Anyone gaming with an UltraWide Monitor

[Kelthus]

I am looking at making the jump with the next generation that will be running between 144 and 200hz.

The largest concern I have are new games and how well they will support it.

[effectiv]

I am looking at making the jump with the next generation that will be running between 144 and 200hz.

The largest concern I have are new games and how well they will support it.

Every game you play will have a config file you can manually put the resolution in for. Most of the time you'll only have to worry about doing this for older titles. Ultrawides are sweeping the market right now, so I would count on newer games supporting all sorts of different resolutions. Even some older games have updated to add support for 21:9 (ultrawide).

If you're looking at a 144hz ultrawide you're looking at around $650-1300 price range wise so be ready to dish out some money for it. Unless you want to wait until they drop in a year or two.

[Kelthus]

That all sounds about right, I will wait until sometime next year most likely as there are a lot of newer models in the works.

If by some chance I pull the trigger earlier I have been leaning toward the Acer Predator X34

Thanks

[ZED]

That all sounds about right, I will wait until sometime next year most likely as there are a lot of newer models in the works.

If by some chance I pull the trigger earlier I have been leaning toward the Acer Predator X34

Thanks

I'd also would wait for the next year (which I'm doing now) because:
a) makes to sense to go 1080p for a new monitor, so 1440p would be minimum but prefer to have 1440p 144hz and to run new titles at 1440p 144hz and achieve 100+ FPS stable would require something more powerful than GTX 1080Ti, which makes no sense to get at this point either. So, also waiting for Volta.
b) 4k gaming isn't there yet - overpriced and need more GPU power (GTX 1080 Ti is just not enough). Also, I rather go lower resolution with high refresh rate than get 4k 60hz. So, back to point a).
c) all current ultra wide monitor models are 1 - 2 years old and new monitors are in development. So, if you get one of those current monitors now, next year most likely they will become older models and thus money will be wasted on something that is older when there is available something newer and better for the same or less money.

[effectiv]

I'd also would wait for the next year (which I'm doing now) because:
a) makes to sense to go 1080p for a new monitor, so 1440p would be minimum but prefer to have 1440p 144hz and to run new titles at 1440p 144hz and achieve 100+ FPS stable would require something more powerful than GTX 1080Ti, which makes no sense to get at this point either. So, also waiting for Volta.

A GTX 1080 can run 1440p games at near 144fps. Lowering settings in game will make this easier. Same goes for a 1070 unless you're wanting to max out AAA titles.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ZED]

A GTX 1080 can run 1440p games at near 144fps. Lowering settings in game will make this easier. Same goes for a 1070 unless you're wanting to max out AAA titles.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

GTX 1080 kinda struggles to keep 144 FPS in many tittles even at 1080p not to mention 1440p and moreover 1440p UltraWide. Even GTX 1080 Ti can't maintain stable 144 FPS at 1440p in many AAA titles. Check out BF1 GTX 1080Ti at 1440p benchmarks:

[effectiv]

GTX 1080 kinda struggles to keep 144 FPS in many tittles even at 1080p not to mention 1440p and moreover 1440p UltraWide. Even GTX 1080 Ti can't maintain stable 144 FPS at 1440p in many AAA titles. Check out BF1 GTX 1080Ti at 1440p benchmarks:

Basing your argument around Youtube benchmarks, especially from an unknown person, isn't really viable to be honest. There are so many busted "benchmarks" on youtube by people who don't know the half of what they're doing. Unless it's from Linus or Jayztwocents, I don't consider them. Instead, look at benchmarks done on other sites.

The fact of the matter is, you don't NEED 144fps stable to benefit from the higher refresh rate. Even at lower FPS you'll notice a distinct difference between 60 and 144. The 1080 will play most games maxed at above 70-80FPS on 1440p, which is more than adequate. The 1070 is even capable of this in most titles. And this is at high/ultra settings. You can always lower things to gain more fps.

Here's a thread on the 1080 @ 1440p 144hz on reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/co...or_1440p_144hz
Here's a video by LINUSTECHTIPS about the 1070 on 1440p: https://youtu.be/rkiZdSBux9E?t=292 (Just a TL;DR - The 1070 hit 60fps on 1440p in every benchmark they ran at max settings)
Here's an overview GameSpot did comparing the two: https://www.gamespot.com/articles/nv.../1100-6439863/. The 1080 was near 100fps average in everything at 1440p aside from Metro Last Light (the game destroys GPUs. So pretty though.)
Small discussion on tomshardware (Top answer stated to expect 90+FPS in most games at high/ultra): http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/...-gtx-1080.html

This is before we take into consideration the CPU/GPU load balancing between different games. Some games are CPU based and will gain more FPS by upgrading your CPU/overclocking. Some games will benefit more from a better GPU.

There's a lot of factors that go into this, but saying that the 1080 isn't a viable option for 1440p/144hz monitors isn't really true.

[ZED]

Basing your argument around Youtube benchmarks, especially from an unknown person, isn't really viable to be honest. There are so many busted "benchmarks" on youtube by people who don't know the half of what they're doing. Unless it's from Linus or Jayztwocents, I don't consider them. Instead, look at benchmarks done on other sites.

The fact of the matter is, you don't NEED 144fps stable to benefit from the higher refresh rate. Even at lower FPS you'll notice a distinct difference between 60 and 144. The 1080 will play most games maxed at above 70-80FPS on 1440p, which is more than adequate. The 1070 is even capable of this in most titles. And this is at high/ultra settings. You can always lower things to gain more fps.

Here's a thread on the 1080 @ 1440p 144hz on reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/co...or_1440p_144hz
Here's a video by LINUSTECHTIPS about the 1070 on 1440p: https://youtu.be/rkiZdSBux9E?t=292 (Just a TL;DR - The 1070 hit 60fps on 1440p in every benchmark they ran at max settings)
Here's an overview GameSpot did comparing the two: https://www.gamespot.com/articles/nv.../1100-6439863/. The 1080 was near 100fps average in everything at 1440p aside from Metro Last Light (the game destroys GPUs. So pretty though.)
Small discussion on tomshardware (Top answer stated to expect 90+FPS in most games at high/ultra): http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/...-gtx-1080.html

This is before we take into consideration the CPU/GPU load balancing between different games. Some games are CPU based and will gain more FPS by upgrading your CPU/overclocking. Some games will benefit more from a better GPU.

There's a lot of factors that go into this, but saying that the 1080 isn't a viable option for 1440p/144hz monitors isn't really true.

Not quite true, yes there are some video's on YouTube where games are benchmarked by some people who have no idea what they are doing but talking about this specific video it doesn't seem so. His PC has good specs and is overclocked pretty good as well. As for CPU load etc, his CPU load is also very good for BF1 since BF1 is extremely demanding on CPU. So, right away I can tell that whatever he is doing there, he is doing it right.

As for GTX 1070, I have GTX 1070 and I overclocked it quite a bit (see signature). I've tried running a few games with this GPU at 4k and at 1080p and of course in VR with my Oculus Rift and used all kinds of settings, AA, Supersampling etc. Given the fact that GTX 1080 is only 25% more powerful than GTX 1070 then it is easy to predict what performance I would get if I were to upgrade GTX 1070 to GTX 1080. With that said, I can run BF1 at 1080p Ultra Graphics and achieve somewhat 100 - 120 FPS, which sometimes would dip down below 100 but not below 90. So based on that you can get easily numbers for GTX 1080 by simply adding 25% if I were to upgrade my GTX 1070. So, those numbers you see in that specific video are pretty damn accurate.

I can also bring up other big titles like GTA5, Witcher 3 that just destroys any GPU and are still demanding even today.

As for benchmarks from big Tubers like Linus, JayzTwoCents, Pauls Hardware etc etc, I prefer to actually watch a real time benchmark rather than some charts because in real time benches I can see all ups and down and how often FPS would dip, which can give me more idea of how the game is performing.

There's a lot of factors that go into this, but saying that the 1080 isn't a viable option for 1440p/144hz monitors isn't really true.

