BOTTLENECK ISSUE
BOTTLENECK ISSUE
It seems there might be a problem with the system. My laptop runs an i7-6700HQ with turbo boost turned off, which keeps it at 2.6GHz. The GTX 1060 uses full power constantly. A stock 6700HQ is only slightly faster than a 3570K, and a mobile 1060 is about 10% slower than a desktop 1060.
But this is still a matter of perspective.
If you're setting up a 1080p gaming rig, really what extra frames will you require? There will always be a bottleneck. I've tested my 1080ti with various GPUs—8700k, 4790k, and even 3570k—mostly on 4K resolution. I haven’t truly experienced the need for it. In the games I play, BF1 required the 4790k to run smoothly, and it seems the lack of hardware acceleration really affected the 3570k.
If I run benchmarks, I can notice some differences—some areas are better than others.
But cutting the frame rate by about a third would definitely not cause any problems.
Yes, there were times when my 1080ti ran at 70% usage or less, and I didn’t mind.
The fun part is, if I had that PC for 1080p gaming, I’d limit my FPS to match the monitor’s refresh rate. If I had a 60Hz screen, I’d go for around 75fps (not VSync). The CPU/GPU would handle it, and even run at idle sometimes.
The power consumption would drop significantly, and it would be much quieter—though it doesn’t say much these days.
To add what
@RasmusDC emphasized, individuals should cease focusing on avoiding bottlenecks in their setup. The presence of a bottleneck isn't the main concern. If the system meets your needs, it doesn't matter whether a bottleneck exists. You might wonder why you didn't choose a more balanced graphics card, but if you later decide to upgrade other components, you'll have to replace the graphics card again to achieve better performance. A Pentium and a GT 1030 are considered balanced, yet not optimal.
Focus on obtaining the desired performance first, then address bottlenecks only when necessary.