what to upgrade CPU or GPU

[p00se2]

hello !

i currently use :

ryzen 5 1600
gtx 1660 super
16 gig 3200 ram
600watt psu bronze

which should i upgrade first ? GPU or CPU ?
looking to get more FPS in CoD warzone


thanks in advance

[Snow]

𝔇ave eredeti hozzászólása:

I would say GPU. With an rtx 2080 you'd be looking at roughly 13% bottleneck which is not terrible.. you'd be roughly around 2% bottleneck with the 1660.

There is no such thing as "% bottleneck", so, please, stop giving misinformation.

[_I_]

or by his maths
2% on gpu = 98% on cpu
so why upgrade the gpu

[p00se2]

i can see how the mainboard is a limiting factor
if i wanted to go anywhere beyond the 3600 id need a new mobo and psu (+ when combined with a more powerfull GPU id need the watts )


going for cpu now may be cheaper compared to the GPU but overall it seems to make more sense to upgrade cpu later when able to replace mainboard and psu as well + figure if i wanna stick to r5 or go r7 r9

[rezo]

p00se2 eredeti hozzászólása:

i can see how the mainboard is a limiting factor
if i wanted to go anywhere beyond the 3600 id need a new mobo and psu (+ when combined with a more powerfull GPU id need the watts )


going for cpu now may be cheaper compared to the GPU but overall it seems to make more sense to upgrade cpu later when able to replace mainboard and psu as well + figure if i wanna stick to r5 or go r7 r9

Id just get a new gpu right now and get a new cpu mobo combo later on when the next gen have released because they'll be a similar price

[hawkeye]

The correct answer is dependent on your full specs, which includes monitor specs and the games that you want better performance in.

PC Games Hardware magazine (DE) gives the 1600 a gaming score of 53 out of 100. If the mobo is poor maybe less. If upgrading wait for next gen.

Why is it slow? Because the single thread speed is about the same as an intel cpu released in 2011. It's about 2/3 as fast of top current cpus.

The 1660s is low end as well. It would get 60fps on all but the most demanding titles at 1080p. If upgrading also wait for next gen.

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2019-10-29-gtx-1660-super-review-7001?page=5

So, both could be upgraded. Which one to do first depends on the games you want to play. Make that decision when next generations arrive. Simple as that.

[𝔇ave]

Snow eredeti hozzászólása:

𝔇ave eredeti hozzászólása:

I would say GPU. With an rtx 2080 you'd be looking at roughly 13% bottleneck which is not terrible.. you'd be roughly around 2% bottleneck with the 1660.

There is no such thing as "% bottleneck", so, please, stop giving misinformation.

Get over yourself snow.. you gotta stop with the superiority complex.

[Snow]

𝔇ave eredeti hozzászólása:

Snow eredeti hozzászólása:

There is no such thing as "% bottleneck", so, please, stop giving misinformation.

Get over yourself snow.. you gotta stop with the superiority complex.

This isn't about you or me, it's about the bad advice you give to people in HW&OS. If a person comes here to get helped with something - don't feed them with totally unrelated BS.

[rezo]

Snow eredeti hozzászólása:

𝔇ave eredeti hozzászólása:

Get over yourself snow.. you gotta stop with the superiority complex.

This isn't about you or me, it's about the bad advice you give to people in HW&OS. If a person comes here to get helped with something - don't feed them with totally unrelated BS.

I agree, theres no such thing as a % bottleneck. Its just some gimmicky term made up by a comparison website. Majority of the time the GPU is a bottleneck unless you have a very slow and old gen cpu. In this case his 1600 is whats holding him back. There isnt any percentages involved, How could that be possible when theres an unlimited amount of benchmarking tests you can do where the % difference between two things can vary depending on the benchmark.

Its like comparing my cpu (i5 9600k @5.0) compared to a R7 2700x when matched with a graphics card. If you make the systems run csgo it mean mine would shread the r7 because of my high clock speeds and thus decrease this '% bottleneck' between my cpu and gpu. Whereas if you run an intensive load like firestrike extreme or star citizen, where all cores of the cpu can be utilised then chances are the r7 2700x would destroy and the '% bottleneck' of my cpu would be greater. Theres no context nor fair comparison when it comes to this % bottleneck

[Taxi Driver DeNiro]

hawkeye eredeti hozzászólása:

PC Games Hardware magazine (DE) gives the 1600 a gaming score of 53 out of 100. If the mobo is poor maybe less. If upgrading wait for next gen.

I put exactly zero stock in that opinion.

hawkeye eredeti hozzászólása:

Why is it slow? Because the single thread speed is about the same as an intel cpu released in 2011. It's about 2/3 as fast of top current cpus.

Misleading. It's at least 30% faster per core than Intel CPUs from 2011, and Intel couldn't do those core counts back then in anything but their highest end HEDT and server parts.

Bad 💀 Motha eredeti hozzászólása:

Another poor PC with a junk A320 board in it. Replace it.

