Build system, high Hz, 1080 ti, 1440 or 1080 Pubg ?

[kage65]

Pros, help me build my system.

 

The only game I play is Pubg. Currently I play on an apple 27 cinema display with a gtx 970 and i7 2600 and while the game is playable I'd like to upgrade. 

I like playing in 1440 but want a more fluid experience. If I get a whole new system with high end stuff, ( i7 8700k , 1080 ti ) would I be better off getting a 144 Hz 1080 p monitor or can it run a 1440p 144Hz monitor? Tks

[userzero]

PUBG is not optomised as you probably know. Personally, I think you're wasting your time chasing a better experience for a currently flawed game.

 

You could throw everything you can at it performance wise and it'll still be just "alright"

[cliftonr31]

Yeah I agree with userzero, its not a good idea to base a system off of a game that is really hit or miss whether it runs well or not. 

[kage65]

Yea these are good points. Have you played it lately? Its still flawed but has improved since it came out of beta. 

[Darkseth]

1440.

No matter what, if you can afford a 1080 ti, you do NOT buy an ugly 1080p Garbage-crap anymore. Period. Except all you do is playing e-sports competetive and you don't give a fk about Visuals at all ^^"

1440p looks SO much better.

And 1440p @ High looks much better / cleaner than 1080p @ Ultra (Ultra in generall is in most cases a pure Waste on a 1080p Monitor. Resolution is so low, you won't even see the ultra details really).

 

And even if you do lose a little bit of fps, if you have G-Sync (which is a MUST anyway for a 1080 ti user. Makes the overall experience MUCH smoother), it doesn't matter. You won't notice 20-30 fps more or less really that much, because no matter what fps you get: With G-Sync it's always smooth^^

 

And yea again.. I can speak from experience: 30% more fps~ or so are absolutely NOT worth, sacraficing 1440p resolution for 1080p. Especially in the Year 2018 I mean.. 1080p is around for 15+ years already, and a standard since then. 

You are spending so much more money, and still get a crappy visual quality. Waste of the strong hardware in my opinion.

 

The Monitor will last MUCH longer than anything else in your PC, and you benefit from higher resolution also while in Desktop mode (not just gaming).

 

And even if PUBG is not really good optimized, i would rather reduce settings by 1-2 stages and have 1440p, than 1080p @ high/ultra ^^

Also, you will probably play other games than PUBG in the next 5+ years.. or?^^

[userzero]

Meant to say, yes, go for 1440p high refresh rate monitor as your next purchase if you haven't already.

[kage65]

19 minutes ago, Darkseth said:

1440.

No matter what, if you can afford a 1080 ti, you do NOT buy an ugly 1080p Garbage-crap anymore. Period. Except all you do is playing e-sports competetive and you don't give a fk about Visuals at all ^^"

1440p looks SO much better.

And 1440p @ High looks much better / cleaner than 1080p @ Ultra (Ultra in generall is in most cases a pure Waste on a 1080p Monitor. Resolution is so low, you won't even see the ultra details really).

 

And even if you do lose a little bit of fps, if you have G-Sync (which is a MUST anyway for a 1080 ti user. Makes the overall experience MUCH smoother), it doesn't matter. You won't notice 20-30 fps more or less really that much, because no matter what fps you get: With G-Sync it's always smooth^^

 

And yea again.. I can speak from experience: 30% more fps~ or so are absolutely NOT worth, sacraficing 1440p resolution for 1080p. Especially in the Year 2018 I mean.. 1080p is around for 15+ years already, and a standard since then. 

You are spending so much more money, and still get a crappy visual quality. Waste of the strong hardware in my opinion.

 

The Monitor will last MUCH longer than anything else in your PC, and you benefit from higher resolution also while in Desktop mode (not just gaming).

 

And even if PUBG is not really good optimized, i would rather reduce settings by 1-2 stages and have 1440p, than 1080p @ high/ultra ^^

Also, you will probably play other games than PUBG in the next 5+ years.. or?^^

Great points. I'll follow this advice. 

[Darkseth]

If you are interested in my personal experience:

 

i had a Dell U2414H IPS Monitor for a few little years (still have it as a 2nd monitor). 23,8", 1080p, 60 Hz.

 

Upgraded to a Dell S2417dg (23,8", same size. But 1440p, 144 Hz (OC up to 165) and G-Sync.  Sold it for an Acer XB241YU (pretty much same specs. But different On Screen Display menu with more controls over stuff like gamma).

 

In first view, not much "sharpness/detail" difference to 1080p, but my old GTX 1060 struggled harder. While i had a clean 60 fps Lock always with V-Sync, fps droped down to like 40-50 fps, same settings (still, thanks to G_Sync very well playable. G-Sync is seriously nice.. so smooth. As someone, who hates tearing and stuttering very much).

