• 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.

Minimum GPU for 5120x1440?

Associate
Joined
20 May 2012
Posts
27
I'm wondering what graphics card I should get to drive my super ultrawide monitor @ 5120x1440. I currently have a Geforce 1660gtx in my laptop which is good but I want to build a new desktop machine. A Geforce 1660ti seems OTT given that it is my work machine and I will never play games on it. In addition to that I would also want at least one additional output to drive another monitor (at a lower resolution), so that would be at least 2x HDMI/DP. It would also be good to have a card that is either passively called or semi-passive as it'll never be under any significant load. I'm planning to go for a Ryzen processor that doesn't have graphics built-in, so I definitely need a dedicated card.

I've found a Radeon RX5500XT for a good price although I haven't used AMD cards for many years. I'm guessing that even the RX5500XT will be OTT, so I don't know whether there is something cheaper or whether NVIDIA would be better.
 
Associate
Joined
3 Jun 2013
Posts
8
I'm wondering what graphics card I should get to drive my super ultrawide monitor @ 5120x1440. I currently have a Geforce 1660gtx in my laptop which is good but I want to build a new desktop machine. A Geforce 1660ti seems OTT given that it is my work machine and I will never play games on it. In addition to that I would also want at least one additional output to drive another monitor (at a lower resolution), so that would be at least 2x HDMI/DP. It would also be good to have a card that is either passively called or semi-passive as it'll never be under any significant load. I'm planning to go for a Ryzen processor that doesn't have graphics built-in, so I definitely need a dedicated card.

I've found a Radeon RX5500XT for a good price although I haven't used AMD cards for many years. I'm guessing that even the RX5500XT will be OTT, so I don't know whether there is something cheaper or whether NVIDIA would be better.

RX5500XT would be overkill for just office work and definitely not worth £200 just for the purpose of outputting video.. practically any card will run your monitor as long as it has a good enough output connection.
But I can't see any other good option to recommend on OCUK as they are out of stock of most older / cheaper cards. Especially the ones that practically are just passive cooling.
I personally would not spend over £100.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
10,869
Location
Bristol
A Geforce 1660ti seems OTT given that it is my work machine and I will never play games on it. In addition to that I would also want at least one additional output to drive another monitor (at a lower resolution), so that would be at least 2x HDMI/DP.
The £150 1650 Super?
 
Soldato
Joined
30 Jun 2019
Posts
4,453
thats a lot of pixels for your gpu to power. 4k resolution is 8.29 million pixels, this resolution is just a bit lower at 7.37 million pixels. id say youd need at least a rx 6800 or rtx 3070, if playing at native display resolution, but less if you intend to play games at low/medium settings.

if value is your goal, I would consider a rx 580 or rx 590, as they offer better performance per dollar, vs the rx 5500 xt.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
30 Jun 2019
Posts
4,453
does the rx 5500 xt even support that resolution?

this is the max resolution, apparently:
4096 x 2160

Edit -checked another website, which says the max digital res is 7680x4320.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
30 Jun 2019
Posts
4,453
maybe a rx 550? super cheap (£55-75) and supports very high res over display port, and has one display port, hdmi port and dvi port, but this can vary bit depending on which version you buy.

The MSI GeForce GT 1030 2GB OC has passive cooling, a display port and a hdmi port... Also, very good video decoding support. price is around £65. seems like a smart buy
 
Last edited:
Associate
OP
Joined
20 May 2012
Posts
27
Great advice guys. I've realised that my GPU does get used quite significantly just with normal use. I saw it go over 40% at times, so I'll get something better than the bare minimum. Stock is very limited at the moment so I'll probably get something like a 1050. It's a high spec system so I don't want the GPU holding it back.
 
Associate
OP
Joined
20 May 2012
Posts
27
You're spending a lot of money on the rest of the system, so don't scrimp. Check what your software recommends.

I don't think the software recommends anything as it's mostly Google Chrome etc.

I've actually gone for a 1660 Super now. The main reason is because I have one in my personal machine and I know it works really well. Reliability is the most important thing and this also has a spare output if I needed it.
 
Soldato
Joined
10 Apr 2011
Posts
3,410
Location
London
I'm wondering what graphics card I should get to drive my super ultrawide monitor @ 5120x1440. I currently have a Geforce 1660gtx in my laptop which is good but I want to build a new desktop machine. A Geforce 1660ti seems OTT given that it is my work machine and I will never play games on it. In addition to that I would also want at least one additional output to drive another monitor (at a lower resolution), so that would be at least 2x HDMI/DP. It would also be good to have a card that is either passively called or semi-passive as it'll never be under any significant load. I'm planning to go for a Ryzen processor that doesn't have graphics built-in, so I definitely need a dedicated card.

I've found a Radeon RX5500XT for a good price although I haven't used AMD cards for many years. I'm guessing that even the RX5500XT will be OTT, so I don't know whether there is something cheaper or whether NVIDIA would be better.

Would one of these definitely not do the job? https://www.notebookcheck.net/The-A...i9-10900K-in-initial-benchmarks.481216.0.html I know you mention you are getting one without built in graphics but would it not be more cost effective this route? Assuming that the CPU power is good enough that is
 
Top Bottom