A320 is fine for Ryzen 1600. Don't be a dope.

rezo eredeti hozzászólása:

In this case his 1600 is whats holding him back.

Disagreed. The Ryzen 5 1600 is still a fast CPU and can still handle the very best looking games that can actually use the high core count, like Battlefield 5 or Doom Eternal.

rezo eredeti hozzászólása:

Its like comparing my cpu (i5 9600k @5.0) compared to a R7 2700x when matched with a graphics card. If you make the systems run csgo it mean mine would shread the r7 because of my high clock speeds and thus decrease this '% bottleneck' between my cpu and gpu. Whereas if you run an intensive load like firestrike extreme or star citizen, where all cores of the cpu can be utilised then chances are the r7 2700x would destroy and the '% bottleneck' of my cpu would be greater. Theres no context nor fair comparison when it comes to this % bottleneck

Yes. As soon as software starts using the extra cores, the argument is reversed and the 'faster' per core CPU doesn't look so ♥♥♥♥ hot anymore.

This will eventually be the case with games too. Not just tech demos and benchmarks.


Edit: To actually answer OP, upgrade the GPU for now, look at a CPU and mainboard upgrade whenever AMD launches socket AM5. Or whenever Intel reveals their real next gen CPUs.

[Fuerst Fux]

JohnChronic420 eredeti hozzászólása:

hawkeye eredeti hozzászólása:

PC Games Hardware magazine (DE) gives the 1600 a gaming score of 53 out of 100. If the mobo is poor maybe less. If upgrading wait for next gen.

I put exactly zero stock in that opinion.

Their reviews are usually pretty decent. Just to put what hawkeye said into perspective: The 100% gaming score for CPUs is defined by the performance of the I9-10900K, so 53/100 means it is delivering on average 53% of the FPS an i9-10900K can deliver.

[Taxi Driver DeNiro]

Fair enough, that makes sense from a math perspective. But I think when you read "53 out of 100" it doesn't give a very good impression of what gaming on a Ryzen 5 is actually like. 53% doesn't sound very good.

I would rate the Ryzen 5 1600 a 6.5/10 if I were to just give it an arbitrary score based on how ideal I feel the processor is for games today and in the next year or two.

[Grimy_RIck]

Get the best GPU you can afford then get a new CPU and Mobo at a later date, i would however hold on till 30xx series drops and look at your options then.

If you want to go for it now though just sell your current rig CPU, Mobo, and card to raise some cash and go for something like a 3600x and a 2060 or 2070 or the super variants depending on your disposable cash.

[rezo]

JohnChronic420 eredeti hozzászólása:

Disagreed. The Ryzen 5 1600 is still a fast CPU and can still handle the very best looking games that can actually use the high core count, like Battlefield 5 or Doom Eternal.

Ryzen 5 1600 is a slow cpu compared to current gen in 2020.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXsJ1equIUw

A lot of people I know bought a ryzen 1600 and a GTX 1070 or 1080 back in the day and its currently whats holding them back. Only in a very small amount of games is it on par with newer cpus where its entirely GPU limited such as in 4k. Espeically in cpu heavy titles like CSGO its almost 100fps difference with the same gpu. the 3rd gen and upcoming 4th gen has a huge improvement over 1st gen.


In battlefield v https://youtu.be/-LY3X0Jr9Ak?t=435 theres a huge difference between 3600 and 1600 and is the difference between a smooth 144hz experience and a stuttery one. There are some moments where the 3600 is at 145 fps and the 1600 is at 108. Im pretty sure its cpu limited there.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Ryzen 1600 is ok, of all you ever want to do is 1080p/60hz

[Taxi Driver DeNiro]

rezo eredeti hozzászólása:

Ryzen 5 1600 is a slow cpu compared to current gen in 2020.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXsJ1equIUw

No doubt, but not as much as that video would have you believe comparing an X-variant with a non X-variant Ryzen when the proper comparison would be R5 1600X to R5 3600X or R5 1600 to R5 3600.

rezo eredeti hozzászólása:

Only in a very small amount of games is it on par with newer cpus

Probably the games with excellent multithreaded optimisation.

rezo eredeti hozzászólása:

Espeically in cpu heavy titles like CSGO its almost 100fps difference with the same gpu. the 3rd gen and upcoming 4th gen has a huge improvement over 1st gen.

CSGO isn't so much CPU heavy as it is simply running on an ancient game engine.

rezo eredeti hozzászólása:

In battlefield v https://youtu.be/-LY3X0Jr9Ak?t=435 theres a huge difference between 3600 and 1600 and is the difference between a smooth 144hz experience and a stuttery one. There are some moments where the 3600 is at 145 fps and the 1600 is at 108. Im pretty sure its cpu limited there.

That's not as bad as you make it seem. With triple buffered vsync enabled that's not even gonna drop it all the way down.

Regardless, his board should support the 3600 if he's hot for a slight upgrade. It's not as bad in an A320 board as you may think.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wF8EuEfKH3Q