What Monitor for 980 Ti?

[jaayquan]

What's Up?

It was time for an upgrade on my system (i7-3960x 330HGz/16 gb ram) so I bought a GTX 980 Ti which is en-route. I'm thinking about pairing a new monitor with it and would appreciate hearing some of your knowledgeable opinions. In answer to "It depends" here's my use-case:

I play MMOs, RTS and RPGs mainly. Just a little FPS from time to time. Not competitive. Just finished Dragon Age Inquisition and am currently playing Witcher 3. Will start Batman Akrham when it's released.

I really want something 4K in the 28 - 30 inch range. I do want to be able to crank the resolution and effects to max if possible as I really enjoy the eye candy. I've looked at the ASUS RoG Swift (Not 4K) and Acer XB280HK.

One particular question and I'll end. Do I really need G-Sync with this card? Incidentally I have the SC+ w/ACX BP variation. One would think that the card is beefy enough for my application. Would one be wrong?

Thanks in advance Guys!

 

[Grooveriding]

You need 2 cards for 4K, even then you won't be able to crank settings in every game like you want to. While you can certainly game at 4K with the one card, you'll need to turn settings down. For a single 980ti a 1440p monitor is probably a good spot where you can still turn all the settings up in almost every game, but even at that resolution there are games where one card will not be enough for that.

 

[xthetenth]

It is probably worth noting that a monitor will last through multiple GPUs. However, since you can't get high framerates and 4k at the same time, a high end 1440p with the capability to deal with progressively higher framerates as you upgrade might suit your desire for all the shinies now while allowing room for upgrades to be worthwhile.

 

[zigen]

I'm in the same situation as you. Planning on upgrading to a 980 Ti or AMD Fury (if it's good and cheaper). Also we mostly play the same type of games as well.

However, I'm set on getting a 34" Ultrawide monitor for myself. I feel that RPG's would be best experienced in 21:9. Gsync/Freesync would be a nice bonus too.

My only issue is that I can't decide on whether I should get a 34" 2560x1080 or 3440x1440 monitor. I also love my eyecandy so I'm leaning towards 1440 but also I don't want to play at around 45-50ish FPS, that's why I'm also considering 1080p.

 

[xthetenth]

I'm a huge fan of 3440x1440 for anything other than gaming if that matters to you.

 

[myocardia]

...

 

[Pantlegz]

In case you weren't aware of it, gaming at 4k with medium/medium-high settings completely blows away 1080P at super duper ultra plus settings, in image quality. Also, no company makes a G-sync 4k monitor yet.

Doesn't Asus have a 4k ROG monitor coming out this summer that has some sort of adaptive sync?

I've been looking for a good video card for my 144hz 1440p monitor and it seems that maxing out the framerate is going to be tough at that res let alone 4k. From my stance in looking into monitors/GPU's for the last month or so I'd say we're in a shitty place to upgrade either. GPU's can't keep up with high end monitors(either 1440p or 4k) and there are no true high end 4k monitors, yet.

What I decided on was a high refresh rate, high end 1440p monitor over middle of the road 4k monitors for about the same price. Aside from nothing really being able to drive 4k, I found out that higher refresh is better for gaming than higher resolution (I had a 4k monitor for about a week before it started ghosting). Honestly I think 1440p at 120+hz looks better than 4k at 60, if you're able to maintain 60fps.

And finally, if you're looking at either 1440p or 4k I would very much recommend gsync, my experience with it has been very good. While I normally hit 100-120fps, when I do drop to 60 or below in some games it's nothing like non-adaptive sync monitors when they're above/below their native refresh rate. No stuttering, tearing, or slowing down. For a gamer, at this point, I would list this as a requirement for whatever monitor you get because whether it's 120+hz 1440p or 4k no single card is going to run at the native refresh rate consistently. In a couple years where GPU's can push 4k at 120+fps it's not going to be nearly as important unless you've always got to be on the bleeding edge and want 8k resolution.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

99% games will run at max settings at 4k for you without AA. 1% will need to be played at 1440p. I assume everything max except stuff like AA.

 

[Pantlegz]

99% games will run at max settings at 4k for you without AA. 1% will need to be played at 1440p. I assume everything max except stuff like AA.

Based on what exactly? It's not possible to run 4k with max settings minus any sort of AA at decent frame rates with a single card as of right now. Look at any benchmark or go to any number of forums talking about 4k gaming and the consensus is it's not possible. Even 1440p on a singe GPU won't run at or above 60fps constantly in most new games. I've been looking for a single card solution to get me close to an average of 120 fps at 1440p and the average range for high end cards is currently 50(290x)-70fps(titan x) across a variety of games.

 

[Jumpem]

I have this same question. I wonder if you could plat something less demanding like Diablo 3 at 3840x2160, and then play demanding games at 1920x1080 since it evenly divides pixels? I have never gotten a clear answer on whether this would look perfect or not.

Otherwise I am thinking about a G-Sync monitor that is 34", 21:9, 3440x1440, and IPS. A few have been announced, but none are available yet.

 

[alcoholbob]

99% games will run at max settings at 4k for you without AA. 1% will need to be played at 1440p. I assume everything max except stuff like AA.

Most games on steam are indie or console ports anyway that can't even hit 60fps at 1080p consistently and aren't really GPU bound at all

 

[EglsFly]

I'm in the same boat, I just ordered a 980 Ti and looking to upgrade my old 22" 1080p monitor. I play FPS games and also slower moving games, such as BF4, Elite Dangerous, Diablo 3, Shadow of Mordor, Civilization, etc... Looking something in the size range of 27-28", with G-Sync.

It appears from the benchmarks, that running 4K resolution with all the eye candy turned up looks like it would be pushing it to even hit 60FPS on some titles, so I figure better off to go with a 2560x1440 res.

Looking at Newegg, the two monitors that seem to fall into this are:
>Asus ROG PG278Q (TN Panel)
>Acer XB270HU (IPS Panel w/4ms response time)

Which of these two would you pick?
Or is there another monitor that is better?
Can you get a 4K monitor and just run the game at a lower resolution to increase frame rate if needed or is the only option really to run in the native resolution of the monitor?

 

[RaulF]

I want to like the Acer monitor, but to me Acer has always been a cheap brand.

 

[EglsFly]

I'm wondering if it would be better to go with a different brand than Asus or Acer and just get a regular monitor without G-Sync that has good picture and no quality control problems? Suggestions?

 

[PrincessFrosty]

For a single high end GPU such as the 980Ti the sweet spot is still 2560x1600 or 2560x1440 if you want to max out everything.

I'm running an overclocked GTX980 right now and 4k is playable in a lot of things, I was playing Wolfenstien Old Blood last night in 4k with max settings with a decent frame rate, but many other new things require some level of graphical sacrifice.

4k is perfectly doable for many titles with that card but specifically the latest AAA titles with high end graphics aren't going to run maxed out, so just be wary of that. Still I think 4k looks amazing and I definitely prefer games like GTAV in 4k compared to 2560x1600 which is what i used to play in not so long ago.

30"+ is a good idea to get a desktop you can use without scaling 4k, I'm running a 32" panel @ 4k and the text is just about on the cusp of being OK to use, for me it's comfortable but for many others it wont be, so the 27" variants will definitely need some scaling.

 

[Jumpem]

I'm wondering if it would be better to go with a different brand than Asus or Acer and just get a regular monitor without G-Sync that has good picture and no quality control problems? Suggestions?

I were going the no G-Sync route I would look at the curved 34" 3440x1440 VA monitor from Samsung.

 

[Headfoot]

Do 1440p with gsync instead of 4k