>>55142296
No

>>55142298
More on that: Literally no cpu made in last 10 years will bottleneck any gpu ever. Thats not how computers work. If your games are lagging it is not because your cpu is bottlenecking your gpu, but simply because your cpu is not good enough to run the game.

Heya op. I have an 8320 and a 970 since Christmas. I've already bottlenecked my cpu a few times. Only on intensive games like Sleeping Dogs though. I advise going intel, as much as I hate it. AMD really does just up the temps n shit for better results. (Even though they're usually not much better, if anywhere close) I'm also not looking for argument's, just helping op with personal experience.

>>55142313
>because your cpu is not good enough to run the game
therefor bottlenecking the maximum perfocmance the GPU could have provided

>>55142363
Note, I also believe the 1080 will outperform any cpu as the above said. It will never be your bottleneck.

>>55142296
As always, it depends on the game. Some it will, some it won't. Poorly-coded pieces of shit like Dark Souls III that rely heavily on a single thread will struggle, but most won't.

>>55142313
Retard.

>>55142313
O. i thought that since say a amd 5350 paired up with a gtx 980 it wouldnt be able to use all of its power due to the cpu not having enough horsepower to keep up with the gpu thus creating studdering and lower fps.
>>55142363
thanks. i aleready have the fx 8350 just wanted to know. i dont thnk ill go intel any time soon. ill just try to go for a 4.8 ghz orverclock to see if it will help.

>>55142381
No faggot it wont do that in anything but games. You can mine bitcoins with a shitty cpu and gtx 1080ti and it will perform without any loss of performance.

>>55142420
no one said shit about mining. no one mines on consumer hardware you cuck. get a fucking dedicated mining machine if you are gona mine.

>>55142441
go to >>>/v/ if youre going to talk about gaming

>>55142475
i didnt say gaming either you nigger. i didnt mention anything i was speaking in general.

>>55142475
To be fair, you were the one mentioning gaming

>>55142313
this is misleading. CPUs absolutely can bottleneck GPUs. Once a GPU has processed some information, say geometry or textures, it will reply to the CPU asking for more data for the next frame (presuming the VRAM is saturated or expended or the content is not relevant to the next frame) so the CPU will respond by asking the storage (HDD, SSD, etc) for the next relevant data. One retrieved by the storage, the CPU will distribute it to the GPU. It works like a traffic cop telling who to drive when and where.

It's not uncommon to see a CPU bottlenecking an application, however an 8-core CPU with decent clock speed and IPC will not generally have this result.

If you're curious for more information on CPU bottlenecks, when/where they typically occur, I would direct you to some youtube benchmarking content involving video games @ 4k. One frequent result you'll see is that while a GPU is capable of drawing 4k@60hz, it will often require a CPU be constantly providing it with new, updated information. It will also require the CPU to be aware of the processes/changes being made. Some CPUs simply can't keep up.

OP's CPU should do fine for most situations.

Here's an example of CPU bottlenecking in play.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9EJNa0y524

>>55142296
Eh, some games yes, most no. If you're going to spend all that money, upgrade your mobo/CPU after Zen releases later this year.

>>55142313
>how computers work
Either you don't know how computers work or you suck at explaining yourself. Otherwise nice b8 m8

>>55142363
OC your 8320, also Zen will shake up the CPU market

>>55142382
Most games are GPU limited. You'd have to SLI the 1080 to start bottlenecking most CPUs

>>55142504
>i didn't say gaming either you nigger. i didn't mention anything i was speaking in general.
I didn't mention anything about generals, you fag.
Take your military fetish to /k/