What is best GPU to pair up with i5 6600k before bottleneck?

[malice19]

Hi All

Looking to upgrade from my MSI GTX 970 for winter but as my system is now 5 years old I wanted to check that I don’t spend up to £300 and find that my CPU is holding back the GPU. What is the best GPU to pair up with i5 6600k before experiencing bottleneck? Another thing I don't fully understand is that it’s a less of a problem when gaming at higher resolutions? Is this correct or am reading into this wrong?

So I read you get more or a bottleneck at lower rez like 1080p 60Hz but I will be gaming at 1440p at 144Hz on my Gsync monitor.

Thanks for your time and help.

[Terbinator]

Hi All

Looking to upgrade from my MSI GTX 970 for winter but as my system is now 5 years old I wanted to check that I don’t spend up to £300 and find that my CPU is holding back the GPU. What is the best GPU to pair up with i5 6600k before experiencing bottleneck? Another thing I don't fully understand is that it’s a less of a problem when gaming at higher resolutions? Is this correct or am reading into this wrong?

So I read you get more or a bottleneck at lower rez like 1080p 60Hz butI will be gaming at 1440p at 144Hz on my Gsync monitor.

Thanks for your time and help.

That is likely to happen regardless as we move into the new console generation - if it isn't already.

My advice would be to go for the best GPU you can afford, which could well be a new Radeon. Bottleneck might impacting your minimum frame-rates - arguable the biggest factor - but you'd also have a higher top-en with a beefier GPU. Does your monitor support VRR/FreeSync?

CPU is more impactful at lower resolution, yes, but also needed for high-refresh rate work too. You'd be over doubling your FPS going from 1080p60 to 1440p144 and part of that is down to the CPU as well.

[DanceswithUnix]

As you go up in resolution you lean more heavily on the GPU so the CPU speed matters less.

Whether the system is bottlenecked on the CPU or GPU can depend on what game you are playing, what settings as well as what resolution. But there has to be a bottleneck somewhere, that's part of the definition of being the slowest part of the system (there always has to be a slowest part).

Honestly, I wouldn't worry about it. The system has to be horribly out of balance for it to really matter, like an i9 with a GTX 1050 or an dual core Athlon and a 3080.

[scaryjim]

As a 4C/4T CPU the nearest CPU you'll see in recent reviews is probably the i3 9400. If you take a look at a recent Hexus review you'll see that at 1440p using a 2080 Ti there is a fairly noticeable difference between that and, say, an i9 10900k, at your planned resolution. OTOH, you'll also notice that the CPU bottleneck doesn't stop the GPU providing between ~85 and ~110 FPS - good numbers however you look at it.

A quick cross-compare with recent graphics reviews suggests that a Radeon RX 5700 would provide those kinds of FPS, so that might suggest it would be a good match. Although I'd hate to think about how many provisos I should be sticking on that

The only other thing I'd think about is longevity - if this GPU will be carried forward to your next build, then it doesn't really matter if your current CPU will bottleneck it - if you can afford an RTX 3090 then get one on the assumption that your next CPU will be faster

[malice19]

Thanks for all the post, just need to look out for some good deals, found a GTX 1080 2nd hand for £200 which i thought is good. Yes i was looking at 5700XT as rated as very good for 1440p but only thing that put me off it would be a bit of a waste of my Gsync Monitor.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

In a number of newer games a 4C/4T CPU will be a bottleneck,and it will get worse because of the new consoles. You won't see it in averages but in minimums and 1% lows which manifests itself as stuttering,and it won't matter what resolution you run the games at. Two games which show this are BF:V and SOTTR,which show stuttering with even an overclocked Core i5 7600K,as they seem to be coded to use at least 6~8 threads.

Also from my experience of gaming at 1440p,CPU bottlenecked games manifest this at both 1080p and 1440p even at highest settings - again its the minimums and stutter which is consistent at any resolution. An example of a game which is CPU limited due to it hammering two of the six threads it uses is Fallout 4. I saw the same FPS drops at 1080p and 1440p in the same places with a Core i7 3770/Xeon E3 1230 V2 and a Ryzen 5 2600 with a GTX960,RX470 and GTX1080.

[DanceswithUnix]

In a number of newer games a 4C/4T CPU will be a bottleneck,and it will get worse because of the new consoles.

Such games will stutter whatever the GPU put in, but the flip side of that is all the games that are lean heavily on a single thread and those will fly nicely on a better gpu. Then, at some point in the future, you get a CPU upgrade and all games go faster.


