How badly will a i5 6400 bottleneck a gtx1070? I'm getting

>>58566355
Who gives a fuck if its free. There will probably be a small bottleneck, but nothing major. There will always be bottlenecks tho

Just overclock it

>bottleneck
>1080p gaming

lol

>>58566355
If you're playing with a 144Hz monitor, sure.

>>58566355
It wont bottleneck it, dont believe other cunts.

>>58566355
The i5 6400 is clocked at 2.7ghz, not 3.3ghz

>>58566355
What did you have to do to your buddy?

>>58566355

and i3 wouldn't even bottleneck a 1070 and those who think it will are the reason this board sucks.

>>58566355
>gtx1070
>1080p

just end your life

i have a gtx 1070 with i5 6400.

its fine i play at over 100 fps on any game at 1080p. ill be getting 4k hdr later when volta comes out.

>>58566460
The CPU is far more likely to be the bottleneck the lower the resolution is, retard.

>>58566875
End yours. A 1070 is the minimum spec for maxing out modern AAA trash. You aren't getting 1080p/60fps in, say, The Witcher 3 with GoyWorks enabled using anything less. Even a 1060 overclocked to the hilt will see drops into the low 50s. And that game is far from the biggest pile of unoptimised garbage out there.

>>58567038
Fuck this board, go back to /v/

>>58567340
Kys

>>58566355
>I play games at 1080p, however I might venture a bit further in the future.
You don't need a 1070 for 1080p gaming, get an RX 480 and upgrade to a free-sync display

>>58567038
You do realize you'd probably save hundreds of dollars with a free-sync 4k HDR display compared to G-sync right? 4k IPS free-sync displays are already half the price of G-sync ones.

and we don't even know anything about volta, might not even be meant for gaming

>>58567340
/v/ owns this board. You're our personal IT support.

>>58566355
>bottleneck
>being this fagot and new

Just remember to buy some gamer ram and some gamer grade motherboard... oh yeah and some gamer monitor.

>>58567364

If you want to max things out, you do need it.
Like anon up there pointed out, Witcher 3 completely maxed out won't get you a steady 60fps with the 1070 and that game isn't even unoptimised, like Deus Ex, which runs like horseshit even if you have a Titan.
Not to mention think a year or two in the future.
1070 will be the minimum to run any future games in 1080p.

File: 480 2016.png (1MB, 1285x726px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1285x726px

>>58567451
So long as vulkan/DX12 take off like they will it'll be perfectly fine

by the time the 480 struggles at 1080p high settings newer faster $200 GPUs will be out with more technology inside them

>>58567382
New Free-Sync standards require approval of AMD and include HDR and a bunch of other shit. Free-Sync 2 will probably closer to G-Sync prices in the future.

>>58566577
>>58566786
>>58567403
Underage newfags stop
Yes OP it it will bottleneck

>>58566632
intel turboboost is a thing.

>>58567382
whats the point of getting free sync when i have 1070? thats right none.

also volta will be for gaming.

don't be silly.


volta will blow anything ayymd has out of the waters. you realize nvidia and Intel allow AMD to exist because they don't want to get split up by the government right? AMD is basically Nvidia's bitchboy

>>58567773
Why would nvidia release a GPU faster than their Titan XP? They didn't even talk graphics cards at their recent event, it's most likely an architecture designed for machine learning and self driving cars

>>58567803
Wtf? Volta is just a series of cards. Where does it say that Volta is replacing Titan line up of cards? Titan is the enthusiast card of a particular generation of cards. There will be a titan for volta too.


And Nvidia already have Quadro professional. Volta is specifically for Geforce which is nvidia's gaming cards.

>>58567899
Then in that case volta won't be faster than a titan XP at launch, and thus won't be any better for 4k gaming

>>58567384
kek so much pain in this post.
It reminds me of working as an IT for any company before.

>>58566355
>will the cpu bottleneck
yes
>does it matter.
no, it just lowers your FPS and fixes it to the max the cpu can make per sec.

at 3.3 ghz your looking at 55FPS at 1080p with everything maxed.
the 6mb cache is gonna nip you in the butt

>>58567748
I understand ;)

File: 1482491666350.jpg (406KB, 905x997px) Image search: [Google]

406KB, 905x997px

>people don't understand what a bottleneck is
>game that is cpu intensive will be bottleneck by the cpu(GTA V)
>game that isn't cpu intensive will not be bottleneck by the cpu(witcher 3)

maxing out a cpu is not the same as maxing out a gpu
yoy won't just get lower frame rates, but you will get massive stuttering thats makes the game literally unplayable even though your fps counter would be around 40fps

ypu people are so fucking dumb sometimes

>>58567384
Kek /v/ir/g/ins on suicide watch

/sp/ecial /fit/izen masterrace

>>58566443
non k my dude

>>58567286
>The witcher 3
>modern

pick one, that shit is old news. good news, but old

>>58566460
This. I am still running a modestly overclocked fx6300. Still no reason to upgrade, only game that would really benifit is gra5 because shit port

>>58569317
in know you mean gta v

plus your shitty cpu struggling with gta v doesn't mean its a shit port, in fact its one of the best in years

btw, get a better cpu, even a cheap i3 would wipe the floor with that piece of shit

>>58569428
>so you can play a game

File: 65W Desktop i7i5i3.jpg (967KB, 4000x2250px) Image search: [Google]

967KB, 4000x2250px

I have a Skylake i5-6400 65W set to max at 3.3 GHz.

