i bought rtx 4070ti but my cpu is bottlenecking me

[Gökyüzü]

im thinking of buyying
ryzen 7 5800x3d
This is the best cpu my motherboard can handle, is this going to be good enough to handle my gpu or should i also upgrade my motherboard to

[Illusion of Progress]

You can't avoid bottlenecks. If your CPU isn't the bottleneck, then the GPU always is. Even with the fastest CPU, you'll only reduce the extent it bottlenecks.

Without knowing what you have for the CPU, but knowing you have AM4, all I can guess is that the 5800X3D is indeed the best uplift you can get for that platform, and it's often priced well. It's faster on average than everything besides the 13600K+ and 7900X3D/7950X3D specifically. And those aren't worlds faster, either. Up to you if it's worth paying for a new platform for a bit more.

Some considerations.

Notice I say "on average". The 7700X, for example, may be faster than the 5800X3D in some games anyway, because when cache doesn't matter, the 5800X3D basically becomes a 5800X (or even a hair slower to be precise, as it's clocked lower), which still isn't slow, mind you, but I'm pointing out things are a bit variable with it rather than an all around uplift. So while it's basically always equal or better than Zen 3 CPUs, it gets a bit more mixed compared to Zen 4/12th generation, which might still be slower than the 5800X3D at times, but are "innately" faster, if that makes sense.

Do you play a few, select games? Or more of "a lot of everything". If it's the first, it might be worth researching if the games you play benefit from the cache of the 3D models. If it's the second, you'll probably get "good enough coverage" of games that benefit, even if many still don't.

Basically, the 5800X3D is a hard to argue against proposition if you're already on AM4, and on like a Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000 series) or earlier. I probably wouldn't upgrade to it from a 5600/5700X or anything, though.

If you want a larger uplift and don't mind spending a lot to minimize every moment of CPU bottleneck you can, the 13th generation or AM5 (still namely the X3D models if going with this one) are your best choice, but if you consider AM5, wait a bit if you can. The 7800X3D is releasing early April (but availability will probably be tight, so your call on waiting). The 13th generation is also a consideration. The 13600K/13700K are great considerations. You COULD pair them with DDR4, but I really wouldn't unless you happened to already have a very fast kit of DDR4 sitting around. If you do go with the 5800X3D, the good news is the extra cache means, at times, it's fetching to RAM less so it cares just a little bit less about having fast RAM. 3,600 Mhz is the considered "sweet spot" for Zen 2/3, but 3,000 MHz/3,200 MHz would be okay, especially with a 5800X3D.

[Gökyüzü]

Originally posted by Illusion of Progress:

You can't avoid bottlenecks. If your CPU isn't the bottleneck, then the GPU always is. Even with the fastest CPU, you'll only reduce the extent it bottlenecks.

Without knowing what you have for the CPU, but knowing you have AM4, all I can guess is that the 5800X3D is indeed the best uplift you can get for that platform, and it's often priced well. It's faster on average than everything besides the 13600K+ and 7900X3D/7950X3D specifically. And those aren't worlds faster, either. Up to you if it's worth paying for a new platform for a bit more.

Some considerations.

Notice I say "on average". The 7700X, for example, may be faster than the 5800X3D in some games anyway, because when cache doesn't matter, the 5800X3D basically becomes a 5800X (or even a hair slower to be precise, as it's clocked lower), which still isn't slow, mind you, but I'm pointing out things are a bit variable with it rather than an all around uplift. So while it's basically always equal or better than Zen 3 CPUs, it gets a bit more mixed compared to Zen 4/12th generation, which might still be slower than the 5800X3D at times, but are "innately" faster, if that makes sense.

Do you play a few, select games? Or more of "a lot of everything". If it's the first, it might be worth researching if the games you play benefit from the cache of the 3D models. If it's the second, you'll probably get "good enough coverage" of games that benefit, even if many still don't.

Basically, the 5800X3D is a hard to argue against proposition if you're already on AM4, and on like a Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000 series) or earlier. I probably wouldn't upgrade to it from a 5600/5700X or anything, though.

If you want a larger uplift and don't mind spending a lot to minimize every moment of CPU bottleneck you can, the 13th generation or AM5 (still namely the X3D models if going with this one) are your best choice, but if you consider AM5, wait a bit if you can. The 7800X3D is releasing early April (but availability will probably be tight, so your call on waiting). The 13th generation is also a consideration. The 13600K/13700K are great considerations. You COULD pair them with DDR4, but I really wouldn't unless you happened to already have a very fast kit of DDR4 sitting around. If you do go with the 5800X3D, the good news is the extra cache means, at times, it's fetching to RAM less so it cares just a little bit less about having fast RAM. 3,600 Mhz is the considered "sweet spot" for Zen 2/3, but 3,000 MHz/3,200 MHz would be okay, especially with a 5800X3D.

Thank you for your answer thats verry educational :)

i am currently using ryzen 5 5500 and im playing little bit of everything but in the end im planing to return to battlefield 42 and destiny 2.
I dont think i will have any issues with destiny but my fps fractures all around at battlefield some times it drops to 90's some times it reaches 200's. This started to make me worry. Also dlls drops my fps at bf42 for some reason.

İm also currently at 1080p im also planing to take 2k monitor with a cpu and i saw ryzen 5 5500 performs terrible at 2k and 4k

The games i have played so far didn't performed so bad
İ get 70-60 fps at cyberpunk psycho options with RT
İ get 200 fps at Atomic hearth with new fps generation thing
i also get 300 fps at Rage 2 which it did suprised me alot

İ dont plan on upgrading soon i have alot of debt right now im need to save my money till the end of the year. İ just planning what should i buy and how much i should invest

[Illusion of Progress]

The Ryzen 5 5500 in particular is sort of between Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000 series) and Zen 3 (Ryzen 5000 series). it's not as good as the rest of the Ryzen 5000 series for a number of reasons, so you'll get a small uplift from something like a 5800X3D even in worst case scenarios, and that's before factoring in the extra cores. Not quite as much of an uplift as if you were coming from Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000 series) like I would have thought you might, though. Still probably your best "value" proposition, though.

Newer platforms would of course be a bit faster but cost more relative to how much faster they are. It's an option, though, if you are willing to spend as much.

And higher resolutions (I presume you're referring to 1440p by 2K) are often more GPU reliant, not more CPU reliant. It will actually be the same on the CPU at 1080p, 1440p, or 4K, but since you're less likely to be GPU bottlenecked at lower resolutions, the frame goes higher and you see the CPU become the bottleneck. It's not worth worrying about, it's natural. For example, let's say in game A, at second B, your CPU can do 90 FPS. But you're playing at 4K so you're GPU bottlenecked and you get 75 FPS, because the GPU can only produce that much in second B. You change to 1080p, where the GPU COULD do, let's say 120FPS. But you get 90 FPS because of course that's what the CPU can do at that very second. Again, it's not worth micro-managing which is the bottleneck, and instead focusing on "is this performance good enough for me". But if you're going UP in resolution in the future, then you're more likely to not need as fast of a CPU, so it's the other way around from what you're thinking. If the CPU is okay at 1080p, then it's no worse at 1440p or 4K. the worst you'll get is the same performance as now (but likely lower due to the GPU bottlenecking).

Disclaimer; if you go to an ULTRA-WIDE 1440p and compare it to 16:9 1440p, then yes, the CPU will have to do more (but so will the GPU).

Anyway, it sounds like you're not drowning in disposable income so I'd either consider the 5800X3D, or even just stay with the Ryzen 5 5500 (if you're not bothered by your current performance). Do note that the 5800X3D will warrant considerations on cooling. It is a WARM chip, even under good air cooling. I have mine under a Dark Rock Pro 4 and it still gets very warm at times. Not unexpected, but I wouldn't use anything less than near top end air cooling (like the aforementioned Dark Rock Pro 4, Noctua NH-D14/15, etc.), or good AIO/water cooling. The stock AMD coolers or lower end third party ones wouldn't be good for a 5800X3D IMO, so you'd have to factor in up to another $100 (or a bit less) for cooling.

[emoticorpse]

I'd stick with the 5500 until you save up for a whole new build. You're getting good performance. Not sure why you would think otherwise?.

The "but my fps fractures all around at battlefield some times it drops to 90's some times it reaches 200's. This started to make me worry" part is lunacy. How much FPS do you expect? Even if you went to a 5800x3d, you wouldn't get much of an improvement (especially at 1080p). As far as I can tell even a 7900 wouldn't get you much since I'm seeing it on par with the 5800x3d.

"İ get 70-60 fps at cyberpunk psycho options with RT". You're having better performance than almost everyone out there.

