• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

1 GPU 30fps 4k gaming experiment

VEGACORTEZ

VEGACORTEZ

VEGACORTEZ

Associate
Joined
3 Jun 2014
Posts
375
I was messing around after playing the new batman on 1 titan X OC @1442 & I decided to try out 4k at 30fps without SLI. My 4k monitor has very low input lag in the gaming monitor type of range but obviously 60fps has v-sync lag (not a g-sync monitor). I set Nvidia CP normal v-sync to on & disable in games & then frame capped them at 30fps via afterburner. Obviously this gets rid of v-sync lag & so it now feels like v-sync is off in input lag terms coupled with the low lag of the monitor which is the best you can achieve in that aspect. The question now is can you play at locked 30fps at 4k maxed settings without AA and it feel okay in terms of control & camera panning.

Batman uses a really good motion blur tech which makes 30fps look really nice but other games don't use such things so 30fps can look more juddery & slightly double imaged.

Tried out Tomb Raider, GTA 5, Witcher 3 (config enhanced & no hairworks), Battlefield HL for starters & I could maintain 30fps at all times apart from GTA 5 dipping to 25fps-27fps min on a few intense foliage scenes in the countryside but this does not happen most of the time. As their is no input lag to speak of even aiming in shooters is fine unless you are playing online. The motion on the games on an IPS monitor still has the slight tell tale signs of 30fps which sometimes might look a bit sick inducing depending on the person. It actually seemed quite decent on the games.

The question being is it better to play like this on 1 gpu with no SLI issues & a far cheaper cost & have max settings 30fps or do people reckon it's still better to use SLI 2 or 3 for 60fps at more cost & put up with SLI at times & not always get steady 60fps & some SLI related judder plus the associated extra input lag.

To be clear I already own 3 gpu's so it not a question of what I personally should invest in it's just a general question to see peoples opinions about 4k gaming right now. Please no comments about playing at 1440p etc as we all know the benefits of fps & 1 gpu in that regard, this is just for 4k gaming opinions. Also this is regarding NON g-sync or freesync monitors being used as your favourite monitor may not have the above or you don't want to lock down to 1 gpu make. My monitor of choice at 32" for example is never likely to get a g-sync version.

What do you guys reckon although I know most people love their frame rates so it might be a daft question. Would anyone who uses SLI stock cooler gpus (not water cooled via your own loop) ever consider ditching for example SLI 2 or 3 way Titan X & use 1 980Ti (hybrid or Gigabyte G1) or ditch crossfire for 1 Fury? Interested to know the opinions of 4k gamers or anyone thinking of trying 4k.
 
I am going to wait it out on 4k until a single gpu can hold 60fps in most things.

Pascal or the generation after might well deliver that so hopefully i will pick up a 4k monitor in a year or two's time.

Not really up for having to have two power hungry and expensive cards just to get 60fps at 4k the moment.
 
Last edited:
Yeah that sounds fair enough. Just tried crysis 3 maxed with no AA and can still hold 30fps locked and having v-sync on without the added lag on a low input lag monitor I am strangely asking myself is 60fps even needed as the aiming is still really snappy and pretty easy to aim on mouse. Obviously this way of playing really only works on really low lag monitor.
 
Like Jono8 I don't believe 4k is capable of allowing me to game how I like to game at a decent price point and considering how screwed up the ports we get are I'm not willing to save and then spen 2k+ to make 4k gaming acceptable in my eyes.

My current monitor is a 60hz 2ms 1080p Benq and when the frame rates drop to around 30 I can feel it and it affects the experience for me, I don't know if other monitors can change that but as that's what I experience I try to keep my averages around 60 fps so taking everything into account 4k isn't ready (for me).
 
Thing is a 30frame cap is really hit and miss, I find more often than not it yields quite horrendous and consistent screen tear. Tis a rare treat for the frame delivery to match the cadence of the screen refresh.

V-sync on a 30hz screen ( anything hdmi 1.4a <cough> AMD <cough>) provides a brilliant image, but it can also cause inexplicably long input latency, way beyond the single frame that logic dictates. That varies from game to game, but it's very real and very much a problem. To feel the variance yourself try world of Warcraft with v-sync, and enable or disable the low input lag check box. Night and day difference, but most games lack that magic option (whatever it actually does).

So from my experience, 4k30 can work well on the odd game but the large majority demand 60.

BUT maybe 30fps on a 60hz refresh feels less rubbish. Consoles do ok.
 
I chose option 3, turn settings down to achieve 60fps on a single card. Ultra to high or even medium is so hard to distinguish that it doesn't matter.

30fps is rubbish imo. I would rather play a game at low settings than 30fps. The input lag from 33ms frames and lack of actually seeing what is going on kills the gaming experience.

I don't like SLI or Crossfire. I don't think I ever will nor will I need it.

I never use vsync.
 
Asa said:
Thing is a 30frame cap is really hit and miss, I find more often than not it yields quite horrendous and consistent screen tear. Tis a rare treat for the frame delivery to match the cadence of the screen refresh.

V-sync on a 30hz screen ( anything hdmi 1.4a <cough> AMD <cough>) provides a brilliant image, but it can also cause inexplicably long input latency, way beyond the single frame that logic dictates. That varies from game to game, but it's very real and very much a problem. To feel the variance yourself try world of Warcraft with v-sync, and enable or disable the low input lag check box. Night and day difference, but most games lack that magic option (whatever it actually does).

So from my experience, 4k30 can work well on the odd game but the large majority demand 60.

BUT maybe 30fps on a 60hz refresh feels less rubbish. Consoles do ok.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's how it seems to me like a console, as using 60hz refresh rate in game over displayport and using nvidia 60fps v-sync obviously means no tearing and then limiting in afterburner to 30fps max won't introduce any tearing that just purely using frame caps without any v-sync does. Then of course limiting the frame rate under your 60fps v-sync eliminates v-sync lag and then it just feels pretty damn good as long as your monitor is low lag.

If like you say you use just a frame cap then tearing occurs. 1/2 refresh nvidia v-sync may add lag i suppose i've not tried and of course 30hz over hdmi and v-sync will be back to v-sync lag as you are tying v-sync to your refresh rate again.

In the end if console style 30fps with a low lag is possible like i have set the options and you can achieve max settings without AA and even increase config file options in some games to max it even further and at 4k on 1 high end gpu like titan x, 980ti and fury x it certainly makes for a really nice entry point into 4k for a lot cheaper asking price unless of course you are the type of person who just has to have really high hz for online shooters for maximum accuracy but then i guess 4k is not for them.
 
30fps is horrid, even 60fps now feels horrid to me. 120 or 144hz is where its at now. And yeah 4k is nice but 1440p isnt far behind and the 144hz far outweighs 4k at 60fps for me at the moment. Even on games like the witcher 3 i use 120hz with maxed settings minus hairworks on 1440p rather than 4k at 60fps.

144hz is not only for less input lag, the difference between 60 and 144hz is quite incredible its like going for 1080p-4k. Its snappy, smooth as butter and 1440p still looks good.

It depends on personal preference whether your the type of person who doesnt mind a bit of stutter and prefers the looks of 4k, for me it is really annoying and i prefer 1440p 144hz for most games.
 
Last edited:
I'm finding going from 1080p 144hz to 4k 60hz is pretty hard. I think I may have to get rid of this and go 1440p to keep the 144hz, i didn't think it would make much of a difference but it does.
 
Acer Cb280HK here with a Gainward GTX 980 (bios flashed to phantom clocks) - does really well @4k in the games in play :D
 
Jono8 said:
I am going to wait it out on 4k until a single gpu can hold 60fps in most things.

Pascal or the generation after might well deliver that so hopefully i will pick up a 4k monitor in a year or two's time.

Not really up for having to have two power hungry and expensive cards just to get 60fps at 4k the moment.
Click to expand...

If you like to max everything that may be some wait :D

TX here at 1400p and it wont hold 60fps with the max settings I like to use
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom