[SOLVED] Picking a CPU with future GPU in mind

[Eth0s_]

I'm an avid gamer looking to finally get rid of my FX 6300 (yeah, I know). Some of the newer high-end (or poorly optimized) games are finally giving it a pretty good beating, and I'm afraid the same will be true for my GTX 1070 before too long as well. Especially as I consider 100+ hz display rather than 60hz that I currently have.

So I'm wondering what CPU makes the most sense when considering a GPU upgrade of either RTX 2070S or holding out for the 3070/3080, sometime in the next 1-1.5 years.

Of course I'm going to need a new motherboard and RAM no matter what I choose since I've got an AM3 board and DDR3 RAM, and I'd like to keep the total under $600 but I could go higher if it's going to save me a headache later. Bonus points it you've got any recommendations on a MoBo to pair with the CPU of course.

I've been considering the Ryzen 3700x so far, but I'm not sure if that's overkill for what I need out of the next 3-4 years. Or if it would perhaps even be a bottleneck to a 2070S or (speculative) 3070/3080. If I did go the route of 3700x I was planning on pairing it with an ASUS ROG Strix B450-F ATX board.

I've read about older Ryzens being particularly picky about RAM speed and timings, and I've heard that's no longer the case but if it is that would also be nice to know! For reference I was planning on grabbing 16gb of 3200 mhz C16 RAM.

 

[fredfinks]

No it wont be a bottleneck.
Anyway, id prefer to be bottlenecked by CPU than GPU. For some reason everyone cares about the former, never the latter. (you are one of the rare ones who is being held back by the CPU)

GPUs basically age like milk.
The fx series wasnt a good gaming CPU to begin with. Thats why its very long in tooth.

 

[Eth0s_]

No it wont be a bottleneck.
Anyway, id prefer to be bottlenecked by CPU than GPU. For some reason everyone cares about the former, never the latter. (you are one of the rare ones who is being held back by the CPU)

GPUs basically age like milk.
The fx series wasnt a good gaming CPU to begin with. Thats why its very long in tooth.

Ha, in regards to letting this bottleneck exist for so long, with it being due to the CPU and all, it mostly just comes down to convenience/laziness for me.

Installing a GPU is nothing. Having to install a whole new motherboard to support the "new" CPU sockets is a different story. I'd be lying if I said handling and moving all the components didnt make me anxious. Even if I (mostly) know what I'm doing.

I understand why it has to be done, but I really wish an upgrade for me didnt include basically a whole new computer minus a case and acouple components.

I've built 3 machines now, by the time I'm donewith this project I'll call it 3.5. Hopefully third time was the charm and I can avoid the panic this time around

 

[fredfinks]

Ha, in regards to letting this bottleneck exist for so long, with it being due to the CPU and all, it mostly just comes down to convenience/laziness for me.

Understand, its a big hassle than upping a GPU like you say.
Bascialyl, unless youre getting a low tier CPU, dont worry about it bottlenecking a GPU for quite some time.
The GPU itself will go stale before then.

 

[Karadjgne]

Cheapest overall upgrade would be a Ryzen 1600AF. Basically no difference to a 2600, for less cost. But that'll run out of steam considerably faster than a 3600 will, simply due to cpu speeds, fps output etc. A 3700x will have the longest usable lifespan, has the core/thread counts to handle anything in the foreseeable near future, the cpu speeds to keep up with mainstream demands and a 3600MHz sweet spot on ram. Whether the 4th gen show much (if any) real improvements is unknown atm.

A lot will be determined by your gaming habits. I was still pushing around on a 660ti until a few months ago, because I was playing the same game as I was 5 years ago, and graphics demands don't really change much in the same game. CSGO and a 660ti is still good, but if moving to BF5, there'll be issues.

 

[Eth0s_]

Cheapest overall upgrade would be a Ryzen 1600AF. Basically no difference to a 2600, for less cost. But that'll run out of steam considerably faster than a 3600 will, simply due to cpu speeds, fps output etc. A 3700x will have the longest usable lifespan, has the core/thread counts to handle anything in the foreseeable near future, the cpu speeds to keep up with mainstream demands and a 3600MHz sweet spot on ram. Whether the 4th gen show much (if any) real improvements is unknown atm.

A lot will be determined by your gaming habits. I was still pushing around on a 660ti until a few months ago, because I was playing the same game as I was 5 years ago, and graphics demands don't really change much in the same game. CSGO and a 660ti is still good, but if moving to BF5, there'll be issues.

That's why I lean on the 3700x because I do want to be able to future-proof (whatever that really means in this field) without overpaying for small long-term gains like with a 3800x or higher. It seems like a good balance and I'm glad you seem to agree.

As for gaming habits I can kind of relate. The 6300 did last me this far but that wouldn't have been the case with other games. Even Battlefield 1 definitely gave that cpu a run for its money at the highest stable overclock I could achieve. Even then, temps were getting in the caution zone after 2 hours of playing.

I was mostly playing Dota 2, CS:GO, Overwatch, and Rocket League over the last few years, and managed to max most of them with only rare drops below 60 FPS. But the cyberpunk hype is real, and likely wont be handled by a 6300. And apparently No Man's Sky is actually good now. I learned the hard way that the 6300 isn't handling that either. So it's time to move on for me