***21.9 Ultrawide Thread***

[johnnystuff]

Gsync is a feature of the monitor not of the gpu. Anyway, don't know much about internal arch differences between the 970M and the 970 but talking about raw numbers 2x970M should be about the same as one 980, maybe a little more, but let's say 970 + 15/30%

That's enough to drive the X34A at 60-75fps in most games, even the latest ones. Not all of them and not always but having gsync also means that if you have drops or peaks you shouldn't notice them anyway so the experience should be always nice and smooth.

edit: Z35 is bad, forget it.

 

[sparker]

Ok thanks for quick reply, just didn't want to waste money on extra real estate, only to find games would be unplayable.

 

[spulse]

That's enough to drive the X34A at 60-75fps in most games.

not at 3440 x 1440.

I'm running 2 980tis and get 60-80fps in a variety of games on ultra. Two desktop 970's would be waaaay below that, and the m version is slower.

also it depends on what you deem playable. Personally i'm turning settings down so that games hit 100fps because on the x34 it's glorious and tbh one of the major reasons in getting one. If your gpus can't go over 60fps at the native resolution get a different monitor

 

[johnnystuff]

I have a single 970 and play at everything at nothing less than 50 fps at 3440x1440. It can drop below that in some parts or really complex scenes but in these cases I don't care or I turn down one or two of those obnoxious settings like hairworks in TW3 or the grass rendering in GTA or the fog volumetry or whatever else. Btw, I never play with AA higher than 2x, generally fxaa. So yeah, if you plan to use MSAA 8x, forget it. Don't know why you should but... just to be clear.

Also, fella asked if it could drive it with a certain margin at 60-75. He knows already he'll never get 100 rock solid.

 

[james.miller]

You literally have the best 970 ever made.

 

[johnnystuff]

And I can read settings. Terrific combo.

 

[james.miller]

really, tell us more about how the rest of us cant

No, seriously though; the rest of us wouldnt just be lowering some settings (im doing that now at 2560x1080), we' be dropping them through the floor. What's your secret? LN2? super cherry picked core? 980ti mispackaged as a 970? or just plain voodoo?

 

[johnnystuff]

edit: you're a waste of my keyboard's coating/paint/whatever.

 

[james.miller]

I liked your first reply better, had more bite.

Wanna play moron hunting? Ok but first tell me: who's the moron, the one hunted or the one fishing? lmao get out.

However, I still believe you're being somewhat economical with the truth. Actually to be honest no, i think that's being too kind. There is no way you play everything at 50fps or more at 3440x1440 with a 970 unless you're dropping some major settings or by 'everything' you actually mean one or two games in which case total misrepresentation. This is a resolution that nobody else would recommend a 970 for. my 970 just cried connected to a LG 34um95. I just played though Deus Ex at 2560x1080 and it really struggled in areas, and that's without contact hardening shadows etc. If i run DSR and get somewhere comparable to 3440x1440? slideshow.


..... i means what's that hunted/hunter nonsense all about anyway?

 

[Warbie]

Have to agree with miller here. My 390x struggled at standard 1440p, let alone 3440*1440. 2560*1080 is the sweet spot and even then some games struggle. I guess it depends how sensitive you are to lower frame rates. Even with adaptive sync I find 50 fps doesn't look decent. Better than without, sure, but not good.

 

[rogueblade]

Eh You'd be safe with the Z35 most definitely.

On another note, anyone enjoying the BF1 beta in 21:9!! Playing on my x34 and it's just heavenly!

 

[johnnystuff]

I liked your first reply better, had more bite.


However, I still believe you're being somewhat economical with the truth. Actually to be honest no, i think that's being too kind. There is no way you play everything at 50fps or more at 3440x1440 with a 970 unless you're dropping some major settings or by 'everything' you actually mean one or two games in which case total misrepresentation. This is a resolution that nobody else would recommend a 970 for. my 970 just cried connected to a LG 34um95. I just played though Deus Ex at 2560x1080 and it really struggled in areas, and that's without contact hardening shadows etc. If i run DSR and get somewhere comparable to 3440x1440? slideshow.


..... i means what's that hunted/hunter nonsense all about anyway?

Keyboard coating waste you is. Capish?

 

[Baddass]

Enough bickering guys. No more please. Let's get this back on track about monitors

 

[james.miller]

Well, his responses are unwarranted. He hasn't responded to a single point with any reasonable argument. instead i get "moron" and quasi intelligent quips. We all know what the 970 is and isnt capable of and if he wants to carry on believing he has a super duper 970 that's fine, but i cant not response when he's suggesting to other people that a 970 is up to the job at that resolution. it isn't, and we all know it and i wouldnt want somebody to make the wrong choice because of it.

anyway, not going to spend any more time on him. plenty of space in the gpu forum if he wants to discuss further.

Let's get this back on track about monitors

Have you had a chance to see any of the 38" panels yet? I'm curious whether you think 38" might be too big for a flat panel or not. Originally, i was waiting for news of a 38" flat but the more i think about it, the more i believe it would just be too wide for me. I think i'd need that curve?

 

[Burr]

Have you had a chance to see any of the 38" panels yet? I'm curious whether you think 38" might be too big for a flat panel or not. Originally, i was waiting for news of a 38" flat but the more i think about it, the more i believe it would just be too wide for me. I think i'd need that curve?

Maybe it's just me i dunno but i feel these monitor sizes are starting to get a bit out of control. 38" is fine from a distance but sitting 2 feet away you're gonna end up twisting your neck a lot i'd imagine.

 

[james.miller]

Maybe it's just me i dunno but i feel these monitor sizes are starting to get a bit out of control. 38" is fine from a distance but sitting 2 feet away you're gonna end up twisting your neck a lot i'd imagine.

Well, this is my thinking. Just looking at this 34um95 now, it already feels like the panel bends outwards at the extremes. I guess that's a combination of the width and me sitting at arm's length. A 38" flat would be worse. Curved though?

hmm. 'Reaaaally need to see one in action.

 

[Burr]

Yeah i def think it'd be a good idea to see it in person before buying one. I don't know if these companies use standard angles to govern the curvitude of these screens but at 38" it'd need to be very curved to bring it into a comfy size for my own liking.

 

[JediFragger]

I'll be the guinea pig if a Gsync one comes out

 

[Bantu]

tbh at 38'' it becomes really nice for couch gaming! hell my TV at home is only 40''

 

[bimbleuk]

Well, this is my thinking. Just looking at this 34um95 now, it already feels like the panel bends outwards at the extremes. I guess that's a combination of the width and me sitting at arm's length. A 38" flat would be worse. Curved though?

hmm. 'Reaaaally need to see one in action.

Totally agree as that's how I felt with a flat 40" UHD monitor sat in front of me. The middle was close the 4 corners were far so felt almost convex. 34" curved 21:9 felt much more comfortable.

By the way I have a 35" XR501 2560x1080 stacked with the X34 and some games just don't need the extra res of the X34 so I tend to switch between them depending on the content.