1080p or 1440p on super-power rig?

[RikTelner]

(this is near future plan, as soon as components come out, I rush to the shop)

2x [strike]Intel® Core i7-5960X[/strike] Intel® Core i7-6700K
2x Nvidia Pascal Titan X80-series (which seemingly have 24GB V-RAM)
24GB RAM ~2GHz

I would love achieve 144FPS, at least 60FPS (which shouldn't be a problem). On all and latest games that come out, Watch Dogs 2, GTA VI, My Little Pony, Spanky My Manky, what you not. I want to feel that I paid right money for next 5 years or more.

So. Should I go for:
1080p 144FPS IPS 1ms input delay?
or
1440p 144FPS IPS 1ms input delay?

I know for a fact that 1080p will be easy job for such PC. It's a honey spot. And I don't expect it to go any under 100FPS for next 5 years. But is it good enough to fire up 1440FPS?

(yes, I'm insane, I'll pay 8000 euro as dedicated gamer for money I work for, can we skip that part and get to the question?)

 

[PotatoHead32]

(this is near future plan, as soon as components come out, I rush to the shop)

2x Intel® Core i7-5960X
2x Nvidia Pascal Titan X80-series (which seemingly have 24GB V-RAM)
24GB RAM ~2GHz

I would love achieve 144FPS, at least 60FPS (which shouldn't be a problem). On all and latest games that come out, Watch Dogs 2, GTA VI, My Little Pony, Spanky My Manky, what you not. I want to feel that I paid right money for next 5 years or more.

So. Should I go for:
1080p 144FPS IPS 1ms input delay?
or
1440p 144FPS IPS 1ms input delay?

I know for a fact that 1080p will be easy job for such PC. It's a honey spot. And I don't expect it to go any under 100FPS for next 5 years. But is it good enough to fire up 1440FPS?

(yes, I'm insane, I'll pay 8000 euro as dedicated gamer for money I work for, can we skip that part and get to the question?)

Go for it!! get the 1440p display, and grab Nvidia's next Flagship GPU. a current 980 can do good 1440p gaming, So ofc their next high end card should outperform its predecessor!!


Btw, don't get the 5960x... its a waste of money for gaming. Grab an i7 6700k and an h100i and OC it to 4.7 Ghz, you get adequate performance without spending as much as the 5960x costs

 

[djreedj]

i would go with 1440p

 

[CTurbo]

You would be wasting a couple thousand dollars on that setup if you used those parts with a single 1080p or 1440p monitor.

 

[Hyboria]

Definitely go 1440p.

I know you said that you're happy to spend 8000 Euros on this machine, but you're really not gaining anything by going for the 5960X over the 5930k. It has 40 lanes, more than enough to support two X80 graphics cards at 16x. But hey, I know it's fun working hard for your money and going all out on a brand new gaming rig - I'm not gonna tell you what to do 😛

Good plan going for SLI cards though, at 1440p (depending on the game) it provides a serious boost to FPS.

 

[RikTelner]

Go for it!! get the 1440p display, and grab Nvidia's next Flagship GPU.

"next Flagship GPU" ?

a current 980 can do good 1440p gaming

Actually. There has been guy on YouTube that did GTX 970 gaming on Ultra on 1440p, and he went around 50-80FPS. I don't expect huge explosion of performance on next version. I still need those 144FPS man, otherwise screen is not worth. And if it's not worth, that means there's not enough muscle >😀.

So ofc their next high end card should outperform its predecessor!!

Yea, 2.2x times I've seen.

Btw, don't get the 5960x... its a waste of money for gaming.

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-vs-Intel-Core-i7-5960X
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp%5B%5D=2332&cmp%5B%5D=2565

Yea, I guess, I'll talk double 6700K then. It seems to be just little performance loss, and there will two of them, not forgetting that they're both Godlike.

Grab an i7 6700k and an h100i and OC it to 4.7 Ghz, you get adequate performance without spending as much as the 5960x costs

I'll need someone to help with that locally. I never overclock my machines, ever since I'm afraid I'll fudge up.

i would go with 1440p

Nice detailed insight. I'm sure everybody asking themselves question like mine, will find your answer very fruitful.

You would be wasting a couple thousand dollars on that setup if you used those parts with a single 1080p or 1440p monitor.

Actually, one will be 4K IPS for everyday stuff, and I wanted to use another 4K IPS for gaming, but I've been told that even X80 will get trashed on better games. So I decided to stick with honey pot of 1080p, but it felt like many graphics card can easily do it, so I thought, maybe I could get more pixels.
Also. It's my money, I worked for it. And you forgot something, it's 8000 euro for organized pack of metal garbage, it's always worth. Are you nuts?

 

[RikTelner]

Good plan going for SLI cards though, at 1440p (depending on the game) it provides a serious boost to FPS.

Yea, but SLI is not that often supported.

 

[James Mason]

FYI, Double CPUs do not work for gaming. Games don't know how to talk to 2 CPUs, so they'll only talk to 1, ALSO boards that support multiple CPUs typically don't support fast ram and faster ram will provide better performance than 2 CPUs would, no matter how many cores.

 

[Hyboria]

Good plan going for SLI cards though, at 1440p (depending on the game) it provides a serious boost to FPS.

Yea, but SLI is not that often supported.

Even in instances where games aren't optimsed for SLI you still see an increase in performance. See here. You're getting performance boosts of as little as 135% all the way up to 195% at 1440p - makes a huge difference

 

[RikTelner]

FYI, Double CPUs do not work for gaming. Games don't know how to talk to 2 CPUs, so they'll only talk to 1

My situation is very vague. I will be running Linux, and Windows in Virtual Machine, using IOMMU GPU passthrough, giving integrated GPU to Linux (it's UI and video-watching) and double-SLI to Windows machine. The double CPU would not matter then. Because virtualized machine use fixed amount of cores, and not actual processor. When having 2 CPUs, with 8 cores/16 threads. I would dedicate 12 threads to the virtual machine, making virtual machine think that there are 6 cores. Leaving 2 full cores for idle computer.

Even in instances where games aren't optimsed for SLI you still see an increase in performance. See here. You're getting performance boosts of as little as 135% all the way up to 195% at 1440p - makes a huge difference

I can already tell that this post that you provided is fake. Why? GTX 980 Ti. Metro: Last Light, on 4K resolution with set-up provided, would never reach 28.1FPS. 4K resolution is real GPU destroyer. And the result seems overprittified. If this one's not right, what about the others?

Regardless of that, I'll get it for different purposes besides gaming (like applications that do actual natively utilize SLI)

 

[Hyboria]

I can already tell that this post that you provided is fake. Why? GTX 980 Ti. Metro: Last Light, on 4K resolution with set-up provided, would never reach 28.1FPS. 4K resolution is real GPU destroyer. And the result seems overprittified. If this one's not right, what about the others?

Regardless of that, I'll get it for different purposes besides gaming (like applications that do actual natively utilize SLI)

http://www.eteknix.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980ti-6gb-sli-review/9/
http://us.hardware.info/reviews/6292/8/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-sli--3-way-sli--4-way-sli-review-ultra-hd-in-ultra-quality-benchmarks-metro-last-light
http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/1970-gtx-980-ti-sli-benchmark-vs-sli-980-titan-x/Page-2

So everybody is wrong? And honestly, don't assume something is incorrect because it's well presented - maybe do some research of your own if you doubt the results.

In conclusion: you can't already tell the post is fake.