144Hz questions

[Draydince]

Really only considering the GN246HL. It's currently on sale for $200, has a $20 mail in rebate, and also a $20 off discount code through Newegg. I couldn't justify spending another 100 over that. And I'm really not concerned with Freesync or Gsync, I don't like being locked into a brand. Even if Freesync is open source, being realistic about it Nvidia wont be supporting the competition anytime soon. If I had a gsync monitor, I would feel like I had to buy a Nvidia card. If I had a Freesync monitor, I would feel like I had to buy an AMD card, otherwise the features are just wasted beyond being a high refresh rate monitor. 

[Zyndo]

4 minutes ago, Streetguru said:

The other issue being you're going to have to delid your intel CPU for heavier overclocking for pushing those ultra high frame rates as well, another added cost potentially, also don't know yet how well Coffee Lake will overclock

Ryzen is good for what it is and what its priced at. hell its great. frankly its what most people should be putting in their systems right now.

But like you've said several times in this thread, 144hz is all about the CPU (excuse my paraphrasing here) and when it comes to 144hz 1080p gaming, Ryzen simply doesn't keep up. Even the 7700k at 5GHz is (roughly) 30% faster than a Ryzen at 4GHz, and appropriately fast RAM on both platforms, in most games on the market today (not including the small handful of games which scale well with Ryzen's additional cores, in which case the 7700k and Ryzen are actually fairly close, but those games are not plentiful yet). Coffee Lake, even if it offers no IPC gains over Kaby, removes Ryzen's multi-core advantage going forward, and Ryzens single core is frankly just nothing close to Intel right now. I mean its certainly "good enough", but 144hz 1080p gaming is one area where you don't want "good enough"... its the one area where Ryzen is truly inferior right now, and I expect that to hold even more true going forward after Coffee Lake is released.
 

10 minutes ago, Draydince said:

I get it, you like AMD - I'm not looking to have this debate lol... I only came here for monitor questions.

He's not necessarily a fanboy or anything. Just voicing his opinion. and hes right. If we want AMD to stick around, people gotta support them... but that doesn't mean EVERYONE needs a Ryzen CPU.

The caveat here is that in order to truly see the performance difference of a Ryzen vs Intel CPU at 1080p 144hz, you need a strong enough graphics card in order to really push those high refresh rates (which is something those damn Youtubers don't seem to understand at all, thus leading to the terrible arguments i've heard so many times in favor of Ryzen). Assuming your want to play your games on high/ultra settings, a 1070 quite frankly isn't going to sustain 144fps+ in many AAA games today... and you will only see the ~30% fps gains on Intel if you have a GPU which is capable of pushing your framerates 30% further (or more) than Ryzen is capable of going. For example, if a 4GHz R7 1700 is capable of getting ~100 fps in some game on average, and the 7700k is capable of getting ~130 fps on average, but your GPU is only capable of generating 80 fps at your chosen settings and resolution.... then you're only going to be getting 80 fps in said game because your GPU simply cannot get any more than that regardless of your CPU. Your minimums may be very slightly better on the 7700k, but not to any monumental amount.

So that being said, and going forward if you plan to keep a platform for a long time (3-5 years) and wish for 144hz gaming, go with the 8600k or 8700k. Ryzen may be cheaper now, and may allow for upgrades going forward, but it will need to improve by AT LEAST ~30% in single core performance, or games will need to learn how to scale 100% with 12+threads (or some combination thereof, including better game optimization for AM4) before you see the AM4 platform overtake anything Coffee Lake will have to offer (not to mention you then need to BUY that upgrade, which defeats the purpose of the attractive price advantage Ryzen has), which is highly unlikely in the next 3-5 years.... well maybe 5 years out, but at that time you're looking for an upgrade off your Coffee Lake anyway and you can have your pick of the litter of whatever Intel/AMD has cooking up at that time.

So, even though your 1070 right now just isn't going to cut it at 144hz if you're looking for all of the eye candy sliders at max, even a cheap GTX 1160/2060 from Volta (next gen Nvidia out in early 2018) or literally any card in the generation after that (likely sometime early-mid 2020) will be significantly stronger than a 1070, and you're going to want a CPU which can fuel the framerates they can provide. If you don't have the money for a 8600k or 8700k and proper cooling, thats fine. Ryzen isn't "bad" by any means. But if you're looking for the proper 144hz experience, Intel is the only way to go if you are okay with spending the money.


