Bought a GTX 1060. What about my system?

[joaodjota]

HI guys

I recently got a GTX 1060 6Gb to replace my dead R9 280X.

Please is there a bottleneck in my current system?

Benq XL2420T 144Hz
Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3
FX 8350
8Gb 1600 MHz Corsair
HDD Seagate 500Gb
Seasonic 620W

Please let me know!

 

[PatrioticPickle]

HI guys

I recently got a GTX 1060 6Gb to replace my dead R9 280X.

Please is there a bottleneck in my current system?

Benq XL2420T 144Hz
Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3
FX 8350
8Gb 1600 MHz Corsair
HDD Seagate 500Gb
Seasonic 620W

Please let me know!

Nope, will be fine.
For those who say the 8350 will bottleneck.. you're wrong.
http://www.hardwareunboxed.com/gtx-1060-vs-rx-480-fx-showdown/

Of course you will get lower performance in those poorly optimised, CPU intensive titles like ARMA 3 (every AMD CPU struggles with this due to low single threaded performance, but at 1440p the 'bottleneck' disappears)
But for the other 99% of games your good to go

Happy gaming!

 

[4745454b]

Dirt Rally would be another game.

DiRT Rally provides more than a few surprises at 1080p. Firstly there is a huge performance discrepancy between the FX-8350 and 6700K. The GTX 1060 was 21% slower on the overclocked FX-8350 while the RX 480 was 36% slower. More crucially where the RX 480 was previously just 15% slower than the 1060 it is now 32% slower with the FX-8350. So this is the first game where we see the RX 480 perform much worse than the 1060 on the slower FX processor.

Doom would be another game where gain 30FPS by moving from the 8350 to a more modern CPU. Using an Intel CPU in that game would be important because with the 480 you would be above 120FPS avg and could handle 3D, or you won't have to turn down as many settings to get to 144FPS. F1 2015 is another similar case, nearly 30 extra frames on the 1060 which again puts you closer to 144. GTA V is again similar. Minimum FPS is ~60FPS in any case with the 8350, but are nearly 90FPS with the 6700. AVG FPS are even higher of course. Do you want AVG FPS higher then 60FPS in Hitman? If you have the 480 guess what you need as your CPU? That's right, 8350 will give you sub 60FPS.

I agree that the 8350 does just fine in most games. But to claim anyone who says it bottlenecks is wrong is... wrong? You can blame it on "poorly optimized" titles all you want, but the fact is there is more then one game out there that the 8350 runs "less well" then Intel CPUs. And if someone wants to know where the bottleneck is feel free to point out the weak link. He has a 144Hz monitor (so what I said about 144FPS matters.), he has at least 8GBs of ram, he has a semi decent PSU, so unless he's using a stock cooler or wants to buy yet another GPU I'd say the weak link is moving to the CPU. One could also argue he needs an SSD.

And I don't mean to pick on you pickle. I see the 8350 in your system specs. But facts are facts. If you play a variety of games at 144, an Intel CPU would serve you better.

 

[PatrioticPickle]

Dirt Rally would be another game.

DiRT Rally provides more than a few surprises at 1080p. Firstly there is a huge performance discrepancy between the FX-8350 and 6700K. The GTX 1060 was 21% slower on the overclocked FX-8350 while the RX 480 was 36% slower. More crucially where the RX 480 was previously just 15% slower than the 1060 it is now 32% slower with the FX-8350. So this is the first game where we see the RX 480 perform much worse than the 1060 on the slower FX processor.

Doom would be another game where gain 30FPS by moving from the 8350 to a more modern CPU. Using an Intel CPU in that game would be important because with the 480 you would be above 120FPS avg and could handle 3D, or you won't have to turn down as many settings to get to 144FPS. F1 2015 is another similar case, nearly 30 extra frames on the 1060 which again puts you closer to 144. GTA V is again similar. Minimum FPS is ~60FPS in any case with the 8350, but are nearly 90FPS with the 6700. AVG FPS are even higher of course. Do you want AVG FPS higher then 60FPS in Hitman? If you have the 480 guess what you need as your CPU? That's right, 8350 will give you sub 60FPS.

I agree that the 8350 does just fine in most games. But to claim anyone who says it bottlenecks is wrong is... wrong? You can blame it on "poorly optimized" titles all you want, but the fact is there is more then one game out there that the 8350 runs "less well" then Intel CPUs. And if someone wants to know where the bottleneck is feel free to point out the weak link. He has a 144Hz monitor (so what I said about 144FPS matters.), he has at least 8GBs of ram, he has a semi decent PSU, so unless he's using a stock cooler or wants to buy yet another GPU I'd say the weak link is moving to the CPU. One could also argue he needs an SSD.

And I don't mean to pick on you pickle. I see the 8350 in your system specs. But facts are facts. If you play a variety of games at 144, an Intel CPU would serve you better.

The OP bought a 1060, not a rx 480, AMD GPUs perform more poorly with AMD CPUs due to the higher CPU overhead.

I know the 5 year old 8350 is not gonna compare with the latest tech, especially a brand new $500 (AUD prices, 8350 is about $220) i7 6700k overclocked to 4.5ghz with DDR4 RAM (Which can make a little difference in performance 😛).

What I was trying to say is that his 8350 is fine for the moment and will be for 90% of titles and he shouldnt go rush out and buy a new board, cpu and RAM.

 

[joaodjota]

Please, which such be a better AMD CPU option for this system?

