Solved

Would an i5 4690k (non-overclocked) bottleneck a GTX 1080Ti?

Hi people!

I want to game at 4k/60fps in the summer so I will be saving up to get a GTX 1080Ti and 4k monitor then. Currently I have an i5 4690k, 8gb ddr3 ram, a gtx 970, ssd, hard drive, and 500 watt PSU in the Fractal Design Nano S case.

I am planning to upgrade to 16gb eventually but I am worried that my CPU will bottleneck the GTX 1080Ti. I am worried that it will cause stuttering and fps loss, etc. Would that be the case? I have only seen them being used with i7 Kaby Lake CPU's or Ryzen CPU's hence my concern.

Anyone planning to get this card for older CPU's?

I was thinking of upgrading to an i7 4790k and overclocking that so I don't have to upgrade to Kaby Lake and get a whole new motherboard, ram, and CPU + new GPU cause then I may as well build a new PC. But yeah I digress.

Anyone think this will be a problem? Let me know your thoughts and are any of you gamers planning to get a 1080Ti? Or will you get a 1070 or 1080 with the price drops?

Cheers!
10 answers Last reply Best Answer
More about 4690k overclocked bottleneck gtx 1080ti
  1. Yes as 1080Ti is released , price of 1080 will drop and you are able to play 4k with 1080. So get a 1080 and save money for other components.
  2. price of 1080 already drop.
  3. The two people above aren't really giving great answers so I'll try my best. Also long story short, I will have a 1080Ti with a 4690K in about three days and can let you know how it goes.

    I have a stock i5 4690K also, and I'm going with the 1080Ti. I may need to overclock but I don't think I'll need to go to the i7 4790K. I'm basing that on benchmarks that include either the Titan X or GTX 1080, paired with the 4690K. Since those are the two most powerful cards available now, I think that's a fair indication of whether there will be a bottleneck with the 1080Ti, or close to accurate as we can get now. These two videos as evidence...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rutk9ErhKG4

    Now notice in this video, sometimes the 4690K starts to lag behind the 4790K. Particularly in Novigrad city, Witcher 3 gives the CPU a lot more to do. At times, the 4690K runs neck and neck with the 4790K. Very important to note: this is at 1080p. Now watch this...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TScpVAGNdcI

    This guy takes a much, much older processor (i5 750) and pairs it with a GTX 1080. Now, because this is a much older CPU, there *is* bottleneck, but not nearly as bad as you would expect for such an old GPU, and surprisingly, it lessens as he goes up to 1440p and 4K. He explains why in the video, but the short answer is the GPU is being pushed more than at 1080p so the CPU isn't constantly trying to "catch up" (over simplifying but you get the idea). Now, again, he's pairing this with a very old CPU, and it does cause a bottleneck. But by how much? And more importantly, how much would this effect your 4690K? Let's check out another set of benchmarks...

    http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-ti-review

    Digital Foundry is using an *overclocked* i7 6700K at 4.6Ghz - this blows away that i5 750 by lightyears. It shouldn't even be close. And yet DF's average FPS with a 1080 is 47.6 at 4K, while the video above showed a 38 FPS average on 4K - with a CPU over 7 years old.

    Also, note in DF's benchmarks, and many others, the GTX 1080Ti is getting over 60fps or near 60fps in many titles at 4K, high or ultra settings.

    I think we can conclude a few things from these three sets of benchmarks...
    1) the i7 4790K gives slightly faster performance than the 4690K in some situations, with some games, but at times the two run even

    2) CPU bottlenecks with high performing GPUs exist more at lower resolutions and graphic settings; the more the GPU is pushed, the less of a bottleneck there is, no matter how old the CPU, as evidenced by the potato CPU tested with a GTX 1080 in the second video

    3) Given conclusions 1 and 2, that means whatever edge the i7 4790K has over the i5 4690K, it seems to shrink with a high powered GPU at 4K. If an ancient CPU paired with a GTX 1080 running 4K can perform within 9 frames per second of a super modern, overclocked beast of a CPU, then the 4690K should be within a couple of frames of the 4790K.

    4) Ultimately, the 4790K with a GTX 1080Ti will be slightly faster, at times, than the 4690K, but the difference in real average FPS is probably going to equal 1-2 frames. If that's the case, simple, safe overclocking on the 4690K should make up the difference. If you planned to OC the 4790K also? That would put it back, probably, at an advantage of a couple of frames per second.