I know you didn't want to argue about this, but I just wanted to set the record straight for both of you so there wouldn't be any confusion. I also felt like this was important to mention since the topic IS 144hz based, and this is important to understand if you're going to pull the trigger on 144hz hardware

[Zyndo]

4 minutes ago, Draydince said:

Really only considering the GN246HL. It's currently on sale for $200, has a $20 mail in rebate, and also a $20 off discount code through Newegg. I couldn't justify spending another 100 over that. And I'm really not concerned with Freesync or Gsync, I don't like being locked into a brand. Even if Freesync is open source, being realistic about it Nvidia wont be supporting the competition anytime soon. If I had a gsync monitor, I would feel like I had to buy a Nvidia card. If I had a Freesync monitor, I would feel like I had to buy an AMD card, otherwise the features are just wasted beyond being a high refresh rate monitor. 

Yeah, but if its $200 for a basic monitor, or $200 for the same monitor + freesync..... doesn't really make sense to AVOID getting a completely free feature which doesn't negatively impact you in any way on the chance AMD because relevant again in the GPU market in the future

[Draydince]

Just now, Zyndo said:

Yeah, but if its $200 for a basic monitor, or $200 for the same monitor + freesync..... doesn't really make sense to AVOID getting a completely free feature which doesn't negatively impact you in any way on the chance AMD because relevant again in the GPU market in the future

I can get the GN246HL for $160 with a discount code and rebate. The two monitors he suggested were $200 and $250. If they were also $160 it's not like I'm inherently opposed to getting one over the other, but not much point in paying more for features I don't particularly care about.

[Streetguru]

1 minute ago, Zyndo said:

 

That's what the benchmark video was for, for the most part Ryzen is still perfectly capable of 144hz gaming even if it's not the best. In esports games where it matters most it does fine.

 

 

6 minutes ago, Draydince said:

 

Mail in Rebate never work, You should get the free-sync display just to have the option if Na'vi is any good if not you still have a solid display.

 

Nvidia already uses Free-sync in their laptops.
 

It's only $50 for a better panel type with the korean VA display, or about the same for an added feature that's basically free, and a good option to have.

[Zyndo]

Just now, Draydince said:

I can get the GN246HL for $160 with a discount code and rebate. The two monitors he suggested were $200 and $250. If they were also $160 it's not like I'm inherently opposed to getting one over the other, but not much point in paying more for features I don't particularly care about.

fair enough. no sense in paying $40 extra for a feature you're not interested in either

[Draydince]

Give me $50 and you got a deal.

[Draydince]

10 minutes ago, Zyndo said:

He's not necessarily a fanboy or anything. Just voicing his opinion. and hes right. If we want AMD to stick around, people gotta support them... but that doesn't mean EVERYONE needs a Ryzen CPU.
 

My memory is telling me otherwise. I actually just had a flood of memories come back to me why his profile seemed so familiar. Back before Tek Syndicate fell apart, I was a member on their forums and I distinctly remember him turning any irrelevant post somehow looping around to AMD, and trash talking intel any chance the opportunity presented itself, or he created a fallacy to trash it himself. It's quite offputting.

[Zyndo]

3 minutes ago, Streetguru said:

That's what the benchmark video was for, for the most part Ryzen is still perfectly capable of 144hz gaming even if it's not the best. In esports games where it matters most it does fine.

yeah but.... "fine" doesn't really cut it does it? You get much better minimums out of the 7700k as well (usually), so even ignoring the higher/overkill average numbers there is still importance to having the more powerful CPU to have fewer, less impactful dips. Not hating on Ryzen. At all. Like I said, Ryzen is what most people should be building right now.... but high refresh rate 1080p gaming is one area where it just doesn't make sense when the consumer wants pure performance.

[Zyndo]

1 minute ago, Draydince said:

My memory is telling me otherwise. I actually just had a flood of memories come back to me why his profile seemed so familiar. Back before Tek Syndicate fell apart, I was a member on their forums and I distinctly remember him turning any irrelevant post somehow looping around to AMD. It's quite offputting.

lol. perhaps. I also didn't say he wasn't a fanboy. I'm just saying there are good and valid arguments to be made for team blue or team red right now (or is Ryzen team orange?) and quite frankly, until Coffee Lake comes out, Ryzen wins most of those arguments. High refresh rate 1080p gaming is one of the few times it doesn't (assuming people have a high enough budget that is)

[Draydince]

3 minutes ago, Zyndo said:

lol. perhaps. I also didn't say he wasn't a fanboy. I'm just saying there are good and valid arguments to be made for team blue or team red right now (or is Ryzen team orange?) and quite frankly, until Coffee Lake comes out, Ryzen wins most of those arguments. High refresh rate 1080p gaming is one of the few times it doesn't (assuming people have a high enough budget that is)

No, I fully Agree - Ryzen is a good cpu on all accounts. I'm just saying the way he goes about it, bashing intel at every opportunity even if it means creating your own irrelevant conversation, is very offputting. Luckily LTT forums has an ignore feature, whereas the old Tek Syndicate forums didn't.

