980 Ti + which Ultrawide Resolution?

[exar333]

ultrawide is so dumb, completely useless IMO, games' FOV don't support the aspect ratio. just get 2560x1440

Great, completely uninformed response. smh

UWD is fantastic and every game I have played in the last year has supported it. I did have to do a resolution hack for Skyrim (if I remember right?) but that was it. It is great for non-gaming and gaming.

Right this second, every monitor choice is a compromise. You can't get a 144hz 3440x1440 or 4K display that is IPS or PVA. That means selecting what you value the most.

>= 1440P Resolution
IPS/PVA
120hz+

Pick 2....

Hopefully by the end of the year we start having options that check all three boxes.

 

[Zstream]

What about http://www.pcper.com/news/Displays/LG-Announces-27MU67-B-Monitor-27-4K-IPS-AMD-FreeSync

 

[RussianSensation]

What about http://www.pcper.com/news/Displays/LG-Announces-27MU67-B-Monitor-27-4K-IPS-AMD-FreeSync

"The monitor supports AMD's FreeSync technology with a refresh range of 40 - 60Hz. FreeSync eliminates image-tearing and stuttering, which occurs when the monitor and graphics card are out of sync. The result is a smooth and seamless gaming experience, with fluid motion and no loss of frame rate."
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/lg...ch-4k-ultra-hd-ips-monitor-with-freesync.html

 

[zigen]

That's pretty cool, haven't seen that one yet.

Although I'm quite set on getting a 34" Ultrawide for my next monitor and not quite ready to jump to 4k yet. The only question is which resolution is best to get for me.

Can anyone tell me how 2560x1080 look on a 34" Ultrawide?

Or what framerates do you get with a 980 Ti or an equivalent card in a heavily modded Skyrim with ENB on a 34" 3440x1440 Ultrawide?

 

[rchunter]

Great, completely uninformed response. smh

UWD is fantastic and every game I have played in the last year has supported it. I did have to do a resolution hack for Skyrim (if I remember right?) but that was it. It is great for non-gaming and gaming.

Yeah well most newer games should obviously start supporting that rez but older games are hit and miss and probably usually require resolution hacks. It is still an oddball resolution. That's why I didn't buy one, that and the extra grunt required to run it. Also, if you're trying to run a kvm switch forget about it. They pretty much don't make them yet that will support that rez.

 

[exar333]

Yeah well most newer games should obviously start supporting that rez but older games are hit and miss and probably usually require resolution hacks. It is still an oddball resolution. That's why I didn't buy one, that and the extra grunt required to run it.

Worst case is that you run using 75% of the screen in 2560x1440. Coming from a 3x1200P setup, it is SO much better.

Gaming in ultrawide is also awesome. Fantastic for FP titles and strategy alike.

 

[zigen]

Worst case is that you run using 75% of the screen in 2560x1440. Coming from a 3x1200P setup, it is SO much better.

Gaming in ultrawide is also awesome. Fantastic for FP titles and strategy alike.

May I ask what kind of games do you play and what framerates do you get with your 970 in that 3440x1440 resolution? I am also using a 3x1200p setup and really looking forward to a 34" Ultrawide.

 

[exar333]

May I ask what kind of games do you play and what framerates do you get with your 970 in that 3440x1440 resolution? I am also using a 3x1200p setup and really looking forward to a 34" Ultrawide.

Mostly play RTS, isometric RPGs (Pillars, BG, Divinity, etc.) and FPS RPGs like FO3/NV, ES series and Dragon Age.

I will run a couple tests on my 970 for you and post back...ran DA with most eye candy maxed-out on my display and it was good. Not 60 pegged, but good enough. I will install ENB on Skyrim and let you know how that works too...will do a couple FRAPS runs inside/outside and see what it looks like.

Edit: Will re-run DAI as well, since I played it the first couple weeks and there have been a lot of game and driver patches since then. It is likely a decent amount faster now.

 

[Elfear]

With a single 290, I could play heavily-modded Skyrim with decent frames at 3440x1440. I had to drop a few settings (grass density I believe) but it played pretty well. A 980Ti or equivalent should run it just fine.

 

[exar333]

With a single 290, I could play heavily-modded Skyrim with decent frames at 3440x1440. I had to drop a few settings (grass density I believe) but it played pretty well. A 980Ti or equivalent should run it just fine.

I am seeing the same. I just loaded a mod-heavily modded version and it ran just fine. Stayed at 60fps indoors and outdoors...this was with HD textures, face/armor textures, grass/water enhancements, sky detail, weather effects and lighting enhancements. Not too crazy, but a lot going on. GPU pegged at ~1550mhz boost, and ~2.6gb VRAM usage. Stayed at 60fps....

On DA:I, I had everything maxed except tesselation (set to medium). Was hitting ~50fps average; 60fps indoors and dips to ~40 outdoors and/or in more involved battles.

A 980Ti with a modest OC or good aftermarket stock/boost speed would be 40-50% faster. That would more than cover additional mods...

You should be good.

 

[zigen]

I am seeing the same. I just loaded a mod-heavily modded version and it ran just fine. Stayed at 60fps indoors and outdoors...this was with HD textures, face/armor textures, grass/water enhancements, sky detail, weather effects and lighting enhancements. Not too crazy, but a lot going on. GPU pegged at ~1550mhz boost, and ~2.6gb VRAM usage. Stayed at 60fps....