For 144hz you want to have at least 100 FPS, below 100 FPS it is still ok-ish but isn't that great anymore and 144 hz refresh rate is losing it's point. Will it still be better than 60 Hz? Yes, but then what's the point spending money on 144 Hz if you can't even maintain 100 FPS? First upgrade graphics card to make sure you can at least maintain 100 FPS and then think about 144 Hz monitor.

[effectiv]

Not quite true, yes there are some video's on YouTube where games are benchmarked by some people who have no idea what they are doing but talking about this specific video it doesn't seem so. His PC has good specs and is overclocked pretty good as well. As for CPU load etc, his CPU load is also very good for BF1 since BF1 is extremely demanding on CPU. So, right away I can tell that whatever he is doing there, he is doing it right.

You can't tell how he has his system optimized based off overclocking. He could have bought a prebuilt that was OC'd. How are you to know? Maybe he has Windows setup with all of the power saving options? Does he list that? What about his Nvidia control panel settings, which have a huge affect on performance? I bet that's not listed either. That's why I don't trust random youtubers uploading "benchmarks". I can trust LTT and Jayz to know about these options and use them correctly, I can't trust a random to know that. I'm sure there are exceptions to this, but instead of guessing and making an assumption based off someone I don't know, I'd rather just rule them out altogether.

For 144hz you want to have at least 100 FPS, below 100 FPS it is still ok-ish but isn't that great anymore and 144 hz refresh rate is losing it's point. Will it still be better than 60 Hz? Yes, but then what's the point spending money on 144 Hz if you can't even maintain 100 FPS? First upgrade graphics card to make sure you can at least maintain 100 FPS and then think about 144 Hz monitor.

There's still a huge difference between 60hz and 144hz under 100fps. Ever try playing a game on 30fps on 60hz? Probably not because it's unbearable. When I was on my 560TI back in the day, it was much harder to tell I was at 30fps on 144hz. This only gets better the higher FPS you have. I've never been able to not tell that I was on a high refresh rate monitor just because I was getting 80fps vs 100fps. It's still light years better than a 60hz panel, so saying there's no point spending money on a 144hz monitor because of a 20fps difference is kind of ridiculous to me.

Plus, you can always lower settings to obtain more FPS. These benchmarks were ALL done at high/ultra settings. Which is why I said in my earlier post:

unless you're wanting to max out AAA titles.

The argument here isn't whether or not the 1080 can perform at 1440p 144hz. Because it can. You just won't hold 144fps STABLE at ULTRA in most AAA games in 2017. It will still be more than enjoyable because you don't need 100+ FPS to notice a distinct difference between 60hz and 144hz.

If there was such a huge difference in holding 70-80fps constant vs 144fps constant on a 144hz monitor, they wouldn't have become so popular because new GPUs have never been powerful enough to run new AAA games at ultra settings @ 144fps constant. Advancements in technology in the gaming/GPU industry make this near impossible unless you SLI or spend $1000 on whatever powerhouse GPU Nvidia releases next. No one in their right mind would make that investment unless they have a boat load of money unless it actually gave a distinct advantage over 60hz at reasonably high fps (60-80+).

[ZED]

You can't tell how he has his system optimized based off overclocking.

Watch multiple video's and compare and also compare with your results if you have similar specs. Can tell easily if anything is wrong or not with his config.

He could have bought a prebuilt that was OC'd. How are you to know?

Read video descriptions for more details.

Maybe he has Windows setup with all of the power saving options?

That's why I rather watch real time benchmarks than some charts because in real time benchmarks I can see CPU/GPU usage, Frequency, Temps etc, etc.

There's still a huge difference between 60hz and 144hz under 100fps.

You missed the point. Why spend more money on more expensive monitor if you can't maintain close to 100 FPS and barely go above 60 to 70 FPS tops? Sure, you can reduce graphics settings but then you are reducing eye candy in cost for more FPS. Makes no sense again. Buy a better GPU before you upgrade monitor.

