GTX 1080Ti + Ryzen 1600X = Bottleneck?

[Heydiddle]

I've started my PC build and decided to focus more on the GPU.
I was looking at the GTX 1080Ti but probably wont be gaming in 4K resolution.
Card: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125955&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-PCPartPicker,%20LLC-_-na-_-na-_-na&cm_sp=&AID=10446076&PID=3938566&SID=

Should I downgrade the GPU to a GTX 1080 or lower or stay with what I have?

This is my build so far.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD - Ryzen 5 1600X 3.6GHz 6-Core Processor ($239.88 @ OutletPC)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master - Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($26.88 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: MSI - B350 PC MATE ATX AM4 Motherboard ($83.98 @ Newegg)
Memory: G.Skill - Flare X 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory ($106.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: Gigabyte - GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11GB Gaming OC 11G Video Card ($683.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Case: Corsair - 270R ATX Mid Tower Case ($59.99 @ Amazon)
Total: $1201.71
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-06-01 14:36 EDT-0400

Thanks

 

[madmatt30]

So what resolution will you be gaming at ??

& you should honestly go with the 1600, the 1600x isn't worth the extra.

 

[Heydiddle]

The resolution on my monitor is 3200 x 1800 w/ 60 Hertz but I'd prefer to game at 1080p for better performance.

1600 it is.

 

[dotas1]

The resolution on my monitor is 3200 x 1800 w/ 60 Hertz but I'd prefer to game at 1080p for better performance.

1600 it is.

For 1080p/60Hz even the GTX 1080 is overkill. Imagine that I have 1080p/60Hz with a 1070 and I NEVER go below 60fps in the games I play.
So, either go for a 1070 and save some money, or go for a higher resolution with at least a GTX 1080

 

[lakimens]

If you go 1600, remove the Hyper 212, you don't need it, the 1600 comes with a 90W cooler, while it's TDP is 60W.

 

[bloodroses]

In defense of the 1080ti choice, it might be good for the sake of future proofing. As others have said, it's the game resolution (at 1080p) that is the bottleneck, not the CPU. As newer, more demanding, game titles come out, the 1080ti will hold up a little better. Also, by having the 1080ti, you will more than likely will have the same performance at your monitors native resolution as you would at 1080p; making it definitely worth consideration.

As for it being worth the price premium, that can be easily argued against though in favor of a 1070 or even possibly a 1060 at 1080p.

 

[RCFProd]

If you go 1600, remove the Hyper 212, you don't need it, the 1600 comes with a 90W cooler, while it's TDP is 60W.

^ Agreed.

Go for the 1600 instead of the 1600X and save a bunch in costs, won't need a CPU cooler.

 

[madmatt30]

^ lakimems is right , at 60htz you won't even need to overclock

The 1600 boosts to 3.7ghz under mid-heavy load & the spire manages absolutely fine as long as your ambient temps & case cooling are reasonable

If you're happy gaming at 1080p the 1070 will do that , if you want more future proofing (3-4 years) then I would consider the 1080.
The 1080ti is plain overkill of the highest order though.

Spend the money you've saved on a better board , faster ram & a nicer case & you're still $200 better off !!
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD - Ryzen 5 1600 3.2GHz 6-Core Processor ($215.98 @ PCM)
Motherboard: ASRock - Fatal1ty AB350 Gaming K4 ATX AM4 Motherboard ($103.98 @ Newegg)
Memory: G.Skill - Ripjaws V Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-3200 Memory ($129.88 @ OutletPC)
Video Card: Gigabyte - GeForce GTX 1080 8GB G1 ROCK Video Card ($504.98 @ Newegg)
Case: Phanteks - ECLIPSE P400 TEMPERED GLASS ATX Mid Tower Case ($79.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $1034.81
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-06-01 15:03 EDT-0400

 

[RCFProd]

^ Love Gigabyte for bringing back the older G1 design to the GTX 1080. So good.

 

[coozie7]

Er...Exactly what monitor is it? That resolution is used, but mainly in mobile systems like laptops.

 

[mrobscura]

the 1080 isnt overkill for 1080p. a number of games push the card at 1080p and games are only going to get more demanding. or continue to be poorly optimized. and for games that are well optimized, you have decent head room. and brought force for when they are not. a 1080 is a good choice for 1080p if you want to be able to max out everything and everything and not worry about dipping below 60fps.

and the 1080ti is the perfect 1440p card in thatll youll always stay above 60 maxed. but if you are going for high fps 1080p gaming the 1600 will bottleneck it.

though i admit i refuse to spend hundreds on a card and turn down a single setting.

 

[dotas1]

@mrobscura at 1080p/60Hz there is no game that a 1070 can't handle even in ultra settings so yeah 1080 is overkill. Also in lower resolution (1080p and less) all GPUs are bottlenecked by the CPU. The GPU is too fast for the CPU to handle. For higher Hz or higher resolution then you should probably go for 1080.

