your monitors refresh rate, so anything beyond 60 FPS is pointless, unless you have a 120hz monitor.
+1
a c 80 Î Nvidia
November 4, 2012 2:44:40 PM

bigcyco1 said:
:o  i never knew that thanks for info bud


Those are examples of bottlenecks, of course more demanding games won't as much. The question is, "is the cost worth the times it does help".

I'd say 2 680's aren't worth it for 60hz, I would say 2 670's may be worth 120hz or 3D Vision, but not 60hz.
November 4, 2012 2:53:40 PM

Just get 2 670s. The price performance ratio of the 680 is a rip off, considering you're barely benefiting from the 670.

It's also cheaper, so that's what I would get.
a b Î Nvidia
November 4, 2012 2:53:47 PM

bystander said:
Those are examples of bottlenecks, of course more demanding games won't as much. The question is, "is the cost worth the times it does help".

I'd say 2 680's aren't worth it for 60hz, I would say 2 670's may be worth 120hz or 3D Vision, but not 60hz.
This is a bit off topic so i will get right back on topic after no worries!I traded two 570's for a Asus GTX 680 DirectCU II Top when i saw it in person and held it for first time i was like holy crap :o  what a monster!And then when gaming with it something strange happened this came to mind Asus 680 Top = http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=w... and couldn't get that out my head the whole day :heink:  :lol: 
a b Î Nvidia
November 4, 2012 2:59:07 PM

lchrisk said:
Just get 2 670s. The price performance ratio of the 680 is a rip off, considering you're barely benefiting from the 670.

It's also cheaper, so that's what I would get.
I pretty much agree with this
November 4, 2012 5:00:30 PM

Ok, fine. Thank you very much for your evidences. So I presume that a 3930k rather than a 3820 could give my 680 gtx Sli only a moderate fps boost when playing at 1920x1080 all filters ON (AA, AF, and so on). Am I wrong?
November 5, 2012 10:25:43 AM

Regardless of buying a 3820 rather than a 3930K, if I use 1920x1080 60Hz display (not 120Hz), can I see the difference between e.g. 90-100 fps and 60 fps when I play video games with Sli enabled? Do they look smoother even with a 60Hz display when reaching 100 fps instead of 60 fps?
a c 80 Î Nvidia
November 5, 2012 1:31:37 PM

jaredimre said:
Regardless of buying a 3820 rather than a 3930K, if I use 1920x1080 60Hz display (not 120Hz), can I see the difference between e.g. 90-100 fps and 60 fps when I play video games with Sli enabled? Do they look smoother even with a 60Hz display when reaching 100 fps instead of 60 fps?


There are two ways you can play:

With v-sync - This will prevent screen tearing, but will cap your FPS at your refresh rate, at which point, there will be absolutely no difference.

Without v-sync - You will have screen tearing on the screen all the time at those FPS. The higher the FPS, the more tearing. You will visually see no more FPS, but you may notice a slight difference in responsiveness, at least in games like CS source, in which some of the physics is actually influenced by FPS.
November 5, 2012 5:38:49 PM

bystander said:
There are two ways you can play:

With v-sync - This will prevent screen tearing, but will cap your FPS at your refresh rate, at which point, there will be absolutely no difference.

Without v-sync - You will have screen tearing on the screen all the time at those FPS. The higher the FPS, the more tearing. You will visually see no more FPS, but you may notice a slight difference in responsiveness, at least in games like CS source, in which some of the physics is actually influenced by FPS.



Thanks, very clear explanations. But so it's totally pointless to get more than 60 fps on a 60Hz display? E.g. if fraps gives you 100 fps on a particular game with Vsync ON when playing on a 60Hz display (where fps are capped to 60), are there any benefits compared to standard (i.e. not capped) 60 fps? Smoothered camera, more eye comfortable on screen characters' movements, higher speed feeling in racing games and so on? Or are these benefits only perceivable when Vsync is OFF or could they also be felt when Vsync is ON but you have a very fast graphics card (e.g. 680 Sli)?
a c 80 Î Nvidia
November 5, 2012 5:47:52 PM

There is 0 benefit from having cards capable of going over your refresh rate when v-sync is on. As long as you maintain 60 FPS on a 60hz monitor, there is 0 to be gained going higher if v-sync is on.

Without v-sync, it's possible to see slight responsiveness increased, but it would only be on the partial image below where tearing is happening.
a b Î Nvidia
November 5, 2012 5:57:57 PM

Here my two cents AMD press release just say PhysX will die.I highly doubt it either way isn't a big consideration but to me it's like sprinkles on an ice cream cone....if it's available in a game, I want it. It's supported in lots of great games http://www.geforce.com/games-applications/physx is NO gimmick. My personal experience is that Adaptive VSync makes my gaming experience smooth as silk. I don't use it on all my games, but it is nice to know that the option is there and that it works very well when needed. HardOCP, who did a full review on adaptive vsync, was impressed with it:


http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/04/16/nvidia_adapti...


My 670's kick ass not to brag but they violently murder anything i throw at them MSI's GTX 670 Power Edition uses the famous Twin Frozr IV cooler from the MSI Lightning and comes with a large clock speed boost out of the box, making its default clock speed even higher than GTX 680 stock clocks. MSI is asking $389.99 $369.99 after rebate for their card, which doesn't look unreasonable, given the improved cooling and higher clocks.No reason to buy 680 until price comes down.
a c 80 Î Nvidia
November 5, 2012 6:19:38 PM

bigcyco1 said:
Here my two cents AMD press release just say PhysX will die.I highly doubt it either way isn't a big consideration but to me it's like sprinkles on an ice cream cone....if it's available in a game, I want it. It's supported in lots of great games http://www.geforce.com/games-applications/physx is NO gimmick. My personal experience is that Adaptive VSync makes my gaming experience smooth as silk. ]http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-dance005.gif I don't use it on all my games, but it is nice to know that the option is there and that it works very well when needed. HardOCP, who did a full review on adaptive vsync, was impressed with it:


http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/04/16/nvidia_adapti...


My 670's kick ass not to brag but they violently murder anything i throw at them ]http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-sex024.gif MSI's GTX 670 Power Edition uses the famous Twin Frozr IV cooler from the MSI Lightning and comes with a large clock speed boost out of the box, making its default clock speed even higher than GTX 680 stock clocks. MSI is asking $389.99 $369.99 after rebate for their card, which doesn't look unreasonable, given the improved cooling and higher clocks.No reason to buy 680 until price comes down.


Didn't you get a 120hz monitor? I wouldn't think you'd like adaptive v-sync with a 120hz monitor, as it turns v-sync off when below your refresh rate, which would be most the time.
a b Î Nvidia
November 5, 2012 6:23:07 PM

bystander said:
Didn't you get a 120hz monitor? I wouldn't think you'd like adaptive v-sync with a 120hz monitor, as it turns v-sync off when below your refresh rate, which would be most the time.
I have two builds i don't use it on my 120hz monitor ;) 
a b Î Nvidia
November 5, 2012 6:30:21 PM

What kind of monitor are you going to buy or do you have ?
a c 80 Î Nvidia
November 5, 2012 6:42:19 PM

bigcyco1 said:
I have two builds i don't use it on my 120hz monitor ;) 


Ah, that makes sense then.
!