No. At 1080p the GeForce GTX 1060 6GB is the slower part by about 60.1%, so the Ryzen 5 1600 has spare capacity. That is the normal way round for a gaming PC.
GPU limited. The CPU has spare power
The graphics card is the limit by about 60.1%. That is normal and fine for gaming; a faster CPU would add nothing.
| Resolution | Result | Limit |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | GPU limited. The CPU has spare power | 60.1% gpu |
| 1440p | GPU limited. The CPU has spare power | 70.4% gpu |
| 4K | GPU limited. The CPU has spare power | 81.9% gpu |
The processor launched at $219 and the card at $249, so the card cost 1.1 times as much. At 1080p this pairing is limited by the graphics card by about 60.1%. At 1440p it is limited by the graphics card by about 70.4%, and at 4K limited by the graphics card by about 81.9%. The graphics card scores 9.5 on our index and the processor 28.
The processor has 60.1% spare capacity at 1080p, so a faster one would change nothing. More frames have to come from the graphics card, and the GeForce GTX 1650 Super (index 10) is the next step in our list.
For comparison, with the more powerful GeForce GTX 1650 Super the 1080p result would be limited by the graphics card by about 58%, and with the less powerful GeForce GTX 970 the 1080p result would be limited by the graphics card by about 62.2%.
No. At 1080p the GeForce GTX 1060 6GB is the slower part by about 60.1%, so the Ryzen 5 1600 has spare capacity. That is the normal way round for a gaming PC.
No. At 1440p the GeForce GTX 1060 6GB is the slower part by about 70.4%, so the Ryzen 5 1600 has spare capacity. That is the normal way round for a gaming PC.
No. At 4K the GeForce GTX 1060 6GB is the slower part by about 81.9%, so the Ryzen 5 1600 has spare capacity. That is the normal way round for a gaming PC. Higher resolutions put more load on the graphics card, so the processor matters less.
Updated October 3, 2026