1440p or 144Hz? Temporary solution until adaptive sync is standard.

[tobias201]

Hello from Germany!

 

I have a Philips 220EW 1680x1050 and want to upgrade, but right now we have this weird VHS vs. Betamax situation.

I dont know if one will die out or both keep on coexisting or both will be replaced by another open standard. The problem is that I dont want to be stuck with one or the other GPU vendor and I want to use this new monitor for many years. That means that I need an temporary solution that I can use for the next two or three years until AMD and Nvidia hopefully decide to offer something you can use with either vendor. 1440p 144Hz IPS models are too expensive to be a temporary solution (hopefully until then 1440p is the new established min. resolution for PC gaming). So its either 1440p IPS 27ish" or 144Hz TN 24ish" (Budget up to 400€ by the way)

 

My System:

i5-4570

GTX 970 (will be upgraded when next gen GTX 10xx Ti or Fury whatever is out so probably mid to 3Q 2016? no SLI or CF planned because I like simple single card solutions)

8GB Ram

 

Use:

mostly single Player games of every genre AAA and Indie (Witcher 3, GTA V, Dragon Age Inquisition, Europa Universalis IV, Prison Architect, Kerbal Space Program, Starbound etc.)

sometimes FPS (not competitive, CSGO, Call of Duty etc.)

much YouTube an general Web Browsing

rarely Office stuff

no Video editing, CAD, Programming etc.

 

So I mainly ask you because I dont want to make a stupid mistake because I didnt think of some detail or whatever.

I say that because I realize that 1440p IPS 60Hz seems to be the best interim solution for me. I worry that my GTX 970 cant handle this resolution well enough until the GPU upgrade, or can it? I am not used to 144Hz yet so I wont miss it until later. Or is it so groundbrakingly good that I should ditch 1440p and IPS for it?

 

If you agree with me that 1440p IPS is the right choice for me, is the Dell UltraSharp U2515H good value for its money? Something else? Something bigger?

 

Did I miss something? Is 144Hz the right choice no matter what(Fuck Olly IPS)? If yes, would the BenQ XL2411Z satisfy my need for spee... FPS? Or something different?

 

Thank you in advance to everyone answering these questions.

 

[Ling]

There are 1440p 144 Hz monitors available from multiple vendors, so you can have both if your budget stretches that far. As for your for question about the GTX 970, I personally own and use this card in my machine and I play every game at 1440p, including triple A titles (Fallout 4, GTA V, Battlefield 4, etc).

[Deletive]

1440p > 144hz since you like single player

[tobias201]

There are 1440p 144 Hz monitors available from multiple vendors, so you can have both if your budget stretches that far. As for your for question about the GTX 970, I personally own and use this card in my machine and I play every game at 1440p, including triple A titles (Fallout 4, GTA V, Battlefield 4, etc).

As far as I can tell, most 1440p 144Hz monitors are either Freesync or G-sync. I dont want to go with either until AMD and NVidia have decided upon a standard that both teams can use. I definitly want adaptive sync in the future, so another upgrade will be necessary. (In about 2 Years I would guess) Thats why I want to keep the cost down. What FPS do you get in these games? I looked at some Benchmarks and it seems that I will need to turn down some settings to drive 1440p with a 970 and 45+ FPS

 

1440p > 144hz since you like single player

Thats what I thought, too. I should go 1440p before Im addicted to higher refresh rates. That being said, is the monitor I mentioned in my post OK? (Good price point IMO) Or does someone know something that is better?

[CapricaBuccaneers]

1440P is worth using - and the U2515H is an excellent monitor - plenty of us have one because the price/performance is elite tier.

I also bought my U2515h whilst waiting for greater options in the GSync range - then I saw the prices attached to the 34" 1440P Ultrawide 100Hz GSync models and I'll pass on that.

It's worth noting I did have a PG278Q which had to be sent back as faulty so I am aware of the difference, and I can live with it. If you've never tried 144Hz 1440P Gsync - they're too expensive at present, wait it out.

I'd recommend you use the U2515 now and when you upgrade to a new gpu look at the options available then.

[tobias201]

1440P is worth using ...

Sounds good.

Looks like I've got myself an early Xmas present.

[alexyy]

Also have a U2515h myself bloody amazing display for the money.

[Ling]

As far as I can tell, most 1440p 144Hz monitors are either Freesync or G-sync. I dont want to go with either until AMD and NVidia have decided upon a standard that both teams can use. I definitly want adaptive sync in the future, so another upgrade will be necessary. (In about 2 Years I would guess) Thats why I want to keep the cost down. What FPS do you get in these games? I looked at some Benchmarks and it seems that I will need to turn down some settings to drive 1440p with a 970 and 45+ FPS

 

Thats what I thought, too. I should go 1440p before Im addicted to higher refresh rates. That being said, is the monitor I mentioned in my post OK? (Good price point IMO) Or does someone know something that is better?

I'll use Fallout 4 as an example. I have a 4k 60 Hz monitor, and I'm not planning to upgrade to a 4k-capable card until next year. However, I play Fallout 4 at 1440p with as solid 60 fps which rarely drops down to 55. Keep in mind, I have overclocked my GTX 970 using MSI Afterburner, adding 200 MHz to the core and 550 MHz to the memory. I use the MSI version of the GTX 970, and it very easily keeps the temps lower enough to cope with the higher clock. Good luck!

[tobias201]

Done!

(Here should be some Images but .jpg is not allowed???)

 

Next Step: Checking performance in games and Overclocking GPU if needed.