1440p vs 1080p long term

[noot]

I am ready to let my 6 year old ivy bridge machine die and move on to a coffee lake system with a GTX1170. The only decision i need help with is the resolution, 1080p 144hz will be feasible and will last a very long time, 1440p 144hz will be doable and pretty, but it wont last as long.

any feedback is welcome, thank you!

[Technomancer__]

get a nice 1440p high refresh rate monitor like i did

i got the asus swift PG278QR (TN version) on black Friday and it is great btw it oc to 165 htz

[noot]

Just now, Ethocreeper said:

get a nice 1440p high refresh rate monitor like i did

i got the asus swift PG278QR (TN version) on black Friday and it is great btw it oc to 165 htz

I would get a 1440p 144hz quantum dot monitor from samsung

or a 1080p variant for $200 less

 

[noot]

but would a 1170 be able to push that 144hz refresh rate at 1440p , it would be equal to a 1080ti about

 

[Technomancer__]

Just now, noot said:

I would get a 1440p 144hz quantum dot monitor from samsung

or a 1080p variant for $200 less

 

it doesn't have g-sync tho mine has

 

get a g-sync 1440p high refresh rate monitor

[noot]

Just now, Ethocreeper said:

it doesn't have g-sync tho mine has

 

get a g-sync 1440p high refresh rate monitor

i'd rather not, its $300 more and even if it wasnt id still go with that, it looks so much better

[Technomancer__]

17 minutes ago, noot said:

but would a 1170 be able to push that 144hz refresh rate at 1440p , it would be equal to a 1080ti about

 

my 1070 can push about 100fps on games with everything max except anti-aliasing which is not needed thanks to the resolution so it should be fine. of course cant be sure until its released

[ProjectBox153]

4 minutes ago, noot said:

but would a 1170 be able to push that 144hz refresh rate at 1440p , it would be equal to a 1080ti about

The 1170 does not exist. 

[SpencerC]

14 minutes ago, noot said:

but would a 1170 be able to push that 144hz refresh rate at 1440p , it would be equal to a 1080ti about

 

As @Jamiec1130 said, the 1170 doesn't exist at the moment. Don't believe any of the rumors coming out until Jensen comes out on stage with his leather jacket.

[Technomancer__]

10 minutes ago, Jamiec1130 said:

The 1170 does not exist. 

it will be named 1170 or 2070 something like that if you are talking about the next generation of nvidea gpus

and yes they do not exist yet

[noot]

yes but they will in the near next months and from the past the top end always matches the mid for example the 980ti with the 1070

i expect them to be out in like 4 months

[SpencerC]

1 minute ago, Ethocreeper said:

it will be named 1170 or 2070 something like that if you are talking about the next generation of nvidea gpus

and yes they do not exist yet

And as such, we have no idea what the performance will be. Going from 12nm from 16nm is not going to give us the same performance leap from 28nm to 16nm. A 20-30% increase is rational, but expecting another Pascal leap to occur this time round is absolutely ridiculous.

[SpencerC]

Just now, noot said:

yes but they will in the near next months and from the past the top end always matches the mid for example the 980ti with the 1070

i expect them to be out in like 4 months

Pascal was a special case. I would not expect the next generation of xx70 GPU's to perform near the 1080Ti.

[Technomancer__]

1 minute ago, SpencerC said:

Pascal was a special case. I would not expect the next generation of xx70 GPU's to perform near the 1080Ti.

i agree but the next gen 70 should be fine for 1440p high refresh rate given my 1070 can reach about 100fps on ultra with anti-aliasing off

[noot]

1 minute ago, SpencerC said:

Pascal was a special case. I would not expect the next generation of xx70 GPU's to perform near the 1080Ti.

to mean they are going to be worse or better, and not really the 970 out performed the 780ti and same with the 680 and the 770 all almost match.

[SpencerC]

Just now, noot said:

to mean they are going to be worse or better, and not really the 970 out performed the 780ti and same with the 680 and the 770 all almost match.

The GTX 770 was more or less a rebranded 680. Also, this http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-970-vs-Nvidia-GTX-780-Ti/2577vs2165

[noot]

1 minute ago, SpencerC said:

The GTX 770 was more or less a rebranded 680. Also, this http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-970-vs-Nvidia-GTX-780-Ti/2577vs2165

that site isn't relevant i go off of benchmarks and actual in game performance, not how many teraflops it has, but

anyways i still expect performance to be very good from that card

thanks for you're input

[SpencerC]

1 minute ago, noot said:

that site isn't relevant i go off of benchmarks and actual in game performance, not how many teraflops it has, but

anyways i still expect performance to be very good from that card

thanks for you're input

Oh, I'm not doubting that the next xx70 will be a fine performer, and will be able to do 1440p @144hz just fine. However, expecting another Pascal type leap for this round of cards is a little out there personally.

[Darkseth]

1 hour ago, noot said:

i'd rather not, its $300 more and even if it wasnt id still go with that, it looks so much better

Samsung's Quantum Dot monitors aren't perfect. They do suffer from some disadvantages / problems.

 

G-Sync is the best invention for gamers in the last decade

Without G-Sync i could not play any games smoothly, because they would ALL stutter / tear / whatever else.

I would not trade G-Sync, not for any Panel in the world. I would rather stick to TN + G-Sync, than using the best VA / IPS Panel you can get without G-Sync (but with stutter / tearing instead). At least for Gaming!

 

 

A Monitor can last for 5-10 years easy. Do NOT buy an ugly 1080p crap, unless you can't afford anything better. It looks MUCH better, cleaner, sharper, more space while browsing (yes, surprise! You don't benefit in gaming only. You benefit while browsing, working, office, anything you do in Desktop).

And it's wrong, that 1440p won't last as long.

It will last LONGER. Because a higher resolution is so much better useable --> more future proof.

 

If you mean regarding pure fps.. yea. But still: 1440p + High > 1080p + Ultra. by Far.

 

 

Trust me, the best you can get as a Gamer is 2560x1440 + 144Hz + G-Sync.

(except you're into 4k / 60 hz more. Depending on your taste and games).

 

And again my lifespan argument: Even if G-Sync costs 300 bucks more (in usually it's 100-150 bucks more..), it's more than Worth as a Gamer.

What are 300 bucks in 10 years? 30 bucks per Year. 2.5 bucks per Months. That's not even a half Drink per Month. And G-Sync gives you an incredible visual Gain in smoothness.

 

While on the other hand.. Spending 500-600 bucks on a Graphics card, that will be replaced after 3-4 years max anyway because it will be too slow by that time.... how is that perfectly fine, but investing in a variable refresh rate not?