Pretty easy explanation. Youre playing on 4K. At that resolution, the GPU is almost always the bottleneck, not the CPU. The higher the resolution, the less impact a faster CPU has on overall performance because the graphics card has to push millions of pixels every frame.

Looking at your PassMark results, your Ryzen 7 7800X3D is extremely fast for CPU-heavy tasks it just won’t make a huge difference in gaming at 4K compared to an older CPU like your i7-7700K, especially with a powerful GPU like the RX 9070 XT. Where you would see the difference is at lower resolutions (1080p, 1440p), in CPU-heavy titles or in tasks like compiling code, rendering, or simulations.

It's far faster than a 7700k and cannot really be compared, what games are you playing as it should be pretty obvious by looking at the fps.

Originally posted by Schrute_Farms_B&B:

Pretty easy explanation. Youre playing on 4K. At that resolution, the GPU is almost always the bottleneck, not the CPU. The higher the resolution, the less impact a faster CPU has on overall performance because the graphics card has to push millions of pixels every frame.

Looking at your PassMark results, your Ryzen 7 7800X3D is extremely fast for CPU-heavy tasks it just won’t make a huge difference in gaming at 4K compared to an older CPU like your i7-7700K, especially with a powerful GPU like the RX 9070 XT. Where you would see the difference is at lower resolutions (1080p, 1440p), in CPU-heavy titles or in tasks like compiling code, rendering, or simulations.

The 7700k would be severely bottlenecking a modern gpu, even at 4k, though, id not be playing new demanding games at 4k on a 9070xt, especially without fsr.

Though a 60Hz screen is going to limit what benefit you feel, is it atleast a 'gaming' 4k 60Hz screen, as I'm guessing it's pretty old, so, it's likely not doing you many favours either with a slow response time etc.

Originally posted by Monk:

It's far faster than a 7700k and cannot really be compared, what games are you playing as it should be pretty obvious by looking at the fps.

That's the only difference I see is the higher fps in warzone.

Originally posted by Schrute_Farms_B&B:

Pretty easy explanation. Youre playing on 4K. At that resolution, the GPU is almost always the bottleneck, not the CPU. The higher the resolution, the less impact a faster CPU has on overall performance because the graphics card has to push millions of pixels every frame.

Looking at your PassMark results, your Ryzen 7 7800X3D is extremely fast for CPU-heavy tasks it just won’t make a huge difference in gaming at 4K compared to an older CPU like your i7-7700K, especially with a powerful GPU like the RX 9070 XT. Where you would see the difference is at lower resolutions (1080p, 1440p), in CPU-heavy titles or in tasks like compiling code, rendering, or simulations.

I'm actually not playing at 4k res. I play at 1440p. I'm thinking passmark shows that as it's the tv's native res.

Originally posted by Monk:

The 7700k would be severely bottlenecking a modern gpu, even at 4k, though, id not be playing new demanding games at 4k on a 9070xt, especially without fsr.

Though a 60Hz screen is going to limit what benefit you feel, is it atleast a 'gaming' 4k 60Hz screen, as I'm guessing it's pretty old, so, it's likely not doing you many favours either with a slow response time etc.

The 7700k was with an RX 6600 XT.
I am currently using FSR 4 in warzone at around 150+ fps at 1440p.

Originally posted by Monk:

Originally posted by Schrute_Farms_B&B:

Pretty easy explanation. Youre playing on 4K. At that resolution, the GPU is almost always the bottleneck, not the CPU. The higher the resolution, the less impact a faster CPU has on overall performance because the graphics card has to push millions of pixels every frame.

Looking at your PassMark results, your Ryzen 7 7800X3D is extremely fast for CPU-heavy tasks it just won’t make a huge difference in gaming at 4K compared to an older CPU like your i7-7700K, especially with a powerful GPU like the RX 9070 XT. Where you would see the difference is at lower resolutions (1080p, 1440p), in CPU-heavy titles or in tasks like compiling code, rendering, or simulations.

The 7700k would be severely bottlenecking a modern gpu, even at 4k, though, id not be playing new demanding games at 4k on a 9070xt, especially without fsr.

Though a 60Hz screen is going to limit what benefit you feel, is it atleast a 'gaming' 4k 60Hz screen, as I'm guessing it's pretty old, so, it's likely not doing you many favours either with a slow response time etc.

Sure, it’s an super old CPU, and in really CPU heavy scenarios it could and will limit the GPU, but at 4K the GPU is almost always the bottleneck even with a 7700K , especially with a card like the 9070 XT. But like I said, it depends on the game. The 7800X3D is way faster for CPU-heavy tasks and plays in another league, but in 4K gaming the difference compared to the 7700K is usually pretty small because the GPU is doing most of the work. But I guess youd get a few FPS more here and there and much better lows.

What’s true though, if you’re running a 60 Hz monitor, you won’t actually see more than ~60 FPS no matter what CPU or GPU you have. Plus, older 4K monitors often have higher input lag and slower response times, which can further limit your experience.

So basically, at 4K/60 Hz, the difference between the 7700K and 7800X3D in most modern games is pretty minor. unless you are playing MSFS or Star Citizen. You’d really notice the Ryzen more if you were playing at lower resolutions, going for higher framerates, or running CPU-intensive titles.

Originally posted by L.o.D.:

Originally posted by Schrute_Farms_B&B:

Pretty easy explanation. Youre playing on 4K. At that resolution, the GPU is almost always the bottleneck, not the CPU. The higher the resolution, the less impact a faster CPU has on overall performance because the graphics card has to push millions of pixels every frame.

Looking at your PassMark results, your Ryzen 7 7800X3D is extremely fast for CPU-heavy tasks it just won’t make a huge difference in gaming at 4K compared to an older CPU like your i7-7700K, especially with a powerful GPU like the RX 9070 XT. Where you would see the difference is at lower resolutions (1080p, 1440p), in CPU-heavy titles or in tasks like compiling code, rendering, or simulations.

I'm actually not playing at 4k res. I play at 2460x 1444. I'm thinking passmark shows that as it's the tv's native res.

2560×1440, you mean?
That’s 1440p, and at that resolution you should definitely notice a big difference between your old CPU and the new one. Of course, it also depends on the game, something lightweight like Stardew Valley or Plants vs. Zombies probably won’t show much of a difference ^^, but for modern AAA titles or CPU-heavy games, the Ryzen will pull ahead noticeably.

Originally posted by L.o.D.:

I'm actually not playing at 4k res. I play at 1440p. I'm thinking passmark shows that as it's the tv's native res.

I don't think they ever made 1440P TV's?

Originally posted by wing0zero:

Originally posted by L.o.D.:

I'm actually not playing at 4k res. I play at 1440p. I'm thinking passmark shows that as it's the tv's native res.

I don't think they ever made 1440P TV's?

2560x1440 is what I am referring to in warzone.

Originally posted by Schrute_Farms_B&B:

Originally posted by L.o.D.:

I'm actually not playing at 4k res. I play at 2460x 1444. I'm thinking passmark shows that as it's the tv's native res.

2560×1440, you mean?
That’s 1440p, and at that resolution you should definitely notice a big difference between your old CPU and the new one. Of course, it also depends on the game, something lightweight like Stardew Valley or Plants vs. Zombies probably won’t show much of a difference ^^, but for modern AAA titles or CPU-heavy games, the Ryzen will pull ahead noticeably.

I only play warzone atm and the fps without frame gen on, I get around 150 to 200 fps.

Need to update as I checked my res and I am actually playing at 3840x2160@150+ fps.

Originally posted by L.o.D.:

Originally posted by Monk:

It's far faster than a 7700k and cannot really be compared, what games are you playing as it should be pretty obvious by looking at the fps.

That's the only difference I see is the higher fps in warzone.

I mean, what more were you expecting other than better fps?

Though on a 60Hz TV, you are dealing with very high input latency and awful response times from the screen regardless of what fps you are getting from the system, the experience isn't going to be a good one.

you need more than 200fps because....

Originally posted by Takoyaki:

you need more than 200fps because....

Exactly!

Originally posted by Monk:

I mean, what more were you expecting other than better fps?

Though on a 60Hz TV, you are dealing with very high input latency and awful response times from the screen regardless of what fps you are getting from the system, the experience isn't going to be a good one.

I thought the system would be more snappier overall, not just differences in gaming.
I haven't had a bad experience with this system, so am unsure why you think it wouldn't be good?
The only "bad" experience I get is trying to fight an aim assist user in CQC. Doesn't always work out for me.