Is my 4790k bottlenecking my GTX 1080?

[Elijah White]

So, I recently picked up a GTX 1080 to use with my 4790k and I wanted to play my goto game, GTA V on my 1080p monitor at 144Hz (main reason I bought the card). So I boot it up and to my surprise, tweaking a lot of the graphical settings gets me little to no FPS decrease or increase (no MSAA to 4x MSAA gives me almost no FPS difference apart from in grassy areas). And in addition to all this, the GPU usage goes from 67 percent to 98! So, am I bottlenecking this card with my processor or what is going on?

 

[Robert Cook]

if the 4790K is at stock speed then yes at 1080P it is holding back the 1080 slightly. there no chip that will not. your best bet is to OC the CPU slightly. Also though, see if GTAV is not just capped, some games simply will not run well past certain frame rates.

 

[Elijah White]

My 4790k is at 4.6 GHz and it isn't capped.

 

[Chugalug_]

No, it will not hold back the 1080..... even at stock speeds.
You're perfectly fine, even though an overclock would obviously yield slight performance increases.
If your GPU is being used 98%, that is not bottlenecking, that means there is NO bottleneck, as the GPU is able to reach full utilization.
Being bottlenecked by the CPU would be having GPU usage at say 10% and CPU usage at 100%; due to the CPU being topped out, the GPU can't push any further.

 

[Elijah White]

No, it will not hold back the 1080..... even at stock speeds.
You're perfectly fine, even though an overclock would obviously yield slight performance increases.
If your GPU is being used 98%, that is not bottlenecking, that means there is NO bottleneck, as the GPU is able to reach full utilization.
Being bottlenecked by the CPU would be having GPU usage at say 10% and CPU usage at 100%; due to the CPU being topped out, the GPU can't push any further.

But what about the usage dipping down to 67 percent?

 

[sizzling]

Agree no bottleneck. Just for a laugh say it was bottlenecking, what cpu can you buy that is materially better than the 4790k especially running 4.6Ghz?

 

[Robert Cook]

the fact that you had to push 4X MSAA to see 98% would imply some sort of holdback. although I still think the game simply might not run much faster I guess I should have asked, what is the current frame rate?

 

[Chugalug_]

That's just the graphics card adjusting to the load.
It won't use 98% say walking around compared to being in a fight with 5 helicopters and explosions going off left and right.
As long as frame rates are remaining stable, you're good. 😉

 

[Elijah White]

But what about the FPS not changing at all with MSAA and etc?

 

[Chugalug_]

the fact that you had to push 4X MSAA to see 98% would imply some sort of holdback. although I still think the game simply might not run much faster I guess I should have asked, what is the current frame rate?

Robert, i'm sorry I don't mean to be rude, but I highly suggest you do a 'lil research first, your past few answers haven't been exactly accurate. :/

 

[Robert Cook]

we still need the actual frame rates. It stand to be reasoned that if MSAA ( something that is notoriously GPU taxing) results in no FPS change but more GPU usage, that either the game cannot run faster, or the CPU is holding the GPU back. the same thing happens at 4K where the CPU speed ceases to be of as much relevance, as the GPU is working so much harder. this is not some delusion, this is simply how it works.
And please stop insinuating I have no idea what is going on... rude intentions or not it is wrong and thus rude.

 

[Elijah White]

So I turned down shadows, reflections, reflections MSAA, and post FX to normal and soft shadows from sharp, I only get about a 10 FPS increase (81 fps to 90).

 

[Chugalug_]

MSAA will increase the load on the GPU, thereby increasing the percentage load on the graphics card.
The GPU is not quite topping out with MSAA load, so I wouldn't be worried.

 

[Robert Cook]

hmmm those seem a bit low for what I researched on that game. so with everything maxed you get around 81 FPS stable?

 

[Elijah White]

Around that, but going into grassy areas (really taxing parts) get me down to about 50-60 FPS with Ultra grass.

 

[Robert Cook]

see those seem like slightly worse versions the frame rates for 1440p test that toms hardware ran at 1440P very high and 4XMSAA. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-pascal,4572-6.html

 

[J_E_D_70]

You can watch your cpu with the performance tab in task manager - set it to show all cores not the aggregate. Unless a core is pegged at 100% for more than a split second, the cpu isn't choking the gpu.

 

[Elijah White]

Robert, they're using very high settings, not ultra (Ultra grass is MUCH more taxing then very high, same with ultra reflections. I have no idea about ultra post fx.)

 

[Robert Cook]

Robert, they're using very high settings, not ultra (Ultra grass is MUCH more taxing then very high, same with ultra reflections. I have no idea about ultra post fx.)

I agree but can 4X MSAA and 1440p be less taxing than that? it appears you know more than me about this game.

 

[Elijah White]

CPU 0 got to 90%, others got to about 60-80%. Is this regular?
And I have no idea about that though.
They also probably aren't using the NVidia soft shadows in those settings by the way.

 

[Chugalug_]

That's fine.
As long as all cores aren't in the 90s constantly, there is no bottleneck.
The load on the cores is higher than in other titles due to how CPU intensive GTA V is, you'll be fine, this is normal.

 

[Elijah White]

Alright, thanks!

 

[Chugalug_]

Feel free to shoot myself or Robert a PM if you need any help in the future.

 

[thebest21445]

turn off vsync in your video settings in game. thats why u dont get any higher than 60.