Best Long Term Value GPU

[traha9]

18 hours ago, Zando Bob said:

They have 1440p, 1440p ultrawide, and 4K scores for some games with a set of GPUs including the 2080 Ti and 2080: https://techgage.com/article/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-2080-ti-4k-ultrawide-gaming-performance/2/

So, I actually found this last week and I was pretty pumped bc it indicates that the 2070 S may actually be able to drive an Ultrawide the way I am looking for. But as I went back through the benchmarking a couple times, I found myself asking questions that typically would have been covered by the highly regarded benchmarkers ie Gamers Nexus, Tech Deals, Hardware Unboxed, etc. He also didn't disclose the monitor that he was achieving the results on. To see if my red flags were valid, I went to the comment section. Take a look. What are your thoughts?

[traha9]

12 minutes ago, Jon Jon said:

It's such a hard conversation to have these days.

 

I have had my RX 580 8GB for 2 years now, and though I have the itch to upgrade for better VR performance, it does what I need it to fine overall still, so it is hard to justify upgrading.

 

For what you want you want to target and have last a while, really the RTX 2080S is probably the best way to go. Either that, or get a used GTX 1080ti.

 

The RX 5700XT is great too, along with the RTX 2070S, but if you want to take advantage of ray tracing later down the line, an RTX 2080S I would argue is what you want to even take advantage of SOME of it in later titles.

 

Fact is, ray tracing is coming, since the new consoles will have it with the next Navi, so if that even remotely matters to you, then the RTX 2080S at the minimum is what you want to get for your resolution and for the potential for later game support.

 

Personally, I would push that you get an RX 5700 XT, enjoy the performance for gaming now and leverage Radeon Image Sharpening to get near identical graphics quality while lowering the resolution to get the performance you want. If it were me buying now, I would get an RTX 2070S or 2080S strictly because NVIDIA has better VR support and Oculus leveraged the new NVENC for better quality ASR when dropping performance. That and the NVENC provides way better quality than what the UVD in AMD's graphics cards provides for recording.

@Jon Jon Do you think the 2080 Super could provide 100 FPS  consistently at Ultrawide on "AAA shooters"? If so, do you noted any benchmarks for this use case?

[Zando_]

46 minutes ago, traha9 said:

So, I actually found this last week and I was pretty pumped bc it indicates that the 2070 S may actually be able to drive an Ultrawide the way I am looking for. But as I went back through the benchmarking a couple times, I found myself asking questions that typically would have been covered by the highly regarded benchmarkers ie Gamers Nexus, Tech Deals, Hardware Unboxed, etc. He also didn't disclose the monitor that he was achieving the results on. To see if my red flags were valid, I went to the comment section. Take a look. What are your thoughts?

I didn't see many red flags, which do you mean?
 

44 minutes ago, traha9 said:

@Jon Jon Do you think the 2080 Super could provide 100 FPS  consistently at Ultrawide on "AAA shooters"? If so, do you noted any benchmarks for this use case?

Most likely, remember tests on the ultra preset usually have higher AA and such than you need at higher resolutions, you can often drop that and some other settings for a big performance boost with little visual impact.

[traha9]

3 hours ago, Zando Bob said:

I didn't see many red flags, which do you mean?

@Zando Bob@Jurrunio@Jon Jon@xg32

Hmm, looking back over it maybe it was exaggerated in my mind.

 

But, what set my antennas off, were that his results seemed to contradict what everyone else was telling me - including a direct msg from Tim, Hardware Unboxed, who I consider to be an expert. He provided pictures for the in-game graphic presets, but only for 1080p. And then I probably read this comment and immediately discredited the results.

 

So you think the benchmarks are reliable?

 

 

[Jurrunio]

14 minutes ago, traha9 said:

his results

who's "he"?

 

from what I can remember, 2070S beats the 5700XT and the performance gap increases with resolution. There might be a few cases that shows the 5700XT to be faster, but in general it's slower. In 3440x1440 resolution, I dont think even the 2070S is a good high refresh rate card tho. It will crack 60fps no problem, but nowhere near 144fps.

[traha9]

@Jurrunio

 

Not sure who he is, but this is what we were talking about: https://techgage.com/article/nvidia-geforce-2060-2070-super-review/2/

[jones177]

When 3440 X 1440 monitors came out they were 60hz. I bought one. A little later I bought a GTX 1080 and everything ran over 60fps. A few months later I upgraded to a GTX 1080 ti and it was a total waste at that refresh rate and resolution.

 

The world has changed since then.

My RTX 2080 ti can't run a 120hz 3440 X 1440 like my GTX 1080 ran my 60hz version.

 

Going by the "Displays" part of the forum 2560 X 1440 144hz is the most desired monitor. None of the recent AAA games I have bought can run close to 144fps at that resolution even with my overclocked RTX 2080 ti and 5ghz CPU. 

 

When I ran 1080p 60hz monitors for years I only upgraded GPUs for more vram. I was already getting enough frames. 

My 2011 vintage GTX 570 could do 120fps in Skyrim when it came out. The vram was for modding.

 

As far as I am concerned we have not caught up to the current most popular monitor like we did with 1080p 60hz. Until we do that there is no long term value of any of the GPUs on the market today. 

[Jon Jon]

17 hours ago, traha9 said:

@Jon Jon Do you think the 2080 Super could provide 100 FPS  consistently at Ultrawide on "AAA shooters"? If so, do you noted any benchmarks for this use case?

https://techgage.com/article/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-2080-ti-4k-ultrawide-gaming-performance/2/

 

This will give you a good example of what an RTX 2080S can do, as it is marginally better than an RTX 2080.

[xg32]

@traha9 a general rule of thumb for me, 4k/60 is about the same as uw1440p/100, so if a card can run 4k/60 (average) it'd likely be good enough, though i don't recommend running everything on ultra, to free up some headroom.