Query over cpu bottleneck

[gort]

Been using my new 6700xt, upgrading from a GTX 970, whilst still using a AMD 1700x CPU.

At 1440p res I've played Days Gone, Horizon Zero Dawn and Biomutant on high and ultra settings and getting around 85-90 FPS on average, which is fine for me. Not noticing any issues.
GPU is showing 96% and CPU between 25-40%.

Everywhere says the 1700x bottlenecks this GPU but at present I'm not seeing it from the performance.

I was going to get a 5700x as a final CPU upgrade to the AM4 build, however I'm struggling to justify it.

Am I missing something and would the CPU upgrade be worth it?
I understand that various games utilise cpu and gpu differently but I'm not playing the newest and most demanding games.

Ta.

 

[Tetras]

Keep in mind that when reviewers look @ CPU upgrades, they're usually @ 1080p and biased toward high refresh gaming. A lot of CPUs that are considered obsolete are still capable of playable frame rates (i.e. 60+ fps), so long as you don't load up Starfield or Skylines

 

[FredFlint]

If it’s not a problem, stick with it until it is. Developers tend to target low-mid range CPU’s. A 1700x should be ok for some time for 90% of games. Upgrading the CPU would push up the minimums so would probably be a bit smoother in some games but if you are happy, just wait and grab a second hand 5800X3D when they are cheap.

 

[ToOo]

If you don't have any issues with th games you are playing then there's no point spending money.
IMO it is at least in principle a worthwhile upgrade going from 1700x to 5600x3d or 5800x3d, you should see a 50%+ improvement in CPU limited scenarios.

 

[turbot1984]

Hey @gort ... just a personal thing but i would go for it now, but a 5600x from MM at £100 or less. 60% faster single thread than your 1700x so no lost sleep over bottlenecks. The problem with waiting is that the AM4 platform will start feeling too old to justify an upgrade spend, hence why I wouldn't hoof over 300 quid on a 5800x3d and it could be a long wait before its say £200?

I doubt the problem is that bad like you say, AMD generations with a similar performance gpu below ... and this is a 'worst case' 1080P situation, you may actually be within 10-15% depending on game of course.

 

[D1craig]

For cpu to he bottlenecks it needs to he stuck at 100% meaning it is looking for more performance. If it is around 20% then I think it has a lot of room yet.

That's how I understand it.

 

[eeii]

It’s not just about the high frames a faster cpu will fix your minimums. However if you are not seeing a problem don’t worry about it.

 

[cjgardens]

GPU is showing 96%

If it never gets to 100% the you have a slight bottleneck or its overheating and throttling.

 

[throwaway4372]

Split the cpu task manager into logical cores.

For example if 1 of 4 cores is at 100% while the rest are at 0% that reports as 25% but is actually cpu limited.

 

[z10m]

For cpu to he bottlenecks it needs to he stuck at 100% meaning it is looking for more performance. If it is around 20% then I think it has a lot of room yet.

That's how I understand it.

This is not how it works in most games unfortunately.
You can have 20% cpu usage and still be cpu limited as the main thread used by the game is maxed out.

 

[gort]

Thanks all.
As you can see, lows, individual core usage, etc. is not something I've fully read up on. as I am very much now a "just plug it in and turn it on and use" after my OC'ing and tweaking days ended some 10 years ago I think.
I'll see how it goes for now and keep an eye on any decent CPU deals as I will likely end up upgrading it at some point.

Cheers