Question Will Old Core i7 Bottleneck the RTX 2060 ?

[khaled_82]

Hello everyone!

Build:

i7 950
10 gb DDR3 1600 memory
WD 1 TB
Corsair 550w PSU
Windows 8.1 Professional
Resolution 1080p

Thanks in advance

 

[jay32267]

I think it will a little.
I have some first hand experience running an i7-980 and a GTX 1080 and the 980 holds the 1080 back a little.

 

[Mockingjason]

Yes. i7 950 is worse than an i3 4170. It would bottleneck, and a lot. RTX 2060 needs at least a ryzen 7 1700x (or a i7-8400H, if you prefer intel, both of them cost around 120$). Buying one of the cpu's I suggested you would increase your fps by at least 15-20%.

 

[geofelt]

There is no such thing as "bottlenecking"
If, by that, you mean that upgrading a cpu or graphics card can
somehow lower your performance or FPS.
A better term might be limiting factor.
That is where adding more cpu or gpu becomes increasingly
less effective.

What is your current graphics card?-

I assume you are looking at upgrading your graphics card.
If you play fast action games or on high quality or resolutions, then an upgrade might be ok.

Try this test:
Run YOUR games, but lower your resolution and eye candy.
If your FPS increases, it indicates that your cpu is strong enough to drive a better graphics configuration.
If your FPS stays the same, you are likely more cpu limited.

 

[Mockingjason]

There is no such thing as "bottlenecking"
If, by that, you mean that upgrading a cpu or graphics card can
somehow lower your performance or FPS.
A better term might be limiting factor.
That is where adding more cpu or gpu becomes increasingly
less effective.

What is your current graphics card?-

I assume you are looking at upgrading your graphics card.
If you play fast action games or on high quality or resolutions, then an upgrade might be ok.

Try this test:
Run YOUR games, but lower your resolution and eye candy.
If your FPS increases, it indicates that your cpu is strong enough to drive a better graphics configuration.
If your FPS stays the same, you are likely more cpu limited.

i dont think he bought the gpu already

 

[rodrigoxm49]

Yes, by a LOT. Even 2600k or 3770k bottleneck RTX2060 up to 25% in certain cases.

You would have something up to 50% easily. You would never reach 60FPS@1080p on modern games with this CPU with any card. GPU usage will vary between 50% to 70% in games. Sometimes even below.

You have two options: upgrade CPU/mobo/memo to at least Ryzen 1600 or buy a 1050TI or RX570 (already know that you will have bottleneck here).

There is no such thing as "bottlenecking"
If, by that, you mean that upgrading a cpu or graphics card can
somehow lower your performance or FPS.
A better term might be limiting factor.
That is where adding more cpu or gpu becomes increasingly
less effective.

What is your current graphics card?-

I assume you are looking at upgrading your graphics card.
If you play fast action games or on high quality or resolutions, then an upgrade might be ok.

Try this test:
Run YOUR games, but lower your resolution and eye candy.
If your FPS increases, it indicates that your cpu is strong enough to drive a better graphics configuration.
If your FPS stays the same, you are likely more cpu limited.

CPU can bottleneck GPU when GPU is not being able to reach 100% of usage. This is what we commonly call bottleneck on PC Gamers.

And it's very easy to verify. If you have 70% GPU Usage, the CPU is bottlenecking by 30% the GPU. Upgrading to a better CPU, you will have GPU reaching 100%. After that you're being bottleneckeed by GPU, which is not a problem at all and it's expected.

 

[maxamillionfeettall]

I wouldn't go past a gtx 1660 with a 950, if you had a i7 970 or a 980, it would be barely suitable. Do remember, even without a bottleneck, the 1st gen series low ipc performance will yield 10-20fps lower then a modern cpu, so just don't expect the same fps as the benchmarks out there.

If your motherboard is x58, you might be able to pickup a cheap xeon 56xx and reduce the bottleneck a fair bit.

 

[rodrigoxm49]

I wouldn't go past a gtx 1660 with a 950, if you had a i7 970 or a 980, it would be barely suitable. Do remember, even without a bottleneck, the 1st gen series low ipc performance will yield 10-20fps lower then a modern cpu, so just don't expect the same fps as the benchmarks out there.

If your motherboard is x58, you might be able to pickup a cheap xeon 56xx and reduce the bottleneck a fair bit.

Even 1660 is too much. I had a 2500k@4.4Ghz + RX470 OC not a while ago and I was bottleneck up to 30% on games like Control, Metro Exodus, The Division and many other modern games.

So anything above 1050TI is very clock to useless for first i7 gen. RX570 should be where he should stop already know that he would have a massive bottleneck, being able to have a sighlty general performance that 1050TI would have.

Look at this video, 1050TI. Sometimes GPU usage drops to 65%!

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqazW5-KW8E

Now look at this video. Drop to 50% of GPU usage on 1070.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccShzS4gTz8

 

[Cioby]

Yes it will.
Should you still buy it? If you are upgrading from something older than a 780 and you have a good offer for it? Of course you should.
But in the future you may have to upgrade your motherboard, CPU and RAM since the old parts won't be compatible with the new ones.

And still getting a new GPU is the best way to increase your performance overall, unless you already have a fairly decent GPU.

 

[Third-Eye]

Always buy the best GPU you can afford when looking at overall budget for a complete system build. Don't focus on buying the fastest CPU on the market, because generally the fastest GPU will give better results in the long term. Regardless of how old the CPU is, buying a faster GPU almost always increases fps.

Baseline system upgrade recommendation; buy a 12+ thread CPU and the fastest GPU you can afford.

 

[Cioby]

Always buy the best GPU you can afford when looking at overall budget for a complete system build. Don't focus on buying the fastest CPU on the market, because generally the fastest GPU will give better results in the long term. Regardless of how old the CPU is, buying a faster GPU almost always increases fps.

Baseline system upgrade recommendation; buy a 12+ thread CPU and the fastest GPU you can afford.

Wrong. A CPU and usually motherboard and RAM too, are harder to replace and cost more, unless you buy a TI and even then, the TI is easier to upgrade than a CPU/motherboard/RAM.

I'd rather recommend a strong CPU and motherboard and buy a cheaper GPU, unless you really want to see huge performance RIGHT NOW. That huge performance might be 30% or less performant than the next generation that will come out in a year at the same price. While the CPU gains aren't that big or at all, especially at higher resolutions which is the direction we're heading towards, unless you got a slower non-overclockable model.

And I've had the same 4770k for years (around 8), while changing my 780 to a 980ti to a 1080ti. You do generally lose fps at lower resolutions but in some cases it's not noticeable since you won't be playing at 160 fps, more likely you will play at 144.

You also see people upgrading their garbage overhyped Ryzen first generations, because they were really really really bad in gaming especially. That's why you should just get a strong CPU and not worry for years.

Also my previous recommendation was based on upgrading his GPU. Not his entire system.

 

[rodrigoxm49]

You also see people upgrading their garbage overhyped Ryzen first generations, because they were really really really bad in gaming especially. That's why you should just get a strong CPU and not worry for years.

Also my previous recommendation was based on upgrading his GPU. Not his entire system.

This is really really really exaggerated claim. Wrong too.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97sDKvMHd8c

 

[Third-Eye]

Wrong. A CPU and usually motherboard and RAM too, are harder to replace and cost more, unless you buy a TI and even then, the TI is easier to upgrade than a CPU/motherboard/RAM.

I'd rather recommend a strong CPU and motherboard and buy a cheaper GPU, unless you really want to see huge performance RIGHT NOW. That huge performance might be 30% or less performant than the next generation that will come out in a year at the same price. While the CPU gains aren't that big or at all, especially at higher resolutions which is the direction we're heading towards, unless you got a slower non-overclockable model.