A couple more thoughts for the OP:

The Gsync monitor will help smooth out those fps dips, so I think for this upgrade you are firmly tied to Nvidia.

I would honestly just get the best GPU your budget can get you. If your budget is £300, then right now that gets you a 2060 (non super).

We are expecting a 3060 to be released within a few months. If you aren't desperate to upgrade, it might be worth waiting.

[Zhaoman]

Don't gsync monitors work with freesync now? Or am I confusing it with something else? Regardless I agree that I don't think your cpu will hold you back much in the £300 range. Might be better to wait till January for 3060 and 6700 but that's a fool's chase if you can find 2070s or 5700s for cheap right now.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Such games will stutter whatever the GPU put in, but the flip side of that is all the games that are lean heavily on a single thread and those will fly nicely on a better gpu. Then, at some point in the future, you get a CPU upgrade and all games go faster.


A couple more thoughts for the OP:

The Gsync monitor will help smooth out those fps dips, so I think for this upgrade you are firmly tied to Nvidia.

I would honestly just get the best GPU your budget can get you. If your budget is £300, then right now that gets you a 2060 (non super).

We are expecting a 3060 to be released within a few months. If you aren't desperate to upgrade, it might be worth waiting.

The RTX3060 would be even more bottlenecked by a Core i5 6600K in a number of games. Also another thing review benchmarks won't show is the fact they use clean OS installs,with nothing much happening in the background. An average system won't be like that.
I would think the OP is better served by also trying to find a cheap Core i7 for around £100(if they can't stretch to a full platform upgrade),or get a Ryzen 5 3600/Core i5,re-use their current DDR4 and sell the Core i5 6600K and Z170 they have.

Plus another issue is the type of game where you would want over 100FPS,ie,online first person FPS games. Those kind of extreme framedrops will not help during play.

Even a game such as Planetside 2 which used to be lightly threaded,in the last two years got an overhaul and now it uses all the threads on my Ryzen 5. The BF series is another example. Even my old Core i7 3770/Xeon E3 1230 V2 would be able to maintain over 120FPS minimums in BF1,yet a Core i5 6600K wouldn't. Even in some other games,it can be a 4C CPU getting 50FPS minimums,and a CPU with more threads adding 25~50FPS more.

Remember,they say they have a 144HZ monitor.

To maintain 144HZ it needs as much a decent CPU,as a decent GPU.

I would be definitely looking to pair the GPU upgrade with a better CPU.

Don't gsync monitors work with freesync now? Or am I confusing it with something else? Regardless I agree that I don't think your cpu will hold you back much in the £300 range. Might be better to wait till January for 3060 and 6700 but that's a fool's chase if you can find 2070s or 5700s for cheap right now.

It will be dependent on the game.

The OP said they just found a GTX1080,and an RTX2060 is not far off it either. They also have a 144HZ monitor.

From my experience a 4C/4T CPU can be a bottleneck at qHD with a GTX1080/RTX2060 - I have a GTX1080 myself and game at qHD.

[Duckboy79]

Are you overclocking that CPU? if you put to say 4.5/4.6ghz I don't think it would bottle neck that 1080 much @1440p tbh.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Are you overclocking that CPU? if you put to say 4.5/4.6ghz I don't think it would bottle neck that 1080 much @1440p tbh.

It depends on the kind of games. There have been reviews when a Core i5 7600K at nearly 5GHZ in certain games registered much worse 1% lows than a sub 4GHZ Ryzen 5 1600,and had stuttering.

This is why 4C/4T CPUs are under £90 now in the AMD and Intel line-ups. 4C/8T CPUs are now under £100. The Ryzen 3 3100 is £90 and the Core i3 10100F is a 4C/8T CPU for £90.

[DanceswithUnix]

Don't gsync monitors work with freesync now?

No, they don't. Nvidia's Freesync support works in just one direction.

Nvidia graphics cards can now work with Freesync monitors, or more correctly with Vesa adaptive sync as it is now the accepted standard.

Gsync monitors are non standard and can only work with an Nvidia card. They were a way to lock customers into buying Nvidia for the life of their monitor, which for an expensive monitor can be a rather long time.

Remember,they say they have a 144HZ monitor.

To maintain 144HZ it needs as much a decent CPU,as a decent GPU.

No, they said they had a variable refresh rate monitor that goes up to 144Hz. The whole point of VRR is that you don't have to maintain a stupidly high frame rate, unlike a traditional monitor where dropping below 60fps either tears or with vsync enabled makes the frame rate drop off a cliff in terms of feel.