I, unfortunately, only have a Radeon HD 5850, but I've bumped its clocks up maybe 5% and voltage up slightly.

As long as I have my fan speeds set right I can do most games steady 60fps on medium-high set 1080p without the CPU temp going over 48°C.

Skyrim w/ AA? Sure. But Fallout 4 at medium-low spec is a serious challenge I'll admit. I tend to think it's my GPU not CPU though so I'm not sure how much I can help you.

Want me to play a game and screencap my monitoring screen?

>>58569428
Yeah fx cpus are shit. Get an i3 you poor nigger

>>58569428
Lol yeah a good port requires a 250 dollar desktop i5 k series to hold over 60 fps at all time no matter what. Shit port. My 6300 runs every other game in my huge library but thay one port

>>58569505
No need the fx can run anything except for gta5. Im not going to drop 600 bucks on i5k ddr4 and mobo so i can run gta5 better. I can run it at 60 fps it just drips when i wreck a car goong fast

>>58569514
>it's a shit port
you just have a shitty cpu, play more cpu intensive games and you'll understand, cunt

FX cpus are garbage, deal with it

>>58569765
keep repeating yourself doesnt make you any less wrong

>>58569814
>"FX processors aren't garbage, I swear"
keep telling yourself that

It won't. You will be fine.

My 980 GTX is still the bottleneck for most games with an i5 4570k. Could use a better CPU to get more frames in TF2 though.

>>58569990
Let anyone who wants an AMD processor have an AMD processor. That is punishment enough.

>>58570030
50 dollar mobo and 100 dollar cpu 3 years ago was a good deal. Its not like i just bought it.

>>58567286
>The CPU is far more likely to be the bottleneck the lower the resolution is, retard.
You're not *quite* wrong, but that's just an indirect correlation.

What you mean is the less you push your GPU to run something, the higher that framerate can go. If the framerate gets high enough, you can start to run into maxing out your CPU (therefore it being the bottleneck) before your GPU. Most games really won't be bottlenecked by a decently modern CPU at 60FPS. It'd more likely be an issue with either very badly optimized games, or running at 120+ framerates, depending on the game. Unless you have a monitor that can handle high framerate games, just lock your games to 60FPS at all times with Rivatuner or something.

>>58566355
Get a 1060 instead or get a fx-8350 for the 1070.

>>58566355
Bottlenecking a gpu with any decent modern quad core is not gonna happen. Please go back to /v/.

>>58567382
You realize Pascal wasn't meant for gaming right? It was to improve on Maxwell's SHIT compute performance.

Volta was confirmed in 2015 to be the enthusiast gaming cards.

I have a Fury X right now. If you're gonna shill AMD, at least know anything about what you're talking about.

I'm pumped for Vega 10, Vega 11 and Volta

>>58570632
"
Don’t Expect NVIDIA Corporation to Launch Volta Architecture Gaming GPUs in 2017
NVIDIA's next-generation graphics architecture for gamers may be a ways out as its current one sticks around for a while.
"
http://www.fool.com/investing/2017/01/10/dont-expect-nvidia-corporation-to-launch-volta-arc.aspx

>>58566443
This. Either way, there is always a bottleneck somewhere.

>>58566786
it will, under cpu-bound loads. it's a question of whether or not the bottlneck is substantial enough to justify going higher. Additionally, the i3 keeps up in less cpu bound situations simply because of a substantially higher clock speed.

>>58567286
>Hurr durr I got to set everything to MAX

>>58569234
Z boards, and some non-Z boards have overclocking features. OP didn't mention what motherboard he was getting, though.

>>58570101
It's a direct correlation, he just didn't elaborate as to WHY.

>>58567748
>>58571299

/g/ in a nutshell everyone, no one knows what they're talking about.

https://ark.intel.com/products/97147/Intel-Core-i5-7400-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_50-GHz

>>58570768
good. it will come out hopefully around the same time as the next elder scrolls.

i only play dota 2 and csgo anyways so doesnt matter. 1070 is more than enough.

Not that much. The 6400 is a good CPU, you'll be fine.

>>58566355
Fuck off retard. There's a thread for shit like this and /g/ is not your personal tech support, faggot.

>>58569001
the titan XP gets bottle necked by a 6600k even at OC stupid fuck.

>>58570024
>i5 4570k.
>980GTX
not the same the 10700 kicks the 980's butt at 3.3GHz any cpu will bottle neck under 4 real cores its just not noticeable as a gpu would be.

and we are talking stock and a locked cpu.

>>58566355

It won't. Stop crying.

>>58566355
shit single core

get i5 6600k even if you dont OC. i5 6500 minimum

>>58566430
First post best post

don't even bother with i5 6400 if you're not going to OC

OC 6400 will surpass 6500 speeds on decent cooling, dont worry. if your mainboard is good enough, of course, who knows what chipset he went for

>>58572165
No shit dummy. OC 6400 = OC 6600K. No difference at all in games, only need k for avx if you encode a lot.

>>58572220
im talking about raw cpu benchmarks, kid

>>58570101
Never limit your framerate on fast competitive games. It's the obvious example (I don't play it) but muh CS GO. On games not relying on twitch reflex feel free to engage Vsync, but do expect some input lag.

>>58572515
just use adaptive sync, it has almost no input lag

>>58571372
After reading your comment I'm sure it's just limited to a few of you that don't know shit.

>>58569317
I have a fx 6300 and I played GTA 5 last year just fine. Over 60fps

>>58566430
This

>>58571573
a 470 can run those games at 4k