can a gtx 1060 6gb handle a 2650x1080 monitor?

[amos chaim]

can a gtx 1060 6gb handle a 2650x1080 monitor?

[pwn_intended]

Yes, but don't expect to fully max out any new AAA games. Anything from 2 or more years ago should be able to run at ultra settings no problem.

[suchamoneypit]

definitely; but can it play games on ultra settings at 60 FPS on said monitor? Probably not. A 750 ti could handle simply running that monitor.

[Stevoisboss]

2 minutes ago, amos chaim said:

can a gtx 1060 6gb handle a 2650x1080 monitor?

 

[ARikozuM]

Yes, it will. You may have to lower settings like AA to achieve 60hz minimums.

[amos chaim]

so i would not have 60 fps in bf1 with it? because i have a regular 1080 right now and i get between 100 and 115 fps

[Festive]

1 minute ago, amos chaim said:

so i would not have 60 fps in bf1 with it? because i have a regular 1080 right now and i get between 100 and 115 fps

You will be able to.

[Axeonelite]

2 minutes ago, pwn_intended said:

Yes, but don't expect to fully max out any new AAA games. Anything from 2 or more years ago should be able to run at ultra settings no problem.

My GTX 760 runs this exact resolution and I maxed out Battlefield 1 without dropping below 30fps. I think a 1060 would be more than plenty. 

[stealth80]

1 minute ago, amos chaim said:

so i would not have 60 fps in bf1 with it? because i have a regular 1080 right now and i get between 100 and 115 fps

1080 is a lot more card though. I wouldn't think it would be terrible UW though

[amos chaim]

1080 p monitor

 

[pwn_intended]

39 minutes ago, Axeonelite said:

My GTX 760 runs this exact resolution and I maxed out Battlefield 1 without dropping below 30fps. I think a 1060 would be more than plenty. 

30fps is crap for a shooter. Bordering unplayable if you're trying to do that online. I would definitely not run on ultra if that is the fps yo are getting.

 Also, BF1 is hardly a "new" game since it is using the now 3 year old frostbite3 engine which has been optimized really well since the early bf4 days.

[ARikozuM]

18 minutes ago, pwn_intended said:

30fps is crap for a shooter. Bordering unplayable if you're trying to do that online.

Subjective and he's using a 760.

18 minutes ago, pwn_intended said:

I would definitely not run on ultra if that is the fps yo are getting.

 Also, BF1 is hardly a "new" game since it is using the now 3 year old frostbite3 engine which has been optimized really well since the early bf4 days.

An "engine" isn't something like in a car. It changes, frequently, between games. It isn't uncommon for a company to keep the name of an engine despite making several large changes, additions, and omissions.

[Axeonelite]

40 minutes ago, pwn_intended said:

30fps is crap for a shooter. Bordering unplayable if you're trying to do that online. I would definitely not run on ultra if that is the fps yo are getting.

 Also, BF1 is hardly a "new" game since it is using the now 3 year old frostbite3 engine which has been optimized really well since the early bf4 days.

30 FPS is the standard regardless of if you like it or not so please calm your opinion. Second it doesn't matter how old the engine is. You said it couldn't handle new AAA games on High\Ultra settings and I proved you wrong. 

 

We can consider Overwatch a new AAA title, I can max that out at 60FPS on the Utlrawide also. Need for Speed which released a year ago now, still breaking that 2 or more year timeframe you placed, can be maxed out over 30 fps also. 

[pwn_intended]

29 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Subjective and he's using a 760.

An "engine" isn't something like in a car. It changes, frequently, between games. It isn't uncommon for a company to keep the name of an engine despite making several large changes, additions, and omissions.

I understand he's using a 760. But given other variables stay constant (resolution, texture quality etc) a higher FPS is OBJECTIVELY better. The subjective part is whether its better to use lower details and get 60fps+ vs Ultra and run it as a slideshow. In strategy games (like CIV) I would prefer the nicer textures over a high FPS, but for a shooter like BF, I feel that keeping 60FPS while lowering quality provides ME with a better experience. YMMV.

 

And yes, game engines change, but I was only talking about the FB3 engine specifically, which EA has actually been doing a really good job with since the debacle that was the BF4 launch. Hardline and Battlefront both launched without huge issues and they generally ran really well and looked amazing on most hardware. This is because EA/Dice built the FB3 engine in house and they were already very comfortable with and had optimized the crap out of it, as opposed to using someone else's engine and heavily modifying it (ie. CryEngine like a lot of developers do)

10 minutes ago, Axeonelite said:

30 FPS is the standard regardless of if you like it or not so please calm your opinion. Second it doesn't matter how old the engine is. You said it couldn't handle new AAA games on High\Ultra settings and I proved you wrong. 

 

We can consider Overwatch a new AAA title, I can max that out at 60FPS on the Utlrawide also. Need for Speed which released a year ago now, still breaking that 2 or more year timeframe you placed, can be maxed out over 30 fps also. 

30 is the standard only on consoles since they are underpowered. 30 has never been the standard for pc gaming. I am calm thank you very much. Stating that running at 30pfs is crap doesn't constitute anger.

 

There is no one rule that applies to ALL titles, what I was saying was more of a rule of thumb. Certain new AAA games can be maxed out on a potato (NFS uses the FB3 engine, and Overwatch was very well developed). But to that point, keep in mind how long Overwatch was in production, and then subsequently delayed as well. Blizzard is not a company that will ship a half-assed game, so they did it right. This is sadly NOT the case for a good percentage of console ports, and the companies will ship half-finished games (Watch_Dogs, Assassin's Creed Unity and Batman AK come to mind off the top of my head.)

 

 

I still stand by my original statement of "Don't EXPECT to max out any new AAA games"

The caveat being that you may be pleasantly surprised with some of them.

[TomR]

Yes I have a Gigabyte GTX 1060 6GB paired with a i5 6500 and it's great for ultrawide 60hz

[TomR]

I play mostly Rust. At 1080p before the ultrawide I averaged around 80fps with Nvidia's GeForce Experience recommended settings. With an ultrawide around 60fps with the Nvidia GeForce Experience recommended settings.

[Axeonelite]

31 minutes ago, pwn_intended said:

30 is the standard only on consoles since they are underpowered. 30 has never been the standard for pc gaming. I am calm thank you very much. Stating that running at 30pfs is crap doesn't constitute anger.

 

There is no one rule that applies to ALL titles, what I was saying was more of a rule of thumb.

A rule of thumb is an opinion. Not a fact. You simply gave a hyper-importance to your opinion. 30 constutes to most people the baseline of  a playable game. Most people when asking a question here are looking for facts. Not your opinion.

 

Also he never said he is going to be playing games. 

 

Keep this in mind next time you reply to someone, whether it be the OP or me. 

 

Now as this has gotten off topic I will be leaving and no longer looking at this thread. Thank you. 

 

P.S To OP. Get the 1060 and enjoy your time with it.