HD 6870 w/older monitor

[dawgtuff]

I plan to build a i5 2500k, Z68, and a single HD 6870. However, I'm going to use my older Viewsonic 20" LCD 1440x1050 full screen monitor. Will the 6870 be overkill? I'll be playing games like Starcraft II, Crysis,etc.

 

[gmaster456]

No such thing as overkill. You'll be set. You will also have some headroom if you were to upgrade monitors

 

[TakeNoPrisoners]

I would buy cheaper components so you could afford a new monitor.

Switching to an i3 2100 with a 6790 will give you plenty of performance and give you some budget room for a 1080p monitor.

 

[dawgtuff]

Thanks for the info!
I really like my Viewsonic, actually I have 2 of them. A 20" full screen really appeals to me over a wide screen.
BTW- Do these newer games only play in wide screen format?

 

[tulx]

Thanks for the info!
I really like my Viewsonic, actually I have 2 of them. A 20" full screen really appeals to me over a wide screen.
BTW- Do these newer games only play in wide screen format?

I'm not sure if they play only in a widescreen format, but I wouldn't consider anything except 16:10 or 16:9. Buy the 6870 - it's the best price/performance and price/watt card you can get and, paired with a 2500k, you will be able to smoothly play BF3 on ultra settings.

 

[tulx]

No such thing as overkill.

Now that would be a good topic for a long discussion night. I dare say that the 2500k is indeed somewhat "overkill" for a single 6870 - meaning that all games will be limited by the card rather than the CPU.
Not that that's a bad thing - in reality, one component will allways be the "bottleneck" and will need to be upgraded first - but just to put it out there.

 

[maddie]

Now that would be a good topic for a long discussion night. I dare say that the 2500k is indeed somewhat "overkill" for a single 6870 - meaning that all games will be limited by the card rather than the CPU.
Not that that's a bad thing - in reality, one component will allways be the "bottleneck" and will need to be upgraded first - but just to put it out there.

At lower resolutions, the CPU can work more as the video card allows a faster frame rate due to less pixels on screen.

It might be overkill for a 6870 at standard HD but works better at lower resolutions as the 6870 can more easily keep up and so allows a better match.

 

[TakeNoPrisoners]

Thanks for the info!
I really like my Viewsonic, actually I have 2 of them. A 20" full screen really appeals to me over a wide screen.
BTW- Do these newer games only play in wide screen format?

I had a friend that said the same thing, except when they saw a widescreen monitor they thought it was a full screen monitor. Plus they were using a widescreen monitor the whole time without realizing it.

You can play games in 4:3, if you really really want to.

 

[Lonyo]

Thanks for the info!
I really like my Viewsonic, actually I have 2 of them. A 20" full screen really appeals to me over a wide screen.
BTW- Do these newer games only play in wide screen format?

Starcraft 2 is best on a 16:9 screen, as it adds extra map view to the sides of the screen. With 4:3 you lose out on what you can see on screen.
Crysis 2 lets you adjust the FOV I believe so it will play "normally" at any aspect ratio.

 

[Yuriman]

At lower resolutions, the CPU can work more as the video card allows a faster frame rate due to less pixels on screen.

It might be overkill for a 6870 at standard HD but works better at lower resolutions as the 6870 can more easily keep up and so allows a better match.

I see this thrown around a lot... but it seems kindof erroneous to me. If it's playable at high res with with an i5, it's not going to be any less playable at a lower resolution.

Thanks for the info!
I really like my Viewsonic, actually I have 2 of them. A 20" full screen really appeals to me over a wide screen.
BTW- Do these newer games only play in wide screen format?

A 24" 16:10 screen will be about the same vertical size as your 20" 4:3, but will have roughly 20% more horizontal viewing space.

 

[maddie]

I see this thrown around a lot... but it seems kindof erroneous to me. If it's playable at high res with with an i5, it's not going to be any less playable at a lower resolution.




A 24" 16:10 screen will be about the same vertical size as your 20" 4:3, but will have roughly 20% more horizontal viewing space.

This is what I said.

If your CPU is capable of (X) frames/sec but your video card can only handle (Y) frames/sec at a given resolution (Y < X), then reducing the resolution will allow your card to approach or even pass X. The CPU can possibly become the limiting factor. Less screen pixels allow for more frames/sec from the video card.

In other words it becomes more playable at lower resolutions assuming your CPU can generate enough data to keep the GPU fully working.

 

[dawgtuff]

So, can I assume my i5 2500k and my single HD6870 with my current monitor is a good match?

 

[grohl]

I don't understand why people DONT like gaming in widescreen. For any game in the last 3-4 years isn't it a competitive disadvantage not to game in widescreen?

 

[dawgtuff]

I guess it is if you're playing against others.
Back to the point, I simply have 2- 20" full screen @ 1300x1050. They look fine to me and I do play a lot of older games.
I'm now considering a AMD A10 Trinity apu that has a very good video chip. Later, add a better vid card.