[SOLVED] 12900k and Vega 64. How intense would this GPU Bottleneck be?

[ThePCGamer123]

Henlo, frens.

I recently posted on the forums about overclocking my current 7700k. But, I was also thinking about splurging and getting a new 12900K if I find performance gain from the overclock to be lacking. But, I'm fairly certain that would just mean I have a comically overpowered CPU given the GPU, leading to marginal performance gain for the cost. Is this a stupid purchase? I'm not sure I can even get a GPU at this point.

 

[Eximo]

All comes down to what you play really. Certain games will see increases in performance from just the CPU upgrade, but those are games that are likely already running very well. If you play a lot of RTS or Simulators, more CPU is good. If you play a lot of FPS, then it will likely not make a huge difference. That said, recent multiplayer games like Battlefield 2042 will likely see a marked performance increase on minimum frame rates. MMOs are generally CPU bound as well, but you aren't likely to see huge gains as the 7700k is still decently fast.

7700k was my primary system until mid-2021.

 

[Lutfij]

The options for a motherboard that will be necessary to pair the processor without having to ditch your existing DDR4 ram kit may be limited and cost a pretty penny. As Eximo above has stated, if what you doesn't take advantage of the platforms power, then you're going into an unnecessary feedback loop, whereby you just buy things to satisfy a non existent water level. If anything you could look into a GPU upgrade but that's not going to be cheap in 2022.

 

[alceryes]

Henlo, frens.

I recently posted on the forums about overclocking my current 7700k. But, I was also thinking about splurging and getting a new 12900K if I find performance gain from the overclock to be lacking. But, I'm fairly certain that would just mean I have a comically overpowered CPU given the GPU, leading to marginal performance gain for the cost. Is this a stupid purchase? I'm not sure I can even get a GPU at this point.

Your Vega64, although a great card, will definitely hold back performance. How much depends on what games you play, at what resolution, and settings.
Definitely not a stupid purchase if you're expectations are in the right place. I always upgrade my systems in a tick-tock fasion. Either my GPU OR everything else. If you upgrade the 'everything else' now you'll be ready to snag a good GPU when (if ) the prices come down.

 

[ThePCGamer123]

The options for a motherboard that will be necessary to pair the processor without having to ditch your existing DDR4 ram kit may be limited and cost a pretty penny. As Eximo above has stated, if what you doesn't take advantage of the platforms power, then you're going into an unnecessary feedback loop, whereby you just buy things to satisfy a non existent water level. If anything you could look into a GPU upgrade but that's not going to be cheap in 2022.

Maaan I didn't even think about the DDR5 upgrade! Maybe I'll hold off lol

 

[ThePCGamer123]

Your Vega64, although a great card, will definitely hold back performance. How much depends on what games you play, at what resolution, and settings.
Definitely not a stupid purchase if you're expectations are in the right place. I always upgrade my systems in a tick-tock fasion. Either my GPU OR everything else. If you upgrade the 'everything else' now you'll be ready to snag a good GPU when (if ) the prices come down.

I play 1080p 144hz, ultra settings wherever possible. . I might upgrade to a 1440p or 4k display in the future. Not an FPS snob but frames below 100 makes my eyes twitch. I play multiplayer shooters mostly, or RTS, and me and the boys getting into combat sim games, which for some reason are almost always poorly optimized titles. Hell Let Loose for example is kind of a disaster as far as optimization is concerned. and it makes me miss Red Orchestra 2.

 

[hotaru.hino]

Frame rates are primarily determined by the CPU. The GPU is responsible for getting up to that frame rate. If you're hitting 100% usage on the GPU and you're not hitting your target frame rate, lowering the details will help here until you hit the limit from the CPU.

 

[alceryes]

Frame rates are primarily determined by the CPU. The GPU is responsible for getting up to that frame rate. If you're hitting 100% usage on the GPU and you're not hitting your target frame rate, lowering the details will help here until you hit the limit from the CPU.

Frame rates (as in the frames per second measurement) are determined by both the CPU and GPU. Both have an equally important job in producing each and every frame that is delivered. Are you referring to frametime instead?

