Can new GPU's easily handle 2560x1440 with everything on?

[Nvidiaguy07]

Building a new system soon, and for 1080p performance, i can turn just about everything up with my current GPU (560ti). I really wasnt considering upgrading the GPU, but one of the tech podcasts i was listening to mentioned that GPU's are now god enough to comfortably run at 1440p with no problems.

Im guessing the new 680's will be able to, but how comfortably can they handle that res? I would almost consider getting one, but my worry is that they can barely handle todays games at that res, then im screwed in a year or two, and will be forced to go back down to 1080p (presumably playing at a non-native res if i upgrade to a 1440p monitor.

I also have gotten used to 120hz with my current monitor, so not sure if id be able to give that up, but hopefully with apple pushing new high res monitors, they will release a 1440p or 2560x1600 120hz gaming monitor (dont really care about 3d).

 

[A5]

Well the 680 does 60fps on Ultra + FXAA in BF3 at 25x16, so I'd say that would probably be the minimum if you're worried about it going forward.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

My 7970 1175 1625 maxes out most games at 1440p, some with MSAA, some without MSAA, mostly 50-80+ FPS average game dependent.

Including BF3, Alan Wake, Crysis, Crysis 2(1080p with Dx11 n Hi Rez pack, but 1440p without them) Max in both cases, Dirt 3, Splinter Cell Conviction. Most games stay pretty much capped at 60+ FPS during most/nearly all fights as well, and occasionally/rarely below 60 FPS and some never go below 60 FPS.

But if you do want to go 1440p with current intensive games, the minimum would be 7970 1125 1575 or 680 OC.

And you will need a SB quad at 4.0+ GHz for smoothness otherwise regardless of the FPS the minimums will be unbearable besides pathetic lag and stuttering. And of course 8-16 GB RAM.

Even Skyrim does fine at 1440p 8x MSAA MAX with 60 FPS mostly.

 

[Nvidiaguy07]

Well the 680 does 60fps on Ultra + FXAA in BF3 at 25x16, so I'd say that would probably be the minimum if you're worried about it going forward.

yea lookin at AT's review right now, i just dont know if id consider that "easily" handling that res. Even looking at Metro 2033 performance makes me even less confident in how that card peforms.

The last time i spent more than my usual 200-250 was when i bought a 6800gt, and i regretted it pretty badly, considering my friends 7600gt performed similar about a year later for <$200. If the card were really future proof at that price, i might consider, but for now i think im going to wait and see what they offer over the next year or so.

Apparently apple and intel are going to be pushing super hi-res monitors, so i kinda expect hardware to come out pretty soon. I guess ill gauge from there.

I briefly owned a 1440p dell, and loved playing at that res, but i owned a 8800gt at the time and it really couldnt handle it. Dont get me wrong I love my 1080p 120hz monitor, but since im doing a whole new system, what better way to show it off than playing at a super high res?

 

[Nvidiaguy07]

My 7970 1175 1625 maxes out most games at 1440p, some with MSAA, some without MSAA, mostly 50-80+ FPS average game dependent.

Including BF3, Alan Wake, Crysis, Crysis 2(1080p with Dx11 n Hi Rez pack, but 1440p without them) Max in both cases, Dirt 3, Splinter Cell Conviction. Most games stay pretty much capped at 60+ FPS during most/nearly all fights as well, and occasionally/rarely below 60 FPS and some never go below 60 FPS.

But if you do want to go 1440p with current intensive games, the minimum would be 7970 1125 1575 or 680 OC.

And you will need a SB quad at 4.0+ GHz for smoothness otherwise regardless of the FPS the minimums will be unbearable besides pathetic lag and stuttering. And of course 8-16 GB RAM.

Even Skyrim does fine at 1440p 8x MSAA MAX with 60 FPS mostly.

how much AA is needed when gaming at a res that high? I feel like with pixels that small, it almost wouldn't make a difference. does it?

 

[aaksheytalwar]

how much AA is needed when gaming at a res that high? I feel like with pixels that small, it almost wouldn't make a difference. does it?

AA is needed, depends on the game and the exact scene. But in some areas even 4x MSAA isn't enough and 8x MSAA isn't perfect for each scene either.
But by and large 0x AA is usually not that bad.

1440p with 0x AA > 1080p with 4x MSAA by a huge margin in terms of jaggeries assuming both are 27"

No matter what you buy today, within 12-18 months a card will come which will potentially (via OC, or in some extreme situations, etc) will be at least 50-100% faster than a stock 680 or 7970. Most likey 40-70% or so within 12-18 months is sorta given, but it could even be faster.

Big Kepler in late 2012 will be like 20-25% faster than stock 680. Perhaps overclocking it will retain the performance gap as well. Then Q1/Q2 (3-6 months after release of Big Kepler) you should expect Radeon 8970 which will probably be a better deal than 7970 stock CF of today, not faster than CF, but fast enough to provide a smoother experience and a better user experience overall making 7970 CF itch to upgrade.