If there was such a huge difference in holding 70-80fps constant vs 144fps constant on a 144hz monitor, they wouldn't have become so popular

You'll be surprised that some people buy it just to have it. Back to your statement where you said that some unknown YouTubers have no idea what they are doing.



Would this satisfy your requirements to watch unknown YouTuber benchmarks and trust his results? Hence, one of my own vids from 2015:

[effectiv]

I'm just going to ignore most of the stuff about YT, because it's subjective based on who you watch. I said there were exceptions, but for every exception I find, I find 10 that aren't. My opinion is opinion. You have your own. I'll stick to reputable sources. You stick to whoever you want.

Also, the point of these videos/benchmarks isn't to compare to what you have. It's to help people choose products. Not everyone can compare their X GPU to said video with X GPU to determine if it's accurate or not because they're probably watching said video to get an idea of whether or not they should buy it. This is another reason I choose to stay away from non reputable resources, because if some dude in a YT video gives me the wrong info and I drop $100s on a product that isn't what I wanted, I'd be pissed.

You missed the point. Why spend more money on more expensive monitor if you can't maintain close to 100 FPS and barely go above 60 to 70 FPS tops? Sure, you can reduce graphics settings but then you are reducing eye candy in cost for more FPS. Makes no sense again. Buy a better GPU before you upgrade monitor.

I didn't miss the point.

Games will look lightyears smoother on a 144hz monitor at 70-80fps than at 200fps on a 60hz panel. You don't need to disable settings, I just threw that out there to say that you can achieve 144 on 1440p easily with a 1080 if you want to sacrifice some quality. And for your information, I personally sacrifice eye candy for more fps, as do most other competitive players.

You may be a person who wants to run things on the highest settings, but that doesn't mean other people have to.

To the OP,
You do NOT need a $1000 GPU for a 144hz 1440p monitor to give you a smoother gameplay experience over a 60hz panel. And you do NOT need more than 100fps to see that benefit. It does not have diminishing returns because you can't get 20-30fps more.

If you wait to upgrade to the next line of GPUs that come out, you will be disappointed when they can't achieve what you're looking for in 2018 AAA titles. Although, you will be able to get them in previously released titles.

It's about your needs and what you're looking to get into as far as gaming goes. It would help to know what GPU/CPU you're running as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SmokingBarrel]

I am playing BF1 on a 1080ti and a 165hz 1440p panel. At first I wasn't even getting 75fps. Then I turned supersampling off and I am consistently over 100fps and usually closer to 145fps.

[AOD_DukeCLR]

I'm playing Bf1 at 1440p set at ultra and I cap the FPS at 139( 5. Below 144) my rig isn't struggling to maintain that.

[Lilith]

Here is the best one IMO its 144 / 165 HZ Overclocked

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...-827-_-Product

Do not buy a TN Panel you will be sorry make sure its an IPS Panel on whatever you decide to buy.

Im running two of these so far its great.

There are more monitors out including a 200Hz + Refresh Rate for over 1600 USD but Personally id go with these dual 27 inches "Netflix On One" "Game on other" or Multiboxing games works great.

Limited inputs although this can be fixed by buying add-ons to support XBOX in-puts and so on for older consoles etc.

[Rimeraz]

I got the Asus ROG PG348Q 34-Inch Ultra-wide monitor several weeks ago and I have been enjoying it alot, massive step up from 1080p 60fps for me. It doesn't go to 144hz but I am getting stable frames at 100hz+G-sync, all of which is possible thanks to my 1080ti card. :)

[Wankinstein]

34" LG Ultrawide 3440x1440p here, is it beautiful to look at? Yes! games look absolutely amazing on it although the resolution is a bit of a pain sometimes even when you edit configs. For example PUBG bugs out at times my mouse cursor isn't accurate on the screen it's about 2-inches from where it's showing it should be. I just run 2560x1080 seems to not be glitchy, I get 100+ fps in pretty much every game with dual 1070's. If you do a lot of production such as spreadsheets, video editing, PS, and some gaming as well I'd recommend. If you're going for pure gaming purposes I'd def opt for 1440p 144hz ultrawide or 1080p 144hz ultrawide. Predator's are really nice!