• 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.

Graphics upgrade

Toasty

Toasty

Toasty

Soldato
Joined
21 Oct 2002
Posts
2,850
Location
Sunderland
I currently have two KFA2 670 ex oc in sli supported by a 3770k running at 4.5Ghz.

I have major itch to upgrade but I have held off for now.

The plan was to upgrade to a haswell-e in June/August with 2 top end maxwells(880 I presume) running on 4k.

Since gaming quality 4k monitors are now available and the rumours of top end maxwell delayed until 2015 due to 20nm taking longer than expected; I'm considering getting a cost effective upgrade to graphics right now.

It seems 2 r9 290's would provide enough grunt for 4k while costing a quite reasonable £650.

Opinions ?
 
There was a thread earlier with someone asking about 2x7950's running a 4k panel. It would seem that while the AA will need to be kept at bay, it will be playable with enough grunt.

Have you considered keeping your 670s?
 
I have but I just don't think they will be up to the task. Most sites seem to believe you still need some form of AA when running 4k and it's seems silly to me to run 4k without running high/ultra settings.

I mostly play mmo's and although they are not very demanding they also don't make great use of sli/crossfire so more powerful individual cards would be the way to go I would think.
 
Toasty said:
Since gaming quality 4k monitors are now available and the rumours of top end maxwell delayed until 2015 due to 20nm taking longer than expected; I'm considering getting a cost effective upgrade to graphics right now.

It seems 2 r9 290's would provide enough grunt for 4k while costing a quite reasonable £650.

Opinions ?
Click to expand...
To be honest, that would be the only sensible option to go considering performance vs cost.

I think it would probably struggle a bit for demanding games like Crysis 3, if we were using 4x or 8xMSAA...but with 4K res at 28", I really don't think you need that high level AA at all (you'd probably even struggle to tell the difference even between 0xAA and 2xAA).
 
I have taken some in-game screen shots and resized them to 1920x1080 (from 3840x2160) and used various levels of settings and AA. Apart from frame times, can you tell the difference?

1a700033595f3d1c6b8cc34f069d54aa.jpg

9ecfb632cdea2a6c9ef67b39b50c6d36.jpg

d99dc4955075fab42f6afa91ff37634a.jpg

79e14a67844b06cb2834e65164eb86f6.jpg

e06842b6772e2536afa1bc6215f6b2cc.jpg

3accb4da1369afe735263089ad3386fe.jpg

fc376263e17dd797ac35cb0e56c13abe.jpg

BF4 looks good and is very demanding but for me, with AA off completely and even down to medium settings, it looks good (and gives me 200 fps). Don't read too much into needing AA, as with it off and on at 4K, it is damned hard to tell :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom