Steam installeren
inloggen
|
taal
简体中文 (Chinees, vereenvoudigd)
繁體中文 (Chinees, traditioneel)
日本語 (Japans)
한국어 (Koreaans)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgaars)
Čeština (Tsjechisch)
Dansk (Deens)
Deutsch (Duits)
English (Engels)
Español-España (Spaans - Spanje)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spaans - Latijns-Amerika)
Ελληνικά (Grieks)
Français (Frans)
Italiano (Italiaans)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesisch)
Magyar (Hongaars)
Norsk (Noors)
Polski (Pools)
Português (Portugees - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Braziliaans-Portugees)
Română (Roemeens)
Русский (Russisch)
Suomi (Fins)
Svenska (Zweeds)
Türkçe (Turks)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamees)
Українська (Oekraïens)
Een vertaalprobleem melden
2. Utterly noncredible. And I am not talking about specific bottleneck calcs, but all of them.
abit hot (but totally within spec) you really just don't want 90-100c
generally speaking it's better to have gpu usage at 100% vs having cpu usage at
100%, but that's just because a gpu is alot easier to upgrade over a cpu.
also
tons and tons of games ether hardly use or straight up don't use hyperthreading.
some games wont even use all cores, only a portion
others can use everything your cpu has to offer
it depends on the game or application.
some games wont be able to utilize everything you're cpu has
ready or not may only be a quad threaded game
making the other 4 cores you have useless for the game itself
2. i don't really have any idea's as it's almost always easier to
just youtube "X GPU and X CPU on X game"
30% rather much.
https://www.cpuagent.com/build-compare/intel-core-i7-9700k-vs-intel-core-i9-14900k/summary/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-vs-nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti?res=2-vs-2&quality=ultra-vs-ultra&ram=32-vs-32&ramspeed=4000-vs-3800
6.3% i think thats a low estimate.
if your cpu is 100% used when gaming (or 1 core is as most games wont use all cores) while your gpu is not 100% used.. you can be sure its your cpu limiting fps.
same with gpu and ram.
the part thats used 100% thats the bottleneck.. so just look or monitor during gaming what happens to your system.
those calculators will be tested on speciffic games the ones you play are different. also more rare models like very high end cpus that few users pick the 1000+ euro ones.. tend to be miscakculated more than very common models.. sample size is certainly an issue.
but if multiple calculators say you have a cpu bottleneck only disagreeing by how much.. you likely do have one.
to see if the cpu is bottlenecking, lower res and/or visual settings with vsync off
if the fps does not go up, then the cpu is most likely holding it back
you cannot look at cpu usage, or even core usage, most games do not need all the available cores, and windows does a good job at leveling core loads, games will rarely max a single core
there is no 'balance'
if there was no bottleneck (anywhere) fps would be infinite, with vsync off, each sub pixel would be from its own complete frame
ht is 2 cores sharing a single fpu
like 2 workers at a desk sharing a calculator
they can do similar tasks better, any calcs done are saved in cache, if both workers are doing similar stuff, many times the results from one operation make the other not need to use the calc
Games like The Finals can eat up almost 100% cpu usage and only getting 100fps at 1440p low.
Im just picky with fps though and majority of AAA titles will run fine with a 9700k but you will get more fps and better 1% lows with a faster cpu.
I wouldnt trust any online 'calculators'. Best thing you can do is find a youtube channel or reviewer who has consistent testing method and have data and benchmarks of many combinations of components. Like how I use it to compare 7800x3d vs 13900k vs 5800x3d vs 9700k etc and I can see Id get almost 2x the fps in CS2 just by changing my cpu