# Is my i5 3570K bottlenecking my gtx 1080 at 1080p?



## boromaill (Oct 23, 2017)

Yesterday i bought a new gtx 1080 and did some benchmarks where i noticed in some case much lower fps then showed in benchmarks on the net. For example i did Firestrike extrem at 1080p and i got 10600 gpu score which corresponds to the numbers i found in reviews. However when i ran Rise of the tomb raider benchmark with ultra and fxaa I got 88 fps comparing to around 130 fps in reviews with the same graphics settings. Could it be that its because my cpu isnt fast enough for a gtx 1080 in some cpu intensive games? I run my cpu at stock clocks.


----------



## Toothless (Oct 23, 2017)

why would you waste a 1080 on 1080p.

short answer overclock your cpu and find out.


----------



## Jetster (Oct 23, 2017)

Even though the 3570K is 5 gen old now it's still is a viable CPU. Its not so much the CPU but the system as a whole, board memory, chipset and maybe the version of 1080 you have that is affecting the benchmarks.
I wouldn't call it a bottleneck though, Fill out your system specs


----------



## Aquinus (Oct 23, 2017)

Toothless said:


> why would you waste a 1080 on 1080p.


I have a co-worker that has a 1080 but, he won't always use 4k for gaming. He has a 144Hz 1080p display for fast paced games and more often than not, at higher frame rates, the CPU is more likely to be the bottleneck than not.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Oct 23, 2017)

Jetster said:


> Its not so much the CPU but the system as a whole, board memory, chipset and maybe the version of 1080 you have that is affecting the benchmarks



Simply NO. It is the CPU. It must run at least 4GHz. Aim for 4.5GHz to reduce the single core IPC gap completely.


----------



## Outback Bronze (Oct 23, 2017)

Using something like 2400mhz ram can make a pretty big difference in games @ 1080p if your only using 1333/1600 from my own personal testing.

Overclocking the CPU will also have beneficial gains if you have not OCed.

If you are already using these methods then no, I don't think your CPU will be the bottleneck except where games like multithreading and certain CPU instructions.


----------



## Aquinus (Oct 23, 2017)

Outback Bronze said:


> Using something like 2400mhz ram can make a pretty big difference in games @ 1080p if your only using 1333/1600 from my own personal testing.


1333Mhz would start to show performance loss but, anything north of 1600 doesn't tend to yield much benefit on Intel platforms using DDR3. As you said earlier, overclocking the cores is going to yield the most benefit. On my 3820 and 3930k, higher memory clocks tend to also mean lower stable CPU overclocks so, it might be worth it on platforms with more than two memory channels to opt for lower memory clocks to allow for higher core clocks. Simply put, it's not wise to push the IMC harder when it doesn't have to. It's more heat for no reason.


----------



## Frick (Oct 23, 2017)

boromaill said:


> Yesterday i bought a new gtx 1080 and did some benchmarks where i noticed in some case much lower fps then showed in benchmarks on the net. For example i did Firestrike extrem at 1080p and i got 10600 gpu score which corresponds to the numbers i found in reviews. However when i ran Rise of the tomb raider benchmark with ultra and fxaa I got 88 fps comparing to around 130 fps in reviews with the same graphics settings. Could it be that its because my cpu isnt fast enough for a gtx 1080 in some cpu intensive games? I run my cpu at stock clocks.



Many modern games likes threads, so yeah your CPU is holding you back.


----------



## MyTechAddiction (Oct 23, 2017)

boromaill said:


> Yesterday i bought a new gtx 1080 and did some benchmarks where i noticed in some case much lower fps then showed in benchmarks on the net. For example i did Firestrike extrem at 1080p and i got 10600 gpu score which corresponds to the numbers i found in reviews. However when i ran Rise of the tomb raider benchmark with ultra and fxaa I got 88 fps comparing to around 130 fps in reviews with the same graphics settings. Could it be that its because my cpu isnt fast enough for a gtx 1080 in some cpu intensive games? I run my cpu at stock clocks.



