Will I5 3570k be a bottleneck when upgrading to gtx 780 or gtx 780 TI from Radeon HD 7870?

[Basblob]

I have a 7870 and am having some framerate issues in games I desperately want to play (i.e. Far Cry, modded skyrim, modded fallout etc.) I am running at 2560x1440 so I understand that is a factor but even after OCing Its difficult. Now I am planning on a jump to a 780 or 780 ti but have worries about my i5 3570k being a bottleneck.

 

[TheMagicalWallaby]

Your i5 will NOT be a bottleneck. Also, if you can get a 780ti, get it. It is a beast of a card (you get the same performance as a Titan). If you can't, a 780 would probably be fine.

 

[CTurbo]

The 3570k will not bottleneck any one or two video cards.


I'm afraid the 290 or 290x would be better for you at that resolution though.

 

[Basblob]

The 3570k will not bottleneck any one or two video cards.


I'm afraid the 290 or 290x would be better for you at that resolution though.

Out of curiosity since I am newish to this sort of thing, why is the 290x better for that resolution? Ps: thx for the reply though 😉

 

[CTurbo]

Other than the more vram available, I'm not really sure. I've just seen a lot of benchmarks and most of them show the 780/780ti perform better at 1080p and the 290/290x perform better at 1440p/1600p.

 

[Nitesdeath]

Get the 780 ti, not the 290x. 3GB Vram is more than enough for that resolution, and a link to those benchmarks would be nice. I find it untrustworthy, at least from many sites that provide wrong info because they dont do the tests 100% even.

Edit: The 290x probably does not have enough graphical horsepower to use all 4 GB of Vram. It has that much Vram however incase you get an SLI setup (duo GPU's). The 780 definitely has enough horsepower to use all of it's 3GB Vram (which again is more than enough for what u need.)

 

[TraceDaBoss]

Get an R9 290 it barely performs under the 290x and its almost 100 dollars cheaper. Save the money and if you feel like in the future its not good enough, add another one. It does perform better at higher resolutions and as CTurbo said, it just does. It will be more than enough power. But you could just add another 7870 and you could play anything maxed out.
EDIT: Forgot to answer the original question: No absolutely no bottlenecking.

 

[TheMagicalWallaby]

Get the 780 ti, not the 290x. 3GB Vram is more than enough for that resolution, and a link to those benchmarks would be nice. I find it untrustworthy, at least from many sites that provide wrong info because they dont do the tests 100% even.

Edit: The 290x probably does not have enough graphical horsepower to use all 4 GB of Vram. It has that much Vram however incase you get an SLI setup (duo GPU's). The 780 definitely has enough horsepower to use all of it's 3GB Vram (which again is more than enough for what u need.)

What I see an issue in, is that he will be running a modded skyrim. Skyrim Texture mods eat vram like its nothing and running them at that resolution may be a troublemaker.

 

[nikoli707]

im at 1440p with a massive amount of texture/mesh mods with enb and had no problems with my old 7950 3gb, besides fps drops in certain areas of course. my classy 780 3gb just runs those areas smoother. skryim cannot address more than 3.1gb of vram or it will crash. but this really isn't an issue of late with enbs having memory management. those wishing for 4k rendering and running 8k/16k textures can do a fairly complicated memory hack that is available that lets skyrim use more than 3.1gb vram.... but for 99.9% of extreme modding, S.T.E.P., texture pack combiner, etc. 3gb is more than enough running normal extremely detailed 4k mods, even better with enb memory management.

i personally find the regular 780 or 290 much more attractive at their lower prices. the amount of gpu horsepower that the 780ti and 290x give you really only amount to a higher AA level, which i find at 1440p to be more than fine with either smaa or 2xmsaa. obviously in a game that isn't dropping below my monitor refresh, 60hz, i will use higher settings. but in extreme games like crysis 3 for example, the upgrade to the highest tier card only allows better AA.

Turbo is right, the 290x does ever so slightly edge out the 780ti at 1440/1600p, but on stock air, twin frozr, windforce, dc2, tri-x, evga classified acx, etc. the 780ti overclocks MUCH MUCH farther than the 290x and then beats the pants off the 290x. i for example have my regular 780 classified running at 1.212v and 1.3ghz and it will beat or match almost all 780ti/290x out the box and i peak out at roughly 82c with these higher summer ambient temps, sometimes as hot as 85f in my house here in California. but if high overclocks are not in your game plan, dont overlook the r9-290/x cards as they are just as good and much cheaper to boot.

the 3570k is a very very good processor and if you are overclocked, 4.2ghz or so, your fine for years to come. unless you need hyper threading for non gaming apps, dont worry about your cpu setup until after skylake is available and benchmarked to see if it will offer any big jump in performance.

 

[TheMagicalWallaby]

im at 1440p with a massive amount of texture/mesh mods with enb and had no problems with my old 7950 3gb, besides fps drops in certain areas of course. my classy 780 3gb just runs those areas smoother. skryim cannot address more than 3.1gb of vram or it will crash. but this really isn't an issue of late with enbs having memory management. those wishing for 4k rendering and running 8k/16k textures can do a fairly complicated memory hack that is available that lets skyrim use more than 3.1gb vram.... but for 99.9% of extreme modding, S.T.E.P., texture pack combiner, etc. 3gb is more than enough running normal extremely detailed 4k mods, even better with enb memory management.

i personally find the regular 780 or 290 much more attractive at their lower prices. the amount of gpu horsepower that the 780ti and 290x give you really only amount to a higher AA level, which i find at 1440p to be more than fine with either smaa or 2xmsaa. obviously in a game that isn't dropping below my monitor refresh, 60hz, i will use higher settings. but in extreme games like crysis 3 for example, the upgrade to the highest tier card only allows better AA.

Turbo is right, the 290x does ever so slightly edge out the 780ti at 1440/1600p, but on stock air, twin frozr, windforce, dc2, tri-x, evga classified acx, etc. the 780ti overclocks MUCH MUCH farther than the 290x and then beats the pants off the 290x. i for example have my regular 780 classified running at 1.212v and 1.3ghz and it will beat or match almost all 780ti/290x out the box and i peak out at roughly 82c with these higher summer ambient temps, sometimes as hot as 85f in my house here in California. but if high overclocks are not in your game plan, dont overlook the r9-290/x cards as they are just as good and much cheaper to boot.

the 3570k is a very very good processor and if you are overclocked, 4.2ghz or so, your fine for years to come. unless you need hyper threading for non gaming apps, dont worry about your cpu setup until after skylake is available and benchmarked to see if it will offer any big jump in performance.

I must say, that is the best and most detailed response I have ever had hahaha. Well done