    If I'm wrong... well, I'd upgrade CPUs in a heartbeat. I seriously considered it... I have no attachment to my 4690K, I'll dump it in a heartbeat if I think it's stopping my GPU in any significant way. But after research, it seems the gain in performance would be minuscule.
  4. +Elf_Knight Will your CPU bottleneck a 1080 Ti? Possibly, which will result in not achieving maximum FPS. At that point, it's a question of which games, since some are more CPU or GPU dependent. How well the game is optimized is another factor. However, since you'll be gaming in 4K instead of 1080p or 1440p, this is much less of a concern. Generally the higher the resolution, the less demand on the CPU, as fewer frames are rendered by it.

    Will it stutter? Seriously doubtful, as your i5 has four physical cores.

    What would I do in your situation?

    * submit $30 claim for GTX 970 class action lawsuit: https://www.gtx970settlement.com/Home.aspx
    * sell used GTX 970 on Ebay; $150 - $200 (depending on AIC)
    * buy new GTX 1080 Ti; $699.99 on Nvidia.
    * overclock CPU (maybe); depends on how efficiently CPU cooler and case fans remove heat.

    ! Since you're using a micro ITX case, heat generated inside the case would be a concern for me. I would consider buying an EVGA reference GPU or a hybrid card, with a AIO radiator/cooler. The hybrid card will have significantly better thermals, but at a cost premium over the reference.
  5. RyderN7 said:
    The two people above aren't really giving great answers so I'll try my best. Also long story short, I will have a 1080Ti with a 4690K in about three days and can let you know how it goes.

    I have a stock i5 4690K also, and I'm going with the 1080Ti. I may need to overclock but I don't think I'll need to go to the i7 4790K. I'm basing that on benchmarks that include either the Titan X or GTX 1080, paired with the 4690K. Since those are the two most powerful cards available now, I think that's a fair indication of whether there will be a bottleneck with the 1080Ti, or close to accurate as we can get now. These two videos as evidence...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rutk9ErhKG4

    Now notice in this video, sometimes the 4690K starts to lag behind the 4790K. Particularly in Novigrad city, Witcher 3 gives the CPU a lot more to do. At times, the 4690K runs neck and neck with the 4790K. Very important to note: this is at 1080p. Now watch this...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TScpVAGNdcI

    This guy takes a much, much older processor (i5 750) and pairs it with a GTX 1080. Now, because this is a much older CPU, there *is* bottleneck, but not nearly as bad as you would expect for such an old GPU, and surprisingly, it lessens as he goes up to 1440p and 4K. He explains why in the video, but the short answer is the GPU is being pushed more than at 1080p so the CPU isn't constantly trying to "catch up" (over simplifying but you get the idea). Now, again, he's pairing this with a very old CPU, and it does cause a bottleneck. But by how much? And more importantly, how much would this effect your 4690K? Let's check out another set of benchmarks...

    http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-ti-review

    Digital Foundry is using an *overclocked* i7 6700K at 4.6Ghz - this blows away that i5 750 by lightyears. It shouldn't even be close. And yet DF's average FPS with a 1080 is 47.6 at 4K, while the video above showed a 38 FPS average on 4K - with a CPU over 7 years old.

    Also, note in DF's benchmarks, and many others, the GTX 1080Ti is getting over 60fps or near 60fps in many titles at 4K, high or ultra settings.

    I think we can conclude a few things from these three sets of benchmarks...
    1) the i7 4790K gives slightly faster performance than the 4690K in some situations, with some games, but at times the two run even

    2) CPU bottlenecks with high performing GPUs exist more at lower resolutions and graphic settings; the more the GPU is pushed, the less of a bottleneck there is, no matter how old the CPU, as evidenced by the potato CPU tested with a GTX 1080 in the second video

    3) Given conclusions 1 and 2, that means whatever edge the i7 4790K has over the i5 4690K, it seems to shrink with a high powered GPU at 4K. If an ancient CPU paired with a GTX 1080 running 4K can perform within 9 frames per second of a super modern, overclocked beast of a CPU, then the 4690K should be within a couple of frames of the 4790K.

    4) Ultimately, the 4790K with a GTX 1080Ti will be slightly faster, at times, than the 4690K, but the difference in real average FPS is probably going to equal 1-2 frames. If that's the case, simple, safe overclocking on the 4690K should make up the difference. If you planned to OC the 4790K also? That would put it back, probably, at an advantage of a couple of frames per second.

