Own a high end graphics card capable of 1440p and 4K

>own a high end graphics card capable of 1440p and 4K
>still use a 1080p monitor

Who else does this here, don't be shy.

I hate chinese cartons.

It's Japanese animation you idiot, or if you'd like Japanese cartoon. It's not Chinese.

Its commie shit either way

Japs aren't communists

People who claim they are running games on 60fps MAX on cards like a GTX 960 or 970 or 380 are lying to themselves.

To actually run a lot of games with every single setting cranked up as far as it goes and still get > 60 fps you still need top of the line card.

awoo~

And I'm referring to playing at 1920x1080 resolution.

I'm planning on getting a GTX 1070 and a 1080p/144hz monitor. Is it overkill? Anyway I'd rather go for that over a 60hz 1440p panel.

crysis run for me at 90~ fps on the more cluttered scenery at max settings at 1080p using a gtx970

Not side why but I'm keking hard also checked.

I have the 980ti and I still play in 1080p.

>144hz

Considering you would need 144 fps to make full use of that, a 1070 would well suited to it.

I do this but with a 1366x768 smart tv and a crt monitor 1280x1024

Crysis is a fucking old game. Try it with Crysis 3 and every single menu setting turned all the way up. You'll get a frame rate in the 30s.

Depends on the game. I have a 380 4GB and commonly play BF4 multiplayer with FPS ranging between 100 to 144 where I have it capped. Newer games corrupted by shillworks and stuff like that need not apply.

>downsample from 1440 to 1080p
>with post process AA on top of it

Call the cops niggas

I'd rather have a clean, aliasing free image then some high resolution shit

>being this new

It's accomplishing the same thing but I guess I agree. 4K is a meme at the sizes typical for PC monitors.

No, I'm not. You don't need 16x anti-aliasing to play games, but the option is there in many games.

In fact at 1080p you could flick between 4x and 8x MSAA screenshots and you would be -extremely- hard pressed to see any difference. It's 99% placebo and a waste of processing power.

But if you want MAX SETTINGS EVERYTHING TO THE RIGHT at 1080p you still need a big card.

And of course there are things like Nvidia Hairworks and TressFX that need a strong GPU no matter what resolution you're running at.

Dark Souls 3 requires a GTX 970 to hit 60 fps at 1080p. Not sure if you call that a high-end card. I would.

>being this new

Gtx 970, uses it to play garrys mod on a 1080p monitor

That game is very well optimized from what I've read, and it is the epitome of AAA so it is designed to run well on toasters.

However, I'm still not convinced you are doing this with every setting cranked as far as possible.

he's baiting you user. it's a joke. stop getting your body pillow in a twist

Do you feel bad for making a shitty thread OP? It's either Bait or a boring question which could be summed up with lack of funds or laziness. Ultimately who gives a damn

whats that anime (not mimosa and woo) from?

a 380 can barely average 60 fps on bf4 1080p 4x msaa, fuck off

That's in some single player benchmark that all of the sites use which is not at all indicative of actual in game results. In actual use I'm usually up around 120-144 using the game's very own FPS counter, with settings as high as they will go, not including supersampling of course. It is being pushed by a 5820k, so that may account for some of the "bonus" performance I seem to get from it.

GTX 970
1080p 60Hz IPS Monitor

Because 1440p 144Hz IPS monitors are $700 and there's no 144Hz IPS Monitor that's $200~300

I don't care about 1440p

The game is so old now obviously it will run well.

but why buy a 600 dollar gpu when you're not going to use it

I got a GTX 1080 and I just run Gentoo on it and don't really have many games.

im sorry but it's just bizarre behavior.

i bought a formula 1 car to drive to the grocery story and back.

144hz 1080P monitor with a 390 here. doom maxed uses 3.6GB Vram, the newest games on 1080p maxed can give your gfx card a run for its money :^)

I want to be a normal person like everyone else and join in and play video games like all normal people do, so I got a stupid expensive computer and put Windows on, but I am struggling using Windows and I'm trying to download games on it but it takes forever. And I am rubbish at playing games anyway and I don't think people would hate me any less or want to play games with me now. Gentoo kind of works at least and I can read emails and talk to people on IRC who hate me and browse Sup Forums really smoothly. And I got Portal 2 and Left 4 Dead 2 and Minecraft on Gentoo, which is plenty of games really.

I don't actually know what games it is people play which need all these fancy graphics cards.

kys newfag

My 390 is capable of running a lot of games well at 1440p but I'm stuck with a shitty 1080p monitor for the time being because money.

something about this post is really, really cute but i cant put my finger on what it is

1440x900 master race

GTFO New Fag

GTFO pleb scum

I don't understand what's the point of getting a very high end card, made for 1440p/4k at maybe 60-45fps if the game's settings are going to be lower to have better framerate. With 1080p you get the best resolution, it won't matter what settings you pick, and it will last you more than 4 years with that card on a 1080p monitor.

>this fabricated gibberish

There is no person on the face of the earth who has installed Gentoo and also struggles to use Windows at the same time.

Installing Gentoo is easy and actually does what it's supposed to, except for when you have a mess of broken and blocked packages. Windows is horrible and has an awful UI and nothing works as it's supposed to. Even installing Windows is a horrible experience and is pretty much impossible.

I'm using Intel HD graphics for my 1280x1024 monitor.

fags. kys

i do.

all i want is to get as close to 120/144fps on Max or high settings on 1080p.

Just because you can run the game at 1440p with a "1440p card" doesn't mean you'll enjoy the frame rate tanking to 30s on heavy scenes loaded with FX.

if the 1080p monitor is 144hz, then you are making good use of your graphics card

>kys
good meme

fucking took the bait

But why is that the case when Crysis 1 looks better than 3.

Nope, 750 ti with 4k monitor here

i think i've been double baited

I'm gonna get me an Rx 480 but I have a VGA 1680x1050 and I'm not even imagining using VR.

Come on. You could at least try to bait us.

Is it really that farfetched to have not used Windows in such a long time that everything about it feels awkward and unintuitive?

I did actually waste several days trying to install Windows 10 under UEFI + GPT, which doesn't work at all since the Windows installer is buggy and it's very difficult to get even the slightest clue as to what's gone wrong. On this same computer, I installed Gentoo without issue in GPT with UEFI, and it all worked smoothly and my custom kernel config worked almost straight away and it can run Second Life fine with nvidia drivers with all the graphics settings all the way up.

I'm almost getting used to Windows now, but it's an ugly hack of programs which don't quite work perfectly just to do simple things like moving and resizing a floating window without having to drag tiny thin borders around the windows, and having actual usable workspaces. (Native Windows 10 workspaces are kind of disappointing.)

1080p monitor with a 980ti

But I have a Vive which keeps that card very much humble

I bought a 1440p monitor when my old GPU couldn't even handle newer games in 1080p anymore.

It's "Japanimation" you idiot, or if you'd like Nihongo no anime. It's not Cantonese.

Because I cant find a good monitor too buy.
Tried getting a Asus PG279Q, but I returned it because it had horrible backlight bleeding.
And I dont want to go through the whole rma shit again so im sticking with my old samsung syncmaster for now.

>I hate chinese cartons.
>chinese cartons
man, sucks to be you, these things are great.

well fuck, my 780 ti can apparently run 3840x2160
Still using my 1080p monitor...

Define max
I know its a stupid thing to say, but we have all see games where there is no difference between low and high visually, but you can see a massive performance hit (fallout 4 god rays for one, several games textures from high to ultra have no difference, just using an uncompressed version which eats ram but has next to no visual improvement. or games where things are rendered so far away from the player that they realistically could not see the speck on their screen without a magnifying glass and a higher then 4k resolution.

I have a 280x, most games i play i can easily max, and thanks to me not liking how some graphic settings look (soft shadows for one) i get to turn down processor intense things and at least for me, get a better over all looking game.

nope, you got a point for 1 over 2, but 3 looks better then 1, however i believe 1 to still be the better game, also, does 3 have a physics engine like 1 had?

nothing runs 4k maxed single card without frame dips.

