GPU for 1440p is it possible low budget?

[Poneros]

I know this is way off topic talking about coolers ! Say you had £60 to spend I have seen 2 AIO - Cooler Mater Liquid ML240L - GameMax Iceberg 204RGB - or just buy a Wraith Prism for £20 from OC?

ARCTIC Freezer 33 eSports ONE is £25. The 2 fan version (34 duo) is £35. I'd get either of those instead of a £20 Wraith Prism. I'd only say go for Prism if you can find it for £10. Personally I dislike AIOs so I can't recommend any.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

The more I looked into used GPUs the more I was put off. I got a used Ryzen 5 1500x and this was perfect, a 3 year old GPU which may of been mined on/heavily overclocked put me off, this may have been an excuse to buy a new RX 5700XT & Ryzen 3600 so a budget system went out of the window

budget = 1080p screen

anyone using 1440p or higher needs to spend a considerable amount more.

therefore your choice of screen was the issue here. had you bought a 1080p screen. you could have built a system which performs the same for half the price.

 

[Steven Rimmington]

ARCTIC Freezer 33 eSports ONE is £25. The 2 fan version (34 duo) is £35. I'd get either of those instead of a £20 Wraith Prism. I'd only say go for Prism if you can find it for £10. Personally I dislike AIOs so I can't recommend any.

That looks like a good cooler, thanks

budget = 1080p screen

anyone using 1440p or higher needs to spend a considerable amount more.

therefore your choice of screen was the issue here. had you bought a 1080p screen. you could have built a system that performs the same for half the price.

That may be the case, but I already had the screen. Didn't consider selling it and buying a 1080p panel? I looked into a lot of GPUs and £120-£150 would have been fine for 1440p, albeit second hand. I sit very close and a 32' is perfect for me, didn't fancy going that low in resolution.

I will be using the Ryzen 1500X with a 1060 6GB which would bring a system total to £250 - minus the peripherals and screen etc. But this will be used on my daughter's screen which is 1080p for hello neighbor

 

[Psycho Sonny]

That looks like a good cooler, thanks



That may be the case, but I already had the screen. Didn't consider selling it and buying a 1080p panel? I looked into a lot of GPUs and £120-£150 would have been fine for 1440p, albeit second hand. I sit very close and a 32' is perfect for me, didn't fancy going that low in resolution.

I will be using the Ryzen 1500X with a 1060 6GB which would bring a system total to £250 - minus the peripherals and screen etc. But this will be used on my daughter's screen which is 1080p for hello neighbor

when my current screen dies 1440p. if there hasn't been huge leaps in price and performance i think i might revert to 1080p and just go for 240hz. or if there has go for 240hz 1440p.

i currently have a 2070 super and it can't play everything at ultra but my screen is 165 hz. i have to use competitive settings to get it to run well in most games bar csgo.

 

[Steven Rimmington]

when my current screen dies 1440p. if there hasn't been huge leaps in price and performance i think i might revert to 1080p and just go for 240hz. or if there has go for 240hz 1440p.

i currently have a 2070 super and it can't play everything at ultra but my screen is 165 hz. i have to use competitive settings to get it to run well in most games bar csgo.

See mine is a measly 75Hz but I am no way a competitive player, mainly just fun and CIV games. my Laptop is 144Hz and I don't really notice the difference so my eyes must be pants

 

[gpuerrilla]

I know this is way off topic talking about coolers ! Say you had £60 to spend I have seen 2 AIO - Cooler Mater Liquid ML240L - GameMax Iceberg 204RGB - or just buy a Wraith Prism for £20 from OC?

AIO arent much better than air coolers. A decent air one is under £30. Put any left over toward something you really need.

 

[Poneros]

when my current screen dies 1440p. if there hasn't been huge leaps in price and performance i think i might revert to 1080p and just go for 240hz. or if there has go for 240hz 1440p.

i currently have a 2070 super and it can't play everything at ultra but my screen is 165 hz. i have to use competitive settings to get it to run well in most games bar csgo.

Idk, I looked at 240hz as well but my issues with it are that you run into a lot more bottlenecks very quickly & some aren't fixable at all. So you're gonna want to really squeeze CPU & RAM as well, which can easily double costs, besides also absolutely needing the top tier GPU. Plus, a lot of games have caps way before that. Heck, even something as sweet as Doom has a 200 fps cap. So it might be worth it for specific esports titles, but for general gaming there's too many hurdles imo.