Now that GTX 1080, I do worry that it as released over 4 years ago in terms of driver support.

You aren't the only one with qHD, I've got a 144Hz and 70Hz pair of Freesync monitors in front of me here

Edit: My driving thought here though is that this isn't a system build, it is an upgrade. At some point the CPU will no doubt get upgraded as well, in which case a 3060 can be used in the new build. A 1080? Well that would likely be a bottleneck

[cptwhite_uk]

My recommendation for a bare mimimum / value upgrade path would be:

Ryzen 5 3500X, which can be had barebones off AliExpress for £105 (6 cores, 6 threads), or a Ryzen 7 2700 for around £115
MSI B450-A Pro Max (NOT B450M) or MSI B450M Mortar, both of which can eb had for £80 from CCL
Deepcool Gammaxx GTE v2 Black £28 from Scan (perfect for either of the recommend CPU with 65W TDP)

I would hold off the GPU purchase for a couple of months the used market prices are still too high, but if you must buy new now, then I wouldn't go lower than RTX 2060 or RX 5700, both of which are going to set you back at least £275-280. But you'll be disappointed with the uplift you gain. If you can wait for the 6700/6600 series from AMD, or 3060 series from nVidia, you're going to get much better performance in the 300-350 range.

If you're happy to go for a used GPU upgrade, GTX 1080 Ti are going for around £300 on the used market (Facebook market place)

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

No, they said they had a variable refresh rate monitor that goes up to 144Hz. The whole point of VRR is that you don't have to maintain a stupidly high frame rate, unlike a traditional monitor where dropping below 60fps either tears or with vsync enabled makes the frame rate drop off a cliff in terms of feel.

Now that GTX 1080, I do worry that it as released over 4 years ago in terms of driver support.

You aren't the only one with qHD, I've got a 144Hz and 70Hz pair of Freesync monitors in front of me here

They said:

So I read you get more or a bottleneck at lower rez like 1080p 60Hz but I will be gaming at 1440p at 144Hz on my Gsync monitor.

This is what concerns me!

That is a not a fully true statement - running games at 60HZ/60FPS is much less taxing than at 144HZ/144FPS. You need a sufficient good CPU to do so,as you can always drop GPU settings to get higher FPS on a decent CPU.

They want to run games at 144HZ. The only games which actually benefit from high FPS are FPS games like Twitch shooters. You don't benefit nearly as much from slow paced games or single player games. Plus even if you can overclock the Core i5 to get 144FPS with a newer GPU,the problem is if the minimums go down the drain. The issue is then when you turn or do anything the game stutters,as its waiting on the CPU still.

Also the stutter you get from low 1% lows isn't removed with a FreeSync/Gsync monitor - it serves mostly to remove screen tearing(and issues connected to it),not the fact the game is literally micro-pausing when you make a fast paced movement!

I have been on qHD for nearly 5 years now.

I have run a GTX960,RX470 and GTX1080 with a Xeon E3 1230 V2 and a Ryzen 5 2600. Tested games with SMT on and off,etc and the fact is CPU limited games were still seeing the same drops at 1680X1050,1920X1080 and 2560X1440 and its always about minimums. It is exactly the same situation I saw with mates who changed from 1080p to qHD/4K and bought a faster GPU. Their CPU still limited them in certain games. None of us really care about 144HZ/144FPS either,but if you do then prepare to spend more than required!

I have tested it extensively and seen games being limited by both the CPU and GPU in different parts. Just run an overlay and CPU core utilisation,and see how your GPU utilisation plummets when the CPU gets hammered.

I remember DF showing this with Crysis 3 years ago - in some parts the game is more GPU limited,but once it hit the CPU limited parts,GPU utilisation went down the drain.

Edit: My driving thought here though is that this isn't a system build, it is an upgrade. At some point the CPU will no doubt get upgraded as well, in which case a 3060 can be used in the new build. A 1080? Well that would likely be a bottleneck

The issue is a number of the games pushing RT,etc seem to actually thread well. SOTTR,shows noticeably worse 1% lows on a 4C/4T CPU.

If they do intend to only use the CPU for a few months,then fare enough. But if its a longer term upgrade,I would probably split the budget between a faster CPU and a faster GPU(the budget will need to increase).

