- Nov 26, 2015
- 21
- 0
- 0
I know this might be a weird question since it's usually the other way around, but I was wondering if a high-end GPU could choke a low-end CPU since we know the inverse is true?
For example, I have an R9 290X with a G3258 CPU overclocked to 4.0GHz. While playing Shadow of Mordor, occasionally (more often than I'd like to be honest) the CPU usage will spike to 100% and I will get stuttering. Otherwise, it runs at 55-60 FPS most of the time with my CPU load around 85-95%
However, I was looking at other people's gameplay, and on some people's machines, they would be running an R9 270 with the G3258 at stock speeds - 3.2 GHz - and they would not get any stuttering or CPU spikes. However, their FPS was also around 35-40 most of the time with CPU load of 60-70%.
So, do lower-en GPUs give more consistent performance at the cost of total performance when it comes to low-end CPUs even when the game is at comparable settings?
This is mostly out of curiosity.
For example, I have an R9 290X with a G3258 CPU overclocked to 4.0GHz. While playing Shadow of Mordor, occasionally (more often than I'd like to be honest) the CPU usage will spike to 100% and I will get stuttering. Otherwise, it runs at 55-60 FPS most of the time with my CPU load around 85-95%
However, I was looking at other people's gameplay, and on some people's machines, they would be running an R9 270 with the G3258 at stock speeds - 3.2 GHz - and they would not get any stuttering or CPU spikes. However, their FPS was also around 35-40 most of the time with CPU load of 60-70%.
So, do lower-en GPUs give more consistent performance at the cost of total performance when it comes to low-end CPUs even when the game is at comparable settings?
This is mostly out of curiosity.
Last edited: