Question Help, I want to upgrade my CPU but not sure which is compatible

alaborte

Honorable
Mar 21, 2014
13
0
10,510
Hi everyone,

I have a Gigabyte Technology Co. Ltd. X79-UP4 (SOCKET 0)/Socket 2011 LGA mother board with a Intel Core i7 4820k installed.

I want to know what CPU i could use to upgrade it for better gaming. I used canyourunit.com to see if my current build will be sufficient to run RDR2 but it says i should upgrade my CPU.

Any help would be appreciated.

Respectfully.
 

alaborte

Honorable
Mar 21, 2014
13
0
10,510
What are your full system specs?

The i7 4820k is far above the minimum requirement of an i5 2500k, so i doubt you need a cpu upgrade to run the game at a playable framerate.

Everything else I have in my rig is above the recommended settings. 16gb ram, GPU is a evga geforce gtx 1070. I just want it to be up so I can play it on max settings, and it recommended that the only upgrade I need is the CPU.
 

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
According to game debate (take with a grain of salt) your 4820k at stock settings is 39% above minimum and 3% above recommended, and the recommended cpu is an i7 7700T.

You don't need an upgrade to get good fps, what I'd suggest is some OC, 4.3 or 4.4GHz, 4.5GHz if you feel spiffy and have the cooling for it.

That's going to apply to any HEDT cpu you may swap to, but going higher usually just means more threads, not necessarily more speed.

There's a huge difference between having enough cpu to run a game, and having enough cpu to run a game well. Your 4820k is plenty good enough to run red dead 2 without issue, to run it better just takes a little more speed, which is quite possible with that cpu.

Max settings is on the gpu. The cpu sets the fps limits, the gpu either lives upto that limit or not, depending on resolution and detail settings. The cpu has very little to no impact on details or resolution.

If the cpu is capable of 100fps, and on low it gets 100fps but on ultra it gets 50fps, that means the gpu isn't strong enough to do the work. Cpu still puts out 100fps.

If the cpu puts out 100fps, and on low it gets 100fps and on ultra it gets 100fps, that means the gpu is plenty strong enough to do the work, but if you upgrade to a bigger gpu and you think fps should be higher, it won't/can't because the cpu only supplies 100fps.

Either way, your cpu is plenty for red dead 2, whether you can get good fps and max settings is upto the gpu, not the cpu.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: alaborte

alaborte

Honorable
Mar 21, 2014
13
0
10,510
According to game debate (take with a grain of salt) your 4820k at stock settings is 39% above minimum and 3% above recommended, and the recommended cpu is an i7 7700T.

You don't need an upgrade to get good fps, what I'd suggest is some OC, 4.3 or 4.4GHz, 4.5GHz if you feel spiffy and have the cooling for it.

That's going to apply to any HEDT cpu you may swap to, but going higher usually just means more threads, not necessarily more speed.

There's a huge difference between having enough cpu to run a game, and having enough cpu to run a game well. Your 4820k is plenty good enough to run red dead 2 without issue, to run it better just takes a little more speed, which is quite possible with that cpu.

Max settings is on the gpu. The cpu sets the fps limits, the gpu either lives upto that limit or not, depending on resolution and detail settings. The cpu has very little to no impact on details or resolution.

If the cpu is capable of 100fps, and on low it gets 100fps but on ultra it gets 50fps, that means the gpu isn't strong enough to do the work. Cpu still puts out 100fps.

If the cpu puts out 100fps, and on low it gets 100fps and on ultra it gets 100fps, that means the gpu is plenty strong enough to do the work, but if you upgrade to a bigger gpu and you think fps should be higher, it won't/can't because the cpu only supplies 100fps.

Either way, your cpu is plenty for red dead 2, whether you can get good fps and max settings is upto the gpu, not the cpu.

Thank u so much, very detailed response.
 
From what I've read in the last day or so, the GTX 1070 is supposedly good for 60+fps on high settings in RDR2. I'll have to track down where I read it, it might have even been from Rockstars own words. I would upgrade the video card first to an RTX 2070 Super or 2080 Super if possible.

In GTA 5 with high-ultra settings, my own GTX 1070 with an i7-2600k at 4.5ghz, was enough for up to 90-100fps in single-player and 65+fps in online for the latest patches in the last 3 months. I've seen people get higher fps increase from upgrading their video card before the CPU from similar spec'ed hardware to my own. I myself gained around 10fps in GTA Online and around 20 in single-player when I upgraded to a Ryzen 5 2600 that I still havent bothered to overclocked.
 

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
Exactly. In GTA 5, you were cpu capped. The cpu pre-renders the game code, it deciphers it and places every object at specific addresses, says 'this is a blade of grass' and these are the dimensions, and there's X amount of these at these angles etc. It'll do this for every frame. When the frame is complete, it sends it to the gpu. How many frames it can complete in a second is FPS. That'll be determined by the clock speeds of the cpu, and it's IPC (instructions per clock).

A Ryzen 2600 has a considerably higher IPC than a 2nd Gen sandy, so more frames are pre-rendered and sent to the gpu per second. The gtx1070 is strong enough that the difference is still below its maximum ability to get the frames finished and shoved onscreen. If you oc'd that 2600, it'll be upto the complexity of the game code vrs the ability of the 1070 whether or not actual fps goes up, it may not or it might be the gpu is still strong enough to raise detail levels and post-processing affects and still retain the same fps output.