[SOLVED] which graphics card can I buy for i5 9600K without bootleneck of CPU???

[gigabelcior]

Will a core i5 9600k bottleneck with a rtx 3060 Ti??

 

[drivinfast247]

Why not? It is fine for high refresh gaming, and will last them a long time. Get the best GPU you can afford, and your PSU can handle, without going super low on the CPU. Just look at the 1080p results, from techspot's 6700xt review. There are some titles that even a 3090 cannot do 144fps, on 1080p ultra, and that number is only going to increase, in the coming years.

AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT Review

The new Radeon RX 6700 XT arrives with the promise of significantly improved supply when compared to previous Big Navi GPUs. Targeting the $480 price point, let's...

www.techspot.com

Ok

 

[John Chesterfield]

Why not? It is fine for high refresh gaming, and will last them a long time. Get the best GPU you can afford, and your PSU can handle, without going super low on the CPU. Just look at the 1080p results, from techspot's 6700xt review. There are some titles that even a 3090 cannot do 144fps, on 1080p ultra, and that number is only going to increase, in the coming years.

AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT Review

The new Radeon RX 6700 XT arrives with the promise of significantly improved supply when compared to previous Big Navi GPUs. Targeting the $480 price point, let's...

www.techspot.com

Only if the OP plans on a monitor and CPU upgrade in the next 6 to 12 months. If they don't, it's a poor use of money and a less expensive card would be a better option.

 

[logainofhades]

Only if the OP plans on a monitor and CPU upgrade in the next 6 to 12 months. If they don't, it's a poor use of money and a less expensive card would be a better option.

They have a 144hz monitor. There are already games that cannot do 144fps, 1080p, on max settings, with a 3080 or 3090. Turn RT on, in RT capable games, and the performance would dip even further. You should not buy a GPU for today's games. You should buy one that will also be able to play future titles as well. Today's 3080 will be tomorrow's 4070. I wouldn't do a 3090, personally, due to price/performance, but a 3080 12gb makes perfect sense for high refresh gaming.

 

[Why_Me]

Will a core i5 9600k bottleneck with a rtx 3060 Ti??

Budget and country you are located is needed. I'd look at an i5 12400F + B660 board which allows you to reuse your RAM and put the rest towards a graphics card.

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...2400f-processor-18m-cache-up-to-4-40-ghz.html

 

[hotaru.hino]

They have a 144hz monitor. There are already games that cannot do 144fps, 1080p, on max settings, with a 3080 or 3090. Turn RT on, in RT capable games, and the performance would dip even further. You should not buy a GPU for today's games. You should buy one that will also be able to play future titles as well. Today's 3080 will be tomorrow's 4070. I wouldn't do a 3090, personally, due to price/performance, but a 3080 12gb makes perfect sense for high refresh gaming.

OP saying they have a 1080p 144Hz monitor doesn't necessarily mean they require 1080p 144 FPS sustained on maximum quality settings. So I think we should figure out what OP actually wants rather than try to figure out what he has and making the most of it.

I mean, I have a 240Hz 1440p monitor, but that doesn't mean I require 1440p 240 FPS sustained on maximum quality. I just want to have a nice monitor.

 

[logainofhades]

Life is too short to have a crappy computer. Why buy a nice monitor, like that, if you aren't going to make proper use of it? That would be a total waste of money. Again, there are already games that can't reach near the 144hz mark. Games are only going to get more demanding. I agree the 3090 is a terrible buy, and it always was. The 3080 12gb should last a good 3-5 years before it needs replaced. Buy cheap and pay twice.

 

[hotaru.hino]

Why buy a nice monitor, like that, if you aren't going to make proper use of it?

What's "proper use?" That I run all my games at 1440p at maximum quality and either I get 240 FPS or higher or I'm pissing away my money?

There are other benefits to having a nice, quality high refresh rate monitor that don't necessarily need 240 FPS to make "proper use" of, whatever that means. But to put it in context, I have a Samsung Odyssey G7

• It supports HDR and is rated for HDR 600, which I argue HDR 500 is the bare minimum for me to make HDR worthwhile.
• It has a high static contrast ratio of around 3000:1, whereas most other monitors that use IPS panels are around 1000:1. Since I wanted HDR, having a higher static contrast ratio makes the lows less blown out.
• It has FreeSync Premium Pro and is G-Sync Compatible
• Since it has FreeSync Premium Pro, it supports low framerate compensation, meaning despite the lower range of Adaptive Sync being 60 Hz, it actually still offers tear-free frame rates below that because it keeps the refresh rate above 60Hz and simply repeats the frames as necessary
• I don't want what's basically a TV on my desk

So yeah, I wanted a nice monitor and it being 240Hz was just a plus. It lets me play games tear free with wonderful image quality at lower frame rates, but then I can still enjoy fast frame rates on other games if I can get there.

 

[John Chesterfield]

They have a 144hz monitor. There are already games that cannot do 144fps, 1080p, on max settings, with a 3080 or 3090. Turn RT on, in RT capable games, and the performance would dip even further. You should not buy a GPU for today's games. You should buy one that will also be able to play future titles as well. Today's 3080 will be tomorrow's 4070. I wouldn't do a 3090, personally, due to price/performance, but a 3080 12gb makes perfect sense for high refresh gaming.

Fact is, 1080p image quality is nowhere near as good as 1440p or 4k, I can tell a marked difference between 1080p and 1440p. Total waste of a 3080 or 3090 with a 9600k which would be leant upon far more at lower resolution. RT? Still at the stage where the performance hit is largely not worth it, certainly not worth basing a purchase on.