 

[4745454b]

There isn't one. You already have the best AMD worth while out there. There are the FX 9xxx CPUs but those are a horrible idea to get. First, you can get the same chip by OCing the snot out of your 8350. You'll have the same core count, clock speeds, etc. Second, the TDP will shoot from 125W like your chip to 200W+ by using the FX9xxx. You'll also need to change your board as very few 970 chipset boards support that one. (to be fair I haven't looked yours up, it might but probably doesn't.) Third, you can't wait for Zen either. Zen is on a different socket so won't plug into your board. Basically if you are going to have to buy a new board and CPU you might as well just go Intel. Will perform better in all game, not just "90%" of them.

I don't mean to suggest you should upgrade your CPU. I took exception to someone with apparent AMD favoritism saying you were fine and didn't have a CPU bottleneck. Fact is you will have random games here and there that won't run as well as an Intel CPU. You might not even play any of them. But when I was upgrading my system last I went with Intel because I didn't want to have a random game come up that the 8350 didn't support as well as Intel CPUs did. If it was ONLY one game I might have gone with the 8350, but as I pointed out it's more than just one. The weak points in your system on the CPU, and then maybe the cooler, "only" 8GBs of ram, or the lack of an SSD. You have a good GPU, PSU, monitor, etc. But I'm not going to sugar coat it and say you are fine in the CPU dept as there are cases where having a different one would help. That said I do agree that you don't need to rush out and buy one, I'd wait for Zen to show up and see how things are running then.

The OP bought a 1060, not a rx 480, AMD GPUs perform more poorly with AMD CPUs due to the higher CPU overhead.

Dude, just stop. It's not "poorly optimized" games or "CPU overhead" that causes the 8350 to run slower. Can you even tell me what "CPU overhead" is?

 

[PatrioticPickle]

There isn't one. You already have the best AMD worth while out there. There are the FX 9xxx CPUs but those are a horrible idea to get. First, you can get the same chip by OCing the snot out of your 8350. You'll have the same core count, clock speeds, etc. Second, the TDP will shoot from 125W like your chip to 200W+ by using the FX9xxx. You'll also need to change your board as very few 970 chipset boards support that one. (to be fair I haven't looked yours up, it might but probably doesn't.) Third, you can't wait for Zen either. Zen is on a different socket so won't plug into your board. Basically if you are going to have to buy a new board and CPU you might as well just go Intel. Will perform better in all game, not just "90%" of them.

I don't mean to suggest you should upgrade your CPU. I took exception to someone with apparent AMD favoritism saying you were fine and didn't have a CPU bottleneck. Fact is you will have random games here and there that won't run as well as an Intel CPU. You might not even play any of them. But when I was upgrading my system last I went with Intel because I didn't want to have a random game come up that the 8350 didn't support as well as Intel CPUs did. If it was ONLY one game I might have gone with the 8350, but as I pointed out it's more than just one. The weak points in your system on the CPU, and then maybe the cooler, "only" 8GBs of ram, or the lack of an SSD. You have a good GPU, PSU, monitor, etc. But I'm not going to sugar coat it and say you are fine in the CPU dept as there are cases where having a different one would help. That said I do agree that you don't need to rush out and buy one, I'd wait for Zen to show up and see how things are running then.

The OP bought a 1060, not a rx 480, AMD GPUs perform more poorly with AMD CPUs due to the higher CPU overhead.

Dude, just stop. It's not "poorly optimized" games or "CPU overhead" that causes the 8350 to run slower. Can you even tell me what "CPU overhead" is?

The higher CPU Overhead causes a AMD GPU to run slower, not the CPU. Because of the way the GPU drivers are made for AMD. I am not saying the 8350 doesnt perform poorly in CPU intensive titles, I was just mentioning that Nvidia GPUS perform better with AMD CPUs than AMD GPUs with AMD Cpus.

This is what I was referring to.. http://www.overclock.net/t/1495236/amd-vs-nvidia-cpu-overhead
I know its a few years old, but note how the 780ti and 290x perform closer when using an i5. When switching to the 8350, the 780ti edges ahead more.

I was just mentioning that if the OP bought a RX 480, he would have more performance issues then he would with a 1060 because of the 8350 he has.


I wasnt saying that his 8350 is the best of the best and Intel sucks. No shit Intel is better, everyone knows that. But it wouldnt be worth it for the OP to go fork out for a new CPU, Mobo and RAM because he already has a 8350 and a decent board and RAM. If he had a FX 6300 or something it would be worth the upgrade.

The bottleneck depends on the game you are playing; some there can be a pretty bad performance hit, whilst others there will be no performance hit. In that particular run of benches 5 out of 24 games saw a performance hit when running the 5 year old 8350 vs the latest and greatest i7 6700k OC'd

As I said, of course Intel is better, but the 8350 isn't shit. I know they are old as time itself, and I know that you'd be silly to buy one brand new today. Theres so many threads on here where people see a 8350 and say 'Oh no, you have to upgrade that CPU or you won't be able to play games a playable framerates'. The 8350 holds up pretty darn well still considering its age and price.

And no I am not a fanboy. When I purchased my 8350 3 or so years ago, it would perform identical to the i5 3570k in just about every title out there and the i5 was $60 to $100 more so it was a no brainer to buy a 8350 at the time. Of course if I (and many other 8350 owners) knew more CPU intensive titles were gonna come out 2-3 years on and heavily relied higher IPC and not core count I would have got the i5.

 

[4745454b]

Seeing as this is marked as solved by the OP I'm closing now.