So you should only buy something you can afford to upgrade within 12-18 months max.

If you go with a 7850 and overclock it 30-40% then that compares with a 580 OC which is like 80-85% of a stock 680 for half the price

 

[tviceman]

The correct answer is..... SOMETIMES.

 

[chimaxi83]

The correct answer is..... SOMETIMES.

Yep ^^

Can't just say yes or no, it depends on the game.

 

[Gigglin]

I play BF3 and Skyrim at 1440p with a 7970. I have it OC'ed to 1000 1575 right now before I upgrade to a nicer better ventilated case and IVB next week. The fps range for BF3 is between 45-60, and occasionally dips below 40 in big firefights. This is with 16x AF, and 8xAA @ 1440p. Skyrim stays in the 55-60 range with everything ultra + 2k texture mods. I think I am bottlenecked by my Phenom II x4 965 a bit as well, hence the upgrade.

I definitely think I'll have to upgrade my GPU when the next generation comes out to keep up with games at this resolution.

 

[Face2Face]

I play BF3 and Skyrim at 1440p with a 7970. I have it OC'ed to 1000 1575 right now before I upgrade to a nicer better ventilated case and IVB next week. The fps range for BF3 is between 45-60, and occasionally dips below 40 in big firefights. This is with 16x AF, and 8xAA @ 1440p. Skyrim stays in the 55-60 range with everything ultra + 2k texture mods. I think I am bottlenecked by my Phenom II x4 965 a bit as well, hence the upgrade.

I definitely think I'll have to upgrade my GPU when the next generation comes out to keep up with games at this resolution.

Let us know the difference at 1440p, going from a Phenom II clocked @ ? to an IB clocked @ ?. I am very interested.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

I play BF3 and Skyrim at 1440p with a 7970. I have it OC'ed to 1000 1575 right now before I upgrade to a nicer better ventilated case and IVB next week. The fps range for BF3 is between 45-60, and occasionally dips below 40 in big firefights. This is with 16x AF, and 8xAA @ 1440p. Skyrim stays in the 55-60 range with everything ultra + 2k texture mods. I think I am bottlenecked by my Phenom II x4 965 a bit as well, hence the upgrade.

I definitely think I'll have to upgrade my GPU when the next generation comes out to keep up with games at this resolution.

It is your CPU, not the graphic card.

Other than Metro and Crysis 2(with Dx11 and high rez pack) I can't think of a single game which won't run at 1440p maxed nearly perfectly/perfectly as long as you don't use AA/AF. In most games you can use AA and AF but in some very intensive games, don't use AA and AF. Pretty much every game runs perfect at 1440p max.

If a 7970 1125 1575 isn't playable at a given setting, then 6990 and 590 or 6970 CF would do much worse. Chances are 580 SLI would give better FPS but may not be smooth either.

There is no popular game which won't run maxed out, maybe 1 in 100 games or 1 in 500 games like Metro.

Even in Crysis 1 I average 50+ FPS with my current overclock and that is pretty much one of the most intensive games out there.

In games like BF3 I need to turn down/switch off AA and MSAA at 1440p, but that is about it.

Skyrim shouldn't have a problem at 1440p with 4x MSAA or even 8x MSAA provided you have a 2600k at 4.2-4.6 Ghz and 8-16 gig RAM.

And even the games like Metro or Crysis 2 I play at 1080p on my u2711 seem perfect, a lower rez looks nearly just as good with of course the lower rez thing, but no problem at all. So there is no reason to worry at all.

You don't need 7970 CF unless you want 100-120 FPS in modern games or unless you want 8x MSAA with BF3 and still 80-100 FPS or so.

But you do need a good CPU. If you buy this card and monitor and power it with a 920 at 3.6 Ghz or something, you will probably end up crying despite what many might believe. But with an Ivy at 4.5, especially 3770k you are all set.

 

[Gigglin]

Let us know the difference at 1440p, going from a Phenom II clocked @ ? to an IB clocked @ ?. I am very interested.

I will. Phenom II x4 965 is at 3.7 GHz right now, and runs at 50C idle, 70-80C load on air. Too hot for my taste. IVB will save on power and temps I am sure with way better OC on H100.

@aaksheytalwar: You are right! Initially I thought I would wait till Haswell to upgrade, but after looking at a lot of benchmarks decided that a I5 3570k is a significant upgrade over the Phenom II for gaming purposes, which is all I do.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

I will. Phenom II x4 965 is at 3.7 GHz right now, and runs at 50C idle, 70-80C load on air. Too hot for my taste. IVB will save on power and temps I am sure with way better OC on H100.

@aaksheytalwar: You are right! Initially I thought I would wait till Haswell to upgrade, but after looking at a lot of benchmarks decided that a I5 3570k is a significant upgrade over the Phenom II for gaming purposes, which is all I do.

Ivy is hotter than SB and possibly hotter than your Phenom II as well, under load, that is.

 

[Insomniator]

Right now yes because every game is a console port and the consoles are 7(?) years old now.