And I've had the same 4770k for years (around 8), while changing my 780 to a 980ti to a 1080ti. You do generally lose fps at lower resolutions but in some cases it's not noticeable since you won't be playing at 160 fps, more likely you will play at 144.

You also see people upgrading their garbage overhyped Ryzen first generations, because they were really really really bad in gaming especially. That's why you should just get a strong CPU and not worry for years.

Also my previous recommendation was based on upgrading his GPU. Not his entire system.

Not sure why you say I'm wrong when I pretty much said the same thing as you. I never said don't buy a fast CPU, I'm literally recommending the OP buy the fastest GPU that they can afford. Would I buy a GTX 2060 to pair with an i7 950? No, but If I had to choose between a new CPU and a new GPU and had limited money, a GPU upgrade would be where the money goes. Money can be saved again to buy a new CPU, motherboard and memory to upgrade later on. We also don't know what GPU the OP has now, but I'd probably still say upgrade GPU. I should really be saying, buy the fastest GPU you can afford that is compatible with your PSU.

Although it's not exactly the same situation, I personally just upgraded my 2600k that I bought in 2012 to a Ryzen 2600. Through the last 7 years I've upgraded the GPU 5 times from a GTX 460 to a GTX 1070. Every GPU upgrade increased my fps. The jump from a GTX 970 to a 1070 was about 65-70% increase in fps at 1080p. I could have upgraded yet again to a GTX 1080ti or RTX 2080 and increase my fps probably another 60% but I instead decided to upgrade my CPU so I'd have an upgrade path to a Ryzen 4000 series 8-12 core 16-24 thread CPU. The Ryzen 2600 gave me about a 10-25% increase in fps in the games I play, but I also haven't yet bothered to overclock the CPU. In Far Cry New Dawn I see about a 6-7fps increase and in GTA Online I see around 10-15fps increase.

 

[rodrigoxm49]

Not sure why you say I'm wrong when I pretty much said the same thing as you. I never said don't buy a fast CPU, I'm literally recommending the OP buy the fastest GPU that they can afford. Would I buy a GTX 2060 to pair with an i7 950? No, but If I had to choose between a new CPU and a new GPU and had limited money, a GPU upgrade would be where the money goes. Money can be saved again to buy a new CPU, motherboard and memory to upgrade later on. We also don't know what GPU the OP has now, but I'd probably still say upgrade GPU. I should really be saying, buy the fastest GPU you can afford that is compatible with your PSU.

Although it's not exactly the same situation, I personally just upgraded my 2600k that I bought in 2012 to a Ryzen 2600. Through the last 7 years I've upgraded the GPU 5 times from a GTX 460 to a GTX 1070. Every GPU upgrade increased my fps. The jump from a GTX 970 to a 1070 was about 65-70% increase in fps at 1080p. I could have upgraded yet again to a GTX 1080ti or RTX 2080 and increase my fps probably another 60% but I instead decided to upgrade my CPU so I'd have an upgrade path to a Ryzen 4000 series 8-12 core 16-24 thread CPU. The Ryzen 2600 gave me about a 10-25% increase in fps in the games I play, but I also haven't yet bothered to overclock the CPU. In Far Cry New Dawn I see about a 6-7fps increase and in GTA Online I see around 10-15fps increase.

You're right, but we can't forget that at some point, upgrading a GPU will give us ZERO frames depending what CPU we have.

It's the case here. Even a 1050TI is insanely limited by i7 950 in certain cases, like we could see on video that I have posted. GPU usage on 65%. 35% of underuse.

There's a good reason why people should be worried about bottleneck. And we have a good example here in this thread. Its save you from waste money. A lot of money.

If OP is thinking on change upgrade CPU/mobo?mem in the next months and buying a RTX2060 would not preventing him to do it, go on and buy it. But if he's planing to keep this RIG for a while, should not buy anything better than RX570. The frames would be absolutely the same.

 

[Third-Eye]

You're right, but we can't forget that at some point, upgrading a GPU will give us ZERO frames depending what CPU we have.

It's the case here. Even a 1050TI is insanely limited by i7 950 in certain cases, like we could see on video that I have posted. GPU usage on 65%. 35% of underuse.

There's a good reason why people should be worried about bottleneck. And we have a good example here in this thread. Its save you from waste money. A lot of money.

If OP is thinking on change upgrade CPU/mobo?mem in the next months and buying a RTX2060 would not preventing him to do it, go on and buy it. But if he's planing to keep this RIG for a while, should not buy anything better than RX570. The frames would be absolutely the same.

You will not see the same fps on an RTX 2060 as an RX 570. GPU biased games will get a large fps increase. Upgrading from an RX 570 to a RTX 2060 is an even bigger gap than me going from my 970 to a 1070. In Fallout 4, in areas I was getting 35fps on the 970, I was getting 60fps and likely higher if I hadn't locked the game to 60fps. In GTA 5 single player, I think it was about 30-40fps increase with the same graphics settings. In a game like Witcher 3, I'm GPU limited by my GTX 1070 and see the same fps on the Ryzen 2600 as on my i7-2600k with around 70-80fps at 1080p and nearly all max settings. At 4k resolution it's 35-40fps in all areas except the cities which drop to around 25-30fps.

 

[rodrigoxm49]

You will not see the same fps on an RTX 2060 as an RX 570. GPU biased games will get a large fps increase. Upgrading from an RX 570 to a RTX 2060 is an even bigger gap than me going from my 970 to a 1070. In Fallout 4, in areas I was getting 35fps on the 970, I was getting 60fps and likely higher if I hadn't locked the game to 60fps. In GTA 5 single player, I think it was about 30-40fps increase with the same graphics settings. In a game like Witcher 3, I'm GPU limited by my GTX 1070 and see the same fps on the Ryzen 2600 as on my i7-2600k with around 70-80fps at 1080p and nearly all max settings. At 4k resolution it's 35-40fps in all areas except the cities which drop to around 25-30fps.

Yes, but I'm talking about modern games, games that really matters.

RX570 to RTX2060 is a very similar jump. RX570 15% better than GTX970 and 2060 is 20% better than 1070.

Anyway, it's not the point here. We're talking about a Core i7 950 on modern games. The video was very clarify about it. It's a disaster. You're talking about GPU bottleneck. We're talking about CPU bottleneck. Completely different story.

 

[King_V]

A 2060 is overkill for 1080p, assuming a limit of, say, 60Hz refresh. A 1660 Super or Ti would be plenty for that resolution and refresh rate.

 

[digitalgriffin]

Hello everyone!

Build:

i7 950
10 gb DDR3 1600 memory
WD 1 TB
Corsair 550w PSU
Windows 8.1 Professional
Resolution 1080p

Thanks in advance

Yes. The degree of impact depends on what game/resolution you are running. As you are running a lower resolution, the CPU will hold you back more. But you should have more than enough adequate horsepower to run at decent frame rates with even that older CPU. I'm GUESSING, but I would say 60fps should be doable with that CPU.

The one thing later generations improved upon was consistency of frame rates. So you'll get less stutter with later generations also.

 

[rodrigoxm49]

Yes. The degree of impact depends on what game/resolution you are running. As you are running a lower resolution, the CPU will hold you back more. But you should have more than enough adequate horsepower to run at decent frame rates with even that older CPU. I'm GUESSING, but I would say 60fps should be doable with that CPU.

The one thing later generations improved upon was consistency of frame rates. So you'll get less stutter with later generations also.

60FPS? Core i7 950 on modern games below. If 950 is not being able to push 100% usage on 1050TI, what we can say about a RTX2060? Or even 1660 like people are saying here?

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccShzS4gTz8

 

[King_V]

@rodrigoxm49 - before you start downvoting willy-nilly, perhaps it's best if you know what you're talking about.