So we'll agree to disagree, I think it's a waste of money at 1080p with a 6-core processor. At 1080p and such a powerful card, you need a powerful CPU to drive it. CPU determines FPS and at 1080p, that 9600k would be screaming for mercy and probably roasting itself trying. Yeah, it'd run today's games. But the results would be inconsistent due to the hardware imbalance of low resolution and a hex core chip attempting to feed a powerful graphics card. There'd be no system balance whatsoever here.

Unless planning a CPU and monitor upgrade in the nearish future, a 3080 or 3090 is a total waste of good money IMHO. If the OP is planning these upgrades in the not too distant future then yeah, have at it.

Just my $0.02.

 

[John Chesterfield]

Budget and country you are located is needed. I'd look at an i5 12400F + B660 board which allows you to reuse your RAM and put the rest towards a graphics card.

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...2400f-processor-18m-cache-up-to-4-40-ghz.html

This is an excellent suggestion. You get the impressive IPC of the Intel 12 series with what is an excellent chip for the money, and which is currently faster than or competitive with everything AMD has to offer with the exception of the 5800X3D. It's bang for buck at its finest and the best advice you've been given here by far, this is worth doing and maybe hanging on for another 2-3 months to then get a powerful graphics card that such a system could drive. And then maybe another few months down the line, upgrade to a higher res monitor.

 

[John Chesterfield]

What's "proper use?" That I run all my games at 1440p at maximum quality and either I get 240 FPS or higher or I'm pissing away my money?

There are other benefits to having a nice, quality high refresh rate monitor that don't necessarily need 240 FPS to make "proper use" of, whatever that means. But to put it in context, I have a Samsung Odyssey G7

• It supports HDR and is rated for HDR 600, which I argue HDR 500 is the bare minimum for me to make HDR worthwhile.
• It has a high static contrast ratio of around 3000:1, whereas most other monitors that use IPS panels are around 1000:1. Since I wanted HDR, having a higher static contrast ratio makes the lows less blown out.
• It has FreeSync Premium Pro and is G-Sync Compatible
• Since it has FreeSync Premium Pro, it supports low framerate compensation, meaning despite the lower range of Adaptive Sync being 60 Hz, it actually still offers tear-free frame rates below that because it keeps the refresh rate above 60Hz and simply repeats the frames as necessary
• I don't want what's basically a TV on my desk

So yeah, I wanted a nice monitor and it being 240Hz was just a plus. It lets me play games tear free with wonderful image quality at lower frame rates, but then I can still enjoy fast frame rates on other games if I can get there.

This is also good input. It's the reason I ran my GTX 980 with a 1440p Dell 2716DG 144Hz G-Sync monitor quite a few years ago now. I was getting nowhere near 144FPS with that set up. But what I was getting was smooth, tear free gaming with virtually no input lag at around between 60 and 90FPS.

Variable refresh rate monitors were a game changer, no longer did people have to chase 100+ frames to get a 'smooth' experience. There comes a point where it's just a higher number but not a very noticeable difference when viewed by the human eye.

 

[Why_Me]

This is an excellent suggestion. You get the impressive IPC of the Intel 12 series with what is an excellent chip for the money, and which is currently faster than or competitive with everything AMD has to offer with the exception of the 5800X3D. It's bang for buck at its finest and the best advice you've been given here by far, this is worth doing and maybe hanging on for another 2-3 months to then get a powerful graphics card that such a system could drive. And then maybe another few months down the line, upgrade to a higher res monitor.

The OP is into first person shooter games where frames per second mean a lot so he has the right monitor atm imo. A 12400 / 12400F along with an RTX 3060, AMD 6600XT or RTX 3060 Ti should suit him well.

https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i5-12400-Desktop-Processor-Cache/dp/B09NMPD8V2
Intel Core i5-12400 $159.99

https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813144531
MSI PRO B660M-A DDR4 $129.99

https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/PRO-B660M-A-DDR4

Total: $290

 

[John Chesterfield]

The OP is into first person shooter games where frames per second mean a lot so he has the right monitor atm imo. A 12400 / 12400F along with an RTX 3060, AMD 6600XT or RTX 3060 Ti should suit him well.

https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i5-12400-Desktop-Processor-Cache/dp/B09NMPD8V2
Intel Core i5-12400 $159.99

https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813144531
MSI PRO B660M-A DDR4 $129.99

https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/PRO-B660M-A-DDR4

Total: $290

Totally agree. And what you suggested has the beauty of being able to re-use the memory. As I said, best advice given in this thread by a long way.

OP, I'd be going this route and apparently, the 12400f is currently on sale at $175.00 via Amazon in the US and £167.00 via Amazon UK. To me, that's a total no brainer if shopping in either of those countries. It's a lot of CPU for the price.

 

[logainofhades]

They are getting a bottleneck with a 6c/6t chip. That means a 6c/12t chip is still going to see high CPU usage, as it will be into the hyperthreading. I wouldn't go below an i7 12700, if the OP can afford it. BF5 is a title that benefits from more cores/threads.

 

[Wayfall]

You will lose around 20fps really compared to a better CPU like an i9 which is double the price. If your doing 1080p that will be around 120fps while 1440p will be 100fps which is perfectly suitable. 4K you are gonna be more GPU bound so the bottleneck will drop and get around 60-70fps.

 

[joan16v]

I saw this video and even on a RTX 3060 the 9600K CPU bottlenecks the GPU...

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4MT9DYFRWQ

 

[jacob249358]

Life is too short to have a crappy computer. Why buy a nice monitor, like that, if you aren't going to make proper use of it? That would be a total waste of money. Again, there are already games that can't reach near the 144hz mark. Games are only going to get more demanding. I agree the 3090 is a terrible buy, and it always was. The 3080 12gb should last a good 3-5 years before it needs replaced. Buy cheap and pay twice.

I totally agree, I do a lot of skiing and found the same thing applies. Same reason I upgraded to a 3080 when I found a deal.