[SOLVED] Should I upgrade?

[dralaamonirsrg]

Hey guys,
Since. I bought a high refresh monitor I started to have sick hunger for more fps in games.
My current pc specs:
i5 8400
Gtx 1070
16gb ram psu cx600

I have been thinking slot about upgrading
No specific reason except having smoother frames,less stuttering mabe in pubg 100+ frames with decent quality. The 1070 does the job in some games but other games still feels choppy example..bfv despite fps is 60-80 it still feels somehow stuttering or high frame timings I had to lower the quality to have smoother experience.
I have been thinking alot like mabe I need to get an i7 for smoother frames and other times I say get a new GPU. On other hand choices are abit confusing and not convenient enough for example there is good offer for Vega 64 but he'll needs 750watt psu and performs same in ubisoft shitty tittles while super in games like bf v. The 2060 is another choice less power hungry but still seen low 1% frame rate compared to Vega 64 and advantage is 20% avarage over 1070.
I am really confused even thought mabe I should switch to ryzen then see ryzen 2600x not far away from the i5 performance.

What do you guys think?
That sapphire nitro + Vega 64 keeps going on sale and I can't resist it xD

 

[WildCard999]

Generally for more FPS you'll want a better CPU so the 8700(K) would probably be what I'd get. Also how much memory do you have? If only 8gb then increasing it to 16gb should help a bit.

^^^This is assuming your gaming @1080P.

 

[dralaamonirsrg]

Generally for more FPS you'll want a better CPU so the 8700(K) would probably be what I'd get. Also how much memory do you have? If only 8gb then increasing it to 16gb should help a bit.

^^^This is assuming your gaming @1080P.

Yea am on 240hz/144hz 1080p I got 16gb 4*4gb and my motherboard is not Z it's only b360

 

[WildCard999]

Yea am on 240hz/144hz 1080p I got 16gb 4*4gb and my motherboard is not Z it's only b360

Well even if the board doesn't support overclocking if the price is similar to the non K variant then I would get the K version due to the higher clock speeds.

That being said a friend of mine recently built a 9700K/1080/16gb for 1080P/240hz and he still needs to lower the settings slightly to keep those FPS high (hasn't OCed yet). Primarily streams Fortnite & Apex but if your not streaming then you'll get better FPS.

 

[cryoburner]

I would not bother with a CPU upgrade yet. Your existing i5-8400 is not likely to limit performance much in most current games. Have a looking at this recent 9600K review, for example. Scroll down to the 1080p gaming charts...

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i5_9600K/19.html

Even with a GTX 1080 Ti running at 1080p resolution, the i5-8400 managed to offer average frame rates within 5% of an i9-9900K. Such miniscule performance gains are arguably not worth spending hundreds of dollars for. And with a less high-end graphics card, you would be looking at even smaller average performance differences in the games they tested.

You would undoubtedly see the most performance gain in most titles from putting that money toward a graphics card upgrade. From another recent review at the same site, you'll notice that there tends to be much more significant performance differences between different levels of graphics cards...

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GeForce_GTX_1660_Gaming_X/28.html

In my opinion, if you don't find the performance of your 2070 fast enough, you'll probably also want something faster than a 2060 or Vega 64, which on average don't perform that much better than a 1070 Ti. Perhaps something like a 2070 might be a better option.

 

[dralaamonirsrg]

I would not bother with a CPU upgrade yet. Your existing i5-8400 is not likely to limit performance much in most current games. Have a looking at this recent 9600K review, for example. Scroll down to the 1080p gaming charts...

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i5_9600K/19.html

Even with a GTX 1080 Ti running at 1080p resolution, the i5-8400 managed to offer average frame rates within 5% of an i9-9900K. Such miniscule performance gains are arguably not worth spending hundreds of dollars for. And with a less high-end graphics card, you would be looking at even smaller average performance differences in the games they tested.

You would undoubtedly see the most performance gain in most titles from putting that money toward a graphics card upgrade. From another recent review at the same site, you'll notice that there tends to be much more significant performance differences between different levels of graphics cards...

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GeForce_GTX_1660_Gaming_X/28.html

In my opinion, if you don't find the performance of your 2070 fast enough, you'll probably also want something faster than a 2060 or Vega 64, which on average don't perform that much better than a 1070 Ti. Perhaps something like a 2070 might be a better option.

But again have to deal with titles optimization choosing AMD over Nvidia...and what scares me about the 2070 is the failure rate of them and what do you think about low 1% values?
Like i would love to play in constant fps like for me I would go for a card that dun drop too much rather than 144+ but keeps going down to 80-60. What do you think? Not mentioning that Vega 64 might force me to upgrade psu unless I try undervolt...

 

[WildCard999]

What about getting a Freesync (Nvidia compliant) or Gsync monitor? At least if your FPS does dip the adaptive range would keep it pretty smooth.

 

[dralaamonirsrg]

What about getting a Freesync (Nvidia compliant) or Gsync monitor? At least if your FPS does dip the adaptive range would keep it pretty smooth.

I already have one but dun understand why it isn't like 100% free of tearing
I have the xl2540 it shows as compatible screen. I feel it is still bugged and immature like sometimes if I alt+tab fps goes down by half if I alt+tab back to game it happened in league of legends. In Assassin's creed it kept tearing very minimal but not completely free. I wonder what is wrong it is fresh install of Windows and ddu driver cleaned windows drivers and latest drivers installed. There might be something am missing or gsync thing still immature

 

[dralaamonirsrg]

Well even if the board doesn't support overclocking if the price is similar to the non K variant then I would get the K version due to the higher clock speeds.

That being said a friend of mine recently built a 9700K/1080/16gb for 1080P/240hz and he still needs to lower the settings slightly to keep those FPS high (hasn't OCed yet). Primarily streams Fortnite & Apex but if your not streaming then you'll get better FPS.

I wish I had the 1080 instead from beginning xD it is better card but as u have said turning down settings stresses the CPU mabe more

 

[WildCard999]

Haven't used Gsync however I know with Freesync it needs to be activated via AMD's software and the monitor.

 

[dralaamonirsrg]

Haven't used Gsync however I know with Freesync it needs to be activated via AMD's software and the monitor.

Yea, did activate it from the monitor then inside Nvidia control panel but still has some weird behaviour it still can be fault of my monitor but I think it is only early drivers not sure.
But hell am looking into the performance of the Vega 64 it is a beast but setback is only it needs 750watt good psu and that's about extra 80$ to its price making it as much as a 2070 price with so much less power draw.

But damn dude it looks smoother than a 2070 card I am not sure why but do u think Vega has better frame times? Or it is just bfv that is optimised for AMD cards?

 

[WildCard999]

Yea, did activate it from the monitor then inside Nvidia control panel but still has some weird behaviour it still can be fault of my monitor but I think it is only early drivers not sure.
But hell am looking into the performance of the Vega 64 it is a beast but setback is only it needs 750watt good psu and that's about extra 80$ to its price making it as much as a 2070 price with so much less power draw.

But damn dude it looks smoother than a 2070 card I am not sure why but do u think Vega has better frame times? Or it is just bfv that is optimised for AMD cards?

Depends on the games, Vega 64 does better in some titles but I think for the majority of games the 2070 does a bit better.