What is considered worse? CPU or GPU Bottleneck?

[Jermaphobe]

Greetings

I plan on upgrading to the Ryzen platform soon and I'm not able to afford a GPU upgrade as well.

My computer's soon to be specs (more or less)

CPU: Ryzen 5 1600
GPU: EVGA GTX 960 SSC 4GB
Mem: 16GB DDR4 @2666mhz

I already know my GPU is "slow" compared to the current pascal cards on the market and that the card will hold my CPU back. But I'd like to know you guys' thoughts on whats worse.

CPU Bottlenecking or GPU Bottlenecking? I know there will bottlenecks in all systems given certain circumstances are met, I just merely want a discussion

 

[derekullo]

GPU's are easy to replace.

Pop out the old one and slide in the new one.

Just make sure your psu can handle it.

CPU requires ... alot of work, unlatching the cpu carefully, cleaning the surface carefully, applying thermal paste in the correct amount carefully, putting it back in carefully.

And this is assuming you don't require a new motherboard for your computer then you have to take everything apart and put it back together with the new motherboard and cpu.

I say all this from the direction of fixing a gpu / cpu bottleneck.

 

[Jermaphobe]

GPU's are easy to replace.

Pop out the old one and slide in the new one.

Just make sure your psu can handle it.

CPU requires ... alot of work, unlatching the cpu carefully, cleaning the surface carefully, applying thermal paste in the correct amount carefully, putting it back in carefully.

And this is assuming you don't require a new motherboard for your computer then you have to take everything apart and put it back together with the new motherboard and cpu.

I say all this from the direction of fixing a gpu / cpu bottleneck.

Not quite what i was talking about, I am an experienced PC builder, but thanks for the recap

What I'm saying is, what do you think would be worse in a system? GPU bottleneck or CPU bottleneck?

 

[Rexper]

As long as your performance goals (framerate desire, normally influenced by your monitor's refresh rate) are met, bottle necking is pointless to worry about.

Remember bottlenecking can be shifted easily by changing graphic settings and resolution.

If I'm aren't hitting my performance goal with my hardware, I would temporarily reduce the resolution to 400 x 400p to identify where my CPU's potential performance limit lies at (eg, 40 - 50FPS). From there I'd gradually increase the resolution and graphical settings until I find the FPS starts to decrease, or the limiting factor shifts to the GPU.
This way I receive the best graphics and frame rates possible from my system.

If that is a bit confusing, this could possibly help explain: https://pcpartpicker.com/forums/topic/214851-on-cpugpu-bottlenecking-in-games

 

[derekullo]

GPU's are easy to replace.

Pop out the old one and slide in the new one.

Just make sure your psu can handle it.

CPU requires ... alot of work, unlatching the cpu carefully, cleaning the surface carefully, applying thermal paste in the correct amount carefully, putting it back in carefully.

And this is assuming you don't require a new motherboard for your computer then you have to take everything apart and put it back together with the new motherboard and cpu.

I say all this from the direction of fixing a gpu / cpu bottleneck.

Not quite what i was talking about, I am an experienced PC builder, but thanks for the recap

What I'm saying is, what do you think would be worse in a system? GPU bottleneck or CPU bottleneck?

Low fps is low fps no matter what is causing it.

The only thing that could make it worse are the steps needed to fix it.

Hence, my response.

A CPU bottleneck takes much more work to remedy, but you already knew that from being an experienced PC builder.

 

[naifm92]

for me i think it's CPU Bottlenecking, i tried both and it's really bad when you have a CPU that bottlenecks, for the GPU it's really ok, i don't mined having an i7 8700k pired with a GTX 1050ti, i really don't find it that much of pain in the ass as having a CPU Bottlenecking