Graphics cards to 4K 100+ fps monitor

[PCguy132]

I am building a computer but i wondered which graphics cards i should choose. I would like a 4K monitor with 100+ fps. I have looket at: dual nVidiaTitan X or dual nVidia 980Ti.

Which of these options should i choose? Should i choose a 3 graphics card setup instead? If you have another better solution i would also appreciate that!

If you have a good 4K monitor with 100+ fps you can recommend i would be glad to hear it 😀 I think it should have a displayport 1.4. Maybe. Or a displayport 1.3. I dont know.

 

[Mr Kagouris]

You make good points, but trust me, companies would never make that bad business decisions, that's just what the consumers want, not what we'll be getting anytime soon. They are going to make as much money as possible, so expect 10% GPU performance improvements per new generation, just like the last 4 years. NVIDIA are basically Apple, good marketing, poor and often overpriced results. Better lighting and heavier textures is definitely down to settings, that's correct, but if you're looking at 4k 144 Hz, and with a budget that big, no doubt the OP wants to max games out. Infact, playing at 1440p 144 Hz at max is better than 4k at mid/low. Visual acuity does play a big part here, but leaving science out of this, 1440p is the best option, and will be for years.

Well see the thing we're not considering here is AMD. Let me try to explain (this is pure speculation atm):

Pascal might not feature very good support for DX12 Async Compute, but as we know current gen AMD cards get significant performance boosts from it, so Polaris is likely to do so as well. Now, if Polaris delivers the performance/watt AMD is advertising, and if Pascal doesn't improve its own power consumption too much over current gen architecture, AMD might be in a position to create massively more powerful cards. On top of all this, AMD is going to release their own "Gameworks" and the new nvidia Gameworks is going to be open source. And finally, once we get DX12 game engines it could result in much wider use of Async Compute. So all in all we'd have:

• 
  ■ Much better performance from AMD cards due to the lower power consumption opening up the possibility for much greater performance.
  ■The above factor heavily exaggerated by Async Compute
  ■Nvidia loses its advantage of Gameworks tanking AMD cards

All this means that AMD would have a real chance to ram into the GPU market and rip a big share of it from Nvidia's hands. What happens if Nvidia starts losing so much of its marketshare? They'll be forced to act. Purposely getting AMD's performance in games tanked again just wouldn't do much good for its reputation, so their best choice would be to compete on the performance level.

Of course this is all pure speculation as previously said, but so far AMD haven't had any issue going against Nvidia's strategy of customer milking.

And If it does what you say they have said it would (4K on 144 Hz) when would a monitor with 4K and 144Hz then release (do you think)?

Probably a few months after Pascal.

 

[PCguy132]

And If it does what you say they have said it would (4K on 144 Hz) when would a monitor with 4K and 144Hz then release (do you think)?

Probably a few months after Pascal.

Yes but when does pascal release? I cant find it anywhere ...

 

[Suzuki@1473780084@1473780163]

They better succeed. From a business standpoint, the only reason NVIDIA lowered prices was because AMD managed to achieve the same performance,m and were selling their cards for less. As far as 4k is concerned, people should look at it from a business perspective, not what would be great, or the marketing claims. Both AMD and NVIDIA are going to try to get as much money as they possibly can, and the enthusiast market is not where that money is at. The mid to low end cards are the most popular GPU's from both brands. There is next to no money on the enhusiast side. But, they still don't give the consumers the advantage/edge when purchasing a graphics card. Both companies already have the money to release massive performance improvements every year, but they don't. That goes for all companies, just look at the gaming devs, they have the PC power to develop realistic games, but they don't. Think EA is poor for instance? Just like movies, games are so processed, they're developed from ground up to hit the biggest market. 25% improvement from 980 to 980 Ti is great, but then look at the price...

 

[sshortguy1]

But is there a monitor that can run at 4k 100+ Hz?

no it can't pc guy I have the monitor u mentioned a acer xb280hk and cannot I mean cannot get over 60 frames per second on it , I even tried to overclocking the refresh rate on it and failed miserably
Yes this monitor can run 4K at 144 Hz:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00O0Z5682/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B00O0Z5682&linkCode=as2&tag=monkeytrucker-20&linkId=2IG7PBFY2QPTD5LO

Look in the video about 30 sek.

 

[sshortguy1]

I got a gtx 1080 but I only get 40s to 60 fps not much of a jump up for sli unless you're adding 3