1440p recommended GPU@minimum / resolution vs performance scaling

Discussion in 'Player Support' started by sagolsun, Aug 27, 2014.

  1. sagolsun

    Recently I've upgraded to a 1440p monitor. Performance went down to the masonry-punching level of "sorta okay, when not fighting, but sluggish and unresponsive when you need it".

    Currently running a GTX 560, minimum quality.

    My questions are:

    1) What graphics card has the minimum horsepower to pull an unflinching, framelocked 60 on 1440p?

    Minimum details, every possible optional setting disabled or set to lowest. Performance and responsiveness are the primary concern, visibility (no vegetation, minimum particles) goes second, visual fidelity is completely irrelevant and frankly, unwanted.

    2) Is my CPU adequate? 3570k@ 4.7

    3) Is there a CPU-related bottleneck with UI rendering at high resolutions?
  2. noidea

    CPU is ok imo, but your GPU seems is pretty weak to do 1440p in demanding games. Dont expect a fluid 60 with that card.

    Toggle on the fps counter and see for yourself if it's the CPU or GPU holding you back, but my guess is the GPU.
  3. sagolsun


    It hovers around 51fps, CPU. Render quality is 75%.
  4. baka


    What settings have you adjusted to get to 4.7, and what cooling solution do you have? Also....Virtu? You actually use that? :)

    OMG, super potato mode activate! I tried that once, and just could not stand the quality loss.
  5. sagolsun

    I have on-board virtu, it's sync option is disabled because I use it to power additional monitors.
    I am NOT running PS2 multi-monitor however.

    Cooling is corsair H100i closed-loop WC. BIOS settings to get this multiplier are mostly default, except for turbo boost and PLL. Followed this guide:
    http://www.overclock.net/t/1198504/...-guide-sandy-bridge-ivy-bridge-asrock-edition
  6. FireclawX

    My recommendation would be to get a new GPU... I know that it says CPU bottlenecked and whatnot, but your CPU doesn't help push more pixels, that's all GPU, and a 560 won't cut it. Almost the ONLY thing that helps you push more pixels to your screen in a game is the amount of VRAM that your system has. And ofc your GPU processor has to be able to handle crunching the pixels, but that's generally not a problem.

    Wait about a month and grab the upcoming GTX 880 desktop card.
    Current (unconfirmed by nvidia, but confirmed by external manufacturers) specs are...
    Price: $400
    Performance: > 780TI
    VRAM: 4GB DDR5

    Put that badboy in your system, and keep your current CPU... It's good enough for 1440p.
    • Up x 1
  7. sagolsun

    Good points all around, thanks!

    I don't play games much, Kerbal runs just fine on my current card, Dwarf Fortress doesn't need a graphics card. If an 880 is what it takes, I'll get one. Keep in mind though, the goal is 60fps framelock at barest minimum settings. If a cheaper card can pull it off, I'll go for a cheaper card.
  8. FireclawX

    Here's the thing though. (Price comparisons below)

    At the moment, the best cards money can buy (that are reasonable for gaming)

    AMD R9290X - 500~600 USD
    GTX 780TI - 600~700 USD

    The 880 will probably let you play PS2 (and future games) @1440p at max - medium settings for the next 3 or so years... And it's cheaper than the top of the line current gen cards, AND it preforms better than both of them...

    It's literally a doozie... My advice to ANYONE who's planning on building or upgrading now... WAIT! WAIT! WAIT! and WAIT SOME MORE!!!