2K 165Hz vs 4K

[TheAmazingGeek]

So i'm upgrading my monitor and i'm not sure if i should get a 27in ASUS 165Hz 2560 x 1440
G-Sync IPS Monitor or a 32in 4k Acer monitor, thoughts?

Price Range around $1200

system specs:

Intel i7 4790K
Corsair Vengeance Pro DDR3 32GB
EVGA GeForce GTX 980 Superclocked

 

[getochkn]

Depends on your GPU and what it can handle.

 

[TheAmazingGeek]

Depends on your GPU and what it can handle.

updated thread

 

[HugoStiglitz96]

I would get the asus 1440p monitor, it has a much higher refresh rate 165Hz vs 60Hz, G-sync, it's 27" which is the max size I would use for a desk 1-2 feet away. Also 4K won't run well on a single GTX 980.

 

[getochkn]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8526/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-review/14

your card can only do about 60FPS at 2K on Ultra, so 165HZ is kind of pointless since you'll barely hit a 3rd of it.

4K and some games on lower settings and you could hit 60FPS.


in reality, your current card as is, isn't fast enough to take advantage of either monitor fully.

 

[redgarl]

4k is out of reach for you... however higher resolution > Higher refresh rate with adaptive syng

I am playing at 4k and I am not going back. I plan on switching my video card when pascale is released.

 

[redgarl]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8526/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-review/14

your card can only do about 60FPS at 2K on Ultra, so 165HZ is kind of pointless since you'll barely hit a 3rd of it.

4K and some games on lower settings and you could hit 60FPS.


in reality, your current card as is, isn't fast enough to take advantage of either monitor fully.

Not with any big title of this year... i.e. The witcher, Batman, Dragon Age, Metal Gear Solid.

Going 4k without SLI or CF is kind of pointless.

 

[lodders]

165Hz???
TV was OK at 50Hz, and good enough to watch football matches really smoothly at 100Hz.
I'm pretty sure that this is because our eyes don't work fast enough to see things much quicker than 50Hz

I may be wrong here, but is this another example of "MOAR IS ALWAYS BETTER!!!!"

See also Hi Fi that produces sounds twice as high in pitch as the highest note that anyone can hear. (apart from dogs obviously)

 

[photonboy]

Quick: 165Hz GYNC... yes, yes yes.

Long:
165hz vs 60Hz vs HDTV motion smoothing

Watching a football game using "motionsmoothing" with an HDTV is quite different from how computer gaming works. That adds in artificial frames (one or three per frame depending of 120Hz or 240Hz is chosen). It also adds a lot of latency so is unsuited for gaming.

Motionsmoothing is also unsuited for movies because the amount of MOTION BLUR added to movies is carefully adjusted to match the 24Hz film rate.

*So back to video gaming...
GSYNC first of all is about the monitor drawing the next frame almost as soon as it gets it thus eliminating the issues due to synchronizing with a buffer etc.

As said, it's difficult to stay below 60FPS (for a 4K 60Hz monitor) thus you're not getting the benefit of GSYNC because you'll be forced to use regular VSYNC ON/OFF modes if outputting more than 60FPS from the GPU.

There are CAPPING METHODS but that's complicated.

Other quick points:
1) Higher refresh rate benefits the DESKTOP (smoother cursor)

2) 4K doesn't look much different from 2560x1440 most of the time

3) Gaming at 4K takes a lot more processing power, again doesn't look much different, and yes you can choose what resolution you want per game why bother with 4K at that point?

4) DPI Scaling of many programs gets worse as the resolution increases (older programs or ones not rewritten yet to scale properly)

5) *IMPORTANT: NVidia cards like the GTX980 use a lot more power when the refresh rate increases. Just so you are aware. It only affects idle modes because the power draw when gaming is the same. There's an article showing it jumps a lot from 60Hz to 120/144 then I think jumps again at 165Hz.

I'll see if I can link the article, however that doesn't change my advice.

 

[photonboy]

Power draw article for NVIDIA at 165Hz:
http://www.pcper.com/news/Graphics-Cards/Testing-GPU-Power-Draw-Increased-Refresh-Rates-using-ASUS-PG279Q

Basically, the NVidia card idles slightly lower than AMD cards at 60Hz but isn't optimized for running at 144Hz+ so it jumps the frequency of the GPU higher than it likely needs to. That's apparently not something that can be change (unless, I guess it's possible in a vBIOS update for the card?).

It means about 57W more in idle, though that probably will still be pretty quiet running for the card since I suspect it will stay below the fan turn-in point.

*That does NOT change my recommendation of getting that truly awesome 165Hz monitor. You'd be truly kicking yourself if you got the 4K then realized what you were missing for gaming.

 

[TheAmazingGeek]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8526/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-review/14

your card can only do about 60FPS at 2K on Ultra, so 165HZ is kind of pointless since you'll barely hit a 3rd of it.

4K and some games on lower settings and you could hit 60FPS.


in reality, your current card as is, isn't fast enough to take advantage of either monitor fully.

so if i want 165Hz i need to be able to get 165 FPS is that how it works? also if i did want to take full advantage of the ASUS monitor should i get another 980 or a 980TI or wait for the Pascal GPUs to come out? Thx

 

[chenw]

No, it actually means the opposite: higher fps is not wasted on a higher refresh monitor compared to a lower refresh rate one.

You certainly don't need to lock your fps at 165 to benefit from 165hz monitor, a lot of the benefits of it are found when running below that.

Personally, I would stick with the 980 and wait until Pascal.