 

But where i saw the difference at most was at Final Fantasy 14, the MMORPG one. For a month, i had to RMA the Acer monitor, and had only my old 1080p / 60 Hz screen to use (already upgraded to a GTX 1080 tho).

And that's when it striked me. Objects like stairs, Gras, Tree leaves, vegatation, Windows etc did flicker noticeably more, and in general is aw the drop in resolution.

With flicker i mean the aliasing from fine lines (stairs like i said) when moving slightly. 1080p is so low, even with VERY high AA settings, you might still see it.

 

 

So since there is a very high chance, you are already familiar with 1920x1080 resolution, i would recommend going for 1440p, and just see for yourself how the difference is.

 

If your current Apple monitor uses 1440p, you will probably not be happy with 1080p anyway. You notice the difference at most, when you go from the better to worse. 

This also applies with stuff like Sound.  Switch to better speakers / headphones, and then after getting used to, try your old stuff again. And you will think "wtf is that.. i was listening to this the whole time? ew"

 

About the "more fluid experience": G-Sync.

Either Tearing or stuttering will give you a less-fluid experience if you're sensitive to both.

 

When i had my 1080p screen, i noticed that in Wticher 3. V-Sync on, and had like 55 fps. Felt horrible, because i had stuttering (v-Sync on, less fps than Hz =  stuttering / microstuttering).

45 fps with G-Sync (= 45 fps at 45 Hz, adapting also to fluctuating fps) felt MUCH better/smoother/more fluid than non-GSynced 55 fps.

 

 

But G-Sync more than resolution is also something, you really have to test for yourself. There are enough people, who don't notice any Tearing at 144 Hz anymore, so g-Snyc doesn't to much for them.

I am allergic to Tearing / stuttering. As soon i see the smallest Tear, i cant stop looking at it, and searching for it. so G-Sync feels to me like sent from heaven  (slight exxaggaration tho. you get my point).

 

As for some recommendations, if you want to stick to 27":

- Acer Predator XB271HUAbmiprz

- Dell S2716dg (if it's cheaper.. OSD isn't that great, and no Gamma control.)

- ASUS ROG Swift PG278QR (one of the best TN Monitors on the market. Very good colors (except you use any professional applications for photo editing etc... For any normal-use, more than perfectly fine.Especially for gaming)

 

With an IPS Screen (Take Note here, All those IPS Panels come from Au-Optronics, they all use the same panel (with different revisions). They ALL suffer from terrible quality control. You can be very unlucky with stronger backlightbleeding, clouding, defective pixels, and stuff like that. Stronger than it should be usual.

- AOC Agon AG271QG

- ASUS ROG Swift PG279Q

- ViewSonic XG2703-GS

[maartendc]

I have a 980Ti and a i5 6600, and the game runs terrible for me at 1440P, except on Low or very low. On medium, I don't get 60fps.

 

So don't even bother. You would have to go with a 1080Ti and a 8700K, and it might still not run all that great.

[Darkseth]

Well, an i5 6600 can be a Bottleneck for GPUs this Class.

it's just an i5 4-Core CPU, without Hyperthreading. And on top of that, it's a non-K model --> only 3.6 Ghz in all-core-Turbo.

And since you probably use an H110/H170 Board, you're limited to slow 2133 Mhz DDR4 Memory.

Many modern Games are quite taxing. Even Console-ports like Assassin's Creed Unity, which can get my i7 6700k @ 4.4 Ghz to a usage of 80-90%+, in 1080p (drops to 60-70% in 1440p, because fps decreases naturally. But in high refresh.. should be a CPU bottleneck before i hit 144 fps)

 

There aren't many games, where this wont hit 60 fps tho. But on some, you will simply not reach it (Crysis 3 for example), and Pubg is poorly optimized. 

 

But still: https://www.techspot.com/article/1532-pubg-cpu-benchmarks/

An i5 6600 should be similar fast as an i3 8100 (3.6 Ghz, Quad Core), and it manages 112 fps, and doesn't fall below 95.

 

And: http://www.legitreviews.com/pubg-cpu-core-benchmarks-many-cores-need_197719

 

Should still hit 60+ fps.

 

But yea, the point is.. Pubg optimization is still crap. Even high end machines won't hit a stable 140+ fps.

[geo3]

4 hours ago, Darkseth said:

And even if you do lose a little bit of fps, if you have G-Sync (which is a MUST anyway for a 1080 ti user. Makes the overall experience MUCH smoother), it doesn't matter. You won't notice 20-30 fps more or less really that much, because no matter what fps you get: With G-Sync it's always smooth^^

 

And yea again.. I can speak from experience: 30% more fps~ or so are absolutely NOT worth, sacraficing 1440p resolution for 1080p. Especially in the Year 2018 I mean.. 1080p is around for 15+ years already, and a standard since then. 

You are spending so much more money, and still get a crappy visual quality. Waste of the strong hardware in my opinion.