The actual 'next gen' games might bring us back down to reality in terms of any $100+ video card maxing out most games.

 

[Face2Face]

I will. Phenom II x4 965 is at 3.7 GHz right now, and runs at 50C idle, 70-80C load on air. Too hot for my taste. IVB will save on power and temps I am sure with way better OC on H100.

@aaksheytalwar: You are right! Initially I thought I would wait till Haswell to upgrade, but after looking at a lot of benchmarks decided that a I5 3570k is a significant upgrade over the Phenom II for gaming purposes, which is all I do.

Wow! that's pretty hot for a Phenom II. Mine maxes @ 51C @ 1.4v with a crappy TX3.

I gotta say I only play @ 1080P and with 6870 and I play Skyrim, GTA4 and some BF3 - and they all play a lot better than I thought they would. Single player BF runs at ultra with 2X AA and 16X AF - not sure of the frames, but it's very smooth. GTA 4 and Skyrim Maxed play great as well.

 

[Gigglin]

Ivy is hotter than SB and possibly hotter than your Phenom II as well, under load, that is.

I guess just for the power savings then. Going from a 125W to 77W processor with better gaming performance. Hopefully the Corsair 550D with H100 will provide adequate cooling for the 3570k. I am not planning on going beyond 4.3 - 4.5 OC.

 

[Gigglin]

Wow! that's pretty hot for a Phenom II. Mine maxes @ 51C @ 1.4v with a crappy TX3.

I gotta say I only play @ 1080P and with 6870 and I play Skyrim, GTA4 and some BF3 - and they all play a lot better than I thought they would. Single player BF runs at ultra with 2X AA and 16X AF - not sure of the frames, but it's very smooth. GTA 4 and Skyrim Maxed play great as well.

At stock the idle was at 30C and load @ 50-56C, running at 3.7 Ghz has pushed the temps up quite a bit. This is on an Arctic Freezer Pro 64. Nothing fancy. The case isn't the best for OCing either with a 7970 and phenom II running mild OC.

 

[Face2Face]

At stock the idle was at 30C and load @ 50-56C, running at 3.7 Ghz has pushed the temps up quite a bit. This is on an Arctic Freezer Pro 64. Nothing fancy. The case isn't the best for OCing either with a 7970 and phenom II running mild OC.

Yeah, it's the Artic Freezer Pro or your voltages are really high.

 

[Nvidiaguy07]

The correct answer is..... SOMETIMES.

So, basically the answer is no then. I think im a year or so away from buying a new card to

Right now yes because every game is a console port and the consoles are 7(?) years old now.

The actual 'next gen' games might bring us back down to reality in terms of any $100+ video card maxing out most games.

When, if ever can we expect these "next gen" games? Crysis 3?

I think im still a year or so away from upgrading my GPU/Monitor to game at 1440P (I like 16:9 more than a 2560x1600 monitor, hope this is the more popular res). I just cant justify buying a 500 dollar GPU, that wont get that much life out of it because it wont be able to handle the newest games in 1-2 years at that res.

Right now my 560ti will be more than fine for 1080p gaming, and i really like my 120hz monitor (even if it is on the small side - 23"). I think an a year or so, higher res monitors will be more mainstream, prices will be lower, and there will be more of a selection.

I havent seen any 1440p 120hz monitors out, so hopefully there will be some released in that time. Possibly even something crazy like 1440p, 120hz, AND IPS. fingers crossed.

 

[Face2Face]

I havent seen any 1440p 120hz monitors out, so hopefully there will be some released in that time. Possibly even something crazy like 1440p, 120hz, AND IPS. fingers crossed.

We can only hope. Now that the ipad 3 dropped the High Rez bomb on the industry, we should be seeing more High Rez screens within a year - No point until then.

 

[Zanovar]

No

 

[peonyu]

2xAA is fine for me at that rez, I have a 7970. I could use 4xMSAA and most likely have great frames to but why bother since the pixels are small enough that 2x clears it right up. The kicker is AA+Adaptive AA in order to AA transparent textures, right now 2xAA+Adaptive is fine but 4x+Adaptive in future games will likely be to much for 1 card.

 

[Gigglin]

Yeah, it's the Artic Freezer Pro or your voltages are really high.

I haven't undervolted the CPU. I was happy with stock for the longest time, and just bumped it up last week to see what it can do. IVB arrives in a week, so not tempted to do any more tests on this system.

 

[Face2Face]

I haven't undervolted the CPU. I was happy with stock for the longest time, and just bumped it up last week to see what it can do. IVB arrives in a week, so not tempted to do any more tests on this system.

I hear you. Please let us know the differences when you get the IB. Thanks!

 

[aaksheytalwar]

As of now a single $500 gpu can max out 99.9% games, sometimes without AA. However when next gen consoles release in 2014 you may need 2 $500+ gpus of the future to max out games released in the future the answer isn't sometimes, the answer is always yes with very rare exceptions. So in short the answer is yes, not sometimes.