Help with 120fps at 120hz

I wanted to know if instead of then selling it. Could I keep buying more and get 120fps that way. I found out I cannot and now I need to know the easiest way to reach that. Be it 1 very expensive card or multiple mid range cards.

I still say that one single card will be better, with my crossfire i notice micro stuttering, the noise is fairly loud, they push the pc temps up if they arnt watercooled...
 
Surely if you are going to turn the graphic levels down to achieve your required fps then you may as well keep your consoles and forget about a gaming machine? Or am i being a noob and missing something obvious? I use xbox 360 for games like cod and fifa because all my friends are on live and wont or cant convert to pc gaming but i love smashing f1, crysis 2 and bf3 on my pc simply for the asthetics, so if i had to turn some of the settings down to get a high fps, surely id be better off financialy atleast sticking with a console?

Toning down graphics on a PC is still *so* much better than on a console.
 
+1

You have been advised multiple times and all advice is on the same page. X79 is not essential for you.

If you know better then stop asking and buy X79.

As said before, coming from a console even a low spec system will be a huge step up so no need to chase that 120fps.

ive not once asked for advice on a mobo or a cpu

i simply asked if it were possible to get a steady 120fps with multiple lower end gpu's.
i recieved my answer as no, so ill be getting a higher end gpu and then just sli down the road

i dont see what the big deal is. i came for advice on graphics and achieving 120fps. instaed i get hammered about my mobo and cpu?
 
quick answer should have been no then

possible yes with silly money, probable no with the system quoted " p9x79 pro mobo with the intel i7 3820"
 
ive not once asked for advice on a mobo or a cpu

i simply asked if it were possible to get a steady 120fps with multiple lower end gpu's.
i recieved my answer as no, so ill be getting a higher end gpu and then just sli down the road

i dont see what the big deal is. i came for advice on graphics and achieving 120fps. instaed i get hammered about my mobo and cpu?

You got advice as to how to achieve your goal. It was noticed you were over killing it and how your budget could be amended to get to where you want to go.

You also did not get "hammered" on your CPU and mobo choice. You were advised that there are better/cheaper options. You ignored. You were advised again. You ignored and tried to justify yourself. You were advised again, you seem to have become offended by it.

Maybe console gaming is for you......
 
you don't *need* 120fps.

The pixel response time on the benq makes the experience better as it is. Your eyes can't distinguish 60 fps from 120fps when running 120hz, but they can distinguish the slow pixel response time of a 60hz monitor.

+1

Can't believe only one person has said this so far. The increase in smoothness from a 60Hz panel to a 120Hz panel doesn't come mainly from running vsync capped at 120 FPS.

If you were to compare 120Hz panel @ 60 FPS compared to 60Hz @ 60 FPS the main difference between th two is there to see.

Obviously in an ideal world you'll want to be 120 FPS capped but games are still extremely smooth ~@ 80-90FPS on a 120 Hz panel.
 
Toning down graphics on a PC is still *so* much better than on a console.

i didnt realize that as ive listened to people on here and got a decent card from the start, even still............ id stick with a console rather than get stuck with a ****** £100 gpu that will only sell for a fraction of that price when i wanted to upgrade.
 
That board doesn't have 16x/16x

Any z77 board would need an extra chip(plx etc) to support over 8x/8x for dual gpus because there is only one 16x lane from the cpu.
 
Last edited:
You came on asking for advice on how to get 120fps with your budget. People suggested how you can reduce some parts of your rig to improve other areas to get you closer to your goal.

Think of it this way:
In an imaginary computer, you have 5 components. In this imaginary world these components are all equally useful for frame rates, and all scale nicely with price (so a £100 component is twice as good as a £50 component, a £200 component is twice as good as a £100 one etc)

In an ideal world, therefore, if you had a £500 budget, you'd have 5 components at £100 each to give the best possible computer for your money. If you had twice as much money, you'd spend twice as much.

What you're suggesting instead is a setup where:
3 cost £100 each
One costs £150
The last costs £50

This means that your computer will run at the same speed as a £250 computer, even though you've spent £500 on it, because the other 5 components are waiting for the £50 one, so you'd fix it by getting rid of the expensive and cheap components and buying ones that fit your system better.

In the real world, things aren't as nicely balanced, but the same theory applies that a rig with some over-specced components mean that you're going to have expensive kit waiting around for something to do, whereas a rig with some under-specced components mean the whole rest of the system is going to spend a lot of time idle. What the posters in this thread are trying to do is suggest how you can balance the rig to achieve as closely as possible what you want to achieve, with the budget you have, by balancing the rig better than your original suggestion.

As for expansion and upgrades, it's not the right way to build a computer to unbalance your rig now in order to upgrade it later - by the time you go to upgrade your CPU, your memory will be out of date and you'll always have one part or other waiting for the rest. Buy a good quality case, power supply and hard disk drives (as these things need to be upgraded far lest often). Then spend the rest of your current budget on a balanced motherboard/memory/cpu/gpu. When it comes to upgrade time, sell all 4 of those items and put the money toward your upgrade. You'll have to top it up, the same as you would be with a single component, but you'll have a better computer at any one stage.
 
+1

Can't believe only one person has said this so far. The increase in smoothness from a 60Hz panel to a 120Hz panel doesn't come mainly from running vsync capped at 120 FPS.

If you were to compare 120Hz panel @ 60 FPS compared to 60Hz @ 60 FPS the main difference between th two is there to see.

Obviously in an ideal world you'll want to be 120 FPS capped but games are still extremely smooth ~@ 80-90FPS on a 120 Hz panel.

Pretty much agree with the last statement. I can notice the smoothness beyond 60FPS (although some would disagree, but then some still think there's no difference between 30/60).

At around 100FPS though anything above that makes no difference to my eyes personally (obviously may differ to others).

Personally my preference is to have a minimum of 60 FPS @ 1080p with everything cranked up, if it doesn't dip below that I'm happy and typically means the average is around 80-90 FPS which makes for a great experience with the right monitor (my old 120Hz panel with 8ms seemed great, my new one with 2ms is fantastic and fixed linear tearing).
 
Back
Top Bottom