I guess you heard about "bottleneck" and it got your hopes up that there is a cure for the performance "woes" you think you have.

You have absolutely nothing to worry about and got the right budget CPU for gaming. It's all you need. If you did want to get more performance it should have been done NOT by spending x on a CPU+GPU, it would be by spending x on a GPU. If you had just chucked the money you would spend on a new CPU into the GPU then you would have better performance.

[Gökyüzü]

Originally posted by emoticorpse:

The "but my fps fractures all around at battlefield some times it drops to 90's some times it reaches 200's. This started to make me worry" part is lunacy. How much FPS do you expect? Even if you went to a 5800x3d, you wouldn't get much of an improvement (especially at 1080p). As far as I can tell even a 7900 wouldn't get you much since I'm seeing it on par with the 5800x3d.

Before i bough this gpu i was have rtx 2060 and i was allready getting around 70-120 fps at low settings now im not even at ultra settings some of them is at high some of them is at low and my fps changes this much. Fps is kind a important to me because i have all most 900 hours of aimlab and i can feel my when its started to get decrease. Its important because under 120 fps im begining to miss click, and this usualy happends at the most intense moments. But i think its because of this game idk it uses alot of cpu and everybody at the forums complains about %100 cpu usage of this game mine is usualy around %75-90. If i drop to low settings im getting minimum 150 fps but i did pay all that money i dont wanna play at low settings.

[emoticorpse]

Originally posted by Gökyüzü:

Originally posted by emoticorpse:

The "but my fps fractures all around at battlefield some times it drops to 90's some times it reaches 200's. This started to make me worry" part is lunacy. How much FPS do you expect? Even if you went to a 5800x3d, you wouldn't get much of an improvement (especially at 1080p). As far as I can tell even a 7900 wouldn't get you much since I'm seeing it on par with the 5800x3d.

Before i bough this gpu i was have rtx 2060 and i was allready getting around 70-120 fps at low settings now im not even at ultra settings some of them is at high some of them is at low and my fps changes this much. Fps is kind a important to me because i have all most 900 hours of aimlab and i can feel my when its started to get decrease. Its important because under 120 fps im begining to miss click, and this usualy happends at the most intense moments. But i think its because of this game idk it uses alot of cpu and everybody at the forums complains about %100 cpu usage of this game mine is usualy around %75-90. If i drop to low settings im getting minimum 150 fps but i did pay all that money i dont wanna play at low settings.

A lot of what you paid for is dlss. Does that game support that?

[Gökyüzü]

Originally posted by emoticorpse:

A lot of what you paid for is dlss. Does that game support that?

Yes Battlefield 2042 supports dlls but strangely dlls acualy drops my average fps in this game. Something like this never happend to me in any other game so far

[emoticorpse]

Originally posted by Gökyüzü:

Originally posted by emoticorpse:

A lot of what you paid for is dlss. Does that game support that?

Yes Battlefield 2042 supports dlls but strangely dlls acualy drops my average fps in this game. Something like this never happend to me in any other game so far

hmmm, that doesn't sound right but I never messed with DLSS. Really doesn't sound right, but I am definitely interested in this. Especially because I'm considering either a 4070 ti or 7900 xt.

Are you sure you set it right?

[Gökyüzü]

Originally posted by Illusion of Progress:

The Ryzen 5 5500 in particular is sort of between Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000 series) and Zen 3 (Ryzen 5000 series). it's not as good as the rest of the Ryzen 5000 series for a number of reasons, so you'll get a small uplift from something like a 5800X3D even in worst case scenarios, and that's before factoring in the extra cores. Not quite as much of an uplift as if you were coming from Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000 series) like I would have thought you might, though. Still probably your best "value" proposition, though.

Newer platforms would of course be a bit faster but cost more relative to how much faster they are. It's an option, though, if you are willing to spend as much.

And higher resolutions (I presume you're referring to 1440p by 2K) are often more GPU reliant, not more CPU reliant. It will actually be the same on the CPU at 1080p, 1440p, or 4K, but since you're less likely to be GPU bottlenecked at lower resolutions, the frame goes higher and you see the CPU become the bottleneck. It's not worth worrying about, it's natural. For example, let's say in game A, at second B, your CPU can do 90 FPS. But you're playing at 4K so you're GPU bottlenecked and you get 75 FPS, because the GPU can only produce that much in second B. You change to 1080p, where the GPU COULD do, let's say 120FPS. But you get 90 FPS because of course that's what the CPU can do at that very second. Again, it's not worth micro-managing which is the bottleneck, and instead focusing on "is this performance good enough for me". But if you're going UP in resolution in the future, then you're more likely to not need as fast of a CPU, so it's the other way around from what you're thinking. If the CPU is okay at 1080p, then it's no worse at 1440p or 4K. the worst you'll get is the same performance as now (but likely lower due to the GPU bottlenecking).

Disclaimer; if you go to an ULTRA-WIDE 1440p and compare it to 16:9 1440p, then yes, the CPU will have to do more (but so will the GPU).

Anyway, it sounds like you're not drowning in disposable income so I'd either consider the 5800X3D, or even just stay with the Ryzen 5 5500 (if you're not bothered by your current performance). Do note that the 5800X3D will warrant considerations on cooling. It is a WARM chip, even under good air cooling. I have mine under a Dark Rock Pro 4 and it still gets very warm at times. Not unexpected, but I wouldn't use anything less than near top end air cooling (like the aforementioned Dark Rock Pro 4, Noctua NH-D14/15, etc.), or good AIO/water cooling. The stock AMD coolers or lower end third party ones wouldn't be good for a 5800X3D IMO, so you'd have to factor in up to another $100 (or a bit less) for cooling.

Okey then im staying with 5500 im gona upgrade my monitor to 1440p first then i might consider for the rest. Thank you for your help

[Gökyüzü]

Originally posted by emoticorpse:

Originally posted by Gökyüzü:

Yes Battlefield 2042 supports dlls but strangely dlls acualy drops my average fps in this game. Something like this never happend to me in any other game so far

hmmm, that doesn't sound right but I never messed with DLSS. Really doesn't sound right, but I am definitely interested in this. Especially because I'm considering either a 4070 ti or 7900 xt.

Are you sure you set it right?

İ can acualy screen share from discord if you have time

[emoticorpse]

Originally posted by Gökyüzü:

Originally posted by emoticorpse:

hmmm, that doesn't sound right but I never messed with DLSS. Really doesn't sound right, but I am definitely interested in this. Especially because I'm considering either a 4070 ti or 7900 xt.

Are you sure you set it right?

İ can acualy screen share from discord if you have time

Shoot, I don't do discord. But aim labs is free? I would like to install it and run it to compare with what you're getting.

I have a 3700x and 2070.

[Illusion of Progress]

Ray tracing (and sometimes, other settings) add to CPU demands and not just GPU demands. So you can likely find a way to play above low and still not drop as many frames.

You'll have to monitor utilization to try and figure out if the frame drops are at times when the GPU is at/near 100%. if so, it's the GPU. If not, it's the CPU. And if it's the CPU, an upgrade may or may not make a substantial enough difference.

[Gökyüzü]

Originally posted by emoticorpse:

Shoot, I don't do discord. But aim labs is free? I would like to install it and run it to compare with what you're getting.

I have a 3700x and 2070.

Yea aimlab doesnt use %100 of your gpu unless you have a something like gtx 950
It wouldn't be healty but i did get around 250-300 with 2060 and now im getting like %10 more :D

[emoticorpse]

Originally posted by Gökyüzü:

Originally posted by emoticorpse:

Shoot, I don't do discord. But aim labs is free? I would like to install it and run it to compare with what you're getting.

I have a 3700x and 2070.

Yea aimlab doesnt use %100 of your gpu unless you have a something like gtx 950
It wouldn't be healty but i did get around 250-300 with 2060 and now im getting like %10 more :D

Yeah, a 10% increase doesn't sound right. I'm installing the game now to test.

Can you run a userbenchmark by going to userbenchmark.com and running the benchmark then when the results page opens copy the link and paste it here?

[Gökyüzü]

Originally posted by emoticorpse:

Originally posted by Gökyüzü:

Yea aimlab doesnt use %100 of your gpu unless you have a something like gtx 950
It wouldn't be healty but i did get around 250-300 with 2060 and now im getting like %10 more :D

Yeah, a 10% increase doesn't sound right. I'm installing the game now to test.

Can you run a userbenchmark by going to userbenchmark.com and running the benchmark then when the results page opens copy the link and paste it here?

My normal results
https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/59852474

I just wanted to see how much i can overclock before artifacts. Im not using overclocked just wanted to see how far i can go.
https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/59751818