I actually had a Ryzen setup, but I ended up having to RMA it. I would have liked it to work, I conceptually like the idea of 8 cores in the hopes that the future will provide more multi core support for games, but I just couldn't risk missing out on my return period.

[Streetguru]

12 minutes ago, Draydince said:

 

It may not even be worth buying the 144hz display before you upgrade your CPU because you will be so bottlenecked lol. depending on the game of course. esports will be fine.

Was informing you for suggestions on your CPU situation as your FX chip will bottleneck you and you're likely going to upgrade soon, saved you from having to make another thread about the topic whenever it comes up.

If you want the absolute best for 144hz you buy an 8700K coming soon, delid it and there ya go.

If you want the best value you get Ryzen 7, slap a $25 cooler on it and you're just about good to go.

For your monitor, VA is probably worth the extra $100 though it is korean, if you don't want free-sync whatever, it's just a nice option to have, and adds to the value of the display should you ever sell it.

[Streetguru]

7 minutes ago, Draydince said:

 

If intel didn't put poor TIM on their CPUs, and weren't changing sockets so quickly I wouldn't have much to complain about. Aside from the 5 years of 4 cores/8 threads at the same price.

**Also at the time of Tek Syndicate I don't think Ryzen was even out man

Digital Foundry did some Recent FX 6300 testing as well.

 

[Streetguru]

21 minutes ago, Draydince said:

 

I suppose I'll leave you with :
Your CPU will generally bottleneck you for 144hz gaming, so it's up to you if you want to spend the money to get a better display for some esports and lighter games, or to spend that money towards a better CPU whatever that may be, then see what display options are around by the time you get to the display upgrade later on in that scenario. That is why tangents and extra info is important, usually.

Or if you want to go crazy save up $500 for a 240hz display

[Glenwing]

1 hour ago, Draydince said:

Really only considering the GN246HL. It's currently on sale for $200, has a $20 mail in rebate, and also a $20 off discount code through Newegg. I couldn't justify spending another 100 over that. And I'm really not concerned with Freesync or Gsync, I don't like being locked into a brand. Even if Freesync is open source, being realistic about it Nvidia wont be supporting the competition anytime soon. If I had a gsync monitor, I would feel like I had to buy a Nvidia card. If I had a Freesync monitor, I would feel like I had to buy an AMD card, otherwise the features are just wasted beyond being a high refresh rate monitor. 

Just be aware that the GN246HL is only capable of running 144 Hz over Dual-Link DVI, and that it is not possible to use adapters to get Dual-Link DVI except for $100 DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI converter, so if you have a computer without an actual DVI port now or in the future, you're pretty much stuck. But if that's not a problem, then go for it.

[Draydince]

5 minutes ago, Glenwing said:

Just be aware that the GN246HL is only capable of running 144 Hz over Dual-Link DVI, and that it is not possible to use adapters to get Dual-Link DVI except for $100 DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI converter, so if you have a computer without an actual DVI port now or in the future, you're pretty much stuck. But if that's not a problem, then go for it.

Should be fine, I have this model specifically https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487248&cm_re=evga_gtx_1070_sc-_-14-487-248-_-Product but that is something to think about, I wonder how long cards will still have DVI ports available...

[Streetguru]

6 minutes ago, Draydince said:

Should be fine, I have this model specifically https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487248&cm_re=evga_gtx_1070_sc-_-14-487-248-_-Product but that is something to think about, I wonder how long cards will still have DVI ports available...

Analog output is already phased out now I think on all gaming cards. Can't hook up my god damned CRT without an adapter, RIP.

DVI is likely next on the chopping block, that may be part of why it's pretty cheap and on sale.

[79wjd]

6 hours ago, Draydince said:

Should be fine, I have this model specifically https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487248&cm_re=evga_gtx_1070_sc-_-14-487-248-_-Product but that is something to think about, I wonder how long cards will still have DVI ports available...

I'd give it a couple years -- I'd expect DVI to be gone by the time you're ready to upgrade the GPU. As it is it's already far less common than it used to be.

 

Note: DVI will probably exist on at least one aftermarket card for quite a bit longer, but gone from the rest/most.