My recommendation for a bare mimimum / value upgrade path would be:

Ryzen 5 3500X, which can be had barebones off AliExpress for £105 (6 cores, 6 threads), or a Ryzen 7 2700 for around £115
MSI B450-A Pro Max (NOT B450M) or MSI B450M Mortar, both of which can eb had for £80 from CCL
Deepcool Gammaxx GTE v2 Black £28 from Scan (perfect for either of the recommend CPU with 65W TDP)

I would hold off the GPU purchase for a couple of months the used market prices are still too high, but if you must buy new now, then I wouldn't go lower than RTX 2060 or RX 5700, both of which are going to set you back at least £275-280. But you'll be disappointed with the uplift you gain. If you can wait for the 6700/6600 series from AMD, or 3060 series from nVidia, you're going to get much better performance in the 300-350 range.

If you're happy to go for a used GPU upgrade, GTX 1080 Ti are going for around £300 on the used market (Facebook market place)

Its a shame the Core i7 CPUs still cost so much secondhand. If the OP could get a Core i7 6700/7700 for around £100,and sell their Core i5 6600K,and do a bit of tweaking it would at least fare a bit better.

I think waiting for the newer generation GPUs is prudent. If it is from the current generation of GPUs,even though I think the RX5700 is better value,Turing does have better feature support(VRS,etc).

[DanceswithUnix]

I have been on qHD for nearly 5 years now.

Erm, my 144Hz Freesync QHD monitor here will be 5 years old next month, with wide enough range to do low framerate compensation. I'm not plucking stuff out the air here.

I got the thing partly for the increased pixels for work, partly for gaming, so to start with I only had a 2GB R9 285 and an FX 8350. I assumed games would be unplayable, and I do like a twitch game, but I was stunned how playable stuff like DooM was on such an under-powered machine.

The traditional choice is between stuttering and tearing, VFR means not having to make that binary choice and it makes the system so much more forgiving of frame rate drops.

Game play at a constant 144Hz? Not going to happen with *any* £300 upgrade from where the OP is now. But that monitor is a tool that can be used in the compromise. Shame it isn't Freesync, but I honestly wouldn't give up the Gsync ability.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Erm, my 144Hz Freesync QHD monitor here will be 5 years old next month, with wide enough range to do low framerate compensation. I'm not plucking stuff out the air here.

I got the thing partly for the increased pixels for work, partly for gaming, so to start with I only had a 2GB R9 285 and an FX 8350. I assumed games would be unplayable, and I do like a twitch game, but I was stunned how playable stuff like DooM was on such an under-powered machine.

The traditional choice is between stuttering and tearing, VFR means not having to make that binary choice and it makes the system so much more forgiving of frame rate drops.

Game play at a constant 144Hz? Not going to happen with *any* £300 upgrade from where the OP is now. But that monitor is a tool that can be used in the compromise. Shame it isn't Freesync, but I honestly wouldn't give up the Gsync ability.

Which doesn't change what he said:

What is best GPU to pair up with i5 6600k before bottleneck?

So I read you get more or a bottleneck at lower rez like 1080p 60Hz but I will be gaming at 1440p at 144Hz on my Gsync monitor.

Which is wrong. You are far more CPU limited at 144HZ and qHD,not 60HZ.

The OP is asking about CPU bottlenecks,and you literally implying there will be none. Its even worse when you now tell them to buy a RTX3060,which is probably going to be GTX1080TI/RTX2070 Super level.

Luckily you got a Ryzen 7 3700X now,right?

A few of my mates have qHD monitors too! These high FPS games are CPU limited,and again you can maintain high FPS at low graphics settings(and using resolution scaling) ONLY if the CPU is good enough. The minimums are very important and more importantly consistent FPS.

A Core i5 6600K can bottleneck a GTX1070/GTX1080/RX5700XT at qHD. A couple of us tested them with a few CPUs(Xeon E3,Ryzen 5 2600,Core i7 6700K,Ryzen 7 2700 and Ryzen 5 3600),and mucking around with core configs. Adaptive sync does not do as much as you think for high FPS games with very poor 1% lows. The FPS looks very high but its see-sawing which is the problem,especially with quick movements. You are after consistent FPS for a reason.

Its better for the OP to save up some more and upgrade their CPU and GPU together. Even a £140 Core i5 10400F would blow the Core i5 6600K out of the water.

I would never buy anything with GTX1080 level performance(even a RTX2060 or RX5700),let alone an RTX3060 and pair it with a 4C/4T CPU unless it was really a temporary measure. It would be like telling someone to buy an RTX2060 or RTX3060 and pair it with a Core i3 9100F or Ryzen 3 3200G. Its a lopsided configuration. Again less of a problem at 60HZ/60FPS but not if you are aiming for over double that.

In the end you don't think that,but I do so we will agree to disagree.