-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
will the intel core i5 2500k bottleneck a gtx 1060?
- Thread starter Zephros
- Start date
- Joined
- May 23, 2008
- Location
- London, England
If you don't overclock, probably not. If you do, definitely not.
Modern games just don't need much CPU anymore. CPU improvements have slowed since Sandy Bridge. The last big jump was from Nehalem/Westmere to Sandy Bridge.
Modern games just don't need much CPU anymore. CPU improvements have slowed since Sandy Bridge. The last big jump was from Nehalem/Westmere to Sandy Bridge.
Not a lot, no. 2500K is still a viable cpu, particularly when overclocked.
Now, you are losing out on some features of new cpus amd chipsets (usb 3, m.2, etc)... but it seems your goal is cheap. Is a 4 generation old chip your only way to go?
Now, you are losing out on some features of new cpus amd chipsets (usb 3, m.2, etc)... but it seems your goal is cheap. Is a 4 generation old chip your only way to go?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2002
I'm still in the process of it but I was looking at the what the i5 2500k @ 4.5Ghz is in comparison to my i7 6700k that I have now (going to 4.5Ghz for better speed comparisons).
Though really even a 1080 shouldn't bottleneck the CPU but doesn't mean the performance of the game might not increase due to having a newer CPU.
Though really even a 1080 shouldn't bottleneck the CPU but doesn't mean the performance of the game might not increase due to having a newer CPU.
- Joined
- May 23, 2008
- Location
- London, England
Something has to be the bottlenck in a system. So if CPU is not the bottleneck, GPU is, and the bottleneck determines performance.
IPC improvements depend on the application, but from Sandy Bridge to Skylake it's about 20-25% (http://www.anandtech.com/show/9483/intel-skylake-review-6700k-6600k-ddr4-ddr3-ipc-6th-generation/9). So a 2500k at 4.5 GHz should be about as fast as a Skylake at 3.6-3.7 GHz.
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2009
- Location
- Sydney, Australia
I think bottleneck implies that one or the other cannot physically run at 100% due to a limitation of the other.
Usually with CPU, if the GPU cannot run at 100%(99% as usually shown), and therefore you're losing frames due to high CPU usage which cannot keep up it'd be considered a bottleneck. But if your GPU is able to fully load itself, i wouldn't call it a bottleneck anymore, just that X CPU is not as fast as Y CPU, hence a reduction of frame rates.
I don't believe a 2500k would 'bottleneck' a GTX 1060. Especially if overclocked anything past 4.2ghz.
Usually with CPU, if the GPU cannot run at 100%(99% as usually shown), and therefore you're losing frames due to high CPU usage which cannot keep up it'd be considered a bottleneck. But if your GPU is able to fully load itself, i wouldn't call it a bottleneck anymore, just that X CPU is not as fast as Y CPU, hence a reduction of frame rates.
I don't believe a 2500k would 'bottleneck' a GTX 1060. Especially if overclocked anything past 4.2ghz.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 23, 2008
- Location
- London, England
At every frame the CPU has to do a certain amount of work, and the GPU also has to do a certain amount of work. They can do them at the same time, but the faster one to finish has to wait for the slower one, so the overall frame time (and therefore frame rate) is dependent on the slower of the two. That's the bottleneck, and there's always a bottleneck - it's simply the slowest component. It doesn't matter how fast your machine is, there will always be the slowest component.
If the GPU is used at 100%, that means getting a better GPU will improve frame rate, much like if the CPU is at 100%, getting a faster CPU will improve frame rate.
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2009
- Location
- Sydney, Australia
Yes, I agree, but for gaming, if the GPU is able to be pegged at 100%, the CPU is fast enough in general to not 'bottleneck' the GPU. It's not actually REDUCING the performance of the GPU. It would only be 'bottlenecking' if the GPU was sitting at say 70% with a 100% CPU load. If that makes sense? Of course there will always be one that is 'limited', but for gaming (the purpose of the OPs question), I don't think it'll be a 'bottleneck' in that it would stop the GPU from performing.
- Joined
- May 23, 2008
- Location
- London, England
Oh yeah definitely. The GPU isn't bottlenecked in this case. The CPU is bottlenecked by the GPU (or more accurately, the whole system is bottlenecked by the GPU).
I had i5 2500k 4 months ago with a equivalent card EVGA ssc GTX 970 and the the GPU bottlenecked the CPU that ran stock.
i5 2500k vs i7 6700k http://www.techspot.com/review/1096-star-wars-battlefront-benchmarks/page3.html
i5 2500k vs i7 4790k http://www.techspot.com/review/1006-the-witcher-3-benchmarks/page5.html
i5 2500k vs i7 6700k http://www.techspot.com/review/1096-star-wars-battlefront-benchmarks/page3.html
i5 2500k vs i7 4790k http://www.techspot.com/review/1006-the-witcher-3-benchmarks/page5.html
Similar threads
