980 Ti and 2560 x 1080 for gaming?

[TechLoad Network]

With a 980 Ti, will I be able to play games on high settings on a 2560 x 1080p monitor?

[Oshino Shinobu]

Yes. 

[MegaDave91]

Maximum settings with ease.

[AlwaysFSX]

You'll be able to play games pretty much maxed out.

[Picky Peep]

That's not even a challenge for a 980 Ti.

[BarisERY]

its overkill, a 980/390X/390/970 is enough for that res it is just %30 more pixels than 1080p so it is not that deminding to put it into perspective 1440p is 70%more 4K is 400% more.

[TechLoad Network]

its overkill, a 980/390X/390/970 is enough for that res it is just %30 more pixels than 1080p so it is not that deminding to put it into perspective 1440p is 70%more 4K is 400% more.

How about at 3440 x 1440?

[MegaDave91]

How about at 3440 x 1440?

With less ease but still ease.

[BarisERY]

How about at 3440 x 1440?

that would be much better for a 980Ti and 34''3440x1440 monitors are just amazing.

[TechLoad Network]

that would be much better for a 980Ti and 34''3440x1440 monitors are just amazing.

Would you happen to know where I could find some 980Ti 3440x1440 benchmarks? Can't seem to find any

[BarisERY]

Would you happen to know where I could find some 980Ti 3440x1440 benchmarks? Can't seem to find any

yea those ones are hard to find just look at 1440p benchmarks and lower them a bit, around 30%. note that this wont be 100% accurate but it should give you a pretty good idea about how it will be.

[MMKing]

(3440 * 1440) / (2560 * 1440) = 1.34375 = 34.375% more pixels in 3440 compared to 2560 width same height.

 

Something to keep in mind when you're gaming on an ultra wide monitor. The games that support the resolution either stretch the image so that it can be viewed on a wider surface, or the game display a wider image. The first solution is a flat increase in pixels. The second solution does not increase the fidelity, but allow you to see more of the game, thus further increasing the GPU load by displaying, and consequently rendering more visual effects.

 

Either way, vertical fidelity is not increased by the added pixels. Thus you are not free to tone down anti aliasing as you would be if you compared the fidelity between 1080p and standard 16:9 1440p.

 

It's not safe either to assume a 30-35% reduction in FPS compared to standard 1440p. As mentioned, if the game extends the field of view, your GPU may be forced to render additional effects which would not be rendered in standard 1440p. So the performance difference is highly subjective to which game you are playing.

 

You can also run into games which support it poorly or not at all.

 

Far cry 4

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/20670693/FarCry4_21-9.jpg

 

Star Citizen - just an example, the game is not released so i'm not bashing.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/20670693/StarCitizen_21-9.jpg

 

Here is a great example of Bioshock implementing the ''second solution'' i described above.

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/6-15-2014/n2ZLcb.gif

 

As you can see, the game allows the game to see more of the world, adding a flat 34.3% more pixels. However, it also adds more visual effects such as water reflection in this example. So that the taxation on the system may exceed 34.3%, even though it's not displaying a greater number of pixels.

 

Head over to Wide screen gaming forum WSGF.org for more info, they have detailed discussion in released and upcoming games. Here is their Witcher 3 discussion thread: http://www.wsgf.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=29015

[Monarch]

That's not even a challenge for a 980 Ti.

 

Try Witcher 3 maxed out.