• 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.

Which gpu for 2560x1440

Lokken86 said:
It was sarcasm in response to others pushing up and up the requirements fir 1440p. Of course you won't get 60fps all the time on a 290x but it will do a stellar job.
Click to expand...

so now we have you on one side and another guy who had 2 290x and wasn't enough.

I'd just get a single card capable of running whatever games the OP is playing decently, or even a bit more than that, for future games.
 
Are there any 390's (or 290x's) about for that money? I'd personally go with one of them over anything Kepler, More than likely before a 970 as well although I'd choose a 970 over a 780 or 780ti.
 
Lokken86 said:
It was sarcasm in response to others pushing up and up the requirements fir 1440p. Of course you won't get 60fps all the time on a 290x but it will do a stellar job.
Click to expand...

Well, it's all relative and depends on expectations. The 1070 will drop quite badly in some titles if you aim for very high settings, even without AA, let alone max stuff.

I'm just telling how it is as I've tried it myself, don't want to discourage anybody. If the OP is happy to dial some stuff down to medium and be light on AA, then a 290x/390 might be enough.
 
Griffildur said:
so now we have you on one side and another guy who had 2 290x and wasn't enough.

I'd just get a single card capable of running whatever games the OP is playing decently, or even a bit more than that, for future games.
Click to expand...

He probably sets the bar higher than I do. 1 290x won't be dropping under 40fps much that is for sure. Also depends on the game. My fury isn't much faster but I play games like battlefront, ryse, far cry, doom and they all run awesome at 1440p.
 
I used a 390 for quite some time at 1440p and it done a fine job.

For £150, I think its the best value 1440p option. If you can get the "X" for not much more go for it, but the normal 390 will do just fine.
 
390X cannot be beaten at 200 quid. Overclock it and it will serve you well.
Far superior to the 970/780ti.
 
390x would be ideal, or 390/290x if you can get a nice price used. The 780, 780Ti and all Kepler cards have aged horrendously compared to the 390X/390/290X Hawaii cards. Just look at Doom, compared to Kepler cards it's night and day. Going in to the future games with the latest APIs you're much better off with Hawaii cards over Kepler.

Even the 970 will not age well with 3.5GB ram and equivalent AMD cards performing far superior in Vulkan. Just make sure you use TSSAA/no AA, or you won't get the Vulkan performance boost with AMD cards in Doom.
 
Last edited:
As a 970 owner, I cannot recommend it for 1440p. Sure there's a few amazingly optimised games that you can run at 60fps on max settings, but otherwise you will struggle to maintain good fps at good settings. For proper 1440p at 60 fps, with max or close to max settings, a 980ti or 1070 would be the best choice. Other than that, the best budget options would be AMD cards like the 390 or RX480.
 
As a 970 SLI owner who plays at 1440p, I wouldn't recommend a 970 for anything above 1080p. There are times where I've had to go single GPU on recent titles due to lack of SLI support and it struggles.

I'm currently looking to upgrade but the 1080 would be the only real jump and the prices are a bit crazy right now.
 
Griffildur said:
so now we have you on one side and another guy who had 2 290x and wasn't enough.
Click to expand...

My comment was aimed at Amatsubu who said a 1070 wasnt enough in some games. For most people its plenty, it only becomes insufficient when you have people like me and Amatsubu pushing the settings too far. The only reason it wasnt enough for me is because i couldnt get 4xmsaa and hold 60 fps, for most people it wouldnt be a problem.
 
BluD said:
My comment was aimed at Amatsubu who said a 1070 wasnt enough in some games. For most people its plenty, it only becomes insufficient when you have people like me and Amatsubu pushing the settings too far. The only reason it wasnt enough for me is because i couldnt get 4xmsaa and hold 60 fps, for most people it wouldnt be a problem.
Click to expand...

different expectations I guess.

Oh and sorry for calling you "another guy". I was too lazy to scroll up and see the actual name!
 
BluD said:
My comment was aimed at Amatsubu who said a 1070 wasnt enough in some games. For most people its plenty, it only becomes insufficient when you have people like me and Amatsubu pushing the settings too far. The only reason it wasnt enough for me is because i couldnt get 4xmsaa and hold 60 fps, for most people it wouldnt be a problem.
Click to expand...

To be fair, it's not like it's struggling terribly by any stretch of imagination. It just won't hold 60fps all the time in e.g. RotR, even with shadows on high and FXAA. However, OC'ing takes care of that and it only drops a couple of fps in the problematic areas (Geothermal Valley etc.)

I agree, for most people it'll indeed be plenty, I'm very happy with it myself. But I wasn't with the 970 at this sort of res.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom