11% bottleneck is it bad ?

[rdxriad236]

my specs are
intel core i5 4460
12 gb ddr3 1600 mhz ram
sapphire nitro+ rx580 4gb ddr5 graphics

i checked bottleneck on bottleneck calculator ...

 

[shknawe]

Short answer is no, it means your system is running at 89% efficiency. But the I5 4460 is a weak cpu for high end gaming.

 

[evongugg]

Where do I go to test if there is a bottle neck?

 

[gasaraki]

No. That is not bad. Bottleneck would depend on your game and resolution also.

 

[shknawe]

Where do I go to test if there is a bottle neck?

www.thebottlenecker.com/#calculator
it dosnt have gtx 1070/ 1080's gpu to pick just use titanx if you have a 1070/1080 its basically same.

 

[sizzling]

That website is complete garbage and very misleading. Just don’t use it.

At 1080p in some cpu heavy games the cpu will be the limiting factor but in others your gpu will be the limiting factor. It will be game dependent. If running lower resolutions then your cpu will limit you more often and at higher resolutions your gpu will limit you more often.

 

[King_V]

I would not trust a bottleneck calculator at all.

People overly obsess over bottlenecking - there is almost always SOME kind of bottleneck.

Some games are more demanding on the CPU, some are more demanding on the GPU.

If you increase to a higher resolution monitor, that creates more work for the GPU.

Best to use CPU and GPU load monitoring to see what hits 100% and what doesn't, when playing games. If the CPU is always being pegged at 100%, then that's your bottleneck. If it's the GPU hitting 100%, then there's your bottleneck.

 

[rdxriad236]

I would not trust a bottleneck calculator at all.

People overly obsess over bottlenecking - there is almost always SOME kind of bottleneck.

Some games are more demanding on the CPU, some are more demanding on the GPU.

If you increase to a higher resolution monitor, that creates more work for the GPU.

Best to use CPU and GPU load monitoring to see what hits 100% and what doesn't, when playing games. If the CPU is always being pegged at 100%, then that's your bottleneck. If it's the GPU hitting 100%, then there's your bottleneck.

well some time both on 90% or 100%

 

[sizzling]

Ignoring bottleneck cpu & gpu bottleneck you have 12gb RAM. That means your RAM must be running in single channel mode, you would need 2x4gb or 2x8gb to run dual channel. You probably have a little performance hit from this.

 

[rdxriad236]

Ignoring bottleneck cpu & gpu bottleneck you have 12gb RAM. That means your RAM must be running in single channel mode, you would need 2x4gb or 2x8gb to run dual channel. You probably have a little performance hit from this.

so i should use 2x8 gb instead of one 4gb ram ?

 

[sizzling]

2x4gb or 2x8gb can operate in dual channel mode, you will need to check your motherboard manual to confirm which slots but it’s usually 1+3 or 2+4 the RAM needs to be installed in. Running 3 RAM modules which I expect you are prevents dual channel. FYI 4x2gb or 4x4gb would also work in dual channel.

The gains won’t be much for gaming.

 

[USAFRet]

Where do I go to test if there is a bottle neck?

www.thebottlenecker.com/#calculator
it dosnt have gtx 1070/ 1080's gpu to pick just use titanx if you have a 1070/1080 its basically same.

That site is a complete waste of electrons.

 

[King_V]

I would not trust a bottleneck calculator at all.

People overly obsess over bottlenecking - there is almost always SOME kind of bottleneck.

Some games are more demanding on the CPU, some are more demanding on the GPU.

If you increase to a higher resolution monitor, that creates more work for the GPU.

Best to use CPU and GPU load monitoring to see what hits 100% and what doesn't, when playing games. If the CPU is always being pegged at 100%, then that's your bottleneck. If it's the GPU hitting 100%, then there's your bottleneck.

well some time both on 90% or 100%

What % for CPU vs GPU on which specific games?

What resolution and refresh rate is your monitor?

Are you running with Vsync set, or using FreeSync's adaptive refresh?

 

[SkyBill40]

That site made me audibly LOL. What a joke. The short answer is: You're fine.

 

[mdd1963]

an 8086K with a GTX1050 is something to 'worry' about.....as is an older Pentium with a TItan at 1080P. You are a long way from either scenario.

