2560 or 1920

ennogs · 18 Nov 2011 at 00:43

I know as far as FPS in games goes resolution counts a lot. Naturally you want to play your games on max graphical settings. So would a 2560 x 1600 monitor need high end SLI or crosffire to get full max settings? I am talking about games like crysis, call of duty etc.

I current have

i7 2600k overclocked to 4.5
1 TB hard drive
8 GB ram
GTX 580
GTS 450 for physics.

If I am going to need SLI to run on max settings with 2560 x 1600 then I guess I am better off with a 1920 x 1080 resolution.

Sc00p007 · 18 Nov 2011 at 01:02

Yes you will. I used one 480gtx@900 at 2560x1440 and had to buy another for sli for some of the latest games. Cod was smooth at max settings, but games like bad company 2 and crysis were running with low fps. I guess that would now apply to crysis 2, battlefield 3, fear 3 etc
With overclocked 480gtx sli i can now play all games at max settings with around 4xaa but some of the latest games cannot keep above 60fps so i notice some slowdown at times, thankfully nothing major......yet.

Phil.

ennogs · 18 Nov 2011 at 20:41

Thanks

mamboboy · 18 Nov 2011 at 22:10

I was pleasantly surprised with the FPS @ 2560x1400 on my 27" Hazro

I have a core i5 oc to 4.5 ghz, 4gb ram and a single AMD 6870 HAWK (mid range gpu?) running at stock speeds and BF3 was perfectly playable on high settings with AA off (it's not exactly needed at this res any ways). Skyrim ran even better.

I'd personally say the only games that would struggle at max settings on a single GPU system would be Witcher II (Ubersampling on most definitely) and Crysis 2 because it's poorly optimized cack.