KyberKylo77

I recently built a new system and used a PNY XLR8 4070 Ti as the GPU.  I can say that for 1440p gaming at medium to high settings it was okay to great, depending on the title.  However, when the Resident Evil 4 Remake was released, I played for about 3 hours before I decided to change my GPU before the return period expired.  It has since been swapped for a Powercolor Red Devil 7900 XTX, and even after having to add another $200 to cover the difference, I am glad I did.
 
The 4070 Ti was not a bad card, or even a bad value in my opinion.  The change to the 7900 XTX was simply put, a better value and ultimately a better choice.  As far as a 3080 or a 4070 Ti, I can say that my previous card was a 3080, and the 4070 Ti, not only moved me to the new platform, to take advantage of future advances and driver changes that the 30 series cards may not take advantage of, but the performance did feel smoother, and it did run cooler.

I use NIS on my 4k tv. Just do an overall upscale from 1440p to 4k. (I think RSR works on NVidia cards too, but I don't think it's any better)

Depends. This GPU can run very well at 4K if you play games that support DLSS 3.0
I have 4070 Ti and can run no problem over 100 FPS Hogwarts Legacy at 4K Ultra without RT or High + all RT ON but need use DLSS Performance that still do very good upscale due game rendering at 1080p that is higher resolution than use Quality at 1440p and frame generation ON.
A lot people misleading that this GPU can't run 4K AAA game and they are right if you want run without any upscale and frame generation OFF
And you don't need use Ultra settings is stupid anyway. Ultra settings make no visual difference that would worth and have massive performance penalty in some case Ultra can drop your FPS even more than RT ON.
Just use High settings DLSS and frame generation and that GPU run no problem any new AAA game at 4K
But if you want play games without any upscale or frame generation than is bad choose.

Well it obviously depends on your budget, if you can afford a 4080 especially an FE card (given they're easier to physically fit in a case) then that should at least mitigate against those games that have memory bandwidth issues on the 4070 Ti.

If you don't care about raytracing and the games you play don't do DLSS then maybe AMD?

Its just really hard to predict if memory bandwidth will become more of an issue any time soon.  Here's a good example of a current issue that pushes VRAM (focused on capacity but bandwidth is surely a factor too).

Hey so i have been playing around and i found out you can have 10bit (8bit + FRC) with a 240hz native refresh rate here are the steps i did on my monitor (Asus VG279QM)
1- Download CRU (this trick only works for CRU)
2-once you open it go to the first box the detailed section and go to your current refresh rate which is 240hz click on it and click copy in the right-hand corner
3-close the small window and click ADD in the bottom of the detailed and paste the copied timings and refresh rate
#most important step 4
4- change the refresh rate from 239.xxx to 238.xxx basically lower the refresh rate to 1hz 
5-click on ok and restart using the command in the folder of CRU and go to windows click on you 239hz new refresh rate
6- go to your AMD  or Nvidia control panel and click on 10bit ....your welcome!
 
small note -------------------------------------
if you want to go for 240hz bcz you hate odd numbers continue reading 
1- go delete the first preset that is already been added in CRU which is 249.xxx then restart.
2-go to your current one again 238.xxx and copy it and add a new one and paste it 
3- change the refresh rate to 239.xxx 
and your welcome now your running 10bit with 240hz 
please note you will need a display port for that since it carries alot of data in those signals 

rtings calibrates the display down to 100cd/m2, this may not be bright enough for you but they reduce the brightness to 24.
https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/benq/ew3270u
 
If that doesnt fix the issue then try the display plugged into a different source to make sure its the display, if it is it may be defective.

Sennheiser 569's.

It's a different sound signature otherwise pure sound quality wise it's pretty similar.

Akg k371, if you have an amp the dt770 250 is pretty great. Don't reccomend lower impedance models though. Sivga sv006 is nice as well. Those are generally my closed back go tos.

The akg k361 close I'm price , sound signature is not too far away. In my opinion sounds better

yap, im just curious, hoping it's not a low range ips that's worse than a VA lol

Define 'proper'.
 
VA ultrawides aren't bad, it just depends on your specific use cases. For what I do, a VA panel would serve me better than an IPS. I actually had a high end IPS (acer XB27UGX) but ill be going back to VA simply because the advantages that VAs have over IPS is more important to me than the advantages that IPS has over VA.
 
Does smearing bother you? go IPS
Does bad contrast bother you? go VA
Do you like the highly oversaturated look? go IPS
Does backlight bleed bother you? go VA 

Not necessarily. The production cost is dependant on how much of the "motherglass" can be utilized. OLED TV panels are produced in one big sheet of 2.2x2.5 m and then they cut the TV panels out of this so-called "motherglass". How many panels they can fit on one sheet and how much scrap is left over after they're all cut out is what dictates production cost. Thtat's the main reason why 48" and 55" OLED TVs often cost the same or more for the smaller model. This video explains it quite well if you want to know more:
 

Either the FI32U or wait for other new releases.
 
Don't buy a monitor out of "brand loyalty". Every brand has pad products, including Asus. And the PG32UQ is not a good monitor. It has performance on par with by now 5 year old IPS monitors. Other than the color gamut the Gigabyte FI32U is better in every regard. And depending on what you want to do with your monitor, you likely don't even need the wide gamut of the PG32UQ.
 
There are more 32" 4K monitors coming. Afaik LG, Gigabyte, MSI and other display brands are already working on them.
 
Or go for a 27" 4K monitor. Therey are much more developed as they have been on the gaming market for a few years now.
Here the Gigabyte M28U is the best one atm.

So what the hell was the point of this topic in the first place? Multiple people have told you the situation, and it's indisputable. The 1080p image is upscaled, and any form of upscaling degrades image quality. These are simple facts. That you don't notice a difference speaks only to the quality of your vision; it doesn't change reality.

aight thanks man, really appreciate your input. Ive actually learned a lot from you in the past couple of months 

They seem quite similar apart from these differences:
 
The Asus has a much higher contrast, a slightly more aggressive curve, has a higher refresh rate, better I/O, has speakers (if that matters to you), but is more expensive.
 
Both seem to be mid-range VA-ultrawides with mediocre response times.
 
For a detailed comparison check this out: ASUS TUF Gaming VG34VQL1B vs Dell S3422DWG Side-by-Side Monitor Comparison - RTINGS.com

For me the jump from 144Hz to 200Hz is not really visually different.
 
It just feels more responsive. And that's what i felt when going back to 144Hz.

yea lol I cant go back to 60Hz too after trying out 144Hz. Even on singleplayer games like life is strange its really jarring to play at 60 FPS. Usually i turn down a couple of settings until im at least hitting 90 FPS

You'll notice, though definitely avoid 60Hz.

i think gsync was acting up with 2 monitors so i switched to 60hz for a bit for netflix, forgot to switch back, launched a game, think it was borderlands 3, during one of the battles i had to move from side to side on 60hz, it actually felt like a sudden stutter as something i wasn't expecting, but in reality it was just 60hz, it was bad lol.

yea lol I cant go back to 60Hz too after trying out 144Hz. Even on singleplayer games like life is strange its really jarring to play at 60 FPS. Usually i turn down a couple of settings until im at least hitting 90 FPS

I have not tried for a lot time 144Hz tbh ... but I know 60Hz very well and that is not acceptable. Hertz me to think about 60Hz...
 

Same, played some diablo 2 teh past 2 weeks, and there is no getting used it (coming from 120/144Hz), my eyes hurt, my head hurts, i feel sick, i feel slugish, the controls don't listen to me, everything is late. It feels like trying to play basketball very drunk after no sleep for a week.

I have a 240hz monitor and its hard for me to go back to 144 but you get used to it after using 144hz for a week or two.
60Hz is possible too but not for competitive games, I just finish botw on a 4k 60hz monitor but games like apex I simply can't play on 60hz.