    If I'm wrong... well, I'd upgrade CPUs in a heartbeat. I seriously considered it... I have no attachment to my 4690K, I'll dump it in a heartbeat if I think it's stopping my GPU in any significant way. But after research, it seems the gain in performance would be minuscule.


    Would you mind replying to this comment once you decide if the 4690k is a bottleneck? I am in the same boat as well, but I have mine overclocked to 4.4ghz.
  6. Best answer
    Elf_Knight said:
    Hi people!

    I want to game at 4k/60fps in the summer so I will be saving up to get a GTX 1080Ti and 4k monitor then. Currently I have an i5 4690k, 8gb ddr3 ram, a gtx 970, ssd, hard drive, and 500 watt PSU in the Fractal Design Nano S case.

    I am planning to upgrade to 16gb eventually but I am worried that my CPU will bottleneck the GTX 1080Ti. I am worried that it will cause stuttering and fps loss, etc. Would that be the case? I have only seen them being used with i7 Kaby Lake CPU's or Ryzen CPU's hence my concern.

    Anyone planning to get this card for older CPU's?

    I was thinking of upgrading to an i7 4790k and overclocking that so I don't have to upgrade to Kaby Lake and get a whole new motherboard, ram, and CPU + new GPU cause then I may as well build a new PC. But yeah I digress.

    Anyone think this will be a problem? Let me know your thoughts and are any of you gamers planning to get a 1080Ti? Or will you get a 1070 or 1080 with the price drops?

    Cheers!


    Also +FreeWayPineapple wanted to know these results, so as promised...

    I got my GTX 1080Ti today, and have a run a few tests, with my stock non-OC i5 4690K at 3.5Ghz (3.9Ghz boost). All of these were on max graphical settings except where noted otherwise, and at 4K.

    I tried Dragon Age Inquisition first because that's what I had been playing, and because Mass Effect Andromeda coming out is why I upgraded my GPU, so it being a Bioware title in Frostbite seemed like a good test.

    • CPU did not appear to be a bottleneck, it mostly stayed at 60-70% usage.
    • In a lot of areas GPU usage was in the 70-80%, as well as some periods where it was high 90s
    • At ultra everything and fade touched textures, it almost never dropped below 60fps with AA set to low. With AA set to MSAA 2x it made a big difference, and while it was regular at 70s, 80s or even triple digit FPS, it could also see dips to high 40s in high foliage areas.
    • This was the least optimized Frostbite game of region memory and supposedly tougher on CPUs, so encouraging to see no bottleneck.


    Next I did Witcher 3, another game known for being slightly more CPU bound.

    • No noticable bottleneck here either. CPU usage did stay in 80% range at times, and occasionally up into 90% range, but GPU usage was not dropping at those times. Even in Novigrad, the biggest non-DLC city, which is impressive.
    • Not a CPU issue, but I did notice actually out in the wilderness there were some areas that got low 50s and high 40s on FPS. This was with AA off, and everything set to Ultra. I turned down foliage distance to high, and it was pretty much locked at 60, with occasional blips to 58-59. AA being turned on seemed to effect it by 2 FPS consistently.
    • Overall ran great, with plenty of areas where the CPU was not tasked more than 65%.


    Next, was GTA V. Which surprised me in a couple of ways.

    • There was an occasional CPU bottleneck in places.
    • During the benchmark test, near the end where the bus explodes and during the car chase, CPU usage maxed out to 100% and GPU usage predictably went down as low as into the 60-80% range while CPU was maxed; FPS dropped to low 40s.
    • During much of the benchmark test, there didn't seem to be a bottleneck. CPU usage ranged from 70-80% and GPU usage stayed around 85-95%. FPS was often in 70s, and 60s.
    • I walked around and drove around in the city, seeing if I could catch anymore CPU bottlenecking and I could not. The game ran amazing well; FPS in the 70s and 80s walking around, getting into fights and shootouts, 60s and high 50s during fast driving and chases. CPU usage was consistent, and not dropping GPU usage.


    Lastly, Rise of the Tomb Raider, which is known to push even the best builds.