 

[subbytna]

Well, I went a bit silly and got a 3600 + 5700XT amongst other items Spent near enough £800 this afternoon. I had the itch to get something a bit more powerful, need an CPU cooler I think. the AMD one looks pants.

Also got an NVME M.2 SSD, 16GB of memory and a new PSU Seasonic GC650 as my 450W only had 1x6+2 PCIE

Boy, that escalated quickly

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Idk, I looked at 240hz as well but my issues with it are that you run into a lot more bottlenecks very quickly & some aren't fixable at all. So you're gonna want to really squeeze CPU & RAM as well, which can easily double costs, besides also absolutely needing the top tier GPU. Plus, a lot of games have caps way before that. Heck, even something as sweet as Doom has a 200 fps cap. So it might be worth it for specific esports titles, but for general gaming there's too many hurdles imo.

Cpu and ram are cheap enough.

You can get some of the best ram available for as little as £70 for 16gb. Again one of the best gaming cpu available is £150-£175.

Gpu and monitors are the most expensive parts of any build and by quite some margin.

 

[Poneros]

Cpu and ram are cheap enough.

You can get some of the best ram available for as little as £70 for 16gb. Again one of the best gaming cpu available is £150-£175.

Gpu and monitors are the most expensive parts of any build and by quite some margin.

Yeah, but you're not gonna get to 240 fps targets with 'one of the best', and that's my point. You'll want a top clocked 9900K + great ram, maybe not quite needed to go all out for 4000 mhz but can't be a 3000-3200 slouch either. https://youtu.be/VElMNPXJtuA

And then ofc to push the OC that hard, you'll need a great mobo to allow that as well as a LOT of cooling, all which adds up. Because, again, if you go for 240, then you're gonna want to actually reach it otherwise staying at 144hz is very much in the 'good enough' territory. And you're still not gonna get there in most games anyway, even with all this horsepower. Maybe if the games also support SLI.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Yeah, but you're not gonna get to 240 fps targets with 'one of the best', and that's my point. You'll want a top clocked 9900K + great ram, maybe not quite needed to go all out for 4000 mhz but can't be a 3000-3200 slouch either. https://youtu.be/VElMNPXJtuA

And then ofc to push the OC that hard, you'll need a great mobo to allow that as well as a LOT of cooling, all which adds up. Because, again, if you go for 240, then you're gonna want to actually reach it otherwise staying at 144hz is very much in the 'good enough' territory. And you're still not gonna get there in most games anyway, even with all this horsepower. Maybe if the games also support SLI.

rubbish - i get 200 fps in apex legends already and 500fps in csgo.

CPU and RAM make very little overall difference. Plus the ram I'm talking about clocks to 3800 MHz and that is more than enough and only £70

a 9900K vs my 3600X you are talking a 1-5% gain at best in games. in benchmarks it's a 7-8% gain at best.

 

[McManicMan]

ideal gpu for 1440p is a GTX 2080Super, with a gsync 144hz monitor, everything runs great at max details even with RTX on

 

[Poneros]

rubbish - i get 200 fps in apex legends already and 500fps in csgo.

CPU and RAM make very little overall difference. Plus the ram I'm talking about clocks to 3800 MHz and that is more than enough and only £70

a 9900K vs my 3600X you are talking a 1-5% gain at best in games. in benchmarks it's a 7-8% gain at best.

What I said to begin with:

So it might be worth it for specific esports titles, but for general gaming there's too many hurdles imo.

But, saying it's a 1-5% gain at best, that's inaccurate.

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3489-amd-ryzen-5-3600-cpu-review-benchmarks-vs-intel

Hitman 2? >20%
Warhammer 2 (Campaign)? >20%
F1 2018? >15%
Civ 6 turns? >20%
AC Origins? >15%
GTA V? >20%
SotTR? >20%

And the list can keep going. Idk why you'd even want to have this argument. If you want to aim for 240 fps in general (and not just a specific game) then you'll want the fastest CPU available, because that's still a bottleneck in many, many games (ignoring the ones that are inherently bottlenecked to never reach 240 fps). The fastest gaming CPU is the 9900K(S) OC'ed to furnace levels. I'm not recommending it, but nonetheless that's the route you'd have to take if you're gung ho about 240 fps in general.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

People can always drop the resolution when playing on a 1440p screen. Its not the end of the world if you need to run games at 1080p(you can always use resolution scaling) - in the past people couldn't always run games at native resolution on their monitors.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

What I said to begin with:



But, saying it's a 1-5% gain at best, that's inaccurate.

