[Celeras]

Simple yes/no question pertaining to gaming. Standard resolutions, lets say 1080p just for consistency.

In terms of CPU/GPU, specifics irrelevant. You have a rig in which your GPU usage is pinned at 99% max load. Will you ever gain noticeable framerates by upgrading your CPU?

(yes, I asked this in the processor forum last week, but was unaware how terribad that section was and received a whopping 8 votes to date.. so reposting!)

[edit]

I look at it this way: CPU is a conveyor belt, and the GPU is a mechanical painting arm(lol). The CPU cranks 50 blank canvas on its belt per second, and the GPU is capable of painting 50 per second. Up that belt speed to say 100 canvas/sec, and the arm can still only paint 50.. you won't see any increase in productivity.

Pretty obvious what side I'm on. My friend then makes the argument that theres a third factor: the canvas are rotating on a pivot while going down the belt. And upgrading the belt to slow down the spin prevents the GPU from having to steady it before it paints.. so it slightly increases productivity despite arm not increasing its load.

Or, to simplify our ******ed analogy: its not just CPU/GPU(my view), and there are some processes that require both to work together. So even a max loaded GPU can benefit from a faster CPU (his view), to which I would counter that is not major principle of performance. Round and round we go~

Hence the poll

 

[Epitope]

I say no. Maybe 2 or 3 FPS max. I think it's possible to gain a slight improvement but nothing substantial or even really noticeable.

 

[AblueXKRS]

Nope. If your GPU is maxed, adding power to your CPU makes negative sense.

 

[Traches]

Depends on the game. FSX for example is poorly written and very CPU intensive.

 

[joemaniaci]

I wouldn't be surprised if it is one of those things that depends on the game. That 99% load could just as well be the gpu fetching data from the cpu and waiting.

 

[Princess Garnet]

It might help with minimum frame rates as well, meaning that while your frame rate won't increase across the board or see a higher maximum, it might be more smooth/balanced.

 

[Chuckclc]

I myself kinda wonder bout this. While running a GTA IV benchmark I noticed video memory was 99% but cpu usage was only 53%. Guess thats not necessarily gpu usage but still.

 

[Kvjavs]

I only voted yes because it depends on the game, such as someone else said.

If I said no, then I'd be lying.

 

[mib2347]

I've been thinking about this for a while, mainly because I see a lot of people that upgrade to SB and wonder why they just don't spend that money on a better GPU. Obviously for gaming that would be a better choice, but I guess not everyone just games on their PC's

 

[Bal3Wolf]

Yes and No its not a real clear answer lower res require more usage from the cpu compared to much higher ones where the gpus are taxed alot more. While its not a game but a benchmark is 3dmark06 its very dependt on the cpu heck my trifire with a i7 only got 28k but iv seen 470s in sli with a sandy get 30k.

 

[Celeras]

I look at it this way: CPU is a conveyor belt, and the GPU is a mechanical painting arm(lol). The CPU cranks 50 blank canvas on its belt per second, and the GPU is capable of painting 50 per second. Up that belt speed to say 100 canvas/sec, and the arm can still only paint 50.. you won't see any increase in productivity.

Pretty obvious what side I'm on. My friend then makes the argument that theres a third factor: the canvas are rotating on a pivot while going down the belt. And upgrading the belt to slow down the spin prevents the GPU from having to steady it before it paints.. so it slightly increases productivity despite arm not increasing its load.

Or, to simplify our ******ed analogy: its not just CPU/GPU(my view), and there are some processes that require both to work together. So even a max loaded GPU can benefit from a faster CPU (his view), to which I would counter that is not major principle of performance. Round and round we go~

Hence the poll

 

[nelson]

sensible answer = no

 

[Traches]

I believe this thread is desperately in need of somebody who actually knows what they are talking about.

 

[Awaz]

This is very situational. But I voted 'no' with the assumption that we are talking about decent games and at 1080p resolution. And assuming your CPU is keeping your high end GPU happy. For example, I am running a i5-750 with two 6950 on crossfire. My GPUs get fed adequately by the CPU. I am 99.99% positive if I go with a i5-2500K or 2600K, I will not get any increase in FPS on decent games. Synthetic benchmarks is whole different ball of wax as they do test CPU separately.

This reminds me of a comment someone made a long long time ago about CPU cores. I think this applies here too. CPU cores are like hot girls gone wild in a swimming pool. You do not know what you gonna do with more, but you will not say no to them.

 

[Draygonn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Celeras;13019856
In terms of CPU/GPU, specifics irrelevant. You have a rig in which your GPU usage is pinned at 99% max load. Will you ever gain noticeable framerates by upgrading your CPU?

In CPU intensive games yes. However, if the GPU is getting 99% load it won't be helped by a faster CPU in that game.

 

[Quantum Reality]

I used to believe CPU bottlenecking didn't exist until I swapped out two 8800GTs for two 9800GTX+'s on an Athlon X2 5000+.

No change.

Once I got an X2 250, then things started to kick ass.

 

[Citra]

Probaly not, unless the game is very CPU dependent.

 

[MetalBeerSolid]

Yes, in Crysis. If your GPU is at 99% you can still get higher frame rates with a faster (not more cores) CPU.

 

[Segovax]

Depends on the game, but yes you would gain a measure of performance depending on the game. How much is subjective.

 

[microman]

i am a little shocked here... there is only one answer here and its YES. I cant imagine someone thinking it wouldnt make a difference. Lets say you have a 775 board and it has a P4 in it and you upgrade to a QX9650, your gonna tell me you arent gonna see a MASSIVE fps increase? If you say that then me thinks you might not be too bright.