 

[madmatt30]

The 1080 is a good choice for 60fps 1080p gaming with 2-3 years of future-proofing mind.

There are actually quite a few titles now that a 1070 cannot max out at 1080p 60fps solid, there are none the 1080 won't manage

 

[mrobscura]

exactly, a 1070 already struggles to max out a number of games and a 1080 is pushed to the limit by a few. it might be more due to optimization rather than the card not being powerful enough but even the 1080 will drop below 60fps at 1080p in deus ex and wildlands. the idea that a 1080 is overkill is ridiculous. especially considering the fact that some people want to keep a gpu more than 6 months. ive said it before and ill say it again... i would have had no problem going for a 1080ti despite playing at 1080p. but a 300 dollar difference just made the 1080 a far better deal. plus that extra money allowed me to upgrade my cooling and my cpu.

 

[lakimens]

1080 for 1080p is a little overkill. Yes, there are a few games that can max out the 1080, but just lowering a few settings will make it perfect for the 1070. I don't think it's worth getting a 1080 for 2-3 games, I only know of Deus Ex that can max out a 1080.
I guess it depends on the games you play.
If you play those games, could be worth it.

 

[mrobscura]

games are only going to get more demanding.

anyway op, at 1080p yes any ryzen chip will bottleneck a 1080ti. hell, ryzen 7 even bottlnecks a 1080 at 1080p(http://www.legitreviews.com/cpu-bottleneck-geforce-gtx-1080-ti-tested-on-amd-ryzen-versus-intel-kaby-lake_192585)

but at 60hrz it wont matter, at least not until games get demanding enough to push even the 1080ti at 1080p. but considering youre willing to spend 700 bucks on a gpu, im guessing you upgrade long before then. plus you could always game a 1440p to alleviate the bottleneck.

 

[RCFProd]

games are only going to get more demanding.

anyway op, at 1080p yes any ryzen chip will bottleneck a 1080ti. hell, ryzen 7 even bottlnecks a 1080 at 1080p(http://www.legitreviews.com/cpu-bottleneck-geforce-gtx-1080-ti-tested-on-amd-ryzen-versus-intel-kaby-lake_192585)

but at 60hrz it wont matter, at least not until games get demanding enough to push even the 1080ti at 1080p. but considering youre willing to spend 700 bucks on a gpu, im guessing you upgrade long before then. plus you could always game a 1440p to alleviate the bottleneck.

A Ryzen 5 1600/x or any Ryzen 7 gets 130 fps in games where Intel i7's get 140 fps lol.

Saying ''but at 60Hz it won't matter'' is just an extreme conclusion.

In most cases you'll probably not spot the difference without an FPS counter.

 

[mrobscura]

thats simply not true, dont just spew nonsense. there are numerous benches(including the one i posted) showing an r7 lagging behind an i7 by 30fps with just a 1080, let alone a 1080ti. so, how the hell is saying at 60hz it wont matter an "extreme conclusion?" lol

at 1080p 120+hrz the ryzen chips can hold you back noticeably, but they are more than capable of delivering 60fps no problem...hence my "conclusion" is simply fact.

 

[RCFProd]

thats simply not true, dont just spew nonsense. there are numerous benches(including the one i posted) showing an r7 lagging behind an i7 by 30fps with just a 1080, let alone a 1080ti. so, how the hell is saying at 60hz it wont matter an "extreme conclusion?" lol

at 1080p 120+hrz the ryzen chips can hold you back noticeably, but they are more than capable of delivering 60fps no problem...hence my "conclusion" is simply fact.

Your tests don't show that delivering 60 fps is no problem, they show that delivering 100+ FPS is not a problem. So even with a 144Hz monitor It's still not going to be a problem. Saying ''for 60Hz it won't matter'' is pretty ridiculous considering higher refresh rate monitors will still also be fine.

Also it would be better if you posted more recent benchmarks, with DDR4-3200+ speeds tested. RAM speeds really excel Ryzen's performance whilst recent BIOS patched fixed some performance issues.

 

[lakimens]

The thing is, even playing at 60Hz, comparing 60FPS to 120FPS, you can see the difference. There's less input lag, the game just runs smoother, now this isn't crucial in all games, but FPS games like CS:GO or BF1 will benefit from this.

 

[RCFProd]

The thing is, even playing at 60Hz, comparing 60FPS to 120FPS, you can see the difference. There's less input lag, the game just runs smoother, now this isn't crucial in all games, but FPS games like CS:GO or BF1 will benefit from this.

I don't think there is a boundary of which games benefit. It's pretty simple, all games that can run at high framerates benefit. Sure, for competitive multiplayer games it might improve your performance more, but it changes the gameplay experience in any case. Even for single player games, they'll look far better at super high framerates. Most can if you just balance the graphics settings.