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3489-amd-ryzen-5-3600-cpu-review-benchmarks-vs-intel

Hitman 2? >20%
Warhammer 2 (Campaign)? >20%
F1 2018? >15%
Civ 6 turns? >20%
AC Origins? >15%
GTA V? >20%
SotTR? >20%

And the list can keep going. Idk why you'd even want to have this argument. If you want to aim for 240 fps in general (and not just a specific game) then you'll want the fastest CPU available, because that's still a bottleneck in many, many games (ignoring the ones that are inherently bottlenecked to never reach 240 fps). The fastest gaming CPU is the 9900K(S) OC'ed to furnace levels. I'm not recommending it, but nonetheless that's the route you'd have to take if you're gung ho about 240 fps in general.

i don't have a 3600 i have the 3600X which is 200mhz faster.

you don't need the fastest cpu available you just need a decent one. the 3600X is only 7-8% slower than a 9900K in benchmarks. the 3600 you are talking about is 11-15% slower. so the difference is half what you said.

3600X is one of the best gaming cpu's you can buy. buying faster is pointless. £200 to gain in certain situations 10% and in others 1-5%, which is why you cherry picked warrhammer 2 campaign because in battle the difference is less. i could also cherry pick ones that say there is no difference.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

People can always drop the resolution when playing on a 1440p screen. Its not the end of the world if you need to run games at 1080p(you can always use resolution scaling) - in the past people couldn't always run games at native resolution on their monitors.

does that not make it look like crap though? better off running native and dropping settings instead?

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

does that not make it look like crap though? better off running native and dropping settings instead?

Some monitors/TVs scale better than others especially more expensive ones,and certain games do resolution scaling fine if you have output at native resolution but render internally at lower resolution.

 

[Scania]

People can always drop the resolution when playing on a 1440p screen. Its not the end of the world if you need to run games at 1080p(you can always use resolution scaling) - in the past people couldn't always run games at native resolution on their monitors.

Absolutely this, I’ve got a 4K 43” LG TV as my display, 4790k @4.8 and a Zotac 1080ti Amp extreme, it handles the vast majority of my games @4k with ease, any that don’t (read RDR2) I just drop to 1440p and tbh it’s hard to spot the difference (either very good scaling or my eyesight that’s just passed the criteria for an HGV medical is worse than I thought !!)

 

[Grim5]

What I said to begin with:



But, saying it's a 1-5% gain at best, that's inaccurate.

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3489-amd-ryzen-5-3600-cpu-review-benchmarks-vs-intel

Hitman 2? >20%
Warhammer 2 (Campaign)? >20%
F1 2018? >15%
Civ 6 turns? >20%
AC Origins? >15%
GTA V? >20%
SotTR? >20%

And the list can keep going. Idk why you'd even want to have this argument. If you want to aim for 240 fps in general (and not just a specific game) then you'll want the fastest CPU available, because that's still a bottleneck in many, many games (ignoring the ones that are inherently bottlenecked to never reach 240 fps). The fastest gaming CPU is the 9900K(S) OC'ed to furnace levels. I'm not recommending it, but nonetheless that's the route you'd have to take if you're gung ho about 240 fps in general.

you need to work on your maths

And why y'all comparing a 6 core and 8 core cpu and acting like it's a surprise

a lot of the titles mentioned, the 9900k can indeed lose to AMD when you put it against a more comparable CPU.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Absolutely this, I’ve got a 4K 43” LG TV as my display, 4790k @4.8 and a Zotac 1080ti Amp extreme, it handles the vast majority of my games @4k with ease, any that don’t (read RDR2) I just drop to 1440p and tbh it’s hard to spot the difference (either very good scaling or my eyesight that’s just passed the criteria for an HGV medical is worse than I thought !!)

It's easier to that than always having to buy a new graphics card.