Thats because most reviews are done with a extreme overclock on both CPU ( on the latest generation) and GPU, sometimes the GPUs sent for reviews are cherry picked so that they boost as high as possible.For an accurate overview check sites that report results form a large amount of cards.


----------



## Sasqui (Oct 23, 2017)

Rise of the Tomb Raider is not very CPU bound at all.  May be something else going on.

See charts here:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i3_8350K/13.html


----------



## EarthDog (Oct 23, 2017)

Frick said:


> Many modern games likes threads, so yeah your CPU is holding you back.


Well, this game is... If you look at Sasqui's link, the 7600K and 7700K with a 200 Mhz difference show 30+ FPS difference. So ROTR can use more than 4 threads. Though it may be more clockspeed considering that FPS gap goes away at 2560x1440.....


----------



## SpAwNtoHell (Oct 24, 2017)

Just something to look out for, in Rise of tomb rider are some settings that are not maxxed out on default highest settings, but if you put those to max like shadow de detail, ssax 4x will make your fps drop so unless you are using the absolute same settings for the game as the benchmarks this is not relevant. Not sure if your i5 ivy is bottlenecking but on a separate rig i have with ivy i7 3770k and 1070 gaming x is no bottleneck on 1080p but again on the rig with i5 4460 and the same gtx 1070 gaming x is bottlenecking in bf1 but not rise of tomb rider or witcher 3 on 1080p... check you gpu ussage if it is not reaching 100%load in game... if your cpu is reaching 100% it is a bottleneck

Note: i get a average of 80fps in Rise of tomb rider on a 1080p144hz screen with evga sc2 gtx 1080ti, i7 7700k stock and 16gb ddr4 2400... and the gpu ussage is 100% maxing at 8496MB vram used...but i cranked every possible setting as i high as i could...


----------



## Final_Fighter (Oct 24, 2017)

if your cpu is running at stock speed then yes. you should be able to get 4.5ghz out of it without much effort. just change the multiplier to 45 on all the cores and up the volatge .120mv and  leave everything else alone and it should be good.


----------



## lyndonguitar (Oct 24, 2017)

The CPU is holding you back. Can you try playing on higher resolutions to see if it goes closer to the benchmark results? it should push the load into the GPU, removing the CPU bottleneck


----------



## trog100 (Oct 24, 2017)

try comparing scores on a normal firestrike run.. not extreme which is at 1440.. 

trog


----------



## boromaill (Oct 24, 2017)

I also get random fps drops from like 60 to 30 in ROTR when playing with 4xssaa. But only sometimes, I don't get my cpu usage over 90 percent, my gpu usage is almost always 99 percent, my ram usage around 7 gig at max and vram goes sometimes to 7700 mb. Btw my pc has 8 gb 1600 MHz ram installed.


----------



## Vayra86 (Oct 24, 2017)

As an OC'd to 4.4 (2c) - 4.2 (3c/4c) 3570k owner with a GTX 1080 in my system, I can tell you right now that yes, you lose about 0 - 20% of GTX 1080's optimal performance. Depends 100% on the game and your target frame rate but yes, there is a loss.

That said the combo still does well and I disagree with it being a bad fit for a 1080p monitor. If 1080p 60 hz then yes, no way you'll utilize either the CPU or GPU max performance, but if 120hz or up, then this is a well balanced rig. @Ferrum Master is spot on - if you can push a 4.5 Ghz OC on all cores, then you can mitigate almost everything you lost. Its a feasible OC on a decent air cooler. and a half-decent chip.

We have pretty much identical systems, even same RAMs 

Note that even though CPU usage isnt pegged at 100%, there are other bottlenecks in the pipeline, of which a big factor is RAM throughput, but also just the game/engine.

Also, you really need to OC this still pretty beasty CPU. You're running 3.8 Ghz now... moving to 4.2 all cores is a pretty big boost already and you can do this in many cases without ever touching the voltage. Another route you can take, instead of upgrading your whole rig, is to just go for a 1440p monitor. This will remove the burden off the 3570k and towards the GPU. Just give it a shot; throw a 42x multiplier on each core Turbo and leave everything else as is - if not stable, move to x42 on 3core active and x41 on 4 cores active (or more volts). 

If you're unsure about safe voltages: keep core temperatures below 86-88C, and don't exceed 1.3v on air. If you want more tips for a quick n dirty OC, let me know ^^


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 24, 2017)

Oc the cpu or grab a 3770K and call it a day.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Oct 24, 2017)

This is going to depend so much on the game...

I've had cases where my 670 is bottlenecked by my 4790k...


----------



## Vya Domus (Oct 24, 2017)

GorbazTheDragon said:


> I've had cases where my 670 is bottlenecked by my 4790k...



I am doubtful.  A 670 is weaker even than a 1050ti , you can easily run a 1080ti alongside a 4790K.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Oct 24, 2017)

Vya Domus said:


> I am doubtful.  A 670 is weaker even than a 1050ti , you can easily run a 1080ti alongside a 4790K.


Did you miss the other sentence I wrote????

There are games where a 1080ti isn't bottlenecked by even a G3258...


----------



## EarthDog (Oct 25, 2017)

But usually it doesn't work the other way around... or with such a CPU and what is now considered a low-end GPU.


----------



## hapkiman (Oct 25, 2017)

boromaill said:


> Yesterday i bought a new gtx 1080 and did some benchmarks where i noticed in some case much lower fps then showed in benchmarks on the net. For example i did Firestrike extrem at 1080p and i got 10600 gpu score which corresponds to the numbers i found in reviews. However when i ran Rise of the tomb raider benchmark with ultra and fxaa I got 88 fps comparing to around 130 fps in reviews with the same graphics settings. Could it be that its because my cpu isnt fast enough for a gtx 1080 in some cpu intensive games? I run my cpu at stock clocks.



I'd chalk it up to that particular game.  Your CPU is fine.  Overclock it if you want a little more oomph.


----------



## SpAwNtoHell (Oct 25, 2017)

Just noticed now.... 8GB ram?! In 2017?! You might find that your ram is afecting fps not 100% sure but all of the systems i listed in my previous post run on at least 16gb dual channel... the ivy runs on 4 sticks of 8GB 1600 in my case. And as a extra note ROTR benefits of more cores and HT but not as much as 40+fps in FHD.

Ps: how can you run rotr at ultra? As highest setting is very high?


----------



## Vayra86 (Oct 26, 2017)

SpAwNtoHell said:


> Just noticed now.... 8GB ram?! In 2017?! You might find that your ram is afecting fps not 100% sure but all of the systems i listed in my previous post run on at least 16gb dual channel... the ivy runs on 4 sticks of 8GB 1600 in my case. And as a extra note ROTR benefits of more cores and HT but not as much as 40+fps in FHD.
> 
> Ps: how can you run rotr at ultra? As highest setting is very high?



8GB is fine still for 90-95% of all games. Not recommended because you'll use the Page File more often, but it should not have an adverse effect on performance beyond an very rare stutter here and there. It will not affect average FPS per se; what will affect avg FPS is RAM speed though, but getting another stick won't fix that problem for OP.


----------



## Artas1984 (Oct 26, 2017)

Rise of Tomb Rider benefits from 6 cores. Having said that Core i5 3570K is the bottleneck.  Paired with 2400 MHz DDR3 and overclocked to 4.5 GHz it becomes equal to stock Core i5 6600K - which would be demolished by Core i5 8600K in Tomb Raider anyway. I hate to say it, but if you aim for 144 Hz, it's time to move to a new platform or buy a Core i7 3770K to replace Core i5 3570K.


----------

