GTX 970 Bottlenecks with AMD FX-8350?

[mrhippo900]

People keep saying the AMD FX-8350 Bottlenecks with a GTX 970 is this true?

 

[cdrkf]

People keep saying the AMD FX-8350 Bottlenecks with a GTX 970 is this true?

1: whatever 'people say' are you actually experiencing any issues? If not then I wouldn't worry about it

2: The answer is 'complicated' in that it depends entirely on the game. The more modern games (e.g. watch dogs, BF4 etc) use threads quite well and the FX 8350 does pretty well in benchmarks. Older games which aren't as well threaded (e.g. Starcraft 2) can get slowed down using the FX compared to an Intel Core processor due to the fact that *per core* Intel is quite a bit faster.

 

[Proxify]

Personal experience, this is indeed true. I have another pc using some of my older parts (FX-8350), I tried my friend's reference GTX 970 replacing the GTX 760... heaven benchmark BARELY increased. Min. FPS went up 2 FPS, Max FPS + 5 FPS, Avg. FPS + 2. Not enough of a different for me to purchase a new card for friends who come over.

Although not a big deal, the 8350 in the machine is at 4.5Ghz

 

[cdrkf]

Personal experience, this is indeed true. I have another pc using some of my older parts (FX-8350), I tried my friend's reference GTX 970 replacing the GTX 760... heaven benchmark BARELY increased. Min. FPS went up 2 FPS, Max FPS + 5 FPS, Avg. FPS + 2. Not enough of a different for me to purchase a new card for friends who come over.

Although not a big deal, the 8350 in the machine is at 4.5Ghz

I'd be interested to see some other benchmarks besides Heaven.... that is an Open GL benchmark and it's probably worst case for your FX, given that Open GL is very poorly threaded (the new 'Open GL Next' should be much better for that).

A DX 11 based test (e.g. 3D Mark) would probably have performed much better.

 

[neieus]

Before we start AMD = Bottleneck as the answer you may want to consider a larger problem. Speaking from my own experience my 8320 oc isn't bottlenecking my 970 in anyway. However the larger issue is that there is currently a major problem with the 970/980's that are impacting everyone including those with I5's and I7's. Do a search for GTX 900 series low usage and you'll see what I'm talking about.

Will it bottleneck... no it will not however if you're not seeing the performance you should be after upgrading to the 900 series low utilization is most likely why. Nvidia is already aware of the problem.

 

[mrhippo900]

People keep saying the AMD FX-8350 Bottlenecks with a GTX 970 is this true?

1: whatever 'people say' are you actually experiencing any issues? If not then I wouldn't worry about it

2: The answer is 'complicated' in that it depends entirely on the game. The more modern games (e.g. watch dogs, BF4 etc) use threads quite well and the FX 8350 does pretty well in benchmarks. Older games which aren't as well threaded (e.g. Starcraft 2) can get slowed down using the FX compared to an Intel Core processor due to the fact that *per core* Intel is quite a bit faster.

I play games such as BF4, and Very heavily Modded Skyrim. Most other games i have are not very Graphic intensive.
And just if you are wondering i do have a Skyrim ENB (Hopefully you know what that is).

 

[cdrkf]

People keep saying the AMD FX-8350 Bottlenecks with a GTX 970 is this true?

1: whatever 'people say' are you actually experiencing any issues? If not then I wouldn't worry about it

2: The answer is 'complicated' in that it depends entirely on the game. The more modern games (e.g. watch dogs, BF4 etc) use threads quite well and the FX 8350 does pretty well in benchmarks. Older games which aren't as well threaded (e.g. Starcraft 2) can get slowed down using the FX compared to an Intel Core processor due to the fact that *per core* Intel is quite a bit faster.

I play games such as BF4, and Very heavily Modded Skyrim. Most other games i have are not very Graphic intensive.
And just so you are wonder i do have a Skyrim ENB (Hopefully you know what that is).

Well you'll be fine for BF4.... Skyrim could be a problem given it's an old (ish) engine that isn't well threaded. A friend of mine is into the HR texture packs and mods for Skyrim and manages to kill his set-up which is based around an i7 and a Radeon 7990 (thats a dual GPU card faster than a 970). I think it's one of those games that is prone to chug when cranked up max no matter what you do

 

[nikoli707]

skyrim wont be a problem unless its ultra modded, at which point it will stress vram and system ram. battlefield 4 for sure can be crippled around 25% compared to an i5. but if you sustaining 60fps, or rarely dropping below your monitor refresh, its not really a big deal.

 

[mrhippo900]

skyrim wont be a problem unless its ultra modded, at which point it will stress vram and system ram. battlefield 4 for sure can be crippled around 25% compared to an i5. but if you sustaining 60fps, or rarely dropping below your monitor refresh, its not really a big deal.

I have over 180 mods, an ENB, and lots of Textures for my Skyrim, my FPS varies, Outside i get around 35FPS average, inside 60FPS. My BF4 stays at a stable 60FPS.

 

[mrhippo900]

Personal experience, this is indeed true. I have another pc using some of my older parts (FX-8350), I tried my friend's reference GTX 970 replacing the GTX 760... heaven benchmark BARELY increased. Min. FPS went up 2 FPS, Max FPS + 5 FPS, Avg. FPS + 2. Not enough of a different for me to purchase a new card for friends who come over.

Although not a big deal, the 8350 in the machine is at 4.5Ghz

I'd be interested to see some other benchmarks besides Heaven.... that is an Open GL benchmark and it's probably worst case for your FX, given that Open GL is very poorly threaded (the new 'Open GL Next' should be much better for that).

A DX 11 based test (e.g. 3D Mark) would probably have performed much better.

Heaven gave me some interesting results
Min FPS: 29
Max FPS: 115
80% of the frames were at an average 43FPS or more.

 

[nikoli707]

skyrim wont be a problem unless its ultra modded, at which point it will stress vram and system ram. battlefield 4 for sure can be crippled around 25% compared to an i5. but if you sustaining 60fps, or rarely dropping below your monitor refresh, its not really a big deal.

I have over 180 mods, an ENB, and lots of Textures for my Skyrim, my FPS varies, Outside i get around 35FPS average, inside 60FPS. My BF4 stays at a stable 60FPS.

are you using skse and its memory mod set to 768mb? are you using the enboost features?

my system is in my sig below and i get solid 50+fps with the full SMC install with enb.

 

[mrhippo900]

skyrim wont be a problem unless its ultra modded, at which point it will stress vram and system ram. battlefield 4 for sure can be crippled around 25% compared to an i5. but if you sustaining 60fps, or rarely dropping below your monitor refresh, its not really a big deal.

I have over 180 mods, an ENB, and lots of Textures for my Skyrim, my FPS varies, Outside i get around 35FPS average, inside 60FPS. My BF4 stays at a stable 60FPS.

are you using skse and its memory mod set to 768mb? are you using the enboost features?

my system is in my sig below and i get solid 50+fps with the full SMC install with enb.

Yes and yes.