GTX 1070 SC and AMD FX 8350 bottleneck?

[SlashDA]

So ive got my EVGA GTX 1070 SC ed. And i was wondering if my FX cpu will bottleneck it?

Current Specs:
AMD FX-8350 CPU
GIGABYTE 970A-UD3P MOBO
EVGA 750 Ti SC GPU
8GB CORSAIR VENGEANCE RAM
2TB SEAGATE HDD

 

[chemmajorp53]

Depends on the game how much it will bottleneck, but yes the 8350 will be the component limiting your gaming experience, especially if you're not playing at 4k.

 

[SlashDA]

Sorry i am unable to quote, but so in that case, if im playing on 1080P i will get 60 FPS but the bottleneck is the fact that the card can handle so much more?

 

[chemmajorp53]

Yes, most likely. If you're playing games like multiplayer BF1 you might experience more frequent frame drops than expected because of the CPU, but you should still be able to average 60fps+++ in any semi-well optimized game at 1080p. The GTX 1070 is made more for 1080p 144hz, 1440p60, and 4k. This card is overkill for your monitor in most cases.

 

[atomicWAR]

Some games you may not even get 60FPS. I see complaints all the time with FX series CPUs (8350/8320 particularly) maxing out a 50FPS or less in some modern games when the GPU they are running is capable of so much more. Some games 60FPS will be no problem but as I said not all. Regardless I would not expect frame rates higher then 70-80FPS and not be surprised if you hitting 40-50FPS either on CPU heavy games like GTA V of BF1. your mileage may vary!

 

[SlashDA]

Ah, i understand. However aside from frame drops, i understand it might be a bit overkill but should future proof me for quite a while and thats why i invested in it, at least until 4K is a bit more common and affordable

 

[atomicWAR]

Yes, most likely. If you're playing games like multiplayer BF1 you might experience more frequent frame drops than expected because of the CPU, but you should still be able to average 60fps+++ in any semi-well optimized game at 1080p. The GTX 1070 is made more for 1080p 144hz, 1440p60, and 4k. This card is overkill for your monitor in most cases.

I see questionable claims like this all the time on overkill. Maybe, maybe not. If he only runs max in-game setting then your right most of the time but if he runs 16x filtering by 8x AA (especially if set manually) one GTX 1070 may not even be enough to maintain 60FPS. I run 2 OC'd GTX 1080s for 4K and 2 OC'd GTX 980s for 1080P. when games don't support SLI or i test with single card for the 1080P system...plenty of games can drop to the mid/low 30s at max settings with 16x by 8x filtering AA. Even with the GTX 1070 adding another 20% to his frame rates he could still be shy of 60FPS in some titles. Now he runs no filtering and AA though and everything runs just fine over 60FPS. It is a question of how demanding he is with his game settings. But a blanket statement that it is over kill for 1080P is incorrect. It is certainly the high end for gaming though I won't argue that.

 

[SlashDA]

In response to Atomic War,

I am looking to run most games max, however some settings ill cut back on like AA, too much AA just looks bad to me. Ambient Occlusion will also orobably stay relatively low

 

[atomicWAR]

In response to Atomic War,

I am looking to run most games max, however some settings ill cut back on like AA, too much AA just looks bad to me. Ambient Occlusion will also orobably stay relatively low

If your not running high levels of AA then it's probably enough card for up to 1440P 50-80FPS depending on the title. It will give you some future proofing for sure! Though As i stated in my first post some CPU heavy games will still be an issue but if not the above advice applies.

 

[chemmajorp53]

I rarely meet people that run 16x AA and 8x filtering, that's just putting tons of unnecessary stress on your card for super marginal gains in fidelity. "Overkill for 1080p60" is a blanket term, but he didn't list any games and for 95% of PC games with Vsync on you'd get roughly the same experience out of a 1060 6GB, which is why I added "in most cases." All I'm saying is that the extra $200 for the 1070 isn't worth the added cost at this resolution and there's a reason this card isn't marketed towards 1080p60 gamers.

 

[atomicWAR]

to chemmajorp53

I wasn't saying you were wrong more that it didn't cover all settings. Sorry if my attention to detail came off as such. I know gamers like myself are rarer these days then they once were...ie running 16x by 8x filtering, say 10 years ago or so when it was very common for PC gamers to run such heavy settings it was one of the many reasons people started claim PC superiority (which is bunk both platforms have advantages and disadvantages) . I just don't believe videophile gamers are THAT rare these days either. One of the biggest reasons I game on PC more than any other platform is the fact as a console user you can't run (or control) things like heavy filtering and AA. Though medium to heavy filtering is at least more common then medium to heavy AA on console. Regardless I was just pointing out a certain usage scenario groups can well benefit from cards that are frequently labeled as "overkill". I have noticed a lot of younger gamers don't even know what filtering and AA even do so again your point is not moot either. Which is a whole other issue. I personally find when I turn someone on to heavy AA in particular they have a tough time going back. Some of the blame IMHO falls on reviewers. They use to by default include heavy filtering and AA in the benchmarks. I believe pressure from dev's in particular played a role in the fact most reviews now tend to just use the in-game setting, some with light filtering AA and others with none. Dev's want people to see hardware run there games at faster frames then would be capable otherwise. Point being people new to the PC game space don't even learn what they are missing. Though in the case the OP, Slashda stated he didn't like the effect, surprising but not unheard of. I prefer clean "stairway" free lines any day gaming, but especially in competitive FPS as your target is much better refined from the background and IMO easier to hit. Regardless your approach was not wrong per-say as I stated just incomplete.

 

[RobCrezz]

I would be looking at the 1060 or RX480 unless you plan on getting a better CPU.

1070 is overkill for the 8350 IMO.

 

[atomicWAR]

I would be looking at the 1060 or RX480 unless you plan on getting a better CPU.

1070 is overkill for the 8350 IMO.

Yes with his current CPU and his lack on use of heavy AA a GTX 1070 is a bit much unless he was gaming at say at least 1440P (regular or widescreen). However if the OP plans on stepping up his CPU or panel resolution soon, say post Ryzen. Then I could see it as an investment in the future. And yes the RX 480/ GTX 1606 6gb would be excellent choices for his 1080P usage if that's where he plans to stay.