    • No CPU bottleneck here either.
    • I was really surprised my machine handled this as well as it did in the benchmark test. I ran it at 4K, with every bell and whistled turned on and up to max - and it ran an average of 56FPS, with the lowest average of the three scenes being 54FPS in Syria. I saw maybe a dip to the 40s for a second during the benchmark. This was even with the fancy hair tessellation setting maxed out.
    • I didn't get to run around in game, but from my previous benchmarks with my old graphics card, I found the test to be very strenuous and generally did better in most parts of the game than the test. This benchmark as an indication of real game performance, the GTX 1080Ti kills it, and no sign that my CPU slowed it down at all.


    FINAL SUMMARY

    Three out of four games ran without any sign of CPU bottleneck, at highest settings (minus one or two), on 4K, 60fps or within a few frames of that. That's with an i5 4690K, completely factory, no overclocking. I'd say there's very little to no bottlenecking here.

    On GTA V in the benchmark test, it did cause an issue during the one portion I described above. I couldn't make it do something similar with about 20 minutes of random gameplay running around. Not very scientific, but I think you'd mostly be able to play the game with very little notice of the CPU bottleneck as it seems highly infrequent. The majority of the benchmark test, across a number of different terrains, ran smoothly with both CPU and GPU. showing high 60s and 70s FPS.

    For anyone out there reading wondering if they need to upgrade their 4690K because they want to get a GTX 1080Ti - I'd say you're fine keeping your CPU. This is only a limited test, but from what I found, there's no bottleneck on most games. And if there is one, it's not a major occurrence. I'd say if you run into any issues, overclock your 4690K by a little bit and you'd be fine.
  7. RyderN7 said:
    Elf_Knight said:
    Hi people!

    I want to game at 4k/60fps in the summer so I will be saving up to get a GTX 1080Ti and 4k monitor then. Currently I have an i5 4690k, 8gb ddr3 ram, a gtx 970, ssd, hard drive, and 500 watt PSU in the Fractal Design Nano S case.

    I am planning to upgrade to 16gb eventually but I am worried that my CPU will bottleneck the GTX 1080Ti. I am worried that it will cause stuttering and fps loss, etc. Would that be the case? I have only seen them being used with i7 Kaby Lake CPU's or Ryzen CPU's hence my concern.

    Anyone planning to get this card for older CPU's?

    I was thinking of upgrading to an i7 4790k and overclocking that so I don't have to upgrade to Kaby Lake and get a whole new motherboard, ram, and CPU + new GPU cause then I may as well build a new PC. But yeah I digress.

    Anyone think this will be a problem? Let me know your thoughts and are any of you gamers planning to get a 1080Ti? Or will you get a 1070 or 1080 with the price drops?

    Cheers!


    Also +FreeWayPineapple wanted to know these results, so as promised...

    I got my GTX 1080Ti today, and have a run a few tests, with my stock non-OC i5 4690K at 3.5Ghz (3.9Ghz boost). All of these were on max graphical settings except where noted otherwise, and at 4K.

    I tried Dragon Age Inquisition first because that's what I had been playing, and because Mass Effect Andromeda coming out is why I upgraded my GPU, so it being a Bioware title in Frostbite seemed like a good test.

    • CPU did not appear to be a bottleneck, it mostly stayed at 60-70% usage.
    • In a lot of areas GPU usage was in the 70-80%, as well as some periods where it was high 90s
    • At ultra everything and fade touched textures, it almost never dropped below 60fps with AA set to low. With AA set to MSAA 2x it made a big difference, and while it was regular at 70s, 80s or even triple digit FPS, it could also see dips to high 40s in high foliage areas.
    • This was the least optimized Frostbite game of region memory and supposedly tougher on CPUs, so encouraging to see no bottleneck.


    Next I did Witcher 3, another game known for being slightly more CPU bound.

    • No noticable bottleneck here either. CPU usage did stay in 80% range at times, and occasionally up into 90% range, but GPU usage was dropping at those times. Even in Novigrad, the biggest non-DLC city, which is impressive.
    • Not a CPU issue, but I did notice actually out in the wilderness there were some areas that got low 50s and high 40s on FPS. This was with AA off, and everything set to Ultra. I turned down foliage distance to high, and it was pretty much locked at 60, with occasional blips to 58-59. AA being turned on seemed to effect it by 2 FPS consistently.
    • Overall ran great, with plenty of areas where the CPU was not tasked more than 65%.


    Next, was GTA V. Which surprised me in a couple of ways.