Yes, by a LOT. Even 2600k or 3770k bottleneck RTX2060 up to 25% in certain cases.

You would have something up to 50% easily.
...
CPU can bottleneck GPU when GPU is not being able to reach 100% of usage. This is what we commonly call bottleneck on PC Gamers.

The fact that you throw around "bottleneck percentage" numbers and use the term "bottleneck" as much as you do strongly suggests that you do NOT know what you're talking about. If you are using bottleneck calculators or giving bottleneck percentage numbers, then you are giving BAD advice. What you say on PC Gamers is called bottleneck is also not particularly useful.

 

[rodrigoxm49]

@rodrigoxm49 - before you start downvoting willy-nilly, perhaps it's best if you know what you're talking about.

The fact that you throw around "bottleneck percentage" numbers strongly suggests that you do NOT. If you are using bottleneck calculators or giving bottleneck percentage numbers, then you are giving BAD advice.

I'm not using any web calculator. They're useless and really stupid. Probably they would say "hey, there's no problem on RTX2060+i7 950".

I'm proving with videos, showing GPU usage to prove my arguments, different from you that not only don't know what you're talking, but isn't able to prove. What you are doing is giving a opinion. I'm here to show facts and the video proves everything.

First understand how CPU bottleneck works. After that try to help people.

About downvoting, I think this is a very stupid feature, but you start to use, so i just followed you. Bye!

 

[King_V]

I'm not using any web calculator. I'm proving with videos, showing GPU usage to prove my arguments, different from you that not only don't know what you're talking, but isn't able to prove. What you are doing is giving a opinion. I'm here to show facts and the video proves everything.

First understand how CPU bottleneck works. After that try to help people.

I'm not giving an opinion. If the GPU can provide more frames in all games than the monitor is able to display, then the GPU is overkill.

About downvoting, I think this is a very stupid feature, but you start to use, so i just followed you. Bye!

I downvoted based on the merits, or lack thereof, of what you posted. You, on the other hand, are admitting to "revenge downvoting" rather than doing so based on the content of the posts. Got it.

 

[Rogue Leader]

HEY

I see a lot of name calling, personal attacks, and so on in this thread. Also someone who somehow admitted to retaliation. This is going to stop now, or you will be getting sanctioned. I'm now watching this thread closely. Act like adults. This is your ONLY warning.

 

[Third-Eye]

A 2060 is overkill for 1080p, assuming a limit of, say, 60Hz refresh. A 1660 Super or Ti would be plenty for that resolution and refresh rate.

If the RTX 2060 is over kill then so is the 1660ti since they are nearly the same in performance to a GTX 1070/ti. The 1070 is perfect for max graphics settings at 1080p for 60+fps in most games released in the last 3 years. It's good for 1440p as well but not with max graphics and 60fps.

Edit - I downvoted @King_V for the miss information I quoted.

Edit 2 - I decided to remove the downvote because it honestly could have just been a mistake if he was thinking of a RTX 2070.

 

[King_V]

If the RTX 2060 is over kill then so is the 1660ti since they are nearly the same in performance to a GTX 1070/ti. The 1070 is perfect for max graphics settings at 1080p for 60+fps in most games released in the last 3 years. It's good for 1440p as well but not with max graphics and 60fps.

Edit - I downvoted @King_V for the miss information I quoted.

Edit 2 - I decided to remove the downvote because it honestly could have just been a mistake if he was thinking of a RTX 2070.

I actually would've said the plain old 1660, except that's going away, and I think the 1660 Super is supposed to have the same price as the original 1660. But, yeah, the 1660 and 1660Ti more or less straddle the 1070 in terms of performance. Plus, in some of the reviews on this site, there are a some games (not many) that will dip below 60fps at 1080p with max settings. The 2060 is more 1070Ti range, which, in and of itself, was just shy of the GTX 1080.

EDIT: I guess it's a matter of whether aiming for 60fps average, 60fps min in most games, or NEVER dip below 60fps in any game. 1080p, that is.