• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

4770K Worth Upgrading?

yion

yion

yion

Permabanned
Joined
28 Nov 2018
Posts
5
Hi Guys,

I have one 4770k .4.5 overclocked and I was thinking to upgrade to new cpu./
Now I have one 780 gtx and one old monitor which ls lg flatron 27 size tn..

At 1440p will I have bottleneck if I will; buy one new 2080 ti card and one new gaming 27" WQHD 1440p IPS 165Hz monitor ;
The most games will have bottleneck with my 4770k;; and 27" WQHD 1440p IPS 165Hz monitor ; with one 2080 ti;
also the most games need 6 or 8 cores;';;
 
If you're getting a 2080TI then yes a new 6 or 8 core will necessary. 8700K or 9900K for the 2080TI.
 
If you want over 165fps then you will need to base your system around a really highly overclocked CPU and uber high end memory. Min-maxing to the extreme.
 
what card to buy;; for not to have bottleneck;; with my 4770k;

2080 0r 2070;; for not have bottle;
My problem now is that I don't have very good monitor and my card is very old.
 
Last edited:
1060 my friend cant keep very good frame in assassein origins and the newest games and what to buy one very old card;'';

also I want to buy and one new gaming 27" WQHD 1440p IPS 165Hz monitor
 
For the price of just the gtx2080ti and a 165hz "gaming" monitor you could build a full system around an 8 core Ryzen chip, Vega card and quality freesync monitor.
 
my friend I don't want to update my 4770k now.. I need to buy new monitor and card. for this I am asking will I have bottle with 4770k .4.5 if I buy one 2080 or 2080 ti with 27" WQHD 1440p IPS 165Hz monitor ;\\

I don't want vega or freensyng monitor
 
yion said:
my friend I don't want to update my 4770k now.. I need to buy new monitor and card. for this I am asking will I have bottle with 4770k .4.5 if I buy one 2080 or 2080 ti with 27" WQHD 1440p IPS 165Hz monitor ;\\

I don't want vega or freensyng monitor
Click to expand...

My friend, you are kind of peeing into the wind and wasting money chasing a rainbow. You will need a much faster card than an rtx2080ti to maintain over 165FPS at 3.7mega pixels.
 
He means 1440p 165hz is higher output than 4k, which even now is fairly tepid an idea on high or more settings.
Beyond that the 4770k even at 4.5 probably will not be 165 plus consistently with any background tasks and will be clapped out on aaa ttiles. I would go for 1080ti which is similar to 2080 but cheaper and wait 3 years and whole system refresh on high gz 144.
 
The 1080ti is a good match for an overclocked 4770k... I ran that setup for a couple years and it works well.

You won’t get anywhere near 165hz but you don’t need too in order to get a great experience
 
X-Mikuru_Beam-X said:
You won’t get anywhere near 165hz but you don’t need too in order to get a great experience
Click to expand...

Yeah chasing 165 FPS solid is pretty pointless - for single player stuff anything much above 60 fps with adaptive sync is perfectly playable and for multiplayer you might as well go the "lowpro" config route for maximum clarity, maximum FPS - which removes a lot of the demand on the hardware. There are a few games where silly high framerates can be an advantage but they are mostly older stuff like CS based games.

You don't need to be constantly churning out refresh rate level framerate to take advantage of a high refresh panel especially if you use some form of adaptive sync but it gives you good flexibility.
 
My understanding is that at 1440p or 4k the cpu is less important but acknowledge that at 1080p the difference between haswell and coffee lake is c20% or above game depending
 
Rroff said:
Yeah chasing 165 FPS solid is pretty pointless - for single player stuff anything much above 60 fps with adaptive sync is perfectly playable and for multiplayer you might as well go the "lowpro" config route for maximum clarity, maximum FPS - which removes a lot of the demand on the hardware. There are a few games where silly high framerates can be an advantage but they are mostly older stuff like CS based games.

You don't need to be constantly churning out refresh rate level framerate to take advantage of a high refresh panel especially if you use some form of adaptive sync but it gives you good flexibility.
Click to expand...

You're right, but 60 fps vs 100 fps is a game changer sp or mp in terms of premium experience.
 
geordiejc said:
You're right, but 60 fps vs 100 fps is a game changer sp or mp in terms of premium experience.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah especially if you don't have adaptive sync - but especially for single player the advantage of extra framerate doesn't extend that much above 60 FPS depending on person. I'm playing The Division on a 1070 with 1440p G-Sync and most settings turned up averaging around 70-80 FPS and it isn't a problem for me and I come from a 125 FPS Quake background, etc.

The nice thing is just having that extra headroom above 60Hz/FPS to keep everything smooth and responsive.
 
I went from a 4770k @ 4.3 and 780 to a 1080 (via a 1070), then to a Ryzen 1700 @4.1. You're not going to notice a huge CPU bottleneck, considering how much of a hit you'll be taking from the 780 at the moment. I only play at 1440p 60hz, where a 1080 is still plenty. For 160hz, I'd look at a 2080 (you'll see a technical bottleneck, but I wouldn't lose any sleep over it). For a 2080ti, you'd be better sticking with a 2080 and ploughing the rest of your budget into a CPU upgrade.
 
A 2080ti will likely be choked by your CPU. CPU also starts coming into play for multi player titles so keep that in mind. If you're going for a 2080ti, get a 8700k/9900k depending on your budget and how long of a shelf life you want for your CPU.

This also might be of relevance:

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwrevie...k-revisit-2018-benchmarks-vs-9900k-ryzen-more

If gaming is your thing, stick to intel. If you're needing mixed workloads, AMD could be a consideration:

"Moving to Ryzen would be lateral and not provide a substantially improved gaming experience over the 2600K (and a Windows reinstall would likely smooth-over any frametime issues); however, moving to Ryzen would be a recommended change for someone working with applications like Blender on the regular. In this instance, the 2700 – priced similarly to the launch 2600K price (or cheaper, actually) – provides a several-fold uplift in performance in Blender, reducing render times noticeably with its increased thread count. If this type of workload sounds like you, AMD is a worthy contender to consider. The market is much different than when the 2600K launched."
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom