Yo j Define our six in white, I think.

Five or six and white.

Okay, okay, it's in our six, but it's not new.

In fact, it's not even all white.

I mean, what's with the black front?

Really?

Coming from the guy with the black and white car black hood that's different.

It's the same.

That's not the same exact same thing.

Not distant fine changes that how, with custom ran from slick wraps, front panel whole case, whatever you want and custom designs, that's right.

We do.

Do that video about the custom wrapped our six.

Choose any of their existing designs or customize your own uploaded and they'll make it for you.

See, wow, you really can make things custom with reps.

Today we're gonna talk specifically about bottle necking, a topic we haven't really covered on this channel in quite a long time.

My opinion and my reason behind that not being as much of an issue as it used to be, is the competition that's taken place in the CPI space since a M D launched risin has cost CP manufactures, namely Intel to really have to catch up in terms of what a M.

D is offering.

We talk about over clickable si, pues more cores, more threads, games.

It started becoming more multi threading friendly, which means that the CPU itself has been less of an issue, as it was back in like the early 2000 ten's, when FX was still the deal four core a thread was the maxim get on mainstream.

But we're gonna do today is we're gonna go ahead and show you kind of an extreme example of what bottle necking really looks like.

And then we're gonna kind of like to knit out basically to kind of show you where that sweet spot really is.

Now, you can actually try this at home with their own CP if you guys want to.

If you're running an Intel based sleep you anyway, I don't know if AMG has as useful of a tool, but this is actually the Intel extreme tuning utility or X to you.

You can download this.

It's free.

And if you have over clocking CPU, it will let you do anything that you want to it pretty much.

And then if you don't I don't know what suddenly a light to do.

I think you can play with the ratio and bring it down.

I just don't think you can over clock.

But anyway, this is an 8700 K that what we've done so far.

As you can see, we have to act.

Of course, because we turned it into basically a 71 100 now, yes, I know the cash values are different.

Yes, I know the cash frequency and all that stuff is different.

This is not intended to be like Here's how performances on a 71 181 100 in 83.

But that's not what we're doing today.

We're showing you examples.

What?

But I'm liking looks like in a real case scenario with real game and stuff.

So what we're doing is we're obviously starting on the very opposite end of the spectrum is bottlenecked as we think we can get to show you what it looks like in its definitive form with a 28 e t.

I on her test bench.

So obviously you should never Paris 7100 toe a 28 e d I.

That's guaranteed to bottleneck, which is exactly what we're doing here today.

So this is just kind of our extreme test right here.

So we're also gonna have inside afterburner open.

We are gonna be running a slight over clock on our graphics card, because again, we're trying to get these two as far away from each other as possible.

And then we're gonna be actually using shadow of the Tomb Raider because it has really good tools built into their benchmark to show us things like frame timing, CPU timing, lots of different it even show us what percentage of GPU bound we are.

So obviously you see CPU 1234 here because again, two cores, four threads because we have hyper threading enabled.

We also have our settings that said to highest right now, which is kind of unfair for this test a little bit because of the fact that if we really wanted to see a CPU bound test where we're bottle necking, we'd want to have less post processing filters going and for hire frame rates, which would push our CPU even harder.

But for the sake of this test, we are just leaving everything next we could see right now, with the test running left bouncing between 95 100% utilization on the CPU.

And because of that RG pew, utilization is extremely low, even in 10 80 p.

R.

F.

P s is only sitting in the fifties with a 28 e t i c.

We hit 100 on all of them for a second there, but our GP was spending a lot of time just waiting for the CPU.

And that's indicative by these high spikes where suddenly the PS will climb a little bit and then come back down.

But you can kind of see a median line sort of drawn through the middle.

We're starting dip right there down to 40 is obviously as we dip, so does our dreams.

Our GP utilization.

All right, So as you can see right here, it's not fully rendered cause watch this flickering there.

And then we're gonna see a big pop for the mountain.

Come in.

There it is.

There's the rest of the scene.

So that's an example of one thing that happens with an under specs, eep you versus the games minimum specs, which is clearly not a good thing.

Seeing that popping in like that.

But once again, our GPU, till it's all the way down to the thirties are core.

Clock has even suffered because obviously, it's not gonna ramp up the core clock if it's not even being utilized.

So this scene is only being writer with 1350 megahertz with the GPU because the CPU is absolutely 100% peg.

So the reason why we used this particular benchmark for this video is because you can see we get a lot of information, including a graph.

So this is our GPU graph G PCP relative graph here.

So, as you can see, the CPU has taken much longer to do things in the GPU is.

But if this orange line was above the green Line, this could be an instance of where you have a very fast keep you with a very slow jeep.

You, where the GP was then with the CPU, is waiting on to be able to get the next team in the next frame ready so we could see her here a GP bound 0% and that's ah, that's kind of a problem.

So we all seriously saw to that are CPU was pretty much maxed out during that test because we're going to do now.

I'm gonna change the CPU now, too, from theoretically a 71 102 and 8100.

Which means now we're gonna get rid of hyper threading.

We're gonna enable two more course with four physical cores.

But instead of having it running at 3.9, which is the next speed for these chips, remember, they have No, they have no turbo clock on those models.

We're gonna reduce it down to 3.6 because that's what the 8100 is.

All right?

So Test Two, we have it running at 3600 megahertz or 3.6 gigahertz, with four active cores, no hyper threading, and our cash ratio is set to match.

We're gonna run the exact same test, all the same settings as you can see here.

The graphics are all set to highest.

Same sort of thing on the menu, though, but you'll notice instead of pegging up in the nineties, we'd go down to the seventies for a little bit.

So we're gonna look at initially when we start.

This test is what happens on the initial utilization of the graphics card as well as the CPU.

All right, so the initial test, we're sitting in the nineties, obviously, still one core hit it 100 that hundreds gonna bounce around.

But utilization came up significantly.

Member.

It was sitting in the fifties initially and then drop down to the thirties.

Well, now we hit the sixties and drop down into the forties in terms of utilization on the GPU, Still seeing 100% on the chorus bouncing around.

So obviously, we're still seeing, uh, the CPU cause about Electra GPU because we want this number to be at least 85 to 90% or higher if we see this go up into the nineties and we know the GPU is now we're bound by because GPU is being utilized to its full capacity or full potential.

But if this number is sitting this low, that is what a bottleneck is.

And that's what we're trying to avoid.

So by doing nothing more than switching from hyper threatening to four physical cores emulating an ice 7 80 earned by 3 8100 while I 7 81 100 would be That would be an interesting CPU.

But I digress.

We've gone up from 72 to 88 and as you can see right here, GP bound is still 0%.

But we're getting we got close, but what you're gonna notice is both charges the whole moved down because of the timing it took because these were measured in milliseconds.

This is the time for it to do the task.

And as you can see, everything just slid down on that chart.

So that's obviously an improvement.

But we still are clearly gonna be bottlenecks.

Although in the menu we went from 70 ish, 78% like 93 which is crazy because the menu does indeed render the game in the background.

So we're gonna do now is I want to see what happens now if we just give it a crap ton, Of course, Speed.

So we're going over clock this to 5.2 gigahertz, and we're going to see what happens to that.

F.

P s by having the same core count the same cash, the same ah, number of threads, obviously, and the same CPU settings, the state or the same GPU settings were still the same over clock going on are 20 t I and see how much more we gained by over clocking.

So here's what we did.

We over clocked it to 5.2 gigahertz, with a 50 ratio on the cash.

That's not something that exists.

It's not something that you can even try to do with your own 8100 because a member of the loch to CPU.

So that's why we use SI pues like 8700 k and then no.

900 k to do our emulation or emulating of other si pues because we can take it and dial it to where we want to see what theoretical performances, like at different frequencies that you couldn't otherwise Dubai just popping in 8100.

So although the cash amount is a little bit different, I don't believe that is enough difference between the sea pews to invalidate our test.

Like I said, the start, though, this is all theoretical to show you what bottle necking looks like.

It's not meant to be an exact representation of the CPU that we're trying to emulate.

So I dropped down into the fifties and sixties at the start here, did started about 71 up to 81 then came down as this test is happening.

But look, we're seeing a lot less of the 100 pegged.

There's one.

Um, it's still pretty high, obviously.

And still clearly bottlenecked.

Even running at 5.2 gigahertz on this one test, you can tell to the DPP Look.

Oh, cool.

It's running.

Check this out.

So we went to GP Bound 2% which is right down here where I said it was gonna potentially happen.

Um, again, Everything moved down to the max chart before was 30 milliseconds.

Now it's 20.

So you could see things are getting faster specifically because of the CPU.

But we went up from 88 Tow 105 on our average frames per second.

And then you can compare obviously down here on the bottom with the mid max and all that was but the it really did improve, obviously, but we are still clearly overall bottle necking.

Our jeep.

You.

So the issue here is that if you were running something like a 20 t i and put it on a C.

P like this then there's a whole lot of performance that you paid for that you're not getting.

So we're gonna do now is we're gonna go ahead and unlock the CPU and go normal 8700 k 85 gigahertz.

And we're gonna see theoretically what the performance looks like with the GPU bound looks like with not introducing any sort of bottleneck at all.

And what you're going to see right now is that our C P utilization is gonna stay fairly low on GPU.

Should jump up into the nineties.

Oh, drop down to 82 gets nowhere bottle necking.

But, you know, look at our CPU.

It's not so It's possible, too, that this engine is just not using an entire 20 t i in terms of utilization.

But this is still considered good, you tell, because our CPU, as you can see, is not pegging on any of the course.

One of the reasons why we're not actually doing like a 14 40 Pierre Fourcade test is because, um, if we're talking about bottle necking and those that are running low NC pews, I think it's extremely rare that you're gonna find someone running a 71 100 or in 8100 with a four K panel, possibly a 14 40.

But if you guys want to do another video where we test very similar type deals and see a resolution effects various CPU speeds, that makes you guys comment down below that you want to make that video, we'll do it already.

I get this one I like.

And our average went up to 121 F.

P s.

We gained from 105 toe, 1 21 unlocking all, obviously all of our cores.

So I bet you anything if we're in a 99 100 K or another CPU with more threads, we'd probably see even hire a P s with the same GP says we're going to Now we're gonna pop in a 16 60 which is a much more mid range graphics card with the same low NC pews, and we're gonna see exactly how it compared.

We're gonna spare you guys going through.

All the tests were just gonna show you all the charts of the end.

Alright, here we go.

99% GP bound with 16 60 on the fully unlocked 87 indicate over clocked.

But you could tell that we're gp about because if you look right here in our frame rendering times, you can see that our GP was higher than the CP one.

Everything.

So the CPU, I was like, Hey, here's your friend.

Do what you need to do to it and we're ready for the next one.

Come on.

Are you ready for us?

So the CPU was literally waiting on the GPU, which is 100% non bottlenecks in this case.

So as you saw the 20 t, I is obviously a bad pairing for Lo N.

C.

P is because there's a lot of performance would be paying for in here that you're not necessarily getting, at least with this one title.

I mean, there's there's so many different variations that we could we could have chosen any CPU where to be rising or Intel.