I think an indicator will be if you see CPU usage hit 100% constantly. At the moment it is mostly GPU bound at 4K, but once games start using more than 4 cores constantly it will be more important since CPUs don't do much at high resolution.
-
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.
When does a CPU hold back 4k resolutions
- Thread starter bakes0310
- Start date
Or you add more gpu power and see no fps increase at all is a classic too. Seeing your cpu at 99% would be a good sign to me as long as they do not throttle or stutter.
It would mean finally proper multicore support as i never saw this happen, But i think ive been cpu bound at 65% on most of my cores as well.
Most games have wildly varying CPU load.
So short load spikes can cause problems far before constant 100% load.
That is true, but wouldn't that be a lot harder to detect though?
Frame time monitoring should show it easily.
Though it should be also felt as kind of unsmoothness/stutter, unless frame rate is high.
In Finnish PC forum people with both six core HEDT and newer faster clocked quad core desktop CPU have said that in some games six core CPU gives smoother feeling gaming experience despite of lower max fps.
All it simply needs is all those countless background stuff threads wanting CPU time at the same time when game is having CPU intensive moment and frame time/fps starts jumping around.
Reviews actually give rosier picture than real world use.
For consistency and minimizing number of variables reviewers never have same amount of stuff installed and running on background than normal home user.
Associate
I'm currently Running i7 6700K (Overclocked ofcourse) and an Nvidia GTX 1080Ti - I run everything in Ultra in all games I play (I haven't tested Metro Exodus Though) and I game in 4K on a 28" Acer Predator G-Synch Monitor.
No issues at all for me, with G-Sync on - Stable 60FPS in everything.
With G-Sync turned off I am hitting 70-90FPS and over 100 in some slightly older games.
This is why I haven't jumped up to the 2080Ti's, I'm just not seeing the point at the moment. Quite happy to sit and wait for "30 Series Cards" for another year or two.
Hopefully the next Ti card is not 2K
Associate
In my experience, yes. Turn off AA for a big boost to the performance. It won't look as good without but the difference is minimal. You could even drop AA down to a low setting too just for a bit of extra jagged edge reduction.
Arma 3 as an example runs at a great FPS without AA at 4k in Ultra settings (On My Rig) - Not much difference noticed in Jagged Edges.
Don
That doesn't sound right..
G-SYNC means you shouldn't have limited FPS. Sounds like VSYNC is applied to yours if you're getting 60FPS limit.
-edit, oh it's not a 144Hz screen. 60Hz screen.
Associate
We can all hope
Associate
G-Sync - Monitor Refresh rate won't exceed GPU refresh rate, eliminating screen tear. When its a 60Hz Screen, G-Sync locks at 60
-Edit: I was a relatively early adopter of 4K. Patiently waiting on superfast 4K panels being readily available and not wallet busting
Don
^See my eedit @OcUK - PREDATOR
@OcUK - PREDATOR
Associate
must have edited as I typed my response 
Soldato
CPU bottlenecked games will show this at 1440p and 4k and is manifested in low minimums and performance spikes. An example is Fallout4 which showed the same CPU bottlenecks for me with a GTX960,RX470 and GTX1080,and using a Xeon E3 1230 V2 and Ryzen 5 2600 at 1080p and 1440p. The same can be seen with strategy games,etc.
It’s more amplified at 1080p that it affects average framerate.
Some people are so used to dodgy 1% lows that they waive it off because it only happens for a short period.
Yes cpu bottlenecks affect your 1% lows at 4K, but I’ve found most people don’t care because it doesn’t affect the average fps much
Some people are so used to dodgy 1% lows that they waive it off because it only happens for a short period.
Yes cpu bottlenecks affect your 1% lows at 4K, but I’ve found most people don’t care because it doesn’t affect the average fps much
Associate
Thanks, that’s good to know. I tend not to like most gaming reviews as they concentrate only on FPS. However what bothers me more is turn times for say total war warhammer2 mortal empires and cpus with lots of clocks should benefit that despite having lower fps
Just a quick update - I upgraded to a Ryzen 2700 and DDR4 3200 last month, Forza Horizon 3 is now achieving a 60 lock at 4k at ultra on a 1080ti whereas previously with my xeon 3470 and the same GPU it was dropping to low 50s sometimes depending on the scene. Proof in the pudding right there, even with what I would call a GPU limited game.
