• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Which video card would I need to drive 3,840 x 1,600 resolution?

madoka

madoka

Diamond Member
After eight years I finally figured out the source of my eyestrain was a Dell 2709 that is just WAY too bright, even with the brightness set at 0. I thought it was just old age, but I believe that the Dell messed my eyes up and I finally confirmed it when I looked up that particular model on the internet.

So now I'm in the market for a new monitor and I'm interested in the LG 38" monitor (38CB99).

Currently, I have an old Radeon card, which is inadequate to drive this monitor. So which cards should I be looking at?

I'll be doing web surfing, word processing, and some light gaming (SCIII and Company of Heroes).
 
Last edited:
I would buy a decent card near the $200 range, maybe the RX470 if you want to save a little, otherwise a RX480/RX580 or GTX1060.
 
Headfoot said:
No, wtf, this card is way too slow for this resolution. Terrible advice.

OP: 470/570, 480 or 1060 6GB or better
Click to expand...
I don't know what SC3 is but Company of Heroes is a 2006 game which would run well at 4K.Seems like he only plays very old games.
 
Used HD7970 for $80. I can max almost all games at 1080P, and have played at 2160 just fine on the 2 games ive tried it on.
 
I think you can get this one for around $1.5k.

But what's your budget? And what's SCIII? Will you never play a new game?
 
mohit9206 said:
I don't know what SC3 is but Company of Heroes is a 2006 game which would run well at 4K.Seems like he only plays very old games.
Click to expand...
Starcraft 2. Really doubt he means company of heroes one. Probably company of heroes 2. And it's an infinitely short sighted piece of advice to suggest a card thats just barely able to play 2 games he plays today, just sticking your head in the sand like he might not ever play another game. Plus, only very expensive monitors have the resolution he quoted. Why should he pinch pennies on the GPU for a $1000+ monitor? Ludicrous. Honestly if you cant make those small logical deductions, you shouldnt give folks advice on what card to buy.
 
Whatever is the best deal. On a Polaris-based card (RX 470, 480, 570, 580) or GTX 1060 6GB you should be fine for 4K for the games you listed with all the eye candy turned up. In addition, it gives you some headroom if you choose to play anything recent (should be capable of mix of med/high settings most games).

Spending $600-700 on a video card now is wasteful for his desired performance when he can simply upgrade to a mid-range Vega or Volta down the road for even better performance should he need it... and spend less money total.
 
Headfoot said:
Starcraft 2. Really doubt he means company of heroes one. Probably company of heroes 2. And it's an infinitely short sighted piece of advice to suggest a card thats just barely able to play 2 games he plays today, just sticking your head in the sand like he might not ever play another game. Plus, only very expensive monitors have the resolution he quoted. Why should he pinch pennies on the GPU for a $1000+ monitor? Ludicrous. Honestly if you cant make those small logical deductions, you shouldnt give folks advice on what card to buy.
Click to expand...
Well he didn't state his budget so i recommended the cheapest possible card that will get the job done.
If he had stated his budget, people would be better able to give advice.
 
You're projecting. Not everyone wants the cheapest possible thing. Most normal buyers would prefer to have headroom...
 
Headfoot said:
You're projecting. Not everyone wants the cheapest possible thing. Most normal buyers would prefer to have headroom...
Click to expand...
Ok, so your projection is better than his? How do you know OP wants headroom and not cheapest possible...? Budget would definitely clarify these types of things, or stating targets like what you're debating.
 
OP is not on a budget. Lol.

Doesn't mean he likes wasting money either, though. I like to think my suggestion is best as that reserves more capital for future upgrades... or more Austrian-made things that rhyme with clock. 😉
 
A 4(5)70/4(5)80 or a 1060 would be the best card to play consistently at 4k within reason on most semi current games. That should probably be the baseline.
 
Without a budget or other build specs given, I'd just say go for a GTX 1070. Relatively power efficient, plenty of headroom for light gaming at that resolution down the road, and better value (Zotac mini version is just $350) versus springing for a 1080/1080 Ti/TItan Xp.
 
Yikes, that's 368% more pixels than what I've got.

I think a 390x would be best. Since the resolution is frickin' huge, you'll want as wide a memory bus as possible. And since COH 1 is Direct3D 9, you'll want an AMD card due to the hardware scheduler (less driver overhead).
 
OP's monitor is FreeSync 52~75Hz. So an AMD card.

I'm stuck with a HD 7850 running 3440x1440 whilst I wait and/or save for Vega, and it's actually playable with less demanding titles and lowered settings... Not that I'm happy with it; but I've a good CSS community and a backlog of old games I'm finally getting around to.

I would say even a 4GB RX 460 or 560 (when they are available) could be enough for OP, and 470/570 or 480/580 would give a little breathing room.
 
470 or better I would say. Possibly Vega would be a good idea.
 
The 380 should support higher resolution. That is likely the DVI max only. Not sure about its HDMI, but its DP should support 4k.

And yes, a 480 or 580 is best right now in terms of AMD options, you will need to turn down settings for good FPS in newer games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top