4k 60hz vs 1440p 144hz

[Nik Balor]

i know that gaming is much better and smoother on 1440p than 4k , but If the load on GPU on 1440p 144hz is ( 530,841,600 ) pixels , and on 4k 60hz is ( 497,664,000 ) pixels . How 1440p will future proof my GPU better than a 4k monitor will ?!!!!!!

 

[reapzzer]

2 things : 144Hz all the way. It's just soooooo smooth, and the second one when in a year or so a game so power hungry will be released you can always drop to 1440p 60 and keep ultra settings

[3rrant]

2 minutes ago, reapzzer said:

2 things : 144Hz all the way. It's just soooooo smooth, and the second one when in a year or so a game so power hungry will be released you can always drop to 1440p 60 and keep ultra settings

I think it's a lot more about personal opinion.

 

I'd always go 4K over 1440p or 1080p, at 60fps vs 144 or 240Hz. Even on FPS.

[Nik Balor]

i know it's all about personal opinions , but i was just talking scientifically which one puts more load on the GPU?!

i have sapphire rx 580 and ryzen 7 1700 btw . Can it handle both , or just one of them ?

[Guest]

4K 60fps is better then lower resolutions such as 1080p and 1440p 60Hz, better image quality and the game generally looks nicer. Higher resolutions tend to put more stress on the GPU because it has more pixels to be rendered, the 1440p res with a higher refresh rate is less pixelated with less stress on the GPU resulting as a higher frame rate in games, higher refresh rate monitors (I think 144Hz means that it will try cap the game at 144fps) are better if you want more fps, but image quality isnt going to be as good as what 4K would be. Depending on the GPU, I'd say, anything below a gtx 1070ti to (at the minimum) a gtx 1060 6GB, can handle 1440p high refresh rate easily, GPUs below the 1070ti or 1080 can handle 4K resolution, but might not reach 60fps, anything higher tiered, such as the 1070ti (1080+1080ti) can handle 4K 60Hz, or can possibly go higher in fps (depends on the settings of the game). I would assume that GSYNC helps in this matter as well.

[Nik Balor]

3 minutes ago, TheBeastPC said:

4K 60fps is better then lower resolutions such as 1080p and 1440p 60Hz, better image quality and the game generally looks nicer. Higher resolutions tend to put more stress on the GPU because it has more pixels to be rendered, the 1440p res with a higher refresh rate is less pixelated with less stress on the GPU resulting as a higher frame rate in games, higher refresh rate monitors (I think 144Hz means that it will try cap the game at 144fps) are better if you want more fps, but image quality isnt going to be as good as what 4K would be. Depending on the GPU, I'd say, anything below a gtx 1070ti to (at the minimum) a gtx 1060 6GB, can handle 1440p high refresh rate easily, GPUs below the 1070ti or 1080 can handle 4K resolution, but might not reach 60fps, anything higher tiered, such as the 1070ti (1080+1080ti) can handle 4K 60Hz, or can possibly go higher in fps (depends on the settings of the game). I would assume that GSYNC helps in this matter as well.

i have sapphire RX 580 . is that enough or should i upgrade to RX Vega 64 ?! to be honest im not really such a fan for Nvidia . what do you suggest ?!

[McHox]

38 minutes ago, Nik Balor said:

1440p 144hz is ( 530,841,600 ) pixels , and on 4k 60hz is ( 497,664,000 )

what the fuck is that math supposed to be
1440p has 3.686.400 pixel and 2160p has 8.294.400 

[Nik Balor]

2 minutes ago, McHox said:

what the fuck is that math supposed to be
1440p has 3.686.400 pixel and 2160p has 8.294.400 

you sure about that ? cuz i watched some benchmarks and calculated it otherwise !

[Princess Luna]

4k60hz and 1440p144hz is a matter of preference, there is not a better one than other as it depends on what you're after.

 

If you want to play fast paced games like Overwatch, LoL/DOTA2, CS:GO, Rainbow6Siege and so on you'll be better off with a high refresh rate monitor as your focus is usually seeing the enemy as soon as possible to give you the most reaction time as possible.

 

If you want to focus on single player story driven games like The Witcher 3, Final Fantasy XV, Life Is Strange, Assassin's Creed and so on where eye candy is more important, you're there to enjoy immersion on the game's beauty and such without the need for massive reaction times the 4k60hz panel will be superior.

 

I personally always recommend the middle term with something like the Acer X34 3440x1440p100hz ultrawide specially because it is a lot easier to see the difference between 60hz to 100hz than 100hz to 144hz.

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, Nik Balor said:

i have sapphire RX 580 . is that enough or should i upgrade to RX Vega 64 ?! to be honest im not really such a fan for Nvidia . what do you suggest ?!