On DA:I, I had everything maxed except tesselation (set to medium). Was hitting ~50fps average; 60fps indoors and dips to ~40 outdoors and/or in more involved battles.

A 980Ti with a modest OC or good aftermarket stock/boost speed would be 40-50% faster. That would more than cover additional mods...

You should be good.

Thank you so much. Music to my ears. I think you just sold me on the 980 Ti and the 3440x1440p. My wallet will hate you though.

 

[exar333]

Thank you so much. Music to my ears. I think you just sold me on the 980 Ti and the 3440x1440p. My wallet will hate you though.

Haha! Enjoy!

Make sure to grab a nicely-cooled version with a decent bump in clocks. 10-20% extra performance out of the box is nothing to sneeze at!

Out of curiosity, what ENB mods are you using? I am probably going to do a complete re-load this year and probably do a clean install...any suggestions welcome.

(debating a new Oblivion or Skyrim playthrough)

 

[zigen]

Haha! Enjoy!

Make sure to grab a nicely-cooled version with a decent bump in clocks. 10-20% extra performance out of the box is nothing to sneeze at!

Out of curiosity, what ENB mods are you using? I am probably going to do a complete re-load this year and probably do a clean install...any suggestions welcome.

(debating a new Oblivion or Skyrim playthrough)

For sure, will get a nice non-reference card if ever. Will also wait a bit for what AMD has to offer as well.

I also just rebuilt my mod list recently. Was using Dahaka ENB (beta version still unreleased on Nexus) and now switched to Tundra ENB. I suggest go for a Skyrim playthrough, lots of great mods being released. And for sure will look great on that 3440x1440 Ultrawide. :thumbsup:

 

[soccerballtux]

Ultrawide is also the best resolution for anything other than gaming by a huge margin.

huh???? how?

 

[soccerballtux]

Great, completely uninformed response. smh

UWD is fantastic and every game I have played in the last year has supported it. I did have to do a resolution hack for Skyrim (if I remember right?) but that was it. It is great for non-gaming and gaming.

Right this second, every monitor choice is a compromise. You can't get a 144hz 3440x1440 or 4K display that is IPS or PVA. That means selecting what you value the most.

>= 1440P Resolution
IPS/PVA
120hz+

Pick 2....

Hopefully by the end of the year we start having options that check all three boxes.

you don't seem to understand the difference between resolution support and FOV support.

I have used them, and find the fishbowl effect attrocious

 

[soccerballtux]

Mostly play RTS, isometric RPGs (Pillars, BG, Divinity, etc.) and FPS RPGs like FO3/NV, ES series and Dragon Age.

I will run a couple tests on my 970 for you and post back...ran DA with most eye candy maxed-out on my display and it was good. Not 60 pegged, but good enough. I will install ENB on Skyrim and let you know how that works too...will do a couple FRAPS runs inside/outside and see what it looks like.

Edit: Will re-run DAI as well, since I played it the first couple weeks and there have been a lot of game and driver patches since then. It is likely a decent amount faster now.

RTS, assuming you get the extra room/wideness-space, would be the one legitimate game reason that I wouldn't condemn for these.

for the other games, it needs full FOV support up to like, 140 degrees probably for it to be worth it

 

[exar333]

RTS, assuming you get the extra room/wideness-space, would be the one legitimate game reason that I wouldn't condemn for these.

for the other games, it needs full FOV support up to like, 140 degrees probably for it to be worth it

True. Configuring the FOV in Borderlands 2 made a huge difference. Generally, most newer titles have a FOV slider or adjustments. Older games generally can be tweaked manually to achieve this too.

Edit: I don't have an issue with fishbowl effects myself...can't speak to that. Helps to tweak the FOV though...I may gift this display to my wife and get a curved one late this year or early next year if they release a model >60hz. That would help too, especially if you sit close to your screen. Honestly though, side to side its not any different than a 40 LCD that a lot of people use as well for their gaming display.

 

[exar333]

huh???? how?

If you work in a technical field, it allows for amazing screen configurations. This includes code review, spreadsheets and multi-windows. It is also fantastic for flowcharts and technical drawings as well....

I used 3x1200P before and I am more efficient with my new display, hands-down. I wouldn't say the same thing for a 1080P ultrawide though, because it wouldn't have enough vertical pixels for my uses. Gaming would still be OK though, but the pixel density is a bit on the low end for most models I have seen.

I use my screen for functional spec creation and review for applications. Its great and allows for a lot of different configurations depending on horizontal and vertical needs.

 

[xthetenth]

huh???? how?

Three or four easily reconfigurable columns are a beautiful thing, and it fills the prime area for vision really nicely, without wasting space on bezels. Plus, any additional things like navigator panes or the like don't get duplicated, which saves even more room.

If, for example, I'm doing some shell scripting work and want two windows, three terminal prompts and a hierarchy view of my filesystem. I can fit all of that comfortably on one screen. With multiple monitors, I end up making the two windows of code wider than they need to be, which pushes everything else off onto the second screen. Dealing with a second screen for that sort of thing is a pain and pushes things far enough away they're outside a comfortable viewing area.

It's really easy to underestimate what a big deal it is to be one one monitor, since 3440x1440 is a lot of room that fills the prime viewing real estate nicely, and being able to shrink windows to fit the content allows more full windows to be fit in that area, as well as preventing it from being wasted on bezels.

The only change I'd consider is eventually taking it to 2k or more vertical pixels with a custom base and some capable window management software but I'd need to seriously build my workspace around that.