You could not be more wrong. I to speak from experience, 20-30 fps is a HUGE difference and absolutely worth the trade off of more pixels. Having a 1440p monitor I can tell you that the visual quality is not that much better than 1080p. But the difference of a full 144fps and 30 fps lower is just huge. When they make video cards push a constant 144FPS at 1440p I'll say it's a worth while up grade. But even the most powerful cards today fall way short of being able to provide that consistent performance at those resolutions.

 

1440p is great for productivity applications, but makes not much difference in gaming.

[Darkseth]

I could not be more wrong, because YOU have a different OPINION?

Who are you, to claim to be a reference of truth, and i am wrong?

 

i've seen the difference with my own eyes, i have made the experience myself, and this is my conclusion, my Opinion. Who do you think you are, claiming my experience to be Wrong?

Why is my opinion wrong, and yours is correct? because you think you are always right, and everyone else is wrong? 

 

 

first of all.. 20-30 fps from WHAT BASIS? 10 fps? That's +200-300% more performance.

 

1000 fps? That's 2-3% more performance. Both are 20-30 fps.

Start using % as fps differences.

 

 

How about this: YOU could not be more wrong. The visual Quality is noticeable, especially when you get used to 1440p, and go back to the low res 1080p. you instantly see a big difference. Maybe you need some glasses?! Or maybe you need to start thinking outside your little Box, because YOUR Opinino is nothing more: Just 1 Opinion out of many.

 

Since you have G-Sync, 20-30 fps (110 instead of 135~. That's 25 fps) makes not much difference.

 

You fail to realize, a 1080 ti is beeing used. That Monster should not be combined with a low resolution, as even outside of Pubg, most CPUs will bottleneck here. Good chances tho with a 8700k. But once you upgrade the 1080 ti for a twice as fast.. Even a 8700ti will be a Bottleneck already. But anything below a 8700k? Bottlenecks a OCed 1080 ti. Full HD + Ultra settings are already enough for a CPU Bottleneck. Check Digitalfoundry's CPU Tests. They do pretty much the best CPU Gaming tests you can find. 1080p, Ultra settings, Overclocked Titan X (pascal). And already there, an i7 8700k gives many more fps than i7 7700k --> CPU Bottleneck. Even in well optimized games like the Witcher 3.

 

And you also fail to realize, that Game Developers have included a secret menu called Graphic settings, that most people don't find.

Those 20-30% fps loss from 1440p you can easy counter with lower settings.

1440p + High > 1080p + Ultra. Anytime of the day. fps should be somewhat similar due to the settings. But visuals are much better.

 

And on top of that, you fail to realize, that a Monitor will live out the next 2-4 GPUs. If a 1080 ti won't hit 144 fps at all times, in all games at ultra (as if Ultra is needed anyway...), then the 2080 ti will. Or 3080 ti. They will be out before you replace that Monitor.

Also, you benefit from that outside of Gaming. You benefit outside of gaming AND while gaming.

While with a 1080p screen, you benefit ONLY in gaming. And that only by sacraficing quality for fps.

 

 

You simply don't give a shit about Image quality, or a clean image. You have your priorities solely on a high refresh rate and high fps. Which is fine, especially if you're purely into competetive shooters.

I do give a shit about Image Quality. But not as much, to go 4k / 60 Hz. It will look WORLDS better, but having only 60 Hz, is a major trade off, beause i can clearly see HUGE advantages in a 144 Hz screen. And NO, you do NOT need 144 fps to have a huge benefit. Even with 80-100 fps you have a huge benefit. Not to mention, in Desktop use and Browsing you still use 144 Hz to the fullest.

 

That's why 1440p + 144 Hz (+ G-Sync) is the ideal compromise between sharpness, image quality, and how much performance is needed for higher fps (in 4k, the performance needed explodes kinda. But is not much higher than in 1080p).
Especially with such an enthusiastic level Hardware like an i7 8700k + GTX 1080 ti (probably OCed too).

 

So yea. I am definitely not wrong. And even you are not wrong. You are simply ignorant. Mostly about other's opinions, and other ways then your own.

 

 

I would suggest for @kage65 to try both out for himself, and just see. He can always return the 1440p Monitor if he rather wants higher fps than visual quality.

Or simply turn the ingame resolution down to 1080p, and see if the fps difference makes a difference big enough to drop the resolution advantage.

 

 

Btw: You can EASY see a big difference ingame between 1080p and 1440p native, at the same Monitor size.

You just need to know where exactly to look at. ;-)

The World isnt just black and white, like you think it is.

[Morgan Everett]

I upgraded to a 1440p monitor, and the image quality was much better, but this presumably had much to do with the fact that the panel was better in other ways. I'm actually thinking of returning to a 1080p monitor to replace this one (it's developed a fault), because I'm not sure the resolution increase is worth the degradation in FPS.  

 

I'm also not sure why a 1080 Ti (say) shouldn't be used with a 1080p monitor. If you're committed to very high refresh rate gaming, surely it should be?