If your playing games at a native 4K 60Hz, then I'd recommend the gtx 1080 or 1080ti (to get the most performance out of the gaming experience at 4K resolution). Vega 64 is directed towards the 1070 and lives up to the performance of a 1070ti (falls behind a little bit).

[Nik Balor]

12 minutes ago, TheBeastPC said:

If your playing games at a native 4K 60Hz, then I'd recommend the gtx 1080 or 1080ti (to get the most performance out of the gaming experience at 4K resolution). Vega 64 is directed towards the 1070 and lives up to the performance of a 1070ti (falls behind a little bit).

so what you're trying to say is that my RX 580 cant handle the load right ?

[Phate.exe]

1 hour ago, reapzzer said:

2 things : 144Hz all the way. It's just soooooo smooth, and the second one when in a year or so a game so power hungry will be released you can always drop to 1440p 60 and keep ultra settings

4K doesn't scale cleanly to 1440p at all.  It scales to 1080 perfectly though.  Currently the only game (that I own/play) that I can't comfortably play at 4K on reasonably high settings with my Fury is Watch Dogs 2, so I drop it to 1080p, grab my controller, and sit a bit farther back from the screen.

 

34 minutes ago, Nik Balor said:

i know it's all about personal opinions , but i was just talking scientifically which one puts more load on the GPU?!

i have sapphire rx 580 and ryzen 7 1700 btw . Can it handle both , or just one of them ?

It's more than just the pixels being pushed though.  Higher resolutions tend to bring higher resolution (read:  larger) textures as well.  In general, resolution will beat on the GPU, and framerates will beat on the CPU.  At 4K60 you're beating on the GPU because you're asking it to do LOTS OF THINGS, but CPU-wise it shouldn't be too much more demanding than gaming at a lower resolution.  At 144hz you're beating on both the CPU (because everything in the game needs to refresh for each frame, and there's more of them) more than the GPU.

 

If you're being held back by the GPU, you can always spend some time tweaking the settings to get more frames.  You're not likely to notice a huge difference in how pretty your game is between "Ultra" settings like you'd see in most benchmarks/hardware reviews and high/very high settings.  You'll also likely find that some settings might not add much to the gameplay experience despite completely nuking your framerates.

 

If you're held back by the CPU, dropping the resolution or quality settings isn't gonna do much to improve your framereates.

 

This obviously all depends on the game, but Ryzen generally has no problem at all hitting 100-120hz depending on the game (obviously higher in some others).

[Princess Luna]

7 minutes ago, Nik Balor said:

so what you're trying to say is that my RX 580 cant handle the load right ?

The RX580 is a 1920x1080p meant video card nonetheless if you put all stuff low and medium you could still achieve playable fps in 4k.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Nik Balor said:

so what you're trying to say is that my RX 580 cant handle the load right ?

4K 60fps it will struggle a little but it will still play at 4k, 1440p 144Hz it will handle it quite well at a decent fps at a playable but overall good gaming experience. I'd say that the RX 580 is more of a 1080p card, it can handle higher resolutions, you will get an achievable fps at a playable experience, but dont expect the highest frame rate.

[Nik Balor]

6 minutes ago, Princess Cadence said:

The RX580 is a 1920x1080p meant video card nonetheless if you put all stuff low and medium you could still achieve playable fps in 4k.

 

3 minutes ago, TheBeastPC said:

4K 60fps it will struggle a little but it will still play at 4k, 1440p 144Hz it will handle it quite well at a decent fps at a playable but overall good gaming experience. I'd say that the RX 580 is more of a 1080p card, it can handle higher resolutions, you will get an achievable fps at a playable experience, but dont expect the highest frame rate.

regardless of nvidia , what do you think is the best AMD GPU to handle this ?! or there is none ?

[Princess Luna]

Just now, Nik Balor said:

?

AMD doesn't really have a video card on the highest end tiers, it's best card today is the Vega 64 which is more or less on pair with the GTX 1080.

 

nVidia still has the TITAN X Pascal and GTX 1080 Ti which AMD has no competing card against.

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Nik Balor said:

 

regardless of nvidia , what do you think is the best AMD GPU to handle this ?! or there is none ?

AMD only has their enthusiast grade cards, which are the Vega 56/64 and at the higher end of the tier between the two, the Vega 64 performs near the gtx 1080, but consumes around 400W or more in power consumption when under full load. Obviously, the Vega 64 isnt going to match the performance of a 1080ti from Nvidia. When it comes to the enthusiast levels and higher end GPUs, Nvidia has the performance segment of their category covered and AMD doesnt have any competition with their higher end cards, especially in the performance sector. Almost certainly, the AMD cards will hold up with the higher resolutions and higher refresh rates, but like @Princess Cadence mentioned, the Vega 64 wont live up to the performance of a 1080ti or any higher end GPUs that Nvidia has to offer.

[Nik Balor]

Thanks a lot @TheBeastPC and @Princess Cadence you're my friends from now on