    • There was an occasional CPU bottleneck in places.
    • During the benchmark test, near the end where the bus explodes and during the car chase, CPU usage maxed out to 100% and GPU usage predictably went down as low as into the 60-80% range while CPU was maxed; FPS dropped to low 40s.
    • During much of the benchmark test, there didn't seem to be a bottleneck. CPU usage ranged from 70-80% and GPU usage stayed around 85-95%. FPS was often in 70s, and 60s.
    • I walked around and drove around in the city, seeing if I could catch anymore CPU bottlenecking and I could not. The game ran amazing well; FPS in the 70s and 80s walking around, getting into fights and shootouts, 60s and high 50s during fast driving and chases. CPU usage was consistent, and not dropping GPU usage.


    Lastly, Rise of the Tomb Raider, which is known to push even the best builds.

    • No CPU bottleneck here either.
    • I was really surprised my machine handled this as well as it did in the benchmark test. I ran it at 4K, with every bell and whistled turned on and up to max - and it ran an average of 56FPS, with the lowest average of the three scenes being 54FPS in Syria. I saw maybe a dip to the 40s for a second during the benchmark. This was even with the fancy hair tessellation setting maxed out.
    • I didn't get to run around in game, but from my previous benchmarks with my old graphics card, I found the test to be very strenuous and generally did better in most parts of the game than the test. This benchmark as an indication of real game performance, the GTX 1080Ti kills it, and no sign that my CPU slowed it down at all.


    FINAL SUMMARY

    Three out of four games ran without any sign of CPU bottleneck, at highest settings (minus one or two), on 4K, 60fps or within a few frames of that. That's with an i5 4690K, completely factory, no overclocking. I'd say there's very little to no bottlenecking here.

    On GTA V in the benchmark test, it did cause an issue during the one portion I described above. I couldn't make it do something similar with about 20 minutes of random gameplay running around. Not very scientific, but I think you'd mostly be able to play the game with very little notice of the CPU bottleneck as it seems highly infrequent. The majority of the benchmark test, across a number of different terrains, ran smoothly with both CPU and GPU. showing high 60s and 70s FPS.

    For anyone out there reading wondering if they need to upgrade their 4690K because they want to get a GTX 1080Ti - I'd say you're fine keeping your CPU. This is only a limited test, but from what I found, there's no bottleneck on most games. And if there is one, it's not a major occurrence. I'd say if you run into any issues, overclock your 4690K by a little bit and you'd be fine.


    Thanks, I think I will be fine with mine at 4.4ghz. My only concern would be battlefield 1, as it really stresses the CPU at load. I would honestly be disappointed if I cant run BF1 at 3440x1440 100fps due to my 4690k bottlenecking the 1080ti.
  8. hey, so ive got a GTX 980TI and was wondering if i should get a GTX 1080TI or not, ill be playing at 1080p 144hz so id want the most amount of frames as possible. do you think theres any point in the upgrade? and also will the 1080TI bottleneck my I5 4690K at 4.5GHz at 1080p 144hz?
  9. I actually have both the GTX 1080ti and the 4690k @4.2. I'm getting really good fps on my 3440x1440p monitor but I have notice some odd stutters and weird fps drop in areas that I remember never happened before on my 980ti. My CPU also hits 60-80% usage while playing games. Let me know if you experienced them. I think it might be the driver.
  10. RyderN7 said:
    Elf_Knight said:
    Hi people!

    I want to game at 4k/60fps in the summer so I will be saving up to get a GTX 1080Ti and 4k monitor then. Currently I have an i5 4690k, 8gb ddr3 ram, a gtx 970, ssd, hard drive, and 500 watt PSU in the Fractal Design Nano S case.

    I am planning to upgrade to 16gb eventually but I am worried that my CPU will bottleneck the GTX 1080Ti. I am worried that it will cause stuttering and fps loss, etc. Would that be the case? I have only seen them being used with i7 Kaby Lake CPU's or Ryzen CPU's hence my concern.

    Anyone planning to get this card for older CPU's?

    I was thinking of upgrading to an i7 4790k and overclocking that so I don't have to upgrade to Kaby Lake and get a whole new motherboard, ram, and CPU + new GPU cause then I may as well build a new PC. But yeah I digress.

    Anyone think this will be a problem? Let me know your thoughts and are any of you gamers planning to get a 1080Ti? Or will you get a 1070 or 1080 with the price drops?

    Cheers!


    Also +FreeWayPineapple wanted to know these results, so as promised...