One thing that does happen, which may actually explain a little bit of the 'bottlenecking' craziness people get worked up about, is that the latencies in one component (either the CPU or GPU) can actually be masked by the greater latentcies in another. E.g. You may not know about the gaming latencies of your 7700k because they're being overshadowed by the greater gaming latencies of your RX 480. However, the latencies of your 7700k will immediately become apparent once you replace that RX 480 with a shiny new RTX 3080.

 

[hotaru.hino]

Frame rates (as in the frames per second measurement) are determined by both the CPU and GPU. Both have an equally important job in producing each and every frame that is delivered. Are you referring to frametime instead?

They're both related to the point where I don't think being pedantic really matters. And I would argue they're important in different ways. The CPU determines the maximum frame rate possible (or minimum frame time if you really want to go that route). The GPU determines how much image quality you can achieve up to that frame rate.

Some people care more about performance, so image quality takes a nose dive. For them, getting a RTX 3090 is pointless because an RTX 3060 can meet their requirements. Some people care more about image quality than performance, so an RTX 3090 may be important to them, but getting an i9-12900K isn't. An i5 could service them just fine. And some people want both.

 

[iTRiP]

I upgraded from a i5 6600K CPU to an i5 10600K CPU combined with my VEGA 64 and there was a huge noticeable difference in performance all round in many games, I even upped my in game settings from high to ultra on 1080p and still hold more fps.

A strong CPU does wonders for performance, I even bet that upgrading a cpu to a decent multicore unit will still even hold once the GPU upgrade is due again.

 

[Karadjgne]

Once you get beyond the refresh of the monitor, there's very few ppl who can tell the difference in cpus. You'd have to be a penultimate player of a specific game, then switch to a different cpu, and see the latencies difference to know the difference. The difference between a 12600k and 12900k at 150fps on a 144Hz monitor is a couple of milliseconds at best.

The only reason to upgrade a cpu is to get closer to or beyond the refresh in the games You play. Otherwise it's pointless. Just numbers on a benchmark.

 

[mdd1963]

The 12600K offers some pretty darn stellar FPS rates for it's cost...

 

[Makaveli]

The 12600K offers some pretty darn stellar FPS rates for it's cost...

This I would drop down to a 12600k or 12700k and the extra money you would have spent on the 12900k put it toward the GPU upgrade budget.

 

[alceryes]

The CPU determines the maximum frame rate possible (or minimum frame time if you really want to go that route). The GPU determines how much image quality you can achieve up to that frame rate.

I think you mean maximum frame rate if your GPU isn't the limiting factor.
If your GPU is the limiting factor (higher latency in delivering a completed frame than your CPU) then your GPU is determining your maximum frame rate.

 

[hotaru.hino]

I think you mean maximum frame rate if your GPU isn't the limiting factor.
If your GPU is the limiting factor (higher latency in delivering a completed frame than your CPU) then your GPU is determining your maximum frame rate.

I meant what I said. Maximum frame rate possible means if you threw on a GPU with infinite power, then it's the limit you'll run into because the CPU cannot push out any more frames. The CPU is responsible for giving the GPU work. There's only so many times a second the CPU can tell the GPU what to do.

Also if the GPU was responsible for determining the maximum possible frame rate, then pairing an RTX 3090 with a Celeron or Athlon should able to achieve 300 FPS in say Cyberpunk with all the settings turned down.

 

[alceryes]

I meant what I said. Maximum frame rate possible means if you threw on a GPU with infinite power, then it's the limit you'll run into because the CPU cannot push out any more frames. The CPU is responsible for giving the GPU work. There's only so many times a second the CPU can tell the GPU what to do.

Also if the GPU was responsible for determining the maximum possible frame rate, then pairing an RTX 3090 with a Celeron or Athlon should able to achieve 300 FPS in say Cyberpunk with all the settings turned down.

Yup - just clarifying.

I never said it was just the GPU. The effective frame rate that gets delivered to your screen will always be determined by the slower of the two in producing every frame that gets delivered.


Ahhh, I think I see where the false thinking is. 'Settings turned down' in no way nullifies the job the GPU has to do to produce the finished frame. It makes the job easier, sure, but never nullifies. Even on the lowest settings, GPUs have to do a TON of work in Cyberpunk 2077.