I would much rather push 60fps everything rather then get some hardware based aa.

even then, i would rather push 1080p120/144 rather than push the resolution.

little brother just got a 1440 144 monitor, the difference is night and day as far as refresh goes between his side by side old 60hrz, but the resolution difference, i honestly don't notice it at all.

for me,

43ich philips 4k monitor for productivity
120/144 g/free-sync monitor for gaming.
60hrz 1080p for backup in case they break if i had the money.

got 980ti and titan and i use two 19 inch dell screens at 1280x1024 kek

Getting a 1070 for a 1920x1080 60fps monitor.
Who /overkill/ here?

who budget gamer here
got this for $150 bux and couldnt be happier with 4GB vram

This is how I feel about running at 1440p.

In terms of jaggies, I usually can't tell the difference between 1080p with anti-aliasing, and 1440p with no anti-aliasing.

>Have 970
>Play everything at max no problem
>Default res is 1360
>Even 2x the res on Dark Souls 3 at max never drops below 60

Maybe you need to upgrade other parts if you can't pull 1080 at max settings.

1440p 120hz monitor with a vaporx 290x

Can barely hit 60 maxed in recent releases

I've been thinking of upgrading to 1440p since I need a new monitor and 4K is in its infancy, but I'm worried about the scaling of 1080p content. Do you find things that were designed for 1080p looking blurry at all?

>$150 bux
>150 dollars bux

>retards buying amd
nothing to see here folks

I refuse to use windows scaling options because it makes everything look like I need glasses. High quality videos looks fine, it's only streaming media like youtube where I notice a drop in quality.

Thank, as long as it's bearable I guess it should be too bad. 1440p it is.

Dark Souls 3 has a fuck ton of optimization problems through

4K = 4x 1080 so the scaling is perfect.
a 24 inch 4K monitor with an 1080p image scaled will look the same as a native 1080p 24 inch monitor

It's better than bearable. It's downright great.

That's why I made the post, I've been considering a 1440p monitor since it will be a few years before 4K monitors settle in price and quality, but I was concerned about scaling content to a non-multiple resolution. I was just asking how bad the scaling looks.

it depends on your scaling, but think of it like this, since the pixels themselves are becoming so small will you really notice if a pixel is in the wrong spot or not ?
When the pixels are big (1080p display) you notice these things, when the pixels are much smaller (4K and up) it becomes harder and harder to notice individual pixles being in the wrong place/scaled incorrectly.

I would say go for the 4K monitor instead, it is becoming the next standard for media

I've got a 4K monitor, playing games at 1080 just make things look more 'blurry' but really that is because the representation of what a pixel is are 4x bigger at 1080.

> Video gayman √
> Weeb √
Fucking

My 670 can't even play doom at the most shitiest settings.

But when I buy a 4K monitor I want to invest in something great that I can use for years. I'm just not sure if it's worth it yet. 1440p monitors are getting pretty cheap now due to 4K, so I've been considering getting one for the next year or two.

My last monitor (lg ips236v-pn) now 'belongs' to my ex-wife, so I've been using a 13" Cinteq for the past four months. I need a new screen, so I'm not too bothered if it's a 'temporary' one.

>4k monitor
>Intel HD 3000

I've had a Dell 1440x900 monitor for years and it still just werks so I probably won't be assed to upgrade until it dies.

the real newfags got double baited

Been using my Dell UltraSharp 2407WFP for ~10 years. Pretty good going from a 15" TN to a 24" S-PVA.

It wasn't cheap though, but this is set it and forget it tech.

Budget?

>4K & 1440p
>thinks this is the best quality and rathers skips HD because it's too blurry.
Enjoy $5000 down the drain faggot. Now kill yourself.

Up to £300 ($4XX?) is what I'm looking for, I'm not bothered by second hand either.

AOC do a 1440p panel for £230 on amazon. Best part is you can OC it to about 90-120hz.

Dell also do a 1440p for about £300.

my monitor is a 1680x1050.. and i still dont think my GTX 970 can run it properly.

I have a 1080p monitor, but don't plan on upgrading in the next 10 years because of muh VR headset

Thanks, that's the one I'm considering now, it's £200 on eBay new.

I'll be using the 8GB RX 480 next month, which can do 1440/60 and 4k/30 with a 1080p monitor.

Japs are the most capitalist people on the planet.

It's the only 1st world country that leaves the homeless and disabled to die.

That would make them the most 1st world country then

Gundam Thunderbolt. Pretty good if you like mech porn.

Because I have a 560ti.

And my eyes are shit so I can't use a 4K monitor.