    I got my GTX 1080Ti today, and have a run a few tests, with my stock non-OC i5 4690K at 3.5Ghz (3.9Ghz boost). All of these were on max graphical settings except where noted otherwise, and at 4K.

    I tried Dragon Age Inquisition first because that's what I had been playing, and because Mass Effect Andromeda coming out is why I upgraded my GPU, so it being a Bioware title in Frostbite seemed like a good test.

    • CPU did not appear to be a bottleneck, it mostly stayed at 60-70% usage.
    • In a lot of areas GPU usage was in the 70-80%, as well as some periods where it was high 90s
    • At ultra everything and fade touched textures, it almost never dropped below 60fps with AA set to low. With AA set to MSAA 2x it made a big difference, and while it was regular at 70s, 80s or even triple digit FPS, it could also see dips to high 40s in high foliage areas.
    • This was the least optimized Frostbite game of region memory and supposedly tougher on CPUs, so encouraging to see no bottleneck.


    Next I did Witcher 3, another game known for being slightly more CPU bound.

    • No noticable bottleneck here either. CPU usage did stay in 80% range at times, and occasionally up into 90% range, but GPU usage was not dropping at those times. Even in Novigrad, the biggest non-DLC city, which is impressive.
    • Not a CPU issue, but I did notice actually out in the wilderness there were some areas that got low 50s and high 40s on FPS. This was with AA off, and everything set to Ultra. I turned down foliage distance to high, and it was pretty much locked at 60, with occasional blips to 58-59. AA being turned on seemed to effect it by 2 FPS consistently.
    • Overall ran great, with plenty of areas where the CPU was not tasked more than 65%.


    Next, was GTA V. Which surprised me in a couple of ways.

    • There was an occasional CPU bottleneck in places.
    • During the benchmark test, near the end where the bus explodes and during the car chase, CPU usage maxed out to 100% and GPU usage predictably went down as low as into the 60-80% range while CPU was maxed; FPS dropped to low 40s.
    • During much of the benchmark test, there didn't seem to be a bottleneck. CPU usage ranged from 70-80% and GPU usage stayed around 85-95%. FPS was often in 70s, and 60s.
    • I walked around and drove around in the city, seeing if I could catch anymore CPU bottlenecking and I could not. The game ran amazing well; FPS in the 70s and 80s walking around, getting into fights and shootouts, 60s and high 50s during fast driving and chases. CPU usage was consistent, and not dropping GPU usage.


    Lastly, Rise of the Tomb Raider, which is known to push even the best builds.

    • No CPU bottleneck here either.
    • I was really surprised my machine handled this as well as it did in the benchmark test. I ran it at 4K, with every bell and whistled turned on and up to max - and it ran an average of 56FPS, with the lowest average of the three scenes being 54FPS in Syria. I saw maybe a dip to the 40s for a second during the benchmark. This was even with the fancy hair tessellation setting maxed out.
    • I didn't get to run around in game, but from my previous benchmarks with my old graphics card, I found the test to be very strenuous and generally did better in most parts of the game than the test. This benchmark as an indication of real game performance, the GTX 1080Ti kills it, and no sign that my CPU slowed it down at all.


    FINAL SUMMARY

    Three out of four games ran without any sign of CPU bottleneck, at highest settings (minus one or two), on 4K, 60fps or within a few frames of that. That's with an i5 4690K, completely factory, no overclocking. I'd say there's very little to no bottlenecking here.

    On GTA V in the benchmark test, it did cause an issue during the one portion I described above. I couldn't make it do something similar with about 20 minutes of random gameplay running around. Not very scientific, but I think you'd mostly be able to play the game with very little notice of the CPU bottleneck as it seems highly infrequent. The majority of the benchmark test, across a number of different terrains, ran smoothly with both CPU and GPU. showing high 60s and 70s FPS.

    For anyone out there reading wondering if they need to upgrade their 4690K because they want to get a GTX 1080Ti - I'd say you're fine keeping your CPU. This is only a limited test, but from what I found, there's no bottleneck on most games. And if there is one, it's not a major occurrence. I'd say if you run into any issues, overclock your 4690K by a little bit and you'd be fine.


    I want to confirm one thing that are you playing all games at 1080p or 4k? because i also have i5 4690k and running at stock speed and I have a psu antec vp650pm of 650 W so should I need to change the psu? and also please share your PC components name.
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs 1080Ti FPS Nvidia Gtx Bottleneck