 

[USAFRet]

A couple of months ago, a member here came screaming about his "bottleneck" number from that site.

A newer Ryzen system, with a GPU of (don't remember).
"18% bottleneck!! OH NO!"

I input my parts, just to see:
i7-4790k, RX-580 8GB
Result - 18% bottleneck.

hmm....interesting.
So I changed it to the GPU they suggested, a Quadrosomething. What?
Result - 39% bottlneck.

Yeah, OK.
That was a couple of months ago.


I tried that site again today.
Exact same parts, the i7, RX-580, 32GB RAM, SSDs.
Result - 9% bottleneck.

No parts changed.

I think they just have a poor RNG, and display whatever it spits up.

 

[SkyBill40]

A couple of months ago, a member here came screaming about his "bottleneck" number from that site.

A newer Ryzen system, with a GPU of (don't remember).
"18% bottleneck!! OH NO!"

I input my parts, just to see:
i7-4790k, RX-580 8GB
Result - 18% bottleneck.

hmm....interesting.
So I changed it to the GPU they suggested, a Quadrosomething. What?
Result - 39% bottlneck.

Yeah, OK.
That was a couple of months ago.


I tried that site again today.
Exact same parts, the i7, RX-580, 32GB RAM, SSDs.
Result - 9% bottleneck.

No parts changed.

I think they just have a poor RNG, and display whatever it spits up.

I put in my parts just for funsies (FX8350 + GTX 1080 + 16GB RAM) and I got a 13% neck. Yeah, no. Thankfully we know to not rely on such tripe though others unfortunately will take it as gospel. Things like that are always super sketchy.

 

[shknawe]

A couple of months ago, a member here came screaming about his "bottleneck" number from that site.

A newer Ryzen system, with a GPU of (don't remember).
"18% bottleneck!! OH NO!"

I input my parts, just to see:
i7-4790k, RX-580 8GB
Result - 18% bottleneck.
So what is your real bottleneck then?

hmm....interesting.
So I changed it to the GPU they suggested, a Quadrosomething. What?
Result - 39% bottlneck.

Yeah, OK.
That was a couple of months ago.


I tried that site again today.
Exact same parts, the i7, RX-580, 32GB RAM, SSDs.
Result - 9% bottleneck.

No parts changed.

I think they just have a poor RNG, and display whatever it spits up.

So what is your actual bottleneck then?

 

[shknawe]

A couple of months ago, a member here came screaming about his "bottleneck" number from that site.

A newer Ryzen system, with a GPU of (don't remember).
"18% bottleneck!! OH NO!"

I input my parts, just to see:
i7-4790k, RX-580 8GB
Result - 18% bottleneck.


hmm....interesting.
So I changed it to the GPU they suggested, a Quadrosomething. What?
Result - 39% bottlneck.

Yeah, OK.
That was a couple of months ago.


I tried that site again today.
Exact same parts, the i7, RX-580, 32GB RAM, SSDs.
Result - 9% bottleneck.

No parts changed.

I think they just have a poor RNG, and display whatever it spits up.

I put in my parts just for funsies (FX8350 + GTX 1080 + 16GB RAM) and I got a 13% neck. Yeah, no. Thankfully we know to not rely on such tripe though others unfortunately will take it as gospel. Things like that are always super sketchy.

Ah it made you laugh but you couldn't help yourself to use it huh? So what is your calculated bottleneck then using your huge brain?

 

[USAFRet]

So what is your actual bottleneck then?

That is not something you can put a number on. Which points to the uselessness of that site.

All that can be said is "some". As is the case for every system on the planet. Every single one.
At some point, in some use case, some part in your system will be maxed out and another not quite maxed out.

And it changes, due to what you are actually trying to run at this particular moment.

Some application may be more CPU focused, another might rely more on the GPU.

There is no "X% bottleneck" for a particular configuration of hardware.

 

[SkyBill40]

Well, Shknawe, I checked it out for the sake of it and because USAFRet is a respected poster. As for my supposed bottleneck, I put in my post what it stated. If you used your eyes and paid more attention to what was written instead of trying so hard to be condescending and appear clever when you are not, perhaps you'd have seen that.