When does a CPU hold back 4k resolutions

DarrenM343 · 24 Jun 2019 at 08:13

Quartz said:
You can't even play at 1080p with all details maxxed with some technologies enabled (RTX, anyone?).

Yes you can. BFV works fine on a 2080 at 1440P with pretty much max everything. Everything is game dependent. Far Cry 5 New Dawn without RT gets lower FPS with nearly max everything.

Personally I dunno why folks would cheap out at 4K. At that res I'd want nothing less than a 2080 Ti (turning settings down IMO is a waste - you're paying £ for all that stuff in games). And for an optimised solution I'd not be using an old CPU either. Top end resolution, top end components IMO. Not long ago 4K monitors were what, upwards of £1k? Running it with a £50 or whatever 2500K processor just seems so wrong

.
So while 4K might not push processors as hard as other resolutions, nobody has tested every single game out there and every single config. To ensure you're getting the best out of a top end resoltuion monitor I'd recommend a good modern fairly top end build generally

beany_bot · 24 Jun 2019 at 08:34

shamus21 said:
It will be a good few years yet before most gamers will need to buy a new cpu for 4K gaming. Do not forget developers design games for consoles first and the add a few extras on for the pc gamer

80% of the games I play as they are PC exclusives. So thats just a false blanket statement.

apostolis_kt · 24 Jun 2019 at 09:19

I normally game on a Full HD 16:10 monitor because I know my core2quad now is too old for anything else. After all it bottlenecks my Vega 56.

Suprisingly i tried my pc on my 4k tv and lo and behold Witcher 3 all settings maxed were maxing out the GPU and not the CPU and was getting 38-40fps as much as the Vega56 does on current systems.

So the oxymoron in this situation is indeed you can get a budget CPU and spend money on the GPU to get the best in 4k. I wouldn't try this though if i didn't have the hardware.

VincentHanna · 24 Jun 2019 at 10:17

If you are playing at 4K, it's generally always best to spend upgrade money on faster GPU's as the CPU is very rarely the bottleneck.

I'm gaming on a 2080Ti paired with an Intel 5930k from 2014.
6 Cores @ 4.3 Ghz and I don't think the CPU has ever held me back.

VincentHanna · 24 Jun 2019 at 10:18

beany_bot said:
80% of the games I play as they are PC exclusives. So thats just a false blanket statement.

That's unique to you though.

What he said is true of AAA titles.

Alan1969 · 24 Jun 2019 at 12:32

I used my RX480 8gb on my 4k monitor and that was fine (I have since sold that a bought a reference VEGA 56 that I am very happy about).

shamus21 · 24 Jun 2019 at 16:23

The GPU is what matters. A 9900k clocked @ 5 GHZ plus running a 4k panel will only give you from nothing to extra 5 to 8 fps and that will be game dependent

Quartz · 25 Jun 2019 at 10:05

DarrenM343 said:
Yes you can. BFV works fine on a 2080 at 1440P with pretty much max everything.

Now put ray-tracing on.

DarrenM343 · 25 Jun 2019 at 10:29

Quartz said:
Now put ray-tracing on.

As I think I said, that was with RT on!

SOme of the MP maps get over 100FPS too, albeit, less RT intensive. But, compare it with other possibly poorly optimised games, the performance with RT on may be no worse than other games using similar settings without RT. As my example, Far Cry new dawn initially saw 60 FPS at 1440P (DX 11, no RT) when I first loaded it up with nearly max everything which was a shock because after playing BF5 for a while I assumed soemthign without RT would be 100+FPS with max everything.
Now I just run BF5 it at 1440P with RT on Ultra and happy with both the effects and frame rate although I don't stare at the FPS counter. Definitely feels a bit smother though since using a 9900K than it was with a 6700K, although I guess that's not proven so subjective. As many drop other settings, it's okay to drop RT to medium too

.

Loads of work to do on RT but to say it's not playable at 1080P which I'm assuming some think is all RTX cards is untrue. Just have to have the right card for the resolution. (2080 is fine for 1440P).

It amuses me that some say 4K is great, just drop settings, while other think RT is useless unless it's >100 FPS and RT has to be on Ultra or it rubbish

.

Poneros · 25 Jun 2019 at 11:52

DarrenM343 said:
(turning settings down IMO is a waste - you're paying £ for all that stuff in games).

Yeah, who wouldn't want to hurt their performance by 40% for this? Or this.

I have always believed in turning up all the settings, even if I can't see the difference and the game runs at 10 fps.

DarrenM343 · 25 Jun 2019 at 12:55

Poneros said:
Yeah, who wouldn't want to hurt their performance by 40% for this? Or this.

I have always believed in turning up all the settings, even if I can't see the difference and the game runs at 10 fps.

10 FPS is a bit extreme of course.
40% is quite a lot but do you have the time to test all the settings for differences in every game you play? The result might not always be the same. Not sure those examples show any differences where an effect is off which would more visually make a difference, such as fog or smoke. In a face paced FPS with lots of effects you might see more of a difference.
I don't bother looking at low settings these days but I do remember in the past comparing them and easily telling a difference. Benefit of keeping on 1440P, don't need to consider low or medium. I'd not want to cheap out on components at 4K tho if I did move to it.

Rofflay · 25 Jun 2019 at 17:12

I must read through this thread this resonates with me as i use DSR on high hertz monitors to get 4K that way the same way the consoles cheat with checkerboarding.

In some games like Overwatch they really stress both the cpu and gpu when i upgraded to 240hz from 120hz briefly it made my oc unstable as i was hitting 175fps at 4k with all but good stuff like Textures and models kept to minimum. So yea thats a 4790k cpu doing the best MP shooter engine out there only held back i bet by the GPU. I think a 2080Ti would go higher as i used a 1080.

Skynet5 · 26 Jun 2019 at 17:47

Isnt it any point that you see your GPU not consistently hitting 99%?

Feel like that might be too simple, but must be an indicator?

aoaaron · 26 Jun 2019 at 20:09

Do you guys think a 4670k can run at 4k or is that too outdated?

keyser · 26 Jun 2019 at 23:21

Run GPUZ, play a game, wait for a laggy bit, check if your GPU was at 99%. Yes? You are GPU bottlenecked. No? You are CPU bottlenecked.

Grim5 · 26 Jun 2019 at 23:34

Why does his title say "suspended"?

triss · 27 Jun 2019 at 06:46

Grim5 said:
Why does his title say "suspended"?

Because he's been suspended atm

bakes0310 · 27 Jun 2019 at 08:53

No I'm not, where does it say suspended in the title?

Glanza · 27 Jun 2019 at 11:16

Doesn't mean you scroll up aoaaron has it.

HRL · 27 Jun 2019 at 15:05

keyser said:
Run GPUZ, play a game, wait for a laggy bit, check if your GPU was at 99%. Yes? You are GPU bottlenecked. No? You are CPU bottlenecked.

My 2700X with XFR2 and PBO boosting to almost 4.5Ghz is still holding back my 2080Ti occasionally @ 4K.

Part the reason I'm looking at the 3900X or 3950X.